This is the kind of thing that irritates me to no end about partisan politics. I seriously do respect you, and we tend to agree on a substantial number of issues, but I think it's clear that you're getting into an area of supporting the candidate who claims to forward the goal of ending abortion, no matter the lack of fitness or integrity of the candidate.
Sarah Palin might be beautiful, and strong, and relatively competent, but she's also unreflective and deeply lacking in integrity. Who knows, maybe she would ultimately shine on the national stage, but at this point it seems doubtful, when she answers the question from Katie Couric about "What newspapers and magazines do you read?" with "All of them," and a litany of talking points strung together with nonsense.
And no scandal that demonstrates a politician's willingness to put herself and her interests above those of the polity can be considered "baloney" or inconsequential. Unless you dispute the facts of the case, but might I humbly suggest that you're not in much of a position to know more on the question of, say, whether or not she pushed for the firing of a State Trooper out of family loyalty, than anyone else in Europe or, in fact, most of the rest of the United States. If she lacks integrity in those small things, then she may very well lack it on a larger scale.
The notion of supporting the anti-abortion candidate at all costs boggles my mind. 99 anti-abortion candidates out of 100 don't give a damn about abortion, and that's been demonstrated by the dramatic lack of direct action on the national level since Roe v. Wade. They'll say anything to court the vote of the right wing, and make up any excuse when it comes time for reelection on why they haven't been effective. Palin's choice was a cynical thrust right into the heart of that voting bloc, because McCain was deeply suspect among them, and the GOP feared them staying away in droves.
Well, he's got the vote he was after now, but the middle is slipping away from him in a hurry. All the invective in the world is not going to make Palin more attractive to the middle, nor make the middle respect McCain any more for such a cynical choice.
no subject
Sarah Palin might be beautiful, and strong, and relatively competent, but she's also unreflective and deeply lacking in integrity. Who knows, maybe she would ultimately shine on the national stage, but at this point it seems doubtful, when she answers the question from Katie Couric about "What newspapers and magazines do you read?" with "All of them," and a litany of talking points strung together with nonsense.
And no scandal that demonstrates a politician's willingness to put herself and her interests above those of the polity can be considered "baloney" or inconsequential. Unless you dispute the facts of the case, but might I humbly suggest that you're not in much of a position to know more on the question of, say, whether or not she pushed for the firing of a State Trooper out of family loyalty, than anyone else in Europe or, in fact, most of the rest of the United States. If she lacks integrity in those small things, then she may very well lack it on a larger scale.
The notion of supporting the anti-abortion candidate at all costs boggles my mind. 99 anti-abortion candidates out of 100 don't give a damn about abortion, and that's been demonstrated by the dramatic lack of direct action on the national level since Roe v. Wade. They'll say anything to court the vote of the right wing, and make up any excuse when it comes time for reelection on why they haven't been effective. Palin's choice was a cynical thrust right into the heart of that voting bloc, because McCain was deeply suspect among them, and the GOP feared them staying away in droves.
Well, he's got the vote he was after now, but the middle is slipping away from him in a hurry. All the invective in the world is not going to make Palin more attractive to the middle, nor make the middle respect McCain any more for such a cynical choice.