uite simply liberals should be tripping over themselves to endorse Sarah Palin.  This is because she represents the very ideal of the liberal platform.  And that is why liberals have been so hostile towards her.  First of all, since Palin is a woman, then it follows as a conceptual truth that she has been oppressed.  She has 5 children.  Clearly, her husband’s only concern has been to keep her barefoot and pregnant.  Obviously, Palin has suffered from oppression without even realizing it.  Feminists tell us that this sort of thing happens all the time.  So, to begin with, Palin is rightly deserving of the support and sympathy of all sensible and right-thinking women—women who are no longer slaves to the sexist mentality. 

Now, I do understand Sarah Palin—God bless America!—has precious little experience.  But I seem to recall that liberals believe mightily in affirmative action.  To hear liberals tell it: All of this talk about qualifications is none other than a way for white men to keep women and minorities out of power.  So what if a person doesn’t have experience?  After all, look at all of these old white men with lot and lots of experience.  And look at where we are.  Clearly, experience isn’t all that people make it out to be. 

Someone without experience may be just what we need in order to bring a fresh perspective to issues.  Behind those burning bushes of desire there was a gift from God—not in the form of a lamb, but in the form of a woman without experience.  God bless America! 

Now, some liberals have already observed that Sarah Palin can hardly be a good mother and, at the very same time, serve well in the office of vice-president.  I was almost persuaded by this until I remembered just how much liberals believe in day care. 

As I understand day care—and clearly my experience is limited seeing that I am only a man—its very raison d’être is to free from the oppressive burden of having to attend to the children whom they bring into the world thereby permitting these women to pursue more meaningful roles.  To here liberals tell it, the ideal would be for women to be back at their jobs—and so their more meaningful concerns—the day after giving birth. 

I mean come on: The child can learn from others who the parents are.  We are talking equity here: If the father can keep on working after an ejaculation that results in pregnancy there is no reason on the face of this earth why the mother cannot keep on working right after giving birth.  We all know that if it were men who gave birth, then birthing would amount to not much more than urinating after lunch.  At any rate, technology would deliver this outcome.

Unless I am missing something, Sarah Palin is surely the poster-child for the liberal point of view.  Hell, liberals should marching around with Sarah Palin in tow claiming that she exemplifies the very idea of “God Bess America”

If I understand the liberal agenda correctly, what could be a better sign of social progress—something that would make a man want trade in his testicles for breasts—than having someone like Sarah Palin only a heartbeat away from the presidency?  Given the liberal agenda, the answer is: Nothing ! ! !  And that, alas, is precisely the problem for liberals.  And it shows.  One unmistakable sign of ingratitude is getting precisely what one asked for and then complaining about it.  We have jealousy, by contrast, when we get angry because someone up-staged us by doing precisely what we claim people ought to do.  So which is it: ingratitude or jealousy?