I never cease to be astounded by logic used by people who spend most of their time in the Washington beltway. Sarah Palin a net negative? Okay, here's my new argument: Last year the New England Patriots finished 18-1. They lost the Super Bowl, therefore Tom Brady was a drag on the team.Pondered the member of GOP Senate Leadership, "Has she been a net negative? You could maybe make that argument, but I would blame some of the campaign handlers for her being that net negative because they did not handle her correctly."
Asked Gillan: "Do you think she's qualified to be president?"
Ensign said, "I do not think that Barack Obama or her are experienced enough to be president of the United States -- neither one of them, and Hillary Clinton was much more qualified to be president than Barack Obama was, but that's who the nominee is.
"John McCain is much more qualified than Barack Obama and certainly, Joe Biden is much more qualified than Sarah Palin is," Ensign said. "I'd rather have the most qualified person at the top of the ticket, not number two."
Now, I will agree she hasn't been handled properly, but it's not about speeches or interviews, it about not letting her be her. She should have been unleashed from Day 1. Nevertheless, I see more than just foot-in-mouth going on here.
Nobody in Washington loves anything more than being right. If McCain-Palin lose, and many in the GOP are convinced they will, they want to be able to say on November 6th, "Yeah, I knew it, I told them they should've...."