It’s more likely, and obvious to many, that Obama searches for words that are non-commital at best, and obfuscating and deceiving at worst.

So far as that quoted Palin paragraph goes, I can’t even follow the train of thought. Maybe my old elementary teacher could have diagrammed the sentences and clarified the meaning. It seems to me like a string of memes.

As a “PROFESSIONAL WRITER!”, you of all people should understand that the rules for grammar and structure are relaxed regarding the colloquial nature of an informal verbal exchange. Only an arrogant asshole, like a “PROFESSIONAL WRITER!”, would demand that spoken language should precisely conform to grammatical rules.

In this answer to O’Reilly’s question, Palin communicated her thoughts far more effectively than the broken, littered, rambling, and nonsensical oratory tortures that often characterize Obama’s candid answers. But that’s because Obama isn’t telling us what he really thinks. If he were truthful about his thoughts, none of us would ever have heard of him.

Supposed??? WTF? lets just stipulate that this is not open to debate emphatically, and go from there.

Corruption. What BO is and what Palin is not. Period.
I do not agree with many of her positions, I having examined her back round and experiences, I would vote for her just to watch Congress squeal like the pigs at the trough they are. And I mean both side of the isle. I would not stand in her way, as I would take a person of principle over one of deciet, regardless of their views.

Every time Palin opens her mouth, she delivers another astonishing pearl of semi-English. Here’s an exchange with Bill O’Reilly just from the last day or two…

O’REILLY: Let me be very bold and fresh again. Do you believe that you are smart enough, incisive enough, intellectual enough to handle the most powerful job in the world?

PALIN: I believe that I am because I have common sense, and I have, I believe, the values that are reflective of so many other American values. And I believe that what Americans are seeking is not the elitism, the the kind of spineless… a spinelessness that perhaps is made up for that with some kind of elite Ivy League education and a fat resume that’s based on anything but hard work and private sector, free enterprise principles. Americans could be seeking something like that in positive change in their leadership.

I’m sorry, it is very difficult to take seriously anyone who thinks this woman has any shot at the presidency.

But I’ll try. To answer your questions: anybody who knows anything about economics knows that employment is a lagging indicator of the end of a recession; most economists believe a) that the Obama administration’s 8% assessment early in the year was wildly optimistic and being spouted for purely political reasons; b) nonetheless, the stimulus package and bailouts prevented a full-scale Depression; and c) the stimulus package, in order to get it passed, was way too small to have a sufficient impact on employment. Paul Krugman and other “liberal” economists wrote exactly this six months ago. Now their predictions are coming true, and Congress is talking about a second stimulus, which is almost certainly needed, and will almost certainly be opposed by, um, thinkers such as yourself and other Republicans.

As for Afghanistan: for idiots like you to be whining about Obama taking his time figuring out a rational way to resolve that catastrophe, after the past eight years of object lessons of what happens when a U.S. president rushes heedless into military action without a sufficient plan, constitutes a moral offense against all the U.S. soldiers who have already lost their lives. Obama is acting like a commander in chief. If you’re a Republican in thrall to Limbaugh/Palin-level political thought, I can understand why you wouldn’t recognize genuine leadership when you see it.

She is the real deal not manufactured…by MSM.