Posts tagged ‘Sarah Palin’

November 9, 2010

Palin Lashes Out At WSJ Reporter, Misquotes Story


Facts and Palin just don’t mix.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

::impersonates Tina Fey impersonating Sarah Palin::

 

There goes the LAME STREAM MEDIA again and their fact checking and using the words that come out of my mouth to prove that I haven’t a clue of what I’m talking about. The important thing here is not that my data is, in fact wrong, it’s that the American people get that I’m a real person, just like they are; and, also, too, Mister Fancy Elitist_Pants Wall Street Journal Guy with your fat_juicy steaks and succulant (succulent) lobsters every night for dinner, real people like me notice when our food prices rise 0.011111% from the previous year. Perhaps that’s not a lot where YOU live, but I absolutely refudiate and refuke (rebuke) everything that passes through your educated lips as I am a TRUE American scraping by like everyone else and if it wasn’t for the hundreds of thousands of dollars I make at speaking arrangements I would be on the streets, in line for free government cheese and chicken broth, waiting for retirement age so that I could live off of Medicare and Social Security.

The LSM just don’t get it!

September 16, 2009

Insurance Companies are the real life Death Panels.

Real-life ‘Norma Rae’ dies of cancer after her health insurance refused to cover her medications.

crystallee

Crystal Lee Sutton, whose courageous efforts organizing Southern textile mills inspired the award-winning 1979 film “Norma Rae,” passed away on Friday after a long battle with brain cancer. Sutton’s story is particularly tragic because after fighting her whole life for rights of working Americans, her health insurance wouldn’t cover the medications she needed:

She went two months without possible life-saving medications because her insurance wouldn’t cover it, another example of abusing the working poor, she said.

“How in the world can it take so long to find out (whether they would cover the medicine or not) when it could be a matter of life or death,” she said. “It is almost like, in a way, committing murder.”

Although Sutton eventually received the medication, the cancer had already taken a toll on her.

More from ThinkProgress:

Former Health Insurance Executive Explains How Companies Pocket Billions Through ‘Rescission’

NOTE: This is the first installment of our series — Meet Your Insurance Company Executive: An Interview with Wendell Potter.

Yesterday, ThinkProgress talked with Wendell Potter, Cigna Health Care’s former Communication Director, about a common and widespread practice among insurance companies called “rescission.” As the former Cigna executive explains, rescission is the insurance industry practice of finding reasons — even reasons as flimsy as typos on your enrollment form — to cancel your coverage when you get sick. According to Potter, insurance companies are saving billions by rescinding coverage from Americans who purchase individual insurance:

POTTER: If they determine that you might have left out something that they consider pertinent on your application and might have indicated that you would have had some illness or might get an illness down the road, and you’ve been getting treatment and submitting claims to your insurance company, they will go back and look at that application and they will often rescind or cancel your policy even if you’ve been paying your premiums on-time, every month, for years. You will be left holding the bag with the responsibility of paying all of your medical care when insurance companies do this. They’ve been doing it for many years and saving billions of dollars as a result of this.

Watch the video here.

The Washington Post recently highlighted other examples of rescission:

Woman Lost Her Home Because Coverage Was Canceled For Condition She Didn’t Have. “For Teresa Dietrich, it was fibroids. The Northern California real estate agent was left to pay $19,000 after Blue Cross said she did not disclose a diagnosis of the benign uterine tumors. But Dietrich said the doctor who had written ‘fibroids’ on her medical record never mentioned his suspicions to her. The bills destroyed her credit and cost her her home – and, in a comically cruel twist, the surgery proved the doctor was wrong. ‘They said I had a condition I didn’t even have,’ Dietrich said. ‘And they canceled me.’”

Woman Saddled With $25,000 Debt For Not Disclosing Condition She Didn’t Know She Had. “The untimely disappearance of Sally Marrari’s medical coverage goes a long way toward explaining why insurance companies are cast as the villain in the health-care reform drama. ‘They said I never mentioned I had a back problem,’ said Marrari, 52, whose coverage with Blue Cross was abruptly canceled in 2006 after a thyroid disorder, fluid in the heart and lupus were diagnosed. That left the Los Angeles woman with $25,000 in medical bills and the stigma of the company’s claim that she had committed fraud by not listing on a health questionnaire ‘preexisting conditions’ Marrari said she did not know she had.’”

Woman Denied Coverage For Gall Bladder Surgery Because Of Husband’s High Cholesterol. Washington Post: “In a pending case, Blue Shield searched in vain for an inconsistency in the health records of the wife of a dairy farmer after she filed a claim for emergency gallbladder surgery, according to attorneys for the family. Turning to her husband’s questionnaire, the company discovered he had not mentioned his high cholesterol and dropped them both. Blue Shield officials said they would not comment on a pending case.”

Rescission is widespread – an investigation by the House Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations found that three insurance companies alone (WellPoint, UnitedHealth and Assurant) cancelled more than 20,000 policies in the last five years.

September 11, 2009

Republicans: Why Should we vote for you? (Reprise)

9/11 Tribute

9/11 Tribute

Before I start this entry, I would like to take a moment to remember the 9/11 tragedy and its victims during, and after the event.

9/11 had to be one of the most surreal experiences of my life, topped only by the deaths of my parents the 1+ year prior to the event. In fact, 9/11 came exactly 1 year and 10 days after my fathers death in 2000. I remember being in a deep depressive fog that I just could not shake. Due to that depression, I did not awake that day until after the 2nd plane had hit.

When I turned on my television set (it was already on CNN) I just recall being confused and dumbfounded, but I must admit that much of that day is still a blur to me. I can’t sit here and recount the exact second I heard about it, nor my visceral reaction; other than it was the ultimate What The F–k moment. While immensely shocked, I was strangely void of emotion. It was when I witnessed a female reporter struggling to contain her emotions that it all began to sink it.

What can I say? I am good for having delayed reactions. After the levees broke in New Orleans, it wasn’t until the telethon (where Kanye West made Mike Myers squirm, and Chris Tucker eyes pop out of its sockets) that I broke down. Of course, with Katrina, I had my own personal reasons for why it was even more heart wrenching than it would have been normally. I’m sure I will share that at some point.

Meanwhile, I still have my main entry to get to where I ask the question: Republicans, why do you deserve our vote?

I wonder if the republican party realizes that, just because the democrats got voted into office, it doesn’t mean that everyone who voted for them think that they are perfect? It’s not like we are all happy with everything that they have done, (or have not done for that matter…) But, here’s my ultimate inquiry: When your only other real option is the Republican Party… why in the world would any sane, rational, informed individual vote for them?

I hear people talking about voting the democrats out of office in 2010 because they didn’t “do what they promised” and it’s clear that they aren’t really thinking things through. That they are just in the heat of the moment… (I mean, talk about the desire for instant gratification.) But, when it comes down to actually voting, why would the public, as a whole, trust the party that was at the helm when our economy tanked? When 9/11 hit? (“We kept you safe for 8 years,” my eye.) A party who, for the 8 years, did nothing to even attempt reform healthcare?

Why should we trust a party that has fallen back on their previous tactics of scaring people into voting for them? Why should we trust a party that doesn’t actually put forth any solutions, but simultaneously say NO to anything that is proposed by the opposing party? Particularly when it helps we, the little people?

These are questions that the republicans should be asking themselves, and what we the American people should demand them to answer. Why should people who are truly open to voting for either party WANT to vote republican? Do they realize that they aren’t gaining new supporters with their fear mongering? That they are just pandering to a very loud, yet very minority base? Sarah Palin referred to them as the “real America” during the campaign. Yes Sarah, they are real Americans. The real small group of Americans who will swallow anything that she and the rest of her colleagues tell them. I have a newsflash for these “real” people:  Just because more people may be unhappy with the president than before, it doesn’t mean that those  same unhappy people are daft enough to support the republican party come election time.

Best case scenario, for the republicans, is that they simply don’t vote at all. Worst case scenario, is they scare even more people into going out to vote AGAINST them. Like me! I stood in line four hours to vote the democrats into power last election, and I’ll do it again!

What people have to realize is that it’s early, not even a full year into Obama’s first term. While the republicans may feel that they are winning a couple of tiny battles here and there,  I predict that these underhanded tactics are going to come back to haunt their party. Americans are fickle and irrational at times, but once time passes and things DO improve, we will have forgotten about the fright-wing and their desperate antics. And… in the end, they will be even worse off than they are now. Much to my glee.

As of now, I know that there is no way under the sun I could ever consider voting even one republican into office. So, Republicans, how do go about changing my mind?  What are YOU going to do to better the country I live in? When will the “little people” that you step on to serve your masters begin to matter?

Why do you deserve my vote?

October 9, 2008

Palin Says Obama Would Diminish “The Prestige Of The United States Presidency”

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin attacked Barack Obama Thursday for not being honest about his association with 1960’s radical William Ayers.

“Barack Obama hasn’t told the American people the total truth about that, about his association with Ayers,” Palin said on conservative radio host Laura Ingraham’s show. “Doggonit he fails to tell the American people with candor and with truthfulness what his associations are and we have to know.”

Palin blamed the media for not providing what she characterized as the same level of scrutiny to Obama that it has applied to her and running mate John McCain.

Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

This is simply outrageous. They count on the fact that their supporters rely heavily on two sources for their information, them and Fox News. They know that they won’t fact check. Their supporters just take them at their word. In their world, everything they are told by McCain and Palin is the GOSPEL TRUTH.

I am part of a community on line that has been brought together by an unpolitical commonality. We do discuss politics, however, and not one republican will touch on two key hypocritical points of the McCain/Palin ticket; no matter how eloquently the facts are laid out before them. One, is the “unpatriotic” nature of the Palin’s for being associated with a party that wants to secede from the rest of the US. The second is the fact that McCain has his own shady past, full of characters that he has had MUCH stronger ties to.

Of late, the fact that a McCain supporter, and republican, is the one who put Obama and Ayers on that board together has also been ignored. Especially when I ask how they aren’t outraged that McCain would accept support from a woman who has “palled” around with a terrorist.

In short, the republican party do not care one iota about facts and are full of hypocrites who want to distort the truth for their own political gain. They have frightened their constituents to death at the thought of Obama becoming president; an irrational fear that has been created by lies and slander promoted by both the McCain/Palin party and Fox News. NONE of their fear is even remotely rational. What they should be scared of is living out of a cardboard box when they turn 60 and their retirement fund isn’t there. McCain is CLUELESS about the economy and has admitted as much. His answer for everything is a commission.

Lord help us.

I never thought I would see McCain stoop to Karl Rove style politics, but he has. I feel that his character is so far in the toilet that, upon his death, this is one of the things he will be most remembered for.

I guess he’s no real hero after all.

October 5, 2008

Tina Fey As Sarah Palin In VP Debate On SNL (VIDEO)

Tina Fey as Sarah Palin

Click here to see video!

This is even funnier the second time around… So you can hear the parts you missed when you were laughing your bum off.

BRILLIANT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1one1!!!11!
More on Sarah Palin
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

October 4, 2008

Fact-Checking the VP Debate

Joe Biden and Sarah Palin Vice Presidential Debate

As with any presidential campaign, lies and half-truths flow freely. The following is from wire.factcheck.org. The guys over there have done a real job of “Keeping them Honest,” throughout the entire Election.

Some highlights:

Killing Afghan Civilians?


Palin said that Obama had accused American troops of doing nothing but killing civilians, a claim she called “reckless” and “untrue.”

Obama did say that troops in Afghanistan were killing civilians. Here’s the whole quote, from a campaign stop in New Hampshire:

The Associated Press fact-checked this one, and found that in fact U.S troops were killing more civilians at the time than insurgents: “As of Aug. 1, the AP count shows that while militants killed 231 civilians in attacks in 2007, Western forces killed 286. Another 20 were killed in crossfire that can’t be attributed to one party.” Afghan President Hamid Karzai had expressed concern about these civilian killings, a concern President Bush said he shared.

Whether Obama said that this was “all we’re doing” is debatable. He said that we need to have enough troops so that we’re “not just air-raiding villages and killing civilians,” but did not say that troops are doing nothing else.

McCain in the Vanguard of Mortgage Reform?

Palin said that McCain had sounded the alarm on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac two years ago.

Palin is referring to a bill that would have increased oversight on Fannie and Freddie. In our recent article about assigning blame for the crisis, we found that by the time McCain added his name to the bill as a cosponsor, the collapse was well underway. Home prices began falling only two months later. Our colleagues at PolitiFact also questioned this claim.

Palin’s Health Care Hooey

Palin claimed that McCain’s health care plan would be “budget-neutral,” costing the government nothing.

The McCain campaign hasn’t released an estimate of how much the plan would cost, but independent experts contradict Palin’s claim of a cost-free program.

The Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center estimates that McCain’s plan, which at its peak would cover 5 million of the uninsured, would increase the deficit by $1.3 trillion over 10 years. Obama’s plan, which would cover 34 million of the uninsured, would cost $1.6 trillion over that time period.

The nonpartisan U.S. Budget Watch’s fiscal voter guide estimates that McCain’s tax credit would increase the deficit by somewhere between $288 billion to $364 billion by the year 2013, and that making employer health benefits taxable would bring in between $201 billion to $274 billion in revenue. That nets out to a shortfall of somewhere between $14 billion to $163 billion – for that year alone.

Palin also said that Obama’s plan would be “universal government run” health care and that health care would be “taken over by the feds.” That’s not the case at all. As we’ve said before, Obama’s plan would not replace or remove private insurance, or require people to enroll in a public plan. It would increase the offerings of publicly funded health care.

Did McCain “vote the same way” as Obama on funding troops? This correction by Factcheck.org answers that question.

Correction Oct 3: This article originally faulted Biden for saying that McCain had voted “the exact same way” as Obama on a controversial troop funding bill. We said that McCain was absent for the vote and so didn’t vote at all. Biden was, however, correct.

McCain did vote against the troop-funding bill in question, H.R. 1591, on March 29, 2007, when it originally cleared the Senate. The vote to which we referred, and which McCain missed, was a later vote on the House-Senate compromise version of the same bill, on April 26, 2007. McCain opposed the bill, which Obama supported, because it contained language calling for withdrawal of troops from Iraq. Biden was responding to Palin’s accusation that “Obama voted against funding troops.” Obama voted for the bill March 29 and April 26, and then on May 24, 2007, following a veto by President Bush, Obama voted against a similar troop-funding bill, H.R. 2206, that lacked any withdrawal language.


To read more facts on the topics that the Vice Presidential candidates discussed Thursday night, check out wire.factcheck.org and PolitiFact.org.

A few other misleads of note:

  • Palin said, “We’re circulating about $700 billion a year into foreign countries” for imported oil, repeating an outdated figure often used by McCain. At oil prices current as of Sept. 30, imports are running at a rate of about $493 billion per year.
  • Palin threw out an old canard when she criticized Obama for voting for the 2005 energy bill and said, “that’s what gave those oil companies those big tax breaks.” It’s a false attack Sen. Hillary Clinton used against Obama in the primary, and McCain himself has hurled. It’s true that the bill gave some tax breaks to oil companies, but it also took away others. And according to the Congressional Research Service, the bill created a slight net increase in taxes for the oil industry.
  • Palin repeated a falsehood that the McCain campaign has peddled, off and on, for some time; that under Obama “millions of small businesses” will pay high taxes. As we reported June 23, it’s simply untrue that “millions” of small business owners will pay higher federal income taxes under Obama’s proposal.
  • Palin: We need to look back, even two years ago, and we need to be appreciative of John McCain’s call for reform with Fannie Mae, with Freddie Mac, with the mortgage-lenders, too, who were starting to really kind of rear that head of abuse.

    October 4, 2008

    Does Folksy REALLY work for you?

    Sarah Palin

    Sarah Palin

    I was born, and spent most of my childhood, in a small town. When I was twelve years old, my family picked up and moved to the big city of Atlanta. From one southern state to another, that hospitality was something that was never lost. I still smile at strangers when I walk down the street. Wave at my neighbors as I drive through my subdivision. Guest are still offered something cold to drink, something to eat. While others from bigger cities may scoff at this, one thing we from the south will always be known for is a hospitality that is genuine and meaningful.

    But here’s the thing… There is quite a fine line between that genuine graciousness and the quite disingenuous nature of what we saw displayed on stage, by Governor Palin, last night.

    Leading up to last nights debate, I had the opportunity to see several clips from Palin’s previous debates; and for a moment I thought perhaps that that would be the Palin that would show up last night. Not that I heard anything riveting during any of those performances… but the “folksiness” was kept to an absolute minimum. Why the drastic change of persona over the last couple of years? Is it that she doesn’t think she can speak to Americans, as a whole, as if we have more than two braincells to rub together? The only time I speak in the manner that she spoke to us last night is when I am playing with my 9 month old nephew. Being talked to as if I am an infant, or at best, a toddler is not something that I would calling “endearing.”

    Didn’t we, as Americans, learn our lesson last go around with Bush? That wanting to have a beer and pizza with the president (or in this case, vice president) isn’t a qualifying factor? That it simply cannot be the barometer by which we measure presidential competency? It’s as if many of us are allergic to those who are intelligent. How else can you justify smearing someone for being a Harvard Law grad, while praising someone who took years to find a major, after changing schools three or four times? Yes, that may make her “normal” and “just like many other Americans,” but is that what we really want in someone who has to deal with the complexities of being one of the leaders, if not the leader, of the “Free World?”

    The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

    I know that the Obama/Biden ticket has been trying to draw comparison between the Bush/Cheney Administration, and what a McCain/Palin Administration would look like, but after last night, never before has the similarities been so glaringly obvious. A (potential) vice president that has their own interpretation of the constitution? Where have we seen that before?

    Palin made an attempt to further explain her position on the constitution and the role of the vice president today on FoxNews:

    Incoherent? Maybe. Unnerving? Definitely.

    October 1, 2008

    Palin’s Credentials Reads Like a Padded Resume

    Elisabeth Hasselbeck

    Today on The View republican apologist, Elisabeth Hasselbeck, was given the opportunity to tell the world why she feels that Sarah Palin is qualified to be Vice President, or God forbid, President of the United States. After trying to redirect the question to Obama’s qualifications, Elisabeth parroted what only can be described as a short laundry list of qualifications that have been floated around since Palin blasted onto the scene just before the Republican National Convention.

    She has executive experience, she’s commanded the Alaskan National Guard, and she is an “expert” on oil.

    Palin’s National Guard Experience:

    Delving deeper into what supporters are calling one of Palin’s strongest attributes, provides little detail on what Palin has actually done as the “commander” of the Alaskan National Guard. Hasselbeck exclaimed that Palin has commanded the National Guard “in times of war,” yet in an interview with the Associated Press, Maj. Gen. Craig Campbell said that he and Palin play no role in national defense activities, even when they involve the Alaska National Guard. The entire operation is under federal control, and the governor is not briefed on situations. Of course, days later, Campbell appeared on FoxNews to soften the blow of what he said. (Which he was rewarded for in terms of a promotion.)

    And who can forget Tucker Bounds inability to cite one instance where Palin actually had to command the National Guard in terms of National Security?

    Palin’s Expertise on Oil:

    In my opinion, this is Palin’s strongest qualification; however, it isn’t helped by the McCain/Palin campaigns gross overstatement of the things that Palin has achieved in terms of oil. The McCain/Palin camp have boasted that Palin is responsible for negotiating a $40-billion pipeline project for Alaska. They have also stated that the state of Alaska is responsible for 20% of our nations oil production.

    The facts? Well, recently, the Resource Development Council for Alaska updated their website to say that Alaska accounts for 20% of domestic oil production between the period 1980-2000; which helps to put the McCain/Palin camp comments into context. The update notes that Alaska currently accounts for 15% of the nations oil production. In this case, the deception lies in what is not stated. While Alaska accounts for 14.3% of oil produced in the US, it only accounts 4.8% of the oil that is actually supplied to the United States.

    As far as that pipeline? Well, the folks over at Politifact.org have ranked that as “barely true.”

    Executive Experience:

    Now we arrive at what I deem to be the weakest argument. One must only look as far as Dubya himself to note that Executive Experience isn’t all what it’s cracked up to be. Enough said.

    Being able to successfully pad a resume is a tangible skill in and of itself. Whether it is stretching the truth on her states contribution to oil, or insisting that a refueling stop in Ireland, and being able to see Iraq from the Kuwait/Iraqi border truly counts as “foreign travel,” this resume has enough padding to stuff a whole gaggle of prom-goers brassieres.

    September 30, 2008

    Palin makes it easy.

    I’m sure that, by now, everyone has seen Tina Fey’s masterful “reenactment” of the Palin/Couric interview from Saturday nights SNL. I simply MUST call it a reenactment due to the fact that much of it didn’t even have to be written. Most of the “verbage” (as Palin would call it) was lifted straight from Palin’s lips and delivered straight to Tina’s.

    Here is a side by side comparison:

    Ouch.

    Meanwhile, the McCain camp is continuing their line of attack on the “biased liberal media” for daring to hold them accountable for anything that comes out of their mouths. They’ve now added the phrase “gotcha journalism” to their repertoire of campaign vocabulary; which seems to include any question that Palin does not know how to properly answer. How convenient.

    So, let’s see if we have this straight… A young man asked her a question she didn’t fully understand because she was in a pizza place at the time? Let’s examine what she actually said, shall we?

    “How about the Pakistan situation?,” asked Rovito, who said he was not a Palin supporter. “What’s your thoughts about that?”

    “In Pakistan?,” she asked, looking surprised.

    “What’s going on over there, like Waziristan?”

    “It’s working with [Pakistani president] Zardari to make sure that we’re all working together to stop the guys from coming in over the border,” she told him. “And we’ll go from there.”

    Rovito wasn’t finished. “Waziristan is blowing up!,” he said.

    “Yeah it is,” Palin said, “and the economy there is blowing up too.”

    “So we do cross border, like from Afghanistan to Pakistan you think?,” Rovito asked.

    “If that’s what we have to do stop the terrorists from coming any further in, absolutely, we should, Palin responded, before moving on to greet other voters.

    Where exactly does the breakdown in communication occur?? Is it that she hears words differently if she is otherwise engaged in… ya know, buying food? Is it even safe to say that, at the VERY least, she knew that they were talking about Afghanistan and Pakistan? Maybe it’s that she thought perhaps he meant in some fictional world where there is a place called Afghanistan and Pakistan and that he clearly didn’t mean THE Afghanistan and Pakistan?

    Straight talk express, my eye.

    September 26, 2008

    Palin is Out of Her League

    After watching Palin in interviews, it’s a given that she will be slaughtered during the debates. She has an extremely limited vocabulary that is compounded by her weak grasp of the issues. As described by conservative columnist, Kathleen Parker, “Palin filibusters. She repeats words, filling space with deadwood. Cut the verbiage and there’s not much content there.”

    I could not say it better myself.

    I honestly wonder how many other conservatives out there are willing to admit that Palin is completely out of her league. That this pick was a huge gamble that only paid off in the short run, and things are starting to unravel… Beginning at the base.

    Kathleen Parker joins a steady stream of conservatives that have been questioning McCain and his decision-making throughout this campaign.

    Kathleen Parker

    Kathleen Parker

    Palin Problem, by Kathleen Parker on National Review Online

    If at one time women were considered heretical for swimming upstream against feminist orthodoxy, they now face condemnation for swimming downstream — away from Sarah Palin.

    To express reservations about her qualifications to be vice president — and possibly president — is to risk being labeled anti-woman.

    Or, as I am guilty of charging her early critics, supporting only a certain kind of woman.

    Some of the passionately feminist critics of Palin who attacked her personally deserved some of the backlash they received. But circumstances have changed since Palin was introduced as just a hockey mom with lipstick — what a difference a financial crisis makes — and a more complicated picture has emerged.

    As we’ve seen and heard more from John McCain’s running mate, it is increasingly clear that Palin is a problem. Quick study or not, she doesn’t know enough about economics and foreign policy to make Americans comfortable with a President Palin should conditions warrant her promotion.

    Yes, she recently met and turned several heads of state as the United Nations General Assembly convened in New York. She was gracious, charming and disarming. Men swooned. Pakistan’s president wanted to hug her. (Perhaps Osama bin Laden is dying to meet her?)

    And, yes, she has common sense, something we value. And she’s had executive experience as a mayor and a governor, though of relatively small constituencies (about 6,000 and 680,000, respectively).

    Finally, Palin’s narrative is fun, inspiring and all-American in that frontier way we seem to admire. When Palin first emerged as John McCain’s running mate, I confess I was delighted. She was the antithesis and nemesis of the hirsute, Birkenstock-wearing sisterhood — a refreshing feminist of a different order who personified the modern successful working mother.

    Palin didn’t make a mess cracking the glass ceiling. She simply glided through it.

    It was fun while it lasted.

    Palin’s recent interviews with Charles Gibson, Sean Hannity, and now Katie Couric have all revealed an attractive, earnest, confident candidate. Who Is Clearly Out Of Her League.

    No one hates saying that more than I do. Like so many women, I’ve been pulling for Palin, wishing her the best, hoping she will perform brilliantly. I’ve also noticed that I watch her interviews with the held breath of an anxious parent, my finger poised over the mute button in case it gets too painful. Unfortunately, it often does. My cringe reflex is exhausted.

    Palin filibusters. She repeats words, filling space with deadwood. Cut the verbiage and there’s not much content there. Here’s but one example of many from her interview with Hannity: “Well, there is a danger in allowing some obsessive partisanship to get into the issue that we’re talking about today. And that’s something that John McCain, too, his track record, proving that he can work both sides of the aisle, he can surpass the partisanship that must be surpassed to deal with an issue like this.”

    When Couric pointed to polls showing that the financial crisis had boosted Obama’s numbers, Palin blustered wordily: “I’m not looking at poll numbers. What I think Americans at the end of the day are going to be able to go back and look at track records and see who’s more apt to be talking about solutions and wishing for and hoping for solutions for some opportunity to change, and who’s actually done it?”

    If BS were currency, Palin could bail out Wall Street herself.

    If Palin were a man, we’d all be guffawing, just as we do every time Joe Biden tickles the back of his throat with his toes. But because she’s a woman — and the first ever on a Republican presidential ticket — we are reluctant to say what is painfully true.

    What to do?

    McCain can’t repudiate his choice for running mate. He not only risks the wrath of the GOP’s unforgiving base, but he invites others to second-guess his executive decision-making ability. Barack Obama faces the same problem with Biden.

    Only Palin can save McCain, her party, and the country she loves. She can bow out for personal reasons, perhaps because she wants to spend more time with her newborn. No one would criticize a mother who puts her family first.

    Do it for your country.

    Kathleen Parker is a nationally syndicated columnist.

    © 2008, Washington Post Writers Group

    Link to the article.