I reproduced the complete post from someone named Tuari that appeared today on HotAir.com (link at left) because it gives a succinct argument why Barack Obama's attack on Sarah Palin is wrong.
I just heard that Obama released a new ad saying that the Palin choice means “no change”. I’m going through an exercise in futility in trying to figure out exactly what Obama defines “change” as. Palin is a HUGE change in the government as a whole in practically every regard. She’s anti-govt corruption, anti-big spending, for morality, for family, pro-country. The only thing I can come up with is that Obama’s “change” is just the opposite of those. His record does show that pretty well too. I always gave libs the benefit of the doubt, I mean who would want to be against freedom, family, country, but I guess they really are pro corruption (Obama and his associates and deals, saying whatever gets you elected instead of standing by your convictions), big spending (raising taxes, adding tons of heavy govt programs), anti-US (His pastor, his and his wife’s various speeches and Freudian slips), anti-family (having children is a burden). It’s quite scary that’s the “change” they can believe in. Makes you wonder if there’s something in the water.
Tuari
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment