And Sinz…A big fat raspberry for your generalized and generally ignorant comments about why feminists dislike Palin. It has nothing to do with whether or not she has children, nor does it have anything to do with her having a special needs child.

The reason that a Miss Wasilla Presidency scares the bejeezus out of many, many women?

1. She’s disengenuous
2. She’s ill informed, and in many ways downright igorant
3.. She puts a premium on her clothing over and above her actual content (she’s as creepy to women in that regard as John Edwards is to men)
4. She is ill-informed with a vengeance.
5. She obfuscates with impunity and a wink!
6. She’s frighteningly ill-informed and seems to think that’s a “good thing”
7. She contradicts herself, often from one day to the next
8. She’s a dabbler: She dabbled in motherhood until poltical power attracted her eye; she dabbled at political power playing until fame caught her eye. Bottom line: She’s “dabbled” in a lot, but never really devoted herself to seeing anything through.
9. She’s an unwielding, judgemental witch. Do read her papers from Alaska sometimes. She governed like a sorority girl. About what I would expect from a pageant pro, but good Lord- PRESIDENT?
10. She’s frighteningly uninformed, and stubbornly refuses to give a stab at even the most rudimentary improvement in her knowledge.

With your post, Sinz, you started to sound very like the unhinged MiGOPer or GOPROUD or whatever he’s going by these days. Get a grip. There is much to dislike about Palin, and women or feminists or Beagle puppies don’t have the corner on that market.

She thanked all the ‘real people’ at the rally. “Real People.” Just another coinage for “Real Americans.” Her usual put-down of anyone that doesn’t fit her conception of what a ‘real American’ is…. Christian, right wing conservative, anti-government, anti-Obama.

She’s good at bromides and singing conservative platititudes, good at using quips and barbs and her poison darts that gets her cheers. Little substance, if any, because she is an academic sluggard. She hasn’t done her homework.

But “sinz” thinks ‘liberal women’ (all liberal women of course) hate her because she read some columns written by some feminists with extreme views. She subscribes to the school of the some/all fallacy. Some liberals think thus, so all liberal women think thus.

The real truth is that liberal women dislike Palin because, like liberal men and even some conservatives, we are shocked this this women who couldn’t even articulate why her son is in Iraq, who still thinks it ‘might’ have something to do with 9/11, who didn’t know what the Bush Doctrine was, etc…. is now saying she feels perfectly fine to grab the brass ring of the most powerful position in the world.

This is how far the cynicism has reached within the Republican party. They support her not because they really feel she is up to snuff, but because it ‘drives liberals crazy.’ They have no real belief in serious governance.

Not that Jesus would ever have had a thing to do with their hate-mongering and finger-pointing.

December 31, 2007 9.23 trillion
December 31, 2008 10.70 trillion
December 31, 2009 12.31 trillion

No. This is a falsehood. One that’s easy to overlook because the fiscal year runs September 31 to September 31 … but in reality if you go look at the Monthly Statement of the US Debt:

http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/mspd/mspd.htm

December 31, 2007 9.23 trillion
December 31, 2007 10.70 trillion
December 31, 2007 12.31 trillion

Thus, during the last full CALENDAR year Bush was in office, we ran a 1.47 trillion dollar deficit.

In 2009, the US ran a 1.61 trillion dollar deficit.

I am sick of the “tripled the deficit” canard. It is an attempt to deflect the responsibility for the acceleration of the deficit from Bush economics, and it will therefore distort any discussion of what will be a successful and responsible economic policy going forward.

If someone does not acknowledge that Bush ran a 1.47 trillion dollar deficit in 2008 … then they don’t deserve to be called a conservative. A Republican apologist, perhaps – but certainly not a fiscal conservative.

Money quote for you: “Hennessey doesn’t deny the undeniable reality that this is entirely because Obama inherited a collapsed economy and a structural deficit caused by Bush-era policy changes.” The term “undeniable reality” doesn’t seem to apply to you. I find that disappointing. You’re usually more level-headed than that.

Depends on your definition of “soft”. He’s certainly not as sadistic and self-defeating as the last crowd, who embraced torture when there is a line out the door of experienced interrogators who say that it doesn’t work for producing good intelligence. BTW, Obama increased drone attacks, has actually nailed terrorist leaders (not like Bush trumpeting every “trusted Lieutenant” killed), and even got the man responsible for the assassination of Benazir Bhutto.

Oh, yeah. He’s also actually trying to win in Afghanistan, unlike the last gang that couldn’t should straight. The Afghan/Pakistan border area is where many of the terrorist leaders actually live.

Sorry, but the facts point to Obama actually being more competent in fighting terror.

2. Obama has repeatedly apologized for America’s alleged past sins–as if that would earn us any brownie points. Has it? The vast majority of Americans are proud of their country. I know I am. Are you?

You can’t be proud of your country and admit that we f***ed up royally in the past? If that’s the case, you have a pretty shallow form of patriotism … one divorced from reality.

3. Sarah Palin did NOT blame Obama for the deficits. She merely noticed that “Washington” has now run up a $3.6 trillion debt. Bush didn’t do that. Obama took the deficits that Bush incurred, and TRIPLED them. That was HIS choice, and liberals like Paul Krugman are actually claiming that it’s not enough and we need to have even bigger deficits and bigger debts. Do you agree?

I call bulls**t. “Washington” ran up the debt because of Bush’s policies, though the GOP lead Congress certainly helped. Massive tax cuts? Check. Massive increases in discretionary spending with no cut/revenue offsets? Check. Massive increase in entitlement spending with no cut / revenue offsets? Check. Massive war costs with no cut / revenue offsets? Check. Failure to not only pass needed financial regulation, but willful and purposeful failure to uphold existing financial regulation? BIG TIME! SEC neutered? Check. OTS complacent? Check. OCC actively protecting criminal mortgage activity? Check.

The vast majority of “Obama’s deficit” is a drop in revenue from a recession that was ongoing for about 14 months before he took office. His increased spending and tax cuts were required to save our economy from that existing recession. BTW, his budget projections actually reduce (slightly) the size of the deficit from the one he inherited from Bush.

Do I agree that we need more gov’t stimulus right now? Yes. So did Reagan when he both cut taxes and increased spending to get us out of a bad recession. (It’s OK when St. Ronny does it, I guess.) I’ll judge Obama in 2-3 years, as I judged Reagan. If he makes no attempt to raise taxes and/or cut expenses (just like Ronny), I’ll be glad to blame him for those deficits.

Finally, look at this post and chart to find out where the current deficit and projected deficits REALLY came from. Almost all of the long-term issues are from Bush policies.

In support of my thesis, I would also cite public opinion polls showing that Sarah Palin is viewed more favorably by MEN than by WOMEN.

She’s not impressing women with her success in business or politics. She is hated, absolutely hated, by left-wing women and feminist women. And it’s for the reasons I stated.