TW: This explanation of why she knows more than a 3rd grader about Russia is asinine. Again will anyone come out and defend this choice!!
And this from Ross Douthat (conservative at Atlantic)
"And now, an excerpt from my inner monologue, as transcribed while watching various clips from Sarah Palin's interview with Katie Couric (I can't link to them; they're too painful):
'And that, Douthat, is why nobody's ever going to hire you to help pick their running mate'
But hey, maybe it's all just effing brilliant rope-a-dope for the Biden debate ...."
Watch CBS Videos Online
5 comments:
we need to be fair here.. no mention of Biden and his countless gaffes.. At least she knwos how many states there are unlike Obama who thinks there's 57..
Thanks for the comment.
Biden has made some gaffes and will make more. Obama has made them. McCain made one last week that hurt him about the "fundamentals of the economy". You will note that I did not jump on that one. I did comment that McCain's speech did not show grasp of the econmic issues generally. That gaffe hurt McCain but does not mean he is grossly unqualified to be POTUS.
Gaffes are inevitable
"A clumsy social error; a faux pas"
Palin does not merely make gaffes she is woefully unfit and unqualified to VP or by extension POTUS. Comparing Obama's 57 state gaffe (a very minor one) to Palin's sophmoric interviews is a apple to orange comparison.
Anon
I will approach this from a different angle.
Do you believe Alaska's proximity to Russia is a legitimate source of foreign policy experience for Palin? If so how?
do you truly feel that if Obama had chosen someone to be his running mate with similar qualifications they would be under this scrutiny..
I am in agreement she is a bad choice.. right idea to bring someone in outside of washington who can represent change, wrong choice as she is really not connectign with the Hilary voters.. might of regenerated the right wing base but it wasn't liek they were going to vote for Obama..
Bloomberg was the choice in my opinion to represent true change. God knows he doesn't need any lobbyist $$
Would a similar Obama choice have received the same scrutiny?
One, Obama would have been crucified and rightly so for bringing in someone with even less experience than himself. Obama's obvious weakness is lack of experience so exacerbating that would have been foolish.
Two, the Palin scrutiny has been telescoped into a few weeks with minimal cooperation from the candidate or her campaign. No one knows this person and obviously we are very interested to find out but only have a few weeks whereas Obama and Biden for that matter have now been vetted for months or years. We still know very little and what little I know is very concerning.
The one thing Palin has done without question is energizing the Republican base. This I believe will help McCain less (he will lose anyway) but Congressional Republicans will benefit greatly. It has not received much press but the marginal Republican seats have firmed up for the Republicans since Palin and have not softened much since the convention.
Finally Bloomberg v. Palin those ar definitely two different animals. I would have loved to see him on Obama's ticket. But a NYC, Jewish, pro-choice, pro-gay rights, billionaire might have appealed to some independents and elite Republicans, not so sure about the base.
Again thx for the comments.
Post a Comment