NW hunter;
We realize you are sold on Ron Paul, but where does that give you permission to talk like a catty female Democrat about her?
Now, putting Ron Paul aside for the moment, because that is where he has put himself since last November.
You try to denigrate her "credentials", yet Sarah has been CEO of the largest and richest state in the union, one that not only doesn't heap taxes upon it's citizens but gives each one a rebate check! Although I have nothing against Ron Paul, the number of people who have been CEO of the largest and richest state of all ..are few and far between. And there are not many who have guided their home state to fiscal success over the last 10 years or so.
You talk about "experience"..Nazi Pelosi and Barbara Boxer as well as Joe Biden and, Teddy Kennedy and Barney Frank have tons of experience, but I sure wouldn't want them running things. Perhaps experience in Washington is the last thing we need, it hasn't done us any favors lately...just a bunch of entrenched self-servers. Frankly, I would take Palin's few years of honesty and successful operation of our largest state over many of the D.C. hangers-on almost any time.
You say "The country is full of good looking, intelligent, pro-life, pro-gun women. This alone does not make them a good choice for the highest office in the land."
1) the assumption that all her qualifications are as you listed ...is your assumption alone. Curiously, you use a liberal's argument..first you purport to give ALL her qualifications in one sentence..then you say they are not enough. Liberals are great at setting up straw men, then knocking them down.
While Ron Paul is a viable candidate, sometimes I tend to think that there is a core group of Paulistas who think he is the ONLY one who could do the job.
Sure sounds like the Obamanites who could see no other than Barack Hussein to be their "messiah"..
Sure Palin scares some folks even here; she is the epitome of the honest, non-lying candidate..and that scares liberals wherever they may be hiding out.
