The American Spectator

drudge ette obama| 7.6.09 @ 7:05AM

I remain unsure whether Sarah Palin is right person to run in 2012, but she was more experienced than Obama.

I am sure of the following:
1. The press and progressive politicos have deliberately attacked Palin for the sole purpose to destroy her electability.
2. Palin's attackers have used foul methods which would have been unthinkable if levied against a liberal black or liberal woman.
3. David Letterman would cry like a baby if someone went after him and his family like they have against Sarah Palin. In fact, he couldn't handle the backlash he got when he made the so-called jokes about Palin. How many times did he try to explain it was a joke. Hint, Dave, jokes are funny.
4. Vanity Fair is in the tank for Obama, another great reason not to buy the magazine. Read it for free.
5. Maureen Dowd is about to join the "dead fish floating with the flow club" of angry- mean people against Sarah Palin. Can that woman smile?
6. Palin is far prettier and a better dresser than Obama's wife. This is probably what bothers Maureen Dowd.

Bob| 7.6.09 @ 7:08AM

RSM -- Much of the criticism of Palin has been done to personify the Republican party as backwards, uneducated, and unknowledgeable. Both Dems and moderates chose her as the face of the party. The rabid nature of her supporters only aggravated this perception. As polling has proved, there were many of us who were initially interested in this governor, but became disenchanted when we actually listened to her and saw her extreme lack of knowledge. If you are not a social conservative, like many socially moderate Republicans, there is no reason to love Sarah Palin. In fact, you become embarrassed that she is representative of the "best" the party can present. That's why much of the criticism of Palin came from Republicans.

If Palin were a smart, knowledgeable person, people would not have used her to personify the party. Historically, I believe that she will have done more to make the Republican party smaller than almost any other person besides Bush. I'm sure social conservatives will call me names for this view, but that is also indicative of the hatred and closed minds of the extreme right.

Those of us who remain fiscal conservatives, will look for a Republican candidate who does not have extreme social views and believes in a larger tent.

Paul Bunker| 7.6.09 @ 7:09AM

Sarah is so typical American and so real that she scares the feces out of democrats in particular and politicians in general. She is basically a sensible person, honest, and an extremely rare quality public servant.

She could take the money, relax and enjoy life with her fine family. But I'll wager she will be back, driving the typical pols, democrats and republicrats alike absolutely nutty!

Appleby| 7.6.09 @ 7:22AM

Sarah Palin now becomes a private citizen and as her attorney reminds her tormentors, the slander and filth spewed by the likes of Maureen Dowd now become actionable. A couple of really big lawsuits for defamation of character against the Times in general and Dowd in particular, and those like her, will show people out here in the hustings that it is possible to fight back, and the Sarah Palin cohort will increase in numbers and in power.

Right now it seems that the King Zero juggernaut is unstoppable. Mrs. Palin can, as a private citizen, show the wavering citizens currently under relentless attack as *traitors to the planet* for not supporting the antichrist Obama and his thugs that the largest majority in the world is still the individual with principles who will not be moved.

Fight back, people. Watch Mrs. Palin to see how it can be done.

Fred| 7.6.09 @ 7:22AM

Better she just simply retire, or, at the most, do what she can to continue the cleaning up of Alaskan politics/garbage.
To do otherwise?
The media would kill her -- and the extreme right would use her with its anti-Choice message. She sure doesn't appear to be masochistic, does she?
She doesn't need it.
And, is Ed Rollins an opportunistic whore? Or what?

Big J| 7.6.09 @ 7:43AM

Sarah is the anti-politician. That drives the left absolutely bonkers. She is not "highly educated" as Bob states above, but she is smart. She's strong and independent, which negates the need for "women's rights groups". And she has principals, a quality not often found in the world of politics.

I think that a lot of people can't get a grip on her because she is exactly the opposite of the "conventional politician". That makes her very dangerous to the status quo. That is the reason for the continued attacks.

RSM has done the best job analyzing the situation that I've seen yet.

Ryan| 7.6.09 @ 8:09AM

Two things come to mind on her resignation:

1. Lisa Murkowski (sp?) is vulnerable as a target in the primaries. It's probably the better political move for Palin if she stays in politics.

2. She trusts her Lt. Governor Sean Parnell, and it's actually not a bad move, if he is capable, to allow him to serve the remainder of her term and get some experience in the tank if he wants to run on his own.

Scott C| 7.6.09 @ 8:10AM

I take Sarah Palin at her word. It would be irresponsible for her as governor to remain in office while relentless, scurrilous and unfounded attacks against her, merely for existing, are wasting taxpayers dollars to defend. The state government cannot function if its resources are being used to counter frivolous accusations against the governor, rather than the business of the state.

I admire Sarah Palin. And I do not get the vitriol hurled against her. She's just a small town girl who made good. What's the problem with that?

Oh, yeah, that's right, John McCain and the Republican establishment. I could not and did not vote for the man. All he's ever done is make a career out of criticizing conservatives and making deals with liberals. Palin drew monster crowds and gave him at least 20 points in the election. Without her, he would have been slaughtered.

So for him to allow his surrogates to trash her is indefensible and indicative of the total lack of respect he deserves. The same goes for the Republican establishment and its lame pundits. They're all nothing but a bunch of classless jerks and losers.

I supported, campaigned for, contributed to, and voted for the Republican party for 25 years. But I'll never vote for another Republican again, not until the gutless wonders who run the party are driven out.

I'm not going to speculate on Palin's political future. The decision she made was in the best interests of her family and her state.

I will however speculate on the Republican party's future. It will go the way of the Whigs. And good riddance to that.

Louis Jenkins| 7.6.09 @ 8:37AM

Palin must scare the Left Wing Government run newsmedia out its proverbial trousers. I have yet to hear or read one of the blabbermouthed reporters state: “Thanks goodness, she’s gone!” Instead they remain beside the bubbling cauldron stirring and agitating the false filth of their trade, speculating what all of this could mean, and predicting further weakening of the Conservative message with her resignation. If Mrs. Palin has decided to become citizen Palin then we should all wish her well, yes including M. Dowd, etc. It is our responsibility to ensure that the Conservative movement continues. It is an idea, a belief, a concept, and is not dependent on any sole spokes person.

St. Thor| 7.6.09 @ 8:44AM

I am sorry to see comments like Bobs which demonstrate total ignorance of Governor Palin's views and political positions. Bob, do your own research and don't rely on liars and frauds in the MSM and Daily Kos to do it for you. You obviously have a computer, use it for doing something other than demonstrating your own ignorance.

Bob| 7.6.09 @ 8:51AM

St. Thor -- so what are Palin's positions (not McCain's), on Afghanistan or what we should do politically with Africa? What about her detailed positions on economic theory? What about her knowledge of the Supreme Court? What about her misstatements about the Constitution? Please show me her position papers on these issues BEFORE she was chosen to be VP. If you can't, then I would look in the mirror for signs of ignorance.

--| 7.6.09 @ 8:51AM

Yeah -- good point (above) concerning Lisa Murkowski. She's been a mediocre (at best) senator - - lots of room for improvement there, but it shouldn't be Palin's route; she should remain in The Great Land and remain sane, rather than subject herself to media assasination.

blackelkspeaks| 7.6.09 @ 9:11AM

I have perused the Internet with especial interest since Sarah Palin's announcement last Friday. I have noted that many of the "conservative" blogs that I frequent (Powerline, Hot Air, American Spectator, National Review, et. al.) and other venues (FOX, etc.) have found no end of fault with her decision and action. In reading and hearing the "conservative" punditocracy bloviate and palaver on this event (Goldberg, Krauthammer, Hinderaker, Noonan, Parker, etc.) I could not help but notice that the same gang of intellectualoid asshats that foisted Rudy McRomney on the Republican base last year continues to do their repugnant dirty work to dishearten and destroy whatever remains of the conservative movement. In my mind, these east coast belt-way "elites", the sneering and sniveling representatives of the Ivy-league mentality, are truly blind to the damage their idiocy has done and is doing to this country. Although they label themselves "conservatives", in my mind they are no better than the worst statist Democrat, and, in truth, are made worse by the malevolent harm they do as a fifth-column that operates within conservative circles. If these jackasses believe that the future of the Republican Party is in the hands of abject charlatans like the specially priveleged, Democrat-fellow traveler, mush-. mouthed RINO, Rudy McRomneys of this country, then last November's election will truly constitute the death of American liberty, as the Republicans will likely lose any future election. Sarah Palin was, and is, middle America's attempt to return this government to its Constitutional roots and to prevent our unravelling and degeneration into a Marxist tyranny. It may, indeed, be time to consider the possibility that this country cannot be saved and will likely be torn apart into enclaves of liberty and hell-holes of tyranny. The future could very well be a separation, with those who value liberty rallying around the Sarah Palins in the red states against the enemies of freedom in the blue states. And by enemies of freedom, I include the "conservative" intellectualoids who are too downright stupid to see what is as plain as the nose on their face. That is, the slickly marketed but squishily repugnant Rudy McRomney types that they find so appealing will NEVER get the average American's loyalty or commitment.

In fact, I'd rather these "conservative" SOBs (Powell, McCain, etc.) just get it over with and declare themselves Democrats outright. Better to see the enemy starkly identified, than to see so many of those in the conservative cause confused about their true nature.

J. Scott Hamilton| 7.6.09 @ 9:12AM

I'm an ex-TAS staffer from way back, and there's no way a pol like Palin would have received a column inch of favorable attention during mid-80s. This lady is an airhead, and i challenge anyone to watch the entire 20 min press conference of her resignation without feeling pity for her. We cannot have blind allegiance to a politician just because they're in the GOP.

She should be mocked as the nincompoop that she is. We can do better. If she's the GOP's savior then we'll be out of power for a long time.

Siegfried X| 7.6.09 @ 9:18AM

Sarah Palin in 2008, talking about Hillary Clinton's "whining" about media attacks:

Sarah Palin: Fair or unfair"and I do think that it's a more concentrated criticism that Hillary gets on so many fronts; I think that's unfortunate. But fair or unfair, I think she does herself a disservice to even mention it, really. You have to plow through that and know what you're getting into. I say this with all due respect to Hillary Clinton and to her experience and to her passion for changing the status quo. But when I hear a statement like that coming from a women candidate with any kind of perceived whine about that excess criticism or a sharper microscope put on her, I think, man, that doesn't do us any good. Women in politics, women in general wanting to progress this country, I don't think it bodes well for her, a statement like that. Because, again, fair or not fair it is there. I think it's reality and it's a given, people just accept that she's going to be under a sharper microscope. So be it. Work harder, prove to yourself to an even greater degree that you're capable, that you're going to be the best candidate. That's what she wants us to believe at this point. So it bothers me a little bit to hear her bring that attention to herself on that level.

SC Mike| 7.6.09 @ 9:18AM

RSM -
Thanks to Instapundit I ran across an interesting thread about Palin hatred on a Feminist blog. Violet, the proprietress, coined the phrase "Designated Hate Receptacle" to describe the way that Palin's been treated. It's apt.

For the most part the discussion is fair and quite interesting, but there are a lot of terms in the feminist glossary that are quite new to me and explain why I would not want to hang around such a crowd. On the whole it's thoughtful, but does take a bit of time to wade through, and we've all not much time for wading. I recommend that you make an exception in this case.
http://www.reclusiveleftist.com/2009/07/04/feminists-and-the-mystery-of-sarah-palin/

Big J| 7.6.09 @ 9:21AM

Blackelk:

Excellent rant, spot on.

Tom not rabid| 7.6.09 @ 9:24AM

I find the belief that she should sue anybody distressing. People speculate over Obama's connection to Reszko, they find his membership in Rev. Wright's Church a bad thing, they even speculate about his Birth Certificate.

A "Palin Precedet" would silence voices on the Right also.

Nothing brings out the self-pity in Republicans like Sarah Palin.

If you don't like our laws and Bill of Rights, try China. They have a polite internet.

anonymous| 7.6.09 @ 9:26AM

Bob--if you are going to discuss misstatements about the Constitution consider Biden in the VP debates saying that the powers of the VP are clearly defined in Section 1 of the Constitution. The American public elected him when he clearly hadn't even read his job description (the Executive branch is outlined in Section 2).

I'm not defending Palin's lack of knowledge on Supreme Court cases or other issues, but safe to say we've elected worse...

owyheewine| 7.6.09 @ 9:30AM

There are a lot more conservatives out in flyover country that are "undereducated", and don't believe that the intelligence of the world is centered in the modern axis of evil (the Boston/NY/DC corridor). Whether Sarah Palin becomes the voice of the new silent majority, or it is someone else, we will be heard, and very much need to regain control of the Republican Party from the beltway establishment types. I kind of remember another undereducated simpleton politician named Reagan.

Bob| 7.6.09 @ 9:40AM

anonymous -- I agree with you totally on Biden. In fact, I would judge Palin to be brighter than Biden. The difference is that Biden has run for President, has experience with the judiciary and foreign policy and has positions on issues. I believe Sarah lacks both discipline and intellectual curiosity. She is neither a student nor interested in policy. Thus, she would be far more dangerous than Biden at the helm. I would have voted for McCain/Romney as Romney is extremely bright and successful and actually completed his term as governor.

Siegfried X| 7.6.09 @ 9:44AM

A lot of conservatives talk endlessly about "liberty". Yet they are totally silent about Sarah Palin's attempt to censor the entire internet and news media, preventing criticism of herself.

That is the biggest problem with the Republican Party and especially conservatives, that we never criticize each other any more. It's a totally tribal, siege mentality, that "they" are totally evil, and no one on our side can do anything wrong.

Democratic blogs and media are totally different. They constantly get involved in primary elections and criticize moderate candidates to keep their party from moving to the center. They also run unqualifed candidates out of their party.

Aaron| 7.6.09 @ 9:44AM

Why I like Governor Palin... She would have hand delivered the Declaration to the King. Would Rudy, Romney or Gingrich? Surly not Obama. Its time for a mainstream American, not a career politician.

Bob| 7.6.09 @ 9:44AM

owyheewine -- Reagan may have been undereducated, but he was smart enough to realize that fact and spent a huge amount of time learning the issues and developing positions. He had been developing these positions for years. In other words, he did have intellectual curiosity. You should never conflate Reagan with Palin.

And by the way, you are NOT the silent majority. Social conservatives only represent about 19% of the voting public. The silent majority voted for Obama. It was southern whites that llke Palin.

Bob| 7.6.09 @ 9:49AM

Aaron -- please define "mainstream American". I was under the mistaken impression that we are all Americans and that all of our votes counted equally. And please link to some quantitative evidence to prove your point. The vast majority of people in the U.S. live in coastal urban centers like New York, Miami, Los Angeles and San Francisco. Therefore, they must be centers for "mainstream Americans".

Siegfried X| 7.6.09 @ 9:51AM

"She would have hand delivered the Declaration to the King."

What if the King called her children names? Sarah would have run away and quit, like she did in Alaska.

SC Mike| 7.6.09 @ 9:53AM

Bob and J. Scott should start wearing a cup whenever they leave the house.

The old “incurious” attack remains a hoot, something to throw out when even the kitchen sink is gone. Biden may have experience with the judiciary and foreign policy, but he has been wrong in every policy pronouncement he’s made about anything, to include the weather.

Obama may be clever at moving behind the scenes with his Chicago thug tactics, but he’s proved inept at taking on the House, the Senate, the Russkies, the Arab world, radical Islam, and a host of others. Curious, no?

If Palin does decide to more forward, she will have lots of support from outside the beltway. I suspect that her advisors will not be from the typical beltway crowd.

D. Smith| 7.6.09 @ 10:03AM

Not really sure what Mr. McCain's point is here. I guess he's saying that we don't know why she resigned. That much is true. It is also true, as Philip Klein writes on this website, that Palin is no Reagan. Perhaps she's embarking on a new career as a commentator, but I have hard time seeing voters elect a candidate that wouldn't finish the job.

james23| 7.6.09 @ 10:08AM

terrific piece. The reaction of the pundits is the story here, and the moral of the story is simple: never, ever, ever let any pundit tell you who you should support, who can win, who is "serious," etc. All of that pundit crap is worth less than zero.

Mimi Evans Winship| 7.6.09 @ 10:11AM

SHE’S STUNNING THE COCKTAIL CIRCUIT

There is ranting and shrieking on the Left.
The timid Right has gotten the vapors.
I’m sipping champagne in red, white and blue.
While watching their convoluted capers!

Mimi Evans Winship

Tim| 7.6.09 @ 10:15AM

Maybe this really is some brilliant play, a cunning strategy that will catapult Palin into the White House in 2012 and historians will study her strategems for decades to come.
But really, I listened to the live feed and all those quacking ducks in the background did not stirke me as a good omen.

On The Mark| 7.6.09 @ 10:18AM

Bob's comment about looking for a fiscal conservative not wrapped in social conservatism is spot on. The last thing our nation needs is a social conservative in high office. The first thing our nation needs is a fiscal conservative.

Aside even from that, Palin is simply erratic and more than a bit unbalanced. We dodged a bullet with Sanford and with Palin.

Aaron| 7.6.09 @ 10:18AM

SC Mike,
"If Palin does decide to more forward, she will have lots of support from outside the beltway"
We were talking about this last night on this site, it appears that the Gov has a lot of support from Matalin, typical beltway yes, but she has distanced herself from the White House insiders since early in G.W.s first term. A very lethal weapon she would be. I would be very interested to see who Palin has surrounded herself with lately.

Interested Conservative| 7.6.09 @ 10:19AM

Nice series of projections, Bob. Don't let your ignorance of her ignorance stand in the way of calling her ignorant.

She sure takes the focus off of the POTUS, doesn't she?

Hermit| 7.6.09 @ 10:28AM

Take a short look back at the choices presented to us for Pres in the last election by both parties. Look at what we put in office.
Hacks and retreads on both side. McCain, Clinton, Edwards, Romney, Biden, Richards, Dodd all of them card carrying dinosaurs of the political class. All of them boast some level of esteemed education, all of them claim great experience. All of them gave us what we have today, an unresponsive out of control government dedicated to the proposition that all officials should get reelected at any cost.
Talk to me about knowledge of economic theory! These fools spend our money on things we do not want or need to get reelected. Just consider energy policy as an indicator. Every politician for the last 40 years has talked about the danger of dependence on foreign oil, and then voted for policies that increase that dependency.
I was attracted to Palin last summer because she was not of Washington. Is she our best hope I really don't know but I trust her more than any of the rest because she has not been infected by the putrid virus that is DC.
If we do not at every level start sending Citizen Legislators that look first to the constitution rather than the interest groups that sent them our Republic is lost.
I am convinced that we must do everything we can to remove as many incumbents as we can. We need to adopt and embrace the idea that if any candidate has been in DC for more than 4 years are by that fact alone disqualified. WE ARE TERM LIMITS!
Ask yourself honestly, we are a nation of 300 plus million people, are these fools the best that we can find?
Sarah was refreshing in the sense that she had not yet mastered double speak. While she may not possess an Ivey League education she has a reverence for the constitution and common sense. We need honest leaders who are focused on our founding principles and the constitution first and everything else second; Leaders willing to trust us enough to tell us the truth about the issues facing the country and propose common sense solutions for our consideration.
Sarah may or may not be that politician, but compared to much of the rest of the crop of currently identifiable contenders we could do a lot worse.
Government at every level is growing too powerful and too intrusive. I am not looking for a wonk who can discuss the intricacies of policy, I am looking for someone who can direct a jackhammer and bulldozer the create vast green areas in Dc where agencies now stand in an determined effort to devolved power from Washington back to the people and the states.

Vern Crisler| 7.6.09 @ 10:33AM

There's not a single Republican that could stand against Sarah in the next Presidential primaries. That's why establishment Republicans stupidly trash her.

I do hope she takes the time to familiarize herself more thoroughly with national matters, so she'll be ready to go in 2012, but I can't think of any other Republican who even comes close to Sarah as a candidate. They'll find that out if they're stupid enough to go up against her next time around.

She brings charisma and excitement to the Republican party not seen since Ronald Reagan.

Bob| 7.6.09 @ 10:33AM

Interested -- Interesting comment with no substance or logic. No wonder you like Palin -- there are lots of similarities between the two of you. However, you are entitled to your ad hominem attacks -- it suits you.

Aaron| 7.6.09 @ 10:33AM

Right on Hermit

Tim| 7.6.09 @ 10:45AM

Old Democrat political Hacks fear Obama much less then old Republican Hacks fear Palin.

That's because Obama can be controlled by the Chicago political machine that created him.

Palin on the other hand, as others have stated, scares the living pooh out of her own party to say nothing of those in the opposition party because she is actually what you see in front of you........

and that and "politics as usual" is about as far apart as Pluto is to Earth.

"If" she can rally the masses despite the Republican and Democrat political establishment that has united against her she will become President, especially if the over all ecomomy keeps sliding well into 2011 as it no doubt will.

At the end of the day, the common folks are sick and tired of the political double speak and the elitist attitudes that come out of the political swamp in DC.

But the elitist can't see this because their nose is too far up in the air.

jerryofva| 7.6.09 @ 10:48AM

The simplest explanation is the best explanation. I think the Letterman affair drove home the point that the Democratic Party controlled media would continue to attack her family and she is not going to allow that to happen. She just doesn't want to subject her family to that kind of abuse. So MSM has accomplished its mission of destroying a viable Republican candidate.

Bob:

Your attempted punditry shows that you are a product of the anti-Palin meme generation industry. Palin has already shown a greater understanding of the economy and international relations then President Barak “Herbert Hoover” Husain Obama.
Consider this: He is on the wrong side in Iran and Honduras. His Middle East narrative of Palestinian victimhood is shared by nobody in the region. (Saudi Arabia has already worked out a deal with Israel should they need to deal with Iran.) His economic policies are a disaster and are pushing the country into a second New Deal driven depression (At least FDR was testing a new theory.)

narciso| 7.6.09 @ 10:50AM

Sarah Palin, has all the issue positions, we say we wany, strong on defense, fought for prudent budgeting, for the life issue, the oil pipeline, and opening up ANWR, gun rights, sensible judges,
responsible immigration policy. Yet she called out
Barak Obama, and reaped a whirlwind of lies. The
Exxon right and the Alinsky left, used the ethics law as a cudgel against her, and she went into debt to the tune of a half a million dollars, Even though
all these charges have been found groundless there's no reason another 15-30 couldn't be generated over the course of her term, She set up a legal defense fund, but still couldn't cover enough of that balance. It would be a sad commentary if this is the lesson we take from this

Biden has been wrong on every issue that one cares to mention, he was against the original Alaska pipeline, for FISA (which handcuffed our government agencies, and led to September 11th)
for the partition of Iraq, against Bork, Alito, Roberts, the Contras, the deployment of the Pershings, thought the US and France 'had kicked Hezbollah out of Lebanon'. so I find it's a frightening prospect that he's one 'heartbeat away from thr presidency.

Basil Plumley| 7.6.09 @ 10:51AM

Bob projecting?

Let's see,
In the past 48 hours we had to educate Bob about the duties of the VP with regard to the Senate. We have had to educate Bob in the nuances of privacy enumerated in the Constitution.
Now, our presumably Hahvard educated Bob pontificates about the evil Social Conservatives. He now claims that Palin lacks discipline and intellectual curiousity. This, coming from a guy who posted so much venomous tripe about Palin, he made Letterman blush.

The odd thing about Bob is that he claims to be an original thinker but just about all of his ideas come from other sources. If Bob were a keen observer of politics, he would know that Palin was elected as a reformer, a believer in limited government. That means cutting out government corruption and spending abuses.

No, someone told Bob she was a Social Conservative and Bob ran with it, posting about witch doctors, book burning, and other lies. Bob is a good little Stalinist; he always accuses others what he is guilty of.
Intellectual curiousity? Bob read who and what she is rather depend on the opinion of others. Show some intellectual curiousity.
Lack of discipline-You can't help yourself when it comes to Sarah Palin. You even broke your promise to never post on a Quin thread just so you can amaze the world with your obtuse stupidity and lies concerning Palin. Lack of discipline indeed.

Why do you have such a problem with a woman on top? I'd bet someone in your household may be a little frustrated and disappointed with you.

notoobama| 7.6.09 @ 10:54AM

Sarah Palin is EVERYTHING that these harpes want to be, but never will. Ugly Maureen Dowd.

Ran| 7.6.09 @ 10:55AM

That comment about looking for a fiscal conservative not wrapped in social conservatism is [silly]. The last thing our nation needs is another [RINO] in high office.

For starters, Palin is well admired amongst Libertarians precisely because she 's socially tolerant. Hardly the big, scary social ignoramus certain lightweights make of her.

Bob the inconsequential Boob| 7.6.09 @ 10:56AM

Seriously, Bob accusing someone of ad hominem attacks?

"said the frying-pan to the kettle, get away, blackbreech"

Theresa| 7.6.09 @ 11:00AM

Responding to:
Siegfried X

If all Governor Palin had to do is deal with the negative press then you would have a good point. I do not remember when she made that statement, could you reference it? Anyway, if that is and was all she was dealing with you woudl have a good point. But that is not all she was dealing with. She was dealing with frivilous ethics charges, all of since have been proven to either wrong or not having anything to do with violating ethics. The other point is that her family, her kids were also dealing with blatently defaming press. It is okay for a parent to protect their child, especially when that child holds no bearing on any political outcomes or decision.

Finally when has that ever in history been done to any other politician? Does anyone have a memory of this? Any also, there were many reason why she stepped down - not just 'bad press'.

By golly I think we may have found our Reardan.

ds80| 7.6.09 @ 11:04AM

J. Scott Hamilton: "I'm an ex-TAS staffer from way back"

Well thank goodness TAS had the good sense to throw out the garbage long ago. "nincompoop" ... yes, your Pulitzershould arrive real soon.

Dustoff| 7.6.09 @ 11:06AM

She is not "highly educated" as Bob states above
+++++++++++++++++++++++++

Let's see now, just how many times have we heard the same story from the left. Then after checking the left were the real ones who turned out to be (not so smart) Can you say Kerry & Teddy K to start off with.. Plus No-one knows Obama's grades were.
So you lefties. I would really drop the who's smart talk.
It just blows up in your face.

ds80| 7.6.09 @ 11:12AM

Governor Palin scares the Left because she's a confident, principled, white Christian woman. That about sums it up.

Claims of "inexperience" or being "simple minded" are laughably transparent. Two words: Obama. Biden.

Claims of "simple minded

Eric Damon| 7.6.09 @ 11:13AM

Sarah Palin is not liked by political elites on either side of the aisle for one simple reason...she is not like them. That's it, end of sentence.

The political elite have no respect for people who aren't like them because they cannot understand anyone that is different from them. We have a political elite that seeks power for the sake of having power; they have aspired to political prominence all of their lives, and power is the end-all be-all for them. A person like Sarah Palin comes along , a person who runs for office as an outsider, wins, and actually tries to do the business of the voters who elevated her to office and the political elite do not understand that type of mindset. That is foreign to them...a politician that is not caught up in power plays and the perks of politial power must be silenced or discredited because that person shines a light on the shortcomings of the entrenched political class.

As for the GOP, they are thrown by her because she did not follow the established plan that is seen within the Party too often. Start small, bide your time, go along with your Party at all costs, and one day it will be your turn to move up (see Dole, Robert and Elizabeth). Only Mrs. Palin did not take that route; she took on an established, corrupt Party within her state and won. She then took on the challenge of running for VP and gave John McCain his only real chance of keeping the race with Obama close...without having "paid her dues." Add the facts that she didn't seem to care about currying favor with the Washington insider crowd or waste her efforts on making a hostile media like her, and you can see why she didn't fit in with the Party of McCain and Gingrich.

The fact that Palin is not a traditional politician is exactly why the grassroots of the Party took such a liking to her, while the Party establishment...including the people running the McCain-Palin campaign...was at best standoff-ish towards her, and at worst downright hostile. Palin was a unique character in a political world that claims to want "change" but is totally wedded to conformity.

Siegfried X| 7.6.09 @ 11:14AM

"when has that ever in history been done to any other politician?"

You're kidding, right? Several presidents, and some of their first ladies, spent most of their presidencies fighting off scandal charges brought by the other party through "special prosecutors".

Like Bill and Hillary Clinton and the White water investigations, of things that happened before he became president, and that eventually led to his impeachment. The American Spectator and Rush Limbaugh made their businesses and reputations by attacking the Clintons 24 X 7.

President Reagan faced "Iran gate" while the first President Bush had "Iraq gate", since it happened to Republicans too. Even the recent President Bush had to hire a personal lawyer and was questioned under oath by Special Prosecutor Fitzgerald about the leak of the spy's name.

Newt Gingrich came to power by filing dozens of ethics charges and knocking the Democratic speaker out of power. Once he became speaker, Newt himself had dozens of ethics charges filed against him, ended up pleading guilty to some, and was driven from office partially because of that.

Criticism from the media and phony ethics charges are a part of politics. Someone who can't handle them should be in another business.

J. Scott Hamilton| 7.6.09 @ 11:15AM

Wow...I've not been to a Spectator comment board, but I hope those represented here are the vocal minority.

I refuse to accept that just because someone is a republican they reflexively get my backing. I'd love to have her as a neighbor, and possibly running my school district's PTA, but to claim she is fit to lead at a national level is just silly. It's a belief that's not going to be shared by enough other voters to win an office. We can and must do better.

And just to be clear, when i say I was a staffer, I was just that...a right out of college staff assistant--not a writer. My impact on the journal was limited to the twice daily pick-up of mail from the post office.

Bob| 7.6.09 @ 11:18AM

Basil -- your post is full of lies, but really, the vitriol aimed at me? Perhaps I can play the victim just like Sarah and talk about right wing extremist attacks. Hmmm.....

It is clearly you who doesn't understand the duties of the VP -- perhaps you could actually READ the Constitution. There is NOTHING in the Constitution that says the VP sets the agenda of the Senate. Perhaps you can point to a previous recent VP that set the agenda of the Senate? Hmmm.....

Then again, do you really believe there is a privacy right specifically enumerated in the Constitution? You should discuss that with Scalia or Thomas. Hmmm......

Did I ever say Palin wasn't elected as a reformer? She had a history of having a streak of libertarianism, but where did that go when she was running for VP? By the way, given her background, I actually liked her at the beginning for exactly those reasons. She ruined the whole thing by opening her mouth about things she didn't understand. Polls indicate the same thing.

And, Basil, unlike you, I have never hobnobbed with witch doctors, promoted book burning, etc. So how am I accusing her of what I believe in? Hmmmm......

Regarding new ideas, I've consistently promoted an all inclusive flat tax (different from Forbes and anyone else), I've promoted abolishing the income tax on business in favor of a consumption tax just like NOBODY else in the blogs or in D.C., and I've promoted a tiered system of health care insurance that I have not seen elsewhere.

So Basil, continue with your lies and attacks, they only strengthen my position and weaken yours.

And by the way, speaking of hypocrites, I though you were going to ignore me... Hmmmm.....

Hey, Boob, I love ad hominem attacks. Keep them coming....

jerryofva| 7.6.09 @ 11:21AM

Dustoff:

You hit the nail on the head. Ever since Eisenhower/Stevenson the Democrat’s narrative has been that we are so much smarter then the stupid Republicans. The reality has always been that when a Democrat was “more intelligent” then a Republican it didn’t matter since both were pretty bright fellows or the advantage was decisively with the Republican candidate. Eisenhower was as intelligent as Stevenson; Nixon had about 60 IQ points on Kennedy, Johnson and Goldwater were both pretty bright guys. The aforementioned Richard Nixon was also more intelligent then Humphrey and McGovern; I doubt that “nuclear engineer” Jimmy Carter was more intelligent then Ford (BA, University of Michigan, Yale Law School)) or Reagan (He wrote all his radio addresses and the strategy to defeat the Soviet Union can be found in Reagan’s own hand). Bush 41 was more intelligent then Dukakis and probably the equal of Clinton. Bush 43’s academic records and test score were better then both Gore and Kerry, and in the case of Kerry their military test scores indicate that Bush had at least 10 IQ points the famous Vietnam Veteran. President Obama is not particularly brilliant nor is he well read. I suspect we would find that Sarah Palin has higher IQ then our President and despite her narrow book list would not be making the same kind of mistakes in foreign and domestic policy.

Media Matters Bob---| 7.6.09 @ 11:27AM

Bob lost everyones respect (what little he or she had) IMHO to post here when he kept calling the authors "hacks".

Want to see/read a hack? Read the NYT or watch NBC. They may be drowning in the toilet tank by now. Seems they can't keep their respective media properties afloat with the Obambi Schmoopie Fest (NYT meet Carlos Slim, Washington Post---how'd that Salon 25k/fundraiser work out?--Katie Couric---meet lowest ratings---ever----CNN---meet lowest ratings since being called the Chicken Noodle Network).

Then he sourced from Media Matters on another occasion. Media freakin Matters as a source!!!----he truly believes the MSM crap fed him. What an inferiorllectual. When you resort to using a George Soros media source as fact, you've got a credibility problem. Those fools at Media Mutters do such a great job of exposing Conservative Bias in ----Conservative media. It's like going to a basketball game and shocked, shocked I tell you to find them playing----basketball!

He/she deserves to be ignored. Women hate to be ignored more than anything. HeShe will soon be posting things like "Why hasn't anyone responded to my post at blah-blah time!?!?!?" .

Let's give it a try and just say there's a gnat in the room. Or a Rat in My Kitchen.

An Amateur Observer | 7.6.09 @ 11:29AM

I find the whole thing is very sad. I am an amateur observer and I saw in her remarks that the reason she is quiiting is because of all the vulgar attacks on her and her children, So, she has decided not to seek public office ever again. It is too bad, because she would have made a great VP or senator. It is amazing that the punditry has yet to see this. It is these kinds of attacks are the reason why we do not have decent people in office today. It is too bad because we are in vital need of decent people to lead this country again. She will probably do a radio show or do speaking tours.

Tim| 7.6.09 @ 11:34AM

The fact that most former presidents and most politicians are dragged through the mud pile is a no brainer.

That has been the US political game for decades if not since after the civil war.

That said, just because that is the way the political game has been played doesn't mean it has been in the best interst of it's citizens.

Perhaps what we really need is a plain spoken, no BS, get to the bottom line type of person in charge.

Where has politics as usual gotten us?
Where has the MBA's and law degrees from Harvard and Yale gotten us?

So then why not elect some hunter hockey mom with kids that doesn't buy into the rules of the political game to the highest office of the land?

It seems to me that the only people that are afraid of Palin becoming president are the folks that think that their own Pooh doesn't stink.

Samuel af Ugglas| 7.6.09 @ 11:36AM

Why is it, The FBI has shown Mrs. Palin such an interest. Couldn´t FBI make some kind of effort finding The Obama birthcertificate?

Doug Welty| 7.6.09 @ 11:38AM

Friday, July 3, 2009 was the day that fixed terms of office became a relic of the past. Henceforth, the model will be: Serve for as long as you think you can do some good, then step aside for your no. 2 man.

Veep and Lt. Governor picks are going to be more important from now on...

Nick| 7.6.09 @ 11:40AM

Bob,

Why are you commenting on anything?

Until recently you thought the U.S. Constitution, as originally written, gave blacks 3/5 of a vote.

Then you were educated by the fine posters at TAS. But we all know teaching the constitution is not a big priority at Havard.

And you still have the gall to question Gov. Palin's knowledge of our federal government?

You seem to have a lot of time on your hands, why don't YOU buy some books and educate yourself on how our Constitutional Republic is supposed to function?

Paul| 7.6.09 @ 11:51AM

Nobody should be writing off Sarah Palin. Instead, take a look at what Ronald Reagan was doing in 1977 after Jimmy Carter took office, as well as the state of the Republican party. Then take a look at Palin's facebook page. The parallels are wonderful. Liberals will step up the attacks because they will be very very scared. Go Sarah!

Liberal Reader| 7.6.09 @ 12:06PM

McCain, who mocked her son Trig?

I'd like some evidence.

Name me one person in print or public life who mocked that child.

I defy you.

Here's the reality.

From Hillary Clinton, Sarah Palin learned the value of being the victim. She was protesting being the victim of "vicious attacks" from the moment she stepped onto the national stage, and she's playing that card now.

Sure, David Lettermen made a stupid, shallow, and cruel joke. Sure, some in the media overdid questions about her role as a mother. And sure, there was way too much about her daughter Bristol.

But most of that has died down or gone away. And it is an absolute lie that anyone has "mocked" her son Trig.

Again: I challenge you to provide some evidence. A link, the name of a publication -- a name. Anything. Name me one person who has publicly "mocked" her son with Down's Syndrome.

Now, in addition, I'd like the name of one credentialed journalist or one Democratic politician that has made "vicious attacks" on Palin's family.

Most of the tasteless jokes and remarks, which I admitted above, were uttered by foolish entertainers or bloggers. But they are routinely attributed to "the media and Democrats," as though Mike Wallace, Barack Obama, David Lettermen, and Bill Mahr were all a part of some Palin-hating club with identical agendas.

I know many of your readers believe just that, but I don't have any respect for someone supposedly contributing serious political commentary who does.

Siegfried X| 7.6.09 @ 12:07PM

Sarah Palin will run for vice-president. In other words, she will give speeches, write books, etc. to drive up her approval rating, but won't campaign for president in 2012.

She doesn't have the will power, ability, or knowledge to win the presidency in 2012. She won't want to submit herself to learning things, handling tough interviews, and spending years on the road getting ready for the primaries.

Siegfried X| 7.6.09 @ 12:10PM

"From Hillary Clinton, Sarah Palin learned the value of being the victim"

Yes, and she also learned that from John McCain, her mentor. McCain deflects all questions by calling them attacks on his POW status. Sarah Palin hides behind her children.

That's actually the oldest trick in the book. Someone rips someone off in a business deal and says "I did it for the children".

Big J| 7.6.09 @ 12:14PM

Dustoff, don't mistake my statement for one of attack. I love Sarah. I intended to point out that she is not "ivy league" educated, but very smart. There is a difference between being intelligent and smart (Bob is a perfect example. Sorry Bob, couldn't resist. All those "Hmmmm...'s you listed). I would prefer to be smart.

By the way, I didn't have a clue about running a business 7 years ago when I started. I learned the hard way, many things that you wouldn't get taught in college. I believe running everything works like that. She has actually run things, unlike our poser in chief. Talk about on the job training. Unfortunately, he is not willing to actually learn how to do it right, he thinks he already knows.

Would I prefer Palin in the White House over what we have right now?

You betcha!

Too bad we are being held hostage by the media. It might be different.

I promise you that Sarah would bow to no one, nor would she blame this great country for the woes of the world.

Now that's change you can believe in.

georgepa| 7.6.09 @ 12:22PM

Ok, let's say Sarah Palin does not like the limelight on her family and made the move to protect them, so tabloid stuff like the Levi Johnston family bashing Palin and Levi contending that the "blissful marriage" announcement for "the fall" was nothing but a lie never sees the national day of light. Then the announcement would make a lot of sense. Out of politics, nobody cares. But, why then contend that higher office, even the presidency, is the calling here? If that is indeed true, then the announcement makes no sense. Certainly, a majority of Alaskans don't agree with Palin's decision, and that is after all the constituency she made a contract with, gave an oath to.

Secondly, does anybody REALLY buy the explanation that once someone decided to not seek re-election (say, for president or Senator or governor) they immediately, upon that personal realization, become lame ducks in their office. She is barely half-way through her first term and is NOW a lame duck who can't do anything meaningful for her constituents? That seems absolutely ridiculous. She needed to finish out the term, she gave the people of Alaska her oath. If she indeed got tired of Alaska politics (and infighting, opponents, whatever) then she does not belong in politics. Not finishing her term, instead quitting, means that she is not cut out for the political stage on any level. Nothing wrong with that, most of us aren't, which is why we are citizens. Just don't fool yourselves into believing that there is any higher office on the horizon.

Bob| 7.6.09 @ 12:22PM

Nick, do you really want to challenge me on the basis of knowledge? First you guys accuse the MSM of misrepresenting Palin's remarks, then you misrepresent Obama's remarks, and finally misrepresent my remarks. When I misrepresent Palin's remarks, it is in response to dumb statements about her or similar remarks made against others. It is to show the absurdity of such things. If you lack the intelligence to separate reflective parody from serious factual analysis, that is clearly your problem.

If you want plain spoken, unsophisticated people to be President, then I question your logic. I thought we wanted the best and brightest for the most important job in our country -- not a Paris Hilton/Brad Pitt wannabe.

Bob| 7.6.09 @ 12:30PM

Big J -- Palin is so smart she achieved a "D" in macroeconomics. Imagine what she would be like if she weren't so smart. She's exactly the one who would understand the effect of derivatives and swaps on the economic fallout of the housing bubble. Thanks for providing the laugh of the day....

Nick| 7.6.09 @ 12:31PM

Bob,

And if I wanted unsophisticated, pseudointellectuals for president, I'd vote for you, Bob.

p.s. You weren't being humorous, you truly didn't know what the 3/5 clause meant. Which is stunning for someone with all your book learnin'. You betcha' !

somnolence| 7.6.09 @ 12:42PM

Bob, trot out the same old, same old mold like last year's McCain in the form of Crist, Huckabee, Romney, Gingrich, etc. and a substantil number of us won't even get out of the bed to vote on election day. Sarah Palin's timing is just right.

John II| 7.6.09 @ 12:50PM

Bob: Haven't we already been through this one? You keep misusing the term "ad hominem." So does everyone else, but you're the only one who claims to be highly educated.

Let's go through it again. All arguments are "ad hominem" because all arguments take measure of the interlocutor along with the issue. Our interest in "issues" always begins with some measure of our experience of others. For example, before I rejected socialism many decades ago, I was first taken with an impression of socialists written by George Orwell (in "The Road to Wigan Pier") which I found stunning because it exactly matched my own impression of such people in the rarefied atmosphere of academia where I make my living.

I subsequently accumulated abundant reason to reject socialism on moral, intellectual, and, of course, economic grounds--but I wouldn't have been as alert and receptive to such reason if I hadn't first been revolted by the kinds of people who call themselves socialists.

My example is a bit bunt and cursory, but perhaps can be applied to the discovery of more subtle instances that crowd our experience of the world every waking moment. The point is, reason and analysis and the rest of it are merely tools we apply to achieve more coherence and clarity in the flashes of understanding that come to us in a pre-rational way. Any argument we make against another's take on an issue is going to be tied up in a measure of the other's character. In that sense, all arguments are ad hominem.

The ancients, perhaps because they were less distracted from probbing deeper into such matters, understood the fundamentally ad hominem character of disputation. A man of loose morals, for example, was considered suspect in his political views since his bad character rendered him less capable of clear thinking.

This is why so many of your own points are laced with dismissive comments about the character, background, education, and so forth, of the rest of us. Sarah Palin's political judgment and economic views are taken to be suspect because Sarah Palin as an airhead and a fool. Your points rest on your judgment of her character--a judgment which you've arrived at by whatever field of experience you bring to bear on the discussion. Whether or not that judgment is flawed, the judgment itself is ad hominem--and a necessary ground for disputation. Perhaps this is also why you never register much interest when others accuse you of arguing ad hominem.

The technical term for what you keep miscalling "ad hominem" is "ad personam." The former is necessary to argument; the latter is mere abuse disconnected from the reflective measure of character.

Bob| 7.6.09 @ 12:51PM

somnolence -- I agree on most of the names, but Romney is extremely bright, understands economics, but does not understand how to speak to social conservatives. He would have been better at handling the economy than Obama (who is better than McCain). Yes, he does have the charisma of wallpaper and is a Mormon, but I ran across him in school and you won't find a smarter candidate. His weakness is that his desire to succeed is greater than his devotion to principle -- the textbook definition of a pragmatist. If he would stop trying to be someone he isn't, and be the pragmatist he was at Bain, as Governor, and at the Olympics, he'd be dynamite. By the way, I would have voted for McCain if he had picked Romney -- they would have made a good team.

Basil Plumley| 7.6.09 @ 12:52PM

Bob--

You are a one man riot. The VP is the president of the Senate and can certainly run the agenda if he/she chooses. Tell me where in the Constitution it says he can't. Perhaps, you should read up on your John C Calhoun.

Umm ...... you have the right of privacy from unreasonable search and seizure as well as self incrimination.
Of course, if the Founding Fathers could have anticipated an obtuse moron like you, they probably would have installed the words privacy as well as the parameters of privacy.

BTW Bob, the book burning was proven to be a lie. It's funny how the list of books presumably to be burned contained books not written at the time when Palin was Mayor.
Witch doctors? Perhaps, you can regale us with that story. There are witch doctors? Do the evil Social Cons know about this?

Bob, I never discussed your ideas. If you want to discuss policy, fine, but if you want to take cheap political shots at Palin, be prepared to defend yourself.
You have a hard time arguing your way out of a paper bag as it is. Then again, I have to suffer fools, like you and Siegfried, gladly.

Bob, you remind me of Daddy Bush. When you said I shall never post on a Quin article was there an expiration date for that promise?
Yep, like a moth to the flame goes Bob......

jerryofva| 7.6.09 @ 12:52PM

Bob:

So she got D in macroeconomics (please show your source) what of it? Undergraduate macro is generally just a simple minded explanation of the fatally flawed Keynesian economic theory. Mastering the subject is like mastering error. (Before you bloviate, at one time in my life I was an Assistant Professor of Economics at a Big Ten university so you probably don't want to get into a theoretical argument with me on the subject.)

Your model of the Presidency is that of the master mechanic who goes in and micromanages the country and the world rather then someone who administers the Federal Government. The President shouldn’t have to understand the minutiae of how the financial system works. He/she only needs to appoint people who understand these things and can clearly explain it. Palin has already demonstrated her ability to make policy decisions in complex areas like energy policy without the vaunted Harvard credential while our President has demonstrated his lack of knowledge and understand required to make decisions in both foreign and domestic affairs. Obama is quite adept at reading from the teleprompter, playing hardball politics and stealing money for his friends. There are many hacks back in Chicago who don’t have the Ivy League diploma who could do a better job running the country then our new FDR.

Liberal Reader| 7.6.09 @ 12:56PM

georgepa --

The answer to your question, "Does anyone buy" Palin's claim that she was rendered "lame duck" by her decision not to run again, is emphatically: NO.

No one buys it. No one believes a governor involuntarily becomes a financial strain on the people simply because she's not going to run again. It's a ludicrous argument: it's bizarre, actually, and like every other "reason" she gave for abdication, difficult to argue with because it's premise is deeply flawed.

Look folks. Palin said she was quitting because she's a fighter. She said she was pursuing a larger political vision outside of government. She said she would increase her public activity because she wants to spend more time with her family. She wants to fight a larger conflict because she's sick of being attacked. She wants to help Alaskans by resigning from the office they elected her to fill.

If you are asking yourself, somewhere deep down, "How does any of this make sense?" then you're exercising your God given ability to think critically. Keep it up.

daboss| 7.6.09 @ 12:58PM

Bob –

GMAFB – people can be book smart or real world smart. When the founder of FedEx presented his business model to his ivy league university – pretty sure he failed it. Did Bill Gates finish college? Not sure. And let us not forget that lowly Swiss patent clerk.

All I want from a candidate is someone who will stand for freedom. I could care less if they offer nuanced or intricate opinions on this that or the other.

If a law limits freedom – seems like an easy NO vote. How hard can it be?

Plus at least she didn’t use a teleprompter!!!!

Palin may be out for good … or trying to form a new party. Time will tell. But the R field is very very thin and is getting thinner all the time.

Oldefarte| 7.6.09 @ 1:01PM

Great [and accurate] thoughts, Robert! Palin scares the excrement out of people [especially liberals] because they sense the enormous potential political popularity [possibly comparable to Reagan] of her candicacy. The moronic liberals describe her and her followers as 'rednecks', which can be descriptive of just about every person who works 24/7, pays taxes, serves in the military, participates in church worship, and that are the source of everything positive/productive that happens in this country. Liberals' MESSIAH and his welfaric/destructive policies cannot be defeated by the typical Republicans presnet today. Conservatives need a OUT-OF-THE-BOX leader to take on/defeat these welfaremongers, and Palin just may be that person/candidate. Does she need to fine-tune her image and knowledge of world events/politics? Of course whe does, but now, she has the time and freedom to do so, in preparation for 2012. Palin speaks to 'rednecks' nationwide [way beyond the South], and her message is: WE'RE FED UP WITH THE POLITICAL EXCREMENT THAT IS CURRENTLY HAPPENING TO US AND OUR COUNTRY! So I say to all of you elitiest, Harvard educated MORONS, beware-------PALIN MAY JUST BECOME YOUR WORST ENEMY AND THE MESSIAH'S WORST ENEMY IN NOVEMBER OF 2012!!!!!!!!!!

Jeff| 7.6.09 @ 1:02PM

You guys are joking right? Stop whining about how the liberal media treats Sarah Palin. Have you forgotten about the way liberal females are treated by the Conservative media? ie. Hilary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi. Again, too partisan to see the truth.

Old Texican| 7.6.09 @ 1:05PM

Robert Stacey,Very thoughtful article. Thank you.

Guys
some splendid thoughts here.
As one of you mentioned, we were having a very serious discussion on one the blogs. It is a shame those discussions can't stay around here longer.

If our country has reached the point where an honest decent elected official such as Sarah Palin can be hounded out of office by smut, then my slogan henceforward will be...
REPEAL REPEAL REPEAL !

I truly believe "conserving" is no longer a viable option. I believe our country needs desperately to be put in "retrograde motion"...ie: reverse.

There is no question in my mind that if cap and trade and/or nationalized medical are passed, then REPEAL of both will be the only ...ONLY... salvation of our country as a free society in anything but name.

I notice that many of us keep trying to dip into history to get a perspective. It is my contention that there is NO historical happening in 232 years that even comes close to our present day situation.

Ladies and gentlemen, it is my belief that for the very FIRST time, a true revolution has been declared upon we free sovereign citizens. I do not exagerate here. War has been declared upon us, just as surely as a war was declared when Islamic terrorists knocked down the Trade Towers, and hammered the Pentagon.

I have read and heard SO many inadequate terms to describe our politicos in DC..."thugs, Chicago thugs, utopians, idiots, incompetents, narcisists, etc.

THEY ARE NOTHING OF THE KIND!

First of all...they are "OATH-BREAKERS"!
They swore to preserve, protect, and defend our constitution. They have since stated very clearly in words and actions that they have no intent to preserve protect and defend our constitution.

To them, our constitution is nothing more than something that limits their efforts. They talk about a "living constitution". They are liars.

We do have a living constitution...but the way it is supposed "grow and mature" is through:

1. Constitutional conventions of the several States to perfect that constitution if needs be.

2. Ammending that constitution again by concert of the several States.

They have chosen an unconstitutional method, called.........."force" ie war!

Every single one of us have heard Obama's own words about building a national internal "police force", (or words to that effect), that is equal in size and strength to our present armed forces.

Why? Please ask yourself............. why?

My thought is that it is his back-up plan B if he can't win the stealth war that is quietly destroying the legs of the table...one by one... that holds all of our labor fruit...and all of our future hopes.

For the very first time in our history, our federal government has declared war on it's own tax-paying, law-abiding citizens. Their "war goals"
are pretty simple, and as old as time. (theft, writ large)

Their weapons and tactics are pretty novel in some cases, but their "war aims" are to reduce us to submission or incarceration...or death if incarceration becomes too expensive because there are too many of us.

I take Sarah's "re-quote" by Douglass McArthur very seriously. God bless her, she is trying to "advance in another direction".

I don't know "which" direction we should go...but we Americans still remember how to sit on our ass and produce no taxable income.

Think about it a moment. If tax revenues dropped even 80% in a given month from we in the middle class...oops?

Thoughts?

Liberal Reader| 7.6.09 @ 1:06PM

John II --

I think you may actually be confusing two concepts in classical rhetoric.

The ancients believed in three "rhetorical appeals," the ethical appeal (ethos), the pathetic appeal (pathos), and the logical appeal (logos).

Great arguments tend to combine different strands, using now this appeal, now that, although they ideally should always be rooted in sound thinking.

The ethical appeal is the appeal to character (and situation). John McCain's entire campaign was based on the ethical appeal: I am a war hero. Therefore, I can be trusted to run the country in a time of war.

Ad hominem arguments are considered basically flawed (see Quintillian, especially) because they ignore or deemphasize the substance of what an opponent is saying in favor of speculating about or commenting on his character.

There's room for discussing an opponent's character, of course, and you're right to see it as a central part of rhetoric and good debate. But it's never a sound substitute for engaging an opponents ideas.

Basil Plumley| 7.6.09 @ 1:06PM

@ jerryofva

Darn good post!!

I would only add that what people do in college does not reflect present day competence. For those who think it does; it shows real shallowness.

Bob| 7.6.09 @ 1:11PM

John II -- great response! You are almost entirely correct. However, I use "ad hominem" for the very reason you claim it should not be used. It's purpose is to bring out the hate of extreme right to show their extreme bias and anger. It almost always works. Your assumption that these types of attacks are indicative of my analytical beliefs are misdirected.

That said, you are clearly wrong on one account. It is Palin's LACK of knowledge and reason that leads to personal ridicule, not the other way around.

However, John, for TAS, your response is absolutely superb and brings up some concepts I have not considered. It would be nice to have a forum where logic and reason dominated the discussion, but it is not possible here.

I also have negative views on socialism, but they were not due to examples of socialists. I studied the issues both in terms of individual freedoms and economics, and came to the conclusion that for the structure that exists in this country, socialism simply cannot work. I find that your logic that since you operate in a specific manner, that all of us must operate in the same manner to be deficient. It may be true of you, but not me.

I actually liked Palin when she was first announced. She was attractive, savvy, had a libertarian streak, worked well with Democrats in Alaska, and seemed to be a breath of fresh air. But then I listened to her with Gibson, then Couric, then on Fox News and saw her drop her libertarian positions and could no longer support her because of her lack of knowledge and intellectual curiosity. It was only then that her character turned negative for me.

So, no, I do not rest my opinion on her character as you presume. That said, good try....

Steve Brown| 7.6.09 @ 1:18PM

I have mixed feelings about Sarah Palin's decision to resign as governor. Part of me wanted her to finish out her term and then, if she wanted to, make a run for the presidency, as I agree that on principle, it's a good thing to finish what you started before moving on to other pursuits. But the other part of me thinks that another 16 months in office as Governor of Alaska isn't going to do much more to prepare Sarah to run for the presidency. There's a lot she's going to have to do though in the meantime. Say what you will about the media's attacks against Palin, on the issue of preparedness, Sarah dug herself the holes and looked uncomfortable in the spotlight, especially in the debate with Joe Biden. While she may have won points on charm and charisma, Biden was an easy target and Palin struck out time and again looking, to use the baseball term. This bothered and worried me as it has many others who were privately cheering for her but were concerned to see her flounder at times.
I think if Sarah uses these next two years to travel the country, support Republican candidates running in 2010 and develop her opinions and ideas on a wider range of issues than energy and being a "maverick", she will have a shot. As a Romney supporter, I have to admit that Sarah Palin has something that many candidates don't, and that is an ability to connect directly with people, something that Romney struggled with throughout the campaign.
Let's give her a chance and see what unfolds.

Steve
Delanson, NY

Siegfried X| 7.6.09 @ 1:20PM

The thing to notice is that no one dares to defend Sarah Palin here. They keep changing the subject to irrelevant topics like Barack Obama and socialism. I don't blame them for being afraid to try to defend Sarah Palin. I admit that I couldn't defend her either, because there is no defense possible.

If Sarah had a brain, all she would have to do is submit to an interview on national television, and show that she knows her stuff. Palin doesn't dare have an interview though because she is so ignorant that she'd get torn to shreds like in the Katie Couric interview. So Sarah runs away. Like in the debate with Biden, Palin knew she w0uldn't be able to answer most of the questions, so she gave the excuse that she was going to wink instead because she was different and special.

Same thing now. Defeated by the Democrats in Alaska, Palin slinks away with the excuse that she is someone special and the ordinary rules (like succeeding) don't apply to her.

Siegfried X| 7.6.09 @ 1:23PM

I wonder if anyone who support Palin's resignation would support other Republicans who do the same thing. If the Democrats call all the congressional Republicans names, and file phony ethics complaints against them, should all those Republicans resign like Sarah Palin did? Likewise should all the Republican governors resign like Sarah Palin did?

MetaCon| 7.6.09 @ 1:36PM

I like Sarah Palin, but I wasn't particularly enthusiastic about the McCain/Palin ticket (then again, who was?). I said as far back as the primaries that Romney was the guy to support. And who would be the most qualified politician on the national scene to deal with this financial mess? Mitt Romney.

God Bless Sarah Palin and her family. And maybe we'll see a Palin 2020 ticket.

In the meantime: ROMNEY 2012!

David | 7.6.09 @ 1:38PM

Bob, we conservatives all know that social issues are what drives your intense dislike for people like Palin. Palin may not have been the most knowledgeable person concerning world affairs back in August 2008, but I'll bet she has learned a lot since then, and will know a lot more than Obama will ever know by 2012 or 2016.

Just knowing things is not what is important, but knowing how to apply and come to certain conclusions with what one knows - that is called good judgment and wisdom. In that sense, Palin has it all over our current president, McCain, and even Bush the younger.

Until I hear you complain about Obama and his claim to have campaigned in all 57 states, or his current support for the return of Zelaya in Honduras, or complain about the many other nitwits in both parties, your ragging on Palin appears not to be with good reason.

John II| 7.6.09 @ 1:38PM

Liberal Reader:

You seem to have misconstrued my point. The rhetorical appeals to which you allude (first delineated by Aristotle) have little to do with the identification of "ad hominem" as the mainstay (not "a central part") of all argument. I said nothing about its being a substitute for anything.
As for Quintillian, he was a man of his times--which is to say, he recognized that the substance of what a man says is inseparable from his character.

Perhaps you too are confusing ad hominem with ad personam. The latter is often used as a substitute for discursive engagement, especially by liberals. The trouble, of course, is that the term "ad hominem" is used loosely (exclusively, so far as I can tell) to mean ad personam. It would be interesting to trace that loose usage to its source(s). My guess is that the confusion probably started seriously percolating during the so-called Enlightenment, perhaps the most ironically named period in western history.

thirteen28| 7.6.09 @ 1:39PM

"Sarah is the anti-politician. That drives the left absolutely bonkers. "

It doesn't just drive the left bonkers. It drives a significant portion of the right bonkers as well, particularly the national GOP and the rightwing beltway punditocracy.

thirteen28| 7.6.09 @ 1:44PM

@ blackelkspeaks| 7.6.09 @ 9:11AM

Those of whom you speak in your comment don't really give a rat's ass about conservatism as anything other than an abstraction. Sure, some of them talk a good game about advancing conservatism, but in the end, the only thing they want to change from the current status quo is to replace a few D's with R's. Otherwise, they prefer things remain as they are.

Tim| 7.6.09 @ 1:46PM

What does it say about the GOP that fossils like McCain never quit while 45 year olds take their ball and go home?

Red| 7.6.09 @ 1:46PM

blackelkspeaks: Absolutley!

jim rice| 7.6.09 @ 1:48PM

This was awesome.
Her resignation speech was spot-on hilarious. Hopefully she'll just go back to raising sexually promiscuous daughters, and I won't have to hear from her ever again. :)

Siegfried X| 7.6.09 @ 1:50PM

Here's the Sarah Palin link I was asked to provide:

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0709/Palin_flashback_Perceived_whine.html

somnolence| 7.6.09 @ 1:51PM

Romney was my candidate in the primaries in 2008, but obviously there is a campaigning weakness there, as he couldn't take out McCain. With that said I abhor all those who dislike him simply because of his religion. He also has to overcome the Big Dig controversy in Mass. and the health insurance debacle there, as well as a similar political profile which dogged the first President Bush in the election of 1992. That is why I maintain that Sarah is part of the vital new blood (instead of blue blood) of the GOP. And without that vital new blood I'm afraid the election of 2012 is already over, even with a mediocrity like Obama.

Bob just backpedaled| 7.6.09 @ 1:56PM

Ha ha... good one John II!

ThinkTank| 7.6.09 @ 2:08PM

I can think of no greater gift to the Democrats than to have Sarah come back and run for the nomination.
So bring it on - Palin in 2012!

Bob| 7.6.09 @ 2:11PM

David, it is not that Sarah is a social conservative -- it is that she is unknowledgeable and lacks reason. I have said I like Jindal and Romney, and they are both social conservatives. I liked Reagan even though I disliked his view on choice. I didn't like Bush because he simply lacked intelligence -- just like Palin.

S af Ugglas| 7.6.09 @ 2:13PM

Why is it, The FBI could have any interest in Mrs. Palin? Wouldn´t they make better use of their time investigating The Obama birthcertificate?

daboss| 7.6.09 @ 2:15PM

somnolence - i agree. Mitt received my vote in the OH primary even though the race was already over.

While I like Palin - the same will apply to her as to most of the R front-runners - they are far removed from politics by the time 2012 comes about.

The trouble with a Palin run is logistics – she needed to spend time in the lower 48. She could not do that as a sitting governor without being lambasted.

If she decides to run – this might have been her only option. If she does run, I’ll vote for her. Anything is better than what we have now.

Liberal Reader| 7.6.09 @ 2:15PM

John II

I think the confusion is between the very real connections among character, situation, and rhetorical effectiveness and the tendency in today's political climate to reduce everything to a personal assault.

We tend to speculate too much on people's secret motives and not enough on what they say.

This can be used to prop people up as well: does anyone really understand the speech Palin gave last Friday? We easily substitute our feelings for reasoned response.

Tim| 7.6.09 @ 2:23PM

"I leave you gentleman now and you will write it. You will interpret it. That's your right. But as I leave you I want you to know — just think how much you're going to be missing. You won't have Nixon to kick around any more, because, gentlemen, this is my last press conference and it will be one in which I have welcomed the opportunity to test wits with you. "

Louis Jenkins| 7.6.09 @ 2:29PM

Old Texican-

I notice that many of us keep trying to dip into history to get a perspective. It is my contention that there is NO historical happening in 232 years that even comes close to our present day situation.

Amen. I've spent some time in my old age reading about our nation's founding, and events thru the mid 19th century. There are no similarities. New ground has been broken.

blackelkspeaks| 7.6.09 @ 2:33PM

Siegfried X wrote: "The thing to notice is that no one dares to defend Sarah Palin here. They keep changing the subject to irrelevant topics like Barack Obama and socialism. I don't blame them for being afraid to try to defend Sarah Palin. I admit that I couldn't defend her either, because there is no defense possible. "

Brother, you are as wrong as can be! My post was a direct defense of her decision and action! She explained her position very clearly in her speech. And I find no fault with her position and do not assume, as the punditocracy automatically did, that she has no political future henceforth because of some asinine template of protocol proffered by our corrupt political class.

The fact is the beltway punditry is so cynical, jaded, and twisted that they couldn't, or wouldn't, take her statements at face value. Being the mind-blown liars that they themselves are, they chose to misinform, mislead, and speculate on all manner of machinations behind her decision than accept what she clearly stated. Herein lies the problem. When you, yourself (like the beltway punditry of both parties) are essentially mendacious propagandists, you have to contort yourself into a pretzel to shoehorn events to fit your warped perspective. Like Goebbels himself, every statement must be pathologized to fit your sick vision of "how the world works".

The Bible says, "Let your yes mean yes, and your no mean no. Anything else is of Satan."

Thom| 7.6.09 @ 2:47PM

The primary interest in politics of the “Bobs” of the world is protecting their 30 pieces of silver… Their “moderate” views were tried in 1976, 1992, 1996, 2008 and lost big time. They dice and slice the Republican Party and Conservative movement in general to such an extent to make any common ground there moot. They dismiss any and all things “social” in nature and then don’t understand why they consistently lose elections to a Democrat electorate that is nothing but social and identity politics. They conveniently overlook the corrosive nature of our devolving cultural bonds and can’t grasp that it is our dysfunctional sociality that is driving our fiscal irresponsibility to the brink of bankrupting this Nation. One needs to look no further than California, the bed rock of moderate views on social evils, to see where ignoring the social underpinning leads….

As to the smartest person the planet has ever known, Mitt Romney accomplished nothing of note as Governor of Massachusetts. When the State Supreme Court legislated a new law from the bench rather than stand up to the Court he ran away with his tail between his legs. The chief executive office is not supposed to be a rubber stamp for the other branches else what is the purpose of the Governor’s office? Mitt might be a smart business man but running a business is not the same as running the Federal Government.

The “Bobs” of the world see jettisoning that portion of the electorate as “social Conservatives” as a winning idea with demographics where the other side is 100% social issues based and ignorant of the most basic civics lessons about this country’s form of government . You have to truly be insane to want to keep proving what has been proven several times in the last 35 or so years of national politics to be a losing position to take. There is no such thing as socially liberal and fiscally conservative in the same person. The former will destroy the latter given enough time….

Seek| 7.6.09 @ 3:03PM

Pure spin from "The Other McCain." Everyone -- even partisan GOP people like myself -- will properly reason that if Palin can't take the heat for two and a half years as Alaska governor, she's certainly not up to the job of taking at least four years of heat as U.S. president.

It doesn't matter whether the ethics charges against Palin have any substance. Stick a fork in her; she's done -- in 2012 and all points beyond. Time to look elsewhere.

Tripp| 7.6.09 @ 3:06PM

Correct, Seek. Look to the southeast- specifically, Rick Perry, Bobby Jindal, and Haley Barbour. Perfect records, just not so much name recognition- but there's plenty of time for all that.

Dustoff| 7.6.09 @ 3:07PM

Bob
I didn't like Bush because he simply lacked intelligence -- just like Palin.
++++++++++++++++++++++++

Odd. Bush had NO problem beating the dem's at their own game. So which one is it Bob. GW was stupid or the dem's he fought against were even dummer?
You can't have it both ways.

David| 7.6.09 @ 3:08PM

Bob, you really need to give some examples of the ways Palin has governed Alaska that reflected a lack of ability to reason and use good judgment.

I know she has or would exhibit excellent judgment with these issues:
She supports drilling here and drilling now - unlike Obama, Clinton, McCain, and Bush.
She would never nominate a Sotomayor for the Supreme Court - as Obama has.
She would never support comprehensive immigration reform without first securing the border - as Obama, McCain, and Bush have.
She would never sit in hate-filled so-called Christian church with her family for 20 years - as Obama has.
She never would have claimed to have campaigned in all 57 states - as Obama has.
She would never diss our friends such as England and Israel and coddle the enemies who have said they want to destroy American and the West - as Obama has.
She would never claim that blacks and the homosexual movement experience the civil rights struggles - as Obama has.
She would never (at least I don't think so) have claimed that the United States is one of the largest Muslim countries - as Obama has.

As asked, please provide examples of her lack of good judgment when governing Alaska. I suppose you could criticize her for the upgrade of her wardrobe during the campaign, but my guess is, clothes that might be comfortable to wear in Alaska, did not quite feel right down here in the lower 48 - er, uh, or lower 56 if you use Obama's numbers. Couldn't resist that.

In general you really shouldn't be too hard on Palin's suppposed lack of knowledge when our current president has been repeatedly criticized for misstating historical events; or when Biden claimed to have witnessed certain events on the tube when the events that occurred happened before there were televisions. Can you agree with that statement, Bob?

To Bob and everyone who claims that Palin has received no worse treatment from people than Hillary and some others have, there is a big difference between conservative voices on talk radio, publications, and blogs, and what is considered the mainstream media, including the NYT, Washington Post, LA Times, etc., and NETWORK television. The MSM never trashed Hillary and others in the manner Palin has been trashed.

Interested conservative| 7.6.09 @ 3:19PM

Wow - what an interesting give and take. Bob - I wasn't intending to be ad hominem, but rather ironic - noting the little we know about either the POTUS or Gov. Palin - and considering how well she comes off in comparison.

Others are noting this in much lengthier analyses, and have done so for some time now.

By comparison, we "know" all too much about former candidates McCain and Biden.

The irony is that while many have set their views of Gov. Palin in stone, so to speak (I recall the old line about a lie traveling the world around, while the truth is still tying its shoes), at the media's current pace, we'll be "learning" about the POTUS for the next 20 years, while we already know all we need to know about the Gov.

It's a case study in delusional mobs vs. emotional projection - with classic negative and positive effects.

I expect she'll make a fortune, appear live and unedited with Larry, later taped with Oprah and Dave, have her on show (maybe Fox/maybe not) and see how Newt, Huck, John Kasich, and others transition back into the game. I suppose Al Gore is worth watching as well, but he may be done with elective politics, and I don't see many other dems. following this path.

Ultimately, of course, the paths to follow include Nixon, which many have noted, but also Lincoln and Teddy - Abe being a decade between offices, and Teddy dying young, which shouldn't be a health concern for her.

Much of the same applies to Jeb as well, but with the concern about the Bush curse - though the Feiler Faster Thesis may overcome that.

If anything, she's regionally parochial, but far from ignorant. She can overcome that. OTOH, the POTUS is no genius, though "clean and articulate", but are we really as sure of his character as we are of others shortcomings?

Seems like we're on quite an adventure whether we intended it or not Si Se Pueda!

Thom| 7.6.09 @ 3:29PM

“I also have negative views on socialism, but they were not due to examples of socialists. I studied the issues both in terms of individual freedoms and economics, and came to the conclusion that for the structure that exists in this country, socialism simply cannot work”

Bob, you are pulling our leg here right? You had to study Marx’s theories to decide it didn’t (couldn’t) work (here?) Where in the world has it worked in any form Bob? And when? Every place that has tried the lite version of Socialism is declining as a society and going bankrupt trying to pay for it on the backs of the few people it leaves willing to excel at anything. We are of the same age group so I am just a bit surprised you would admit having actually “studied” it before assessing all the failures of it from day one…. Unless you think humans are perfectible like bees in a hive you don’t need to study much of what Marx said to understand the inherent evil Socialism presents in its dressed up forms. I guess all that time spent in Academia getting all those degrees skewed your common sense completely out of wack. The only people who truly like Socialism are those at the top where you find all the Academic degrees and intellectual brain power required to run the Hive….

Is there a government report to back up your views on this Bob?

Interested Conservative| 7.6.09 @ 3:36PM

Thom - I just re-read the Road to Serfdom after 20 years, and it still pretty much open and closes your case - particularly the "inherent" and terminal flaws.

Without even getting into the founding political works, pairing it with De Toqueville pretty much summarizes what we need do, and not do. We're muddling on both counts.

txn4ever| 7.6.09 @ 3:40PM

"...she doesn't slavishly follow the standard script of Republican politicians."

Uh, seems to me that she's doing what other high profile conservatives/republicans do when the going gets tough: she quits. Gingrich, and Delay readily come to mind.

It's unfortunate since I would have voted for her. But no more. She just proved she doesn't have the stomach for the fight. If she plans on running for the Senate or President, does she really think things will be any better?

Bob| 7.6.09 @ 3:42PM

Thom, you have a funny view of history. Reagan won because the economy tanked and marginal tax rates were out of sight. Bush41 lost because of the recession. Bush43 won as a "compassionate" conservative -- code words for "I am a moderate". Carl Rove knew the demographics changed enough that Bush needed to position himself as a moderate. Reagan only got 50.7% of the vote in 1980. Some analysts have determined that if the demographics in 1980 were the same as today, Reagan would have lost.

Simplistic analyses may make you feel better, but they are often wrong.

Interested -- none of your examples quit because the pressure was too intense or the job was too hard. Palin obviously can't stand the heat so it is only right that she got out of the kitchen.

As I've said before, as an individual, if she quit to spend more time with her special needs child and daughter, I give her high personal credit as family should be the highest priority. That has nothing to do, however, with the qualities necessary to be President.

Thom| 7.6.09 @ 3:52PM

This . “will properly reason that if Palin can't take the heat for two and a half years as Alaska governor, she's certainly not up to the job of taking at least four years of heat as U.S. president.” and similar views miss the difference between Palin and what others (including the Bushes, Clintons and Obama) have had to endure. The attacks are against her family and particularly her children not her or her policies. As an elected public figure she can’t do anything much about it but as a private citizen she can “enrich herself” for the stupidity of others with their money. If similar things were said by the MSM of Bush’s juvenile children, Clinton’s only daughter or Obama’s kids while in office there would have been consequences but at the Governor’s level she has no such national support and this and other tactics are costing the State of Alaska a lot of money not well spent in times when every dime needs to be well spent. You might not like that she “quit” in your view but your juvenile family members weren’t the target of these tactics and she doesn’t have 80% of the media on her side like the opposition. She could have stayed and let her family take the “heat” for no good purpose and let the people she represents pick up the bill for all the non sense she is having to endure at home with frivolous lawsuits and alike but that doesn’t match her down to earth persona. What she does from this point forward is important for better or worse.

Interested Conservative| 7.6.09 @ 3:55PM

Bob - I question what seems to be your idea of "quit"? She resigned as Governor - not really a big deal, for a long list of reasons. She was very obtuse about whether she plans to "quit" anything else. For comparison, it seems safe to say the Gov. McGreevey, Senator Craig, Rep. Foley, Sen. Torricelli, and a long list of others, really did "quit" in the comprehensive sense, never to be seen again in anything remotely resembling their prior roles.

The takeaway line from her rambles is the Gen. Smith quote (which she misattributed to the younger Gen. MacArthur.)

Interested Conservative| 7.6.09 @ 4:01PM

Bob - One last point, which is really the first and only point which many don't seem to make - she's actually taking a promotion - she needs to make a fortune, which she can do clearly enough, and legally enough.

It's out of the sequence most of our current "leaders" follow, and aside from the personally admirable example of VP Biden (the least wealthy Senator, by far), it says a lot about national elective offices. Perhaps Rep. Boehner is the only other current serving national figure without personal riches, however gotten - notorious, family, commercial or otherwise.

Thom| 7.6.09 @ 4:03PM

Bob, get your history correct first. Ford lost to Charter in 1976. Ford was a moderate. Bush 1 lost to Clinton in 1992 because “read my lips, no new taxes”…. More Democrats voted for Third Party guy than Clinton btw. Bush 1 was moderate. Bob Doyle lost to Clinton big time, economy was booming by your standards, Doyle was a moderate. GW positioned himself as a social conservative at least and won two elections; John McCain made no pretense at all and lost big time. Are you suggesting Reagan won his initial election and got reelected by being a “moderate” on Social issues?

David| 7.6.09 @ 4:15PM

Bob, with regard to "the lower 48", that really was a typo.

Now, how about some examples of Palin's lack of reasoning ability, poor judgments, or unsound governing practices while mayor of Wasilla or governor of Alaska?

syn| 7.6.09 @ 4:23PM

Bob

Quite simple really, Sarah Palin as Governor of Alaska managed to keep her state operating in the black.

Harvard MBA Mitt Romney while Governor of Massachusetts imposed an economic policy which has bankrupted his state.

And the guy from Chicago who has a Harvard Law degree happens to be the head of community organized crime, at the moment is looting, pillaging and violating you and everything your are.

Who is smarter , the woman who kept her state operating in the black, the Harvard-degreed who operated his state into bankruptcy, or the other Harvard-degreed who is stealing everything right in front of your face?

Compare and contrast

Ralph | 7.6.09 @ 4:27PM

Stating that Sarah Palin is not smart is just wrong on the merits. Virtually everyone that has actually worked with her, including some who disagree with her, have said that is not true.

But having this discussion on the heels of having just elected the two dumbest candidates ever on a single ticket, is just, I don't know, ironic just isn't strong enough. The United States could've held a national lottery and come up with two people smarter than Obama and Biden.

FauxHunt| 7.6.09 @ 4:30PM

Let me start this by saying I don’t think that Sarah quit because of anything like ethics complaints or how much time/money it was costing the state. She quite proudly proclaimed victory over her detractors on a regular basis and it built up her ego every time she did so. I also think that while there may well be something to this whole “Legal Fund” ethics issue, I have no doubt she would have found a way to broker another deal in which she was able to claim victory because we have all see how adept she is at getting the right people to back her up.

She did not quit because she was a “lame duck” due to not running again, because she was unable to do anything for the state while she was campaigning for VP and she refused to turn over the reins of power to Parnell then. She did not care that she was ineffective then, so why would it bother her now?

I have no doubt that the attacks she claims were becoming too much for her is another lie because she has become adept at playing the victim. It is her M.O.

We have all seen it time and again, from the Letterman issue, to the fake Trig issue. It is all about twisting a situation to the point she can claim she is a victim and garner more and more sympathy from her fans. She needs those attacks on her because she uses that more than anything else to shield herself from having to deal with issues. She can and does turn even questions regarding what she is doing into an attack on her.

Are there investigations into her? I would not doubt it as we are all well aware of her blatant unethical behavior. She has a long history of that. It is not something that has cropped up overnight. We are all well aware of her ego as well. I recall reading somewhere that one of her closest friends said her greatest ambition is to become President. She lives for that idea. She believes with all her heart that is her destiny. It has been said that she craves power and her past behavior as well as what we have seen since her term as Governor and as is being proved now in the media regarding her time on the campaign trail she has a thirst to control everything around her.

Is she getting bad advice now? I doubt that she is getting bad advice. What I do believe is that she has people around her who believe the same things she does and so they just simply agree with her no matter what. As we know, to disagree with her means risking her wrath and retaliation. I am sure that those closest to her know that and don’t dare challenge her, but that does nothing more than feed into her ego that she is right.

We know from Todd’s interview in Sports Illustrated that he is her defender until the end. He believes she is right and does the right things and those who challenge her or disagree with her are “haters” who are trying smear her good name.

I don’t think that Sarah has trust in anyone outside of Todd. Family all admit they were surprised by this announcement of hers to resign. People were not told until the last moment, some not finding out until the actual announcement came. Todd’s father confirmed in his interview…They are very private people. They are all about total control and it shows.

I am quite honestly convinced that only something truly serious would have forced Sarah from office. She didn’t have a problem with outing her own daughter’s teen pregnancy to try and prove that she was Trig’s mother in the face of all those rumors. She has had no problem using her children as a shield for her, and as props to show just how wonderful she is and her family is. She uses people quite willingly, family included so I don’t think that any personal family crisis would make her leave her office, she would simply use it to garner sympathy.

Money & Power might make her leave. If she thought she would get more of it by leaving office, then I could see her deciding to leave willingly, because those seem to be the two things she craves.

Adoration is what she is looking for. She has become a Jim Jones figure in many ways. She wants people to be thrilled when she is there. She wants them to give themselves to her and her needs. She needs people who believe in her and her views. She needs to have that kind of support. It drives her. The palin fan sites just feed into that need. Some of her supporters claim “love for her”. I’ve seen at least one who states they would willingly die for her. It is an obsession that borders on clinically insane in my opinion. That is the kind of adoration she craves. I also think that she was well aware of what was going on at her rallies and it rather than being something that worried her, actually fed into her own ego.

One really scary thought: If she ever does make it to POTUS God forbid, if she is this crazy now what will she be like going thru menopause???

Jerry Prater| 7.6.09 @ 4:32PM

I marvel at comments that view Sarah's supporters as ignorant, not ready for prime time, anti-choice rabble-rousers. Many of us are just as knowledgeable, and more, as the self dubbed elite of Dem/Rep ranks and choice is just another word for murder of the innocent.
All these people that say they really liked Sarah when she came out but soon saw how unprepared,
ignorant, full of rabid conservative ideals, come in two groups--those who wanted to destroy her as a threat and the weak-minded who lapped up everything the media and RINOS said. I vote for weak-minded snobbishness on their part.
Sarah and her family are the real deal. In spite of wishful thinking on the part of her detractors, her supporters do not consist of a small group of rednecks. There are millions and millions of us out here. We are onto the politics of personal destruction, and we ain't buyin it.
We are tired of lockstep ivy league types who think their degree gives them the right to rule.
Evidently, there is not much learning going on at the ivies and sub ivies as the media elites haven't had an original thought in 30 years. Those that do get their pink slip immediately.
To put it succinctly and in the vernacular the elites
understand and expect from us Palin supporters--MSM and RINOS suck-always have; always will.

Thom| 7.6.09 @ 4:39PM

Demographics are the moderate’s canard for everything it seems. Per “Bob” Reagan would not have won had he had the demographics of today. Really? That statement pre supposes that Reagan was a one trick phony and could not assess the lay of the land and change his message to suit. Not very realistic a thought for what was a very successful politician. The make up of identity politics may have changed since the 1980s but the lay of the land is still the same. Ask the California voters who voted down tax increases to pay for all their free stuff from government. Nothing like having to pay for something to change one’s demographics a bit. Someone has to pay for all the promises government makes and the bill is growing larger and faster than is feasible to every pay down or just the debt service on. Somebody has to pay and the payers are shrinking as a proportion of those demographics that supposedly would work against Reagan today. “Government is the problem” would be just his warm up pitch….because no matter what the demographics are you can’t have a shrinking minority of the population pay for an increasing majority of tax consumers over time… the Bill is coming due on nearly 7 decades of fiscal irresponsibility of government and what we are now seeing is the leading elements of trying to get blood from a stone. Those with the wealth have the means to shelter it or remove it from taxation even if that means relocation to another state or country. That is taking place even now even in California.

So Bob put your faith in demographics and I’ll put my faith in the School of Hard Knocks. We’ll see who wins when all the Bills come due and those tax consuming demographics have to do with less or start paying some real taxes to get all the free things they get from government today. A 21st century Reagan would have a field day with all the cowardly moderates of today.

Bob| 7.6.09 @ 4:41PM

David, just let me take a direct quote from one of her interviews:

"That's why I say I, like every American I'm speaking with, were ill about this position that we have been put in. Where it is the taxpayers looking to bail out. But ultimately, what the bailout does is help those who are concerned about the health care reform that is needed to help shore up our economy. Um, helping, oh, it's got to be about job creation, too. Shoring up our economy, and getting it back on the right track. So health care reform and reducing taxes and reining in spending has got to accompany tax reductions, and tax relief for Americans, and trade -- we have got to see trade as opportunity, not as, uh, competitive, um, scary thing, but one in five jobs created in the trade sector today. We've got to look at that as more opportunity. All of those things under the umbrella of job creation."

It sounds like a tight, cogent argument to me.... Hmmm....

Thom...

Yes Ford lost to Carter (not Charter). It couldn't have been because he pardoned Nixon... Nah.... And Bush41 lost because of "read my lips" so the electorate decided a Democrat who spends is better???? Hmmm..... Why then did Bush41 get the Republican nomination???? Hmmm..... And GW positioned himself as a social conservative, not a "compassionate conservative"???? I guess I didn't see that ad. Perhaps you can give me the link. Hmmmm... Regarding Reagan, he won the reelection because the economy was better and he was one of the better Presidents like JFK. My point was that Reagan would not have won in the first place had the demographics been similar to today. Thus, he would not have been "reelected". But that takes logic to understand.... I liked Reagan, by the way, and thought he was one of the better Presidents -- not because of his tax policies, but because of the pressure he put on the Soviet Union. That was his greatest achievement. Reagan did appoint Scalia, Kennedy and O'Connor to the Supreme Court. The latter two are definitely moderates. Good luck making your point.

the-gunslinger| 7.6.09 @ 4:41PM

"St. Thor -- so what are Palin's positions (not McCain's), on Afghanistan or what we should do politically with Africa? What about her detailed positions on economic theory? What about her knowledge of the Supreme Court? What about her misstatements about the Constitution? Please show me her position papers on these issues BEFORE she was chosen to be VP"

Bob, you are totally KILLING me!

How about asking these questions of the current resident of the White House...!

The electorate has spoken. Having a clue is not a requirement.

the-gunslinger| 7.6.09 @ 4:48PM

"What does it say about the GOP that fossils like McCain never quit while 45 year olds take their ball and go home?"

I hope it means the GOP goes the way of the Whigs, and we can start a new party that actually represents American values.

Dai Alanye| 7.6.09 @ 4:51PM

I wonder when the day will come that the person who calls himself "Bob" will admit his true reason for slashing at Sarah—because he was so misguided as to vote for Obama, and ever more desperately needs to justify his error.

How any intelligent and analytically-inclined person could let himself be fooled by the empty suit (or should I say 'blank teleprompter') of Obama is beyond my understanding.

It takes a special kind of stupidity to let yourself be taken in so completely by a man who has accomplished so little and lied about so much.

Ran| 7.6.09 @ 4:57PM

This isn't just about Palin, it's about roll-back. We are going to need a lot of Reagans and Palins in Congress, too, if any sort of roll-back can be effected. That means Tea Partying, annoying your elected reps, supporting State and Federal candidates that back a strong conservative or libertarian agenda, talking to your neighbors... H^ll, B. Hussein Obama can get re-elected but if we swamp Congress, he's duck. The real legislative power is in Congress if we work to recover it. '10 and '12 are not about Palin, they're about POWER.

Get busy. Join the NRA. Show up with some friends at local Republican meetings and "diamond" the room. Have fun kicking local ass.

Mark30339| 7.6.09 @ 5:17PM

Stacy, soon to be Ex-Governor Palin is a quitter.
I expected a fighter, and I think you did too. Yeah sure, she's going to cash in battle in other ways, but this delusional Resign Early With Honor strategy rewards the character assassins and makes backers like you and me look like fools. You can keep blogging in blind support, but to me your continued Palin writing looks like lipstick on a pig.

janet| 7.6.09 @ 5:22PM

Love the fact that the mainstream media are spinning their heads on this one!

Fauxhunt, claiming that Sarah Palin is trying to be a victim in everything is just absurd. Are you really telling me with a straight face that the mainstream press has treated her fairly or like they treated Obama and Meeeechelle? If you want to point out victims, just look at the demographics of the Democratic party. You may not like Palin, but you cannot accuse her of being dishonest or not standing up for what she believes in. She has spoken forcibly and in a forthright manner about the recklessness of the Obama administration. HE is the one that deserves public scorn and ridicule for being so inept. Direct your cynicism to where it's warranted.

Thom| 7.6.09 @ 5:34PM

Bob, you are making the case that the electorate is stupid (demographically speaking) and does irrational things at election time for some irrational reasons like a minor recession or a pardon that pales by comparison to all the pardons Clinton gave and was in fact Impeached but not removed from office and I’m making the case that hard core circumstances will overcome demographic stupidly eventually. We have an ignorant and unprincipled electorate for the most part made more so by sound bite politics and the ability to rob one voter and give to another through tax policy. The Party is pretty much over in that regard. Real damage waits not too distant down the road and regardless of what the growing MOB votes, someone has to generate the “wealth” that is the foundation to our way of life. If you see compromising with the MOB for short term gains I can’t help you understand the fallacy of that. Given your age and mine I could rationalize you simply don’t care any more but then there are your children and their children…. Somebody has got to pay and real smart guys in government got us into this mess and I have absolutely 100 percent confidence that those same Ivy League thieves can make things much worse because all they have is their “book theories” to fall back on and they don’t work. The fundamentals haven’t changed since the beginning of time…. If principle does not win here than most of us are going to end up just like the rest of the losers that vote academia over common sense. The 4.0 I got in my major field of study (a science) and 4.0 in my minor (economics) didn’t qualify me for the office of President any more than your degrees or Obama’s did. What I’ve leaned in life far exceeds what lessons of life one can get from Academia. That’s your core problem Bob, you equate one’s degrees with one’s qualifications for elective office. You discount the character of the man or women that runs for elective office based on their time not spent in Academia. Character of the man or woman in office means little to nothing to you as long as your pile of money is doing ok. There are several words to cover that behavior none of which are compliments.

Keep putting your faith in the smartest, most highly schooled idiots on the planet Bob. Complexity worship got us into to this mess created by such people so you probably think more of the same will get us out of this? Not in what is left of our life times…..

David| 7.6.09 @ 5:34PM

Bob, that was a pretty good quote and a fair criticism. I recall the interview - and also recall it was probably the only time I heard Palin say something when she was not completely clear in what she said. Hey, it's tough for a lady without a teleprompter and without handpicked inquisitors and questions.

That said, you still haven't pointed out how she used faulty reasoning, exhibited poor judgment, or was inept at any decision she made or political position she held.

Faux Hunter's Words: "Are there investigations into her? I would not doubt it as we are all well aware of her blatant unethical behavior. She has a long history of that. It is not something that has cropped up overnight."

Don't be a dishonest, or a moron. She cleaned up corruption in Alaska and is well-known for it. I bet even Bob will agree with that.

Faux Hunter's Words: "We are all well aware of her ego as well. I recall reading somewhere that one of her closest friends said her greatest ambition is to become President. She lives for that idea. She believes with all her heart that is her destiny."

First, the place you recall reading it was probably from a blogger on Daily Kos or some such site. Even if true, I suppose her dreams are somehow different than almost every president in recent memory. At least we won't hear Palin claim to "cause the waters to recede", and claim "the earth will begin to heal itself" if she is elected president. I think Palin knows there is only one God - and she ain't Him.

Our new president, however, did not get nickmanes such as "the one", the anointed one", and "the messiah" because he thought so little of himself.

Liberal Reader| 7.6.09 @ 5:59PM

On Obama's "nicknames":

It's true that a small percentage of the population, imitating a handful of right wing radio talk show hosts, call Obama "the One" or "the Messiah."

But this small group is so ill-disposed towards Obama, indeed they seem to hate him so intensely, that the "nicknames" don't really ring true.

Nicknames that issue from some kind of affinity are more likely to have the ring of truth to them, probably. At any rate, nothing Obama has ever done or said suggested to me that he even partially considers himself to be comparable to a prophet or religious leader.

Indeed, it was our last president who spoke to God about invading another country. (God said it was O.K.)

Ironically, I think Obama has a fairly cautious and conservative temperament. I realize his policies are fairly text-book liberal, but I don't think he has a overly optimistic belief about his own abilities.

Jeff| 7.6.09 @ 6:08PM

Have you guys listened to Sarah Palin speak? Maybe its just folksy Alaskan slang but she has never said anything that betrays particular intelligence. To say otherwise is quite dishonest.

Thom| 7.6.09 @ 6:12PM

Jeff, Mark Twain was kind of folksy too. Did you hear H. Clinton's imitation of a West Virginian during the campaign stops there? If Palin spoke with an arrogant condescending down your nose kind of way, as Obama does, would you feel better?

janet| 7.6.09 @ 6:18PM

Jeff, say what you will about Palin, but have you listened to Barack Obama speak? Maybe its just his faux inner city brother jive that he intonates when he's in front of a particular crowd, but he has never said anything that betrays particular intelligence to me. He is proof that affirmative action can get you into an Ivy League school, but it cannot impart intelligence or wisdom to the wannabes in our society.

ED CARTER| 7.6.09 @ 6:19PM

I voted for her last time. I will vote for her next time. There are many more like me. By 2012 (thanks to Obama)there will be a lot more like me. We can take this country back------Ed Carter

Siegfried X| 7.6.09 @ 6:19PM

Sarah Palin will support Democrats?

Of her future plans, Palin, 45, said in her Friday announcement, "I will support others who seek to serve, in or out of office, for the right reasons, and I don't care what party they're in or no party at all. Inside Alaska -- or outside Alaska."

molonlabe28| 7.6.09 @ 6:35PM

The Democrats are worried sick about the prospect of a free Palin who can attack and deride their socialist agenda without having to spend the next several months following an onslaught of false ethics charges.

And I don't blame them a bit for being afraid.

She needs to ditch all of the "Republican strategists and operatives" and use her own considerable political wits and wiles.

American Conservative| 7.6.09 @ 6:43PM

Oh the vitriol that liberals unleash on Governor Palin is unlike anything we have ever seen since Ronald Reagan. And therein lies the truth...liberals fear Governor Palin because she is real and unassuming. Americans connect to that. Americans recognize truth when we see it.

For the people that fell for the "hopey-changey" rhetoric of Barack Hussein Obama, one can only hope that they will come to their senses and realize that Obama is nothing more than a flim-flam man.

And thank GOD that Governor Palin hasn't taken on the affected speech patterns of the phonies that reside within our capitol.

Give me down-to-earth, sensible. Give me something real. Give me truth and unabashed love for our country. Governor Palin is all of that and more.

Glen| 7.6.09 @ 7:11PM

I believe Palin's reason for resigning is that she, and her state, have become the recipients of the law of unintended consequences. The Ethics Code in Alaska provides that any person can file an ethics complaint against any public official for any reason. The Ethics Board must investigate. The object of the complaint must defend her self. The intention of the law is to protect whistle blowers, which is a good thing in normal circumstances.

I happen to be in the middle of reading Saul Alinski's Rules for Radicals (1979), which is the playbook for Acorn and others who have a vested interest in promoting Obama's power. One rule suggests using the tactics of the opponent against them, in unusual and creative and, if necessary, frivolous ways. So it fits Alinski's rules to a tee to do what the organized folks against Palin are doing.

Palin came into power as a reformer. Ethics was her calling card and it proved to be one of her strongest resume credits. From the moment she appeared on the national scene, the organization took her ethics credentials and threw them back at her with a slew of ethics charges, all of which were fabricated. Alinski encourages that the more outrageous the use of a tactic the better and more effective. Truth and facts don't matter at all in achieving the goal.

So there have been 18 ethics charges filed against Palin. The first 15 have been investigated, at $2 million cost to the state, and dismissed, at a half million cost for Palin to defend herself. A defense fund was established and even that became another charge. She was charged with wearing a logo on a winter jacket. She was charged with giving a speech in Indiana. There are currently 3 more charges to go through. And it was obvious that as time went on they would keep on coming. Another six months, another 15 charges. Another year, another 50 charges. There would be no stopping it.

Palin was trapped in her position as governor and at the mercy of this Alinski tactic. The longer she stayed on the job the more legal bills she would rack up, and the more the investigations would cost the state. She was imprisoned like no other governor, because no other state has this kind of ethics system.

She had to resign or go personally bankrupt in the process. This is one of the best examples of the effectiveness of the Alinski method. Alinski writes that the end always justifies the means.

Basil Plumley| 7.6.09 @ 7:22PM

Dear Bob,

I miss your cogent posting. It seems as though some idiots may have absconded with your handle. They have made many mistakes that belie a stellar Hahvard education.
One Bob says he initially liked Palin while the second Bob said it is not that Sarah is a social conservative -- it is that she is unknowledgeable and lacks reason. I have said I like Jindal and Romney, and they are both social conservatives.

Of course to be fair the first Bob cited the Couric and Gibson interviews where Bob "saw her drop her libertarian positions and could no longer support her because of her lack of knowledge and intellectual curiosity. It was only then that her character turned negative for me."

Which libertarians positions were those Bob? Please be specific.

Then some nitwit using your handle started posing as a historian. What drugs they on in 1980?
Reagan was no shoo-in to win the election. Carter was ahead in many of the polls until a couple weeks before the election. This was while the the "bad economy" was in full swing. Perhaps, you forgot the rap that Reagan had w/r/t his tax cuts (which old Bob would post are a waste of time); do you remember "voodoo economics"?

Ford came real close to beating Carter. There are many who believe that if Ford had another week or ten days, Ford wins. Not bad after being down by 20+ in the polls in August. The Nixon pardon was an afterthought.

It's almost like the other Bobs had a Time-Life-Newsweek understanding of American politics.
It is quite apparent you/them lack the knowledge, intellectual curiousity, and competence to post on this subject. From now on please keep your handle under lock and key. It would a shame if some popinjay like Siegfried stole your identity. In the meantime, stick to a subject in which you may know something like ................................................................................. Aramaic translations.

Siegfried X| 7.6.09 @ 7:23PM

"She had to resign or go personally bankrupt in the process"

Why couldn't she beat the system? She was governor, why didn't she propose new laws to fix the problem? Why didn't she collect enough contributions from Republicans to pay her legal expenses?

Will there be ethics charges filed against the Republican Lieutenant Governor who is taking Palin's place? If so, will he resign too? Should we just give every political job up to the Democrats?

Or are there some Republicans who, unlike Sarah Palin, are willing to fight instead of quitting and running away?

Michael L. Hauschild| 7.6.09 @ 7:34PM

Yawn, said Mike, as he put down his checkbook writingly.

Old Texican| 7.6.09 @ 7:41PM

Ladies and ...whatevers.
For the very first time I find myself EMBARRASSED to be here.
It seems you guys would rather argue with a ...dumb shirt like Bob... than to express your thoughts on how to preserve our country.

One single man read and commented on my post earlier. (thank you)
I hung myself out to dry vis a vis the liars and theives...in power, and you ignore it?

I am ashamed to have wasted my time with you.

AKintheKnow| 7.6.09 @ 7:42PM

The most simple explanation of Palin’s pout: As Willie Sutton is rumored to have said, “That’s where the money is.” For those of us who have lived up in Alaska for awhile, Palin is no stranger. Going way back to her time as part-time mayor of the thriving metropolis Wasilla, there were persistent rumors that she just ….wasn’t there. There were rumors she spent lots of money buying a car and decorating her office, but complaints were heard constantly - where’s Sarah? According to rumor, after losing the Lieutenant Guv’s race, the Repubs handed her a plum job for which she had absolutely no education, experience or background - a spot on the Oil and Gas Commission. She hadn’t been there long when once again, the rumors started - Where’s Sarah? Let’s just say you didn’t call earlier than 10 or after 2. She, of course, was rumored to have quit that job when a chance came up to slam the head of the Alaska Republican party, who, like Palin, been awarded the office by that Hero of the People, Frank “the Bank” Murkowski. According to rumors, Palin became Guv. (It was kinda hard to tell sometimes.) We all know how that worked out. “Where’s Sarah?” became a Juneau staple. Now the chickens (or should I say turkeys?) are all coming to roost. She’s pissed off just about every legislator on either side of the aisle. Every time she starts punching buttons on her Blackberry or Van Flein repeats the words “Wasilla Sports Center”, more people begin to wonder what the heck’s going on? Her response to the ongoing economic disaster in Western Alaska is to show up with a plate of cookies. Her pick for Attorney General went down in flames. People are starting to ask about that gas pipeline she claimed was being built. She’s happy oil prices are back up, except she’d also like it if they went down, unless she needs to hand out more money for special dividends…. wait, I’m confused. whatever……. So, with approval ratings melting faster than the arctic icecap, what’s Queen Palin to look forward to? Then, like an oasis on the horizon - flying First Class to $30K/night speaking gigs performed in front of adoring fans, butt-kissing interviews on FauxNews, an unlimited shoe budget, a gazillion dollar book deal, handlers to keep the riff-raff at bay, cocktails by the pool with Kristol and Van Susteren. Or she could stay in Alaska and reap the harvest of the neglect and viciousness that she and her attack dogs have sown. Who in their right mind would stay as Guv? Of course, we’re not dealing with a right mind, ……. The NRA has been looking for a shill ever since Charlton Heston died. I’m sure we can look forward soon to seeing Sarah up there, winking and waving her Mac-10 over her head, “….when they pry open my cold, dead fingers.” as Meg passes the hat. P.S. If you are reading this, Mr. Van Flein, please be assured that I am asserting nothing as fact. Its all rumored. In fact, I’m making this whole thing up. I’m sure your client never actually was Governor or if she was, I’m sure she’s been working day and night to be sure that the Alaskan families in western Alaska have food for the winter and that the folks in Eagle can rebuild their houses….oh, she went fishing in Dillingham instead? …. Oh well, another thing, Van Flein, please also be assured that your pompous, inflammatory blathering directly into the national media machine has done more to publicize any doubts about your client’s integrity than all the bloggers combined.
Sarah the TwitterQuitter says it all.

Old Texican| 7.6.09 @ 7:53PM

ALKINTHEKNOW

Would you PLEASE break paragraphs between restroom breaks.
You are so dumb I shall put you in the "scroll down" category now. Thank you for your numbnuts.

Alan Brooks| 7.6.09 @ 8:03PM

Palin is a fine lady, but she is no Thatcher or Kirkpatrick. Palin might be inaugurated POTUS in 2021, but not in 2013.

Thom| 7.6.09 @ 8:06PM

Old Texan, short reply. I’m putting everything I can into my 401K (I did not ride the Sub Prime idiotic train ride down….). That takes tax money out of the system. I’ve switched to an MSA vs a conventional Health Insurance plan. Cuts my insurance bill 75% and the difference went into my 401K. I’ve cut back on my company paid life insurance for which I’m taxed on imputed income over a fixed amount determined by the government to be excessive. That amount went into my 401K. I’m not buying any product made by Government Motors…..when I do buy a new vehicle it won’t be an Obamamobile and I’ll pay at least 2/3rd in cash. All these measures along with getting out of any debt possible takes away funds from the government. Look at your utility bills, cell phone, regular phone, internet, electric, gas bills,,,,,,, they all have government tax in them which in my case is a significant portion of the bill.

Most people don’t have the option to not earn income but they do have control of their spending. Spend less, the government gets less. Don’t live beyond your means, don’t borrow for the sake of borrowing…… spend less, save more and what you see happening in California happens more until the right people get the message.

Ted R.| 7.6.09 @ 8:26PM

Fred Barnes, speaking on Fox recently, really hit the nail on the head: he said that Palin inspires the contempt of liberals, for cultural and stylistic reasons, as much as political ones. As an ardent liberal, I certainly think he's right about that. I have the same visceral reaction against her, that you guys have against HRC. On top of that, though, she's clearly a dumbell - it mystifies me, all you folks who love her in spite of (or, especially, because of) that.

Anyway, she's certainly contributing to the current theme of a Republican party in complete disarray. She's definitely going for the presidency - and in a manner that is surely just going to lead to internecine war in the party, between the social cons and the rest. Part of me feels sorry for her - she's a classic example of someone who's reach exceeds her grasp. She's gonna do a bellyflop - but not before her ego rivens an already weakened party.

Alan Brooks| 7.6.09 @ 8:37PM

it is true Palin is not seasoned, though she may be smarter than she pretends. I've noticed how people who lowball their intelligence have an edge in being cagey-- Dubya was smarter than he seemed, he put on that folksy Southern charm to win the redstate votes;
do you think he would have done as well with Adlai Stevenson rhetoric?

Siegfried X| 7.6.09 @ 8:40PM

In the wake of Governor Palin stepping down from her job, new allegations have surfaced today in Alaska charging Palin with additional violations of the Alaska Executive Ethics Act.

Zane Henning -- a conservative government watchdog from the governor's hometown of Wasilla and an oilfield worker on Alaska's North Slope -- asserts in a letter to Alaska Attorney General Daniel S. Sullivan that Palin has "been charging and pocketing per diem to live in her home and has used the process for a personal gain since being elected."

In a detailed press release accompanying the charges, Henning declared that:

Palin's use of the per diem is in direct conflict with Section 39.52.120. (a) of the Alaska Executive Ethics Act....More than a thousand state employees commute from the Mat-Su Valley daily and none of them get to pocket free money.

Alan Brooks| 7.6.09 @ 8:44PM

having said that, the old gal MIGHT be resident someday-- she is tough, and the tough survive, while the Good are crucified.

Bob| 7.6.09 @ 8:44PM

Thom -- education is a starting point, not an ending point as those of us who are older, know well. Education not only exists in schools, but in our jobs and lives as well. If Palin had an interest in economics, she would not have settled for a "D" in school. I dare say that you would not have settled for a "D" as well. There were a few subjects that were difficult for me, but I studied and fought my way to an acceptable grade. It's called will. My point in bringing up her effort in school is that she maintained that attitude throughout her life. She was never interested in our economy, the Constitution, the Supreme Court, etc. If she had changed her attitude over her life, I would not mention school. But it a pervasive pattern with her. That's the problem.

Alan Brooks| 7.6.09 @ 8:44PM

president, not resident!

Alan Brooks| 7.6.09 @ 8:49PM

but libs miss the point here, the celebrity status that a mediocrity like Carter enjoyed was not at all better than the hero worship of Palin.

Today Jimmuh writes a book like 'The President Builds An Outhouse' and it gets a glossy jacket and a puff-review in the NYT

Alan Brooks| 7.6.09 @ 9:24PM

Krauthammer gets it just so:
Look, this is the most unexpected and, I would say, erratic political announcement since John McCain declared in the middle of September he was going to suspend his campaign so he could solve our financial crisis, which, unfortunately, he didn't.
It also had a tinge here of Nixon's 1962 "you won't have Dick Nixon to kick around anymore" resignation—actually, it was his concession speech in '62. It had a personal edge.
And on one level, you can accept it and say there was a lot of heat in the kitchen. She wanted to get out. There were attacks on her. The ethics investigations, all of which had not panned out, attacks on the family. She mentioned attacks on Trig, the mocking of Trig. That is tough stuff, and she wanted out.
If she has a calculation for the future, I would say that it has to be 2016 or beyond. It's not going to be in 2012. You have to remember, she is extremely young. In 2016, she will be only 52. In 2020, she will be a young presidential candidate.
I think if she has a strategy, and here I'm not sure, it would be to become a national figure, a conservative figure, work on the movement, educate herself, get boned up on national issues—which you are distracted from if you're in Alaska—and look at the long run.
So I think it can work out in the future, but in the short run, for 2012, I think this is utterly leaving her out of the picture.

Akan Brooks| 7.6.09 @ 9:35PM

but Angelo Codevilla, writes one of his intros-- Angelo writes wordy preambles rather than pieces-- saying she represents the "clay of America", all that jazz.

Liberal Reader| 7.6.09 @ 9:56PM

janet --

Your posting betrays a smug and really brazenly ignorant lack of knowledge about the world. You need to get out more.

Doc| 7.6.09 @ 10:11PM

To certain degree, it's fun to read what some of these asshats are coming up with (have Bob, Sigfried X and Faux Hunt run out of feet to shoot)? By Friday this could be as insane as the Jacko funeral. No one knows what Palin's next move will be except Palin.

Thom| 7.6.09 @ 10:15PM

Bob, I got an A in Micro, Macro Economics, Marketing, etc. I got an nearly an A average in my major subjects. I got an A in English 101 and 102 and I hate English. My school was in the top ten in the Nation in English at the time. I got an A in Civics and Government too. None of this has anything to do with the quality or passion I bring to the job I’ve done for over 37 years. Does any of this make me Presidential material? How many of the past Presidents can attest to their success or failure as a President on the basis of what they took or the grades they got in college?

You and Colin Powel voted for the most liberal Marxist lending man in the Senate who hasn’t work a single day in his life at a real wealth producing job, met a payroll or run even a single small company under the laws that he helped enact and you berate Palin because she doesn’t impress you with her academic pursuits? She has at least worked for a living in the real world and helped run a company under difficult conditions. Obama can’t say the same and it shows all too clearly. He is out there trashing Honduras because they actually stand for their Constitution, cutting the Israelis loose to sink or swim on their own, you defend his weak foreign policies on the basis of “style”, Colin is out there trying to talk to Obama like he is his long lost grandson or something in order to get him to slow down the train wreck and you said he was spending “way too much” before he really got started on his spending spree to Hell. At the rate the horse you and Colin hitched your wagon to is heading for the cliff, it might not really matter who runs against Obama in 2012.

Not to make too fine a point of it Bob, but you and Colin volunteered to be charter members of the Benedict Arnold Club when you voted for Obama. Giving lessons to the team you left is like Arnold giving tips to the Colonists on how to beat the British after he switched sides. That horse don’t hunt and as you and Colin are both going to eventually find out, once you betray others no one will ultimately put any stock in what you say even if you are right. That’s where you and Colin are now, both without a political entity to call yours. You can call yourself “Republicans” all day but at the end of the day you voted for the Marxist in office and he is driving the ship of State into a very large Iceberg “right ahead”. You made you bed Bob. You might not like the beg bugs you get down the road….

Liberal Reader| 7.6.09 @ 10:20PM

Thom --

Obama's not a Marxist. I know you hear Hannity and Limbaugh and Levin say this on the radio, and I know it makes you feel better say so, but this doesn't make it true.

Obama is a text book liberal. Every move he has made has been from a pretty old-fashioned liberal playbook.

"Conservatives" these days are having a harder and harder time drawing distinctions -- the basic cognitive activity we call "analysis."

It's true that liberals have some things in common with socialists, but that doesn't mean they are "Marxists."

Learn to make distinctions, Thom. Use words precisely and don't use hyperbole. It just makes you cynical in the end, and it dulls your ability to think well.

Thom | 7.6.09 @ 10:36PM

Liberal Reader, how precisely do you know what or who I listen to? You are entitled to your opinion but you have no basis on which to base your statement. In addition, Liberalism, as practiced in this country for the last 70 or so years is right in line with Marx’s thinking for an industrial nation. Liberalism is and always has been the weak sister to Marx’s theory and pretty much follows his lead using less overt tactics and more covert tactics such as lying, distortion, misdirection (saying one thing, doing the opposite). Only in the later stages of Marx does “wet” work become necessary and should be avoided for as long as possible. That’s the true face of Liberalism Liberal Reader provided you actually understand Marx’s vision for the Workers Paradise.

Conrad Spiracy| 7.6.09 @ 10:40PM

WOW - too many comments, falsehoods, contributors, fact mongers, and some just plain idiots to follow.

1. More Americans consider themselves conservative than liberal (Gallup, June 15, 2009. See here: http://www.gallup.com/poll/120857/conservatives-single-largest-ideological-group.aspx)

2. I don't recall Sarah Palin claiming that the primary reason she was leaving office was the level of attacks on her. They were the attacks on her family, and the scurrilous rediculousness with which she had to spend personal time battling those vs. the "people's business," (a favorite Clinton line).

3. Of the many ethics charges filed against her, all but 2 have been dismissed outright. One dismissal here: http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2009/06/24/Palin-aide-cleared-of-ethics-complaint/UPI-82201245869338/

She settled one by paying airfare, hotel and meals for her kids for ONE TRIP! Do the words Congressional Junket mean anything to anyone?
Another complaint stated that she wore a jacket with the logo of her husband's snowmobile racing sponsor in public. Does that mean that if I run for dogcatcher I have to quit wearing my Rush Libaugh Club Gitmo shirts at my backyard BBQs?

Give me a freakin' break. Unless the sponsor paid her to wear the jacket, there's nothing wrong. If proof can be found that she was paid, then hoist her on the petard.

Campaigning while still in office? OK - let's try Bush, and Bill, and George H.W., and Dukaka, and Kerry, and Algore, and..... for doing same. Deal?

4. Alan Brooks - Thatcher and Kirkpatrick. Two of my very greatest heroines. Could never have voted for Maggie for president, but Jean was always on my short list ever since her Senate grilling after Grenada. Much more gravitas than The Father of Obomunism can ever hope to achieve.

5. Old Texican - I'd like to meet you and share an adult beverage (or four) someday. Osama Obama Violated the Constitution almost from day 1 (violating "Protect" by Exec Order to shut Gitmo). He continued by violating "Preserve" by forcing GovCo takeover of mortgagors/banks, auto industry (GM and Ford continue to thrive outside of Amerika) and insurance companies. He sure didn't "Defend" when he went overseas to defame our glorious country on his Apology Tour 2009 (if only he could have been joined by Baldwin, Basinger Crow, Penn, Jolie, Sarandon, Robbins, Carter, Powell, ad nauseum ). He's done more than enough to warrant removal from office already.

7. Who cares what Article of the Constitution Biden screwed up? He still couldn't Constitutionally aruge his way out of a playpen.

8. Romney - who cares what religion he is? The man has run, and yes even saved, large corporations.

Kennedy was seen as anathema because he was a Catholic. Oh yeah - a lot of respect he gave his wedding vows (see Governor Sanford).

9. Kennedy II - bugged MLKJ did he?

10. Kennedy III - three words: Murder at Chappaquiddick (what I would have been charged with and quickly convicted of - and back then, executed for).

OK gang - get real. Can you picture Dennis Miller, circa 1996 saying somthing like, "Well Newt Gingrich hasn't been doing too well lately. But yesterday on that debate for energy independence, he managed to electrify Chelsea Clinton by the first recess?"

Hung, drawn and quaterered on the mall in 15 minutes flat.

P.S. Letterman's apology was a non- apology. Go back and listen to it. He blames the naysayers for failing to understand it was a "joke." Not a joke Dave. A flagrant denigration of a young girl still in the formative stages of her life, just beginning to deal with her biology. You scumbag!!!!!

P.P.S. I have two teenage daughters. If he had said something like that about one of them, you'd probably be watching my story in about a year on Law and Order.

Basil Plumley| 7.6.09 @ 11:06PM

First, well done Thom. That was very impressive. I would love to read Bob's rebuttal. Don't worry, he will pull something out of thin air and amaze us all with more nonsense.
He's toned it down a notch today but for those of us who have read his tripe for the last ten months know the venom he has for Palin. I wonder if they teach folks how to spell at Hahvard.

Next, Liberal Reader

Your cheap shot at Janet would have been better if you had bolstered it with a fact or two to prove she was incorrect. Since you offered no facts to back your statement, it was a cheap shot.

Your rebuttal statement to Thom concerning Obama being a Marxist was very weak. In fact, it was downright embarrassing.
You conveniently omit many of the Marxist influences that even Obama notes in his books that shaped Obama's life.

It seems that there was a guy named Frank who was a huge influence in Obama's formative years. It turns out "Frank" was Frank Marshall Davis, a known Communist.
In college, Obama enjoyed reading books written by Black marxists and admits their influence. You probably don't want to get into the work of James Cone.

You delicately avoid any analysis of what Marxism is versus "text book Liberal". The closest you come is a milquetoast analysis of "liberals have some things in common with socialists, but that doesn't mean they are "Marxists." "

That's it? I'm sorry but you have got to do better than that. Why don't you try to differentiate where Obama is not a Marxist.
BTW, You do realize The Daily Worker and Pravda heartily endorse the work of Obama in very recent editorials. You should be proud of your guy.

Do better next time. You don't want people to think you are intellectually vapid.

Basil Plumley| 7.6.09 @ 11:12PM

@ Conrad Spiracy

Since you did not give me a shout out in your post ............. I'm not buying any drinks for you and Old Texican. Take that!!

Ran| 7.6.09 @ 11:20PM

Janet,
I got exactly the same impression listening to him on NPR parroting the "negative rights" model of constitutional interpretation. It was all of it trite, boilerplate freshman Marxist classroom nonsense. Has he ever expressed a shred of original thought in his life? He even cribbed Wright for the title of a book.

I'd like to see the applications, the transcripts, the med reports, the passports...

Basil, old chap, I'll take you up on the offer of free beer, man. Heh!

Elle| 7.6.09 @ 11:33PM

I'm a lot less interested in a candidate's positions (especially since they tend to be manufactured for elections and change with the political winds) than I am in whether their comments demonstrate common sense and a commitment to the American values and culture, both socially and economically, that made this country great.
I hope that Sarah Palin has not left politics because I believe that she demonstrated enormous potential. If she decides to stay in the game she now has the time and the opportunity to prepare herself for the challenges that exist at the national level personally and professionally.
I also agree with those who suggest that Sarah Palin was rejected by the so-called elite because she is a person of real class not the imaginary value that comes from attendance at Ivy League schools, vacations in The Hamptons and membership in the "right " clubs.

Basil Plumley| 7.6.09 @ 11:52PM

Ran ......

No problem. You're a mensch. Top shelf it is.(:

Partisan| 7.7.09 @ 12:08AM

I haven't read all the comments but this one needed responding to.

"Bob| 7.6.09 @ 8:51AM"

"St. Thor -- so what are Palin's positions (not McCain's), on Afghanistan
or what we should do politically with Africa? "

Huh? And why should we do anything?

"What about her detailed positions on economic theory?

Huh? And why is that the federal gvmnts job?

"What about her knowledge of the Supreme Court? "

What of it? How much detail does an executive need?

"What about her misstatements about the Constitution?"

What misstatements? Support your assertion first.

"Please show me her position papers on these issues BEFORE she was
chosen to be VP."

Huh? Position papers? Google up any of the debates she was in running
for governor and watch them.

"If you can't, then I would look in the mirror for signs of ignorance."

Huh? She has a governor of a state and studied up and understood the
issues that mattered to her state and its citizens.

I reject the entire premise of your comment. A person with values and
principles doesn't need detailed position papers to lead. They use
their values and principles to make the right decision as they see fit
when a situation arises.

You're a small minded technocrat elitist. Now piss off while the common
men and women of this country go about saving it from the likes of you.

Yellowstone| 7.7.09 @ 12:20AM

AKintheKnow sounds exactly like the attention whore blogger that called a press conference to whine about Sarah Palin being mean to her. Honestly, these old recycled charges are getting a bit worn and tired. By the way, I heard a rumor that you are still servicing clients behind the dumpster on Spenard Road. Anything to that?

Yellowstone| 7.7.09 @ 12:39AM

If you are interested in what a real Alaskan, in the real "know" thinks, check out the following. http://community.adn.com/adn/node/142223#none

Yellowstone| 7.7.09 @ 12:40AM

If you are interested in what a real Alaskan, in the real "know" thinks, check out the following. http://community.adn.com/adn/node/142223#none

Liberal Reader| 7.7.09 @ 12:53AM

Thom et al. --

Marxism is an actual, historical, definable, real political philosophy. You're using it as a loose metaphor to stand for government policies you don't like.

Central to Marxism is the ownership of the means of production by the "people" or proletariat.

Obama has asserted some government control over a few banks and a few auto companies that were endangering tens of thousands of jobs and billions of tax payer dollars. That's hardly Marxism.

Under Eisenhower and under Nixon the top tax rates were more than double what they were today. (And the middle class was much more secure.) Does that mean Eisenhower and Nixon were twice the "marxists" that Obama is?

You just call people names. Marxist, fascist, communist, terrorist. It's all the same. And you lose the actual meaning of these words, which is a shame, because it actually prevents you from understanding important issues and historical events. You look at the world and you see the small group of people who agree with you on one side, and then this gigantic blur on the other that you can't understand.

No wonder you people hole up with guns on compounds and end up shooting up people's work places just because your wife divorces you or you lose your job. Your driving blind.

Scottie| 7.7.09 @ 1:07AM

I find it astonishing that all of you speak with authority on Sarah, but no one has mentioned or seems to know her record in Alaska.

1. Cut millions of waste and balanced the budget.

2. Scrapped Murkowski's tax system on the oil companies that would have basically seen AK paying them to extract and sell our resources instead of the state sharing in the profits.

3. Brought a gas pipeline project to the contract and development phase -- something that's been tried and failed by other governors for 30 years without success. We even had one of those brilliant Yalies, Tony Knowles, give it a try. In any event, it looks like the first pipe may be laid next year. Read about it at:
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=329698559684271

4. Removed legislators who were on the take from the oil companies to vote for the Murkowski plan We believe there will be more to come, by the way.

5. Redirected the wasteful Gravina Island bridge project (Bridge to Nowhere) funds to needed road projects throughout the state. Incidentally, the "Bridge to Nowhere" was a Stevens earmark obtained, most of us believe, at the behest of Murkowski who just happens to own property on the island. Sarah had nothing to do with it.

6. Though it’s true the oil revenues have slowed, we are still running a surplus of about $5 bn.

She turned the state over to Sean Parnell because he is a very capable administrator and will continue her good policies. And he has actually won statewide office in his own right. He won the office of Lt. Governor, which means we thought he would be more than able, if the time should come that he would have to take the reins as governor.

Certainly, we were all as surprised as you were with this latest move, but most of us still like her, respect her and wish her and her family well in whatever she decides to do in the future.

Angel| 7.7.09 @ 2:02AM

Man, Bob sure got his sorry butt kicked good today: I almost feel pity for him. Almost.

Excellent posts, Conservative gents--I feel like the cavalry has arrived. And just in time, too!

Angel| 7.7.09 @ 2:04AM

janet, great post--you made me laugh.

Basil Plumley| 7.7.09 @ 2:22AM

Dear Liberal Reader,

Everything after your first sentence in baloney. There is no rebuttal as to whether Obama is a Marxist. You also do a poor job of defining terms.
For instance, Communist is a person who belongs to a political party which adheres to the Marxist-Leninist tenets. You can be a Marxist and not be a Communist. However, you lump all the terms together as one and the same. No one has called Obama a Communist or a terrorist (although he has palled around with some). The terms of Marxist and Facsist are related to each other. Both seek government control of the economy in the name of the people. Of course, no one ever defines exactly "who are the people?".

No ... we know exactly who you are. The difference between you and us is a matter of honesty. We have no problem telling America the truth. Your statements have expiration dates and deceit if it furthers your cause. You obfuscate reality because if people really understood you, you would not last in the arena of ideas. Yeah, just who is blurring who.

Textbook Liberal? I guess it depend what the definition of "is", is?

FeralCat| 7.7.09 @ 2:34AM

He's a real Control Freak Man
Ruling in this hostage held land
Making all his controlling plans
For everybody

Doesn't listen to an opposing point of view
Control Freak man, ruling all he thinks is his purview
Control Freak Man, he had better listen
He don't know with what he's messin'
Knows already just what he wants to do
Doesn't he seem a lot like Hitler and Mussolini to you?

He's a real Control Freak Man
Ruling in this hostage held land
Making all his controlling plans
For everybody

He's as blinded by his lust for power as he can be
Just sees what he wants to see
He's got such a God complex point of call
Control Freak Man can you even see America at all?
Knows already just what he wants to do
Doesn't he seem a lot like Hitler and Mussolini to you?

He's a real Control Freak Man
Ruling in this hostage held land
Making all his controlling plans
For everybody

About Control Freak Man we should all worry
To destroy all America built he is in a hurry
If he controls everything his fascist way
It will be a forlorn day
Hes going to leave it all a mess
Anyone of sound mind must confess

He's a real Control Freak Man
Ruling in this hostage held land
Making all his controlling plans
For everybody

Angel| 7.7.09 @ 2:41AM

Interesting poetry/lyrics--funky and scary at the same time.

FeralCat| 7.7.09 @ 2:49AM

Sarah tried to warn them
But they held their blue noses up high
All the time she warned them
But they only passed her by

She tried to tell them
But I guess they didn't care
They turned their backs and
Left her standing there

All the destroyed parts of America that have fallen after him
All the lonely feelings and the burning memories
Everything Obama trashed each time he closed a freedom door
Destroyed parts of America lost forevermore

Obama tried to get me to take a job a while ago
When I finally saw it was just printing more fiat money for his cronies I didn't want to go
The party Ronald Reagan gave to me
The Rinos just tore it all away
Now there's nothing left for me to say

All the destroyed parts of America that have fallen after him
All the lonely feelings and the burning memories
Everything Obama trashed each time he closed a freedom door
Destroyed parts of America lost forevermore

When years have passed they'll start thinking
What fools they've been
They'll look back into the past and
Think of way back then
They'll know that America lost everything they thought that it could win
I guess they should have listened to their friends

All the destroyed parts of America that have fallen after him
All the lonely feelings and the burning memories
Everything Obama trashed each time he closed a freedom door
Destroyed parts of America lost forevermore

Destroyed parts of America lost forevermore

Angel| 7.7.09 @ 3:14AM

FeralCat, it's hard for me to admit that you've captured my feelings; it's so very painful, too.

Blackeney| 7.7.09 @ 3:53AM

Letterman is a deceiver, a dissembler
His fallen trousers are alight
From what pole or gallows
Shall they dangle in the night?

What infernal serpent
Has lent him his perverted tongue?
From what pit of foul deceit
Are all his slanders sprung?

What red devil of mendacity
Grips his sick soul with such tenacity?
Will not one he cruelly shower with lies
Put a fist between his pedophile eyes?

observor| 7.7.09 @ 8:26AM

i read the whole page of comments ...it is filled with bile, so many insults, such total disrespect for one another...reminds me of the 7th grade schoolyard...

Dennis Elliott| 7.7.09 @ 9:59AM

What drives them nuts and what they don't understand is that the power in politics doesn't mean much to her. Only the potentials matter. That makes it easy for her to walk away from a venue that has become unworkable to one that offers more leeway to accomplish those things she deems important.

Missy| 7.7.09 @ 1:52PM

Cool post, Dennis.

Old Texican| 7.7.09 @ 2:02PM

Conrad spir...Basil.
You guys always make an important contribution, along with Aaron and a couple of our drop in ladies.
Thank you all for thinking and expressing genuine thought.
I was very frustrated yesterday.
I had been mentally composing that post over the holidays.
I DO believe these jerks have declared war on our country...on ya'll and I.

Maybe Ya'll are just smarter than me, or more circumspect than me.

Our resident liberals simply do not understand that they are the toolfools of the revolutionary communists trying to conquer our free country.

They will be the first enslaved, and they cannot even imagine that.

Richard Baker| 7.7.09 @ 3:28PM

I like her because she doesn't see politics as all there is in life, in short, she's not a political junkie. To her critics, let me come to your house and say similar things to your children and spouse, in your presence, and let's see just how TOLERANT and unconcerned you'd be.

Conrad Spiracy| 7.7.09 @ 6:53PM

Sgt. Major Plumley;
SHOUT OUT!!! Sincerest scumbucket E5 Squid apologies for neglecting to acknowledge your presence in this mostly honorable forum.

Conrad Spiracy| 7.7.09 @ 7:01PM

Somehow, my previous comments got severely truncated when I hit the "crammit key."

Old Texican;
Thank you for the acknowlegement. Same back in Spades.

Sgt. Major;
Ready to report for head (er, latrine) duty. Are you wearing your CMOH and combat boots?

Can I get that beer now?

Rick Garner| 7.7.09 @ 10:47PM

With Palin's resignation as Governor of Alaska, the feeding frenzy is on of news organizations clamoring to be the first to announce all the details. After all, if one quits their job they either couldn't handle the pressure or were up to no good, right?

http://richardtgarner.blogspot.com/2009/07/palin-keeps-em-guessin.html

Angel| 7.8.09 @ 2:46AM

Old Texican, most of us have been posting here at AmSpec for almost a year now and are used to the crappy trolls. AmSpec helped me survive Obummer's election, it's been a true life-line.

I understand your frustration--we all do, but don't get mad---get even. You're not alone. I wish I lived in Texas, I would go to your Tea Party.

Just keep posting your great comments; eventually something will come of our camaraderie--I just don't know what it is yet. :)

mimi| 12.15.09 @ 12:12AM

cheap watches

poptropica | 4.9.10 @ 12:08AM

I’ll have a Poptropica full written walkthrough very soon, but in the meantime, here are some answers to some of the frequently asked questions about Mythology Island. Having trouble? Post a question in the comments and I’ll try to answer it!
Getting Hercules to Help You Poptropica

Hercules won’t help you until you have all five items from Zeus’ quest. Once you have the five items, bring them to Athena. Zeus will appear and steal them. The big jerk! Once this happens, talk to Athena and she will tell you that Hercules will help you. You’ll need to have the magic mirror from Aphrodite because Hercules doesn’t want to have to walk. He’s so lazy!
Getting the Hydra Scale Poptropica

You can see how to do this in the videos, but basically you need to jump up when the Hydra is about to strike. He will rear one of his heads back to attack and his eyes will bulge out. Poptropica When this happens, jump up in the air and then try to land on top of his head. That head will get knocked out. When all five heads get knocked out, the Hydra will be asleep and you can click on him to get one of the scales. Poptropica I’ll have a full written walkthrough very soon, but in the meantime, here are some answers to some of the frequently asked questions about Mythology Island. Having trouble? Post a question in the comments and I’ll try to answer it!
Getting Hercules to Help You

Hercules won’t help you until you have all five items from Zeus’ quest. Poptropica Once you have the five items, bring them to Athena. Zeus will appear and steal them. The big jerk! Once this happens, talk to Athena and she will tell you that Hercules will help you.Poptropica. You’ll need to have the magic mirror from Aphrodite because Hercules doesn’t want to have to walk. He’s so lazy!
Getting the Hydra Scale

You can see how to do this in the videos, but basically you need to jump up when the Hydra is about to strike. He will rear one of his heads back to attack and his eyes will bulge out.Poptropica When this happens, jump up in the air and then try to land on top of his head. That head will get knocked out. When all five heads get knocked out, the Hydra will be asleep and you can click on him to get one of the scales. Poptropica

onlystep| 4.28.10 @ 11:39PM

Nice news. Thanks a lot.
bugcart.com | igetfun.com

balloon| 11.30.11 @ 9:16AM

i am feeling lucky, another good article.