The Character Assassination of Sarah Palin and John McCain

By: Jim Byrd

The most effective method of judging the impact of an action is to observe the reaction it generates. John McCain’s choice of Sarah Palin as his Vice-President has caused rampant hysteria for the Democrats. One would have thought John McCain, by picking a Vice-President with unabashed morals, was clutching a wooden stake and the Democrats were susceptible to the same fate as Vlade the Impaler.

The reaction from the left was immense, broad, and their perfunctory barbaric rhetoric was quintessential Democrat. To achieve insight into the mindset of the contemporary liberal, one must labor through several publications daily to stay up to date–as when dealing with any entity whose foundation is not based on principles, the rules change daily. I toil through the,, and various other Marxist newspapers that parade around as legitimate journalistic publications. My meandering brought me to an article in the Baltimore Sun, concerning pandering. The Baltimore Sun is one of the more scurrilous publications, especially to anyone harboring a granule of common sense. I actually found the link to the Baltimore Sun on the website rather than from my own expiscatory searching. The author, Susan Reimer, feels she is being pandered to by John McCain because he chose Sarah Palin as his VP.

Reimer is under the obtuse impression that John McCain picked Palin, in her words, “to woo women like me.”

Let us discover what type of women Susan Reimer is to warrant all this wooing.

Before continuing with Reimer’s political diatribe, which includes a combination of presumption, supposititious reality, and psychic insight into McCain’s reasons for choosing Palin–an insight that the rest of the world is not privy to, the reader will be made aware of her peculiar qualifications. As with most liberal publications, a scribe’s ideology will trump their qualifications. As in the case of the clairvoyant Susan Reimer, whose credentials include a sports writer, and writing a column on gardening, her political acumen was honed through the contemplative discourse of petunias and okra.

Reimer is one of those voters consumed with hate and illiteracy because Hillary has been relegated to the peanut gallery. She ineptly compares Hillary vs. Palin in regard to John McCain’s decision: “He seems to think that my girlfriends and I are so disappointed that an utterly qualified woman is not going to be president that we will jump at the chance to vote for an utterly unqualified woman for vice president.” A subtle, yet a problematic theme has emerged and continues to repeat itself with liberals since the announcement of Palin. Reimer is comparing Hillary the President to Palin the Vice President. The Democrats and Obama, continue to compare his credentials to Palin–a potential President vs. potential Vice-President. Most of the populace is acutely aware that John McCain is running for President, not Sarah Palin. To compare and contrast Obama and Hillary to John McCain’s VP pick, is a strong presumptive indicator of fear.

Reimer also, being a sports writer in the past, cannot seem to, in her overnight progression towards a political pundit, upgrade her sportscaster vernacular circa 1970′s, to a more professional articulation. Her insight into McCain’s psyche, “Does McCain think we will be so grateful for a skirt on the ticket that we won’t notice that she’s anti-abortion, a member of the NRA and thinks creationism should be taught alongside evolution?” Reimer may be sorely disappointed to learn that McCain probably did not have in mind soley the members of the female gender when picking his VP, especially of Reimer’s ilk, who may or may not wear skirts, who promote infanticide, are anti-Constitution (Second Amendment), and who believe that God did not create this world. Reimer, in her witlessly induced myopic haze, refuses to believe that Palin’s accomplishments and conservative principles, may have been the deciding factor in McCain’s choosing her.

It would behoove the Democrats to focus on the actual candidates in this election. Once again, for clarification’s sake, McCain is running against Obama. Obama is not running against Palin. Hillary is out of the loop. And Joe Biden has become, as is customary in presidential elections, irrelevant.

She also states that to garner the Evangelical vote, a term I seriously doubt she could describe with the remotest accuracy, that McCain had to “Choose a running mate with a Down syndrome child.” Reimer’s train of thought may have completely derailed at this point. It should be apparent to the most plebians of society, that in order to appeal to the Evangelicals, (assuming she meant fundamental Christians), that it would be most effective to appeal to their Christian beliefs and values, rather than their perceived handicap of the Palin’s child.

Reimer continued to debase Sarah Palin with her captious prose, while concurrently and mysteriously excluding that the fact that Sarah Palin is the Governor of Alaska, is the Commander in Chief of the Alaskan National Guard, chaired the Alaskan Oil and Conservation Commission, and served as Ethics Supervisor of the Commission, and her, so far, victorious fight against corruption. Reimer fails to mention the fact that Hillary Clinton has never operated in an executive capacity, only stating that she is qualified to be President. She also failed to mention that the only executive experience that Barack Obama has was running an organization with William Ayers, the terrorist, that distributed 49 million dollars, but Obama won’t comment on where the money went.

She capped it off with this nugget of soothsayer prowess: “But it is more likely that she will be in over her head, and all the women McCain thinks he is courting will be cringing for our sister instead. And then we will be furious at him for setting one of us up to fail. It isn’t just that Palin might look bad campaigning against the likes of Biden or Obama. It’s that she already looks bad compared to the likes of Hillary Clinton.” This was one of the more derogatory statements about Palin by stating that she is one of us. It could be assumed that a female of morals would cringe at the comparison.

Andrea Mitchell of ABC news said that the only voters that Palin will bring to the McCain campaign are uneducated women. I find this hard to believe, because if there was a modicum of truth to the statement, then the likes of Susan Reimer and the majority of the Democrat female voters would be standing in line to vote McCain-Palin, including the degreed, but poorly educated Mitchell.
It has been overtly unambiguous this election cycle of the raw hatred of the Democrats. But in the first 48 hours after McCain announced Palin as his VP, the left has taken their level of hatred to another level. Their hatred of any candidate associated with morality has been so manifested that the putrid stench of it will not dissipate regardless of who wins the presidential election. Liberal politicians like to use the term “two Americas.” They are right in this regard, there are two Americas, one of morals and one without.

About The Author Jim Byrd:
Jim Byrd's website is A Skewed View.

No Comments

No comments yet.

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.