news-record.com

wait for it bob, wait for it.

What should Bob wait for, sirrah? Howls of laughter? Because really, he has earned them. To say that by political experience, Palin is more qualified for the presidency than Obama, he certainly has missed the boat. And if you compare their educations, how could you eve come close to such a conclusion? Experience with debating? Experience with even world travel?

What I don't understand is how anyone could say Obama is a failure in his office when he has arguably had the toughest row to hoe of any president since Andrew Johnson or FDR. Seriously, in real life I find that the biggest lesses take the longest to solve. And having a whole world of nut cases ranged around, doing everything they can to protect the mess he is trying to clean up only slows down the work.

You guys go ahead and vote for Palin for president. It would be as much fun to watch her win any debate as watching Dan Quayle ever could have been.

Mr. Goodman, here's a quote taken from the Weekly Standard about Sarah Palin's qualifications:

"Her unfavorable rating among all voters is up to 55 percent. More than 70 percent say she is unqualified to hold the office of the presidency. Less than a majority of Republicans say she is qualified. Most important, the number of independents who say she is qualified has fallen to 29 percent."

I suggest that you read the second line of the quote. Palin is saying what some people want to hear. She is doing nothing more. She has no ideas. If someone who has to write four, not forty, bullet points on her hand in order to memorize them, is your idea of presidential caliber material, it just reinforces the lunacy that has taken control over some people in this country. If Sarah Palin looked like Golda Meir or Janet Reno, you wouldn't give her a second thought.

Palin better qualified than Obama? This premise is so ridiculous, it does not deserve any additional effort for me to debunk this nonsense, so I will re-post something I wrote a couple days ago:

I concede your point that our president uses a Teleprompter during his prepared speeches. Apparently, it is preferable for our president to provide material for the malapropism book industry, such as his predecessor. My guess is the president uses the Teleprompter because he cares that each word he says is the precise word he wants to say, unlike Bush, who, as Twain would say, was content to use its third cousin twice removed. Yes, Obama mangled the word 'corpsman', but at least it stopped his detractors from criticizing his superior oration skills as being a negative quality for a while. Many people use Teleprompters, but I submit Bush never did. Perhaps this is because Bush reads at a third grade level, and would actually sound smarter if he butchered his native tongue ad-lib than if he read mono-syllabic words at a snail's pace.

What Palin did was write her platform, her reason for entering politics on the national scene, on the palm of her hand. This might be acceptable, if say, Dick Butkus wrote 'Tackle guy with football' on his hand, or Dale Jr. wrote 'Drive Fast' on his. I am willing to bet they did not.

On top of this, Palin resigned her job as the chief executive of a state as though she gave her two weeks notice at Taco Bell (which, by the way, I submit is a better match for a person of her skills). I think I understand why her defenders think this is a non-issue- she only left because she saw an opportunity to make more money.

I would like to thank Bob Goodman for the belly laugh he provided me this morning. I sincerely hope he and his ilk keep up their defense of Palin. It helps one weed out the shallow thinking in any serious political discussion.

Good points, Mr. Goodman. The community organizer in chief has been a child of one government or another for His entire life. After His affirmative action sponsored college career (where He was 'president of the Haaavod Law Review'...swoon, swoon, ejaculate, ejaculate) He went on to set up camp in gangland Chicago (where personal responsibility means buying your own coke and not ratting out the dealer when caught) and show the folk there how to increase the productivity of the government teat. (the gold standard by which liberals judge other liberals)

This is the extent of His experience.

People with little intellectual capacity but significant charisma don't disappear, they become talking heads on tv and talk radio where they can become quite wealthy.
I never got the problem reactionaries have with Obama's being a community organizer. He dealt daily with more people and bigger problems than Palin did as a mayor, and his responsibilities were at least comparable. In addition, he could be fired, while Palin was assured her term.
In any election, we have limited practical choices. We can vote for one of the two candidates who have substantial party backing, we can cast a protest vote for someone whose party provides less backing, or we can write in an acquaintance who has absolutely no chance no matter how qualified. Few of us take either of the two latter possibilities. McCain missed his chance in the 2000 election. By 2008 he had compromised every value and position that had made him admirable and worthy to be our president - he had to do so to win Republican primaries, a circuitous route to disaster. He has settled into worse positions since for reasons I don't pretend to fathom.
The people of Alaska had a choice between Palin and another candidate and choose her. The people of Illinois had a choice between Obama and another candidate and chose him. While I respect anyone who devotes years of his/her life to public service, the population of Alaska offers a substantially smaller pool of choices than does Illinois; it's simple math. The American people had only the choice between McCain and Obama, and I think we did the best we could with those two choices - everyone else was weeded out in a fair process.
As for Palin today, I don't see that her opponents are the ones forcing the issue. She quit her elected position of her own free will, surely conscious of the stigma that would incur. She has repeatedly put herself before the public of her own free will which, as has been pointed out, has not endeared her to the public at large but only to a very limited segment. She has accepted employment by a news service that is known for its bias favorable to issues which she supports at a goodly salary, and she speaks through that service on topics of her choosing. She has stirred the pot for her own benefit, and if anyone wants to waste the time discussing her fitness or incompetence, that is only because of her stirring.

Why is being a community organizer a bad thing? By implication, a community organizer gets citizens together to promote change for the common good.