A lot of alleged, self-proclaimed, so-called "conservatives" have been abandoning John McCain to support Barack Obama, and many of them have cited McCain's choice as his running mate of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin.
I've been thinking about what I'd have to believe in order to make a jump like that:
10. That two years as the chief executive of a state is less relevant experience for the presidency than two years as a back-bench senator with no major legislative accomplishments.
9. That a man who is revered as a "maverick" because he pisses off social conservatives is never allowed to do anything that pisses me off.
8. That the man who included his time in elementary school and his undergraduate degree in international relations among his presidential qualifications knows more about foreign policy than a war hero with two and a half decades in the Senate, or even more than a woman who for two years has received intelligence briefings on Russian incursions into Alaskan airspace...
(h/t ProEcclesia)
I get the 'I'm for baby-killing, Obama's my man' defectors , or the 'I'm for baby-killing but not war'(because war kills tall children) defectors, but Palin as a reason? Economics? McCain may not be 'conservative' but um...NEITHER IS B.O.!!
On the other hand, I totally understand voting for Ron.
1 comment:
If I was in the States I think I might have voted for Ron Paul... seemed like a genuinely good person.
Post a Comment