I hate, hate, hate writing posts about politics. Mostly because my positions are usually so uninformed that you could blow them over with a feather. I admit that. But it just astounds me that the first thing that Sarah Palin’s partisans chose to focus on was her supposed “foreign policy experience”.
Now, it has been obvious to everyone on both sides of the aisle that she was picked as an offering to the religious right (McCain wanted Lieberman, but Rove said no – way to be a maverick, John!) The reason that she has resonated with the Republicans is her stand on guns, abortion, and taxes. Which is fine. But we’re not to think about her stand on these issues, instead focusing on her foreign policy experience?
The intellectual dishonesty of this astounds me.
I also think she was picked for her energy policy and a means to get that oil out of Alaska.
I also thought “Is Tina Fey funning for VP” before any pundit had a chance to point it out.
My favorite ploy? Attacking her by setting her abstince stance against her pregnant daughter. What? The only people who can run for office are those whose children practice what the parent preaches?
Attack her stance on birth control if you want, but her daughter has nothing to do with it unless she encourages or forces the young woman to do something that is against her stance. I mean, if the woman is pro-life and pro-abstinence and then gets her daughter to terminate the pregnancy, then you might be able to call her a hypocrite.