Carly Fiorina, a key surrogate for John McCain on economic issues, said on Tuesday that Sarah Palin does not have the experience needed to run a major company like the one that Fiorina formerly headed.

"Do you think [Sarah Palin] has the experience to run a major company, like Hewlett Packard?" asked the host.

"No, I don't," responded Fiorina. "But you know what? That's not what she's running for."

Listen to the audio here.

So she has the experience to be the Commander in Chief of the world's only superpower, but not enough experience to run a company.

Sara couldn't run a Dairy Queen.

Sara couldn't run a Dairy Queen.

Maybe not, but you have to admit, she could run as Dairy Queen.

She can't run a major coorporation, but she can be a heartbeat away from leading the most powerful country in the world? More crazy talk, I'm afraid.

They claim that she her "executive" experience from being a burgermeister of a tiny village is sufficient to be President, but not Chief Executive Officer of a big company? What the fuck?

That's OK, Fiorina couldn't run one, either.

Nice Silver!!!!

Good thing as Vice President she only has to break ties in the Senate... pretty easy job...

McCain is healthy... he'll make it through his first term, and after 4 years as VP she'll be fine.

Obama however has even less experience then she does and he'd actually be President...

And just what is Barry qualified to run?

-Obama however has even less experience then she does and he'd actually be President...

Think I found who has your calculator, Vernon.

Think I found who has your calculator, Vernon.

#11 | Posted by Corky

Senator for 4 years... running for President for 2 of them. Nevermind... clearly he's the most qualified.

And just what is Barry qualified to run?

#10 | Posted by MSgt

Trash Route?

The 10 years as a Senator in the Illinois legislature doesn't count?

Worked for Abe Lincoln.

"Worked for Abe Lincoln."

That it did. I suppose the following other members of the IL state senate are also qualified to be president.

Worked for Abe Lincoln.

That only works on Republicans from the north Corky.

Continuing list of those in the IL Senate who are qualified to be president under Dorky's standards, because their level of experience "worked for Lincoln."

"Nevermind... clearly he's the most qualified."

Vastly more qualified than that half-baked Alaskan.

Sure, Joe. Any of them who can win a Dem Primary.

Prolly any of them that can raise 66 million in a month

And I'm only halfway through the list. Dorky also forgets that Abe Lincoln's career in the Illinois State Senate was full of notable accomplishments. Obama's simply was not.

So Dorky has revised his qualifications for president. You must have (1) experience in the IL state legislature, (2) win a dem primary, and (3) raise money. That is all it takes to be an effective leader of America.

Dorky forgets that Abe Lincoln actually did something in the IL state legislature, and that he was captain of a militia company during a war (see: executive experience) and that he was a reputable trial lawyer who actually went to court.

The 10 years as a Senator in the Illinois legislature doesn't count?

Worked for Abe Lincoln.

#14 | Posted by Corky

Wow... you're right, I totally forgot about that. That will be helpful in dealing with our two biggest issues of the Southern States threatening secession, and what to do with all our slaves...

Palin Day 18 0 Press conferences< br />
1 Interview

0 Sunday news shows

Dorky?

Should I call you, Joe Drool?

Palin Year 44 0 meetings with foreign leaders

Yep, Vern. He's got your calculator.

Don't let him try to change the subject when you ask him for it.

Vastly more qualified than that half-baked Alaskan.

#18 | Posted by nullifidian

Not really, but even if that were the case, hooray for you, your Presidential candidate is slightly more qualified then the other party's Vice Presidential candidate.

Lincoln was an unmitigated failure who had lost several elections before he became Pres.

But as I can see now that the mere ability to count to ten, as in years in the Illinois Senate, is unmanning to some.

My retort was to Rob's assertion that he had less experience than her. It just isn't true.

Besides the fact that he has somewhat more than half a brain, while she has the gravitas of a Twinkie.

Not to offend any sensitive Twinkies out there. Joe.

Not really, but even if that were the case, hooray for you, your Presidential candidate is slightly more qualified then the other party's Vice Presidential candidate.

Back at you asshole.

Why must you always be the hypocrite?

"My retort was to Rob's assertion that he had less experience than her. It just isn't true."

Then why reference Lincoln?

Wow... you're right, I totally forgot about that. That will be helpful in dealing with our two biggest issues of the Southern States threatening secession, and what to do with all our slaves...

It might be useful for dealing with Alaskan secession if Palin's cohorts (and husband) get their way.

-Then why reference Lincoln?

Obviously because he also had 10 years in the same Ill legislature.

Are you sure you are getting your money's worth at that college?

Ammend that to Day 12 - she wasn't going to do ANY interviews until the GOP convention was over.

Other than that, your point is fair.

But she could be a community organizer in the 57 states.

The 10 years as a Senator in the Illinois legislature doesn't count?

Worked for Abe Lincoln.

#14 | Posted by Corky

As Joe has already pointed out, the similarities end there.

Cork, trying to equate Obama with Lincoln based upon resume, or anything else for that matter, is a losing proposition IMO.

"Obviously because he also had 10 years in the same Ill legislature."

But your retort was in reference to whether Obama had less experience than Palin. Not Lincoln. So again, why bring up Lincoln? If the only reason was because he also had 10 years in the Illinois state legislature, there are plenty of others you could bring up.

"your Presidential candidate is slightly more qualified then the other party's Vice Presidential candidate."

Well let's do the math.

1 year experience in state legislature of Illinois, 5th largest state = approximately 10 years of presiding over Moose Festival.

10 x 10 = 100 Obama advantage

1 year experience in U.S. senate = 10 years experience as Governor of Froxen Dirt.

4 x 10 = 40 Obama advantage

Foreign leaders and foreign countries visited, let's estimate 25. Obama advantage.

100+40+25=165

Ergo, Obama has 165 times the amount of experience as the Half-Baked Alaskan.

Bonus Obama points for attending real Universities and academic achievement.

Minus Palin points for not having a passport until last year.

"not having a passport until last year"

Is that true?

I've had a passport since 1949.

"Ammend that to Day 12 - she wasn't going to do ANY interviews until the GOP convention was over."

Nope. If Biden can give interviews before, during and after the convention, so can Palin. Anything less is a double standard.

You've gotta love Nulli's math - as long as you agree to his formulas.

To all, don't even bother responding to Nulli's #37 post - it will be just like arguing with BuffaloBob.

Funny how Tighties get their ass all puckered when someone mentions Obama and Lincoln in the same breath.

The point is that your ilk like to say, as Rob did, that Palin has more experience in politics than Obama, which is demonstrably false.

Mentioning that Lincoln also had ten years in the same congress as Obama only helps point out to the people using Vernon's Calculator that that experience is, and has been in the past, good enough by itself on a Pres hopefull's resume.

Try to get your panties outta your crack before you post nest, eh?

"You've gotta love Nulli's math - as long as you agree to his formulas. "

I thought it was amusing. But I did give the Mooseville Messiah the benefit of the doubt.

Comparing Obama's experience to Palin's:

If you're going to appeal to middle ground voters who are as likely to vote McCain than Obama, this is not the road to take. I don't know what road one should take with that goal in mind, but it's definitely not this one.

That's why what Obama should have done from the day he won the nomination was to continue with what made him successful against Clinton, i.e. working to get people who've never voted registered and energized. Remember, 50% of the voting age population doesn't vote... it seemed that was one thing he was interested in changing... during the primary at least.

Now he'd be happy if he won the presidency based on the votes of only about 25% of the voting age population.

It was amusing actually, now that I realize you were joking.

You've been so serious lately and with such a short fuse, that I actually thought you were being serious.

Shame on me, I suppose.

My retort was to Rob's assertion that he had less experience than her. It just isn't true.

Its a matter of opinion to say the least.

I don't see "State Legislator" as anything important... and I'm guessing deep down, most of you agree. I look at Mayor (unless its NYC) the same way too.

Governor and Senator are the only two important parts of their resumes... and Governor has much more responsibility then Senator. Especially since Obama has spent most of his time in the Senate preparing for and actively campaigning to be President.

The point is that your ilk like to say, as Rob did, that Palin has more experience in politics than Obama, which is demonstrably false.

Then wouldn't the most logical way to demonstrate that be to compare Obama and Palin, and say what Obama has done that Palin has not?

Mentioning that Lincoln also had ten years in the same congress as Obama only helps point out to the people using Vernon's Calculator that that experience is, and has been in the past, good enough by itself on a Pres hopefull's resume.

But it wasn't "by itself" on Lincoln's resume. It was next to the fact that he was captain of a militia that fought in a war, that he ran a business, that he was a gifted trial lawyer, and that he actually accomplished noteworthy things while serving in the IL legislature.

"Especially since Obama has spent most of his time in the Senate preparing for and actively campaigning to be President."

How is the McCain camp letting surrogates go off the reservation this late in the game? He was riding high this week and it now appears as though that post convention bounce is starting to dwindle. As much as I hate polls, I would bet the polls that include this week are going to show an up-tick for Barry considering the economy and the fact that Palin is old news now.

Obama requested for $1 million for the hospital that Michelle Obama works.

Obama secured $1.3 million of an $8 million request in 2006 for a high-explosive technology program for the Armys Bradley Fighting Vehicle. The list said the program was overseen by General Dynamics.

One of Mr. Obamas top supporters, James S. Crown, serves on the board of General Dynamics, a military contractor. Mr. Crown is a member of Mr. Obamas national finance committee.

Mr. Obama also secured $750,000 of a $3 million request for renovation of a space center named for Mr. Crowns grandfather, Henry Crown, at the Museum of Science and Industry in Chicago.

In addition to the University of Illinois, Mr. Obama secured several million dollars for a project at Chicago State University. Emil Jones Jr., the president of the Illinois State Senate and an early and powerful political benefactor of Mr. Obamas, has been a dogged champion of Chicago State, and one of Senator Obamas closest friends. A Chicago businessman, James Reynolds, sits on its board.

So there you have it Jeff, Obama has apparently accomplished many things.

Ergo, Obama has 165 times the amount of experience as the Half-Baked Alaskan.
only in the twisted, half fried brain of a dimwit.

Wow, earmarks for hospitals, scientific exploration and defense spending...how terrible. Sure does beat pork on a bridge to nowhere though.

"nly in the twisted, half fried brain of a dimwit.

#51 | Posted by midtowncowboy at 2008-09-16 02:48 PM "

Guess you never heard of satire, eh, midnight cowboy?

"Wow, earmarks for hospitals, scientific exploration and defense spending...how terrible."

If it were such a great thing, why doesn't he champion it instead of claiming "no earmarks for 2009?"

Do you think museums, hospitals and the defense industry aren't going to get cash if earmarks are quashed?

Joe, to be honest, no matter what any politican says, there will always be earmarks, unfortunately. With that said, if there is going to be pork, I want it going to something worthwhile. I still don't understand why Congress just can't have up and down votes on these items.

Having done ops research during the primary, lol, I think I know at least as much about Obama as Joe Drool.

And, like many honest conservatives, I find Palin to be a half-baked Alaskan moose MILF, compared to someone with the both the policy knowledge and the obvious intellect of Obama.

"to be honest, no matter what any politican says, there will always be earmarks, unfortunately."

There doesn't have to be. A president could veto any bill containing an earmark or the legislature could adopt a law forbidding them. Whether they will always be there or not doesn't excuse Obama for requesting nearly a billion dollars' worth.

Dorky - respond to #46 or STFU. Your choice.

A president could veto any bill containing an earmark

Yes he could and then Congress would never work with that administration.

or the legislature could adopt a law forbidding them.

And their constituents would raise all hell when federal money stopped funding their local programs.

Whether they will always be there or not doesn't excuse Obama for requesting nearly a billion dollars' worth.

Again, the programs you mentioned - defense, health, and science - are admirable programs as compared to the pork sought by Palin and pork sought by other politicians, including dems.

"Yes he could and then Congress would never work with that administration."

And who would look worse?

"Again, the programs you mentioned - defense, health, and science - are admirable programs as compared to the pork sought by Palin and pork sought by other politicians, including dems."

If all of Obama's earmarks are admirable, he should be championing them instead of rejecting them and going for "zero earmarks."

And who would look worse?

Depends on who you're asking. If you are someone who benefits from those earmarks then you are going to be upset.

If all of Obama's earmarks are admirable, he should be championing them instead of rejecting them and going for "zero earmarks."

This is becoming a circular argument. These institutions will still receive federal funding without earmarks and I think that is part of the point. I can't really see someone saying "no" to reasonable defense spending or funding for hospitals.

Guess you never heard of satire, eh, midnight cowboy?
Yes I've heard of her. Pretty red head. She love me long time.

"If you are someone who benefits from those earmarks then you are going to be upset."

And what percentage of the American population benefits from earmarks compared with those that do not? I'd wager that it's less than half, which means you'd be smarter to oppose them.

"I can't really see someone saying "no" to reasonable defense spending or funding for hospitals."

Then legislators shouldn't be afraid to propose it under their own names as a bill and subject their great idea to the scrutiny of everyone else.

And the argument is only circular because you keep repeating the same old falsity - that somehow Obama's earmarks are "admirable" even though he himself has realized that it's politically smarter to abandoned them.

abandon

compared to someone with the both the policy knowledge and the obvious intellect of Obama
He uses big words in his speaches that were given to him which makes him an intellect. He has not demonstrated policy knowledge, other than thinking the UN security council would pass a resolution asking Russia to remove troops from Georgia. I will give him the benefit of doubt and say he "forgot" Russia has a veto on the security council.

His intellect didn't prevent him from securing his home in a shady deal with a home boy convicted of bribing officials in Chicago. So maybe people who use big words impresses you, but if you've been in corp america for a while, you learn those are the BS artist, who like to talk, but don't accomplish anything. Just like empty suits walking around. Kinda like Obama.

Face it, every Congressman and Senator is going to have earmarks because they are expected to bring back something for the people in their districts. Be it a new town library or money for a new park, people in their district elect that politician to be their state or district's liason with Washington, D.C. and to funnel some of that tax money back back their way.

Now abuses like Sen. Stevens' Alaskan "million dollar bridge to nowhere" is obviously an abuse of earmarks. But getting some funds back to your city for worthy projects is all part of the job of the politicians you vote to represent you.

Now Fiorina is saying the same about McCain:

Obama spokesman Bill Burton kicks off a conference call by cheerfully quoting another line from Carly Fiorina today, this one just now on MSNBC.

"I don't think John McCain could run a major corporation," Fiorina said, before continuing to reiterate her criticism of Obama's experience.

"If John McCains top economic adviser doesnt think hes qualified to run a company, how on Earth can he run the largest economy in the world in the midst of a financial crisis? Apparently even the people who run his campaign agree that the economy is an issue John McCain doesnt understand as well as he should," Burton said.

"getting some funds back to your city for worthy projects is all part of the job of the politicians you vote to represent you."

Again - if that's part of the job, then why is Obama intent on ending the earmark process, or at least not using it himself? If this was as devastating as you and Taxman describe, I don't think he'd be doing it.

Let's put it this way....

you are playing "Who wants to be a Millionaire" for the Million dollar prize

The question is, "Which of these describes the Bush Doctrine?" (or any similar policy question)

You can Phone a Friend, either Sarah Palin or Barack Obama.

Be honest now. For a million bucks. Who do you call?

(Hint: Not Ghostbusters!)

Let's put it this way....

you are playing "Who wants to be a Millionaire" for the Million dollar prize

The question is, "How many states are there in the United State?"

You can Phone a Friend, either Sarah Palin or Barack Obama.

Be honest now. For a million bucks. Who do you call?

(Hint: Not Ghostbusters!)

I guess if weren't for the creepy/scary clowns, little kids could sleep at night, eh?

Perhaps, given a week or two to "think" on it, Cowlicker Boy could distinguish the difference between a gaffe and unmitigated ignorance.

But I doubt it.

Dorky-

I was unaware that "what is the Bush Doctrine" is the essential question facing our nation in 2009. Thank you for the update.

You can use any similar major national policy question you like, Jolene.

Who ya gonna call?

The 6 year journalism degree student or the Harvard Law magna cum laude grad?

-I was unaware that "what is the Bush Doctrine"

Actually, it is a very important policy question.

But then, if we were to try and calculate everything you are unaware of, the gerbil would have a coronary.

"Who ya gonna call?

The 6 year journalism degree student or the Harvard Law magna cum laude grad?"

Hell I don't know. The moose hunter who just got a passport last year or the guy who has traveled the world?

"Actually, it is a very important policy question."

I don't doubt that had Palin simply been asked for her policy stance with regard to pre-emptive strikes that she would have given a fine answer. She apparently didn't know it was called "the Bush Doctrine." Does that matter?

"Who ya gonna call?"

I didn't know Obama was running against Sarah Palin for president. When did that happen?

"Who ya gonna call?"

Top of the class at Harvard?
Statistically likely to be alive in four years.

Bottom of the class at Annapolis?
Statistically likely to be dead in four years.

-When did that happen?

When a 72 year old got the GOP nomination, that's when.

I don't doubt that had Palin simply been asked for her policy stance with regard to pre-emptive strikes that she would have given a fine answer. She apparently didn't know it was called "the Bush Doctrine." Does that matter?

#77 | Posted by JOE at 2008-09-16 04:43 PM | Reply | Flag:

You sir are a fucking moron for positing that it does not matter. As the candidate for VPOTUS, if she doesn't know something that so basic that almost everyone that blogs here could expound on it, she need's to take her ass back to Mooseville.

-she would have given a fine answer.

Only if Rove had written it on her palm.

Kinky Karl's Krib Notes?

Anyone can say whether they think America should attack other countries pre-emptively. Palin gave her answer on that topic. She simply flubbed on "the Bush doctrine," a term coined by a commentator on fox news. Spare me the outrage.

If you are going to continue arguing that Sarah Palin is anywhere near as knowledgeable about policy, foreign or domestic, as is Obama, or that she is as intelligent, then I DO have some swamp lan... er, real estate you might be interested in?

No Joe, Charles Gibson should have done as a teacher would have done. "Ok, you don't know that one, let's move on." Palin hasn't the mental wherewithal to be in this position, you know it, I know it. You're just being a partisan hack.

Frankly, I am outraged that McBush would put Americans in a position where this is a choice. Obama didn't pick a woman for VP, so he did to score those points.

When you walk like a duck, talk like a duck and feign that you're not defending her, well you're not a duck your a dick.

And she's seen pictures of human footprints in dinosaur bones. Further proof of rightwing incompetence.

Fuck off Reagan. You have yet to explain the importance of knowing that Bush's foreign policy is described as the "Bush Doctrine" by a fox news commentator. The point was that she gave her opinion on pre-emptive strikes and you can either agree with that or disagree with it.

Pound sand Joe, you're another rightard liar. Even after Gibson had to explain it to her like she was a 6 year old, the answer was spin and bloviating. I watched the entire painful thing, she said nothing in any of the interview segments that was substantive.

Soooo, who is she as knowledgeable as?

This guy?

Not to mention the fact that I've been researching your idiots assertion that the term "Bush Doctrine" was coined by a Fox News pundit. Nothing out there to support it, so unless you can provide a link with attribution, you're still a rightard liar. But in the true rightard way, I'm sure you'll keep repeating lies.

Conservative commentator Charles Krauthammer used the term in February 2001 to refer to the president's increased unilateralism in foreign policy, specifically regarding the president's decision to withdraw from the ABM treaty.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Bush_Doctrine

You clearly haven't been researching shit, because all you have to do is type "bush doctrine coined" into google and you'll get hit after hit referencing Charles Krauthammer. Again - tell me why it is important to know that policy by the name given to it by a person in the media.

Alright, I'll give you that one, Charles Kruathammer coined it. That said, it's been used so much and so often since 2001 that it's vernacular, I knew it, you knew it(or maybe you didn't and that's why it pisses you off that she missed the question). She doesn't have the background, intelligence or capacity to be 1 heartbeat away from POTUS. She's a rightwing, fundamentalist, flat earther that would ruin our country.

But then, so is McBush.

"Yes, Palin didnt know what it is. But neither does Gibson"

Bullshit. Any informed person would've have answered as Gibson described it. Krauthammer is just shilling for Palin. Like you.

he captured perfectly the establishment snobbery and intellectual condescension that has characterized the chattering classes reaction to the phenom who presumes to play on their stage.
article.nationalreview.com

#96 | Posted by JOE at 2008-09-16 05:26 PM | Reply | Flag:

I WANT someone smarter than myself to be president, not someone that'd be cool to have a beer with. We've already seen where that got us.

(1) Show me a source that proves that the Bush Doctrine has always been universally understood to have one meaning.

(2) Explain to me why knowing a phrase that was coined by a member of the media has any relevance to the presidency.

If neither of you can do either of these things, then politely shut the fuck up.

"I WANT someone smarter than myself to be president"

That post referred to Gibson, not Obama. Strange how you would immediately take a snob reference and start defending Obama.

P.S. being smart doesn't necessarily make you a snob.

Strawman Joe, you're too dumb to fucking live.

Out of the 4 people involved at the top of the D & R tickets, there are only a couple of people you could have been referring to and neither of them is an R.

If any of these Palin shills had been asked the question two weeks ago, they would've have answered "pre-emption."

Reagan- Answer the questions or shut the fuck up. Your choice. You have not explained why knowing a term coined by a member of the media has any relevance to the vice presidency. You also haven't explained why you lied about researching it when clearly you hadn't. You also haven't given any proof that the term "Bush Doctrine" has always had one meaning that everyone is supposed to know when a snobby reporter looks down his glasses and asks them about it.

If you can't explain any of those things, you are worthless to the discussion. Chiming in and telling people they are stupid does not make you look any better.

ROBTHEAHOLE "Not really, but even if that were the case, hooray for you, your Presidential candidate is slightly more qualified then the other party's Vice Presidential candidate."

Actually no. He has never held any position where he was required to make even one responsible decision. Palin as a Mayor and Governor had to make decisions and be held responsible, so how is he slightly more qualified than her???

Obama's background is fomenting class and racial conflict. The prospect of needing to do something positive is beyond his purview.

Obama knews about "the poor," the "American" poor and underprivileged, who lived in apartments, owned cars, were given food. Then he went to Pakistan and saw what "poor" really meant. So, now he contemplates distribution of American goods and services to "the needy" at home and abroad because he has invoked the magic phrase, "social justice," which makes it all well and good.

We may be going the way of Venezuela and Bolivia, and with such mindless leadership will kill the goose that keeps laying golden eggs. The South Americans will destroy the productive class. We can watch the stages. Maybe South America will become a Zimbabwe redux. Mugabe distributed wealth that he took from "the bad guys." And regard the results. Is there a whitey remaining in Zimbabwe to blame for their desperate plight? Or is this a situation engineered by blacks for blacks.

Take it strictly for the question... does she have the experience to run a large company like a Hewlett Packard... Then ask, do any of the candidates? I don't think so...

To be CEO of a major corporation takes a whole different type of experience, and Fiorina says so, "Running a corporation is a different set of things."

I don't see McCain, Biden or even Obama with the corporate experience to get to CEO...

By teh way Rogers, hate to point this out (who am I kidding?) but this is a bullshit headline. Fiorina didn't say she couldn't run a big corporation... the question was: "Do you think she has the experience to run a major company like Hewlett Packard?" To which she answered, "No, I don't."

I'm sure it will be corrected...

So she has the experience to be the Commander in Chief of the world's only superpower, but not enough experience to run a company.

#2 | Posted by nullifidian

this is typical of americas CEO's that consistently fail..this bitch ran a company worth 80 billion at its peak and the us economies budget is 3 TRILLION dollars..

she flubbed.. dont blame obama or anyone else..

"heartbeat away"

#5 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2008-09-16 01:33 PM | Reply

Another cliche that has worn out its welcome.

I WANT someone smarter than myself to be president, not someone that'd be cool to have a beer with. We've already seen where that got us.

#100 | Posted by Reagan58 at 2008-09-16 05:32 PM | Reply

I am smarter than George W. Bush. That is probably why I never wanted to have a beer with him.

"That is probably why I never wanted to have a beer with him."

Posted by anton

I've had one with him.
He's not too bright.

But he makes Palin look like a fungus.

Fiorina couldn't run HP either. She ran it into the ground and she was fired by the Board of Directors. One thing she does have is a big mouth and no humility.

'Fiorina couldn't run HP either. She ran it into the ground and she was fired by the Board of Directors.'

So true. Zulu used to work in Building 5 in Boise, PLS.

This guy knows a thing or two about successful business:

Fiorina couldn't run HP. Next.

When Fiorina was let go at Hewlett-Packard she walked away with a $25,000,000+ golden parachute. No wonder McCain's economic advisers are on board. They do well whichever way things swing.

If Phil Gramm and Fiorina are the cream of the economic adviser crop in the McCain camp God help us if he's actually elected.

The McCain-Paliin campaign's throwing Ms. Fiorina under the train. (She will however, remain on the RNC and be asked to separate GOPiggy boobs from their loot.)

McCain's next economic expert adviser?

Who's left?

Mitt Romney?

Rudy Giuliani?

Zza Zza Gabor?

Now that I know that Fiorina is an economic advisor, I really don't want McCain to win.

And just what is Barry qualified to run?

#10 | Posted by MSgt

Apparently just his mouth, but only with a teleprompter.

"When Fiorina was let go at Hewlett-Packard she walked away with a $25,000,000+ golden parachute. No wonder McCain's economic advisers are on board. They do well whichever way things swing."

What??? The Straight Talk Express said yesterday that they are opposed to golden parachutes for CEOs....Are Phil Graham and Fiorina opposed to the McCain "reform" of Wall Street????

someone should tell McSame that his message would be a little more believable without Graham, Fiorina, and all those lobbyists riding around with them on the STE. As it is....they come off as a bad joke.

"Fiorina is an economic advisor"

Such a success at HP.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

obama has never run anything.... except the scam he is pulling on the Dumbocrats

Warren Buffett said on Monday that he would be comfortable putting Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama in charge of running a business, though not his Berkshire Hathaway Inc insurance and investment company.

That is he would be comfortable in putting him in charge of someone else's business...his competition...oh what a glowing endorsement! Like saying Sam Walton would have been comfortable putting obama in charge of k-mart too. I would be comfortable with obama running Russia, China, Europe or any other place than the usa.

HP has never recovered from the catastrophe of Fiorina's reign. She basically gave blow jobs to every executive up the chain at AT&T, and then took Lucent public and fucked it up, then jumped to HP just as the house of cards she had created at Lucent came crumbling down. Rinse and repeat ... she jumped to HP and sucked cash and motivation out of one of Silicon Valley's jewels, then went out the door with a huge severance, leaving HP a shell of its former self. Same day Fiorina says Palin lacks experience to run HP, the HP she decimated announced yet another 24,000 people to be laid off. As a former employee and long-time stockholder in HP, I can assure you: Fiorina is a despicable, lying cunt.

Oh, and I should add: Why Fiorina is on McCain's team is a valid question to ask. Even as a McCain supporter, I question his choice.

time almost up so I had to skip to end but I am sure that one of my rightwing bros has mentioned ONE LITTLE BIT OF FACT

she continued in saying that NONE OF THE FOUR COULD.........

sort of like when mccain said that the economy was on good foundation WHICH IT IS in the context that he was speaking.
so you libs can repeat a 5 second soundbite and call it the gospel but we cant???? figures

No BaconLettuceTomato,

Fiorina's track record speaks for itself, McCain's record on the commerce committee speaks for itself, and Palin's lack of......well anything credible speak for itself.

It took years and even decades to make that kind of statement about the McCain campaign's ability to understand and manage economic issues.

...not a five second soundbyte. It is, however, a decent summarizing sentence.

that has nothing to do with my point
the ad STOPS before she says that NONE OF THE FOUR COULD and not including that is just more dishonesty

so you libs can repeat a 5 second soundbite and call it the gospel but we cant???? figures

Don't tell me a lib took something out of context?

Signed,
Lawerence Summers
Bill Bennett
Rick Santorum

Fiorina, Fiorina, you are emotionally/mentally feeling a thousand stings of bees..... please blame yourself and give time for McCain to cool down on this.....

If given a second chance to speak on the media, redeem yourself.....

Everytime this question is brought up, start by saying Obama cannot run a major company and Biden cannot run a major company..... then explain yourself. Never mention McCain or Palin in this explanation.... always put in the names of Obama and Biden while explaining....

And next time, better to hesitate than blurt an answer to a surprise question....

Wasn't she the Hp Official accused of spying on her executives and employees. Maybe she should have been the VP nominee.

Wasn't she the Hp Official accused of spying on her executives and employees.
Posted by bigblackie

No, that was her successor.

"that has nothing to do with my point"

It has everthing to do with mine. I don't take Fiorina's "Expertise" on running businesses very seriously considering she's fucked every company she's touched. Given McCain's record on regulation and Palin's inexperience and track record managing a miniscule budget, it is a perfect "blind leading the blind" analysis. Upon further review, the soundbyte stands.

Who gives a rats ass if she doesn't think Obama or Biden can run a business....Warren Buffett, a slightly more credible CEO has full confidence in Obama. Not to mention the way he managed his campaign to defeat Clinton, a huge upset, proves that he can run a large operation. Nobody on the GOP side point to any success whatsoever resulting from their economic philosophies.

Mcsame has put this uppity woman in her place and she won't be allowed to talk to the menfolk again.
But that's not sexist.
"Saint sarah helped run a car wash into bankruptcy, so she's every bit as qualified as Dubya to run a nation into bankruptcy.'
John "regulateordontregulatejustlet
menap" McSame.