The American Spectator

drudge ette obama| 11.17.09 @ 6:42AM

I wonder is David Brooks would have the courage to tell Sarah Palin that she is a joke. Agree or not that Sarah Palin is the next Reagan, but there is nothing more unseemly than a group of arrogant media buzzards feeding on someone. I wouldn't want to be in the same room with the Andrea Mitchells, David Brooks, David Corns of the world. They are mood busters.

And if I hear one more pundits, like Ellison whatever his strange voiced face's name is, complain that Palin is whining, I will scream.

Alan Brooks| 11.17.09 @ 10:19AM

Sarah's a tough lady. Perhaps her future is better than it even seems at the present.

But a long row to hoe.

Angel| 11.17.09 @ 7:37PM

Told you so, Alan. Oh, ye of little faith.

Alan Brooks| 11.17.09 @ 11:07PM

Still many rows to hoe in the field.

Angel| 11.18.09 @ 12:26AM

True, but at least you can visualize the possibilities now.

alyeska| 11.19.09 @ 1:56AM

am i prescient, or not? i was among the first to advocate a palin/beck ticket :)

Patriot Games| 11.17.09 @ 1:57PM

You're referring to Ellis Hennican, a 100 percent dyed-in-the-wool nutty, shrill, NY lib, a newspaper scribbler and the most BORING lib in the world. O'Reilly has him on all the time to provide the left-wing view. He's like one of those cheap toys where you press a button and a tinny recording comes on for 15 seconds, but this cheap toy also sneers at the TV camera and at whatever is decent and American. I think O'Reilly relies on Hennican because he's willing to travel into Manhattan from Long Island for nothing but the free sandwich they give him in the gree room.

Angel| 11.17.09 @ 7:41PM

What an awful little man! Being exposed to the high-pitched voice of the little moron Hennican is like listening to fingernails scraping over a chalkboard.

notoobamessiah| 11.17.09 @ 6:44AM

Palin held her own with the bamsters election gal oprah yesterday. The questions that were asked would NEVER have been asked of a dimocrat and they wouldn't have been hammered on certain questions as Sarah was. Oprah is tiresome and needs to move on to cable tv.
Palin in 2012!

victor| 11.17.09 @ 10:16PM

Yes, the one about family and career would never be asked of libs or "moderates", would it?
BTW I heard that Oprah will blast off into space and broadcast from her own satellite.

Jericho| 11.18.09 @ 2:40AM

Is that satellite receiving a feed from the mother ship trailing behind the comet. If so I hope she takes Louie with her?

One thing is for sure the Palin interview on Oprah built Palin. While Oprah having to come crawling to the hottest political gal in the US diminished the big O.

Appleby| 11.17.09 @ 6:44AM

TheKids hate being ignored. The best thing Mrs. Palin can do (besides making sure she is referred to as MRS. and not MS.) is rise above them and continue with her own agenda. As pointed out in the above essay, liberal media hates people who do not grovel for their every lollipop and string of plastic beads. She ought to just smile and walk on. Like a child exhausted by its futile tantrum, they will pick themselves up and follow her, whining all the way.

Stephanie| 11.17.09 @ 6:46AM

Right-o Drudge ette! Talk about whiners!

Big J| 11.17.09 @ 6:51AM

Hang on, here come the lunatics. Just the mention of Sarah's name sends the libs into a tailspin.

What is it that Toddard calls it?

Oh yeah, monomania.

Richard Baker| 11.17.09 @ 7:20AM

I say to liberals all the time, if she's so stupid and foolish then get out of the way and let her self-destruct. The only problem is that she's NOT self-destructing. Life is SO unfair, isn't it? By the way, she does look good in shorts. Try that with Hillary Clinton or Helen Thomas. Ewwwww!

GMAN| 11.17.09 @ 4:29PM

... or Candy Crowly on CNN

Tom| 11.18.09 @ 12:59PM

Or that one one guy - what's his name?
Oh yeah, Rachel Maddow

E from CV| 11.18.09 @ 3:07PM

Zow. Went to the same high school as Maddow. Only player on the girl's volleyball team with hairy legs.

And no, I'm not kidding. Back then it just seemed "earthy." Of course now it makes more sense.

Bydand76| 11.17.09 @ 7:25AM

I hope this throws all of you Lib Readers, Alyeska's and Deaf Pigs into such a tizzy that you are unable to type any longer.

You to Bob!

The wicked thing about Sarah Palin is she keeps proving the liberal media wrong.

I remember hearing about how she was going to fade into oblivion after McCain lost the election and now here she is dominating the liberal media goons. Well to hell with them!

if Obama= Carter? Then Palin = Reagan!

I say "Go Sarah" ! Keep up the good work pretty lady! You have my support!

Moose Hunting is awesome good fun too!

victor| 11.17.09 @ 10:29PM

Just remember, they are dying for the day when someone says "Sarah", the response will be Sarah who?
Never happen.
BTW remember her office?
http://blogs.laweekly.com/styl...../palin.jpg

WestWright| 11.18.09 @ 7:50AM

Thanks Victor, I love that SP Office pic!

alyeska| 11.19.09 @ 2:02AM

on the contrary -- i welcome sarah palin and her supporters -- the more the merrier. i hope she stays front and center for a long time to come and i think a palin/beck, or, a cheney/palin ticket in '12 would be a thing of beauty.

QU| 11.18.09 @ 5:28AM

Sarah Palin manages to sway away the media from its sole job; the job to inform America about what really matters to Americans as a nation. She is now the magnet that pulls all the attention on her by doing what is just right and walking the line to earn a place in history. In fact she is doing so much a hell of a job that the media has to rereel their camera on her; resulting in their failure to update Americans on Obama’s trip to Asia, the impact of bringing the trial of the September 11 attack’s mastermind to New York, or even about Shania Davis who was found dead in a heavily wooded area.
Going Rogue is becoming a wonder for every American writer, the flame that lit all Americans’ curiosity, and the eraser that is fading the popularity of Obama’s days behind the cameras. The Grand Old Party (GOP) did not make or break her; she is orchestrating her own destiny and she is taking off to be the real 2012 candidate with the guts and the courage to give us what we really need.
Sarah is a straight shooter and a forward politician. She is as popular as she is right as she is “going rogue” on the media and even on her own party. She does not voice our opinion to take revenge or to redeem herself but to set the record straight and to show the world that she can narrate her political and social agenda in a way that will keep Americans wondering whether they made the right choice in the last elections. If Sarah has any arrogance at all; she should rewrite the song of Will Smith to say “This is the story about a woman whose life was badly propagandized by the media but used that exude negativity to turn it into good results and now that woman can seat on her throne to tell America how she becomes the sensation of a worldwide politic and that she is ready to move her little ass to Washington.”
Sarah is gaining a lot of publicity for her book “Going Rogue.” Whether badgering or foreshadowing; this publicity is placing her ahead of the flock of possible candidates for 2012. Whether she runs or not; America will think her for she had fought real hard for us; she had fought for what it is right. Her name should be entered into the Webster Dictionary as a word that would mean “reshaping the way America thinks and hopes.” Her tactics to avoid the press but to always stay on top of the major search engines should be placed in an anthology so to be taught in business and marketing classes.
Move over Obama! Sarah Palin is moving from the little known girl from Alaska to gain national spotlight in order to school America on the real definition of hope and change.

Graham| 11.18.09 @ 12:36PM

Moose hunting may be fun, but this deadly serious; and so is moose hunting. But more than that, it provides meat (to chew on). We need more of that and Sarah brings that to the table. She is all about values that sustain. That takes hard work, risk and reward, following the law of the land and doing the right thing because it's the right thing to do; not because it's popular or glamorous, or everyone else is doing it.

SC Mike| 11.17.09 @ 7:38AM

Further confirmation of McCain’s thesis that the mainstream media are upset because Palin does not need them is on the op-ed page of today’s WaPo where Eugene Robinson and Richard Cohen make vain attempts to denigrate the werewolf from Wasilla.

Robinson’s is the more ridiculous take: casting Palin as our Rouge Evita is laughable. Cohen’s snooty take is more Brooksian and less fun.

victor| 11.17.09 @ 10:30PM

Gene Robinson is a hack.
He slobbers all over the 'Bama.
No objectivity at all.

alyeska| 11.19.09 @ 2:10AM

yeah, gene robinson is a hack -- a pulitzer prize winning hack, but a hack nonetheless. give me rush limbaugh or glenn beck anytime for incisive, measured and informed commentary any day.

damned libs!

Kris Lepine| 11.17.09 @ 7:39AM

I'm old enough to remember what was done to Dan Quale. I'm also old enough to remember the "Little Rascals". Remember the bullies in those shows and many more like them? Sarah Palin, Dan Quale, conservative talkers, the list is endless of those being attacked by the play ground bullies. And for too many years, we have taken it and allowed it to happen to conservative leaders. When are we going to stand up to the BULLIES and say enough is enough? Hey Republican leadership, use their attacks against them for a change. I would be proud to be the party of "NO" to what the Dems are doing to this country. Wimpy Republican men in this country need to look at Sarah Palin and other strong women and follow their lead, then do what men are supposed to do; come to her defense

Liberals are afraid of Palins faith and her values. They don't want a strong conservative woman who actually lives what she believes. It scares them mightily. WHY? They don't want anyone or anything to remind them of how shallow and fake their lives are. Sarah Palin is a mirror they don't want to be reflected in.

alyeska| 11.19.09 @ 2:14AM

i remember dan quale too. i remember his answer when he was asked what he would do if his daughter became pregnant and was considering an abortion and he replied that he wouldn't get involved as that was Her Decision to make. kinda, almost like he supported a woman's right to chose. but, nah, that couldn't be. right?

stacy stewart| 11.17.09 @ 7:48AM

Why does anyone call David Brooks a coservative?
He along with David Frum and Peggy Noonan are
neolibs and all conservative pundents should brand
them so.

Paul from SA| 11.17.09 @ 12:49PM

Exactly. David Brooks is a Republican anti-conservative, just like John McCain, Lindsay Graham, Kay Bailey Hutchison, Kathleen Parker, Peggy Noonan, Colin Powell, ....

The word "Republican" has no meaning today.

Margie| 11.17.09 @ 2:19PM

Well, Sarah Palin's a Republican, and she's willing to fight for the Party. She said on Rush's show today she's not for a Third Party. She knows it wouldn't work in today's America. She believes the plank in the Republican Party is the best bet.
Don't believe all the hype.

Paul from SA| 11.17.09 @ 3:26PM

Believe me, I never believe media hype.

I understand completely what you're saying, but I will not be associated with people like David Brooks or Janeane Garfola in any way. The chairman of the RNC should make a public statement denouncing Brooks, et. al. Until then, I am partyless and unrepresented, and they will not get my vote or my support or my money.

How can Brooks' mean, sexist and nasty statements toward such a popular Republican be tolerated within the Party? He is bad for the party and needs to be shown the door.

Imagine if a Democrat denounced Obama using similar words that Brooks used to describe Sarah. That person would be lynched by the liberals.

Margie| 11.17.09 @ 4:23PM

Well, the more conservatives speak up and get involved in helping to get conservatives nominated and elected, the more the liars like Brooks will start fleeing the Party. Remember, the light outshines the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it. Jn.1:5.
We've got work to do!

Joanie| 11.17.09 @ 7:44PM

Yes, we do, Margie. Glad to see you're coming to your senses about the RINO problem in our party.

Margie| 11.17.09 @ 8:07PM

Excuse me, troll stalker. For all those who don't know~~ this little entity follows me around completely oblivious to reality by repeating it's same mantra.
I will repeat for all to see. I have been working my entire "political" life to help nominate and back, and vote for conservatives in all of my local elections, as well as national elections. have you been doing the same?
So buzz off.

Joanie| 11.17.09 @ 10:18PM

Thin skinned, very thin-skinned. You sound crazy, Margie; explains some of your posts. You're the RINO, not I.

Pssst! No one cares, Margie; no need to address fellow posters--also makes you sound crazy.

victor| 11.17.09 @ 10:40PM

I see someone's sobered up.
Like Toddard, you don't get to define us or anyone else.

Joanie| 11.18.09 @ 12:29AM

victor = Margie, Margie = victor; who's the crazy sock-puppet here?

Margie| 11.17.09 @ 11:00PM

Then quit addressing me, loser.

alyeska| 11.19.09 @ 2:16AM

does this mean you won't go to their xmas parties. they'll be soooo disappointed.

Phyllis Scheck| 11.17.09 @ 8:14PM

You're 100% correct, Kris ~~ I'm almost 79 yrs. "young", and have heard all that you speak of! The statement about Sarah Palin that the State-run Media uses that makes them look so dumb, is that she has no "experience" to be President of the United States ~~ Dah! Look at their annointed one who IS sitting in that chair, and how inept he is!!! Phyllis in IL

fundamentalist| 11.18.09 @ 1:33PM

Good points, Stacy! As much as I admire John McCain and Sarah Palin, McCain has never been a conservative and Sarah Palin is conservative on social issues only. She is very much the socialist on economic issues.

Doc| 11.17.09 @ 7:55AM

Not to mention, she doesn't seem to need the interdiction from some of the country club/RINOs who are forever running around with a "KICK ME" sign on their collective back.

Joellen| 11.17.09 @ 8:32AM

Do what I have done. I have a bumper sticker on my car "Sarah Palin 12'". It is DRIVING THE LIB's CRAZY!

alyeska| 11.19.09 @ 2:20AM

just because we're laughing hysterically every time we see your bumper sticker does not mean we're crazy -- it means we're over-the-moon happy.

palin/beck 12

Mattled| 11.17.09 @ 8:37AM

This sums it up nicely:

It's a chilling moment when the light goes out in someone's eyes. A once-radiant child hardens from abuse. A woman's heart shrinks after her husband's abandonment.

The person looks the same, maybe acts the same. But something is gone, and what's lost is irretrievable. It's like when a person dies: in a heartbeat, the soul vanishes.

I witnessed this alteration recently when I visited my goddaughter, a radiant girl. Her mom, a hardcore progressive, has started exposing her to the darkest elements of the left. And the last time I looked in the girl's eyes, the light had gone out. Disappeared. Just like that.

I see this phenomenon every day: a light dimming. The friendly shopkeeper snaps at me. My cheerful neighbor seems flattened.

And you hear it in the news: people acting strangely, going off the deep end. The most bizarre behavior becoming the new normal.

A thug bites off a finger. Sarah Palin's church is torched. Bullies intimidate voters.

Last week, an esteemed Columbia University black architecture professor punched a white female coworker in the eye for not doing more about white privilege.

He has no history of violence. So why now?

Why now? This may be the most important question of our time. Why are some people reaching the boiling point? Why do many others look vacant, like an Invasion of the Body Snatchers? The shootings at military bases, from Little Rock to Fort Hood -- why now?

It's Obama, of course.

Sir| 11.17.09 @ 8:48AM

We had all better get our spiritual affairs in order.

I'm not saying that Barry Hussein is the anti-Christ. Frankly, I don't think he's intelligent enough to play that role. I do, however, believe that the final years are upon us. How many is "final"? I don't know. 10? 15? Whatever the case, Bad is certainly being called Good, and vice versa. It can't last long.

Jesus is the ONLY way, folks. Sign up.

Ron| 11.18.09 @ 8:34AM

Read Psalm 109:8. David asked for help from God. So should America! Romans 1 is the passage Sir referred to. It is indeed prophetic.

shoey| 11.17.09 @ 10:12AM

Obama?

no it's his agenda, it's anti-american in just about every way you can think of, ppl are shocked and angry because they know they've been had (although most still won't admit it, still they know)

John II| 11.17.09 @ 6:14PM

Yes--"Invasion of the Body Snatchers." The 1956 Don Siegel version, that is; not the cheesy, bombastic 1978 remake, misidentified by liberal movie critics as an "improvement" on the '56 version.

Hmmm. 1978. Yes, by that time American liberals had started behaving like the pod people in both movies.

Confucius say, "Logophobe who live only by heart become heartless." Thank you so much.

Jeremiah| 11.17.09 @ 6:22PM

This hit a nerve. It has long troubled me that I look at people and, sometime between the late teens and the late 20s, I can see the light of hope, the spark of idealism gone from their eyes. They think they have become realists. I think otherwise. They have become cynical.

I believe that if you scratch the surface of a cynic, nine times out of ten you will find a disillusioned idealist desperately looking for a reason to believe. The other time you will find a nascent evil.

davidt| 11.17.09 @ 10:00PM

http://tiny.cc/Ql9AM

Ken (Old Texican)| 11.17.09 @ 8:40AM

Kris
Out of all the comments here, you nailed it!
Mr. McCain
Splendid column. Thank you.
supposed to do; come to her defense
Kris wrote:
"Liberals are afraid of Palins faith and her values. They don't want a strong conservative woman who actually lives what she believes. It scares them mightily. WHY? They don't want anyone or anything to remind them of how shallow and fake their lives are. Sarah Palin is a mirror they don't want to be reflected in. "

I even loved your emphasis created with the inside out grammer. heh! Delightful.

I have always thought that the most loving action a human being can provide is simply holding up a mirror...being a mirror...to a beloved person.
Conversely, holding an accurate mirror up to an evil person or a pompous person...or an empty person...is the first step for those persons' to ever hope for salvation. Thanks for the reminder, Kris

cuban pete| 11.17.09 @ 9:03AM

Reminds me of what someone once said about Grover Cleveland. "I love him for the enemies he's made."

Sandra in Severn| 11.17.09 @ 9:25AM

Why do I admire Mrs. Palin the most? She is just like me, but unlike me, she is not sitting down, writing letters, she went out and started to take charge and MAKE the changes.

Amazing what the PTA can teach you about politics and how being the part-time mayor of a small town teaches about building consensus.

What do the "elites" of both parties hate most? This woman, was not a fellow private-prep school student. Just an "average" public school educated one of the masses. She's not supposed to "jump" all the barriers that were erected to keep people like her OUT.

Mrs. Palin was supposed to be another "working class" soccer(or hockey) mom with a van, a bunch of kids and vote the (Democrat) party line and be grateful for all that the "Feminists Elites" have done for her.

Mrs. Palin is a "DO-ER," not a "DONE-FOR." She does what need to be done, (same for her wonderful husband) they do! They don't wait for some politically appointed bureaucrat to "do for" them.

Go Sarah! Go!

Anthony| 11.17.09 @ 9:27AM

The real question is when will those same leftist ass kissers over at the AP fact check Obama's birth certificate?
Our country is now governed by a cabal of '60s leftist elites in government, the media and academia. Their bona fides are not necessarily Ivy League schools, look at Pelosi and Reid for proof of that, rather, it's being part of the ruling clique, no matter how one got there.
Their hatred, distain, and yes, fear, of Gov. Palin has been exposed and the reasons clearly seen by those with half a brain. Obama & his radical leftist administration is the last gasp for the pampered, conceited and self absorbed aging denisens of Woodstock Nation. Those of us who choose not to join must be marginalized or destroyed.
Governor Palin will lay waste to these snot nosed fools and the road to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. will be littered with their carcasses.
The last futile gesture of this pathetic generation will be the reduction of their carbon footprint as they compost nicely in the earth's rich soil.

Mike Geremia| 11.17.09 @ 4:03PM

Hey Anthony-- I love your post. Good job---you said it all. Keep up the good work.....Mike G

Tweeter| 11.20.09 @ 1:34AM

Marry me!

bluecollarbytes| 11.17.09 @ 9:27AM

Conservatives who refuse to minimize or apologize for their beliefs are the largest targets of PopMedia, fellow Democrats and flat-out socialists. What we're seeing is a handful of conservatives (many of them Women) refusing to play the Republican moderation game re introduced by the first Bush. Are Democrats and Obama to be opposed or not? In case it's not been noticed, Obama is dragging us severely to the Left, with no discernible ideological restraints derived from his Party, American values, PopMedia or Obama's political beliefs. Do Republicans continue to pick around at the edges of fatally-flawed proposals or hit them head on?

Sarah Palin represents the common sense of the people, something politicians tend to recognize only when an issue reaches critical mass, like the amnesty attempt, or mandated govt.-ruled health ins. under threat of prison. Most politicians seem caught in todays Leftist-muck one way or the other, either supporting it or making their peace with many of its elements. Once the peace is made, Obama/Democrats will be right there with the next round of 'unmet needs', eco-doomsday scenarios, and continued demonization of America. Either we'll have folks like Palin opposing Obama stew or we'll be stuck with Republicans trying to save their jobs by adding water. Boil it all down and it's still Obama stew.

Beer For My Horses| 11.17.09 @ 9:28AM

A Limbaugh-Coulter ticket in 2012!

That would be great fun; what a concept!

alyeska| 11.19.09 @ 2:39AM

that would be impossible; one is a college educated, family-values oriented guy who is still married to his first wife and teaches sunday school and the other is a thrice married, high school grad, drug addict. they wouldn't get along at all -- totally different agendas :)

alyeska| 11.19.09 @ 2:41AM

oops, i misread your post and thought you wrote "a limbaugh/colbert ticket."

my bad.

Johnno| 11.19.09 @ 6:00PM

You're right about the different agendas: Colbert's a liar and Limbaugh tells the truth.

jd| 11.17.09 @ 9:43AM

I concur that Kris nailed it. I admire Palin tremendously mainly because she reflects who I am - a conservative woman who is college-educated, works, is raising kids, and lives by traditional values and beliefs. We are a group larger then what the mainstream media wants to believe exists and am fed up not only with liberal elites anointing who THEY think are intelligent and worthy, but also am fed up with the RINOS of the Republican party. They do not represent me or my party. I hope Palin runs in 2012 but would be happy with anybody, male or female, who is not a RINO.

mike geremia| 11.17.09 @ 4:09PM

You said it all. I agree 100%. Yes, the Republican Party needs to purge itself of all the Rinos. Yes, GB #1 changed the party to a "moderate, liberal" course and we are now paying for it. Sarah is our only hope--another Reagan Conservative. Yes, I have a Palin sticker on the back of my van and an upside down US flag to show that this country is upside down with all the stupid political correctness going on. I go out of my way to be the opposite and if I offend somebody, so be it. T.S.

RevJDSpears| 11.17.09 @ 9:45AM

Sadly far to many people making comments on this article have been listening to Rush to much. "Drives the libs crazy!" We are overly delighted in the amount of time that people spend elevating this barely run to godhead status. Palin 2012! Go for it! We welcome the easy run and Obama's second term!

Ken (Old Texican)| 11.17.09 @ 11:41AM

Hello Rhhheeeverundddddddh! Spears.
I hope your sermons make more sense than your post here. I have read it a couple of times, and your reasoning is still murky.
You can have your omamessiah. We just like the lady. Get over it.

stephanie| 11.17.09 @ 1:23PM

Best not hold your breath Rev. Obamessiah will be, God willing, another Jimma Cahtah....down in the real history books as the looser that nearly destroyed our country.
And as others have told you, you can't stand that she gets this much attention, her being so irrelevent, dumb and ignorant. Oh! and that her book has been on the best seller list for weeks before it even hit the shelves. How 'bout we send some 11 fact checkers out to check out Barry's books. No? I thought so.

Anthony| 11.17.09 @ 2:59PM

Let me guess, Rev. Spears, might you be Rev. Wright's successor? Might you also be spending a good amount of your time on the pulpit, not only fleecing your flock, but shilling for Obama as well? Hmmm, seperation of church and state huh?
Hey how's that house of yours in that gated, tony, whitey community, or, have you not been able to con your flock out of their cash as well as Wright did?

Mike Geremia| 11.17.09 @ 4:15PM

What flavor Kool-aid are you drinking Pal?
Grape like Jim Jones in Jonestown? Keep on dreaming. Obama is done for. His ratings are plummeting every day. Every time the Narcissist opens his mouth, he puts his foot in it. Meanwhile our troops in Obama's War are dying while he keeps fiddling around and taking vacations on our expense.

Richard Baker| 11.17.09 @ 10:02AM

Rev. Spears:
She's the point of the spear for Conservatism and being an American. Why does she distress you so? If she's so worthless then let her self-destruct.

mayen1985| 11.17.09 @ 10:03AM

RevJDSpears (God I hope you are not a real reverend),

Your description of Palin as a "barely run to godhead status" -- are you not describing Obama? He is the barely run that the media has anointed as a godhead but we already know that he is at best a false prophet and at worst the devil incarnate.

Margie| 11.17.09 @ 12:35PM

Yes, and Obama is also the Clerical Error-in-Chief as well.

David Brooks| 11.17.09 @ 10:31AM

Her trousers are very poorly creased, and you know how important that is to me. Why did my dreamboat run off to China and leave me alone with this horrible....snowbilly?!?

S.L. Toddard| 11.17.09 @ 10:32AM

A few words from the great Daniel Larison (in response to Matthew Continetti's Palin-boosting in the neoconservative Weekly Standard) should suffice:

“So we come to the core of Palin’s pseudo-populism, which is her cultivation of the cultural grievances of her audience and the manipulation of their feelings of relative powerlessness to promote her own ambitions. She feeds off of the elite anxiety that her performance generates, and elites are happy to fuel her rise, because she makes populism appear ridiculous and makes their positions even more secure than they were before. After all, when given the choice between the incompetent and ridiculous populist and even a moderately informed establishment figure, the public will tend to favor the latter despite their dissatisfaction with the status quo. They may also suspect that she has no intention of giving any substance to her complaints against elites. This makes her useful as a means of diverting populist anger away from them and their preferred policies and channeling it into useless identitarian protest movements that congratulate themselves on how deeply American they are before fading into obscurity. This is why many movement and party elites tolerate and even encourage Palin, but regard Huckabee as a serious threat who must be thwarted, because he occasionally gives them reason to worry that he is hostile to their interests. In reality, even Huckabee’s gestures towards economic populism are empty, but they have seemed real enough to terrify some of the very same people who now happily boost Palin as the great populist hope.”

“One thing that moves me to dismiss (Continetti’s) arguments for Palin is his insistence that she in some way represents a tradition of Democratic populism exemplified by Jackson and Bryan when she has no claim to such a tradition, especially when she seems to have no sympathy for such a tradition once she is in the national spotlight. Another is the idea that she can appeal to independent voters to revitalize her political career when, as Brendan Nyhan noted, the vast majority of independents believes she is unfit for presidential responsibilities and just 28% believe her to be qualified."

“Continetti has embarked on a project of rehabilitating the national political fortunes of someone who dropped out of elective office in her own state mostly because she could not put up with the tactics of her opposition and the scrutiny of the media. Why should we take such a project seriously? If arguments in support of Palin’s political future don’t deserve to be dismissed pretty quickly, no argument ever should be.”

“I would have thought that anyone interested in promoting reasoned, thoughtful discussion would shudder at the thought of a Republican Party led and defined by Sarah Palin, whose national political career has been one episode of inflammatory, uninformed agitation after another. That is the kind of party and the kind of conservatism Continetti is working to create. Fortunately, his preferred candidate is so politically radioactive to most of the country that it will never take hold.”

“In reality, Jackson’s legacy is the antithesis of much of what the Whigs and Republicans have stood for in domestic politics since 1824, and Palin has no claim on such a legacy. The financial sector bailout last year was the sort of close collusion between government and banks that infuriated Jackson and his followers. The so-called heiress of Jackson endorsed the bailout. There is a Jackson-like anti-Fed populism out there, but Continetti and his colleagues have no interest in encouraging Palin to embrace their arguments.”

“Everything that made Jackson and Bryan’s populism interesting gives most Republican and movement conservative leaders hives, because these men married cultural and economic populism together. As the GOP’s Palinolatry itself shows, cultural pseudo-populism is at least tolerated as a gimmick or electoral maneuver, but even a whiff of real economic populism has always been toxic for Republican leaders and activists. There is a reason why Palin’s own Alaska record of hiking windfall profit taxes on oil companies has been carefully and consistently eliminated from all conservative discussions of her time as governor. That is her claim to some measure of populist leadership, and it is the one thing about her economic conservatives and national GOP leaders would like to forget. Indeed, as she has become a national figure she has run as far away from the substance of what she did in Alaska as possible, because raising any taxes on major corporations for any reason is exactly the one thing that will never fly with Republicans on a national level.”

“Of course, we understand that the purpose of the article is to give favorable press coverage to Palin and to continue The Weekly Standard’s embarrassing cheerleading for her. There is also a clear desire to burnish Palin’s credentials as the “rogue” anti-elitist and to make her part of the most absurdly artificial tradition of “Jackson-Bryan-Reagan.” After all, no Palin love letter would ever be complete without some reference to how she resembles Reagan in some intangible, mystical way that only devotees can understand. I simply don’t know how one draws a line between William Jennings Bryan, an intense evangelical Christian who fiercely opposed concentrated wealth and power, and Ronald Reagan, a mild Presbyterian and former FDR Democrat whose practical domestic legacy was the advancement of corporate and large business interests”

DAC| 11.17.09 @ 11:36AM

Just send the link next time, eh? Prefaced by "blah, blah, blah...".

Tim| 11.17.09 @ 11:40AM

SL's never left us wanting more.

Stephanie| 11.17.09 @ 1:26PM

Yeah, whatever.

Doorgunner| 11.17.09 @ 1:40PM

There is only one reason Tarded attacks a a potential conservative cndidate: he thinks they might be electable.

Dai Alanye| 11.17.09 @ 1:49PM

Anyone know a way to disable the >copy< function of this SLT's computer?

Al Adab| 11.17.09 @ 5:52PM

A few words? It reminds me of the lawyer who says, "I'll be brief". Everyone goes to lunch and he never notices.

John II| 11.17.09 @ 6:30PM

A FEW words???

Toddard? Is that you? If so, you forgot the secret signal. If not, whoever you are, how DARE you traduce the name of Toddard with a posting of such resolute smugness.

Confucius say, "Man who use 'of course' in argument and pretend to mind-reading reveal more of self than of topic." Thank you so much. And now back to Charlie Chan and honest detection.

Bohred| 11.17.09 @ 8:06PM

SL you talk too much, you go on too long. Keep it short and keep it clear. You confuse quality with quantity.
Zip it mouth boy.

victor| 11.17.09 @ 10:46PM

Here's the real reason for Toddard's disdain of President Sarah Palin:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bJaA7Is5WdM

WestWright| 11.18.09 @ 8:05AM

Blah,blah Toddard, we laugh at your oblviousness, your unintelligence is displayed proudly in your every post! And yet you must think that your idiotic cut & paste commentary is an example of INTELLIGENCE??? The joke is on you and similar post tools!

alyeska| 11.19.09 @ 2:54AM

SLT:

this is the rift in the republican party that really raises my spirits. i am counting on the primary season disabling the gop in 2010.

Johnno| 11.19.09 @ 6:10PM

Don't count on a repub rift to win dem elections; all we need is a strong leader in 2010 and 2012 to wipe the floor with you libs.

With Obama's 10.2% and skyrocketing unemployment numbers, O 'bow' ma's obsequious bowing and scraping to tyrants and emperors and the dems stupid and dangerous decision to unleash terrorists all over NYC, you guys are in big trouble.

You democrats can always cheat your normal way, though; there's always corrupt ACORN to steal elections for you. :~)

Tweeter| 11.20.09 @ 1:44AM

Toddy, learn to write your own opinion.

Tweeter| 11.20.09 @ 1:44AM

Toddy, learn to write your own opinion.

Margie| 11.17.09 @ 10:57AM

More from the Hoity-Toity, Fresh n' Freudy gallery.

Margie| 11.17.09 @ 11:11AM

Yes, David Brooks calls himself a "conservative." So does Toddard and his sickening ilk.

They despise true conservatism, and thus their hatred is unleashed on Sarah Palin and Ronald Reagan conservatives. And I know some of you can't stand it when I compare the two, but too bad. She IS like him. And she IS the base of the Republican Party. SHE is ME, and she is the grass roots who the Left and FAUX conservatives despise.
So, David Brooks is right~ "conservatives" hate her. Isn't it interesting how the phonies always accuse the true conservatives of being what they are? It's the Saul Alinsky method. It's also what the Devil does. He's called "The accuser of the Brethren" in the Bible. These Leftists can't handle who THEY really are and so their method must be to destroy the good in others that they don't possess.
That's why they hate Sarah. But she's unstoppable, and so is true conservatism, and so is the truth.
God bless her!

S.L. Toddard| 11.17.09 @ 1:16PM

"They despise true conservatism, and thus their hatred is unleashed on Sarah Palin and Ronald Reagan conservatives. And I know some of you can't stand it when I compare the two, but too bad. She IS like him"

How?

Margie| 11.17.09 @ 1:30PM

For one thing, she is pro-America, Toddy. You know~~ a STRONG Military Defense, limited Government, low taxes, pro-business, pro-Life, pro-Family, to name a few. But then, Toddy already knew this, and this is a Slithering Lizard Toddard question.
Sarah Palin is against the Ron Paul-Toddy Fortress America Non-Interventionist, Israel hating doctrine.

Adam Smith| 11.17.09 @ 2:57PM

Margie,

You belong at Kos or HuffPo.

You are literally that stupid with your Ron Paul vitrol and smearing. Toddy & Brooks in no way fits into Pauls ideals.

Give it a rest. Sarah is a great person, no need to go on the attack in such rabid, logic free fashion against Paul. Why bring him up at all in an article about Palin?

They cetainly have more in common with each other than with you.

You are as tiresome as Bob with the ignorant comments and hysteria.

Margie| 11.17.09 @ 3:00PM

Buzz off Adam.

victor| 11.17.09 @ 10:49PM

Hey Adam,
Toddy voted for Paul.
Brooks voted for Obama for spite.
But they both hate Conservatives.
Do you?
Perhaps you should ask Toddy why he likes Charles Lindbergh?

Bohred| 11.17.09 @ 8:09PM

She doesn't die her hair.

See SL, short and clear. That is what you need to be, "short and clear".

OneMoreCarol| 11.17.09 @ 11:11AM

Proverbs 13:11 Wealth obtained by fraud dwindles, But the one who gathers by labor increases it. 12 Hope deferred makes the heart sick, but a longing fulfilled is a tree of life.

Wombat-socho| 11.17.09 @ 11:21AM

I see the Media Matters drones and Daily Kos dimwits have arrived to cr@p all over the comments again.

victor| 11.17.09 @ 10:53PM

I have just the thing for those roaches:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v.....re=related

Louis Jenkins| 11.17.09 @ 11:28AM

If I wanted to read the Weekly Standard I'd read it. Palin is the kind of person I'd be comfortable talking to at the kid's soccer game, in the supermarket, or at social function. She's approachable. Now, can the same be said for Pelosi, Reid, et al? In fact, I can see Palin at the market, but cannot Pelosi or Reid, or the Earthly Messiah, or maybe see them at a Gay Pride rally, but not a kid's soccer game. Palin is connectable and that's what causes the Liberals to wee-wee all over themselves. Too much originality! They cannot stand sincerity. When you hear the detractors talking, look at what they're doing.

Toddard Palin| 11.17.09 @ 11:37AM

S.L., that's a lot of effort just to prove you're a psuedo-intellectual snob just like most of Palin's detractors.

Sir Unctuous Toddard, Esq.| 11.17.09 @ 10:56PM

Watch it,
I resemble that remark!

Ken (Old Texican)| 11.17.09 @ 11:45AM

Hi Toddard
Go look at your reflection in a mirror. Heh!

Al Adab| 11.17.09 @ 5:51PM

Ken,
What makes you think there would be a reflection?

Jackson| 11.17.09 @ 7:49PM

HAHAHA!!

victor| 11.17.09 @ 10:59PM

Agatha Christie called,
She wants her book,
The Mirror Crack'd,
back

Seek| 11.17.09 @ 11:57AM

Unlike most posters here, I fully agree with Daniel Larison, who is a real conservative, not a Red State Uber Alles celebrity. Manufacturing grievance, as opposed to developing policy, is what Palin's fevered supporters are all about. Conservatism deserves better.

Whether or not Palin's personal lifestyle "drives liberals wild" ought to be irrelevant. Personally, I could care less whether she drives a Range Rover or a Volvo. Nor do I care whether she eats mooseburger with Heinz ketchup or quiche lorraine with crackers. What I do care about is whether she understands the nature of state power and its consequences. Here, she has demonstrated, time and again, that she doesn't. That's why real conservatives should not support her in any bid for U.S. president. That's not snobbery or "elitism"; it's realism.

Doctor Right| 11.17.09 @ 12:06PM

We get it.

You prefer the Bush '41-Dole-McCain-type of Republicans...

...The losers. Like David Brooks.

Margie| 11.17.09 @ 12:17PM

Not even. They actually despise Republicans, period. More like Ron Paul, the Non-Interventionist.

Margie| 11.17.09 @ 12:31PM

I keep forgetting R. Paul IS a Republican. (RINO). But I believe his beliefs are Libertarian, and that he was one off and on. Especially when he runs for President.

Walter| 11.17.09 @ 12:41PM

Hi Doc,

It seems to me that some Republican moderates want to return to the "good old days" when they were a permanent minority party in Congress and the Democrats would throw them the occasional bone and give them a pat on the head ("Nice little Republican. Now go sit down and we'll see about building that bridge in your district".) If that's all that you want to accomplish, why bother.

S.L. Toddard| 11.17.09 @ 1:18PM

"You prefer the Bush '41-Dole-McCain-type of Republicans"

That describes Sarah Palin to a T.

Margie| 11.17.09 @ 1:24PM

Liar. Read her book. Or just look around. Oh, and you're just missing her on Rush's show. She's a true conservative. Not what you say. But that is your hobby~~ to lie about others.

mike geremia| 11.17.09 @ 4:34PM

What! You have got to be pazza(Italian for Crazy) Sarah is definitely no RINO!

Margie| 11.17.09 @ 4:41PM

FYI~ Toddard's game is smearing conservatives. He is a liar. He used to post links to his type of "conservatism". Such as AMCON. He is a "Non-Interventionist" which means no war except on our own shores. He has called America the "AGGRESSOR." He doesn't believe in the U.S. backing Israel.
He calls himself a "Paleo-Conservative". That's Toddy in a nutshell.

Margie| 11.17.09 @ 5:00PM

Ron Paul is also a "Paleo-Conservative."

victor| 11.17.09 @ 11:02PM

Why does Toddard and a nutshell in the same sentence, seem appropriate?

Margie| 11.17.09 @ 11:17PM

Heehee. ;^)

Bydand76| 11.17.09 @ 12:41PM

So then Mr Mighty purveyor of conservative thought.

Tell me who you would put forth as a candidate?

I am so sick of hearing this garbage from you blue blood yabo's who have no clue of what they are talking about.

I am talking about you too SL Toddard .

You sit in here and rail against probably the best hope for getting this country back on track but you offer no viable alternative.

Oh wait... Ron Paul?

I am going to find a small dog and kick it because that is about the only thing Ron Paul is worth. He is a laughing stock, a rube. a tepid joke at a clown convention.

He has no agenda other than the meaningless non-interventionist pap that you and SLT like to propogate.

Wake up and step into the 21st century fella's
Before it's too late. The left is running amok and all you two can do is talk nonsense. We are on the brink of disaster in case you have'nt noticed!

Are you two seriously going to suggest that the Obamanuts option is better than a Sarah Palin Presidency?

If that is your brand of conservatism (and God help us if it is) then I suggest some serious soul-searching is in order because you two ding-a-lings (Seek & SLT) have got your priorities seriously screwed UP!

Damn!

Wesley Mouch| 11.17.09 @ 2:36PM

Huckabee.

Jackson| 11.17.09 @ 7:53PM

Nah, Wesley--no more "COMPASSIONATE CONSERVATIVE" bullcrap. Huckabee doesn't stand a chance and neither does 'cardboard cutout candidate' Myth Romney. Sorry.

Wesley Mouch| 11.17.09 @ 8:26PM

No candidate is perfect. Huckabee did a good job in Arkansas & has good ideas. He is not establishment, manages his media well & is fairly humerous. I'm more of a Paul guy but let's face it, the guy is too old & is too radical for today's America. He also did not manage his media well which is a fact of life for a candidate. I haven't heard anything on Mrs Palin's positions that are really that exciting & with her appeal so far being only to people like you guys here on Am Spec she is a long shot. If she can get her media management sorted including tough interviews where she does well & can somehow broaden here appeal she deserves a second look; otherwise she's toast. You guys are good about ideological purity but you've got to win elections & have a little water in your wine, otherwise you'll be right but out of power. That's just the way these things work. Also calling your opponents liars, Nazis & traitors all the time is not a good way to broaden the base of the GOP IMHO. not just talking about you guys here.

Jackson| 11.17.09 @ 10:31PM

Wesley, did you know that Huck has a new book out, too? Don't feel bad if you don't--no one else knows, either.

We tried it your RINO way in 2008; you can see how that worked out for us. This time we will call the shots--NO RINOS!!!

You sound a little paranoid, no one called you a Nazi.

Palin is huge, and not just with us AmSpec folks; she makes Huckabee and all other repub candidates pale by comparison. Join the Palin political movement; it's great fun and we have a real shot at winning by staying true to our Conservative beliefs.

victor| 11.17.09 @ 11:06PM

Instead of cutting, Hucklebuck raised all sorts of taxes.
That's not conservative, cutting them is.

victor| 11.17.09 @ 11:08PM

PS what was "watered down" about Reagan, eh?
Back in 1975, Ronald Reagan called for a 'revitalized' Republican Party, 'raising a banner of no pale pastels, but bold colors which make it unmistakably clear where we stand on all of the issues troubling the people.'

victor| 11.17.09 @ 11:05PM

Hey now, don't kick the dog, just call it "Ron" and throw it a bone once in a while.
On second thought, you could call the bone "Toddy".

Grzmlyk| 11.17.09 @ 12:02PM

Sarah Palin is definitely a real threat. I agree with those who believe she has yet to prove herself, but I disagree with those who think she never will.

She's got the inside track with me, because liberals all the way from mid-town Manhattan to the cubicle next to me and everywhere in between foam at the mouth at the very mention of her name, which puts a 10,000-watt smile on my face.

But more important, one of the reasons they hate her is because she's an anti-“intellectual” (which is not the same as being unintelligent, but “intellectuals” will never admit that). Anti-“intellectualism” is pure kryptonite to the liberal elite - and these fops’ ultimate allegiance is to their little club above all else – above ideology, above right and wrong and even above reality (which is why you have David Brooks, et al, as well as the trolls who dangle daily from this site like snot from a sick child's nose pretending to be something other than Kleenex fodder).

I have come to loathe “intellectuals.” I wish they spent 100 percent of their time worshiping at the communal altar of their own self-regard but, unfortunately for mankind, they tear themselves away from the vanity mirror of their mind's eye with far too frequent regularity.

They simply cannot bear the existential crisis that ensues if they're not ramming their “intellectualism” down the throats of their fellow man. After all, for these malevolent imps, elitism is like riding a bike: If you ain't peddling forward through the front lawn of American values and dictating to other people, you tip over in an embarrassing heap, and they can't have that. Much better to roll on and on and on trashing whatever they encounter so that they can look fondly upon their destruction as monuments to their titanic egos. Whether what they impose works or not is utterly beside the point - it's the conquest they're after.

“Intellectuals” have done more to destroy this country than any other single entity. Hands down. Which is one reason William F. Buckley said he'd rather be ruled by the first 400 names in the Boston phone book than by Congress.

I concur. Let human beings run the country. "Intellectuals” should be excised from our daily existence, pried from their natural habitat in universities and government (and trolling Web sites) and placed once and for all where they belong: In zoos where they have no access to power or to keyboards and cannot pose a threat to the body politic.

Sarah Palin would make a dandy zoo keeper, and that’s why they hate her so.

Margie| 11.17.09 @ 12:21PM

Thanks for the 100,00 watt smile you just put on this anti-intellectual's face!

Louis Jenkins| 11.17.09 @ 6:17PM

A zoo would be a great place to put them, but have you read "Animal Farm?" "Zoo" would be a sequel. Difference is there are critters in a zoo that will eat the others if they get hungry. If Palin is such a waste why all the bother from the state run newsmedia and some of the posters here? Mrs Palin is comfortable in her skin, no matter what the situation, but the pundits can't find comfort no matter what the situation. I hope Palin with all her unbound energy runs the critics ragged, seems to be doing a good job and she hasn't even deigned to put her bonnet in the ring. If she doesn't then she is the precursor of better things to come. She has that Hollyweed term used so often: she has "it." Go get 'em girl.

doug| 11.17.09 @ 7:23PM

Wasn't it the first 400 names in the Boston
phone book rather than the Harvard faculty?...beautifully written...always enjoy your
postings

victor| 11.17.09 @ 11:13PM

They hated Truman for the same reason.
He wasn't "hoity-toity".
Like Sarah, he didn't go to an Ivy League school,
Heck, he didn't even go to college.
But he ran rings around them.
The elite media didn't like his voice, his looks or his manners.

Doctor Right| 11.17.09 @ 12:17PM

David Brooks is the REAL joke...A useful idiot masquerading as a Conservative. He has Zero influence, and he knows it...Thus he directs his invective against people like Sarah Palin, whose lack of an "intellectual" pedigree really annoys elitists like himself.

Palin's appeal to the middle-class confounds elitists across the political spectrum, who believe that only Ivy-League types are qualified to make policy.

These folks are in for a rude awakening. The last time the elites banded together to criticize an "amiable dunce" who was seeking our nation's highest office, the dunce defeated a sitting, liberal President in a landslide, and won re-election by an even bigger margin.

Is Sarah Palin the reincarnation of Ronald Reagan? Probably not. But she's got more balls that most of the GOP men whose names are frequently bandied about as the Party's nominee in 2012.

Newt Gingrich? He's done. Making commercials with Nancy Pelosis was an insult. Supporting Dede Scozzafava was the last straw.

Mitt Romney? A good man...But his upper-crust demeanor will alienate independents...And his record as Governor of Massachusetts is far from idyllic to Conservatives.

Ron Paul? His ideas on foreign policy are naive at best.

Whoever it is, the GOP Party apparatus needs to understand one thing: Screw us this time with a wishy-washy, ineffective candidate like McCain, and we're done.

At present, only Palin has what it takes. Don't push her aside because morons like David Brooks and the elite in Manhattan and DC don't like her.

victor| 11.17.09 @ 11:17PM

Shhhh!
Not too loud.
You'll wake up toddy.
Oh heck,
Wake him up:
PALIN / JINDAL 2012

Now the poor boy will get agita.

Margie| 11.17.09 @ 12:24PM

In an unrelated, but actually quite related (as to the rise of true conservatives winning in droves everywhere)~
Doug Hoffman just unconceded the race in NY!
Read it here:
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-.....s-in-ny-23

Grzmlyk| 11.17.09 @ 12:38PM

Hi Margie:

First off, thanks for the kind word. Intellectualism is a malignant cancer - just look at the university system in this country, how they've created little police states, elevated victimhood to god-like status and destroyed what used to be the reason universities existed: education. Now it's about indoctrinating "pod people" such that they'll be good little cogs in the tyranny machine.

We must never lose site of the fact that reality is the eternal enemy of the intellectual (as well as the liberal, of course).

Second, I'm soooooo glad Doug Hoffman unconceded.

It is my opinion that conservatives need to "lawyer up" and dispute EVERY election in which we lose by, say, 7 points or fewer. We know the history of election stealing is the sole province of the Democrat party, and it's time we fought back instead of putting our tails between our legs and slinking away.

I still marvel that Dems caught us flat-footed in 2000 and that Gore's attempt to steal the election got as far as it did. Bush prevailed, but the legacy is toxic. It doesn't matter that every liberal media outlet conducted its own recount and determined Bush won Florida (this is back when the mainstream media had a scintilla of honesty to them; now they've lost that fig leaf). Unfortunately, most ignorant liberals (and I include the "intelligensia" among the ignorant) still subscribe to the meme that Bush stole the election.

Don't they know it's ALWAYS Dems who steal elections? They're always the ones running the polling places!

So I say, GO DOUG HOFFMAN! LAWYER UP AND NEVER, EVER, EVER let go.

It's time the Republican party exercise our litigatory muscles. :-)

Remember Al Franken!

Margie| 11.17.09 @ 1:17PM

Sarah's coming on Rush in a few minutes.
Grz,
Your words do my heart good, and others, I'm sure. I'm actually thankful to not have taken part in the Liberal University system. Some of the greatest people are "unschooled" but self taught. Look at Rush. Abraham Lincoln. My Grandfather. He went to school up to the 6th grade. He was self taught. He helped in the discovery of Uranium and is in the Who's Who in Rutgers University. The Japs wanted him to go to Japan. He taught the hands-on stuff at Rutgers with the students though he never had a title. He was like Ronald Reagan, though I never knew it till after he was gone. I was a teenager when he died. So, Sarah reminds me of my own family. She's down to earth real. And SMART as all get out.
You know, it isn't evil to be a Republican. It seems the latest fad is to degrade anyone who calls themselves one. It's just that we have a two Party system and they're the best bet. I'm glad for the Clerical Error-in-Chief in one respect. And that is that he is unintentionally causing conservatives everywhere to wake up and unite.

my prayer| 11.18.09 @ 8:16PM

grzmlk
thanks for your comments

my prayer| 11.18.09 @ 8:16PM

grzmlk
thanks for your comments

cuban pete| 11.17.09 @ 12:25PM

"I wish they spent 100 percent of their time worshiping at the communal alter of their own self regard...."
You can turn a phrase,young man. I'll use it but give you credit.
As always thanks for your aphoristic remarks.

Grzmlyk| 11.17.09 @ 12:41PM

Thanks, Cuban Pete.

I wish I were young.

But I still have a few years left before the Obama health care system turns me into Soylent Green!

victor| 11.17.09 @ 11:20PM

To quote Jack Smith;
You Asked For It!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Sp-VFBbjpE
The Late, Great Chuck Heston!

Walter| 11.17.09 @ 12:27PM

I hope that Sarah Palin NEVER runs for President. I am having too much fun with what she's doing now. Driving the liberals crazy!!

She could easily become the female Rush and make a bundle on the radio. And, like Rush, probably have more impact than any Republican politician out there.

Go Sarah!!

Doctor Right| 11.17.09 @ 12:35PM

I have to disagree.

NOTHING will drive Liberals more insane than "President Sarah Palin".

NOTHING.

Because it will mean two (2) things that will INFURIATE them:

1) An unapproved, non-elite, conservative, God-fearing, bourgeois house-wife is the President.

2) She won by defeating Barack Obama...The greatest man who ever lived!

Oh, it would be JOYOUS to watch them squirm in anger and disgust...It would rival Florida 2000...

How fun would that be???

Grzmlyk| 11.17.09 @ 1:06PM

Dr. Right, that is JUST the prescription we need.

I'd buy a ticket just to see SL Toddard's and Bob's and David Brooks's and Peggy Noonan's (and their fellow travelers) heads explode.

But I wouldn't want to sit too close - the first two rows might get slimed.

I really wish Krauthammer would get turned around on Palin - while I agree with him about 75% of the time, he, too, is infected with the disease of intellectualism.

Jackson| 11.17.09 @ 7:55PM

Inside the Beltway elitism--all of those clowns are infected with the disease.

Bydand76| 11.17.09 @ 12:49PM

Mattled,
in regards to your earlier post in which you included this line.
Last week, an esteemed Columbia University BLACK architecture professor punched a WHITE female coworker in the eye for not doing more about white privilege.

I suggest that if the article read like this:

Last week, an esteemed Columbia University WHITE architecture professor punched a BLACK female coworker in the eye for not doing more about white privilege.

It would be front page news across the country and would even replace the A hole Hasan douchbag in Ft Hood as the top story in the country right now.

Kill whitey!

Patsy| 11.17.09 @ 7:57PM

Now, they're even going after white women. The sorry SOB sucker-punched her; what a piece of scum.

Oldefarte| 11.17.09 @ 1:17PM

Robert, the reason why liberals hate Palin [in my opinion] is that they realize her political potential. They likewise hate Limbaugh, Hannity, Beck, Ginguich [and other conservative politicians]; but they know that these individuals are either not politicians or are incapable of political victory. Palin has the ability to win big time as a conservative politician; and this fact scares the hades out of liberals. She has the qualities of being an everyday, ordinary, common individual just like the millions of hard working, taxpaying, God-loving, individuals that daily/constantly go about their lives as LEADERS, not as FOLLOWERS. Palin is representative of this group and they are appreciative of her. They share a common bond of experiences and lifestyles. They are reflective of the 'tea party' crowds recently seen nationally. They're damned tired of these career politicians of either/both political parties that tax them, ignore them, demean them and steal from them. Obama is a god-like messiah to the liberal class and Palin is a Joe-the-Plumber like politician to conservatives. Personally, I cannot wait to see the head-to-head confrontation that is slowely coming to fruitiation!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Doctor Right| 11.17.09 @ 1:28PM

Is that you, Dad?

marion palmer| 11.18.09 @ 11:33AM

For this generation: A non-politician radio talk show-great [in my opinion] can be elected ! The one who has already inspired, taught, articulated and lead us to re-examine the constitution and principles of our founding fathers of liberty and freedom. Yes , Sarah will in 2010 help stop the bleeding. This great " American in Spirit " has offered to help elect conservatives. A grateful america awaits. The gates for 2012 will be open and God-Willing we will elect the likes of Mark Levin.

Margie| 11.18.09 @ 6:34PM

Good Heavens, I've never thought of it!
Levin/Palin 2012.
Beautiful!

S.L. Toddard| 11.17.09 @ 1:41PM

I can tell you people, as a resident of Massachusetts, that Sarah Palin does not "infuriate" liberals. They find her ridiculous, and laugh at her, and they believe she is stupid (she is). In general though, there's no "fury". There no cause for it - she is a rather harmless, comical character, but not the sort that inspires anger.

Dai Alanye| 11.17.09 @ 2:10PM

Opposition to Palin is rarely rational but almost entirely emotional, running from fear to envy. Her opponents fear her influence while envying her looks and popularity.

But even if you fail to appreciate her politics, compare her natural good sense with that of Obama (he-who-bows-to-foreign-monarchs) and Biden, who forever speaks the first thought to enter his mind, no matter how bizarre.

How could any sensible person prefer them to Sarah? How could anyone choose to unleash his spleen against her when these far preferable targets are available?

Stephanie| 11.17.09 @ 2:25PM

She's anything but ridiculous or stupid. And about the anger, are you nuts? Take a read over at HufPo or even the WashPost! They seethe with anger.

Sarah Smile| 11.17.09 @ 2:29PM

The fact that you are from mASSachusetts explains a lot about your postings.

Anthony| 11.17.09 @ 3:21PM

That's cool Toddard. We know that you and your fellow Massholes, who attend their anything but God Unitarian Churchs on Sunday, with their NY Times and their Boston Globe under their arms, think Palin is a joke.
We think you Massholes are a joke as well. Hey hows that Big Dig working out for you guys? Has it bankrupted the state yet?
Toddard, have you seen the petition going around, since your fellow elites over at Amherst want the GITMO detainees released in their community, that the rest of America has decided they should all be released in Massachusetts, with Cambridge getting the second wave. Thought you might want to know. Go Red Sox!!!

mike geremia| 11.17.09 @ 4:46PM

Well that explains it. You are from the People's Republic of Taxachusetts. Nuf said.

John II| 11.17.09 @ 7:21PM

Massachusetts? Really? I mean: The People's Republic of Massachusetts?

Oh. Okay. I think I understand now. Confucius say, "Culture more likely determinant of worldview than reflection." Whatever. My condolences, Toddard.

Anyhow, as a resident of academia, I would like everyone to know that Professor Palin (sorry--where I work, everybody has the same first name) does indeed send the lefties up the wall. Granted, a certain effort at aloof dismissiveness will ordinarily begin the self-affirming conversations one witnesses among the fauna of the academic habitat, but when the topic is Professor Palin, as it's become again of late--why, then, the eyes flash, the nostrils twitch, and the lips tremble. In short, the lefties lose it.

An honest scholar among the psychologists and sociologists in the habitat would be fascinated by the phenomenon and eager to understand it. But it would take an honest scholar, and I don't know anybody like that in the contemporary academic habitat.

And now back to my Charlie Chan movies, where there is sanity.

Jackson| 11.17.09 @ 8:02PM

Turddard, you're confused: It is WE who find YOU ridiculous, laugh at you, believe you're stupid (YOU ARE!!) and understand that you're just another smug, snotty liberal who is harmless and comical.

We laugh AT you not with you, loser.

Bohred| 11.17.09 @ 8:27PM

I am truly sorry, I didn't know you were a Masshole. I wouldn't have presumed to teach you anything.

Still, SL that was short and clear, good boy.

Bydand76| 11.17.09 @ 8:29PM

I can tell you people, as a resident of Wisconsin and Minnesota that Sarah Palin DOES in fact infuriate Liberals.

I can tell you people as the ONLY conservative member of a very liberal family that Sarah Palin does in Fact infuriate Liberals.

They despise and hate her.

I have heard them wish great bodily harm upon her and her family.

The Liberals I know consider Sarah Palin to be a Conservative female Karl Rove of sorts and would like nothing more than to see her fall from grace.

They do think she is stupid (She isnt) but whatever. They also think Obama is a great man so their not all together there anyways.

Giant Slor| 11.17.09 @ 8:39PM

Well there you go, S.L. Massachusetts. MASSACHUSETTS!! Really, um, what more need be said.

Remember, as Dai said above: 0pposition to Palin is almost entirely emotional. Obviously support of Palin is entirely emotion-free and based on cold, hard rationality.

Why can't you see it, man?

victor| 11.18.09 @ 1:25AM

You need to get out more Toddy.
And you need to read more.
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/.....ent-405367
No fury?
No anger?
Seems like there's plenty of both on this blog.

Hazim| 11.17.09 @ 1:43PM

Liberals want their "strong" women to have cankels and wear pant suits...... Sarah Palin is a huge threat to their idea of what a women should be and look like.

Hazim| 11.17.09 @ 1:45PM

PS. S.L. Toddard is a gay man.

Margie| 11.17.09 @ 1:53PM

Slithering Lizard Toddard is actually looking in his magic mirror again.

Grzmlyk| 11.17.09 @ 2:26PM

Margie, ya slay me.

The "slithering lizard's" comment reminds me of Pauline Kael's famous observation in 1972 that she was shocked that Nixon won reelection because "nobody I know voted for him." Well, sure - however, the Upper West Side is not exactly a cross-section of America (I used to live there - I know!).

I'm sure that among Toddard's peers, Palin is hilarious.

As if the bowels of the Wellesley library is a cross section even of Massachusetts!

All the more reason to believe she's got the mojo.

Margie| 11.17.09 @ 2:49PM

I betcha Toddard is really more like a fish out of water, (or lizard). In other words, he isn't that for real of an intellectual and doesn't really fit in with them. I mean, most of his posts are cutty & pasty. How intellectual is that, I ask you. He probly just thinks it's coolest to be "one of them." But the trade in for that is you can't recognize cool when you see it.
I can understand the perdicament. In High School I never really truly fit in with the Hippies. For some unexplained reason, they didn't accept me. Well, maybe it had a little something to do with my Dad's being a Cop. Hmm, now that I think about it..
Anyhow, glad I finally found my niche. (Eons ago).
Hey, I lived in NYC too. From '75-'85, during stinkin' Dinkin's admin. I left and Rudy becomes Mayor, so I missed the clean up era, which I heard was great.

Grzmlyk| 11.17.09 @ 3:26PM

Wow, Margie! We passed each other in NYC - I lived there from '85 to '95. I lived in Brooklyn for most of that time (Park Slope), but spent 2 years on West 77th Street between West End and Riverside Drive; despite its being ground zero for liberalism, I did love the area, and I do love New York - or what's left of it after decades of liberalism. Funny how it snapped to attention the MINUTE Giuliani was elected. I have my issues with Rudy, but the city became more liveable literally overnight.

At one point while I was living on 77th, the guy running for state representative called me personally to ask if I was going to vote. I was shocked. I said to him, you're calling every registered republican personally? He said, how many do you think there are in this district? You're it! TRUE!

Anyway - my theory is that toddard works at a university - probably not Harvard, but in the shadow of harvard (hence the Wellesley reference) but is not a professor; I'm guessing, though, that he tries to pass himself off as one to the gullible - perhaps he impresses the young boys at one of the Fenway clubs.

So you and I agree - he's a wannabe. I think all of the trolls who continually post here - Toddard and Bob in particular - are people who lack credibility in their real lives, and so they've created these cyber-identities in order to get what they don't have in real life: respect. They think people cower before their giant frontal lobes. It is a rich irony indeed, because I don't think either they or Liberal Reader fool a single soul at this site.

Personally, I wouldn't hire Toddard to teach my kid to walk across the street, and I wouldn't hire Bob to balance my checkbook, and I wouldn't hire liberal reader to read to my dog. Because most "intellectuals" aren't half as smart as they think they are. As I never tire of saying, it's not intellect that drives them - it's a decidedly unattractive combination of vanity and insecurity, tossed with a heaping helping of grandiosity.

Anyway, Margie, I remember the Dinkins years - the embarrassing press conferences in track suits, the baffled look on the mayor's face whenever anyone asked anything, the cronyism run amok. At least Koch had real brains - I didn't agree with him 99% of the time, of course, but he wasn't an obvious idiot whose caoability was entirely a confection spun up by the media.

Kinda like Obama.

S.L. Toddard| 11.17.09 @ 3:43PM

My word - look at that! Paragraph after paragraph, fantasizing about who I am, what I do for a living, where I've gone to school etc. Looks like someone spends an inordinate amount of time thinking about me. It's flattering, truly.

Look - despite what you think, I really am not worthy of this sort of obsession, I assure you. If you'd like to know more about me please just ask. I would be pleased to enlighten you. No need to obsess and fantasize, imagining me in different roles and universities etc. "What's he doing now? What's he wearing?" etc. Just ask - do not be shy!

Anthony| 11.17.09 @ 4:37PM

Don't flatter yourself Toddard, a classic, self absorbed Masshole, if there ever was one. There is nothing about you we find the least bit interesting. We don't give a rat's ass about who or what you are. All we want is the town you live in so the GITMO detainess can be released in your neighborhood. Here's hoping a beheading jihad soon comes to your neighborhood, perhaps you'll be the first. Inshallah!!!

mike geremia| 11.17.09 @ 4:52PM

Hey Pal---I went to Brown University and graduated in 1957 and my friends call me a RWF---of course you know what that is. I must be some sort of Rogue don't you think?

Big J| 11.17.09 @ 6:42PM

The most accurate words Toddard has ever written:

"Look - despite what you think, I really am not worthy of this sort of obsession, I assure you."

Wow! Never thought I would actually agree with him.

Wonders never cease...

John II| 11.17.09 @ 6:44PM

Toddard? Now that LAST post sounds more like the Toddard of old. But you forgot the signal again.

[Dramatic aside. In a few days I shall run out of Charlie Chan movies. What then? Mr. Moto, perhaps. Except he's Japanese and doesn't quote Confucius. I think I'll need to ration my Charlie Chan movies for the next several weeks; good practice for our pending medical system. ]

Anyhow, Confucius say, . . . no, I'd better ration that too.

Jackson| 11.17.09 @ 8:05PM

John II, your desperate, sweaty man-love crush on Turddard is most disturbing.

victor| 11.18.09 @ 1:37AM

You could watch Toddard's favorite series:
Boston Blackie.
The Thin Man always comes through.

Bydand76| 11.17.09 @ 8:38PM

I would guess that your a big Birkenstock and clothesmade out ofHemp kind of guy are'nt ya Toddard?

Listen to Modest Mouse and Dave Matthews, Phish.

Ha Ha Ha

Margie| 11.17.09 @ 4:05PM

Oops, forgot to mention, I moved back again in '89-'92, thus Dinkins. I actually lived in Hell's Kitchen, also in the Village, and in SoHo. I always worked in Mid-town. I did live in Brooklyn, Ave J & Ocean Ave for a brief stint in '75-'76. It was a nice quiet area.
As per Koch,
I used to listen to him on the radio and he used to make me laugh. He is some character. I still to this day say to my husband "I wanna HUG you." and "WRONGA!" He did make sense sometimes, almost in spite of himself, it seemed. Even though he was a Democrat, he could admit when he was wrong. He even endorsed, on occasion, Repubs.
Having said all that, I was apolitical till '92. I had the instinct though, to know the phonies from the real thing. Dinkins always reminded me of someone who was sleeping, like one of the seven Dwarves. Rudy just seemed like a cool guy to me. I didn't know what a "moderate" was then. I voted for the first time for Bush Sr. against Clinton. The first time I laid eyes on Clinton I said "If that man becomes Pres., it will be a disaster for the country." I just knew it because he was obviously like a loser hippie type. I was right.
I've been voting ever since.
So happy to hear Sarah today. She said exactly what I've been saying. Don't leave the Republican Party. Fight for it. I'm glad she doesn't want to go for a Third Party because, as she said, it can't work in today's America. We have a 2 Party system, and the Repub. platform is good, so work with it.
Go Sarah!

Margie| 11.17.09 @ 2:09PM

Audio transcript of Sarah Palin on with El Rushbo a little while ago:

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/ho.....guest.html

Tom Anderson| 11.17.09 @ 2:22PM

Does anyone know what Sarah Palin's political philosophy is? Can you provide a link to a more detailed statement of what it is?

Sarah Smile| 11.17.09 @ 2:32PM

Why don't you share your political philosophy with us...or are you being snarky?

Wesley Mouch| 11.17.09 @ 2:41PM

I don't think Todd Anderson is being considered for the Republican ticket. I am also curious about her political philosophy. This is a serious question, no fooling. What is her take on spending? What would be cut? Border security? Overall tax policy? Again, a serious question.

Al Adab| 11.17.09 @ 6:46PM

Mouch (with apologies to Ayn)
Political philosophy is the prism through which the issues you cite may be viewed. In that regard Palin is, at most appearences so far, a pragmatic populist with social and fiscal constraints.

Now, whether that might place her in the Conservative camp as it might, she is likely not the cornerstone but better seen as an active outlier. Certainly wouldn't write her out of the movement, but she does not serve, as of yet, to define it.

Margie,
It was only when the Conservative Movement controlled the GOP that the Republican party enjoyed success. I would cite 1980 and 1994. At other times the GOP maintained its accomodationist RINO leanings even with Conservative support. Whether that was wise or not history will show. Still I prefer the NY 23 scenario, out the lefties, and run Conservatives. It was the great loss of 1964 which after all, gave the movement wings.

Margie| 11.17.09 @ 8:40PM

Yes, Al. Run conservatives in the Republican Party. Did you hear Sarah today? I posted a link, below. She was on Rush's show. She said third parties aren't realistic in today's America. We have a two party system. The Republican plank is good enough for her, and it's good enough for me. My whole life I have backed conservatives like Sarah, and will continue to. Hope you'll join me. I'm tired of the stone throwing and complaining, and going to continue working with Republicans to get the best conservatives nominated!

Margie| 11.17.09 @ 2:39PM

Buy her book. That ought to do it for ya.

Ken (Old Texican)| 11.17.09 @ 2:38PM

Tom Anderson
I can answer your question...and fold up your mouth...in one sentence.

"We can run own our lives better than ANY government can."

Read ...or listen...to her words...stupid!

Tom Anderson| 11.17.09 @ 2:49PM

Sarah Smiles says: "Why don't you share your political philosophy with us."

I am a Goldwater conservative. I favor defense of individual rights, laissez-faire capitalism, strong national defense, limited government. Anything else you want to know?

Ken says: "'We can run our own lives better than ANY government can.'"

That's what you may think Palin believes, but where does she actually come out and say what she believes, in principle? We've been sandbagged so many times before with people who seem to be one thing and then out to be something altogether different.

I will not be supporting her, if she runs for anything, unless and until I know what she actually believes. Of course, any person who can stimulate the amount of vitriol and hate she inspires from the media and the Left does work very much to her advantage, but what if she's just another empty "suit"?

Bush 43 portrayed himself as a small-government conservative, yet he governed as a big-government liberal who wanted to "nation build", after saying that's exactly what he wasn't going to do.

So I ask, does anyone really know what Palin stands for? And where is the evidence?

Margie| 11.17.09 @ 2:53PM

Like I used to say to beloved belated kitty: "NO bites!"

Grzmlyk| 11.17.09 @ 4:01PM

Tom:

First off, Bush was wobbly from the start - his governorship of Texas showed that he was no real conservative. He posititioned himself to the right to get elected, but he was always soft on illegal immigration and government spending. He had some genuine conservative instincts, I think, but they were drowned in the sea of paternalistic noblesse oblige that has rotted the entire Bush clan through to the core (and is also why Jeb Bush should never get closer to the White House than Camden Yards).

Palin is a self-made person, an outsider, unencumbered by the dynastic pedigree that shaped Bush and not mesmerized by the Bush clan's hokum reverence for "service."

I believe she is the real deal when it comes to Reagan-style thinking - Reagan, too, was a self made person and far more intelligent than the left painted him.

For my money, Palin definitely needs to prove herself further, because the nomination should be earned (well, not, of course, if you're a Democrat, and especially not if your name is Barack) and she is still to a great extent an unknown quanitity in terms of efficacy.

I do want to know more about her before getting on the bandwagon. But I think the early signs are good. I think she's a classic American - self reliant and possessed of boatloads of common sense.

The dirty secret is you don't have to be a genius to be president (and in fact, as Wilson, Roosevelt, JFK/Johnson's "best and brightest," Carter and Clinton proved, being known primarily for your supposedly capacious mind could just be the kiss of death when it comes to policy. In reality, you just need a strong moral compass, a solid native intelligence, an ability to learn and see the big picture, political acumen and nerves of steel. No small list of traits, but the ability to parse reality into an unrecognizable mass of nihilism is not among them.

Of all of these traits, the only one Obama posseses, even obliquely, is a proclivity for nihilism.

mike geremia| 11.17.09 @ 4:55PM

Have you read her book, Tom? You might just learn something about Sarah Palin.

Mattled| 11.17.09 @ 2:59PM

She is such a nothing, APObama assigned 11 people to read her book. And found 6 'fact checks".
415 pages---six (and remember, this is AP) and found 6 so-called inaccuracies---like one time she stayed at The Waldorf.

So it's really 5 then because she did say she tries not to stay at luxury hotels.

Yeah, she is such a boob and a rube that EVERY media outlet has taken to the airwaves to shoot her down. Newspeak, er I mean Newsweek with it's two readers, Brooks and Evan himself, are probably running a deficit keeping that rag from going under.

Nothing to see here. Move along. Obama is still smart---even though he makes an A** out of himself daily.

BTW--where did that multiple Billion in porkulus go? Did it find it's way to mags and rags (with apologies to Pelosi and Boxer)? Is that what is keeping the red ink media up? By sending the money to non-existent Congressional districts?

Where's the investigative reporting?

Oh, I forgot. They're all covering Palin.

Liberty or Death| 11.17.09 @ 3:04PM

I am concerned the conservative powerhouses (Rush, Hannity et al.) are building Sarah up to be something that she is not; a real, Reagan conservative. At the risk of being labeled a "seminar caller," or a closet liberal, for my one disagreement with Limbaugh (who I hold up as the modern architect of the conservative movement and the single, most influential voice of the original intent of the Constitution and our Founding Fathers), I feel compelled to provide a word of caution to my fellow brethren about going down the Palin road.

I am from the 49th state, and have witnessed what Sarah is all about first hand. She did help clean up the corruption Alaska was mired with. Palin was behind stronger ethics laws in the wake of the largest pay-to-play crime ever perpetrated on the people of Alaska by their elected representatives.

She also ran a tight economic ship, by balancing the budget while in office. Palin even refunding taxpayers during the gas hikes last year, with leftover oil tax revenues, instead of rolling it into some other wasteful government-funded program. All good things right? Yes.

Where conservatism breaks, and where I believe most conservatives should break with Sarah, is on free-market economics. She raised taxes on Alaska's most lucrative business- Oil. This move has forced the big companies: BP, Conoco Phillips, Exxon etc. to seriously rethink doing business in the state. While there haven't been any serious ramifications thus far, this move was far from encouraging big business to remain up here. She also tried to muscle them to the table with the now famous AGIA (Alaska Gasline Inducement Act) plan to bring a natural gas pipeline to Alaska- which we still do not have, nor will have anytime soon. To sum that up, she basically said, we are tired of waiting on you to produce a line, so we are going to do it ourselves. News flash... without the product what good is a pipeline? This move has put the people of Alaska on the hook for billions of dollars, without guarantees that the producers will provide the product. It's a gamble that could go either way- still TBD.

Third, she cut and ran out on the governorship up here. I can understand the legal challenges she faced from endless "ethics" complaints, but she did not do a good enough job in espousing that as her primary reason. Many of us up here wanted to see her fight on. I wanted to see her fight on. How can she be a viable, presidential nominee, when she cannot handle the pressure of baseless accusations at the governor level? Would that ease up in the White House? It looks bad that she walked away from the job. It looks bad that she is now taking her sold-out book around the pop culture scene. To me it sends the message that she got out to make some money-- even if she didn't-- that is how it looks.

The best way to describe her is as a "populist." Palin's star quality has me thinking of another "leader" with star quality. We have a liberal, populist in the White House right now. We need a leader who will encourage business in America. Someone who will ease up the hand of the federal government's burdensome regulations, to bring businesses back to our shores, not somebody who will heap more regulations and taxes upon them.

That being said, Palin is a strong, social conservative. She has all of her ducks in a row when it comes to standing up for life, guns, freedom etc. I love that she has the media and the liberals knocking themselves silly. I am equally angry about how they have attacked her as a woman and mother etc.

I just don't believe she should be running for president. I fear she isn't pragmatic enough, not steeped enough in the compelling, conservative solutions to REAL problems facing this nation. We don't need another American Idol president. We need someone who translates the age-old conservative ideology that America has always succeeded with.

My fear is that Sarah splits the vote with conservatives in 2012, between those starry-eyed wonders in the party looking for someone who is "popular," and those of us looking for REAL answers to the issues facing America. I know we are a little short on the leadership list right now, but surely there is someone out there who can point us in the right direction with a solid foundation, and record, in the principles this nation was founded on?

Margie| 11.17.09 @ 3:12PM

Hilarious, actually.
Sarah is a Republican, and says she is in agreement with the Plank of the Party. She doesn't believe in a Third Party and so is not interested in SPLITTING the vote, thankfully!
Better run and hide behind those rocks with the rest of them in your neck of the woods because all the lying in the world isn't going to change a blessed thing.
P.S. She's coming on Hannity in a few.

Liberty or Death| 11.17.09 @ 3:17PM

Margie,

I'm just calling it like it is. Sorry if you don't like to hear the truth.

I wasn't talking about 3rd party. But I could see a possible Perot situation if she loses in the primary.

Margie| 11.17.09 @ 3:24PM

You're a liar. That's all I need to know.

Liberty or Death| 11.17.09 @ 3:37PM

Case in point. Thanks for proving the starry-eyed reference.

Hahahahaha...

I certainly didn't expect overwhelming agreement on my points above, but to call me a liar is a bit above the fray. Do a little research lady. You'll see there is a bit of truth to what I wrote.

S.L. Toddard| 11.17.09 @ 3:48PM

Welcome to AmSpec! Haha. This poor SOB makes a reasoned and conservative case for why Palin isn't the great white hope and - of course - gets slimed by Marge. Notice she doesn't refute any of his allegations - she just insults him and bolts. Par for the course.

For the record, LOD, I don't agree with most of what you've said but do agree with your main point. Either way, you should know that Marge's lack of manners/decency is par for the course here. Be prepared for that sort of reaction every time you veer from the Fox News/talk radio approved script.

Margie| 11.17.09 @ 4:10PM

I'm one of the rare souls who DOESN'T run from you, low-life. Smear away all you want, liar. You're friend is a liar as well. probably one of your alto-Faux-egos.

Liberty or Death| 11.17.09 @ 4:24PM

Oh brother! Now I know nobody will take my comments seriously now that I've got S.L. on my side. Thanks a lot! ;)

Seriously folks, Sarah has a long way to go before she gets my rubber stamp for the White House. And I am not saying she cannot get there, but I want to see substantial policy answers and not media fluff and drama. So far, she is leaving me wanting in that category.

Who cares what she said about Katie Couric? Who cares if she will invite Levi to Thanksgiving dinner? I know that is what the media wants to know, because it builds ratings, but it is not what Americans want, or care about. Give us REAL meat and potatoes~ not this populist garbage. We have enough of that right now.

I don't care about Obama's dog, or shirtless escapades. I care about jobs. I could care less about his never-ending apology story. I want to see someone really attack this guy as the liar he is based on policy.

We don't need a Republican Barack.

S.L. Toddard| 11.18.09 @ 7:41AM

"Now I know nobody will take my comments seriously now that I've got S.L. on my side. Thanks a lot!"

Unfortunately that's pretty much the case.

Margie| 11.17.09 @ 4:11PM

Only a "bit of truth?"
So you admit you're a liar.

Margie| 11.18.09 @ 10:52AM

Liberty or Death said:
"to call me a liar is a bit above the fray. Do a little research lady. You'll see there is a bit of truth to what I wrote."
~OK, My husband and I did our research and found you to be misrepresenting Sarah Palin. Nice try. You lose. Your smear tactics didn't work. Read victor's post @ 2:12 a.m. today, and also the link provided.
a bit of truth? That still makes you a liar.

Ken (Old Texican)| 11.17.09 @ 8:18PM

Liberty or Death
I know you.
I appreciate your concerns.
When all the snot is blown away, we could do a lot worse than Sarah as she is NOW.

She is going to learn a lot...and teach a lot... over the next three years.
Chances are, she is going to help us get a lot of bright new blood in congress next year. I hope so.
IF
She should run for President, the anal exam of the nominating process for 2012 should inform our decision about that. For now, it is a non issue.

Just maybe, a MAN...MALE...will grow some cajones due to her efforts. Maybe not. Personally, I think she would love to "endorse" another candidate with cajones.
As of this moment, she is a wealthy woman in terms of her personal lifestyle. She has nothing else to prove financially.
I personally enjoy the heck out of her "flirting with running"....for President. She literally scares the living daylights out of the , (pardon the shorthand), communists,and their fellow traveler media hounds.
That itself is enough for me to like her.

Bottom line...picture our country if we FAIL to elect a "repealer" congress and Senate next year.

Picture our country if we endure thousands or hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths due to presidential cowardice over the next couple of years.
Picture another great depression because of the damned communists...over the next couple of years.
Picture millions of Americans going hungry and freezing over the next couple of years because we productive citizens sit on our collective arses!
Sir
Your little "policy wonk" quibbles will sound so damned silly.
Best regards

Margie| 11.17.09 @ 8:45PM

That's right. And to go along with that, what is this about Sarah "not being ready" to run for Pres? It's a crock of Bull crap!
Sarah is qualified. She's smarter than most conservatives on the scene now, and definately any Dems. Besides, we all know the requirements, don't we?
1. 35 years of age.
2. Natural born citizen.

Margie| 11.17.09 @ 11:43PM

"Third, she cut and ran out on the governorship up here. I can understand the legal challenges she faced from endless "ethics" complaints, but she did not do a good enough job in espousing that as her primary reason." Really? What a crock.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G1tnUvtjaaY

Margie| 11.18.09 @ 12:59AM

Liberty or Death said:
"The best way to describe her is as a "populist." Palin's star quality has me thinking of another "leader" with star quality. We have a liberal, populist in the White House right now."
~As Sarah says: "Bullcrap!" Obama is not a populist, he's an elitist. And to say Sarah is a populist reminds me of the Leftists who try and say Rush is "nothing but an entertainer". As if there's no SUBSTANCE there. As far as Obama goes, like my husband has said "The clothes have no Emperor." Sarah has plenty of substance, and is a woman of high moral character. Way more than you Leftists could ever dream of possessing.
You sound an awful lot like Liberal Reader. And it's interesting you and he had such a "nice" conversation here. Your both full of it.

victor| 11.18.09 @ 2:12AM

"She raised taxes on Alaska's most lucrative business- Oil. This move has forced the big companies: BP, Conoco Phillips, Exxon etc. to seriously rethink doing business in the state. While there haven't been any serious ramifications thus far, this move was far from encouraging big business to remain up here."
Taxes on oil were "raised" because they were too low in the first place due to collusion between oil execs and legislators.
Two elected officials went to jail for bribery and corruption.
The taxes had to do with the oil companies getting too many breaks from the previous governor.
As long as production is high then the minimum tax would apply. If they slacked off and production was low, then the price of oil would go up and so would the tax.
This would encourage the producers to produce oil.
The reason they have these taxes on busines is because they have no property, sales or income taxes.
Just think if we had a president that wanted the oil companies to drill the 2 trillion barrels that are in Colorado, Utah and Wyoming. We'd have money to burn.
Wish the Governor in Jersey could drill the offshore oil and solve our budget deficits.

Margie| 11.18.09 @ 10:11AM

Read the truth here:
http://carywesberry.blogtownha.....tion.thtml

Simon Templar| 11.19.09 @ 2:35PM

They were more than baseless accusations..they were bankrupting her family and making it impossible to effectively do her job. Bam Bam nor any other politician has ever had to deal with that particular targeted onslaught of political sabotage. She did the right thing. Your argument left out this particular fact. As far as the taxes on Big Oil..well I admit I do not know all about this issue but why should anyone make the stretch that she would tax all corporations or that she is not a free market conservative? Perhaps, once again you are not telling all the story? Now, one could argue that she needs more experience...which she can gain over the next three years. This argument, however, is no longer valid ... look at what got elected and is now sitting in the white house. She is not perceived as stupid or not pragmantic enough by the rest of us nor is seen as as a Idol. That is a lame argument and actually contradicts your earlier statements about her successes in Alaska. If we can not get behind a Palin, start defending her, and stop this eating our own, then we will lose. So..you do not think she is ready yet for the presidency..ok..fine..you are certainly entitled to your opinion..but please lets have an honest discussion here and tell the whole truth.

Seek| 11.17.09 @ 3:06PM

Tom Anderson's being perfectly reasonable. Why the hell should anyone vote for Palin if she's coy about her positions on key issues, especially immigration from the Third World? She strikes me as a "Northern Exposure" mainstream GOP pol in skirts, and not much else.

A lot of politicians on the Right promise one thing and deliver another. George W. Bush, remember, promised he would pursue a "humble" foreign policy. Say, what?

mike geremia| 11.17.09 @ 5:03PM

Hey, I thought you guys were all done beating up on George Bush. Now you have Sarah Palin to take his place. He got hammered by the press for 8 years. Give him a break.

Liberal Reader| 11.17.09 @ 4:11PM

Predictably, any and all questions or criticisms of Palin are characterized by her supporters as "attacks" and even hatred.

Never has a public figure who sought higher office been considered so off limits to all questions whatsoever.

Palin has her book; Palin has her millions. What more do you want? Should I suspend absolutely my critical thinking skills because they might hurt the governor's feelings?

I have no ill will against Palin personally; she seems like a decent person to me, and she does have an attractive, compelling personality -- when she's not whining about the media. (She should let her supporters do that for her; it looks awful when she does it herself.)

However, I don't have any feeling of obligation to treat her differently than any other person, and I don't care who it angers.

All this having been said, Palin's poll ratings are not very promising for a presidential run.

60% of the country believes she's unqualified to be president; 53% of voters say they'd NEVER vote for her. Her unfavorable ratings surpass her favorable ratings. (This is not true of other conservatives: Romney's favorable ratings surpass his unfavorables. It IS true of other very divisive figures, like Rush Limbaugh.)

mike geremia| 11.17.09 @ 5:07PM

Hey pal---where do you get your info on polls? Sometime you ought to read Team Sarah and see what almost 100,000 Sarah supporters have to say.

Giant Slor| 11.17.09 @ 8:52PM

You can find 100,000 people in this country to say Oprah should be President. So what?

100,000 people? Where do think that's going to get Palin?

victor| 11.18.09 @ 1:43AM

Can't speak in your own tongue, SR?
Here, have a bite or two of Sarah and Rush:
http://www.freedomslighthouse......sarah.html

Doorgunner| 11.17.09 @ 5:58PM

"Never has a public figure who sought higher office been considered so off limits to all questions whatsoever."

Barack Hussein Obama

Liberal Reader| 11.17.09 @ 7:44PM

Are you kidding? Every day, 16 hours a day, at least, conservative media call him Hitler, Stalin, Mao -- whatever. The more absurd the better. He's setting reeducation -- no! concentration -- camps. He's indoctrinating our children.

Now, you're right. These aren't "questions." These are the hysterical blubberings of impotent middle aged men.

But still. It's not as though there is no criticism of Obama.

JimE| 11.17.09 @ 10:11PM

Moron boy,
If Palin is as stupid, ignorant,and ill mannered as you and your liberal controllers amke her out to be why are you even worried about her? She will fade into the obscurity just like your pin up hag Cindy Sheenan.
It's telling that you and the media find Levi tard- boy intelligent and engaging.

Liberal Reader| 11.17.09 @ 4:20PM

Many of you are foolishly following Rush's argument: that because Palin inspires more "fear" or "anger" among liberals than anyone else, she's your best candidate.

Rush is a great radio personality -- the best their is -- but he doesn't understand political science of the American electorate.

He also doesn't know history.

His hero, Ronald Reagan, captured the hearts of my whole family -- all of whom had been Democrats as long as anyone could remember.

They did not all of a sudden become conservative Republicans. They just believed in Reagan, trusted him, and were willing to give him a chance.

Palin does NOT have that effect on people. Sure, she has you guys. But you already love her and support her.

She just doesn't reach out and grab NEW people the way Reagan did.

You should be looking around for someone who at least respects the other side. (Never believe contempt or hatred for your opponent in a democratic contest is wise. The Democrats gave in to that sort of thing in 2004, and it wrecked them.)

I'm a liberal from a liberal state: I don't know much about Palin. I DO know, however, that she does not like me or think I'm a "real" American.

There are so, so many people who feel as I do, I don't understand how she could ever take the "middle" -- which is necessary for winning in the presidency.

There just aren't enough Beck and Rush fans to elect a president.

Liberty or Death| 11.17.09 @ 4:56PM

In a round about way you are making my point LR. But I disagree about needing a middle-of-the-roader to win back the presidency. We tried that with McCain. We also cannot have a rabid, lib-hating conservative (as much as I'd like to see that). Realistically, turning people off is not going to attract them to vote for you. I DO NOT believe Palin is one of those rabid lib-haters. I do believe she loves the spotlight a little too much, however.

We need a conservative. Someone who believes in freedom. Freedom of religion, free-economics, freedom to live your life without fear of government intrusion. Freedom is what binds us all. Take that away {like now} and what is left? France.

Conservatives who run on cannot be defeated on ideas. Liberals have no ideas... well, no good ideas anyway.

It is already a fact that the majority of Americans consider themselves more conservative than liberal. Look at the recent polling data.

We need a conservative. Reagan didn't win the confidence and trust of your Democrat family by being "Democrat-lite," he won them based on his ideas. Those ideas were conservative and they worked. That is why Reagan was the greatest president.

Liberal Reader| 11.17.09 @ 6:52PM

Liberty --

I can't blame a conservative for hoping that a conservative becomes president.

I think you'd have a better SHOT if you had someone who, as I say, was able to grab a family of blue-collar Democrats and make them all vote Republican NOT on the basis of some cheap set of talking points, but rather on some larger vision of what America could be.

Here's a secret you guys don't understand:

The people who crossed over to vote for Reagan couldn't give a two-penny damn about the capital gains tax cut; they didn't care about deregulating airlines or phone companies either.

They liked his "shining city on the hill" idea; they BELIEVED the story he told about this country.

Great leaders are great storytellers.

JFK could tell one hell of a story; Roosevelt and Lincold could too.

In the end, all the stuff that "conservatives" hyperventilate about every day (all day) on the radio is just so much cackling of crows.

In the next election, the man who can tell the best story about what America will have become by the year 2100 wins. Period. In 2100 is this country a nation of tv watching idiots, slowly being colonized by China; or, are we beginning another American century, in which our innovations continue to revolutionize the world and our political system continues to inspire the world? That's the real deal of the next election. (Unless we're done for already.)

Liberty or Death | 11.17.09 @ 7:46PM

LR the story is meaningless without the actions to back it up. Reagan backed those "stories" as you refer to them, with actions. He brought America back from a recession and made it that "shinning hill." He wasn't great because he talked a good game; he was great because his conservative view of the country was realized through action.

We have the great "storyteller" now. And he has told us some great stories. The reasons Obama was elected are many: Hatred for Bush. His race. McCain was the other option. The Media. His campaigning center-left. His clever teleprompter speechifying. 60 million people were essentially duped into electing a partisan, narcissist, Marxist, racist, who hates the country, as currently constructed. He has even stated his desire, "to fundamentally change," it. Throw in a contempt for the Constitution of the United States, and anyone who disagrees with him, for good measure.

I feel you are onto something with Americans and their apathy toward politics, though.

I pray people wake up in 2010 before it is too late.

Liberty or Death| 11.17.09 @ 7:52PM

Sorry. Correction: I mispelled "shining hill." :)

Liberal Reader| 11.17.09 @ 8:04PM

As far as I know, Obama has only discussed his race in his autobiography and in his speech on the topic in Philadelphia. If you can name any other times when he's made it an issue, I'd like to know them.

When you say he's a Marxist, you're either a) using hyperbole; or b) mistaken.

If you think 60 million of your fellow citizens were "duped" you are arrogant and foolish. (And a bit narcissistic.)

And you're just wrong about storytelling. Presidents -- in fact -- don't really "do" all that much. The system is set up so that they are the head of government and the head of state. Storytelling -- that is, framing what you might call the nation's mythos -- is the most significant thing they do.

Perhaps you view storytelling as somehow dishonest. But as the sages of the world know, it's often the highest most universal form of honesty.

We'll see if Obama is a good storyteller. It's too soon to tell; but depend upon it, 10 years from now no one will care that some miserable radio disc jockey claimed he was a Nazi or a Marxist. Like other presidents, he'll be held to amazingly high standards, and we'll see what we see.

Jackson| 11.17.09 @ 8:10PM

Love it when a hugely narcissistic liberal moron like LibReader/Jeremiah calls us narcissists. Idiot.

Liberal Reader| 11.17.09 @ 8:41PM

I love it how your respond to my trite, thoughtless, pointless post with this thoughtful, insightful, understanding, and patient essay. Such a learning experience to read what you've written here!

Jackson| 11.17.09 @ 10:46PM

I'm glad you finally see things my way, LR/Jeremiah!! You're so incredibly obtuse it never occurs to you that I'm pointing out your blatant hypocrisy.

You're a typical smug, self-righteous liberal moron. You never disappoint, Jeremiah; you always make me laugh--AT YOU!

Margie| 11.18.09 @ 1:08AM

You contradict yourself. First you say we don't need a "rabid hater", but we need a "conservative." (Sneaky there, insinuating Sarah is a rabid hater, and she's not a conservative. Tricky.)
Then, you say Reagan didn't win by being Democrat-lite.
Psycho-babbling Bull.

Margie| 11.18.09 @ 10:18AM

Liberty or Death says:
"We need a conservative. Someone who believes in freedom."
~And Sarah isn't a conservative? Perhaps your idea of a conservative is your friend, Liberal Reader's.

Interested Conservative| 11.17.09 @ 6:02PM

LR - with all due respect, perhaps you're missing a point in the Reagan analogy.

Consider what he did and how he did it, and how long it took him.

Now consider where she is, where she started and where she could end up.

Keep in mind that in the 2024 race, she'll still be younger than Hilary was last year.

Finally, I take the point of the current effort to be to review the instant introduction, immediate media condemnation, and McCain camp handling of her - all of which failed her in various ways.

Sure she's responsible for much of her image, and she seems more than willing to concede that, but it does her no harm to continue to point out media treatment of her. At some point they'll either treat her more neutrally or simply continue to demonstrate their bias, which is politically useful.

Interested Conservative| 11.17.09 @ 6:06PM

Another template to consider is that of BO himself, form the 2004 convention speech to his senate term to 2008. She can follow that to some extent, though out of order - her experience preceded her speech, and she'll already have one national campaign behind her.

Another advantage she has is her role in 2010, which should far eclipse his in the 2006 mid-terms (which was not negligible).

She doesn't have the Chicago machine behind her, which may be more good than bad.

Liberal Reader| 11.17.09 @ 6:44PM

Interested --

You make good points. Palin could enter a period of study, reading, and discussing ideas with really smart people to train herself how to think and make good arguments. That's exactly what Reagan did -- all his life.

But Reagan was greater than the sum of his ideas, like most great men in history. Reagan's did not FAKE a friendship with Tip O'Neil. He was able to be friends with an ardent partisan of the opposing camp. He was -- how else can you put it? -- big enough to do that. (So was Tip.)

Palin may do this; she may somehow acquire that largeness of spirit. I doubt she will, nor should she be criticized for not being great. No one should. She's charismatic as all get-out; maybe that will be enough in a cable-tv, internet age of blinking screens and mass illiteracy.

Finally, don't kid yourself about Obama: the infamous "Chicago machine" that people around here mention all the time had no more to do with hm becoming president than the Crawford Machine had to do with making W president.

You just don't get over 60 million people to vote for you by luck, or by having a "machine," or even just because you give a good (or a lousy) speech. There's a genius in American democracy, of that I'm sure -- even when it goes against me, as it usually does.

Interested Conservative| 11.17.09 @ 7:27PM

LR - decades ago I would have concurred with your view of the effect of the Chicago machine.

Having lived here for 10 years, I don't.

The vote totals in 2008 reflect many things, including "he's not W" and the MSM falling to pieces over him (literally - they're failing and dissolving as we watch), but a HUGE backstop to his effort was the machine. If nothing else, consider how he got from 2004 to 2008.

As much charisma as he has, she has even more, and from her appearence on Oprah yesterday, I don't doubt Oprah's worried about her entree in talk-tv-land. I think Oprah still carries the day there, but the Governor is multi-talented in multiple fields.

The more people demean and ignore her accomplishments, the more "surprising" and "impressive" she'll be.

To the extent BO was an empty vessel into which so many poured their feelings, she's the opposite - a politician with many facets onto which people dump all sorts of attributes, some accurate - most hilariously deluded - and a quite a few simply mean spirited. Every day which passes makes her more "normal", comparatively, and that will be all she needs to prevail.

I have no idea how the democrats compete with her, and the past year indicates they don't have any idea either. They'll find one eventually, but it may be too late.

Liberal Reader| 11.17.09 @ 7:53PM

You could be right. I love Chicago, but I've never lived there. Still, it may be difficult for a non-Democrat to know what Obama's speech at the 04 convention was like to hear. EVERYONE I knew said that he was going to be president someday.

And I'm not sure I really believe presidents get elected because they're "charismatic." Sean Penn is charismatic; Johnny Depp is charismatic. More power to them. But as much as I admire their acting abilities, I wouldn't vote them onto a town council.

It's easy to feel up-beat about Democracy in America after your guy wins. I realize I may be looking through rose colored glasses. But even in what was for me a depressing year after 04 I still was able to summon up something better than saying Bush won because his Daddy helped him, or any of that lame stuff people used to say about him.

W won because he was the best candidate in both elections; and therefore, pains me as it does to say it, he probably was the best man for the job. If we don't have some sort of trust in the process, we're lost utterly.

About Palin: maybe the Democrats can't "compete" with her. But this is just my point.

Presidents elected because they rally their base and divide the country -- as Bush did -- rarely have a mandate, and I don't see how they can do great things.

Take a gander at that election map back in 80 or 84. That was not won by a man who was a good candidate just because he got under the skin of liberals.

Jackson| 11.17.09 @ 8:13PM

Sarah can't wait that long to run for the presidency because of the disaster that liberal morons such as you, LR, and ObaMAO have wrought. We don't have the time.

Palin 2012!

Liberal Reader| 11.17.09 @ 8:39PM

Jackson --

You're right. Obama and I are morons. I haven't really thought about the issues in light of this one truth. Thanks for setting me straight!

victor| 11.18.09 @ 8:23PM

Liebral Reader
"You're right. Obama and I are morons"

Truer words were never spoken.

Giant Slor| 11.17.09 @ 8:59PM

Are you really REALLY saying Sarah Palin is our only hope? God I hope you're not saying that.

You're really saying that, aren't you.

Jackson| 11.17.09 @ 10:49PM

Who are you talking to? Try addressing the recipient of your post, conversation flows smoother that way.

Giant Slor| 11.17.09 @ 11:17PM

You're absolutely right, Jackson, I replied to the wrong post. I apologize for confusing you. Allow me to clarify: Jackson- I'm talking about you.

Jackson| 11.17.09 @ 11:51PM

I think you're the one who is confused. What's your problem with my post?

Giant Slor| 11.18.09 @ 12:11AM

What I'm saying is that it's probably unwise, at this point, to be pinning all your hopes on Sarah Palin.

Jackson| 11.18.09 @ 12:44AM

Giant, did it occur to that hugely massive brain of yours that I was just trying to torture the moron, astroturf LibReader? It's fun, try it.

Palin has to prove herself just like any Republican candidate: My fealty is to the Constitution and Conservative principles. Geesh.

Do I meet your approval now? Besides, if you've got someone better, speak up. Please.

victor| 11.18.09 @ 1:48AM

Speaking of Speeches,
remember St Mario's spech at the 1984 Socialist Convention?
It was abarn burner for sure and they said that Mario would be King, er, president, but he never was.

JimE| 11.17.09 @ 10:16PM

More bogus garbage from liberal moron " shift to the left and you will be loved and enlightened". I would remind you moron that the left dosen't read or buy books.

Sarah Smile| 11.17.09 @ 8:08PM

I revere Reagan, named my 3rd child after him. That said I don't believe he would have the same following today mostly because of our current political climate and the media. His lack of an Ivy League education and no post graduate degree AND especially his experience as an actor would never fly in today's political climate.

Grzmlyk| 11.17.09 @ 4:30PM

Well, Margie, please don't hate me, but Liberty or Death should at least be allowed to bring up Palin's record. That is utterly fair game.

I'd like to know more about the context of what Liberty or Death brought up, but in general more information is better than less information. I think all of the facts should be on the table.

Liberty or Death, to have Toddard sticking up for you is a horrible position. It happened to me once. Here's what I suggest: Take two very hot showers and then pour yourself four fingers of decent bourbon. Rinse. Repeat.

In six weeks, the incident will be just another forgotten memory. :-)

Margie| 11.17.09 @ 4:48PM

Liberty or Death is already misrepresenting Sarah Palin in her post, proving it is a lying troll.
But hey, have fun.
Hate you? No way.

Cuban Pete| 11.17.09 @ 4:49PM

Margie:
Listen to this guy.
LOD
Four fingers of Wild Turkey 101 will do the trick.
Please no third party!! Perot gave us Clinton.

Liberty or Death| 11.17.09 @ 6:44PM

Thank you Grzmlyk and Cuban Pete. I write only out of concern for the direction this country is heading. I know Rush and Sean want what is best for our country, but they do not live here in Alaska. I have seen her accomplishments. She is a strong conservative on many things, but she has also punished big business like a liberal up here. I know it sounds good to say, "Let's stick it to the oil companies, or we're not getting our fair share of the oil profits. Yada yada..." There are ways to promote growth and that ain't it my friends.

Republicans, and conservatives, should be polar opposites when it comes to the liberal mantra, "X {insert whatever industry of the month is in the crosshairs} is making too much money, or is too corrupt/evil, and therefore should pay more in taxes and damages."

Look at the last seven months:
-Big Business doesn't work- Big Bad Wall Street.
-Big Oil is raping the environment and price gauging us at the pump.
-Big food is force feeding our kids McDonalds.
-Big Auto isn't making the tiny, tin-can cars we SHOULD be driving.
-Big Health Insurance is taking advantage of us.
-Big Mortgage is defrauding the American people {no fingers pointed at the creators of the crisis Dodd/Frank etc}.
-Big, Evil Radio isn't fair and balanced enough (Big TV and Big Newspaper, conveniently, get left out of the equation.

What's next? Big Gun- naturally. Heck, I heard some idiot on CNN blaming Texas' gun laws for the Ft. Hood massacre the other day. Ridiculous.

Big Christianity is always to blame for something, but not Big Islam... no not them.

All the while it's BIG BROTHER who needs to be scrutinized and curtailed.

We should be getting out of the way so businesses can produce and continue to make America great, not put our thumb in their eye with excessive taxes and punitive damages for "perceived" misdeeds.

Business does not thrive in that kind of environment.

Grzmlyk| 11.17.09 @ 7:19PM

Liberty or Death, you said it beautifully and I agree with every word.

I will look into Palin's Alaska record more closely. Demonizing any business is a bad idea. I'm not actually a fan of populism beyond the fact that it can galvanize an otherwise indifferent public - but, as Shakespeare's Julius Caesar shows, even that is of very limited value.

So the concerns you raise are valid. I would like to think Palin would rise to meet the challenge history appears to be laying before her. And I love that she's an outside-the-beltway, real human being and not a phony baloney intellectual.

But she does have to prove herself.

Someone here said Reagan failed to rein in government - that is certainly true, but it's not because Reagan was weak - it was because after LBJ's Great Society, government metastasized to the point where NO ONE could rein it in.

Irrespective of Palin's perceived conservative bona fides - or lack thereof - it is going to take more than a president to check government's growth.

If China pulls the plug, perhaps we'll see that impetus. Now I'll throw it over to TrollBob, who will argue that we never, ever have to worry about economic collapse because 1) effective tax rates never rise above 28%, and 2) GDP, that pristine bellwether, only goes up, up, up! Happy days are ALWAYS here!

Liberty or Death| 11.17.09 @ 8:09PM

Her policies with respect to the oil companies were disconcerting. And I believe in my heart of hearts she meant to do good by the people of Alaska, but tacking extra taxes on an industry that already faces enormous hurdles (both locally and federally) was the wrong move. AGIA was also a risky deal, which depends on the oil companies to pony up the resources once a line is built. One could, equally, argue that it did bring the parties to the table when there had been years without any movement, or talk, on a gas line.

She has been very vocal about support for development and industry. Palin has a lot of good things going for her and I believe she would be an asset to the country. I am just concerned that the big world out there might be going to her head. I was disappointed at her resignation and I question her motive. I'd like to believe it was because of the ethics complaints and the legal costs to the state, but I just don't know.

She is not ready for the presidency, just as Barack was not {that is more and more obvious every day}.

Grzmlyk| 11.17.09 @ 8:28PM

I gotta say, I've never been a fan of Bill O'Reilly, but the day I heard him, a couple of years back, play the populist card by demonizing the oil companies' "immoral profits," I almost jumped through the TV to throttle him. The man's a useless waste of ratings and a panderer. He remains willfully, obstinately, ignorant about the economics of energy, and it's infuriating (it slays me that he proudly defends his "immoral" salary vis a vis oil company profits by saying energy is something people need, while his show is something people choose to watch - as if money weren't fungible!)

I'm not so sure about Palin's resignation - I think history will tell if it was the right move, although I'm aware of the myriad conservatives who wrote her off at that point.

I will say this - Reagan had a long history marinating himself in the philosophical underpinnings of conservatism; his entrance ramp onto the national stage was long and it tested his mettle.

Like you, I like Palin. And I'm hoping she proves to have the right stuff. She may. But if she doesn't, then we need to find someone who does - not 2008 retreads like Romney and Huckabee. We need genuine leadership - on that I think all conservatives can agree!

Jackson| 11.17.09 @ 8:25PM

Grz, it was my understanding that Governor Palin went after the Oil companies because of their corruption, not because she's anti-big business.

I don't know about LoD, maybe he/she just has an axe to grind: Palin has many enemies in Alaska because she fought corruption wherever she found it. Perhaps, LoD was on the wrong side of that corruption.

Margie| 11.17.09 @ 8:26PM

LOD is a lying troll.

Grzmlyk| 11.17.09 @ 8:51PM

Margie, you are a pistol!

Do you have a history with LoD's troll-dom?

BTW, that's a legitimate - i.e., not snarky - question.

Liberty or Death| 11.17.09 @ 9:02PM

For my part, I do not know what I did to deserve all of the hostility?

I've got to run, but it was nice speaking my mind to the fellow American Spectators on here (even Margie). Just think about what I said. Look into it for yourselves before you take everything the talking heads say at face value. Trust but verify. It's always been good advice.

I will continue to watch Sarah's progress. She is a bright woman with a good head about her. The world could certainly use more people like her.

Grzmlyk| 11.17.09 @ 9:09PM

LoD, I saw nothing in your posts that screamed, "TROLL," which is why I'm wondering if you and Margie have a history.

Unfortunately, it's pretty common that trolls masquerade as conservatives on this site, as you appear to know, so that may explain why some of us here get trigger happy on occasion.

Margie| 11.17.09 @ 9:31PM

Grz,
The typical pretending to "like" Sarah Palin while at the same time smearing her.

Grzmlyk| 11.17.09 @ 8:45PM

The problem, Jackson, is to make the distinction between corruption and fueling populist resentment. The oil companies do not make unreasonable profits when compared to other industies.

On the other hand, as we've seen with Wall Streeters climbing into bed with Democrats, corruption is always looming; while most businesses are honest, the unholy alliance of big business with politicians is generally fertile ground for the weeds of corruption.

And of course it depends on which sources one chooses to believe as to which side one comes down on.

I also know that, even at its best, politics is ugly, and that faustian bargains must be struck with alarming regularity. It ain't beanbag, as they say. So my attitude with Palin is, show me what you got. I'm on her side right now.

Nothing reveals a person's character more accurately than the way they run their campaigns. A look at Gore and Kerry, for example, shows that both of these hacks were second-rate people, blustery, pompous demagogues with no character whatsoever. Even Bush's campaign, I thought, revealed his strengths and weaknesses rather vividly.

So we shall see!

Liberty or Death| 11.17.09 @ 8:46PM

Jackson,

I do not work in oil. I am just the average, inquisitive, Alaskan citizen:). I do not have an axe to grind with Palin; I just don't think the hype meshes with the message sometimes. I like Sarah Palin. I like that she stands up for the Constitution and Alaskans. I believe she needs more experience and she now needs to prove she can hold down an office for a full term-- no matter how difficult it may be.

My daddy did not raise a quiter. Did yours? I don't understand the resignation.

And...you don't "fight corruption" by taxing the heck out of the entire industry. You go after them with your AG when you have evidence.

Margie- you have serious issues girl.

Margie| 11.17.09 @ 8:49PM

I have serious issues with liars, you are correct, girl.

Jackson| 11.17.09 @ 11:02PM

Nice try, LoD; your "quiter" (nice spelling; obviously, your daddy didn't raise a spelling bee champ) snark is a dead giveaway that you're a Sarah hating Concern Troll.

Sarah is not anti-business, Sarah is anti-corruption; she'll have a field day with all of the disgusting filth spewing from Obama's administration. Shut your trap, liberal.

Liberty or Death| 11.20.09 @ 12:27PM

Jackson,

Sorry child... You ever type fast numb nuts? Smear me all you like, I have a point. Look at her record turd!!!

Jackson| 11.21.09 @ 3:16AM

Death, the only point you have is on your head, moron. You're lying about Palin, too; she's a muckraker not a socialist like the commie, Obama. Nice try, though, troll.

The only 'quiter' here is you, loser. lol

Nick| 11.17.09 @ 7:22PM

"BIG CHRISTIANITY"!!!!! Ahhhhh!!!

I love it!
Great post, LoD.

Margie| 11.18.09 @ 10:28AM

Liberty or Death said:
"She is a strong conservative on many things, but she has also punished big business like a liberal up here."
This is a smear,
Sarah did NOT punish the oil companies. This person is misrepresenting Sarah.
if you want to know the truth, read victor's post at 2:12 a.m. 10.18.09
http://carywesberry.blogtownha.....tion.thtml

Grzmlyk| 11.17.09 @ 5:00PM

Cuban Pete, four fingers of Wild Turkey 101 would probably take the shine right off of my shoes (oblique Rolling Stones reference).

There was a time, though, when Mr. Jose Cuervo and I were regular dance partners, but I had to dump him; he's very possessive.

Thanks, Margie. I shall dig into this more deeply.

But god, I do remember the Perot debacle.

Funny, when I saw Bill Clinton speak - and speak - and speak - and speak - at the Dem convention in '88 on tv, I thought, this poor used car salesman just ruined any chance he might have had at becoming a credible candidate for president - even for the Democrats.

Then Perot came in and we're still wiping Clinton's narcissism off of our collective chin - and still having to look at Hillary's cankles as we ponder the question: THIS passes for smart? And libs think WE'RE the stupid ones?

Ugh. :-)

Tom Anderson| 11.17.09 @ 5:12PM

Cuban Pete says: "Please no third party!! Perot gave us Clinton."

Clinton and the Republican Congress gave us some of the best government the United States has had, at least since the administration of Calvin Coolidge.

I understand that Clinton does not deserve the credit, but I really doubt that Republicans can act as conservatives if one of their own is in the WH. I shutter to think what would have happened had Bush 41 or Dole been elected. One thing for certain would not have happened, welfare reform, one of the best pieces of roll-back legislation I've ever seen pass Congress.

Congress can do amazing things for a short time. It is important for the Right to have a long-term ideological agenda that members can press forward. We need people like Ted Kennedy who work ceaselessly, day and night, and make every opportunity count to advance the agenda. Only our agenda has to be one that restores limited government, that presses for constitutional amendments to guarantee the right of contract, the right of association, the unqualified right to keep and bear arms, to repeal the income tax amendment (#16), abolish the Federal Reserve and fractional reserve currency (restoration of the gold standard), correct the unlimited power the commerce clause has come to grant to Congress, etc.

We need a lot more than just a statement of policy objectives. We need a political agenda that seeks to reform the Constitution so that we don't have to lie awake in our beds at night, wondering what new outrage will the government spring on us today to steal our property or abridge our liberty.

I don't see, so far, any of this in Sarah Palin. I may be wrong. Say what you want about Reagan, he had a strong ideological agenda and we need to learn where he succeeded and where he failed, for failed he surely did, by his own admission, to reign in the federal government.

I don't see the strong intellectual element in Palin. It takes a lot more than "common-sense" to guide us in these troubled times, a lot more that shop-worn conservative slogans that in the end mean little. Even the man-child talks about "competition", so he knows how to use the words even if he hasn't a clue about their meaning.

Doorgunner| 11.17.09 @ 6:04PM

"Clinton and the Republican Congress gave us some of the best government the United States has had, at least since the administration of Calvin Coolidge."

Except for that whole Most Favored Nation trading status R.O.C./DNC cross bribe that nobody likes to talk about.

And Coolidge? Dude, what are smoking? Put it down.

Richard Baker| 11.17.09 @ 5:41PM

Remember, these trolls have great comedic value and prove that vaudeville is NOT dead.

Tom Anderson| 11.17.09 @ 6:32PM

Doorgunner: Coolidge was one of our best Presidents. You would do well to re-acquaint yourself with the history of this country. There is good reason why President Reagan removed Truman's portrait from the Cabinet Room and in its place put one of Coolidge.

Coolidge also was the last president who believed in a passive chief executive. Of all 20th century presidents, he was the most Jeffersonian in philosophy and practice.

Suggested Reading:
Coolidge: An American Enigma, by Robert Sobel (1998)

Doorgunner| 11.17.09 @ 6:57PM

Suggested reading: Truman, by David McCullough

However, I'm overly partial to Harry due to his service record and his sense of loyalty. Acheson found him worthy; that's a pretty good endorsement.

Reagan, God Rest That Man's Soul, I suspect admired Coolidge's hands-off, and small government, approach to the economic engine, but even as a conservative, I would argue that Coolidge was more guilty of a blind-eye than an Adam Smith detachment. The unsecured speculation, and rampant pumping, on Wall Street were demonstrably known pretty much throughout Coolidge's terms; he did nothing. And it cannot be argued that consequences could not be forseen; modern economic collapse due to speculation has been studied since , at least, since the Dutch tulip market colapse of 1637.

The 16th Amendment was ratified in 1913. Did Coolidge try to turn back the clock? No. Did he try to use it to bring reform to the market? No.

victor| 11.18.09 @ 8:19PM

Scuse me DoorGunner,
But you have to create an amendment to repeal the previous amendment.
The same arduous process applies

cuban pete| 11.17.09 @ 9:20PM

Tom:
Well said. A woman dining with Cal said "I bet I can make you say more than two words."
To which Mr.Coolidge replied,"You lose."

June| 11.17.09 @ 6:41PM

Right on!

Richard Baker| 11.17.09 @ 7:17PM

Doorgunner:
Appreciate HST, as well. However, read up on Operation Keelhaul. Was shocked when I learned that he authorized this. Coolidge believed like Mr. Jefferson that "that government is best which governs least." Still a great sentiment. Look at the mess we're in, at present, most of which is due to government distortion of everything it touches. Remember, also, that Smoot-Hawley 1930 is generally credited with taking a short disruption and making it a long depression. The was an ultimate distortion and we've seemingly learned nothing in 79 years. The Dutch problem was a very long time ago and the economy of the world had radically changed by 1929. We could look and find parallels throughout history but not all lessons apply all the time.

Nick| 11.17.09 @ 7:56PM

Mr. Baker,

I only know this because I just researched it while battling Marxist Reader/Mr. Military Occupational STATEGY, but it wasn't Mr. Jefferson who made the quote.

It was actually Henry David Thoreau, who it is believed was paraphrasing the motto of the magazine United States Magazine and Democratic Review, which was "The best government is that which governs least."

I found this at:
http://www.bartleby.com/73/753.html

Dorgunner| 11.17.09 @ 8:13PM

Mr. Baker, Nick, Mr. Anderson,

Thank you for your insights; I cannot argue or postulate further without doing some homework.

Kudos to a well-read triumvirate; hopefully we may rejoin this discussion with the can- further down the road.

Doorgunner| 11.17.09 @ 8:16PM

Egads, muffed my owm moniker... kicking that bean tin once more...

Doorgunner| 11.17.09 @ 8:17PM

(sigh)... single malt... "OWN"...

Joanie| 11.17.09 @ 11:04PM

Sure it's just a single, hon? Haha.

Richard Baker| 11.17.09 @ 7:23PM

This was an ultimate, not The was an ultimate.

hogrider| 11.17.09 @ 7:28PM

I wonder if those on the left realize that all their attacks on Ms. Palin only serve to make her stronger.

Giant Slor| 11.17.09 @ 9:03PM

So does that mean all the attacks on Obama from the Right make him stronger?

Jackson| 11.18.09 @ 1:03AM

No, the buffoon keeps doing stupid stuff like bowing LOW to 4 foot tall emperors. You can't make that stuff up; Obama's a moron.

Nick| 11.17.09 @ 7:36PM

Doorgunner,

Some good points on President Coolidge, but I can't help it, I like his hands off approach.

There are things I like about President Truman, but I can't get over his protection of FDR's Soviet spies and losing China.

Tom Anderson| 11.17.09 @ 7:38PM

Doorgunner says: "The unsecured speculation, and rampant pumping, on Wall Street were demonstrably known pretty much throughout Coolidge's terms; he did nothing. And it cannot be argued that consequences could not be forseen; modern economic collapse due to speculation has been studied since , at least, since the Dutch tulip market colapse of 1637. "

I think you are viewing the twenties from hindsight, which is always 20/20. You appear to overlook the creation of the Federal Reserve under Woodrow Wilson, as the ultimate "cause" of the Great Depression, as it is of our current Depression. The point is, fractional reserve currency with Big Government pulling the strings will always hurt the people by creating inflation. Our currency has lost something like 95% of its value since 1913.

I've never bought the idea that speculation ever "caused" anything. It is a symptom, not a cause. To say such a thing suggests a lack of understanding about how economies work.

Speculation performs a function, and to condemn it as a cause is tantamount to saying a high temperature is the cause of the fever.

BTW, I enjoyed reading David McCullough's book on Truman. Excellent read, but McCullough doesn't really much get into Truman's socialistic domestic policies. Forgiveable, perhaps, in a President who commands our interest primarily for his foreign policies and his conduct of the Korean War and the beginning of the Cold War.

Truman was a remarkable man, and an interesting American. The book gives us great insight into the life and times. To this must be added the fact that McCullough is a superb writer, and reading him is such a pleasure.

Liberal Reader| 11.17.09 @ 7:56PM

The most common praise I'm hearing of Palin goes something like this: "Liberals hate her more than any of our other people; she 'frightens' the Democrats more than any of our guys; therefore, she's the best candidate."

This is a weak, lame, and utterly bankrupt way of thinking about politics. If her most valuable political strength is that she offends half the country, I think it's fair to say she'd make a horrible president.

Jackson| 11.17.09 @ 8:29PM

Dope, kinda' like you bozo liberals screaming, 'RACIST' every damn time we launched a well deserved criticism against your O 'BOW' MA. LOL

Grow up, libtard.

Liberal Reader| 11.17.09 @ 8:36PM

Jackson --

I know I'm a "dope." I'm sure your intellect is vastly superior to mine.

Perhaps some of called you racist merely for criticizing Obama.

I'm not sure how that responds to my point. But again -- clearly your acumen is so far advanced beyond my own I'm probably just not keeping up.

Again, I'm open to learning new things. If you can teach me where he has, I'll stand corrected.

Jackson| 11.17.09 @ 11:07PM

You're a hypocrite, dope! Guess the concept is a tough one for liberal morons like you to grasp.

Now, go to your corner and bow, low low low.

Margie| 11.17.09 @ 9:28PM

You will learn that according to LibRead. no one is intelligent to comment on any of his lying rants.
However~~ another Liberal snot nose he will kindly converse with.

Sarah Smile| 11.17.09 @ 8:13PM

It can be difficult to govern purely on political ideology when trying to run a state. In other words Governing is HARD--just ask Obummer.

Jackson| 11.17.09 @ 8:31PM

We could ask the question, Sarah Smile, but Obama couldn't answer it because he's never governed.

Liberal Reader| 11.17.09 @ 8:32PM

Or ... just ask Sarah Palin, who couldn't stick out a single term as governor of Alaska.

(Something tells me Obama won't quit the post he was elected to hold.)

Jackson| 11.17.09 @ 11:13PM

O'BOW'MA'S lack of executive experience is painfully obvious to the country and to the world. The guy's a putz and lacks leadership skills and experience. He's a pretty face who spits out pretty words and that's it.

10.2% and skyrocketing unemployment is a disaster for the country and you liberals don't give a damn. I hope you losers get run out of DC on a rail. Treasonous morons.

Sarah Smile| 11.17.09 @ 8:36PM

One more final comment on the great President Reagan. While he was governor of California he signed the legislation that legalized abortion believing that the citizens of California had spoken and never dreaming the practice would be used as a form of "birth control." The state legislature would have overtuned a veto and he felt he had signed a "Conservative" therapeutic abortion bill. The abortion rate in 1967 was about 650 and went on to skyrocket into the hundreds of thousands. Reagan said it was the biggest mistake of his public life and why he was so stauncly pro-life after this. A good example of populism gone bad. Maybe Palin did beat down the oil companies to get money for Alaskans but as Reagan found out "Governing is hard."

Liberal Reader| 11.17.09 @ 8:45PM

You say Reagan was "staunchly pro life" for the rest of his career.

But what did he actually do about it?

Name ONE Republican who has sacrificed anything in the pro-life cause.

The fact is, Republicans are the biggest fans of Roe v Wade there are.

Every four years they come along and scoop up the votes of millions of people who are politicized by this issue.

Jackson| 11.17.09 @ 11:21PM

ME--you baby killing monster. I've worked with pregnant teenagers for years helping them through difficult pregnancies so they didn't kill their unborn children. Don't lecture us about pro-life matters, you crappy, faux, self-proclaimed "CATHOLIC!"

Soulless liberal bastard, you idolize the infanticide loving monster in the White House; how dare you preach to us, liar.

Margie| 11.17.09 @ 8:51PM

Sarah Palin did not beat down the oil companies.
It's a lie.

Jerry| 11.17.09 @ 8:49PM

Liberals are just too caught up in themselves and can't stand an intelligent woman "one-upping" them.

If they had half the brains that Palin has, they'd be absolute geniuses in their own minds.

Liberal Reader| 11.17.09 @ 9:05PM

The "conservative" base has a very strange set of standards. They claim to revere the military, yet they turn on leaders with distinguished military records.

Bob Dole, George H W Bush, John McCain -- even Eisenhower! -- are all Republicans that the so-called "base" of the Republican party loves to hate.

Some people with NO distinguished career in the military:

Dick Cheney
Karl Rove
George W Bush
Ronald Reagan
Rush Limbaugh
Sarah Palin
Bill Krystol
Sean Hannity
Glenn Beck
Mark Levin
Jonah Goldberg
John Boehner
Michelle Bachmann
Bill Oreilly
Ann Coulter
Michelle Malkin
Newt Gingrich
Dick Armey

Interested Conservative| 11.17.09 @ 10:38PM

Here's a curious trivia question - of the Clinton inner circle, from the campaign into the transition, including the Arkansas crowd - who had the senior military rank/experience?

Hint - it is one of possibly only two reasons I know of which are undeniably admirable and completely apolitical qualities of the man.

It is a bit scary considering the rest of the crowd, though, that this was the height of their military background.

Alas - it may well exceed the current administration.

Interested Conservative| 11.17.09 @ 10:41PM

And about your list - actually, W's military service was distinguished.

To be sure, non-combat experience, but the fighter he flew was a notorious widow-maker simply in "routine" operations.

victor| 11.18.09 @ 2:34AM

Non-combat while he was training for two years 68-70. They were still sending ANG units to Nam, but they were cutting back by the time he graduated training. He could have still been sent to fly in combat. He finished in the top 5%.
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/qu.....0185.shtml

Nick| 11.17.09 @ 11:25PM

Interested Conservative,

Was it the Rajun' Cajun?
According to wiki he served two years in the Marine Corps.

Interested Conservative| 11.17.09 @ 11:38PM

Bingo - Nick answers correctly - I believe he rose to Cpl. at some point, and I count his experience ahead of VP Gore as a military journalist/son of senator. As a marine, he may even get more kudos than W's work as a pilot, but that's a tougher call.

Plus, by all accounts, he's a fabulous family man.

Other than that - nothing appealing I know of.

Jackson| 11.17.09 @ 11:47PM

Carville? Egad, now I know how Mary can stand to live with the little puke. Sort of.

Nick| 11.18.09 @ 12:42AM

Yaaaayyyy!!!!
I win! I win! I win!

Hey, what I win?

Nick| 11.18.09 @ 12:44AM

Oops! That should be: Hey, what'd I win?

Doorgunner| 11.17.09 @ 10:51PM

What was your military career again?

Jackson| 11.17.09 @ 11:27PM

At least we don't dither when it comes to supporting our troops in the field like no military career Obama.

Gutless liberals have no stomach for national security: 8 years of Clinton got us 9/11 and, only 9 months in office, Obama's already responsible for the first Islamic extremist terrorist attack on our country since that terrible day. God only knows what the Left's feckless policies have in store for us in the future.

Liberals are useless.

victor| 11.18.09 @ 2:38AM

Then Barack HUSSEIN Obama equals 2o Conservatives. Or so it seems.
GW beats Barry and his crew any day of the week and twice on Sundays.

Bydand76| 11.18.09 @ 4:50AM

The same thing could be said of the "progressive" crowd as well.
It almost seems as though having NOT served in the military is a badge of honor to some liberals.

With that being said LR I dont think that this is a fair assesment on your part.

Having served in the military does not make you an automatic choice for the presidency.

Some of the finest presidents that we have ever had have been without military resumes.

Lincoln, Adams are a couple that come to mind quickly here.

Some presidents had military experiance and turned out to be somewhat lacking in their leadership. (Grant is who I am thinking about here.)

I think the more important question really becaome a matter of principle and lately it seems that for what ever reason. Liberals seem to view the military as a petri dish for their pet social programs.

If as you say you served then you remember well the mentality of some of the leadership in mindlessly adhering to some of the more asinine Washington policies, but I digress.

I for one do not hold military membership as a prerequisite for civilian office.

It is the policy and the principles that form my opinion.

If a person does not choose to serve then that is their peregotive. I cannot and will not hold that against them.
However they need to be made to realize that they hold a fundamental ignorance when it comes to things related to the military. That is where the difference lies.

Nick| 11.17.09 @ 9:14PM

Marxist Reader,

Ohhh wrong-o, Mr. Military Occupational STRATEGY!!! Ha-ha!

The question that has to be asked is WHY you liberals hate Sarah Paling so much?

I have been answering this question for the past couple of days, now.

Most liberals hate Mrs. Palin simply for the fact that she didn't kill Trig when she found out he had Down's. He is a gut-wrenching reminder of the babies they, or someone they know, have aborted because they were less than perfect.

She must be destroyed at all costs.

Where were you stationed again?

Tony in Central PA| 11.17.09 @ 9:24PM

The liberal hatred of this woman is a true spectacle. Its manifests itself as irrational, spittle - producing rants by various pundits. I am reminded of the remake of " Invasion of the Body Snatchers " when the pod people recognized somebody as not one of them, they would stop and point, mouth agape, before producing an umintelligible howl to alert their fellow pods. Is it because they think she's dumb ? Liberals don't seem to be bothered by their many high profile, low IQ personalities from Joe Biden to Nancy Pelosi.
I tend the think the almost visceral hatred of Palin stems from the fact that she presents a femininity not seen on the left - - a mother who clearly loves her kids, so much that she chose not to have her disabled child aborted.

PCP Smoker| 11.17.09 @ 9:27PM

Now, see this is an article. Interesting, funny, concise, and upbeat. In other words, the opposite of the garbage we get from Quin Hiler or the sentimental shit we get from Ben Stein.

Here is an idea. Fire Quin and Stein, and link up to the "Other McCain" website instead

Jackson| 11.17.09 @ 11:43PM

Klein's a puke, too.

dudette| 11.17.09 @ 9:32PM

Sarah is DROP DEAD gorgeous!!!! And SMart!! They are just so jealous---she looks like that even after having kids --- no thankles there like Hillary has---they are just jealous. Even with years of Plastic surgery the likes of Andrea Mitchell, Oprah, Barba Walters, Rhino-faced Joy Behar could not hold a candle to her! OOOH---green with envy and with a hot husband who is a MAN not some nebbishy androgynous house husband type....I LOVE HER!!

Margie| 11.17.09 @ 9:39PM

Now there's a great comment! :^)

Liberal Reader| 11.17.09 @ 9:48PM

Todd Palin's membership in a political party that advocates treason against the United States doesn't seem to bother many of you.

Interested Conservative| 11.17.09 @ 10:46PM

Todd voted for McCain? That's treason?

(Seriously - The AK Independence party or whatever it's called is treasonous? More so than the socialists or communists? It's an enemy of the US? Advocates violence against the US? Is it as dangerous as PETA? The ELF? La Raza? MALDEF? SPLC?)

Doorgunner| 11.17.09 @ 10:54PM

Offer proof. You know, something greater than granting the rights of citizenship to foreign enemies of the United States captured on foreign land and imprisoned off-shore.

Doorgunner| 11.17.09 @ 10:56PM

Ann Coulter says it best: Fag.

Jackson| 11.17.09 @ 11:33PM

Better watch the treason snark, Jeremiah; after watching the parade of numerous Obama administration communists, Maoists and Marxists picked off by Glenn Beck, you can hardly talk. Joke.

CopyKatnj| 11.18.09 @ 12:24AM

Liberal Reader:

Up to this last post I was sympathetic to your writing and explanations for your point of view. In fact I found most of the comments here informative.

Todd Palin explained his association with the political party. What is more disturbing is why the Democrats were not bothered by Obama's association with one William Ayers, a self confessed fifth column terrorist who admitted his crimes that murdered Americans . Where is your outrage about Rev. Wright hate speeches and his ties to Obama and family. I will leave this listing at two for starters.

Regarding Sarah Palin, she's worth watching.
Huckabee was the spoiler to knock out Romney that left the Republicans with McCain. This was a predetermined outcome by the GOP. I suspect a deal made when GWB beat him in SC primary.

I think Romney could have given Obama a real run for the money in a debate. Romney's speech defending his religion was excellent.

Liberal Reader| 11.17.09 @ 10:57PM

Interested --

I only use the word "treason" because conservatives have become so comfortable using that word of absolutely everyone they disagree with.

But technically, the Alaska Independence party advocates secession, and that is treason -- or so it was found to be in the 1860s, as you know.

At Palin rallies during the campaign people called out "traitor" when Obama's name was mentioned; I just find it kind of ironic. Obama has never advocated secession from the union or any sort of seditious or treasonous idea whatsoever. Except for the idea that a black Muslim from Kenya who hopes to set up concentration camps and destroy America should be president, of course.

Interested Conservative| 11.17.09 @ 11:33PM

Well, as an epithet, I suppose it's just a run of the mill put down.

Legally, though, it's miles away from accurate, particularly compared with the unfortunate events of 1861 - the key distinction, of course, being to make "war" against the US. I don't think the Alaskans have that in mind, and thus it seems like many another local third party.

However, a very interesting comparison with the POTUS will be whether Maj. Nidal is charged with treason, and whether he'll be charged with 13 or 14 murders (a fetus of the pregnant soldier being the 14th victim). Both charges are available under existing federal law, though I don't know if the UCMJ includes them by incorporation or not.

Still, a charge of treason would be an interesting statement, considering the "war" making element required for conviction.

Liberal Reader`| 11.18.09 @ 1:54PM

Treason may be appropriate, particularly if he planned this crime with overseas agents. 14 counts of murder would be just fine with me.

Secession alone -- without the consent of the union -- is an act of treason. Alaska and Texas are stuck with us, whether they like it or not, unless the Congress approves their departure. I'm not sure how that would work, but I do know that secession alone would not be tolerated.

SoCon| 11.18.09 @ 4:07PM

This drivel spewed by a liberal who worships the Maoist, Anita Dunn. Fool.

victor| 11.18.09 @ 2:19AM

Hey Simple Reader,
That was found to be a fake. Secret Service inverstigated and did not find anyone to corroborate the "reporters" story.
As far as criminal activity from th heCurrent Occupant, how about seizing private property without due process?

Nick| 11.17.09 @ 11:07PM

Who knows how many "less than perfect" babies Katie, Jane, Leslie, Diane, Andrea, and Bawbwa have had?

John II| 11.17.09 @ 11:14PM

"I only use the word 'treason' because conservatives have become so comfortable using that word of absolutely everyone they disagree with."

But I'm VERY conservative, and I've never once called Toddard a traitor. In fact, I've never even called Liberal Reader a traitor. As Napoleon Dynamite would say, "Gosh!"

And as Confucius say, "Logophobe often use term 'absolutely' without sense of meaning of same."

Thank you so much.

[P.S. Did I wait long enough to get the last word in on this thread?]

Jackson| 11.17.09 @ 11:38PM

No. But no worries, I'm sure there's an old movie out there to make you feel better. :)

Gerry Kendall| 11.17.09 @ 11:26PM

The only way that Palin can get the media elites off her back is for her to convert to Islam and perhaps have Obama convert to true Christianity.

Jackson| 11.17.09 @ 11:35PM

Gerry, Palin just has to have an abortion and the Left, like LibReader/Jeremiah, would love her.

John II| 11.17.09 @ 11:37PM

Good point, Gerry. But I STILL want the last word for a change.

How about a Sarah Palin quote?

Okay, here 'tis: "I suppose my experience as a small-town mayor could be compared with the experience of being a community organizer. Except I had some real responsibilities."

Jackson| 11.17.09 @ 11:40PM

You have waaay too much time on your hands!

Margie| 11.18.09 @ 10:37AM

Excellent!

John II| 11.17.09 @ 11:58PM

Jackson: Well, I'm just practicing for retirement. . . . Well again, not really. I just TAKE way too much time to do anything--but I don't cut corners.

For example, I just spent an hour grading one student essay that stretched to all of two and a half pages, double-spaced. It was that bad, and I had to tell him why.

Now do you see why I watch old movies and post their wisdom? Does anybody see? Does anybody care? May I PLEASE have the last word on this friggin' thread so I can get some sleep?

As Kojak would say, "Ciao, baby!"

Nick| 11.18.09 @ 12:36AM

Sorry, John.
I couldn't resist!

Angel| 11.18.09 @ 12:51AM

I like, "Book 'em Danno," better.

John II| 11.18.09 @ 10:19AM

"Yeah--tell me about it."

Angel| 11.18.09 @ 9:55PM

What's with the quotes? Hope I didn't push you over the edge.

John II| 11.18.09 @ 10:58PM

Sorry, Angel, I was just quoting Kojak again: "Yeah--tell me about it" was one of his signature lines: even better than "Book 'em, Danno," although I admit that's a hard one to beat.

Right now I'm just waiting for a chance to get the last word in again. I can't believe this thread is still alive after another 24 hours.

"Another twenty-four balloons! Stavros!!"

Angel| 11.18.09 @ 11:47PM

The glare that bounced off his bald head could blind 'ya if you weren't careful.

Nick| 11.18.09 @ 12:33AM

Let's be...uhh...Fair and Balanced, shall we, and not forget all the heroes in the democrat party:

John F'ing Kerry- Hit himself (said like Forrest Gump) "in the buttocks" with his own grenade blast; after getting 3 phony Purple Hearts, QUIT his Swift-boat command.

algore (is Forrest Gump)- Joined the Army in a failing bid to save his racist father's senate seat; spent 5 months in Viet Nam as fashion photographer in Bien Hoa.

Michael "Snoopy" Dukakis- Last seen riding on top of a firetruck at a "Save-the-Whales" parade.

Tom Harkin (D-IA)- Fake war hero; claimed he flew combat missions in Viet Nam, BIG FAT LIE.

Chris Matthews- Ran and hid in the peace-corps, like the yellow-bellied coward he is.

Bubba the pervert-- didn't serve.
Shrillary the Hut- didn't serve.
Sandy Burglar-- didn't serve.
Madeleine Albright- didn't serve.
Keith Olbermann- didn't serve.
Alan Colmes- didn't serve.
Al Franken- didn't serve.
Michael Moore- didn't serve.
Jon Stewart- didn't serve.
Bill Maher- didn't serve.
Jeneane Garofalo- didn't serve.
George Stephanopoulos- didn't serve.
Thomas Friedman- didn't serve.

Rachel Maddow did serve aboard the starship USS Enterprise under the name Wesley Crusher.

Angel| 11.18.09 @ 12:49AM

Nick, you still make me laugh! You're right about Madcow, she does look like Crusher. Too funny.

RachelLovesHerSomeRUG| 11.18.09 @ 1:36AM

Every time some SCUM DUMMACRAT ( and we KNOW it's a DummaCrat because he/she/it is doing his/her/its best to destroy Sarah ) writes another hit piece, I just send MORE MONEY to her campaign.
Do I care if you think I'm stupid ?
Nope.... I am a small business owner, and small biz in this country CANNOT SURVIVE with that Inexperienced Chicago Marxist in office... If I can't make the profit margin that I've worked 20 years for ( sometimes 24 hours per day x 3 days ), then I will LAY OFF WORKERS until I can get there.... Don't like it ?? I DON'T CARE...
THAT JUG-EARED PUNK you elected is NOT gonna' confiscate 20 years of hard work so he can "spread it around".
As I've said many times before: FIRE YOUR Liberals & hire conservatives to take their place.
GO SARAH...

Osamas Pajamas| 11.18.09 @ 2:03AM

I'm surprised my fellow libertarians are criticizing conservatives and conservatives are criticizing libertarians when we all have so much in common [apart from hatred for OhBummer]. Slap yourselves in the face, lads 'n' lasses, there will be time to debate outstanding issues when we're standing on OhBummer's windpipe and the Democrats are bubbling and sparking merrily over an open fire.

Osamas Pajamas| 11.18.09 @ 2:07AM

Geez. I'm surprised to find my fellow libertarians and consertvatives at each other's throats when we have so much in common --- apart from hatred for OhBummer. There will be time to debate the outsdtanding issues when we're standing on OhBummer's windpipe and the Democrats are bubbling and sparking merrily over an open fire.

Richard Baker| 11.18.09 @ 8:52AM

If I'm not mistaken, George Bush had 300 hours and the squadron wanted those to be deployed to Vietnam to have at least 500 hours. This from his squadron commander. And I also believe that Bush requested assignment to Vietnam and lack of flying hours eliminated him from that duty.

victor| 11.18.09 @ 8:13PM

Non-combat while he was training for two years 68-70. They were still sending ANG units to Nam, but they were cutting back by the time he graduated training. He could have still been sent to fly in combat. He finished in the top 5%.
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/qu.....0185.shtml

Tom Anderson| 11.18.09 @ 11:01AM

Nick writes: "The question that has to be asked is WHY you liberals hate Sarah Paling so much? "

May I digress just a bit?

I was reading through this thread and finally hit on your question, and it occurs to me your puzzlement is exactly of the sort I have felt over the question, "Why do liberals hate Bush so much?"

Throughout his presidency, and particularly when he seemed to be losing the Iraq War in 2005-2006, I was about finished with Bush, quite frankly, kicking myself in the butt for entertaining the slightest hope this fellow might actually do something right, when I pondered the hate question.

+Bush was born with silver spoon in mouth, but so was Kennedy;
+Bush went to Ivy League, just as Kennedy did;
+Bush was a big spender, as was Kennedy;
+Bush reduced taxes, as did Kennedy;
+Bush started an unpopular war, as did Kennedy;
+Bush was publicly inarticulate, Kennedy was articulate, and didn't look like Alfred E. Neuman in caricature;
+Bush was an uber-Texan, Kennedy was a Cambridge sophisticate (not really, but he passed);
+Bush liked to work on a Texas ranch for relaxation, Kennedy had his brother & the secret service pimp for him;
+Last, but not least, Bush refused to lead the country rhetorically, he refused to engage his opponents intellectually; Kennedy was all about rhetoric and launched what Ayn Rand called The Fascist New Frontier. Liberals are always very big on rhetoric, since the thoughtful intent is for them almost the only thing that matters.

In the last analysis, the refusal to engage his enemies dispirited his supporters and left everyone just wanting to get his sorry butt off center stage. Bush became useless politically and a terrible weight around the neck of conservatism.

Palin seems willing to engage her opponents. We will have the opportunity to see how this works out for her. I am hopeful and look for a good time the next couple of weeks.

If Palin turns out to think like a conservative, especially on economics, and if she can learn, as Reagan did, to take the fight to the opposition, then we might have a deeply promising candidate for 2012, or later.

I don't think we should be all that impressed with the fact that the Left develops a derangement syndrome over a potential candidate.

What may begin to qualify her lay in her ability and willingness to fight the ideological battle while keeping focus on the real issues people feel. Can she connect the dots for the average American, as Reagan could?

I had another point that annoyed me just a bit was Grzmlyk's attack on what he calls "anti-'intellectualism'". I start feeling a little uncomfortable around anyone who seems to attack reason, which is what you attack when you attack intellectualism. George Wallace introduced that particular mime in the 1972 primary election, or was it in 1968?, by calling his academic opponents "pinheads," not because they were pinheads, but because they were well-educated and went to Harvard, or wherever.

I suggest the word "elitist" as preferable, to identify the particular qualities of smugness, disdain and impenetrable ignorance that so frequently characterize the liberal products of our most esteemed universities. I just wish they were more truly intellectual, applied reason to the facts of reality, as many of us do.

Grzmlyk is himself an intellectual, as is anyone who attempts to reason about facts from a larger, more theoretical point of view, i.e. from that of a political philosopher rather than a journalist. And if "political philosopher" is too grand a title, then "intellectual" it will have to be. Charles Krauthammer would be an example of an intellectual who happens to be a political commentator and analyst.

We should not be in the business of permitting the current crop of Leftist morons to claim the title of rational people, or of intellectuals. Their failure is not their intellectuality but their imperviousness to dissent and rational discussion that probes basic premises.

gbee| 11.18.09 @ 10:48PM

Excellent insights Tom!

Larry Pierson| 11.18.09 @ 12:31PM

Sarah's biggest crime, insofar as the liberal news media is concerned, is going around them and straight to the people with her book. How dare she bypass them! if she and other politicians keep this up, can anyone guess how many liberal news jobs will be destroyed?

Seriously, I think its time the news media realize they have lost their ability to control events. We were winning in Vietnam until they began to mislead the American people. Thanks to their lies, over 50,000 Americans died for nothing. That, however, was irrelevant. Once they realized how powerful they were, they became addicted to it (shades of Machiavelli!). From that point, they abused it. When technology finally enabled the people to get the straight stuff without the press putting their spin on it, they have been throwing royal temper tamtrums that would make a spoiled rotten child jealous.

And they still don't get it.

Liberal Reader| 11.18.09 @ 1:49PM

Nonsense. Every politician and every politician's aide, speechwriter, and mens' room attendant writes a book like this nowadays.

Just because YOU don't pay attention to books not written by Sarah Palin and her ghostwriter does not mean they're not published!

SoCon| 11.18.09 @ 3:58PM

At least a terrorist didn't write Sarah's book for her like O 'BOW' MA. Numbnuts.

Liberal Reader| 11.18.09 @ 4:18PM

So Con --

a) You are a douche bag.

b) You are boring.

c) You are stupid.

d) You are ill-informed.

e) You are obnoxious.

f) Your comments are incoherent and foolish.

I can't think of anything else worth adding.

Cervantes| 11.18.09 @ 9:00PM

So Con,

Do not worry, Liberal retard here is describing himself to you. It is his pickup line you know?
You See Liberal Retard
a) Is a douche bag.

b) Liberal Retard is boring.

c) Liberal Retard is VERY stupid.

d) Liberal Retard is ill-informed.

e) Liberal Retard is very obnoxious.

f) Liberal Retards comments are incoherent and foolish.

there is nothing else worth adding.

(I think he likes you though!)

SoCon| 11.18.09 @ 9:48PM

Cervantes, thanks for the kind words, but it's my impression that LibReader/Jeremiah doesn't swing that way; if you know what I mean. Wink wink.

The Axelrod troll's a little light in the loafers, a little limp-wristed, if you will.

Seek| 11.18.09 @ 12:57PM

To say that Sarah Palin is not qualified to be president is not to "hate" or be "driven wild" by her. It's simply to say that she has yet to demonstrate an ability to deal with complex issues that a president must face every day. Would that her hysterical supporters, who equate a debate with a punch in the ribs, could tell the difference.

SoCon| 11.18.09 @ 4:01PM

Obama's been president for a year and the clown is still committing major social gaffes. The guy's a disaster, and only brain-dead liberal ideologues don't admit it.

Talk about hysteria, moron--look in the mirror.

Bydand76| 11.18.09 @ 9:05PM

Right.

and Obama was so much more qualified?

Sorry, but your argument makes about as much sense as a soup sandwich. The Left hates SP simply because she does not fit their mold and it drives them nuts. I think you underestimate SP skills. She has proven to be a formidible opponent.

As far as debating?
Tell that to all the people who disagree with PBHO and get called a racist.

seriously.

Richard Baker| 11.18.09 @ 7:04PM

Seek:
Do you have ANY knowledge of what she did in Alaska while Governor? Might oughta check. Exactly what executive experience is possessed by the Kenyan or Biden? Her supporters are not "hysterical" but see her as someone who shares their values. Thank God she's not a dud like Dukakis or Biden. Were you complaining about Obama-mania last year?

Bob Belvedere| 11.18.09 @ 7:12PM

Quoted from and Linked to at:
THE PALINPALOOZA TOUR HITS THE ROAD

PALIN 4 PRESIDENT| 11.18.09 @ 9:42PM

YAY, SARAH!!

gbee| 11.18.09 @ 10:42PM

The fact that McCain almost won the election shows how much people actually liked her. But conservatives and conservative independants didn't trust or like McCain.

John II| 11.18.09 @ 11:28PM

Nobody here? Everybody's gone? Quiet thread?

Good. Now for the last word:

Confucius say, "Wise (wo)man conduct self with respect, perform duties with reverence, treat others with wholehearted sincerity."

Thank you so much. And good night.

Angel| 11.19.09 @ 12:10AM

John, you missed your calling, you should have been on stage--on Vaudeville! "Take my wife, puleeeze!" You like old movies, so you would feel right at home there.

You must be a hoot in class, what a nut.

Yosemeti Sam| 11.19.09 @ 12:08AM

" ... What is it about Palin that sticks in the craw of liberal journalists? ...."

She's inspiring!

They are cardboards.

Angel| 11.19.09 @ 12:14AM

Sweet thing to say about Sarah Palin, Yosemeti Sam--she inspires me, too. So do you.

Tassie| 11.19.09 @ 12:27AM

I am a mother from New Zealand and I fell in love with her from the day she was nominated for VP. Look after her, America,because she is everything the liberals hate. She is a fresh breeze for us-normal people.

Angel| 11.19.09 @ 1:17AM

God bless you, Tassie. Please pray for us that we may find the courage to fight for our beloved country. I am heartsick with worry and I know that only God can right this floundering ship.

We need all the help we can get right now.

Yosemeti Sam| 11.19.09 @ 12:50AM

Angel, I like angelic names :)

Take care.

Richard Baker| 11.19.09 @ 12:35PM

Victor:
The reason Bush didn't go to Vietnam was purely lack of flight hours. His squadron commander so stated recently. The unit SOP was 500+ hours and they felt that less would make that pilot a hazard in a combat zone. That's what unit SOPs are for.

John II| 11.19.09 @ 8:32PM

Okay, no postings for hours now. Quiet as a churchyard. And I've got the perfect quote for the LAST WORD on Sarah:

"By God, she reminds me of me!" (John Wayne, "True Grit," 1969)

Prudence| 11.19.09 @ 8:40PM

I like Sarah Palin because she is the only prominent republican around who has any balls. Go Sarah!

Richard Baker| 11.20.09 @ 2:09AM

Tassie:
Like your comments, Kiwi.

Mike| 11.23.09 @ 11:57AM

You Palin-heads are smoking dope. She is not the next Reagan. The lady simply doesn't have the smarts that Reagan had. She will never be president. Quit squandering our Republican options on this pathetic thing. She is good looking but she is also an empty suit.

Jo Ellen| 12.1.09 @ 11:37PM

[Caught this web bit not long ago. BTW, "Pretrib Hypocrisy" is likely embarrassing to the A of G's and possibly to Palin. Jo Ellen]

PRETRIB RAPTURE RUSTLERS

To see the long hidden side of the 179-year-old, British-invented-and-American-merchandised, apocalyptic "rapture" mania, Google "Pretrib Rapture Diehards," "Thomas Ice (Bloopers)" (the sloppy copyist "genius" that Lindsey, LaHaye and other "rapture" tycoons lean on!), "LaHaye's Temperament," "America's Pretrib Rapture Traffickers," "Edward Irving is Unnerving," "Thieves' Marketing," "Appendix F: Thou Shalt Not Steal," "The Newest Pretrib Calendar," "The Rapture Index (Mad Theology)," "Roots of (Warlike) Christian Zionism" and "Pretrib Rapture Dishonesty," for starters. The author of these items plus the bestselling nonfiction book "The Rapture Plot" (available online) is journalist/historian Dave MacPherson who has uniquely focused for 40 years on the bizarre history of this endtime craze which is anti-Jewish, anti-Catholic and anti- just about everyone else! MacPherson is the "Pretrib Rapture Answerman" who has researched throughout Britain and aired so much rapturesque "dirty linen" that he's found behind the scenes (clever revisionism of early 19th century documents, rampant plagiarism, phony doctorates, Swaggart-type scandals etc.) that he is now No. 1 on the hate lists of the leading "rapture" money-changers! As everyone's black, dust-covered book says, "There is nothing hidden that won't be revealed...." (PS: Google "Pretrib Hypocrisy" for stun gun shocks about the Assemblies of God with whom there's a Sarah Palin connection!)