[rintense]

Oh figures you'd chime in. You can't stand Sarah anyway. What's one more stick to bear her with?

Let me ask you this... whoever you choose to support come 2012, when they make a 'celebrity' appearance, will you toss them aside too?

[rintense]

That’s ‘beat’ her with. Seems I need to beat myself with one to stop these typos!

[OldDeckHand]

"Let me ask you this... whoever you choose to support come 2012, when they make a 'celebrity' appearance, will you toss them aside too? "

If they play the part of stand-up comic? You bethca!

I don't see Abe Lincoln doing stand-up.

[PaleoBob]

Oh figures you’d chime in. You can’t stand Sarah anyway. What’s one more stick to bear her with?
Let me ask you this... whoever you choose to support come 2012, when they make a ‘celebrity’ appearance, will you toss them aside too?

---

LOL Good point there. Reminds me of something F. Scott Fitzgerald said to his daughter in a letter. She was constantly complaining that all the good men were taken, and he cautioned her to not flip the thesis around and assume that an untaken man could not possibly be “good” solely because he was available.

Here at FR, any day of the week you can get a long list of potential candidates for president who could not possibly get elected — that fact being their chief qualification for the office, or so it sometimes seems.

And as for the one person who CAN win, well, she seems to disqualify herself just because, well, she actually can (win).

And as for the celebity thing specifically—do people here remember what Ronald Reagan did for a living before he entered politics?