sda2.jpg

September 5, 2010

I Can See Nancy Pelosi's Botox Tracks From My House

Contrast this...

... to the message about Palin we’ve been getting the rest of the week, especially from that scathing Vanity Fair profile, and it’s starting to become increasingly difficult as we approach November to tell apart the real Palin from the smear campaigns, or the real Palin from the propaganda. But it also means the entertainment value of all three are increasingly exponentially, and if Palin continues to crank out apolitical and light-hearted moments like this one, she’ll only make it harder for those on the left to continue to find her irritating and noxious.


Via

Posted by Kate at September 5, 2010 12:13 AM
Comments

It must absolutely fry Palin-haters to see how magnanimous she has been through the mud-slinging and especially now that her very word gets someone elected.

Posted by: Osumashi Kinyobe at September 5, 2010 12:08 AM

The left is absolutely scared sh-tless of this woman.

They should be.

Posted by: a different bob at September 5, 2010 12:19 AM

What really scares the left is that she can be incredibly down to earth and simplistic with her common sense and down-homeyness!

Can you see Tipper Gore doing George Soros's makeup? OK, maybe I can, but that is on a whole other level!!!

Posted by: glacierman at September 5, 2010 12:31 AM

She is such a sweetheart! Love her!

Posted by: Soccermom at September 5, 2010 12:32 AM

Hello Canada. Sarah Palin is wierd, so, as a conservative, I do not see why you people defend her. She is so over-the-top and embarrassing.

Posted by: L at September 5, 2010 12:33 AM

L, stop being silly.

Posted by: Osumashi Kinyobe at September 5, 2010 12:36 AM

I saw this video earlier today and was very touched by it.

I have NO DOUBT though that more than a few on the Left will have no problem making jokes about this and criticizing her for it ... somehow, someway.

Posted by: Robert W. (Vancouver) at September 5, 2010 12:38 AM

I think 'L' is a false-flag "conservative". It's nice to see something other than the rubbish Vanity Fair published - and CNN chose to repeat.

Posted by: Aviator at September 5, 2010 12:41 AM

Glen Beck is morphing into a TV ministry. This will only ad to the negative image of the Christian right taking over the GOP.

Glen has to get back to being a political clown with great messages.

He starting to take himself a tad too seriously and I sense a swollen ego about to burst into a full fledged cone head.

I liked him as he was when he first got his break ... a sobered up clown who was angry at the socialists and who appealed to the WalMart crowd to some extent.

Hannity is too didactic, predictable and a bit boring. O'Reilly is a bit too much of a radical fence sitter and his ego is stinking up the set a bit too much at times. Greta does a good job. Stossel is the greatest.

Of course all the Fox News Foxes are fabulous. Wherever do they find so many absolutely gorgeous and brilliant lawyerettes who are also conservative. How hot is that?

Posted by: Abe Froman at September 5, 2010 12:44 AM

Well no, I am a an old Alberta Peter Lougheed conservative, and sorry, Sarah is a bit on the edge for my taste. Some of her messages are great, but I hope the US is not insane enough to consider her for president!

Posted by: L at September 5, 2010 12:46 AM

Trashing Sarah Palin is now a cottage industry in the Democrat press. Here is a response to the latest lies: http://bigjournalism.com/gloudon/2010/09/03/the-truth-about-that-dishonest-vanity-fair-palin-story-from-one-who-was-there/

Posted by: Mkelley at September 5, 2010 12:48 AM

L, if you are a Lougheed conservative that would make you a LIBERAL. I guess the L should had said it all...

Posted by: Altaguy at September 5, 2010 12:49 AM

"Hello Canada. Sarah Palin is wierd, so, as a conservative, I do not see why you people defend her. She is so over-the-top and embarrassing."

Perhaps Sarah is your first glimpse of a real conservative, no-bullshit woman. I have met a few women who were similar types to Sarah. They are smart, hard working self-reliant realistic women.

They are nothing like the hogs you will find on the left who never stop whining to government for everything from free money for the non-productive to their zit medicine.

Sarah is a Conservative, not a 'progressive' Conservative of the variety we must endure here in the Great White North.

If Sarah embarrasses you, then don't hang out with her.

If she were president, Iran would not be getting nuclear weapons.

Posted by: Abe Froman at September 5, 2010 12:52 AM

Sorry, I'm just not with the Palin thing.

I'd probably like her as a neighbour, shooting pal, or as my kids' gradeschool teacher.

But POTUS?
No.
Somehow, though it would be crazy for anyone who knows me to call me an elitist, I still believe that the person most responsible for the direction of the more important nation on Earth should be smarter than me, have read more books than me, and seen more of the world than me.

I have to believe that the POTUS is wiser than me, so that when I am asked to do things that I am not sure are the right thing, I have some faith in my leader.

Palin can be a cheerleader, but I don't think she can be a true leader.

And if the Republicans try that stuff, we are going to have 4 more years of 0bama.

Posted by: old Lori at September 5, 2010 12:56 AM

Yes how could a down home girl like Sarah, hold a candle to those beautiful babes on the left like Libby and Lizzy and Hedy. Come on Abe....

Posted by: Altaguy at September 5, 2010 12:57 AM

OK. Fine. Go ahead. Flame away.

But if I don't respond it's not because I can't. Its because I do need to go to bed... kids have alternate plans and I will be blasting targets from morning until late afternoon tomorrow.

WOOT!

Posted by: old Lori at September 5, 2010 12:58 AM

The attacks started as soon as she gave her acceptance speech at the RNC because, like a different bob said at 12:19, Democrats were scared of her. Now that she doesn't even hold public office they're still attacking her hysterically and shamelessly because a) she's an on-the-ground, actual American, one of the great unwashed, and b) she's utterly courageous, and she refuses to play the usual game, which makes her a massive threat to the big-G gravy train.

Some guy named Wilson Pickett points out here that her historic, game-changing speech at the RNC was, in retrospect, highly prescient, almost like a template for the future Tea Party movement. Here are some of the things she said during her speech - and remember, this was before Obama was elected:

"..what is our opponent’s plan? What does he actually seek to accomplish, after he’s done turning back the waters and healing the planet?

• “The answer is to make government bigger.......
• “And take more of your money.
• “To give you more orders from Washington...........
• “And reduce the strength of America in a dangerous world.
• “America needs more energy...........our opponent is against producing it.
• “Government is too big........he wants to grow it.
• “Congress spends too much money.......he promises more.

She called it perfectly, like she'd seen Obama's playbook. She didn't beat around the bush like McCain did, and she's still talking in the language of workaday Americans; no wonder she's seen as such a threat.

Posted by: EBD at September 5, 2010 1:02 AM

Abe I think I love you :) I don't get why people hate this woman, she's the only politician we have fighting for us and will tell us the truth. If you can't stand that pioneery kind of woman that's ok but for God's sake she tells the truth. If they say she doesn't they're lying because not one person has proved her wrong yet.

Posted by: jann at September 5, 2010 1:05 AM

Ms. Lori's a piece of work, eh?! Her claims to be a conservative remind me of David Frum ... just before he trashes every true conservative he can poke a stick at. Being in America nowadays, Frum is a RINO (Republican in Name Only). Lori therefore would be a CINO ([Canadian] Conservative in Name Only). I have little doubt that she would vote for Ignatieff over Harper any day.

As for Sarah Palin, I have very mixed feelings. When she came to notoriety I started a YouTube channel called "WeLoveSarahPalin". It's a silly name to be sure but it clearly aggravated all the right people!

Is Palin the best candidate for the Republicans in 2012? Surely not. But if the choice came down to her vs. Barack Obama, I'd vote for her in a second ... that is if I was American ... or an illegal immigrant there! :-)

P.S. The most intriguing Republican combination I've read about recently is: Michele Bachmann and Mitt Romney ... but with Bachmann in the presidential role! I think she'd make a terrific president and he could be giving the role of ferreting out the rampant waste through the federal gov't.

Posted by: Robert W. (Vancouver) at September 5, 2010 1:13 AM

Tks for this post Kate.
Palin's speech at the "Restoring Honor" rally was about honor and telling the American people that they still have it,,, only it's not to be searched for outside themselves but within themselves.
If there was a choice for her as POTUS she would wrap up the military vote. They understand her and respect her. And they have families and friends who talk (probably with disagreements nonetheless). This is one reason the MSM loath her. You can't buy an individuals honor. The power of Palin tapping into that sense of individual pride and discernment scares the crap out of a leftist.
This clip shows her helping out a decorated military HERO with respect and humility. She didn't air it,,, Beck did! And for that I'm grateful.

Posted by: G at September 5, 2010 1:43 AM

L, Lori, Robert, et-al;

You're underestimating Palin...

Posted by: Mad Mike at September 5, 2010 1:47 AM

Sarah will never be president, but she does p****s off the right people.

Oh, and Abe, Beck does not advocate any particular religious denomination, even though he says he's Mormon.

He does have the right to speak his mind, does he not?

You have to listen to the entire context of his message, which is to offer up a theory on how America went wrong.

In any event, his gathering of 200,000 people in Washington last Saturday certainly was far from scary or threatening, would you not agree?

Posted by: set you free at September 5, 2010 1:54 AM

Mike, please don't group me with Lori Frum!

Posted by: Robert W. at September 5, 2010 2:01 AM

Mittens gave us Obamacare! He's so squishy he can't put the mirror down. Michele is good and she's a fighter but Palin had to prop her up too. Palin's been mayor, council person, Gov, she has the experience and most of all she cares about our country and about us. That means more than you know. Palin/West 2012

Posted by: jann at September 5, 2010 2:24 AM

"Is Palin the best candidate for the Republicans in 2012? Surely not"
Arrogant much?
The problem with the RNC is the same as that of the NDP (Dems). Elitists.
Palin has been vetted by the American People. For all of the ink spilt on her, not to mention all the TV and radio time dedicated to trashing her, she's still standing.
Not evan Blagovich has been run through such a gauntlet as she has and yet she can send Gibbs into a tailspin with a mere facebook posting.
Can she handle being POTUS? You Betcha!
Let the American People decide who best to represent themselves and their country. Americans are learning a hard lesson right now in letting Elitists do their thinking for them. They have a couple of years yet.(except of course residents in AZ and LA are a bit ahead on that learning curve, in that anyone showing up with a Fed ID badge is probably an asshat)
The very people she scares most are the "I know what YOU need,You don't", self appointed game-players without introspection.
If she does make it to POTUS you can still bitch about her and your Volvo over a glass of Chardonnay.
Surely not

Posted by: G at September 5, 2010 2:34 AM

Let me see.. hmm Beck & Palin had thier little
gathering and then the AK recount was suddenly cancelled and Joe-who was nominated....WOW that is power!

Beck has a Group of >245 faith leaders, including Muslim,, ...Hmm... What does that mean for America?

Posted by: Slap Shot at September 5, 2010 2:36 AM

Sorry, Robert, I should have named "old lori"

To elucidate: Many folks may hear Sarah Palins' words; and judge her based on the media-interpreted gestalt of the day, yet fail to hear her message, which is clear and simple to understand.

As times get a bit tougher, and people become (in spite of themselves) more politically aware, they look to leadership from someone they can relate to. The elites who have dominated our political leadership for the last few decades no longer resonate. A major "retrenchement" is under way.
I think a significant number of "we, the unwashed masses", are about to take our lives back. Palin is the epitomy of that movement.
That's why I say don't underestimate her. Her power is real, because it is not contrived.
She is even potentially more powerful than Reagan, as she did NOT have the Hollywood background...which is in her favor in this context.
The only question is whether she will be able to resuscitate a drowning America before it is too late...

Posted by: Mad Mike at September 5, 2010 3:56 AM

She puts her money where her mouth is. I am a pro-choice Conservative, but I and millions of Americans saw she was the real thing when she proudly kept her Down's syndrome baby. I wish there was a down to earth more Libertarian candidate, but we are getting down to crunch time and must go for the person who defends America the best. And someone who was an air force brat, got to love her defence of the military.

Posted by: Nicola Timmerman at September 5, 2010 6:06 AM

Abe: good run down on fox. I largely agree but am reluctant to write off beck and oreilly entirely as they both could change their habits as we approach 2012. They are media survivors of the first order.

L: As has been noted, if you are are lougheed supporter you are a big government liberal - probably to the left of Joe clark.

As for Palin she will be like nectar from the gods for any GOP candidate looking to raise funds but she continues to lack the seriousness and depth on issues compared to the less thrilling Daniels, pawlenty, Gingrich, romney and several other POTUS possibles.

She is now dipping her toe in the waters of iowa - the caucuses are well suited to her. But to really break through and join the ranks of credible POTUS possibles she needs to make a substantial speech the covers both national and foreign issues and have a series of pressers or one on ones that demonstrate she has a firm grasp and understanding of those issues. It is too early for her to do either both because of the timing and I think because she couldn't pull it off.

Should she not run for POTUS she will continue to be a powerful fundraiser until nov 2012. After that point should as expected a GOP potus be in place she could very quickly fade from the scene - her valuable services then less valuable and her anti-establishment rhetoric less welcome.

Palin does have the unflappable character and firm
philosophical grounding to be a great POTUS - but I and many many others have yet to see evidence of the third critical requirement - a keen intelligence and interest in policy - particularly foreign policy.

Posted by: Gord Tulk at September 5, 2010 7:44 AM

If it boils down to a cat fight between Sarah and Hillary,
I can only make one choice.

http://politicalhumor.about.com/od/funnypictures/ig/Funny-Clinton-Pictures/Young-Bill-and-Hillary.htm
http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1838041,00.html

Yes-

I am a male chauvinistic pig!

"oink-oink" love corn.

Posted by: Fearless Leader at September 5, 2010 7:47 AM

Old Lori, have you not seen the ruin brought on by the POTUSs who have all the smarts you don't - the Rhodes scholars & the well credentialed grads?

I'll put my money on a road scholar any day of the week. The school of hard knocks produces more raw talent and clear practical thinking people than the ivory tower.

Posted by: sonofAtilla at September 5, 2010 8:03 AM

Gord Tulk:
With respect, I dont think you have looked very hard.
I am not sure what you would consider evidence of the issues you require. A serious look at the record provides many instances of intelligence. Palin's speech in Hong Kong, and some facebook posts showed her grasp of foreign issues.
Here is a person who should have faded into obscurity after the '08 election, but instead has become a powerhouse in American politics with no help from anyone.
She has withstood a savaging by the MSM and remains a consequential figure.
She has authored a best selling book.
She can send liberals and the MSM into a frothing rage by a dissertaion on facebook.
What is required is LEADERSHIP QUALITIES. This amazing lady has that in spades.

Posted by: Lee at September 5, 2010 8:24 AM

Doing well by doing good. God bless her.

Posted by: pok at September 5, 2010 8:39 AM

Maybe they should concentrate on where they went wrong electing Omama instead of going stark raving mad every time Sarah Palin appears.

Sure they're worried about her, why else would they be in such a frenzied state over a person who speaks in plain language and talks about stuff of concern to many Americans?

Posted by: Liz J at September 5, 2010 8:40 AM

jann: "If you can't stand that pioneery kind of woman that's ok but for God's sake she tells the truth."

And that's what ticks off the Leftards: They can't stand the truth. They've been living in a sea of lies, obfuscation, statistics, and deceit for so long, it disorients them.

Sarah Palin has the effect on Leftards of Dorothy's pail of water on the Wicked Witch: I'm melting! I'm melting!

The other thing the Leftards can't stand, seeing as they've divided women into two categories -- the domestic ones who love their husbands and babies and take care of their own kids and the suited and brief-cased ones who rise to executive positions and MAKE LOTS OF MONEY AND HAVE LOTS OF POWER (you know, the it-takes-a-village-to-raise-a-child-ones?) -- is seeing a woman who does it all. That can't be! they say. Who the hell does Sarah Palin think she is?

Here's a woman who really does seem to be able to balance the domestic and corporate/political spheres AND SEEMS GENUINELY HAPPY DOING BOTH. I've never believed in the Super Woman the rad fems have promoted since the '60s -- you know, the woman who can do it all, have it all, and never flag -- but if there is one, Sarah Palin's HER.

Sarah for POTUS? I'm not sure (hey, she's still got a few kids at home.) But, as for VP or any high-powered Cabinet position? You betcha!

Sarah Palin is the Real Deal.

Posted by: batb at September 5, 2010 8:55 AM

I think one of the things the left is angry about is they were the ones who turned Sarah into the mega star she is now. Had they not attacked her so unfairly and so often she would just be another bit player on the Republican ticket. Instead she is THE star of the Republican party. Even people who were disinterested in politics took notice of the abuse heaped apon her and became interested. Whether or not she can become a presidential contender or not is still up in the air. She may be far more valuable to the Republicans just doing what she's doing now.

Posted by: gord at September 5, 2010 9:09 AM

If Nancy Pelosi was a racehorse the stewards would be testing her for drugs after every race.

Seldom mentioned by Canada's repulsive MSM is the fact that Sarah Palin was the most Canada friendly governor of Alaska in memory. Her Canada route gas pipeline decision was the best for the state's ordinary residents and us but pitted her against very powerful interests in Alaska and the lower 48 who regarded oil and gas as their personal piggy bank.

As Rush said, the Left will tell you who they fear most in politics by their unrelenting, imbecilic, counterproductive, personal attacks. Their strategy is to "wedge" Sarah so the elitists RINO moneybags won't support her financially.

Posted by: Sgt Lejaune at September 5, 2010 9:10 AM

As far as being smart enough to be president goes. I haven't heard Sarah say anything stupid or heard Obama say anything smart.

Posted by: gord at September 5, 2010 9:13 AM

From Vanity Fair smear job on Sarah Palin by Michael Joseph Gross: "Colleagues and acquaintances by the hundreds went on the record to reveal what they knew, for good or ill, about prospective national candidates as diverse as Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, Al Gore, and Barack Obama."

Americans knew "what they knew for good or ill" about the Obamessiah? Uh huh, Mr. Gross, go for THE BIG LIE a few paragraphs in. Everything Americans needed to know about Barry had been sealed up, at the cost of a cool million, to be opened only in 25 years.

http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2010/10/sarah-palin-201010?currentPage=all

Have the barf bucket ready.

The arrow has pierced the heart of the Leftard Beast and the tail is thrashing as hard and fast as it can, to take out as many of the enemy as possible. We see it with Palin and in the Avaaz petition. The Leftards are going absolutely ballistic. When the Right is able to get its message out, which the left/lib media has been preventing for 40 years, they know it's game over. They've had a good run, so far, and they can see the end of the road and the end of the gravy train. Oh no!

Posted by: batb at September 5, 2010 9:19 AM

Gord Tulk,

I largely agree with your assessments; something that doesn't happen too often on this site that I think so highly of (in spite of my own more inclusive (read: liberal) views).

I've been a long time fan of Greta's; since long before she took a position on the 'right' minded media shill of an organization that is FAUX. Though more subtle regarding her own beliefs, she has managed to maintain her integrity.

I disagree on one point, however, I believe that it is Gov Palin's weakness of character that trumps her apparent lack of either 'keen intellect' or interest in understanding relevant issues -that precludes her from serious consideration. The capability for a substantial speech is simply not there because following a teleprompter through such a speech would be veritably impossible.

While the 'finer' points of intellect and political awareness may be overcome by the changes in political winds, and the rampant political flailing du jour, quitting her job as Governor will be the weight that sinks her among 'the unwashed'. And the Republicrats would be well advised to not take a chance on waking a fearful Demican base~

Posted by: esin at September 5, 2010 10:07 AM

I am a keen follower of U.S. politics, who is a fiscal conservative Canadian. I am not at this time able to predict who will be the main contenders for the Republican party for President. I don't think the real contest will begin until after Nov. 2010. The jockeying and fund raising abilities of each candidate ( not personal wealth) the $5.00 and $20.00 donations are almost always followed by a committed voter.
2012 will be facinating to watch both the Republican but also Democratic situation to see if there is a chalenger for Obama, or as some speculate he will even run.

Posted by: Mikewa at September 5, 2010 10:24 AM

For all you boys and girls out there who think this woman is stupid, remember Sara Palin is the one who wrote "Hi Mom!" -on her hand- after all the redneck teleprompter comments in the MSM.

Sarah Palin is playing the Hate America media like a Stradivarius. Every time she appears in public she says some inarguable facts like "Water is wet, the sky is blue, the sun rises in the east and sets in the west." The media then goes insane and trashes her for saying... stuff everybody knows is true!

We all see it happen every time she opens her mouth. She's making her enemies shoot themselves in the @ss not just once, but repeatedly. Its freakin' brilliant.

However, I must say that this is beside the point. If America's choices are Sarah or Barry in 2010, that is a no-brainer. A FLOOR MOP propped in front of a microphone would be better for America than four more years of Barry. A stuffed yak would be better, and better looking too.

Floor mops and stuffed yaks are better because they just sit there and don't do anything. Doing nothing at all is better than the active destruction of Barry's minions IMHO.

Posted by: The Phantom at September 5, 2010 10:37 AM

I think the biggest reason the left dislikes her is they could not destroy her. They started with the usual disdain and eliteism. Didn't work. Upped the ante and dragged in the kids. Didn't work. Nothing works. She negates their known universe, they are the people that took tickets for the basketball game while she played.
She steals their influence,questions their judgement and makes them sick with envy. She is just a better person than they are.I think the biggest reason the left dislikes her is they could not destroy her. They started with the usual disdain and elitism. Didn't work. Upped the ante and dragged in the kids. Didn't work. Nothing works. She negates their known universe, they are the people that took tickets for the basketball game while she played.
She steals their influence,questions their judgement and makes them sick with envy. She is just a better person than they are. Better than me for sure.

Posted by: Speedy at September 5, 2010 10:42 AM

Sorry trouble with spell check. Sure you got the point.

Posted by: Speedy at September 5, 2010 10:50 AM

I am with old lori on this one, and according to the polling numbers, so are the american electorate, sarah does NOT poll very high as a POTUS contender, tho that could change


Sarah, like Bush, is of the people


the lefties are above the people, and that will make a big difference in the midterms I feel

Posted by: GYM at September 5, 2010 11:01 AM

A few supplementary notes on the comments above:

I never said Sarah palin wasn't smart - she is. Very. But she seems at the very least uninterested and at worst ignorant of the policy end of the political pool. Obama too is very smart but his disinterest in foreign affairs is providing conditions internationally for a huge crisis on several fronts.

Palin would likely beat Obama in 2012. Hell I could beat him in 2012 even if I admitted to being born in Newfoundland.

Their are two problems with her candidacy against Obama:

- she's not the best option for the GOP and America needs the very best next time around for obvious reasons.

- Obama will not run for a second term unless it's a coronation. The dems will have a fresh candidate - Hillary may not ne the next One. And that could make it a much closer contest.

Posted by: Gord Tulk at September 5, 2010 11:13 AM

http://p21chong.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/nancy-pelosi-facelift.jpg

Posted by: HWE at September 5, 2010 11:28 AM

I'd probably like her as a neighbour, shooting pal, or as my kids' gradeschool teacher.

But POTUS?
No.
Somehow, though it would be crazy for anyone who knows me to call me an elitist, I still believe that the person most responsible for the direction of the more important nation on Earth should be smarter than me, have read more books than me, and seen more of the world than me.

I have to believe that the POTUS is wiser than me, so that when I am asked to do things that I am not sure are the right thing, I have some faith in my leader.

I agree with this whole heartedly. But, the left has been creating and defining the "Elite" for the last 50 years. Are we ever going to see a conservative leader who was educated at Harvard or Yale, which are historically creators or presidents? Any great conservative leader now would have to come from industry, but the leaders of the major corporations all seem to be left wing rent seekers. The conservative world is going to have to look farther afield to find good leadership, because their isn't any in what we have defined as the elite in the past.

Posted by: minuteman at September 5, 2010 11:43 AM

Well, Gord, if Palin is not the best option, please tell me who is the better option.
If you cannot name a better person, then obviously Palin is the best option.
Those kinds of statements are exactly what is wrong with political discourse today.
The "she is not the best" meme has been around forever, but i have yet to hear chapter and verse about a better contender. There is a plethora of evidence showing Palins suitability, and a scarcity of evidence to the contrary,- except for statements backed only by the fact that they are repeated ad nauseum.
Facts and data. Nothing beats it.

Posted by: Lee at September 5, 2010 11:51 AM

L, your $1.5 trillion deficit is embarrassing.

Derek

Posted by: derek at September 5, 2010 11:52 AM

Gord...don't show your ignorance, it's Newfoundland and Labrador...there is no such province as Newfoundland.

" Obama too is very smart "..how about Obama is also very smart...maybe you should go to NandL and learn grammar and correctness.

Posted by: Mike L. at September 5, 2010 11:52 AM

Even a casual glace at the Dem elite shows a long history of politicians with too much interest in carnality....Slick Willy and JFK were the rule not the exception.
Put quite simply....Sarah Palin... mounted the stage and they all had the urge to mount her...simply on looks before she opened her mounth. The "sexy librarian" remarks nailed it.

In the Dems (perhaps realistic)way of thinking they panicked that they would lose by a landslide due to the shallow thinking by so many voters.
I recall seeing CH 11 Hamilton's reaction to her recent visit there......they all demurred on her message but ALL declared she was drop dead beautiful.

Then outside of the psycho-sexual thinking is the reaction to "Joe the plumber..." If the dems could have fitted him with concrete gollashes.....

Posted by: sasquatch at September 5, 2010 12:26 PM

What America and the world needs now are leaders who are not part of the Ruling Class elite.

Who would you prefer making the rules:
- a very smart King?
- an incredibly savvy dictator?
- an unbelievably smart puppet?
- a hopelessly clueless elitist?

- or a normal, well grounded democracy laden person who listens to what the people are saying?

Posted by: ron in kelowna ∴ at September 5, 2010 12:33 PM

@11:52 - I suppose Gord Tulk should have said "...even if I admitted to being born in Newfoundland and Labrador".

Palin is not stupid, any more than Obama is particularly bright. This is about very shallow external "markers" - body language, hobbies (she hunts!), and accent. North American lefties are snobs as big as any charicature of an upper-class Englishman when it comes to accent; it's okay to fake a folksy cadence one in a while like that sleazy ham Clinton - we all understand you need to talk down to the rubes - but actually to have a regional accent in real life?

Obama is an upper-middle-class lefty's idea of a genius: He went to the Ivy League, he has a narcissist's arrogant body-language, he's "cosmopolitan", which is to say rootless, he's cold, he has the American version of the "standard received" accent - i.e. non-regional and upper-class without being ridiculous about it - and his hobby is golf. And he's a lefty; remember that being a Conservative is in and of itself proof of stupidity. Because it's proof that you are of the wrong class. Not being left-wing is a declasse hobby, like shooting.

Posted by: Black Mamba at September 5, 2010 12:42 PM

GYM writes: "Sarah, like Bush, is of the people."

Well, not quite. Bush's father was PotUS and grandfather a Senator. For his own reasons, W chose to become one of the people of West Texas. Obama came from even humbler stock than Gov. Palin, but he chose to align himself with a different crowd. One the great things about America.

The current media culture puts Palin at risk of over-exposure; for years, Ronald Reagan was as active as Palin, but was largely overlooked by the media.

There are many people who don't care for Palin's style (as there are many who do); they think that folksiness was fine for Abe Lincoln, but we are too ironic for that now. They don't like her voice or her accent, and they really wrinkle their noses at her children's names (perhaps she could have named them LeBron, Tayshaun, Keeshondra, and Shaniqua). They associate her with the neighbourhood they moved out of. But being thoughtful, and above all, educated people, they struggle to demean her understanding of important political issues.

Palin does not have detailed policy answers to our most pressing problems, and neither have any of the great Presidents. Certainly Reagan didn't; but she has, as Reagan had, a sense of what was important to the future of the US and the world, a sense of the direction in which to lead, and an ability to speak clearly and directly to the people. By all accounts, the most accomplished policy wonk to hold the Presidency was Jimmy Carter, and we saw what that yielded. Currently, Newt Gingrich remains a fountain of policy ideas, none of which he could sell to public today.

Could Palin *be* a good President? I have no doubt she could. Could she be *elected* President? Things could change, but I'm doubtful, in part because neither her most ardent supporters nor her harshest critics is prepared to give her a fair hearing and constructive feedback. She is, however, like our host, a remarkable woman.

Posted by: Roseberry at September 5, 2010 12:47 PM

Roseberry - "One the great things about America."

Someone once observed that noone knows off the top of his head what Reagan's father did, but everyone knows that Thatcher's was a grocer

I still don't know what Reagan's father did. I don't want to know.

Posted by: Black Mamba at September 5, 2010 1:06 PM

I honestly do not believe that she electable now. Too much of the "urban legends" that the lame stream media have blurted for the last two years has become engrained in the American voter's mind now.

BUT!!!

I do think we are looking at Steele's replacement as head of the GOP, which could only be a good thing for the party. RINOs would be running around like chickens with the heads lopped off with an actual conservative running the party and helping to set policy.

Posted by: AtlanticJim at September 5, 2010 1:09 PM

Good points, Atlantic Jim and Black Mamba. There is a great deal of good sense to be found in the Maritimes; it just has to remain underground.

Posted by: Roseberry at September 5, 2010 1:56 PM

I know you rather not know That RonalD Regan's father sold shoes, but, as we Canadians speculate on what the American electorate will do, I kindly suggest the greatest compliment for an American is She or He is a Great American. Sarah Palin has reached this level and what do we really know about her intellectual capacity. We who bought in a long time ago the elitist brag there is nothing "too low brow" for the American masses. Backoff; you are starting to sound like the CBC/CTV coalition. I apologize for the lecture,Cheers;

Posted by: Mike Sr. at September 5, 2010 2:25 PM

She's making a fan out of me.

Posted by: Mark Peters at September 5, 2010 2:29 PM

old lori said:

"I still believe that the person most responsible for the direction of the more important nation on Earth should be smarter than me, have read more books than me, and seen more of the world than me."

It never ceases to amaze me how citizens within post-modern society keep craving kings and queens. They still have a need to be led by superiors ... what a pathetic frakking peasant mentality.

The post-modern era offers up more knowledge at our finger-tips than is humanly possible to absorb. But, it also means that any one person, can be an expert in just about any field, or in many.

Every day on CNBC or FOX we watch a plethora of learned people "disagreeing"! Any day in politics offers up a load of people supposedly smarter than Lori destroying economies, allowing reckless immigration, pandering to all manner of enemy, and making simply dumb choices.

So, I ask Lori ... who'd you chose ... brainiacs like Noam Chomsky? ... surely, being the father of modern linguistics he'd be a perfect fit to lead you.

As for me, I want a reasonably intelligent person, who surrounds themselves with a good team, and who can cut through all the mountains of guano to make simple, clear-headed, decisions. Political chief execs depend almost entirely on their team, and then on guiding principles. They don’t have time to cogitate ... they listen, knock around a few choices, listen to advisors, then act. In the end, their decisions are made on very basic and SIMPLE principles.

Personally, I fear brainiacs because I have yet to meet one who could lead effectively ... and that includes my very long experience in education, business, and politics. Every great leader I've followed and learned from had a "gift" to lead which was reliant on an innate ability ... not on amassed knowledge. Those with amassed knowledge were usually good “advisors” ... seldom good leaders.

I’d even argue that the undoing of the Canadian CPC is going to be PM Harper’s brains ... sure he's smart man; but chess players end up being crushed by base forces. Canada’s two main political leaders, in fact, Harper and Iggy are brainiacs ... and neither could inspire a mouse to eat cheese, least of all inspire a nation to come on side and win a majority for their parties, so each is stuck with dirty under the covers politics.

Old Lori ... we are no longer peasants to be led by people "smarter" than us. We are all equals who simply ask for leadership that is guided by principles aligned with our personal views; leadership that won't ditch those principles once power is attained.

Posted by: Cjunk at September 5, 2010 2:31 PM

Please Mr. Tulk, could you offer some specificity to your Sarah indictment. What specific errors in judgement have you seen in her positions? The generalizations you offer are assertions, without argument supporting those assertions.

Please, Esin, could you explain what weakness of character means to you, in the sense you used that phrase in your post? What actions or judgements have demonstrated, for you, a " weakness of character " in Ms. Palin?

Sarah has been marked for political death by all the Democrats, and by all those fellow-travelling Republicans who share the Democrat view that those unspeakable little people; non- ruling class Americans, need a master.

Many posts deprecate her accomplishments. Why was Sarah the first AK governor to get a private ( non-government ) gas pipeline agreement inked? Could it be that her integrity and and intelligence allowed her to think independently from the Republican old guard in AK, and simply do what was right for her state, and the nation, regardless of what that mafia could do to harm her politically?

As she has demonstrated over and over with her family, she is extremely wary of calling people who have demonstrated their hatred for the US " friends ", or otherwise glossing over plain facts for the sake of not offending the ruling class. She is unafraid to point out that the ruling class's politically self- serving policies are stupid for the nation, and yet at the same time does not take the obvious cheap shots those clowns deserve, or attack their characters.


Hasn't this person Sarah Palin has done an extremely good job of describing the threats to the country. And far from lacking what it takes in foreign policy, it's impossible to imagine her sitting on her hands as Iran, a sworn enemy, prepares a nuclear arsenal, as Bush and Obama have done. Should we really care about style details, over substance? We are in a crisis, and the old guard has failed us. And it has zero desire to either listen to the people, or change course. In their view, things are fine, although we really do need more spending in some vitally important programs.

Posted by: small c conservative at September 5, 2010 2:42 PM

Without re-reading old lori's post, I found her view very reasonable and definitely not deserving of many of the negative comments.

Black Mamba: Excellent. It's not the accent for me, rather the vocal tone. Said to my wife the other night -- who loves her as much as I do -- she could do with a vocal coach. I find her speaking voice grating, not the accent. I had to bail just a minute into her Beck Revival speech.

Gord Tulk gets closest to my view. At some point she'll have to get past the "common sense" homiles. She will have to perform well in a presser. Obama didn't have to, of course, with PravdaUSA sheltering him.

Like most here I'm extremely suspicious of the charge of "polarization" or "divisiveness", but really, I don't think the US can withstand another 4+ years of BDS2, i.e., PDS.

Surely, the US can produce a leader with strong conservative/libertarian principles, who understands free market economics, but who won't drive the LEFT crazy? No?

Posted by: Me No Dhimmi at September 5, 2010 2:45 PM

Me No Dhimmi: If you don't drive the left crazy, you are doing something wrong.

Posted by: Cjunk at September 5, 2010 2:54 PM

I was born in Newfoundland. N&L Is what it is known as now. My father was born in the country of Newfoundland not Canada.

As to who would make a better POTUS Ihave already noted a few in my comments above.

As for specific instances of Palins weakness on policy there were several instances during 2008 and she has been criticized to this day for not doing the Sunday shows on specific topics - israel, the stimulus etc.

Posted by: Gord Tulk at September 5, 2010 3:18 PM

To the end of my days, I will never stop enjoying this clip. I also think Dennis Miller is spot on about why so many Leftist women can't stand Palin!

Posted by: Robert W. (Vancouver) at September 5, 2010 3:33 PM

Gord Tulk-

Thank you for the reply.

Posted by: small c conservative at September 5, 2010 4:00 PM

Robert W. That is an outrageously funny clip.
And clearly a very plausible psychological diagnosis of cranky lefty women.

Question: While it's super clear that Miller possesses a great intellect and great soul-warming humanity, do you think he gets a chance to work out some of those breathtaking metaphor analogy rants beforehand? I mean, they're awesome either way, but can he really be THAT spontaneous?

I first became aware of Miller as a political pundit when he began offering tentative defences of Bush and praising his character. I remember being very pleasantly shocked. A 9/11 conservative?

Posted by: Me No Dhimmi at September 5, 2010 4:13 PM

Maybe a Chris Christie & Sarah Palin ticket for 2012. Christie can cover the urban, fiscal conservatives, Palin gets the rural, social conservatives.

They could get Beck to be the press secretary.

Posted by: Norman at September 5, 2010 4:20 PM

Me No Dhimmi: Miller is indeed a 911 Conservative. His choice for 2012 was once Newty and the Beauty (Palin).

"she bugs the right people"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kmUqqwwXqu4

Posted by: Cjunk at September 5, 2010 4:21 PM

What Cjunk said.

Posted by: KVB at September 5, 2010 4:26 PM

Heh, I can be naive sometime!

I mean, wouldn't it be great if a leader of high intellect, integrity, learning, economic understanding (with business experience) would emerge with such leadership skills and personal appeal that he could maybe make the left wary without making them insane?

I agree with a commenter above who thinks she's unelectable as president (as much as I like and respect her) and honestly live in dread of a Palin Presidency. OTOH, this political junkie might get clean in the event of a Palin Presidency and maybe take up needle point or something.

Could you honestly take that voice for 4 years?!?

Posted by: Me No Dhimmi at September 5, 2010 4:36 PM

'Me No Dhimmi' & CJunk:

Dennis Miller's "conversion" is a bit more complicated than that. I know this because I'm a subscriber to his podcast and have pretty much consistently listened to his radio show since Day One.

'CJunk' is correct in that 9/11 was the final straw for him but he first gained an awareness that Leftism was not all he had thought it was when he watched how VP Candidate James Stockdale was treated by the Left in 1992. Hint: Not well.

As to his brilliant quips, I think the ones on O'Reilly's show have been pretested on his own radio program. He has mentioned that he always carries a little digital audio recorder around to record jokes, thoughts, etc. that come to him all the time. I would guess this is quite common for all comedians.

As an aside, I often use Dennis Miller as a litmus test of sorts to differentiate between a Person of the Left and a Radical Leftist. If they only loathe Miller then undoubtedly they have consumed insane overdoses of you-know-what Kool-Aid!!!

Posted by: Robert W. (Vancouver) at September 5, 2010 5:00 PM

What Robert W. and Dennis Miller said. Especially Dennis Miller.
Even if Sarah Palin never ascends to the highest office in the land (and I think the Americans could do worse), political fortunes rise and fall on her say-so. Joe Miller, anyone?

Posted by: Osumashi Kinyobe at September 5, 2010 5:52 PM

Sarah Palin is a Unique phenomena for these times. Where she ends up. Only God & maybe Palin knows.
All I know is she just doesn't talk like most politico's. Which is a relief. Besides she's an enabler.
as to How smart she is, where about to find out.
JMO

Posted by: Revnant Dream at September 5, 2010 5:54 PM

Robert is 100% correct on miller. He ad libs like mad on the radio and pretty much everything on oreilly has been tested.

Posted by: Gord Tulk at September 5, 2010 5:55 PM

Palin-Romney and you've got a landslide in 2012.

Posted by: Peter O'Donnell at September 5, 2010 6:07 PM

Very interesting Robert W. So, 9/11 merely hastened a process.

BTW, when I use the phrase "9/11 conservative" I never mean it as a smear. I admire people who can toss a heavy long term investment in an ideology/world view when encountering new information. Kathy Shaidle is one too, which is why I cut her a lot of slack with some of her provocations.

That's a really key distinction you've made there: person of the left vs. hard radical leftist. George Orwell himself was a man of the left. I've long felt that there are definite potential areas of common cause between libertarians and leftists: in the matter of corporate skullduggery and needless war-making.

Posted by: Me No Dhimmi at September 5, 2010 6:11 PM

Back. That was a blast. Shoulder aching, but worth it. Still have 2 hours of gun cleaning to do, though.

I am a bit surprised that my comment about Palin did not elicit a more vehement reaction (though the person suggesting that I would prefer Ignatieff over Harper was rather silly considering that I was probably one of the first Ontario members of the Reform party, and that gave up my CPC membership last year in protest of the increasingly non-conservative policies that the CPC is pursuing).

By the way, my comment about Palin as cheerleader rather than leader was not intended to be derogatory. If a strong conservative leadership candidate emerged, and Palin endorsed that candidate and campaigned actively for him or her, I think that it would be nearly an unbeatable situation. Used correctly, Palin could be an outstanding asset in the fight for the next presidential election. I remain convinced though, that fundamentally she is unfit to be president, and a majority of the US electorate would see her that way as well.

A fair question is who would I chose over Palin. I must confess that I don’t know. We need someone with the intellect of Gingrich or Romney, straightforwardness of Palin, and fiscal conservatism of Paul. We need someone with some foreign relations experience. But each of these people I listed, and any others I come up with, fail profoundly on other counts.

0bama would not have passed muster by these criteria, but of course he had the media batting for him in the most incredibly biased manner.

NJ Governor Chris Christie has been looking good in the last year. His successful battle against the NJ teacher unions has been impressive. But he’s probably too fresh a face, and probably needs to finish at least one successful term as governor before he can be considered seriously. Something, by the way, that Palin should have done if she wanted to be star to be taken seriously.

People are talking about Pawlenty, but I don’t know enough about him.

Yes, I know there is no perfect candidate. If pressed, I would say that the most electable candidate the republicans have is Romney, but he’s hardly a conservative. As much a RINO, or more so, as McCain.

Right now 0bama, though incompetent, looks much more presidential than any of these people. I fear that he may end up getting a second term just because there is no credible alternative.

Part of the problem is that the Republican party is in transition. There is a lot of dead wood there that needs to be eliminated by fresh blood from the Tea Party crowd, by people who genuinely believe that government is the problem, not just pay lip service to that statement. So much of the current republican candidate base is not really any better than the democrat group. They are all pigs, just wearing different hats.

Posted by: old Lori at September 5, 2010 6:32 PM

Me No Dhimmi - as you know, both the Left and the Right claim Orwell. This might interest you (I hope it's not too off-topic): From Paul Johnson's Intellectuals***:

"...in her essay on Orwell, Mary McCarthy... was severe: Orwell was 'conservative by temperment, as opposed as a retired colonel or a working man to extremes of conduct, dress or thought'... Had he lived he must surely have moved to the right, so 'it was a blessing for him probably that he died.' (This last thought - better dead than anti-red - is a striking example of the priorities of archetype intellectuals)"


***fascinating but tabloidish; I have very mixed feelings about Johnson (who moved from the left himself. He used to edit the lefty New Statesman.)

Posted by: Black Mamba at September 5, 2010 6:50 PM

'Me No Dhimmi' - I can tolerate people from a wide spectrum of political views but not the Radical Left. Surprisingly, in my social circle, the Radical Lefties I meet don't generally come from poverty but almost entirely from extremely wealthy families. They were all educated in the finest Americans & Canadian universities. They were all given expensive condos or houses, cars, world trips, and a whole lot more. And each of them would tell you with the deepest conviction that you are a selfish, uncaring, cruel person for wanting lower taxes and "daring" to complain about how governments spend their money.

The 2008 U.S. Presidential Election was a big awakening for me in that it succinctly showed how much hatred these aforementioned folks could feel towards an individual, namely Sarah Palin. It's what prompted me to create this first video on my political YouTube channel. In case you're wondering, that is my [most favourite] Patton music in the background which I deliberately added.

Posted by: Robert W. (Vancouver) at September 5, 2010 8:22 PM

By the way, later in September 2008, as the hatred towards Palin grew & grew "from all the right people" I made this video to truly poke a stick in the eyes of the Radical Left!!! Perhaps a modified version of it will be in the works for Fall 2012!

Posted by: Robert W. (Vancouver) at September 5, 2010 8:26 PM

Old Lori - I disagree that Obama will run for a second term. I spent much of my career looking out for people who might crack under stress. After watching Obama's Labor [sic] Day speech, I saw a man showing signs of chronic fatigue; that's less than two years in the job! He'll be lucky to make it to four years without a collapse or breakdown - he's in over his head. Sarah Palen, by contrast, hasn't been worn down at all by the campaign against her or subsequent trotting all over the place (and writing a book in the meantime). She's handling stress, Obama is wilting under it.

Posted by: Aviator at September 5, 2010 8:35 PM

Aviator - you could be right. 0bama looks like the kind of person who'd quit if things weren't going his way.

But, if he quits, we get Clinton. She's actually going to be tougher to beat than him.


Actually, for sheer resilience, the politician I admire most is Bush Jr. The abuse that man took was beyond belief, and much of it was unjustified. But I don't believe I ever saw him visibly frustrated or angry at the people who clearly had done him wrong.

Posted by: old Lori at September 5, 2010 9:37 PM

Sarah Palin is for the dull and ignorant. She is mediocrity in the flesh, hailed by her supporters as an example of that for which to strive towards.

Posted by: BTJ at September 6, 2010 2:10 AM

tiklu shebway: I know a lot of women, including myself, who think that Palin's great, she's a breath of fresh air, she hasn't been turned around by the spoiled-brat, entitled, arrogant, misguided agenda of the feminazis (take a look at Pelosi and Billary, just two examples of the hybrid aliens produced by official feminism).

She's a genuine human being, a feisty campaigner, says what she believes without licking her finger and holding it in the air to see which way the Zeitgeist wind is blowing, likes having her kids around, lives in a "normal" house not a Westchester or San Francisco mansion like Billary or Nancy Pelosi, who's among the richest members of Congress.

Palin's real folk. I'm not clear she's President material, but as I said above, she'd make a great member of a Republican Cabinet or, possibly, VP -- but not Mitt Romney's. I don't think Americans would vote for a Mormon as Pres.

Posted by: batb at September 6, 2010 10:56 AM

small c conservative,
'weakness of character' in the context used relates to Gov. Palin's demonstrated zero interest in state affairs after November.

Further, Governors are always defending themselves from frivolous lawsuits. Gov. Palin was under investigation(s) for ethics violations; defense that she would have to pay for 'herself' (tic).

So, Administer to the Government position she was elected to, or, bust out, quit, for fame and fortune, braying to flailing malcontents and the ignorant. Her greed simply outweighed her duty to the Alaskan people. Or so it seems; and in politics, perception is…

btw, more to the point, perhaps, I don’t think she actually cares about politics… she has never actually fleshed out anything resembling a fundamental political philosophy. Her politics are based on the political winds du jour. She is an opportunist and full blown narcissist, imho. That said, I believe she did some noteworthy and very creditable work in her short run as Gov of Alaska. Ain’t life funny that way ; )

Posted by: esin at September 6, 2010 11:02 AM

"she hasn't been turned around by the spoiled-brat, entitled, arrogant, misguided agenda of the feminazis"

They're left wingers and she's a right-winger. Did you really expect her to become a left-wing feminist as soon as she became powerful? FWIW, neither Pelosi nor Hillary started as right-wingers, so I really don't know where the comparison is coming from. As for 'misguided' agendas, thats just a reflection of the fact that half the population of the US (maybe more) has an opinion that is different to yours. Are you the only one who knows the right way? If so, please write a book so that I can follow your right path. Share the knowledge.

As for the whole 'spoiled-brat, entitled' bit, give it time. Hillary and Pelosi have been around forever. I am willing to guarantee that Palin will become like them sooner or later. For one, I don't think she uses public transportation to commute anymore. And I don't think its an availability issue either. I suspect she thinks she's entitled to her chauffeur-driven car and premium cabin air ticket. And for all the noise about her appearance, the clothes may be the same, but the designer labels are replacing the budget labels, and the fake jewellry is being replaced by the real stuff. And why not? She's earning more and she should spend it.

That said, people do change when they suddenly stumble on large amounts of money (like FOX contracts). Give her time. She'll become like the rest. Her politics won't change, so don't expect any misguided policies from her. However her feelings of entitlement, arrogance etc will emerge. The Iron Law of Oligarchy will probably force her to change.

"She's a genuine human being, a feisty campaigner, says what she believes without licking her finger and holding it in the air to see which way the Zeitgeist wind is blowing".

I don't know. Feisty campaigner? Definitely. Genuine? Was I the only one left scratching my head by her daughter's pre-election engagement and post-election cancellation? That smelled an awful lot like "licking her finger and holding it in the air to see which way the Zeitgeist wind is blowing". The whole thing was rushed and seemed like a cheap gimmick to gain political capital in the run-up to the election. Once the election passed, Palin did what most normal parents would do - avoid rushing things and let the kids decide. They split and now they're back together. Two years later. Imagine if they'd gotten married before the election - the marriage would probably have been irretrievable by now. The kids needed their time, but mommy had an election to win. Nearly turned into a fiasco.

"likes having her kids around"

Right. Presumably, all the other parents don't like to have their children around? I don't buy it. She likes having her children around during her public appearances because that is part of her image. Many parents, especially those involved in politics, try to keep their children out of the public eye, mostly because of the hassle, irritation and abuse that being in the public eye brings. Palin's children are no strangers to the abuse. That she's willing to use them to gain political capital is, well, her prerogative. Its clearly working with you. However, I don't think its fair to suggest that other parents don't like having their children around simply because they don't put their children smack in the middle of the public eye. Parents tend to be protective, and I personally would never expose my children to that kind of public scrutiny.

"lives in a "normal" house not a Westchester or San Francisco mansion like Billary or Nancy Pelosi"

Now I'm confused. You seem to be insinuating that 'rich' people are not 'normal' people. Palin's contract at Fox will make her rich. The logical assumption is that, at some point, she will stop being normal. From your words, I can only assume that this transformation will take place when she buys a Westchester or San Francisco mansion. I suspect she will be investing in property soon. A lot of rich people do that. When she does, wither Sarah Palin? Personally, I am not convinced that there is any correlation between a Westchester and how you govern. Ronald Reagan and George HW and W all have/had massive properties. That didn't make them Pelosi or Hillary. However, what do I know? You are clearly basing your arguments on some kind of sound evidence.

"Palin's real folk."

You mean the image she is peddling is, in your opinion, real. She's a millionaire now. She may stick to her image, but I can guarantee that every dollar she earns now is going towards living a millionaire's lifestyle, as opposed to charity.

"I don't think Americans would vote for a Mormon as Pres."

If you ever want to know why I oppose the Christian far right, it is because of the truth in your statement. It baffles me no end that a country that claims to be a meritocratic democracy, one that counts amongsts it founding fathers several famous deists, still produces a population that judges people by their religion (in this case, a variant of the predominant religion, not a minority religion).

The sad truth of this Christian awakening is that John Adams, the second president of the United States, would, in today's America, be treated as political nobody because of his open deism. In some ways, America has progressed. In other ways, it has regressed. In its earliest days, when it faced the most challenges, the American people were willing to overlook candidates' religious beliefs. Nowadays we can effectively disqualify anyone who does not claim to be a protestant or, at the very least, catholic. For all the judeo-christian speak, I somehow doubt America will ever have a Jewish president. Falwell was convinced that the anti-christ will be Jewish, so I think we know where the Christian right will stand on Jewish candidates.

Posted by: devil's advocate at September 6, 2010 11:41 AM

da: "As for 'misguided' [feminist] agendas, thats just a reflection of the fact that half the population of the US (maybe more) has an opinion that is different to yours."

Uh, no.

When the feminazis encouraged women to leave their hearths and homes and kids -- and bullied those who didn't fall into lockstep with them -- a great deal of damage was done to the health of the North American family and, because families are the building blocks of any civil society, to the fabric of our communal life.

I experience the damage that's been done every day in the classroom, where a critical mass of kids are neglected. Though the neglect may be of the benign variety (Parent: "I didn't mean to neglect my child, I just didn't have time to spend with him/her") it's neglect just the same and these kids simply aren't socialized. They're self-centred, rude, undisciplined, and not teachable. It's moms who civilize and socialize children, not nannies, daycare workers, the TV, or teachers, who have enough on their plates just trying to teach the A,B,Cs.

So, da, nice try. My argument with the Gestapo ... oh, I mean the radical feminists, is that they deconstructed the family and, thus, our, up to then, social and civilized Western way of life. They're one of the main lobby groups to cheer on the disintegration of Western Civilization, with hammer in hand to help smash things up.

I'm talking about Sarah Palin now; I'm in no position to hypothesize on what she may become. How come you're so sure? 'Got your crystal ball handy?

As for Mitt Romney being a Christian: Mormons are most definitely NOT Christians. Although their Book of Mormon closely resembles the Good Book, there are so many anomalies, additions, and subtractions (show me the Angel Moroni in either the Old or the New Testaments ...) that it is a stretch to equate the two faiths. A lot of people are confused about this, however, including you, it would seem.

Although I've never met a Mormon I didn't like (they're wonderful family and community-minded people, though they do tend to stick together), their theology is suspect. (Also, unlike Christian churches, who rush to the aid of victims of natural disasters all over the world, you don't tend to see Mormons doing the same thing. You'll see them all over the world, two by two, in their white shirts and ties, carrying The Book of Mormon, but they're proselytizing door to door.)

Posted by: batb at September 6, 2010 12:58 PM

[Mormon] theology is suspect ~ batb

I would surmise that you apply this suspicion to anyone who doesn't subscribe to your particular brand of Christianity.

Posted by: glasnost at September 6, 2010 1:23 PM

OK, glasnost, yuck, yuck.

Christianity -- what's "my brand," anyway? -- has been around for over 2000 years and is still going strong, not so much in the West (which will be our downfall) but it's going gangbusters in Africa and China. ('Never mind that most of the West's public educational, health, judicial, and cultural institutions were founded by people strongly influenced by their Judeo-Christian faith -- and for everybody, not just adherents to the Christian or Jewish faiths: That's merely a "minor" historical fact that most progressives (sic) like to relegate to the trash heap ...

Mormonism has been around since 1830. 'Slight difference. By the time Christianity, originating with Jesus of Nazareth (actual historical figure) and his disciples (actual historical figures), had been around 180 years, its influence had spread far and wide. There is no similar spread of Mormonism outside of Utah.

Facts, my dear, will always help your argument. Verdad?

Posted by: batb at September 6, 2010 1:58 PM

Sarah Palin is for the dull and ignorant.

That explains why she's such a hit around here.

Posted by: phil at September 6, 2010 2:01 PM

Oh yeah...Palin/Beck in 2012??
Run baby, run.

Posted by: phil at September 6, 2010 2:03 PM

Why do all the trolls (a la BTJ, phil, tiklu, devil's advocate) try to get the last word in at the end of a thread? Is it because they want to see how long a thread can go or do they truly believe the utter nonsense they type?
Is Sarah Palin a politician? Yes. Is she a good person? Yes.
Moving on...

Posted by: Osumashi Kinyobe at September 6, 2010 2:18 PM

"When the feminazis encouraged women to leave their hearths and homes and kids"

I don't know if you can give feminists credit for that. Women entered the work force in WWII and they never really left, partly because they got used to having a secondary income. The post-war economic boom gave them the opportunities to work and their standard of living became predicated on the extra household income that they were bringing in. The 'feminazis' came and made loud noises, but I don't think they actually had an impact on the composition of the work force. We've just become a greedier lot.

We like our luxuries. We all want to buy a house as soon as we can (whatever the mortgage), we want a car, we want a flat screen tv, we want the newest phone on the market. Thats what makes our economy tick - thats what makes our countries' 'prosperous'. Can we do without them? Absolutely. Will we choose to do so? Nope. We'll hear the same lame excuse - "I'll stay at home after I've saved more money/I'll have kids when I earn more" etc. Will they ever earn more? Yes. Will it change the way they live? No.

Why? Taxes and the 'private' sector. Between them, we never have disposable income. Taxes bleed you dry. Then the 'competitive' private sector, where different companies sell the same product at the same price, engage in rampant price-gouging to justify their profits. We want the latest phone. We pay and arm and a leg for it. Ask yourself what you pay per minute to speak on a cellphone. Now ask yourself how much that minute costs the cell phone provider. About ninety to ninety-five percent of what you pay is pure profit. You could choose not ot make that phone call, but sometimes you have no choice. Its plain old price gouging, but we're a compliant lot. We pay, no questions asked. After all, why would the private sector try to cheat us, right? End result: No savings. Means you have to work more to cover your costs. Want to have kids? Better figure out a daycare for them, because life, as we know it, has become too expensive.

"I'm talking about Sarah Palin now; I'm in no position to hypothesize on what she may become. How come you're so sure? 'Got your crystal ball handy?"

Of course. Besides, how do you know she lives in a real house, not a mansion? I use the same approach that you do when I make my claims. I don't think she has to disclose how she uses her money to the public. For all you and I know, she may well own a Westchester.

"Mormons are most definitely NOT Christians."

4 billion non-Christians (and not a few Christians) will remind you that, it walks like duck and talks like a duck, it must be a duck. Catholics don't think protestants are real christians. Protestants don't think catholics are real christians. Anglicans don't know if they themselves are real christians, but they're pretty sure the catholics are not real christians. Its all very strange.

In any case, it is irrelevant. You have just gone on to prove what I said about 'Christian' America.

"Although I've never met a Mormon I didn't like (they're wonderful family and community-minded people, though they do tend to stick together), their theology is suspect. (Also, unlike Christian churches, who rush to the aid of victims of natural disasters all over the world, you don't tend to see Mormons doing the same thing. You'll see them all over the world, two by two, in their white shirts and ties, carrying The Book of Mormon, but they're proselytizing door to door.)"

What does any of this have to do with Mitt Romney becoming President? Or his credentials as a candidate? Are his policies distinctly Mormon policies? Is his approach distinctly mormon (and presumablty by extension anti-Christian)?

This is the reality of Christian Americana. A non-Christian candidate is pretty much a non-entity in any presidential election. Religion is, apparently, the key issue. We talk about how Islam dominates every aspect of life, yet we subconsciously assume that all religions, including Christianity, do the same. Christ drew a distinction between the spiritual and temporal worlds, but we are incapable of drawing that distinction.

As a result, in rather bizzare fashion, we are now effectively stating that several of the founding fathers - the ones who bestowed upon America the 'judeo-Christian' framework and values that we cherish - would not stand a chance in a presidential election in today's America. John Adams, Thomas Jefferson and possibly even George Washington, all prominent deists, would be deemed non-Christians and unworthy of consideration. It is, indeed, ironic that a country that was meant to be a refuge from religious persecution now insists on vetting its leaders on the basis of their religion.

The reality only hits home when you look at the new breed of promising leaders. Bobby Jindal had the good sense to convert to Catholicism while living in a predominantly Catholic state. Its paid huge dividends for him. If he does face Palin in a primary, we both know the religion card will become a major factor. The fact that he was born a Hindu will become a focus of debate, even though it has precious little to do with his track record, style of governance and beliefs, let alone his capabilities.

That is the Christian America, a far cry from what the founders envisioned. And that is the problem with the Christian right, which Palin depends on.


"Why do all the trolls (a la BTJ, phil, tiklu, devil's advocate) try to get the last word in at the end of a thread?"

Was busy yesterday, otherwise I would have commented earlier.

Posted by: devil's advocate at September 6, 2010 3:10 PM

Not a troll, unfortunately probably one of the last to read this, but, Old Lori; I am probably older and therefore hesitant to make casual assumptions and from this make "drive by" comments about the intellect and staying power of a proven leader such as Sarah Pallin. Here is my assumption; you are a female; you are envious of a female who has succeeded beyond all you can achieve; you probably believed all the tripe placed on Kim Campbell when she undertook to lead this country. cheers;

Posted by: Mike Sr. at September 6, 2010 3:30 PM

Hilarious SNL spoof Palin 2012: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NepbcXTTluY

Posted by: randall g at September 6, 2010 3:31 PM

And Palin is nice in real life too?

That sound you hear now is Leftist's head exploding!!!

Posted by: Friend of USA at September 6, 2010 3:49 PM

Mike Sr. - I don't particularly agree with "old lori", but what a nasty response from you.

Posted by: Black Mamba at September 6, 2010 5:22 PM

I love reading the comment section, because the "dull and ignorant" SDAers always argue circles around the trolls, who are in way over their heads every time they drop their yawners that we've heard a gazillion times before.

The truly dull and ignorant are already drooling over Trudeau Jr., and will vote for him en masse when he finally campaigns for PM. They'll vote for him because he's 'cute', Trudeau's son, and speaks all the unoriginal correct-speak we've had drilled into us since the '60s by the CBC, et al. They'll vote for him despite the fact that he'll be completely unqualified.

Sarah Palin was a self-made mayor of a town and governor of a State. She did not use Daddy's money (Pelosi), husband's coattails (Hillary) or a famous last name (Trudeau) to make her way. Just one endorsement from her gets her friends elected in the primaries of one of the two parties in the most powerful country on the planet. She is a happily married mom of 5. She chose life for a Down Syndrome child that the trolls here would have aborted because the little blighter would have cramped their style.

Shallow Palin is not. Shallow Trudeau Jr. is. Or at least those who vote for him are/will be.

Posted by: ann at September 7, 2010 12:58 PM

Mr Dimmie, I respectfully disagree with your postion regarding Mrs Palin.
But here's my take... Sarah would have scored big time for offering here staging to the opposition as well as doing the oppositions makeup. That would be a story to tell...

Posted by: orlin of Marquette at September 7, 2010 8:38 PM
Site
Meter