When I watched the Presidential Debate between Sen. John McCain and Sen. Barack Obama, I couldn't help but to remember what is often referred to as "The Great Debate." The Great Debate took place in 1960 between former Presidents John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon. However, what stuck out most to me was the idea of when winning a debate visually over when a debate audibly - an idea which was bounced around a great deal during a time when many people relied heavily on non-visual forms of communication, such as radios.
So, I closed my eyes (well, not really) and listened to the debate.
I found that Sen. McCain's voice was rather low. It was almost as if he whispered into the microphone at various times. There were also numerous times when he paused to search to words. Now, just let me say, I am not upset with a politician who chooses their diction carefully. But, when one takes too long to search for the right words, one runs the risk as coming off as indecisive. And what really annoyed me the most, where the coughs that McCain riddled his speech with towards the beginning of the debate.
Sen. Obama's voice was firm. He raised his voice when he attempted to make strong points. Obama came off as being very assertive and definitive. He answered questions quickly for the most part. However, there were a couple times when he, like McCain, searched for the right word. Obama also used facts and figures frequently during this debate. The use of numbers helps to depict a more clear and concise picture of the notion that is being conveyed.
So if you ask me who won the debate audibly, I would say Obama. However, visually I would say that the winner may depend on one's personal preferences.
Why personal preferences? Well, if you prefer a candidate looks very stoic and serious while in the heat of battle, then McCain is your man. He did not crack a smile. He began the debate with a somber, yet partially inaccurate, comment about Sen. Ted. Kennedy (Kennedy was already released from the hospital, although McCain says he was in the hospital). McCain maintained his apparent anger through the night. But, this may have worked for many Americans, as Americans have many reasons to be rather angry themselves.
However, Sen. Obama had an opposite approach. He looked directly into the camera and addressed the voters at home. He turned to McCain when McCain spoke. But, the key difference can be seen in Obama's response to what he argued to be untruths. Obama smiled at statements that he would soon refute. He did not show anger or frustration. He appeared very cool and collective at all times, even when firing back. So, to those Americans who desire a rational, cool-headed leader, Obama came off in a good light.
Monday, September 29, 2008
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
I Want A Multi-Tasking Man
These days we all multi-task. We eat while driving. We listen to music while exercising. We chat on AIM while working. And of course it goes on from there. But, really I think Barack Obama is absolutely correct when he said "it is going to be part of the president's job to deal with more than one thing at once. It's more important than ever to present ourselves to the American people." Does McCain not understand that maybe he should spend his mornings in Washington and his evenings on the campaign trail? Hell, he can even speak to large groups of people via satellite these days - you know how someone appears on the Today Show and they are hundreds of miles away?
I'll be honest. I would love to say to my boss that I cannot work one day because I need to stay home and finish a research paper. And I would love to tell the holder of my student loans that I cannot pay because we are in or nearing a recession and I need to store cash in my mattress at home (I am joking). But, the truth of the matter is that as time goes on we cannot always pick and choose what we want or even have to do for that matter. I would not be happy to hear that the President of the United States cancelled an important meeting because his favorite football team was playing at that same time. I mean this sounds ridiculous. But is it?
But, this is what I really think. I think that McCain wants to buy himself more time to think about the crisis and have something solid that he can throw on the table with his name on it proving his involvement in bettering the situation. He wants to counter Obama’s introduction of legislature that aimed to curb the deadly mortgages that many succumbed to.
An article on CNN.com, highlights today’s chain of events following McCain's announcement and includes both the responses of Obama and the White House. I think that it is about time that McCain is rolling up his sleeves and getting himself dirty with the country's problem. But, I also think that the American people want to see him out there, on road, telling us how he plans to fix this mess that he was apparently so blind to, even up until last week.
I'll be honest. I would love to say to my boss that I cannot work one day because I need to stay home and finish a research paper. And I would love to tell the holder of my student loans that I cannot pay because we are in or nearing a recession and I need to store cash in my mattress at home (I am joking). But, the truth of the matter is that as time goes on we cannot always pick and choose what we want or even have to do for that matter. I would not be happy to hear that the President of the United States cancelled an important meeting because his favorite football team was playing at that same time. I mean this sounds ridiculous. But is it?
But, this is what I really think. I think that McCain wants to buy himself more time to think about the crisis and have something solid that he can throw on the table with his name on it proving his involvement in bettering the situation. He wants to counter Obama’s introduction of legislature that aimed to curb the deadly mortgages that many succumbed to.
An article on CNN.com, highlights today’s chain of events following McCain's announcement and includes both the responses of Obama and the White House. I think that it is about time that McCain is rolling up his sleeves and getting himself dirty with the country's problem. But, I also think that the American people want to see him out there, on road, telling us how he plans to fix this mess that he was apparently so blind to, even up until last week.
The Virgin Hockey Mom
There seems to be an awful lot of firsts happening in Sara Palin's life. While she may be no stranger to PTO bake sale sells. She now is attempting to sell herself to the foreign leaders of the world, as she was introduced to them for the first Wednesday at the United Nations in New York. It seems as though Palin has just turned 16 and had her coming-out party, along with her first intelligence briefing on Tuesday, which sounds to me a lot like parents laying the ground rules out to a child who they are entrusting with the slightest bit of freedom for the first time.
The Republican-American published an AP article highlighting this first-time experience for Palin. Now, this article was written in a rather positive light. Okay, I am not angry at that. But, all of these de-virginizing activities have me a little worried when I think about a woman who just received a passport for the first-time in her life last year. What does she really know about policies over sees, when she clearly is baffled by some at home? What does she know about foreign cultures and how they vary from those at home?
Now it seems that that Afghan President Hamid Karzai had a pleasant statement to make about the Vice Presidential nominee. "I found her quite a capable woman," Karzai said. Now let’s really think about this. What does that statement really mean? Capable woman? What does that mean coming from the President of country that does not even allow females to attend schools or in most cases the opportunities to work, according to the United States Department of State? Does it mean that she is capable to perform the most basic functions of womanhood? We already know that - she has five kids to prove it. Now, I am not calling the man misogynist. But come on, what else does he have to say? Why did he not choose his diction more carefully? Does it matter that he said woman and not politician or vice president or even leader for that matter?
I do give Palin some credit. She is bringing herself up to speed on many things and in a rather shortened time of period. The Associated Press even used the term "crash course," to describe the pace of the information that has come her way. But, my question is when does she take the final exam? At 3am one morning, when the red phone is blaring?
The Republican-American published an AP article highlighting this first-time experience for Palin. Now, this article was written in a rather positive light. Okay, I am not angry at that. But, all of these de-virginizing activities have me a little worried when I think about a woman who just received a passport for the first-time in her life last year. What does she really know about policies over sees, when she clearly is baffled by some at home? What does she know about foreign cultures and how they vary from those at home?
Now it seems that that Afghan President Hamid Karzai had a pleasant statement to make about the Vice Presidential nominee. "I found her quite a capable woman," Karzai said. Now let’s really think about this. What does that statement really mean? Capable woman? What does that mean coming from the President of country that does not even allow females to attend schools or in most cases the opportunities to work, according to the United States Department of State? Does it mean that she is capable to perform the most basic functions of womanhood? We already know that - she has five kids to prove it. Now, I am not calling the man misogynist. But come on, what else does he have to say? Why did he not choose his diction more carefully? Does it matter that he said woman and not politician or vice president or even leader for that matter?
I do give Palin some credit. She is bringing herself up to speed on many things and in a rather shortened time of period. The Associated Press even used the term "crash course," to describe the pace of the information that has come her way. But, my question is when does she take the final exam? At 3am one morning, when the red phone is blaring?
Monday, September 22, 2008
My Personal, Personal Opinion
I hung up the phone and yelled across the room. "There's an accident on Interstate 95 in New Haven," I said. "Is there is anyone dead?" asked my disgruntled co-worker. "No," I replied. "Then why should I care?" snapped my office mate.
To me this scenario lays the groundwork in order to begin asking who the media is. The media is comprised of people who are the gatekeepers of information. In some weird way it is as if they are positioned on the top of a snow-capped mountain creating tiny little snowballs and releasing only the ones that they see fit.
However, it is both sad and admirable that the media is in the business of not caring. Now, please let me explain. It is sad when one person goes through a hardship and the media turns its cheek, deeming it unworthy for coverage. However, it is admirable when journalists go after difficult-to-uncover information that would prove of interest to a mass population.
What is the media? That's a great question. That's a complex question. But, I am starting to believe that it is a huge, uncontrollable, yet sometimes mutable monster. And, I have to admit that I have been responsible, as a member of the media, for pressing that mute button and turning off stories that I didn't care about it. But, I don't want you to take that statement the wrong way. I don't hit that button irresponsibly, like a child pressing every button in the elevator at the mall. I do it with my audience in mind.
Now, even though I am apart of that media monster, I am still annoyed with it. I too want my news quick, concise, and non-biased. I hate reading newspapers (actual papers). And yeah, maybe as journalist, I should be ashamed of saying that. But, I am not! I do. I hate it. And, I cannot tell you how many people I have border-line offended with that statement. And yes, I did write for a paper during my college years. But, these days the only thing that I want the paper for is the sodoku games and the Target sale flyer.
I am more of the internet newsy. Without a doubt, I make up one of the 7 out of 10 Americans who turn to the Internet for news. It certainly does not surprise me that "some people have stopped reading print newspapers and instead get their news online [or that] those looking for national and international news have a host of 24/7, high-quality, free options," as mentioned in the annual report by State of The News Media.Who wants to pay for news? Who wants to pay for bad news? I don't.
I do, however, pay for magazines. I have a coffee table in my apartment dedicated to magazines. Is that a double standard? Maybe…But, to me magazines are of a different breed. Magazines offer an interesting twist to the news, especially when accompanied by a sketch or an amazing photograph that may actually be more powerful in conveying a message than that of the article itself. To me it is almost a no-brainer that in "varying degrees, [magazines] have also turned to writers from opinion publications," according to State of The News Media. News moves at the speed of light these days. Weekly publications would be utterly stale if they were to just report the news straight up; they would forever be playing catch-up. Journalists who write for magazine publications have more room to play around with ideas and criticisms - far more than the writers of newspapers. But, it could be that because I work in a local television news industry that frowns upon the slightest hint of opinion that, I enjoy journalism mixed with of opinion. It is sort of a guilty pleasure of mine - just as long as the preliminary facts are not distorted.
To me this scenario lays the groundwork in order to begin asking who the media is. The media is comprised of people who are the gatekeepers of information. In some weird way it is as if they are positioned on the top of a snow-capped mountain creating tiny little snowballs and releasing only the ones that they see fit.
However, it is both sad and admirable that the media is in the business of not caring. Now, please let me explain. It is sad when one person goes through a hardship and the media turns its cheek, deeming it unworthy for coverage. However, it is admirable when journalists go after difficult-to-uncover information that would prove of interest to a mass population.
What is the media? That's a great question. That's a complex question. But, I am starting to believe that it is a huge, uncontrollable, yet sometimes mutable monster. And, I have to admit that I have been responsible, as a member of the media, for pressing that mute button and turning off stories that I didn't care about it. But, I don't want you to take that statement the wrong way. I don't hit that button irresponsibly, like a child pressing every button in the elevator at the mall. I do it with my audience in mind.
Now, even though I am apart of that media monster, I am still annoyed with it. I too want my news quick, concise, and non-biased. I hate reading newspapers (actual papers). And yeah, maybe as journalist, I should be ashamed of saying that. But, I am not! I do. I hate it. And, I cannot tell you how many people I have border-line offended with that statement. And yes, I did write for a paper during my college years. But, these days the only thing that I want the paper for is the sodoku games and the Target sale flyer.
I am more of the internet newsy. Without a doubt, I make up one of the 7 out of 10 Americans who turn to the Internet for news. It certainly does not surprise me that "some people have stopped reading print newspapers and instead get their news online [or that] those looking for national and international news have a host of 24/7, high-quality, free options," as mentioned in the annual report by State of The News Media.Who wants to pay for news? Who wants to pay for bad news? I don't.
I do, however, pay for magazines. I have a coffee table in my apartment dedicated to magazines. Is that a double standard? Maybe…But, to me magazines are of a different breed. Magazines offer an interesting twist to the news, especially when accompanied by a sketch or an amazing photograph that may actually be more powerful in conveying a message than that of the article itself. To me it is almost a no-brainer that in "varying degrees, [magazines] have also turned to writers from opinion publications," according to State of The News Media. News moves at the speed of light these days. Weekly publications would be utterly stale if they were to just report the news straight up; they would forever be playing catch-up. Journalists who write for magazine publications have more room to play around with ideas and criticisms - far more than the writers of newspapers. But, it could be that because I work in a local television news industry that frowns upon the slightest hint of opinion that, I enjoy journalism mixed with of opinion. It is sort of a guilty pleasure of mine - just as long as the preliminary facts are not distorted.
Thursday, September 18, 2008
Say What You Mean, Mean What You Say
So, the Republican-American posted an Associated Press article on their website, in which Palin defends John McCain. Palin says, "it was an unfair attack on the verbiage that Sen. McCain chose to use because the fundamentals, as he was having to explain afterwards, he means our work force, he means the ingenuity of the American people. And of course, that is strong and that is the foundation of our economy." Why didn't he just say that? Was he too busy trying to glaze over topics, with as little straight talk as possible?
I understand that in the heat of the moment one can choose the wrong word. But, a seasoned politic an such as John McCain should know that the media and the American public are like sponges, soaking up every word and action. So, I have to ask... Has John McCain been stuffing his ears with cotton these last few weeks? Why did he feel comfortable making such a blanket statement when employment is down, the market is down, and homes are being foreclosed upon at an all-time high? I am sorry but, does he really think that the American people want to turn on the TV or read the paper, only to hear him praising the strong economy. Well, I'll tell you one thing the economy is certainly strong-arming the pocketbooks of America. I want to hear McCain's plan on bettering the economy.
I spent this last weekend at my friends wedding, in South Carolina, literally watching the gas prices rise by the hour. I had never seen anything like it. I left my hotel for coffee in the morning and the price of gas was $3.49. When I left the hotel again just before noon, the price was $3.99. And when the wedding was over and I headed back to the hotel for the evening, that very same gas station was up to $4.59 a gallon. Oh, let's not mention that the neighboring gas station was literally out of gas! Should I attribute all of that to Hurricane Ike? Or the strong economy that McCain speaks of?
He can spear me his continual attempt to distance himself from the Bush Administration and the negative economic state, by pretending we are not in a recession. I want to know how I can stop spending so much money at the pump. I want to know when the prime interest rate is going to layoff my already expensive student loans. McCain needs to channel some of his POW strength and just be honest with the American people instead hitting us over the head with vague double-talk. It is no wonder that others have to try and come to his rescue and clean up the verbal mess.
Politicians, all politicians have to choose their diction carefully. And Americans, all Americans have to choose their President even more carefully!
I understand that in the heat of the moment one can choose the wrong word. But, a seasoned politic an such as John McCain should know that the media and the American public are like sponges, soaking up every word and action. So, I have to ask... Has John McCain been stuffing his ears with cotton these last few weeks? Why did he feel comfortable making such a blanket statement when employment is down, the market is down, and homes are being foreclosed upon at an all-time high? I am sorry but, does he really think that the American people want to turn on the TV or read the paper, only to hear him praising the strong economy. Well, I'll tell you one thing the economy is certainly strong-arming the pocketbooks of America. I want to hear McCain's plan on bettering the economy.
I spent this last weekend at my friends wedding, in South Carolina, literally watching the gas prices rise by the hour. I had never seen anything like it. I left my hotel for coffee in the morning and the price of gas was $3.49. When I left the hotel again just before noon, the price was $3.99. And when the wedding was over and I headed back to the hotel for the evening, that very same gas station was up to $4.59 a gallon. Oh, let's not mention that the neighboring gas station was literally out of gas! Should I attribute all of that to Hurricane Ike? Or the strong economy that McCain speaks of?
He can spear me his continual attempt to distance himself from the Bush Administration and the negative economic state, by pretending we are not in a recession. I want to know how I can stop spending so much money at the pump. I want to know when the prime interest rate is going to layoff my already expensive student loans. McCain needs to channel some of his POW strength and just be honest with the American people instead hitting us over the head with vague double-talk. It is no wonder that others have to try and come to his rescue and clean up the verbal mess.
Politicians, all politicians have to choose their diction carefully. And Americans, all Americans have to choose their President even more carefully!
Make Up Your Mind Already!
Make up your mind already - that is what someone should should say to those political analysts, who believe in fair weather commentary... I find it pretty sad, yet amusing that some find it so easy to take a stance on a particular topic and then then recant their stance, when the opposite opinion would benefit them more.
The Daily Show did a great job showing recent examples of political flip-flopping. One example involves Bill O'Reilly tearing the parents of Jaime Lynn (and Britany) Spears apart for letting their unwed teenage daughter get pregnant. O'Reilly does not hold back his criticism of the Spears parents, who he calls pinheads. However, O'Reilly tells his viewers that Sara Palin and her family should commended for supporting the unwed teenager with her pregnancy. What is wrong with this picture?
I must say, everyone has the right to change their opinions and at any given time. But, when it is clearly a matter of convenience - it makes you think. I am sure that O'Reilly would not be praising Joe Biden were he to have an unwed teenage daughter with a baby on the way...I say give me a break!
The Daily Show did a great job showing recent examples of political flip-flopping. One example involves Bill O'Reilly tearing the parents of Jaime Lynn (and Britany) Spears apart for letting their unwed teenage daughter get pregnant. O'Reilly does not hold back his criticism of the Spears parents, who he calls pinheads. However, O'Reilly tells his viewers that Sara Palin and her family should commended for supporting the unwed teenager with her pregnancy. What is wrong with this picture?
I must say, everyone has the right to change their opinions and at any given time. But, when it is clearly a matter of convenience - it makes you think. I am sure that O'Reilly would not be praising Joe Biden were he to have an unwed teenage daughter with a baby on the way...I say give me a break!
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
McCain on “The View”
I think it’s fair to say that only recently has John McCain been more willing to grant interviews to the media. So, when a friend of mine emailed me the Sen. McCain on The View – I just had to watch.
Now, it is clear that the McCain camp is pumping Sara Palin full of answers for the prying media on various topics. But, my goodness, will someone please brief McCain on this stuff already? He really struggled to come up with a solid answer when questioned about the fashion in which Palin plans to reform Washington. This question was prompted by an interview, in which the Alaskan governor claimed that McCain picked her for her reforming abilities. But, what I loved about this interview was how well-polished, the co-hosts were when McCain gave vague answers; they chimed in with relevant tidbits of information that exposed apparent half-truths.
And Joy Behar didn’t just stop at half-truths, she asked about what she says are lies found in commercial ads (lipstick on a pig, perverse sex education) which were approved by McCain. McCain countered by saying “actually, they are not lies.” But, I see a growing trend with politicians feeling comfortable saying what an idea or a statement is not. However, they rarely say what something is. Why? Well, because it is too definitive and impossible to back out of without recanting.
John McCain more than likely will not have to worry about recanting a statement made during his interview…because he gave such glossy, glazed over answers. And once when he tired of softening his statements on Roe vs. Wade, he said “let’s move on.” I am still scratching my head on that one. Is that what he will do in office, if elected President? Will he just mumble those few words if the topic at hand is one that he chooses to evade?
But, one thing also became clear to me by watching this interview. Sen. McCain is in the business of passing the buck. He does not want to come off as the bad guy and is willing to find others to do his dirty work (decisions that will spur heated debates) for him. This is evident from his desire to appoint Supreme Court Justices who will uphold the constitution as the forefathers envisioned it. That sounds like a bucket of speculation to me. How can we know what that group of founding men envisioned, unless we revert back to the original constitution? And that reminds me John…Whatever happened to change?
Now, it is clear that the McCain camp is pumping Sara Palin full of answers for the prying media on various topics. But, my goodness, will someone please brief McCain on this stuff already? He really struggled to come up with a solid answer when questioned about the fashion in which Palin plans to reform Washington. This question was prompted by an interview, in which the Alaskan governor claimed that McCain picked her for her reforming abilities. But, what I loved about this interview was how well-polished, the co-hosts were when McCain gave vague answers; they chimed in with relevant tidbits of information that exposed apparent half-truths.
And Joy Behar didn’t just stop at half-truths, she asked about what she says are lies found in commercial ads (lipstick on a pig, perverse sex education) which were approved by McCain. McCain countered by saying “actually, they are not lies.” But, I see a growing trend with politicians feeling comfortable saying what an idea or a statement is not. However, they rarely say what something is. Why? Well, because it is too definitive and impossible to back out of without recanting.
John McCain more than likely will not have to worry about recanting a statement made during his interview…because he gave such glossy, glazed over answers. And once when he tired of softening his statements on Roe vs. Wade, he said “let’s move on.” I am still scratching my head on that one. Is that what he will do in office, if elected President? Will he just mumble those few words if the topic at hand is one that he chooses to evade?
But, one thing also became clear to me by watching this interview. Sen. McCain is in the business of passing the buck. He does not want to come off as the bad guy and is willing to find others to do his dirty work (decisions that will spur heated debates) for him. This is evident from his desire to appoint Supreme Court Justices who will uphold the constitution as the forefathers envisioned it. That sounds like a bucket of speculation to me. How can we know what that group of founding men envisioned, unless we revert back to the original constitution? And that reminds me John…Whatever happened to change?
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
Smearing Lipstick
Smearing lipstick all over one’s face can be a messy situation. I know – I have done it accidentally. However, smearing someone’s word to suit your own benefit is not an accident. It can be down right dirty.
For the last two days, I have watched and read about the comment that Sen. Obama made on Tuesday at a campaign stop. Obama talked about facades that are used to cover up realities and in making this point, Obama said that you can put lipstick on a pig…but, it’s still a pig. Well…I am sure that I don’t have to tell you that the media is having a field day with this and people are sitting at home trying to dissect Obama’s comment and attempting to ascertain whether or not the Democratic Presidential Nominee gave a direct blow to Sara Palin after her reference to lipstick being the difference between a pit bull and a hockey mom. I completely understand the media circus trailing behind this comment, but what unnerves me is the unbalanced reporting that I encountered on this story. Thursday morning, I watched two cable morning news shows (no, not Fox). However, only one of them ran a clip of John McCain making the original comment that Obama reiterated on Tuesday. I think it is utterly irresponsible to run an unbalanced story, especially when the topic is intense enough to permeate the minds of the voting public. The Republicans must be pleased with the one-sided coverage, as it helps to fuel their demand of an apology for this supposed negative attack on Plain.
But, hold on a minute. Let’s say that Obama did take a jab at Palin in the political arena…When did we do away with the heavy hitting rules? Why is everyone running around asking for consistent apologies? I am sorry (no pun intended), but I like my politicians to be hard-hitting, as long they are swinging in the name of truth and a faded version of it. Or are politicians expected to be more cordial to female counterparts? Well, taking a look at the hand that Hilary Clinton was dealt in the game of politics – I seriously doubt it. No one whispered sweet-nothings into podium microphones when talking to her. No, instead they were brash. And, I am willing to bet that she was not toting any amour underneath her pantsuits when she was verbally attacked. So the Republicans, should not expect Democrats to greet Palin with a bouquet of long-stem roses and a box of Moose Munch. Maybe Republicans should take the hint and have her trade in her stylish pumps (which I do love by the way) for some combat boots, because this battle is going to be a heated one.
For the last two days, I have watched and read about the comment that Sen. Obama made on Tuesday at a campaign stop. Obama talked about facades that are used to cover up realities and in making this point, Obama said that you can put lipstick on a pig…but, it’s still a pig. Well…I am sure that I don’t have to tell you that the media is having a field day with this and people are sitting at home trying to dissect Obama’s comment and attempting to ascertain whether or not the Democratic Presidential Nominee gave a direct blow to Sara Palin after her reference to lipstick being the difference between a pit bull and a hockey mom. I completely understand the media circus trailing behind this comment, but what unnerves me is the unbalanced reporting that I encountered on this story. Thursday morning, I watched two cable morning news shows (no, not Fox). However, only one of them ran a clip of John McCain making the original comment that Obama reiterated on Tuesday. I think it is utterly irresponsible to run an unbalanced story, especially when the topic is intense enough to permeate the minds of the voting public. The Republicans must be pleased with the one-sided coverage, as it helps to fuel their demand of an apology for this supposed negative attack on Plain.
But, hold on a minute. Let’s say that Obama did take a jab at Palin in the political arena…When did we do away with the heavy hitting rules? Why is everyone running around asking for consistent apologies? I am sorry (no pun intended), but I like my politicians to be hard-hitting, as long they are swinging in the name of truth and a faded version of it. Or are politicians expected to be more cordial to female counterparts? Well, taking a look at the hand that Hilary Clinton was dealt in the game of politics – I seriously doubt it. No one whispered sweet-nothings into podium microphones when talking to her. No, instead they were brash. And, I am willing to bet that she was not toting any amour underneath her pantsuits when she was verbally attacked. So the Republicans, should not expect Democrats to greet Palin with a bouquet of long-stem roses and a box of Moose Munch. Maybe Republicans should take the hint and have her trade in her stylish pumps (which I do love by the way) for some combat boots, because this battle is going to be a heated one.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)