It is difficult for me to understand the animosity that Rochelle Riley of the Detroit Free Press has for Sarah Palin. Riley is writing like a spurned 17 year old at the high school prom.
In her latest opinion piece splashed on the front page of the Freep's online edition, (since I never spend a nickel on that particular tired city rag, I don't even know where it is located in the print edition,) Riley asserts that
Palin is setting the gender back by decades. The next time a woman runs for any national office, her opponents will have sound bites galore from the Palin ditz reel, the last time a woman ran. That reel will grow if Palin participates in a vice presidential debate that will be funnier than the "Saturday Night Live" parodies that already have aired.Seriously? Palin's candidacy has, according to Riley, pushed the female gender back at least into the 1980s and perhaps further, depending on how hysterically Riley meant the word "decades." Has a more profoundly idiotic comment ever made it into an opinion piece of a major newspaper in history?
McCain cannot drop her; to do so would be political suicide. He cannot cancel the debate. He failed to do that with his own. But I cannot imagine that Palin really wants to continue with this campaign just because she doesn't like to lose. This isn't a beauty pageant or a mayoral run or even a gubernatorial campaign among the moose.So, Rochelle, please go ahead and tell us why you think she really wants to continue with this campaign. Perhaps you can project for us what you would do if you were ever taken seriously enough to be elected a governor, a mayor, or a beauty queen. All platitudes aside, is there even a point to this article other than trying to dig your nails into the hide of another woman?
This election comes at a time when our country is globally hated and financially imploding. What person in their right mind still thinks that this is politics as usual?There are numerous lucid arguments as to why any of the top four candidates on this year's ballot are less than desirable for the jobs to which they have been nominated.
Sarah Palin, go home.
Rochelle Riley's "I hate her because she is prettier than I am" article is not one of the better ones.