I'd love to know how you think Carly Fiorina is better qualified than Sarah Palin just because she ran Hewlett-Packard into the ground.
More importantly, do you think that picking *any* of those women would have electrified the convention, energized the base, and made this the most-watched political convention in history?
The only reason I think Carly Fiorina is more qualified is because I have heard her talking and she seems far more informed (and intelligent) than Palin.
As for the "electrification" of the republican convention, the idea goes against your own standards. You were commenting Obama in your blog for picking a VP candidate based on his ability to be president and not political opportunism of the moment.
There is no doubt that Palin is far from qualified to be president. Want proof? The fact that they do not allow her to give interviews says it all. She is uneducated and ignorant on foreign affairs and basic economics. Not to mention that she is a religious fundamentalist (I am sure your realize that).
The republicans could have picked an equivalent of Ciciolina in Italy and that would have electrified the convention even more than Palin (especially among men). However, that would not make any such candidate qualified to be president. Running this country is a serious business and it deserves serious leadership. Especially after 8 years of an administration like the Bush one.
But beyond the many reasons for which McCain does not deserve to be elected, there is one that is very defining...It is not that he is too truly out of touch with the average American (although that is also true). It is Sarah Palin." (BW)
<
<
Now THAT has got to be one of the funniest lines I've seen in a long, loooooong time.
Especially since, of the FOUR candidates running, Sarah Palin, for better or worse, is far more like the average, outside the beltway American than any of the others.
The irony in that makes the above statement incredibly, albeit inadvertently hillarious.
We all need a good laugh each day. So, THANKS!
JMK,
Dont embarrass yourself more. You are a supporter of foreign dictators and fascist regimes. American politics is too much for you. Keep up your support for the likes of Pinochet or Mugabee.
Milton Friedman wasn't a foreighn dictator and he never actually supported one, despite reforming TWO economies (Sukarno's and Pinochet's) run by foreign dictators, from his offices at the University of Chicago.
Dr Friedman sought to prove the GREAT Freidrich Hayek's assertion that "socialism CAN'T work, precisely because it ignores the ineluctable forces of the market."
While Allende (a well-intentioned socialist's regime) actually proved that socialism CANNOT sustain itself, Friedman's pushing both Sukarno and Pinochet toward free market economies resulted in vibrant economies in those places, even absent any real political freedoms.
As to your assessment of Palin, it really was/is funny.
The problem with the Left is that they jumped to the wrong conclusion, early on, as McCain WASN'T trying to woo Hillary women, not at all.
He floated the idea of Lieberman and found that the Conservative base would've virtually abandoned him over that. He recognized that he needed to shore up the base.
Palin is a woman who resonates with most of America (the majority of Americans (over 2/3s) are NOT from urban areas, but suburban and rural areas.
With abortion and gay marriage NOT on the table this election, those views aren't a real big deal. Moreover, the vast majority of Americans realize that even IF Roe were overturned (and I believe we agree, that it, like the '73 decision that briefly outlawed Capital Punishment via SC fiat was BAD LAW) all it would do would return the abortion to the individual states, where it belongs. So Palin's family and her small town roots resonate in lager America.
As a bonus, the mainstream media's initial hysterical attacks only strengthened her Conservative credibility. She is now an official "martyr of the MSM." There's no greater badge of honor in Conservative circles.
On top of THAT, dopes on the Left and even some in the Obama camp thought it wise to highlight her lack of experience - she was only elected to higher office (Governor) in 2006 after all, so her resume is pretty thin......OF COURSE, that also highlights Obama's lack of same, as he too was only elected to higher office in 2006 and sworn in, like Palin, in January of 2007.....and Obama is at the TOP of his ticket!
As a result, and amazingly enough, his opponents have given the McCain camp a great gift in these first ten days.
Why'd they do that?
I believe because the Liberals in the media are lazy thinkers, in fact, like most Liberals, they tend to emote a lot more than they think - so they didn't realize that Palin was there to galvinize Conservatives more than attract Liberal women (although apparently she has attracted moderate and independent women - Obama's lead among independent women as dropped from 14% to 7%) and they didn't realize how their attacks on her family and her family-responsibilities would come off to both Conservatives and working women.
Oh well, sucks to be them, r
Mugabee?
I just saw that!
Now THAT is also quite funny....that's the laugh for today! Thanks again.
Robert Mugabe is a "darling of the American Left."
He's actually, like Hugo Chavez, tried to bring "a workable form of land reform (wealth redistribution) and socialism to Africa."
He's failed and I LOVE that.
EVEN if socialism COULD bring a paradise on earth (it couldn't) I'd oppose it, because I fervently believe that we humans are here to work, to produce....so as to provide value to our fellow man.
Socialism would make people "slaves to the state."
My personally held conviction is that EVERY socialist/communist, from the kind-hearted, well-meaning Jesuit priest studying in his Abbey, to the blue-haired, mohawked, drug-crazed "street performers" or "activists" ARE sub-human scum for their support of enslaving their fellow humans to the state. I see socialists as "economic terrorists" worthy of death," but please don't tell me that THAT alone, makes me a "bad person."
Seriously, I'm passionate about LIBERTY, private property rights, free markets and traditional values, but I'm also quite sensitive. I see my views (my support for fend-for-yourself Liberty) as positive and uplifting, not at all mean-spirited or vicious.
JMK,
I dont care about your "traditional values". They suck. People like Palin represent everything that is wrong in America. And you are their obedient supporter.
Traditional values are what made America great.
I think you're getting a bit hysterical because Obama's lead among independent women has fallen from 15% to 7%.
While John McCain is far too centrist for me, Palin and I agree on guns (the basic right to violent self-defense), opposing explicit sex-ed, low-taxes, limited government, etc.
I DON'T consider abortion a critical issue, because as you know even IF Roe were appealed (it IS "bad law" as written) it would NOT eliminate abortion rights. The abortion issue would merely go back to the states.
I'm glad you've backed the proven false assertion that Sarah palinwas a member of the AIP, and the "Bristol is Trig's mom" smear that some mouth-breather at the D-Kos puked out, but you're also wrong on "Creationism."
"Palin said during her 2006 gubernatorial campaign that she would not push the state Board of Education to add creation-based alternatives to the state’s required curriculum, or look for creationism advocates when she appointed board members. She has kept this pledge, according to the Associated Press.
"Palin has spoken in favor of classroom discussions of Intelligent Design, in some cases. “I don’t think there should be a prohibition against debate if it comes up in class. It doesn’t have to be part of the curriculum,” Palin told the Anchorage Daily News in a 2006 interview."
So it would seem you have to amend your erroneous view that "she wants Creationism taught in schools."
Yikes! It seems you're wrong on a LOT of things. I think it's due to your having too muhc emotionally invested in all this.
Commenting by HaloScan
