Irony Deficiency: Straight-Faced Palin Says "I'm Not a Quitter"

Forget Tina Fey.

Sarah Palin is now beyond parody.

Republicans may be struggling to get right with this whole resignation thing. (A new national survey of Republicans by the Rasmussen polling group finds that 40 percent think Palin's decision to exit stage right will damage her political prospects, while just 24 percent imagines that erratic behavior will help her get elected president.)

Rational Republicans might join the rest of America in asking: Did the woman the Grand Old Party proposed in 2008 to place one heartbeat away from the presidency blink in the face of the challenges of governing?

Did the governor of Alaska wig-out in the middle of her term?

No way, says Palin.

"I am not a quitter. I am a fighter," Palin told CNN, in one of a series of interviews with national broadcast and cable networks that she gave after announcing that she was, uh, quitting before completing the job to which Alaskans elected her.

But, but, but, uh, you see, that's O.K. because, er, Palin's "unconventional."

"I'm not going to take the comfortable path. I'm going to take the right path for the state," she said of her decision to hand over responsibility for running the state to someone else.

"That caught people off guard," the soon-to-be-former governor explained, in what would probably qualify as an understatement. "It's out of the box and unconventional. That's what we are as Alaskans and certainly how I am as a public servant."

The video of Palin's CNN interview is not to be missed.

And, yes, that really is Sarah Palin -- not her "Saturday Night Live" doppelganger.

Tina Fey would do just about anything for a laugh.

But even Fey would not go so overboard as to suggest that Palin would, while done up in fisherman drag, answer a question about her political future by saying: "We can't predict the next fish run, much less what's going to happen in 2012."

Comments (140)

1. George Will said on "This Week" Sunday that what Palin did makes her a quitter. So I'd say the verdict is in.

   And the weird thing is, right before Stephanopoulos turned to George Will, they played part of Palin's crazy announcement speech, and I just knew that even George Will would not be able to defend it. And he wasn't.

   If she would just say "leaving to spend more time with the family," people would give her more of a pass. Instead, she's lying, repeatedly, about not quitting and not wanting a second term, when the clear issue is that she's quitting mid-term for no reason.

   I was never prouder of Joe Biden than when I saw him on "This Week" -- our knowledgeable and experienced Vice President, not the publicity stunt John McCain would have inflicted on the Republic. (Like Juan Cole, I saw what Biden meant about Israel-Iran and knew it wasn't a gaffe or a threat.)

   Can we get David Letterman to start telling mean jokes about Mitch McConnell? And John Boehner....? And....

   Posted by RLawrence at 07/07/2009 @ 11:05pm

2. Palin's Nixonian excuse for quitting is...

   She is going to save the Alaskan taxpayers millions of dollars that would be wasted by pursuit of frivolous ethics charges against her by her enemies.

   She told Andrea Mitchell this while clad in waders on the shores of an Alaskan lake.

   Maybe the moose, salmon and wolf lobby has it out for her.

   Posted by koroviev at 07/07/2009 @ 11:19pm

3. Think of the savings in not incarcerating the Alaskan Blago alone!

   I guess MJ is gone; so someone had to take the reins of self-absorption and Sarah is just the NPD sufferer to do it, you betcha.

   I seriously can't wait to see what ordnance goes off in Pug hands next because I can't even hazard a guess at this point.

   Posted by snowball777 at 07/07/2009 @ 11:57pm

4. Good to see the nice car with no engine is once again deciding to unleash her mind on the rest of us. If I had simply heard that speech the other day, I would have thought I was listening to the some poor drunken sod hanging around outside the bar, looking for an alley in which to vomit.

   Which pretty well explains why for many she is the face of the Republican Party.

   Posted by onthehelm at 07/08/2009 @ 12:07am

5. Mask,

   You asked me a question about Sarah Palin on one of the other threads. I had said I would not reply, but now I am......since that thread is getting old you may not see it, so I will repeat it here.

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

   Mask,

   You asked previously (regarding Sarah Palin):

   ".......SJ....what's the "department of law"???

   http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=8016906&page=1

   Posted by Mask at 07/07/2009 @ 11:49am........"

   And I said that I was not going to look that up.

   I assumed that this was yet another case were a Palin critic (you, in this case) was claiming Sarah Palin said something stupid.

   Certainly at the Federal Government level, the Judical Branch does not call itself a department of law, and most state governments probably have a lengthy bureaucratic name for their legal branches.

   But, independent of you and on a Time magazine website, I wound up reading the interview she gave and saw reference to the "department of law".

   So I went to the State of Alaska website to see what I could find.

   Here it is.

   Department of Law 907-465-3600 Administrative Services Attorney General's Office Civil Division Consumer Protection Criminal Division Document Library Environmental Crimes Unit

   http://www.state.ak.us/local/akdir1.shtml#dolw

   At this point Mask my comment is that if you are concerned about what the Department of Law in the State of Alaska is, why are you asking me?

   You have the phone number now, call them and ask them.

   Posted by sjchermak at 07/08/2009 @ 03:51am

6. Posted by sjchermak at 07/08/2009 @ 03:51am

   Except she wasn't talking about state government, but Federal government.

   BTW...

   Karl Rove...

   Mike Huckabee...

   Fred Barnes...

   George Will...

   and now 40% of Republicans (in the "cannot be denied" Rasmussen).

   While YOU ...are in the 24%*.

   *(Of course, you may be getting used to that...heheh)

   Posted by Mask at 07/08/2009 @ 07:42am

7. BTW, as I noted to SJCHER on the other thread...

   I see no reason why Palin still can't be the GOP nominee in 2012.

   Seriously. After all, the GOP base has no problem voting for "war hawks" who never fought in a war (listening to them on AM radio too), so why would they have a problem with somebody who...

   is a quitter, who says they're a "fighter"????

   heheh

   Posted by Mask at 07/08/2009 @ 07:47am

8. Posted by Mask at 07/08/2009 @ 07:47am

   "I see no reason why Palin still can't be the GOP nominee in 2012."

   Can you name of another presidential nominee that resigned from elected office, for reasons other than to run for another political office? I can't.

   Posted by srjenkins at 07/08/2009 @ 08:06am

9. Before the announcement, Sarah Palin had about as much chance of being the Rep nominee as Dennis Kucinich had for the Dems.

   And after the announcement, zero is still zero.

   Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/08/2009 @ 08:09am

10. Posted by srjenkins at 07/08/2009 @ 08:06am

    Didn't Gary Hart resign for reasons other than to run for office?

    Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/08/2009 @ 08:19am

11. Paglia on Palin and the media

    http://www.salon.com/opinion/paglia/2009/07/08/ reader_letters/print.html

    The vicious double standard is pretty obvious. Only the tabloids, for example, ran the photos of a piss-drunk Chelsea Clinton, panties exposed, falling into her car outside London clubs a few years ago. If Chelsea had been the scion of Republican bigwigs, those tacky scenes would have been trumpeted from pillar to post in the U.S. as signals of parental failures or turmoil in clan Clinton. As a Democrat, I detest the partisan machinations that have become standard in Northeastern news management and that are detectable in editorial decisions at major metropolitan newspapers nationwide. It's why I, like a host of others, have shifted my news gathering to the Web.

    Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/08/2009 @ 08:24am

12. Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/08/2009 @ 08:24am |

    And why I, like a host of others, have never listened to a word whiny Camille has to say; Chelsea never claimed to be fit for office.

    Posted by snowball777 at 07/08/2009 @ 09:43am

13. Mask,

    In the interview I read Governor Palin was talking about "our department of law" ---- she was not referring to the federal government.....she is still Governor of Alaska....the reference she made was about the Alaska Department of Law.....dealing with the frivolous lawsuits being conducted for no other purpose but to try and impede her future success.

    I just read it this morning... I know what I saw......

    Posted by sjchermak at 07/08/2009 @ 09:54am

14. Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/08/2009 @ 08:24am

    give it a rest, Darin. The double standards are the ones held by the Family Values crowd.

    You have this idea that the "MSM" somehow does not include the highest rated talk shows, Rush, Hannity, O'Reilly. Those people BLASTED Hillary when she was only the wife of the president. They continued to BLAST her when she carpet bagged her way into the Senate and when she ran for President.

    Not to mention that according to right wing MSM, Obama was a Muslim, hates America, is a Marxist and is somehow taking freedoms left untouched by Bush/Cheney. We actually have a new verb , "to swiftboat".

    To this day people (including I think SJCHERMAK) think Hillary had Vince Foster killed.

    "No public figure in contemporary life has elicited more polarized reactions than Hillary Rodham Clinton. The first presidential spouse who pursued a major policymaking role, the beleaguered first lady has been a heroine and role model to her feminist allies - and a malevolent, power-mad shrew to her conservative foes."-David Brock, former conservative pollster

    Then when she ran as a "liberal" she was turned on by the so-called MSM,

    "Clinton was suddenly a bitch, a witch, the Queen of Hearts "who has parasitically attached herself to the legacy and record of" her husband, the screech on the blackboard with an elitist trademark laugh. "Hitlery," "Hildebeast," and "Billary" - staples of 1990s criticisms of the feminist First Lady have returned with a vengeance. She was a monster, the devil in a pantsuit, targeted with dehumanizing and eliminationist rhetoric to which liberal bloggers used to object when the right used it against liberals, but apparently now consider okay, as long as it's only directed at a candidate they don't like"

    Posted by crabwalk at 07/08/2009 @ 09:56am

15. Posted by srjenkins at 07/08/2009 @ 08:06am

    I'm referring to the base of the Republican Party....not myself.

    Being a "quitter who's a fighter" makes sense to them just as "Cheney knows how to fight wars" does.

    Posted by Mask at 07/08/2009 @ 09:59am

16. "In the interview I read Governor Palin was talking about "our department of law" ---- she was not referring to the federal government....."----Posted by sjchermak at 07/08/2009 @ 09:54am

    "As to whether another pursuit for national office, as when she joined Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., in the race for the White House less than a year ago, would result in the same political blood sport, Palin said there was a difference between the White House and what she had experienced in Alaska. If she were in the White House, she said, the "department of law" would protect her from baseless ethical allegations.

    "I think on a national level, your department of law there in the White House would look at some of the things that we've been charged with and automatically throw them out," she said. "

    "I think on a NATIONAL LEVEL"

    http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=8016906&page=1

    Posted by Mask at 07/08/2009 @ 10:02am

17. "war for peace"

    Family Values candidates with pregnant teens, or prostitutes on the side.

    "I'm not a quitter", as she quits before her term is up.

    Wanting to post the Ten Suggestions everywhere, but bringing false witness against political opponents, lying about political opponents, calling for the death of thousands, hundreds of thousands, coveting the land of others.

    Speaking and writing about "freedoms" while holding people forever without trials. Kidnapping Canadians, Germans and Albanians.

    Putting a pedophile on the committee against pedophilia.

    Complaining about Hollywood celebrities involved in politics while celebrating their very own "entertainer" as the titular head of their party.

    Decrying the collapse of the family, while having multiple divorcees as their spokesmen.

    How do you cons expect us to take you seriously?

    Really.

    There is a reason the brand of the GOP is about as valuable as Confederate scrip. It takes a while for sheep to get it, but the American electorate is finally waking up. Palin is a drain on your "cause" and you are incapable of realizing it, partly because you would rather blame someone else (libs, lib media, elites) than look into a mirror.

    It is likely that one major reason McCain lost is because of who he picked as his running mate. The more she spoke, the more the center fled. Now she is supposed to be your savior?

    Please.

    Posted by crabwalk at 07/08/2009 @ 10:07am

18. Posted by Mask at 07/08/2009 @ 10:02am

    nice.

    SJ will not let actual statements get in the way of what he knows he saw.

    Saddam was building that moon base.

    no LOL.... Chuckle quietly while shaking my head.

    CQWSMH.

    Posted by crabwalk at 07/08/2009 @ 10:11am

19. Posted by Mask at 07/08/2009 @ 10:02am

    Just like the other cons he turns something like "I think on a national level your department of law" into "our department of law".

    Dishonest or just stupid? :)

    Posted by BlackFrancis at 07/08/2009 @ 10:20am

20. Another question;

    Why is Hillary Clinton (or Hillary Rodham or Hillary Rodham Clinton), a known "liberal", able to handle the national spotlight for almost 2 decades, while a "strong conservative" like Sarah Palin folds like a cheap beach chair in less than a year?

    I thought liberals were weak and conservatives able to weather any storm via their faith and inherent righteousness?

    Posted by crabwalk at 07/08/2009 @ 10:28am

21. She is correct, resigning is the best thing she could have done for the people of Alaska.

    Posted by running-dog at 07/08/2009 @ 10:34am

22. Posted by BlackFrancis at 07/08/2009 @ 10:20am

    It's human nature. They see what they want to see. We all do it. The most unreliable evidence in a trial is an eyewitness.

    We could all live with this, but the Nation cons are so cock sure of themselves that they set themselves up for the fall. Then, when they fall, they blame the liberal media or unions. It's easier that way. It's hard to see ones own faults, harder still to change them. Where I a follower of their Christ I would have to forgive them, as they have to forgive us. But, luckily for me I have so such constraints.

    Posted by crabwalk at 07/08/2009 @ 10:35am

23. "Dishonest or just stupid? :)"----Posted by BlackFrancis at 07/08/2009 @ 10:20am

    I like to be generous and say the latter.

    heheh

    Posted by Mask at 07/08/2009 @ 10:48am

24. Mask,

    The interview I read was a totally different interview. I did not go to your interview that you read.

    The interview I read referred to the Alaska Department of Law.

    You have a quote where she is referring to the legal branch of the U.S. Government as the Department of Law.

    But obviously, at this point it becomes clear why she did that.

    She is used to referring to the legal branch of government as the department of law, because that is what it is called where she lives/works.

    So, in a conversation about the federal government, she fell back into that same term. Technically that term is not correct but it is hardly the massive mistake you are trying to promote it to be.

    It only matters to nit-picking libs who are attempting to build a case that she is ignorant. And you know these same nit-picking libs just say, regarding Joe Biden and FDR and television in 1929, that it was just Joe Biden being Joe Biden and we are just supposed to ignore that.

    I would think that it is a bit more of a stretch that Joe Biden is inventing FDR on televison when television didn't exist and FDR wasn't President so he could not have really been doing what Biden said he did, televison or not, than for Sarah Palin to fall back to the use of a term that she would typically be using anyway on her job.

    But here on The Nation, with leftist bloggers, it is viewed differently, essentially viewed through the prism of warped agenda driven ideological logic and sense of lefist superiority.

    Posted by sjchermak at 07/08/2009 @ 10:53am

25. Mask, crabwalk and other non-cons: good job - keep pointing out the fallacies of the cons.

    The title of this video is the question our resident cons should be asking themselves:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4zP1IjgSO_E

    Posted by BlackFrancis at 07/08/2009 @ 10:55am

26. crabwalk,

    Given that it turns out Mask and I were looking at two different articles, you can retract your statements now.

    (Refer to my 10:53 am post for details).

    Posted by sjchermak at 07/08/2009 @ 10:56am

27. sjchermak: do you have a link to the version you read?

    Posted by BlackFrancis at 07/08/2009 @ 11:02am

28. Posted by sjchermak at 07/08/2009 @ 10:53am

    What interview WAS that, SJ?

    What source? Link?

    Posted by Mask at 07/08/2009 @ 11:02am

29. crabwalk,

    Just want to point out another one.....at no point in time do I EVER remember commenting on Vince Foster.....EVER...

    obviously in these threads I have had plenty to say about Slick Willie, but I do not ever remember commenting on Vince Foster.

    There certainly are people that conjecture that it seemed to be hazardous to one's health to be associated with the Clintons, but there has been no proof or any solid information that I have ever seen about that.

    Accordingly, I have always known and know better now than to even theroize about something like that on The Nation, where leftist bloggers refuse to accept or believe things for which there is ironclad logic or proof.

    If conservatives can not get lefties here to agree or concede to things that are logical and known to be true, I guess because logic and facts and truth do not seem to enter the leftist equation or mindset.....then I know full well that any theory about health dangers posted by friendships with Hill and Bill is something that would never fly or be accepted here.

    Another posting you need to retract, because you are wrong.

    Not doing too well today, eh, crabwalk?

    Posted by sjchermak at 07/08/2009 @ 11:05am

30. Mask,

    Here it is:

    TIME's Interview with Sarah Palin: 'It's All for Alaska' By Jay Newton-Small / Dillingham, Alaska Wednesday, Jul. 08, 2009

    http://www.time.com/time/nation/ article/0,8599,1908983-1,00.html

    (there may be a space in the link that needs to be removed)

    excerpt....

    Now, there's been some frustration with some in the media not fully reporting what's been going on, so this may come as a shock to some Alaskans. We have sat down with reporters, showed them proof of the frivolity, the wastefulness -- you know, millions of dollars this is costing our state to fight frivolous charges. And countless, countless hours from my staff, our department of law, from me every single day just trying to set the record straight. And it doesn't cost the adversaries a dime in this game. It costs our state so much in time and in resources. Alaskans that have paid attention to that, despite the media choosing not to fully report on the circumstances today, Alaskans understand why there had to be a shift here. There has to be a change of direction, and it makes sense for Alaska, my final year in office, to not only be honest with them and tell them that I'm not going to run again, knowing that we've accomplished what we wanted to accomplish, but taking it one step further, saying I'm not going to put them through a lame-duck session where there will be, obviously, more wasted time and money because of the political game being played right now.

    Posted by sjchermak at 07/08/2009 @ 11:10am

31. sjchermak-It is hardly just libs who find her comments about the department of law,etc to show ignorance, as numerous polls clearly show.Conservatives,frequently,ignore facts and truth in order to cling to their beliefs.That is a human thing and not a left/right thing.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 07/08/2009 @ 11:11am

32. sjchermak: You may not have noticed that the Time article you referenced was dated Jul. 08, 2009. The ABC interview was on July 07, 2009. She changed her tune, probably after someone pointed out that there was no "department of law there in the White House".

    http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2009/07/palin- hasnt-spoken-to-mccain-in-weeks-says-department- of-law-would-protect-her-in-white-house.html

    Posted by BlackFrancis at 07/08/2009 @ 11:27am

33. sjchermak-Juries look at the exact same facts and evidence,but,quite often,will arrive at vastly different conclusions because we humans interpret facts based upon our own world view.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 07/08/2009 @ 11:28am

34. Posted by sjchermak at 07/08/2009 @ 11:10am | ignore this person | warn this person

    So that is her spin? The frivolous lawsuits against her are costing too much money?

    Then she turns around and files a frivolous lawsuit of her own. What a Hypocrit

    Excerpt from her attorneys below dated 7/4/09

    "To the extent several websites, most notably liberal Alaska blogger Shannyn Moore, are now claiming as "fact" that Governor Palin resigned because she is "under federal investigation" for embezzlement or other criminal wrongdoing, we will be exploring legal options this week to address such defamation. This is to provide notice to Ms. Moore, and those who re-publish the defamation, such as Huffington Post, MSNBC, the New York Times and The Washington Post, that the Palins will not allow them to propagate defamatory material without answering to this in a court of law."

    http://www.politico.com/static/PPM124_release_for_7-4-09-1.html

    Posted by Extraneous at 07/08/2009 @ 11:29am

35. Watching Palin in the interview with Andrea Mitchell, I'd say she made the right decision.

    I think the left hates any woman who doesn't submit to their ideology requirements of supporting infanticide, feminist nazism, high taxation, and is open about their Christian faith.

    I wish her well in whatever she does in the future.

    Posted by antisocialist at 07/08/2009 @ 11:34am

36. antisocialist-Trying to make this about sexism is as ignorant as when the other side tried to make all opposition to Obama about racism.The left is not big on male right wingers,either making your claim that is about gender incorrect.Many on the left loved Edwards who frequently talked about God,Jesus,faith,and being a Christian and was quite open about his Christian faith.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 07/08/2009 @ 11:43am

37. I think the left hates any woman who doesn't submit to their ideology requirements of supporting infanticide, feminist nazism, high taxation, and is open about their Christian faith.

    I wish her well in whatever she does in the future.

    Posted by antisocialist at 07/08/2009 @ 11:34am

    Anti, you seem to be more of a troll lately. Making rediculous inflamatory statements that really are irrelevant to the topic at hand.

    Here is the wikipedia definition of what you are

    "In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts controversial, inflammatory, irrelevant, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum or chat room, with the primary intent of provoking other users into an emotional response[1] or to generally disrupt normal on-topic discussion.[2]"

    Do not feed the trolls (DNFTT)

    Posted by Extraneous at 07/08/2009 @ 11:43am

38. Palin's point was made when the demon-crat-spawned national liberal media tracked her down salmon fishing just to try to get in a last jab!

    So called journalism is more a tool of the hell bound than righteous based objective reporting!

    Posted by BigPasture at 07/08/2009 @ 11:47am

39. "I guess because logic and facts and truth do not seem to enter the leftist equation or mindset....."SJ

    "I think the left hates any woman who doesn't submit to their ideology requirements of supporting infanticide, feminist nazism, high taxation, and is open about their Christian faith. "ANTI

    Caution: open minds at work.

    I do apologize for saying SJ thought Hillary killed Vince Foster. I get SJ confused with Pontificus. Sorry about that SJ.

    However, I stick to my initial response that attacks on Palin are somehow more virulent than those endured by Hillary Clinton is as absurd as saying that quitting is not actually quitting.

    Go get em chickenhawks!

    Posted by crabwalk at 07/08/2009 @ 11:51am

40. I think the left hates any woman who doesn't submit to their ideology requirements of supporting infanticide, feminist nazism, high taxation, and is open about their Christian faith.

    I wish her well in whatever she does in the future.

    Posted by antisocialist at 07/08/2009 @ 11:34am

    Anti, you seem to be more of a troll lately. Making rediculous inflamatory statements that really are irrelevant to the topic at hand.

    Here is the wikipedia definition of what you are

    "In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts controversial, inflammatory, irrelevant, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum or chat room, with the primary intent of provoking other users into an emotional response[1] or to generally disrupt normal on-topic discussion.[2]"

    Do not feed the trolls (DNFTT)

    Posted by Extraneous at 07/08/2009 @ 11:43am

    Hmm,

    What in my post was off message?

    What in my post was not true about the attitude of leftists/liberals towards conservative women?

    And I had no intention of provoking an emotional response. I was "telling it like it is"

    Posted by antisocialist at 07/08/2009 @ 11:55am

41. bigpasture-Palin did something that she knew would get her media attention.She seeks out media attention and then whines about just like celebrities who seek attention and then whine when they get it.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 07/08/2009 @ 11:56am

42. Posted by sjchermak at 07/08/2009 @ 11:10am

    Ah, I see.

    But in the interview that I first gave you a link to....which you REFUSED to look at, by the way(to those who didn't see the thread)...and which would be embarssing to her and you...

    she WAS talking about the Federal government ("national level", "there in the White House")...

    there is no "department of law"....is there?

    Posted by Mask at 07/08/2009 @ 11:57am

43. Yep, no question about it, the liberal media caused the downfall of another great conservative mind.

    Can't make this stuff up.

    They see what they want to see, they have to live in fear of something, someone. They have to feel victimized, while mocking "the victim mentality of the left".

    Weird.

    Isn't Obama open about his faith? Sharpton sure is. As is Bishop Robinson, Bishop Spong and Bill Moyers. The nuns that put blood on nuclear bombs are, as are Quakers that oppose war.

    Sorry, Larry, you got a kennel full of dogs that won't hunt.

    Posted by crabwalk at 07/08/2009 @ 11:57am

44. Posted by antisocialist at 07/08/2009 @ 11:55am

    And remember, Larry HATES it when people stereotype a whole group of people based on their political ideology....

    uh....sometimes.

    Posted by Mask at 07/08/2009 @ 11:58am

45. antisocialist-I already pointed out what was wrong with your post about conservative women.The left said the exact same stuff about Bush, who is male.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 07/08/2009 @ 11:59am

46. "however leftist bigots tend to stereotype Republicans by those kind of images so as to reinforce their own bigotry"----Posted by antisocialist at 05/11/2009 @ 09:41am

    (In case you needed proof of how much he despises generalities and pidgeon-holing!)

    Posted by Mask at 07/08/2009 @ 12:00pm

47. antisocialist-You did not tell it like it is and forgot about the Christian Edwards,the right wing males Bush,Cheney,etc and were just expressing an easy to prove to be wrong opinion.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 07/08/2009 @ 12:02pm

48. "What in my post was not true about the attitude of leftists/liberals towards conservative women? "

    All of it?

    I mean really, Larry, do you actually think feminism equals nazism? And do you actually think that by posting such a phrase that you are not trying to provoke?

    I mean this is all compassion and sincerity, no joking, no mockery. You need to take some time for some introspection. You need to apply the standards you apply to the left to yourself and your causes. I think if you honestly did that you would be shocked at who you truly are.

    Posted by crabwalk at 07/08/2009 @ 12:03pm

49. What in my post was not true about the attitude of leftists/liberals towards conservative women? Posted by antisocialist at 07/08/2009 @ 11:55am |

    "I think the left hates any woman who doesn't submit to their ideology requirements of supporting infanticide, feminist nazism, high taxation, and is open about their Christian faith."

    a) You've started with a specious generalization which is certainly not applicable to all leftists.

    b) You've implied that our disagreement rises to the level of hatred; also untrue. I personally don't despise her, but I do find her pathetic on several fronts.

    c) You've used con emotional language to miscategorize the feminism and pro-choice movements, but somehow weren't intending to invoke emotion...yeah, right,...is lying still a sin, Rev?

    d) You've assumed that our problem with Palin is her faith, and not her dire lack of competency, her problems with veracity and ethics, or her tendency to categorize large chunks of the US population as 'unreal' Americans.

    Posted by snowball777 at 07/08/2009 @ 12:14pm

50. Conservative Women

    Aren't they the ones who leave neatly bundled disposable diapers in full view in & around predominately liberal patronized brunch places?

    Only someone like Anti would tear- up on an encounter like this.

    Posted by Sorelish at 07/08/2009 @ 12:33pm

51. Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/08/2009 @ 08:09am & @ 08:19am

    I agree that Palin had and has zero chance to win the Republican nomination.

    I do not think Gary Hart ever became a presidential nominee.

    Posted by Mask at 07/08/2009 @ 09:59am

    I think you underestimate Republicans.

    Posted by crabwalk at 07/08/2009 @ 10:28am

    No matter what way you slice it, there is a double standard applied in how women are covered in the media. The fact that Palin wasn't up for it doesn't undercut the validity of this criticism.

    Posted by antisocialist at 07/08/2009 @ 11:34am

    "I think the left hates any woman who... is open about their Christian faith."

    Exactly! I mean Nancy Pelosi should just come out and say she hates....hey, wait a minute. She's Roman Catholic? You also mean to tell me that most of the female members of Congress are Democrats - and almost all of them identify with some form of Christianity?

    If only Republicans would start "hating" women like Democrats and the "left"...

    Posted by Extraneous at 07/08/2009 @ 11:43am

    You are aware that posting this is feeding the trolls, according to your conception?

    Posted by srjenkins at 07/08/2009 @ 12:52pm

52. Soon enough Sarah will be indicted. And very soon thereafter, the Sarah Palin Freedom Fund to cover her legal expenses will kick off, a stunt she couldn't pull off while guv.

    She'll be well paid as long as she gets enough eyeballs to watch the ads too. Then she'll fade away, loot in hand, another all-American success story.

    Posted by sloper at 07/08/2009 @ 12:56pm

53. Every Palin supporter knows that it is not just the left that says these things about her and it is dishonest of them to to try to make it appear to be that way.There are republicans,moderates,and independents who say the same things and all Palin supporters know that.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 07/08/2009 @ 1:10pm

54. What in my post was off message?

    Posted by antisocialist at 07/08/2009 @ 11:55am

    Well your post was on message if the message was smear the thoughts and beliefs of liberals. But nothing in the post was on TOPIC, except some vague association to Palin.

    Posted by Extraneous at 07/08/2009 @ 1:15pm

55. Posted by Extraneous at 07/08/2009 @ 11:43am

    You are aware that posting this is feeding the trolls, according to your conception?

    Posted by srjenkins at 07/08/2009 @ 12:52pm

    Yes. Anti, does not realize that he is a troll. But sometimes for entertainment value it is fun to feed the trolls.

    Posted by Extraneous at 07/08/2009 @ 1:20pm

56. Yep, no question about it, the liberal media caused the downfall of another great conservative mind.

    Can't make this stuff up.

    They see what they want to see, they have to live in fear of something, someone. They have to feel victimized, while mocking "the victim mentality of the left".

    Weird.

    Isn't Obama open about his faith? Sharpton sure is. As is Bishop Robinson, Bishop Spong and Bill Moyers. The nuns that put blood on nuclear bombs are, as are Quakers that oppose war.

    Sorry, Larry, you got a kennel full of dogs that won't hunt.

    Posted by crabwalk at 07/08/2009 @ 11:57am

    I'm sorry, when did Obama, Robinson, Spong, Moyers, those wacked out nuns, and the Philadelphia Friends become conservative women?

    Posted by antisocialist at 07/08/2009 @ 1:43pm

57. antisocialist-Why do you believe that people should view politicians differently based on gender?

    Posted by i'm nobody at 07/08/2009 @ 1:48pm

58. Mask,

    I already said that I now saw in your posting that she was talking about the Federal government with her remark.

    And it confirmed my suspicions that the purpose of your posting was to provide something you thought was embarrasing to her.

    Which is what your intent was, so there was no need to look at your original link, your purpose turned out to be exactly what I suspected.

    But I also told you I came across an article while browsing the Internet where she used the term as regards to her own state government, and I also went to the Alaska web site.

    And it became clear that her remark regarding the Federal government was not a sign of any "ignorance" or something that should cause embarassment to her, it was clear once I saw why she used that term that she just fell back on the term she is familiar with when referring to legal people.

    Her statement was not one that required super-precise precision in the same manner as someone working on the space shuttle needs to get their math formulas exactly right. It is clear even in your posting what she was referring to.

    People use terms they are familiar with and sometimes in different regions the terms are different, but it is not the crime of the century if they do not use the proper local technology.

    There are probably people from Massachusetts that may have moved to perhaps Virginia, and then ask somebody after they move in "Where is the nearest Registry (Registry Of Motor Vehicles) where I can go get my license plates" and are told "I don't know what you are talking about, why don't you go to the DMV and get your car tags instead?"

    And unless it were George W. Bush or Sarah Palin doing that, nobody gets too contorted about terminology.

    Give it a rest, Mask.

    Posted by sjchermak at 07/08/2009 @ 1:55pm

59. sjchermak-If you want to be a Gov or POTUS then you should be more informed than some person who moves from one state to another.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 07/08/2009 @ 1:57pm

60. i'm nobody,

    So apparently your standard only applies to Governor or President of the United States, and not the Vice President?

    Was it or was it not OK for Joe Biden to tell Katie Couric that FDR (who wasn't President) went on television (which didn't exist) to level with the American people about the stock market crash in 1929?

    If that was OK, then why was it OK?

    And also, if it was not OK, then was it or was it not OK that Katie Couric didn't call him on the error?

    And if that was OK, why was it OK?

    And regarding Ms. Couric, do you think she caught the error or no?

    If you say no, then was it or was it not OK that journalists are not informed?

    If it was OK that journalists are not informed, then why was that OK?

    And if you say she caught the error, then why was it OK for her not to say anything, as was the case?

    Was it or was it not OK that she did not say anything?

    And if you say it was OK, then why was it OK?

    Do you think liberal bias among newspeople had anything to do with this? Yes or No?

    If your answer is Yes, then is that OK or no?

    And if you say liberal bias in the news is OK, then why is that OK?

    So, as you can see, being "informed", if you insist upon it to your supposed standards, involves a lot more than you probably thought.

    What say you about this?

    Posted by sjchermak at 07/08/2009 @ 2:18pm

61. Can you name of another presidential nominee that resigned from elected office, for reasons other than to run for another political office? I can't.

    Posted by srjenkins at 07/08/2009 @ 08:06am

    SJ,

    In a characteristically stoooopid and pointless act of showy symbolism for which rightwingers are rightly known and mocked, Robet Dole resigned his Senate seat in summer 1996 as a prelude to his final failed campaign for the executive branch (following the 1976, 1980, and 1988 wipeouts). Voters were supposed to be stooppid enuff to submit to the GOP script that cadverous insdier Robert Dole had been liberated from sucking the public bosom as a career and had been "born again" as a firebrand outsider, to the approval and aquisence of mindless JOMAMMA types...

    Posted by PhilMcCrevice at 07/08/2009 @ 2:20pm

62. Poking his head over his hedge while garbed ina a loin cloth tailred from his "special therapeutic" leaves and home-made "war point" derived from organic berries that will not sap his manly purity, ANTISOCIAL angers thusly at unsuspecting passerbys of his porperty (07/08/2009 @ 11:34am):

    "I think the left hates any woman who doesn't submit to their ideology requirements of supporting infanticide, feminist nazism, high taxation, and is open about their Christian faith".

    With usual rightwing assbackwardness, what ANTISOCIAL had meant to say:

    "I think the RIGHT hates any MAN OR woman who doesn't submit to their ideology requirements of supporting THE WHOLESALE MURDER OF THOSE FETUSES WHO BECAME REAL PEOPLE AS UNDER THE ANTI-COMMIE AUSPICES OF PINOCHET, SUHARTO, & DUARTE, nazism, high taxation FOR THE NANNY STATE TIT-SUCKING OF THE MILITARY-INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX, and is open about TRASHING their Christian faith AND THUS FARTING CONTEMPTOUSLY RIGHT IN JESUS' FACE".

    Posted by PhilMcCrevice at 07/08/2009 @ 2:39pm

63. sjchermak-You are making too much out of the fact that I did not mention every office that a politician could hold and Biden and others have made some rather ignorant statements.The media does not have a liberal bias since it is a fact that there is the conservative media,the independent media,etc. No,being informed does not involve more than I thought and since these people know in advance that they will be questioned or,like the media,asking the questions then they should get their facts straight.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 07/08/2009 @ 2:41pm

64. Posted by PhilMcCrevice at 07/08/2009 @ 2:20pm

    I'm inclined to call quiting the senate in the summer of 1996 to focus on his run for President - as a run for another political office.

    If we were to include people that quit to run for another political office, we'd have to include Barack Obama. You could also look back on someone like Roosevelt who quit his elected position as a senator in the New York legislature to become Assistant Secretary of the Navy.

    So we probably need to expand the exceptions to include a run for office or appointed to an executive position. Neither of which applies to Palin, or anyone I can think of seeking a presidential nod.

    Posted by srjenkins at 07/08/2009 @ 2:48pm

65. "Her statement was not one that required super-precise precision ...."---Posted by sjchermak at 07/08/2009 @ 1:55pm

    So on matters of government ethics, she can be allowed to be "a little vague". Okay.

    Any other issues?

    Posted by Mask at 07/08/2009 @ 2:57pm

66. AN OPEN LETTER TO SJ-ASSCLOWN ON HIS (COUGH) "RELATIONSHIP" WITH SAINT SARAH BARRAQUITTA

    Dear SJ,

    I have salient news for you.

    Saint Sarah Barraquitta DID NOT resign her position as Guv of Alaska in order to pursue a love affair with you. In fact, when you see her speaking on TV she is not even speaking to you personally nor is she sending you personal messages in a secret winking code. SJ, this is because Saint Sarah Barraquitta DOES NOT KNOW YOU. Moreover, as disappointing is this fact will be to you, Saint Sarah DOES NOT read the letters that you send on a daily basis even if your letters have been stained/aromatically enriched with your bodily fluids.

    In fact, Saint Srah Barraquitta is speaking to the camera on those occasions when you see her on TV and she IS NOT not to you personally. This means that while Saint Sarah IS speaking to millions of people at once, she does not know them or desire to mother them, as you have been fantasizing. Saint Sarah Barraquitta is married to another person named Ayatollah Todd with whom she shares a bed and with whom she has countless children who have been handicapped in life by having been given dumbassd names with which no intelligent person would think of harming a child.

    These are facts, SJ. Facts of Life, yes.

    Furthermore, no one is impressed by you going around the high school lunch room talking up how Saint Sarah Barrquitta is "your girlfrind" or your "squeeze" or your "hole". The reactions that you have been getting are not jealousy as you have imagined since Saint Sarah Barraquitta is widely reviled as a highschool skank. Those reactions are reactions of pity, SJ. Pity for you.

    We hope you now better understand the adult world of the birds, bees, and of politics. But we doubt it very very much ...

    Posted by PhilMcCrevice at 07/08/2009 @ 2:59pm

67. As Sarah would say in her own words;

    Basketball in my head and government also too float down stream with the dead fish. Mavericks again are fighters too for this great country of the real america. It's my duty as governer to save alaska so apathy from quitters spending millions again to defend myself from the unfair bias elite media. So, I have said what is that is my decision and again it's clear. Is it a difficult decision? You betcha! But again, I am not gonna do what those people think i should do if not that I should do what they want me to. *Wink*

    Posted by seeksense at 07/08/2009 @ 3:01pm

68. Posted by srjenkins at 07/08/2009 @ 2:48pm

    OK, I see I misconstrued your comment (but regret not the opportunities to bash Dole, and his final failed campaign on the top of the GOP ticket in '96 with a running mate whom he had formerly derided as a slavish creature of ... hairspray)...

    Posted by PhilMcCrevice at 07/08/2009 @ 3:04pm

69. I think the left hates any woman who doesn't submit to their ideology requirements of supporting infanticide, feminist nazism, high taxation, and is open about their Christian faith.

    I wish her well in whatever she does in the future.

    Posted by antisocialist at 07/08/2009 @ 11:34am

    Did you catch the interview clip of Sarah helping out Todd with pulling in the gill net on a workday/weekday when she should be in Juneau attending to her official duties - till July 26.

    You have to ask yourself why the Palin's get to gill net salmon. Here is a family helping themselves to taxpayer largesse and to our resources. Sarah, I assume is still pulling in her salary as governor.

    Curious about how Todd got a commercial fishing license - I assume a commercial license is required for gill netting salmon. Notice they aren't using a rod and reel. No doubt the Palin's freezer is full of "free" salmon, along with the moose and caribou steaks. Hmmmm.....wonder if Sarah pulled a few strings at Fish & Game Department?

    Free lunch. This is something Sarah knows very well. She isn't someone you should be looking up to. The 'Last Frontier' indeed. She would like to put your Federal lands in her bank account as well - including lumber, oil, natural gas, and minerals. A steward of her own personal and selfish interest, and architect of her own demise is a better characterization.

    Posted by OneVote at 07/08/2009 @ 3:07pm

70. Was it or was it not OK for Joe Biden to tell Katie Couric that FDR (who wasn't President) went on television (which didn't exist) to level with the American people about the stock market crash in 1929?

    Posted by sjchermak at 07/08/2009 @ 2:18pm

    FDR did go on the radio not the television, he is famous for his fireside chats. That is what Biden was referring to. The fact that Couric did not go after him for mixing radio and television is really a non issue and renders the rest of your questions mute.

    Posted by Extraneous at 07/08/2009 @ 3:07pm

71. Since I know its comming.

    While FDR was not president 1929, he initiated his fireside chats as Govenor or New York, and yes it was 1929. So Bidens story was correct, but he gaffed on one detail. Whatever...

    Posted by Extraneous at 07/08/2009 @ 3:31pm

72. Problem with the original post is that Republicans have not soured on Palin, and in general find it irrelevant that she has resigned as Governor of Alaska. The latest poll from Gallup shows, among GOP'ers, 72 percent would consider voting for.

    That's pretty high, though it's a general question. And that's after the manic flailing among the beltway crowd.

    Even Republicans, or sort of Republicans, like David Brooks, showed contempt for her. As did many for Ronald Reagan.

    But the basics are that she scares the liberal left. And thus must be destroyed -- through lawsuits, ridicule, derision (David Broder just recently said she was worthy of being derided).

    And it hasn't worked. What has worked is forcing her to run up $500,000 in legal bills with no end in sight, for silly lawsuits, with the only thing found is that she had to reimburse Alaska for flying with her children while traveling.

    Pelosi anyone? Taking her family everywhere on a military jet. Or Obama flying to New York on Air Force one, just for dinner and a show.

    Get used to Palin, she's not going anywhere, and your fears are justified.

    Posted by J. Saxon at 07/08/2009 @ 3:41pm

73. The Right-Wing Powers-That-Be have taken Sarah up to the top of the Mountain and shown her the whole world and offered her the Dominion thereof, and said unto her:

    "Behold, you can make a Hell of a lot of Money whipping up the Faithful and bamboozling the Believers who are such an important part of our Base and if you are not Governor you can keep all of it,

    And lo you will wax exceeding Wealthy and Powerful and pay for your own clothes and we can send you into tight elections where you will be able to deliver the Loonies (and the elections) to the anointed of the Republicans (as you did with Chambliss in Georgia) while the rest of us try to stay in the background, above the fray, so as not to excessively alienate the more rational parts of the electorate,

    And you will gather many Political IOUs thereby and amass Major Gratitude among the Party Faithful, so that you will (with our discreet advice and expertise) become a potent Right Wing Power Broker and who knows, if we can get you cleaned up and a little more presentable to those who aren't paying too much attention, maybe you can run for President,

    But in any case you will be of Great Use to us even if you don't.

    For verily, the Faithful will ignore your incoherent and self-contradictory excuses for doing the old cut-and-run for they love you no matter what, and for our purposes, no one else matters,

    So waste not another year and a half in that barren land where you are looking worse and worse all the time, running up legal bills and generally having to, uh, actually govern, for now that things have gotten a little difficult, you can escape all this by blaming it on the media, cashing in and moving on to bigger and better things and save the whole United States. For lo, if you hang around Alaska you won't really want to run on the record you will have by that time anyway.

    And Sarah looked on this and found it good and said "Yup, gee whiz, OK I'm outta here!"

    Posted by NatChas at 07/08/2009 @ 3:42pm

74. jsaxon-There are not enough liberals in Alaska to do her much harm.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 07/08/2009 @ 3:47pm

75. Posted by J. Saxon at 07/08/2009 @ 3:41pm

    When did "liberals" and "Democrats" get control of...

    the Alaska state legislature?!??!? (who are the ones investigating the ethics violations)

    Posted by Mask at 07/08/2009 @ 3:52pm

76. Liberals in Alaska? some, the ones in NY and DC and LA, and such places, yes.

    Some in Alaska are associated with the establishment GOP -- they hate her; Don Young, the Murkowskis, Ted Stevens, she took them on. And beat them; don't doubt they have it in for her.

    But also, don't underestimate the bulls eye on her by left wing groups and Democrat-associated advocacy people.

    Posted by J. Saxon at 07/08/2009 @ 4:13pm

77. jsaxon-What do liberals in LA have to do with Alaska?In the real world politicians all have targets on their backs and the other side shoots at them.Sometimes their own side shoots at that target.That is life in politics.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 07/08/2009 @ 4:17pm

78. But the basics are that she scares the liberal left. And thus must be destroyed -- through lawsuits, ridicule, derision (David Broder just recently said she was worthy of being derided).

    Posted by J. Saxon at 07/08/2009 @ 3:41pm

    No, the basics are that she is a bumbling idiot who is not fit to lead period. She loves the spotlight, which is the real reason she is leaving Alaska. She is would rather spend her time in the lower 48 doing speaking engagments, travelling the rubber chicken circuit, and in general promoting herself. She has had a taste of the spotlight and like a heroin addict will do anything for more, even if it damages her in the longrun.

    But as an American she does scare me. I would not want someone who can't hold an intelligent/intelligable coversation to be in charge of our country. Call me elitist, but I think the job of president requires skill, intelligence, patience, cool headed thinking, knowledge, wisdom, etc. Irregardless of their policies, these traits are critical. Palin has none of these qualities.

    Posted by Extraneous at 07/08/2009 @ 4:32pm

79. Any other issues? Posted by Mask at 07/08/2009 @ 2:57pm

    You are asking CHERMAK if he has any other issues?

    Posted by ficheye at 07/08/2009 @ 4:53pm

80. Hey NatChas: That was hilarious

    Posted by impita at 07/08/2009 @ 5:30pm

81. "But the basics are that she scares the liberal left."

    You're joking, right? She does not scare me one bit. I hope she gets the Republican nomination. I can think of nothing better. She is the perfect face for that party: pretty with minimal brains, and a quitter. Well, maybe the pretty part is not typical of the Republicans. Shit, Sanford has to take the plane to Argentina to get some.

    Posted by onthehelm at 07/08/2009 @ 5:32pm

82. So anti you are basically saying that "leftists" hate conservative women. Well here's a news flash they don't like conservative men either. Just like Conservative men and women hate leftist men and women. Your point is a childish boiling down of and entire group to make seem as if it's out of the norm. You hate leftists to the point of saying you would rather not be around them. So what makes you any different?

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/08/2009 @ 6:48pm

83. Posted by J. Saxon at 07/08/2009 @ 3:41pm

    In what world is Palin even remotely scary? She's a punchline.

    Posted by srjenkins at 07/08/2009 @ 6:55pm

84. George Will said on "This Week" Sunday that what Palin did makes her a quitter. So I'd say the verdict is in.

    Posted by RLawrence at 07/07/2009 @ 11:05pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    I bet George Will got his ass kicked in elementary school.

    Probably got wedgied, too.

    Posted by schnellerheinz at 07/08/2009 @ 7:07pm

85. Although I agree with his statement.

    Posted by schnellerheinz at 07/08/2009 @ 7:09pm

86. And kudos for your take on Boehner and McConnell. Good idea.

    Posted by schnellerheinz at 07/08/2009 @ 7:10pm

87. In the middle of the Bering Strait are two small, sparsely populated islands: Big Diomede, which sits in Russian territory, and Little Diomede, which is part of the United States. At their closest, these two islands are a little less than two and a half miles apart, which means that, on a clear day, you can definitely see one from the other. Meaning that you CAN see Russia from Alaska.

    You can also see Russia from other points in Alaska. According to a New York Times article written in the waning years of the Cold War (when the Alaska-Siberia border was known as the "Ice Curtain"), if you stand on high ground on the tip of St. Lawrence Island--a larger Alaskan island in the Bering Sea, southwest of the Diomedes--you can see the Russian mainland, about 37 miles away.

    I believe that Sarah Palin is taking a little time off so that she may verify these facts for herself. When she comes back, she's gonna be hell to deal with.

    Posted by ficheye at 07/08/2009 @ 7:11pm

88. Posted by sjchermak at 07/08/2009 @ 03:51am | ignore this person | warn this person

    Except she wasn't talking about state government, but Federal government.

    Posted by Mask at 07/08/2009 @ 07:42am | ignore this person | warn this person

    Boy, you guys like to play gotcha!

    Posted by schnellerheinz at 07/08/2009 @ 7:15pm

89. ...but the Nation cons are so cock sure of themselves ...

    Posted by crabwalk at 07/08/2009 @ 10:35am | ignore this person | warn this person

    Kinda like Mark Sanford, eh?

    Posted by schnellerheinz at 07/08/2009 @ 7:29pm

90. I think the left hates any woman who doesn't submit to their ideology requirements of supporting infanticide, feminist nazism, high taxation, and is open about their Christian faith.

    Posted by antisocialist at 07/08/2009 @ 11:34am | ignore this person | warn this person

    But I thought YOU GUYS wanted women to be submissive, an' stuff.

    Posted by schnellerheinz at 07/08/2009 @ 7:35pm

91. "In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts controversial, inflammatory, irrelevant, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum or chat room, with the primary intent of provoking other users into an emotional response[1] or to generally disrupt normal on-topic discussion.[2]"

    Do not feed the trolls (DNFTT)

    Posted by Extraneous at 07/08/2009 @ 11:43am | ignore this person | warn this person

    And, here in Michigan, a "troll" is someone who, of course, lives in the Lower Penninsula, i.e., below the bridge. (As you probably know, Extra).

    Posted by schnellerheinz at 07/08/2009 @ 7:39pm

92. The bottom line is she has deep support in the Republican party and is tied in polls among leading Republican candidates. She is very much a fighter and it remains to be seen what her decision will be in two years when the charge for the nomination will begin in earnest. Meanwhile, the democrats have their own demons to conquer - mainly sky-high unemployment, pending hyper-inflation, an admission that they don't know what to do about it, and their inability to do the one thing that must be done - reduce taxes for business and garbage-can the cap-n-tax lunacy.

    Posted by pyeatte at 07/08/2009 @ 9:01pm

93. Extraneous,

    You say Biden mixed radio and television and I guess you believe it is clear what he was referring to.

    By that standard then, it is clear what Sarah Palin was referring to when using the term Department of Law regarding legal people available to the Executive Branch of the Federal Government.

    She just mixed in a term she commonly uses no doubt in the course of her job...it is clear she was referring to legal people available to those in the Executive Branch.

    Thus the contorted concern by leftists here is moot and the contorted contentions that she is ignorant are invalid.

    You on the left are trying to have it both ways. The reason some Conservatives (such as me) have continued to harp about the Biden thing is that we just went through 8 years where the political left hyper-examined and hyper-criticized and hyper-mocked every breath of air George W. Bush took.

    The left was ready and raring to go if even one t was not crossed or if even one i was not dotted, so to speak, in anything George W. Bush ever said.

    Yet, when Biden comes along and pulls stories out of his ass, it is said it is just "Joe being Joe" along with lib bloggers here saying it is no big deal.

    Libs are trying to have it both ways. Don't bother posting in and telling me the same is true for Conservatives......I doubt people like me would have concentrated on the Biden thing to the degree we have if it had not been for the 8 year non-stop mocking and ridiculing of George W. Bush, mocking and ridiculing that was only interrupted when the political left took breaks to switch off to more serious crucifixion and condemnation.

    Posted by sjchermak at 07/08/2009 @ 9:15pm

94. pyeatte-Palin is a quitter and being a quitter is quite different than being a fighter.Fighters do not quit.It is quite sad for people like me who have some conservative views to only have the one party to vote for since the republicans have decided to admire quitters,draft dodgers,and cowards and have moved so far to the right that they can longer be taken seriously.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 07/08/2009 @ 9:15pm

95. sjchermak-It is far more than just the left who believe that Palin is not too bright.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 07/08/2009 @ 9:17pm

96. Yet, when Biden comes along and pulls stories out of his ass, it is said it is just "Joe being Joe" along with lib bloggers here saying it is no big deal. Posted by sjchermak at 07/08/2009 @ 9:15pm

    This is one of those rare occasions when I find myself it agreement with you sjchermak.

    Biden is an incompetent buffoon and represents everything that is wrong with Washington.

    Posted by Shingo at 07/08/2009 @ 10:02pm

97. <em><i>Quitters never quit</i></em> Wailin' Sara Pailin; she breathes without inhalin'.

    Posted by victoreador at 07/08/2009 @ 10:43pm

98. Posted by i'm nobody at 07/08/2009 @ 9:15pm:

    Sorry, but I decline to share your opinion.

    Posted by pyeatte at 07/08/2009 @ 11:17pm

99. pyeatte-It is not an opinion.You,like most republicans,admire and support the quitter Palin.Cheney was draft dodger and Bush was a coward who used family connections to avoid Nam.You guys went for Bush over McCain.These are the types that modern republicans admire and support.Your claim that quitting makes one a fighter and not a quitter is a perfect example of modern republican thinking.It is common knowledge that the GOP is moving farther to the right.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 07/08/2009 @ 11:33pm

100. pyeatte-And when the GOP gave McCain the nod few got behind him until the quitter and unknown Palin showed up and then the GOP got instantly energized by someone that most knew nothing about.

     Posted by i'm nobody at 07/08/2009 @ 11:39pm

101. Palin's point was made when the demon-crat-spawned national liberal media tracked her down salmon fishing just to try to get in a last jab!

     So called journalism is more a tool of the hell bound than righteous based objective reporting!

     Posted by BigPasture at 07/08/2009 @ 11:47am

     I was under the impression that Palin invited the press. The interview I saw with Andrea Mitchell was generally favorable of Palin; although, she did say Obama's policies were "uneconomic."

     Posted by koroviev at 07/09/2009 @ 12:01am

102. /She just mixed in a term she commonly uses no doubt in the course of her job...it is clear she was referring to legal people available to those in the Executive Branch. /

     You know the deathless prose of the Bush/Palin defenders always sounds like the White House briefing room wherein the Press Secretary clarifies the deep and considered paragraphs of their leaders with the nuance they so richly deserve through the years of studied analysis of their abyssal depth of meaning. "What the President was saying . . ." You know, in case regular idiots like the educated Americans asking clarification on something monstrously idiotic that the President said didn't understand that he is really a Jeffersonian Bard.

     Then they turn to an inequivalent line - "Yet, when Biden comes along and pulls stories out of his ass, it is said it is just "Joe being Joe" along with lib bloggers here saying it is no big deal. "

     Well, let's ask Joe to address the first question, not something else. "Hey Joe, is there a 'Department of Law' at the White House?" - because that's equivalent, right?

     I don't think he'd bungle the answer because, let me think, oh, let me guess, he knows what's going on at the Federal Level. In fact, I would bet that any Senator, Congressman and most Governors know the answer and wouldn't mis-articulate because it takes an idiot with less than a College "Government" credit to come up with that one out of thin air.

     Why doesn't the GOP come up with an articulate and smart candidate? Why?

     Don't they have ANYONE?

     Or is it now a requirement that you have to come from the Base to appeal to the base? A leader needs to be a lot smarter than their constituents; draw your own conclusions about the GOP by looking no further than their application of that equation.

     Posted by Riemann at 07/09/2009 @ 04:47am

103. Not to mention that according to right wing MSM

     Posted by crabwalk at 07/08/2009 @ 09:56am

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

     Being a "quitter who's a fighter"

     Posted by Mask at 07/08/2009 @ 09:59am

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

     I guess this is oxymoron day. Mask is right; you can't be a quitter and a fighter at the same time.

     Likewise, you can't be "mainstream" and "right wing" at the same time. You gotta pick one.

     Air America positions itself as Leftwing. Rush/Hannity position themselves as Right wing. ABC, CBS, NBC, NYT, Washington Post, Time, Newsweek, Rueters, AP, CNN positions themselves as mainstream, but because they are blind to their own biases, they slant their reporting left.

     Fox positions itself as mainstream, but slants their reporting right.

     Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/09/2009 @ 06:57am

104. The double standards are the ones held by the Family Values crowd.

     Rush, Hannity, O'Reilly... BLASTED Hillary when she was only the wife of the president.

     according to right wing MSM, Obama was a Muslim, hates America

     We actually have a new verb , "to swiftboat".

     To this day people (including I think SJCHERMAK) think Hillary had Vince Foster killed.

     Then when she ran as a "liberal" she was turned on by the so-called MSM,

     Posted by crabwalk at 07/08/2009 @ 09:56am

     Hey Crabman

     Not enough time to do all these points justice, but ...

     There is a difference between double standards and being a hypocrite (family values)

     Rush, Hannity, O'Reily are right wing. Of course they blast Hillary.

     Swiftboat as a verb came about from Kerry in '04. It was not the MSM, but the political action group, Swiftboat vets for truth.

     I know Foster committed suicide, but I believe he did it in his office. The reason the conspiracy nuts have any case at all is because Hillary had to have the body moved in order to protect her legal rights.

     Finally, the MSM did do a hatchet job on Hillary, but not because she's a lefist. It is because they preferred Obama and no longer feel any compunction agaisnt taking a giant shit on objectivity by openly taking sides and becoming an extention of their favorite candidate.

     Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/09/2009 @ 07:04am

105. Posted by i'm nobody at 07/08/2009 @ 11:43am

     Posted by Extraneous at 07/08/2009 @ 11:43am

     I think you are missing the point. It's one thing to be an opponent; it's a different thing to be a traitor.

     The Left doesn't view us "angry white males" as "allies". But women, minorities, gays-- these are people, from the Left's point ov view, that should be on the left because the Left is fighting for their rights.

     Women, like Palin; blacks, like Alan Keys and Larry Elders; gays, like the people who run the website www.gaypatriot.com and Log Cabin Republicans; these aren't just opponents, these are traitors to the cause. The Left holds them in particular contempt as compared to trolls like me.

     That was Larry's point, not the the MSM is sexist.

     Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/09/2009 @ 07:49am

106. Then she turns around and files a frivolous lawsuit of her own. What a Hypocrite

     Posted by Extraneous at 07/08/2009 @ 11:29am

     Do you remember what happened to AK's senator? He was hounded and defamed for taking bribes. Then he was convicted and lost his Senate sead to a Dem. Then a judge said he was railroaded by prosecutorial misconduct and the conviction was thrown out. And the prosecutor repremanded

     And since the election was over, there was no interest in re-filing charges.

     And Palin shouldn't try to prevent defamation?

     Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/09/2009 @ 07:54am

107. there is no "department of law"....is there?

     Posted by Mask at 07/08/2009 @ 11:57am

     Unless you're willing to condemn everyone who's ever referred to Virgina as a "state" (instead of a commonwealth) as bing an idiot, you are hold Palin to a different standard for referring to a federal department by the name used in her state.

     Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/09/2009 @ 07:57am

108. Posted by J. Saxon at 07/08/2009 @ 4:13pm

     "Left wing groups" and "Democrats" control...

     Alaskan Republicans?

     Ah........ha. Okaaaaay.

     Posted by Mask at 07/09/2009 @ 07:58am

109. however leftist BIGOTS (emphasis added) tend to stereotype ... Posted by antisocialist at 05/11/2009 @ 09:41am

     (In case you needed proof of how much he despises generalities and pidgeon-holing!)

     Posted by Mask at 07/08/2009 @ 12:00pm

     Hey Mask

     "Sterotyping" is pretty much the definition of "bigotry". Is it "generalizing" to refer to all men as males?

     Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/09/2009 @ 08:00am

110. The GOP is a party that since 1968 has relied on the southern strategy -- i.e. bigotry -- for its national margins of victory (except in´'00 when it relied on a victory margin of 1 Supreme's vote).

     Given this approach for 2 generations, idiocy becomes ingrained, bigotry & stupidity are nurtured, the moronic is rewarded. Only looks matter ... just look at Fox TV, for example ... which is why fatboy druggie Rush has a radio show.

     Posted by sloper at 07/09/2009 @ 08:02am

111. crabwalk,

     About another one, up above.

     You say "......Rush, Hannity, O'Reilly... BLASTED Hillary when she was only the wife of the president......"

     Hillary was ONLY the wife of the president?

     Your pronouncement, crabwalk, would be news to Hillary.

     Did you forget her comment "We are the president"?

     Of course, that was selective. "We" were the president if whatever was happening was percieved to be good. If there was something her husband did that was not looked upon as good, then it was "Well, I don't know anything about that - you will have to ask the President".

     But if you say, crabwalk, that Hillary Clinton was only the wife of the President, then you had better email Hillary (I am sure she must have a state department email) and tell her, because she was unaware she was only the wife of the president.

     Posted by sjchermak at 07/09/2009 @ 08:07am

112. So on matters of government ethics, she can be allowed to be "a little vague". Okay.

     Any other issues?

     Posted by Mask at 07/08/2009 @ 2:57pm

     Okay, that is just plain bullshit.

     Misspeaking, by calling a federal department by the wrong name has nothing to do with "ethics".

     They say it takes one to know one. I know a troll when I see one.

     Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/09/2009 @ 08:07am

113. While FDR was not president 1929, he initiated his fireside chats as Govenor or New York, and yes it was 1929. So Bidens story was correct, but he gaffed on one detail. Whatever...

     Posted by Extraneous at 07/08/2009 @ 3:31pm

     Two details: didn't he also say FDR went on television to calm fears during the Depression when the Depression pre-dated television by two decades?

     And Mask has the temerity to pretend that referring to a department by the incorrect name because that name is familar to you in your current organization is something she should be embarrassed about?

     Disingenous to the extreme.

     Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/09/2009 @ 08:11am

114. the Alaska state legislature?!??!? (who are the ones investigating the ethics violations)

     Posted by Mask at 07/08/2009 @ 3:52pm

     They are the same ones that were reprimanded in the Sen Stevens case for prosecutorial misconduct.

     Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/09/2009 @ 08:13am

115. Let's put aside Mask's contention that misstating a federal deparment's name is an ethics violation and get back to the matter at hand.

     You can't be a fighter and a quitter at the same time, but sometimes walking away from a fight is the altruistic thing to do, even if you're right, because those around you will be hurt the most by the fight. (By this I mean all the cheap shots by the MSM at her daughter Brystol and the "retard" jokes about her son Tryg).

     If someone is defaming you from the middle of a pile of pig shit, you can either enter the pig shit and shut them up (risking a shower of pig shit on you and your family) or you can let them be wrong and walk away.

     Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/09/2009 @ 08:27am

116. Get used to Palin, she's not going anywhere, and your fears are justified.

     Posted by J. Saxon at 07/08/2009 @ 3:41pm

     SAX' seems to be trying to out-"I want in every fiber of my being for my personal Kim Il Sung, Saint Sarah Barraquitta, to strap on her baddest dildo" SJ-ASSCLOWN in the realm of dubious obsession with the bimbo ex-guv.

     Since SAX' knows who his Maximum Leader of the moment is, we look forward to hearing him (?) angrily bark that had Ronald Reagan quit as Guv of Cali in a blizzard of boo-hoos and self-pity in mid-1969, that it would have been THE master stroke in setting up his subsequent career (tetter teeter).

     Posted by PhilMcCrevice at 07/09/2009 @ 08:29am

117. Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/09/2009 @ 08:27am:

     "(By this I mean all the cheap shots by the MSM at her daughter Brystol and the "retard" jokes about her son Tryg)."

     Just reeks of the usual self-pitying rightwing bullshit.

     Name one such specific moment in something that clearly is a part of MSM (and NOT an uncorroboarted "Obama was born in bin Laden's cave"-style rightwing doozie reported in phony rightwing media that will nonetheless stimulate the base instinct's of the base).

     "If someone is defaming you from the middle of a pile of pig shit, you can either enter the pig shit and shut them up (risking a shower of pig shit on you and your family) or you can let them be wrong and walk away."

     Sheer fucking nonsense.

     So Clinton should have "walked away" from the Whitewater-Vince Foster-Filegate-ShitGate-NadaGate charades that drove the Repugnant party for 8 disgraceful years in an effort to take down a man's man and a law-abiding, effective administration whose ankles they could not reach?

     Obama should "walk away" when your foam-at-the-mouth fellow travelling rightwing freak show goes apeshit with canards about Obama's religion, place of birth, political philosophy, concentration camps (etc etc)?

     Says everything one needs to know to see how rightwing debris deals out hideous defamations and abuses state power to pursue enemies in their own version of a Stalinist manner. But if anyone so much as looks at them cross-eyed and utters a crtical syallable, they crumble pathetically into a sickly undignified muddle of boo-hoo, self-pity, whiny-assed finger pointing, and ass-covering that is the recourse of the politically inferior.

     Posted by PhilMcCrevice at 07/09/2009 @ 08:45am

118. SAINT SARAH BARRAQUITTA IS A PERSECUTED MARTYR? WHAT A SICK FUCKING JOKE & SO TYPICAL OF RIGHTWING FECALISTS!

     For some real persecution in abuse of state authority, try 'BAMA GUV DON SIEGALMAN:

     "Did DOJ Retaliate Against Siegelman Whistleblower? By Scott Horton

     In a nine-page June 1, 2009 letter to her boss, Attorney General Eric Holder, Tamarah Grimes, a member of the Justice Department team that prosecuted former Alabama Governor Don Siegelman, itemized an astonishing list of acts of misconduct by her colleagues as they developed what they called "the Big Case."

     Two key witnesses were cajoled, coached, and pressured to change their testimony to better support the charges. This specifically included the key evidence given by one witness on which Siegelman was convicted. But, as Grimes notes, the witness in fact had no recollection of the events–he was pressured to recount them in a way that suited the prosecutors.

     Documents were purloined from a Waste Management site.

     Members of the prosecution team communicated directly with a pro-prosecution juror while the case was pending and afterwards.

     Every aspect of the case was overseen by U.S. Attorney Canary. She had nominally recused herself from the case because her husband, a friend of Karl Rove and the most prominent G.O.P. elections advisor in Alabama, was advising a campaign against Siegelman for which the prosecution provided essential grist.

     Eight days after submitting these meticulously documented complaints, many of which echo concerns stated by others in the U.S. Attorney's office in Montgomery, Grimes received a reply of sorts. She was fired. Grimes notes in a press release that she was informed of her dismissal in a letter from Terry Derden of the Executive Office of U.S. Attorneys..."

     Posted by PhilMcCrevice at 07/09/2009 @ 08:52am

119. Mo' Horton:

     "Derden formally denies that Grimes's dismissal is related to her status as a whistleblower. On the other hand, his denial is pretty thin gruel. According to the Grimes press release, the decision to fire "arose from a management decision made [in an] after-hours meeting in the lobby bar at the Embassy Suites Hotel in Montgomery, Alabama." That meeting occurred on November 1, 2007, & it was an all-in-the-family affair, involving U.S. Attorney Leura Canary and her then first deputy Patricia Watson. Watson is married to Leura Canary's first cousin, & both Canary and Watson were the direct targets of Grimes's whistleblower complaints. The appearance of an act of retaliation could not be stronger.

     According to the Justice Department, Grimes was terminated because she presented "an unreasonable risk to operational security." The Justice Department apparently reached that conclusion because of her denunciation of the "victory at all costs" tactics adopted by the Public Integrity Section, and her objection to juror tampering, witness cajoling, and similar criminal capers also provided justification for termination of her security clearance. The Justice Department's conduct looks increasingly like a Sicilian mob group: you commit the crimes the bosses order and you keep quiet about it, or the consequences will be fearsome. The No Fear Act purports to shield whistleblowers from acts of retaliation against employees who disclose misconduct. However, the clever consigliere of the Bush Justice Department, who amazingly continue to control all aspects of the case involving Siegelman 5 months into a new Democratic administration (including Leura Canary, who is still on the job in Montgomery), are not about to be stopped by legislation that protects whistleblowers."

     Posted by PhilMcCrevice at 07/09/2009 @ 08:56am

120. Posted by PhilMcCrevice at 07/09/2009 @ 08:45am

     Phil

     I'm speculating about Palin's motives for quitting instead of fighting. I'm not second guessing Sen Clinton or President Obama's decisions.

     Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/09/2009 @ 09:11am

121. Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/09/2009 @ 08:13am

     Darin, again, are the Alaskan REPUBLICANS "liberals" and "Democrats" as Saxon says are the ones "behind the persecution of poor Sarah"????

     How cultish can it get, even for you???

     Posted by Mask at 07/09/2009 @ 09:22am

122. Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 07/09/2009 @ 07:54am |

     "Do you remember what happened to AK's senator?"

     Yes, we remember Mr. "System of Tubes" and his spiffy remodeling shenanigans...a whore, and a cheap one.

     "He was hounded and defamed for taking bribes."

     He was INDICTED, yes.

     "Then he was convicted and lost his Senate sead to a Dem."

     By Dubya's DoJ...not Dems.

     "Then a judge said he was railroaded by prosecutorial misconduct and the conviction was thrown out."

     The judge said the Dubya's DoJ dropped the ball by excluding POTENTIALLY exculpatory evidence in the form of testimony from a Rocky Williams, but that doesn't get the former senator off the hook.

     This is an inherent danger of recruiting almost exclusively from faith-based law programs, if you ask me.

     "And since the election was over, there was no interest in re-filing charges."

     Or because the case had been botched beyond repair, by REPUBLICANS and Holder wanted to drive home a point about prosecutorial misconduct (i.e. don't try it, we won't get your back if you do)?

     "And Palin shouldn't try to prevent defamation?"

     Sure she should, if and when it ever actually occurs.

     Posted by snowball777 at 07/09/2009 @ 09:42am

123. SAX' seems to be trying to out-"I want in every fiber of my being for my personal Kim Il Sung, Saint Sarah Barraquitta, to strap on her baddest dildo" SJ-ASSCLOWN in the realm of dubious obsession with the bimbo ex-guv.

     Posted by PhilMcCrevice at 07/09/2009 @ 08:29am

     Here is a wonderful example of unhinged leftist verbiage -- if one can even call it that. I assume this is a personal attack, though it's hard to tell from the strange language usage. If one can call it language or usage thereof.

     It is quite a feat for Palin that she is able to inspire such spittle spewing fury among those on the left -- I don't remember Huckabee, or Ron Paul, or Mitt Romney, or McCain bringing out this sort of anger and stupidity in posters such as this.

     Posted by J. Saxon at 07/09/2009 @ 09:49am

124. "I don't remember Huckabee, or Ron Paul, or Mitt Romney, or McCain bringing out this sort of anger and stupidity in posters such as this."

     Then you obviously don't read right wing blogs.

     Posted by BlackFrancis at 07/09/2009 @ 10:19am

125. "I don't remember Huckabee, or Ron Paul, or Mitt Romney, or McCain bringing out this sort of anger and stupidity in posters such as this."

     Then you obviously don't read right wing blogs.

     Posted by BlackFrancis at 07/09/2009 @ 10:19am

126. This just in...

     Sarah Palin has apparently quit her post as governor of Alaska so that she may pursue a new venture with a cosmetics company.

     They sell a new brand of lipstick which is only tested on pigs.

     Posted by ficheye at 07/09/2009 @ 10:19am

127. "It is quite a feat for Palin that she is able to inspire such spittle spewing fury among those on the left -- I don't remember Huckabee, or Ron Paul, or Mitt Romney, or McCain bringing out this sort of anger and stupidity in posters such as this."

     Posted by J. Saxon at 07/09/2009 @ 09:49am

     Whether it is A-11's thuggish base in Iran whacking citizen demonstrators with pipes, King Il Sung's cowardly apologists in NoKo, or Saint Sarah's shabby brigades of lumbering dittoheads in the fake precincts of America, one thing that one can count on with the self-appointed mindguards and enforcers is dense stupidity (so criticism of the Maximum Leader is...parsed as being really a form of maximalist praise, just upside down. Or something. But not really criticism). Among the the thugs, one also finds a total absence of a sense of humor about their own backwardassed whacked-out hateful radicalism while they "love" their nation even as they despise 98% of its people.

     We can try tweaking SAX's words for illustration of the principle of complete indifference toward how shithouse preposterous one sounds when one deserts the reality based community for the feces-stained walls of the Maximum Leader's rightwing asylum. In SAX's world, where criticism of The Maximum Leader IS really praise, we may also find that by similar logical gymnastics that...

     "It is quite a feat for BILL CLINTON that HE is able to inspire such spittle spewing fury among those on the RIGHT -- I don't remember CARTER, or LBJ, or JFK bringing out this sort of anger and stupidity in IMPEACHMENT-DERANGED MCs such as this."

     Posted by J. Saxon at 07/09/2009 @ 09:49am

     Posted by PhilMcCrevice at 07/09/2009 @ 10:20am

128. In the past PhilMcCrevice's nurses at the sanitorium have left him unattended and not given him his meds on a timely manner but.....

     I think in the last couple of days the opposite has occurred and they have mistakenly overmedicated him.

     Posted by sjchermak at 07/09/2009 @ 10:37am

129. Posted by sjchermak at 07/09/2009 @ 10:37am |

     At least he's been diagnosed and is seeking treatment, unlike some others we could mention.

     Posted by snowball777 at 07/09/2009 @ 10:48am

130. Posted by sjchermak at 07/09/2009 @ 10:37am |

     At least he's been diagnosed and is seeking treatment, unlike some others we could mention.

     Posted by snowball777 at 07/09/2009 @ 10:48am

131. I'll go out on a limb right now...

     If Sarah Palin EVER explains why she resigned as Governor of Alaska in 35 words or less....I'll vote for her when the GOP Primaries occur in my state (it's an open primary for registered Independents and well before the end). Hell...give her 40 words.

     And if her explanation makes sense....I'll vote for her for President...heheh

     Posted by Mask at 07/09/2009 @ 10:53am

132. "So I henceforth proclaim your knighthood and declare you...Sir CHERMAK!". The queen touched both shoulders with a volkswagen antenna.

     CHERMAK winced slightly, and shielded his eyes from the intense glare of queen Palins teeth. His sword clanked against the plastic armor as he stood.

     "You are my invincible warrior, protector of all that is good and just! You also have a chunk of spinach stuck in your teeth. Now, go forward, and remember to always protect the innocent from THOSE ON THE LEFT! You know... those folks over THERE!!"

     CHERMAK jumped... and then awoke. He was still inside of Chuck-E-Cheese, where he had dozed off after his breakfast burger. A number of people were staring at him, standing safely back.

     "Hey, buddy..." one man said, "Are you going to eat those pickles?". CHERMAK stood, grabbing vainly for his sword, then he lurched out the door and into the street. The sun was bright, just like her teeth! He looked quickly to his left and saw... no one. Oh well, he thought. There were many on the left who needed to be schooled in the ways of Rush and righteousness. He would prevail, he would use the power of the letter limit until all on the left were vanquished.. or at least had moved from his neighborhood.

     Posted by ficheye at 07/09/2009 @ 11:55am

133. Posted by ficheye at 07/09/2009 @ 11:55am

     Now, now...that's not fair.

     Supposedly SJCHER is in his early 50s (nearly missed getting his chance to fight in Vietnam and win it...same as Rush and Cheney)....so he wouldn't be at a Chucky Cheese...

     it'd be an Arby's....heheh

     Posted by Mask at 07/09/2009 @ 12:12pm

134. Posted by ficheye at 07/09/2009 @ 11:55am | ignore this person | warn this person

     creative

     Posted by emile duBois at 07/09/2009 @ 3:42pm

135. Posted by ficheye at 07/09/2009 @ 11:55am

     Brilliant!

     Posted by PhilMcCrevice at 07/09/2009 @ 4:06pm

136. "It is quite a feat for Palin that she is able to inspire such spittle spewing fury among those on the left -- I don't remember Huckabee, or Ron Paul, or Mitt Romney, or McCain bringing out this sort of anger and stupidity in posters such as this."

     Posted by J. Saxon at 07/09/2009 @ 09:49am

     I agree on her polarization potential.

     Disagree on how that will work out for Repubs.

     Posted by schnellerheinz at 07/09/2009 @ 6:43pm

137. Posted by ficheye at 07/09/2009 @ 11:55am

     Ha!

     Too funny!

     Posted by koroviev at 07/09/2009 @ 10:05pm

138. Back in the summer of 2008 a few months before the convention whining leftist feminists were going on CNN and even Fox News bitterly complaining that Hillary Clinton lost the Democratic nomination because of sexism. Their heads were in the clouds because they could not see thru the fog that the reason Clinton lost was because she ran a horribly inept campaign.

     Obama won far and square and his campaignwas never sexist or condescending in any way to Clinton. The Feminists, in their own way, were as inept as the McCain people were in choosing Palin.

     The McCain staff must have watched these women and thought they could get a leg up on Obama by choosing a woman as his running mate. The problem was not that there are no qualified Republican women McCain could have chosen. The problem was that they were all pro-choice which would have caused a walkout at their convention, so McCain's inept staff chose the most unqualified, inexperienced bimbo they could find in Sarah Palin who became a deserved mockery nationwide. If the Republican party chooses this bimbo to oppose Obama in 2012 Obama will become the first President to ever win with seventy percent of the vote.

     In a time of war in Iraq and Afganistan, the economy tanking, and Iran rushing to build a nuclear weapon, choosing Palin was a disgrace and an extremely stupid and dangerous thing to do. The people who chose her made what could have turned out to be a catastrophic disaster for our country. Thank God Obama won and spared us all from Sarah Palin.

     Posted by mjkoch at 07/10/2009 @ 08:02am

139. BTW, I've run Palin's speech through an Palinese/English translation program...

     and here's why she resigned-

     "It's costing the people of Alaska millions of dollars to investigate why we need more people like Trig who's learned from the troops that they need to play point guard to stop Obama's policies."

     Simple enough to understand, isn't it?

     Posted by Mask at 07/10/2009 @ 08:11am

140. I think I feel a little more like I do now than I did when I first got here. Did I get that right?

     I mean, only Katie Couric could misunderstand that juggernaut of logic.

     Posted by ficheye at 07/10/2009 @ 4:52pm