"Oh come on, because we thought Sarah Palin was the better candidate," John McCain told reporters Tuesday. "Why did we not take Pawlenty, why did we not take any of the other 10 other people. Why didn't I? Because we had a better candidate, the same way with all the others."
John the non-bragging war hero said, "Romney had all his money hidden in Switzerland. Sarah Palin was better, because she had never heard of Switzerland."
Why not Romney? Not because there was anything menacing in his tax returns. Because Sarah Palin was better. That's right. Sarah Palin was better. Sarah "Refudiate" Palin, who would not let the public rest until a Lifetime original series was dedicated to her, whose meandering remarks left you feeling as though you had been struck from behind by a blunt object, whose mere mention made millions of campaign-watchers cry out in terror and then go suddenly silent — was a better choice.
According to what criteria? Relative bizarreness of children's names. Hair care? Even then, the race is tight.
Unless the sole criterion by which the McCain campaign selected its helpmeet was resemblance to Tina Fey, I am not sure what the explanation was. Sarah has — er, more X chromosomes? She lives in a more remote area of the world? She has never strapped an animal to the roof of her car that was not already deceased?. I suppose she shook up the race more, in the sense that a tossed grenade shakes up a cocktail party.
One said, "I can see Russia from my house." The other one said, "I can see thousands of the jobs I created from one of my Russian houses."
Portions stolen from the Washington Post
Portions stolen from the Washington Post
No comments:
Post a Comment