Carol Fowler’s Apology for Abortion Comment Regarding VP candidate Palin

Alex Burns of has reported during an interview with Greta van Susteren of Fox News that Carol Fowler, the SC Democratic Chairperson, in apologizing for her comment about Sara Palin, stated that she was referring to Palin being selected by John McCain as a single issue choice, that is, to appeal to those who oppose abortion.

Apparently, Carol Fowler, along with a great number of Democrat pundits, simply don’t get it. Or, they would like to make everyone believe that Sara Palin was selected based on a single issue and one of their, the Democrat’s, choice.

Unfortunately for them and taking a little twist on a statement I heard many years ago, “That boat don’t float.”

The Democrats are desperately trying to portray Sara Palin as a single issue candidate whether it’s her gender appeal to women, abortion or a contrived lack of experience. None of those boats float.

I have four sisters and two daughters, all of voting age. I’ve discussed Sara Palin with both of my daughters, one of my sisters and my mother. My oldest daughter is opposed to Sara Palin on a single issue, her perceived opposition to abortion. My youngest daughter is undecided about her saying she doesn’t know enough about her. She doesn’t like Obama thinking he’s an opportunist. My mother likes Palin. I’m not sure why. My oldest sister likes Palin because of her stand on reforming politics in Alaska. She doesn’t agree with Palin’s stand on abortion but doesn’t think it’s as important an issue as reform. She thinks Obama is a Marxist.

So …

My limited and unofficial straw poll of my closest feminine relatives covers the entire spectrum of opinions.

The Democrats’ strategy to portray Sara Palin as a single issue choice for vice president by John McCain whether it be as a woman appealing to women or anti-abortion appealing to Pro Life advocates is an over simplication that may not work … no more than portraying John McCain as another George Bush or too old to be president.

Admittedly and obviously some people will vote based on a single issue.

I give the majority of American voters credit for having more depth and maturity in their decision making process than that.


S.C.’s Carol Fowler on Sara Palin: “Palin’s only qualification is lack of abortion.”

Carol Fowler, the Democratic chairperson for South Carolina,stated in a recent interview with that Sara Palin’s only qualification as a vice presidential candidate was that she hasn’t had an abortion.

According to’s blogger, Jonathan Martin in the following article,  S.C. Dem chair: Palin primary qualification is she hasn’t had an abortion,

South Carolina Democratic chairwoman Carol Fowler sharply attacked
Sarah Palin today, saying John McCain had chosen a running mate ” whose
primary qualification seems to be that she hasn’t had an abortion.”

It sounds like Ms. Fowler is vying for the position of Secretary of State under Obama or trying to begin a campaign to eventually replace Howard Dean as Democratic national chairperson.

I think she approaches or surpasses Dean in appropriateness and eloquence. But, then again, her intuition for diplomacy may be just what Obama would need as head of the State Department.

These are the type of people Barack Obama will be choosing from if he’s elected president.

I now live in South Carolina although I am unequivocally from Georgia and grew up farming for my family. Regarding people like Carol Fowler, we’ve had a common saying, “This person is dumber than dirt.” Comment by Earl | September 10, 2008

“Oink, Oink!!”

From “porkbarrel” to “when pigs fly” or one of my favorites, “can’t make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear”, swine have lent a porcine flavor to politics for a long time.

Intended or not, Barack Obama’s comment obviously struck a particularly timely chord with the crowd seated behind him with his “lipstick painted pig” comment and a nerve with Sara Palin supporters and other feminists. With Sara Palin’s extremely recent reference to hockey moms and pit bulls, Obama’s lipstick analogy was, in the least, poorly timed.

Obama should simply say, “Okay, my comment was poorly timed and I shouldn’t have said it, regardless of what I meant or how it was taken.”

Unfortunately for Obama, admitting a mistake, inadvertent or otherwise, is like walking over a bed of glowing coals. The man simply can’t do it. It’s not a part of his inherent nature. His ego won’t allow it.

And, that’s the problem … his ego … not the comment … a significant character flaw.

Obama, “Spare me the phony outrage!”


Barack, spare “me” the phony outrage!!!

Your entire campaign has been based on phony illusions and comparisons.

Ethics reform: You claim to want to reform Washington. What’s your record? Reforming Chicago politics? Reforming Cook County, Il. politics? Reforming Illinois politics? Okay, the Democratic leadership stuck your name on the list as the lead Democrat on an ethics reform bill the day it was voted on after months of negotiations and debate. How do we say “phony”? Washington Reform? You’ve claimed to have passed a reform bill in Congress … wow, single handed. Wasn’t the critical amendment to keep the Senate Democratic leadership from killing the actual reform of the proposed House bill actually sponsored by Republicans. Again, … phony.

Economy: After promising everyone everything in your acceptance speech at the Democratic convention, it’s a little confusing as to how you’re going to achieve all of your promises without ruining the economy … especially when your unadulterated support of unions is in direct conflict with any real economic growth. Unions have destroyed more than one industry from railroads to steel to the automotive industry to even our educational system.

Education: Your support of teachers’ unions is in direct contradiction to improving education. Teachers’ unions don’t want teachers to actually be held accountable for competency.

Energy: Somehow, we’re all going to mysteriously teleport to 10 years into the future when we all have electric cars powered by wind and solar energy. I suppose you’ll be serving your third term by then. Under your plan, will our foreign oil dependence increase from 70%  to 90 or 95% before the transition occurs? Will we still be “studying” nuclear and clean coal?

War: You keep chiding John McCain with the $10 billion a month that the war is costing. But, your own plans will keep those expenditures going for another year or two … unless you aren’t being completely honest. Phony indignation and comparison?

And “your” phony outrage over McCain and Palin stealing your claim to use of the word “change”?

You’re simply another prophet of a “progressive, socialistic agenda” which hasn’t changed since Karl Marx introduced it in Europe in the 1860’s and Charles William Eliot brought it to Harvard in 1869 to save a failing university with radical “new” ideas. What’s new or different or change about a failed 150 year old philosophy?