Interesting how you have nothing to say about Palin's qualifications, rather, you're saying that anybody could be President, and Palin proves it. That's not exactly a ringing endorsement, TB.
And then, of course, you're off for a dozen paragraphs dissing Democrats. I didn't think you could answer the question without partisan sniping.
The conjunction of the two parts of your response validates a theory: Palin was chosen not for her qualifications, but to piss off anybody who cares whether a potential President is qualified, giving you a pretext for yet another attack on all of us Democrats. There's nothing sexist about questioning the qualifications of a candidate who happens to be a woman, but Republicans have acted like Palin's ovaries confer immunity to examination. Sorry, that won't work. Palin is abysmally unqualified for the office.
It's not just a craven tactic, it's criminally irresponsible, given the slight possibility that the electorate may yet be fooled and actually elect that dangerously incompetent ticket; and the nonzero probability that Palin will step up to the Presidency. The choice of Palin proves once again that Republicans always put partisan politics before the good of the country.
Current Events » in reply to Yes. I do.
re: Yes. I do.
The whole thread (46 posts)
- Bush doctrine
- Totally clueless
- re: Totally clueless
- You shouldn't be so harsh, Robert.
- re: Bush doctrine
- I thought the Bush Doctrine was to make the oil company executives rich...
- Typical Krauthammering nitpick CYA maneuver.
- Odd that I, and most other observers, knew exactly what he was referring to....
- If you read Krauthammer regularly, you probably do believe Bush is a liberal. (n/t)
- "I've said Bush's foreign policy is liberal rather than conservative." So much for you. (n/t)
- Totally clueless