THats the dumbest interpretation I have ever heard.
Ain’t I a private citizen speaking out on issues?

“I think you may have meant “authority” instead of “responsiblity.””

No, I meant responsibility. She had no responsibility for making public policy, so she was completely free to make irresponsible statements geared to cultivating a political following.

That kind of thinking is true… of left-liberals and Gitmo. Keeping a couple hundred terrorists locked up in Gitmo is the only way. In the last year, Obama and other lefties have been forced to recognize that. In a strange, twisted way, as reality teaches our leftie friends various hard lessons, their minds produce a defensive projection that is it somehow libertarians/conservatives that are being forced to learn various hard lessons – or who would be so forced, if they held office. Thus they can avoid seeing the fact that libertarian-conservative ideas, unlike leftist ideas, actually work in reality and don’t need to be drastically altered.

Sounds like you’re saying private citizens shouldn’t speak out on such issues. I think you may have meant “authority” instead of “responsiblity.”

Huh?

Fiorina had no responsibility whatsoever on the matter, and was not an out-front political figure at the time it passed.

So why the purple-plexia over whether or not Palin supported it?

And card check? Isn’t that a totally dead issue by now?

Nope:
http://thehill.com/business-a-lobbying/61049-sen-brown-decent-chance-for-a-card-check-deal-to-pass

Perhaps you and the other a-hole liberals would like it to be forgotten so it can be sprung on us later, but it’s not dead. Not as long as liberals are still rewarding the unions for their kickbacks er….”campaign contributions” (yeah, that’s the ticket).

Fiorina had no responsibility whatsoever on the matter, and was not an out-front political figure at the time it passed. As a result, her “position” speaks only to the question of which constituency she is seeking to win over, not on how she would have voted if the responsibility were on her shoulders.

To be sure, I’m not on board with Carly on every issue. She, for example, supported Prop 8.

Agreed. (I voted against Prop 8; although I do not fault Prop 8 supporters / gay marriage opponents, because they had a valid point that SCOCA was wrong to have imposed gay marriage on CA by judicial fiat.)

With Fiorina’s answer, we’ve arrived in territory where the only way to accuse her of supporting the stimulus is to simultaneously accuse her of being a ridiculous liar. Which I do *not* accuse her of; quite the contrary. I’ve been impressed with her recent appearances. I asked the question because others have asked the question of me, and I couldn’t find anything definitive on google, but I will take this latest answer as definitive, that Fiorina was against the stimulus. (The right position, IMHO)

I’d love to ask her how she would shrink, not slow the growth of, but shrink government. I’ve found thats a good way to weed the real fiscal conservatives out from the rhetorical ones. The former will have concrete answers because they have actually thought about the issue, the latter will hem and haw because they have no real interest in shrinking govt.

I readily admit I know little of Fiorina, and am just beginning to learn about her — will be interested to hear about the rest of the interview.