Trial by Debate

Sarah Palin goes on trial tomorrow. I wish it weren't so, but it is...the jury is stacked against her. At least half the voters and three quarters of the press/media are expecting, possibly hoping, she will screw up. The rest of us are hoping she will not, not certain even that the questioning process will be evenhanded. "Screw up" meaning what? A slip of the tongue? A hesitant pause? A minor bit of mis-information? There is the perception that even these will be pounced on to prove her inadequate for the job.

In reality, does her performance, good or bad, prove that she is right or wrong for the job. I don't think so. I had been leaning that way for some time, and then I read Taylor Stockdale's piece in the Wall Street Journal. His father, Admiral James Stockdale, was Ross Perot's Vice Presidential choice, and appeared in a televised debate with the Republican and Democrat choices.

According to his son, his father's performance was dreadful. He looked weak, unsure and woefully inadequate.This was a man who was a successful leader all his life, a greatly respected senior officer, and an inspiration through John McCain's years in captivity.

A debate involves skills a leader virtually never needs to use, skills that are specific to the exercise. Debates do not generally demonstrate judgment or leadership abilities. There is no doubt that Admiral Stockdale was prepared to lead the country. He simply had not put time into developing debating skills. This is not a dereliction. Debating in public with time restraints and a hostile audience is not part of the Presidential job description. Then we were looking for a leader and that's what we're doing now. This exercise tomorrow does little to help us find one.

All that being said. I fully expect her to do well. That's her history. Go Sarah Baracuda!