Attention PUMAs! Attention All PUMAs!
For those of you out there who are bitter that the candidate of Hope and Change decided to choose a snark-tongued Senate greyhead as his running mate instead of a woman, let me play a little “what if” game. Stick with me. It’ll pay off for you at the end.
What if John McCain wins in November and Sarah Palin becomes the first female Vice President in American history? Well, we’ll add Palin’s name to the list of historic “diversity firsts” that have happened during Republican administrations. But let’s think a bit farther down the line.
About four years farther down the line, to 2012.
What happens should John McCain decide not to run for President then?
Folks, that leaves Sarah Palin as the instant front-runner with all the push that an incumbent Vice President gets. That means, if you PUMAs understand that in the Democratic Party, Hillary Clinton will never get the nomination for President thanks to her daring to defy the party’s Chosen One, you have the chance right now to get behind a woman who stands a very good chance of becoming the first female President we’ve ever had.
And I guarantee you that conservatives will not spurn you the way progressives have. That’s not our style. Ask Elizabeth Dole. Ask Condoleeza Rice. Ask Kay Bailey Hutchison. We may disagree with you, but we will always listen to you and give you a place in the discussion. We conservatives disagree all the times, sometimes very bitterly, but we return respect for respect. That’s just how we’re raised.
So, what do you say? Palin ’12? You know it could happen. Come on board.
Other Posts of Interest:
- Could He Pick Sarah? I Sure as Heck Hope So!
- Fred Thompson? While You’re at It, Wish for a Pony.
- McCain’s Veep is Sarah Palin. Conservatives Rejoice. (Updated with Extra Democratic MSM Snarkiness. And Fred! And Van Palin!)
Category: Hillary!, Johnny Mac, Sarah Palin
I sort of agree. I don't think the far leftwing Dems will nominate her in 4 years or even in 8 years. They will always find an excuse to keep Hillary Clinton off the ticket, even though she is the best candidate to be on it. The dems are railing that Palin will not get any of us Puma's votes- they are dead wrong because they already have one- mine.
If Palin becomes President because McCain dies, that can only help Hillary in 2012.
Becoming a president by default is not the same as being elected the first female president. History will remember that.
McCain/Palin 2008 !
Hillary 2012!!!
Marie, Hillary Clinton is done. I don't know if you've noticed, but the Democratic Party has shoved her firmly to the side and she will never, ever be the Presidential nominee. They'll let he be a Senator and I predict that she'll be an accomplished and venerable one.
But she'll never be the nominee. She came as close this year as she ever will get. The Party has spoken.
Shoved her to the side Jimmie? They gave the Clintons 2 nights at the Dem convention. Both Bill and Hill gave speeches that earned almost universal praise. She's still very much in the game IMO.
You really are crazy, aren't you? Palin is an anathema to anyone who would ever vote for Hillary. If she were just pro-life, that might be tolerable. But anti-contraception, anti-women, and a creationist to boot: no way.
Yeah, keep saying that, man. Seriously…you think that Hillary Clinton supporters might not identify with an accomplished woman being attacked because she's a woman? Seriously?
You're going to stake this election on the argument that Sarah Palin is "anti-woman".
Please. Go right ahead.
Chen, she got those two days because of the power she had in her hand, not because the Obama campaign took her seriously. If he had taken her seriously, he would have at least spent an hour or so getting her feedback on his VP pick. It's not like she didn't represent the wishes of just about as many Democratic voters as Barack Obama.
Hillary supporters are policy wonkettes. They damn well want control of their uterus and don't want Palin to tell them what to do with it. And they understand science and don't want the Flintsones theory taught in science class. And they understand that someone who just got their passport last year doesn't really understand foreign cultures. The bible recognized that knowing one's enemy is valuable. But even a Christian like her doesn't even seem remotely interested in policy in the Middle East. I guess that's a good thing: at least she doesn't seem to want to create Armageddon. But actually knowing the culture is clearly way beyond her abilities. She's a lightweight's lightweight, at best. If she spent half the time I spent in the Dubai airport, she'd have twice the foreign policy experience she has now.
"You’re going to stake this election on the argument that Sarah Palin is “anti-woman”. "
Hey, there's an Uncle Tom in every disenfranchised group. Palin believes that women should have no control over their bodies, cannot use contraceptives, and should be paid less than men. Oh, and they should stay at home and raise kids until their husband realizes that she can improve British Petroleum's situation by her being governor. Sadly for him, that won't last long either way the investigation goes. BP wasted their money on her. And Todd's going to pay for it. And Hillary's voters won't be tricked by the light.
Nonsense.
What she clearly believe is that women should have enough control of their bodies to bear a child without your condescension. She believes that a woman can not only raise a family but also be a successful and wildly popular governor. She believes that a woman can take on an entrenched "good ol' boys' club" and win repeatedly. Would that Hillary Clinton had been as successful with the Democratic Party and Barack Obama's Chicago political machine.
You do realize that Todd quit BP when he found that the company directly had business before his wife, right? He gave up 17 years of employment there to make sure his wife would not be unfairly smeared by folks like you. Not that it did him any good.
If you really want to take that line of attack, go for it. Write yourself a letter to the Obama campaign and tell them just how eager you are for them to denigrate her for being a woman who has exercised her "right to choose" over and over again.
Have at it.
You really are scared spitless of her, aren't you, Tom. It would be your worst nightmare if the Clinton supporters, tired of the insults hurled at her and them by folks like you decided that they're sick and tired of the way the Democratic Party treats women who don't toe the party line.
Keep those happy thoughts. Obama's convention bounce, what tiny bit there was, is gone today. Gone. You have two women to thank for that.
Got Misogyny?
"What she clearly believe is that women should have enough control of their bodies to bear a child without your condescension"
In other words: she must bear a child against her will if she doesn't want a child. That's not a choice. And Palin supports forced pregnancy when it will kill the mother. And she supports the introduction of chemicals into the biosphere that cause miscarriage, which results in more destruction of blastocysts than abortion. Ironically, the wingnuts in Colorado are trying to push legislation that would define a blastocyst as a human, and thereby open up mining companies to lawsuits from causing miscarriages by releasing heavy metals. Oops, sucks to be stupid.
If you really want to say you're pro-life, you'd stop killing it. And you'd oppose in-vitro fertilization for the six blastocysts that get destroyed for every life. One life for one is bad enough. But six for one is just plain crazy. The pro-life movement is apparently okay with it, though. But, hey, I never thought the pro-life movement actually cared about life, anyway.
I do, and I want to limit the amount of abortions rather than making it a political issue. Reducing pregnancy would go a long way. But McCain and Palin want to increase pregnancy by making sure no young girl ever gets any scientific information about reproduction. They want to rely on the good judgment of teenagers. Now I don't have any teenage children, but I was once a teenager. Let's just say my judgment was good enough for the Ivy League, but not quite up to abstinence. And I was one of the more responsive students. Good thing I used condoms. No thanks to the Christian based education I got in public school. Even the best students won't remain abstinent, but Palin believes they should forced by law into into a bad marriage and a life of raising a child they can't afford to have. And she believes that the child should have have a bad education because its parents can't afford private school.
Look, I've been to India and seen the results of what conservatism has on society. The rich are fabulously rich. And the poor just wish they had something to eat. And the society is completely dysfunctional because the poor are too hungry to think, and the rich don't think at all anymore (except for a small minority in Bangalore). Any concept of economic progress is quickly overrun by their insistence on uncontrollable procreation. Conservatives love this kind of thing: No contraception, No infrastructure development, and No eduction. Keep the populace starving and pregnant is the way. This is the society that Bush wants, it is the society that McCain wants; and if Palin had a brain, it's what she'd want too. But I've been to India, and believe me, you don't want it. But conservatives will certainly vote for it because being a king in a third world country is still better than working.
I am now fully convinced that you are yanking my chain here and just being ridiculously contrary for the sake of contrariness.
No, Palin's positions on the issues really do scare me. She's the worst of the theocratic Republicans. I've traveled the world and seen what theocracy does to countries, and it's not pretty. My attitude is clear on this: decisions made by the government should be based on sound science, proper math, and internationally accepted accounting practices. They should not be based on the Bible. Palin and I obviously disagree on this point. Look, you would have a problem with a government based on religion if that religion were Islam. You have made that clear in the case of Iran. And, on that point, we agree. But when a government is based on Christianity, I still have a problem with it and you don't. In fact you want it, as your support for Palin shows.
Theocratic? You can't even tell me what religion she is. You can't find one single instance where she insists that anyone follow her example.
Again, you're making stuff up.
Oh, and right on time, Palin's daughter proves my point. Bristol, at only 17 years old, is pregnant. My family may have been a little dysfunctional, but nobody got pregnant or made anybody pregnant at that young age. It would have been a disgrace in my family. But in Palin's family, sexual irresponsibility is perfectly acceptable, apparently. I understand why you people talk so much about family values: it's because you don't have them. So instead of forcing your laws on my house, why don't you get your house in order first.
"You can’t find one single instance where she insists that anyone follow her example."
How about her support of laws banning abortion and contraception? When you pass a law about something, you are insisting that they comply with your wishes or go to jail. That's not just insistence, it's insistence backed by the force of law.
"You can’t even tell me what religion she is."
She's Christian. And one of those "post-denominational" ones. The last time I met one of those, it was Randall Terry, the scariest theocrat I've ever met in any religion. He advocates killing homosexuals and the jailing non-Christians.
Fostert – When is the last time you stepped outside for a breath of fresh air? Please, step away from your computer, go outside & take a few deep breaths and then come back.