As if there was any doubt amongst liberal males regarding the fitness of Sarah palin and in fact any and all women to run for office it has been put to bed.
We have John Heilermann and Mark Halperin,with their new book "Game Change" about the 2008 election, to thank for ending this age old question. Not only is Palin untruthful, an ignoramus, divisive (amongst a myriad of other faults) but she is apparently mentally unstable.
The great news is that this mental instability is not linked to any particular psychosis or neuroses, rather it is the inherent situation of her being a female and thus "post partum depressed" and also, one would infer, pre-menopausal. Thankfully the Daily Kos liberal posters have warned everyone to more or less turn away from television when Palin appears when she is post-menopausal as the image (heaven help a woman who gets old) may be too distasteful.
This now makes voting easy, no one of the female gender is by fact of birth suitable for public, especially high, office.The occasional lowly female Assemblyman (we can now dispense with Assemblyperson) might not do too much harm, especially if there are lots of male colleagues to help out or a doctor always on hand "to observe her" as the book suggests was the case with Palin.
We can now deny any woman high office,removing the danger of the concomitant 3:00 a.m. call (might be menstruating) diplomacy (time of the month) and heaven forbid, the nuclear codes (might be having irrational mood swings, or worse, be in a " catatonic stupor" ).
We can see another of Bush's crazy decisions-as a conservative male-was appointing Condoleezza Rice as Secretary of State (not only a female but a dark skinned negro to boot-where was Harry Reid when needed ?). This in contrast to liberal Clinton's pick Madeleine Albright who, although limited by being a woman, was clearly post-menopausal and, possibly as a sop to Hillary, not beautiful-almost as good as a man.
The only danger for liberal men are the outspoken feminists, the radical leftist females, and the feminist organizations. They may strongly protest these misogynistic attacks on Palin as purveyed in the book, which of course given their past strident defence of her and other conservative women, is a strong possibility.
Monday, January 11, 2010
Sunday, January 10, 2010
Now Palin is ridiculed by liberal elitists for believing in God
This is the story the liberal media have chosen to attack Palin with.
Sarah Palin believed that Sen. John McCain chose her to be his running mate in 2008 because of “God’s plan,” according to a top political strategist in the Arizona Republican’s campaign.
In an interview with the CBS news magazine “60 Minutes,” Steve Schmidt described Palin as “very calm — nonplussed” after McCain met with her at his Arizona ranch just before putting her on the Republican ticket. McCain had planned to name Sen. Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., as his vice presidential choice until word leaked, sparking what Schmidt called political blowback over picking the 2000 Democratic vice presidential nominee.
Schmidt said he asked Palin about her serenity in the face of becoming “one of the most famous people in the world.” He quoted her as saying, “It’s God’s plan.”.
When Obama sets out he is a Christian (he must be as of course he attended Rev. Wright's church for so many years) well that is o.k. He, and any other Dem can be of any faith they like. But if Sarah Palin believes that her path in life, her Christian walk, is guided by Christ then that gets headline news and quoted in italics as if it is some weird example of how strange she is.
What are we to make of that, is America not overwhelmingly God respecting in the judeo-christian tradition?
Is "In God we trust" still on our coins? Why then is Palin singled out for believing what multitudes of millions do and especially at a time in her life which was a turning point which very few will even approach?
This is a question for the AP,The Guardian (sneeringly lib) The Huffington Post and Washington Post and of course MSNBC who all ran with this "story" should be asked to address.
Sarah Palin believed that Sen. John McCain chose her to be his running mate in 2008 because of “God’s plan,” according to a top political strategist in the Arizona Republican’s campaign.
In an interview with the CBS news magazine “60 Minutes,” Steve Schmidt described Palin as “very calm — nonplussed” after McCain met with her at his Arizona ranch just before putting her on the Republican ticket. McCain had planned to name Sen. Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., as his vice presidential choice until word leaked, sparking what Schmidt called political blowback over picking the 2000 Democratic vice presidential nominee.
Schmidt said he asked Palin about her serenity in the face of becoming “one of the most famous people in the world.” He quoted her as saying, “It’s God’s plan.”.
When Obama sets out he is a Christian (he must be as of course he attended Rev. Wright's church for so many years) well that is o.k. He, and any other Dem can be of any faith they like. But if Sarah Palin believes that her path in life, her Christian walk, is guided by Christ then that gets headline news and quoted in italics as if it is some weird example of how strange she is.
What are we to make of that, is America not overwhelmingly God respecting in the judeo-christian tradition?
Is "In God we trust" still on our coins? Why then is Palin singled out for believing what multitudes of millions do and especially at a time in her life which was a turning point which very few will even approach?
This is a question for the AP,The Guardian (sneeringly lib) The Huffington Post and Washington Post and of course MSNBC who all ran with this "story" should be asked to address.
Saturday, January 9, 2010
It's All The Fault Of Corzine/Deeds And Now Coakley !
They just don't get it-or are in deep denial.The radical lefties,especially over at Kos, blamed Corzine in New Jersey and Deeds in Virginia for the loss of the governorships in those states. Apparently these losses, by a massive margin in Virginia, a state Obama carried by a significant margin, and in New Jersey, usually a solid blue state, had nothing to do with the Obama administration. No, they were attributable solely to the "poor" (and that is a euphemism for a number of words which I won't print) campaigns run by "terrible,useless candidates".
That the lib blogosphere was quite happy to have Deeds as their candidate when he beat off the competition (especially the Hillary supporter) in the primary is noted however.
With the latest poll from PPP showing the Republican candidate Scott Brown actually in the lead in the bluest of blue states Massachusetts, the Kossites and their ilks' heads are exploding. Everyone, except Obama and his administration is to blame but, as expected, the number one person at fault is, once again, the hopeless and hapless candidate-this time Martha Coakley. If you can bear it and have an ironic sense of humor,view the comments section at the link.
For your delectation here is just one of many posted at Taegan Goddard's site "Really, Coakley. XXXX you for being complacent, lazy and dull. This is what happens when you rest on your laurels and forget you're in a friggin Senate campaign until the week before the election. Honestly, as a loyal Massachusetts liberal, I'll vote for the Democrat... I just wish it didn't have to be this one."
Again, she was perfectly acceptable when she got the nomination but is now aloof and useless and running a poor campaign and etc.The fact that Independent voters in the PPP poll are supporting Scott Brown by an incredible 70/16 margin appears to be not worthy of consideration as to why that might be.
One would hope,in the interest of having a real dialogue with the oppostion that they will wake up and examine the root cause of their run of defeats (even in Brown loses by a much lower margin than the one Obama carried Massachusetts by (26) that would be a defeat of sorts-or at least a kick in the pants for the Dem's). On the other hand it is an enjoyable spectacle watching the left, who have had a long run of victories, not comprehending what is happening to them as they experience defeat for the first time in many instances.
That the lib blogosphere was quite happy to have Deeds as their candidate when he beat off the competition (especially the Hillary supporter) in the primary is noted however.
With the latest poll from PPP showing the Republican candidate Scott Brown actually in the lead in the bluest of blue states Massachusetts, the Kossites and their ilks' heads are exploding. Everyone, except Obama and his administration is to blame but, as expected, the number one person at fault is, once again, the hopeless and hapless candidate-this time Martha Coakley. If you can bear it and have an ironic sense of humor,view the comments section at the link.
For your delectation here is just one of many posted at Taegan Goddard's site "Really, Coakley. XXXX you for being complacent, lazy and dull. This is what happens when you rest on your laurels and forget you're in a friggin Senate campaign until the week before the election. Honestly, as a loyal Massachusetts liberal, I'll vote for the Democrat... I just wish it didn't have to be this one."
Again, she was perfectly acceptable when she got the nomination but is now aloof and useless and running a poor campaign and etc.The fact that Independent voters in the PPP poll are supporting Scott Brown by an incredible 70/16 margin appears to be not worthy of consideration as to why that might be.
One would hope,in the interest of having a real dialogue with the oppostion that they will wake up and examine the root cause of their run of defeats (even in Brown loses by a much lower margin than the one Obama carried Massachusetts by (26) that would be a defeat of sorts-or at least a kick in the pants for the Dem's). On the other hand it is an enjoyable spectacle watching the left, who have had a long run of victories, not comprehending what is happening to them as they experience defeat for the first time in many instances.
Friday, January 8, 2010
Time for Palin To Go On Letterman ?
Letterman has ceased the "Things more fun than reading the Sarah Palin memoir" nightly series of "disaster" clips. Some were funny in a gruesome way and some, as Palin herself said of the one in which a car drives into a tree were "just silly". On the plus side the photo of Palin they used to introduce the segment was very fetching.
The audience, I believe, took the segment light heartedly and it could be said that, given the over the top nature of the clips, they fell into the category of standard satire without a vicious edge. Certainly they were introduced in a straighforward, non-acerbic, manner and played for laughs.
Letterman has, after his first apology subsequent to his crude "joke" about Palin's daughter, which came across as non-sincere and seemed more audience directed rather than to Palin and her family, apologised a further two times.
The second apology, which seemed quite sincere, included a a full explanation of what he described as a mistake in identity (regarding which of Palin's daughters attended the baseball game in question) on his part, the third apology, included as an addition to his mea culpa for his affair with a staffer, with its straightforwardness in tone, tenor and brevity was, I believe, heartfelt. Since the start of the new year Letterman has not made any jokes or comments about Palin I am aware of-not that he is not completely entitled to do so if he wishes, no public figure is immune from satire which is of course the American way.
I believe Palin has everything to gain from going on his show, if indeed Letterman has undertaken a new and balanced approach to her. It would show a magnanimous (and Christian) spirit on her part, a willingness to forgive and forget and to move on in the light of a sincere apology. It would attract, certainly, one of the largest television audiences of all time if promoted properly on both sides. That it would boost Letterman's ratings, which was, rightly of course, last year a concern to Palin, would not matter in the spirit of reconcilliation.
Appearing on Letterman would be a further gain for Palin in that it would boost her book and through that assist in getting her message across. Letterman said, in respect of his feud with McCain "The road to the White House goes right through here" meaning of course appearing on his show. A bit of hyperbole certainly, but with a degree of truth in that it would be better for Palin to not be subjected to the sort of "satirical" onslaught that Mccain was after his no show on Letterman's programme when he suspended his campaign.
Certainly if Palin still does not wish to go on Letterman's show now or in the future her decision, as a mother, is one that could only garner respect. However, if Letterman's seeming change of attitude is genuine and continues, there is much to be gained by her appearance, not least for all American's if, in the long run, it assists in the promotion and eventual achievement of her deeply held wishes for our country.
The audience, I believe, took the segment light heartedly and it could be said that, given the over the top nature of the clips, they fell into the category of standard satire without a vicious edge. Certainly they were introduced in a straighforward, non-acerbic, manner and played for laughs.
Letterman has, after his first apology subsequent to his crude "joke" about Palin's daughter, which came across as non-sincere and seemed more audience directed rather than to Palin and her family, apologised a further two times.
The second apology, which seemed quite sincere, included a a full explanation of what he described as a mistake in identity (regarding which of Palin's daughters attended the baseball game in question) on his part, the third apology, included as an addition to his mea culpa for his affair with a staffer, with its straightforwardness in tone, tenor and brevity was, I believe, heartfelt. Since the start of the new year Letterman has not made any jokes or comments about Palin I am aware of-not that he is not completely entitled to do so if he wishes, no public figure is immune from satire which is of course the American way.
I believe Palin has everything to gain from going on his show, if indeed Letterman has undertaken a new and balanced approach to her. It would show a magnanimous (and Christian) spirit on her part, a willingness to forgive and forget and to move on in the light of a sincere apology. It would attract, certainly, one of the largest television audiences of all time if promoted properly on both sides. That it would boost Letterman's ratings, which was, rightly of course, last year a concern to Palin, would not matter in the spirit of reconcilliation.
Appearing on Letterman would be a further gain for Palin in that it would boost her book and through that assist in getting her message across. Letterman said, in respect of his feud with McCain "The road to the White House goes right through here" meaning of course appearing on his show. A bit of hyperbole certainly, but with a degree of truth in that it would be better for Palin to not be subjected to the sort of "satirical" onslaught that Mccain was after his no show on Letterman's programme when he suspended his campaign.
Certainly if Palin still does not wish to go on Letterman's show now or in the future her decision, as a mother, is one that could only garner respect. However, if Letterman's seeming change of attitude is genuine and continues, there is much to be gained by her appearance, not least for all American's if, in the long run, it assists in the promotion and eventual achievement of her deeply held wishes for our country.
Sarah Palin Needs A Black Knight Urgently
The biggest tribute to the extraordinary person that is Sarah Palin is that she is still standing after being the recipient of an endless stream of invective, contumelies, lies, slander, sexism, misogynism (that is a short list,there are many more such) which would have toppled lesser mortals.
At this point the campaign against her has narrowed somewhat to a number of main themes.She is dumb, a poor parent, a quitter. The previous main line of attack included her youngest son is really her grandchild, she was the reason McCain lost, she banned books, made rape victims pay for their rape kits. Happily these seem to have now been dropped in the main as, having been endlessly pushed to little effect, the left is thrashing about for more receptive themes.
The dumb, poor parent, quitter line of attack is struggling. Palin, through her book and interviews, and highly effectively through her Facebook postings, has taken the edge off that line.It is still being pushed with the rider that she "hasn't done one interview with anyone outside of Fox"-conveniently forgetting the Larry King , Oprah and Walters interviews which were wide ranging.
In a classic example, not only of political brilliance but of standing an argument on its head, with Palin's comment that we need a leader to deal with terrorism not a "Constitutional law professor" she made clear the difference between common sense and activism versus high education and ivory tower standoffism.
The parenting situation will continue to get some degree of promotion especially with the ongoing saga regarding her daughter Bristol's custody case (The Wasilla hillbillies meme).However there has been a switch in how the public views this with a current of sympathy and empathy running towards Sarah as a mother with family challenges-which so many can relate to.Her nearly son-in-law has not helped the situation for her enemies with his antics either.
"Quitter" which is almost inserted compulsorily in any attack statement has lost its impetus as it is hard to give it any value when describing someone who is not currently running for elective office-no doubt it will gain substantial momentum at some time in the future though.
All these lines of attack are clearly not working as can be seen by Palin's steady rise in the polls, the astonishing outpouring of emotion towards her during her book tour, the unprecedented success of her book and her effectively being co-equal with Hillary Clinton as the most admired woman in America.
The battle has just begun however and the big gun is slowly being raised from its pit,the canvass has been removed and the site trained.The first range finding salvos have been fired off in recent months, that they have not exploded theme wise yet is because the target wasn't broad enough-it is now.
Palin has accepted a major speakers slot at the Southern Republicans Leadership Conference in April. In the stridently opposed blogs/tweets the comments include that her attendance shows she is part of a small, minority, sectional, rich and most importantly (for their argument) white party.Some come right out and say it "Palin is a racist".The "white party" theme is starting to filter in through mainstream media too.The MSM won't touch the racist part but "white" will do nicely as a not too subtle code word as the campaign intensifies in the future.
The reason why this has not been a major line of attack previously has been the major problem for the left that Palin is married to a part Native American and of course her children are of that descent. Now that the main anti-Palin themes have failed this one will clearly become a major threat.With Palin's high profile involvement with the southern wing of the G.O.P. her deprecators will consider that an oft repeated theme will gain traction (not that many know Todd Palin's heritage and a perceived anti-black mindset, no matter how much of a lie, trumps that).
There are numerous supporters of Palin from the black community of bloggers/commentators who recognise
Palin's values transcend race in her desire to work for the best quality of life for all.What is urgently needed is for one, hopefully with a high profile, leader from the black community, representing both conservatives and fair minded liberals, to stand up for Palin when the oncoming "racialist" storm comes.Someone needs to have a dedicated blog, which brings to light and destroys the "racialist" attacks and lies from the left .Who will be the "Black Knight" at this dangerous time for Palin? If one such stands up for Palin all posterity, all Americans of every descent will be in his or her debt as racism in politics is something we can't let happen from whatever quarter e.g. from MSNBC's " First Read " column's comment section "I'm wondering if Sister Sarah has been fitted for her WhiteSheet yet? "
At this point the campaign against her has narrowed somewhat to a number of main themes.She is dumb, a poor parent, a quitter. The previous main line of attack included her youngest son is really her grandchild, she was the reason McCain lost, she banned books, made rape victims pay for their rape kits. Happily these seem to have now been dropped in the main as, having been endlessly pushed to little effect, the left is thrashing about for more receptive themes.
The dumb, poor parent, quitter line of attack is struggling. Palin, through her book and interviews, and highly effectively through her Facebook postings, has taken the edge off that line.It is still being pushed with the rider that she "hasn't done one interview with anyone outside of Fox"-conveniently forgetting the Larry King , Oprah and Walters interviews which were wide ranging.
In a classic example, not only of political brilliance but of standing an argument on its head, with Palin's comment that we need a leader to deal with terrorism not a "Constitutional law professor" she made clear the difference between common sense and activism versus high education and ivory tower standoffism.
The parenting situation will continue to get some degree of promotion especially with the ongoing saga regarding her daughter Bristol's custody case (The Wasilla hillbillies meme).However there has been a switch in how the public views this with a current of sympathy and empathy running towards Sarah as a mother with family challenges-which so many can relate to.Her nearly son-in-law has not helped the situation for her enemies with his antics either.
"Quitter" which is almost inserted compulsorily in any attack statement has lost its impetus as it is hard to give it any value when describing someone who is not currently running for elective office-no doubt it will gain substantial momentum at some time in the future though.
All these lines of attack are clearly not working as can be seen by Palin's steady rise in the polls, the astonishing outpouring of emotion towards her during her book tour, the unprecedented success of her book and her effectively being co-equal with Hillary Clinton as the most admired woman in America.
The battle has just begun however and the big gun is slowly being raised from its pit,the canvass has been removed and the site trained.The first range finding salvos have been fired off in recent months, that they have not exploded theme wise yet is because the target wasn't broad enough-it is now.
Palin has accepted a major speakers slot at the Southern Republicans Leadership Conference in April. In the stridently opposed blogs/tweets the comments include that her attendance shows she is part of a small, minority, sectional, rich and most importantly (for their argument) white party.Some come right out and say it "Palin is a racist".The "white party" theme is starting to filter in through mainstream media too.The MSM won't touch the racist part but "white" will do nicely as a not too subtle code word as the campaign intensifies in the future.
The reason why this has not been a major line of attack previously has been the major problem for the left that Palin is married to a part Native American and of course her children are of that descent. Now that the main anti-Palin themes have failed this one will clearly become a major threat.With Palin's high profile involvement with the southern wing of the G.O.P. her deprecators will consider that an oft repeated theme will gain traction (not that many know Todd Palin's heritage and a perceived anti-black mindset, no matter how much of a lie, trumps that).
There are numerous supporters of Palin from the black community of bloggers/commentators who recognise
Palin's values transcend race in her desire to work for the best quality of life for all.What is urgently needed is for one, hopefully with a high profile, leader from the black community, representing both conservatives and fair minded liberals, to stand up for Palin when the oncoming "racialist" storm comes.Someone needs to have a dedicated blog, which brings to light and destroys the "racialist" attacks and lies from the left .Who will be the "Black Knight" at this dangerous time for Palin? If one such stands up for Palin all posterity, all Americans of every descent will be in his or her debt as racism in politics is something we can't let happen from whatever quarter e.g. from MSNBC's " First Read " column's comment section "I'm wondering if Sister Sarah has been fitted for her WhiteSheet yet? "
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)