Luckovich: "If Palin Had Become VP"

[calimary]

8. Which would lead one to ask the simple question - WHY???

Last edited Sun Oct 26, 2014, 01:59 PM - Edit history (1)

WHY??? WHAT is there to be proud of? She's a freakin' BIMBO. Well, okay. I just answered my own question. THAT is what they hold as a shining example of women. THAT is their idea of relating to women. Just the same as they brought a male bimbo to the foreground with bush1. I distinctly remember when he picked the idiot dan quayle for his running mate. quayle was widely regarded as easy on the eyes. By both sides. And I forget who in the public arena - either pol or pundit - made the comment but there WAS a comment: "that'll be one for the ladies." Telegraphing that bush1 thought all he had to do was offer us gals a pretty face, a good lookin' guy, and we'd fall for it. Embarrassing to admit on behalf of my gender but some women did. They did get some of the women's vote. Thank God that didn't last for another four years. Rumplestilskin stepped in to spoil it for king george the first, and wound up spinning straw into gold for an appealing new squire from Arkansas.

I will always be grateful to Ross Perot for that! His presence as a third-party candidate messed up the equation in 1992 and allowed Bill Clinton to come out ahead. And it was a beautiful thing to see that World's Biggest Entitlement Program go DOWN (the World's Biggest Entitlement Program is the presumptive "entitlement" of the GOP to OWN and monopolize the reins of power. They think it's their birthright.). I LOVE seeing them be denied this. Not only for the sheer glory of seeing them defeated yet again but also what it means for the benefit of the rest of us for whom the GOP does NOT speak, and cares even less.