Who said it????

[jgaffney]

Nov 21, 2008 18:08:10 GMT -5 saunterelle said:

My point with bringing up Palin is to illustrate that Obama is smart enough not to surround himself with inexperienced yes men. Rather, he is using Lincoln's model to a certain extent.

Kinda reminds me of the old joke:

I would never want to be a member of any club that would have someone like me as a member.

Maybe Obama realizes that, now that he is president-elect, he'd better hire the experience he needs to do the job.

[saunterelle]

almost half of the american people voted for mccain/palin. does this mean that obama will select some conservative republicans to his cabinet? ha!

Obama won a relative landslide. It was a much more sound win than Bush's self-proclaimed "mandate" in 2004.

disaster? Palin managed to energize the conservative base much more so than even john mccain could. disaster? hardly.

Lol. Do I really have to drudge up the numbers for you?

Source: abcnews.go.com/PollingUnit/Politics/story?id=6105651&page=1
Gov. Palin's been dogged by difficulties, including the Oct. 10 finding that she abused her power as governor in seeking the dismissal of an Alaska state trooper and the controversy this week over the Republican National Committee spending $150,000 on clothes for her and her family.

Palin said the wardrobe controversy was fueled by gender bias.

However, her overall favorability rating -- the most basic measure of a public figure's popularity -- has fallen more steeply among women, by 17 points, and among white women, by 21 points, than it has among men, an eight-point drop.

IMHO, we need to clear out the old guard in washington (all of them) and replace them with some hockey moms and joe six packs who aren't beholden to special interest groups.

You really think that would be best for our country? How would hockey moms and joe six packs handle pressing foreign and national security issues, or our current economic crisis for that matter? What America understood we needed was a change from the Bush regime. Our economy was booming under Clinton. It makes sense to put some of his people in charge.

so why didn't the DNC just nominate someone who already had the experience and didn't need to be surrounded by smart people to help him out? doesn't make much sense now, does it?

Because they didn't have fresh ideas. Obama does, and he is using those with experience to help him carry out his agenda.

[The Big Dog]

Boy you just can't help yourself from spreading manure, can you Saunterelle.

You neglect to note that while you all on the left gleefully reported Palin as having "abused power", she was cleared by the final arbiter of the state's Personnel Board of any and all charges.

It makes sense to you to put Clinton people in charge.... let's see:

** Balanced budget, forced on Mr. Clinton by a Republican Congress.
** Welfare reform, same.
** Presided over 8 years of corporate malfeasance which ultimately led to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, signed into law by Mr. Clinton's successor.
** Presided over the genesis of the current mortgage meltdown we are experiencing... although to Mr. Clinton's credit he has openly and publicly admitted his own mistakes in pushing that agenda.
** Left office with the economy in recession, which his successor took on without whining about it and, post 9/11, led the nation to 24 straight quarters of positive economic growth while being falsely accused day in and day out by you leftists of pushing the economy into a ditch.

Obama said that we needed change. That was the overriding theme of his campaign from day one. To effect change he is going to employ the self same DC insiders who enabled everything I note above.

Thats not change. Be a man and admit it.