@OmSigDAVID,
OmSigDAVID wrote:
OmSigDAVID wrote:
If Sarah were elevated to the Presidency, she 'd surround herself with pro-freedom advisors
to handle the complexities, the important thing being that we were going in the right direction,
not pulled into Marxist despotism.
engineer wrote:
Quote:But I haven't seen even that much managerial ability.
What do u expect to
SEE ?
She has been the chief executive officer of Alaska for several years now
and nothing shockingly untoward has happened. U see a problem ?
Alaska's governor is under investigation, has been found to have abused her power in troopergate, has gone from an extreme budget surplus to having to make cuts even though the price of crude is going up. Yes, I see problems.
Quote:
engineer wrote:[/b]
Quote:
I think the more likely senario would be that Palin would find herself surrounded by advisors
who would run the country by proxy.
That has been true of all Presidents.
None of them has been an
expert on
EVERYTHING.
That is what his cabinet is for; he additionally has more advisors.
Presidents have advisors and they make the big calls. I don't Palin has the background or curiosity to fill that role. She had the benefit of the doubt on day one, but she's failed to demonstrate any capability
Quote:
engineer wrote:
Quote:
I'll take a President who can present a clear vision of his desired
future over one who can spit out only soundbites.
Hitler was very, very clear (and loud) of his desired future.
(and plenty of manual gestures)
I am sure that u do
not mean that u will take him over Sarah
nor over anyone who "can spit out only soundbites".
A lot depends on what that vision
IS.
Sure, but I didn't say I would take ANY person with vision, I just won't take a person without one.