Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

More evidence Palin should stay inside her bubble

As I've noted here before, the evidence is mounting that Sarah Palin is successfully tightening her emotional grip on her devoted legions of supporters -- at the expense of everyone else, who increasingly find her to be a major turn off.

Here's the latest data point: A new survey from the Dem firm Public Policy Polling finds that in the wake of Palin's endorsement of Kelly Ayotte, the GOP Senate candidate in New Hampshire, Ayotte's lead has dropped to its lowest level yet.

And it appears to be all about Palin: As Taegan Goddard notes, the poll's key finding is that Ayotte's appeal to moderate voters has dropped precipitiously in the wake of Palin's endorsement.

The key here is that this isn't a one-off finding: Palin's toxicity is born out in other polls, too. A recent Gallup poll noted a striking disconnect in public attitudes towards Palin: While her favorability rating is far higher among Republicans than any other 2012 GOP contenders, she's also far and away the least liked of all the 2012 hopefuls among Americans overall.

That's not all: A recent NBC/WSJ poll found that a majority of adults nationwide would look negatively on candidates endorsed by Palin.

The pattern is becoming overwhelmingly obvious. Palin's current role of celebrity quasi-candidate works for her. It's allowed her to insulate herself from direct media cross-examination and to communicate directly to the Palin Nation hordes, who remain as transfixed as ever. But the rest of the world continues to find her more and more distasteful, and it's growing less likely that she'll succeed if she ever steps outside the bubble she's crafted for herself.

UPDATE, 1:03 p.m.: It gets better: That new poll out of New Hampshire also finds that 51 percent say they're less likely to back a Palin-endorsed candidate; among moderates that number is 65 percent.

By Greg Sargent  |  July 27, 2010; 12:40 PM ET
Categories:  2012  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Yet again, it all turns on Olympia Snowe
Next: Now a Blue Dog Democrat gets caught talking chickens for checkups!

Comments

"and to communicate directly to the Palin Nation hordes, who remain as transfixed as ever. "

This makes me think of a really bad zombie movie where a bunch of wild eyed psychos is chasing after you

Posted by: mikefromArlington | July 27, 2010 12:49 PM | Report abuse

There is no doubt that Sarah's star is ascendant, while Barry's morphs into mud.

Posted by: idesign | July 27, 2010 12:56 PM | Report abuse

This is why I get confused when people continue to talk about Palin running in 2012.

Clearly she can't win in a general election -- and I'd be surprised if she could even win in a GOP Primary.

Posted by: Quick2822 | July 27, 2010 1:03 PM | Report abuse

@idesign

Only because I'm curious, do Sarah Palin fans get an email which contains things to copy/paste into comment sections of political sites?

Your response is what I see when her fans are forced to defend her in the face of real poll numbers.

Posted by: Quick2822 | July 27, 2010 1:06 PM | Report abuse

At the Netroots conference, Sarah Palin far and away won the Straw Poll for the GOP nomination. Liberals are overjoyed at the prospect of her as a candidate against Obama. I don't know if I can stand for her to be in the news every day for a year and a half campaign, but it might be worth it just to see republicans get trounced even worse than they were last time.

Posted by: SDJeff | July 27, 2010 1:09 PM | Report abuse

Greg, You must really be afraid of Sarah... either that or she turns you on and you are afraid to admit it to your liberal friends at the New Pravda aka The Washington Post..

Posted by: 2010Rout | July 27, 2010 1:11 PM | Report abuse

so 2010, when you criticize Obama, is it because you're afraid of him, or because he turns you on?

Posted by: SDJeff | July 27, 2010 1:12 PM | Report abuse

"Your response is what I see when her fans are forced to defend her in the face of real poll numbers."

Quick, it is crazy how inept her supporters are at comprehending facts and statistics.

I don't know if you'll get an answer, but do a google search for that phrase and you'll find it in the comments section on at least two other websites, one by idesign herself, another by Ahmedsaid.

It's amazing what you can find on the internet.

Posted by: SDJeff | July 27, 2010 1:15 PM | Report abuse

Hey Quick2822, here's the other copy/paste meme from the Palin crowd via 2010Rout:

Greg, You must really be afraid of Sarah...

And yes, she would win a GOP Presidential primary going away! Look who she is up against: Rommney, Tpaw, Gingrich, Paul.

Who has the rabid, psycho base on the Right? Sarah does.

Posted by: bmcchgo | July 27, 2010 1:17 PM | Report abuse

If she is such a nothing and a nobody why do all you liberal wags find it necessary to report on her every breath?

Posted by: carboz | July 27, 2010 1:18 PM | Report abuse

"If she is such a nothing and a nobody why do all you liberal wags find it necessary to report on her every breath?"

A fair question. Well maybe if we were this vigilant before Bush ran, we might still be a safe and prosperous nation. Never again can we allow an ignorant fundamentalist anywhere near the White House. The more colossal failures your side racks up, the less likely it is you'll ever mess things up so badly again.

Posted by: SDJeff | July 27, 2010 1:24 PM | Report abuse

""If she is such a nothing and a nobody why do all you liberal wags find it necessary to report on her every breath?""
Posted by: carboz | July 27, 2010 1:18 PM

Why? Because she is appalling and amusing! Political train wreck! No one's afraid of Lindsay Lohan, but everybody reports and comments on her every breath too.

I believe she is delusional enough to run for president. I only hope her handlers are unsucessful in trying to talk her out of it.

Posted by: MichieMich | July 27, 2010 1:26 PM | Report abuse

~I believe she is delusional enough to run for president. I only hope her handlers are unsucessful in trying to talk her out of it.

Posted by: MichieMich | July 27, 2010 1:26 PM

Sarah Palin, that is, not Linday Lohan. Though Lohan 2012 would also be awesome.

Posted by: MichieMich | July 27, 2010 1:29 PM | Report abuse

Greg Sargent - As a propaganda piece for the Democratics you're skating on thin ice! Your references are joke, and frankly this is a weak smear on Sarah Palin. Why is it honest people, like Sarah Palin, are so hated by the leftist Revolutionairies of the Obama Administration? Can't stand the truth that exposes you? Why do you want to destroy the United States?

Posted by: USDefender | July 27, 2010 1:30 PM | Report abuse

"Palin's current role of celebrity quasi-candidate works for her. It's allowed her to insulate herself from direct media cross-examination and to communicate directly to the Palin Nation hordes, who remain as transfixed as ever."

You forgot "and make boatloads of cash," arguably the most important element.

Posted by: jimeh | July 27, 2010 1:30 PM | Report abuse

Of course, this fits in very well with Palin's desire to run for the nomination in 2012 and then be forced out by the slings and arrows of a partisan media beholden to America-haters and/or a Republican establishment corrupted by hateful secular and liberal values.

She's going to be on this gravy train for quite some time. I'm telling you, she's the Al Sharpton of the right, only with fewer charitable activities and substantive achievements. Which is an amazingly low bar to have failed to clear.

Posted by: theorajones1 | July 27, 2010 1:32 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin also endorsed Lisa Murkowski's primary challenger, Joe Miller. So far, that endorsement has not registered much of even a blip to help him. Kinda sad for Sarah that she has so little sway among her former constituents.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | July 27, 2010 1:35 PM | Report abuse

@Quick2822

Sarah Palin made in the U.S.A...
Barack Obama made in the MEDIA....aka JournoList.

Look in the most recent PPP poll Palin drew even with Obama at 46-46 and was also leading him by 19 points among WHITE voters (55-36), ahead of him with independents 47-42 and even beating him among female voters 47-44. Ask yourself objectively, are these the numbers of a “loser” or someone who is unelectable?

Sarah rising, Obama falling.
Good for America

Posted by: idesign | July 27, 2010 1:35 PM | Report abuse

all this sarah palin hatred and mockery by the rabid leftists and obots are clearly a sign that they fear her... all you libs invest so much time into her.. so much so that you have to bash her online every chance you get.

there are two things that sarah has going for her and why she will win the presidency in 2012:

first - i remember exactly the same hatred and mockery the socialists/democrats launched at ronald reagan. they called him an intellectual lightweight, a moron, etc.

second - liberals always underestimate real conservatives. conservatives - real conservatives - always go on to win the presidency.

mr. sargent - you are the one in the bubble.. the bubble of the elitist left-wing socialist liberals who think you own this country. you are in the bubble of entitlements - you feel you are entitled to rule.

this article shows how disconnected leftists are with the average citizen. the country is increasingly NOT turned off by sarah palin. more and more people who i know are taking a second look at her, or are at least willing to take a second look - mainly because all the hatred and vitriol against her has people wondering what it is that is so threatening about her - and when they read her book or learn more, they always - ALWAYS - end up becoming pro-Palin.

so let it rip liberals! keep writing mr. sargent. you guys are totally disconnected with the folks out there and sarah represents middle america... she's a self-made woman who has a loving and supportive husband and 5 lovely children. she is what you liberals despise: she is happy.

Posted by: carthage87 | July 27, 2010 1:36 PM | Report abuse

Curious that the Palin Nation seems to show up whenever her name is mentioned. In addition to talking points, Kristol and her other puppetmasters must send emails to unleash the hordes to defend her weak sensibilities. Certainly Kristol doesn't want her to quit again - not yet at least.

I particularly like the claim that Caribou Barbie is honest.

Posted by: cmccauley60 | July 27, 2010 1:38 PM | Report abuse

"leftist revolutionaries" LOL. I wish. Where have you been? LBJ musta been Che Guevara.

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | July 27, 2010 1:38 PM | Report abuse

It's good to know that Americans have wised up since the election of old 5 to 4 GWB.

Posted by: DougH1 | July 27, 2010 1:39 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin is the Dems 50-state strategy. It would be a wonder if she could carry Alaska in a general election.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | July 27, 2010 1:40 PM | Report abuse

I'll never understand the liberal mind , REALLY

to me , everything Palin says is crystal clear ,and sounds like music to my ears , God bless Sarah " Barracuda " Palin

Posted by: michel1835 | July 27, 2010 1:43 PM | Report abuse

So, all you people who deride and write off S. Palin, how is it that polls state, if a general election was held today, ANY GOP candidate would beat B. Obama? I assume S. Palin is included.

Posted by: jrwbrit1 | July 27, 2010 1:43 PM | Report abuse

Sd Jeff, I pity Obama for being a fool when I make fun of him.. I am not attracted to stupid people... and liberals...

Your in an increasing minority of voters supporting him..

See you in November!

Posted by: 2010Rout | July 27, 2010 1:44 PM | Report abuse

carthage87: "all this sarah palin hatred and mockery by the rabid leftists and obots are clearly a sign that they fear her..."

Uh, no. It's clearly a sign that we are laughing at YOU.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | July 27, 2010 1:44 PM | Report abuse

PPP July poll Palin vs Obama among INDEPENDENT voters:

47/42

Recent Gallup poll of Palin favorables/unfavorables among independents (courtesy of Greg Sargent at the PLUM)

44/44

Recent Obama’s job approval/disapproval with Independents with Quinnpiac:

38/52

Assessment of Obama’s handling of the economy by Independent voters by Quinnpiac:

34/61

It is not Palin who is having trouble with Independent voters but your Messiah.

Posted by: idesign | July 27, 2010 1:44 PM | Report abuse

I bet the Palin/Fox Nation is proud of this statistic too:

Only 1.38 percent of Fox News’ primetime viewers are African-American.

http://thinkprogress.org/2010/07/27/fox-viewers-african-american/


Posted by: cmccauley60 | July 27, 2010 1:45 PM | Report abuse

Palin/Gingrich 2012!

That will make the leftists spin out of control...

Note to suekazoo1: I believe Obama will be campaigning in 57 states.

Posted by: carthage87 | July 27, 2010 1:47 PM | Report abuse

WHy do liberals always resort to racism... maybe because they cant win an intelligent argument so they have to call people names... losers!

Posted by: 2010Rout | July 27, 2010 1:49 PM | Report abuse

Welcome to all the Quaylin fans who were directed here by some fool website.

Posted by: SDJeff | July 27, 2010 1:52 PM | Report abuse

O/T - Hey palintrolls - how do you feel about this from one of your hero's puppetmasters:

Fueled by his fear that the greenhouse gas pollution generated by Koch Industries might be limited by government regulation, Koch promotes a fantasy about benefits of a changing climate:

Koch says he’s not sure if global warming is caused by human activities, and at any rate, he sees the heating up of the planet as good news. Lengthened growing seasons in the northern hemisphere, he says, will make up for any trauma caused by the slow migration of people away from disappearing coastlines. “The Earth will be able to support enormously more people because a far greater land area will be available to produce food,” he says.

http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2010/07/27/koch-global-boiling/

So, he admits that global warming is occurring but he thinks it is a good thing.

Do you wingnuts agree?

Posted by: cmccauley60 | July 27, 2010 1:53 PM | Report abuse

suekazoo1 - liberals don't laugh; you only get angry and mean... you have become what you claim to be fighting against: closed-minded, self-absorbed, anti-semetic, haters. you couldn't possibly laugh because you are so busy being angry...

besides - you will never be even 1% of the woman she is. i'll bet you are butt ugly and that's why you're jealous of her..

Posted by: carthage87 | July 27, 2010 1:54 PM | Report abuse

Sarah jumped the shark with her death panels madness. Moderates were ALWAYS repulsed by her and even some of the Teabagger fringe now realize she's a scam artist.

Posted by: blazertaco | July 27, 2010 1:54 PM | Report abuse

If Republicans actually nominate her or don't defeat her in the primary stage then that party is finished - and actually I don't have a problem with that. However I don't see SP running. See if she ran she couldn't charge her fees, would have to pay for the planes and salaries for OTHER people. In her public life in Alaska and elsewhere it has always been "what's in it for me" and basically everyone else can take a flying leap. It is also hard work, no one speech with a week's down time. It is knowing the issues and actually having answers that unite rather than divide. It is talking to people who ask questions - that deserve specific answers not "all of 'em" or "gee there are too many to just pick one". Look at her record from day one - the path of least resistance for the most benefit to herself. That's fine if you own a business for yourself but in government or representing ordinary people -- not such a good trait.

Posted by: Lemon7221 | July 27, 2010 1:55 PM | Report abuse

@Greg

Hodes should get an ad out showing Palin's glowing praises of Ayotte. If he can make the race between him and Palin, we'll see another seat Dems were supposed to lose flip back into the blue column.

Posted by: TheBBQChickenMadness | July 27, 2010 1:56 PM | Report abuse

Behold The Power of the FORCE……

Sarah Palin in 2012, uh-huh, you betcha. ***Buy drug stocks***, the sale of antidepressants for deranged liberals are going to go through the roof……LOL

Posted by: idesign | July 27, 2010 1:56 PM | Report abuse

"i'll bet you are butt ugly and that's why you're jealous of her.."

ooh look out, carthage has spoken. Obviously Palin's only appeal is her appearance, which conservatives like and liberals loathe. The ignorant and hateful rhetoric spewing out of her mouth and out of her ghostwriters keyboard have nothing to do with it.....

Posted by: SDJeff | July 27, 2010 1:57 PM | Report abuse

While I'd happily vote for Sarah Palin, I doubt she'd win the GOP primary, much less the general election, especially against an incumbent.

Still, I don't think it's as completely impossible as most on the left--who apparently thought a doddering old Reagan trouncing Jimmy Carter and then Walter Mondale in a nationwide landslide was also impossible. But, still, highly unlikely.

That being said, I don't think liberals are afraid of Sarah Palin, she's just an excellent embodiment of the American right wing and the Tea Party folks, whom they despise, so it's great fun to run her down and gloat over her many perceived failings.

Palin is almost sure to have trouble with independent voters, because she has really strong opinions on issues, and doesn't back down (even when, perhaps, she should--see "refudiate"). Generic pabulum about hope and change and morning in America tends to work much better with independent voters, as the last election proved, to great effect.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | July 27, 2010 1:58 PM | Report abuse

Anyone who thinks Palin is a viable candidate for POTUS is cleary out of there mind and no we are not afraid of her at all in fact it is our greatest hope she does run. And when 2010 does not turn out like all you raving lunatics on the right hope i will be LOL of course no one is happy we are in a recession the problem for your side though is we know who caused it and we know what your plan is to fix it nothing more of the same bad policys that led to the recession no thanks.

Posted by: doug123422 | July 27, 2010 2:00 PM | Report abuse

"If she is such a nothing and a nobody why do all you liberal wags find it necessary to report on her every breath?"

Because she constantly tells lies to her minions, giving them the wrong impression that she is a goddess and cannot do any wrong. Even though there are minions who will believe anything she says, even if they do some research and find what she has said is wrong, the truth must be told in hopes that some others will know and give up on her. She is a extremely dangerous person. You are NOT free under her power.

-An Alaskan

Posted by: Ardiva1 | July 27, 2010 2:01 PM | Report abuse

cmccauley60 - focus on your failure of a president who cannot even create one job if his life depended on it. the only job he's concerned about is his own.
obamacare - we will not forget.......
REPEAL RE-WRITE REPLACE
it's more like obamacan't!!

you liberals are such anti-semites.


Posted by: carthage87 | July 27, 2010 2:01 PM | Report abuse

Greg, You must really be afraid of Sarah... either that or she turns you on and you are afraid to admit it to your liberal friends at the New Pravda aka The Washington Post..

Posted by: 2010Rout | July 27, 2010 1:11 PM | Report abuse

LOL LOL LOL afraid please get a grip dude thats so funny i think i am going to cry

Posted by: doug123422 | July 27, 2010 2:02 PM | Report abuse

Greg, You must really be afraid of Sarah... either that or she turns you on and you are afraid to admit it to your liberal friends at the New Pravda aka The Washington Post..

Posted by: 2010Rout | July 27, 2010 1:11 PM | Report abuse

LOL LOL LOL afraid please get a grip dude thats so funny i think i am going to cry

Posted by: doug123422 | July 27, 2010 2:02 PM | Report abuse

As a liberal I pray to God the Right keeps trotting out this ninny to speak for them and endorse their candidates. But of course they won't, because they know what a humiliating lesson they'd receive in why you don't nominate an idiot for public office - as if they didn't already learn that very lesson is 2008.

Posted by: blazertaco | July 27, 2010 2:04 PM | Report abuse

why have you not allowed me to post in the comments sections.

Posted by: ninnafaye | July 27, 2010 2:04 PM | Report abuse

There are hordes of stupid people on both the right and left, people whose political philosophies come out of a can, come off of a poster. Who wins the presidency in 2012 will depend on how many stupid people the smart people can cram into a bus headed to the polls.

Posted by: HookedOnThePost | July 27, 2010 2:05 PM | Report abuse

Palin is no dummy. She's got her laser-like focus trained on the group who'll empty out their kids' lip-sticked piggy banks and send her the CASH.

Posted by: txclaire | July 27, 2010 2:06 PM | Report abuse

@Lemon: "If Republicans actually nominate her or don't defeat her in the primary stage then that party is finished"

The way it was finished with the election of Barack Obama? How's that working out?

@carthage: "besides - you will never be even 1% of the woman she is. i'll bet you are butt ugly and that's why you're jealous of her.."

Oh, for Pete's sake. Can't anybody just like somebody or something without having to attack the people who don't on the most shallow and substance-free of grounds?

@JeffSD: "Welcome to all the Quaylin fans who were directed here by some fool website."

You don't like Ezra Klein?

@cmccauley60: "I bet the Palin/Fox Nation is proud of this statistic too: Only 1.38 percent of Fox News’ primetime viewers are African-American."

What are you trying to say with that statistic? That liberal African-American's purposely avoid any contradictory opinion, and only look for news sources or opinion that endorses what they already believe? And who are you comparing them to?

Seriously, cmccauley60. I think your racism is showing.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | July 27, 2010 2:06 PM | Report abuse

Do you ever see more liberal morons and hatemongers gathered in one place than when a Palin thread appears?

The left has Palin living rent free in their heads.....LOL

Posted by: idesign | July 27, 2010 2:07 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin will go down in history as one of America's greatest scam artists.

Posted by: blazertaco | July 27, 2010 2:07 PM | Report abuse

"you liberals are such anti-semites."

So carthage, where does this come from anyway? I hear this so much from the right. We liberals have no problem with Jews or Muslims, both of whom are Semites. And besides, the vast majority of Jews in America are democrats, so this accusation is even more confusing.

Republicans seem to love Israel but hate Muslims, which would appear to make your side anti-Semitic, if you're going by the facts, which conservatives rarely do anyway so I don't know why I even bother explaining to you.

Posted by: SDJeff | July 27, 2010 2:08 PM | Report abuse

All, now a Blue Dog Dem gets caught talking chickens for checkups!

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/07/now_a_blue_dog_democrat_is_tal.html

Posted by: Greg Sargent | July 27, 2010 2:09 PM | Report abuse

PPP July poll Palin vs Obama among INDEPENDENT voters:

47/42

Hey idesign, where's the link for this polling data? I cannot find it on the PPP site.

Posted by: bmcchgo | July 27, 2010 2:11 PM | Report abuse

@idesign: "Do you ever see more liberal morons and hatemongers gathered in one place"

Maybe I'm off, but name-calling doesn't strike me as that smart. Certainly isn't a way to open a dialog, and provides critics with an easy way to dismiss anything you say.

@SDJeff: "Republicans seem to love Israel but hate Muslims"

Actually, Republicans (generally speaking) dislike terrorists, not Muslims. Are you equating all Muslims with terrorists, SDJeff, or just saying that you can't tell the difference?

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | July 27, 2010 2:12 PM | Report abuse

doug123422 save your crying for November... dont want you to get dehydrated! :D


Posted by: 2010Rout | July 27, 2010 2:12 PM | Report abuse

2010Rout, You must be terrified of anyone not boxed in by what Palin describes as her little "real" american. Are you a palin "real" american? are you, 2010Rout? Don't hide....tell us all. Don't take your Palin lapel pin off when you walk around in public...

Posted by: swatkins1 | July 27, 2010 2:13 PM | Report abuse

"Do you ever see more liberal morons and hatemongers gathered in one place than when a Palin thread appears?

The left has Palin living rent free in their heads.....LOL


Posted by: idesign | July 27, 2010 2:07 PM | Report abuse "

Mostly I see pathetic Teabagging wanna-bes who desperately hope Palin will ditch the First Dude to come running into their arms. Probably they should get out of mommy's basement and find girlfriends. Hey, I bet you're one of them!

Posted by: blazertaco | July 27, 2010 2:13 PM | Report abuse

When all else fails, do a Palin attack article. It satisfies your need for attention and feeds the Palin haters who drool on their keyboards while writing hateful remarks about a woman whose only crime is that she is a conservative who ran for vice president on the Republican ticket.

Palin is under a constant microscope by the left-wing media. If you and other "journalists" (and I use that term loosely), don't find anything legitimate to criticize, you manufacture it.

We get it! The November elections are approaching. By making Palin the face of the Repubonlican party, you can discredit the party and sway votes to the Democratic party. Your agenda is transparent and lost on many voters who recognize that you are part of a progressive media movement.

I am an independent voter and resent the constant barrage of manipulative Palin trash articles.

Posted by: bethg1841 | July 27, 2010 2:13 PM | Report abuse

no, nobody fears this bimbo it's just we already had a m0r0n in the white house, we're bushed.

Posted by: calif-joe | July 27, 2010 2:15 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin posts nonsense on her Facebook page while her other hand is rifling around in her supporters' pockets for loose change. She's a very talented scam artist. Hey, did she ever pay the RNC back for that shopping spree at Saks?

Posted by: blazertaco | July 27, 2010 2:17 PM | Report abuse

Kevin Willis....thanks for your well reasoned post about Palin. I'm sure we're on opposite sides but I appreciate your tone and lack of Fox News rhetoric.

However, your next post left me wondering how cmccauley could be considered a racist. Fox News is not an opposing viewpoint, it's pure and classic propaganda, directed toward white conservatives with a clear intent on race baiting. That can't even be debated.

That explains why blacks don't watch. It also explains why I don't watch. I don't like propaganda. I don't like it from the left either which is why I avoid most of MSNBC.

Posted by: SDJeff | July 27, 2010 2:17 PM | Report abuse

Run, Sarah, Run. Lose , Sarah, lose.

Posted by: mraymond10 | July 27, 2010 2:20 PM | Report abuse

"When all else fails, do a Palin attack article. It satisfies your need for attention and feeds the Palin haters who drool on their keyboards while writing hateful remarks about a woman whose only crime is that she is a conservative who ran for vice president on the Republican ticket.

Palin is under a constant microscope by the left-wing media. If you and other "journalists" (and I use that term loosely), don't find anything legitimate to criticize, you manufacture it.

We get it! The November elections are approaching. By making Palin the face of the Repubonlican party, you can discredit the party and sway votes to the Democratic party. Your agenda is transparent and lost on many voters who recognize that you are part of a progressive media movement.

I am an independent voter and resent the constant barrage of manipulative Palin trash articles.

Posted by: bethg1841 | July 27, 2010 2:13 PM | Report abuse "

It's an attack article to point out that she polls horribly? That's an...interesting point of view.

Posted by: blazertaco | July 27, 2010 2:21 PM | Report abuse

That being said, I don't think liberals are afraid of Sarah Palin, she's just an excellent embodiment of the American right wing and the Tea Party folks, whom they despise, so it's great fun to run her down and gloat over her many perceived failings.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | July 27, 2010 1:58 PM

=========================================

I don't think it's fear either; For liberals, elites and the Jornolist crowd it's more of a total contempt for who she is and where she came from.

I also think one factor that fuels her success is many people who come from the same place use supporting her as a way to show Manhattan-Dupont Circle-Hollywood crowd that the feeling's mutual.

Posted by: bbface21 | July 27, 2010 2:21 PM | Report abuse

Sitting on my patio with a group of friends on a hot summer afternoon sipping margaritas, we invented a new game. We called it "Predict Palin" in which each player gets three tries to predict what would happen if she were elected president. The winner is the person who can come up with the most plausible and scariest scenario coming out of a Palin presidency.

It's fun. Kind of like riding a really big roller coaster that scares the heck out of you but as soon as its over you know there is no real risk.

Posted by: tunkefer | July 27, 2010 2:21 PM | Report abuse

2010 we will see who does the crying

Posted by: doug123422 | July 27, 2010 2:22 PM | Report abuse

July 4, 1776-January 20, 2009: United States of America (USA)

January 20, 2009 - January 20, 2013: The Obama Regime. United Socialist States of America (USSA)

January 20, 2013: President Palin re-establishes United States of America.

Posted by: carthage87 | July 27, 2010 2:22 PM | Report abuse

@bmcchgo
Hey idesign, where's the link for this polling data? I cannot find it on the PPP site.

Go to google, type in "PPP Palin ties obama". You will get hundereds of links.

I can see November from my house......

Posted by: idesign | July 27, 2010 2:23 PM | Report abuse

@bmcchgo
Hey idesign, where's the link for this polling data? I cannot find it on the PPP site.

Go to google, type in "PPP Palin ties obama". You will get hundereds of links.

I can see November from my house......

Posted by: idesign | July 27, 2010 2:23 PM | Report abuse

Bagging on Sarah may have lost its luster because most of America now joins us in being repulsed by her, but you'll never take away the glee I feel to this very day that you tried to shove that idiot down our throats and we vomited her back up on you.

Posted by: blazertaco | July 27, 2010 2:23 PM | Report abuse

"Never again can we allow an ignorant fundamentalist anywhere near the White House"

I see, but you would elect a non-experience socialist?

Posted by: carboz | July 27, 2010 2:25 PM | Report abuse

SDJeff: "Fox News is not an opposing viewpoint, it's pure and classic propaganda, directed toward white conservatives with a clear intent on race baiting"

I don't see that. Now, I watch mostly 30 minutes of Fox and Friends in a given week, a little of the straight news reportage. I've seen a little of Beck and O'Rielly, and since they ditched Alan Colmes, I don't watch Hannity. And I really can't stand Huckabee. So, I haven't seen it.

If there is a Grand Kleagle coming out in full sheets regalia and advocating the burning of crosses in Clarence Thomas's lawn, I haven't seen it.

Fundamentally, I'm asking for clarification on the point. Is the point that Fox News just racist propaganda? If so, how did you establish that? I'm admittedly a casual observer, but if it's some how the house organ of modern day racism in America, it's been far too subtle for me.

I was also being snarky. Because, really, what is that supposed to mean?

"That can't even be debated."

I disagree. See?

"Propaganda" is problematic, but it's hyperbole that rankles me, which is why I'm not a big fan of Olberman or O'Rielly. And I'm not a big fan of paranoid conspiracy theories, which is my problem with Beck. The racism thing, however--I'm apparently missing something. So, please enlighten me.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | July 27, 2010 2:25 PM | Report abuse

I find it pretty hard to believe that almost two years after Sarah Palin's cotillion, sponsored by none other than John McCain, people are still talking about the Governor still being an electable political figure.


Posted by: helloisanyoneoutthere | July 27, 2010 2:25 PM | Report abuse

@Quick2822

Sarah Palin made in the U.S.A...
Barack Obama made in the MEDIA....aka JournoList.

Look in the most recent PPP poll Palin drew even with Obama at 46-46 and was also leading him by 19 points among WHITE voters (55-36), ahead of him with independents 47-42 and even beating him among female voters 47-44. Ask yourself objectively, are these the numbers of a “loser” or someone who is unelectable?

Sarah rising, Obama falling.
Good for America

Posted by: idesign | July 27, 2010 1:35 PM | Report abuse

*******************************************

McCain got 55 percent of the white vote and got trounced. Running on a "win the white vote" theme has already failed, and each year it becomes less and less viable as a political strategy. Stop trying to play the race card, we're sick of it.

Posted by: nsu1203 | July 27, 2010 2:26 PM | Report abuse

As a Democrat I love it when Sarah endorses a Republican. I love the way it makes people think twice about voting for the Republican candidate.

And I'm here to remind you that Sarah Palin is a quitter who never finished her job as governor of one of our least populous states.

Posted by: tony_in_Durham_NC | July 27, 2010 2:26 PM | Report abuse

2012 Palin elected, 2013 INGSOC is created, Same year war with Iran, North Korea, 2014 Invasion of Canada.

Posted by: UnknownHenson | July 27, 2010 2:26 PM | Report abuse

"@bmcchgo
Hey idesign, where's the link for this polling data? I cannot find it on the PPP site.

Go to google, type in "PPP Palin ties obama". You will get hundereds of links.

I can see November from my house......

Posted by: idesign | July 27, 2010 2:23 PM | Report abuse "

667 Americans from two weeks ago? Nice poll lolololol

Gallup shows Dems +6 in their latest generic ballot. Care to comment?

Posted by: blazertaco | July 27, 2010 2:28 PM | Report abuse

@bbface: "I also think one factor that fuels her success is many people who come from the same place use supporting her as a way to show Manhattan-Dupont Circle-Hollywood crowd that the feeling's mutual."

That's me in a nutshell. ;)

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | July 27, 2010 2:28 PM | Report abuse

"Actually, Republicans (generally speaking) dislike terrorists, not Muslims. Are you equating all Muslims with terrorists, SDJeff, or just saying that you can't tell the difference?"

Kevin, we all hate terrorists. Republicans don't have a monopoly on that. It appears you're the one who has equated Muslims with terrorists. I never did and I don't know of any other liberal who has.

It would take months for me to research and present all the hateful and disrespectful rhetoric toward Muslims that has come from conservatives over the past decade. If you really haven't noticed, I guess I gave you too much credit in that last post.

Posted by: SDJeff | July 27, 2010 2:28 PM | Report abuse

SDJeff,

You are SO right. Both Jews and Arabs are Semitic people. Thank God that someone on here is an intellectual. Hating Arab Muslims also makes you anti-Semitic.

Posted by: nsu1203 | July 27, 2010 2:31 PM | Report abuse

carthage get a grip man we are no more socialist now than we where before yall republicans deregulated everything and brought our economy down geez . Now watch our right wing friends try and rewrite history. If you want to see communists go to North Korea or China because there are none here all your name calling will never change that and who made you the self appointed anti socialist anyhow.

Posted by: doug123422 | July 27, 2010 2:32 PM | Report abuse

Yes, by all means, let's focus on ONE candidate whose numbers have dipped with a Palin endorsement instead of the MANY, MANY candidates whose numbers have increased or even skyrocketed with her endorsement.

Sargent is such a failure it's not even funny anymore.

The Greg Sargent Journalism Method 101:
1. Cherry pick a minor bit of data that supports my already formulated conclusion.
2. Extrapolate that data to make a broad, completely unsubstantiated generalization.
3. Sit back and watch as my tiny pool of echo chamber supporters tells me how right I am.
4. Collect underpants.

What a joke. But he's still obsessed with Palin, by God. It's kind of cute, really. Or would be, if it wasn't so creepy.

Toolbag.

Posted by: etpietro | July 27, 2010 2:33 PM | Report abuse

Hey, we're not hating on ole' Sarah and her litter, we're MOCKING them!

I just hope it doesn't do any irreparable psychological damage to her kids - muck, spunk, belch, phlegm and tard - or interrupt her husband who is out boning that neighbor of theirs.

Posted by: BattleOffSamar | July 27, 2010 2:33 PM | Report abuse

Palin posts are generating almost comical contradictions within the Republican Party.

I have a very conservative friend who mimics the post of bethg1841.

There are many R's(some still have functioning intellects and are not displaying the effects of a Palin lobotomy like pathetic idesign) who are upset with the left covering Palin not because they like and respect her...but because they loathe and despise what she has done to their party. And as bethg1841 points out it is to the left's advantage everytime Palin gets airtime..writing on her hands...refudiating things..lying about bridges to nowhere...and ethics findings in the State of Alaska. Everytime Palin opens her mouth to speak on ANYTHING of substance the ignorance is overwhelming.

Smart R's know this and resent we on the left taking advantage of Sister Sarah's ignorance and hateful mean spirited personality!

BTW Skip give it up...for you losers to talk about freedom when you don't even wish to allow a LEGAL RELIGIOUS organization to build on property on which it is LAWFULLY obtained to right to do so.

FREEDOM Skipper...unless it's determining whether or not my wife's end of life decisions be honored..then the entire Republican structure will raise up from the U.S. Senate and House and beyond...all to crap around with the FREEDOME OF Terri and Michael Schiavo.

Freedom skipper...yes to screw my neighbor out of money with absurd investment schemes called Credit Default Swaps..or freedom to carry a gun anywhere...such as the Texas Legislature...and yeah let's make sure folks are free to carry their firearms into bars as well.

Yeah if Skippy had his way we'd all be a free as those lucky residents of Deadwood S.D. at the turn of the 20th century.

Posted by: rukidding7 | July 27, 2010 2:34 PM | Report abuse


As a Democrat I love it when Sarah endorses a Republican. I love the way it makes people think twice about voting for the Republican candidate.

And I'm here to remind you that Sarah Palin is a quitter who never finished her job as governor of one of our least populous states.

Posted by: tony_in_Durham_NC | July 27, 2010 2:26 PM | Report abuse
*******************************************

Exactly. They love America, but support seccesion, and they support a candidate who quit her last job because she didn't want to be a lame duck. I'm assuming she would quit as president also, man, what a proud American. She is chasing money, let's stop pretending that she is a legitimate political mind.

Posted by: nsu1203 | July 27, 2010 2:35 PM | Report abuse

Funny thing about terrorists though, they almost always turn out to be conservative fundies. Whether it's the Taliban flogging women and beheading innocents, Al-Qaeda suicide bombing its own people back to the Stone Ages, or Christian fundie Tim McVeigh blowing up a federal building. Speaking of which...I don't recall the great Right Wing outrage at Christians after that attack...

Posted by: blazertaco | July 27, 2010 2:36 PM | Report abuse

@blazertaco


Gallup shows Dems +6 in their latest generic ballot. Care to comment?

Gallup’s latest polling on the generic Congressional ballot showed momentum swinging back to the Democrats, but Rasmussen has it going the other direction. Their latest weekly survey puts Republicans up by 10 points among likely voters, giving them their biggest lead since mid-April:
And Obama himself is back down to a good, solid -20.

I can see November from my house.....


Posted by: idesign | July 27, 2010 2:37 PM | Report abuse

tony_in_Durham_NC - every one of her endorsed candidates except 2 won their primary.
every candidate obama endorsed lost.

"sarah palin is a quitter" - is that all you got? you can't stand the fact that she didn't stay put to get beat up by obama's political operatives?

all you liberals should focus your attention on your messiah - he's a failure and a liar and a cheat. he got elected in the primary by intimidating clinton voters

obama's political operatives worked with the black panthers to threaten and intimidate white voters at the polls..

obama is the classic leftist in the mould of benito mussolini, juan peron, and francisco franco. each of them destroyed their country's economies with massive spending and sociliast policies - but they did it with a smile! each of them eventually closed down media that opposed their policies.

so - all the talk by you leftists about fox news is a sign that we are heading in the direction of facist italy, fascist argentina, and fascist spain.

plus, liberals are anti-semitic and have been post 9-11.

Posted by: carthage87 | July 27, 2010 2:38 PM | Report abuse

@ idesign

I guess you missed the Time Poll which showed Obama trouncing Palin 55 to 34.

http://thepage.time.com/time-poll-obama-palin-head-to-head/

Posted by: puakev | July 27, 2010 2:38 PM | Report abuse

"The racism thing, however--I'm apparently missing something. So, please enlighten me. "

Glenn Beck went on Fox and Friends last year and called our president a racist. Surely someone as reasonable as you would recognize how ridiculous and inflammatory that is for a national figure like Glenn Beck to make that claim on a highly watched program such as Fox and Friends, which you say you watch. No one on Fox and Friends challenged Beck on that or even asked him to back up his words.

Easy question for anyone with a background in journalism would've been: "Ok Glenn, exactly which branch of Obama's ancestry is he racist towards, anyway? His white mom and white grandparents who raised him? They somehow instilled racism in him? And yet he managed to convince more white Americans than any democrat in history to vote for him?"

And yet, you must be aware that thousands of viewers at home nodded in agreement, or gasped at the horror of the thought of our racist president and became motivated to do something about it.

Besides that, they've spent most of the past month accusing Shirley Sherrod, the NAACP, and the Justice Department of reverse racism.

Posted by: SDJeff | July 27, 2010 2:38 PM | Report abuse

I generally disagree with her politics and just about everything else being an atheist and all, but I think she's hot. The more people talk about her the more she's going to run off at the mouth. She's in it for the long haul, love her or hate her, and given the lukewarm performance of the current administration she may end up running on a Presidental ticket with either Romney or god-forbid Gingrich.

Posted by: UnknownHenson | July 27, 2010 2:38 PM | Report abuse

I love it when wingnuts try the "You must be afraid of Palin" meme.

I'm not afraid of cockroaches...but I don't want them in my home either.

Posted by: agolembe | July 27, 2010 2:39 PM | Report abuse

I guess the Mama Grizzly analogy doesn't fly in New Hampshire. Perhaps Sarah Palin can come up with a Moose or Elk analogy for her heard of Pink Elephants.

Posted by: kishorgala | July 27, 2010 2:42 PM | Report abuse

We should stop making fun of the mentally insufficient. Sarah Palin is trying although anyone with common sense can see right through here. Unfortunately 60 per cent of Americas are uneducated, and you might call them rednecks, racists, or white supremacists. These are ignorant people from the school of hate taught to them by pappy and mama. These are Sarah Palin people. They are incapable of rational thought,and believe George W. Bush was the best President ever. These are the lost soles that worship caribou barbies plastic mind which glows in the dark. Just pull this barbies string and she repeats the most stupid things ever said by the "dumb as dirt" Bush President.

Posted by: MarkHarrisLtd | July 27, 2010 2:44 PM | Report abuse

Gotta love the Palin supporters. Point out the obvious - ie that she is a light-weight, no-nothing, semi-literate hypocrite and they rise up against you fulminating about how Sarah's detractors must hate America or be Marxist or whatever other blah, blah, blah nonsense they have on their minds ... it's laughable, but sad.

Posted by: chert | July 27, 2010 2:44 PM | Report abuse

carthage and idesign: you two Palinbots are FREAKING HILARIOUS. Keep up the good work, we can all use the laffs.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | July 27, 2010 2:46 PM | Report abuse

Has she ever endorsed a candidate who won a general or special election?

Posted by: SDJeff | July 27, 2010 2:48 PM | Report abuse

I find it rather amusing that, when Palin is attacked, the typical response is "oh liberals are scared of her" -- when in reality Democrats in general would love if Palin was the GOP challenger to Obama.

Oh well, debating a Palin fan is like debating a child. Facts aren't relevant if they don't conform with their view of her.

Cognitive dissonance is a cruel thing in politics -- and Palin fans are fully infected.

Posted by: Quick2822 | July 27, 2010 2:48 PM | Report abuse

chert you forgot we are all scared of Palin ROTFLMAO

Posted by: doug123422 | July 27, 2010 2:49 PM | Report abuse

@carthage87

Clearly your numerous spelling and grammatical errors make clear why you feel such kinship with the similarly half-literate Sarah Palin.

And by the way, Juan Peron, Francisco Franco, and Benito Mussolini were on the far right of the political spectrum. Did you also know that fascism is pretty well accepted as being on the far right wing while communism is on the far left wing? I guess your knowledge of history and politics is about as deficient as your ability to use upper case letters and correct spelling.

And 'mould' is actually spelled 'mold'. And "sociliast" is actually spelled "socialist". But these misspellings are typical of teabaggers.

Posted by: puakev | July 27, 2010 2:50 PM | Report abuse

Maybe, someday soon, Palin and the rest of the Republican Dooms Day Cult will drift off to some God forsaken hell hole of a town in Alaska and commit mass suicide. We can only hope.

Posted by: GabsDaD | July 27, 2010 2:50 PM | Report abuse

Hey, we're not hating on ole' Sarah and her litter, we're MOCKING them!

I just hope it doesn't do any irreparable psychological damage to her kids - muck, spunk, belch, phlegm and tard - or interrupt her husband who is out boning that neighbor of theirs.

Posted by: BattleOffSamar |

========================================

I wouldn't be surprised if this was taken verbatim from a Jurnolist thread. :P

Posted by: bbface21 | July 27, 2010 2:50 PM | Report abuse

"and to communicate directly to the Palin Nation hordes, who remain as transfixed as ever. "

This makes me think of a really bad zombie movie where a bunch of wild eyed psychos is chasing after you

===

LOL!!

Hilarious mental image conjured up by this one.

Posted by: ravenmocker | July 27, 2010 2:52 PM | Report abuse

etpietro: Truth hurts, huh? The voters in states where the average IQ is above single digits just don't seem to "get" the Quitter.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | July 27, 2010 2:53 PM | Report abuse

yeah, this is the same trick that Dave Weigel used.

I called the pavlov dogs approach. All Mr Sargent must do is post something that mentions Sarah Palin and, like pavlov's dogs, the liberals respond in a predictable way.

Some other commenter here got it right. The reaction of the liberals isn't fear, it is contempt.

Liberals have enormous contempt for the American people. That's why they seek to enslave us. They think that they know better than us on just about everything. Why else would the liberals be so fond of central planning if not to wrench control of life away from people that they hold in comtempt (us!)

Posted by: skipsailing28 | July 27, 2010 2:59 PM | Report abuse

There is enough hard data to keep Palin off the Republican ticket in 2012, but she's enough of a whack job and egomaniac to run third party. And the Democrats are very grateful for this.

Posted by: ravenmocker | July 27, 2010 3:00 PM | Report abuse

I sure hope they put Palin on the Republican presidential ticket again in 2012.. and 2016.. and 2020

Posted by: cmsatown | July 27, 2010 3:02 PM | Report abuse

MarkHarrisLtd & liberal company:

you libs use adjectives and think you are making a logical argument. on every policy position, sarah is with mainstream america.

with obamaSCARE - 57% of the country want it repealed. president palin intends to sign that legislation when it reaches her desk.

with immigration - 64% of the country oppose amnesty and want the boder secured first. president palin will seal the border with mexico.

on terrorism - 55% of the country believes we are less safe than we were under george bush. president palin will support israel and stop iran from obtaining nuclear weapons. president palin will re-affirm NATO's charter and the allied cause of defending freedom in the world wherever it is threatened.

on taxes - president palin will cut personal income taxes, and slash corporate taxes to make america more competitive. president palin will again eliminate the death tax, the marriage pentalty tax, and the capital gains tax hikes (all set to expire Jan 1, 2011).

on energy - president palin will order the immediate opening of ANWR and other land-based intitiatives for production of oil and natural gas. president palin will also give tax breaks to homeowners and commercial businesses using solar and wind power.

on the budget - president palin will propose a balanced budget her VERY FIRST YEAR IN OFFICE. no more borrowing - period. president palin will produce a budget (unlike the current democrat congress which did not even produce a budget for FY2010. president palin will eliminate earmarks and require disclosure of federal projects to be posted for the public to view prior to a vote.

president palin will also sell off all the government's interests in the banks, auto industry, and health industry which were nationalized under the obama regime. president palin will also freeze all stimulus projects and outsource them to private firms.

president palin will eliminate all the illegal czars in the white house.

Posted by: carthage87 | July 27, 2010 3:04 PM | Report abuse

@UnkownHenson: "Invasion of Canada."

One can only hope. Beer, oil, and back bacon. There are so many reasons to direct our imperial impulses northward.

@blazertaco: "Gallup shows Dems +6 in their latest generic ballot. Care to comment?"

I'll comment. It's unlikely that 2010 will be a rout, but Democrats will almost certainly lose seats in both the house and senate, just because they have so many of them. A lack of advancement of a significantly progressive agenda (and a general lack of Utopia, complete with magical rainbows and a free unicorn for everybody) will keep a fair amount of once enthusiastic Obama voters home. Anger and elected Democrats for daring to be liberal and advance a left-of-center agenda will get excited conservatives and Republicans out to the polls.

Caveat: over-confidence may work against Republicans.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | July 27, 2010 3:08 PM | Report abuse

"There is enough hard data to keep Palin off the Republican ticket in 2012, but she's enough of a whack job and egomaniac to run third party. And the Democrats are very grateful for this."

This is going to be the most amusing aspect of the upcoming republican primary. Which candidates will have the huevos to go on record tearing her down to other conservatives, and which ones will defer to her in the hopes of being chosen as running mate?

I still think she won't run and has no intention to. Her ego couldn't handle a loss where she couldn't blame it on someone else like she did with McCain. Besides, president doesn't pay enough when you could just have someone else write a book for you and make instant millions.

Posted by: SDJeff | July 27, 2010 3:08 PM | Report abuse

I get so sick of libruls misrespecificating Sarah. Sarah is spastasmagorifical.

Posted by: beachykeen02 | July 27, 2010 3:11 PM | Report abuse

Here's what nobody is telling you. For the sake of argument, if we accept the data that Public Policy Polling (D) found for New Hampshire, then it's pretty clear that Governor Palin's endorsement in the Granite State is stronger than Obama's endorsement in Ohio, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania, all states that he won in 2008.

Here's what PPP(D) found regarding whether voters in the following states were more likely or less likely to vote for a candidate that Obama endorsed:

More likely/Less likely to Vote for a Candidate Endorsed by Barack Obama

Illinois: 26/40
Ohio: 24/51
Penn: 22/50
Wisconsin: 19/50

Ican see November from my house

Posted by: idesign | July 27, 2010 3:11 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin is known in Japan as :
Mitsubichi........if you know what I mean.

Posted by: infinitus | July 27, 2010 3:11 PM | Report abuse

puakev - mussolini, franco, and peron were LEFTISTS. the political battle between communism and fascism was a battle between two left-wing ideologies. they were NOT right wing at all! you have no idea - no idea - what you're talking about.

and the rest is just a distraction - spelling? really. when you can't argue the substance you liberals always try to change the subject to insulting intelligence. that's all you got!!! and it's NOTHING new.

so to get back to the subject at hand, obama is of the same leftie schools of thought of peron, mussolini, and franco.

interesting how all you libs know what teabagging is. i guess that's what you do in your spare time?

Posted by: carthage87 | July 27, 2010 3:11 PM | Report abuse

If Palin is as bad as her opponents say, then they shouldn't worry.

The problem her opponents have is that, if Palin runs for President, Palin is likely to outperform the low expectatons her detractors are creating in an effort to discourage her from running. That turns artices like Mr. Sargent's into tools Palin will benefit from later.

Meanwhile Obama is sinking into the Gulf with the economy tied around his neck.
2012 is all about whether Obama turns the economy around without bankrupting the nation.

By 2012, New York, Illinois, California and one or two other high tax/high spend states will be bankrupt, or in the throws of government employee strikes and civil disorders caused by services/welfare cutbacks. Rosier alternative aren't likely. These states will serve as a sign post for where Obama is leading the country.

That's the battlefield on which Palin will conduct her campaign. If economic conditions are much better than expected, Palin won't run. Good Generals choose their battlefield. Likewise, good hunters choose where and when they strike their prey. Obama might have higher SAT scores, but Palin is a hunter/General.

Until we know what 2012 looks like, all Palin has to do is maintain enthusiasm in her base. Patience is a virtue when stalking game.

Posted by: jfv123 | July 27, 2010 3:13 PM | Report abuse

"""the political battle between communism and fascism was a battle between two left-wing ideologies"""

Surrveyyy SAYS?!?!

XXX

"Scholars generally consider fascism to be on the far right of the conventional left-right political spectrum"

More:

"Fascists reject and resist the autonomy of cultural or ethnic groups who are not considered part of the fascists' nation and who refuse to assimilate or are unable to be assimilated. They consider attempts to create such autonomy as an affront and a threat to the nation."

Sounds an awful lot like the Tea Parties if you ask me. "We want our (white) country back"

Posted by: Ethan2010 | July 27, 2010 3:18 PM | Report abuse

"president palin will eliminate all the illegal czars in the white house."

So now you're accusing Reagan and both Bushes of being criminals?

Posted by: SDJeff | July 27, 2010 3:18 PM | Report abuse

"Liberals have enormous contempt for the American people."

Not quite. Remove "the American people" and replace those words with "morons like Sarah Palin and the drooling slackjawed yokels who worship her."

Happy to help.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | July 27, 2010 3:18 PM | Report abuse

I am friends with a guy who was a major fundraiser for a Republican presidential candidate in '08. He swore to me that McCain wanted Joe Lieberman as his running mate, because they are pals and because, by running with a Jew and a nominal Democrat, McCain thought he might peel away enough Dems to win. A plausible strategy. But McCain was told in no uncertain terms that running with a Democrat would destroy him with the base, so Lieberman was a no go.

According to my friend, when McCain gave in, he exploded in anger and said, "Okay, then, I'll just run with that (unprintable four letter word for a female) from Alaska."

And that's how Ms. Palin wound up a national figure.

Posted by: jhpurdy | July 27, 2010 3:20 PM | Report abuse

@SDJeff: "Glenn Beck went on Fox and Friends last year and called our president a racist. Surely someone as reasonable as you would recognize how ridiculous and inflammatory that is for a national figure like Glenn Beck to make that claim on a highly watched program such as Fox and Friends"


Well, I missed that one in particular, but Glenn Beck tends to be known for making ridiculous and inflammatory statements.

"No one on Fox and Friends challenged Beck on that or even asked him to back up his words."

Well, fair enough. Like I say, I watch a small fraction of Fox's total programming.

"Easy question for anyone with a background in journalism"

I dunno about that. Being a particular race or mixture of races has nothing to do with racism, or being racist, as I understand it. Rather, being a racist would suggest that you evaluate and discriminate against other people or groups of people primarily or entirely based on ethnicity. The question would be: what evidence is there that Obama evaluates people primarily on race, versus ideology, or with an end-goal of a multicultural utopia, or victim politics, or some other explanation? What many conservatives and Republicans attribute to racism should probably be viewed through an understanding of a larger utopian or multi-cultural framework that prizes diversity, etc., rather than a blanket hatred of white folks.

"And yet, you must be aware that thousands of viewers at home nodded in agreement, or gasped at the horror of the thought of our racist president and became motivated to do something about it."

My ability to apprehend what thousands of viewers at home did, when I didn't see any of them, is limited. I guess I could assume, based on my stereotypes and cliched preconceptions of them, but I'd rather not. Given what is rumored to happen when one assumes.

"Besides that, they've spent most of the past month accusing Shirley Sherrod, the NAACP, and the Justice Department of reverse racism."

Are you referring to Fox? Because I'm pretty sure that didn't happen. Even Beck said he needed the whole story before he said anything, and that's saying something. But the first mention of the story on Fox came only after the Whitehouse dismissed Sherrod. Search for the clip of Chris Wallace schooling Howard Dean on the subject of Fox and Sherrod, if you doubt me.

One of the problems with never watching/reading/engaging with something is that your understanding and opinion of it begins to diverge further and further from the actual facts on the ground. Which is not a blanket defense of Fox News, to be clear, just the 30 minutes or so I end up watching of it a week. And on the particulars of the Sherrod issue, which as far as I can tell have been misrepresented by critics.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | July 27, 2010 3:22 PM | Report abuse

She is a airhead...enough said!

Posted by: gidfin | July 27, 2010 3:22 PM | Report abuse

Maybe one of you Palin fans can tell me how to find out when the next and nearest Tea Party rally is near me? Work's been slow lately and I've been thinking of checking one out for myself. There doesn't appear to be any central organization. Anyone?

Posted by: SDJeff | July 27, 2010 3:25 PM | Report abuse

@koolkat: " 'Liberals have enormous contempt for the American people.' Not quite. Remove 'the American people' and replace those words with 'morons like Sarah Palin and the drooling slackjawed yokels who worship her.'"

Is the meta-irony intentional or accidental?

It does seem that some liberals do exhibit enormous contempt for those who disagree with them. Or speak differently--that is, with a twang. Or don't attend the same schools, or attend the same concerts, or otherwise vary from a relatively strict regimen of acceptable activities (as well as food and clothing choices) meant to embody the enlightened, tolerant lifestyle.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | July 27, 2010 3:26 PM | Report abuse

There is no doubt that Sarah's star is ascendant, while Barry's morphs into mud.

Posted by: idesign

________________________________________

Um, I think you either didn't actually read the post or you need a new dictionary.

If Palin's endorsement = lost votes, do you still want to call her "ascendant"?

Seems to me her 15 minutes is running out.

You republicans and tea baggers can insult President Obama all you want. Give it your best shot.

Here are the facts you cannot deny - President Obama won a National Election with over 69 MILLION people (53% of American voters) voting for him.

Palin, meanwhile, quit her Governor of Alaska job in the middle of a term to escape an ethics investigation she knew would end her political career if it continued.

Seriously, you do not have to cast aspersions at Palin - she is the only politician in America who actually brings her own.

Posted by: TOMMYBASEBALL | July 27, 2010 3:28 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin could never have gotten as far as she has if there weren't so many weak-minded women in America. They're thrilled that someone as ordinary as themselves has advanced so far. They look at Sarah and see themselves and are blind to everything else. How sad is that?

Posted by: kenger1 | July 27, 2010 3:28 PM | Report abuse

@SDJeff: "Maybe one of you Palin fans can tell me how to find out when the next and nearest Tea Party rally is near me? Work's been slow lately and I've been thinking of checking one out for myself. There doesn't appear to be any central organization. Anyone?"

Don't ask me. Work's been very busy for me, but even still, I don't think I could be bothered. I like the idea of the tea parties . . . just not enough to attend. I full support peaceable assembly and the right to free association (like, as I may have mentioned elsewhere, like-minded journalists and academics chatting amongst themselves on some sort of mailing list), but I'm not that interested in tea partying.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | July 27, 2010 3:29 PM | Report abuse

It does seem that some liberals do exhibit enormous contempt for those who disagree with them. Or speak differently--that is, with a twang. Or don't attend the same schools, or attend the same concerts, or otherwise vary from a relatively strict regimen of acceptable activities (as well as food and clothing choices) meant to embody the enlightened, tolerant lifestyle.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | July 27, 2010 3:26 PM

======================================

“Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.”

-William F. Buckley, Jr.

Posted by: bbface21 | July 27, 2010 3:30 PM | Report abuse

@kenger1: "Sarah Palin could never have gotten as far as she has if there weren't so many weak-minded women in America. They're thrilled that someone as ordinary as themselves has advanced so far. They look at Sarah and see themselves and are blind to everything else. How sad is that?"

Did you mean, "how sad is that" or "how [appallingly] sexist is that [comment]"? Because I'm not clear.

Plus, there's very little evidence that identity politics plays any kind of role in Sarah Palin's appeal.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | July 27, 2010 3:31 PM | Report abuse

Ethan2010
both communism and fascism were left-wing ideologies. their economic policies were about government control over either all aspects (communism) or national interest aspects (socialism) of the economy.

i too can find a scholar:

"To sociologist Irving Louis Horowitz, left-wing fascism in the United States consists of a denial or rejection of the American democracy, and devotion to socialism that is merely an idealized abstraction, combined with an unwillingness to confront the actual history of communism. It operates through mystified language, attributes faults "everywhere and always in an imperial conspiracy of wealth, power or status..."

further, jonah goldberg writes:

..."both modern liberalism and fascism descended from progressivism, and that prior to World War II, "fascism was widely viewed as a progressive social movement with many liberal and left-wing adherents in Europe and the United States".

"Goldberg probes modern liberalism’s spooky origins in early 20th-century fascist politics. ... Goldberg’s study of the conceptual overlap between fascism and ideas emanating from the environmental movement, Hollywood, the Democratic Party and what he calls other left-wing organs is shocking and hilarious. ... The book’s tone suffers as it oscillates between revisionist historical analyses and the application of fascist themes to American popular culture; nonetheless, the controversial arc Goldberg draws from Mussolini to The Matrix.."

"Goldberg shows how Woodrow Wilson began and Franklin Roosevelt amplified an almost-fascist concentration of power in Washington. FDR boasted of his 'wholesome and proper' buildup of power because he was leading 'a people's government.' Goldberg shows how liberals came to believe that authoritarian government is fine as long as representatives of 'the people' — themselves — are in charge."

Historians, it is agreed, mistakenly called Italian, Argentian, and Spanish fascism as right-wing because all three leaders and movements imprisoned and executed communists. However, all their economic policies mirror the "creeping socialization" of the US economy under Barack Obama.

Posted by: carthage87 | July 27, 2010 3:31 PM | Report abuse

Sarah would do better outside the Fox News Tea Party Bubble if the "lamestream press" would stop printing pictures that make her look crazed and tried to quote her saying something that makes her sound halfway intelligent. I guess they don't want to do the extra work.

Posted by: halo666 | July 27, 2010 3:31 PM | Report abuse

Who Palin reminds me of most is Dolores Umbridge from the Harry Potter series.

Palin is taller and a little more fit, but both have the same essential cruelty and arrogance.

Maybe it is the tone of voice or the essential "wrongness" they exude?

Palin is like that experience guys have when you are walking down a street and you see what looks like an attractive woman ahead but when you get inside about 100 yards you realize it is a man with long hair.

That creeped out feeling you get - that's the same as the Palin effect

Posted by: TOMMYBASEBALL | July 27, 2010 3:32 PM | Report abuse

"@koolkat: " 'Liberals have enormous contempt for the American people.' Not quite. Remove 'the American people' and replace those words with 'morons like Sarah Palin and the drooling slackjawed yokels who worship her.'"

Is the meta-irony intentional or accidental?

It does seem that some liberals do exhibit enormous contempt for those who disagree with them. Or speak differently--that is, with a twang. Or don't attend the same schools, or attend the same concerts, or otherwise vary from a relatively strict regimen of acceptable activities (as well as food and clothing choices) meant to embody the enlightened, tolerant lifestyle."

No, ace, it's way simpler than that. It's the phenomenon of ignorant morons who idolize an ignorant moron who seems to be proud of being an ignorant moron.

I don't know or care what concerts you attend, what food you eat, or what school you went to, or what clothes you were, whether you have a twang. And btw, that goes for other posters on here too. This is solely about your adoration for this nitwit.

How much clearer and simpler do I need to make it for you?

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | July 27, 2010 3:32 PM | Report abuse

I hate to be the one that burst Sarahs bubble but the fact is she is not a credible candidate for President of this country. She is simply not qualified. Sell books, this she can do.

Posted by: joe100821 | July 27, 2010 3:32 PM | Report abuse

"Palin the Quitter"

Grabbing the popcorn ... I can't wait for 2012.

Posted by: HillRat | July 27, 2010 3:33 PM | Report abuse

Why are there two columns (one by you and one by Jacoby) in the same newspaper on the same day, both of them attacking Palin and her family?

It is distressing how rude and unmannerly we have all become.

Posted by: rohit57 | July 27, 2010 3:34 PM | Report abuse

"Palin posts are generating almost comical contradictions within the Republican Party.

I have a very conservative friend who mimics the post of bethg1841.

There are many R's(some still have functioning intellects and are not displaying the effects of a Palin lobotomy like pathetic idesign) who are upset with the left covering Palin not because they like and respect her...but because they loathe and despise what she has done to their party. And as bethg1841 points out it is to the left's advantage everytime Palin gets airtime..writing on her hands
...."
Posted by: rukidding7
===========================================
Sorry, rukidding, you misinterpreted my post. I'm sure it was not by design by a partisan poster.

My party? I am not affiliated with any party. Unlike many of the posters here (mainly progressives), I want what is best for the country, not the party. What I see is a progressive agenda that is taking this country in the wrong direction.

I am not a Palin fan but resent the constant scrutiny and attacks on her and her family. It has become a form of entertainment for many hateful posters.

And, while I recognize your "superior" intelligence, I can assure you that there are many people (who do not identify with your party) who are secure in their intelligence and will not be shamed by the "if you're a conservative, you're ignorant" partisan agenda.

Posted by: bethg1841 | July 27, 2010 3:35 PM | Report abuse

Or what clothes you wear, for that matter! LOL

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | July 27, 2010 3:36 PM | Report abuse

Another article titled,
"Fascism: Mussolini was a Left-Wing Fanatic" (Published June, 2006)

You can read it here:

http://through-the-eyes-of-economics.blogspot.com/2006/06/fascism-mussolini-was-left-wing.html

Posted by: carthage87 | July 27, 2010 3:36 PM | Report abuse

"@koolkat: " 'Liberals have enormous contempt for the American people.' Not quite. Remove 'the American people' and replace those words with 'morons like Sarah Palin and the drooling slackjawed yokels who worship her.'"

....

No, ace, it's way simpler than that. It's the phenomenon of ignorant morons who idolize an ignorant moron who seems to be proud of being an ignorant moron.
Posted by: koolkat_1960 |
===================
The trouble is that the average member of the Tea party is better educated than the average American. So your nasty comments not only show your nastiness, they are not even correct.

Posted by: rohit57 | July 27, 2010 3:37 PM | Report abuse

Oh Please Please say this isn't so. I so much want Sarah to run for President. I need more laughs in my life.

Posted by: a6five | July 27, 2010 3:37 PM | Report abuse

In the Republican Party's Alice in Wonderland 2012 Presidential campaign, there are currently three members of the Mad Hatter's Tea Party who are vying for the title of Queen of Hearts.

1. Sarah "I quit, give me the money" Palin

2. Michele "If we took away the minimum wage we could potentially virtually wipe out unemployment completely because we would be able to offer jobs at whatever level" Bachmann

3. Sharron "I'm late, I'm late, for a very important date. No time to say 'Hello.' Goodbye. I'm late, I'm late, I'm late." Angle

As the election nears I can't wait to watch that catfight develop.

Who's popping the popcorn?

Posted by: apspa1 | July 27, 2010 3:37 PM | Report abuse

Predictably, Sarah's bubble may be ready to pop as it sounds like people are tiring of her. You know, you can fool some of the people some of the time, but not all of the people all of the time. She'll eventually end up on Fox News where her fans, if any are left, will still watch her. Good thing she made her deal with Fox before her stock went down.

Posted by: lddoyle2002 | July 27, 2010 3:38 PM | Report abuse

Us real Alaskans know that Sarah Palin quit on us for the $$. As long as she keeps raking in the dough she will keep doing what she is doing. Nothing more than selling your soul to the devil for cash.

Posted by: alaskantuf_99 | July 27, 2010 3:38 PM | Report abuse

carthage87: Classical fascism exhibits a strain of ultra-nationalism that is conspicuously absent from modern leftism, thus a discussion of modern liberalism that suggest an affinity to fascism is a poor comparison. If anything, liberals are the opposite of nationalists.

Additionally, while fascism is, economically, exemplified by government quasi-ownership of ostensibly private companies (that sounds familiar), the efficiencies of fascism (such as making the trains run on time), could be reasonably contrasted against the inefficiencies of socialism/communism, in which nothing runs on time, or runs at all, at the furthest end of the spectrum.

@TommyBaseball: Palin as Umbridge? Really? I think that's a case of a wishful comparison.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | July 27, 2010 3:39 PM | Report abuse

Dem party polls bashing Palin. No surprise there. The surprise is the "unbiased" WaPo making statements like "it gets better".

Posted by: sportsfan2 | July 27, 2010 3:43 PM | Report abuse

you liberals are nervous because the one time she resigned (as oil and gas commissioner), she then moved up to governor.
resigning the governorship was a BRILLIANT strategic move that will prove once again how liberals always underestimate conservatives.
governor palin deserves the title because she earned it

- unlike obama who got his opponents in his illinois district disqualified from the ballot so he could run unopposed!

Posted by: carthage87 | July 27, 2010 3:45 PM | Report abuse

@carthage: "resigning the governorship was a BRILLIANT strategic"

Quitting in the face of opposition was not a brilliant move, unless the goal was to get straight into punditry and king-making. It will work against her in a GOP primary, especially in 2012, and would work against her in an election. In part because there is not a generally plausible explanation for why she left the job the Alaskan people had elected her to do--other than that it was expedient.

If that explanation doesn't play with me--who would vote for Palin in a heartbeat--I expect there are a fair number who don't think much of Palin's resignation.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | July 27, 2010 3:49 PM | Report abuse

you liberals are nervous because the one time she resigned (as oil and gas commissioner), she then moved up to governor.
resigning the governorship was a BRILLIANT strategic move that will prove once again how liberals always underestimate conservatives.
governor palin deserves the title because she earned it

- unlike obama who got his opponents in his illinois district disqualified from the ballot so he could run unopposed!

Posted by: carthage87 | July 27, 2010 3:50 PM | Report abuse

No no no; you got it all wrong. Sara Palin's best hope is her MC HAMMER glasses.

Posted by: password11 | July 27, 2010 3:50 PM | Report abuse

Hey idesign!

OK, I went to Google, typed in "PPP Palin ties obama" and am now on Page 5... So far I have only found conservative sites that reference this rumored poll result.

I have not found one single link to a PPP poll with this result.

Neither can I find such a poll in the PPP site, nor is it on Real Clear Politics (which, being run by fox, would happily report the poll, you think?) or any of the other major poll compilation sites.

Since we now have compelling proof that republicans are only too happy to fake "proof" of their arguments, I have no problem believing this "poll" is fake, too.

I think we can also safely ignore anything from idesign. She/he certainly is incapable of an original thought and is also intellectually lazy.

Posted by: TOMMYBASEBALL | July 27, 2010 3:51 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin was a figment of John McCain's imagination. He fantasised winning the presidency based on her appeal. Instead of that dream coming true, he left us with a nightmare.

Posted by: AverageJane | July 27, 2010 3:56 PM | Report abuse

President Obama Job Approval
RCP Average Approve 45.7
When it hits 38% it's racism.....LOL

Posted by: idesign | July 27, 2010 3:57 PM | Report abuse

carthage87,

Your first "scholar" doesn't say anything to define fascism. The quote you pasted is basically a senseless rant that happens to MENTION fascism out of context of its actual meaning.

And um jonah goldberg??????

You're kidding right?

As for the DEFINITION of the word fascism in the dictionary, here is the Random House Dictionary definition of 'fascism':

"""a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism."""

That is almost the exact OPPOSITE of socialism.

Here is the Collins English Dictionary definition of 'fascism':

"""any ideology or movement inspired by Italian Fascism, such as German National Socialism; any right-wing nationalist ideology or movement with an authoritarian and hierarchical structure that is fundamentally opposed to democracy and liberalism"""

I mean. That is the DEFINITION of fascism.

It IS on the right wing of the political spectrum. That's just what it is. There really is no debate to be had.

Do we need to have a debate over the meaning of the word DEFINITION now?

Posted by: Ethan2010 | July 27, 2010 3:59 PM | Report abuse

"resigning the governorship was a BRILLIANT strategic move"

She wasn't that well-liked in Alaska after going "rouge".

That's the only reason why quitting was even remotely smart (certainly not "brilliant").

If she went back to AK, after losing in the Fall of '08, and resumed making a mess out of her state, her political career would have been finito. She left AK in the lurch, but at least she left. Btw, I have friends in Alaska. She didn't even attend the July 4th parade after quitting on July 3rd. She really pissed people off up there with her lack of integrity and lack of sound leadership.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | July 27, 2010 4:06 PM | Report abuse

BUBBLE??? YOU MEAN AS IN BUBBLE HEAD? THIS WOMAN IS A TOTAL FRAUD AND TWICE AS DUMB.

Posted by: EdSantaFe | July 27, 2010 4:08 PM | Report abuse

I don't think we really have anything to worry about since Ms. Palin has no real track record in politics. Has anyone forgotten that she cavalierly and irresponsibly "stepped down" as Governor of Alaska to "do other things?" So we know she doesn't take seriously an oath to "serve the people...." In fact, she chases the money, never looking back, except maybe to see Russia from her window. Who would seriously elect her to anything given her history of shirking responsibility?

So as long as stirring up controversy and playing hide and seek with a Presidential compaign can advance her net worth, literally, we'll continue to endure all the publicity she gets. But liberals can probably rest easy knowing there is every probability that she will abandon a nomination as long as there is money to be made by doing so.

Posted by: jannettik | July 27, 2010 4:10 PM | Report abuse

meanwhile Soap Opera Sarah's family goes on strike after being fed Sam's Club fish sticks for 54 consecutive days while Sarah is busy with her politics and media career.

Sarah immediately refudiates them by declaring, as every elementary student knows, that they're nutritious and delicious. In subservient desperation, Todd slaughters a caribou.

Posted by: areyousaying | July 27, 2010 4:10 PM | Report abuse

Kevin_Willis - We are on opposite sides on a lot of issues but I have to give you props for standing up to some of the extreme language used and for having a sense of humor that is not based entirely on cruelty.

I wish you were on my side because, as you see, there are a lot of morons on the left, too.

Maybe I am dating myself, but I recall when it was possible for reasonable people to disagree reasonably and even act where agreement was found.

Or maybe the problem is we are running out of Reasonable people?

Posted by: TOMMYBASEBALL | July 27, 2010 4:12 PM | Report abuse

I love to be proven correct:
=============
"Liberals have enormous contempt for the American people."

Not quite. Remove "the American people" and replace those words with "morons like Sarah Palin and the drooling slackjawed yokels who worship her."

Happy to help.

=====================

I'd like to thank koolkat for once again affirming the fact that liberals hold Americans in contempt.

That was easy, and quick. Thanks!!!

Posted by: skipsailing28 | July 27, 2010 4:12 PM | Report abuse

Sarah's a very talented scam artist. She leaves a trail of destruction behind in her wake (John McCain, Alaska, etc) but thanks to her sycophantic supporters, she rarely has to face any consequences.

Posted by: blazertaco | July 27, 2010 4:14 PM | Report abuse

The Tea Party has been completely coopted by the republican party. It is time to start a new party to continue pursuing the tea party's original goals. We will call it the "Fist Party" because we hold our fists up in defiance to more taxes.
"It's time to give Congress a good fisting!" will be our motto.

Posted by: halo666 | July 27, 2010 4:16 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin was a figment of John McCain's imagination. He fantasised winning the presidency based on her appeal. Instead of that dream coming true, he left us with a pathetic joker...

Who generates a heck of a lot of laughs!

Posted by: AverageJane | July 27, 2010 4:17 PM | Report abuse

let there be no question about it. sarah will run in 2012 because her ego will trump her stupidity.

Posted by: gobears555555 | July 27, 2010 4:19 PM | Report abuse

Sarah is like the anti-Midas where everything she touches turns into a turd. John McCain, the 2008 GOP ticket, Alaska, her own children...the list goes on and on.

Name one Palin success story. I dare you. You can't. Well unless you consider fleecing her naive followers a success story.

Posted by: blazertaco | July 27, 2010 4:21 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin was a figment of John McCain's imagination. He fantasised winning the presidency based on her appeal. Instead of that dream coming true, he left us with a pathetic joker...

Who generates a heck of a lot of laughs!

Posted by: AverageJane | July 27, 2010 4:22 PM | Report abuse

@TOMMYBASEBALL: "Maybe I am dating myself, but I recall when it was possible for reasonable people to disagree reasonably and even act where agreement was found."

Anonymity allows us to express ourselves in a way we normally would not. I saw it in the 80s on the Compuserve CB and different dial-up BBS systems. I got in trouble more than once for tossing something off, then not giving a second thought, and finding out later that someone really got offended.

Name calling and the phenomenon of Nazi Tourrette's (as Lewis Black so aptly described Glenn Beck's comparison of so many Obama initiatives with the Nazi party) just destroys the opportunity for conversation. The reality is, I think, that the further out we get, the more we agree on the big picture--I mean, we can all agree that we like good things, right?

Anyway, my goal in participating in these discussions is to try and engage people productively, and get actual clarifications and explanations, rather than assume I completely understand a person's position and proceed to (in my superiority and arrogance) refute it with a great deal of high-quality insults.

And I always find there are many liberals who are open to thoughtful, agree-to-disagree discussions, and independents. Even those who were sometimes name calling 5 minutes ago. ;)

And in such discussions, clarifications are made. Turns out, people who disagree with me aren't doing so just because they are evil and/or stupid after all.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | July 27, 2010 4:28 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin was a figment of John McCain's imagination. He fantasised winning the presidency based on her appeal. Instead of that dream coming true, he left us with a pathetic joker...

Posted by: AverageJane | July 27, 2010 4:17 PM

==============================

Pathetic joker.....Obama?

(Sorry, there was no way I could resist).

Posted by: bbface21 | July 27, 2010 4:30 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: agolembe;
I love it when wingnuts try the "You must be afraid of Palin" meme.

I'm not afraid of cockroaches...but I don't want them in my home either.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
But there is something to be afraid of, cockroaches are one of the most successful species in evolution, they've survived for millions of years virually unchanged because of there resilience.

Palin and cockroaches have a lot in common.

Posted by: AverageJane | July 27, 2010 4:31 PM | Report abuse

One thing I can say for Sarah Palin...at least she's not Michelle Bachmann.

Posted by: blazertaco | July 27, 2010 4:33 PM | Report abuse

@TommyBaseball: Umbridge comparisons aside (being a big fan of the Harry Potter series, I think Bellatrix Lestrange would be a better choice, if we're going negative), my biggest pet peeve is with 3rd grade puns: repiglicans, repuglicans, dumbocrats, Obamunists, Palinistas, etc. Oh, and republitards--or anything with "tard" appended to it. Can we not disagree without such silliness? Or am I just an old fuddy-duddy>

"Hey, man, I'm not letting any old square tell me how to discuss politics!"

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | July 27, 2010 4:33 PM | Report abuse

You Journolistas and Trig Truthers have disgraced yourselves as writers and commenters. Glad someone popped your bubble for all to see.

Posted by: haiyaku | July 27, 2010 4:36 PM | Report abuse

Dude, is there any other subject you know how to write about? I know you must have a crush on Sarah because you obviously can't stop thinking about her. Is this about your 1000th rant on her?

Here's a little reality check for you --of the few hundred people who read your drivel on this website, 99.9 percent of them already hate her guts and would never vote for her. What exactly is the point of your column?

Posted by: BadNews | July 27, 2010 4:37 PM | Report abuse

Ethan2010
i'm glad you can read a dictionary but it is not the defition of a political ideology. just as you can look up the word "liberal" and "conservative" and you will see that there are things which you may agree or disagree with about defining a political ideology.
and yes - jonah goldberg. he's an excellent thinker.
you are ignoring the fact that fascism was born out of progressivism and liberalism. woodrow wilson even embraced it. the fact is that franco, peron, and mussolini were left-wing fanatics and used socialist economic policies.
by the way - Nazism. what do you think the words in german NSDAP mean? National SOCIALIST GERMAN WORKERS PARTY. I don't know of many right-wing socialist workers parties.... do you?
each of these fascist regimes used nationalism to advance their social experiments. sure, nationalism is usually associated with right-wing ideologies, but again, such statements cannot be made in one fell swoop. franco, peron, and mussolini all had similar domestic economics policies. they did NOT target racial or other minorities as part of their overall agenda. mussolini only embraced hitler's anti-semitic nazism out of the alliance and need to keep german soldiers out of italy. mussolini was never a full-blown anti-semite. nor was fascism born out of some need to persecute a minority. fascism was, and still is, a left-wing program for socialism and nationalism. hugo chavez - barack obama's best friend - is a modern-day fascist with his own ideological twist.
the question you are failing to ask me is - if fascism is left-wing, then what does an extreme right-wing government look like? it has always been the same - fundamentalism in direct contradiction with constitutionalism. saudi arabia is the prime example of fundamentalism. like all fundamentalist regimes, the constitution is written to only re-affirm what is already known: that god is the law and the king is god's representative on earth (the "basic law" of saudi arabia).

fascism, however, does not codify its political ideology when put into practice. for example, there were no basic laws that outlawed opposing media; they were simply shut down and orders were issued by the dictator. nazism, however, was codified by law. this is the fundamental difference between nazism and fascism. both were socialist, both were nationalist; however, nazism's society was to be built on purification which would lead to perfection; fascism was born from economic injustices suffered by the working class under old kingdoms and their serf-like laws.

Posted by: carthage87 | July 27, 2010 4:37 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin was a figment of John McCain's imagination. He fantasised winning the presidency based on her appeal. Instead of that dream coming true, he left us with a pathetic joker...

Posted by: AverageJane | July 27, 2010 4:17 PM

==============================

Pathetic joker.....Obama?

(Sorry, there was no way I could resist).
xxxxxxxxxx
Nope it should have read, left us with "the" pathetic joker! Boy now I know hard it is to be a politician.

Posted by: AverageJane | July 27, 2010 4:38 PM | Report abuse

"The trouble is that the average member of the Tea party is better educated than the average American. So your nasty comments not only show your nastiness, they are not even correct."

Proof that education doesn't equal intelligence. Look at Sarah Palin -- a college graduate, yet she is an ignorant, illiterate fool. So the education of your average teabagger really don't impress me, spanky. Sorry.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | July 27, 2010 4:39 PM | Report abuse

Poor widdle skipsailing. So very illiterate yet also thin-skinned.

No, einstein, "drooling slackjawed yokels" does not equal "Americans."

It might equal a small minority of Americans, and if you're in that group, too bad.

Most Americans think Palin and her slavering fans are fools. Truth hurts, I know.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | July 27, 2010 4:44 PM | Report abuse


Greg, You and your little liberal groupies must be very afraid of Palin.

"Thou doth protest too much"

Posted by: janet8 | July 27, 2010 4:45 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin was a figment of John McCain's imagination. He fantasised winning the presidency based on her appeal. Instead of that dream coming true, he left us with a pathetic joker...

Posted by: AverageJane | July 27, 2010 4:17 PM

==============================

Pathetic joker.....Obama?

(Sorry, there was no way I could resist).
xxxxxxxxxx
Nope it should have read, left us with "the" pathetic joker! Boy now I know hard it is to be a politician.

Posted by: AverageJane |

=====================================

I know what you mean. Once you publish something it's hard to "refudiate" it.

Posted by: bbface21 | July 27, 2010 4:48 PM | Report abuse

carthage: "by the way - Nazism. what do you think the words in german NSDAP mean? National SOCIALIST GERMAN WORKERS PARTY. I don't know of many right-wing socialist workers parties.... do you?"

Come on carthage, you really can't be that stupid. That's the kind of argument a child uses.

The former East Germany and the current North Korea both have "Democratic" in their official names. Do you think either of those countries is or ever was democratic?

Think, McFly, think.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | July 27, 2010 4:51 PM | Report abuse

koolkat_1960
doesn't. your grammar is wrong. you wrote:
"So the education of your average teabagger really don't impress me, spanky."
it should read:
"So the education of your average teabagger really doesn't impress me, spanky."
look in the mirror for an ignorant illiterate fool prior to pointing the finger.

sarah palin is EXTREMELY intelligent. but her good heart made her naive regarding the press and the fear she generates among leftists. 2008 was only greasing the wheels. you are going to see one helluva gal come 2012.

it's great that the leftists are also praying for sarah to become the gop nominee. we conservatives couldn't have shot you in the foot so you're doing it for us!

Posted by: carthage87 | July 27, 2010 4:51 PM | Report abuse

I understand that if one chooses his poll participants carefully he can get whatever poll results he desires.

Perhaps Mr Sargent will do a column on candidates endorsed by Barack Obama and tell us how they're doing as a result of Obama's endorsement.

Posted by: jpbill1 | July 27, 2010 4:54 PM | Report abuse

carthage, stop embarrassing yourself. You discredit the dictionary definition of fascism and then you claim that because the word socialist is in the title, that makes Nazis left wingers.

Yes I'm sure Nazis were all in favor of world peace, racial and gender equality, ending poverty, achieving educational equality, protecting human righs, and the ending of discrimination based on pre-existing medical conditions as you will find in the Democratic Party Platform.

Ask yourself, why exactly is fascism accepted as evil? It's the connection we make between fascism and Hitler, or fascism and Mussolini. What did Mussolini and Hitler do? They beat up and killed political opponents, and once they got into power, did the same thing, only with the force of the military at their disposal. It's the genocide and destruction they caused that makes fascism so evil.

Obviously Obama has done none of this and there is no indication that he ever will.

On the other hand, Bush and the republicans used a terrorist attack as an excuse to suspend civil liberties and invade a country which was not involved, as Hitler did with Czechoslovakia and Poland. I wouldn't call Bush "Hitler" but if we're comparing anyone to Hitler, Bush is light years closer than Obama.

Posted by: SDJeff | July 27, 2010 4:55 PM | Report abuse

@koolkat_1960: "Proof that education doesn't equal intelligence. Look at Sarah Palin -- a college graduate, yet she is an ignorant, illiterate fool."

And, other than that she represents a political ideology you may or may not find repugnant, what leads you to conclude she is illiterate? Ignorant can be a subjective determination (i.e., ignorance is someone not knowing about the things I find important), where as being illiterate is specifically being unable to read or write at a functional level.

I'd be interested to learn what makes you think Sarah Palin is actually illiterate.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | July 27, 2010 4:55 PM | Report abuse

koolkat_1960

democratic is not a universal term. the word "liberal" in England and Europe refers to right-wing politicians. so your argument is false.

they are not democratic according to what you think. you are limited in your worldview. they are democratic according to their own election laws, so yes i do believe they are according to how they MANAGE their elected officials.

i feel like i'm aruguing with a pencil.

Posted by: carthage87 | July 27, 2010 4:57 PM | Report abuse

I understahd that if one chooses his poll participants carefully he can get whatever poll results he desires.

Perhaps Mr Sargent will do a column on candidates endorsed by Barack Obama and tell us how they're doing as a result of Obama's endorsements.

Posted by: jpbill1 | July 27, 2010 4:59 PM | Report abuse

@TommyBaseball & Kevin_Willis

Couldn't agree more with your recent posts about the "tone" of conversations on the blog. Kevin you are most certainly appreciated on this blog. We love "reasonable" conservatives, moderates, independents. We have other "righties" or perhaps you'd call yourself independent and pragmatic who participate. It elevates the debate for us all.

Posted by: rukidding7 | July 27, 2010 4:59 PM | Report abuse

@SDJeff; "On the other hand, Bush and the republicans used a terrorist attack as an excuse to suspend civil liberties and invade a country which was not involved, as Hitler did with Czechoslovakia and Poland. I wouldn't call Bush 'Hitler' but if we're comparing anyone to Hitler, Bush is light years closer than Obama."

Bush might be centimeters closer. But, in the end, it's an irrational comparison in either case. The Nazi's were not remotely classic socialists or Marxists (I may misremember, but as I recall, Hitler despised Marx). I'm sorry, but is it impossible to discuss politics without talking about who most resembles Hitler or the Nazis? Are there not specific issues a little more relevant to today that can be discussed?

You know what reminds me of Hitler? Short hair. Short black hair. And wearing clothes, because Hitler was always wearing clothes. That makes you just like Hitler, because you, too, wear clothes.

It's a pointless argument. Either Bush or Obama have or have not done something, and what they did is either good or bad, legal or illegal, good policy or bad policy, without referring to Hitler.

"You know who else signed executive orders with a pen? Hitler. Mmmhmm."

Maybe I'm wrong, but this seems like a very depressingly shallow level at which to disagree with someone.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | July 27, 2010 5:01 PM | Report abuse

carthage: "sarah palin is EXTREMELY intelligent."

LOL out of all the hilarious things you've posted on this board, this is by far the funniest.

Five (mediocre) colleges? Inability to name ONE newspaper? Come on, we know you love the woman, but don't let your puppy love blind you to her stupidity.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | July 27, 2010 5:06 PM | Report abuse

Kevin....hang on brother and we'll disagree at much deeper levels. LOL There is no doubt that any post with Palin tends to exacerbate some of our less attractive human tendencies...it's kind of like when I watch UFC on Spike TV...you know the combat in the cage where the main difference between what we watch now and what the Romans enjoyed is that we make the competitors stop short of death and we don't let them use swords or kill wild animals. Let's be honest it's not very uplifting but I still find myself watching UFC on Spike and getting involved. I must confess though I do feel a bit dirty afterwards.

In reality Palin at this point has become a mere aggravation if not an actual asset for the left. But kvetching about her is as entertaining as watching a UFC champ choke his opponent into submission.

Posted by: rukidding7 | July 27, 2010 5:10 PM | Report abuse

@kevin_willis:What are you trying to say with that statistic? That liberal African-American's purposely avoid any contradictory opinion, and only look for news sources or opinion that endorses what they already believe? And who are you comparing them to?

I think blacks don't watch fox news partially because they are democrats by in large, but also because they see and hear the racial dog whistles that fox broadcasts and are turned off.

I am surprised that you haven't been following the fox news, "black people are coming to take what is yours, get you etc." focus over the last 2 years. I don't usually recommend Maddow to conservatives, but you should really check out this segment... http://maddowblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2010/07/21/4725628-scaring-white-people-for-fun-and-profit.

And kudos for helping some of your less informed conservatives understand the difference between facism and communism.

"Actually, Republicans (generally speaking) dislike terrorists, not Muslims. Are you equating all Muslims with terrorists"

Actually this is the right wing flavor of the month. Look at the mosque issue in new york. Even "thinking" conservatives like Gringrich make the spurious connection between a muslim community center and mosque and the 911 terrorists. This conflating muslims and terrorists is almost exclusively done by rightwingnuts. Its hard to believe that you haven't noticed this.

"And on the particulars of the Sherrod issue [covereage by fox], which as far as I can tell have been misrepresented by critics."

Again, go to Media matters or the maddowblog for the timeline of Sherrod smearing by fox news and foxnation.com. The many captions showing "Racism at the USDA?" and the repeated showing of the doctored video is a violation of decency.

Posted by: srw3 | July 27, 2010 5:11 PM | Report abuse

carthage: "i feel like i'm aruguing with a pencil."

Whatever that means.

Now you're just being juvenile. You see the word "Socialist" in the official name of the Nazi Party, so to you that means the Nazis were left-wingers (despite the incontrovertible evidence that the actual German socialists and communists were their political enemies).

But then, out of the other side of your mouth, you argue that the word "Democratic" in the official names of East Germany and North Korea really doesn't mean democratic as we understand it.

Sure, that all makes sense.

I feel like I'm aruguing with an eraser.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | July 27, 2010 5:12 PM | Report abuse

Rukidding7: I call myself a rocked-ribber conservative. I try not to create false expectations.

I have voted for our Democrat governor (Phil Bredesen of TN), but he's actually more conservative than our previous Republican governor, Don Sundquist. Also, I voted for Harold Ford, Jr. once. Moderate (or Blue Dog) Democrats do hold a lot of appeal for me.

I think the Republicans are off their nut with the pure obstructionism. With huge Democratic majorities, the Republicans had an opportunity to make the Obama administration more conservative than the Bush admin, and sacrificed that for political gain. I understand the thinking, but it would not be my strategy.

I feel that right-wing trolls reflect poorly on me, so, no, I don't like them either. But it seems too much to expect that every conservative would sound like William F. Buckley or Rob Long or James Lileks. Or even the recently quoted Jonah Goldberg. Say what you will about Jonah, I'm pretty sure he's never said: "And You OBAMUNISTS are gonna SUCK IT in 2010!!1!!"

Also, I'm really disappointed with my side's take on Obama ("socialist","regime","racist",etc) and lack of a coherent conservative agenda for 2010 and beyond, but . . . oh, well.

And my biggest personal problem with Obama has to do with budget cutting: defunding NASA rankles me in a way that only repealing the Eisenhower Interstate system could.

You know who else cut the NASA budget? Hitler.

I'm just sayin'.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | July 27, 2010 5:13 PM | Report abuse

Sargent makes it a point to search for items that make him feel better. Any bad or negative connotation news about Palin makes Sargent feel better. In fact, he tells you so : "It gets better" he writes. Tell your friends on JournOlist that you are feeling better now, Greg.

Posted by: chatard | July 27, 2010 5:14 PM | Report abuse

There is no doubt that Sarah's star is ascendant, while Barry's morphs into mud.

Posted by: idesign
----------------------
Did you read the article?

Posted by: MidwaySailor76 | July 27, 2010 5:15 PM | Report abuse

Palin's main problem is her mischaracterization by the media, especially, I might note, the Washington Post. Let's put her position on the most important issue for most American's, the economy, in contrast with (say) Obama. Palin is opposed to job outsourcing. She would use trade tariffs, high ones, applied o imported goods and services, to not just discourage job and factory outsourcing, but to regain jobs already outsourced. If you fear your job going off to India or China, if you worry about some Indian guest worker showing up in your cubicle on a Monday morning and being told you have two to train them to do your job, if you are disgusted by department store shelves groaning under the weight of cheap Chinese, Indian, and Bangladesh made junk, then you might just consider voting for Sarah Palin. If you worry about feeding your children, worry about the end of the 30 year mortgage, worry about the very future of this country, you might just consider voting for Sarah Palin. Of course, if you like job outsourcing, think that 30 million illegal immigrants is just a wonderful thing, think that disappearing factories, an alphabet soup of intelligence agencies, federal contracts with Blackwater guards to break up potential protests over free trade, is just fine, then you might stand with Obama and Pelosi and Reid and Kerry. Now, I read a lot of comments about how dumb and uneducated Sarah Palin is, but given the stark choice between Palin and Obama, you've got to wonder how dumb you would have to be to support that clueless fool we have as President. The fact is, we can't afford Obama or the Democratic leadeship (or the neocon's from the Republican Party -- Gingrich, Romney, McCain -- who are as bad anything the Democratic leadership has to offer). The choice is between national and personal suicide under the free trade banner and recovery. Palin wins, hands down.

Posted by: mibrooks27 | July 27, 2010 5:17 PM | Report abuse

SDJeff
"On the other hand, Bush and the republicans used a terrorist attack as an excuse to suspend civil liberties and invade a country which was not involved, as Hitler did with Czechoslovakia and Poland. I wouldn't call Bush "Hitler" but if we're comparing anyone to Hitler, Bush is light years closer than Obama."

- You just lost any credibility. You leftists make these sweeping false accusations as if if you repeat it enough it will make it true. The record is clear: President Bush did not - nor could he have - suspended civil liberties.

If it happened, please cite your court case against the federal government in which your civil liberties were suspended and violated. I'm sure if your civil liberties were violated, you would have sued. And certainly you would not be the only one. So, you could possibly provide me with at least a few dozen - maybe even a few hundred - court cases. Newspaper articles are not evidence. Just provide the case numbers of the victims whose civil liberties were violated as a result of a massive, one-stroke-of-the-pen suspension of civil liberties by bush. let's not forget, you leftists claim he's an idiot, a moron, so I'm guessing he's too dumb to have hidden this from view from everyone? I mean - he's too dumb to trick YOU, right? Because you're so smart! You have to be - you're a liberal and all liberals are intelligent.

"...invade a country which was not involved". i realize that is conventional wisdom regarding iraq, but here are the facts:
no one in the bush administration ever made the argument that iraq was behind 9-11....even the mention of it was shot down by bush himself prior to the war.

as a leftist, you probably believe that our government was somehow behind 9-11 or ignored warning signs of an impending attack.

up until early 2003, saddam hussein has been sending $20,000 to palestinian suicide bombers families for their "heroic" sacrifice in blowing themselves up all around israel.

you are an anti-semite if you do not support stopping such attacks because saddam hussein believed that killing jews was a moral obligation.. godly.

every intelligence agency - including bill clinton's own appointed cia director - believed saddam had wmd.

frankly, i don't care if he had them or not. i was living in israel from 1998-2009 and lived through all the threats posed by saddam - we were often going to gas mask centers. those days are long gone - and we have george bush to thank for that!

in summary, israel and the middle east and thus the world are all better off with saddam dead.

iraq is now free and the second democracy in the middle east.

if we had your way, you'd let jews die and saddam gas his own people.

Posted by: carthage87 | July 27, 2010 5:17 PM | Report abuse

She is a airhead...enough said!

Posted by: gidfin | July 27, 2010 5:19 PM | Report abuse

@kw: just a followup on race and fox news...

"The National Association of Black Journalists has faulted Fox for years for inaccurately portraying blacks. And Mr. Beck called Mr. Obama a racist last August, prompting an advertiser boycott that continues.

In the last month, Fox doggedly pursued an accusation of voter intimidation by a fringe hate group called the New Black Panthers on the day of the last presidential election. One news anchor, Megyn Kelly, devoted dozens of segments to the incident. (Ms. Kelly was even upbraided on the air by a Fox News contributor, Kirsten Powers, who accused her of doing the "scary black man thing."

Last fall, Fox's news programs gave heavy play to heavily edited tapes that appeared to show counselors at the liberal community organizing group Acorn giving advice to an ostensible pimp and his prostitute about evading taxes and setting up a brothel. [...]"--nyt

Posted by: srw3 | July 27, 2010 5:20 PM | Report abuse

can't thank koolkat enough for this:
==================
Poor widdle skipsailing. So very illiterate yet also thin-skinned.

No, einstein, "drooling slackjawed yokels" does not equal "Americans."

It might equal a small minority of Americans, and if you're in that group, too bad.

Most Americans think Palin and her slavering fans are fools. Truth hurts, I know.
=======================

As I said, the contempt that liberals feel is obvious. Koolkat continues to prove this by repeatedly posting such insults.

The first rule of holes, koolkat is simple, if you're in one, stop digging.

You just keep proving me right. I thank you for that.

Posted by: skipsailing28 | July 27, 2010 5:21 PM | Report abuse

I would pay good money to watch Sarah Palin compete on "Are You Smarter Than a Fifth Grader?" She wouldn't even have to leave her Fox channel comfort zone!

Posted by: blazertaco | July 27, 2010 5:22 PM | Report abuse

Let me get this right. An endorsement from an Alaska lunatic who quit office as governor, is hurting those she endorses? The American public is not as gullible as I thought. Who knew?

Posted by: COLEBRACKETT | July 27, 2010 5:23 PM | Report abuse

'sarah palin is EXTREMELY intelligent.'
///
definitely. 5 years and 6 colleges surely did it.

Posted by: apocrypha | July 27, 2010 5:26 PM | Report abuse

"Palin's main problem is her mischaracterization by the media, especially, I might note, the Washington Post. Let's put her position on the most important issue for most American's, the economy, in contrast with (say) Obama. Palin is opposed to job outsourcing. She would use trade tariffs, high ones, applied o imported goods and services, to not just discourage job and factory outsourcing, but to regain jobs already outsourced. If you fear your job going off to India or China, if you worry about some Indian guest worker showing up in your cubicle on a Monday morning and being told you have two to train them to do your job, if you are disgusted by department store shelves groaning under the weight of cheap Chinese, Indian, and Bangladesh made junk, then you might just consider voting for Sarah Palin. If you worry about feeding your children, worry about the end of the 30 year mortgage, worry about the very future of this country, you might just consider voting for Sarah Palin. Of course, if you like job outsourcing, think that 30 million illegal immigrants is just a wonderful thing, think that disappearing factories, an alphabet soup of intelligence agencies, federal contracts with Blackwater guards to break up potential protests over free trade, is just fine, then you might stand with Obama and Pelosi and Reid and Kerry. Now, I read a lot of comments about how dumb and uneducated Sarah Palin is, but given the stark choice between Palin and Obama, you've got to wonder how dumb you would have to be to support that clueless fool we have as President. The fact is, we can't afford Obama or the Democratic leadeship (or the neocon's from the Republican Party -- Gingrich, Romney, McCain -- who are as bad anything the Democratic leadership has to offer). The choice is between national and personal suicide under the free trade banner and recovery. Palin wins, hands down.

Posted by: mibrooks27 | July 27, 2010 5:17 PM | Report abuse "

Palin's main problem is that she's a moron who thinks that Africa is a city in France. You can scream until you're blue in the face and it won't change that fact. Don't show your ignorance with the 'Lamestream Media' garbage.

Posted by: blazertaco | July 27, 2010 5:26 PM | Report abuse

carthage87, SDJeff - I just love to watch you necon's and multinationalists fight. The problem is, you sound *exactly* the same. We have no reason whatsoever to be in Iraq or Afghanistan. They are failed states, no democracies, run by crooks, bandits, dictatorial wannabes and and our money and the lives of our precious and brave soldiers are simply not worth it.

Both of your camps are populated by free traitors - fuzzy minded one worlders, neomarxist idiots parading your globalization delusions around like college sophomores, and calling each other socialists. Well you are. Both of you. And most of us are clear headed enough to know that there isn't a dimes worth of difference between Bush and Obama or them from Gingrich, Romney, Schumer, Wyden, or any of the other free trade globalization nitwits that pass for party leaders. Your blind support for these ghouls is both troubling and rather pathetic. Cut it out.

Posted by: mibrooks27 | July 27, 2010 5:27 PM | Report abuse

@srw3: "Actually this is the right wing flavor of the month. Look at the mosque issue in new york. Even 'thinking' conservatives like Gringrich make the spurious connection between a muslim community center and mosque and the 911 terrorists."

I have a hard time regarding that as spurious, even if you only take the location into consideration. Given some of the associations with group sympathetic to terrorists (not to mention countries, as in Saudi Arabia), I think opposition to the 9/11 mosque, whatever your final conclusion about it may be, is a little more than simply "spurious".

Image captures aside, I don't the Media Matters timeline is entirely correct. At least, there is some disagreement. From Mediaite.com:

"Fox News didn’t cover the story before her resignation (aside from a few comments in their primetime opinion hour). What’s more, the day after her resignation, Fox News’ opinion hosts covered the story in a light favorable to Sherrod and unfavorable to the NAACP and the White House."

Plus, the fact that even Glenn Beck was uncharacteristically willing to jump on Sherrod before all the facts were known does not really lend itself to the Fox-As-Race-Baiting-Smear-Artists narrative, to me.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | July 27, 2010 5:28 PM | Report abuse

Kevin...at least a "rocked ribber" conservative we can all respect.

Trust me when I tell you there are at least a dozen or so "progressive" bloggers on this site who will approach you with respect and pay attention to your responses and your side or position.

Most of the righties on here view me as the ultra pinko commie but actually I'm simply calling for a tax schedule that matches the one under Republican Eisenhower...also get the Corps to pay the 25% of the national tax burden they used to pay under Ike instead of the paltry 8% they now pay. I'd like to make the tax fairer..Warren Buffet a Billionaire pays a lower "effective rate" than his secretary.
Immediately eliminate the cap on FICA contributions from the current 102,500. Why should someone who earns $100,000 face a 7.65% tax on earnings while someone who earns a million only pays .00765% ?

Folks are free to disagree but these thoughts hardly make me a wild eyed liberal or a socialist or communist.

I'd love to discuss socialism RATIONANLLY with folks of your persuasion Kevin but mainly I get propaganda back. Like little remarks about how the trains don't run on time in a socialized country. Actually you wouldn't wish to compare our record on train schedules with the Euro's and the Socialists who blow our doors off! My wife and I each drive a Volvo...those damn unproductive Swedes must have gotten something right. We could debate on whether getting health care, higher education for our children, 6-8 weeks of vacation is worth paying 38-40% of our earnings instead of the 25% we currently pay. It's just money! Nothing to get emotional about but when the word Socialist comes up people go bonkers!!!
Meanwhile Google "happiest people in the World" The various lists will invariably feature "socialist" countries at the top and the U.S. rarely breaks the top 10?

The typical rightie response...if you love the Euro's so much why don't you move. How about because I'm a patriot who loves my country but doesn't yet believe it's perfect. Ahh but a debate on socialism if for another day.

Posted by: rukidding7 | July 27, 2010 5:29 PM | Report abuse

Palin is an anchor around the necks of the GOP-Bag Party. It's hard to believe that her tanking of the 2008 GOP ticket didn't wake the Right up to this fact. But their ignorance is our gain.

Posted by: blazertaco | July 27, 2010 5:30 PM | Report abuse

koolkat_1960

You see the word "Socialist" in the official name of the Nazi Party, so to you that means the Nazis were left-wingers (despite the incontrovertible evidence that the actual German socialists and communists were their political enemies).

-- You are so limited in your history. First, I correctly said the WHOLE name - NATIONAL SOCIALIST GERMAN WORKERS PARTY. What part of that do you not understand? Typical liberal - even faced with the facts you have to twist it all to fit your template!

TIME MAGAZINE - JANUARY, 1939:

""Most cruel joke of all, however, has been played by Hitler & Co. on those German capitalists and small businessmen who once backed National Socialism as a means of saving Germany's bourgeois economic structure from radicalism. The Nazi credo that the individual belongs to the state also applies to business. Some businesses have been confiscated outright, on other what amounts to a capital tax has been levied. Profits have been strictly controlled. Some idea of the increasing Governmental control and interference in business could be deduced from the fact that 80% of all building and 50% of all industrial orders in Germany originated last year with the Government. Hard-pressed for food- stuffs as well as funds, the Nazi regime has taken over large estates and in many instances collectivized agriculture, a procedure fundamentally similar to Russian Communism."

Hitler setup the Labour Front. Both employers and employees joined it. According to the National Labour Law of January 20, 1934, the state would exert direct influence and control over all business employing more than twenty persons. In other words, both employers and employees were put under the control of the government.

Barack Obama, therefore, has conducted socialist economic policies very similar to Adolf Hitler and the Nazis - Time Magazine lays it out for you quite clearly.

Posted by: carthage87 | July 27, 2010 5:30 PM | Report abuse

blazertaco - Ah, so we can understand, based on your comment and post name, that you are here illegally?

Posted by: mibrooks27 | July 27, 2010 5:31 PM | Report abuse

carthage: "sarah palin is EXTREMELY intelligent."
-----------------------
Wow. Not from what I've seen of her. She may surprise me some day and come up with something beyond cute sound bites and twitter feeds. If that happens, I'll gladly note I was mistaken.

Posted by: MidwaySailor76 | July 27, 2010 5:31 PM | Report abuse

koolkat_1960 says:

"You see the word "Socialist" in the official name of the Nazi Party, so to you that means the Nazis were left-wingers (despite the incontrovertible evidence that the actual German socialists and communists were their political enemies)."

My reply:

-- You are so limited in your history. First, I correctly said the WHOLE name - NATIONAL SOCIALIST GERMAN WORKERS PARTY. What part of that do you not understand? Typical liberal - even faced with the facts you have to twist it all to fit your template!

TIME MAGAZINE - JANUARY, 1939:

""Most cruel joke of all, however, has been played by Hitler & Co. on those German capitalists and small businessmen who once backed National Socialism as a means of saving Germany's bourgeois economic structure from radicalism. The Nazi credo that the individual belongs to the state also applies to business. Some businesses have been confiscated outright, on other what amounts to a capital tax has been levied. Profits have been strictly controlled. Some idea of the increasing Governmental control and interference in business could be deduced from the fact that 80% of all building and 50% of all industrial orders in Germany originated last year with the Government. Hard-pressed for food- stuffs as well as funds, the Nazi regime has taken over large estates and in many instances collectivized agriculture, a procedure fundamentally similar to Russian Communism."

Hitler setup the Labour Front. Both employers and employees joined it. According to the National Labour Law of January 20, 1934, the state would exert direct influence and control over all business employing more than twenty persons. In other words, both employers and employees were put under the control of the government.

Barack Obama, therefore, has conducted socialist economic policies very similar to Adolf Hitler and the Nazis - Time Magazine lays it out for you quite clearly.

Posted by: carthage87 | July 27, 2010 5:31 PM | Report abuse

skipsailing, yes, I find morons like you contemptible. Please keep acting like you consider that a badge of honor -- it just makes you look like even more of a fool.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | July 27, 2010 5:32 PM | Report abuse

Sheesh.

Posted by: bernielatham | July 27, 2010 5:32 PM | Report abuse

"you are an anti-semite if you do not support stopping such attacks because saddam hussein believed that killing jews was a moral obligation.. godly."

And if we don't stop the killing in Sudan, then you are anti-black. Hell, if you don't rid the inner-cities of drugs and guns, then you are also anti-black. Carthage hates blacks, what do you know? No wonder you hate Obama too.

Look, we can't stop all the killing in the world. Maybe we should've started by trying to rid violence in our own country before creating an Iranian-aligned theocracy in Iraq.

Estimates are that hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis have died as a result of our invasion. So you're against the Iraqis, and therefore, against Muslims, Once again, I have proven that carthage is an anti-Semite as well as racist. Wow, this is too easy.

Tell you what, you stop making false accusations and I'll stop stooping to your level.

As for your convenient lack of memory regarding Bush's record against civil liberties and his administration's repeated assertions that Iraq was retaliation for 9/11, the burden is on me for providing proof since I brought it up in the first place. But there is so much evidence over the past decade at your disposal and if you are interested, you can search for it on this thing we call Google. I'm not gonna waste my time presenting you with facts which you will choose to ignore anyway. If you didn't pay attention before, you're not gonna start now.

Good day.

Posted by: SDJeff | July 27, 2010 5:35 PM | Report abuse

mibrooks -- do you seriously think Sarah Palin even knows how tariffs work? LOL

Your one-note outsourcing screeds are quite boring by this point, and your attempts at weaving Palin into your narrative fail miserably.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | July 27, 2010 5:35 PM | Report abuse

Like Sharron Angle in Nevada, who has been exposed as having hate and anger but no real answers to the problems facing this nation, Palin has nothing to offer but empty rhetoric.

And that's the problem facing the GOP as a whole...for a while the teabaggers were able to convince people that the TP isn't just a subsidiary of the GOP, but that's just not working anymore.

The truth is now as plain to see as the silly tea bags hanging from their tri-corner hats, and it's not a pretty sight to behold.

Posted by: wagner3792 | July 27, 2010 5:35 PM | Report abuse

"blazertaco - Ah, so we can understand, based on your comment and post name, that you are here illegally?

Posted by: mibrooks27 | July 27, 2010 5:31 PM | Report abuse "

Because I like to partake in the occasional taco, I'm suddenly an illegal immigrant? Wow, what a typical Right-Wing response. Hey Kevin, you wanted a Rightie racist, here you go.

Posted by: blazertaco | July 27, 2010 5:36 PM | Report abuse

Ah yes, carthage, Time magazine of 1939, such an unbiased source.

You would be funny if you weren't so pathetic.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | July 27, 2010 5:38 PM | Report abuse

mibrooks27
No I'm not a socialist but I am a very proud Jewish Neocon. I do believe in America's need to be dominant in the world, interventionist, and, when necessary, pre-emptively strike.
Domestically, I would love to see a Fair/Flat tax, and dismantle social security, medicare/medicaid, eliminate all czars, education dept, HUD, and a number of others. All that should be handed over to the states. The government should only be protecting the borders and defending the nation.

SDJeff is basically an apologist and whimp when it comes to national security - he's the kind that looks back and has regrets about America's power during and after WW2 - thinking if we just love, they'll love us back.

Posted by: carthage87 | July 27, 2010 5:40 PM | Report abuse

I will agree with one thing that's been said here in these comments, Palin stories get a little dull these days simply because she's a political non-factor. The danger of her coming anywhere near public office has come and gone, despite what her screaming love-struck supporters would like you to believe. I enjoy these stories not really because of Palin herself, but because her sycophantic drones are so much fun to bait in the comments. We all need a little fun in our lives.

Posted by: blazertaco | July 27, 2010 5:41 PM | Report abuse

blazertaco -- mibrooks actually claims to be a liberal, but you'd never know it from his posts.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | July 27, 2010 5:42 PM | Report abuse

I want to see a Gingrich/Palin or a Palin/Gingrich ticket in 2012. I really, really, really want to see the GOP field that pair as its ticket in 2012. Please, Please, Please.

Posted by: Freethotlib | July 27, 2010 5:42 PM | Report abuse

@carthage87: no one in the bush administration ever made the argument that iraq was behind 9-11.

Dick Cheney--In Iraq, a ruthless dictator cultivated weapons of mass destruction and the means to deliver them. He gave support to terrorists, had an established relationship with al Qaeda, and his regime is no more." –Nov. 7, 2003

"With respect to 9/11, of course, we’ve had the story that’s been public out there. The Czechs alleged that Mohamed Atta, the lead attacker, met in Prague with a senior Iraqi intelligence official five months before the attack, but we’ve never been able to develop anymore of that yet either in terms of confirming it or discrediting it. We just don’t know."--September 14, 2003

"in summary, israel and the middle east and thus the world are all better off with saddam dead."

Actually with Saddam gone, there is no check on his traditional enemy Iran who has become the dominant power and the prime foe of Israel.

"iraq is now free and the second democracy in the middle east."

This is the one that would be really funny if it weren't so sad. What does "success" in Iraq look like? A Shiite majority government with close ties to Iran. An autonomous Kurdistan in all but name. A sectarian civil war just under the surface. Continued bombings shootings, kidnapping, intermittent electrical power, a basically nonfunctional sewer system, 1+ million internally displaced refugees in the country and 2+ million outside the country, ethnically cleansed, segregated Sunni and Shiite neighborhoods in Bagdad, no government 5 months after the election... And this is what success looks like AFTER SPENDING A TRILLION DOLLARS, 4000+ DEAD AMERICANS, 25000+ WOUNDED AND MAIMED, 150000++++ DEAD IRAQI NONCOMBATANTS. Yep, Iraq is a real success story...

"every intelligence agency - including bill clinton's own appointed cia director - believed saddam had wmd." Really? Believed? Really? Suspected, maybe...but there was no certainty in that belief. Somehow the rest of the world didn't believe it enough to launch an unprovoked war... I am still waiting for the collective "I was wrong, you were right" to the inspectors who said there were no wmd in Iraq...

Posted by: srw3 | July 27, 2010 5:45 PM | Report abuse

"mibrooks27
No I'm not a socialist but I am a very proud Jewish Neocon. I do believe in America's need to be dominant in the world, interventionist, and, when necessary, pre-emptively strike.
Domestically, I would love to see a Fair/Flat tax, and dismantle social security, medicare/medicaid, eliminate all czars, education dept, HUD, and a number of others. All that should be handed over to the states. The government should only be protecting the borders and defending the nation.

SDJeff is basically an apologist and whimp when it comes to national security - he's the kind that looks back and has regrets about America's power during and after WW2 - thinking if we just love, they'll love us back.

Posted by: carthage87 | July 27, 2010 5:40 PM | Report abuse"

I know a few other Jews as "conservative" as you, carthage, but almost none are as ignorant as you.

You're so stupid you use "Fair/Flat tax" like the Fair Tax and a flat tax are the same thing. The Fair Tax is a consumption tax. A "flat tax" is simply a less-progressive income tax. They could not be farther apart.

Thanks for proving you really know jack squat about what you try to discuss. We can now completely disregard your posts.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | July 27, 2010 5:47 PM | Report abuse

koolkat_1960
uhhh.. yeah - Time is biased.. towards the left! Are you actually accusing Time of being conservative sympathizers? If so, that would definitely be a first.

In any case, you lived up to your lefty liberal ways - once you started to lose the argument, you attack, insult me personally.

I wish the stock market was as predictable.

Posted by: carthage87 | July 27, 2010 5:47 PM | Report abuse

@kevin_willis:Fox News didn’t cover the story before her resignation

No, but foxnation.com was all over it as soon as breitbart posted it, long before the resignation. And how can you justify the repeated playing of the doctored tape?

And the day after, where was the fox news focus? Not on the slimeball that completely distorted the message from the speech, but on the administration for believing what was reported on fox news.

Kev, I like you but your blinders are on too tight on this issue.

Posted by: srw3 | July 27, 2010 5:55 PM | Report abuse

And on the particulars of the Sherrod issue [covereage by fox], which as far as I can tell have been misrepresented by critics."

"Again, go to Media matters or the maddowblog for the timeline of Sherrod smearing by fox news and foxnation.com. The many captions showing "Racism at the USDA?" and the repeated showing of the doctored video is a violation of decency."

Posted by: srw3

===========================================
Get it straight. Here are the facts. Sherrod was fired BEFORE it was aired on Fox (and msnbc, by the way). Fox immediately apologized for not investigating the matter further. Rather than apologizing for msnbc's part in airing the story, Rachel Maddow condemned Fox. The little respect I had for Maddow and msnbc went to zero after watching her con job.

The video was not "doctored". It was edited. BigGovernment.com had the video complete with her explanation and supposed redemption. The video went viral on the internet with the edited version. Then it was picked up by news agencies.

Where was the NAACP during all of this? They had already condemned Sherrod. Funny. The video was taken at their meeting and the video was their property. Rather than blaming their own organization for the Sherrod incident, they blamed Fox as well.

Fox reacted to their error with class. The Did the NAACP and msnbc? They blamed Fox. No class there.

Posted by: bethg1841 | July 27, 2010 6:00 PM | Report abuse

Name one Palin success story. I dare you. You can't. Well unless you consider fleecing her naive followers a success story.
Posted by: blazertaco
-------------
Actually Palin had quite high approval ratings as governor of Alaska. Ranging from a high of 82% to a low of 68%.

By contrast:
The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Tuesday shows that 25% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as president. Forty-five percent (45%) Strongly Disapprove, giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -20 (see trends).

I am not an Obama basher nor am I a Palin supporter, but the truth is the truth.

Posted by: rohit57 | July 27, 2010 6:02 PM | Report abuse

I consider myself to be an Independent.

What bothers me the most about the current political climate is the extremes that people will go to. For example if you're a Palin fan Obama is a Socialist, inexperienced, elitist, & a racist. The political parties are so partisan very little can get done.

As an Independent I feel, as a citizen, I should educate myself about every issue & come to my own conclusions. I am not going to follow any rabid politician willy-nilly down a path unless this person has laid out a sensible vetted arguement.

We live in a very complex world & it seems that everything is continuing to go at warp speed. We can only adapt by learning what is in the best interest of ourselves, this country, & future generations. The POTUS HAS to be well informed about many issues both national & international. We could become isolationist but history has proven that countries that do this do not thrive in the long run.

I do not have any issue with Sarah Palin. I do, however, would like for her to agree to 6 interviews in the very near future. 3 could be with any media outlet of her choice. The other 3 would be by the "lamestream" media. She could pick the outlets but they would have to be those she has shunned. No politician is perfect & will make the occasional gaffe. But any politician who wants to be POTUS should prove they are well informed about all sides of an issue so they can make a well thought out decision.

If Palin does become a serious contender for POTUS in 2012 she will HAVE to venture into a much wider stream to attract supporters. To do this she will HAVE to sit down with many different people & explain her positions.

If she is the GOP candidate for POTUS in 2012 there will be several debates with Obama & that will tell citizens a lot.

Posted by: Parsley1 | July 27, 2010 6:13 PM | Report abuse

Liberals have enormous contempt for the American people. That's why they seek to enslave us. They think that they know better than us on just about everything. Why else would the liberals be so fond of central planning if not to wrench control of life away from people that they hold in comtempt (us!)

Posted by: skipsailing28
_____________

Skippy, unlike you I can't speak for an entire political group but I can speak for myself.

I don't hold Mrs. Palin in contempt. Disgust is more like it.

I personally wouldn't want to enslave a bunch of disgusting people.

Posted by: arancia12 | July 27, 2010 6:13 PM | Report abuse

koolkat_1960
uhhh.. yeah - Time is biased.. towards the left! Are you actually accusing Time of being conservative sympathizers? If so, that would definitely be a first.

In any case, you lived up to your lefty liberal ways - once you started to lose the argument, you attack, insult me personally.

I wish the stock market was as predictable.

Posted by: carthage87

________________

Yeah, I'm accusing Time of being right leaning. I cancelled my subscription because I got tired of seeing stories about Rush, Beck, Palin, and Coulter when there was only a tiny article about Maddow.

Yes, Virgina, Time is right leaning

Posted by: arancia12 | July 27, 2010 6:19 PM | Report abuse

It's all about neoconservative funny mental lust.

Posted by: whocares666 | July 27, 2010 6:21 PM | Report abuse

The truth is that Obama has withstood criticism for over a year and a half through a terrible economy that is not going to get much better anytime soon, no matter who is president. It's not an excuse, but it explains the poor ratings. That, as well as his response to the BP spill, the disaster in Afghanistan, will make for bad approval ratings.

The amazing thing is that Palin probably has about the highest disapproval for anyone never having served in national office. She would get destroyed in a presidential campaign.

The only approval rating that will ever matter for Obama the vote on Election Day 28 months from now. If he loses that, gloat all you want. If Palin is his opponent, I like his odds.

Posted by: SDJeff | July 27, 2010 6:21 PM | Report abuse

Palin is so stupid, Did you all hear her newest poem?
`Roses are red`
`Violets are blue`
`I'm a retard`
`And so is my baby`

Only Palin could write such a thing! :-p

Posted by: ArmchairGM | July 27, 2010 6:26 PM | Report abuse

"To do this she will HAVE to sit down with many different people & explain her positions."

Biden didn't go after her at all in their debate. Obama would not do the same.

I can imagine Palin avoiding the debates, claiming media bias, and her supporters will eat it up.

Posted by: SDJeff | July 27, 2010 6:27 PM | Report abuse

koolkat_1960
ohhhhh right i forgot - i'm dealing with nitpicky liberals. LOL. ok - i'll fall into your little world just for a moment. do you want me to write out "Fair or Flat"? I really was trying to get the point accross, but AGAIN, you exited your shell to snap at something so irrelevant. how do you liberals get around in a day? i know you are angry, hateful people but this is rediculous? you think i have to prove to YOU my credentials? i think not. over and over again i provide detailed analysis with citations and you come back and attack, insult...
you just can't handle the facts of what was said so you attack the messenger. that's what you lefties do to sarah and that's why she will win BIG in 2012. americans won't fall for your kind again in the oval office.
you notice i've argued against your "policies" and have refrained from calling you dumb and ignorant and stupid. if that's the only thing you lefties have - then i can live with it!

now - to get back on track because you want to divert attention away from the facts.

Barack Obama's policies are no different to what was put in place by the Nazis under Adolf Hitler. There is a pure socialist mantra, and further, you have "anti-constitutionalism". The appointment of dozens of czars are a direct affront to the power of the Senate's advise and consent position.

Sarah Palin will restore the constitution and bring back good government.

Governor Palin has the courage to take on Washington elitists and lobbyists who have bankrupted the federal coffers.

The authority the president has to wage war necessarily requires the Congress to provide the funds to do so. Just as every President did before him, George Bush needed to finance the Afghanistan and Iraq wars with debt. Lincoln, Wilson, and FDR all sold war bonds in one form or another.

At least once President Palin takes office, she will balance the budget her FIRST YEAR in office - no more borrowing, period.

Posted by: carthage87 | July 27, 2010 6:27 PM | Report abuse

"Name one Palin success story. I dare you. You can't. Well unless you consider fleecing her naive followers a success story.
Posted by: blazertaco
-------------
Actually Palin had quite high approval ratings as governor of Alaska. Ranging from a high of 82% to a low of 68%.

By contrast:
The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Tuesday shows that 25% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as president. Forty-five percent (45%) Strongly Disapprove, giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -20 (see trends).

I am not an Obama basher nor am I a Palin supporter, but the truth is the truth.

Posted by: rohit57 | July 27, 2010 6:02 PM | Report abuse "

Why don't you go ask those citizens of Alaska what they think of Palin now?

Posted by: blazertaco | July 27, 2010 6:29 PM | Report abuse

srw3
oooo - this is easy!

Dick Cheney quote:
-- And? where does he say "Iraq is directly involved with the 9-11 attacks?"

-- If you can recall (I don't know how old you are) but in the immediate days of the aftermath, there were dozens of rumors flying around. This one was one that the VP and the Bush administration later said they were unable to confirm the nature of the meeting. Besides, Saddam and his sons were in contact with al Qaida; it would be expected that they would meet.
Still, in the 9/11 report by congress, this was never proven.

Actually with Saddam gone, there is no check on his traditional enemy Iran who has become the dominant power and the prime foe of Israel.
--- No. That's a false assumption of behavior. What you advocate is that in order to counter a dictator, you need another dictator. I believe that you need freedom to counter a dictator. As does Sarah Palin.

I'll tell you exactly what success looks like in Iraq. It's when anyone can walk around the streets of Iraq and it has the look and feel of home. I'll remind you we STILL have troops in Germany and Japan. Why don't you demand they come home? Because they're not getting killed? Well, following the official end of WW2 in Europe on VE day, an additional 3,000 allied troops were killed by Nazi sympathizers and other domestic German terorrists. Nothing we
are seeing in Iraq is new. It is only a repeat of what happened in Germany after the war. It took about 30 years for the country to be fully rebuilt and prosperous - our troops will be in Iraq for another 20 years guaranteed - and I'm completely happy with that. They should remain there anyway until Iran changes its tune or so we can use it as a launchpad to attack and occupy Iran for the next change of regimes.

The Shiites have changed their tune and are fully participating in the reconstruction of Iraq both politically and economically. They do NOT want to join Iran in a political union.

Yep - war is hell ain't it? Why don't you tell your allies in the Muslim world to stop teaching violence and then things like 9-11 won't happen. They attacked us. They are to blame, not us. And if you have a country that is already rogue and dangerous with a past of causing war and killing its own citizens and raping women (like in the 1990 Kuwait Occupation), then you must react with stern deadlines and consequences.
NO BLIND THREATS. ONLY ACTION. This way, they know we will be taken seriously.
Patience. Victory on the battlefield is always quicker than nationbuilding. We have another 20 years to go but at least that's one less dictator in the world and 15 million people freed!

Again, I don't care if they were wrong or right, but I'm just stating the facts that the entire intelligence community KNEW it ("slam dunk").
But I really, really don't care. I'm glad we went in, took Saddam out, replaced it with an electoral process, and now there's freedom!

Palin/Gingrich 2012!

Posted by: carthage87 | July 27, 2010 6:32 PM | Report abuse

arancia12

I may be mistaken, but I don't believe Rush, Beck, Palin and Coulter were around in 1939...

Posted by: carthage87 | July 27, 2010 6:35 PM | Report abuse

I only have one litmus test for candidates: they need to be at least as smart as I am. Because I'm not in the habit of hiring people to do jobs for me when I could do them better myself.

So I'd love to see a show of hands here - how many of the Palinbots support her because they believe she's as smart as or smarter than they are? And how many of them support her because they simply believe that it's not important for an elected official to be smart?

Really can't wait to see how many of you are willing to step up to the plate and admit you're not as smart as Sarah Palin.

Posted by: JennOfArk | July 27, 2010 6:37 PM | Report abuse

@bethg1841: Sherrod was fired BEFORE it was aired on Fox (and msnbc, by the way).

I never claimed otherwise. I did say that foxnation.com went with the video, NO QUESTIONS ASKED, within an hour of it being posted by breitbart. Along with commentary straight from breitbarts site. And fox news did run the video virtually nonstop with captions like "Racism at the USDA" throughout the afternoon.

"Fox immediately apologized for not investigating the matter further."

Some evidence, you know links to video or statements with date and time, would make this more believable.

"Rather than apologizing for msnbc's part in airing the story, Rachel Maddow condemned Fox."

I believe that Maddow did state that MSNBC also ran the tape without verifying it. Certainly Oberman did. And fox was almost gleefully replaying the deceptively edited video with commentary on "racism at the USDA" as the captions clearly show. Did you even watch the maddow segment?

"The video was not "doctored". It was edited."

This is a distinction without a difference. Do you deny that it was edited to totally upend the message of the speech? In the edited version, Sherrod sounds like a racial bigot. In the full video, she tells how she overcame her initial reticence to help the white farmer (she was working at a nonprofit that was charged with helping black farmers at the time) and went out of her way to help the couple keep their farm. That is doctoring the video IMHO.

"BigGovernment.com had the video complete with her explanation and supposed redemption."

REALLY??? when did breitbart post this? Some proof would be helpful here. If he had her story, why would he even post the deceptive video?

"Fox reacted to their error with class. The Did the NAACP and msnbc? They blamed Fox. No class there."

Class would be condemning breitbart and never giving him a platform to spew his hate again. I didn't see reporters or commenters (as opposed to shep smith, and belatedly glen beck) specifically condemn breitbart, who after all, created the entire debacle with his deceptively edited video. Isn't he the evil one here?

In fact, the NAACP and the Obama administration stepped up and admitted that they made a mistake by reacting too quickly to the class 5 media sh*t storm, in less than 4 hours. That is taking responsibility for making a mistake. Fox and especially fox nation deserves a good deal of blame for constantly running the distorted video, along with MSNBC and any other media company that ran the video without checking to see if it was accurate. But breitbart is the real evil one here for posting a distorted video complete with commentary without getting the context. Of course, that was his goal, to distort the video to make Sherrod look like a bigot.

Posted by: srw3 | July 27, 2010 6:38 PM | Report abuse

Carthage, will you please come back here on the night of November 6, 2012 to apologize for being such a moron?

Posted by: SDJeff | July 27, 2010 6:42 PM | Report abuse

"Really can't wait to see how many of you are willing to step up to the plate and admit you're not as smart as Sarah Palin."

Jenn, I wouldn't expect anything but crickets if I were you. These people do not care about intelligence, in fact, they look down on it. When is the last time the democratic candidate wasn't demonstrably smarter than the republican candidate? It's simply not an issue for them and it never will be.

Posted by: SDJeff | July 27, 2010 6:48 PM | Report abuse

@carthage87: Patience. Victory on the battlefield is always quicker than nationbuilding.

I thought Bush was against nation building. He certainly didn't present nation building when he said we should invade.

"We have another 20 years to go but at least that's one less dictator in the world and 15 million people freed!"

At what cost? There are dictators all over the world. Should we spend our blood and treasure to invade them all? A trillion dollars could do a lot of good here in the US. Far more than killing 100,000 Iraqi civilians.

Again, I don't care if they were wrong or right, but I'm just stating the facts that the entire intelligence community KNEW it ("slam dunk").

This is just false. There were lots of nuance in the intelligence reports that was simply ignored. Part 1 of the Iraq investigation confirmed this.

But I really, really don't care. I'm glad we went in, took Saddam out, replaced it with an electoral process, and now there's freedom!

Right, why don't you hop over to Iraq and enjoy some of their freedom to be killed, kidnapped, blown up by roadside bombs, live by open sewers, endure 100+ degrees of heat with no electricity. Somehow I don't think all those dead Iraqis feel free.

I hope your home in farrightwingnutistan is comfortable and far removed from any influence on US policy in the future. We can't afford another Iraq debacle. Clearly the Iraq invasion is the single biggest foreign policy disaster this century and perhaps for all time.

Posted by: srw3 | July 27, 2010 6:50 PM | Report abuse

correction: Clearly the Iraq invasion is the single biggest US foreign policy disaster this century and perhaps since 1787. It is right up there with the Bay of Pigs, although far more destructive and costly in lives and money.

Posted by: srw3 | July 27, 2010 6:54 PM | Report abuse

SDJeff
can you lefties ever say anything without using a personal attack?
maaaan - it's amazing. there has got to be a book instructing you all because you all say the same things... i can't tell you how old it gets. that's why americans are moving right and towards governor palin - because you guys just can't have an intelligent, logical political discussion without reverting back to 4 key words: stupid, moron, idiot, and dumb.
anyway, if that's all you leftists got, i can live with it!

you are really smug after you win an election...

** Join the movement to elect new, commonsense conservatives to BALANCE THE BUDGET and REPEAL, RE-WRITE, REPLACE ObamaSCARE... **

Everyone needs to ask themselves this question:

Is your "pursuit of happiness" easier than it was two years ago?

Posted by: carthage87 | July 27, 2010 6:56 PM | Report abuse

Carthage, your constant Palinpimping and your belief that she would not only win the election but be an effective president is proof positive that you're a moron. I don't usually resort to name calling and I respect opposing viewpoints if they aren't simply the same old tired regurgitated talking points, but after everything Palin has failed and quit at, for you to believe she would not only be a good president but, according to your predictions of her successes, also be the best president in our lifetimes, qualifies you as a moron.

I voted for Obama(obviously) and think he's done a lot of good, and a lot of not so good. But I'll take his mixed bag of accomplishments over the 8 disastrous years of Bush. I won't even worry about Palin. She'll never even sniff at the White House but she'll have her ghost writer keep her Twitter and FB accounts active.

Posted by: SDJeff | July 27, 2010 7:22 PM | Report abuse

srw3:
I thought Bush was against nation building. He certainly didn't present nation building when he said we should invade.
------ He was but I'm not. I would love to turn Iran into one large parking lot and build a mall.

"We have another 20 yrs to go but at least that's one less dictator in the world & 15 million people freed!"

srw3:
At what cost? There are dictators all over the world. Should we spend our blood and treasure to invade them all?
A trillion $ could do a lot of good here in the US. Far more than killing 100,000 Iraqi civilians.
------ US stocks lost $1.2 trillion in value in the week immediately after 9/11. The country would not be able to sustain another attack like that - if al Qaida would hit us hard right now, it would put our economy into a tailspin.
That's why answer to the second question is YES - we should spend our blood and treasure to pre-emptively strike whichever country harbors terrorists or seeks to export weapons of mass destruction.
The president's only mission is to preserve, protect, and defend the constitution of the United States. It is not to spend $1 trillion on dometic programs while threats gather overseas.
Where are these 100,000 Iraqi civilian bodies and graves? Please cite your evidence. Besides, Saddam Hussein murdered 300,000 and those mass graves WERE FOUND and publicized.

srw3:
This is just false. There were lots of nuance in the intelligence reports that was simply ignored. Part 1 of the Iraq investigation confirmed this.
-- Nuance is what it is - nuance! There could be suggestions for lots of things. So, what you're saying is the dumb, idiotic, moronic president TRICKED you???? But how?

Right, why don't you hop over to Iraq and enjoy some of their freedom to be killed, kidnapped, blown up by roadside bombs, live by open sewers, endure 100+ degrees of heat with no electricity. Somehow I don't think all those dead Iraqis feel free.
--- I fought in the Israel Defense Forces in Gaza against Hamas and was attacked and shot at. Doesn't bother me - we were doing what we needed to do to defend the country.
Besides, I would put my money on the fact that more people were murdered or kidnapped in Arizona because of ILLEGAL IMMGRATION.

I hope your home in farrightwingnutistan is comfortable and far removed from any influence on US policy in the future. We can't afford another Iraq debacle. Clearly the Iraq invasion is the single biggest foreign policy disaster this century and perhaps for all time.
--- Why must you always revert back to yourself? I'm trying to teach you the art of a good argument and you have to go again and attack me personally. No - Vietnam was the single biggest foreign policy disaster of all time (started by a Democrat president) - century doesn't matter. And I can hardly
put any stock in saying "biggest foreign policy disaster this century" - it's only 2010. We've got 90 years to go before you can make that assessment.

Posted by: carthage87 | July 27, 2010 7:22 PM | Report abuse

"Where are these 100,000 Iraqi civilian bodies and graves?"

War is a messy thing. Exact casualties are tough, but according to this website, there are anywhere from 97,129 – 105,977 dead civilians, all documented. I don't know the exact locations of each grave, though, so I assume you'll ignore these facts.
http://www.iraqbodycount.org/database/

Moron.

Posted by: SDJeff | July 27, 2010 7:29 PM | Report abuse

SDJeff says:
"your constant Palinpimping and your belief that she would not only win the election but be an effective president is proof positive that you're a moron."

I repeat what I said above. Your vocabulary is so limited. Could you at least get out that handy dictionary of yours and come up with a new, more aggressive, fighting word that REALLY insults me? "Moron" is just way to boring now. Call me something with some pizzaz - have a little chutzpah. You're a liberal so I'm sure you're so smart and have a wide variety of useful insulting attack words on hand.
___________________________________________
i said above:

can you lefties ever say anything without using a personal attack?
there has got to be a book instructing you all because you all say the same things... i can't tell you how old it gets. that's why americans are moving right and towards governor palin - because you guys just can't have an intelligent, logical political discussion without reverting back to 4 key words: stupid, moron, idiot, and dumb.
________________________________________

A President Palin -

She has got the character we need in the White House. She will balance the budget her first year and bring sanity back to the budget process - no more earmarks and no more borrowing, period!

Palin/Gingrich 2012!

Posted by: carthage87 | July 27, 2010 7:32 PM | Report abuse

"I fought in the Israel Defense Forces in Gaza against Hamas and was attacked and shot at. Doesn't bother me - we were doing what we needed to do to defend the country.
Besides, I would put my money on the fact that more people were murdered or kidnapped in Arizona because of ILLEGAL IMMGRATION."

I realize this wasn't directed at me, but can I get in on this? How much money we talking here? Specify the bet. You're saying more people have been murdered or kidnapped in Arizona because of illegal immigration than civilians killed in Iraq? Dude, name your price, we have a bet!

By the way, if you don't mind me asking, are you an Israeli citizen or American, or both?

Posted by: SDJeff | July 27, 2010 7:36 PM | Report abuse

"She has got the character we need in the White House. "

Which part of her character is so appealing? The quitter aspect? The petty vindictive b¡tchy aspect? The total lack of intellectual curiosity? Character? Are you freaking joking me?

Balance the budget the first year? With what money? Explain how this is at all possible. Is she going to completely eradicate Social Security and Medicare? How the hell is she going to cut taxes AND balance the budget in her first year? Do you even understand what you're talking about? Do you understand budgets? Even Paul Ryan, the only republican who knows anything about the budget, doesn't have a plan to balance the budget before 2060.

You're a moron. I was right the first time.

Posted by: SDJeff | July 27, 2010 7:42 PM | Report abuse

There is no doubt that Sarah's star is ascendant, while Barry's morphs into mud.

Posted by: idesign |

________________________________

1. "There will be an election for president in 2012. If the presidential election were held today and the candidates were Barack Obama, the Democrat, and Sarah Palin, the Republican, and you had to choose, for whom would you vote?"

Sarah Palin, 34%

Barack Obama, 55%

[Time Poll conducted by Abt SRBI. July 12-13, 2010.]


2. "Do you think Sarah Palin would have the ability to be an effective president, or not?"

No, 63%

[CBS News/New York Times Poll. April 5-12, 2010]

Posted by: WhateverHeSaid | July 27, 2010 7:46 PM | Report abuse

arancia12

I may be mistaken, but I don't believe Rush, Beck, Palin and Coulter were around in 1939...

Posted by: carthage87 |

________

You're quite right, for once, Carthage. However, I was responding to a single post, not the entire conversation.

Time is now right leaning and has been for my lifetime, although I was not around in 39 either.

Posted by: arancia12 | July 27, 2010 7:47 PM | Report abuse

At least once President Palin takes office, she will balance the budget her FIRST YEAR in office - no more borrowing, period.
Posted by: carthage87
____________________________

I say this without malice. You are living in a fantasy world. I almost wish she would get elected just so you could see how unrealistic your prediction is.

Even if she were not corrupt already, even if she could override congress, trying to balance the budget in one year would destroy the country.

Methinks you are blowing smoke!

Posted by: arancia12 | July 27, 2010 7:54 PM | Report abuse

"I say this without malice. You are living in a fantasy world. "

You're nicer than I am.

Posted by: SDJeff | July 27, 2010 7:58 PM | Report abuse

@carthage87 : Nuance is what it is - nuance! There could be suggestions for lots of things. So, what you're saying is the dumb, idiotic, moronic president TRICKED you???? But how?

By repeatedly insisting that anyone who opposed the Iraq invasion was in secret league with the terrorists. Patriotism is a powerful force in America. It is both evil and tragic that Bush and Cheney (the brains in the outfit) would use it to silence legitimate opposition to a clearly unnecessary, costly, incredibly destructive, and continuing invasion.

Actually most of the progressive blogosphere were correct about the lack of WMD, the debacle that Iraq was and is, the duplicity of the bush administration twisting intelligence reports to lie us into a war, etc. It is a tragedy that we couldn't convince more people of the tragic mistake we were making in invading Iraq. It is small comfort to say "We told you so" with all of the death and destruction the Iraq debacle created.

"That's why answer to the second question is YES - we should spend our blood and treasure to pre-emptively strike whichever country harbors terrorists or seeks to export weapons of mass destruction."

Its too bad that we misfired and attacked a country that didn't have WMD, was actually hostile to Al Qaeda, and killed 100000+++ civilians, but I guess that is OK with you. I personally couldn't sleep at night knowing that I supported that kind of carnage on false pretenses.

"Besides, I would put my money on the fact that more people were murdered or kidnapped in Arizona because of ILLEGAL IMMGRATION."

I have to assume this is sarcasm or that you are losing your tenuous grip on reality.

" I'm trying to teach you the art of a good argument and you have to go again and attack me personally.

Personal attack? Really? You don't get out much...If saying that you reside in farrightwingnutistan is a personal attack, you have a very thin skin. Stay away from the intertubes in the future....

Here is a personal attack...

"you liberals are such anti-semites." who would make such a gross generalization?

idesign: "Do you ever see more liberal morons and hatemongers gathered in one place"

No - Vietnam was the single biggest foreign policy disaster of all time (started by a Democrat president) - century doesn't matter.

You know, Vietnam is a close second to Iraq for the greatest foreign policy debacle in the last 100 years and perhaps since 1787. Actually Vietnam was started by the french trying to hold on to its colonial overlord status after wwII.

Posted by: srw3 | July 27, 2010 8:06 PM | Report abuse

SDJeff
Let's assume the Iraq Body Count website is legitimate (I am saying that FIRST - because it could be funded by George Soros who is a left-wing billionaire tyrant. It only says that "The project was founded in January 2003 by volunteers from the UK and USA". I highly doubt that. SECOND - looking at the media sources:

There are 190 sources listed; of those:
53 are based in Arabic or Muslim-dominated countries (28%)

Then there are liberal organizations: ACLU, Human Rights Watch, Doctors without Borders, and Amnesty International (which is an anti-Israeli organization), and a few other international organizations (no American);

There are 35 American news providers (18%)

Then there are 64 foreign or international sources (UK, Canada, France, Germany, India, Australia, South Africa, Japan, China). (34%)

Thus, we have to be suspect.)

Nevertheless, assuming IBC is legitimate:

1. The US and the Coalition of the Willing are a force for good in the world. The soldiers do not pillage, rape, or intentionally harm civilians.
2. Terrorists are hiding among the civilians - that is overwhelmingly the reason behind the deaths (as evidenced by the locations in the database).

So:

1. It is better that it is Iraqi civilians and not American civilians. If we have to choose (and we must choose because there is a war), that's the choice I make.
2. Iraqis have "seen the light" seen 2007 and have begun to switch sides as they see THE TERRORISTS HAVE KILLED MORE PEOPLE and done so INTENTIONALLLY.

I don't know what your point is about a body count. I mean, would you have been counting the 70 million or so that died in WW2? Where were you when Saddam Hussein was killing his own people? More importantly, where were you when Saddam Hussein was sending $20,000 to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers who blew themselves up all around Israel, killing Israeli civilians?

The whole body count thing doesn't bother me the least bit anyway. I just think you should look start with the Arab and Muslim countries first. You have NO idea the kind of torture the Saudi and Egyptian internal security and police commit. I do know - I saw classified video while I was serving in the army in Israel.

So, we can be confident that a President Palin would use all the tools we need to keep our country safe, stabilize Iraq and Afghanistan for the long-term, and begin to draw down troops in VICTORY.

Posted by: carthage87 | July 27, 2010 8:07 PM | Report abuse

"So, we can be confident that a President Palin would use all the tools we need to keep our country safe, stabilize Iraq and Afghanistan for the long-term, and begin to draw down troops in VICTORY."

First off, this was not at all supported by anything you wrote, so I don't see how this is a logical conclusion. But I haven't seen a hint of logic in any of your posts up to this point, so why start now, right?

So, you repeatedly state you don't care about WMD, you don't care about Iraqi civilians. Apparently all you do care about is who was funding Palestinian terrorists. That's a fair concern. I don't like suicide bombings either. However, that is one of many atrocities of our time and not at all worth spending TRILLIONS and killing 100,000 INNOCENT Iraqi men, women, and CHILDREN as well as over 4000 AMERICAN SOLDIERS.

Do you believe in the innocence of children? Do you have children? If your president(I still don't know what country you claim allegiance to) were committing atrocities, would it be justified for a foreign army to invade and bomb your house, killing your family?

Sorry your people were getting blown up in suicide bombings. It's terrible. One thing you could do is elect Israeli politicians who don't oppress the Palestinians and continue to taunt them by building further settlements. Not blaming the victims. Unlike you, I actually do care about innocent victims in another country.

Much of the Arab world is indeed screwed up in a major way. Sending our military in will not change anything, and when you think of the price we and other countries have paid in blood and money, it is not even remotely worth it.

Posted by: SDJeff | July 27, 2010 8:20 PM | Report abuse

"1. It is better that it is Iraqi civilians and not American civilians. If we have to choose (and we must choose because there is a war), that's the choice I make."

BTW, major circular logic there. If I had to choose, yeah, I'd rather Americans live. But we could choose to kill neither. According to Amnesty International, which had been on Saddam's case for decades, he was done with the mass killings. He was still a horrible, unjust dictator. But Amnesty's estimates are that far more civilians died since 03 than would've been expected had Saddam remained in power.

Face it, the war was botched and ill conceived from the beginning. Terrible idea, and we'll be paying the price for a long time.

Posted by: SDJeff | July 27, 2010 8:25 PM | Report abuse

srw3

""you liberals are such anti-semites." who would make such a gross generalization?"

why - you would! by calling all Tea Partiers racists!!!

you are anti-semites. you don't mind when the arabs are killing jews.

Regarding the French in Vietnam. America's Vietnam began when their's ended. So it is still a fact that the worst war ever - with over 50,000 dead American soldiers - began under a Democrat, and it was a Republican President - Nixon - who ended it. So this whole "holier than thou" thing doesn't fly with me. And now that we REALLY do have to fight a war, where are you lefties except stuck in the 1960s and running away at the pop of a balloon...

You see - I was a radical liberal until 1998 when I switched sides. I grew up in a liberal family. When I finally opened my eyes, I saw all the hypocracy on the left....

Social experiments with the Great Society which was marketed as ending poverty - still continues and still FAILS.

Medical nationalization beginning with Medicare... the Congress was told by LBJ it would cost $10 billion a year.

..and I could provide a list. The point is - I know how you liberals think because I was one for the first 25 years of my life. Oh yes - I hated Rush Limbaugh too. But once I opened my eyes, I couldn't remember why I hated him because I had never listened to him.

All this happened while I was living and working in DC for 3 years. It was a slow transformation from age 22 that led up to final straw for me: the hypocracy...

Yes I sleep just fine knowing that President Bush was courageous enough to make the tough decisions following 9-11 and then Iraq.

And Bush didn't WHINE when he came into office about the RECESSION he inherited. Everyone forgets - Bush inherited a recession too, as well a all those corporate scandals which hit Wall Street hard; and the internet bubble burst before he came into office - so he was dealing with a stock market in decline. AND in September, 2000 the 2nd Palestinian Intifada errupted and so Bush had to deal with security concerns in the Middle East.

But Bush was a MAN - not like the current WHINER-IN-CHIEF.

And just as Margaret Thatcher came at the right time for Britain, America's Iron Lady - Governor Sarah Palin - will step up to the plate...

Posted by: carthage87 | July 27, 2010 8:26 PM | Report abuse

It's hard to believe how toxic and downright suicidal the partisan's have become. The Democrat's sold you out! The are the ones responsible for the massive outsourcing of jobs, factories, the deregulation of Wall Street and banks, the destruction of tariff walls. Go look at the campaign finances for any Democratic candidate. Idiots!

Palin might not be as smart as Obama. She isn't as well educated. But she IS honest and she would put an end to outsourcing and free trade. That sends shivers up the spines of the Democrats and their corporate masters.

And, for you twits on the right, calling for a Palin-Gingrich ticket, don't you understand that Gingrich is a free trader? He is no different than Bush, who is exactly the same as Obama. The entire Republican leaders - Romney, McCain, McConnell, Gingrich -- are free traders, job outsourcers, no different than the Democrats. Their foreign and economic policies are identical. None of them cares about you. These are self centered greedy swine that will sell us out in a minute. The ticket you want has Ron Paul on top. Paul will use trade tariffs to put an end to job outsourcing and the avalanche of imported garbage the rats are destroying this country with.

Posted by: mibrooks27 | July 27, 2010 8:49 PM | Report abuse

Ok, I see.

No one wants to step up and declare, "Sarah Palin is smarter than I am!"

Which leaves us with this: Palin supporters are people who think someone who isn't as smart as they are is qualified to be president.

I wonder if, when they need their car repaired, they take it to a guy who knows less about cars than they do. Or if, when they need a plumber, they ask the neighbor kid to fix it, since it really doesn't matter if he knows what he's doing or not.

Somehow I suspect that they don't do THOSE things, yet when it comes to the most important job in the country - all that goes out the window.

It's definitely cultish, because there's no logical way to describe why people who can show good sense in making decisions in other areas of their lives would throw all that to the side in one instance and decide that the rules don't apply there.

Posted by: JennOfArk | July 27, 2010 8:50 PM | Report abuse

Palin is retarded.

Posted by: GeorgHerbet | July 27, 2010 8:55 PM | Report abuse

SDJeff

Saddam "was done with the mass killings" ?

Oh I see.. so he got it out of his system then? Turned a new leaf?

Wars are messy, but no - I only worry about American national security and the national security of our allies. We at least have good intentions.

It really is wierd because liberals always want to be judged on their/your "good intentions" - not the results.. you don't want the results analyzed, just the fact that you were such a good person and had good intentions...

Yet, when it comes to our soldiers and the wars, you cannot see the good intentions we have. You call them rapists and warmongers.

_________________________________________

"Do you believe in the innocence of children? Do you have children? If your president(I still don't know what country you claim allegiance to) were committing atrocities, would it be justified for a foreign army to invade and bomb your house, killing your family?"

-- Oh geez.. I know when there's a leftist agenda on the table when someone brings up "the children". This whole "children" argument doesn't work with me. The children outside of the borders of the US are not our problem! I am part Libertarian part NeoCon which might be a contradiction to those groups separately, but I believe that IF America - IF - America gets involved, then we force democracy, capitalism, and all the other good stuff we have to offer (from waterbeds to waterboards). Other than that, I don't want American soldiers going anywhere that doesn't have a direct impact on our economic or national security.

If a country wants American money and support, they must CHANGE their behavior.

The only thing I would support is massive sterilization so that these poor people don't create more poor people. The overpopulation is what is killing the planet - not the cars, not the technology, not the wars. Overpopulation. And the world needs to get a grip on that but no one talks about it.

We at least live in a society where we have the best health care in the world - that is, until Obama destroys it. Our health care system is based on the good ole philosophy that competition makes for better quality.

Thus, we must REPEAL, RE-WRITE, AND REPLACE ObamaSCARE.

The same kind of competition needs to be in our schools.

Thus, we must EDUCATE WITH A TAX REBATE. Every child could go to the best school in their area. This would force schools to improve their standards.

A President Palin would sign to repeal ObamaSCARE and reform our public schools by bringing CHOICE to families. This would give MINORITIES chances they otherwise would not have under the current system.

Last - this notion that balancing the budget would kill our country is just nonsense. An accross the board cut of 20% is what needs to be done that would balance the budget....


Posted by: carthage87 | July 27, 2010 8:57 PM | Report abuse

"Yet, when it comes to our soldiers and the wars, you cannot see the good intentions we have. You call them rapists and warmongers."

Carthage you lowlife scum of a lying moron, point out where I said this.

You're a liar just like your idol Palin.

"Last - this notion that balancing the budget would kill our country is just nonsense."

No one on this blog said this. Again, you make stuff up.

"An accross the board cut of 20% is what needs to be done that would balance the budget...."

Which 20%?

"The only thing I would support is massive sterilization so that these poor people don't create more poor people."

This is appalling and sent a chill up my spine. Straight out of Hitler's playbook. I'm done with you.

Posted by: SDJeff | July 27, 2010 9:05 PM | Report abuse

JennOfArk

I am definitely smarter than Barack Obama. I could EASILY take him on in a debate... and yes, Sarah Palin is much more intelligent than I am.

She has run a business with her husband Todd, journalism degree, can balance a city and state budget, can negotiate with foreign governments for energy production and delivery.... I could go on but what's most interesting is that Barack Obama NEVER EVER received the kind of scrutiny that everyone seems to demand of her.

When Obama was elected, we had no idea what we were getting. NOW we know - and the country doesn't like it!

All-in-all, most of the critics here would not be able to multitask all the responsibilities she carries in her life - raising a family, writing a book, commentor on Fox, speeches, endorsements - and still being a good wife and staying in shape. All these things add up to a woman who I admire as the modern woman - she has proven women CAN be excellent managers and mothers and be sexy while doing it..
And I'll step up now and say to the critics who are for sure going to write about my comments regarding her looks: you libs fawned over JFK and RFK.... your knees quivered at the mere mention of Bill Clinton (in 1992 that is)... and then came the Mulatto Barack who even gives men tingles up their legs... Male presidents have been sex symbols in America for quite some time now... it's time women are given the freedom to be as well.

The liberal mantra is that all pretty women are bimbos and stupid. That's why Governor Palin is so great - she doesn't fit the leftists template...

Posted by: carthage87 | July 27, 2010 9:09 PM | Report abuse

Well, her supporters are dumb as dirt, and like being stupid. They're proud of being idiots in a lot of cases. Palin's say one thing, do another standard GOP hypocritical behavior is normal for GOP non-candidate talking heads, but she buries her crazy in a lot fewer made up words & ideas, so it's easier for most people to spot the lies.

Posted by: Nymous | July 27, 2010 9:17 PM | Report abuse

SDJeff

1. Read post by arancia12 | July 27, 2010 7:54 PM - she writes:

"Even if she were not corrupt already, even if she could override congress, trying to balance the budget in one year would destroy the country."
So - proof positive #1 that I do not make stuff up.

2. Regarding "point out where I said this". The "you" is the literary "you" - you meaning anti-war, anti-israeli, pro-terror leftists/liberals. The protests by Code Pink, for example, always denigrated our soldiers, accusing them of raping Iraqi women.

3. 20% cut - I said: accross the board. EVERYTHING gets cut. First cut, then frozen. Bring spending back to 2000 levels.

4. There is nothing wrong with sterilizing people as long as they too are in favor of it. Not sterlization against people's will but rather a program that says, the US will do certain things for the country and the people if you engage in responsible population control.

I don't know why THAT gave you a chill up your spine since you probably support:

a. abortion
b. euthenasia
c. homosexual adoptions
d. death penalty
e. the "necessary" war of defense

These are all currently permitted in the United States.

Posted by: carthage87 | July 27, 2010 9:24 PM | Report abuse

Palin is the kiss of death here in New Hampshire... but for the more obvious reason. Most GOP partisans that are filled with pee and vinegar are men. Sarah has been endorsing a lot of people.... but a lot of them have been women. GOP male partisans who are full of pee and vinegar are often full of pee and vinegar because they don't like the position that women have in today's society. They think men have been screwed over by liberals and the women's movement. Sarah's endorsement now gives these men reason to vote against Kelly Ayotte.... a woman that they don't trust. Instead, they will now vote for any of the less-appealing men in the primary... and probably lose the Senate seat because of it.

Posted by: baldinho | July 27, 2010 9:27 PM | Report abuse

Nymous
Another leftist that opens with 3 of the 4 top key word insults: "Well, her supporters are dumb as dirt, and like being stupid. They're proud of being idiots in a lot of cases."

Can you name the 3 key word insults?
Yep - you guessed it! dumb, stupid, and idiot.

LOL - please guys. you're cracking me up. I can't stand being right.

Talk about Obots!!! Seems there's one memo from the Oval Office and you all got it!

Posted by: carthage87 | July 27, 2010 9:31 PM | Report abuse

Nobody will have to sabotage Sarah Palin's career.

She and gravity will do it for us.


Posted by: gkam | July 27, 2010 9:38 PM | Report abuse

That's why Governor Palin is so great - she doesn't fit the leftists template...
-----------------------------------
I hope you have a better reason than the one above. I hope you have a better reason than she is sexy.

I hope you would think she was just as great if she looked like Golda Meier.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | July 27, 2010 9:50 PM | Report abuse

Doesn't Sarah Palin have to graduate from high school before she can run for president?

Posted by: glenn113 | July 27, 2010 10:03 PM | Report abuse

God, you people are predictable IDIOTS. You will grasp on to anything - ANYTHING - that you believe puts Sarah Palin in a bad light and just might tarnish her image.

Never mind that she is winning thousands of people over on a daily basis, her speeches attract thousands, her Facebook posts get thousands of comments, she is constantly, CONSTANTLY in the media, she has raised thousands and thousands of dollars for leading candidates nationwide, she has made MILLIONS of dollars in the past year through her OWN EFFORTS, and she sticks it to Obama every week, you USEFUL IDIOT Liberals are so in LOVE with your annointed president, his cratering poll numbers and his collapsing ruin of an agenda, you're not even aware that over two years out from the 2012 election, Palin has already caught up with him in a potential race. They are neck-and-neck, TIED if the election were tomorrow. And there's no stopping her.

So please, PLEASE - keep it up. Keep talking about her. Keep trying to tear her down. Keep the slings and arrows and insults and lies coming. It only helps her cause and helps the rest of us who support her. We LOVE seeing her in the news EVERY DAY. No such thing as bad publicity, as they say. You Libs think you're doing damage to her but... well, I'm not going to say anything more other than we LOVE it. Good, bad - doesn't matter. Keep up the chatter, and keep her star on the rise!

PALIN 2012 - - CHANGE YOU'LL BE BEGGING FOR

Posted by: QuineGeology | July 27, 2010 10:04 PM | Report abuse

The dim bulb gets dimmer.

Posted by: Attucks | July 27, 2010 10:10 PM | Report abuse

She's in a bubble that's all about making money, having shown herself to be a world class quitter when she walked away from being governor of Alaska.

The main bubble around her is her head.

Posted by: ssterno | July 27, 2010 10:13 PM | Report abuse

Listening to QuineGeology is like listening to Willie Loman crying out "they love me in New England". Then, he gets fired because he's not selling anything in New England.

According to her supporters, she's "loved everywhere in the U.S.". According to the polls, she has been net unfavorable for a year. But point out this inconvenient fact to her supporters, and they deny it and predict we'll all be begging for her.

I don't hate Sarah Palin--I don't care that much. But the sum of all her polling (and there has been probably a hundred polls) is not good, and is not improving. I just went through the LAST 20 polls, and ALL of them have her net negative.

http://www.pollster.com/polls/us/fav-palin.php

Posted by: 12BarBlues | July 27, 2010 10:24 PM | Report abuse

@rukidding: "Folks are free to disagree but these thoughts hardly make me a wild eyed liberal or a socialist or communist."

Agreed. In fact, I do like the idea of lower taxes (on everybody) in principle, and would occasionally like the see the Warren Buffets of the world agitating for lower taxes on their secretary rather than higher taxes on themselves (and people who, though well to do, actually have a small fraction of Buffet's wealth). Which does not mean I wish to stomp on the backs of the poor while lighting cigars with $100 bills, I just think the Invisible Hand of the market (so-called), over time, nets the greatest amount of good for the greatest amount of people. Which is certainly debatable.

"I'd love to discuss socialism RATIONANLLY with folks of your persuasion Kevin but mainly I get propaganda back. Like little remarks about how the trains don't run on time in a socialized country."

Well, I am going to make off-the-cuff remarks. And I'll stand by the trains, with the addendum I was thinking of the furthest left on the scale--i.e., Communist countries, where generally only the party leader's trains ever ran on time.

"Actually you wouldn't wish to compare our record on train schedules with the Euro's and the Socialists who blow our doors off!"

Well, fair enough, although that's comparing government-run to government-run, as Amtrak resembles a GSE more than a private, competitive enterprise. The same for every mass transit system in America. But part of that is cultural bias of our nation, and our love of the automobile. You can get almost anywhere in and around London by Tube or by train, and I think that's awesome.

"My wife and I each drive a Volvo...those damn unproductive Swedes must have gotten something right. We could debate on whether getting health care, higher education for our children, 6-8 weeks of vacation is worth paying 38-40% of our earnings instead of the 25% we currently pay."

My answer would be that's not necessarily the trade-off you'll get. Specifically, in our country, we'd pay 38-40% of our earnings and get precious little for our money. At least, that's my strong suspicion, and for a variety of reasons. But, you vote for who you think will get us closer to that ideal, and I'll vote for who I think will by the most obstructionist (see, my plan is already working), and we shall see the fruits of representative democracy in action.

"It's just money! Nothing to get emotional about but when the word Socialist comes up people go bonkers!!!"

Not me, but it's not my preference.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | July 27, 2010 10:24 PM | Report abuse

@swr3: "Kev, I like you but your blinders are on too tight on this issue."

I'll have to respectfully disagree, but I understand your position. If this were a baseball game and I was the umpire, I'd say no foul. You'd clearly disagree.

You can continue to not watch Fox news. I will continue to watch it for about 30 minutes a week. But I will try to be a little more attuned to the race baiting.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | July 27, 2010 10:27 PM | Report abuse

@Nymous: "Well, her supporters are dumb as dirt, and like being stupid. They're proud of being idiots in a lot of cases."

Why, that describe me to a "T". Have you been watching my, Nymous? Because you've certainly got my number.

@carthage: "She has got the character we need in the White House. She will balance the budget her first year and bring sanity back to the budget process - no more earmarks and no more borrowing, period!"

Dude, I'd love a president Palin, but a president just cannot do that. Not constitutionally, and not politically. Plus, she's got a very small chance of getting elected.

"Barack Obama's policies are no different to what was put in place by the Nazis under Adolf Hitler"

*sigh*

@SDJeff: "It would take months for me to research and present all the hateful and disrespectful rhetoric toward Muslims that has come from conservatives over the past decade."

Oh, of course. Of course.

"If you really haven't noticed, I guess I gave you too much credit in that last post."

Yes, I suppose you must have. Sorry to disappoint you for not jumping on the conservatives-are-all-racists-who-hate-all-Muslims-because-that-somehow-makes-any-sense bandwagon all the cool kids are on. I've seen conservatives with (a) a real problem with radical Islam that urges death to the infidel and (b) an objection to moderate Islam that seems (in these conservative's opinions) to turn a willfully blind eye to the terrorism practiced by radical Islam. The conservatives that has all Muslims--sorry, I've missed it. I'm not getting the memos, apparently.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | July 27, 2010 10:39 PM | Report abuse

** "The conservatives that *hate* all Muslims--sorry, I've missed it", is what I meant to type. Not only did I miss the memos, I apparently flunked my typing class.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | July 27, 2010 10:42 PM | Report abuse

@blazertaco: "Because I like to partake in the occasional taco, I'm suddenly an illegal immigrant? Wow, what a typical Right-Wing response. Hey Kevin, you wanted a Rightie racist, here you go."

If we're going to compare anonymous commentors, the left would come out looking awfully bad, as well. Are you sure you want to do that?

In any case, I'm not sure that's a typical right wing response. But let's say that it is. Is that a good thing, because it proves what rotten folks conservatives are, generally? Or is it a bad thing, because that does nothing to contribute to a useful discussion of the issues?

That being said, I'm a natural born citizen, believe we should secure our borders, and I love tacos. And nachos. And lasagna.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | July 27, 2010 10:49 PM | Report abuse

@carthage87 :

YOur eyes didn't open, you went to the dark side.

"Social experiments with the Great Society which was marketed as ending poverty - still continues and still FAILS."

Typical conservative statement, just like the stimulus didn't create jobs. If welfare, snap, wic, etc. didn't end poverty they certainly reduce it and those people that are on public assistance are not homeless and starving in the street. Some people don't get off public assistance but the vast majority don't stay on forever and are able to get back on their feet. AS a side note the vast majority of people on public assistance are white. Utah has the greatest per capita use of welfare. Just like the stimulus is on schedule to create 3.5-4 million jobs. It didn't keep unemployment under 8% but those 3.5 million people who got jobs or kept their jobs really appreciate not having to go onto public assistance.

"And Bush didn't WHINE when he came into office about the RECESSION he inherited. Everyone forgets - Bush inherited a recession too, as well a all those corporate scandals which hit Wall Street hard; and the internet bubble burst before he came into office - so he was dealing with a stock market in decline. "

Yeah, the difference is that Bush inherited a surplus not the largest deficit and debt in the nation's history the way Obama did. And what was Bush's solution? Oh, I remember, he CREATED MASSIVE UNPRECEDENTED DEFICITS AND ADDED MORE TO THE NATIONAL DEBT THAN ALL OTHER PRESIDENTS COMBINED. If while creating 1/6 the number of jobs that Clinton created. He was the first president to have no net job gains over 2 terms and the only 2 term president since FDR where median wages did not grow during his reign. Bush and the republican congress were the most fiscally irresponsible regime in american history. And now repubs in the congress have the gall to insist that Obama shouldn't add to the deficit for unemployment benefits or expanding jobs programs or aiding hard hit states. It would be inconceivable unless you notice that it is republicans. They are so steeped in hypocrisy that it comes out their ears.

Posted by: srw3 | July 27, 2010 10:50 PM | Report abuse

Oh and I forgot, the gap between the wealthiest 1% and the rest of society hasn't been higher since the gilded age, and just like that period, after 8 years of this kind of economic blundering, Bush's policies through the country into the worst economic downturn since the great depression.

What a manly man bush is....

Posted by: srw3 | July 27, 2010 10:53 PM | Report abuse

Kevin, is your name Kevin Willis or did you like the basketball player? He was awesome.

Anyway, I appreciate your input. I hope you stick around.

Posted by: SDJeff | July 27, 2010 10:59 PM | Report abuse

Well, of course, Palin Nation still adore her!

They can look right past irrefutable evidence of Cheney's perfidity, Bush's ineptitude, her shallowness, the haters that will PAY her and Beck to spew hate and not care what they're doing to their own country and fellow Americans for a second.

Prolly those in the 90 and below IQ groups.

Posted by: dutchess2 | July 27, 2010 11:00 PM | Report abuse

@KW: Listen to Colin Powell noted socialist:

I'm also troubled by, not what Sen. McCain says, but what members of the party say, and it is permitted to be said such things as: "Well, you know that Mr. Obama is a Muslim." Well, the correct answer is: he is not a Muslim. He's a Christian. He's always been a Christian.

But the really right answer is: What if he is? Is there something wrong with being a Muslim in this country? The answer is: No, that's not America. Is there something wrong with some 7-year-old Muslim-American kid believing he or she can be President?

Yet I have heard senior members of my own party drop the suggestion: he's a Muslim, and he might be associated with terrorists. This is not the way we should be doing it in America.

"The ads, which, according to The Daily News, will run for a month, were created by a 51-year-old conservative blogger named Pamela Geller, who heads a group called Stop the Islamization of America and sees as its task to expose the supposedly retrograde and repressive nature of Islam itself...Still, even those of us mystified and disturbed by the sway of radical jihadist Islam ought to recognize that, with an infinitesimal number of exceptions, the five million to seven million Muslims estimated to live in the United States have behaved like others of Crèvecoeur’s new American men, more interested in getting ahead in their new country than in nurturing ancient conflicts and prejudices... Here in New York, there has been vociferous opposition to plans by a local Muslim group known as Cordoba House to build a 13-story community center in an old coat factory two blocks from the former World Trade Center site. The Muslim center would include a mosque and a memorial to the victims of Sept. 11, 2001...Appearing on the Fox News program “Huckabee” a couple of weeks ago, Ms. Geller said that “a mosque embodies the very ideology that inspired those attacks on 9/11.” That is why Cordoba House is “an outrage, an insult, and humiliating to all Americans.”...If there are more terrorist attempts by Muslims on American soil, there will more Americans paying for bus ads and other things to express their rage at Islam itself as well as at Muslims in America, and to encourage the idea that America is, or ought to be, its and their enemy.

This of course is exactly what the jihadists want them to do. The more we make all Muslims our enemies, the more enemy Muslims we are going to have."--http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/03/us/03iht-letter.html?_r=1&pagewanted=2

Ann Coulter "Let's kill all their (muslim) leaders and convert them to Christianity."

if you don't see the demonization of Islam especially from the republican party, you are not paying attention.

Posted by: srw3 | July 27, 2010 11:11 PM | Report abuse

@kw:
"True, the demonizing of Arabs and Muslims in America began well before the terrible tragedy of September 11, 2001 but, what is new post-9/11, is that now demonizing Muslims and Islam is not only more widespread but also considerably more mainstream and respectable. In short, Muslim-bashing has become socially acceptable in the United States, notes Abdus Sattar Ghazali.


As if the adult media’s vitriol wasn’t enough, the seven-million strong American Muslim community, is now being faced by the alarming publication of a series of ‘children's books’, containing misleading and inflammatory rhetoric about the Islamic faith. The 10-book series - entitled the "World of Islam," – is published by Mason Crest Publishing in collaboration with the Philadelphia-based pro-Israel and pro-war Foreign Policy Research Institute.

Anti-Islamic sentiment pervades the entire series, portraying Muslims as inherently violent and deserving suspicion. It encourages young readers to believe Muslims are terrorists, who seek to undermine US society.

For example:

The book "Muslims in America", says that "some Muslims began immigrating to the United States in order to transform American society, sometimes through the use of terrorism." The cover of Radical Islam features a machine gun and a Muslim head scarf, with what looks like bloodstains underneath the scarf and the title word Radical. The book is rife with incorrect information and fear mongering and ultimately seeks to paint a picture that Muslims in America are to be treated with suspicion and that they all have links to terrorism.

The text titled Islam, Law and Human Rights begins and ends with the same thing, that Muslim majority nations are the only ones that violate human rights laws set forth by the United Nations – for some reason China and North Korea are exceptions to that rule.

The History of Islam offers only a stunted glimpse of Islamic History and focuses primarily on extremism and contains an outrageous quote: “Today, the great majority of Muslims accept the idea that jihad means a struggle against non-Muslims to increase the area under the rule of Islam.”

Another book shows an image of two 7-year-old girls wearing head scarves under the heading "Security Threats."ericans' attitudes about Islam and Muslims are fuelled mainly by political statements and media reports that focus almost solely on the negative image of Islam and Muslims. The vilification of Islam and Muslims has been relentless among segments of the media and political classes since 9/11. Politicians, authors and media commentators are busy in demonizing Islam, Muslims and the Muslim world. In the post 9/11 America attacking Islam and Muslims became the fashionable sport for the radio, television and print media. While print and electronic media continues unabated campaign to smear Islam, radio talk show hosts are busy in spewing out venoms against Islam and Muslims. http://www.middle-east-online.com/english/?id=38502

Posted by: srw3 | July 27, 2010 11:15 PM | Report abuse

@kw:gnify the hostility toward Muslims and cloak it in pseudo-patriotism. This reminds me of the Muslim-bashing campaign at the US campuses in 2007, when some bigots seized the opportunity to create hatred against Islam and Muslims. In a bid to spread fear and hatred under the guise of patriotism and freedom of speech, David Horowitz, a neo-conservative polemicist, launched an Arab/Muslim-bashing campaign at campuses across the nation in October 2007. Borrowing from President Bush’s terminology ‘Islamo-Fascists,’ Horowitz packaged his anti-Arab/anti-Muslim campaign as “Islamo-Fascist Awareness Week.”

Horowitz asked students participating in the campaign to disseminate presentations, such as “The Islamic Mein Kampf,” (meaning the Quran). In a throwback to McCarthyism, right-wing students were encouraged to issue press releases condemning those who refused to sign for the Islamo-Fascist week. It means either you are with us or with our enemy.

The irony is, that fascism is a European concept, that gained a strong following in the early 20th century. Yet hundreds of thousands of volunteer Muslims, now conveniently forgotten, fought against this creation of the ‘civilised world’, alongside the allies in the Second World War. Today, those opponents are remembered as Nazis, yet they were in fact, largely Christian Roman Catholics and Lutherans. They wore religious insignia such as the Iron Cross. Today, it would be patently wrong and preposterous to lambast wholesale, these mainstream Christian groups. No such empathy for Muslims though!

But just who are the “Islamic fascists? According to Horowitz’s FrontPage magazine, they include the Muslim Student Association, which has chapters on hundreds of U.S. campuses--and the Council on American Islamic Relations, which advocates for civil rights and tracks hate crimes against Arabs and Muslims.

There was a collection of bigots and crackpots that Horowitz had recruited to speak for the Oct 22-26 2007 Islamophobia week. Islamophobe right wing columnist Ann Coulter was one. Other luminaries included: Rick Santorum, a former US Senator, who has compared homosexuality to incest; Robert Spencer who claims Islam is "the world's most intolerant religion"; and noted anti-Arab commentator and Islamophobe Daniel Pipes who once said that "Palestinians are a miserable people…and they deserve to be."

Some other well-known Islamophobe speakers were: Dennis Prager, Sean Hannity and Wafa Sultan. More intellectual takes came from such neoconservative icons of Middle East policy as Michael Ledeen, who seeks to apply Machiavellian principles to the modern world.

Surely such a notorious lineup of racist, bigoted, Islamophobic, anti-Semitic and Machiavellian speakers did not serve to educate but to promote hatred and spread misinformation and lies.

Unfortunately, interested groups are now trying to promote a prejudiced view about Islam and its adherents in our classrooms to poison the minds of our young generation.

Posted by: srw3 | July 27, 2010 11:18 PM | Report abuse

@kw:

Turning a blind eye toward this evil phenomenon is similar to ignoring Jim Crow laws or forcing Jews to wear yellow stars. A rock ribbed conservative should be outraged that the fundamental right of freedom of religion is being cast aside on the alter of bigotry and hatred.

Posted by: srw3 | July 27, 2010 11:26 PM | Report abuse

Well Greg, she may never be President and neither will you.

Posted by: Truthteller12 | July 28, 2010 12:41 AM | Report abuse

You mean her bubble of being kingmaker in GOP primaries? That's not a bad bubble to be in.

Posted by: Truthteller12 | July 28, 2010 12:43 AM | Report abuse

srw3

-- The stimulus didn't create jobs. It actually sent nearly a million overseas - Obama says "Created or Saved" - when reality is "Destroyed or Prevented"

If welfare, snap, wic, etc. didn't end poverty they certainly reduce it and those people that are on public assistance are not homeless and starving in the street.
---- Oh yes - your opinion of America is that without government we'd all be standing in souplines and living in Hoovervilles.

Just like the stimulus is on schedule to create 3.5-4 million jobs. It didn't keep unemployment under 8% but those 3.5 million people who got jobs or kept their jobs really appreciate not having to go onto public assistance.
-- The real unemployment is 17%. The porkulus spending bill is not "on schedule" to create anything! Government does NOT CREATE anything. Government only takes and spends.
-- The problem is that you leftists go to the extreme after we cave in and you you a little bit of your agenda. The original $10 billion Medicare is now the 2nd largest entitlement and 3rd largest budget item - $600 billion.

"And Bush didn't WHINE when he came into office about the RECESSION he inherited. Everyone forgets - Bush inherited a recession too, as well a all those corporate scandals which hit Wall Street hard; and the internet bubble burst before he came into office - so he was dealing with a stock market in decline. "
Yeah, the difference is that Bush inherited a surplus
-- Created by the Republican Congress under the leadership of Newt Gingrich
not the largest deficit and debt in the nation's history the way Obama did.
-- Obama has quadrupled the deficit in 2 years. So the answer you leftists provide is that you can spend into deficits faster than Republicans?
And what was Bush's solution? Oh, I remember, he CREATED MASSIVE UNPRECEDENTED DEFICITS AND ADDED MORE TO THE NATIONAL DEBT THAN ALL OTHER PRESIDENTS COMBINED. If while creating 1/6 the number of jobs that Clinton created. He was the first president to have no net job gains over 2 terms and the only 2 term president since FDR where median wages did not grow during his reign.
Bush and the republican congress were the most fiscally irresponsible regime in american history.
-- The American people are safer because of Republican leadership. You are the party of cut and run - you run at the pop of a balloon.
-- You ignored the facts: the internet bubble burst under Clinton and the corporate scandals let to the 2001-2002 recession.

Posted by: carthage87 | July 28, 2010 1:19 AM | Report abuse

srw3
AND - if you liberals had been on top of things, al Qaida would not have been training pilots right underneath our noses! You liberals are directly responsible for 9-11; you let terrorists into the country to live and train in our flight schools. You also issued the first entry visas for those terrorists.
George Bush inherited a recession and the country was attacked because the Clinton administration was so pre-occupied with Israel-Palestinian negotiations (the negotiations failed, leading to the September, 2000 riots and subsequent 2nd Intifada). While the liberal philosophy of being the "honest broker" and
trying to be loved by the Arab world, the Democrats in charge were directly responsible - DIRECTLY - for issuing the first entry (student) visas to al Qaida terrorists.

George Bush spent the next 8 years cleaning up the mess YOU created - the World Trade Center and all those people died as a result of liberal failures in foreign policy. The 9-11 attacks happened because Democrats were in charge of the state department and all visas issued.
All the walls created by the Democrat lawyers in the CIA and FBI leading directly to the terror attacks.

Therefore, all these problems were created by leftists and inherited by President Bush. War costs money to wage and every president - EVERY PRESIDENT - deficit finances wars. Lincoln, Wilson, FDR, Johnson - all sold war bonds in one form or another.
Further, the president has the obligation under the constitution. During wartime, all social services should have been SUSPENDED until the end of the war. That would get you libs feathers all ruffled.

So, you revisionists think the world began in the year 2001. You think back and remember only the things you WANT to remember. But I am here to remind everyone about all the problems Bush inherited and he didn't whine like the WHINER-IN-CHIEF we have today.

Posted by: carthage87 | July 28, 2010 1:20 AM | Report abuse

srw3
"Oh and I forgot, the gap between the wealthiest 1% and the rest of society hasn't been higher since the gilded age, and just like that period, after 8 years of this kind of economic blundering, Bush's policies through the country into the worst economic downturn since the great depression."

-- There were 55 months of job creation and economic growth during the Bush administration - the longest uninterrupted period of growth in American history. This downturn is a result of Clinton administration policies doling out sub-prime mortgages to people who couldn't pay them. The policy began in 1997 under Clinton's plan to get minorities own their own homes. Again - good intentions, but you want to blame Bush for ANOTHER Clinton screw up.
Bush paid the price for 8 years of a leaderless ship.
Had Clinton been focussed on terrorism instead of getting oral sex with a woman half his age, maybe he could have captured Bin Laden.

This whole "blame Bush" thing is convenient for you now. But eventually historians will look back and pinpoint exactly where the trouble started and the Clinton administration and his leftist approach to foreign policy led to the abject failure of negotiations between the Palestinians and Israelis and al Qaida walked right through our front doors.

But Bush didn't spend the next 8 years WHINING that he had fight a war and BLAMING people for the mess he interited. No - he was a dignified leader during times of crises and he led our nation during one of its most challenging national security crises in history.

So, the WHINER-IN-CHIEF can blame and pass the buck all he wants. All the whining won't change the facts.

Posted by: carthage87 | July 28, 2010 1:33 AM | Report abuse

@swr3: "Turning a blind eye toward this evil phenomenon is similar to ignoring Jim Crow laws or forcing Jews to wear yellow stars. A rock ribbed conservative should be outraged that the fundamental right of freedom of religion is being cast aside on the alter of bigotry and hatred."

We're going to have to agree to disagree. Because you're wrong on this. You just are. Factually and morally, and I can't agree with you. No amount of inflammatory hyperbole, or sample quotes from individual whackjobs, is going to change my mind.

And, really, calling someone a Nazi for disagreeing with you--which is all the yellow star reference is--is, and remains, the lowest form of argument. It suggest to me that at some level you know your argument is flawed, even if you find your conclusions sound.

BTW, Council on American Islamic Relations has done enough in regards to apologetics for terrorism and radical Islam that I'm not particular sympathetic to them, as an organization, just as I'm not sympathetic to the KKK or the American Nazi Party (see how that works? Did that convince you that I'm right? Is that sort of rhetoric even remotely effective?)

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | July 28, 2010 9:52 AM | Report abuse

@carthage87 : Sorry you lost me.

I'm sure that in farrightwingnutistan, Bush didn't take historic budget surpluses and squandered those surpluses creating the largest deficits in history. But in the big universe we all share he did.

I'm sure that in farrightwingnutistan, Bush didn't create more debt than all other presidents combined. But in the big universe we all share he did.

I'm sure that in farrightwingnutistan, Bush didn't cut taxes on the rich, financed 2 wars (1 that was started on questionable intelligence to say the least), passed medicare d, ALL PAID FOR WITH DEFICIT SPENDING WHICH REPUBLICANS NOW CYNICALLY INSIST IS EVIL). But in the big universe we all share he did.

I'm sure that in farrightwingnutistan, Bush didn't ignore the intelligence briefing that stated Al Qaeda determined to strike the US. But in the big universe we all share he did.

I'm sure that in farrightwingnutistan, Bush didn't appoint regulators that let the industries, oil companies, financial institutions, etc. regulate themselves and not enforce regulations leading to the greatest recession in 70 years. Bush didn't ignore the problems in the mortgage market. But in the big universe we all share he did.

I'm sure that in farrightwingnutistan, Bush didn't appoint totally unqualified people for the Iraq reconstruction effort (which wasted years and 100s of billion of dollars) and FEMA (that was totally unprepared for a storm that was predicted to hit the gulf coast 6 days out) among other cronies and idiots, But in the big universe we all share he did.

I'm sure that in farrightwingnutistan, Bush didn't preside over the only 2 term presidency since FDR where job growth was a net negative, not even keeping up with population growth. But in the big universe we all share he did.

I'm sure that in farrightwingnutistan, Bush cynically politicize the Justice Dept, appointing and allowing people like Monica Goodling to screen civil service applicants based on their religion and their loyalty to bush, and not on their qualifications. But in the big universe we all share he did.

So, since you refuse to leave the far hinterland of farrightwingnitistan and get closer to the actual history of the US over the last 10 years, there is really no point in trying to communicate with you. The atmosphere in farrighwingnutistan doesn't blocks information about the actual history and current reality of our country and the world.

Posted by: srw3 | July 28, 2010 9:57 AM | Report abuse

Correction:. The atmosphere in farrighwingnutistan blocks information about the actual history and current reality of our country and the world.

Posted by: srw3 | July 28, 2010 10:00 AM | Report abuse

if she is wasted then why write about her?

Posted by: HORNET12 | July 28, 2010 10:46 AM | Report abuse

Palin will go down as the new JOAN OF ARK that saved the U.S. of America from the leftest pigs

Posted by: HORNET12 | July 28, 2010 10:52 AM | Report abuse

"... morning in America tends to work much better with independent voters, as the last election proved, to great effect.

(Kevin_Willis, July 27, 2010, 1:58 PM)

"Morning in America" was the slogan of Ronald Reagan, not Barack Obama. You know, the guy whose economic policies kicked off thirty years of deregulation, corporatism, crumbling infrastructure, and stagnant wages, to name just a few.

Posted by: jeniferlewis | July 28, 2010 11:28 AM | Report abuse

I'm sure that in farrightwingnutistan, Bush didn't take historic budget surpluses and squandered those surpluses creating the largest deficits in history. But in the big universe we all share he did.
-- And in liberal-lefty-naziland, you ignore the fact that the surpluses were created by a REPUBLICAN congress. you also AGAIN ignored the facts that i outlined - bush inherited a recession, the internet
bubble burst under clinton and bush inherited a declining stock market; the palestinian 2nd intifada errupted under democrat leftist rule and bush had to deal with that as well; and the democrat-leftists were
directly responsible for 9-11.

Bush didn't create more debt than all other presidents combined. But in the big universe we all share he did.
--- the president's only mission is to defend the country and every president - LINCOLN, FDR, JFK, AND LJB - all went into deficit spending to support america's defense. the president's job is not to spend $2 trillion
for socialization of the economy (ie. obamanomics)

Bush didn't cut taxes on the rich, financed 2 wars (1 that was started on questionable intelligence to say the least), passed medicare d, ALL PAID FOR WITH DEFICIT SPENDING WHICH REPUBLICANS NOW CYNICALLY INSIST IS EVIL).
--- LBJ promised medicare would cost $10 billion; the Great Society - a transfer of over $1 trillion of money from the rich to the poor - FAILED. therefore, your socialist programs always fail. Deficit spending is justified for defense; NOT for social programs. Just read the constitution.

Bush didn't ignore the intelligence briefing that stated Al Qaeda determined to strike the US. But in the big universe we all share he did.
--- And the blow jobs Clinton's White House resulted in issuing student visas to al Qaida terrorists to train at flight schools in the US.

Bush didn't appoint regulators that let the industries, oil companies, financial institutions, etc. regulate themselves and not enforce regulations leading to the greatest recession in 70 years. Bush didn't ignore the problems in the mortgage market.
--- Clinton's 1997 policies led to the current recession. I stated this all before. You continue to ignore the facts.

Bush didn't appoint totally unqualified people for the Iraq reconstruction effort (which wasted years and 100s of billion of dollars) and FEMA (that was totally unprepared for a storm that was predicted to hit the gulf coast 6 days out) among other cronies and idiots,
--- Unqualified people? I guess you are so qualified - if so, go! But you're too much of a whimp and WHINE. Just ask Barrel OilBama how his magnificent mangement is working out for us. LOL.

Posted by: carthage87 | July 28, 2010 12:01 PM | Report abuse

srw3
Bush didn't preside over the only 2 term presidency since FDR where job growth was a net negative, not even keeping up with population growth.
--- You're a revisionist. The Bush presidency had 55 months of interrupted economic and job growth. The crash of 2008 was a result of people like Chris Dodd and Barney Frank who wrote the policies for the mortgages of the 1990s.

Bush cynically politicize the Justice Dept, appointing and allowing people like Monica Goodling to screen civil service applicants based on their religion and their loyalty to bush, and not on their qualifications. But in the big universe we all share he did.
-- Sure. Versus your racist justice department under Barack Obama.

So, since you refuse to leave the far hinterland of farrightwingnitistan and get closer to the actual history of the US over the last 10 years, there is really no point in trying to communicate with you. The atmosphere in farrighwingnutistan doesn't blocks information about the actual history and current reality of our country and the world.
-- Everything you said is very poetic. It makes me teary eyed! Just such a shame you don't realize that President Sarah Palin is the answer for our country - she will bring good government back to the side of the people.

Sarah Palin is a true American. She will make our country proud again.

________________________________

In any event, writing "far right" is a compliment. You are far left which is the same as the socialist governments of Mussolini, Franco, and Peron - as I outlined before. Far leftists ALWAYS bring about the destruction of the economy and end up killing its own civilians. How far left will you go?

Posted by: carthage87 | July 28, 2010 12:22 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company