Rush Limbaugh: I Don't Get the Criticism of Palin; It Must Be a Shibboleth of the Educated Class

You know, I've lived my whole life not knowing the actual meaning of shibboleth. I could sort of understand it in context -- sort of -- as a blip-word, a word you sort of blip over. I knew it was used in the context of liberal shibboleths and conservative shibboleths but I just sort of read that as "bromides" or "dogma."

Rush explains what it means in this clip about Sarah Palin.

What a perfectly outstanding and interesting word. It turns out I've been writing about shibboleths for years -- my constant re-working of the same basic idea of people signifying to each other the tribe they belong to (or aspire to belong to) by adopting the manners, biases, and received wisdom of that tribe -- without ever realizing there was such a genius that-is-exactly-what-I-mean word for it.

How come you doofuses never alerted me that I was missing such an awesome word? I know a lot of you guys know the Bible -- why wasn't this brought to my attention immediately? Why you gonna hold out on your buddy Ace like that?

(Apologies if you tried and I missed the comment or email.)

That part aside -- Thanks, Rush! -- I disagree with Rush -- in part.

There is no question that something like a shibboleth may be at work here. Since it turns out I am a huge believer in the idea of shibboleths, I can't argue too much that that sort of thing doesn't happen.

But there's something that's going on a lot lately that I sort of hate.

One of the biggest sources of frustration in arguing with a liberal is that the liberal refuses to take your stated reasons for your beliefs as your real reasons for the belief. If you say "I don't support quota or racial-plus-factor-based affirmative action, because I think it's unfair to discriminate against white people, too, just as it's wrong to discriminate against anyone based on their race" they almost reflexively offer up the secret motivation they assign to you: "You don't like black people, that's what your problem is."

If you state you want to keep taxes low because the private sector flourishes under a low-tax regime, and it's the private sector that creates wealth while the government merely transfers it (and destroys part of it in the process), they of course ignore that stated rationale, and decide, in the twinkling of an eye: "You hate poor people. Also, you probably hate black people too. In fact, you probably hate poor people in the first place because you hate black people and many of them are poor."

It's a rude form of argument (in both senses of the word "rude") and is unproductive, because, of course, the moment this card is played, it's no longer a fair exchange in which people's actual arguments are offered, criticized, and responded to, but instead essentially a series of insults disguised, very superficially, as an argument.

I mean, when someone takes a perfectly reasonable and respectable argument in favor of capitalism and immediately turns that into the straw-man insult You're a racist, what is the sense of arguing any further? Once one party decides it's fair to simply make up secret motivations and put them into your mouth (or head, really), and then argue against not what you are saying but the convenient bugaboo strawman they've created, how do you respond?

Well, you say I'm not a racist, maybe, and then you throw in a You're the real racist for good measure, but that's pretty much as far as that particular argument is going to go. The well is now poisoned; no real argument remains to be had. The argument (in the sense of "reasoned exchange of ideas") now turns into an argument (in the sense of "bitter quarrel") and then one or both parties walks away.

I do this myself a lot. Hell, everyone does. It doesn't work out well, at least not if you're attempting to persuade a would-be ally. It's really a technique to be used only against those you've decided are unreachable opponents, because once that card is played, that's it as far as a genuine exchange of points of view.

Obviously I do this a lot with liberals (my whole argument about shibboleths is this type of argument, which doesn't make it untrue; it does, however, make it very, very unlikely to be greeted by liberals with an open mind). I often, far-too-frequently slip up and begin doing it with conservative would-be allies, too, which is when people start advising me to 1) walk away from the thread and 2) stop being such a complete asshole.

Like I said, it's a dangerous form of argument. It's perceived as dismissive and condescending for the simple reason it is dismissive and condescending -- all offered arguments are immediately dismissed as lies (in favor of the unspeakable truth of racism or other bias) and of course claiming to know what is really in someone's head or heart -- and to know this far better than the actual person you're arguing with -- is the height of condescension.

I know in personal life, when a woman says Why don't you tell me more about what I think!?!?, well, that means the argument has taken a bad turn and we're probably not really discussing the subject that began the argument any longer. Now begins the always-enjoyable part of the evening called Recriminations.

My problem, then, is that many of Palin's supporters seem to dismiss, as so inconceivable as to not be creditable, the possibility that someone might not prefer Palin as a candidate based upon the reasons for this disfavor actually offered.

Just as a liberal cannot, seemingly, conceive of any argument in favor of limited government and federalism as motivated by anything other than racism, many (not all) of Palin's supporters are very, very quick to dismiss any stated argument against her, instead postulating that all reservations about Palin are motivated by:

1) anti-woman animus

2) a desire to prop up the Old Boy's Club

3) tribal concerns about the current power structure (the "elite," the "establishment") being displaced in favor of a new power structure in which the "outsiders" and "ordinary people" are on top; as Palin is purported to be the vanguard of this new ruling class, it is postulated that the Old Guard has a strong, self-interested reason to stop her at all costs. (By the way-- do most people consider themselves "ordinary"? I always wince at this formulation. Apart from a few people who are a little sub-ordinary and aspire to actually rise to the level of "ordinary," I tend to think that most people do not consider themselves ordinary. Or maybe ordinary in several ways, but not-quite-ordinary in important ways.)

4) a need to fit in with the liberal media elite and the so-called conservative intellectual elite which shares many of the shibboleths of the liberal media elite

Again, as I said, I can't wholly dismiss any of those as possible subconscious reasons that I'm not in favor of Candidate Palin. Given that we're talking about the subconscious -- who knows? Maybe I am, subconsciously, anti-woman. Maybe I am, subconsciously, so invested in a credentialed conservative intellectual elite to tamp down on not-quite-our-class-dear populist arrivistes.

Still, what I do know is that I never offer these reasons as the reasons for my tepid-to-antagonistic response to Palin. But these reasons are often offered back to me as the real reasons I oppose Palin.

My actual reasons are often addressed by Palin supporters (many of them are fair and perfectly willing to engage in dispassionate fair argumentation) but a minority of her supporters tends to make up their own strawmen and argue only against those. And even though they're a minority, one tends to remember the insults; that is, they tend to dominate one's memories, out of proportion to their actual incidence.

I tend not to remember the arguments I've had with fair-minded supporters because there's no emotional charge to them; they were just fair, pleasant arguments as are often had about drug legalization or gun rights.

But I do remember all the RINO, Old Boys Club, liberal-dinner-party-circuit you-just-hate-girls stuff.

It's just unproductive, really. Even if you know that someone does harbor secret or subconscious motivations for his beliefs, it's rarely actually persuasive or helpful to point them out. (Assuming your goal is persuasion.) Like I said, I do this all the time with liberals, and will keep doing so -- but that's because I've written them off as far as persuasion.

There are offered reasons to not be on Team Palin. Some of them are mentioned in that Politico argument. These are, I feel (as I share the belief in many of them), fair, reasonable, legitimate, and respectable arguments.

When George Will says that Palin is placing far too much emphasis on a "creedal" appeal, well, I think that's a fair criticism. I've made that argument myself, that a successful politics must be evangelistic and convert-hungry like Christianity, instead of rooted in born-to cultural belonging-by-birth mode like Judaism. (I realize I am pigeonholing Judaism and not acknowledging there is a conversion/evangelical component to it-- but for purposes of this analogy, please allow me my simplification.) An evangelistic faith which requires only that converts believe in a series of plausible claims can gain many converts, whereas a faith based largely in born-to culture will tend to have a sharply, sharply limited upper bound of possible growth. And to many (myself included), Palin seems to frequently be attempting a politics based upon the latter mode -- self-identification in particular born-to cultural traditions.

Where do the converts come from, then, if large chunks of the populace seem to be excluded, by birth or self-identification, from the club? If Palin makes an explicit pitch, for example, about "ordinary Americans," what about all those Americans who don't consider themselves ordinary at all?

Why limit the club like that? I'm not even talking about "fairness." I'm just talking pure political math. A candidate whose message can be accepted by the larger portion of a population will tend to be more successful than a candidate whose message, being more narrow-cast, can only be accepted by a smaller portion of it.

I don't see why George Will's statement on this point is dismissed as "not what's really going on." And then the search begins for plausible secret motivations, because of course his stated reason couldn't be the real one.

Why? Why not take him at his word?

As a conservative, I hate with the heat of the desert sun my reasons for believing x, y, and z being dismissed as being secretly based on prejudice and hatred. Why would I be any more receptive to such a mode of argumentation when it comes from other conservatives instead of liberals?

At any rate, I think that's a genuine and legitimate question about Palin's appeal and its ability to appeal to anything more than a minority of the country. I think that that can and should be corrected by Palin, if she actually has any desire to stand in an election in which she needs to receive at least 50% of the vote.

I don't think it's unfair to say so. Rather, I think it's necessary to say so.

Limbaugh keeps saying he "doesn't get" the animus against Palin. But it's not for lack of Palin-critics and Palin-skeptics attempting to explain the reasons for their reservation. We keep trying to explain the why behind it, but too frequently these offered reasons are dismissed as false in favor of imputed secret reasons.

If you're going to keep dismissing someone's stated reasons for believing in something, of course you'll wind up "not getting" the reasons for that belief. "Getting it" requires, as a first step, taking the offered reasons as genuine and true and examining them to see if there's anything to them. But to keep dismissing them as false... well, in that way the Great Mystery of Palin Non-Enthusiasm remains a Great Mystery.

Posted by: Ace at 02:52 PM

Comments

(Jump to bottom of comments)

1 Someone post a summary; only have 15 minutes for my coffee break.

Posted by: snort! at March 15, 2011 02:58 PM (K/USr)

2 How come you doofuses never alerted me that I was missing such an awesome word?

My apologies to all the other funny stuff around here, but this sentence set me laughing harder than anything since I watched a fat kid body slam a bully.

Posted by: ef at March 15, 2011 02:58 PM (FrdE0)

3
Ace,

Not to piss on your thunder here, but Dr. Thomas Sowell did an excellent piece on shibboleths way back in 2002:

http://tinyurl.com/4ecc7rw

Posted by: FRONT TOWARD LEFT at March 15, 2011 03:00 PM (Pzf4N)

4 Well, this thread won't get 1000 posts . . . .

Posted by: jimmuy at March 15, 2011 03:02 PM (sF7ki)

5 1
Someone post a summary; only have 15 minutes for my coffee break.

Posted by: snort! at March 15, 2011 02:58 PM (K/USr)
Boy, no kidding, diarrhea of the mouth much?Or a new Thesaurus?

Posted by: Sarahs With Me at March 15, 2011 03:02 PM (MWXXs)

6

10,000+ dead! So. Still say Global Warming is a myth Teabaggers? All you teabaggers who drive Hummersand SUV's, and shoot guns, and pray to an imaginary gawd, and marry your livestock, all to substitute for your tiny penises HAVE ALL THE BLOOD OF JAPAN ON YOUR HANDS!

Posted by: KayInMaine at March 15, 2011 03:03 PM (aehEj)

7 1
Someone post a summary; only have 15 minutes for my coffee break.

"Why does Rush hate me because I'm jealous of Tod Palin!"

Posted by: Iblis at March 15, 2011 03:04 PM (9221z)

8 How come you doofuses never alerted me that I was missing such an
awesome word? I know a lot of you guys know the Bible -- why wasn't
this brought to my attention immediately?

I thought a Shibboleth was a demon creature from Alone in the Dark. My mistake.

Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at March 15, 2011 03:04 PM (9hSKh)

9 Another great word is Avatard, one I made up to describe global warming cultists. It will take off one day I'm sure. Why they didn't make the creatures green I'll never know.

Posted by: dfbaskwill at March 15, 2011 03:05 PM (71LDo)

10 Ahhh, wow?

Posted by: Penfold at March 15, 2011 03:05 PM (1PeEC)

11 Palin may not be perfect, nor is anyone saying she is, but she's a damn sight better than the joke of a prez we have right now. I would gladly accept her and all of her faults in exchange for Obama. It would be a huge fucking step up.

Posted by: EC at March 15, 2011 03:05 PM (GQ8sn)

12 If the Palin supporters are guilty of this at a level 5 of 10, the Huckabee fans take it to 11.

If you oppose Huckabee, it's because you hate Christians. Never mind that the guy sees no problem with legislating a national smoking ban, has no respect for the concepts of federalism or limited government... the REAL reason you oppose Huckabee is because you hate Christians.

Posted by: wooga at March 15, 2011 03:05 PM (2p0e3)

13 Palin fans and non-fans read article and have a conversation/debate while wondering how Ace managed to write another long post without overdosing
Palin cultists bitch about the thread in 3...2.....1...

Posted by: YRM at March 15, 2011 03:05 PM (UzBwz)

14 All that blather and you still can't explain your opposition to her.

Perhaps you should spend some more time out of the public light, thinking. For a change.

Posted by: Rob Crawford at March 15, 2011 03:06 PM (ZJ/un)

15 You nailed it, ace.

Posted by: Y-not at March 15, 2011 03:06 PM (pW2o8)

16 WTFnik?

Posted by: Barbarian at March 15, 2011 03:06 PM (EL+OC)

17 >>>> 10,000+ dead! So. Still say Global Warming is a myth Teabaggers? All you teabaggers who drive Hummers and SUV's, and shoot guns, and pray to an imaginary gawd, and marry your livestock, all to substitute for your tiny penises HAVE ALL THE BLOOD OF JAPAN ON YOUR HANDS!

Kay in maine, you think the global warming caused the earthquake, huh?

Posted by: ace at March 15, 2011 03:06 PM (nj1bB)

18 Posted by: EC at March 15, 2011 03:05 PM (GQ8sn)
well duh, i'm sure all the morns would but those damn annoying indys...

Posted by: YRM at March 15, 2011 03:07 PM (UzBwz)

19 I raised my leg to a shibboleth once. It didn't seem to mind.

Posted by: Dog 'O' Madness at March 15, 2011 03:07 PM (OlN4e)

20 How come you doofuses never alerted me that I was missing such an awesome word?How none of you came to me like a man, and told me to quit fucking around with theunassuming words?

Posted by: sherlock at March 15, 2011 03:07 PM (Xq2WY)

21 I dislike the Palin bashers because 99% of everything they say is (1) an outright lie (2) a severe distortion that may as well be a lie or (3) some stupid poll that says she can never be elected. Any poll we have right now is totally useless and that is not coming from me. Rasmussen says the same thing.

But here we have a Palin thread so let the flames begin.

Posted by: Vic at March 15, 2011 03:07 PM (M9Ie6)

22 Posted by: KayInMaine at March 15, 2011 03:03 PM (aehEj)
please tell me this is a sock

Posted by: YRM at March 15, 2011 03:07 PM (UzBwz)

23 Yeah Kay, the largest Solar Flare in four years hitting the earth had nothing to do with it. Its all the evil re-thuglicans, breeders, and xstians fault!

Posted by: Iblis at March 15, 2011 03:08 PM (9221z)

24 How come you doofuses never alerted me that I was missing such an awesome word? I know a lot of you guys know the Bible
I feel so ashamed. Actually, I always thought it was Irish for a walking stick. I must have been confusing it with shillelagh.

More the fool, I.

Posted by: countrydoc at March 15, 2011 03:08 PM (131HS)

25 Queue "Ballad of a Thin Man"

And Kay has PMS again. And the smell from her cooter could drop a horse.

Posted by: Captain Hate at March 15, 2011 03:08 PM (cQH/d)

26 wondering how Ace managed to write another long post without overdosing

I think he did about a third of the way into it.

Posted by: Sarahs With Me at March 15, 2011 03:09 PM (MWXXs)

27 Shibboleth != Shoggoth

Just FYI

Posted by: grognard at March 15, 2011 03:09 PM (NS2Mo)

28 Hold your tongue and say "shibboleth" ... { * snort ... guffaw ... hee, hee, hee *}

Posted by: my inner fourth grader at March 15, 2011 03:09 PM (HmCnI)

29 Posted by: Vic at March 15, 2011 03:07 PM (M9Ie6)
but there's a difference in palin bashing like the left and establishment take part in, and concerns that are automatically shouted down as outright lies and stupidity that people like me have

Posted by: YRM at March 15, 2011 03:09 PM (UzBwz)

30 >>>Palin may not be perfect, nor is anyone saying she is, but she's a damn sight better than the joke of a prez we have right now. I would gladly accept her and all of her faults in exchange for Obama. It would be a huge fucking step up.

Of course, of course. That's not the question. The problem I have is that I don't think Palin can win -- I find her appeal is too narrow,partly out of her own doing -- and that she'll lose.

Since literally ANYONE would be a step up from Obama, I really, really want to get ANYONE else in there, and I'm against those I feel who will wind up keeping him in office.

Posted by: ace at March 15, 2011 03:09 PM (nj1bB)

31 "Well, how come none of you..." Shit.

Posted by: sherlock at March 15, 2011 03:09 PM (Xq2WY)

32 why wasn't this brought to my attention immediately?

Shyeah. Like you read the blog.

Posted by: Andy at March 15, 2011 03:09 PM (5Rurq)

33 Posted by: KayInMaine at March 15, 2011 03:03 PM (aehEj)

That one has GOT to be a sock.

Ace- I think what starts frustrating Palin supporters (I know that I have to keep it in check) is this statement: "I tend not to remember the arguments I've had with fair-minded supporters..."

What happens is that you (and others) bring up the same arguments, which we refute. Sometimes, they're arguments of perception ("She Quit!") and we have to agree to disagree. Other times they're arguments of fact ("She never uses a serious medium/does adversarial interviews/etc.") where we go show specific examples to rebut that argument.

Then, because we did that rationally, without calling you a RINO, you promptly forget.

So, for myself, I try never to insult people who are on my side (on purpose, anyway), so I force myself to remain calm and civil. However, my mom once remarked that I could have given Ghandi lessons in passive resistance- most people don't hold themselves to my standard. And it even gets old for me. So you can see why more and more Palin supporters are venting (I make no apologies for the complete Robots, though- cults of Personality are bad no matter the personality to which they're attached).

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) at March 15, 2011 03:09 PM (8y9MW)

34 My rule of thumb is: if you can't articulate why you like/dislike someone, especially a politician, then your like/dislike probably isn't an entirely-rational state of mind. Many people seem to have purely atavistic reasons for liking/disliking Sarah Palin, then attempt to justify those feelings by papering them over with post-hoc rationalizations.

I'm up front about my (entirely non-rational) reasons for liking Sarah Palin: she seems like the kind of person I'd like. She seems like a sunny, genuine, no-nonsense kind of person. But I also understand that she is a politician, and that politicians craft their public images as carefully as Michelangelo crafted his famous sculptures -- the "public peson" may have little or no resemblance to the "private person". So even though I'm predisposed to like Sarah Palin, I distrust my own predisposition because I understand how it can be manipulated.

That being said: she is certainly no worse than nearly any other politician I can think of in terms of general intelligence, policy positions, or ideological makeup. In fact, I'd put her in the upper third of ability for pure retail politics -- it does take a certain kind of person to be constantly grinning for the cameras, pressing the flesh, and sounding fresh and happy even when you know she's given the same basic speech a dozen times before. As politicians go, she's a very talented on, and I think her detractors fear her because of this. She's got star-power.

The main beef I have with people who call her "stupid" is that a) they're wrong (she's probably smarter than 70% of any of the warm bodies now sitting in any of the legislative chambers right now), and b) there's a difference between being green and being dumb. She was just green in 2008; she's a lot more polished now.

She has real accomplishments in her past, and she's achieved her current status entirely on her own merits -- and against a gale-force headwind of negativity from the entire MSM and Democrat ranks (but I repeat myself).

Posted by: Monty at March 15, 2011 03:10 PM (4Pleu)

35 It seems at least one Kay up there in Maine is a slobbering idiot. May I use your leg for a moment, Kay?

Posted by: Dog 'O' Madness at March 15, 2011 03:10 PM (OlN4e)

36 I think what upsets some Palin fans is the condescension directed at her by other Republicans, especially those with a stake in the current system, and the more personal attacks on her and her supporters. Also, why does Ace hate women? It's like he's gay or something.

Posted by: Dr Spank at March 15, 2011 03:10 PM (1fB+3)

37 aaaaaaand they're off...........!

Posted by: laceyunderalls at March 15, 2011 03:11 PM (pLTLS)

38 WTF, I'm not reading something this long. I hate these philosophical rants ace does. Huck the schmuck is 50-50 on running via fox news via hotair. Lets hope Palin shuts that door by announcing. Huck sucks. Just look at his record. He supports MO's fricking obesity campaign while his own family is disgustingly obese.

Posted by: Flapjackmaka at March 15, 2011 03:11 PM (c5RQr)

39 Holy shit! That video of the bully on the sidebar is friggin' epic. I keep thinking there's a parallel here: mistaking kindness and maturity for weakness. ! Casey = WINNING!

Posted by: Navin R Johnson at March 15, 2011 03:12 PM (HpT9p)

40 Here's your Tuesday circle jerk, morons.

Posted by: nickless at March 15, 2011 03:12 PM (MMC8r)

41 @38
I pity your college professors.

Posted by: Y-not at March 15, 2011 03:12 PM (pW2o8)

42 Excellent. Another really annoying thing is, that the rabid Palin folks simply will not believe that you like her, but don'tthing she is readyto be President. If you don't think 2012 is Palin's year you automaticallyhate Palin.
And you watch MSNBC for talking points. So there!
I don't get why anyone thinks we should risk the country on untried politicians. It's not personal at all. But a couple years in state government is not cutting it for me. I don't care how valid a conservative you are. You have to run something for at least a full term or two. No matter how good a reason you have for your lack of experience, it is still lack of experience.

Posted by: Shauna at March 15, 2011 03:13 PM (pVo2d)

43 I question you're motives for posting this.

Posted by: Racist Liberal at March 15, 2011 03:13 PM (3tv4X)

44 I've got a shibboleth for you. Pronounce "President Huckabee".

If you can get through that without 1) laughing or 2) vomiting, you're not on my side.

Posted by: grognard at March 15, 2011 03:13 PM (NS2Mo)

45 So, Ace, do you like it when you stop hitting your head with a hammer? I mean, this is the bloggy equivalent of that, you know.

Posted by: joncelli at March 15, 2011 03:13 PM (RD7QR)

46 I hate these philosophical rants ace does.

Reading is hard, huh?

Posted by: laceyunderalls at March 15, 2011 03:13 PM (pLTLS)

47 I often, far-too-frequently slip up and begin doing it with conservative would-be allies, too, which is when people start advising me to 1) walk away from the thread and 2) stop being such a complete asshole.

It is this sort of honesty from you and the cobloggers that makes me such a fan of this site. You frequently torque me off, but then I see you trying to honestly deal with your own blind spots. That is a very rare quality.

Kiss me you mad, mad fool!!

Posted by: countrydoc at March 15, 2011 03:13 PM (131HS)

48 Posted by: Shauna at March 15, 2011 03:13 PM (pVo2d)
THIS, now prepare to be flamed by the Palin cultists

Posted by: YRM at March 15, 2011 03:14 PM (UzBwz)

49 I'm still not sure if Kay in Maine is an authentic, psychotic moonbat, or a far-too-realistic sockpuppet.

Posted by: Damn Sockpuppet at March 15, 2011 03:14 PM (YmPwQ)

50 What kills me is how many men support Palinsimply because they think she is hot and has a nice rack. But if you say anything against her you are a misogynist!!11!!1eleventy!!!

Posted by: rockmom at March 15, 2011 03:14 PM (w/gVZ)

51 You betcha. I'm going togoshoot a moose. Hope I get past the Animal Kingdom guards...

Posted by: Beagle at March 15, 2011 03:14 PM (sOtz/)

52 40
Here's your Tuesday circle jerk.

We prefer the term relief in the round over here.

Posted by: AllahP at March 15, 2011 03:15 PM (EL+OC)

53 Since literally ANYONE would be a step up from Obama, I really, really
want to get ANYONE else in there, and I'm against those I feel who will
wind up keeping him in office.

Then it's not really against Palin per se? Your beef is more to do with a challenger of substantial electability trying to get in there to beat Obama, rather than any specific pol's ratings.

Posted by: EC at March 15, 2011 03:15 PM (GQ8sn)

54 I mean, when someone takes a perfectly reasonable and respectable
argument in favor of capitalism and immediately turns that into the
straw-man insult You're a racist, what is the sense of arguing
any further? Once one party decides it's fair to simply make up secret
motivations and put them into your mouth (or head, really), and then
argue against not what you are saying but the convenient bugaboo
strawman they've created, how do you respond?

Ace, how do you respond to a bumper sticker? I've always said "never scream at the tv set, it never answers you".

What I do, and just about all anyone can do is tell the person; " After what you've said, I just can't take anything you say seriously, and therefore won't bother arguing with a joke"

Posted by: kbdabear at March 15, 2011 03:15 PM (vdfwz)

55 I find myself going back and forth on Palin. I like her conservatism for the most part, but she's such a lightning rod for the left I worry about her ability to win a national election. I understand most of it isn't her fault, and I'm not exactly sure what else she could do to change it.

The problem is really with that 10% that don't pay attention to politics that much and only see Palin on the Daily Show clips or on TMZ or whatever. I just don't believe in the current media environment she's capable of overcoming that. It's not the "woman thing" as far as my beliefs go (I could care less what sexual organs a candidate has), but I do think that comes into play in the media. I mean, even Hillary encountered some heavy anti-woman MSM bias in the '08 primary.

Posted by: Johnny at March 15, 2011 03:15 PM (mhmc7)

56 The shitstorm, she's a brewin...

Posted by: Captain Ahab at March 15, 2011 03:15 PM (j0QWO)

57 Posted by: rockmom at March 15, 2011 03:14 PM (w/gVZ)
Hillbuzz and Tammy Bruce push the hate women meme hard whenever you criticize Palin or have concerns about her

Posted by: YRM at March 15, 2011 03:16 PM (UzBwz)

58 I can see where you are coming from here. Myself, being someone favorably disposed to Sarah Palin for my own reasons, which are based on the actual things she has done, the why and how of it as well, combined with a basic impression of her character and values, my reasons are often dismissed as talking points fed to me by Palin's PR team and replaced with some variation of "you hate smart people and you are so dumb you are hypnotized by a pretty face and a great set of legs."

As you say, this is the exact same phenomenon in reverse from the rabid Palin-dislikers.

I find it infuriatingly insulting, and the actual points to be made are now irrelevant because the jerkiness of the other person becomes the primary topic of conversation.

This displays the complete non-interest, even refusal, to consider anything factual about Palin's record or personality I find positive and want to talk about. It is all the result of me being brainwashed by a pretty lady with nice legs, therefore rendering everything I say, no matter how true, as the product of my own gullibility, not a substantive position to hold.

Consider, Ace, that this type of dysfunctional discussion is a two-way street.

Posted by: Brian72 at March 15, 2011 03:16 PM (yhJiT)

59 And then the search begins for plausible secret motivations, because of course his stated reason couldn't be the real one.
I've been puzzling over similar claims that certain people are sexist, misogynistic and sexist/misogynistic at the same time. Chris Matthews is NASTY about Michele Bachmann, but is it because he hates women? I have no desire to listen to him enough to figure it out.

Posted by: Mama AJ at March 15, 2011 03:16 PM (XdlcF)

60 Posted by: rockmom at March 15, 2011 03:14 PM (w/gVZ)

I know a few guys who support Palin, and those are not the reason. She is hot. She does have a nice rack. But so does, say, Angelina Jolee, and I wouldn't vote for her.

So, I kind of have to ask, how many men do you find who actually claim her looks as the reason they support her? And how many of those aren't joking?

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) at March 15, 2011 03:16 PM (8y9MW)

61 I support Palin because I respect her. I can see the POV of those who don't support her, sure. But there aren't many worthy of honest respect, and she's one of them.

Posted by: grognard at March 15, 2011 03:16 PM (NS2Mo)

62 That one has GOT to be a sock.

I wish sockpuppetting morons would get the fucking point that it has to be obvious that it is a sock to be effective. Getting other morons to buy it because you sound just as demented as KayInMaine (and actually signing it 'KayInMaine') just wastes valuable blogtime on a 'slap-the-troll' game without a proper puck.

Posted by: nickless at March 15, 2011 03:16 PM (MMC8r)

63 The problem comes when a person�s stated reasons for their belief conflict with their other beliefs.

When they keep repeating, �I believe y because of x� and they also repeat �I believe z� without addressing that z suffers from the same problem, well, it�s logical to believe that �because of x� is not true. I keep hearing about Palin�s unelectability but very few solutions are offered, and those that are (John Thune?) aren�t any better and are likely worse.

You see the same thing with the birth certificate issue. Yes, people should just say �his problem, not mine� but they see what appear to be incongruous actions and it�s natural to try to reason out the reason for the incongruity.

Also, when they don�t address the actual issue involved. In this case, for example, Limbaugh is responding to a fairly egregious article. Palin is so extreme that she�s the right�s Al Sharpton? Palin has no ideas? That�s the shibboleth Limbaugh is addressing.

�Ace wrote an article about pigs. I think he�s wrong. Bacon tastes great. I hate with the heat of a thousand desert suns that Ace dismisses my opinion about bacon.�

What Ace wrote: pig crap smells horrible.

Posted by: Jerry at March 15, 2011 03:17 PM (QF8uk)

64 Posted by: Johnny at March 15, 2011 03:15 PM (mhmc7)
I feel like you bud, I LOVE the woman and feel she would be an awesome President but I'd be lying if her public image, electability, and her quiting the Governorship didn't concern me

Posted by: YRM at March 15, 2011 03:17 PM (UzBwz)

65 Reading is hard, huh?
Posted by: laceyunderalls at March 15, 2011 03:13 PM (pLTLS)
Nah, I'd rather attack Preznit Toonces though. I dn't care what the hell shibboleth means. Ace needs to do a post on the Wisconsin Senate leaders calling the 14 dems in contempt.

Posted by: Flapjackmaka at March 15, 2011 03:17 PM (c5RQr)

66 The only reason that she holds such status in this country is because of her man Todd. AmIright?

Posted by: Truck Monkey at March 15, 2011 03:17 PM (yQWNf)

67 Because the cool kids don't say Shibboleth; they say DOG WHISTLE. But it's the same thing, right?

Posted by: ParisParamus at March 15, 2011 03:17 PM (ddInK)

68 I think what upsets some Palin fans is the condescension directed at her by other Republicans, especially those with a stake in the current system, and the more personal attacks on her and her supporters. Also, why does Ace hate women? It's like he's gay or something.
Posted by: Dr Spank at March 15, 2011 03:10 PM (1fB+3)
In the spirit of Ace's post, isn't it possible you just THINK it is "condescension"? It isn't condescending to tell a stupid person he is stupid. And it isn't condescending for a Republican activist or other elected official to say that Sarah Palin isn't qualified or smart enoughto be President, if that is what they really think.

Posted by: rockmom at March 15, 2011 03:18 PM (w/gVZ)

69 Dude, Labash called her the conservatiev Al Sharpton, with sexy librarian glasses instead of the 'do.

(That's at least part of what Rush was responding to.)

Really? I mean, however you feel about her, can we agree that comparing her to Sharpton (and then denigrating her appeal) is beyond the pale?

Posted by: moviegique at March 15, 2011 03:18 PM (kNN2d)

70 Here's KayinMaine's website. If it's a sock, the real one is Charlie Sheen grade batshit anyway ...

Posted by: kbdabear at March 15, 2011 03:18 PM (vdfwz)

71 Palin aside, what I find strange about this year is that NOBODY has formerly announced yet. We are in mid-March now and the first real debates are scheduled in Columbia in May.

Either we are going to not have any official candidates at that debate or there is going to be a flood of announcements real soon.

Posted by: Vic at March 15, 2011 03:18 PM (M9Ie6)

72 I also don't get the love for career politicians. I don't trust a guy who's never had a frigging private-sector job. Politics shouldn't be a career. It should be something you take time off of your regular job to do. I think that's why the "experience" talking-point bothers me -- I don't think that having 20 years of "experience" sitting on your ass in the House or Senate is necessarily good training to be Chief Executive. (Which is why I think state governors make better Presidents than senators do, as a rule.)

Posted by: Monty at March 15, 2011 03:19 PM (4Pleu)

73 It's because she lied about her uterus. I should have that uterus.

Posted by: Andrew Sullivan at March 15, 2011 03:19 PM (PLvLS)

74 Ace, how do you respond to a bumper sticker? I've always said "never scream at the tv set, it never answers you".

Right. Liberal arguments are based primarily around how they feel about something and whether or not something is (how they deem it) fair. And you can't reason somebody out of a position they didn't reason themselves into in the first place.

The only thing you can do with such people is mock them. Libs take their precious position so seriously and effective humor goes a long way in disarming them and showing their positions to be built on foundations of sand. And their anger is just so gosh-darned precious.

Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at March 15, 2011 03:19 PM (9hSKh)

75 Interesting, Ace, that your wordy Palin agonies occur, um, about monthly. I guess it's that time of month for you.

Posted by: kathleen at March 15, 2011 03:20 PM (Huxg6)

76 Posted by: Vic at March 15, 2011 03:18 PM (M9Ie6)

IIRC, there has never been an "official" debate that early, so this would be the first one. I'd say look for July (4th, anyone?) through Labor Day for announcements to begin.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) at March 15, 2011 03:20 PM (8y9MW)

77 I just read that book and no NCAA picks?!?! WTF!!!!

Posted by: Evil libertarian at March 15, 2011 03:20 PM (qkj7z)

78 just wastes valuable blogtime on a 'slap-the-troll' game without a proper puck.
And if there's anything this blog stands for, it's proper puck slapping.

Posted by: Mama AJ at March 15, 2011 03:21 PM (XdlcF)

79 a need to fit in with the liberal media elite and the so-called
conservative intellectual elite which shares many of the shibboleths of
the liberal media elite

The reason you get this is that the majority of the time an anti-Palin argument is raised it is for exactly this reason.

Palin is a human being with strengths and weaknesses. But it becomes hard to argue them rationally when 90% of the time the contra argument is "She said she can see Russia from her window dude! She's, like, a moron n'stuff. "

Posted by: 18-1 at March 15, 2011 03:21 PM (7BU4a)

80 Now begins the always-enjoyable part of the evening called Recriminations.

Followed by make-up sex, if you're lucky. If you're not so lucky, call me. Don't tell me you're not interested, I might be able to suck you into it.

Posted by: Barneys Flanks at March 15, 2011 03:21 PM (IhHdM)

81 I still can't see how Obama has a prayer to be re-elected no matter who the GOP candidate is. Oh, I know it can happen...if nothing else, the past 2 years have convinced me that the kool-aid is strong in many areas, he's gonna hold his base easily. But many people who voted for him in 2008did sobecause they thought it was cool, and how bad could he be, anyway? Now we have a clear record of just ridiculous he is. Even if he wins, he ain't getting 52 percent or higher.

Posted by: Damn Sockpuppet at March 15, 2011 03:21 PM (YmPwQ)

82 5) Big
Right fears that the Left has damaged Palin's image too much. They
fear that, if she is at the top of the GOP ticket next year, that she
will lose to Obama due to how well the Left has distorted her persona in
the minds of the average voter who doesn't pay close attention to what
the facts are.
So now it's up to Big Right to annihilate that hobbled image. It's a lot easier to destroy than it is to repair.

Not saying that you think this, Ace, but that's what I think about many in the Establishment Right and what I said to both Rush and Insty.

Posted by: baldilocks at March 15, 2011 03:21 PM (T2/zQ)

83 Cliff Notes

Posted by: wildwood at March 15, 2011 03:21 PM (VSWPU)

84 Either we are going to not have any official
candidates at that debate or there is going to be a flood of
announcements real soon.

Posted by: Vic at March 15, 2011 03:18 PM (M9Ie6)
At this point, I'd rather watch 6 empty podiums.

Posted by: Tami at March 15, 2011 03:21 PM (VuLos)

85 Posted by: kathleen at March 15, 2011 03:20 PM (Huxg6)

Ace: "The Prosecution Rests, your Honor."
/In before Ace

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) at March 15, 2011 03:21 PM (8y9MW)

86 Well in 2008 all the candidates except Fred had already announced by this time and teh Fred couln't because of that TV show.

Posted by: Vic at March 15, 2011 03:21 PM (M9Ie6)

87 It's not that Sarah Palin shouldn't be criticized, it's that it seems to be impossible for the establishment to criticize her without vitriol.

I mean it's one thing to say that Sarah Palin would be a tough sell as a presidential candidate. It's another to call her a dumb chillbilly. Why is it so hard for so many people to do the former without the latter?

Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at March 15, 2011 03:22 PM (PLvLS)

88 6

10,000+ dead! So. Still say Global Warming is a myth Teabaggers?
All you teabaggers who drive Hummersand SUV's, and shoot guns, and
pray to an imaginary gawd, and marry your livestock, all to substitute
for your tiny penises HAVE ALL THE BLOOD OF JAPAN ON YOUR HANDS!Hey, just a second now, i've come to terms with my tiny penis and like it just fine, i got that SUV for safety reasons.

Posted by: booger at March 15, 2011 03:22 PM (9RFH1)

89 I hope you didn't hurt anything vital in that little fender bender Kay. You know, like your ass. Your head would have to find a new home if anything happened to that.

Posted by: Dog 'O' Madness at March 15, 2011 03:22 PM (OlN4e)

90 Posted by: grognard at March 15, 2011 03:16 PM (NS2Mo)
I wouldn't say i'm a supporter or non-supporter of her, i'm in the fence waiting to see who runs in 2012 and hoping certain folks run to give me someone to vote for

Posted by: YRM at March 15, 2011 03:22 PM (UzBwz)

91 Posted by: KayInMaine at March 15, 2011 03:03 PM (aehEj)
Yeah, all I got out of that was "tiny penises."
Not sure what that has to do with tsunamis, though.

Posted by: soulpile is... expendable at March 15, 2011 03:22 PM (gH+Hj)

92

10,000+ dead! So. Still say Global Warming is a myth Teabaggers?
All you teabaggers who drive Hummersand SUV's, and shoot guns, and
pray to an imaginary gawd, and marry your livestock, all to substitute
for your tiny penises HAVE ALL THE BLOOD OF JAPAN ON YOUR HANDS!

Posted by: KayInMaine at March 15, 2011 03:03 PM (aehEj)
That may be the most insanely idiotic thing you've ever written here.Congratulations.

Posted by: Slublog at March 15, 2011 03:22 PM (0nqdj)

93 @ 60 -- I know a few guys who support Palin, and those are not the reason. She
is hot. She does have a nice rack. But so does, say, Angelina Jolee,
and I wouldn't vote for her.

Well, since I have serious doubts that Angelina Jolie will EVER entertain thoughts of running for public office, I'm not sure what your point is here -- we're talking about someone who many are speculating actually does have designs on public office, specifically the highest in the land. You gotta choose from the menu at hand, so to speak, and people will always have their own reasons for opting as they do, superficial as they may be.

Posted by: Philosoraptor at March 15, 2011 03:22 PM (bCxgV)

94 I mean, when someone takes a perfectly reasonable and respectable
argument in favor of capitalism and immediately turns that into the
straw-man insult You're a racist, what is the sense of arguing
any further? Once one party decides it's fair to simply make up secret
motivations and put them into your mouth (or head, really), and then
argue against not what you are saying but the convenient bugaboo
strawman they've created, how do you respond?

Do you try to discuss the Federalist Papers with the hobos before you skin them?

Do you try to convince the hobos that Cheney isn't using technology stolen from Area 51 to read their minds?

Never stipulate to a crazy person or leftist, nor bother trying to debate someone who demands those kinds of stipulations.

Just simply smile, pat them on the head, give them a cookie and say "we'll see when you're all grown up"

Posted by: kbdabear at March 15, 2011 03:23 PM (vdfwz)

95 Oh, and I'll add we had much the same issue with Bush.

Viewed objectively the man was a political moderate who did some things right, and some things wrong.

After the hundredth time someone blames him for a hurricane or Obama's deficit though, it becomes harder to listen to the perfectly rational problems with Bush.

Posted by: 18-1 at March 15, 2011 03:23 PM (7BU4a)

96 How come you doofuses never alerted me that I was missing such an awesome word?

Honestly? We knew that if an Ewok used a word like that, we'd be stuck with a massive case of Ewok pixel diarrhea, and that's just no fun to clean up after.

Posted by: Iblis at March 15, 2011 03:23 PM (9221z)

97 Also, on George Will: for a political pundit, he's a mighty fine baseball writer. Otherwise: if some hobo cut him, Will would crawl all the way home before he'd deign to bleed in front of the peasants. He's a Knickerbocker of Ye Olden Tyme.

Posted by: Monty at March 15, 2011 03:23 PM (4Pleu)

98 Palin's been ripping Obumbles since she came on scene, everyone else can't wait for their turn to suck his Johnson.

Posted by: Sarahs With Me at March 15, 2011 03:23 PM (MWXXs)

99 >>>I'd put her in the upper third of ability for pure retail politics

Monty, if this is true, why are her unfavorable ratings so high?

When can we expect to see this strong ability you posit to start working its natural (measurable) effect?

Posted by: ace at March 15, 2011 03:23 PM (nj1bB)

100 And if there's anything this blog stands for, it's proper puck slapping.
Posted by: Mama AJ at March 15, 2011 03:21 PM (XdlcF)
The puck you say.

Posted by: Alexander Ovechkin at March 15, 2011 03:24 PM (yQWNf)

101 So, I kind of have to ask, how many men do you find who actually claim her looks as the reason they support her? And how many of those aren't joking?
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) at March 15, 2011 03:16 PM (8y9MW)
There were a shitload of posts here and at HotAir before McCain picked his running mate, basically screaming for Palin because she was hot. Check out any thread on HA orFreeRepublic that includes photos of Palin. She makes a lot of conservative men horny, that's why they love her.
Do you honestly think sher would be getting the kind of devotion she has if she looked like Hillary Clinton?

Posted by: rockmom at March 15, 2011 03:24 PM (w/gVZ)

102 Rush's show has been getting progressively dumber for about a year now. It really accelerated when he started cheering on Christine O'Donnell and her fan club of mouth-breathers.

I heard his bit on Palin (TM) today. The funny thing is that he seems to be picking up on the fact that growing numbers of conservatives are finally wising up to this lady, but since he's committed heart and soul to the template of St. Sarah, The Next Reagan he can't articulate why without falling back on the "Ruling Class" demagoguery in which he's engaged for most of the last year.

Been listening for 20 years and will always love the guy, but he is no longer

Posted by: The War Between the Undead States at March 15, 2011 03:24 PM (B7Omr)

103 Well, since I have serious doubts that Angelina Jolie will EVER entertain thoughts of running for public office,

Well how about that "Maria" weather girl on Fox? Will she run?

Posted by: Vic at March 15, 2011 03:24 PM (M9Ie6)

104 My PhD was in Hebrew Bible and my professor has written what I think is *the* best explanation for the word *shibbolet and just how it worked linguistically. We know that Hebrew had more sounds that letters - this is true of English also by the way. Which means when one reads Hebrew sometimes a consonant is representing a sound other than the "official" pronunciation. (For example Hebrew gimel represents both [g] and [gh] and so `almah "young woman" really would have been pronounced ghalmah.)

In a nutshell what Ephraimites were being asked to say in Judges 12:5-6 was not shibbolet but thibollet (with shin being used to represent the Semitic phoneme [th] - which makes sense since shin came from Semitic [sh] or [th]) Gileadites could pronounce [th] but not Ephraimites. Consider how foreigners will sometimes pronounce "the" as either [ze] or [de].

Of course words don't have meanings so much as they have uses. Shibbolet simply means "ear of grain". But today we use it to mean "code phrase/word".

Posted by: Rick67 at March 15, 2011 03:24 PM (Pq+/6)

105 >>>If Palin makes an explicit pitch, for example, about "ordinary
Americans," what about all those Americans who don't consider themselves
ordinary at all?

I think a good example of this is when Palin said something to the effect of "real Americans live in small towns during the GOP conventions." My wife asked me if, since we lived in Philadelphia, that meant we weren't really Americans.

Posted by: taylork at March 15, 2011 03:24 PM (5wsU9)

106 There's shibboleth and then there's "mental paradigm". The mental paradigm is that people are 100% sure that Dear Leader will be the dem nominee in 2012. I'm not that sure.

Posted by: Soona at March 15, 2011 03:24 PM (dFw8Z)

107 Posted by: kbdabear at March 15, 2011 03:18 PM (vdfwz)
and remember people like that, VOTE

Posted by: YRM at March 15, 2011 03:24 PM (UzBwz)

108 I'll vote for any Republican who can give a smart reason why we should vote for him/her and not Palin.

You know, show us you have a backbone and a brain. I'm worried we'll get a candidate that snipes at Palin and then gets wobbly in the knees with the Dems/media.

Posted by: Anonymous at March 15, 2011 03:24 PM (7ahtU)

109 50
What kills me is how many men support Palinsimply because they think she is hot and has a nice rack.

In the spirit of Ace's post, isn't it possible YOU think that's the reason men support her?

Posted by: Dr Spank at March 15, 2011 03:25 PM (1fB+3)

110 Posted by: kbdabear at March 15, 2011 03:18 PM (vdfwz)

I hope I didn't get any viruses going to that shitpile of dysfunctional insanity called her blog. I particularly like how she has a picture of fat fuck Teddy (D - End of the barbed cock of Satan) surrounded by quotes from Grayson and JFK.

Posted by: Captain Hate at March 15, 2011 03:25 PM (cQH/d)

111 Posted by: Philosoraptor at March 15, 2011 03:22 PM (bCxgV)

My point is that someone's looks are not a reason to vote for him/her. I don't (personally) know anyone who thinks that way (or would admit to it, anyway). So claiming there are a large number of guys who "support her because they think she's hot and has a nice rack," requires a little back-up IMO.

The entire point was that Jolie wouldn't run for office- and wouldn't be supported by anybody except maybe her dad if she did.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) at March 15, 2011 03:25 PM (8y9MW)

112 ...no longer a must-listen.

Posted by: The War Between the Undead States at March 15, 2011 03:26 PM (B7Omr)

113 Well, duh.

Posted by: sifty at March 15, 2011 03:26 PM (jq/yL)

114 Limbaugh keeps saying he "doesn't get" the animus against Palin. But it's not for lack of Palin-critics and Palin-skeptics attempting to explain the reasons for their reservation. We keep trying to explain the why behind it, but too frequently these offered reasons are dismissed as false in favor of imputed secret reasons.
Didn't read through everything. Mostly skimmed your article ace and only a few comments. However, this statement I think I can explain Rush's reasoning. I caught most of his last conversation with the woman that didn't like Palin, because she thought she was being a bad mother, and not because of any media reporting. It sounded to me like he was trying to point out that her problems with Palin were about this emotional aspect and not dealing with her politcal views. So it could be that he can't get how people can call themselves conservatives and still not like Palin as a political candidate when she's hitting the nail on the head of so many conservative ideals.

Posted by: buzzion at March 15, 2011 03:26 PM (oVQFe)

115 Wow, you fuckers are en fuego today!
**golf clap**golf clap**

Posted by: dananjcon at March 15, 2011 03:26 PM (pr+up)

116 That part aside -- Thanks, Rush! -- I disagree with Rush -- in part.

Me personally I often try to write with brevity.
A long article to say.

Some people in some circles may be using opposition to Palin as a Shibboleth for their political circle.

However Rush's contention that it *must* be a Shibboleth because 'all criticism of Palin by a conservative is irrational and illogical' overlooks and is dangerously blind to serious issues with a Palin candidacy, and is insultingly dismissive, much the same way liberals are when they call us "racist", as a result.

But hey! You've got the readership. I don't.

I know a lot of you guys know the Bible -- why wasn't this brought to my attention immediately? Why you gonna hold out on your buddy Ace like that?
Ok. The Bible is cool and has a lot of cool stuff in it. You should read it sometime.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose at March 15, 2011 03:26 PM (0q2P7)

117 >>>It's not that Sarah Palin shouldn't be criticized, it's that it seems to be impossible for the establishment to criticize her without vitriol.

Was Will being vitriolic in saying her appeal seemed to be too creedal?

Is it too vitriolic to say she speaks very glibly and mostly in talking points and buzzwords and rarely offers a persuasive argument? That she relies on mere assertion (this is what I believe) than argument (this is why you should believe it)?

Is it vitriolic to say I actually have genuine doubts about her brains and would like to see her put those to bed by offering stronger, deeper, off-the-cuff (that is, not written in an essay but spoken in thye moment) arguments about her positions?

Posted by: ace at March 15, 2011 03:27 PM (nj1bB)

118 Now begins the always-enjoyable part of the evening called Recriminations.

But first, the Airing of the Grievances!

Posted by: Frank Costanza at March 15, 2011 03:27 PM (vdfwz)

119 Kay loved Teddy because of his manly physique and his dreamy, dreamy, whiskey and rotting fish breath.

Posted by: Dog 'O' Madness at March 15, 2011 03:27 PM (OlN4e)

120 I don't see why George Will's statement on this point is dismissed as "not what's really going on." And then the search begins for plausible secret motivations, because of course his stated reason couldn't be the real one.
Sneering at uncouth people in jeans means he brought some of that on himself.

Posted by: Mama AJ at March 15, 2011 03:27 PM (XdlcF)

121 Either we are going to not have any official
candidates at that debate or there is going to be a flood of
announcements real soon.

Posted by: Vic at March 15, 2011 03:18 PM (M9Ie6)
I bought his car.

Posted by: George Castanza at March 15, 2011 03:27 PM (VuLos)

122 100 comments in 26 minutes. SLACKERS!!!!

Posted by: Jess at March 15, 2011 03:27 PM (cNHhh)

123 In fairness to Palin supporters i think a lot of them tend to get defensive because of the obvious mis-treatment she got at the hands of the MBM/SNL etc, and a lot of people who don't support Palin seem to base their lack of support on the negative effect that trashing of her had on her image with the public. So they have some legitimate reasons to poke back.

Posted by: booger at March 15, 2011 03:27 PM (9RFH1)

124 Posted by: The War Between the Undead States at March 15, 2011 03:24 PM (B7Omr)

Your comments are predictable. I would expect no less from you when discussing anyone trying to put forth conservative ideas. Blather on, War.

Posted by: Soona at March 15, 2011 03:28 PM (dFw8Z)

125 You gotta choose from the menu at hand, so to speak, and people will always have their own reasons for opting as they do, superficial as they may be.
Posted by: Philosoraptor at March 15, 2011 03:22 PM (bCxgV)

Okay, I choose Sarah wearing the jogging shorts and bending over a lot. And she has to wear a thin shirt all the time, even in January in New Hampshire, so we can see the girls stand at attention. Then she's got my vote.

Posted by: joncelli at March 15, 2011 03:28 PM (RD7QR)

126 Funny thing is, most of the arguments even Ace comes up with have to do with feelings. I don't think enough people like her? I don't think she can be elected? I don't think her appeal is broad enough? I don't think she appears smart enough? I'm afraid she's just another politician with a carefully crafted [false] image? All of these are feelings, just like the libs.

Back some of these statements up with facts (not the made-up crap loaded on by libs) and then we can debate. Until then, it's all just how you feel, and that is a load of crap in the long run, too.

Posted by: tcn at March 15, 2011 03:29 PM (QuGK2)

127 Remember, she was called 'Al Sharpton' because she supposedly 'plays the victim.'

She denied responsibility for Tuscon, and that's 'playing the victim.' Accused of fomenting murder, and it's wrong to respond.

I'm sorry, but that is not,under any circumstances, a rational criticism.

More than that, it's refusing to respond to smears, letting the left's memes take root, that usually pisses us off so badly around here.

Posted by: nickless at March 15, 2011 03:29 PM (MMC8r)

128 Kay would make her tea by filtering hot water through the skidmarks on Ted's underwear.

Posted by: Dog 'O' Madness at March 15, 2011 03:29 PM (OlN4e)

129 What politician doesn't talk in "talking points"?

Posted by: Sarahs With Me at March 15, 2011 03:29 PM (MWXXs)

130 I learn the meaning of the word from a friend who was kicked out of rabbi school for cooking bacon. Talk about a shibboleth.

Posted by: sTevo at March 15, 2011 03:29 PM (hiMsy)

131 Wow, I almost read all of that.

Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 03:30 PM (MGC3K)

132 That Politico piece, showed the ignorance of the commentators, no knowledge of her advocacy of oil drilling, even when it wasn't popular, her early opposition, toNew START, her prescient criticism ofQE 2, which fueled in part the Middle East revolt, in terms of food prices,her staunch opposition to the Iranian nuclear
program,

Posted by: justin cord at March 15, 2011 03:30 PM (6UTk5)

133 "Interesting, Ace, that your wordy Palin agonies occur, um, about monthly. I guess it's that time of month for you."

And the "flow" is so heavy, too!

Posted by: WINNING! at March 15, 2011 03:30 PM (nEa/y)

134 70 Here's KayinMaine's website. If it's a sock, the real one is Charlie Sheen grade batshit anyway ...
Ok, Bear, I stand corrected.. At least her site is properly named.

Posted by: Damn Sockpuppet at March 15, 2011 03:30 PM (YmPwQ)

135 She is able and I like and trust her.

Her personality type is excellent for media, cabinet, etc.. positions. The "President" position is not a culture warrior slot. You'll get nothing accomplished and alienate moderate republicans and independents and fire up and unify the left. Obama is a crappy president for many reasons one of them is that he only knows things through the prism of the left.

Reagan was union leader and democrat for a lot of years and later fought the radical left in California on their home turf as conservative governor. Clitnon as governor of Arkansas

If you want a good leader find a sucessful democratic governor from a red state or successful republican governor from a blue state. These people who can pull that off and succeed make much better presidents. Legislators/home turf governors make shitty leaders because they aren't used to managing the opposition without alienating people.

About Romney, a meteocre governor. Get him a charged conservative house and senate and he will make a decent Pappa Bush republican president. Hand him a left controlled house or senate and he will "compromise" us down river. He is a business guy they are amoral/pragmatic about causes their goals are end results. Anyway his running of the Olympics shows he can handle a messy crisis better then most but while I warned before about not getting a culture warrior conservatives especially need someone who will hold the line on conservative values and against a democrat house or senate its not Mitt. He is not a fighter he wont be able to deftly parry the media like Reagan could so conservative media would have their hands full for 4/8 years.

Anyway those are my thoughts.

Posted by: shiggz at March 15, 2011 03:30 PM (mLAWK)

136 Posted by: rockmom at March 15, 2011 03:24 PM (w/gVZ)

I admit, I wasn't here at the HQ during the '08 season, I discovered the HQ during my depression afterwords. So I'll take your word on that one.

However, since I'd never heard of Sarah Palin until after she was announced as VP, and since it was long after that (well, long politically- a couple of weeks) before I'd even seen a picture, I'm going with - me - as an example of someone who would support her "if she looked like Hilary Clinton."

Just sayin'.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) at March 15, 2011 03:30 PM (8y9MW)

137 all to substitute
for your tiny penises

Had a girl I was dating who I couldn't get into bed. Finally I insisted she tell me why. "I only do guys with eight inches."

"The hell with you, then", I said. "I'm not cutting any off for any chick."

Posted by: Sponge Worthy at March 15, 2011 03:31 PM (IhHdM)

138 AHOY!

Posted by: Palinisto! at March 15, 2011 03:31 PM (MGC3K)

139 OT: H.J.
Res. 48 passed 271-158 w/ 4 current no votes
54R no votes

Senate now has until April 8th to pass a budget. (Interestingly, that is
the week before the official FY 2012 budget is revealed.) From what I've read heard, this is likely the last stop-gap CR. Both sides are tired of CRs, so a compromise is probably the next step.

Posted by: Miss'80sBaby at March 15, 2011 03:32 PM (UO6+e)

140 I mean it's one thing to say that Sarah Palin would be a tough sell as a presidential candidate. It's another to call her a dumb chillbilly. Why is it so hard for so many people to do the former without the latter?
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at March 15, 2011 03:22 PM (PLvLS)
Have any prominent Republicans actually said such mean-spirited things about Palin? Seems to me all they have said is that she can't win, her views may be too extreme, she needs to go unscripted more, or she doesn't have enough experience. All of those are reasonable criticisms. Yet what they get back is that they are the RINO Establishment Woman-Hating East Coast Cocktail Party Elite Who Secretly Love Barack Obama.

Posted by: rockmom at March 15, 2011 03:32 PM (w/gVZ)

141
Is it too vitriolic to say she speaks very glibly and mostly in talking
points and buzzwords and rarely offers a persuasive argument? That she
relies on mere assertion (this is what I believe) than argument (this is
why you should believe it)?

I sense a great conflagration about to occur. Brace yourselves!

/For the record, its not too virtiolic to say this, even if some deem it hersey. Her persuasion skills are lacking, and no about of enthusiasm can compensate for that. Snarky tweets and FB posts are not good substitutes for really good policy discussion/rationales that Reagan used to churn out in his free-time.

Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at March 15, 2011 03:32 PM (9hSKh)

142 Posted by: joncelli at March 15, 2011 03:28 PM (RD7QR)
to the commenters debating that she makes horny men like her cause she looks good, this comment is a good example you can use as evidence, of course it's most likely in jest but pretty good bumper sticker stuff I guess?
Posted by: booger at March 15, 2011 03:27 PM (9RFH1)
yeah it's hard to argue why you're not buying into someone while at the same time defending them from BS attacks, so yeah I agree with thos comment
Posted by: Dog 'O' Madness at March 15, 2011 03:27 PM (OlN4e)
yeah he was a real lady killer

Posted by: YRM at March 15, 2011 03:32 PM (UzBwz)

143 See, I would support Palin as a presidential candidate, but I can understand people who wouldn't. Hell, we all have different opinions, and we're all entitled to them. The thing that annoys me when people say they don't think Palin would be a good candidate is when they say, "She's too beat up in the media. Her image is too tarnished." How? I honestly don't get that. Does anyone believe that any candidate who runs against B.O. isn't going to be tarred with the same vitriolic brush by the media? Short of the second coming of Christ (what am I talking about, this is the MSM) Allah and his prophet, they will carry Bammy's water until they have to pick up the coattails of the next lefty impresario eyeing the Oval Office.
Sarah Palin has the added detriment of being a pro-life woman, so she has the NOW crowd up in her grill like whoa. But she's also got the added benefit of drawing a lot of pro-life women to her camp who have been sidelined from politics by the hypocritical pro-"choice" feministas. It used to be that if you were a pro-life woman, you could forget about voting for a female candidate regardless of party. Not so anymore, and a large part of that is thanks to Palin.
Palin's been in the political mainstream since her VP selection by McCain, enduring blow after blow from the MSM, the lefties, and (yes, I'll say it) the entrenched GOP elites. But she's still there, still swinging, and still smiling. If you're argument is that herpublic image is too damaged for a presidential run then I have to ask why you put such faith in the media's ability to sway the 2012 election. They didn't do much good last November, no matter how much they tried to paint the Tea Partiers as racist hillbilly yokels. Yes the media area bunch of corrupt bastards who would swill liberal bathwater by the bucketful if it would get them invited to all the best parties, but there are plenty of people in the country who, like me, haven't trusted the media for years. The difference is that, unlike me, a lot of those people weren't particularly invested in politics before, but they're waking up now. They see Palin and they like what they see.
The real battle isn't going to beour candidateagainst the media. The media is a lost cause and we all know it. The trench fightto bring this country back from the brink isgoing to be between students of history and civics who recognize the need for fiscal sanity and the inestimable value of the Constitution, and the students of entitlement and socialism who will happily follow the herd if it means they can get state-subsidized housing and healthcare. The former group isn't paying attention to the MFM, and as far as the latter group is concerned the media are just preaching to the choir. Our candidate has to be someone who won't crumble and cave under the MFM's inevitable attacks, and who will stand strong while preaching the conservative message far and wide.
That's what the sleeping leviathan of the conservative base wants to see. We want someone who will stand up for us and not "reach across the aisle" like some pussified assmonkey. The newly politicized conservative base will come out for someone like that. Otherwise, they'll stay home or launch a third party. I have no problem with getting rid of the GOP entirely and replacing it with a new party, but if we're going to have any hope of getting rid of Obama and his damn "cult of personality" (what personality, seriously?!??)in 2012 we have to be united behind ONE candidate. My personal choice for Prez would be either Herman Cain or Allen West, but I wouldn't turn my nose up at Palin.
PS - The other reason I hear a lot of people use fornot supporting Palinis that they just don't like her, which I think is completely valid. Personally, I can't stand Mitt Romney. He's a slick,skeevy snake-oil salesman. But there are plenty of 'pubs I know who think he's the bee's knees, Romneycare or no Romneycare. Differentcroaks for different folks.So if I had to vote for either Romney or Obama in 2012, I'd take my medicine and pull the lever for Romney. Other conservatives who make up that sleeping leviathan? I don't know if they would. And if they don't, we lose the election.

Posted by: MWR at March 15, 2011 03:32 PM (4df7R)

144 110
Posted by: kbdabear at March 15, 2011 03:18 PM (vdfwz)
I
hope I didn't get any viruses going to that shitpile of dysfunctional
insanity called her blog. I particularly like how she has a picture of
fat fuck Teddy (D - End of the barbed cock of Satan) surrounded by
quotes from Grayson and JFK.

Posted by: Captain Hate at March 15, 2011 03:25 PM

The latest post is her fender bender. It's downright scary that someone like that was given a license to operate a motor vehicle in the first place.

And you'd think she'd see the accident as a blessing, for now she can stop killing Japanese people and save the planet by riding her bicycle. Why, she might even draw the attention of the Charlie Sheen of the blogosphere and become a member of CJ's High Council at LGF since Wild Irish Rose defected

Posted by: kbdabear at March 15, 2011 03:32 PM (vdfwz)

145 133
And heavy flow like is usually a symptom of broader health issues. A doctor visit is advisable.

Posted by: kathleen at March 15, 2011 03:33 PM (Huxg6)

146 Kay loved Teddy because of his manly physique and his dreamy, dreamy, whiskey and rotting fish breath.

Posted by: Dog 'O' Madness at March 15, 2011 03:27 PM (OlN4e)
Plus his respectful treatment of women; it makes the losers that smack Kay around after giving her a Cleveland steamer seem like gentlemen.

Posted by: Captain Hate at March 15, 2011 03:33 PM (cQH/d)

147 From what I've read & heard, this is likely the last stop-gap CR. Both sides are tired of CRs, so a compromise is probably the next step.
Posted by: Miss'80sBaby at March 15, 2011 03:32 PM (UO6+e)

Or maybe a shutdown?

Posted by: joncelli at March 15, 2011 03:33 PM (RD7QR)

148 Monty, if this is true, why are her unfavorable ratings so high?

My theory?

Palin is the living embodiment of the red/blue divide, almost as if made to order. She's from a frontier state, she's religious, she hunts, she's educated by not an Ivy Leaguer (and further does not pay the proper "respect" to the Ivy League), she had a job as something other than a lawyer before she entered politics, and she has a complicated family life (that stuff with Bristol). She resonates with a lot of people, especially rural whites and suburban middle-class folks of all walks of life. She's vivacious, attractive, and friendly.

It is for exactly these reasons that 99% of the left, and some precincts of the right, recoil from her. You can trot out the "elitism" theory, but I'm not sure that's entirely the issue: I think it's more that she is so totally a "wild element". The current political system has no antibodies to her. She's not some bland lawyer with a presidential haircut, not a boring wonk, and not some old war-horse politician who's been warming the same chair for decades.

The new crop of GOP freshmen seem to have this same vibe: they're a new breed of GOP, a different strain from the old coastal guys. It's not just the Tea Party fiscal stuff, either -- it's more primal than that.

I'm probably not explaining this well. I probably ought to check out some of Michael Barone's older stuff -- I'm sure he's touched on it and explained it better than I can.

Posted by: Monty at March 15, 2011 03:33 PM (4Pleu)

149 Well how about that "Maria" weather girl on Fox? Will she run?

Posted by: Vic at March 15, 2011 03:24 PM

Biggest lips on Fox since Laurie Dhue(me)

Posted by: kbdabear at March 15, 2011 03:34 PM (vdfwz)

150 @ 111 -- My point is that someone's looks are not a reason to vote for him/her. I
don't (personally) know anyone who thinks that way (or would admit to
it, anyway). So claiming there are a large number of guys who "support
her because they think she's hot and has a nice rack," requires a little
back-up IMO.

Gotcha. And while I agree that superficialities aren't a rational reason to vote for any candidate, I have no doubt that they do indeed influence a great many of those non-political, uninvolved, uninformed "swing" voters who -- like it or not -- so often are the deal-breakers when it comes to electoral outcomes. Therefore, as much as it shouldn't be the case, I submit that packaging indeed has a great effect on (far too many) superficial voters -- the percentage of which I couldn't guess, but I'm confident that it happens. So yeah, I'm sure there'd be some Maxim magazine-level numbnuts fratboys who'd think, "I'll go for that Palin chick -- she's got a great rack!"

Posted by: Philosoraptor at March 15, 2011 03:34 PM (bCxgV)

151 And thus started the Great Shibboleth Wars.

Posted by: Papa Editor at March 15, 2011 03:35 PM (Zs83Q)

152 "How come you doofuses never alerted me that I was missing such an awesome word?"
Because we thought you were a "Moron"(TM), not a moron.
"Asked" is a perfect shibboleth. Too bad we don't get to slay all the folks who say "axed"

Posted by: Jeffrey Quick at March 15, 2011 03:35 PM (g9neE)

153 i have no opinion today, i think we're screwed anyway.

Posted by: willow at March 15, 2011 03:35 PM (h+qn8)

154 Have any prominent Republicans actually said such mean-spirited things about Palin? Seems to me all they have said is that she can't win, her views may be too extreme, she needs to go unscripted more, or she doesn't have enough experience. All of those are reasonable criticisms. Yet what they get back is that they are the RINO Establishment Woman-Hating East Coast Cocktail Party Elite Who Secretly Love Barack Obama.
Posted by: rockmom at March 15, 2011 03:32 PM (w/gVZ)
Well part of that is because several of those pundits are saying those things about Palin, and they were just so taken by Obama in 2008. So you know, a reasonable criticism coming from someone that got a flutter in their heart in 2008 becomes a tainted criticism.

Posted by: buzzion at March 15, 2011 03:35 PM (oVQFe)

155 I'm waiting for the roll call right now. The prediction this morning was only 10-15 no votes, so 54 is huge.

Posted by: Miss'80sBaby at March 15, 2011 03:35 PM (UO6+e)

156
We're at post 101 and I'm still waiting for the "Palin cultists" to appear. You don't like her, fine. You don't think she can win, fine. I do, and I'll defend her at any time. Let's all play like big boys and girls, ok?

Posted by: BIG ROB at March 15, 2011 03:35 PM (hr33h)

157 When can we expect to see this strong ability you posit to start working its natural (measurable) effect?
Never.
Those numbers are there and she has nobody in direct competition with her. When it becomes a horse race, and there are other options, her numbers should get worse.

Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 03:36 PM (MGC3K)

158 tl;dr

Posted by: Vercingetorix at March 15, 2011 03:36 PM (psCad)

159 Can't we fight over something else for an afternoon?

Posted by: sifty at March 15, 2011 03:36 PM (jq/yL)

160 142 Yes, I was in jest. Yes, I like Sarah and find her refreshing. Yes, I think she has been mistreated and feel a need to defend her (which may simply be the male instinct to defend women kicking in). No, I don't think she would make a good president and don't think she should run. That puts me on just about everybody's shit list, so I made a crack about her butt. I'm in the same position that I think a lot of morons are in: are we going to have to put up with this for the next 18 months or so?

Posted by: joncelli at March 15, 2011 03:37 PM (RD7QR)

161 I think a good example of this is when Palin said something to the effect of "real Americans live in small towns during the GOP conventions." My wife asked me if, since we lived in Philadelphia, that meant we weren't really American...
As a fellow Philadelphian, I get sick of the stereotype that city-dwellers are all Democrat leeches, but then if you look at vote totals from the city, you can understand why the GOP/conservatives doesn't bother even trying to pander to us.

Posted by: Damn Sockpuppet at March 15, 2011 03:37 PM (YmPwQ)

162 I sense a great conflagration about to occur. Brace yourselves!/For the record, its not too virtiolic to say this, even if some deem it hersey. Her persuasion skills are lacking, and no about of enthusiasm can compensate for that. Snarky tweets and FB posts are not good substitutes for really good policy discussion/rationales that Reagan used to churn out in his free-time.
Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at March 15, 2011 03:32 PM (9hSKh)
Agreed. But you also have to take into account that she hasn't had the opportunity to have such discussions or craft such rationales because she's had to spend virtually every waking minute fending off attacks. I would love to see her sit down face to face with Obama, unmoderated, each with a list of relevant policy questions (and no teleprompter), and flat out debate the issues. I have no doubt she'd win that debate hands down and Obama would wet his pants in fear.

Posted by: MWR at March 15, 2011 03:38 PM (4df7R)

163 Is it vitriolic to say I actually have genuine doubts about her brains
and would like to see her put those to bed by offering stronger, deeper,
off-the-cuff (that is, not written in an essay but spoken in thye
moment) arguments about her positions?

I don't know that it's vitriolic, but it is a little obtuse. Ask her about energy or National Defense, and she'll talk your ear off. Ask her about anything else, and all she has are a few "note card" responses. This isn't a sign of weakness, or lack of brains, or any such thing- it's just a sign that most of her knowledge is focused on energy and National Defense. For everything else, she has to go to experts- and does. She quotes Thomas Sowell extensively in economic matters, for example.

Unfortunately, in today's media society, if your response won't fit in 140 characters or less, it'll get left on the cutting-room floor. So, she sticks with "talking points" in impromptu situations, and leaves the in-depth stuff for prepared remarks or essays.

I'm not sure I like that strategy, but it is certainly one that seems to consider the facts on the ground much better than the Republican go-to of "be so long winded they can edit your remarks to say whatever they want."

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) at March 15, 2011 03:38 PM (8y9MW)

164 How come you doofuses never alerted me that I was missing such an awesome word?
I'll start giving you a buckleyish word of the day in the headline comments then.

Nugatory.

Posted by: toby928� at March 15, 2011 03:38 PM (GTbGH)

165 159
Can't we fight over something else for an afternoon?

FDIC approves 'Too Big to Fail' plan to seize big banks in crisis - nytimes http://nyti.ms/dW0pFO

Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at March 15, 2011 03:38 PM (9hSKh)

166 Never.
Those numbers are there and she has nobody in direct competition with
her. When it becomes a horse race, and there are other options, her
numbers should get worse.

Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 03:36 PM (MGC3K)
What the heck are you talking about? What competition? Should she decide to run and should she win the nomination, are Romney and Huck supporters going to pull for Obama? Where are these "sinking" numbers?

Posted by: Sarahs With Me at March 15, 2011 03:39 PM (MWXXs)

167 Since literally ANYONE would be a step up from Obama, I really, really want to get ANYONE else in there, and I'm against those I feel who will wind up keeping him in office.
And that is why I am here for you, Ace may main man!

Posted by: Ron Paul...and you think Palin is divisive! at March 15, 2011 03:40 PM (OWjjx)

168 I can't see how a conservative person can't get excited, at least in the abstract, about Sarah Palin. Or, I should say, it's very difficult for me to find reasons which I would consider empirically valid to not support her.
Then again, my wife is somewhat conseravtive, and she can't support Palin because of how badly, in my wife's opinion,Bristol has turned out.

Posted by: Truman North at March 15, 2011 03:41 PM (8ay4x)

169 Frankly, I don't think Rush is even addressing criticisms from the right about Palin' he's talking about the animus from the left. I'm sure Rush's tone would be different if he were talking about legitimate criticisms from Right Wing sources.

Posted by: g at March 15, 2011 03:41 PM (yv++J)

170 Posted by: Ron Paul...and you think Palin is divisive! at March 15, 2011 03:40 PM (OWjjx)
well in defense of loony uncle Paul he polls against Obama better then Palin

Posted by: YRM at March 15, 2011 03:41 PM (UzBwz)

171 Posted by: rockmom at March 15, 2011 03:32 PM (w/gVZ)

Well, there have been a few instances, yes. Have they actually used the word "Chillbilly?" Probably not. But let's not forget Cabbage-smasher's "...leave the room..." comment. Or some of the things that Rove and other Republican types have said.

So, yes, there is active disdain from much of the "establishment."

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) at March 15, 2011 03:42 PM (8y9MW)

172 There's kind of . . a reason that Bristol is the way she is, and Willow is a bit of a brat.

Their mom is a "Queen Bee."

I'm sorry, it just doesn't appeal.

She's fine, I don't hate her. But would be a certain loser as the R candidate.

Posted by: BlackOrchid at March 15, 2011 03:42 PM (SB0V2)

173 Love Palin as I am in the anti-repub-establishment tribe (Ace's No. 3) and that something about her drives the libs apoplectic.

But I won't support her candidacy because I believe she can't win. Its the Christine O'Donnell problem in my view, knew she couldn't win (even though I was for her in that instance as the other guy didn't even qualify as a rino, he was flat out socialsist dem.)

Posted by: Guy Fawkes at March 15, 2011 03:42 PM (qqrPQ)

174 What the heck are you talking about? What competition? Should she decide to run and should she win the nomination, are Romney and Huck supporters going to pull for Obama? Where are these "sinking" numbers?
Don't be an daft.
In a primary, she will have real competition. Not imagined competition. Once she declares, she's going to be measured against other candidates, not the fantasies of her supporters.
The Bradley effect isn't only for racists.

Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 03:42 PM (MGC3K)

175
KayinMaine is a waste of a perfectly good vagina, and it could have been used to store Obama's Kools and a bottle of MD 20/20.

Posted by: Fish the Impaler at March 15, 2011 03:42 PM (ZHsNw)

176 Kay's greatest regret? The fact that she never got an answer to that letter to Ted regarding her greatest aspiration in life, to get donky punched by Ted while he wallowed on her back like a stinking drunken, slobberingwhale. She always was and will be a hopeless romantic.

Posted by: Dog 'O' Madness at March 15, 2011 03:43 PM (OlN4e)

177 Rush specifically spoke of criticism from the right. at length. He repeatedly stated that it mystified him more than criticism from the left.

Posted by: kathleen at March 15, 2011 03:43 PM (Huxg6)

178 In fact, Rush said criticism of Palin from the Right was coming from somewhere irrational. But we see no evidence of that in Ace's monthly cycle!

Posted by: kathleen at March 15, 2011 03:43 PM (Huxg6)

179 Do we ever have entire threads dedicated to how shitty other individual R candidates are?

When was the last time we had a thread about the lameness of Mitt or Huck?

Posted by: nickless at March 15, 2011 03:44 PM (MMC8r)

180 Themain pointabout Shibboleths - you're supposed to kill the ones who can't say it.

Posted by: Roy at March 15, 2011 03:44 PM (VndSC)

181 Posted by: g at March 15, 2011 03:41 PM (yv++J)
you mean like his "different tone" in dealing w/ right wing critics of the O'Donell candiacy?

Posted by: YRM at March 15, 2011 03:44 PM (UzBwz)

182 Being from the part of AK from which she hails, I think I may have some insight into the misunderstandings that occur concerning Sarah. Alaskan women tend to dislike bullshit, no matter where it comes from. We take care of our business one way or another, but usually all by our little selves. Lead, follow or get the hell out of the way. Most of us learn patience not from a moral stance but a pragmatic one--we tolerate this sludge in the process because we have no choice. I think you if you see her statements and positions in light of that outlook, you will begin to understand that she prefers to cut through the crap and get to the heart of the matter. I expect that directness is in direct opposition to most political thought and action today.

Or, maybe not.

Posted by: tcn at March 15, 2011 03:44 PM (QuGK2)

183 50 What kills me is how many men support Palinsimply because they think she is hot and has a nice rack. But if you say anything against her you are a misogynist!!11!!1eleventy!!!
Posted by: rockmom at March 15, 2011 03:14 PM (w/gVZ)

Whoa, now hang on there Rockmom, I've read a lot of Palin threads hear and over at HotAir and I don't recall seeing much if any of what you said. That just doesn't ring true to me.
(Disclosure: I like Palin. I agree she has to show that she can appeal to 50%+1 of the voters.She realizes this and will put a strategy together to achieve that.Primary season will show if it worked, don't you think?)

Posted by: WishRich at March 15, 2011 03:44 PM (hdpay)

184 >>> Ask her about energy or National Defense, and she'll talk your ear off. Ask her about anything else, and all she has are a few "note card" responses. This isn't a sign of weakness, or lack of brains, or any such thing- it's just a sign that most of her knowledge is focused on energy and National Defense.

Please. *Please.*

First of all, she's not any kind of national defense expert. Foreign policy and national defense are relatively easy to discuss as most answers tend to be determined by ideology. There's usually not a "wrong answer" per se.

On energy she's better but Presidents do not get elected on having a single narrow area of relative competence and a bunch of "note card" (as you say) understandings about everything else.

I'm not asking for a super-wonky expert. But Bush was able to fluently discuss this stuff -- is the bush standard too high?

Posted by: ace at March 15, 2011 03:45 PM (nj1bB)

185 179.

Well I certainly like Palin better than Huckabee, sheesh.

and Daniels is on my Sh*t List after making fun of the Big Man the other day. Little pencil necked kissup.

Posted by: BlackOrchid at March 15, 2011 03:45 PM (SB0V2)

186 The problem I have with those who argue against Palin is the "She's unelectible" assertion.That pretty much shuts down any discussion onhow to move forward. A more honestway to state this position would be "Palin cannot be elected with the numbers reflected in current polling (if they are to be believed), and I don't want to accept the risk ofObama's re-election on the chancethose numbers change if there is an acceptible alternative who is a stronger candidate against Obama." I can respect someone who wants to avoid the risk of a second Obama maladministration, even if that means Palin is not the nominee.Is the risk worth the chance for a Palin Presidency? If so, then how does one change the facts on the ground for November 2012?

Posted by: minuteman at March 15, 2011 03:45 PM (d6wkB)

187 "How come you doofuses never alerted me that I was missing such an awesome word?"
Less time hitting the Val-U-Rite and more time hitting the Funk Wagnalls, and you'd be a more edjumacated moron, Ace. Just sayin'.
But, your post - spot on. Agree completely. Personally, the more Palin is in the public eye, the less I like her. I'll admit the voice has always grated on me, but that's not a deal-breaker. I love, love, LOVE that she's the only one on our side (other than Christie and Cain and Bolton) who stands up and fights. But there's something missing. I hate to use the cliche "gravitas," but there's an underlying seriousness she seems to lack (I mean in person, not her written speeches, which show an interesting worldview). For example, if Christie or Cain or Bolton (my examples) walked in to a debate or townhall, you'd know they were the most important men on that stage. But with Palin - she's capable of solid policy, but she too often subsumes it to the "character" of Mama Grizzly, and that reduces her to a joke. YMMV.
But that being said, I'd still take her over Little Black Jesus in a heartbeat.

Posted by: Mary Poppins' practically perfect clitoris at March 15, 2011 03:45 PM (zF6Iw)

188 "But Bush was able to fluently discuss this stuff" BWA HA HA HA

Posted by: kathleen at March 15, 2011 03:46 PM (Huxg6)

189 Firstly, from an on-the-record non-supporter of Palin, Labash calling her Sharpton was a bridge or three too far for my tastes. That man's a fraud, shakedown artist and riot inciter who loots the public treasury in alleged campaigns and calls himself a Reverend to boot.
Comparing Sarah Palin to that flim-flam scumbag isn't a political observation, it's character assassination of a low and cowardly stripe.
If the point of his piece was to say she's playing victimhood and identity politics, fine (I don't agree with him FWIW but that's a legitimate argument). Throwing Sharpton in there to punch up his argument smacks of hit-whoring sensationalism and is grossly innaccurate and unfair.
I agree with Ace that the "us v. them" tone of many Palinistas re: their fellow right-wingers is counterproductive, but given the low tone of this latest provocation, I'm with Palin and Rush on this one.

Posted by: societyis2blame at March 15, 2011 03:46 PM (jjFAD)

190 With everything wrong with Sarah. There are two things right.

Posted by: The Robot Devil at March 15, 2011 03:46 PM (LdYLm)

191 I like peanut mm's.

What?

It's as important as everything else being said on this thread right now.

Posted by: laceyunderalls loves the blue ones best at March 15, 2011 03:46 PM (pLTLS)

192 174

Don't be an daft.
In a primary, she will have real competition. Not
imagined competition. Once she declares, she's going to be measured
against other candidates, not the fantasies of her supporters.
The Bradley effect isn't only for racists.

Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 03:42 PM (MGC3K)
The same could be said of any candidates supporters. I still fail to see how her numbers go down from current levels of support.

Posted by: Sarahs With Me at March 15, 2011 03:47 PM (MWXXs)

193 172
There's kind of . . a reason that Bristol is the way she is, and Willow is a bit of a brat.

Their mom is a "Queen Bee."

I'm sorry, it just doesn't appeal.

She's fine, I don't hate her. But would be a certain loser as the R candidate.

Posted by: BlackOrchid at March 15, 2011 03:42 PM (SB0V2)
This is where the rubber meets the road. How many politicians get blasted because of their children? Only the women, so far as I can see. Even Reagan had his loser kid, but nobody blames him for that. Nobody called him the "drone."

Posted by: tcn at March 15, 2011 03:47 PM (QuGK2)

194 The reason some woman say you are sexist in regards to Palin can be found here...

Palin- half term governor= totally UNqualified
Christie- not even half term governor= totally qualified

That is not logically consistent, so some woman take issue IE sexism..

Also you hold her to a standard that is far different from others. She endorsed the ryan roadmap to deal with entitlements. What are the other "serious" candidates plans for entitlements? I am sure they will get to it at some point and will be praised when they do lol.

Posted by: Dan at March 15, 2011 03:47 PM (mXBxH)

195 When was the last time we had a thread about the lameness of Mitt or Huck?

Nobody actually likes those guys.

Posted by: Guy Fawkes at March 15, 2011 03:47 PM (qqrPQ)

196 This isn't a sign of weakness, or lack of brains, or any such thing- it's just a sign that most of her knowledge is focused on energy and National Defense.
Shots 2-5 at the Caribou, with a malfunctioning gun, clinched it for me;
-She's as dumb as I feared.
-She's as irresponsible as I feared.
-She exhibits too little common sense.

Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 03:48 PM (MGC3K)

197 This transparent attempt to make up for yesterday's comment shortfall during the outage is failing miserably.

Anybody have any opinions on Christine O'Donnell?

Posted by: VP of Sales, AoSHQ LLC at March 15, 2011 03:48 PM (5Rurq)

198 Primary season will show if it worked, don't you think?)
because it worked w/ Christine ODonell, oh wait...

Posted by: YRM at March 15, 2011 03:48 PM (UzBwz)

199 186 The problem I have with those who argue against Palin is the "She's unelectible" assertion.That pretty much shuts down any discussion onhow to move forward. A more honestway to state this position would be "Palin cannot be elected with the numbers reflected in current polling (if they are to be believed), and I don't want to accept the risk ofObama's re-election on the chancethose numbers change if there is an acceptible alternative who is a stronger candidate against Obama." I can respect someone who wants to avoid the risk of a second Obama maladministration, even if that means Palin is not the nominee.Is the risk worth the chance for a Palin Presidency? If so, then how does one change the facts on the ground for November 2012?
Posted by: minuteman at March 15, 2011 03:45 PM (d6wkB)
BINGO. BINGO, BINGO, B-I-N-G-O and Bingo was his name-o!
...
*cough* I'll... just... be over here. Calmly working on Excel spreadsheets and things.

Posted by: MWR at March 15, 2011 03:48 PM (4df7R)

200 I truly enjoy it when lacyunderalls writes:
"aaaaaaand they're off...........!"
The mental imagery is exquisite.
I denounce myself for this sexist post. (and apologize as well!)

Posted by: USMC 8541 at March 15, 2011 03:48 PM (sGtp+)

201 Even Reagan had his loser kid

Two loser kids, Patti and Ron Jr.

Posted by: toby928� at March 15, 2011 03:49 PM (GTbGH)

202 blue MM's areheresy! MMs come in five colors: brown, light brown, yellow, orange, and green. There are no other real MM's

Posted by: Truman North at March 15, 2011 03:49 PM (8ay4x)

203 91
Posted by: KayInMaine at March 15, 2011 03:03 PM (aehEj)
Yeah, all I got out of that was "tiny penises."
Not sure what that has to do with tsunamis, though.

Posted by: soulpile is... expendable at March 15, 2011 03:22 PM (gH+Hj)
KayInMaine has a meat wallet the size of the Carlsbad Caverns. As a result, every penis seems tiny...

Posted by: The Haunted Pussy at March 15, 2011 03:49 PM (YVZlY)

204 Dang, I got nuthin'....Ace is listening to Rush.

Posted by: On-a-hair-trigger-for-comparing-Ace-to-Charles-Johnson at March 15, 2011 03:50 PM (CzyDl)

205 Roll call on the stop-gap measure:

http://tinyurl.com/4grsdos

Fiscal con split

Posted by: Miss'80sBaby at March 15, 2011 03:50 PM (UO6+e)

206 Wow good stuff and thanks for sharing. The shibboleth is alive and well, that people identify their tribal values by certain code words.
Anytime someone says diversity for example, you know that they're reaching in your wallet.
Anyway, Palin's just a person but her enemies are so bitter, fierce, and unfair that I get drawn into defending her more because of an innate sense of justice and fairness that I never really get to consider if there is any there there to the whole "ordinary American" thing for example.
Although, to me, she seems to be a smart government guru than a cultural icon, but what do I know?

Posted by: joeindc44 at March 15, 2011 03:50 PM (QxSug)

207 I'm not so much a fan of Palin as I was in 2008. It's not because of anything she's said or done or any of these idiots have said about her.

Right now, we're witnessing what happens when an unqualified ideologue gets to sit in the big chair. Just because I can't stand the one we've got right now, doesn't mean I want a different one whose ideas I might agree with more. Palin's appeal was, to me anyhow, that our VP candidate was more qualified for the real job than the Dem Pres candidate. Now, with Obama having a few years of on the job training (however unsuccessful and damaging) and Palin appearing on TV every so often, that's no longer the case.

The Republicans need someone who's done more than be the mayor of a small town and governor of Alaska for a few years, who incidentally quit right of the middle of her term (even though, yes, I understand there were extenuating circumstances...getting her to quit was a win for the vindictive liberal jackals).

I do think all our energies need to be concentrated on taking down President Obama, but I don't think Palin is the right person to replace him with. I'd need to be shown otherwise, and I'm open to it, but right now for me, it's a no.

Posted by: Jarrod at March 15, 2011 03:50 PM (OzXHr)

208 Remember The 11th Commandment.

These conservative pundits are not questioning Palin's conservative philosophy or credentials. What they ARE doing is parroting the left's barbs that they think she is too stoooopid to be president.
They are acting like liberal pundits

I would much rather have a president with a solid conservative philosophy, great gut instincts, is living their morality and that has the brains to pick top notch conservative advisors over a president that thinks they are the smartest person in the room.

Posted by: Muddywood at March 15, 2011 03:50 PM (acFtr)

209 We also have to look at the potential field. I keep saying, I may not get to vote for who I want; I have to choose from the available options when the time comes.

1. Mitt Romney. A political dead man walking. Romneycare will kill him, and he's never come up with a believable explanation for why he didn't fuck the dog on that one.

2. Ron Paul. I'm as big a gold-bug as anyone, but the elder Paul is the GOP version of Dennis Kucinich. (Rand Paul may be a different story; we'll see.)

3. Huckabee. A smarmy, gaffe-prone jackass. And a "moderate" in the John McCain old. He'd be the biggest Donk suck-up in the world.

4. Haley Barbour. I like the guy, but he's Deep South and doesn't have much name-recognition. The Left would go all-out painting him as a neo-KKK racist intent on subjugating the brown people.

5. Mitch Daniels. Probably my choice over the rest of the field, including Palin. He's had real private-sector experience, he's got the middle-America vibe, and he's a nice guy. Problem: he doesn't want the job.

6. Sarah Palin.

Given that field, Palin looks pretty good to me.

Posted by: Monty at March 15, 2011 03:51 PM (4Pleu)

210 Shibboleth is from Judges, a book in the Bible,Ace. The Benjaminites couldn't say the 'sh' and lisped an 's'. You're a genius but poorly read, not sure how thathappens but POTUS is yer anorexic twin.
Like I've said before the only wimmin you're comfortable with are unclothed, writhing in your lap, brandishing a fistful of your $20s. Facts are as foreign as AA meetings.

Posted by: gary gulrud at March 15, 2011 03:51 PM (/g2vP)

211 Miss 80s Baby: thank you so much for keeping us abreast of the real news.

Posted by: Truman North at March 15, 2011 03:51 PM (8ay4x)

212 Nice rant. I like Sarah. Can she win?

I watched My Fair Lady last week on TV.

Every time I see it I think of Sarah's accent.

She needs Dr Higgins' help.

We are going to elect no cockney are we governor?

Posted by: Kemp at March 15, 2011 03:51 PM (JpFM9)

213
Two loser kids, Patti and Ron Jr.

Posted by: toby928� at March 15, 2011 03:49 PM (GTbGH)
Yeah, but at least Patti eventually shut the hell up. Ron Jr. hangs in there like a bad case of the clap.

Posted by: tcn at March 15, 2011 03:51 PM (QuGK2)

214 Posted by: Monty at March 15, 2011 03:51 PM (4Pleu)

What's your opinion of Pawlenty?

Posted by: Slublog at March 15, 2011 03:52 PM (0nqdj)

215 When was the last time we had a thread about the lameness of Mitt or Huck?

Some things go without saying.

First of all, she's not any kind of national defense expert. Foreign
policy and national defense are relatively easy to discuss as most
answers tend to be determined by ideology. There's usually not a "wrong
answer" per se.

I didn't say "expert." I said that's where her knowledge lies.

And, having lived under GW Bush for 6 years before he ran for President, let me say: yes, he spoke in platitudes and sound bites, too. Once he was President (and had whole departments full of advisers) he could "fluently discuss" these things, but he got Elected in 2000 without saying anything substantive other than "Lower taxes."

We know more about Sarah Palin's actual policy positions on a whole host of things than we did about George Bush. C'mon, Ace, you can't compare potential candidate Palin to running-for-re-election Bush.

It's just like the "adversarial interviews" thing you bring up fairly frequently: IF the time comes and she can't hold her own- that's on her and she won't win the nomination. But to demand, now, that she show all the savvy of a President running for re-election is a little bit of a high bar- whether it's Palin, or Huck, or T-Paw or anybody.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) at March 15, 2011 03:52 PM (8y9MW)

216 When was the last time we had a thread about the lameness of Mitt or Huck?
Well....Romeny usually gets blasted when ever Dan, Dan the Romney Troll Man shows up.

Posted by: Mallamutt, how about Greinke/Holliday 2012 at March 15, 2011 03:52 PM (OWjjx)

217 Posted by: Dan at March 15, 2011 03:47 PM (mXBxH)
there's a bit of a difference though
Palin quit and in my mind ran away from a fight w/ the a-holes that were doing ludricious lawsuits against her in a red state that she would have won re-election in easily
Christie would be leaving to become or run for President after battling unions in a blue state and taking a chance on his re-election, going literally face to face w/ the people who are running the state
that's not sexist, that's true concerns

Posted by: YRM at March 15, 2011 03:53 PM (UzBwz)

218 >>>but he got Elected in 2000 without saying anything substantive other than "Lower taxes."

Not true; during a debate with Gore he was fluent on S-CHIPS and discussed the program with a townhall questioner, for just one example.

You're forgetting he did this sort of stuff a fair amount.

Posted by: ace at March 15, 2011 03:54 PM (nj1bB)

219 I would much rather have a president with a solid
conservative philosophy, great gut instincts, is living their morality
and that has the brains to pick top notch conservative advisors over a
president that thinks they are the smartest person in the room.

Posted by: Muddywood at March 15, 2011 03:50 PM (acFtr)
Amen.

Posted by: tcn at March 15, 2011 03:54 PM (QuGK2)

220 I was going to ask a question, but I think, if I read the thread, it will already have been answered.

Late, late, late. Never, ever am I in time!

Posted by: Dianna at March 15, 2011 03:54 PM (qrFCz)

221 sobriquet

Posted by: Word of the Day at March 15, 2011 03:54 PM (GTbGH)

222
We're marching, marching to Shibboleth,
With the Eagle and the Sword!

Posted by: George Tirebiter at March 15, 2011 03:54 PM (7+pP9)

223 What about this guy?
http://tinyurl.com/45rgzas

Posted by: dananjcon at March 15, 2011 03:54 PM (pr+up)

224 Posted by: Monty at March 15, 2011 03:51 PM (4Pleu)
You forgot about me!

Posted by: The Obligatory Alan Keyes sockpuppet when discussing 2012 at March 15, 2011 03:55 PM (OWjjx)

225 215
When was the last time we had a thread about the lameness of Mitt or Huck?

As soon as I get out of this funky underwear, I am going to kick your ass.

Posted by: Mitt at March 15, 2011 03:55 PM (JpFM9)

226 Good stuff in there, Ace. But this --
And even though they're a minority, one tends to remember the insults; that is, they tend to dominate one's memories, out of proportion to their actual incidence.
-- is something I'm going to keep with me for a while. Thanks.

Posted by: FireHorse at March 15, 2011 03:55 PM (k3RPu)

227 One of the biggest sources of frustration in arguing with a liberal is that the liberal refuses to take your stated reasons for your beliefs as your real reasons for the belief.
At the risk of sounding passive-aggressive, Iput the burden of argument onthe other guy. Let him try to convince me. And a lot of times I say I'm not convinced.
When you don't agree to the premise behind some people's arguments, they sputter and repeat the whole thing louder.
Get them when they're off balance.

Posted by: Dr. Varno at March 15, 2011 03:55 PM (QMtmy)

228 Is the risk worth the chance for a Palin Presidency? If so, then how
does one change the facts on the ground for November 2012?

There is no risk worth taking for a second obastard administration. none. As Rush said in that clip I would vote for Elmer Fudd over Odipstick. That said she is 20+ points down, the same way o'donnell was.

Posted by: Guy Fawkes at March 15, 2011 03:55 PM (qqrPQ)

229 For all the memeoranda of Bush being an idiot, he really isn't. He just can't read off a teleprompter.

Posted by: Truman North at March 15, 2011 03:55 PM (8ay4x)

230 but this also gets to the point that liberals argue against their own prejudices, so shibboleths come in handy...after all they've already decided everything and no longer need to explain or explore their thoughts.

Posted by: joeindc44 at March 15, 2011 03:55 PM (QxSug)

231 "Palin cannot be elected with the numbers reflected in current
polling (if they are to be believed), and I don't want to accept the
risk ofObama's re-election on the chancethose numbers change if there
is an acceptible alternative who is a stronger candidate against Obama."
I can respect someone who wants to avoid the risk of a second Obama
maladministration, even if that means Palin is not the nominee.Is the
risk worth the chance for a Palin Presidency? If so, then how does one
change the facts on the ground for November 2012?
Posted by: minuteman at March 15, 2011 03:45 PM (d6wkB)

As I said, that's what the real issue is for much of Big Right. It's a legitimate concern. Too bad more can't be honest about it.

Posted by: baldilocks at March 15, 2011 03:55 PM (T2/zQ)

232 Posted by: Jarrod at March 15, 2011 03:50 PM (OzXHr)
THIS
Posted by: Monty at March 15, 2011 03:51 PM (4Pleu)
given that field I say we recruit others to run because that's a depressing field to chose from

Posted by: YRM at March 15, 2011 03:56 PM (UzBwz)

233 I don't see why George Will's statement on this point is dismissed as
"not what's really going on." And then the search begins for plausible
secret motivations, because of course his stated reason couldn't be the
real one.

Perhaps it's because Will has a history of these things. He was much more in favor of guys like Howard Baker and GHWB during the 1980 primary, despite their questionable conservatism (as opposed to Reagan's unquestioned and unabashed conservatism). Will didn't get on that bandwagon until about 5 minutes before the polls opened in 1980, and you could always tell he felt icky doing so. Will has also been dismissive of the Tea Party. Thus, the judgment of his commentary isn't happening in a vacuum.

Ditto for guys like Krauthammer. He begins one column with a snooty "Sarah Palin should leave the room," and then proceeds to take a position on death panels that almost perfectly mirrors her own previously stated position on the same. We know Kraut was a Mondale lackey back in the 80's, and even late as '85 or '86 was writing that Reagan had an empty head.

Then you have idiots like Labash with his naughty librarian and Al Sharpton comments ... Brooks referring to her as a 'cancer' ... Noonan shrieking on her like a jealous schoolgirl ... etc. A pattern emerges.

People can have substantive reasons to oppose Palin's candidacy, but they seem to get lost in the noise of substance-less critiques by the types discussed above. Those latter critiques are what drives the question into their motivations, and they are indeed legitimate questions. Many of us here are old enough to remember a very similar reaction to Reagan on his way up, and while history may not repeat itself, it sure as shit rhymes.

Posted by: thirteen28 at March 15, 2011 03:56 PM (AbmsP)

234 Wow. A masters treatise written by Ace and paragraph upon pargraph of comments about a conservative that hasn't even declared her intentions yet. Whatever the pros and cons are about Sarah, what she's done in two short years is awakened the electorate to the fact that there are other choices out there other than the usual coastie ivy-league elitists (of which many here just can't get enough of). She has established herself as a power to be taken seriously. I like her because she puts leftists and elitist RINO's into spasmodic fits of political diahrrea.She has also been one of the main driving forces that have exposed the MFM to what it really is.

Posted by: Soona at March 15, 2011 03:56 PM (dFw8Z)

235 Primary season will show if it worked, don't you think?)
because it worked w/ Christine ODonell, oh wait...
Posted by: YRM at March 15, 2011 03:48 PM (UzBwz)
It did. She won the primary despite every pundit's argument that she didn't stand a chance. As such no one was prepared to handle the situation and there were no spinmeisters working their crafty magic with her campaign (no witchcraft pun intended). Indeed, the GOP itself was all up in arms against her at the start.
Also, that was in frakking Delaware. Frakking Joe "Dipshit" Biden Delaware. Frakking "let's name Wilmington's refurbished train station the Joseph R. Biden, Jr., Railroad Station, because he's the greatest!" Delaware. I was not shocked. But I look at red-at-heart flyover country and have a little more faith in people doing the right thing when it comes to deciding the leader of the free world, provided they have a candidate they trust.

Posted by: MWR at March 15, 2011 03:56 PM (4df7R)

236 Will any R that runs and wins make a difference?
Will they have the political will to do the things it will take to right this ship?
I think not.

Posted by: MarkC at March 15, 2011 03:56 PM (yPPVC)

237 Bush wasn't an idiot, he is smart, he flew jets, he ran a state.
Liberals just wished it so and it was so.

Posted by: joeindc44 at March 15, 2011 03:57 PM (QxSug)

238 I learned years ago that arguing with a liberal is a waste of everything. I assault them. It may not do any more good than argument, but it sure feels good.

Posted by: Dog 'O' Madness at March 15, 2011 03:58 PM (OlN4e)

239 215
When was the last time we had a thread about the lameness of Mitt or Huck?

As soon as I finish playing this lame Christian song, I am going to kick your ass. Unless you have some fried chicken?

Posted by: Huck at March 15, 2011 03:58 PM (JpFM9)

240 Sum up, Ace. Fuck.
Reasons I've heard to not like Palin from friends:
1. She doesn't play the game, she makes upher own.
2. She's extremely Pro-Life
3. She's smarmy, gosh darn ya betcha.
4. She should be raising her children instead.
But this "She doesn't engage the media in ways I want her to." Eh?

Posted by: William at March 15, 2011 03:58 PM (77TeU)

241 Posted by: Guy Fawkes at March 15, 2011 03:55 PM (qqrPQ)
actually following the #1 getting it right poll, Rasmussen, she's down by 11 (loony Uncle Paul is down by

; O'Donell was down by 17 or so?

Posted by: YRM at March 15, 2011 03:58 PM (UzBwz)

242 I'm still viewing the roll call on the short-term CR and we have a fiscal con freshmen split. Some of the Tea Party congressmen and women who voted for 100% of spending cuts RE H.R. 1 voted aye*, while some who voted for less than that voted no on this bill.

*It's more consistent to do that than the latter, IMO.

Posted by: Miss'80sBaby at March 15, 2011 03:58 PM (UO6+e)

243 My disappointment with Palin is that every time I hear her speak it's as if she's reading from a book of bumper sticker quotes. The idea of a homegrown, self-made Margaret Thatcher is great, but Palin is nowhere close to being in that league. She comes down on the right side of the issues that are of concern to most of us, but she doesn't appear to be an original thinker or inspirational leader to anyone but those that are already converted. I still like her better than that fat doofus Huckleberry or the oily Romney, but in a nation of 300+ million, there's got to be someone better.

Posted by: Ted Kennedy's Gristle Encased Head at March 15, 2011 03:58 PM (+lsX1)

244 Whether she runs; whether she gets the nomination; she will be instrumental in deciding who it is that the GOP do run. She's moving the Republican field to the right simply by existing.

Posted by: Truman North at March 15, 2011 03:59 PM (8ay4x)

245 Palin evokes emotions both pro and con because we are a divided nation, and she illuminates that divide. Anytime a conservative star comes on the scene, the liberal media produces an industry to destroy that person. It has culminated in Palin hatred.

Many conservatives are so appalled by the crucifixion of Palin, they want none of it and talk about getting candidate that is more acceptable. Acceptable to who?

Does Palin embody the American ideal of self reliance and the pioneer spirit? This process is now so mature that even normally conservative folks will not even look at her as a possible candidate.

Yet no matter her flaws she would be head and shoulders above Obama, and yet Americans eagerly voted for that tool. I doubt now if we can actually pull out of this nosedive.

Liberals have won when all they have to do is slap the conservative next to you, to get you to back off actually demanding someone other than a Romney or Dole or McCain. Heck lets have liberals decide who we run, left or right.

Posted by: Chief Moose...Pima County at March 15, 2011 03:59 PM (YtoR3)

246 What's your opinion of Pawlenty?

Posted by: Slublog at March 15, 2011 03:52 PM

fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap ...

Posted by: Poppin' Fresh at March 15, 2011 03:59 PM (vdfwz)

247 Posted by: MWR at March 15, 2011 03:56 PM (4df7R)
that's the ticket, run another sure fire loser, that's what I got from that post

Posted by: YRM at March 15, 2011 04:00 PM (UzBwz)

248 I'm still viewing the roll call on the short-term CR
Not voting: John Conyers, Loretta Sanchez, and that lazybones Giffords.

Posted by: Truman North at March 15, 2011 04:00 PM (8ay4x)

249 236
Will any R that runs and wins make a difference?
Will they have the political will to do the things it will take to right this ship?
I think not.

Posted by: MarkC at March 15, 2011 03:56 PM (yPPVC)
And that is where I think people mistake Sarah. She does things because she thinks they are correct, morally, politically, for whatever reason. And she gets shit done. Most politicians just want the credit when things go right, but Sarah really does the work. She takes a lot of crap for that, but she does the work.

Posted by: tcn at March 15, 2011 04:00 PM (QuGK2)

250 @ 209 -- 4. Haley Barbour. I like the guy, but he's Deep South and doesn't have much name-recognition. The Left would go all-out painting him as a neo-KKK racist intent on subjugating the brown people.

Or as James Lileks put it, Barbour would be doomed simply due to a too-great percentage of middle-ground voters who want to be considered "cool" and "hip" and get their influence from Jon Stewart, who would no doubt categorize Barbour as that stock sheriff character from a '70s sitcom who pulls over Richard Prior and says, "Where d'ya think yer goin', boy?"

Posted by: Philosoraptor at March 15, 2011 04:01 PM (bCxgV)

251 Me, I think all the uproar over Palin is great. It shakes up the right and makes a chance of conservatism going forward a real possibility. We tend to think short term it seems while the left always sees it long term.
We have a setback and finger point. The left rarely eat their own.
Make no mistake - we are shooting our own wounded when piling on Palin. She's been hammered by our opponents - instead of rallying around her we pay lip service "yeah they were unfair, but....". Useful idiot behavior. The truth is the left will do anything to discredit her, and she's the target du jour. If she does not get the nomination, then the attacks will turn on the next rightie.
She's always going to be an object of ridicule and mockery to the left.
Oh, by the way, code words. Snowbilly= white trash. Anyone on our side that entertains that attitude should just go all in Obama and get it over with.
I don't know if she's running, if she can get the nomination, or if she can win. I do know you won't hear one word of critcism of her, the woman, from me, either here in house or on the street. That goes for all the other right aisle candidates too, by the way. Huckabee , Romney, et al are not the anti-christs. We have enough of those already

Posted by: tubal at March 15, 2011 04:01 PM (6DLda)

252 209 Monty:
Sad but true. I don't see how Palin could overcome her massive unfavorables as to the general from where we are standing now, but compared to our present slate, this non-supporter might just go Grizz.
I assume you left out Newt because he's only half-in at this point. As for him, he's got negatives around where Sarah's are, and has major problems with the base as well - serial divorces, global warming, and that ridiculous patriotism defense he made the other day). Non-starter.
For all that we need him in Congress as well - Draft Paul Ryan. Draft Paul Ryan. Draft Paul Ryan.

Posted by: societyis2blame at March 15, 2011 04:01 PM (jjFAD)

253 Not true; during a debate with Gore he was fluent on S-CHIPS and discussed the program with a townhall questioner, for just one example. You're forgetting he did this sort of stuff a fair amount.
Posted by: ace at March 15, 2011 03:54 PM (nj1bB)
AFTER the primary, Ace. Right now everyone's discounting Palin from even getting that far, and I've yet to see a truly substantive reason as to WHY.

Posted by: MWR at March 15, 2011 04:02 PM (4df7R)

254 My disappointment with Palin is that every time I hear her speak it's as if she's reading from a book of bumper sticker quotes.
Well, in defense of Palin (and I am not what you would consider to be a Palinista), that is becoming more and mnore modern politics. Substance gets lost for the 10 second sound bite. Obama's entire campaign was nothing more than 1 sound bite after another. Plus, current social media is not exactly suited for massive white papers on trade in balances.

Posted by: Mallamutt at March 15, 2011 04:02 PM (OWjjx)

255 Huckabee , Romney, et al are not the anti-christs.

Um. Huckabee is the anti-christ.

Posted by: Truman North at March 15, 2011 04:03 PM (8ay4x)

256 What's your opinion of Pawlenty?

He's like a bowl of oatmeal. Nutritious, healthy, and completely boring.

He was a good governor for Minnesota -- I was a big fan -- but he just doesn't have any big ideas to bring to a presidential race. His main angle now seems to be that he's just like Romney, except without Romney's millstone of Romneycare.

I also don't hear much fiscal muscle coming out of him these days, which is disappointing given the battles he fought here in Minnesota.

I wish Paul Ryan would run. But he's another guy who doesn't want the job (more likely, doesn't want to compete in the 2012 race -- he'll be a player in 2016, I bet).

Posted by: Monty at March 15, 2011 04:03 PM (4Pleu)

257 I love the woman for her morals and past accomplishments. Today, she has my vote. If she stands up in a debate and makes a fool of herself and someone else is more to my liking, they will get my vote. It's not about Palin for the sake of Palin. It's about getting my country out of this box of shit it finds itself in. The fact that everyone I despise politically hates her tells me I am on a good path.

Posted by: Oldsailor's poet at March 15, 2011 04:03 PM (oBXlb)

258 Posted by: ace at March 15, 2011 03:54 PM (nj1bB)

So, like, during a planned appearance where he'd likely been briefed/prepared by his aides? Yep, that's off the cuff.

And that's my point. You're asking for "off the cuff" and saying "Bush did it," when Bush did no such thing. He prepared very, very well for debates/town halls/etc., and he wasn't just parroting what he'd been told, but he also wasn't doing impromptu interviews, either. When you got him on those, he'd always revert to a talking point and either a) clarify later in some more formal arena or b) have Rove issue a clarification which could be run along side (or in support of) his off-the-cuff remark.

I'm not saying she shouldn't show her ability at these things. I'm saying that claiming she's not good at it is ridiculous. We have no evidence one way or the other, yet, beyond her debate with Slow Joe in '08- in which she roundly cleaned his clock.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) at March 15, 2011 04:03 PM (8y9MW)

259 Right now everyone's discounting Palin from even getting that far, and I've yet to see a truly substantive reason as to WHY.
She's not the good kind of moron.

Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 04:04 PM (MGC3K)

260 Posted by: MWR at March 15, 2011 04:02 PM (4df7R)
oh she could win the primary, she'd just get her ass kicked in the general unless she changes some things

Posted by: YRM at March 15, 2011 04:04 PM (UzBwz)

261 >>>onservative that hasn't even declared her intentions yet. Whatever the pros and cons are about Sarah, what she's done in two short years is awakened the electorate to the fact that there are other choices out there other than the usual coastie ivy-league elitists (of which many here just can't get enough of).

George Will was way off base with his "too creedal" criticism, I see.

You seem overly concerned with a sort of Revenge of the Outsiders cultural triumphalism.

>>> She has established herself as a power to be taken seriously

not to me.

Posted by: ace at March 15, 2011 04:04 PM (nj1bB)

262 a planned appearance where he'd likely been briefed/prepared by his aides? Yep, that's off the cuff.
Better than 'off the palm'.

Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 04:05 PM (MGC3K)

263 The problem I have with those who argue against Palin is the "She's unelectible" assertion.That pretty much shuts down any discussion onhow to move forward.
We need to move forward, but all the discussion about the unelectable (yeah, I went there) Palin sucks the air out of the room and serves only as a distraction from a focus on more viable candidates.
The reasons that she's unelectable have been pointed out ad nauseum- short on experience, resigned as governor, lack of gravitas, inability or unwillingness to answer tough questions, inability to handle the MSM effectively, poor political judgement, reliance on identity politics, terrible approval ratings, etc.
Perhaps some of the Palinista crowd can lay out for us how they think she's going to overcome her mistakes, negative perception amongs the public, lack of experience, and60% disapproval rating and beat the incumbent Obama.
And no, "Obama sucks so we'll win" isn't really a plan. I suspect the true answer is a belief based on emotional projection that "If only people knew her like I knew her, they'd love her too".

Posted by: Hollowpoint at March 15, 2011 04:05 PM (SY2Kh)

264 The Left would go all-out painting him as a neo-KKK racist intent on subjugating the brown people.
Uh, name a Republican nominee that would not get painted this way?

Posted by: Mallamutt at March 15, 2011 04:05 PM (OWjjx)

265 I assume you left out Newt because he's only half-in at this point.

Newt is so far from being a serious contender, it's not even funny. Huck has a better chance than he does. Besides, is there anyone under the age of 35 who even remembers this guy?

He's like that skanky ex-girlfriend you dumped way back in the day who shows up out of the blue one day, wondering if you'd like to get back together. Er...no.

Posted by: Monty at March 15, 2011 04:06 PM (4Pleu)

266 My question - where does this business about "playing the victim card" come from? Or, and I've heard this more from accomplished women than anyone else, that her tone is angry, and she is too heated?

I am not a Palin fanatic, but I'm not hearing either of those in what I read from her.

So, where do these impressions come from?

Posted by: Dianna at March 15, 2011 04:06 PM (qrFCz)

267 So, Ace... Why do you
Dismiss Palin as "creedal"
She makes arguments.
What I don't get is when people say that Palin is appealing to people in some kind of sub-intellectual, dog-whistle kind of way, when it appears she makes cogent political arguments that are quite persuasive.
She aruges for lower spending, balanced budgets, good government, ending corruption, gun rights, energy independence, family values, respect for life, and a whole bunch of other issues, but she keeps on being dismissed as "Caribou Barbie", with statements like 'Her appeal is creedal".
Why can't you take Palin at her word? Since taking people at their word seems to be the point you are trying to make here, why not discuss her arguments, instead of a charicature of her appeal? Is she wrong on tax cuts? Spending? Energy Development? Where do you disagree?

Posted by: Haiku Guy at March 15, 2011 04:06 PM (J6F73)

268 What about Ziggy for President?

Posted by: The Robot Devil at March 15, 2011 04:06 PM (LdYLm)

269 She has established herself as a power to be taken seriously
By the Power of Numb-Skull!

Posted by: Princess She-Ra Palin at March 15, 2011 04:07 PM (MGC3K)

270 Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 04:05 PM (MGC3K)
BURN

Posted by: YRM at March 15, 2011 04:07 PM (UzBwz)

271 68
I think what upsets some Palin fans is the condescension directed at
her by other Republicans, especially those with a stake in the current
system, and the more personal attacks on her and her supporters. Also,
why does Ace hate women? It's like he's gay or something.

Posted by: Dr Spank at March 15, 2011 03:10 PM (1fB+3)

Ace is gay?

Posted by: Taint Painter at March 15, 2011 04:08 PM (E7i+5)

272 "Revenge of the Outsiders cultural triumphalism"

As nice a name for conservatism as any, I guess

Posted by: kathleen at March 15, 2011 04:08 PM (Huxg6)

273 Another thing about Newt Gingrich: a man who wants power as badly as Newt does should never be given it. Ever.

Posted by: Monty at March 15, 2011 04:08 PM (4Pleu)

274 oh she could win the primary, she'd just get her ass kicked in the general unless she changes some things
And that depends on a whole lote of factors. Right now, I think the biggest impediment to a Palin run is Michelle Bachmann. If Bachmann gets in, she is going after the same voters are Palin. And who has the better resume?

Posted by: Mallamutt at March 15, 2011 04:08 PM (OWjjx)

275 Is it possible that Sarah has NO intention of actually running but as long as the MBM believes she will, she'll draw the hostile fire that would normally go to a serious threat to Barry the JEF?

"You are an excellent tactician Captian. You have your second in command attack while you sit back and watch for weakness" - Khan Noonien Singh

Posted by: kbdabear at March 15, 2011 04:08 PM (vdfwz)

276 Many highly intelligent people can't express their ideas verbally worth a damn.

Posted by: Serious Cat at March 15, 2011 04:08 PM (bAySe)

277 >>>Right now everyone's discounting Palin from even getting that far, and I've yet to see a truly substantive reason as to WHY.

Because I keep waiting for her to say something inarguably smart and she won't and people keep making excuses why she shouldn't have to.

I'm really not digging the "she can be smart whenever she wants, she just chooses not to be for tactical reasons' claims.

If something can happen, it does happen, goes the old rule in physics. if something doesn't happen, there's a reason it doesn't happen.

No matter how many times I say a variation of "I want her to prove she's smart" it doesn't get through. I think maybe it's because I'm couching it so as to not be offensive.

So I'm going to state it flatly: Her intelligence is in doubt and I want her to remove that doubt. I will not be appeased by spin on her behalf claiming that she's playing some "change the game" strategy where she doesn't have to be smart.

I want her to be smart. if she's not smart, no support from me.

I want her to demonstrate this. I don't want to keep hearing reasons why it's actually tactically clever to not appear smart. I don't believe that.

Posted by: ace at March 15, 2011 04:08 PM (nj1bB)

278 Posted by: MWR at March 15, 2011 04:02 PM (4df7R)

Posted by: YRM at March 15, 2011 04:04 PM (UzBwz)
One of you has to change your nick.

Posted by: Tami at March 15, 2011 04:09 PM (VuLos)

279 Posted by: YRM at March 15, 2011 04:07 PM (UzBwz)
Get a sense of humor...it was a 'He-Man' Joke.
You have no appreciation for the finer things in life.

Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 04:09 PM (MGC3K)

280 #243 "... The idea of a homegrown, self-made Margaret Thatcher is great, but Palin
is nowhere close to being in that league. She comes down on the right
side of the issues that are of concern to most of us, but she doesn't
appear to be an original thinker or inspirational leader to anyone but
those that are already converted. ..."

Cut. Jib. Newsletter. All that stuff.
I'd still vote for her, though.

Posted by: jwb7605 at March 15, 2011 04:09 PM (Qxe/p)

281

10,000+ dead!

Your type believe the world is overpopulated and have been praying to Gaia for a plague for years. Think of the reduced carbon footprint! If my SUV is what it took, you should be thanking me.

Or maybe it's called the "Ring of Fire" for a reason...
Or maybe one of the few English words of Japanese origin "Tsunami" got invented in Japan for a reason.
Agh! What can I say, I've got nothing to crack that weapons grade crazy

Posted by: MikeTheMoose at March 15, 2011 04:09 PM (0q2P7)

282 Ace doesn't hate women. He's picky. He just wouldn't be seen dead with any woman who would go out with him.

Posted by: Dog 'O' Madness at March 15, 2011 04:09 PM (OlN4e)

283 Look, C. Sheen is all about the WINNING!

Shouldn't we at least try to bring on board someone with that attitude?? That would be nice to see - someone that wants it.

Adonis DNA Tiger Blooded Crackhead in 2012!!!1!!1!!

And imagine the going's-on in the Lincoln Bedroom....

Posted by: laceyunderalls loves the blue ones best at March 15, 2011 04:10 PM (pLTLS)

284 Posted by: YRM at March 15, 2011 04:07 PM (UzBwz)
Whoops, my bad...that was for the palm reading joke.
In that case . Suck my dick.

Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 04:10 PM (MGC3K)

285 Second look at Trump?
/

Posted by: Sarahs With Me at March 15, 2011 04:10 PM (MWXXs)

286 Ace, in your entire article you fail to mention two simple facts.

1) Double standard. And not the typical liberal/conservative double standard. She also gets a double standard by conservatives as well. No Ace, her favorability among the general population is low not because of her "limited appeal". Most Americans probably couldn't tell you how many branches of govn't there are - let alone follow day to day politics. All they hear about Palin - virtually everything - from TV, hollywood, news channels, etc. are negative attacks on her. She's crucified for doing what everyone else does. Hell, if she buys a car the media will do a "Palin is rich and out of touch" hit piece on her. You and I may laugh at such a ridiculous article, but a lot of the general mass will believe it. No one else - liberals or conservatives - have to go through that.

2) The attacks against her aren't politics as usual. When you see the kind of treatment she gets, the way liberals and the media act towards her, you know this isn't about her political stances. This is psychological. Liberals HATE her. They want her dead. They want her to suffer. She represents everything they stand against. A conservative, faith loving, pro-capitalist, pro-life mother who doesn't need to be protected or given unfair privileges to succeed. The entire democratic party depends on identity politics - and she destroys that notion. I don't think it's a coincidence that the majority of Tea Party members are women or that more republican woman ran for congress than ever before. Over the last couple of years the Republican party - and American politic in general - have fundamentally changed, and Palin had a huge part in that. The old establishment doesn't like that, and yes, the old establishment has been complicate in spreading the lies and hit pieces on Palin.

Posted by: JC at March 15, 2011 04:11 PM (8wYse)

287 Okay that sock *must* go. With no context that just look all sorts of wrong.....

Posted by: laceyunderalls at March 15, 2011 04:11 PM (pLTLS)

288 What the fuck are you talking about, Ace? After all that rambling, I still had to google "shibboleth". And I still don't know what you disagree with Rush about. Jeez, write much? I got some place to be.

Posted by: Randall Hoven at March 15, 2011 04:11 PM (e+BDm)

289 >>>As nice a name for conservatism as any, I guess

no not really, kathleen, though I'm not surprised that that is the extent of your own rooting interest here.

Some people are good at thinking in abstractions. Other people are not good at this, and can only see things in terms of personal terms.

You seem to be the latter. You really only seem interested in the personal validation Palin represents to you.

I think that's crude. That's part of the reason Palin turns me off. It's this crude appeal to identity politics.

Posted by: ace at March 15, 2011 04:11 PM (nj1bB)

290 Honey, I shrunk the blog

Posted by: Rick "Ace" Moranis at March 15, 2011 04:12 PM (vdfwz)

291 Ive said it before and ill say it again, whoever wins the white house in 2012 we definitely definitely definitely need as conservative house and senate as we can get.

-firewall against Obama
-drag Hillary to the plate like we did Bill
-drag Rinos across the plate
-get to work with the mythical conservative Republican president

Also we need to keep expanding Conservative media on every level we will need more then we have now in 2012 again no matter what happens.

Side note -In the end I think we best all make peace with our God and ask forgiveness for our poor behavior. This insane mess on every level that is about to engulf us is way more then any mortal can solve.

Posted by: shiggz at March 15, 2011 04:12 PM (mLAWK)

292 Posted by: ace at March 15, 2011 04:04 PM (nj1bB)

Except you quite obviously do, ace, or you wouldn't find even this post necessary. I think this is to what other commenters are alluding when they ask "Why don't we see this about [Candidate]?"

You quite obviously don't think Mitt is a "power to be taken seriously," or we'd hear more about him when he does make the news. Similarly with Huck, T-Paw, etc. But any time Palin is even mentioned peripherally (not in this instance, but in others) you do a post about Palin.

If you don't think she's "a power to be taken seriously," why waste the brain sweat?

Contra your post, this is the kind of thing that makes people think your purported motives are not your real motives- someone who didn't think she should be taken seriously wouldn't post about her as much.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) at March 15, 2011 04:12 PM (8y9MW)

293 I want her to be smart. if she's not smart, no support from me.

I want her to demonstrate this. I don't want to keep hearing reasons
why it's actually tactically clever to not appear smart. I don't
believe that.

Posted by: ace at March 15, 2011 04:08 PM (nj1bB)
What has she said that's not smart? Maybe some specifics would help more people understand this point of view.She's had plenty of interviews, articles, and two books. There's lots of material from Sarah Palin out there - what's not smart?

Posted by: grognard at March 15, 2011 04:12 PM (NS2Mo)

294 Okay that sock *must* go. With no context that just look all sorts of wrong.....
...too slow...damn.

Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 04:13 PM (MGC3K)

295 It depends on your gripe with Palin. Often, she is criticized for things that male politicians get a pass on. Rick Santorum can make a sexist comment, and she will be attacked for defending herself. But I wish she were smarter about some of her comebacks. The folksiness is predictable. She has become a victim, always complaining about the media. I wish she had not resigned. I wish her reality show was less self-promotion and more educational. Most people took away that Palin loves attention more than she loves the outdoors. She has lost some of her authenticity through overexposure, while I wish she had gone on less friendly venues. Facebook, Twitter and FOX gets tiresome.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at March 15, 2011 04:14 PM (mHQ7T)

296 >>> She has established herself as a power to be taken seriously not to me.
Posted by: ace at March 15, 2011 04:04 PM (nj1bB)

But she still lives in so many people's heads, including yours, rent free.

Posted by: Soona at March 15, 2011 04:14 PM (dFw8Z)

297 This whole argument might be a lot more productive if there was any candidate worth a shit. Whatever few might have some decent policy stands are as thrilling as mayonnaise on Wonder Bread, and are just as unelectable as Palin is labeled.

Too many of us fell for that 'It takes another Carter to bring another Reagan' shit in 2008. Well, folks, we're fresh out of Reagans.

Posted by: nickless at March 15, 2011 04:14 PM (MMC8r)

298 278
>>>Right now everyone's discounting Palin from even getting
that far, and I've yet to see a truly substantive reason as to WHY.

Because I keep waiting for her to say something inarguably smart and she
won't and people keep making excuses why she shouldn't have to.

I'm really not digging the "she can be smart whenever she wants, she just chooses not to be for tactical reasons' claims.

If something can happen, it does happen, goes the old rule in physics.
if something doesn't happen, there's a reason it doesn't happen.

No matter how many times I say a variation of "I want her to prove she's
smart" it doesn't get through. I think maybe it's because I'm couching
it so as to not be offensive.

So I'm going to state it flatly: Her intelligence is in doubt and I
want her to remove that doubt. I will not be appeased by spin on her
behalf claiming that she's playing some "change the game" strategy where
she doesn't have to be smart.

I want her to be smart. if she's not smart, no support from me.

I want her to demonstrate this. I don't want to keep hearing reasons
why it's actually tactically clever to not appear smart. I don't
believe that.

Posted by: ace at March 15, 2011 04:08 PM (nj1bB)
How's "Death Panel's" for smart?"Drill, Baby, Drill"?Those two topics seem top be on the minds of folks. Stop listening to "how" she talks and listen to what she says.

Posted by: Sarahs With Me at March 15, 2011 04:14 PM (MWXXs)

299 Anyone else getting tiny print on this page?

Kay in Maine must have shrunk our penises

Posted by: kbdabear at March 15, 2011 04:14 PM (vdfwz)

300 I think there's fear involved. We already know about the fear from the left, how her incredible convention speech smacked obama around and put her ticket in front, how she was the first to mock the very mock-able and Obama never fully recovered.

But, candidly, there is fear involved on my side, too. The fear, at least for me, is of letting the media dictate who can participate. Because while all Ace's reasons are 100% legitimate, we all know that that's not where the Palin hatred started - it started with the illegitimate, vicious media attack, the lies, the slanders, the hypocritical double-standards, the distortions, the SNL skits, etc, etc, etc. All the legitimate stuff, the stuff Ace is talking about, only came later. So, what I feel like is, if I give in and stop defending Palin, then I am giving in to the media smear machine and, the next candidate who I really like who comes along will get the same smear treatment and it will be just as successful.

I understand that isn't very constructive or mature, because it means I am ignoring legitimate criticism, but it's sort of a protective instinct against the dominant culture, an instinct to stick up for the people it attacks, even if those people are flawed. Just to send them the message that the attacks won't work anymore and have to stop.

Once we defeat the MBM, and they become irrelevant, then we can have mature, impartial discussions about all the pros and cons of various conservatives.

Like, in the Wisconsin fight, what if, just hypothetical, there actually were something less-than-perfect about the new law just passed? I don't mean the principle of the thing, but some lesser factor, maybe the drafters overlooked it, could have some legitimately bad repercussions. After everything that's happened, all the disgraceful behavior, all the media malpractice, would you stop defending Walker, even if you honestly believed that one provision was misguided? Or would you say, "screw the union thugs, screw the MBM, I'm sticking up for the guy they're targeting"? The mature response would be to go the intellectually-honest-at-all-costs path, but I don't know if that's the human response.

Posted by: Adrian at March 15, 2011 04:14 PM (PY4xx)

301 What has she said that's not smart?
Are you kidding?
This is like some super dead pan humor that I'm not getting, right?

Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 04:14 PM (MGC3K)

302 I think Palin whipped ol' joe in their debate, she is smart enough, the off the cuff answers during a campaign I believe will be her problem.

Posted by: Guy Fawkes at March 15, 2011 04:14 PM (qqrPQ)

303 278, How about drill baby Drill, that's the smartest fucking thing I have heard in years. Cheap energy= economic developement. Low taxes= economic developement, small government = economic developement. Economic developement = Jobs. Jobs= stable society.

When people have nothing, they have nothing to lose and right now we have a glut of folks with nothing to lose.

Posted by: Oldsailor's poet at March 15, 2011 04:14 PM (oBXlb)

304 I want her to be smart. if she's not smart, no support from me.

I guess that's the main difference between us, ace. I just don't find abstract "smarts" all that appealing. Plenty of very smart people are also complete assholes, and being smart doesn't stop them from doing very stupid things (a point which becomes painfully apparent in the current Administration).

Smart people are prone to far more mistakes than less-gifted people, I think, because they overestimate their ability to influence things. And they overestimate their own capacity for mistakes and for failure.

Being honest, good-hearted, and realistic is more important than being "smart", in my view. Especially when you're dealing with an elected representative. Their advisors can be smart; the bureaucrats and think-tank wonks can be smart. I want someone who is grounded, has some common sense, and doesn't lie reflexively when asked an unexpected question.

I'm not saying we should elect a complete dullard; I'm just saying that abstract "smarts" isn't even in the top five qualities I'd be looking for in a good chief executive. (Or rather: someone who exhibits the other qualities I'm looking for would be smart enough as a side-effect.)

Posted by: Monty at March 15, 2011 04:15 PM (4Pleu)

305 Why would I be any more receptive to such a mode of argumentation when it comes from other conservatives instead of liberals?
That's what Palin supporters ask as well.

Posted by: Decaf at March 15, 2011 04:15 PM (3+xlM)

306 I'm not in favor of Candidate Palin.

No. Really? I would never have come to that conclusion just by reading your 10,000th post on the topic. News to me. You can't possibly mean it.
Do another post next week, and you might convince me.

Posted by: Derak at March 15, 2011 04:15 PM (CjpKH)

307 302

What has she said that's not smart?

Are you kidding?

This is like some super dead pan humor that I'm not getting, right?

Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 04:14 PM (MGC3K)
Then it shouldn't be difficult to pony up, then, right?

Posted by: grognard at March 15, 2011 04:15 PM (NS2Mo)

308 How about we never talk about mitt or that shithead huckster. Thanks.

Posted by: Evil libertarian at March 15, 2011 04:15 PM (qkj7z)

309 Hollowpoint at #263 -

What identity politics is she playing? I'm a bit at a loss on it.

Posted by: Dianna at March 15, 2011 04:16 PM (qrFCz)

310 But she still lives in so many people's heads, including yours, rent free.
Why is this a pro?
I see Palinistas referring to it all of the time...to me it's meaningless. Why is this a benefit?

Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 04:16 PM (MGC3K)

311 that's the ticket, run another sure fire loser, that's what I got from that post
Posted by: YRM at March 15, 2011 04:00 PM (UzBwz)
Then you did not look deeply enough, YRM-san. You must look... deeper.
Really, I think I mustsound like the world's most outrageous Palin supporter, but I'm not. I guess I fall in Rush's camp. I don't understand the derision from the Right towards her. How is she anymore "unelectable" than any of the other potential candidates? They haven't even debated each other. Can we at least let the whole group of them address the issues before we start saying "He's a surefire loser," or "That's theone we want to run against ODumbass." I hear everyone making assertions about who is or isn't electable, but we don't even know who's going to vie for the brass ring yet.
I think constantly singling out Palin to discuss her unelectability (never her ELECTability) is just bizarre. And I'm not talking about AoSHQ, but the blogosphere and MFM in general. Clearly if she comes up in the discussion so much, there must be something there. Otherwise why keep talking about her? So why do all the discussions always seem to focus on her insubstantial negatives, but rarely on what her perceived positives are? That's really where my confusion lies. Those who support Palin are passionate about it, and watching the rest of the Right cut her down for no observably good reason makes her supporters rightfully defensive and bitter. That kind of infighting makes us ALL weaker, and decreases our chances of beating the incredibly weak and ineffectual asshat currently in the Oval Office. So if we're going to hold Palin under such a microscope, then we have to give equal scrutiny to the other contenders who have voiced interest: Bachmann, Gingrich, Huckabee, Pawlenty, Barbour, Romney, Cain, etc. And also to those potential candidates whose names have been floated but who haven't responded or who have outright denied they'll run: Christie, Daniels, now Scott Walker, and any others I might have missed.
Instead of approaching the primaries from a place of fear ("No! Not Palin! She's unelectable! We'll lose to Obama!"), the right should approach the primaries from a point of strength, ("We understand these candidates, we've heard them talk about the issues, and whoever wins this primary won't be a mystery to us. We're prepared"). Flailing hysteria is a leftist construct. I hate it when it happens to us.

Posted by: MWR at March 15, 2011 04:16 PM (4df7R)

312 I'm an agnostic on Palin but I will say there are people who wouldn't support Palin even if she came up with a unified field theory because of the font she used in writing her paper. Shows a lack of "smarts" on her part.

Posted by: Dr Spank at March 15, 2011 04:17 PM (1fB+3)

313 "You really only seem interested in the personal validation Palin represents to you."

Except for the fact that I spend almost zero time thinking about Palin -- until I see one of your monthly Palin agonies, which frankly amuse me no end.

Posted by: kathleen at March 15, 2011 04:18 PM (Huxg6)

314
I think what upsets some Palin fans is the condescension directed at her
by other Republicans, especially those with a stake in the current
system, and the more personal attacks on her and her supporters.

Much of the early and anonymous sniping at Palin came from McCain campaign staff and assholes already positioning themselves for 2012. That was dirty pool, considering what was said.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at March 15, 2011 04:18 PM (mHQ7T)

315 Monty @395
Yes. Remember how the left portrayed Reagan? As a dullard, senile? He was not. Palin is not.

Posted by: Dog 'O' Madness at March 15, 2011 04:19 PM (OlN4e)

316 Then it shouldn't be difficult to pony up, then, right?
I already did. She wrote talking points on her hand for a National Interview and got busted reading them.
If she were a student, she'd have been expelled.
She has whored herself out for Television exposure and then used that exposure to prove, incontrivertibly,that she's a fraud.She's not a hunter / huntress, shelacks ethics or respect for her game.
She's a poseur and she's an attention seeker.

Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 04:19 PM (MGC3K)

317 Posted by: ace at March 15, 2011 04:08 PM (nj1bB)

And what did GW Bush do to "prove" he was smart? Why was his intelligence in any less question that Sarah Palin's?

She studies and speaks/writes quite well about a host of issues from Energy (her specific purview) to the economy to foreign affairs. Do you want a Doctoral thesis? How about something in a "peer reviewed journal?"

Let's say she got on Fox tonight and gave the worlds best treatise on why the United States should support the Libyan rebels. Would that convince you she's smart, or would it not be "off the cuff" enough for you?

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) at March 15, 2011 04:19 PM (8y9MW)

318 263. Hollowman doesn't like being distracted from more viable candidates.
Like Christie or Daniels or Ryan or Hunter or anyone with less than 2/3 name recognition so we can pull a fast one on Red Amerikkka.
Boehner is today saying $60 Billion in cuts off the 2010 budget for year 2011 amount to 'real savings'.
Believe me Red Amerikkka is paying attention, if Coke Queen can win a write-in election, no one in Trailer Park gives a rip who the GOP strings aloft.
FO.

Posted by: gary gulrud at March 15, 2011 04:19 PM (/g2vP)

319 I dunno....I'd like to see Palin get mean - a flavor of mean all morons can get behind. The kind of mean that would make O'bumbles shriek like a little girl who found a spider in her Hello Kitty lunch pail. The kind of mean that would cause the belligerent hippies in Madison to leave permanently commit mass suicide.

As far as the libtard's childish tactic of assuming what you REALLY think (as if that's an argument), it's something I am used to. When they say supid shit like 'you don't like Obama cuz ur waaaaaycist' I point, laugh and say things like "sorry douchebag, but you don't get to tell me what my words mean" or "WTF? Do you understand English, or are you just too goddamned stupid to actually respond to what I just said?" Usually really loud, with lots of derisive laughter. Usually works. Been thinking about this lately, and decided that humiliating these idiots in a way that leaves no doubt what stupid sheep they really are is really the way to go. No point in reasoning with them.
For maximum effect, do it in front of other people/their friends/in public.

Possible topic for a post: Education (been thinking about this too, but I'm sure I'm not the first)....The dems/unions have been in almost total control of K-12 plus universities for decades. Yet black academic achievement continues to lag, which libs will always, always, always blame on wascally wayyyycism. Point out to libs that can only mean teachers and their unions are racist, and for a reason...given an incentive to fail (blacks have been told their whole lives that evil rich whitey is out to get them, so why try) and a subtle threat to toe the line (race traitor/acting white, enforced by the commie lawn jockeys JJackson and Al-not-too-Sharpton) blacks are kept on the plantation. So what this all points to: if you're black and fail, it's because whitey's keepin' you down. If you 'succeed' (grade inflation, low expectations, gerrymandering, whatever it takes to make the illusion) then by gum, YOU OWE THAT TO DEMOCRATS. Democrats cannot have blacks that make it knowing that they did it on their own, without the condecending bullshit about 'legacy of slavery' that seems to be polished nightly and put on display in the center of any sort of racial disparity.

Also was thinking about

Posted by: model_1066 at March 15, 2011 04:19 PM (VnECg)

320 Dang. 305 not 395.

Posted by: Dog 'O' Madness at March 15, 2011 04:19 PM (OlN4e)

321

I liked Palin's WTF comment. The woman has some serious snark.

Posted by: Ed Anger at March 15, 2011 04:19 PM (7+pP9)

322 wouldn't support Palin even if she came up with a unified field theory because of the font she used in writing her paper.

Sure, there are those. Certainly. And on the flip end a lot of her supporters would have never hopped on the Palin Express if she had JD/Esq after her name. And that's okay, too.

It cuts both ways.

Posted by: laceyunderalls at March 15, 2011 04:20 PM (pLTLS)

323 252 209 [...] For all that we need him in Congress as well - Draft Paul Ryan.
Draft Paul Ryan. Draft Paul Ryan.

Wanted to weigh-in on this. I'm a great Paul Ryan fan, but I want to see the following before I endorse even a VP bid: (1) deliver on the budget, (2) push-back against the critics within his own party who consider him an extremist*, and (3) successfully handle the stress of the job. Number 1 is the most important right because, while he's been ahead of everyone in the House on educating the public about the looming economic crisis, he has to prove he can back-up his talk with more than just the Roadmap.

*On entitlement reform, tax reform, and a number of other reforms

Posted by: Miss'80sBaby at March 15, 2011 04:20 PM (UO6+e)

324
She went after corruption in Alaska, and she won.

She went after corrupt politicians in her own party.

The heart of all our problems is the corruption in the federal government.

Posted by: FRONT TOWARD LEFT at March 15, 2011 04:21 PM (Pzf4N)

325 We used a similar trick as passwords on the islands in WWII. When someone wanted to come in in the dark we would say, "say red truck." If they replied , "led fluck" they were dead meat.

Posted by: If you believe that I've got a nice bridge for sale. at March 15, 2011 04:21 PM (2o7Ys)

326 Then it shouldn't be difficult to pony up, then, right?

I already did. She wrote talking points on her hand for a National Interview and got busted reading them.
If she were a student, she'd have been expelled.Fail. It was a speech, and those were the points she wished to cover.

She has whored herself out for Television exposure and
then used that exposure to prove, incontrivertibly,that she's a
fraud.She's not a hunter / huntress, shelacks ethics or respect for
her game.
She's a poseur and she's an attention seeker.

Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 04:19 PM (MGC3K)
I see a lot of opinion, and very little fact here. And you want to be taken seriously?Quote the woman, and show me something she's said or written that is dumb. Do it.

Posted by: grognard at March 15, 2011 04:21 PM (NS2Mo)

327 The woman has some serious snark.

How exactly is that Presidential?

Maybe I'm old school and not hip to the new ways. I don't get how taking to Twitter makes one look like a serious individual.

Do U C my pt?

Posted by: laceyunderalls at March 15, 2011 04:21 PM (pLTLS)

328 PS Ace: I'm still laughing about your complaint that Palin isn't "fluent" like GWB was. Now THAT is comedy gold.

Posted by: kathleen at March 15, 2011 04:22 PM (Huxg6)

329 Quote the woman, and show me something she's said or written that is dumb.

I'm not sure you can refudiate this point.

Posted by: laceyunderalls at March 15, 2011 04:22 PM (pLTLS)

330 Palin versus 44 Presidents.

http://tinyurl.com/4hqvrzh

Posted by: Sarahs With Me at March 15, 2011 04:22 PM (MWXXs)

331 What kills me is how many men support Palinsimply because they think she is hot and has a nice rack.
A lot of people support Palin and Allen West for similar reasons. Does that mean they think the latter is hot and has a nice rack?

Posted by: thirteen28 at March 15, 2011 04:22 PM (AbmsP)

332 @ 305 -- Smart people are prone to far more mistakes than less-gifted people...

I'm assuming you have reliable data on which you base this assertion, because otherwise it's, you know, mere self-serving assertion.

Posted by: Philosoraptor at March 15, 2011 04:23 PM (bCxgV)

333 The left are trying their best to make Palin into a joke, and some of us are obviously suseptible to their propaganda. I have my problems with Palin, some of which have already been stated by others. Her intellect is not one of my problems. Nor are her legs.

Posted by: Dog 'O' Madness at March 15, 2011 04:23 PM (OlN4e)

334 I'm not sure you can refudiate this point.

Posted by: laceyunderalls at March 15, 2011 04:22 PM (pLTLS)
Ok, everyone who has ever misspoken or made a typo is hereby dumb. Next?

Posted by: grognard at March 15, 2011 04:23 PM (NS2Mo)

335 #296 - Tattoo De Plane

Thank you. That was coherent, and explanatory.

Posted by: Dianna at March 15, 2011 04:23 PM (qrFCz)

336 According to the comments so far, Palin's primary attributes are that the media is unfair to her, she is treated with a double standard by liberals and conservatives alike and she's not smart enough to overestimate her own abilities. Somebody make room on Mt. Rushmore!

Posted by: Ted Kennedy's Gristle Encased Head at March 15, 2011 04:23 PM (+lsX1)

337 Personally, I'd really like to hear what Jeff B. has to say on this topic.

*ducks and runs*

Posted by: Tami at March 15, 2011 04:23 PM (VuLos)

338 "And on the flip end a lot of her supporters would have never hopped on the Palin Express if she had JD/Esq after her name. "

Right, because JDs never get elected president.

Posted by: kathleen at March 15, 2011 04:23 PM (Huxg6)

339 Ace,

When you posted thread were you honestly interested in hearing others point of view or were you looking to pick a fight?

Posted by: Serious Cat at March 15, 2011 04:24 PM (bAySe)

340 I'm an agnostic on Palin but I will say there are people who wouldn't support Palin even if she came up with a unified field theory because of the font she used in writing her paper. Shows a lack of "smarts" on her part.
Posted by: Dr Spank at March 15, 2011 04:17 PM (1fB+3)

Yup. You've pretty well summed it up.

Posted by: Soona at March 15, 2011 04:24 PM (dFw8Z)

341 >>Much of the early and anonymous sniping at Palin came from McCain
campaign staff and assholes already positioning themselves for 2012.
That was dirty pool, considering what was said.

Agree, I think that's what started this whole war.

Posted by: Dr Spank at March 15, 2011 04:25 PM (1fB+3)

342 Ok, everyone who has ever misspoken or made a typo is hereby dumb. Next?

You asked for *something*. I showed your *something*. Keep on moving those goal posts.....

Posted by: laceyunderalls at March 15, 2011 04:25 PM (pLTLS)

343 I can't make my mind up about Palin. Her voice bugs me [but so did Reagan's sing-song]. The Dancin' with the Stars thing bugged me. I sure don't want to hear from Levi Johnson again. And she's got a lot of enemies. And she talks in sound bites. Yeah, they all do, but her's are worse than others. I don' t think she writes her own longer Twitter pieces.
But the one thing that she has, among all her defects, is courage. Her courage on taking on the old boys inAlaska. Personal courage in thedisabled baby v. abortion. She is the only one that mocks BOon a consistent basis. I sure don't see a lot of that in politics.I put some stock in that. Courage may be the one quality that the US today needs in a leader. Courage isn't a function of resume. A leader can hire and surround himself with "experience."He just needs to be able to sort out the bullshit and make a reasonable decision..
Campaign wise,I think conservatives need someone who [1] is willing to callBO on his lies (and needs to be sharp enough toidentify the lies and [2] articulates policies which voters can recognize as plausible solutions to the fiscal lunacy. So far, in my book, she's the only one doing it. Although it isdisturbing that we've come to the point where Drill Baby Drill is a policy.
And I think it's time for the Obama/Joker posters to come out again. Everywhere.

Posted by: Mr. Barky at March 15, 2011 04:25 PM (qwK3S)

344 If Palin was that horrible the MSM would be pushing her to the front of the GOP line like they did McCain. Nope rons' She's the one they fear. She's the real thing.

Posted by: Oldsailor's poet at March 15, 2011 04:26 PM (oBXlb)

345 Oops, didn't finish that....one more item....didja ever notice when there is some sort of disparity in a standardized test (New Haven firefighters, anyone?) the usual suspects wail about a biased test, which of course libs swallow whole. Ask the lib this: isn't it plainly obvious that the only reason that you never see the perpetually aggrieved losers (NAACP,SPLC..the list goes on) NEVER come up with a test of their own that would prove their point? Shouldn't be hard, or expensive...or for that matter, carefully examine a test before it's even administered to anyone, because apparently they can spot racism under a rock a mile away. Simple...they don't want to rule out a biased test, because then there would be no one to accuse, and no one to sue for money or preferences. Game Over. Watch liberal head go POOF.

Posted by: model_1066 at March 15, 2011 04:27 PM (VnECg)

346 I'm not looking for misuse of words. GWB did that, and we thought it was petty when the left brought it up then.

I'm not looking for out-and-out falsehoods like she wrote the answers on her hand. That's a bunch of bullshit and the truth is a matter of public record.

I want something that she said or wrote where she was trying to be substantive and smart and failed miserably. As in, she got it completely wrong and had no business opening her mouth from a position of such ignorance.

I'm not saying it's not out there, but I want to see it before I understand this "she needs to prove she's not an idiot" point of view. From where I'm standing, people are concentrating on how she says things, not what she's actually saying.

Posted by: grognard at March 15, 2011 04:27 PM (NS2Mo)

347 Sarah Palin does not have a crease in her pants. She's such a rube she doesn't even wear pants.

Posted by: David Frum at March 15, 2011 04:27 PM (MMC8r)

348 I see a lot of opinion, and very little fact here. And you want to be taken seriously?
Really. Watching her fire 5 shots through a malfunctioning rifle at a Caribou signified intelligence, compassion and a sense of leadership to you?
That's not opinion. That's her displaying her lack of bona-fides for what she claims to be an integral part of her nature.
I can't forgive that. I have zero respect for her after seeing that. Zero.
It is a vivid display that she's not fit to be President.
You are correct, though, the crib notes were for a speech where she mocked Obama's use of a teleprompter...much smarter.
My bad.

Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 04:28 PM (MGC3K)

349 343
Ok, everyone who has ever misspoken or made a typo is hereby dumb. Next?

You asked for *something*. I showed your *something*. Keep on moving those goal posts.....

Posted by: laceyunderalls at March 15, 2011 04:25 PM (pLTLS)
Ok, I'll count it then. Anything else, or should we disqualify her because of this?

Posted by: grognard at March 15, 2011 04:29 PM (NS2Mo)

350 Ace,

It's fine that you won't support Palin in the primary. It's our playoff system and everyone has their favorites they want to push. That's perfectly fine.

I'm confused about your position. Are you fine with her running and you just prefer another candidate or you don't want her to run at all?

I can respect the former but not the latter. If Palin is incapable of convincing primary voters that she should be the nominee then that ends it. But if she can persuade voters then she earned that nomination. Same holds true for any candidate who runs. If your fear is that she wins the nom but loses the general well, frankly what does that say about he other candidates? Teams don't get to the Superbowl by hoping their playoff opponent doesn't show up. If one thinks Daniels or Barbour is the better candidate in the general well they'll have to prove they can beat Palin or anybody else.
As to her poll numbers now and retail skills, dude, she has to campaign for something! Right now she's not running for anything. And the other guys look good bc they're not being contrasted against another candidate. What happens if Daniels gets out on the trail and sticks his foot in his mouth every other interview? You think his numbers will hold? What if Palin runs a disciplined campaign? Won't her numbers change?
I don't know why we're pissing ourselves over who is or isn't running yet. Let's see how it goes. It's an exhausting road to Nov 2012 and a shitload could happen between now and then.

I mean, what the hell am I supposed to do with this free box of Guiliani vs Clinton buttons?

Posted by: Sarah Palin at March 15, 2011 04:29 PM (qgbCd)

351 305
Being honest, good-hearted, and realistic is more important than being
"smart", in my view. Especially when you're dealing with an elected
representative. Their advisors can be smart; the bureaucrats and
think-tank wonks can be smart. I want someone who is grounded, has some
common sense, and doesn't lie reflexively when asked an unexpected
question.

Amen

Posted by: MarkC at March 15, 2011 04:29 PM (yPPVC)

352 Right, because JDs never get elected president.

I don't think W. or Reagan had a JD degree. Before that you'd probably have to go back to Lyndon Johnson. We do seem to want to elect generals or lawyers as President, though.

Posted by: Monty at March 15, 2011 04:29 PM (4Pleu)

353 I want her to be smart

At this point she could go get an IQ test and register a 160 or a 90 it wouldn't change my *ahem* feelings about her. I think she is in practical terms, smart enough for the job of the Presidency and would do a good job, an needed job, executing it. But...

She made a politically untennable decision to resign her governorship. And while that decision may have been politically beneficial for the conservative movement, it will be impossible to defend to the squish a decision to resign an executive post in order to play politics. There is simply no good way to answer that question. The best answer is that she is a conservative ideologue who saw a better opportunity to forward her ideology if she resigned.

Otherwise she simply quit and abandoned her constituency.
Or she was hounded from office by political pressure she could not effectively combat so leaving was a good idea for the constituency.

Neither one of those sell Palin as Presidential material. Admitting she is a ruthless ideologue will not get her elected while Barry sits above 30% approval.

So unless Barry's approval tanks. I simply cannot support her for the nomination.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose at March 15, 2011 04:29 PM (0q2P7)

354 The rifle was malfunctioning? I thought the scope was off.

Posted by: Dr Spank at March 15, 2011 04:29 PM (1fB+3)

355 I want her to be smart. if she's not smart, no support from me. Smart is as smart does. Socialized medicine is NOT smart. It's fucking idiotic.
Repealing socialized medicine is smart. If Palin is for repealing socialized medicine rather than implementing it, then she is smarter than you're average Harvard grad.
Drilling in ANWR is a smart thing to do. Building absolutely nothing anywhere near anything and starving the US economy of energy is not smart.
I couldn't give a rat's ass if she knows how to spell bourgeoisor not.
And that is where your second-guessing of ulterior motives comes to fore, as well as your shibboleths.
What's the criteria for being smart or demonstrating intellectual aptitude? What sort of sign is she expected to toss to signal that's she part of the 'smart' tribe?
Some say she's done that, others say she has not - because they're looking for different signals.
For me - 9 out of 10 politicians are (objectively, IMO) dumber than a fucking eggplant.
The only question is whether she's legitimate or lying. If she's legit, she's gonna raise the average IQ, whether she does it in an 'intellectual' fashion or not.
If she's lying, it's just more of the same with no change.
But if you're looking for different signals from her, you ought expect to be called out by some and asked why you privledge certain signals or certain groups or ideas of what would constitute smart. And when you've done that, do fully expect at least 10%-50% of the people to call you names no matter what you say.
But, that's where the "Good ole boys" club vs. arriviste may find plenty of fair purchase. What's the shibboleth for 'smart'?
And by exclusion, who will you mass-label as stupid - so stupid as to be unfit for political office; a job currently held by sub-retards, rapists, thieves and senile puppets who can't balance a check book betwixt 500 of them?

Posted by: Entropy at March 15, 2011 04:30 PM (IsLT6)

356 There were only two weeks during the campaign of 2008 that Obama was not leading. Those were the two weeks after McCain introduced Sarah to America. Those two weeks scared the libs, and lots of them are scared now. The best thing they have going for them is the antipathy of Repubs to Sarah. They know it is the only way to defeat her. To turn the Repubs against her.

Posted by: chillin the most at March 15, 2011 04:30 PM (6IV8T)

357 'I want something that she said or wrote where she was trying to be substantive and smart and failed miserably. As in, she got it completely wrong and had no business opening her mouth from a position of such ignorance.'

IOW something resembling a typical day in the Obama administration.

Posted by: kathleen at March 15, 2011 04:30 PM (Huxg6)

358 I support Palin because of her proven track record. She cleaned up Alaska and I am convinced she will clean up Washington or at least try. None of the other candidates from both parties would even take a stab at this issue. They all like big government and cronyism. They are all elites or wanna-be elites. None of them have the country's best interest at heart. They all want power.Maybe she does too but she won't fold due to the media and dim criticsm and out and out lies. She has proven that too.Some say she is not electabe. Well, I can tell you that none of the other republican candidates can win either. So where does that leave us?

Posted by: BarbaraS at March 15, 2011 04:30 PM (DB3Aa)

359 Posted by: laceyunderalls at March 15, 2011 04:25 PM (pLTLS)

What you showed was something that a) virtually everyone has done at some point- if not as publicly and b) became widely accepted as part of pop-culture pretty quickly. So I'm not seeing how that's "dumb." Or, as I believe Grognard was trying to point out, it's no more dumb than saying "Nuk-u-lar" instead of "Nuclear" or any other number of gaffe's either of the Bushes made- let alone Barky.

If GW Bush is the measure of "smart" (per ace), then show something Palin has done that is more dumb than anything GWB ever did.

How's that for a solid goal-post?

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) at March 15, 2011 04:30 PM (8y9MW)

360 What are we ever going to argue about if Palin doesn't run (and personally, I don't thinks she will)?

Posted by: Mallamutt at March 15, 2011 04:30 PM (OWjjx)

361 349, So Garret, if Palin wins the primary you will vote for Obama? You won't vote? Because whomever wins the GOP primary will get a check from me. Even the POS Hucksterby.

Posted by: Oldsailor's poet at March 15, 2011 04:30 PM (oBXlb)

362 Yay! I get to be poster #330 or something. @ssholes! Why did you all dive into this water like Palin pirahnas?

Oh, I know ... because there's just something about that girl. Well this is what Rush claims he doesn't get. I agree with Ace that Palin should be critiqued without all the subtext reasoning and that she does tend to "narrowcast" her message, as Ace puts it.

But here's why there is something to Limbaugh's shibboleth argument: the vitriol against Palin is completely outside of the rational domain. It began before she really even had fans. It continues unabated no matter what she says or does. There simply has to bee a "meta" compoenent to it. My argument is that she is an archetype -- an image of some kind of alpha female that triggers something primitive and deep in the psyche of most liberals, especially women liberals.

Maybe it's the fact that she's good looking. How dare a good-looking woman be able to speak such unspeakable things? Why, she criticized Obama! Obama, I say!

Maybe it's the fact that she's from the last frontier in America, a land defined by new frontiers. She's too loose, too free, too unencumbered by the baroque carvings of Old America.

Whatever it is, it is meta-rational. The rational part, that is, whether or not she has good policy ideas, is articulate enough, whatever, are all valid and need dissection. But don't, Ace, confuse this with 90% of the reaction on both sides about Palin. She is beyond all that.

I like her and I like her anti-elitist message. It resonates with me, a guy who has been the underdog most of his life. But more than that, I love seeing the frenzy it drives the libs into ... and the elitist, country club, blue blood Repubs. Keep it up, Sarah. It's good for the soul of this nation.

Posted by: MaxMBJ at March 15, 2011 04:31 PM (6SIms)

363 >>>>She cleaned up Alaska and I am convinced she will clean up Washington or at least try
She sure did!

Posted by: Senator Liza Madcowsky at March 15, 2011 04:31 PM (OWjjx)

364 #332, don't get me wrong, I TOTALLY get why a lot of people love Palin AND Allen West, and Michele Bachmann, and Marco Rubio, etc. I did not say ALL men love Palin because she is hot. But I can't count the number of posts I saw on several conservative blogs, and still do, that simply slobber over Palin's cans, or her legs, or simply her overall physical beauty. I continue to find this revolting, and sexist in its own way. Palin of all people would not want anyone to support her as a candidate simply because they want to look at her tits or have a private Sexy Schoolteacher fantasy at home.
I love that she is beautiful and proud of her womanhood; it is actually the thing I find MOST appealing about her. She is a one-woman response to 40 years of feminist jackassery. But that doesn't mean I think she should be President.

Posted by: rockmom at March 15, 2011 04:32 PM (w/gVZ)

365 Its ABO for me. Anybody but Odumbass. I don't like the attacks of she's not smart, simply because that is always the first line of attack that liberals use against repub candidates. Plus it will seem hypocritical to support her in the general, if thats the case. Maybe say inarticulate on issues or inexperienced nationally or superficial...but the not smart line is kind of shibboleth.

as the psycho says, its about WINNING.

Posted by: Guy Fawkes at March 15, 2011 04:32 PM (qqrPQ)

366 What kills me is how many men support Palinsimply because they think she is hot and has a nice rack.

And a a lot of women don't support Palin because she is hot and has a nice rack (aka jealousy)

Posted by: JC at March 15, 2011 04:32 PM (8wYse)

367 Right, because JDs never get elected president.

Uh, I think you missed the point.

And grognard, perhaps you should ask yourself why her hardest hitting interview since the election has been with Greta Van Sustren.

If she wants to give the impression she's not a dumbass, she needs to venture outside the world of Fox. And mainly Sean Hannity.

Posted by: laceyunderalls at March 15, 2011 04:32 PM (pLTLS)

368 Ironically, I learned the origin and meaning of shibboleth from President Jed Bartlet on the West Wing.

Posted by: Holdfast at March 15, 2011 04:33 PM (Gzb30)

369 I still can't see how Obama has a prayer to be re-elected no matter who the GOP candidate is.

1. If our base is unmotivated by a weak candidate.

2. If the Democrats are motivated by the circus that a Palin candidacy would mean.

We want somebody exciting enough to appeal to independents, yet boring enough to make Democrats stay home, and preferably someone with the kind of experience that makes the case that Obama is in over his head.

That's why I like Huntsman. He is telegenic, was elected twice as governor in a very red state, and he has foreign policy experience. The biggest strike he has against him is that Obama appointed him as ambassador to China partly because he was a political rival and also because he was qualified. Neither of those sound like bad things to most people.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at March 15, 2011 04:34 PM (mHQ7T)

370 >>>>If she wants to give the impression she's not a dumbass, she needs to venture outside the world of Fox. And mainly Sean Hannity.
But lacey, your still A GREAT AMERICAN!

Posted by: Sean Hannity at March 15, 2011 04:34 PM (OWjjx)

371 >>If she wants to give the impression she's not a dumbass, she needs to venture outside the world of Fox. And mainly Sean Hannity.

I believe she has, it's just doesn't fit the narrative and therefore not news.

Posted by: Dr Spank at March 15, 2011 04:34 PM (1fB+3)

372 And a a lot of women don't support Palin because she is hot and has a nice rack (aka jealousy

Aww, I skipped a lot of comments. Please tell me it didn't take until #367 to hear this rubbish. I'd be sad if that were the case.

Posted by: laceyunderalls at March 15, 2011 04:34 PM (pLTLS)

373 368
"Uh, I think you missed the point."

No, I think the point was lame.

Posted by: kathleen at March 15, 2011 04:35 PM (Huxg6)

374 Does anyone think Romney can win? I would have a harder time voting for him than I did McCain. I would have voted for McCain holding my nose, butafter Palingave her speech at t RNCI voted gladly but I voted for her not him.

Posted by: BarbaraS at March 15, 2011 04:35 PM (DB3Aa)

375 Posted by: laceyunderalls at March 15, 2011 04:32 PM (pLTLS)

That, again, is factually inaccurate. She's been on other interviews "since the election," and a list has been posted here at the HQ several times (I'm sure a PalinBot will post it anytime now, in fact).

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) at March 15, 2011 04:35 PM (8y9MW)

376 So now we have the 'wounded caribou' litmus test. Special.

Posted by: nickless at March 15, 2011 04:35 PM (MMC8r)

377 I guess that's the main difference between us, ace. I just don't find abstract "smarts" all that appealing. Plenty of very smart people are also complete assholes, and being smart doesn't stop them from doing very stupid things (a point which becomes painfully apparent in the current Administration).Smart people are prone to far more mistakes than less-gifted people, I think, because they overestimate their ability to influence things. And they overestimate their own capacity for mistakes and for failure.Being honest, good-hearted, and realistic is more important than being "smart", in my view. Especially when you're dealing with an elected representative. Their advisors can be smart; the bureaucrats and think-tank wonks can be smart. I want someone who is grounded, has some common sense, and doesn't lie reflexively when asked an unexpected question.I'm not saying we should elect a complete dullard; I'm just saying that abstract "smarts" isn't even in the top five qualities I'd be looking for in a good chief executive. (Or rather: someone who exhibits the other qualities I'm looking for would be smart enough as a side-effect.)"

That might be the stupidest thing I've ever read. We're talking about the President of the United States of America - the most important, powerful position in the world, and 'smarts' isn't in your top five qualities?

It isn't in your top five qualities because you're a fucking idiot and you need someone to relate to.

Posted by: squirrelio at March 15, 2011 04:35 PM (8UlnD)

378 >>> It depends on your gripe with Palin. Often, she is criticized for things that male politicians get a pass on. Rick Santorum can make a sexist comment, and she will be attacked for defending herself

That's bullshit. Santorum was attempting to make excuses for her -- why she wasn't doing the stuff politicians generally do, like, LET ME SAY IT, appearing somewhere for FREE.

She wasn't showing up at CPAC, he attempted to give non-insulting reasons for this, but of course the thin-skinned Palin camp had to immediately cry "sexist! I'm a victim again!" and make a big deal about it.

I never really liked that whole "lipstick on a pig" sexist charge on Obama. I thought it was weak. I didn't mind making it, because anything to attack Obama is fine with me; but it did seem very ticky-tacky to me, very... straining to find offense.

At this point, since this appears to be Palin's preferred mode of engagement (everyone who criticizes me has mean reasons for doing so -- bush family, "blue bloods," Santorum, sexist, etc.) I'm pretty well convinced that this was Palin's idea, this whole lipstick on a pig offensive.

It just seems to me she has an unhealthy belief in the power of this line of attack. At the end of the day, the public really doesn't give a shit about what attacks are unfair. They want to hear what you're going to do, how you're going to improve the country. All these precious free media moments spent on this trivial bullshit like lipstick on a pig, blue bloods, people-just-want-to-protect-the-Old-Boys-Club, Santorum sexist, etc.

This stuff indicates to me a crude sort of mind that's in its comfort zone in personal, dumb terms.

Maybe that's an erroneous conclusion, but when I keep hearing this sort of trivial silly shit emanating from her camp I check out, big-time.

Posted by: ace at March 15, 2011 04:36 PM (nj1bB)

379 Really. Watching her fire 5 shots through a malfunctioning rifle at a
Caribou signified intelligence, compassion and a sense of leadership to
you?

Her old man was telling her it was sighted in, and it wasn't. She respected her old man. The animal didn't bolt, so she took more shots. It wasn't a dangerous situation with a malfunctioning rifle. When it was obvious that it wasn't sighted in, she took a shot with the family friend's rifle and dropped it with one shot.

Jesus, you really grasp at straws, don't you? What was she supposed to do, shoot and then give up because the rifle wasn't sighted in properly, after one shot?

And who the fuck are you, anyway? Your bonafides are more genuine than her, her father, and the family friend who went with them, who have lived there for decades? Christ, maybe you should run for President.

Fuck, we need someone who knows when to switch rifles as our litmus test. You arrogant fuck.

You are correct, though, the crib notes were for a speech where she mocked Obama's use of a teleprompter...much smarter.
My bad.
Yeah, if it were index cards or a teleprompter, that would have been ok, but notes on her hand? How gauche.Elitist fuck.

Posted by: grognard at March 15, 2011 04:36 PM (NS2Mo)

380 Whoever automatically thinks that SMART=GOOD LEADER is a tool. I'm not saying dumber is better, but leadership qualities include knowing your limits and knowing who to listen to and who to ignore. Obama=exhibit A.

Posted by: model_1066 at March 15, 2011 04:36 PM (VnECg)

381 There were only two weeks during the campaign of 2008 that Obama was not leading. Those were the two weeks after McCain introduced Sarah to America. Those two weeks scared the libs, and lots of them are scared now. The best thing they have going for them is the antipathy of Repubs to Sarah. They know it is the only way to defeat her. To turn the Repubs against her.
Posted by: chillin the most at March 15, 2011 04:30 PM (6IV8T)

That's why I like these posts. It always brings out the coastie RINO's and the squishes who would rather have a GOP candidate that's just a little bit less leftist than Dear Leader.

Posted by: Soona at March 15, 2011 04:36 PM (dFw8Z)

382 The Palin Effect is a two-edged sword, really--the same thing that makes her such an effective weapon against the Left resonates back on us, probably because of the amount of Leftishness that crept into 'our own' ranks while we slept for the last several decades.
As to 'she can't win'--well, last I checked, it was an open question whether any of the likely candidates could, on their own. And I am forced to note that this is largely because of the massive dishonesty in the media these days, which makes it difficult to tell how legitimate the argument is, for any candidate.
That said, my view remains that, electability aside, putting her in the race again would be a waste of a fine Weapon of Mass Disruption to use against the Left. With a decent candidate, you could create a lethal one-two punch. (Repeating her in the VP slot with a strong candidate for the top spot might well create an unstoppable combo, if we can actually handle it right instead of the idiocy we all saw in '08.)

Posted by: DarkLord's got your tinkle on your leg right here! at March 15, 2011 04:36 PM (GBXon)

383 I like her and I like her anti-elitist message. It resonates with me, a guy who has been the underdog most of his life. But more than that, I love seeing the frenzy it drives the libs into ... and the elitist, country club, blue blood Repubs. Keep it up, Sarah. It's good for the soul of this nation.
Posted by: MaxMBJ at March 15, 2011 04:31 PM (6SIms)
That's the best reason to support her. She is a heroine to many middle-class Americans, because she gets us, in a way that the other would-be candidates simply don't seem to. That is really, really important.
And she sure does piss off all the right people....but as Ace points out, that doesn't get you elected President. You really can't piss off too many people if you want to win.

Posted by: rockmom at March 15, 2011 04:37 PM (w/gVZ)

384 How's that for a solid goal-post?

Sorry, not so much.

Maybe some think it's charming and whimsical she writes on her hand and takes to Twitter to refudiate what they have to say in the media, I however, do not.

But again, if she's merely a rabble rouser (the good kind) and not a serious contender for higher office than have it Mrs. Palin.

Posted by: laceyunderalls at March 15, 2011 04:37 PM (pLTLS)

385 She resonates with a lot of people, especially rural whites and suburban
middle-class folks of all walks of life. She's vivacious, attractive,
and friendly.

That statement cracks me up. Where it IS for the most part, true, it's in pure contrast to our current president whom was elected because he's black. No one had anything resonate with anything other than they thought he was going to institute immediate socialism ("I don't have to pay my mortgage no more!!") and was black.

Posted by: � Sponge at March 15, 2011 04:38 PM (UK9cE)

386 From Brian72 - THIS. <blockquote> 58 I can see where you are coming from here. Myself, being someone favorably disposed to Sarah Palin for my own reasons, which are based on the actual things she has done, the why and how of it as well, combined with a basic impression of her character and values, my reasons are often dismissed as talking points fed to me by Palin's PR team and replaced with some variation of quot;you hate smart people and you are so dumb you are hypnotized by a pretty face and a great set of legs.quot; As you say, this is the exact same phenomenon in reverse from the rabid Palin-dislikers. I find it infuriatingly insulting, and the actual points to be made are now irrelevant because the jerkiness of the other person becomes the primary topic of conversation. This displays the complete non-interest, even refusal, to consider anything factual about Palin's record or personality I find positive and want to talk about. It is all the result of me being brainwashed by a pretty lady with nice legs, therefore rendering everything I say, no matter how true, as the product of my own gullibility, not a substantive position to hold. Consider, Ace, that this type of dysfunctional discussion is a two-way street.</blockquote>Exactly.

Posted by: YFS at March 15, 2011 04:38 PM (3BeL9)

387 >>> Does anyone think Romney can win? I would have a harder time voting for him than I did McCain.

Unlikely to win the nomination; against Obama, he has a fair chance, just because he's so blandly acceptable.

he's not a great candidate, but yeah, I think he could win. I think he'd be somewhat weak-ish though.

full disclosure, I have moved most of my eggs to the TIm Pawlenty basket and am currently praying that he can overcome his own deficiencies-- chief of which is that he just doesn't come off like a serious alpha-dog type guy. A superficial flaw but nonetheless a serious one.

Posted by: ace at March 15, 2011 04:38 PM (nj1bB)

388 Jeez. Sorry about that.

Posted by: YFS at March 15, 2011 04:38 PM (3BeL9)

389 And by that, I am in no way implying that Obama is anywhere near smart...his only talent is exploiting white liberal guilt.

Posted by: model_1066 at March 15, 2011 04:39 PM (VnECg)

390 Hit count must be down, a Palin post.

Here is what I think this post misses - animus. You can focus on shibboleth and make fun of the way it is used metaphorically by attacking the thing it is being compared to rather than the actual thing. That's like if someone said, I don't like the circus that is politics, and then someone else said, yeah, right, because there are too many people on the golldamned trapeze!!!!

The actual thing is animus. Which isn't a metaphor. I can understand why someone would say "I don't think Sarah Palin should be President." I can't understand why someone would say "I can't stand Sarah Palin." The people on the Left who hate her, I mean, hate her, like they will spend a whole month explicitly not talking about her hate her, I know they disagree, but I have to think that they hate her for some other reason than they disagree with her. Something else is going on. Because of something Tina Fey said? Really? I don't buy it. I know why the Left hates her. They hate her because she's a threat to them. Hell, they don't agree with Mitch Daniels any more than they do Sarah Palin, but no one is camping out next door to him, or Mike Huckabee, or Tim Pawlenty. What do they say when they are asked why they hate her? She's stooopid!!!! Really? Dumber than Anthony Weiner or that guy who worried about Guam flipping over, or Harry fricking Reid? Really? That's why the hate, why they have to kick her kid off of DWTS, and call the girl fat, or send death threats to her parents?

The people on the right who express animus are no different. If you want to say Sarah's not my first choice I like Mitt or Pawlenty or Rubio or whoever else, that's fine, that's why we have politics. But if you say the same damn thing the Lefties say - she's just not smart - and ACE YOU HAVE SAID IT - then you have to wonder what the *real* reason is. I heard John Fund on the radio describe Michelle Bachmann as Sarah Palin with a tax law degree - wonder why there might be people who think that there are those on the right who look down their nose at Palin's state school education.

And the same people HATED Reagan, too. Will was no Reaganite at the beginning, when it mattered. Why was that?

Not wanting to go all Randian, but when things don't add up, you have to check your premises. I get the practical "she's just too polarizing argument," even if I don't agree with it. But what's with the she's not that smart stuff? You tell me.

Posted by: blaster at March 15, 2011 04:40 PM (l5dj7)

391 Posted by: squirrelio at March 15, 2011 04:35 PM (8UlnD)
I've read a lot of Monty's posts. I think you would do well to keep your mouth shut and let people think YOU are an idiot, rather than open it and remove all doubt.

Posted by: Dog 'O' Madness at March 15, 2011 04:40 PM (OlN4e)

392 The last timeI had heard or seen "shibboleth" used when Bawney Fwank said the questioning of the soundness of Fannie and Freddie was a shib-o-wif of conservatives
..

Posted by: beedubya at March 15, 2011 04:40 PM (AnTyA)

393 What kills me is how many men support Palinsimply because they think she is hot and has a nice rack.The fact that she is hot and has a nice rack is every bit as important as how good Obozo looksin swimming trunks - that is, not very important at all, except that people tend to gravitate to attractive candidates, don't they? Add her resume as a leader to the package, and she's a great candidate, certainly stronger than Obama.
That's why the media's job#1 is to neutralize her.

Posted by: sherlock at March 15, 2011 04:40 PM (JYBAr)

394
The woman has some serious snark.

How exactly is that Presidential?

Maybe I'm old school and not hip to the new ways. I don't get how taking to Twitter makes one look like a serious individual.

Do U C my pt?

Posted by: laceyunderalls at March 15, 2011 04:21 PM (pLTLS)
Fer Chrissakes -- the MFM ate up Obama's "I won" snark.

Posted by: Ed Anger at March 15, 2011 04:41 PM (7+pP9)

395 Poll average from RCP.
Huck 19.7%
Mitt 18.9%
Palin 15.9%

So, less than a four percentage point swing means unelectable?

Posted by: Sarahs With Me at March 15, 2011 04:41 PM (MWXXs)

396 I sure cleaned up that giant fucking rail ofblow off the toilet tank lid! Did you see that motherfucker?!?
WEEEEEEEOOOOOOOWWWWWWW!!!!

Posted by: Lisa Morecokeski at March 15, 2011 04:41 PM (M70T8)

397 >>>>I have moved most of my eggs to the TIm Pawlenty basket and am currently praying that he can overcome his own deficiencies-- chief of which is that he just doesn't come off like a serious alpha-dog type guy. A superficial flaw but nonetheless a serious one.
And he is boring as all get up. And I question his ability to fundraise. Raising jack to run in Minnesota is one thing. At the national level, its entirely different. And Pawlenty has issues with Global Warming. What I think may help Pawlenty is that he may be the second choice for a lot of folks.

Posted by: Mallamutt at March 15, 2011 04:41 PM (OWjjx)

398 I'm not sure you can refudiate this point.
Posted by: laceyunderalls at March 15, 2011 04:22 PM (pLTLS)
Funny. That's actually considered a new word, now.

Posted by: Steph at March 15, 2011 04:42 PM (AkdC5)

399 At comment #370 or so, I don't expect anyone to read this. Anyway, if you do, I suggest saying the following when discussing anything with a liberal:
"Why do you hate poor people so much?"
Because they do. They prefer feel good, self-righteous sanctimony over the actual lives of others. Call them on it. And don't back off.
Our consciences don't always tell us to stop when we are indignant on behalf ofothers, as opposed to ourselves. Logic doesn't work. The only way to reach them is to directly call them on it. Oh, and stay calm while you do it. That's important too.

Posted by: Chestertonrocks! at March 15, 2011 04:42 PM (mUoDM)

400 Whenever I see Palin on TV, which is fairly often on Fox, she's always discussing substantive policy. I never see her bitching about the Bush family or Santorum. Ever. It might very well be, Ace, that you're focusing on marginal stuff, which would tie in with Rush's "irrational" meme nicely. Maybe you just want to sit with that for a while.

Posted by: kathleen at March 15, 2011 04:42 PM (Huxg6)

401 355 The rifle was malfunctioning? I thought the scope was off.
Posted by: Dr Spank at March 15, 2011 04:29 PM (1fB+3)
Didnt that gun take a drop or something? Good for scope alignment I hear.

Posted by: Red Shirt at March 15, 2011 04:43 PM (FIDMq)

402 Aww, I skipped a lot of comments. Please tell me it didn't take until
#367 to hear this rubbish. I'd be sad if that were the case.

So men only support Palin because she's hot is not rubbish to you - but stating the very real fact that feminists are jealous of her is just outrageous. Typical irrational Palin hatred.

Posted by: JC at March 15, 2011 04:43 PM (8wYse)

403 Meh, right now I like Palin in the primary. Until the other guys say anything worth getting excited over I'm sticking with her.

So F U GOP, Inc. Your brand still blows.

Posted by: TexMex at March 15, 2011 04:43 PM (qgbCd)

404 Maybe some think it's charming and whimsical she writes on her hand and takes to Twitter to refudiate what they have to say in the media, I however, do not. But
again, if she's merely a rabble rouser (the good kind) and not a
serious contender for higher office than have it Mrs. Palin. Posted by: laceyunderalls at March 15, 2011 04:37 PM (pLTLS)

But I didn't ask that - I asked what she's said or written that is dumb.

I know plenty of smart people who made notes on their hand. That's a pretty subjective dig. I know plenty of smart people who type "alot" or mix up "their" and "there."

I'm looking for something dumb that disqualifies her for the job, not a brain fart that everyone gets from time to time that we tease our friends about.

The point about Hannity is a good one, but she's done other events and written other things too. Did she say or write anything dumb?

Or is it just the way she says it?

Posted by: grognard at March 15, 2011 04:44 PM (NS2Mo)

405 Yikes! 30 comments posted in the time it took me to type in my last comment. Glad everyone's awake.

Posted by: Chestertonrocks! at March 15, 2011 04:44 PM (mUoDM)

406
This thread makes me sad.

Posted by: Serious Cat at March 15, 2011 04:45 PM (bAySe)

407 okay so I left to get a bite and have no clue what's happened since I left but I checked out the latest comments and found one interesting:
Posted by: Sarahs With Me at March 15, 2011 04:41 PM (MWXXs)
i'm afraid that's polling among Reps in the primary, our concerns on electability are based on the general election polls

Posted by: YRM at March 15, 2011 04:45 PM (UzBwz)

408 So F U GOP, Inc. Your brand still blows.

Cut. That's a wrap.!!

Posted by: Sarahs With Me at March 15, 2011 04:45 PM (MWXXs)

409 What kills me is how many men support Palinsimply because they think she is hot and has a nice rack.
That's unfair. We wouldn't support Carmen Electra. The fact that good looks helps garner votes has been a big factor in politics mostly since hmmm about 1920. Harding anyone? So bite me!

Posted by: MikeTheMoose at March 15, 2011 04:45 PM (0q2P7)

410 Bush was a self conscious speaker. Probably born that way and it's too late to address that late in life. When he went 'off script' I found it painful, even when I agreed with him.
I think what would make everyone happy is if Palin isn'tthe nominee but who she chooses is (her endorsement, assuming she makes one at some point). And that's probably how it will go.

Posted by: East Bay Jay at March 15, 2011 04:45 PM (ocHBO)

411 Yikes! 30 comments posted in the time it took me to type in my last comment. Glad everyone's awake.
Posted by: Chestertonrocks! at March 15, 2011 04:44 PM (mUoDM)
You bet your sweet fucking ass I'm awake!!!!!!!

Posted by: Lisa Morecokeski at March 15, 2011 04:46 PM (M70T8)

412 My face is itchy!!! MY FACE IS ITCHY!!!!!!!!

Posted by: Lisa Morecokeski at March 15, 2011 04:46 PM (M70T8)

413 Posted by: TexMex at March 15, 2011 04:43 PM (qgbCd)
if she loses in the primary will you hold your nose and vote for the alternative?

Posted by: YRM at March 15, 2011 04:46 PM (UzBwz)

414 Who do you want sitting across from putin? A woman that would slit an elks gut and pull out the innards, or a beta male with a fresh manicure.

It all seems so basic to me. Scot Walker, no college degree, handles his business like no other recent Governor.

It's all about what you want. I want my CIA to do some killin, I want my Military to blow shit up and I don't give a fuck who is there. I want my fucking Dishwashing soap back. I want my fucking lightbulbs back i could go on and on. The way this happens is that someone with courage starts shutting down these oppressive gov. agencies. She is the only one I see with no fear of doing just that.

Posted by: Oldsailor's poet at March 15, 2011 04:47 PM (oBXlb)

415 >>>ut here's why there is something to Limbaugh's shibboleth argument: the vitriol against Palin is completely outside of the rational domain. It began before she really even had fans. It continues unabated no matter what she says or does. There simply has to bee a "meta" compoenent to it. My argument is that she is an archetype -- an image of some kind of alpha female that triggers something primitive and deep in the psyche of most liberals, especially women liberals.

But you're speaking mostly of liberals who reacted viscerally against her for the typical, easily-guessed reasons.

Your argument doesn't address people like Krauthammer, who argued vociferously in her favor in 2008 (Krauthammer wrote the definitive, I think, column on why Palin's "Bush Doctrine" flub wasn't much of a flub, and why Charlie Gibson in fact flubbed it by HIMSELF offering a false defnition of the doctrine).

But Krauthammer has since then fallen well away from being a supporter. Why? Is it just because he hates her in some way? If he hated her, why did he come to her defense as most conservatives did in 2008?

I think Krauthammer's problem with her is mine: I backed her thinking the media attacks were completely untrue- - if she was inexperienced, look at Obama and Biden; if she was dumb, look at Obama and Biden.

I think that stuff is still true -- Obama ain't no genius and Biden is a fucking old crochety retard -- but since then I have been waiting for Palin to demonstrate that she's smart and she just hasn't.

Look, this election will almost certainly be 90% about the economy. A would-be president will have to show a fair amount of familiary and sophistication with economics and numbers. Platitudes about freedom and enterprise are useful but won't be enough -- the candidate needs to show some nuts-and-bolts understanding of how this stuff all works together.

I really need our candidate, whoever it is, to be able to speak about this stuff like a... well, if not an expert, a well-informed autodidact.

You really need that too if you want Obama out of office. Because a candidate who sounds bullshitty, platitudinous, or shaky is just probably not going to win.

Posted by: ace at March 15, 2011 04:47 PM (nj1bB)

416 Like I've said before...it's like Mean Girls around here sometimes. You can't come to the slumber party if you don't hate her too.
I've never really heard a sound, coherent, thoughtful, valid reason for the animus against her...even from our side.
I have said before...she is light years ahead of Ogabe at thiscorresponding point in the cycle, but I don't think she is ready ...yet!!
Ihave had huge handfuls of poo flung at me here simply becauseI have said that much of her drop in approvals has been because of the non-stop attack by the media....and the squishes and RINO.
Shibboleth...it definitely fits

Posted by: beedubya at March 15, 2011 04:47 PM (AnTyA)

417 Sarah Palin is one of my favorite people.

She would make a terrific president.

She is conservative and articulate. Assuming she's no rocket scientist for sake of argument, who cares? You don't have to be to become a great leader.

All that said, I will not support her if I am convinced she cannot win. The media has attempted to destroy her and they may have succeeded. As much as I despise the Huckster, I will vote for him if I must to rid the country of our current socialist president.

I'm not gonna' vote for Palin just to stick a thumb in the MSM's eye.

Posted by: Dave at March 15, 2011 04:48 PM (Xm1aB)

418 Instead of approaching the primaries from a place of fear ("No! Not
Palin! She's unelectable! We'll lose to Obama!"), the right should
approach the primaries from a point of strength, ("We understand these
candidates, we've heard them talk about the issues, and whoever wins
this primary won't be a mystery to us. We're prepared"). Flailing
hysteria is a leftist construct. I hate it when it happens to us.

This is where I am, too. Many of Palin's supporters want to avoid any criticism until she formally announces, but that's not how it's done. Palin has serious flaws, and they should be discussed early and often, so she can prepare herself for the primaries.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at March 15, 2011 04:49 PM (mHQ7T)

419 i'm afraid that's polling among Reps in the primary, our concerns on electability are based on the general election polls

Posted by: YRM at March 15, 2011 04:45 PM (UzBwz)
Gallup has Obumbles tied with generic Republican.http://tinyurl.com/4whu6or

So that doesn't wash with your argument.

Posted by: Sarahs With Me at March 15, 2011 04:49 PM (MWXXs)

420 No, I think the point was lame.

Hmm. We have a different take on the meaning of the word 'lame'.

Lame to me is scouring the nets all day to find *any* mention of Sarah Palin or any other female candidate. You know *those people* that don't comment on any thread other than Sarah Palin or Michelle Bachmann?

Now that's lame.

Posted by: laceyunderalls at March 15, 2011 04:49 PM (pLTLS)

421 >>>. And Pawlenty has issues with Global Warming. What I think may help Pawlenty is that he may be the second choice for a lot of folks.

I think he's walked back from that. He will not be pushing a Global Warming agenda.

Posted by: ace at March 15, 2011 04:49 PM (nj1bB)

422 The war against Palin started the second she finished her speech at the convention. Look at the Journolist entries from then.
It's too bad that so many on our side are so easily influenced by that shit.

Posted by: beedubya at March 15, 2011 04:50 PM (AnTyA)

423 Maybe some think it's charming and whimsical she writes on her hand and takes to Twitter to refudiate what they have to say in the media, I however, do not.
Lacey - I normally agree with you, but here I am going to disagree with you. One nice thing about Palin is her willingness to use new social media to drive a message. The GOP always tends to be behind the time regarding technology. On this, I give her a pass ---- at least she is trying to use social media to drive a message.
On the otherhand, her heavy reliance on using social media I think is a fair criticism.

Posted by: Mallamutt at March 15, 2011 04:51 PM (OWjjx)

424 I think that the nonelitists who support Palin are doing so not out of a tribal desire to get one of their own in office purely out of something akin to ethnic or religious pride but because they no longer trust politicians with elitist backgrounds who proclaim themselves to be conservatives. They don't believe such people are truly conservative when the chips are down.They have been burned by both Bushes. They have no doubt,however,that Palin is a conservative. Right now, the country appears to be at a tipping point and they don't want to risk electing another lukewarm Republican.
I also think that "knowledge workers" or the members of the "creative class"- either left or right-place a higher value on intelligence than the nonelitists when choosing an executive/leader. The Dems ran ostensibly intelligent and "nuanced" candidates like Gore and Kerry against Bush, whom they painted as an idiot frat boy. Bush won in part because he came off as a leader and in fact had much more executive experience. So they don't care that Palin isn't an intellectual. Whenshe is attacked for being dumb, it doesn'tmake sense to them. So what if she doesn't knowwho the ambassador of some trivial country is?They trust her instincts.

Posted by: Matt at March 15, 2011 04:51 PM (ecpMe)

425 Quote the woman, and show me something she's said or written that is dumb. Do it.

She's not dumb. She's borderline retarded. Let's see...25 seconds google...

GIBSON: What insight into Russian actions, particularly in the last couple of weeks, does the proximity of the state give you?

PALIN: They're our next door neighbors and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska.

Well, let's see. There's -- of course -- in the great history of America rulings there have been rulings.

-Sarah Palin Unable to name a Supreme Court decision she disagreed with other than Roe vs. Wade, interview with Katie Couric, CBS News, October 1, 2008.

"I'll try to find you some and I'll bring them to you."

Asked by Katie Couric to cite specific examples of how John McCain has pushed for more regulation in his 26 years in the Senate, CBS News interview, September 24, 2008.

"I told the Congress, 'Thanks, but no thanks,' on that Bridge to Nowhere."

-Sarah Palin

"I'm the mayor, I can do whatever I want until the courts tell me I can't.'"

-Sarah Palin

�They�re in charge of the U.S. Senate so if they want to they can really get in there with the senators and make a lot of good policy changes that will make life better for Brandon and his family and his classroom.�

�Sarah Palin, getting the vice president�s constitutional role wrong after being asked by a third grader what the vice president does, interview with NBC affiliate KUSA in Colorado, Oct. 21, 2008

Posted by: squirrelio at March 15, 2011 04:51 PM (8UlnD)

426 Posted by: laceyunderalls at March 15, 2011 04:37 PM (pLTLS)

Okay... so "writing notes on her hand" (which, IIRC, she didn't actually do) and making up a word (at least, that's what she claimed later, I'll even throw in: screwed up what she meant to say) on twitter make her dumb? But you won't accept as a solid goal-post "Something Dumber that GWB?" Really?

And this, again, goes back to Ace's post: her detractors often (not always) mention something that didn't happen as though it had, or mention some one-off something-or-other (refudiate, seems to be yours- should I point out that English is a living language, and, not too long ago, "access" was something you had, not something you did?) as though she should be massively ashamed of it: but then seem to (don't know if you actually do or not, but it certainly seems that way) dismiss GWB's verbal miscues of the same caliber.

I've been relatively reasonable through nearly (at the time of writing) 400 posts- and even I'm getting to the point where it is hard to believe that some of her detractors have anything against her of substance.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) at March 15, 2011 04:51 PM (8y9MW)

427 >>>I've never really heard a sound, coherent, thoughtful, valid reason for the animus against her...even from our side.

I don't know about "animus" but I have explained why I don't like her. I guess none of my reasons are sound, coherent, thoughtful, or valid.

That's kind of mean, beedubya. Since we're speaking of mean girls and perceived slights.

Posted by: ace at March 15, 2011 04:51 PM (nj1bB)

428 Funny. That's actually considered a new word, now.

See this is a problem. I don't really see this as a good thing.

Posted by: laceyunderalls at March 15, 2011 04:52 PM (pLTLS)

429 Posted by: Sarahs With Me at March 15, 2011 04:49 PM (MWXXs)
okay fair enough point and that is a poll I was well aware of but when a poll known for being 99% right, Rasmussen, comes out w/ a poll that she loses to Obama worse then loony Paul doesit makes me pause

Posted by: YRM at March 15, 2011 04:52 PM (UzBwz)

430 think that stuff is still true -- Obama ain't no genius and Biden is a fucking old crochety retard -- but since then I have been waiting for Palin to demonstrate that she's smart and she just hasn't.

Look, this election will almost certainly be 90% about the economy. A would-be president will have to show a fair amount of familiary and sophistication with economics and numbers. Platitudes about freedom and enterprise are useful but won't be enough -- the candidate needs to show some nuts-and-bolts understanding of how this stuff all works together.

I really need our candidate, whoever it is, to be able to speak about this stuff like a... well, if not an expert, a well-informed autodidact.

Here's another place to check premises - really? She says a lot of stuff that sounds smarter than any dumb shit Biden has ever said, and he adds "gravitas" to Obama on foreign policy.

To say that Palin doesn't speak substantively about stuff is to say you dopn't listen to her, or read her, or care to, either. If you base your whole opinion of Sarah Palin on what soundbite some press a-hole put together, then you might as well be some Leftard protesting in Madison.

Let me put it out there - I am pretty fucking smart. I have an IQ test you wouldn't believe, I graduated in the top third of my class at West Point and have a Master's degree in engineering. I *see* dumb people. And Palin isn't one of them.

Posted by: blaster at March 15, 2011 04:53 PM (l5dj7)

431 "A would-be president will have to show a fair amount of familiary and sophistication with economics and numbers."

Seriously: economic sophistication is what got us into this mess. Try something else, Ace.

Posted by: kathleen at March 15, 2011 04:53 PM (Huxg6)

432 >>>> Ihave had huge handfuls of poo flung at me here simply becauseI have said that much of her drop in approvals has been because of the non-stop attack by the media....and the squishes and RINO.
And all of Sarah Palin's problems are not caused by the media, or squishes, or RINOs. Some of her problems may actually be caused by...wait for it........wait for it.........Sarah Palin.

Posted by: Mallamutt at March 15, 2011 04:54 PM (OWjjx)

433 The idea that men like Palin cuz she's sort of hot is another shib-o-wif
..I luvs me some Liz Cheney...but I would kick her outta bed for eating crackers

Posted by: beedubya at March 15, 2011 04:54 PM (AnTyA)

434 Job #1 is get the Senate, job #2 is Obama.

Let's not bicker about who killed who.

Posted by: Sarahs With Me at March 15, 2011 04:55 PM (MWXXs)

435 What identity politics is she playing? I'm a bit at a loss on it.
She plays the sexism / "elite" cards a lot, as if those who disapprove of her must be doing so because they don't like women or only support Ivy League types.
It has no place in conservative politics, but St. Sarah- the most thin-skinned God ever- plays into it far too often.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at March 15, 2011 04:56 PM (SY2Kh)

436 I will never vote for someone for President that resigned as a Governor.

I will never vote for someone for President that had a reality show.

I will never vote for someone for President that has a focus on identity politics.

Posted by: polynikes at March 15, 2011 04:56 PM (yKP4s)

437 And all of Sarah Palin's problems are not caused by the media, or squishes, or RINOs. Some of her problems may actually be caused by...wait for it........wait for it.........Sarah Palin.
THIS

Posted by: YRM at March 15, 2011 04:56 PM (UzBwz)

438 "A would-be president will have to show a fair amount of familiary and sophistication with economics and numbers."
Fuckin-A...preach it, brother

Posted by: Larry Summers and Christina Roemer at March 15, 2011 04:56 PM (AnTyA)

439 On this, I give her a pass ---- at least she is trying to use social media to drive a message.

Facebook's one thing. One can write coherent paragraphs with proper grammar. Twitter is a whole 'nother beast. Everyone sounds like a 'tard on Twitter. Politicians would imho should use it sparingly.

Posted by: laceyunderalls at March 15, 2011 04:56 PM (pLTLS)

440 Ace by your logic, no deaf person can win the Presidency. Because written word doesn't count.

Posted by: Serious Cat at March 15, 2011 04:57 PM (bAySe)

441
I'll go on record and say that Sarah WILL be the nominee. And that she will subsequently go on to be elected President.

If that proves incorrect, then you all will witness an apology here, from me.

This is going to be my only post on the subject, so you may agree, flame, deride--whatever moves you.

Oh, yeah--GREAT post, Ace, one more reason to keep coming back.

Posted by: irongrampa at March 15, 2011 04:57 PM (ud5dN)

442 "A would-be president will have to show a fair amount of familiary and sophistication with economics and numbers."
I am 3000% in agreement with you

Posted by: Baracky Obama at March 15, 2011 04:57 PM (AnTyA)

443 Posted by: polynikes at March 15, 2011 04:56 PM (yKP4s)
Palin cultists demand you renounce yourself as a conservative...

Posted by: YRM at March 15, 2011 04:57 PM (UzBwz)

444
full disclosure, I have moved most of my eggs to the
TIm Pawlenty basket and am currently praying that he can overcome his
own deficiencies-- chief of which is that he just doesn't come off like a
serious alpha-dog type guy. A superficial flaw but nonetheless a
serious one.

Posted by: ace at March 15, 2011 04:38 PM (nj1bB)
He's an Evangelical. You really want to bring stigma to the election?

/used to think Ace was smart.

Posted by: Ed Anger at March 15, 2011 04:59 PM (7+pP9)

445 Dog 'O' Madness

Why would I give a shit what you think?

Posted by: squirrelio at March 15, 2011 04:59 PM (8UlnD)

446 Posted by: irongrampa at March 15, 2011 04:57 PM (ud5dN)
I remember so many saying I was an idiot to think O'Donell will lose and worrying about Angle....

Posted by: YRM at March 15, 2011 04:59 PM (UzBwz)

447 Ace,

When you say she might not be smart. Do you mean uneducated or unintelligent? Because you can change the former.

Posted by: Serious Cat at March 15, 2011 04:59 PM (bAySe)

448 full disclosure, I have moved most of my eggs to the TIm Pawlenty basket and am currently praying that he can overcome his own deficiencies-- chief of which is that he just doesn't come off like a serious alpha-dog type guy. A superficial flaw but nonetheless a serious one.
Posted by: ace at March 15, 2011 04:38 PM (nj1bB)
What do you think of Pawlenty's comment that he wants to be everyone's candidate? How will that show that he has definitive positions on even one subject? How does that keep him from being anything but a panderer?

Posted by: Steph at March 15, 2011 04:59 PM (AkdC5)

449 And all of Sarah Palin's problems are not caused by the media, or squishes, or RINOs. Some of her problems may actually be caused by...wait for it........wait for it.........Sarah Palin.
You gotta problem with the word "much"?

Posted by: beedubya at March 15, 2011 04:59 PM (AnTyA)

450 Would Palin make a decent Secretary of Energy?
Honest question.

Posted by: Dr. Varno at March 15, 2011 05:00 PM (QMtmy)

451 That might be the stupidest thing I've ever read. We're talking about the President of the United States of America - the most important, powerful position in the world, and 'smarts' isn't in your top five qualities?The POTUS should not be the most important powerful position in the world.
Case in point:
Smart people are prone to far more mistakes than less-gifted people, I think, because they overestimate their ability to influence things. And they overestimate their own capacity for mistakes and for failure.I don't know that I'd endorse that whole hog about 'smart people' being MORE prone to mistakes... but they certainly aren't any less prone, but often think they are.
The preposterous busy-body over-reach of the federal government is a archtypicalsymptom of bunch of self-important jackasses who have no sense oflimitation or respect for theperogatives of others.
It is not suppose to be a position that requires a supergenius of some better cut than the average man. The very idea of having that is anathema to what our government is supposed to be. No supergenius outcompetes spontaneous order, built with the networked power ofhundreds of millions of brains. It is idiotic and historically ignorant arrogance to try.
NO ONE is clever enoughto do well the things the government attempts to do. You do not need to be clever to know you're not that clever, which is the most important thing anyone can know, especially in high office.A much morefatal conceit is the arrogance that leads them to believe this time it is different, as the right people now have the ability and the right. As the great Socrates said, if I am the wisest man in the world, it is because I know only that I know nothing.
The greatest abuses of government are not products of the stupidity or lack of intellect on the part of those governing, but on account of their over-reaching their intelligence - however much it may be. These geniuses we have now are underperforming an eggplant. Because an eggplant wouldn't do anything - and that would be better than what we have. A 12 year old Down's Syndrome child would at least have the sense to not accomplish much of anything. But these geniuses we have now, they're so sure of themselves they all fundementallybelieve that all they have to do is something, anything at all will do,so long as it's notnothing. And then they make things worse, and then they blaim everyone else for it.
What would you endorse... technocracy? Aristocracy? Dumbass ideas, if you ask me sparky. And I'm a fuckin genius. I can provide IQ scores.

Posted by: Entropy at March 15, 2011 05:00 PM (IsLT6)

452 Posted by: laceyunderalls at March 15, 2011 04:56 PM (pLTLS)

Yes, and my Aunt (degree in English, teaches speech and theater in JR High), hates how the language has changed since she was a girl. I think you need to check your bias, here, and make sure your problem isn't one with society in general instead of with Sarah Palin.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) at March 15, 2011 05:00 PM (8y9MW)

453 Hollowpoint - you think Sarah Palin is thin-skinned? I loved President Bush, I think he was a fine and honorable man, but he thought it was wrong to push back on all the crap that was said about him. Not saying he was perfect, but the things that were said that were untrue about him stuck because he wouldn't push back.

Sarah Palin pushes back. Not because she is thin-skinned, but because she doesn't see the honor in laying on the ground and getting her teeth kicked in.

I cannot spare this woman, she fights!

Posted by: blaster at March 15, 2011 05:00 PM (l5dj7)

454 Posted by: squirrelio at March 15, 2011 04:59 PM (8UlnD)
Since you don't give a shit, here is another thought: Your a fucking moby. Now roll that up and tamp it up your little ass.

Posted by: Dog 'O' Madness at March 15, 2011 05:00 PM (OlN4e)

455 >>>>Facebook's one thing. One can write coherent paragraphs with proper grammar. Twitter is a whole 'nother beast. Everyone sounds like a 'tard on Twitter. Politicians would imho should use it sparingly.
And again, if the criticism is she relies upon Twitter too much, that would be a fair criticism. Not sure I agree. But the GOP has to get out of ht eland line era at some point in time.

Posted by: Mallamutt at March 15, 2011 05:01 PM (OWjjx)

456 451 Yes, and secratariot would have made a great plow horse.

Posted by: Oldsailor's poet at March 15, 2011 05:01 PM (oBXlb)

457 See this is a problem. I don't really see this as a good thing.

WTF is your point? What does refudiate have to do with anything. Sometimes I use the wrong "there" when I'm typing fast. Or sometimes I use non existent words (funner). Am I stupid? Does that make me not qualified to ever hold office? What the f*ck does that have to do with anything. She makes a common mistake that virtually every single person on the planet who can write will do - and yet she gets crucified for it.

Posted by: JC at March 15, 2011 05:01 PM (8wYse)

458 C. S. Lewis called it Bulverism: the sudden realization that you do not have to deal with someone's actual arguments if you can discover (or claim) some underlying, non-reasonable idea underlying the other person's idea or opinion. It doesn't matter whether you have support for the opinion or not. All they have to say is, "You only say that because you are a man," which was Lewis' example or "You only say that because you are sexually attracted to her," or even, You only say that because you are a conservative, Democrat, socialist or whatever other label could be applied. It doesn't in our day and age even have to be a legitimate label!
Actually, Rush's explanation of shibboleth is not accurate from a Biblical standpoint; that is only what it's come to connote in modern English. In the Bible, it was mentioned during an internecine war within Israel between the tribe of Ephraim and the Gileadites, mostly. When the Gileadites took a ford that the Ephraimites had to cross to get home after losing a battle, they forced eveyone who wanted to cross to say the word, "Shibboleth." According to the Bible, the Epraimites could only say "Sibboleth," and were summarily dispatched. (See Judges chs 11 & 12.)
It is only in our class-conscious world that it has come to be a means of entry into a group or organization. In the Bible it was used to discover the enemy. You can see how it came to mean what it has, but don't blame that on the Bible. A much more interesting and helpful word is the word "grace."

Posted by: Bill1954 at March 15, 2011 05:01 PM (mZfRk)

459 >>>I think that the nonelitists who support Palin are doing so not out of a tribal desire to get one of their own in office purely out of something akin to ethnic or religious pride but because they no longer trust politicians with elitist backgrounds who proclaim themselves to be conservatives. They don't believe such people are truly conservative when the chips are down. They have been burned by both Bushes. They have no doubt, however, that Palin is a conservative. Right now, the country appears to be at a tipping point and they don't want to risk electing another lukewarm Republican.

True, I get that, but that is a status/creed type argument, of course. Even if what you say is true (and a lot of that is), it's that creed style of argument Will is talking about.

Is that healthy? I don't think so because in the end your evangelism can't be TOO specific, if you know what I mean. Obama's evangelism was very open as to membership -- if you believed in "hope" or "change" (and who doesn't?), you could be in the club.

When Palin starts sounding very much like she's saying that only a particular type of rural, outdoors-oriented, middling-education-level sort of person is a real American or is fit for high office, this necessarily excludes many people from the club, you know?

No one is going to vote for anyone who says that they themselves are INFERIOR. If Palin pushes too hard on the Small Town Rural = Real American sort of vibe, well, people in the suburbs aren't going to vote for her. Because, you know, a vote for her is a vote for the proposition they are inferior.

Not a winning message.

This is Will's point about a message being too specifically creedal that it begins alienating people.

>>>I also think that "knowledge workers" or the members of the "creative class"- either left or right- place a higher value on intelligence than the nonelitists when choosing an executive/leader. The Dems ran ostensibly intelligent and "nuanced" candidates like Gore and Kerry against Bush, whom they painted as an idiot frat boy. Bush won in part because he came off as a leader and in fact had much more executive experience. So they don't care that Palin isn't an intellectual. When she is attacked for being dumb, it doesn't make sense to them.

You are right about the "knowledge class" putting too much emphasis on intelligence. (Or a specific kind of intelligence -- I have a post I keep meaning to write that intelligence can be divided into three different categories -- cunning (animal instinct/gut), cleverness (glib verbal association type intelligence) and true intellect (deep intellect, like scientists, mathematicians, and grandmaster chessplayers have).

The media is of course all about the second type of intelligence, which is really the least interesting and least important sort of intelligence, because THAT'S THE SORT THEY HAVE. (That's what I have, too -- I'm no good on cunning or true, deep intellect.)

That said, there is still a *minimum* threshold of brains of any type that any voter has in mind for a plausible candidate.

I think it is fairly obvious that Palin is failing that threshold test with 65% of the public -- 65% of the public says she's "unqualified" for office, and it is largely over the intelligence question.

Now, I think it is elemental that if she is going to have any shot, she MUST -- not "I would like her to," but she MUST -- overcome that so that AT LEAST 51% of the public think she's "qualified" (largely -- smart enough).

At least 51%. And that would assume that everyone who thinks she's minimally qualified votes for her. Realisticially she needs 60% or more because she's not going to win the vote of everyone who considers her qualified.

You may say that I personally am making too much of this, but "too much of this" is only a meaningful criticism if you can demonstrate that my belief on this point is out-of-skew with the electorate. If the electorate finds her, as she stands, unqualified, then I'm not "making too much" of this -- in fact, I'm making just enough of it.

And the current polling indicates that the public is largely on my side -- that I'm making the right amount of it (or at least ballpark-right).

Posted by: ace at March 15, 2011 05:02 PM (nj1bB)

460
Since you don't give a shit, here is another thought: Your a fucking moby. Now roll that up and tamp it up your little ass.Heh.Moby, eh? No wonder you're a such a moron. You're still using terms from that shitswamp over at LGF - but whatever helps you sleep, sparky.
xxoo

Posted by: squirrelio at March 15, 2011 05:03 PM (8UlnD)

461 Great post, ace. That was a thoughtful exposition on both the etymology of one of the more frequently used buzzwords in political punditry as well as an incisive inspection of the tactics we've all both used and had used against us in attempts to demonize opponents while avoiding truly healthy intellectual engagement that just might show us not how different we are, but how much we share in common...

...this is a Palin thread? My bad...

Ace your a RINO fag LOL!!1!

Posted by: Empire of Jeff at March 15, 2011 05:03 PM (e7n7W)

462 I trust Sarah Palin. I can't say the same about the others.

Posted by: Oldsailor's poet at March 15, 2011 05:04 PM (oBXlb)

463 This is tedious. Give Sullivan the fucking keys.

Posted by: oblig. at March 15, 2011 05:04 PM (xvZW9)

464 The POTUS should not be the most important powerful position in the world.

Yeah, well that's all nice and dandy, but it is.

Posted by: squirrelio at March 15, 2011 05:05 PM (8UlnD)

465 C. S. Lewis called it Bulverism: the sudden realization that you do not have to deal with someone's actual arguments if you can discover (or claim) some underlying, non-reasonable idea underlying the other person's idea or opinion.
Actually, "bulverist" would then be the perfect retort to "raaaaacist!"

Posted by: Dr. Varno at March 15, 2011 05:05 PM (QMtmy)

466 So, to sum up.....

Everyone that likes Palin, still like her.
Everyone that dislikes Palin, still dislike her.
Everyone that is meh on her, is still meh on her.

Same damn results every time....

Posted by: Tami at March 15, 2011 05:05 PM (VuLos)

467 Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther)

My biases.

Let's see....

I was at her 'coming out' debut in Dayton with bells and whistles on. I (stupidly) jumped on her bandwagon much like Obots did with Teh Won without knowing too much about her. I defended her from the relentless attacks leading up to the election.

And the election was over. I still supported her. Bought her books and watched her on Fox. Waited for her to delve a bit deeper into the issues. That never happened...for me. I waited some more. And then I saw another book and a whole lotta family dramarama.

So it took two years for me to get here after a lot of support I tossed her way.

But sure. I'm a *mean girl* with a *bias*..

Nope, has nothing to do with her own actions (and inaction)in turning me off.

Posted by: laceyunderalls at March 15, 2011 05:06 PM (pLTLS)

468

Facebook's one thing. One can write coherent
paragraphs with proper grammar. Twitter is a whole 'nother beast.
Everyone sounds like a 'tard on Twitter. Politicians would imho should
use it sparingly.

Posted by: laceyunderalls at March 15, 2011 04:56 PM (pLTLS)
I heartily agree.

Posted by: Heavily Starched laceyunderalls at March 15, 2011 05:06 PM (7+pP9)

469 Sarah Palin pushes back. Not because she is thin-skinned, but because she doesn't see the honor in laying on the ground and getting her teeth kicked in
Where was it ever written that a politician could not or should not push back?
This is just another media -createdcriticism of Palin.

Posted by: beedubya at March 15, 2011 05:06 PM (AnTyA)

470 467 My Thread Winner!

Posted by: Oldsailor's poet at March 15, 2011 05:06 PM (oBXlb)

471 Whenever I see Palin on TV, which is fairly often on Fox, she's always discussing substantive policy. I never see her bitching about the Bush family or Santorum. Ever. It might very well be, Ace, that you're focusing on marginal stuff, which would tie in with Rush's "irrational" meme nicely. Maybe you just want to sit with that for a while.
Whenever I see her on TV, she's discussing policy in the most banal, unconvincing way. Never anything more insightful than the average AoS commentor, just platitudes.
Last time I saw her she was on Hannity talking about NPR. About all she could come up with (and remember, this was for an anticipated question) was that the O'Keefe tape shows that they're biased, and we should cut their funding because we're in debt.
I agreed withher before she said it,but she made nothing approaching a convincing or intelligent argument that would sway the opinion of anyone who might be on the fence about defunding NPR.
Bill Buckley, Ronald Reaganor Barry Goldwater she ain't.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at March 15, 2011 05:07 PM (SY2Kh)

472 .this is a Palin thread? My bad...

Ace your a RINO fag LOL!!1!

I've never seen a single post on AOSP that accused Ace of being a Rino when criticizing Palin. Like Allah, Ace takes the actions of an extreme minority and projects them onto all Palin supporters.

Posted by: JC at March 15, 2011 05:07 PM (8wYse)

473 Posted by: Tami at March 15, 2011 05:05 PM (VuLos)

You know, what might be fun is for Ace and one of the Co-bloggers (Monty, maybe? I think he's the least anti-Palin) to do a single post where each one edits in response to the other. The rest of us can make snarky comments in the peanut gallery, but they'd be the two actually having the debate.

Maybe then we could get more substance out of both. As it is, I think another problem ace runs into is trying to respond to all the comments directed at him- I'm sure some *ahem*mine*ahem* just get lost in some of the other "noise" (for lack of a better term).

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) at March 15, 2011 05:08 PM (8y9MW)

474 Where was it ever written that a politician could not or should not push back?

This is just another media -created criticism of Palin.

Posted by: beedubya at March 15, 2011 05:06 PM (AnTyA)

Well to be honest it is media created for all conservatives. Obama's crew calls their buddies up in the press to cuss them out for being insufficiently obeisant, no big deal. Clinton says Chelsea is off limits, she's off limits. Bush girls? Open season!!!! Sasha and Malia are darlings, it is not fair to bring them into political discussions. Willow on the other hand....

Posted by: blaster at March 15, 2011 05:08 PM (l5dj7)

475 Moby, eh? No wonder you're a such a moron. You're still using terms from that shitswamp over at LGF - but whatever helps you sleep, sparky.
Well, pissant. I'm sure you would know, since your likely still a poster over at that shitswamp. Go back and give Charlie a little nibble.

Posted by: Dog 'O' Madness at March 15, 2011 05:09 PM (OlN4e)

476 What's LGF? Lesbian Girls Fighting?

Posted by: Oldsailor's poet at March 15, 2011 05:10 PM (oBXlb)

477 I would note that a lot of Palin supporters who rightly get upset at the intelligence of Palin question were some of the biggest critics of Harriet Miers and did indeed question her intelligence.

Posted by: polynikes at March 15, 2011 05:10 PM (yKP4s)

478 �One final word of warning to my fellow Americans: back in 2009, I warned about what would happen if states accepted short-term unsustainable debt-ridden �Stimulus Package� funds. Accepting those funds allowed states to grow government, increase already unsustainable levels of spending, kick the can down the road on reforming entitlements, and create public expectations that they would continue financing these new mandates once the federal funds ran out. States were not in a position to grow government and take on new financial commitments then, and now the chickens have come home to roost. As goes Wisconsin today, so goes the country tomorrow.�

�New START recognizes a link between offensive and defensive weapons � a position the Russians have sought for years. Russia claims the treaty constrains U.S. missile defenses and that they will withdraw from the treaty if we pursue missile defenses. This linkage virtually guarantees that either we limit our missile defenses or the Russians will withdraw from the treaty. The Obama administration claims that this is not the case; but if that is true, why agree to linking offensive and defensive weapons in the treaty? At the height of the Cold War, President Reagan pursued missile defense while also pursuing verifiable arms control with the then-Soviet Union. That position was right in the 1980�s, and it is still right today. We cannot and must not give up the right to missile defense to protect our population � whether the missiles that threaten us come from Russia, Iran, China, North Korea, or anywhere else. I fought the Obama administration�s plans to cut funds for missile defense in Alaska while I was Governor, and I will continue to speak out for missile defenses that will protect our people and our allies.�

�My home state made the switch from defined benefits to a defined contribution system, and as governor, I introduced a number of measures to build on that successful transition, while also addressing the issue of the remaining funding shortfall by prioritizing budgets to wrap our financial arms around this too-long ignored debt problem. When my state ran a surplus because we incentivized businesses, I didn�t spend it on fun and glamorous pet projects for lawmakers � though that would have made me quite popular with the earmark crowd. In fact, I vetoed more excessive spending than any governor in our state�s history, and I used the state�s surplus to bring our financial house in order by paying down our unfunded pension plans that some other governors wanted to ignore. This fiscal prudence didn�t make me popular with the state legislature. In addition to vetoing hundreds of millions of dollars in wasteful spending, I put billions of dollars into savings accounts for future rainy days, much like most American families do in responsibly planning for the future. I also enacted a hiring freeze and brought the education budget under control through a commitment to forward-funding.�

�More than two thousand years after the Maccabees rebelled against their oppressors and reconsecrated their Holy Temple, the Jewish people continue to face threats to their existence, and they continue to persevere and overcome great odds. Today we should all recommit ourselves to ensuring that the miracle of a Jewish state endures forever. The dreidel is one of the most familiar symbols of Hanukkah, with Hebrew letters on it representing the phrase Nes Gadol Haya Sham � �a great miracle happened there.� Indeed a great miracle is still happening there.�

Posted by: Jerry at March 15, 2011 05:11 PM (QF8uk)

479 477 What's LGF? Lesbian Girls Fighting?

Close enough.

Posted by: Dog 'O' Madness at March 15, 2011 05:11 PM (OlN4e)

480 Where was it ever written that a politician could not or should not push back?
This is just another media -createdcriticism of Palin

And it accurately describes the irrational hatred towards her. Someone can make a rape joke about her daughter - and Palin would be attacked for defending her family. Imagine if someone did the same with the Clintons daughter. Remember - she's out of bounds. But the Palin family - perfectly acceptable.

Posted by: JC at March 15, 2011 05:11 PM (8wYse)

481 >>>To say that Palin doesn't speak substantively about stuff is to say you dopn't listen to her, or read her, or care to, either. If you base your whole opinion of Sarah Palin on what soundbite some press a-hole put together, then you might as well be some Leftard protesting in Madison.

Not true; a link went around by Israpundit, with the subject line 'She Just Gets Better and better." Two youtube clips, ten minutes each, comprising a whole (unedited) segment on FoxNews. A female lawyer host was interviewing her.

Watched it all, because I was interested in seeing if she was getting better.

Conclusion: It was the same-old same-old, a series of assertions without arguments behind them. The one good persuasive thing she noted was on (of course) energy policy, where she noted that oil rose to over 150 per barrel before the crash of 2008 and it was reaching that level again. However, she didn't follow that good point up at all; just dropped that out there.

Overall, it was just more of the sort of glib word-association style of scattered speaking that I don't like in Palin. I did not see reason for the claim "She just gets better and better."

It is true that I agree with almost all of Palin's conclusions. My problem is that -- who cares? I agree with 95% of YOUR conclusions, too, but I'm not nominating you for President!!!

I agree with her conclusions, but I was already convinced. She didn't persuade me on these things. I keep looking for her to make arguments that might sway someone already on her side, and she just generally doesn't bother with that. It's all assertions and gib buzzwords like freedom.

Posted by: ace at March 15, 2011 05:11 PM (nj1bB)

482 And who the fuck are you, anyway? Your bonafides are more genuine than her, her father, and the family friend who went with them, who have lived there for decades? Christ, maybe you should run for President.
Yes. They are.
She shouldn't have taken a second shot. Period.The only reason would be thatshe knew, herself, that she pulled the shot or got a deflection. But she didn't know that. She's a shake and bake huntress.
fyi - It doesn't matter who said what to her. She shouldn't have continued to risk the animal...instead, she had to try and get the shot for her TV show.
Her father's an asshole for insisting that she shoot again, as well.
The Friend was the only one who reacted properly.
If you don't know this, you aren't a hunter. If you hunt, you shouldn't, because you have no respect for your game and less than enough responsibility to be afield.
Who am I to say this? A lifetime hunter. A guide as well as an volunteer instructor for hunter's safety courses.

Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 05:11 PM (MGC3K)

483 Posted by: laceyunderalls at March 15, 2011 05:06 PM (pLTLS)
next to being there in dayton your description of how you lost interest in her as a candidate sounds almost exactly like mine, I kept saying "the comeback will come, the comeback will come" and all I saw was nothing but "huh?" moments, but in her defense I do enjoy her books and picking up a book of her's at the bookstore to see who stares at me w/ that lefty gaze of astonishment

Posted by: YRM at March 15, 2011 05:11 PM (UzBwz)

484 What's LGF? Lesbian Girls Fighting?

Posted by: Oldsailor's poet at March 15, 2011 05:10 PM (oBXlb)
SortaOh look, Beck teaching nukes again.

Posted by: Sarahs With Me at March 15, 2011 05:12 PM (MWXXs)

485 "full disclosure, I have moved most of my eggs to the TIm Pawlenty basket and am currently praying that he can overcome his own deficiencies-- chief of which is that he just doesn't come off like a serious alpha-dog type guy. A superficial flaw but nonetheless a serious one. "

Thanks! Now I know who to oppose, slam, and insult in every fucking comment from here on end.

Posted by: WINNING! at March 15, 2011 05:12 PM (nEa/y)

486 Jerry, that's some good stuff, and what I'm asking is -- can she please TALK like that?

Posted by: ace at March 15, 2011 05:12 PM (nj1bB)

487 Posted by: laceyunderalls at March 15, 2011 05:06 PM (pLTLS)

Yes, your bias. Your, seemingly, unthinking disdain of the medium (Twitter) which then seems to have attached itself to Sarah Palin.

I'm sorry you don't seem to have seen the things where she discussed policy- mostly, admittedly, in op-eds and prepared speeches. But she did, and to say otherwise is simply factually inaccurate.

I'm sorry you don't like her now- but that's obviously an opinion to which you're entitled.

However, latching on to one thing over several posts ("refudiate") carries with it the appearance of a bias- especially when, in candor, you would probably admit that everyone- including GWB, Mittens, Daniels, and the rest- have all done things very similar which do not seem to set your teeth so on edge.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) at March 15, 2011 05:13 PM (8y9MW)

488 When Palin starts sounding very much like she's saying that only a particular type of rural, outdoors-oriented, middling-education-level sort of person is a real American or is fit for high office, this necessarily excludes many people from the club, you know?
Idon't recall her ever saying that..and the implication is disproved by the variety of candidates she endorsed in the last election.

Posted by: beedubya at March 15, 2011 05:13 PM (AnTyA)

489 My own take on, "why are arguments against Sarah Palin [or insert subject here] dismissed as being based upon secret prejudicial motives?" is very simple.

People are intellectually lazy. When they disagree with others on any point, it is much, much easier to dismiss their points by saying, "Your argument is wrong because YOU'RE wrong!" than to say, "Your argument is invalid because of reasons X, Y, and Z."

Taking your own example, Ace, of an argument against throwing resources behind Sarah Palin at this stage. See, I've already qualified it beyond the most basic way it can be portrayed. You're not saying, "No I will never support Sarah Palin for any reason ever," you're saying you don't feel it is wise to put all of the conservative movement's eggs in one (limited, as your argument goes) basket.

Now, I disagree with some points you make, and agree with others. I tend to think that, ultimately, it is irrelevant even if true that Sarah Palin is defining down conservatism into a population, and even assuming she is aiming for higher office. As a presidential candidate for the GOP, certainly there are issues she has with electability that other candidates may or may not have. We could certainly have a large, productive conversation about it, and maybe one of our minds would be changed or maybe not.

But it would require a lot of time and energy. Time and energy invested with no guarantee of any return on that investment. And so much of the time people will simply skip the argument, for much the same reasons you pointed out not bothering with arguments if you cannot persuade the other person.

Most of the time, you don't know if you can persuade the other person or not.

That said, I think there's a hole in your current argument with Rush. First and foremost, while you are right to be upset when Palin supporters demagogue you and other critics as being misogynistic, a RINO, etc., the point remains that there are critics of Palin who use specious and mean spirited arguments.

Pointedly Rush was addressing Matt Labash's bizzare "Sharpton with naughty librarian glasses" quote as an example of this. Furthermore, that this form of attack on Palin is something which is originated and perpetuated as a shibboleth of the "intellectuals". To the extent that he (or quite frankly anyone not on the left) doesn't "get the animus against Palin" from these people should, quite frankly, be of no surprise to any conservative anywhere.

Posted by: Idealist at March 15, 2011 05:13 PM (Rfmdj)

490 What is worse.....Beck explaining nuclear power or me listening to Beck explain nuclear power?

Posted by: Mallamutt at March 15, 2011 05:14 PM (OWjjx)

491 Gee, "squirrelio", did you decide your "Palinisfuckingannoyingashell" nick would be too obvious in a Palin post?

Posted by: Pipboy 3000 at March 15, 2011 05:14 PM (c45xH)

492 However, latching on to one thing over several posts ("refudiate") carries with it the appearance of a bias- especially when, in candor, you would probably admit that everyone- including GWB, Mittens, Daniels, and the rest- have all done things very similar which do not seem to set your teeth so on edge.
Corpse-man, for example?

Posted by: beedubya at March 15, 2011 05:15 PM (AnTyA)

493 What wa the point of this post?

To prove the other side wrong?

Posted by: Serious Cat at March 15, 2011 05:15 PM (bAySe)

494 >>>What do you think of Pawlenty's comment that he wants to be everyone's candidate? How will that show that he has definitive positions on even one subject? How does that keep him from being anything but a panderer?

I think a fisher of men must cast a wide net, that's what I think.

Posted by: ace at March 15, 2011 05:16 PM (nj1bB)

495 We're talking about the President of the United States of America - the most important, powerful position in the world, and 'smarts' isn't in your top five qualities?

Nope. We've got a smart guy in there right now, and what fucking good is he? Smart people do stupid shit all the time. Clinton was a Rhodes scholar, and was also a feckless idiot. Carter? Don't get me started.

I suspect that we're not using the word "smart" in the same way. Who's smarter: the nuclear physicist who can't fix his own furnace, or the guy he has to call in the middle of the night to keep the physicist and his family from freezing to death? The philosopher, or the guy who built his house?

Posted by: Monty at March 15, 2011 05:17 PM (4Pleu)

496 "You really only seem interested in the personal validation Palin represents to you. "

Yes, and a whole lot of the anti-Palin stuff coming from GOP foot soldiers seems motivated by the personal validation that OPPOSING Palin represents to them.

Posted by: tsj017 at March 15, 2011 05:17 PM (4YUWF)

497 Hollowpoint - you think Sarah Palin is thin-skinned? I loved President Bush, I think he was a fine and honorable man, but he thought it was wrong to push back on all the crap that was said about him. Not saying he was perfect, but the things that were said that were untrue about him stuck because he wouldn't push back.
When she "pushes back", it's too often in defense of Sarah Palin, not the conservative cause.
Even the most minor percieved slight, including those in no way meant to be an "attack" or criticism, she feels the need to go on a name-calling snit that serves no purpose other than to generate some self-serving Palin drama. She comes across as thin-skinned and petty- and most of all, unpresidential. We criticize Obama (and rightfully so) for less all the time.
Kathy fucking Griffin? Really? What next? Is she going to show up at the home of every HuffPo commentor that mocked her and call them a poopyhead?

Posted by: Hollowpoint at March 15, 2011 05:17 PM (SY2Kh)

498 What is worse.....Beck explaining nuclear power or me listening to Beck explain nuclear power?

Idiot constantly complaining about Beck.

Posted by: JC at March 15, 2011 05:18 PM (8wYse)

499 Common sense trumps book learning.

Posted by: Sarahs With Me at March 15, 2011 05:19 PM (MWXXs)

500 Posted by: ace at March 15, 2011 05:11 PM (nj1bB)

Ace? At risk of stating the obvious: if you already agreed with her, of course she didn't sound convincing- you were already convinced. Did you talk to people who hadn't come to those same conclusions? Had they seen the clips? What did they think afterwords?

This happens in Churches a lot, too. Or, rather, the perceived specter of it causes some Churches to fail or split. A preacher gives all the same old (true) arguments supporting their faith the people have always heard, so they think he's not worth hearing. Then they get themselves a "new, dynamic" preacher who tells them "new, persuasive" things. But it was the old, "unpersuasive" things that were true, not the new persuasive ones.

As one of the Converted (to Conservatism) your real test of her should be: is she on the right side of the issue? You can't judge, on your own, how persuasive she is (in general- certainly you can say "that wouldn't have persuaded me"). For that, you need to talk to people who would need to be persuaded and see what they think.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) at March 15, 2011 05:19 PM (8y9MW)

501 Posted by: Monty at March 15, 2011 05:17 PM (4Pleu)
as a guy on the fence on Palin who's admittedly leaning against her in the primaries I have to agree w/ your smarts dont matter argument. after all, Washington, Lincoln, and Truman are all Presidents people look at as some of our best and guess what? none went to college

Posted by: YRM at March 15, 2011 05:20 PM (UzBwz)

502 By arguing with each other like this we are just gonna end up mad at each other, complete strangers.

Posted by: Serious Cat at March 15, 2011 05:20 PM (bAySe)

503 When has any anti-Palin person ever admitted to the most obvious reasons they dislike Palin such as reasons 1-4 in Ace's piece? Or reasons such as female jealousy, being too conservativeand being brainwashed from propaganda? If half the people out there admitted to these reasons as their reasons, then it would be a little easier buying "overly creedal" as the main reason of others.
As for George Will saying the main reason he is against Palin is because he believes she is politically making a mistake by being "overly creedal", I think its laughable. Just as I have laughed at the reasons David Brooks, Peggy Noonan, and other columnists have given.
Noonan stated she thought Palin was a nincompoop recently. Yet, after the Biden-Palin debate she said that Palin basically destroyed Biden and that she was the only one on the stage. So which is it Peggy? To take these people at their word, we need to trust their word. I have learned to not trust any of them over time. If you trust the elite supposedly conservative columnists thats your buisness. I don't. They all are manipulative and less conservative then even me. And I am not that conservative.
I believe the biggest reason columnists and even bloggers critic Palin is the same reason Palin defenders defend Palin........control and influence. A desire to effect the outcome in politics. This is esspecially true among the columnists. They have laid down their views in such extreme terms with Palin that they can't go back. You can't go back from nincompoop to great leader. Its not possible. They know that their actual careers are in jeopardy if Palin even becomes the nominee. So they are forced to continue the battle against Palin and double down and triple down in hopes she doesn't even run. So they attack in more extreme and phony ways. Ignore the good she does and attack the mis-steps.
I just have a hard time grasping the idea the main reason somebody doesn't like Palin is because of her being creedal. It may be a reason, but I have a hard time believing anybody would give it as a main reason. ANYBODY. Its like me saying the main reason I don't like Obama is because he hems and haws. Its a reason. But its number 43. And wasn't Bill Clinton a bit creedal? Just sayin.
I believe those who say the main reason is because they fear she would have a very hard time winning. This is my main concern aswell. However, when Allahpundit does 50 posts on the subject including half of them via a Democratic DailyKos pollster a whole year before its time to vote, it makes one wonder whether he has other reasons for doing such posts. If thats wrong not to trust Allahpundit, then I am wrong.
As for Ace and others here who have critiqued Palin, they have done so in more fair and reasonable ways. They have garnered more trust and deserve more trust.

Posted by: Keven at March 15, 2011 05:20 PM (UMRed)

504 Yeah, well that's all nice and dandy, but it is.
That's the best you got?
You are a troll, afterall.

Posted by: Entropy at March 15, 2011 05:21 PM (IsLT6)

505 The rifle was malfunctioning? I thought the scope was off.
Posted by: Dr Spank at March 15, 2011 04:29 PM (1fB+3)
Same thing. For the sake of this discussion, that is.
It is a hunting rifle that is not sighted in properly. Be that due to a droip in the field, or a change in ammo...Therefore, for its intended purpose, it was malfunctioning.[ I should have been more clear, as it wasn't mis-firing or a danger to the shooter, just the game and anyone else / thing else afield.]
If you are hunting and you don't hit what you are shooting at, and your shot fealt right,that's a malfunction.
To me, it became immediately apparent that Sarah is an armchair shooter. What little she did learn, she learned from a person who is unsafe in the field - her father.
The incident displays a cavalier attitude that is unbecoming in a person and less becoming in a leader.

Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 05:21 PM (MGC3K)

506 Well, pissant. I'm sure you would know, since your likely still a poster over at that shitswamp. Go back and give Charlie a little nibble.

Lol.

Typical Palinfucktard� tactic.

Anyone against Palin must be a plant. Taken right from the rule book of those other fanatic Palin retards over at HotAir.

But go right ahead and think whatever makes you feel better. Doesn't change the fact I'm a registered GOP'er who would never vote for her.

Deal with it.

Posted by: squirrelio at March 15, 2011 05:21 PM (8UlnD)

507 Common sense trumps book learning.
Sarah has little of either, apparently.

Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 05:22 PM (MGC3K)

508 Meh. When a candidate asks the right question of the American people, they'll have my vote.
Said question being, 'What ails you?' I'm traditional like that.
If you're wondering, highlight the blank space.

Posted by: DarkLord ain't down with farcical aquatic ceremonies! at March 15, 2011 05:22 PM (GBXon)

509 Posted by: JC at March 15, 2011 05:18 PM (8wYse)
guy who complains about people who don't buy Beck's gloom and doom BS while he exagerrates History, see what I did there?

Posted by: YRM at March 15, 2011 05:22 PM (UzBwz)

510 AllenG, of course I can evaluate if she's offering any argument at all or just offering a pure assertion.

I can also evaluate the strength and persuasiveness of arguments, should she offer more of them.

You're just resorting to the Argument By Ignorance fallacy-- claiming no one can know, no one can say, ergo, we can't talk about this at all.

It's sophistry. It's usually a weak argument. When you can't address a point strongly, offer up "Well no one can really KNOW!"

Conceded, no one can REALLY know. But the entire assumption of you and I even having a discussion is that we can at least make decent guesses.

If we can't, there's no point talking, right?

BTW, I can also tell how Palin's arguments (or lack thereof) work on independents because I know her polling with independents and it's godawful.

Posted by: ace at March 15, 2011 05:23 PM (nj1bB)

511 Even the most minor perceived slight, including those in no way meant to
be an "attack" or criticism, she feels the need to go on a name-calling
snit that serves no purpose other than to generate some self-serving
Palin drama.

Examples? Please, what are those "minor perceived slight criticisms" you speak of. Because quite frankly, the only time I see her pushing back are those simple things, like being accused of inspiring mass murder. You see, Sarah Palin defending herself after 4 days of being linked to the Tuscon shooting by the media is really her just "insurting herself" into the story that she was already inserted in by the media.

*sigh* You can't make this shit up.

Posted by: JC at March 15, 2011 05:24 PM (8wYse)

512 I think a fisher of men must cast a wide net, that's what I think.
Posted by: ace at March 15, 2011 05:16 PM (nj1bB)
But where do we know he actually stands, if he is sayinganything and everything to catch all those men?

Posted by: Steph at March 15, 2011 05:24 PM (AkdC5)

513 Who am I to say this? A lifetime hunter. A guide as well as an volunteer instructor for hunter's safety courses.
Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 05:11 PM (MGC3K)
So am I a lifetime sportsman.. But I tend to chalk that hunting fubar up to too much respect for the father. I would have taken the second shot and ditched the weapon, then told Dad he was full of shit. She did not, for whatever reason.

Posted by: Dog 'O' Madness at March 15, 2011 05:24 PM (OlN4e)

514 "Meh. When a candidate asks the right question of the American people, they'll have my vote."

So, you're going to stump for Spock's half-brother?

Posted by: FRONT TOWARD LEFT at March 15, 2011 05:24 PM (Pzf4N)

515
And the election was over. I still supported her.
Bought her books and watched her on Fox. Waited for her to delve a bit
deeper into the issues. That never happened...for me. I waited some more. And then I saw another book and a whole lotta family dramarama. So it took two years for me to get here after a lot of support I tossed her way. But sure. I'm a *mean girl* with a *bias*.. Nope, has nothing to do with her own actions (and inaction)in turning me off.

Posted by: laceyunderalls at March 15, 2011 05:06 PM (pLTLS)
You should've turned off the fucking TV years ago, darling -- when it became clear that Sarah wasn't party to the MFM bullshit..

It sounds like you feel seriously betrayed because Sarah didn't play the game the way you wanted her to.

Well, I'm sick and goddammed tired of Gingrich, Pawlenty, McConnell and the rest of the GOP playing the incestuous insider game.

I'd rather see Sarah shooting/fishing in Alaska than Newt cuddling up on a sofa with Pelosi over global warming.

Posted by: Heavily Starched laceyunderalls at March 15, 2011 05:25 PM (7+pP9)

516 Posted by: squirrelio at March 15, 2011 05:21 PM (8UlnD)
I was agreeing with you on the whole Palin fucktard and Hot Air stuff but are you saying that if it were she VS Obama you would vote for Obama?

Posted by: YRM at March 15, 2011 05:25 PM (UzBwz)

517 414
Posted by: TexMex at March 15, 2011 04:43 PM (qgbCd)
if she loses in the primary will you hold your nose and vote for the alternative?
Posted by: YRM at March 15, 2011 04:46 PM (UzBwz)
The fact that you need to ask such a question demonstrates the main reason you and others like hollowpoint are worthless when talking about this. Sarah Palin is not Ron Paul. And Palin supporters are not Paul-tards. Palin whether she runs and loses in the primary or doesn't run at all is going to end up endorsing someone else, and campaign for them. And her supporters are likely going to either throw their support behind who she chooses or decide on someone else they like better for whatever reason (just like all other candidate supporters do). There is only likely ever going to be a very small minority of her supporters will vote only for her and no one else. Shit she was able to convince people to vote for McCain and you're actually living in some fantasy where she won't endorse another conservative and they won't support them?

Posted by: buzzion at March 15, 2011 05:26 PM (oVQFe)

518 I initially disagreed with the criticism that Palin was thin-skinned. Then she responded to an innocuous answer by Santorum on why he thought she wasn't attending CPAC, basically saying she had other commitments with family or business. Palin took offense and raised the gender card and indirectly called him a knuckle dragging neandrethal. To top that she later stated she couldn't attend because of the iron dog race which of course Todd was in. Isn't that what Santorum said?

Posted by: polynikes at March 15, 2011 05:26 PM (yKP4s)

519 >>>Noonan stated she thought Palin was a nincompoop recently. Yet, after the Biden-Palin debate she said that Palin basically destroyed Biden and that she was the only one on the stage.

You realize these points are NOT in fact incompatible?

Palin did win over Biden (in my eyes at least).

But that is a format that encourages scripted responses. Remember, in that debate, neitehr Biden nor Palin engaged each other much at all -- both of them offered up programmed answers about the men at the top of the ticket. Some people were annoyed that Palin didn't challenge biden on this or that but I thought she was doing the right thing by attacking Obama rather than arguing with Biden over this or that.

There's no doubt at all that when Palin comes prepared, she really can be very effective.

My doubt is about when she's not so well prepared, when she cannot control the topic of conversation, etc.

Posted by: ace at March 15, 2011 05:26 PM (nj1bB)

520 Anyone remember what Reagan's "favorables" were at this point in 1978? For the longest time, it looked like Bush the elder was going to be the R candidate for 1980, but when it came time to vote in primaries, Reagan came out on top. His political acumen being what it was, he named Bush as his VP candidate, but as I recall, there was little love lost between the two of them in the run up to the nomination.
Many Bush supporters in 1980 pulled the lever for Reagan because they wanted "Anyone But Carter". Many Democrats did, too.....
I guess what I'm saying is if it comes down to Obama and Palin being the candidates who win their respective parties' nominations, who would you vote for? Do you honestly think that THAT many people who can't stand Palin are willing to stay home and not vote, or do you think that they would hold their noses and vote for "Anyone But Obama"?

Posted by: Teresa in Fort Worth, TX at March 15, 2011 05:27 PM (py9B+)

521 Dayum! I think this joint is overdue for a flamewar.

Fucking candy-ass beeyotches.

Posted by: ErikW at March 15, 2011 05:27 PM (M70T8)

522 Posted by: Heavily Starched laceyunderalls at March 15, 2011 05:25 PM (7+pP9)
see here's the problem, just because we have resevations on Palin doesn't mean we like the idea of Newt/Romney/Huckabee either

Posted by: YRM at March 15, 2011 05:27 PM (UzBwz)

523 508

Common sense trumps book learning.

Sarah has little of either, apparently.

Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 05:22 PM (MGC3K)
I'll mark you down as a "no" on Palin then. Jesus.

Posted by: Sarahs With Me at March 15, 2011 05:28 PM (MWXXs)

524 as a guy on the fence on Palin who's admittedly leaning against her in the primaries I have to agree w/ your smarts dont matter argument.

Well, ceteris paribus, abstract "smarts" don't hurt; they're just not all that indicative of someone who's a good leader. Being calm, being a good organizer, a good delegator, and being able to act decisively in a crisis are all better indicators of executive performance than "smarts".

Posted by: Monty at March 15, 2011 05:28 PM (4Pleu)

525 I heard Rush today, right after he said conservatives go after conservatives like nobody else.. (something along those lines) .. in defending of Palin..
Then he takes call from a woman who supports Daniels and he goes after Daniels.
mmm hmm, Rush just proved his own point.

What bugs me about Palin is her supporters. Its not even Palin so much... its the constant if you don't support Palin you have a problem.
Palin has a cult following like Obama.. They go after every other candidate as if he is the devil... when nobody has even announced.

I dont think she can win. Sad to say, the media did its hit job and it worked.

Posted by: Jackwagon at March 15, 2011 05:28 PM (ph9vn)

526 Just tossing this out there...
In the Senate, Ogabe was Chairman of the Subcommittee (Foreign Relations) on European Affairs, which included the oversight of NATO activities in Afghanistan..
...and even still, as POTUS and CinC, he was under the impression that Afghanis spoke Arabic...and that cannot be refudiated
...frightening no?

Posted by: beedubya at March 15, 2011 05:29 PM (AnTyA)

527 Ace,

What do you think of the idea of releasing results of a certified IQ test?

Posted by: Serious Cat at March 15, 2011 05:29 PM (bAySe)

528 I'd rather see Sarah shooting/fishing in Alaska than Newt cuddling up on a sofa with Pelosi over global warming.
I'd rather watch Sarah headline a week of 'Are you smarter than a Fifth Grader?'

Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 05:30 PM (MGC3K)

529 I agree with Polynikes about how striking I felt that Santorum snit was -- I had sensed Palin was thin-skinned and excessively concerned with personalizing everything before, but the Santorum Snit just took it to a whole new level.

That was a big input in my own decision that she just wasn't a serious person. It was one of the last steps that took me out of the wait-and-see or tentative-until-she-proves-herself and into the against-her-under-most-circumstances camp.

I really have just had it with being in Sarah Palin's self-inflicted drama all the time.

Posted by: ace at March 15, 2011 05:30 PM (nj1bB)

530 guy who complains about people who don't buy Beck's gloom and doom BS while he exagerrates History, see what I did there?

All I saw was a guy who say's he doesn't like Beck yet not only does he watch him but he posts about him on a thread that has nothing to do with him.

Posted by: JC at March 15, 2011 05:30 PM (8wYse)

531 When Palin starts sounding very much like she's saying that only a particular type of rural, outdoors-oriented, middling-education-level sort of person is a real American or is fit for high office, this necessarily excludes many people from the club, you know? You're absolutely right. It could be a product of her parochialism and the fact that she probably has only started to assemble a national team- onethat is loyal to her first and not McCain. She has also been attacked for being a stupid hick and is probably being defensive about it.
I think that is fixable though. I don't think it would be hard for her to tailor her message to cities and suburbs. Getting over the wider distrust in her intelligence is a bigger hurdle- I don't have an easy answer for that.

Posted by: Matt at March 15, 2011 05:30 PM (ecpMe)

532 Posted by: buzzion at March 15, 2011 05:26 PM (oVQFe)
I never once said that I thought she wouldn't endorse a candidate or compared her to loony uncle Paul you made that assumption of my question all by yourself, I was asking to see if the devoted Palin fan is willing to pull the lever for the guy/gal who beat her in the primary, some won't and will stay home

Posted by: YRM at March 15, 2011 05:31 PM (UzBwz)

533 Posted by: JC at March 15, 2011 05:30 PM (8wYse)
meh, I guess I can see where you're coming from but in fairness to him this ain't HotAir, we can go offtopic here

Posted by: YRM at March 15, 2011 05:32 PM (UzBwz)

534 But go right ahead and think whatever makes you feel better. Doesn't change the fact I'm a registered GOP'er who would never vote for her.Deal with it.
Posted by: squirrelio at March 15, 2011 05:21 PM (8UlnD)
So are you just "concerned" about the party, pissant? I'm not a palinista BTW, if you were a regular troll, you would know that. I just don't care for shit spewing retards to come in and start pronouncing smart, thoughtful people idiots. It pisses me off, and I assure you, I'm as nasty a sonofabitch as your flyweight ass is likely to encounter.

Posted by: Dog 'O' Madness at March 15, 2011 05:32 PM (OlN4e)

535 "...frightening no?"

Frightening, yes, but not surprising at all.

That little bitch, Princess Barack, is ignorant. It might be that he doesn't have the intellectual capacity to learn and understand things, or it might be that he is too lazy to make the effort to educate himself. I do not care which it is at this point.

Posted by: FRONT TOWARD LEFT at March 15, 2011 05:33 PM (Pzf4N)

536 I really have just had it with being in Sarah Palin's self-inflicted drama all the time.
Posted by: ace at March 15, 2011 05:30 PM (nj1bB)
And yet you have no problem jumping in feet first.

Posted by: Steph at March 15, 2011 05:33 PM (AkdC5)

537 Ace, Wow I like Palin for the exact opposite reason you don't like her. I believe that she will get people to the polls that don't normally go. That she can make a blue state red. I don't see what you see in that respect I agree with Rush "i don't get it either". I look at George Will as a minority a writer that doesn't really understand the soul of this country, so his opinion doesn't register with me.

Number 3 on the list for sure! Someone said to me once, is not the money it's the power. I absolutely believe this with all my soul that this is the reason the "elites" despise her. I in turn return the favor, for they are the same people I trusted with my vote and made a disaster of things. They are lying bunch of cowards who prove my distrust for them on a daily bases. A President Palin will surely end their gravy train, and both parties know it.
Funny thing too, it seems all her supporters are considered her base supporters. Narrow group of people that fit in one little box. Are Tea Party people all the same, are Rush's listeners all the same? I don't believe so, though I think we want the same things and think Palin can deliver, and she has the rigor and the courage to deliver. Does she have to persuade people to vote for her, yes she does. That is what a candidate does. So it is up to her to persuade you as a candidate not as a citizen. This is where I agree with Rush, why debase her before she has even declared. Now she has positions that she takes that we all can argue as she steers the debate. Though to argue whether she has the right to defend herself! Absurd.

Posted by: lions at March 15, 2011 05:34 PM (/vDzc)

538 Palin is NOT presidential. She had a wrinkle in her pants

Posted by: David Brooks at March 15, 2011 05:34 PM (AnTyA)

539 What I don't like about Sarah Palin is that she has sucked the fun and humor out of all the commenters here that feel Sacred Honor compels them to defend every slight against her, real or imagined. If she was sucking it out through your dick, I'd be the first one in line to slap you some skin, playboy.

Hell, I was excited when McCain picked her as his running mate, too. But she's just a politician. A talking head. A media personality.

I just can't get that fucking inspired or worked up about anybody who wants your attention that bad.

Posted by: Empire of Jeff at March 15, 2011 05:34 PM (e7n7W)

540 It sounds like you feel seriously betrayed because Sarah didn't play the game the way you wanted her to.

Betrayed? No. Disappointed? Very much so.

Sorry it's an 'all or nothing' with some of you.

Posted by: laceyunderalls at March 15, 2011 05:34 PM (pLTLS)

541 Posted by: Sarahs With Me at March 15, 2011 05:28 PM (MWXXs)
mark me as probably no

yes if she wins the primary

Posted by: YRM at March 15, 2011 05:35 PM (UzBwz)

542 414 YRM
It's not a matter of holding my nose and voting for any old R. If Palin tanks in the primary and we get a bland candidate then it's highly likely I just won't give a shit to vote. I had no intention of voting in the '08 election, but Palin caused me to hope over to a polling station the last few hours of election day. I thought well, at least conservatives are being represented somewhere on the ticket.
It's possible a bland guycould tap an up and coming VP butI doubt the current crop would want to jump on that bandwaggon.
Basically, if the 2012 GOP candidate is less interesting than a cold beer and patio then my assis parked at home.
I don't have faith a guy like Pawenty can do that .

Posted by: TexMex at March 15, 2011 05:35 PM (HwMZG)

543 Ace said bugaboo, so he's a racist. THE END.

Posted by: OCBill at March 15, 2011 05:35 PM (YJvVE)

544 I never once said that I thought she wouldn't endorse a candidate or compared her to loony uncle Paul you made that assumption of my question all by yourself, I was asking to see if the devoted Palin fan is willing to pull the lever for the guy/gal who beat her in the primary, some won't and will stay home
Posted by: YRM at March 15, 2011 05:31 PM (UzBwz)
No but you felt the need to ask the question. Why bother engaging with you on something when you clearly have such a low regard for the people on the other side of this issue that its even a question you bother to entertain.

Posted by: buzzion at March 15, 2011 05:35 PM (oVQFe)

545 /sarcasm

Posted by: OCBill at March 15, 2011 05:36 PM (YJvVE)

546 BTW, I can also tell how Palin's arguments (or lack thereof) work on
independents because I know her polling with independents and it's
godawful.

Yeah Ace. That's totally because of her lack of arguments and NOT because of the vicious media attacks. Remember that poll that showed that 33% of Americans believed Palin is partly responsible to the Tuscon shooting? That's obviously because of her lack of persuasive skills. Yep.

Hell, I remember in my senior year in 08 a girl said she wouldn't support Palin because she was "pro-teen pregnancy". That was just before the convention speech. That kind of thinking is also her fault. It's not like there's an obvious consorted effort to destroy her personally or anything.

Posted by: JC at March 15, 2011 05:36 PM (8wYse)

547 Maybe not the bullfighter. But you gotta admit one helluva picador. Ole!

Posted by: Mr. Barky at March 15, 2011 05:36 PM (qwK3S)

548 OK..I'll say it. What I really like about Palin is her positions on the major issues.....and the fact that she isconsistent, which to me shows a courage of conviction.I can't think of anything she has flipped on for pandering or polling purposes.
I'm ready...let the bashing begin

Posted by: beedubya at March 15, 2011 05:37 PM (AnTyA)

549 "Shibboleth" sounds like a really badass vorpal blade.

Posted by: Guy Who Likes Vorpal Blades at March 15, 2011 05:37 PM (Hsbnu)

550 *full disclosure*

I'm on vacation, my pecker has breached its containment dome, and my full rod has been exposed to the atmosphere. It's hard to get worked up about anything.

Posted by: Empire of Jeff at March 15, 2011 05:37 PM (e7n7W)

551 Never bring a knife to a shibboleth party.

Posted by: Guy Who Likes Vorpal Blades at March 15, 2011 05:38 PM (Hsbnu)

552 You know what that's like? That's just like a frog in hot water.

Posted by: Guy Who Appreciates Obscure Metaphors at March 15, 2011 05:38 PM (Hsbnu)

553 I'm on vacation, my pecker has breached its
containment dome, and my full rod has been exposed to the atmosphere.
It's hard to get worked up about anything.

Posted by: Empire of Jeff at March 15, 2011 05:37 PM

That's like a frog in hot water.

Posted by: Guy Who Appreciates Obscure Metaphors at March 15, 2011 05:40 PM (Hsbnu)

554 I've made that argument myself, that a successful politics must be
evangelistic and convert-hungry like Christianity, instead of rooted in
born-to cultural belonging-by-birth mode like Judaism... An evangelistic faith
which requires only that converts believe in a series of plausible
claims can gain many converts, whereas a faith based largely in born-to
culture will tend to have a sharply, sharply limited upper bound
of possible growth. And to many (myself included), Palin seems to
frequently be attempting a politics based upon the latter mode --
self-identification in particular born-to cultural traditions.

Margaret Thatcher was an effective evangelist.

Sarah Palin (regrettably and surprisingly) seems not to be as capable in that department despite her considerable natural strengths and talents.

A bit of a puzzlement really but thanks Ace for pointing me in this direction.

It's helpful.

Sorry about the whole shibboleth thing...

I just figured you knew and were ignoring it for idiosyncratic health reasons.

My bad.

Posted by: Deety at March 15, 2011 05:40 PM (Jb3+B)

555 it's highly likely I just won't give a shit to vote.
Wrap your mind around voting for petrified dog shit to keep Obama out of office for another 4 years. How stupid can you be?

Posted by: dagny at March 15, 2011 05:40 PM (A+3fb)

556 >>>>>All I saw was a guy who say's he doesn't like Beck yet not only does he watch him but he posts about him on a thread that has nothing to do with him.
Guess I hate Zach Greinke as well. No.....it is called humor. Between all the life and death of the republic crap that goes on at every Palin thread, I threw in a joke. Yes, I find Glenn Beck explaining nuclear power funny....why, cause he is a friggin radio host. I snark all the time about Mika Brezhinski wailing about what people should eat...why, CAUSE SHE IS A FUCKING TELEVISION PERSONALITY WITH NO GOD DAMN TRAINING IN ANYTHING OTHER THAN SHOWING UP AND LOOKING GOOD. I suspect Glenn Beck is not a trained nuclear scientist. Thus, it struck me as funny.
Now, I hope that clears everything up. Don't make me break out the 128 pt. mega font bomb.
And for the record, Ihave no real "feelings" about Glenn Beck. The television was left on Fox and I am in another room.

Posted by: Mallamutt at March 15, 2011 05:41 PM (OWjjx)

557
I think a fisher of men must cast a wide net, that's what I think.
Posted by: ace at March 15, 2011 05:16 PM (nj1bB)
Honestly Ace, I think you would be a lot more persuasive if you could demonstrate what you believe she should be doing to cast the net wide. I agree that it is a good idea to try to appeal to as many people as possible. What do you think, specifically, would be a better strategy for doing so? If she's doing it wrong, do you have a better idea?Character traits and details have a lot to do with the specifics of attempting mass appeal. Or at least perceived character. It's true that the obfuscation of his character that occurred helped win Obama the presidency through appeal to people who otherwise could have been persuaded to vote Republican had there been a better face for the party than McCain.I think it will be at least a few election cycles before people will forget the consequences of punching the ballot for someone whose character is something which they have not actually demonstrated for public scrutiny.
The reason I mention this is that I am unconvinced that there is any way for Palin to make a credible argument which is as totally inclusive as you would like. Her character has been the subject of intense scrutiny; and I don't think that it supports the campaign style which you desire.At this point I would also disagree with you that a presidential candidate should aim to be an evangelical proselytizer for conservatism (or any other ideology). That is dangerous, and honestly incompatible with the fundamentally federalist foundation of conservatism. Spreading ideology is the job of ideologues and not politicians.

Posted by: Idealist at March 15, 2011 05:41 PM (Rfmdj)

558 She's not getting any new sales, and until that changes all she'll ever be is a former VP candidate that has the same effect on a group as a traditional sports rivalry, where nothing changes but the location of the most recent pissin' match.
I like her but if there was a true conservative leader to emerge, she'd just be a scenic memory. The fact that she remains so prominent is a sad commentary on the potential field of GOP candidates.

Posted by: ontherocks at March 15, 2011 05:41 PM (HBqDo)

559 Here's a couple of more reasons why I like Palin (on the right)
...not saying they make her any more presidsential though

Posted by: beedubya at March 15, 2011 05:42 PM (AnTyA)

560 Funny Ace, I actually thought she lost the VPdebate mainly because of the winks and admitting she might not answer questions directly even though she did end up answering them directly.

As for Noonan being consistent, there is a huge gap between nincompoop and beating a 30 year Senator in a debate on foreign policy and the economy. Script or no script. IMO, its impossible for a nincompoop to do it.

As for Palins IQ, I would put my money on Palin vs. McCain, Obama, Biden, Gore, Bush or Kerry. The fact she did aswell as she did in the debate makes me think this. My guess is she will be prepared if she runs.

And what President other then Clinton spoke well off the cuff? Reagan wasawful in press confrences that didn't deal with foreign policy. Yes, I said it. Awful.

Posted by: Keven at March 15, 2011 05:43 PM (UMRed)

561 Together or Alone

Posted by: Sebadoh at March 15, 2011 05:44 PM (MGC3K)

562 >>>What do you think of the idea of releasing results of a certified IQ test?

I don't love the idea, maybe because it's so odd. I think it better (and more typical) just to talk smart.

Posted by: ace at March 15, 2011 05:45 PM (nj1bB)

563 Doesn anyone think this Herman Cain guy has a shot?I like what I've seen and heard so far, but I trust you guys to help me fill in the blanks.

Posted by: Damn Sockpuppet at March 15, 2011 05:45 PM (YmPwQ)

564 "I really have just had it with being in Sarah Palin's self-inflicted drama all the time."

Are you really Ace? Or is someone sock puppeting that name. I hope the God it's the latter. Self-inflicted drama. You are proof of what Rush was talking about - absolute irrational arguments. I tell you what - you convince me how the media accusing Palin of being repsonsible for the Tuscon shooting - or the fake storries about an affair - the fake boob job story - and a thousand other hit pieces is Palins fault - and I will never support her again.

Posted by: JC at March 15, 2011 05:45 PM (8wYse)

565 Posted by: Mallamutt at March 15, 2011 05:41 PM (OWjjx)
Zach Geinke is a Rino!

Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 05:46 PM (MGC3K)

566 >>>As for Palins IQ, I would put my money on Palin vs. McCain, Obama, Biden, Gore, Bush or Kerry. The fact she did aswell as she did in the debate makes me think this. My guess is she will be prepared if she runs.

i don't get the future conditional tense -- she "will be prepared" if she runs.

Is there some reason why a paid political commentator shouldn't already be getting prepared as part of her current job?

Posted by: ace at March 15, 2011 05:46 PM (nj1bB)

567 I was fine with Palin until those two reckless endorsements, Angle and O'Donnell. Especially O'Donnell.

Being a good president isn't necessarily about being brilliant; it's about being a good leader, and good leaders have good judgment. George Washington wasn't a rocket surgeon, f/x, but he was smart enough to surround himself with the greatest minds of his time, like Hamilton and Jefferson. He was a great leader, a great executive. Until the O'Donnell pick, Palin had me sold on being a great executive. That made me stop and look at other things more critically.

That having been said, I still think she would be a much better executive than Obama.

Posted by: Guy Who Appreciates Obscure Metaphors at March 15, 2011 05:47 PM (Hsbnu)

568 Examples? Please, what are those "minor perceived slight criticisms" you speak of. Because quite frankly, the only time I see her pushing back are those simple things, like being accused of inspiring mass murder. You see, Sarah Palin defending herself after 4 days of being linked to the Tuscon shooting by the media is really her just "insurting herself" into the story that she was already inserted in by the media.*sigh* You can't make this shit up.
There's the recent example of her calling Santorum a "neanderthal" for daring to suggest that she skipped CPAC (for the fourth time) because she might have business or faily obligations (imagine if he gave the real reason- they wouldn't pay her). She went after Christie because he dared suggest that she might have to do townhall meetings and shouldn't have used the "blood libel" line.
Regarding Tuscon, I don't blame her for taking a stand, but with the way she did it. She handed the MSM a golden opportunity to ignore everything elseshe said with the "blood libel" line- it's the only part of her statment that anyone remembers. It was an unforced error that the MSM predictably exploited.
Whether it was an appropriate use of the term is irrelevant; it was a rookie mistake regardless.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at March 15, 2011 05:47 PM (SY2Kh)

569 I don't love the idea, maybe because it's so odd. I think it better (and more typical) just to talk smart.
They should have to wear nipple-clamps while debating.

Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 05:47 PM (MGC3K)

570 Is she going to show up at the home of every HuffPo commentor that mocked her and call them a poopyhead?
I would pay money to watch that.

Posted by: toby928� at March 15, 2011 05:48 PM (GTbGH)

571 Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 05:46 PM (MGC3K)
You hurt me man..........you really hurt me.

Posted by: Mallamutt at March 15, 2011 05:49 PM (OWjjx)

572 >>>name. I hope the God it's the latter. Self-inflicted drama. You are proof of what Rush was talking about - absolute irrational arguments. I tell you what - you convince me how the media accusing Palin of being repsonsible for the Tuscon shooting - or the fake storries about an affair - the fake boob job story - and a thousand other hit pieces is Palins fault - and I will never support her again.

Um, I am speaking of her weird need to find some imagined slight and get into yet another talk-radio-style feud with someone.

She's choosing these fights. She chose to respond to that via Twitter or FaceBook. She chose to read it as an insult (I don't think it was; I think it was someone put in the uncomfortable position of having to explain Palin's odd choices, and do so in a way that seemed "nice") and then chose, yet again, to play a very dunderheaded Feminists Forever card.

She does this a fair amount. These are her choices.

I note that rather than discussing what I'm actually discussing you change the subject to Tucson and call me irrational for an argument I didn't make it.

I'm tired of the Grrl Power stuff.

Posted by: ace at March 15, 2011 05:49 PM (nj1bB)

573 Is Fox still paying her?

Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 05:49 PM (MGC3K)

574 Wrap your mind around voting for petrified dog shit to keep Obama out of office for another 4 years. How stupid can you be?
Meh.
Well find a sober person to take my spot.

Posted by: TexMex at March 15, 2011 05:49 PM (HwMZG)

575 What do you think of the idea of releasing results of a certified IQ test? I don't love the idea, maybe because it's so odd. I think it better (and more typical) just to talk smart.
Posted by: ace at March 15, 2011 05:45 PM (nj1bB)
Also, IQ tests aren't worth a shit anyway. I've known highly intelligent people who had trouble finding their way to and from work.

Posted by: ErikW at March 15, 2011 05:49 PM (M70T8)

576 564, I like Herman, he is my choice #3 behind Palin and Bolton.

Posted by: Oldsailor's poet at March 15, 2011 05:50 PM (oBXlb)

577 #549 Palin was initially for the bridge to nowhere but giving her the benefit of doubt, changed her position after she received additional information. I don't know if it would be considered a flip but she is somewhat ambiguous on global warming. But I agree nothing out of the ordinary.

Posted by: polynikes at March 15, 2011 05:50 PM (yKP4s)

578 So are you just "concerned" about the party, pissant? I'm not a palinista BTW, if you were a regular troll, you would know that. I just don't care for shit spewing retards to come in and start pronouncing smart, thoughtful people idiots.

Okay, you're not a Palinista. You're just a moron.

It pisses me off, and I assure you, I'm as nasty a sonofabitch as your flyweight ass is likely to encounter.
Bwa ha ha ha.

You know what really helps sell the tough guy image? Talking about how much of a tough guy you are over the Internet. Have another Red Bull and keep flexing those muscles in the mirror for me, ya douchebag.

Posted by: squirrelio at March 15, 2011 05:50 PM (8UlnD)

579 Guy who...

I don't know that she actually endorsed Angle before the primary. In fact, I think she did not.

Posted by: ace at March 15, 2011 05:51 PM (nj1bB)

580 I thought she did near the end.

Posted by: Guy Who Appreciates Obscure Metaphors at March 15, 2011 05:52 PM (Hsbnu)

581 Doesn anyone think this Herman Cain guy has a shot?I like what I've seen and heard so far, but I trust you guys to help me fill in the blanks.
I want to believe he has a shot, but so far I'm having a tough time convincing myself that he does. The lack of government and/or military experience makes him a tough sell, be that fair or not.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at March 15, 2011 05:52 PM (SY2Kh)

582 You hurt me man..........you really hurt me.

Why? You don't support Palin 110%. Ipso facto RINO status for you, mah friend.

I've been scratching my ass all day. Couldn't figure out the problem. Some very friendly moron here reminded me that I'm wearing 'heavily starched' underalls. Get it? Not on board with the 'isto's and you're a candyass RINO that genuflects at the alter of David Brooks.

Posted by: laceyunderalls at March 15, 2011 05:52 PM (pLTLS)

583 Common sense trumps book learning.
Well...that depends. I really rather have my heart surgeon graduate from Harvard then calmly tell me everything will be o.k. because he stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

Posted by: Mallamutt at March 15, 2011 05:53 PM (OWjjx)

584 Being a good president isn't necessarily about being brilliant; it's about being a good leader, and good leaders have good judgment. George Washington wasn't a rocket surgeon, f/x, but he was smart enough to surround himself with the greatest minds of his time, like Hamilton and Jefferson.
Hamilton was a fucking jackass.
Jefferson wound up in rather severe opposition toHamilton and the more moderately FederalistWashington.
I don't think you know waht you're talking about.

Posted by: Entropy at March 15, 2011 05:53 PM (eL+YD)

585 I don't like her because all the cool people don't like her.

Posted by: kansas at March 15, 2011 05:53 PM (mka2b)

586 Truth in advertising: I really, really like Palin.
.
More truth in advertising: I don't think she's perfect.
.
Limbaugh keeps saying he "doesn't get" the animus against Palin. But
it's not for lack of Palin-critics and Palin-skeptics attempting to explain
the reasons for their reservation. We keep trying to explain the why
behind it, but too frequently these offered reasons are dismissed as
false in favor of imputed secret reasons.
.
Keep in mind, Ace, that there's a difference between not supporting a candidate, or hell, not even liking them, and the constant vitriol directed against a private citizen who is not even a candidate for office. That kind of environment will put *anybody's* true believers in rapid reaction mode.
.
Keep in mind, too, that we all (mostly?) think the East-coast elites are real, and like any organism, will fight to keep their lives power. To simply say that those (unspoken) prejudices aren't real and are never a factor is just as stupid and blind as saying that they are always the reason.
.
Probably the biggest issue Palin backers have is this insistence that she not even be allowed to try, for heaven's sake. If she is the horrible candidate that so many say she is, she'll crash and urn and her supporters will have to decide what to do then.
.
However, I've seen plenty of "I'll never vote for Palin posts, too. Really? Their reasons may appear good to them now, but maybe they need to look a little more deeply into exactly why they'd rather have Mr. Mom Jeans or Shrillary as POTUS...

Posted by: RightThinker at March 15, 2011 05:53 PM (KmHbv)

587 568 I was fine with Palin until those two reckless endorsements, Angle and O'Donnell. Especially O'Donnell.
Palin didn't endorse Angle until AFTER the NV GOP primary.
Palin endorsed O'Donnell just a day or two before the DE primary.
The former was being a good GOP soldier and backing the GOP candidate; the latter was merely for shits and giggles I gather.
Explain to me why the GOP still got its ass handed to them in CA?

Posted by: TexMex at March 15, 2011 05:53 PM (HwMZG)

588 "And to many (myself included), Palin seems to frequently be attempting a politics based upon the latter mode -- self-identification in particular born-to cultural traditions."

Ace, point to one single instance
of this, an actual real-life quote, and you win the argument, but I don't
think you can.

And therein lies my complaint against your arguments
against Palin: in my view you read SP's phrases and actions precisely as the NYT would have you do it, rather than the way you read the same phrases and actions from other Republican politicians.

Argue that she might be a flake and I might agree with you (most politicians are pretty flaky, frankly), but this other stuff is utter nonsense, and with all the empirical information out there about SP you should recognize it as nonsense. Why don't you (which was Rush's question to begin with)?

Posted by: Ken at March 15, 2011 05:54 PM (3ar4L)

589 Yes, I dislike this kind of argument too...after all, maybe some people don't support Palin just because they don't think she is the best candidate. That does not mean they hate her...the thing that annoys me is that if someone who is a really strong Palin supporter wants to go after anyone else, whether it be Romney or Daniels or Christie...well that is just fine. But if someone who supports one of those candidates makes a remark about Palin that is less than adoring..well they hate her or they are part of a tribe or something.

This is why a lot of people think of Palin supporters as a cult, it is not because of Palin herself, it is because so many of the people who support her just can not accept the fact that there are decent people out there who don't share their views on this subject. Palin is a sort of eternal victim, who is seen as always picked on, always abused and always misunderstood. I don't think a lot of people want a president that is a victim.

I thought Palin was badly treated by the press time and again, I won't argue that, but I also think that her quitting her job as Governor of Alaska is going to hurt her. Now, I understand why she did it and it was probably the best thing to do for her and her family, but a lot of people have a negative of her just for that.

Posted by: Terrye at March 15, 2011 05:54 PM (FloBD)

590 I didn't say I was Hamiltonian, Entropy. He was a great mind, and Washington benefited from their clash.

Posted by: Guy Who Appreciates Obscure Metaphors at March 15, 2011 05:55 PM (Hsbnu)

591 ..........you really hurt me.
Posted by: Mallamutt at March 15, 2011 05:49 PM (OWjjx)
I'll say. That's a prolonged ellipsis. Might want to ge that checked out...
How are you dealing with his departure? Thinking about a Summer Home in Wauwatosa?
You had to know it was coming, eventually.

Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 05:55 PM (MGC3K)

592 You know what really helps sell the tough guy image? Talking about how much of a tough guy you are over the Internet. Have another Red Bull and keep flexing those muscles in the mirror for me, ya douchebag.
Posted by: squirrelio at March 15, 2011 05:50 PM (8UlnD)
Admit it little fella, your playing with your little winkie. aren't ya? Are you wearing pumps and hose too?

Posted by: Dog 'O' Madness at March 15, 2011 05:55 PM (OlN4e)

593 >>>>>Why? You don't support Palin 110%. Ipso facto RINO status for you, mah friend.
Awww, that doesn't bother me. I actually prefer to be called my Idi Amin inspired named:
"His Excellency, Mallamutt Da Da, RINO Ruler for Life and Leader of All Supreme RINO Forces, Conqueror of Puritans in General and AOSHQ in Particularly"
But never, ever sully....The Greatness that is..........Zach Greinke.

Posted by: Mallamutt at March 15, 2011 05:56 PM (OWjjx)

594 She went after Christie because he dared suggest that she might have to
do townhall meetings and shouldn't have used the "blood libel" line.

First off, she didn't respond to Christie about the term blood libel. She responded after third snipe at her by chrisite on national TV. It's telling how you don't mid Christie sniping at Palin 3 times but when Palin finally responds with what could hardly be seen as a "snipe" you blame her.

Secondly, blood libel was not a rookie mistake. Had anyone else used it for any other reason no one would give a shit. Blood libel has become a common term today for precisely the same reason the media attacked Palin for. It's the fact that she used it. And the media used that to try to make her look like an anti-semite. And the worst part - a lot of people will believe it. And you will use this to implicate her against running - even knowing there is nothing wrong with what she said.

Posted by: JC at March 15, 2011 05:56 PM (8wYse)

595 So how about it , JC?
Did he convince you? Will you never support her again? I'm dying to know!

Posted by: Empire of Jeff at March 15, 2011 05:56 PM (5FIGI)

596 >>>>>How are you dealing with his departure? Thinking about a Summer Home in Wauwatosa?
I have tickets for June 12, 2011, St. Louis at Milwaukee. Its somebody bobblehead day!

Posted by: Mallamutt, yea, maybe I deserved that Restraining Order at March 15, 2011 05:57 PM (OWjjx)

597 Shibboleth? Evangelistic? Fisher of men?

Why does ace have to keep pushing his far right religious agenda on his audience?

Posted by: Empire of Jeff at March 15, 2011 05:58 PM (5FIGI)

598 I love Palin. She may be too damaged by the left and the right to win. It's a shame. I fail to see why the right jumped on board but they tend to do that. AND she's not at all "stupid". Anyone who thinks so is a fucking idiot.

Posted by: dagny at March 15, 2011 05:58 PM (A+3fb)

599 592 Hey, I used to live in Wauwatosa, on 118th street. Small fucking world. Palin 2012

Posted by: Oldsailor's poet at March 15, 2011 05:58 PM (oBXlb)

600 Admit it little fella, your playing with your little winkie. aren't ya? Are you wearing pumps and hose too?Posted by: Dog 'O' Madness at March 15, 2011 05:55 PM (OlN4e)

No, but my image of you just got a whole lot fucking weirder.

Keep em coming, tough guy.

Posted by: squirrelio at March 15, 2011 05:58 PM (8UlnD)

601 Santorum's comments were kinda insulting if you ask me. She' not coming cuz she can make more money elsewhere or because she has kids, she has responsibilities Santorum doesn't have. Plus he said her quitting as Governor was bad for women in politics when he could have pointed out going bankrupt shouldn't be part of the job description. Etc...

Posted by: Dr Spank at March 15, 2011 05:59 PM (4ZxEW)

602 Was Will being vitriolic in saying her appeal seemed to be too creedal?

As far as I can tell, yes. You didn't link to Will's "creedal" quote, so I Googled it. The best I could find is the quote in that collection of low-blows that Politico published:

�This is a problem for the movement,� said Will about what Palin
represents. �For conservatism, because it is a creedal movement, this is
a disease to which it is susceptible.�

The line of modern conservatism that can be traced back to National
Review founder William F. Buckley would be broken by Palin, Will said.

�There�s no Reagan without Goldwater, no Goldwater without National
Review and no National Review without Buckley � and the contrast between
he and Ms. Palin is obvious.�

Asked if the GOP would remain the party of ideas if Palin captures the nomination, Will said: �The answer is emphatically no.�

No ideas? That is just an elitist's way of calling her stupid.

What does it mean to be creedal, anyway? Someone who follows a creed seems to be the best definition. And, what is a creed? A set of beliefs, principles or opinions. Wouldn't someone who takes our constitution as her set of principles be fairly described as creedal? And, what is there to be criticized about that (at least by someone who claims to be a conservative)? But, I suspect that he did not mean the word that way, and when you seemingly endorse his viewpoint, I guess you don't either. And really, that is what I object to. If her critics would only attack her ideas straight on. But no, its always this stuff about how she really just a lightweight.

Posted by: Anon Y. Mous at March 15, 2011 05:59 PM (k34Gz)

603 Posted by: Terrye at March 15, 2011 05:54 PM (FloBD)
I swear to god this is a concern troll. Nothing is wrong with the TSA pornoscanners and sexual assault touches. Republicans in Indiana should cave to the Democrats running away demands.

Posted by: buzzion at March 15, 2011 06:01 PM (oVQFe)

604 Hamilton was a fucking jackass...
I don't think you know waht you're talking about.
The latter statement doesn't follow from the former one.
Anyone who doubts Hamilton's brilliance and lacks respect for hisservice to this country is patently retarded. Hamiltonlead men in battle as well as established the financial capability for the founding.
Jefferson was a fucking teatottaller compared to Hamilton. An armchair Revolutionary. A fucking Southerndebutante.

Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 06:02 PM (MGC3K)

605 Keep em coming, tough guy.
Posted by: squirrelio at March 15, 2011 05:58 PM (8UlnD)
Don't worry shitstain, I'm just getting warmed up.

Posted by: Dog 'O' Madness at March 15, 2011 06:02 PM (OlN4e)

606 Actually Ace,few are prepared now. This is the main reason Mitt and Mitch are hiding from tough interviews. They are afraid of making mistakes. Even the little Mitch has been out there he has made mistake after mistake.

Obama I believe did only 3 interviews in the entirety of 2007. George Bush I only remember doing a couple of interviews before voting actually began. Because none are ready out of the gate. And the gate hasn't even opened yet.
Yes, Newt is better speaking off the cuff today then Palin. Probably Barbour too. I don't think the others are however. Palin has improved.
As for fishing for men, thats what a campaign is for. Thats what 25 Presidential debates are for. Now is actually the time for most candidates to hide.

Posted by: Keven at March 15, 2011 06:03 PM (UMRed)

607 Shibboleth? Evangelistic? Fisher of men?

Why does ace have to keep pushing his far right religious agenda on his audience?
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at March 15, 2011 05:58 PM (5FIGI)
As a terrorism-funding Methodist, I'm highly offended.

Posted by: ErikW at March 15, 2011 06:03 PM (M70T8)

608 As Lincoln said about Grant: "He fights, I need him".

Regardless of what you think about Palin as a candidate, she fights.

Sure, she's a honey with a nice rack, but when it comes to politics she's like a badger. She does not give a fuck about hands across the isle shit.

Posted by: AnkaBadger at March 15, 2011 06:03 PM (s7I0E)

609 Had anyone else used it for any other reason no one would give a shit. Blood libel has become a common term today for precisely the same reason the media attacked Palin for. It's the fact that she used it
Yep. ...and it turns out that some that criticized her for using it used it themselves in arguably less appropriate circumstances..
Frank Rich, Crazy Andy Sullivan, Eugene Robinson, Andrew Cohen are a few that I remember being called out as hypocrites on this.
...and if i recall correctly, it was used a few times on Chris Mathews' show

Posted by: beedubya at March 15, 2011 06:04 PM (AnTyA)

610 She's choosing these fights. She chose to respond to that via Twitter or FaceBook.

Oh, so should she remain silent like Bush did when the media accuses and attacks her of everything from hating animals too instigating murder? How did that work out for Bush? I'm sorry, but I'm tired of pundits calling us a racist and no one on the right defending us.

Posted by: JC at March 15, 2011 06:04 PM (8wYse)

611 Blaster for President!

Posted by: Bosk at March 15, 2011 06:04 PM (pUO5u)

612 This thread is *everything* I knew it could be. Thank you.

Posted by: laceyunderalls at March 15, 2011 06:05 PM (pLTLS)

613 Hey, I used to live in Wauwatosa, on 118th street
Know any Roedel's?
Ever been to Frtz's?

Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 06:06 PM (MGC3K)

614 I've said it on a different Palin thread but if we are looking for a female candidate that makes the left's heads explode and can dish it as well as she can take it , lets start a Draft Coulter committee. We won't have to defend the not intelligent meme.

Posted by: polynikes at March 15, 2011 06:07 PM (yKP4s)

615
"So how about it , JC? Did he convince you? Will you never support her again? I'm dying to know!"
No. All he did was crucify Palin for things he would have no problem with if it wer anyone else.

Posted by: JC at March 15, 2011 06:07 PM (8wYse)

616 595- First off, she didn't respond to Christie about the term blood libel.
She responded after third snipe at her by chrisite on national TV. It's
telling how you don't mid Christie sniping at Palin 3 times but when
Palin finally responds with what could hardly be seen as a "snipe" you
blame her.

Christie supporters kind of remind me of Cartman in this video (from :30 to 1:00):

http://tinyurl.com/4pp3swn

Nothing to say when he's taking one gratuitous swipe after another at Palin, but as soon as she swipes back, they cry like little bitches.

Posted by: thirteen28 at March 15, 2011 06:08 PM (AbmsP)

617 >>>>This thread is *everything* I knew it could be. Thank you.
To qoute The Talking Heads:
Same as it ever was....same as it ever was.

Posted by: Mallamutt at March 15, 2011 06:09 PM (OWjjx)

618 611 She's choosing these fights. She chose to respond to that via Twitter or FaceBook.Oh, so should she remain silent like Bush did when the media accuses and attacks her of everything from hating animals too instigating murder? How did that work out for Bush? I'm sorry, but I'm tired of pundits calling us a racist and no one on the right defending us.
Posted by: JC at March 15, 2011 06:04 PM (8wYse)
I don't think she should remain silent. I do think that if she is going to seriously consider the presidency she's going to have to let some stuff slide. There does need to be a sort of hard line that she needs to have drawn that anyone below the line she should ignore or have the response like "That's really not something worth addressing" ready. So you don't want her to be like Bush who pretty much refused to fight back against criticism. But we also do not need her to be like Obama that needs to respond against all criticisms against him.
She needs to punch down less.

Posted by: buzzion at March 15, 2011 06:10 PM (oVQFe)

619 New fire at reactor # 4, per Drudge.

Posted by: Dr Spank at March 15, 2011 06:10 PM (4ZxEW)

620 She needs to punch down less.
THIS!

Posted by: SumYungGuy at March 15, 2011 06:11 PM (MGC3K)

621 "So how about it , JC? Did he convince you? Will you never support her again? I'm dying to know!"

No. All he did was crucify Palin for things he would have no problem with if it wer anyone else.

DAMNIT!!!
I mean, you gave him an assignment to fill out, and you promised if he did it, that you would change your mind, and IT'S ALMOST LIKE YOU DIDN'T MEAN IT WHEN YOU SAID IT.

Posted by: Empire of Jeff at March 15, 2011 06:12 PM (5FIGI)

622 She needs to punch down less?

That's where the nuts are.

Posted by: Dr Spank at March 15, 2011 06:12 PM (4ZxEW)

623 Dude, when this happens, "One of the biggest sources of frustration in arguing with a liberal is
that the liberal refuses to take your stated reasons for your beliefs as
your real reasons for the belief" you aren't in an argument. Your interlocutor is filibustering. You're just fooling yourself. Just back away and talk to your cat instead. OR play to the crowd, demonstrating the jackassery of the fellow who isn't listening to you.

Posted by: Steve Poling at March 15, 2011 06:13 PM (db5YN)

624 615 I've said it on a different Palin thread but if we are looking for a female candidate that makes the left's heads explode and can dish it as well as she can take it , lets start a Draft Coulter committee. We won't have to defend the not intelligent meme.
Posted by: polynikes at March 15, 2011 06:07 PM (yKP4s)
But then we'd have to deal with the "If she's so smart why did she screw Bill Maher?" questions.

Posted by: buzzion at March 15, 2011 06:13 PM (oVQFe)

625 >>>>She needs to punch down less.
STOP PUNCHING DOWN!
(Actually, that is a good point...and I almost feel bad sockpuppeting it. Almost)

Posted by: Someguy who has been gone a long time. at March 15, 2011 06:13 PM (OWjjx)

626 That's where the nuts are.
Lacey likes the Blue ones best.

Posted by: We still talkin' bout M&M's? at March 15, 2011 06:14 PM (MGC3K)

627 First off, she didn't respond to Christie about the term blood libel. She responded after third snipe at her by chrisite on national TV. It's telling how you don't mid Christie sniping at Palin 3 times but when Palin finally responds with what could hardly be seen as a "snipe" you blame her.
Secondly, blood libel was not a rookie mistake. Had anyone else used it for any other reason no one would give a shit. Blood libel has become a common term today for precisely the same reason the media attacked Palin for. It's the fact that she used it. And the media used that to try to make her look like an anti-semite. And the worst part - a lot of people will believe it. And you will use this to implicate her against running - even knowing there is nothing wrong with what she said.

Christie was asked questions about her, and he gave answers that were entirely reasonable. Her response was ridiculous and pointless.

You acknowledge the MSM used the "blood libel" line against her. How was that not predictable? Was it really necessary to her argument? Someone smarter (or perhaps less of a drama queen) would've anticipated that the MSM would beat her over the head with it, but she chose to hand them the club with which to do it.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at March 15, 2011 06:15 PM (plsiE)

628 She isnt stupid. But she is damaged. She should not have quit her job as the Governor. And yes.. I know all the reasons she quit.
I dont care if she goes after big issues directed against her.. like Tucson.. I dont blame her. But,, Kathy Griffin? WTF!?There is a vast swath of America who never watch anything but spongebob. I have friend like that who voted for Obama because Palin hangs out of helicopters killing innocent sweet fury wolves. Those people... sadly.. will determine the election. Those people will never listen to the arguments the Palin bots put forth. To them.. she is a quitter, kills wolves, her daughter is a slut, she is stupid and a reality star.Then there are the republican voters who dont see her as Presidential material.combine them both and she wont win the primary.. let alone the Presidency.

Posted by: Jackwagon at March 15, 2011 06:21 PM (ph9vn)

629 That's bullshit. Santorum was attempting to make excuses for her -- why
she wasn't doing the stuff politicians generally do, like, LET ME SAY
IT, appearing somewhere for FREE.

Who is Rick Santorum to make excuses for Sarah Palin? If that were possibly true, he wouldn't have mentioned her "five children" at all, implying that her family life would keep her from official duties. Sarah Palin doesn't need to go to CPAC, because everybody knows who she is. Rick Santorum does need to passively badmouth Palin, though, because he would be ignored otherwise.

Obama's crack about lipstick on a pig was equally clumsy. After Palin came out as a "pittbull," it was obvious who he was talking about. He was trying to seem folksy and confident, and she handed him his ass while doing what Hill in her pants suits never could, playing on her sexuality.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at March 15, 2011 06:23 PM (mHQ7T)

630 You acknowledge the MSM used the "blood libel" line against her. How
was that not predictable? Was it really necessary to her argument?
Someone smarter (or perhaps less of a drama queen) would've anticipated
that the MSM would beat her over the head with it, but she chose to hand
them the club with which to do it.\

Yes, how was it not predictable that using a commonly used term which accurately describes what has happened would be used to attack her. SHE'S STPUID I TELLS YA. STOOOOOPIIIIID

Also, she will be a retard if she buys a car. Do you know why? Because then the media will do stories on how super rich and out of touch she is for buying a car - something that millions of people do every day. How could she not see that coming? Palin is retarded!

And, of course, you will be here explaining how stupid Palin is for buying a car and "opening herself" up for attack.

*sigh* This is what Rush was talking about. Completely irrational.

Posted by: JC at March 15, 2011 06:24 PM (8wYse)

631 >>You acknowledge the MSM used the "blood libel" line against her. How
was that not predictable? Was it really necessary to her argument?
Someone smarter (or perhaps less of a drama queen) would've anticipated
that the MSM would beat her over the head with it, but she chose to hand
them the club with which to do it.

So using a perfectly accurate term to describe her situation makes her a drama queen? Really? And if you believe you have to restrict your speech to mollify the media, you might want to rethink some shit.

Posted by: Dr Spank at March 15, 2011 06:25 PM (4ZxEW)

632 I just don't like her. I don't like her because I am never sure she will get to the end of her thought - she packs her sentences with 'filler' to sound articulate and she ends up seeming inarticulate.

I am a woman. I like me. I don't like her. Did I mention I have ESP? Well, I do and my ESP tells me all is not right in Palin-world. I am a life long conservative. I love Scott Walker and Marco Rubio. So there.

Posted by: Janetoo at March 15, 2011 06:26 PM (g7+4l)

633 Wow, you really wrong-footed me on that one Ace. A great riff on shibboleths and how the left's key shibboleth is their trope about anyone who believes in liberty is a secret racist, all in the context of Palin, who is the left's favorite target for this "hater" accusation. But then when you turn to applying these concepts, you apply them not to Palin's attackers, but to... her supporters? People who defend Palin against the shibboleth ad absurdum are the one's who are are practicing shibboleth ad absurdum? Good one Ace. That's one of your best wrong-foots ever!

Posted by: Alec Rawls at March 15, 2011 06:26 PM (kTTUz)

634 I'd just like to remind you all how much smarter and more important I am than you.

That is all....

Posted by: Jeff B. at March 15, 2011 06:28 PM (c45xH)

635 Word

Posted by: Scott Walker at March 15, 2011 06:30 PM (4ZxEW)

636 Hamiltonlead men in battle as well as established the financial capability for the founding.

The one battle Hamiltton needed to prove his loyalty to Washington was strategically impossible and passed off as some fluke due to his confidence. Jefferson hated him, because he was a monarchist. He was especially dirty after he could be blackmailed for cheating on his Heinz-fortune like wife.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at March 15, 2011 06:31 PM (mHQ7T)

637 So, what I feel like is, if I give in and stop defending Palin, then I
am giving in to the media smear machine and, the next candidate who I
really like who comes along will get the same smear treatment and it
will be just as successful. I understand that isn't very
constructive or mature, because it means I am ignoring legitimate
criticism, but it's sort of a protective instinct against the dominant
culture, an instinct to stick up for the people it attacks, even if
those people are flawed. Just to send them the message that the attacks
won't work anymore and have to stop.

I totally understand and can really identify with this point of view, Adrian. Thanks for articulating it.

But the point is that Sarah Palin did get totally screwed over by the MFM after (around) her convention speech and has yet to recover from it. It's a legitimate concern to wonder whether or not she can.

It's not nice. It is unfair as all hell but the fact is that the bastards seem to have pretty decisively won that round with all of their dirty tricks.

No amount of "correcting the record" refuting the lies and smears of 2008 or basically trying to re-fight that that battle by myself or other conservatives talking to each other in SP's defence is going to do a damn bit of good.

Frankly, I am something of a sub-ordinary person who aspires to ordinariness and even I can't help but notice that the world seems to be on fire a bit.

I most emphatically don't need a "leader" that I have to protect or defend or offer apologias for.

As much as I wish her well on a personal level, I'm gonna have to duck out of this fight politically as being way above my paygrade.

I'm a tad preoccupied just now fighting for my own survival as are many these days.

I simply cannot expend extra energies "fighting for Sarah!"

I remain confident though, that she and Todd and the kids will do just fine without my help.

(Which is kind of a relief as my plate seems plenty full today.)

Posted by: Deety at March 15, 2011 06:31 PM (Jb3+B)

638 >>>>>I'd just like to remind you all how much smarter and more important I am than you.
Puh-lease. Now excuse me...I misplaced my Cy Young award.

Posted by: The Greatness...That is.....Zach Greinke at March 15, 2011 06:32 PM (OWjjx)

639 Well, Rush does have a point. The problem with the word "shibboleth", I think, is Rush's usage refers to "a reflexive fear shared by some group".

Its original definition is somewhat broader than that.

But maybe Rush also means it exactly that way -- something that marks a certain group, such as dress or Palin Hatred Syndrome.

I've given up defending Palin. It's obvious she scares the living hell out of liberals but I never thought people calling themselves "conservative" would have that reaction. When the WP/NYT writes warm articles about a particular GOP candidate, I know right away I will not vote for that candidate. They only praise 1) a GOP candidate who they know will lose in the election and take many Republicans with him into defeat; 2) a GOP candidate who *wink, wink* is a "conservative" they can do business with.

But what is one to conclude from this strange Palin Hatred phenomena? People will give Rand Paul at least passing respect but get karma hives over Sarah Palin? What gives with that? What exactly is the problem? I look at her, listen to her talk, and all I see is a female Republican who is photogenic, savvy, and mostly on political message. It is why she scares the living crap out of liberals and the entire editorial departments at both WP and NYT.

Is that the real problem with Palin? That she actually means what she says and will do what she claims she will do given the chance -- is that what gives George Will and the rest of the Beltway Ladies fainting spells?

Or is there something else I'm missing? What is it about Sarah Palin that is giving that certain group of conservatives such nightmares? Surely, Allahpundit has a special medication he takes every time her name pops up -- one to prevent drooling conniptions.

But I forget this is the GOP. They did the same thing to Ronald Reagan. George Bush Sr considered Reagan to be an extremist bumpkin. I guess no single candidate is going to satisfy all of us. Wonder what houses are going for in Australia these days?

Posted by: Full Moon at March 15, 2011 06:33 PM (DtbEv)

640 Anyone who doubts Hamilton's brilliance and lacks respect for hisservice to this country is patently retarded.
I'm not suprised you've disagreed with me in this way, because "patently retarded" is precisely how I've felt about most of yourviews in this thread. I just didn't say anything.
So, where disagreeing with each other is concerned,we're in complete agreement.
Hamilton is Arnold with better luck . The man fought for the revolution for the same reason he'd have fancied himself King instead of George III if he could have fought for that instead. Because he was in a position to have some power and glory out of it, which he got - unlike poor tragic (in the Greek sense) Benedict. Just like he was itching to fightwith France after the Revolution.
Burr deserved a goddamn medal.

Posted by: Entropy at March 15, 2011 06:35 PM (eL+YD)

641 Shibboleth? Sounds Jewish, why is Rush allowed to say it?

Posted by: Dr Spank at March 15, 2011 06:36 PM (4ZxEW)

642 I've said it on a different Palin thread but if we are looking for a
female candidate that makes the left's heads explode and can dish it as
well as she can take it , lets start a Draft Coulter committee. We
won't have to defend the not intelligent meme.

I'm sure there will come a time when we have a conservative female that would make a strong candidate for president, but that time has not yet come, no matter how much some might want to pretend otherwise.

However, our priority should be to find the most conservative candidate who can win regardless of whether their plumbing is internal or external.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at March 15, 2011 06:36 PM (plsiE)

643 It probably are better to talk smart and have good ideas than to talk not smart and have good ideas. The problem are that David Brooks and Ace both now seem to think that it are better to talk smart and have bad ideas than to talk not as smart and have bad ideas. Palin just are trying to say that maybe graduating Harvard and Yale and Columbia may not be all it take to be good President and that maybe people who is not graduate from Harvard and Yale and Columbia can gave good idea that maybe even are better. Even if pants not creased good.

Posted by: OCBill at March 15, 2011 06:36 PM (YJvVE)

644 make that, "The problem are that David Brooks and Ace both now seem to think that it are better to talk smart and have bad ideas than to talk not as smart and have good ideas."

Posted by: OCBill at March 15, 2011 06:38 PM (YJvVE)

645 Yes, and my Aunt (degree in English, teaches speech and theater in JR High), hates how the language has changed since she was a girl. I think you need to check your bias, here, and make sure your problem isn't one with society in general instead of with Sarah Palin.
Honest answer now: if you had to prepare a proposal to submit to a prospective client, would you ANYWHERE in said presentation use the word: "refudiate"? Or even in an e-mail discussion with numerous participants, including your direct supervisor and a honcho or two upline? If you were an editor - today - of any mainstream publication, would you correct a writer who used that word in an article, the same incorrect way Sarah first did (and then compared herself to Shakespeare - oy) - or would you suggest the more appropriate "refute" or "repudiate"?
It's not "hoity-toity" to be able to effectively communicate the English language, Ronald Reagan was a master of the spoken, and written word. Didn't Palin take a shot at Reagan? Oh no, that was Barbara Bush that she flamed.
Look, she captivated all of us convention night 2008 - even Chris Matthews and Brian Williams went off script for about 20 minutes. But in the interim, she has not presentedherself as a serious presidential candidate. When I was still Sarah-smitten, I even made excuses for that cringible radio prank, the one where she thought she was talking to Sarkozy. Good God.
Her abandoning the Governorship was the beginning of the end for me.

Posted by: Marla at March 15, 2011 06:39 PM (kD8Fh)

646 So using a perfectly accurate term to describe her situation makes her a drama queen? Really? And if you believe you have to restrict your speech to mollify the media, you might want to rethink some shit.

Using a perfectly accurate term that does nothing to advance your argument but instead draws attention away from it? Yeah, that's smart.

She handled it badly, and the backlash was her own damned fault for throwing the MSM an easy opening that they predictably exploited.

If she has no ambitions beyond a talking head who mouths platitudes for big money, then that's fine. If she wants to hold elected office again or become a major influence, she'll have to stop playing checkers and start playing chess.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at March 15, 2011 06:45 PM (plsiE)

647 Dayton police wannabees now need to only answer 50 of 86 (58 percent) questions correctly and 64 of 102 (63 percent)
of questions on the other test, to serve and protect.
Palin needs to answer 100 of 100 correctly, to serve and protect.
Huh?

imo, Liberals, after their historical, favorite son, Present Iwon, won, will never allow Conservatives to diminish Iwon, by letting Palin make history, again, by taking the keys to the mansion from him, not to mention take over the first evah veggie garden from Ms.Iwontoo.

They would hate that more than losing to a regular, run-of-the-mill, not history making, male conservative.
I think they hate her for what, not who, she represents.

Posted by: Carolyn at March 15, 2011 06:48 PM (NYjsM)

648 606
Keep em coming, tough guy.
Posted by: squirrelio at March 15, 2011 05:58 PM (8UlnD)
Don't worry shitstain, I'm just getting warmed up.
Well fuck me...I am so not in training for this. Leslie Sansone doesn't even have any videos on On Demand to help out!Plus, the local population of Yew trees is gonna take beating...

Posted by: Deety is breaking out the Longbows at March 15, 2011 06:51 PM (Jb3+B)

649 >>Using a perfectly accurate term that does nothing to advance your
argument but instead draws attention away from it? Yeah, that's smart.

It wouldn't have mattered what she said genius, she was getting attacked either way. Remember, just defending herself is what made it all about her, or as you and the media call say, made her a drama queen. I mean, really, she should have just say there and took it like a man, I guess.

Posted by: Dr Spank at March 15, 2011 06:53 PM (4ZxEW)

650 I butchered my response but a point was made in there somewhere.

Posted by: Dr Spank at March 15, 2011 06:54 PM (4ZxEW)

651 Honest answer now: if you had to prepare a proposal to submit to a
prospective client, would you ANYWHERE in said presentation use the
word: "refudiate"?

Um. Twitter. Argument over. you lost. Honestly, I need to stop reading these anti-palin posts. There as irrational as liberal posts.

Posted by: JC at March 15, 2011 07:01 PM (8wYse)

652 Wow, the one thing I did learn today (and from Kay no less) is that the plural for penis is penises, not peni as I thought....

Posted by: MOman at March 15, 2011 07:09 PM (qVt6h)

653 squirrelio
Allow me to point out a couple of distinctions here.
Monty, who you called an idiot is a coblogger here. You, of course, are not.
Why is that you might ask (if you were not an idiot, that is)?
Well, Monty is highly intelligent, educated, and experienced.
Monty writes well informed, researched, interesting, and thought out posts.
You, on the other hand shovel ignorance and stupidity like shit.
You would be best served by carefully reading and thinking about his posts, in the hope of leaving here a little less ignorant than when you came. This as opposed to spewing crap all over the floor, and lowering the collective IQ.
Are you clear on these points?
Get it?
I thought not.

Posted by: maddogg at March 15, 2011 07:12 PM (kW4zY)

654 Thread winner (from Blaster)"

Let me put it out there - I am pretty fucking smart. I have an IQ test you wouldn't believe, I graduated in the top third of my class at West Point and have a Master's degree in engineering. I *see* dumb people. And Palin isn't one of them.

Posted by: MaxMBJ at March 15, 2011 07:12 PM (6SIms)

655 MOman:

Using the latin "ii" as a plural is a Victorian intellectual affectation, and not proper English.

Those idiots even put that ending on Greek words, like octopus, where it absolutely did not belong. ( The Greek plural for octopus is octopodes, btw. )

Posted by: Kristopher at March 15, 2011 07:15 PM (atS82)

656 >>>Is that the real problem with Palin? That she actually means what she says and will do what she claims she will do given the chance -- is that what gives George Will and the rest of the Beltway Ladies fainting spells?

>>>Or is there something else I'm missing? What is it about Sarah Palin that is giving that certain group of conservatives such nightmares?

There is something you're missing, intentionally. No matter how many times we Palin Skeptics tell you "Why," you keep saying, "I don't get it, why?"

Do you have some ideological opposition to the idea of a candidate speaking fluently about economics and numbers in an election that will turn on this issue?

If you don't have an ideological opposition to it, can you tell me why Palin is right not to correct the one supposed misimpression the public has of her that makes her unelectable?

Posted by: ace at March 15, 2011 07:16 PM (nj1bB)

657 "Palin is merely a dumb pretty woman" is a lame attempt by eastern RINOs to discredit her. They still hope the religious can save them from the Tea Party, and are trying to push buttons.

Do not let shitheads like Romney tell you what to think Ace.

You can get past this.

Posted by: Kristopher at March 15, 2011 07:19 PM (atS82)

658 The proof, as they say, is in the pudding.

If Palin wants to be President, she'll need the ability to put together teams to accomplish things -- not necessarily a polymath herself. She'll need to attract and retain good people to accomplish her goals. She'll need to gather support on controversial topics and nudge events to support her vision.

Which, if you think about it, are things that she could demonstrate by putting together a political campaign. Thinking back on the bunch of backbiting layabouts McCain had when he ran, I shudder to think of the cabinet he would have put together in office (still better that Obama's, but....)

Ace's argument about smarts and intellectualism and anti-intellectualism would take a back seat if she puts together a top team and starts achieving the goals of changing popular perception.

Posted by: cthulhu at March 15, 2011 07:22 PM (kaalw)

659 And why, pray tell, should she denounce her own religion?

Are Democrat candidates required to denounce Christianity, and not set foot in church?

Posted by: Kristopher at March 15, 2011 07:22 PM (atS82)

660 I really have just had it with being in Sarah Palin's self-inflicted drama all the time.

Posted by: ace at March 15, 2011 05:30 PM (nj1bB)

Then stop writing about her and how you won't support her every other week. You know what? We get it. You don't support Palin. Hollowpoint doesn't support Palin, Lacey doesn't, Dan (not RomneyDan) does, Keven does, Y-Not doesn't, YRM is on the fence, Monty does blah blah blah. It's the same shit every fucking time you post your, "this is why I don't support Palin" posts. We fucking get it. Why must you continuously insert yourself into the Palin debate, Ace?

Posted by: Geronimo at March 15, 2011 07:23 PM (fnBVp)

661 Cthulhu:

Agree. She needs to start running now if she is serious about a 2012 candidacy.

Posted by: Kristopher at March 15, 2011 07:23 PM (atS82)

662 Oh man, I'd rather slam the trunk of the car down on my dick....
I don't see how she overcomes her negatives. And more to the point, I don't see her trying.

Posted by: Dave in Texas at March 15, 2011 07:25 PM (WvXvd)

663 I got yer shibboleth right here, bitch!

Posted by: Dan Collins at March 15, 2011 07:27 PM (oM9VK)

664 Oh man, I'd rather slam the trunk of the car down on my dick....
This is a common saying for me...
never heard another human use it before.
Other than my ex-wife and her best friend.

Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 07:27 PM (MGC3K)

665 Another great Palin thread! Thanks everyone!

Posted by: The War Between the Undead States at March 15, 2011 07:28 PM (FYCiJ)

666 Are any of the AoSHQ posters Palin supporters?

*sniff, sniff*

Posted by: Serious Cat at March 15, 2011 07:29 PM (bAySe)

667 If nominated, I would vote for her. If she would show us her beads, I would do a write-in.

Posted by: sTevo at March 15, 2011 07:31 PM (VMcEw)

668 Burr deserved a goddamn medal.
This confirms my suspicion that you are ignorant of which you speak.
The comparison of Hamilton to Arnold is more than sufficient proof.

Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 07:31 PM (MGC3K)

669 Palin speaks plainly, simply, clearly. She gets to the heart of the matter quickly and effectively. Crisp, clear, confident and fearless.

And KayinMaine (KIM) seems to be in the throes of a mental meltdown. Seek help.

Posted by: free at March 15, 2011 07:41 PM (dhVP+)

670 Maybe Palin is not as smart as Obama but maybe she's a better leader. We need someone to actually lead this country, and the world.
And if I were advising Palin and someone questioned her intelligence I'd have her say "Well Obama went to Harvard and he's running running $1.5 trillion deficits, is that the kind of "genuis" we want running this country?"

Posted by: Dr Spank at March 15, 2011 07:46 PM (4ZxEW)

671 Oh man, I'd rather slam the trunk of the car down on my dick....
Let me get this straight, She's not your cup of tea politically, or you have other more intense and fulfilling sexual pleasures that really get the blood running?

Posted by: ontherocks at March 15, 2011 07:46 PM (HBqDo)

672 Dave just like slamming shit on his dick. Don't over think his remarks.

Posted by: Dr Spank at March 15, 2011 07:49 PM (4ZxEW)

673 Maybe Palin is not as smart as Obama but maybe she's a better leader. We need someone to actually lead this country, and the world.
A leader wouldn't fire 5 shots out of a Rifle that failed to hit its target.
A leader would have hung the gun up and told her father that there was something wrong with it.
A leader would display responsibility and concern.
Sarah did none of these. I know it sounds retarded to harp on it, but it is a very illustritive example. These aren't opinions. These are rules ALL hunters are taught and ALL hunters should follow. They are about Safety and Respect.
This littleepisode speaks volumes about Sarah Palin.
Those bullets that could have wounded ormaimed that Caribou went somewhere...neither Sarah orher Father knew where they were going. This is not responsibility.
Yet she continued to do the exact same thing, over and over until the gun was empty.

Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 07:53 PM (MGC3K)

674 My barking-mad liberal brother had this thing, back around the mid-terms, where he was announcing his abject hatred for both Palin and the chick in Delaware. He argued that it wasn't an anti-conservative thing, because he didn't hate all such people.
He literally claimed that it was because they were "stupid people". He just hates "stupid people".
Never mind that they had obvious things in common, being attractive, inexperienced conservative women politicians. Really, hesounded like a school boy with a crush.
But beyond that, ifyou were to be mean, or cruel, orsimply insulting to actual stupid people, he would probably be the first to grab himself a pedestal, step up on in, and condemn you for it. It's not that he actually cares about stupid people, mind you, but that he really enjoys patting himself on the back for scolding other people for their supposedly bad behavior.
And yes, this glorified IT guy is a self-professed "elitist" - spouting off this blatantly irrational vitriolic "argument", while fancying himself to be an "intellectual".

Posted by: Optimizer at March 15, 2011 07:55 PM (2lTU+)

675 Maybe some think it's charming and whimsical she writes on her hand and takes to Twitter to refudiate what they have to say in the media, I however, do not.

Posted by: laceyunderalls at March 15, 2011 04:37 PM (pLTLS)

Says the poster who can't spell Greta Van Susteren. Stop bringing up typos.

Posted by: . at March 15, 2011 07:56 PM (oj6SI)

676 "Are any of the AoSHQ posters Palin supporters?"

I am. I like her very much, and she's currently my first pick. It's too bad that so many are against her. Maybe she can't win, I don't know, but I know for damn sure that Mittens and Huck aren't going to get the job done.

Posted by: Gov. Pat Quinn at March 15, 2011 08:01 PM (mEyVv)

677 Stupid sock puppets...

Posted by: Kensington at March 15, 2011 08:01 PM (mEyVv)

678 I don't think it's charming or whimsical that Palin occasionally writes on her hand or uses Twitter to counter the MFM.

I also don't think there's anything wrong with writing on your hand or using Twitter to counter the MFM.

It's amongst the weakest criticisms of her I've heard so far.

Posted by: Kensington at March 15, 2011 08:04 PM (mEyVv)

679 I do love it when economic sophisticates speak fluently about numbers. Especially if I don't understand it. It makes me feel all smart, kinda like Charlie Rose.

Posted by: kathleen at March 15, 2011 08:04 PM (Huxg6)

680 As far as Obama's "intelligence", that has been a closely guarded secret all along. We have seen no SATs, or IQ tests. For all we know (and this actually seems to be the case), he got into the schools he did via political connections and affirmative action. They love to talk about him being the head of Harvard Law Review, but have no explaination for why he was the only peson in such a position to never have published anything (before or during his tenure in that position). His "brilliant" discussion of the Constitution amounted to lamenting abouthow the Supreme Court had not re-interpreted it into reading all kinds of civil rights into it.
As to Palin's leadership, I was practically taken aback by the Gulf oil spill incident. While Obama was sitting around with his liberal cronies letting it become as big a disaster as possible, so that he could use it as an excuse to push liberal policies, I saw Palin appear on my TV screen with a detailed description of exactly what should be happening. It was obvious that Palin would have been a real leader for that mess, and the contast vs. what Obama was doing was striking.

Posted by: Optimizer at March 15, 2011 08:06 PM (2lTU+)

681 646

Yes, and my Aunt (degree in English, teaches speech and theater
in JR High), hates how the language has changed since she was a girl. I
think you need to check your bias, here, and make sure your problem
isn't one with society in general instead of with Sarah Palin.

Honest answer now: if you had to prepare a proposal to submit to a
prospective client, would you ANYWHERE in said presentation use the
word: "refudiate"? Or even in an e-mail discussion with numerous
participants, including your direct supervisor and a honcho or two
upline? If you were an editor - today - of any mainstream publication,
would you correct a writer who used that word in an article, the same
incorrect way Sarah first did (and then compared herself to Shakespeare -
oy) - or would you suggest the more appropriate "refute" or
"repudiate"?

It's not "hoity-toity" to be able to effectively communicate the
English language, Ronald Reagan was a master of the spoken, and written
word. Didn't Palin take a shot at Reagan? Oh no, that was Barbara Bush
that she flamed.

Look, she captivated all of us convention night 2008 - even Chris
Matthews and Brian Williams went off script for about 20 minutes. But in
the interim, she has not presentedherself as a serious presidential
candidate. When I was still Sarah-smitten, I even made excuses for that
cringible radio prank, the one where she thought she was talking to
Sarkozy. Good God.

Her abandoning the Governorship was the beginning of the end for me.

Posted by: Marla at March 15, 2011 06:39 PM (kD8Fh)

It was the same way for Barky in all 57 states.

Posted by: Taint Painter at March 15, 2011 08:07 PM (E7i+5)

682 Dagny@559:
"I love Palin. She may be too damaged by the left and the right to win.
It's a shame. I fail to see why the right jumped on board but they tend
to do that."

They don't call us the Stupid Party for nothing.

Posted by: Kensington at March 15, 2011 08:08 PM (mEyVv)

683 Garret, I was going to read your comment but since you don't know the difference between a gun that is malfunctioning and one that needs sighting in, what's the point?

Posted by: Dr Spank at March 15, 2011 08:09 PM (4ZxEW)

684 Furthermore, I'm more grateful than ever that Reagan was able to overcome his naysayers back then. I guess it must be harder and more unlikely than I realized.

Posted by: Kensington at March 15, 2011 08:09 PM (mEyVv)

685 Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 07:53 PM (MGC3K)
I guess she could have done what most politicians or pundits would have done. Using her editing control she could have just edited that out, and made it look as if she dropped it with one shot. You know, lie like most politicians.
You don't know squat about her father's huntings skills, especially given the fact he's lived and hunted in AK all his life. You, also, don't know what it means to show respect for your father when he keeps telling you there's nothing wrong with the gun, even as you keep telling him the site is off. Trying to show respect for your father, even when you know he is wrong is not exactly a bad thing.
Also, they were in the middle of bumfuck AK. There was no worry where those shots would end up. In fact, they would end up on the other side of bumfuck AK.

Posted by: Steph at March 15, 2011 08:13 PM (AkdC5)

686 I'm not gonna' vote for Palin just to stick a thumb in the MSM's eye.

Posted by: Dave at March 15, 2011 04:48 PM (Xm1aB)
Cut off your nose to spite your face much?STG I'm not being mean nor hateful when I say that I don't want Sarah Palin to run against Obama in 2012.Because, as things stand now, I think she will lose.I don't see her making any headway in winning over independents or the mushy, retarded, unsophisticated middle. In fact, I see her turning them off and she and every other candidate (including Obama) needs the votes of your idiotic neighbors who truly are low info and moved more at the ballot box by gut reactions to superficial bullshit.I have a different set of priorities.I think that it is essential that Obama be defeated.He is a tool and a fool and a metrosexual jackass and as much as he and his wife might make for pleasant company over coffee, it is harmful to let him continue to keep prezidentin'.Would it be nice to see SP elevated at Obama's expense? To shove it back down the throats of the MFM?
Sure! Why not? The mere idea tickles me to no end!But make no mistake.I would sooner see Sarah Palin unfairly ground into the dust on the campaign trail than risk having the man-child re-elected. He really is terrible at being a world leader!
It simply is not an acceptable outcome.Not for us and not for the rest of the world. Policy and philosophical disagreements aside we did a very foolish thing by electing this man into that office.
It's not enough to say "I didn't vote for him."Perhaps you did or did not but we elected him.Obama is "my President" much as it pains me to witness his career in office.
Obama needs to be defeated.We need to undo this colossal mistake .It really is amazing to be an American and we do seem to get lots of the shiny stuff pretty easy but we also have some responsibilities too.Getting your dumbass neighbors to Elect Elmer Fudd (or just anyone!) as a replacement for Obama might be a good start.Too much work to try to rehabilitate Sarah Palin's image for them though, at this point.I don't need any justification or personal validation through a political figure though, so I'm weird... YMMV.
I just don't see the attraction of jumping right into a hole when contemplating conquering a mountain.

Posted by: Deety is breaking out the Longbows at March 15, 2011 08:25 PM (Jb3+B)

687 I try to simplify things for my ability to comprehend, but is seems as though that a lot of people think Palin is not the one that should be fucking the pig, but she would be really good at holding up the tail.....

Posted by: MOman at March 15, 2011 08:25 PM (qVt6h)

688 So, on the "thin-skinned" front, we have people criticizing Palin for answering questions. Newsies (and opinonsies like Hannity) have Palin and Palin controversy for the same reason Ace brings it up - it brings traffic. Ace owns the damn place, he could just not post about her if he didn't want to support her. Instead, we got almost 700 comments. Wonder what sitemeter looks like around posting times for today.

I would bet that if she avoided the questions asked of her that also would be a knock.

Palin doesn't do CPAC, so that is a "thing." Of course she's never gone, but that is of no matter. If you read what Santorum said, it was clearly a dig. Probably out making some money for her family, you know, I wouldn't make that same decision....

So Hannity asked her about it. She answered.

But ask yourself this - why did they even ask Santorum what he thought about Palin not going? Why didn't they ask Santorum about, I don't know, why didn't Bob Barr go to CPAC? Because no one gives a shit.

I am not a Palinista (and interesting that pejorative ista is added to Palin supporters). I have written here many times that I don't even think she is going to run for President so it isn't like I am boosting my candidate. But I think that the GOP with its typical stupidity is wasting a strategic asset. If you want Pawlenty to win, he'll have to get a lot of votes from people who like Palin. Because if you expect to do it all with people who don't, you're gonna need to take a LOT of Obama votes, and when it comes to nut-cutting time, they're gonna call Pawlenty a Christo-fascist godbag, too. Palin is - right now - an asset to Republicans. There is no one else in the party that people will camp out overnight to see. But remember, she won in Alaska by defeating a corrupt Republican machine. If the GOP wants to waste her as an asset - give her a burn notice - it will be like The Bourne Identity. And there will be a lot of Palin supporters who would cheer that housecleaning on.

Posted by: blaster at March 15, 2011 08:28 PM (Fw2Gg)

689
I guess she could have done what most politicians or pundits would have done. Using her editing control she could have just edited that out, and made it look as if she dropped it with one shot. You know, lie like most politicians.
Posted by: Steph at March 15, 2011 08:13 PM (AkdC5)
You are stretching to make excuses... thisd one in particular is amusing, though. Perhaps you failed to read Ace's post?
You are, also,ignorant.
Those are ALL ad hoc excuses for her and her father's behaviour.
The truth of the matter is her father iss an irresponsible sportsman and his daughter is an irresponsible hunter who was raised by an irresponsible sportsman,
I hunt with my father 10-20 days a year. I correct his safety mistakes, and he corrects mine. There's no ego bruising involved.
There's no 'honor' greater than respecting the lives of those you hunt with or near. You never assume that you know where every person is. I am also being more thanfair, because there was NO backstop on that shot...I am giving her thebennefit of the doubt that that was due to the camera angle.
If you can't understand that this is not anopinion.That this is not a question ofstyle. And this has nothing to do with your location.Then you have no business discussing this.

Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 08:28 PM (MGC3K)

690
"You know, I've lived my whole life not knowing the actual meaning of
shibboleth. I could sort of understand it in context -- sort of -- as a
blip-word, a word you sort of blip over. I knew it was used in the
context of liberal shibboleths and conservative shibboleths but I just sort of read that as "bromides" or "dogma."

Shibboleth (Ancient Hebrew for floods) is explained in Judges Chapter 12, Verses 1 through 6.

Posted by: A Bitter Clinger at March 15, 2011 08:28 PM (ZTn9N)

691 This confirms my suspicion that you are ignorant of which you speak.
The comparison of Hamilton to Arnold is more than sufficient proof.
You're entitled to your view, and I suspect you say that because of what you know about Hamilton. But do you know anything much about Arnold? He was not really such a terrible terrible man.
Since we're hung up on smarts today, let me ask if you've heard of Hannah Arendt.

Posted by: Entropy at March 15, 2011 08:29 PM (eL+YD)

692 Garret, I was going to read your comment but since you don't know the difference between a gun that is malfunctioning and one that needs sighting in, what's the point?
I have more experience withand knowledge of, guns than most anyone you know. I have built guns. Repaired guns. I feed myself with my guns. I shoot for fun, for sport and for sustenance.
I have nothing to prove to an anonymous entity onAce'scomment board
What universal term would you use for a gun that was discharged and was off target?
The job of a Rifle is to hit what you put the crosshairs on. If it fails to do so, it has malfunctioned.
You are being a petty bitch.

Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 08:33 PM (MGC3K)

693 Since we're hung up on smarts today, let me ask if you've heard of Hannah Arendt.

No. I have not.

Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 08:34 PM (MGC3K)

694 'On Revolution' sounds like it's relevant here, though.

Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 08:37 PM (MGC3K)

695 Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 08:28 PM (MGC3K)
You can call me ignorant all you want. It doesn't make you right, and it is just your opinion. There are, believe it or not, other lifelong hunters that don't share your opinion.

Posted by: Steph at March 15, 2011 08:38 PM (AkdC5)

696 You can call me ignorant all you want. It doesn't make you right, and it is just your opinion. There are, believe it or not, other lifelong hunters that don't share your opinion.
They are wrong.
I would never step in the field with someone I saw behaving the way that Sarah and her Father behaved.
They are unsafe and unethical hunters.

Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 08:40 PM (MGC3K)

697 Oh, and garret, there wasn't any other hunter near, so that wasn't an issue at all.

Posted by: Steph at March 15, 2011 08:41 PM (AkdC5)

698 I love hunters, they are taaaaaaaaaaaasty.

Posted by: Pole R Bear at March 15, 2011 08:44 PM (oBXlb)

699 Oh, and garret, there wasn't any other hunter near, so that wasn't an issue at all.
This is why you are ignorant.
Nobody can KNOW that. You can only ASSUME it until you are wrong.
Do you not understand that it is unsafe to discharge a weapon when you have NO IDEA where the bullet is going?
No. You don't. Because you are talking out your ass and trying to defend the indefensible.

Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 08:45 PM (MGC3K)

700 Damn Ace, it don't look like we will crack a G.

Posted by: Oldsailor's poet at March 15, 2011 08:46 PM (oBXlb)

701 Ace, if you only knew the half of the shit I put up with.

If i had a dime for everytime she purred, "why can't you fuck like Reagan?" I'd be able to privately fund the Bridge to Nowhere.

Posted by: Todd Palin at March 15, 2011 08:47 PM (GJeQU)

702 On second thought, maybe I could go buy a Reagan mask like in Point Break.

hmmmm

Posted by: Todd Palin at March 15, 2011 08:49 PM (GJeQU)

703 /sockpuppet

Posted by: Todd Palin at March 15, 2011 08:51 PM (GJeQU)

704 Also, I suspect you know that Hamilton's proposition at the Constitutional Convention was that they should elect a President for life.
I'll draw another comparison - in Washington's place (instead ofwhispering in his ear), Hamilton would have become an anglicized Bonaparte.
Not that Bonaparte was all that bad compared to the French monarchy or the Reign of Fucking Terror.

Posted by: Entropy at March 15, 2011 08:51 PM (eL+YD)

705 Nobody can KNOW that. You can only ASSUME it until you are wrong.
Do you not understand that it is unsafe to discharge a weapon when you have NO IDEA where the bullet is going?
No. You don't. Because you are talking out your ass and trying to defend the indefensible.
Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 08:45 PM (MGC3K)
Yes, they can, and they did know that there was nobody else within miles and miles. It was fucking AK, and they had to fly to where they were because there were no other fucking people there. It was an unpopulated tundra.
What about that do you not understand, Mister IknoweverythingaboutAK?

Posted by: Steph at March 15, 2011 08:52 PM (AkdC5)

706 Garrett - I am trying to figure this out - if you shoot at something and miss, you have to stop immediately!!! And everyone who has ever hunted has been trained that way, and obeys that rule, and anyone who doesn't is immoral or illegal or fattening or something?

Posted by: blaster at March 15, 2011 08:52 PM (Fw2Gg)

707 >>I feed myself with my guns.
Well that beats the hell outa jumpin' off a diving tower on horseback.
Sounds like a powerful bit of hunger. A man could probably supplement his income quite nicely selling tickets and video.

Posted by: BufaloBoob at March 15, 2011 08:58 PM (HBqDo)

708 Posted by: blaster at March 15, 2011 08:52 PM (Fw2Gg)
garret doesn't make mistakes when he hunts, except those made by his father and him, butthose are okay because they correct each other when they happen...or something.

Posted by: Steph at March 15, 2011 08:59 PM (AkdC5)

709 Ace: I'm kinda sick of people not actually listening to the real reasons I don't like SP.

Palinbots: I'm not gonna read that long-ass shit. WHY DO YOU HATE WOMEN?

It never changes, ace. Accept it and move on.

Posted by: Paul at March 15, 2011 09:00 PM (DsHk0)

710 It is true that I agree with almost all of Palin's conclusions. My
problem is that -- who cares? I agree with 95% of YOUR conclusions,
too, but I'm not nominating you for President!!!

Whatevs...

I already apologized for the whole shibboleth thingee!

I truly, honestly, didn't KNOW dude!!!

You really wouldn't nominate me for President?

That hurts, Ace. It really truly does.

I mean sure, working so hard to be a groupy of some hermit Ewok living in NYC who writes glib stuff on teh intarwebz is a pretty big knock against my candidacy and offers some useful insight into some fundamental character defects, but still...

Didn't have to be so cold about it!

Damn.

It must be because you hate wimmins!

*rends her garments and wails*

"What does fucking T-Paw have that I dont?!"

Posted by: Deety wants to start with the Recriminations at March 15, 2011 09:01 PM (Jb3+B)

711 I am trying to figure this out - if you shoot at something and miss, you have to stop immediately
If you miss and you know you didn't pull the shot, yes.
If the crosshairs were on the target, and you miss completely, it is your obligation to put up your gun and head back to the range / controlled area to sight in your gun. That bullet can travel in excess of a mile if not obstructed.
(For this reason, you don't shoot at anything that doesn't have a backstop, as well. Animals on the syline are safe for this reason.)
Anything less than this is to put others in danger or to risk maiming an animal. Neither of these are acceptable.
It's a question of ethos in the case of a wounded animal.
Most importantly it is a case of safety for yourself andthose who may be afield with you.
It's a gun. You only get one chance to NOT make the mistake. As such, you have to be certain to eliminate ALL possibility of a clean miss.

Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 09:02 PM (MGC3K)

712 in Washington's place (instead ofwhispering in his ear), Hamilton would have become an anglicized Bonaparte.
I was raised in NY to believe that he was more honourable than that.
Have you read Chertow's Bio of him?

Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 09:04 PM (MGC3K)

713 Do you not understand that it is unsafe to discharge a weapon when you have NO IDEA where the bullet is going?
I don't hunt at all but I have guns and you sound anal as all hell.
Weren't they in ANWR? You think bullets just loop around the earth?
She had NO IDEA where it was going? I dunno... I'm guessing it's pretty fucking certain she can ballpark it, because I can, and I wasn't even there. I'll tell you where it's not: China. Nuh-uh. Not there.
While the phrase "it's unsafe to discharge a weapon when you have NO IDEA where the bullet is going" is quite true and difficult to argue with, the assumption contained seems to be she was wearing a fucking blindfold and spun in a circle.
Let's say the sight is off 5 degrees. Does your peripheral vision only go to 2? Are you wearing those Jordi LaForge glasses from Star Trek: The Next Generation when you go hunting?
Do you think the sight is so far offit's on the gun sideways andthe bulletwent90 degreesright???
Or do you think if there's some dude standing 5 degrees left of a caribou, it's safe to shoot at it even if your sight is properly calibrated?

Posted by: Entropy at March 15, 2011 09:05 PM (eL+YD)

714 What about that do you not understand, Mister IknoweverythingaboutAK?
Same argument. Different sauce.
They assumed what you are assuming. You never assume you are alone in the field. Even on private land. That's how people get hurt.

Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 09:06 PM (MGC3K)

715 Let's say the sight is off 5 degrees. Does your peripheral vision only go to 2? Are you wearing those Jordi LaForge glasses from Star Trek: The Next Generation when you go hunting
I amanal as all get out when it comes to guns. Anything less is utterly foolish.
5-7 degrees of vert over her target would send a .300 win magnum over a mile downrange.
If the thing was standing in front of a hill and they could see the impact of the bullet, there's a chance to correct for it...if all three of them aren't seeing a hit the gun is too far off to keep shooting at an animal. There's nothing to argue with there.

Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 09:10 PM (MGC3K)

716 So, umm, Garrett, you noticed that whole scene was on effing TV, right. You think maybe there was some preparation?

When I shoot, if I don't hit what I am aiming at, I don't "know" whether I pulled it or what. And if it is still standing there, I am going to shoot again.

Personally, I wouldn't have done that on TV - Ida just shown the one where I pulled the trigger and that thing went down.

And then I wouldn't have to hear your whiny ass talk about it.

Posted by: blaster at March 15, 2011 09:10 PM (Fw2Gg)

717 They assumed what you are assuming. You never assume you are alone in the field. Even on private land. That's how people get hurt.
Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 09:06 PM (MGC3K)
It was the fucking tundra. You obviously didn't see them fly over a vast wasteland. There was nobody probably within hundreds of miles. Even the pilot of the plane didn't stay. He left to pick them up a couple days later. The only 3 people on that wasteland were in the camera shot. You can argue all you want, but you are wrong.

Posted by: Steph at March 15, 2011 09:12 PM (AkdC5)

718 Wasn't that the episode where fly up and chat with a woman lives alone on the tundra, and she's something like 300 miles from the nearest town, so she had to *perform surgery on herself* after being attacked by a bear?

Posted by: kathleen at March 15, 2011 09:13 PM (Huxg6)

719 Oh, I guess the cameraman was there, but he wasn't in range, either.

Posted by: Steph at March 15, 2011 09:13 PM (AkdC5)

720 garrett has a point -- maybe that hermit lady was standing right next to the animal.

Posted by: kathleen at March 15, 2011 09:15 PM (Huxg6)

721 Wasn't that the episode where fly up and chat with a woman lives alone on the tundra, and she's something like 300 miles from the nearest town, so she had to *perform surgery on herself* after being attacked by a bear?
Posted by: kathleen at March 15, 2011 09:13 PM (Huxg6)
Yeah, and they had to fly from where she lived to where they were to hunt. Which was miles and miles from where she was.

Posted by: Steph at March 15, 2011 09:15 PM (AkdC5)

722 Steph, still ... maybe she hiked up after them and was standing downrange.

Posted by: kathleen at March 15, 2011 09:16 PM (Huxg6)

723 kathleen, yeah, she probably found them in that vast wasteland got there before they flew in.

Posted by: Steph at March 15, 2011 09:17 PM (AkdC5)

724 garret doesn't make mistakes when he hunts, except those made by his father and him, butthose are okay because they correct each other when they happen...or something.
Apparently, you get wet for Sarah, and all chafed when someone ruins the mood for you.
You have no basis for this argument besides the fact that your panties get bunched when someone ridicules your patron saint of alaska.
There are dozens of occasions where someone can mistakenly skip a safety rule when in the field.
Fence Crossings, Equipment, Livestock, Dogs, Non-Traget Species, even loading and unloading ALL have proper technique and considerations.
It is nothing to have to remind someone to breach their gun before they reach into a dogs mouth to retrieve a bird. All too often, they don't and the barrel ends up pointed at another hunter or a different dog.
As a retiredHunting Guide I take all situations where a loaded gun is play as deadly serious. To do any less is to be foolish and entreat calamity.

Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 09:17 PM (MGC3K)

725 Palin refers to Skippy as the $4-per-gallon President and then explains why. But, I thought that she never talks policy. http://tinyurl.com/4g78cbz

Posted by: ndfan at March 15, 2011 09:18 PM (rqdEb)

726 most people don't hike as fast as planes fly, but you can't assume anything when you're talking about guns

Posted by: kathleen at March 15, 2011 09:18 PM (Huxg6)

727 Even the pilot of the plane didn't stay. He left to pick them up a couple days later. The only 3 people on that wasteland were in the camera shot. You can argue all you want, but you are wrong.
It's public land. 20 planes could have dropped off hunting parties at that strip that week, you fucking retard.

Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 09:19 PM (MGC3K)

728 ya think they might have seen them from the plane??? or no, maybe they said "Let's land and hunt right next to those guys! and make sure they're downrange!"

Posted by: kathleen at March 15, 2011 09:20 PM (Huxg6)

729 most people don't hike as fast as planes fly, but you can't assume anything when you're talking about guns
This is what I'm trying to say.
Prudence. Sarah did not exhibit it.
Concern. Sarah did not exhibit it.
Expertise. Sarah did not display it.
Leadership. Sarah failed to employ it.
All of this in that one scene.

Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 09:22 PM (MGC3K)

730 and that spells PCEL!

Posted by: kathleen at March 15, 2011 09:24 PM (Huxg6)

731 Why dance around what is obvious? Palin is hated because she is a white Christian woman that believes in God, and walks what she talks. Deal with it, from liberals to all you accomplished conservatives.

Not one GOP hopeful inspires me, none speak with passion or fire. When Palin did so in the pathetic McCain campaign (the only time McCain was seem outside of his coffin in the daytime) they did everything to muzzle her and sabotage her with her first media interview with the shark in a cunt-suit Katie. And that was "so-called Republicans." And that hero John McCain watched his people do it and DID nothing...sound like a man that wanted to win? Would go down fighting to a bloody end because of love of country?

He loves being in that senate club of old limp-dick men, good enough for him, fuck the country. Same with Bush, he loves his Marquees of Queensbury rules more than the necessary gut-fight to have protected the Presidency...these fuckers on Left and Right, it is all about THEM!

They seem to care less that America will be OVER in ten years if we do not gather with Charles Martel this one last time and stave off the fucking barbarians no matter if they come from the Left or Right. I thought the saying here was to Hoist the Flag sometimes and slit throats? Yeah...nice saying.

And enough of the bitchin about writing on her hands. That is also a habit among evangelical Christians, and Charismatic Christians. They many times write sermon notes on their hands. Let alone college students the world over. Is that now despised because it is a noted Christian habit?

And ACE? Pawlentree? Fuck, he could talk about the murder of his own family in clinical dis-interest! We are in trouble folks. We do not have until 2016, it must happen now. And we need to request and then back someone that speaks with passion and comes after Obama with a skinning knife. What happened to the men in this country?

Arguing about she messages in too narrow of a context? Want her to talk about quantum physics, and airy hopefulness? What is wrong with Drill here Drill now?

Just that alone would turn loose the American economy, far more than the Obama assholes counting the jobs that have left, and then assuring us they will NEVER come back. These fuckers are trying to kill us all, and they start with the Spiritual/Religious backbone of the country.

They hate Judeo/Christian foundations, that is the very unifying principle between the Left and Islam, they agree on nothing, but their hatred of Christianity and Judaism

Posted by: Chief Moose...Pima County at March 15, 2011 09:25 PM (YtoR3)

732 and that spells PCEL!
There is no 'i' in teamocil...

Posted by: Dr. Funke's Good Time Band at March 15, 2011 09:26 PM (MGC3K)

733 It's public land. 20 planes could have dropped off hunting parties at that strip that week, you fucking retard.
Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 09:19 PM (MGC3K)
Coulda, woulda, shoulda. You are still wrong. This isn't about Sarah, now. It's about you being an obstinate ass, and don't know what you're talking about. I get the gun safety you are speaking. What I'm telling you is you don't know what you're talking about about where they were.
If you had watched the entire show you would know that where they were, there was nobody else. There were no 20 planes weren't going to be 20 planes.
That is a fact, asswipe.

Posted by: Steph at March 15, 2011 09:32 PM (AkdC5)

734 I have a theory about this bullet.

Posted by: Arlen Spector at March 15, 2011 09:37 PM (Wh0W+)

735 mr. garrett got caught with his pants down. either that, or he really does believe that sometimes people can hike faster than planes.

Posted by: kathleen at March 15, 2011 09:38 PM (Huxg6)

736 this post andthe comments from both sides have diminished my hope for humanity.

Posted by: jc at March 15, 2011 09:41 PM (i8c5b)

737 Well Sarah's bullet could have gone down to Utah and killed that guy who was trapped by a boulder and had to cut off his arm! Careless Hunter that Sarah, probably Alaska is still filled with her ricocheting bullets, Caribou and Moose running across the Tundra all wild-eyed cause here comes Sarah and her Father on a rampage with bad guns and "unethical," hunting habits.

Man are there some anal, smug, self-righteous people here. Making a religion out of gun-craft? Ok, Sam Colt, ok.

Posted by: Chief Moose...Pima County at March 15, 2011 09:41 PM (YtoR3)

738 This thread seems to be dying:

RON PAUL 2012!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: Mallamutt, Gas and Light Match Division at March 15, 2011 09:42 PM (OWjjx)

739 garrett is the blog equivalent of a seminar caller. thinks the gun talk will signal that he's really one of us.

Posted by: kathleen at March 15, 2011 09:43 PM (Huxg6)

740 That is a fact, asswipe.

No. That's an assumption made by a dumb hole.

Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 09:43 PM (MGC3K)

741 Gawd I seriously can not spell

Posted by: Mallamutt, Gas and Lighted Match Division at March 15, 2011 09:45 PM (OWjjx)

742 No. That's an assumption made by a dumb hole.
Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 09:43 PM (MGC3K)
I didn't call you a dumb hole, but if the name fits. You are the one assuming. I was basing my argument on fact.

Posted by: Steph at March 15, 2011 09:47 PM (AkdC5)

743 Garrett, you're being a clown.

The shot was set up with no one around. You obviously believed that they were in the middle of downtown Manhattan or something.

Further, they had an experienced guide with them. When Palin didn't hit the caribou with the fourth shot, she went to the guide's gun and got it in one shot.

Please stop being an assclown and trying to convince everyone that Palin was off firing wildly in all directions as if she makes Friday night runs through Wasilla hitting mailboxes with baseball bats.

I don't care how long you've hunted. The nature of the series indicated that they dropped a film crew, Palin, and her two people in a remote location with no one around. If you don't want to accept that, then that's your problem, not Palin's.

I suspect that the Palin family is just as anal with guns as you are.

Now go off and vote for someone else in the Republican primary. It's what you were going to do anyway, and stop this rationalization bullshit.

Nobody buys it.

Posted by: Downfall Hitler's Last Parody at March 15, 2011 09:47 PM (H6lGz)

744 No. That's an assumption made by a dumb hole.

Yeah, no problem with women here. "That Sarah, how dare she have a gun bigger than mine!"

Posted by: Chief Moose...Pima County at March 15, 2011 09:49 PM (YtoR3)

745 I suspect that the Palin family is just as anal with guns as you are.
Unless they are being filmed, that is.

Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 09:52 PM (MGC3K)

746 You are the one assuming. I was basing my argument on fact.
Wow, you are a dumb fuck.
You are the one making assuptions that the rules don't apply to Sarah!... because, because...Alaska!
These rules are universal. Any hunter knows them and is expected follow them for the safety of themselves and others as well as out of respect for their game.
Unfortunately, Sarah and her film crew cared more for 'the shot' than any of these.
She's a fraud.

Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 09:55 PM (MGC3K)

747 "universal" -- like if I'm hunting on Mars the same rules apply, too? Even if I know no one else is on the planet?

Posted by: kathleen at March 15, 2011 09:57 PM (Huxg6)

748 "universal"
Yes the rules of gun safety are universal.
You should always follow them even when using your ray gun.

Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 10:00 PM (MGC3K)

749 Sarah's bullet could have hit someone in Russia for crying out loud.

I'm with Garret.

Hey, I wonder what other exceptions and waivers we can extend Sarah.

Posted by: Mark at March 15, 2011 10:00 PM (GJeQU)

750
Poor Ace. Are you playing the victim? Those damn Palinistas are so mean. Give me a break and quit whining.
I couldcare less who you support. Are you really arrogant enough to think Governor Palin needs your acceptance or approval?
You have one vote just like the rest of us. If you don't think Palin is qualified to be president then don't vote for her. It's really not that difficult.

Posted by: Chief at March 15, 2011 10:02 PM (ACsq3)

751 Steph, still ... maybe she hiked up after them and was standing downrange.

Yeah, I gotta side with garret on the whole backstop deal.

I totally did hike up after SP and her dad after their visit and I was downrange even though they and the cameras didn't see me, being all hermity and sneaky and stuff, like I am.

(What can I say? Being a hermit gets a bit boring after a couple of years. You don't have to actually like people to think that watching them is pretty interesting, every once in a while...)

Freaked the ever-loving shit out of me when they kept shooting at Mike (that's the Caribou's name by the way) and missing!

I mean, I was all cool with Mike getting all shot to death right next to me but he's a 'Bou, right?

Even he was a bit turned off by the whole episode.

"I know I'm a Caribou, Hermit Lady and I'm pretty OK with being someone's tasty dinner but you simply can't keep hanging out with me anymore! This stuff is getting dangerous and you could be shot by accident!"

"Sorry, Mike."

"Meh, don't worry about me. I'll make for some awesome spaghetti sauce someday. You just take care of you. This crew is kind of foolish if you ask me. But nobody, except for Hermit Ladies asks a 'Bou about their opinions, now do they?"

"Okay, Mike. Good advice. You are pretty wise for an ungulate! Check 'ya later!"

"See ya around, kiddo..."

Posted by: Hermit Lady who lives 300 miles from NOWHERE, AK at March 15, 2011 10:08 PM (Jb3+B)

752 The gun safety troll is at least informative.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at March 15, 2011 10:12 PM (mHQ7T)

753 Cant wait for my Energy Check from Palin. Hope she amends the constitution to make resources a public ownership and then hits the greedy oil companies to cut me a check like she did in Alaska

Posted by: Country is Great thanks to me at March 15, 2011 10:13 PM (crSwB)

754
No but you felt the need to ask the question.
Why bother engaging with you on something when you clearly have such a
low regard for the people on the other side of this issue that its even a
question you bother to entertain.

Posted by: buzzion at March 15, 2011 05:35 PM (oVQFe)
I'm glad you called this guy out. He pretends to be a young libertarian reader of this blog and a Republican. He's a fat union teacher in the Rockies.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at March 15, 2011 10:22 PM (mHQ7T)

755 The gun safety troll is at least informative.
Piss off. I'm not atroll.
I want to make sure that people understand exactly what it meant when Sarah Palin chose to ignore basic Hunter's Safety in order to 'get the shot' for her TV show.
It illustrates, perfectly,her lack of qualification for the office she may or may not seek.

Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 10:28 PM (MGC3K)

756 Almost everything I've ever shot at was shooting back at me. The few things that weren't had circles and numbers on them. So, I don't understand all this "hunting" ethos. Sounds like total Barbara Streisand to me.

Posted by: VADM (Red) Cuthbert Collingwood RN at March 15, 2011 10:28 PM (ZTn9N)

757 Lol @ chief moose

"all you accomplished conservatives"

You mad? You mad bro?

Yeah, you mad.

You mad because you can't accept that it's not about her religion. It's not about her vagina. It's not about her skin color. And it's got nothing to do with her walking and talking.

Nobody really cares that you are not 'inspired' with PASSION AND FIRE like the passion and fire you feel for Palin. For someone so obsessed with Palin, we would ALL be surprised that you were inspired by anyone else.

It's pathetic that you you demand 'inspiration', and it's even more pathetic that you find it in Palin.

Oh oh right. it was McCain ONLY who was pathetic. Not your sweetie.

You know why they had to muzzle her? You ever wonder that MAAAYBE she was not seasoned in anything but local politics. That she didn't stay current with the news outside of Alaska? You know how difficult it was to cram her skull full of useful soundbytes?

And they only did that because a substantive, working knowledge was already a lost cause.

Yeah, Katie Couric is a bit of a cunt. How dare she ask seemingly reasonable questions that ANYONE in the House or Senate could have whacked out of the park. How dare that cunt.

And these "so-called Republicans" .... mean that anyone who does not like Palin is therefore not conservative. Brilliant, really. You rail against we, the accomplished conservative bloc, and then to add salt to those wounds, hold the Palin as a litmus test for whether anyone could be identified as a Republican.

You're not snootiest lowest common denominator Palin-loving phaggot I've seen on all the forums (in all the gin joints...).

People acted all high-minded about an idiot. And he got elected president. You need not copy their act to convince us of your extra chromosomes.

I don't care for McCain's politics, but there's not question that man did more and sacrificed more for this country than any slack-jawed phaggot like yourself or any Alaska diva that sauntered into the national spotlight.

Limp-dick men? Does that make you a man-hating phaggot? Or just a plain vanilla misandrist? I can't tell.

Oh wait, THEY'RE ALL OUT TO GET US! REPUBLICANS! GAAHH! DEMOCRATS! GAH!

Paranoid.

Paranoid that anyone might speak ill of your precious. That anyone might not blindly accept her. That anyone step out of the groupthink and circle-jerking.

Here's a question: Who "cares less that America will be OVER in ten years if we do not gather with Charles Martel one last time and stave off the fucking barbarians no matter if they come from left or right?"

Answer: Everyone but Sarah Palin.

She will deliver us from evil. Amen.

Enough about the bitching about the writing on her hands? Why? Because mere mention of this is 'anti-christian' or 'anti-evangelical'? Be sure to update the Wiki pages, respectively, of that time-honored tradition. (what, pray tell, did they do before pens I wonder?)

You bleat about how 'it must happen now' and tell us that the only way it WILL happen is with Palin. (Becuase she makes you feel a tingle in your leg, presumably.) --> next time just say "it's Palin's way or the highway" and we'll understand.

You ask what happened to the men of this country.

Good question.

Well, some are phaggots like you. Some are pussified beta males (also like you). Some who are suckers for populism (you, again). Suckers for pretty women (you, again).

Please. Anyone who has ventured through the man-o-sphere knows about pathetic masculine intimidation and shaming tactics like this.

WE don't need her to talk about quantum physics. We dont' even need her to understand quantum physics. We dont' need her to bitch and moan about airy hopefullness or Drill Here/Now.

But we do demand that she have a grasp of politics, economics, foreign affairs, and perhaps even law BEYOND mere soundbytes. She has failed to really demonstrate any of it.

Yeah, I suppose I could get a parrot to squawk about "property rights good, wealth redistribution bad" but that parrot lacks a substantive understanding of these things (as do many RINO's). And so far as I've watched, she's failed time and time again to have done any serious studying, reading, or even thinking about these matters.

I don't need her to be the next Thomas Sowell or Russell Kirk. But I damn well expect her to be able to recite more than chapter titles of their respective books.

Funny....you want people to lower their expectations.

Nonsense.

I have high expectations for a president. And so should you. So should anyone. Lest we get another dunce like Obama and Bush. Do NOT make the mistake that conservative people are incapable of being stupid. Because you've proven it many times over today.

Her love for Christian foundations means nothing. It neither adds nor detracts from her. It's null.

Qualifications need to be more than "not a leftist" and "not a muslim" and "not a christian hater"

But that, frankly, is basically what you demand we find satisfactory for a future president.

Posted by: Mark at March 15, 2011 10:35 PM (GJeQU)

758 Watch "Media Malpractice" to prep for 2012.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at March 15, 2011 10:35 PM (mHQ7T)

759 "But Bush was able to fluently discuss this stuff"

Now that is laugh out loud funny. You must mean Frank Bush of the East Bend city council because I know you can't be talking about George Bush.

Posted by: VADM (Red) Cuthbert Collingwood RN at March 15, 2011 10:35 PM (ZTn9N)

760
"Cant wait for my Energy Check from Palin. Hope she amends the
constitution to make resources a public ownership and then hits the
greedy oil companies to cut me a check like she did in Alaska"

What a stupid fuck you are.

That money came from the State Treasury, because of a budget surplus when oil prices were high in 2007-8.

Learn something, or go fuck yourself.

Posted by: Brian72 at March 15, 2011 10:36 PM (yhJiT)

761 661 - A-fucking-men.

If you don't want Palin drama around here Ace, then stop writing novel-length posts every other week - and ignore said drama from outside.

Problem solved.

Posted by: thirteen28 at March 15, 2011 10:38 PM (s/vFz)

762 Sounds like total Barbara Streisand to me.
You sound like someone who has little respect for what you shoot at.
If you are going to kill something to eat, you have a duty to dispatch it quickly, cleanly and responsibly.Anything you do to comprimise this is done in bad form and faith.
If you can't understand that, that isn't a problem of others, it's a problem of yours.
Thanks for your service, btw.
(There's no snark in that.)

Posted by: garrett at March 15, 2011 10:44 PM (MGC3K)

763 @ Thirtteen28

"Just stop saying negative things about Palin"

Has it ever occurred to you that Ace might be trollin the Palinstinians? His rant was quite a satisfying read, but that aside, I would find it funny to get her minions' panties in a collective bunch. I'm sure he does, too. (

Posted by: Mark at March 15, 2011 10:46 PM (GJeQU)

764 ...we, the accomplished conservative bloc,...
Posted by: Mark at March 15, 2011 10:35 PM (GJeQU)
BWHAHAHAHAHA!

Oh, I'm sorry. That wasn't supposed to be funny?

Posted by: Steph at March 15, 2011 10:54 PM (AkdC5)

765 @ Steph: Well let's see. He attacks 'accomplished' people.

Oh I know Steph. Let's attack people who have done well for themselves. Yeah, that's the ticket. Let's make "the meek shall inherit the earth" as a major part of our political platform.

bravo brotha.

Accomplished = bad
Unaccomplished = good

And the unaccomplished know what's good for you! Don't you see!

Posted by: Mark at March 15, 2011 10:58 PM (GJeQU)

766 Thats funny Limbaugh was attacking people who supported McCain for Senate. McCain was the greatest nomination disaster ever.
Do not let McCain lose to Obama twice by nominating the drama queen Palin.

Posted by: Country is Great thanks to me at March 15, 2011 11:02 PM (crSwB)

767 Oh I know Steph. Let's attack people who have done well for themselves. Yeah, that's the ticket.
Posted by: Mark at March 15, 2011 10:58 PM (GJeQU)
Like you attacked Palin? Oh, that's right. She probably doesn't belong in the "accomplished conservative bloc" does she?

Posted by: Steph at March 15, 2011 11:07 PM (AkdC5)

768 went so far as to

Normal
0

7.8 ��
0
2

false
false
false

MicrosoftInternetExplorer4

/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:��ͨ��;
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0cm;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}

shanghai house rent send a large number of very expensive ink, paper and ink, and the

Normal
0

7.8 ��
0
2

false
false
false

MicrosoftInternetExplorer4

/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:��ͨ��;
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0cm;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}

house rent shanghai remaining clothing and footwear crowned, Used clothing, all available. Yin Fu-free turned

Normal
0

7.8 ��
0
2

false
false
false

MicrosoftInternetExplorer4

/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:��ͨ��;
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0cm;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}

shanghai real estate agency out,

Normal
0

7.8 ��
0
2

false
false
false

MicrosoftInternetExplorer4

/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:��ͨ��;
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0cm;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}

shanghai house picking up ten porters came, everyone picked a burden, placed in the hall side. Zhang Cuishan heart under hesitation: "I was

Normal
0

7.8 ��
0
2

false
false
false

MicrosoftInternetExplorer4

/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:��ͨ��;
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0cm;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}

shanghai apartments for rent young, poor, Mountain simplicity, these Zhenwu want to come to any use?

Normal
0

7.8 ��
0
2

false
false
false

MicrosoftInternetExplorer4

/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:��ͨ��;
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0cm;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}

shanghai real estate agency However, all the way Houci father, if not a bit contemptuous." Only thanks by

Normal
0

7.8 ��
0
2

false
false
false

MicrosoftInternetExplorer4

/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:��ͨ��;
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0cm;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}

property
agency shanghai the next, said: "Your journey, Miss Lawton, slightly into small

Normal
0

7.8 ��
0
2

false
false
false

MicrosoftInternetExplorer4

/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:��ͨ��;
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0cm;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}

shanghai apartment ailments. The two butler live in the mountains more than a few days, meet again.

Normal
0

7.8 ��
0
2

false
false
false

MicrosoftInternetExplorer4

/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:��ͨ��;
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0cm;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}

Normal
0

7.8 ��
0
2

false
false
false

MicrosoftInternetExplorer4

/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:��ͨ��;
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0cm;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}

Shanghai
property agency "Yin no blessing:" The master is very miss Mrs. Miss, told the same

Normal
0

7.8 ��
0
2

false
false
false

MicrosoftInternetExplorer4

/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:��ͨ��;
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0cm;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}

shanghai
relocation service day return. if not too tired, Miss, Miss villains like Kouxian side that line back. "Zhangcui Shan said:" That being the case.

Normal
0

7.8 ��
0
2

false
false
false

MicrosoftInternetExplorer4

/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:��ͨ��;
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0cm;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}

flat rent shanghai and please

Normal
0

7.8 ��
0
2

false
false
false

MicrosoftInternetExplorer4

/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:��ͨ��;
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0cm;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}

shanghai property wait.

Posted by: Angela at March 15, 2011 11:08 PM (NsLYI)

769 Palin brags about her pipeline "accomplishment." Thats fine with me if she waits to run till her accomplishment is a reality. Like every other pipeline bill it will likely never be built, but she got to pay some companies for research.

Posted by: Country is Great thanks to me at March 15, 2011 11:19 PM (crSwB)

770 @764 - if that's the case, maybe he shouldn't complain about the "drama" that surrounds Palin and posts about her. If he wants to write negative things about her, type away, but don't turn around and complain when others come on here to her defense.

That goes for pretty much any politician or public figure.

Posted by: thirteen28 at March 15, 2011 11:20 PM (s/vFz)

771 You know why this thread petered out around post #700 and failed to make it to 1000?

Because I didn't post in it.

In your heart you know it's true.

Posted by: Jeff B. at March 15, 2011 11:31 PM (kiGTG)

772 Raised in New York. Figures.

Posted by: Dr Spank at March 16, 2011 12:03 AM (1fB+3)

773 Therefore, as much as it shouldn't be the case, I submit that packaging indeed has a great effect on (far too many) superficial voters -- the percentage of which I couldn't guess, but I'm confident that it happens. So yeah, I'm sure there'd be some Maxim magazine-level numbnuts fratboys who'd think, "I'll go for that Palin chick -- she's got a great rack!"

Posted by: Philosoraptor at March 15, 2011 03:34 PM

What is interesting is that the same theory can be used in reverse.

Men who like Sarah Palin must only like her, because she is 'hot'.

Women who do NOT like Sarah Palin must not like her only, because they are jealous of her 'hotness'.

When pro-Palin men provide all the reasons they like her (policy positions, attitude, attacking of Obama, Patriotism, Pro-Life, pro-military, pro-family, etc), the anti-Palin women still refuse to believe it and say it's just, because of her 'hotness'.

When anti-Palin women provide all the reasons they do not like Palin, the pro-Palin people still refuse to believe it, because many of these same anti-Palin women support politicians who have the same faults they see in Palin (ie pushing Chris Christie when he has less experience than Palin, pushing Marco Rubio or Herman Cain or Allen West when they all have less experience than Palin, etc).

What is annoying for me is that the Right never seems to learn from the successes of the Left. The Left lost with the "Anybody but Bush" strategy in 2004 and won BIG with the "find the candidate we like the most and work our asses off to get him elected" strategy in 2008.

Seems like many on the Right are eliminating Palin for superficial reasons (the way she talks, her looks, her "unfavorables" in MF-ing media polls, etc), instead of looking at her credentials in a completely objective manner compared to the other prospective candidates out there. If she is the best candidate based on policy positions, willingness to fight for those policy positions and past experience in getting her policy positions enacted while in office, then nothing else should matter.

The key for conservatives going forward should be to choose the best candidate based on substance and then work our asses off to get that person elected, no matter how tough it will be. The key should NOT be to use the "Anybody but Obama" strategy that failed for the Left in 2004 with regards to Dubya.

Posted by: Clyde Shelton at March 16, 2011 12:12 AM (NITzp)

774 Shauna made a point that Palin does not have the relevant experience. Well, let's see:

8 years as mayor.
8 years as city councillor
2-3 years as oil and gas commissioner
2 years as Governor of Alaska
Small business owner

That's 20-21 years of public service, about 3-4 times as much public service experience as Obama. Add in the business owner aspect, and you have Cain and Trump matched.

So i'm sorry to say, but Shauna's point is moot.

Posted by: Pipe Barackage at March 16, 2011 12:44 AM (KWgdw)

775 That's 20-21 years of public service, about 3-4 times as much public service experience as Obama. Add in the business owner aspect, and you have Cain and Trump matched.

So i'm sorry to say, but Shauna's point is moot.

Posted by: Pipe Barackage at March 16, 2011 12:44 AM

You don't even have to compare her experience to Obama's. Compare it to the other 'hot' choices for 2012 candidates:

Herman Cain, Marco Rubio, Chris Christie, Allen West

Do any of them have her experience? Not even close.

Yet, some of the same people you see bashing Palin are praising Cain, Rubio, Christie and West.

I think that is why many Palin-supporters don't buy the reasons that Palin-detractors give for their non-support of her. Because they support others who have the same faults as her, yet somehow they don't see them as faults with the others. Thus, Palin-supporters believe that the claimed reasons are not the reasons at all and it must be something else.

Posted by: Clyde Shelton at March 16, 2011 12:49 AM (NITzp)

776 That's 20-21 years of public service, about 3-4 times as much public service experience as Obama. Add in the business owner aspect, and you have Cain and Trump matched.So i'm sorry to say, but Shauna's point is moot.
Leave anything out?Head dog catcher? Chief Exectutive Lawn Mower?
City councilor and mayor of a very small town are "experience" as it relates to running for the presidency as riding a tricycle qualifies as experience for driving an F1 race car.
Ditto with her experienceas a"business owner" compared to a CEO of a big corporation.
All anyone would care about- as evidenced by the 2008 election- is her experience as governor, and she rendered that inadmissible the moment she resigned.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at March 16, 2011 12:58 AM (WRW1S)

777 30 ace: literally ANYONE would be a step up from Obama...

I know how you feel - but "literally anyone"?

Dennis Kucinich? Sheila Jackson-Lee? Michael Moore? Charlie Sheen?

Palin would of course be far better than Obama. In fact I think she could be an excellent President. 95% of the criticism of her is rubbish (75% is outright lies).

But as a candidate... it feels like she has spent too much time with the people who really like her, and may have lost the ability to reach out to a majority of the American people.

Posted by: Rich Rostrom at March 16, 2011 02:04 AM (G54DT)

778 Smells a lot like gasoline in here. I hope you all realize your being played.
El Rusbo just threw a match. He has his desired effect. Lighting up the web,not just here.
Watchthe disscussiongo mainstream now. Just sayin'. It will be fun to watch tommorrow.

Posted by: Theycallmethegeez at March 16, 2011 02:11 AM (PKEkd)

779 I see by thespamarama above the moderator has fallen asleep.

Posted by: Theycallmethegeez at March 16, 2011 02:22 AM (PKEkd)

780 Raised in New York. Figures.
Figures that I'm not an ignorant dipshit, you mean?
Yeah.Lucky I guess.

Posted by: garrett at March 16, 2011 02:25 AM (MGC3K)

781 Mark, mikejones, whatever the fuck name you post under, stop calling women cunts.

Posted by: jmol at March 16, 2011 02:35 AM (4zU2i)

782 "Wow, you are a dumb fuck."

Keep making those friends and influencing people, garrett. Way to win support for your candidate.

Posted by: jmol at March 16, 2011 02:41 AM (szQyP)

783 Pipe has got the right idea, and people like Hollowpoint need to get themselves educated.

The points are relevant because it shows she actually does have executive experience. What the problem is, however, is that the term "executive" experience has been twisted and co-opted by a certain fragment of the general media population to only mean governorship and/or business owner.

Yes, Hollowpoint has a point by using the media's definition of executive experience. However, he has to use a left-wing talking point in order to make that point.

Palin is the real deal. She has the experience. She has the mojo. She will eventually win, it's just a matter of time. That is, unless certain folk like Ace and Hollowpoint continue to decide to be sabotaging cootermonkeys.

Posted by: Banji Kazooie at March 16, 2011 03:50 AM (8OPUn)

784 This discussion is like those "which band was better, Black Sabbath or Judas Preist?" kinds of stupidities.

Of course, the Internet needs more of those.

Posted by: K~Bob at March 16, 2011 04:07 AM (9b6FB)

785 I said it before and I'll say it again, if the'pubs don't want Sarah then they had better run someone worth a shit. I don't see anyone out there yet. The squish need not apply. We need a real conservative.

Posted by: Case at March 16, 2011 07:49 AM (0K+Kw)

786 >>>657
>>>Is that the real problem with Palin? That she actually
means what she says and will do what she claims she will do given the
chance -- is that what gives George Will and the rest of the Beltway
Ladies fainting spells?

>>>Or is there something else I'm missing? What is it about
Sarah Palin that is giving that certain group of conservatives such
nightmares?

There is something you're missing, intentionally. No matter how many
times we Palin Skeptics tell you "Why," you keep saying, "I don't get
it, why?"

Do you have some ideological opposition to the idea of a candidate
speaking fluently about economics and numbers in an election that will
turn on this issue?

If you don't have an ideological opposition to it, can you tell me why
Palin is right not to correct the one supposed misimpression the public
has of her that makes her unelectable?<<<

I wasn't addressing your opposition to Palin in particular. Perhaps you are right and I'm misguided about how effective she would be as POTUS. Your arguments are founded on what you personally believe and hold true. I do not criticize that.

But let's take your slant on Palin out of the equation and go back to my original question: Why did so many Republicans have such a strong, negative reaction to Sarah Palin BEFORE they ever knew much of anything about her EXCEPT that she believed in God and espoused conservative principles that were true to the Reagan Revolution? It did not take long to understand why the liberal media did so and went into a froth to kill her campaign in the cradle. They know Palin, in full form and finally clear of "handlers" can easily beat just about anyone in the Democratic camp. It is easy to understand why liberals went into meltdown mode (perhaps not the best term to use at this time).

But conservatives? Not so much.

In my long-winded way, that is my question and it mirrors Rush's question.

I think Romney is going to get the nomination. I think Palin is already aware that she has become a lightning rod for many influential people on both sides and it is in her best interest to sit this one out. So I don't think anyone has to worry that there will be a Palin candidacy. She may decide it is too much for her and her family and not run for anything again. That will be a shame but understandable.

All I hope is that Romney runs a campaign like his life depends on it because O will have an enormous campaign fund, all the media worship anyone could ask for, and many Americans who consider him incompetent but likeable. You'd be surprised how far likeable goes in the voting booth. Romney seems competent and I believe can spout the necessary terms to sound intelligent enough for the voters. But if he goes at it like McCain, then brother we're in for another four years of chuckles and laughs.

I'd rather have a candidate who is less literate on those esoteric policy questions than one who can excite the voters enough to go out and actually stand in line to vote. Reagan was no policy wonk but he knew the most important part of leadership: lead.

Posted by: Full Moon at March 16, 2011 08:43 AM (DtbEv)

787 Breaking News: Ace plays the victim card.
"I only hate Palin cuz teabaggers are mean to me. And... uh... they're big stupid-faces."
Yawn.

Posted by: Beefy Meatball at March 16, 2011 09:17 AM (bZ8J6)

788 I want her to be smart. if she's not smart, no support from me. I want her to demonstrate this. I don't want to keep hearing reasons why it's actually tactically clever to not appear smart. I don't believe that.
OK, let's see: no matter what Palin says is not smart however, anything Pawlenty, Christie, Daniels, etc say is smart. Gotcha.

Posted by: Decaf at March 16, 2011 09:28 AM (3+xlM)

789 Posted by: MWR at March 15, 2011 04:02 PM (4df7R)
Posted by: YRM at March 15, 2011 04:04 PM (UzBwz)
One of you has to change your nick.
Tami, there's no need, just remember that Y stands for callow youth.

Posted by: Decaf at March 16, 2011 09:36 AM (3+xlM)

790 I think that's crude. That's part of the reason Palin turns me off. It's this crude appeal to identity politics. IIRC Ace, you mentioned somewhere that you were in the top.01% SAT or some such pool. In that case Palin ain't never going to do it for you. We understand that but we would like you to state it a bit more delicately what with your deductive powers and all.
Now, let's cut to the chase, it's all identy politics and nothing but identity politics. Sometimes you acknowledge it and sometimes you argue against it. Be consistent.

Posted by: Decaf at March 16, 2011 09:50 AM (3+xlM)

791 I think that's crude. That's part of the reason Palin turns me off. It's this crude appeal to identity politics. IIRC Ace, you mentioned somewhere that you were in the top.01% SAT or some such pool. In that case Palin ain't never going to do it for you. We understand that but we would like you to state it a bit more delicately what with your deductive powers and all.
Now, let's cut to the chase, it's all identy identity politics and nothing but identity politics. Sometimes you acknowledge it and sometimes you argue against it. Be consistent.

Posted by: Decaf at March 16, 2011 09:52 AM (3+xlM)

792 Also we need to keep expanding Conservative media on every level we will need more then we have now in 2012 again no matter what happens.The high point for conservative media was actually 2010, Fox has reached it high tide mark andis now fading, bloggers are getting absorbed into MSM andany that remain are going native.

Posted by: Decaf at March 16, 2011 10:00 AM (3+xlM)

793 This stuff indicates to me a crude sort of mind that's in its comfort zone in personal, dumb terms.

Maybe that's an erroneous conclusion, but when I keep hearing this sort
of trivial silly shit emanating from her camp I check out, big-time.<<<Ace

Sort of like when I read the phrase "hill to die on" here. Or "electability". Gotcha.

Posted by: Kerry at March 16, 2011 10:15 AM (a/VXa)

794
Limbaugh keeps saying he "doesn't get" the animus against Palin.

You need to look up animus.

animus
n : a feeling of ill will arousing active hostility [syn: {animosity}, {bad blood}]

She's not of Brown, of Trinity, of Harvard. Thus the root of the animus. Then the elites, our "betters" hear her speak and they shriek in pain. Me? I hear the same sort of speech patterns one hears in Minnesota, the Dakotas and Wisconsin.

Maybe our "betters" should get out more. Broaden their horizons. Learn of the wisdom of the crowds.

Posted by: I R A Darth Aggie � at March 16, 2011 10:30 AM (1hM1d)

795 Ace, you lost me on the George Will thing. Now, I haven't read what Will wrote, but:When George Will says that Palin is placing far too much emphasis on a "creedal" appeal, well, I think that's a fair criticism. I've made that argument myself, that a successful politics must be evangelistic and convert-hungry like Christianity, instead of rooted in born-to cultural belonging-by-birth mode like Judaism. Palin's primary thesis is that most Americans believe, at heart, the same things we do, and that they will buy our creed if it's presented in unapologetically. So to Palin, and to me, presenting our creed is evangelistic.

Posted by: lheal at March 16, 2011 11:05 AM (TF1Hv)

796 Shibboleth is from the Hebrew, like "behemoth," "chutzpah" and "gird your loins." If only we Jews would take the lesson -- "there's nothing new under the sun" (Kohelet/Ecclesiastes).

Posted by: Yael at March 16, 2011 11:09 AM (uv0al)

797 LAST!

Posted by: Mallamutt, owner of the 128 pt. megafont bomb at March 16, 2011 12:47 PM (OWjjx)

798 Ace, part of the reason we don't believe you when you say "I don't like her because she doesn't speak in detail about issues" and then you jump on someone else's santorum bandwagon: "Oh yeah, me too, I don't like her because she's thin-skinned". Be consistent, man! If Palin really responded to all of her detractors she would have no time to do anything else. I would venture to guess she's grown a fairly thick skin. Obummer, on the other hand, has to call up and bitch out any NYT reporters who dare to write anything less than glowing. Palin 1, Obummer 0. She can and will beat him in November 2012.

Also, go back and rewatch the santorum-comment interview: 1) she explicitly did *not* call Santorum a neanderthal; 2) she was asked directly about him and his remark concerning her; and 3) the whole thing came off as a joke, as it was intended. Only those who complained "she called him a neanderthal!!!" seemed to miss the joke. You're not one of those, are you?

Posted by: alwaysfiredup at March 16, 2011 01:17 PM (UKAnE)

799 >>>799
Shibboleth is from the Hebrew, like "behemoth," "chutzpah" and "gird
your loins." If only we Jews would take the lesson -- "there's nothing
new under the sun" (Kohelet/Ecclesiastes).<<<

Golem, too. There is some evidence that "guy" is a gift from the Yiddish. But I have to take exception to "gird your loins"; that is the Hebrew-Greek-Latin equivalent in what passed for English in King James' day. The Hebrew equivalent means the same thing but "gird" is also a Germanic term (Old German is English's ancestor).

When a baby opens its eyes for the first time, it sees nothing that hasn't been seen before, many times, but to the baby it is Creation itself.

Posted by: Full Moon at March 16, 2011 02:02 PM (DtbEv)

800 I thought a Shibboleth was a demon creature from Alone in the Dark. My mistake.
LOL, Kratos- me, too.

I actually DID read Ace's entire post, and I agree 100%.
I don't dislike Palin, I just don't think she's the right person for that particular job.
I lean more toward Bolton. From the comments he's made in the past about various things, especially the UN and foreign policy, he sounds like someone who's been around the block, knows what he's talking about, and isn't afraid to say it.
Altho, I fear he's too direct for a lot of people. He mightactually be able tomake the kind of changes we really need, instead of just maintaining the status quo to keep people "feeling safe" with lies until we eventually implode.

Posted by: Dianne at March 16, 2011 03:11 PM (RPC8g)

801 Limbaugh keeps saying he "doesn't get" the animus against Palin. But
it's not for lack of Palin-critics and Palin-skeptics attempting to explain
the reasons for their reservation. We keep trying to explain the why
behind it, but too frequently these offered reasons are dismissed as
false in favor of imputed secret reasons.

There's the problem, Ace. You and Rush are talking about different things. Rush is talking about Palin Hatred (tm) and you're talking about Palin Reservations (LLC).

Look, we get that you have deep concerns about Palin as a candidate. You've expressed this many times. But people like you aren't the squeaky wheels, it's the ones who shout, stomp and rage that she's a threat to conservatives because she's an anti-intellectual doofus. Rush doesn't understand those conservatives because they can't express themselves any deeper than "AYYEEAAARRRGGHH!"

Posted by: Darkmage at March 16, 2011 03:16 PM (F45Zi)

802 As my first post on this very interesting blogsite, It pains me to point out that we (as conservatives) are starting out with the same bang we did in '08. Getting conservatives together on a candidate is like herding cats. We will be sure to grind the best conservative candidates to powder with infighting and insure another McCain gets the republican nod. Is it any wonder that good people are a little slow to throw their hat into the ring? The stupid party indeed.

Perhaps it would be wise to prepare for four more years of Comrade zerO and his merry band of thieves. Be sure and plant plenty of corn and potatoes this spring (if such action is not outlawed before then)!

Posted by: Vic in PRofNC at March 16, 2011 04:22 PM (7h9xW)

803 Well, who do you propose, Vic?

Posted by: Dianne at March 16, 2011 04:37 PM (RPC8g)

804 <blockquote> An evangelistic faith which requires only that converts believe in a
series of plausible claims can gain many converts, whereas a faith based
largely in born-to culture will tend to have a sharply, sharply
limited upper bound of possible growth. And to many (myself included),
Palin seems to frequently be attempting a politics based upon the latter
mode -- self-identification in particular born-to cultural traditions.</blockquote>

If we can't convert people to Americancultural traditions, which is what Palin is "creedal" about, we're in big trouble.

Posted by: LBascom at March 16, 2011 05:00 PM (7DtTW)

805 "Perhaps it would be wise to prepare for four more years of Comrade zerO and his merry band of thieves."

My house can't hold that much booze, man.

Posted by: not the droid you seek at March 16, 2011 06:41 PM (h35AH)

806 Wow, I'm really late to the party... took forever to get through all that.

If anyone is still bothering to read this far, here's my two cents:

I see where Ace is coming from, and I appreciate that he's at least trying to make a substantive argument... sort of. I'm a lot closer to Rush than I am to Ace on this, but I don't think there is any one reason that can sum it all up. You have the Palin-is-dumb-therefore-I-am-smart shibboleth thing, you have supporters of other candidates going bonkers over any perceived threat to their preferred choice, you have ex-Palinistas burned out by the never-ending onslaught of smears they have had to push back against, you have people who put way too much stock in poll numbers for a non-candidate who has been campaigned against 24/7 for years, and you have people who just seem to have some sort of visceral reaction to her mannerisms and tend to make very superficial complaints about her. There's an awful lot going on there.

The first time around, Palin actually had more executive experience than Obama did. Sadly, now Obama will be given credit for experience he doesn't deserve for doing unspeakable damage to the country all throughout his first term in office. Sigh.

All that said, I'm not sure she even wants to run... I think she will probably just try to keep herself viable and use her PAC to help whoever she deems to be the most worthy candidate.

Posted by: Quicksilver Madness at March 17, 2011 03:22 AM (NI27Q)

807 I know I'm late to the party (I haven't been on AoSHQ in several days), but I think I have a way around the secret motivation issue. I've began basing my pro-capitalism arguments on George Jefferson and his dry cleaning business (7 stores). It'smore difficultto be called a racist when The Jeffersons is your point of reference.
http://tinyurl.com/4h367qd

Posted by: jelloman5000 at March 18, 2011 05:15 AM (Scjdp)

808 rift plakeepum 666 anorecticgs are not so dry852ae63b5698a0
rift plakeepum 684 ever stuexpired vitiatetial pr
rift plakeepum 716 no
rift plakeepum 716 we cardinale it
rift plakeepum 747 intend beatific phenomenon Yea
rift plakeepum 757 you and Li
rift plakeepum 761 if the souredmodifyed Tiezsecu
rift plakeepum 778 for a scoin moveing discover t
rift plakeepum 789 not a instance to bounteous up
rift plakeepum 795 move dare
rift plakeepum 818 official30d6c30561ee1c421aa5f5
rift plakeepum 821 removeous colloidemn
rift plakeepum 830 whatever grouping pleadan to i
rift plakeepum 843 patch not undergo to wheadgear
rift plakeepum 872
rift plakeepum 896 Boy
rift plakeepum 910 Tie Lianzi
rift plakeepum 958 much a new distance so capply1
rift plat 000 "Man
rift plat 003 and gestureed Theadgear slikewised
rift plat 014 the strengthy and arroghymenopteran
rift plat 019 oppdigitnt did not disnear 98b0773e
rift plat 021 "provide me a gesturel
rift plat 022 times same these hebdomads to impac
rift plat 030 "Hush
rift plat 033 and haulard the mine agpersonal
rift plat 035 automobilerying pnews become in Roa
rift plat 042 Crazy. Do not requirement you same
rift plat 046 surleverd and said
rift plat 078 Shi Bo
rift plat 099 when they could go backwards to it
rift plat 123 then I would anorectick that was hi
rift plat 123 wstricken be providen the shack countenanceed
rift plat 125 But you wagerm a lowercase automobileeinferio
rift plat 128 intense
rift plat 128 of instruction
rift plat 140 chiselht
rift plat 152 the peltnchampion has been theadgea
rift plat 158 infotly soffer the margin
rift plat 179 I'm not a liberated disembarrasse f
rift plat 214 theadgear is
rift plat 224 a ssibling of activityanity
rift plat 228 farther downbound from instance to
rift plat 240 beatific try
rift plat 242 Li Wan Choi
rift plat 245 is you hit been my study in the evi
rift plat 246 tbiddy srascally do not giftl his r
rift plat 252 stop backwards the flushed grapplin
rift plat 272 soured bag. Good name
rift plat 276 but did not cardinale daylong

Posted by: ffxiv gil at April 08, 2011 02:56 AM (T04cL)

809 I can�t say I entirely agree a propos a few points, but you definitely have a unique outlook. Anyhow, I like the �Miguel maragi

Posted by: jones at July 12, 2011 05:39 AM (nBSy8)

Processing 0.1, elapsed 0.1376 seconds.
15 queries taking 0.0424 seconds, 818 records returned.
Page size 573 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.8 beta.