She Said, She Said

There are few notes on my index card of "Insightful Comments by Sarah Palin." The card designated as "Insightful Comments by Michelle Bachmann" has been used for a wad of gum. No sense wasting the card.

If Nancy Pelosi says, "Sorry, Charlie!" to Charles Rangel, I'll add those words to her card. Women like Hillary Clinton and Michelle Obama are in a different stratosphere when it comes to smarts and maturity. Don't bother with index cards; just listen.

Shirley Sherrod has shown her wisdom and character in a week when both were in short supply. The remarks taken out of context by a conservative blogger got her fired in a Fire, Ready, Aim fiasco. She proved herself to be a very down-to-earth, wise woman in subsequent interviews.

What she'll do now is still undecided, but I'll go out on a limb here and say it won't involve appearing on a TV show with Kate+8. (It's all yours, Sarah!)

Learning that Shirley Sherrod 's fate was decided, in part, by what FOX Television host Glen Beck might think, was a shocker. It was bad enough in a Republican administration, but NOW...?

Holy crap.

Another woman who has impressed me in recent months is Elizabeth Warren, the take-no-prisoners head of the Government Oversight Panel on the financial crisis and how the TARP money was used. I listened to hours of those hearings and liked her level-headed, no-bull manner. A Harvard Law professor, she came across as likable, non-pretentious, and extremely knowledgeable. There was no posturing in her manner. She knows her stuff.

Feel free to collect my wisdom on a gum wrapper, but I thought she'd be a shoo-in to head the newly forming Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Silly me. It seems that conservatives and bankers don't like her. Pundits speak of that distinction as if it were a bad thing-- afraid she'd do the job too well, perhaps. She cares about the middle class and advocates more transparency in the financial murkiness which swirled unchecked during the past decade.

The banks and financial agencies spent over $50 million last year for lobbying efforts, the Chamber of Commerce over $13 million. Would putting her in a position to stand up when necessary against that kind of influence really tilt the process?

I've heard some of the arguments against her. They're afraid she'd make businesses shy away from hiring, expanding, etc. for fear of more regulation, a familiar tune that's whistled regularly these days.

She's not anti-business; she's for a more level playing field.

Shows what I know; I'd have thought that would be the idea.