I don't know what I would do without CNN's Fact Check feature online. It really gives me a lot of perspective on all the hot air these politicians are releasing into our already fragile political atmosphere.
Now I'm not going to sit here and pretend that all of you give a rat's arse about what I think...but this is my blog, and I have to get this out. YES, Sarah Palin was more impressive and far more focused than I thought she would be. So kudos to her. But did you notice that her attacks were no more barbed than to reference statements made by the opposing campaign? She used VERY few numerical statistics to back up her assertions. Something that is also bugging me is that she gave NO SPECIFICS WHATSOEVER. NONE. She just spat out a litany of overly rehearsed talking points - one after the other with the word "Maverick" thrown in there a jillion times. It was like Rudy Giuliani talking about 9.11 only MORE ANNOYING.
It bugs me that all the pundits are saying how well she did, but none that I have read/heard have mentioned her complete and utter lack of background knowledge. It was as if a former Bush aide was brought in with a debate preparation manual, sat down with Palin, and only made it halfway through. Am I the only one who finds this slightly disturbing? She really could have driven home a lot of her statements with facts, but instead chose to talk about soccer games, hockey moms, and Joe Six Pack. Oh, and the winking. PLEASE GOD MAKE HER STOP WINKING.
I think she's an accomplished woman, I really do. But I think she is in WAY over her head, and I think (should the McCain/Palin ticket win the general election) that her current tactics aren't going to win over any foreign heads of state. I don't wink during staff meetings at work, because it's NOT PROFESSIONAL. ALL CAPS. I just don't think she has what it takes.
Rant over.
Now I'm not going to sit here and pretend that all of you give a rat's arse about what I think...but this is my blog, and I have to get this out. YES, Sarah Palin was more impressive and far more focused than I thought she would be. So kudos to her. But did you notice that her attacks were no more barbed than to reference statements made by the opposing campaign? She used VERY few numerical statistics to back up her assertions. Something that is also bugging me is that she gave NO SPECIFICS WHATSOEVER. NONE. She just spat out a litany of overly rehearsed talking points - one after the other with the word "Maverick" thrown in there a jillion times. It was like Rudy Giuliani talking about 9.11 only MORE ANNOYING.
It bugs me that all the pundits are saying how well she did, but none that I have read/heard have mentioned her complete and utter lack of background knowledge. It was as if a former Bush aide was brought in with a debate preparation manual, sat down with Palin, and only made it halfway through. Am I the only one who finds this slightly disturbing? She really could have driven home a lot of her statements with facts, but instead chose to talk about soccer games, hockey moms, and Joe Six Pack. Oh, and the winking. PLEASE GOD MAKE HER STOP WINKING.
I think she's an accomplished woman, I really do. But I think she is in WAY over her head, and I think (should the McCain/Palin ticket win the general election) that her current tactics aren't going to win over any foreign heads of state. I don't wink during staff meetings at work, because it's NOT PROFESSIONAL. ALL CAPS. I just don't think she has what it takes.
Rant over.
<< Home