>>>>Some will reflexively say this is just a partisan post. But I don't see how anyone can read this article with any degree of open mindedness and not be troubled about the prospect of this person becoming President of the U.S.
>>>>
>>>>http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/14/us/politics/14palin.html?scp=13&sq=sarah%20palin&st=cse
>>>
>>>If only the media had done the job of vetting Bill Clinton back during his campaign....
>>
>>When you can't defend something, change the subject.
>
>I don't see how that is changing the subject. Vetting has not been done sufficiently for any of the candidates in recent elections... Isn't that your issue with Sara Palin?
>
>Also, why on earth would I need to support someone who belongs to a party I don't? Even if I belonged to her party I wouldn't be defending her. That's ludicrous...
>
>When did you get the impression (false one I may add) that I was a McCain/Palin supporter? Did I ever state that here?

You have occassionally raised questions about the Annointing of Mr. Obama, who so obviously is destined by God (you'll forgive the expression but we still need some of the votes of those who are clinging to guns and religion) to be President.

Only a paid, card-carrying, zombie-like indoctrinated flying-monkey of the Rove-Cheney-Atwater Hate Machine would do such a thing.

If McCainBush is elected it will be either because of such evil dirty tricks as naming a pretend-Woman Bad Mother with a slutty daughter for VP, or because the American people (mostly in those grubby little flyover states) are too stupid again.

I bet the cool guy on the Apple commercials is voting for Obama. McCain is old.