« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

To Sexist AP, HuffPo Inanely Bashing Palin Is More Important Than Helping Haiti

Every time I think that the “Press” can’t sink any lower than the rock bottom they’ve already hit, they somehow manage to burrow themselves further into the earth’s mantle. As is so often the case, this most recent gutter-dwelling example has to do with Sarah Palin, who dared to go on a humanitarian trip to Haiti. This does not suit! You see, how can the Press feel all holier-than-thou and better than Sarah Palin – and her fellow rubes – when she is out helping people in Haiti, while they are sitting at home and sipping their soy lattes? I mean, you can’t even see their super awesome and caring “cause ribbons” in print. Plus, she’s just a girl and not the right kind of girl; she embraces motherhood and doesn’t hyphenate her name. She doesn’t even limit herself to caring only about topics that women are assigned to caring about by the left. This aggression cannot stand.

So, they fall back on sneering contempt, mixed with insanity and outright lies. While that is what they are best at, even that no longer works. A funny little thing happened to their ability to do so: the absolute moral  insolvency of the Fourth Estate is now apparent to most and citizens are now finding the truth for themselves. This again happened on Monday, when the AP ran this picture and caption:

“Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, center, has her hair done during a visit to a cholera treatment center set up by the NGO Samaritan’s Purse in Cabaret, Haiti, Saturday, Dec. 11, 2010….”

What the AP photographer purposely neglects to mention is that the woman “doing Palin’s hair” is her daughter, Bristol. She is clearly seen in the following photograph, as also noted by Free Republic:

In other photos from Saturday, Todd and Sarah Palin’s white, brunette, eldest daughter Bristol, who accompanied her parents on the trip to Haiti, is wearing the exact same clothing and ponytail as the “hair stylist” in the AP photo.

That’s right, what the Palin-hating AP and others fail to report is that the “hair stylist” is Bristol Palin.

Bristol Palin was fixing a loose clip or an errant strand of hair for her mother. The photographer quite clearly knew that, having taken the picture and having actually looked through the lens at the people whose photo he was taking. He managed to identify Todd Palin, yet purposely did not identify Bristol.

There are a couple of things clearly on display here. Firstly, the oh-so-tolerant and loving Left is anything but. It’s far easier to mock and bash Sarah Palin than to actually, you know, do anything to help. Secondly, their blatant sexism, particularly against conservative women (femininity with smarts and strength is icky), has once again been exposed for all to see. I suppose we are to just be grateful that the media didn’t get all atwitter, contemplating boob jobs, like they did last time Palin was photographed in a t-shirt. The Daily Mail picked up on the “let’s totally lie to fit our delusional narrative” line with an article titled Ready for Her Close Up…Sarah Palin Lands in Haiti (where they don’t care what her hair looks like).

Michael Shaw at The Huffington Post went one further with one of the most dreck-filled “articles” I’ve read in a good while. And that’s saying something. I hesitate to quote too much of it, just to be safe, on the off-chance that cuckoo-pants may be catching. But, here are some highlights lowlights:

If I find the fantastically clever Sarah Palin to be one of the shallowest and blatantly self-serving politicians, err, political celebrities I’ve ever seen, it doesn’t stop me from taking pause upon seeing these AP shots from Franklin Graham’s cholera treatment center in Haiti.

Damn right it’s revolting seeing Sarah getting her hair made up like this field hospital is her movie set –

I’ll translate: Shallowest, self-serving and political celebrities – that’s all code for dares to be attractive and feminine.  In the mind of a leftist, women really shouldn’t be taken seriously. They are only tolerated if they allow themselves to be useful idiots and talk the leftist talk and walk the leftist walk. “Revolting seeing Sarah getting her hair made up” – this is also code for “she’s just a dumb broad.” However, it’s also a case of projection. What’s really revolting is that someone sitting on his fanny is mocking someone who is visiting and trying to bring aid and comfort to cholera patients at a field hospital.

Shaw then drifts into even more inane, and insane, territory. I know. But, it’s true:

And then, the multiple shots of Sarah sanitizing and washing her hands suggests the former Gov is primarily concerned, above all humanitarian else, about catching something.

There are two questions I can’t quite answer, however. 1.) Compassion notwithstanding, could these exact same images have been created if it was Biden, Bill Clinton, Hillary or Nancy Pelosi moving around this camp with media in tow over the same afternoon?

She’s concerned about “catching something”? She’s there. Where are you, Mr. Shaw? Furthermore, I’m no fancy-pants journalist who talks out of my cushy and judgmental hindquarters. So, I did a little something called a google search to confirm my common sense (common sense is hard for the Left) suspicions; washing and sanitizing hands after being in contact with people infected with cholera is a way to, you know, stop the transmission and spreading of cholera. It’s what one is supposed to do.

And I’ll answer your idiotic question, Mr. Shaw. No, those same images would not have been created, were it Biden or Bill Clinton. Nor even Barack Obama, if you could get him off the golf course long enough. And, even then, he’d probably just outsource to Bill Clinton again, anyway. No such images nor captions would be created because you’ll never see a caption purposely meant to diminish or demean, based on gender, underneath the photo of a male politician. A photo of Obama, say, having his tie fixed, would never say something  like “Barack Obama has wardrobe styling done during visit.”  And any pictures of Joe Biden having his hair fixed would be photos taken at the Hair Club for Men.

Plus, Sarah Palin is the one with the spine; Bill Clinton, in fact, canceled his planned trip to Haiti because it was too scary.

Shaw goes on to try to explain away the fact that the “hair stylist” in the picture was revealed to be Bristol by claiming that somehow shows media bias in favor of Palin. Or something. I’m not really sure, as I lost my cuckoo-pants to English dictionary.

In any event, keep lying and bashing, Mr. Shaw and your fellow travelers. Lie and bash like the wind.

It only makes Palin stronger. I’m sure the people of Haiti are taking comfort from that strength. I’m also certain that she, and all the others on this humanitarian trip at whom you sneer from the comfort of your own sanctimony, will do more in one day to aid others than you will do your entire life. See, people can’t really subsist on shiny, self-congratulatory “cause ribbons.”

Nor on Smug ™.

—–

COMMENTS

  • harlan

    “Judge not, lest ye be judged!”

    I think SOMEONE WHO SHOULD KNOW said that.

  • speciallist

    sarah hands

    • acat

      Taking flak for doing exactly the right thing …

      Yeah. The press have lost it. How do we get this message out most broadly? (“Palin’s Alaska” is a good first step – what’s the next one?)

      Mew

      • http://www.plumbbobblog.com Plumb_Bob

        The left’s impulses that are illustrated in stories like this are (1) compulsive; (2) dishonest; (3) inaccurate; and (4) vicious. Don’t let the ineffectual banality, the sheer, silly pettiness of this detract from the fact that this is deeply evil. It is evil to call good people “evil,” evil to reflexively find the worst possible interpretation of their acts, evil to hate them so deeply and unthinkingly for no reason.

        It is long past due that we make a habit of calling evil “evil” when it comes out of the mouths of leftists. They imagine themselves virtuous, but there is no virtue in them, and it’s time that we say so, repeatedly and loudly.

        • retail1

          because this woman can catch, gut and skin her own dinner! Just saying…

      • azaeroprof

        I completely understand why some folks on the right are not supportive of a Palin candidacy. As we’ve experienced together in several recent diaries :) Palin supporters here at RS get very defensive and emotional when detractors show up. But it is very easy to understand why this is so, when they (we, including me) are so conditioned by the kind of attacks described here. The conservatives who oppose her are surrogates for the haters on the left. It’s easier for many of us to fight back on RedState where we are used to participating, than to go the lefty sewers and try to fight back against them. (BTW, my monitor smells much better after I’ve been at RS than when I’ve had PuffHo on it!)

        I’m sure Palin has some additional steps in mind. Ultimately, a full-fledged candidacy, without McCain’s “handlers”, will be her best chance to speak relatively unfiltered to the nation as a whole.

        As conservatives, I think our best plan of action wrt Palin is to have a moratorium on friendly fire. We should defend her to the hilt, to as many people as we can, against the kind of attacks described here. If you don’t like her as a POTUS candidate, there will be ample opportunity to argue for other candidates later. But I truly think it hurts not just Palin, but our cause as a whole, if they are allowed to smear her irrationally and inaccurately while simultaneously painting her as the face of conservatism.

        • JSobieski

          No offense, but as you point out, Palin suporters are the people who are construing “the conservatives who oppose her” as “surrogates for the haters on the left.” Many of us don’t even really oppose her, we just say that she isn’t our first choice. Does anyone on this site support Romney over Palin? Huckabee over Palin? Yet, because Palin isn’t #1 on our list, we are “surrogates for the haters on the left”.

          We aren’t irrationally smearing Palin, so don’t treat us that way.
          We aren’t surrogates for the haters of the left, so don’t treat us that way.
          We are providing candidate assessments in good faith, so please do treat us accordingly.

          I think it hurts us when those on the same team treat us as surrogates for the opposition. I also think it hurts us when we can’t rationally discuss strengths/weaknesses of potential presidential candidates.

          If something is inaccurate, correct it. My complaint about the entire Palin debate is that it is relatively devoid of factual assessment. In particular, the record of her governorship is not discussed very often.

          I don’t see alot of irrational criticism of Palin here at RS. Nor do I see a lot of factual mistatements. There are some facts that are very strong in her favor, and some facts that less favorable.

          I have been accused of being an anti-Palin drone even though I have said a lot favorable things about her. I give her kudos when I think she merits them, and I criticize her when I disagree. In other words, I treat her the same like I would any public figure or politician on our side.

          I do think that resigning before the completion of her term is a material fact that does not favor her. It is not irrational to conclude that a President will get more ethics crap thrown at them then a governor will. It is not irrational to observe that Palin’s short tenure as governor was buttressed by high oil prices, and as a result, she was never in a position to have to make tough choices on spending.

          I say all these things even though I am in fact a fan of Palin. She is gutsy. She supports the Paul Ryan Roadmap. She has good instincts. She is a team player (AChance and I had a BIG disagreement on that one). She is a great communicator, and has really hit a stride that few politicians and public figures ever reach.

          Despite my acknowledgment of her pluses, I get characterized as some lefty spreading smears by merely observing that the economic grade for her tenure as governor is really an incomplete. 2 years as governor means one year under your own budget since the first year is the budget of the prior governor.

          I say all this because you appear to be open to the idea that there is an emotional resevoir at play here. In the past, a comment like this would be filled with all sorts of name calling and pseudo-psycho babble about my mental state. I say these things primarily because I am not alone in generating these types of responses.

          Lets agree with the principal that we are on the same team but that we can disagree in terms of strategy and in terms of candidates. Accusing those on the same team of smears and hatred is not a good strategy for victory. Telling anyone in our coaltion to shut up, or take a back seat (regardless of whether the assertion is based on a type of issue, or a particular candidate) does not help our side.

          You have done more to discuss Palin’s record in a factual way than anyone else here, so I give you well deserved kudos. You and I could discuss Palin all day long and not degenerate into the types of reactions that you are rightly concerned with avoiding.

          • azaeroprof

            bearing in mind that the “they” referred to in the last sentence is the buggers on the left, not those here at RedState!

            My only argument is that as long as Palin is portrayed as the face of conservatism (hard to dispute at this point) and is attacked inaccurately and viciously by the LSM (definitely indisputable as Lori points out here), it would be more productive for us to circle our wagons and unanimously and vociferously defend her. Reasoned arguments against her qualifications for office, even if accurate and well-argued, simply display chinks in our armor that the left is all too happy to aim for. There will be plenty of chance to argue the superiority (or inferiority) of other candidates vis-a-vis Palin later.

          • nessa

            …unknowingly violated by Sarah, you NEVER provide aid and comfort to anyone other than America’s Enemies. She would have been praised for taking the time to fix her hair before a meeting with Oooogo, Kim Jung Ill or OBL.

          • aesthete

            Anytime one person becomes *the* representation of an ideological movement, the movement suffers. Some libertarians had the same discussion about defending Ron Paul as he was the representation of libertarianism: did vociferous support of Ron Paul make libertarianism look attractive as an ideology? I should say not! There are no gains to be had by defending Palin from all attacks (reasonable or not), and by avoiding a rational discussion of her pros and cons. It makes conservatism subordinate to a single person, and unhinged support always makes the candidate being “supported” look bad. People like you and gop2010, who work to address the issues that some people have with Palin, are much more persuasive than those supporters who write off any criticism as a sign of leftism/sexism/RINOism etc.

          • JSobieski

            But I am glad to hear it.

            I interpretted it to mean the unfortunate “surrogates of the left” on this website because it seems like your comment was primarily directed to people at RS who were not on the Palin bandwagon.

            When Palin is unfairly attacked, I defend her.
            When Palin does something good, I praise her.

            I don’t see how precluding our side from discussing anything negative about her or her record is productive. The 2012 race is underway . . . in its own way.

            Nobody should be told to be quiet for the sake of team unity. Social conservatives, fiscal conservatives, or whomever. That also goes for Pro-Palin folks and the less than pro Palin folks.

            Palin has a viable record. Better to become more adept at defending it than to bury the discussion of it.

          • azaeroprof

            I didn’t mean to confuse. As long as I remember, conservatism has been defined in the public mind by 1 or maybe 2 people. Originally, if was WFB, then Goldwater, and ultimately Reagan (with WFB being fairly continuous). I don’t advocate Palin being the public face of conservatism. I wish it were the ideas (like it mostly is here at RedState) or at least a collection of conservative thinkers and politicians. It’s just one of those by-products of the media’s need to turn everything into a battle, they need to personify the positions. It’s easier for them to point to Sarah Palin and Barack Obama than to try to explain the ins and outs of conservative/liberal philosophy. Plus, it sells more ads!

            Since that is just the way things are at the moment, I’ll stand by my opinion that we should have the whole offensive line protecting the quarterback in the game, rather than sending the left guard and right tackle to the sidelines to guard the quarterbacks that might soon come in! :)

          • Jack_Savage

            Very nice.

          • Jack_Savage

            “…on a *brief* humanitarian visit…”

          • azaeroprof

            as that comment flew right over my head! :)

          • earlgrey
          • doncorleone

            Maybe the a.p. would regain a smidgion of respect if they spent more time trying to find out what happened to the 1.2 billion dollars in haitian aid that was placed under the “watchful” and “trustful” gaze of billy clinton’s foundation in charge of rebuilding haiti. Rather than spending their time critiquing the Palins’ social grooming regimen. It’s been well over a year, and those poor folks haven’t seen a nickel.

          • gop2010

            “the economic grade for her tenure as governor is really an incomplete. 2 years as governor means one year under your own budget since the first year is the budget of the prior governor.”

            Palin was governor for 2.5 years, encompassing three legislative terms.

            Palin submitted three budgets in those three legislative terms: FY 2008, FY 2009, and FY 2010.

          • MF

            It is not irrational to observe that Palin

        • Goldwater_Conservative

          she has poor character, she cut and ran from the only job her citizens voted for her to do. She has no skin, she cant take any attack without hurling a little catty comment back at the person who has an oppinion INCULDING Barbra Bush of all people. She has become a media whore, appearing on a reality show with Kate Gosslin? She is a joke, and her supporters simply mimic her no skin attacks. Remember talk is very cheap, and when it comes to Sarah Palin thats all you have is talk.

          • Jack_Savage

            I think she should have stayed as governor, run up legal bills no one could pay, then sit idly by while being attacked and not said a word. It worked really well for George W. Bush.

            I find it incredibly funny that an internet warrior would be slamming Sarah Palin from his laptop while she is on her way back from Haiti with the line “talk is cheap”.

          • Goldwater_Conservative

            other people do good deeds all the time, but the main key is we do it because we want to help others not to be on tv. If Palin was doing this Hati relief quielty and under the radar as not to be percieved as a showboat, then I would respect that.

          • Jack_Savage

            Has Sarah Palin been able to do anything quietly and under the radar? And how would you suggest she accomplish that, assuming that she would want to?

          • Goldwater_Conservative

            she has become such a tabloid media item, along with Lindsay Lohan and Britney Spears, that she cant do anything substantive at this point without reading it on the front page of the National Enquirer. Now thats both her and the media’s fault, but you can say she has gone out of her way to get away from the media attention.

          • Mary Beth

            That you see this as a negative is stunning.

          • Locked and Loaded
          • Jack_Savage

            It is telling.

          • JSobieski

            Is resigning the desired strategy of choice for R Presidents? Bloggers aren’t running for President. Of course Palin is more important to the conservative movement than any blogger. The question is how can resigning from office be a positive? And if it is a positive, would that same logic support resigning from the Presidency?

          • Jack_Savage

            If his own party was as vicious to him as his sworn enemies, and defending himself would have caused bankruptcy.

            No one ever said resigning was a positive. Sometimes in life you are faced with two bad choices, and you make the one that is best for you and your family, and to hell with what bloggers on Redstate think.

          • JSobieski

            are you suggesting that she would resign for the good of her family?

          • Jack_Savage

            What I am saying is that if she is depending on Republicans like you for anything other than a knife in the kidney, she is in deep, deep trouble.

            I really have no desire to debate someone who has a visceral hatred of Sarah Palin. That’s your problem, and I will let you work it out in your own time and under your own terms. Just please don’t come back with the passive- aggressive “I may support her, I am just trying to look at some issues that need to be worked out”.

            You and goldwater conservative can go play with each other now.

          • JSobieski

            I support Palin over a lot of people. I have said that repeatedly. I don’t know who is running, so I can’t so who is my first choice. I can say that I would support Palin over any 2008 retread. I would also support Palin over someone without executive experience.

            The fact that I can also talk about her weaknesses makes me an adult, not a “visceral hater”. I didn’t lose my cool with you, call you names, or exhibit any indicia of hatred.

            It is not passive aggressive to be rational. Conservatism is about reason, liberalism is about emotion.

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine
          • Scope

            There is probably nothing about Palin that has not been discussed here ad nauseum. The same old arguments have been brought up over, and over, and over again. I will once again refer to some notes I made from another poster here-

            “How not to behave at Redstate- Repeat the same statements over and over again in the hope that repetition will drill a hole through their ear into their brain.”

            The very same thing happened with some as to the O’Donnell primary. Once some have made their arguments known, or their reasons for not supporting someone, very well known, why is everyone subjected to hearing the same old arguments over and over again. I can see no other reason for the repetition other than to “drill a hole through someones ear into their brain” just in case someone didn’t see the arguments the first time around, or the twentieth time around. With some, it clearly is a campaign against those some do not support. It’s really a Liberal tactic. If you say something enough times, people will eventually believe it, no matter how much you add the nicey nice words along with the negatives. The repetitive arbiters need to get into who they do support, and, off the deal of trying to convince others that they have the last best word.

          • JSobieski

            It takes more than one person to result in discussion lock.

            I presume that it is the people who agree with you are free to be repetitive?

            Its not like these discussion chains involve one-handed clapping.

            I am looking for answers to questions. I am not adding “nice words” to my comments. I am commenting in good faith on the facts as I see them.

            I do not engage in name calling. The most repetitive things I see are insults and name calling that don’t even address the issues. Nobody is forced to respond to anyone elses comment. Likewise, nobody should be forced to stop responding to anyone elses comment.

            Some “sit down and shut up comments” appear to be perfectly acceptable (people not yet on the Palin bandwagon), while other “sit down and shut up comments” are violently objectionable (“truce” on social issues).

            Gamecock will tell you that I am far more pro-Palin than he is, and yet I am the one who is constantly characterized as a hater, a tool, a bot,etc.

          • Scope

            My point was that it seems that many of the questions, and follow up questions are just a repetition of the same question, and apparently keeps being asked because some just haven’t gotten the answers to those questions that they want. As someone else here had said- “She quit” has been burned into Redstate. It is as though some refuse to believe her own words on why she left the Governor’s position. Are they implying that she lied? It has grown from she quit because she just wanted to make tons of money, to, she was only seeking fame and notoriety, she was in over her head, and many more reasons that people have conjured up in their own minds, which had nothing to do with her own reasons. It’s been more than a year since her resignation speech. Maybe some should read it again, and determine if what she said, has in fact been exactly what path she said she was going to take-

            http://criticalpolitics.wordpress.com/2009/07/03/transcript-sarah-palin-announces-resignation-july-3-2009/

            I don’t think many can doubt that she worked her butt off to help get good candidates get elected in these past mid-terms. In her speech she is heavily into working for all of the American people in a meaningful way, which she could not have accomplished as the Governor of a state. If some see that as a weakness, then so be it. If some cannot support her for leaving for any reason, then so be it. I doubt you will get any consensus opinion on the wisdom, or lack of, of Palin leaving her Governor’s position before the term was up. I picked a few lines out of that speech that makes perfect sense to me, now even more so in hindsight-

            “I’ve explained why, though I think of a saying on my parent’s refrigerator, on a little magnet that says- “Don’t explain; your friends don’t need it and your enemies won’t believe you anyway,”

            “Take the words of General MacArthur. He said “We are not retreating, we are moving in another direction.” That she certainly has accomplished.

          • JadedByPolitics

            Cold Warrior, he so berated people that hundreds from this site got up and joined their local Republican Party…..other then CW it doesn’t work :)

          • Scope

            Our CW has accomplished more for the party than many others. He is the ultimate peaceful activist leader. When people ask, what can I do, as so many do, he has the perfect doable answer. We will be supporting his candidacy for office one of these days, and running across the finish line with him.

          • JadedByPolitics

            he would have my money in a minute if he wanted to run :)

          • acat

            Common ground is good to find, no?

            acat

          • JSobieski

            but the idea that people can’t discuss these issues without name calling is disappointing.

          • Jack_Savage

            I guess the passive aggressive thing really gets my goat. Or the whole “no character, thin skin” schtick of goldwater smearbot.

            Disappointing indeed.

          • runner12

            being a nut job and ignorant to boot. Criticizing her for washing her hands too much? Um, she was in an area infected with cholera. It’s called “preventing disease.” Need someone explain to him how cholera is spread? It ain’t pretty let me tell ya and on a very serious note it kills many in third world countries. Had she not been vigilant in washing her hands she could have been responsible for furthering the spread of disease. BTW, there are uncomfirmed rumors that the cholera entered the country via a UN worker after the earthquake and more than likely this person was not as vigilant as Palin in hand-washing.

          • izoneguy

            When they go to Haiti…

            The lefties cannot stand it when a high profile conservative “invades” what they think is “their” territory.

          • JSobieski

            You are the person engaged in emotional outburts.

            My questions are exactly the types of questions that people will ask. What would it take for the logic of resigning from being governor to apply to a decision to resign from being President?

            Just like if someone raises taxes as governor, people will ask, what will stop that person from raising taxes as President.

            These are very fundamental questions. Until we have a nominee, questions are a good thing. Whether its the propensity of Daniels to raise taxes, whether Barbour’s southern accent makes him undesirable in the North, whether Romneycare makes Mitt impotent as a candidate, etc.

            Its called choosing a candidate. It requires factual investigation. Name calling just gets in the way, but feel free to continue. Some of us will continue to ask questions. If more people were willing to ask questions, Obama never would have been elected in the first place.

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

            ‘ski and ‘Savage that to be passive-aggressive is somehow so intrinsically evil that its use renders the substance of what is being argued somehow off the table.

            Seriously people, just because one is irritated at particular form (polite) of argument is not significant. Some people are irritated by all kinds of non-pass/agg forms. So?

            Tolerance for non-violent passive-aggressives!

            Attica! Attica!

          • JSobieski

            That is what they did in the USSR. Every dissident was diagnosed with some mental health issue. Ergo, I am sensitive to such attacks.

            Still, asking questions is hardly passive aggressive.

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

            is an illness worthy of a savage (joke) commitment order!

          • proudmarinemom

            is the mom of three teens. This makes her eligible for sainthood, provided she resists strangling, drowning or dismembering any of them before they reach 21. I ADORE my teen-age children, ADORE. Let me type that again, I ADORE them. They are upstanding citizens (by legal naturalization) and great patriots. They abhor laziness, greed, Communism, labor unions, wasteful spending, overeating, fake Christmas trees and housework. Just like the Palin kids. Their mom, Ms.Palin demonstrates enormous pride, patience and self-control in her interactions with them. Like me, kinda. I could take one of them and .. just … Okay, I ‘m off-topic. I want — I wish — I could be like Sarah Palin, always seeing the positive, the good and the potential in every person. I am learning from watching her, with my jaundiced, skeptical eye. I want to turn away from the negative, destructive criticism, too.

            Does any of this qualify Palin for The Presidency? No. But what a great training ground for a true servant of our Republic. If any person on earth understands sacrifice and service, it’s a mom. All sloppy, self-congratulatory sentiment aside.

            Semper mater fi.

          • AceInTX

            since he/she is engaged in the act of typing out positions and posting them is he really passive?

            I’ve said before…I don’t have a dog in this hunt…I’m backing Barbour first, then Pence….I’m torn between Perry and Palin for third and forth…but I have to say this…

            My issue with those that have a problem with Palin isn’t that they have a problem with Palin. I understand their problem…and share their concerns…it is withn the constant barage from our side like this from above:

            she has poor character

            She has no skin, she cant take any attack without hurling a little catty comment back at the person who has an oppinion

            She has become a media whore, appearing on a reality show with Kate Gosslin

            I and millions of… other people do good deeds all the time, but the main key is we do it because we want to help others not to be on tv. If Palin was doing this Hati relief quielty and under the radar as not to be percieved as a showboat, then I would respect that.

            She is a joke, and her supporters simply mimic her no skin attacks

            Remember talk is very cheap, and when it comes to Sarah Palin thats all you have is talk.

            she has become such a tabloid media item, along with Lindsay Lohan and Britney Spears, that she cant do anything substantive at this point without reading it on the front page of the National Enquirer. Now thats both her and the media

          • azaeroprof

            You made this point better in one post than I’ve tried to do in numerous ones on several diaries. I don’t care if you oppose her, but I stay away from HuffPo, etc for a reason. “Homie don’t do that on RedState”!

            I loved Barry Goldwater. I met the man, and I am now proud to live call his state my home. But I find it very intriguing that someone who purports to be a “Goldwater conservative” decries Sarah Palin as unelectable. Yeah, Goldwater was a pantheon of electability, wasn’t he? Seems to me I recall him saying something like “extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice”. Nobody in the GOP embodies that quote (at least in the media’s eye) like Palin.

          • Jack_Savage

            But that is what we are down to here at firedoglake.com.

            I will believe that other anti-Palin posters are sincere about discussing the merits of her candidacy when they start calling out comments like these. When that happens, we’ll debate, but so far there has been a lot of chiming in and very little critical analysis of this lame idiocy.

          • aesthete

            We’re not responsible for the statements of others, and there is no need for anyone to have to go around denouncing somewhat rude statements about Palin that are a matter of conjecture, and that really aren’t outside the pale. I don’t expect azaero and gop2010 to waste their time pointing condemning Palin supporters who call other people sexist or otherwise make dumb statements; they have both proven their reasonableness through their own discourse, and are not responsible for the statements of peripheral supporters. This is just as stupid as atheists who say that they will only “accept” as legitimate Christians who loudly denounce the sins committed by peripheral Christians. Let’s evaluate people based on *their* actions and words, not those of others.

            @ Ace: good points, and it’s nice to see your, err, less forceful side :)

          • Jack_Savage

            One would think that at a site like Redstate the users would be quick to point out comments that were, in spite of your attempt to minimize them, beyond the pale. Your attempt at making a point about Christians being forced to distance themselves from peripheral Christians falls flat – plenty of Christians have taken great pains to distance themselves from the Westboro Baptist crowd without being prompted to do so. I also expect you to be full throated in your defense of Muslims who don’t feel it necessary to condemn acts of terrorism. I feel sure that their silence will suffice.

            Thanks for the disabuse regarding what seems to be an idealistic view of this place.

          • aesthete

            It’s not a requirement. I don’t believe that Christians who don’t denounce bad things done in the name of Christianity are closet witch-burners by default. I don’t believe that RSers who don’t say anything about uncouth statements implicitly agree with them. I don’t believe that azareo prof is a closet gender-baiter when he doesn’t comment on Palin supporters who cry “sexist”. And no, I don’t believe that a Muslim who doesn’t spend every waking moment denouncing terrorists is a closet terrorist. Your assertion that one *must* denounce those of similar persuasion who make rude statements or do evil things makes civil dialog virtually impossible and unproductive. If I must know of and condemn every mean and inaccurate thing said of Palin, I won’t have time for anything else. JSob, myself, acat and several others have taken pains to make the point that we don’t agree with cosmetic attacks of the sort that Goldwater_Conservatism made here on several threads in the past. That is beyond the call of duty, and it is frustrating to see yet another task required for those not enthralled by President Palin, while no such requirement is seen as necessary for Palin fans who call those with legitimate questions and critiques sexists and the like. I don’t care if you call those people out or not: I will continue to examine and interact with each supporter on a case-by-case basis. I simply ask that you extend the same courtesy to us.

          • Jack_Savage

            Let me tell you where I am coming from regarding Palin. I watched with my Dad when the punk traitor John Kerry smeared the troops in the “hearings” during Vietnam, and no one said a word. I watched when John McCain sat right beside Ted Kennedy and said nothing when Kennedy stated that there was nothing different about the things that went on at Abu Gharib with the exception that it was under American management.

            I am sick and tired of decent people being smeared. You may think it is OK, and people around here may think it is just fine that comments like the ones highlighted by Ace are posted, but I don’t.

            Again, I am sick of decent people being smeared, and in my view either you call it out or you are going along with it. Period.

          • AceInTX

            having Mods ban the person posting them…or otherwise discouraging their use is another question…

            It’s their site…and they set the rules…if they want to smack goldwater_conservative or some of the others down who see nothing wrong with using KOS talking points to smack down and otherwise disparage Palin then that’s their purgative…but I won’t ask them to do it…or call for it…I don’t think it helps….I don’t think its productive….I prefer to have these discussions free flow…and smack the suckers around myself.

            I say this as someone who’s spent some time under the gun having every post scrutinized and having tattle tales baiting me and then snitching when I got out of line and I can tell you it’s no fun.

            Keep the mods out of it and deal with those who are out of line…or stay out of the discussion….that’s my preference

          • Jack_Savage

            And that is what I have been doing. However, it is a shame that what has become an online beacon for the conservative movement has elements like that. It does Redstate, nor the movement, any good.

          • Scope

            Jack Savage, but, you may want to ask aesthete if he, seemingly being more libertarian than conservative, would agree with Kerry, Kennedy and McCain before you can expect to get a reasonable answer about your concerns about attacking good people. That answer would be telling.

          • JSobieski

            You can personally make over the top comments like saying that I am consumed with “visceral hatred” of Palin, and that is a OK. No apology from you necessary. No need for anybody else to condemn you.

            But I am at fault . . . not for making any kind of comment on my own . . . but merely for not condemning the comment by another commentator?

            Your proposed rules of conduct are understood, but are not agreed to. Frankly, there is nothing conservative in your proposed framework.

          • Jack_Savage

            A veneer of reason, and then you say this:

            “Frankly, there is nothing conservative in your proposed framework.”

            A little snipe here, a snide comment there, and you expect to get away with it. If you don’t, and someone responds in kind, you hide behind the “he started it, we need to be civil, etc.”. I usually don’t type what I truly think about little cutesy comments like the one I quoted, so consider yourself spared. Dialogue with you adds zero to any discussion here, and to be quite frank I wasn’t even thinking of you when I responded to aesthete. I simply don’t expect much.

            Please take the last word. You obviously have plenty of time for this.

          • http://www.thejoyofreason.com Greg Garrison

            …after demonstrating that you dislike the term and that it’s not applicable. It sounds like somebody’s being passive-a…Hang on a second!

            Irony (I think).

            Clearly I have nothing mature to contribute to this exchange. That is all. Carry on.

          • gekster

            these guys are in a weeing match.

            Best to stand back least you get wet. LOL

          • speciallist

            it’s better than dropping an F-bomb and getting banned.. :)

          • speciallist

            ditto’s

          • Scope

            Awesome, and so very true as to how some of the comments have degraded any rational debate. I agree with Jack Savage- Those types of comments belong on KOS or as he says firedoglake. Also, yes, when those wanting a rational debate start calling out those kinds of comments, then things may improve drastically.

          • Scope

            is that when some dispute someone else’s argument they are immediately tagged as being “emotional.” Everyone involved in politics, especially in the current political atmosphere, has at least an element of emotions in their arguments. That is a weak argument from anyone. It is more of an accusation without foundation.

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

            my own jokes, but Jack, come on, and especially on a blog site, as opposed to in person, isn’t the main point of this exercise to discern the truth and substance of our principles and positions and that this is best done thru debate that makes us all defend and test all suppositions?

            And I would also suggest that sometimes pass-agg is wisely used in circumstances where one knows that being aggressive would be more than the other would and/o could take?

            I really think pass-agg gets a bad rap.

            Gamecock goes all peacemaker between two of the reasons I even come to RS, i.e. Jack’ and ‘ski.

            Now, I will go and actually read the thread for substance and weigh in with perfect pitch and wisdom…more later

          • JSobieski

            Does that mean I should judge you by what other people say? Or should I judge you by what you say?

            Seriously, I am now somehow responsible for the words and actions of people I don’t even know?

            Some basic suggestions:
            (1) Don’t create straw men of what I say, and instead judge me by what I actually say (not your caricatures of what you think I am saying)
            (2) Don’t impugn me on what other people say, judge me by what I say

          • gop2010

            a) She’s earned a boatload of book money that she didn’t have when she was governor.

            b) She can raise political money in a legal defense fund, which she was unable to do as governor.

            It’s not really in the realm of possibility anymore.

          • weirddave

            I won’t happen. It can’t happen. What happened to Palin happened only because of some unique Alaskan laws. It is impossible for it to happen to the President. It would have been impossible for it to happen to the Governor of Ca. Or NY. Or Ma. Or Ne. or Md, Az, De, Tx. Etc. Etc. Etc. What bugs me most about the “She Quit! End Of Story!” haters is their absolute refusal to recognize the unique position that Palin was in because of unique state laws. It would have been so very easy for her just to hunker down, turtle up and serve out her term before scurrying off home to Wasilla. Doing so would have been easy, yes, but it would have hurt her family and more importantly, deprived Alaskans of an effective governor for the 2 years or so left in her term. So she changed the rules and walked away with her head high, thwarting the left ‘s plan to destroy her. It was brilliant, and unlike you, because I have been willing to look at the entire situation, it was the moment when I thought “This woman has integrity, and she’s effortlessly outsmarting the professional Left. Maybe she IS presidential material after all”. All I ever hear from the likes of you is “Well, she quit. She quit. She quit. Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, ad nauseum.” Yes. She quit. I know that. Given the circumstances, it’s a positive for her, in my opinion, not a negative.

          • azaeroprof

            Given the situation in which she found herself in summer 2009, she left the state of Alaska in more effective hands, and has worked tirelessly ever since to make a difference for conservative principles nationally. Frankly, I’d call that at least smart, if not responsible and brilliant. She’s done a lot more for the country since quitting than a million of us little typists and our keyboards.

          • Goldwater_Conservative

            Win by quitting? I really thought we were better than this, and we used to be better than this until Palin came along, now the standards are all dropping rapidly.

          • azaeroprof

            if you ignore the results! :)

          • janis

            And the R’s standards ONLY dropped with Sarah Palin.

            What a stupid comment you have made here. You think that Sarah Palin is “dropping our standards”? You need to go back and look at some other candidates that the Republican Party has fielded and supported in the past. Bob Dole ring any of your chimes? Granted that he was a good guy, an honorable guy, but he was a lousy candidate. He would have had to pay people to show up and cheer for him at rallies and speeches.

            Sarah doesn’t.

          • JSobieski

            I would take Palin over Dole in 96 or McCain in 2008.

            Of course, those guys lost. We need to do better than that in 2012, or the Republic won’t survive as we have known it in the past.

          • Goldwater_Conservative

            I think Bob Dole is a perfect example. The man has built his whole life on princples and dedication to his country, not just a slogan. Palin doesnt do anything substantive but just go off on whatever the topic of the day is and give big rallies that leave people swooning and making emotional based statements about how she should be president. Hmmmm, thats how we got Obama come to think of it. I like principled people by their actions, not their words, but maybe thats just me.

          • AceInTX

            Really?

            He served his country and is a hero….he’s a lot of things and deserves our praise…but as a politician?

            Principled isn’t a discriptor that applies

            As for the rest of it?

            whatever you say

          • runner12

            some people do win by “quitting” as you phrased it. Recently in the news, a winning and successful football coach gave up a lucrative career by choosing his health and family over success. That is not quitting, it is prioritizing. While I am not 100% sold on Palin for President, I believe that is exactly what she did in Alaska, and it was not for personal gain. We have seen how contentious Alaska politics can be and I believe Palin when she states that she did not think she would be able to get anything done with the media excoriating her every single day. While I may have some doubts about her as a Presidential candidate, I believe the woman tells the truth.

          • Goldwater_Conservative

            “I believe Palin when she states that she did not think she would be able to get anything done with the media excoriating her every single”

            but read that sentence, think about it a little and tell me how that means she should run for President. How much worse do you think the media is going to come after her then?

          • runner12

            hitting “reply.” I was referring to her decision to leave Alaska as governor. That is one state, not the Presidency. You made a rather bold assertion that Palin “abandoned” her state for monetary reasons. I was merely pointing out that a.) that is your opinion and not fact and there is absolutely no way you can know someone’s motivations. b.) Her stated reason is that she felt it would be detrimental to her state if she stayed on and I believe her to be an honest person.
            She has also stated that she may not run for the Presidency for the very reasons she left Alaska. Palin is not stupid, she knows that she has been polarized by the attack-dog, state-run media and that could hurt our chances of winning the White House. I firmly believe that she will do what is best for the country and not for herself.
            I have few questions as to whether Palin is competent enough to be President, it is rather can she overcome the media polarization? That is a question worth debating. Not her personal character.

          • Scope

            agreed. I am not a Palinbot, nor do I even have her on the top of my list, but, the denigrating by our own side is disheartening. It’s like a very bloody primary battle with Senator or House races. If the eventual winner has been so bloodied and beat up by others in his/her own party, they come off the primary win with an immediate disadvantage, which always works to the Democrat’s advantage. We give the Democrat’s the best campaign ads.

          • acat

            having already endured over 2 years of media bludgeoning, she’s the perfect candidate?

            This does appear to be where your logic leads.

            And, in the interest of not offending you, I won’t mew at the end of my comment.

            acat

          • weirddave

            Remember how W almost lost in 2000? Do you remember why? Why, just days before the election, the media “discovered” that he’d had a DWI back in the day, and trumpeted this fact to the skies. A slim but comfortable 5-8 point lead in the polls vanished, and we got Hanging Chad Theater. If Huck becomes the front runner, or Mittens gains traction, the media will go to work digging and digging and digging, to let us know, oh, say…. in 1968 Romney kicked a cat, or that in 1998, Huck looked sternly at some little old lady as he crossed the street (note: I do know that either of these men did either of those things, nor am I claiming they did). Palin? She’s media sabotage proof. After the last few years, there’s nothing left to be dug up. One thing Palin the candidate would not have to worry about is a negative “October surprise” from her past torpedoing her run.

          • JSobieski

            So your statement is moot at best, and a straw man at worst.

            Nobody here is supporting a blogger for President.

            We are comparing Palin to other serious candidates.

            Let me say 100% that I agree that Palin is more qualified to be President than anyone having anything to do with Red State.

            So now we can proceed to the actual issue . . .

          • JSobieski

            Newt Gingrich, Romney, Huckabee, and others whom I would say are bad Presidential candidates.

          • Goldwater_Conservative

            I’m used to these types of reponses from the Palinistas. If you make a clear valid undisuptable point like “she quit her job that the people entrusted her with to go make a lot of money” you can expect a response along the lines of “what have you done with your life”. Its becoming a cultlike following, and I guess only those of us who refuse to drink the koolaid can see how dangerous this is becoming.

          • Jack_Savage

            To help us “Palinistas”. That really helps the debate along, and makes me glad we are on the same team.

            Who are you supporting, by the way? Or are you content with smearing Sarah Palin for the foreseeable future?

          • JSobieski

            There are reasons for it, sure. But if identifying a fact is a “smear” I think you need to change political ideologies.

          • Jack_Savage

            How’s that for a fact? Or would you call it a smear?

          • JSobieski

            You would have done better to keep the inability private and in doubt rather than public and indisputable.

            I am not smearing anyone. I am not name calling anyone. I discuss the strengths and weaknesses of candidates. If that is too much for you to take, that is on you . . . not on me.

          • Jack_Savage

            She quit her post as governor under debilitating financial pressure and no help form Republicans, and left the state of Alaska in very capapble hands. That is indeed a fact. Since I have a life to live, I am going to do just that, but why don’t we meet up when you think of a real reason she should not run for any elective office ever again in her life?

          • acat

            Because she didn’t turn the case over to the Alaska State Attorney General, whose job is to defend the governor.

            Why did she do that?

            Mew

          • Mary Beth

            IIRC, under the Ethics Law, the Attorney General/Department of Law could not step in if it was the Governor…Lt Governor or Staff.

            Besides…IMAGINE for a second if the above weren’t true and Palin went this route.

            I can hear the endless screams from the left now…”SEE HOW CORRUPT SHE IS??!?? She’s using her own government to protect herself from ethics complaints!”

            BTW…Conservatives for Palin has a new post up that deals specifically with why she resigned. Yes, they’ve covered it before but like Freddie Krueger or Jason Voorhees, this thing just keeps coming back to life!

            http://www.conservatives4palin.com/2010/12/why-governor-palin-resigned.html

          • acat

            I don’t want to back someone who can’t close the deal.

            My understanding is that if the ethics violation was a part of her job, then the A.G. can defend her… it’s only if it’s part of her personal life that she can’t. So, wearing a logo to an official appearance – part of the job. Troopergate – maybe not so much?

            I also don’t put much stock in what might have been. If she’d stayed in Alaska, odds are the Tea Parties would have found someone else to lead the parade. (politicians all vied for the job, Sarah won … had she been in Alaska it could have been .. Newt?)

            Yes, the ethics stuff and the resignation are very old news… but it still leaves me with an uncertain feeling about her… why didn’t she take this to the A.G. and walk away a free woman? And I’m one of the ones who should be easy to win over…

            Mew

          • speciallist

            or twitter her

            nobody on Redstate has the answer to your question…so please find a FRESH issue to talk about

            if you don’t trust her judgment than Don’t vote for her…but showing up on every Palin diary and repeating the same tired lines is torturous

          • acat

            Look, if Sarah Palin becomes Candidate Palin, then these questions are going to be asked… and you, her loyal followers had damn well better have answers ready when Aunt Millie and Uncle Chester and your co-worker Satish ask you…

            If nobody on Red State knows, then why are you telling me to quit asking? Shouldn’t you want to know what to say when you’re asked?

            Seems to me either there are valid questions that you and a lot of other Palin fans are ignoring, or the “campaign” hasn’t gotten its’ message straight yet.

            Mew

          • speciallist

            go ahead and keep on bringing your tired questions about her quitting…

            and keep on dismissing her loyal followers with hyperbole about how they are ignoring important questions and blindly following her….feel free

            but I won’t be reading, cause you’re boring the heck out of me…and others

            I can promise you, the only bot -like activity is coming from her detractors

          • acat

            bot-like isn’t a good word for her followers.

            Mew

          • Mary Beth

            You obviously have the right to your own opinion…but nothing about this woman says “quitter” to me. So, if I were a betting woman, I would wager that she did everything in her power to keep from having to hand the ball off to Parnell because the idea of leaving went against her grain.

            I mean just watching her over the past two years plus has shown her to be someone not afraid of a fight…or someone unwilling to roll up their sleeves and do the hard work… not only in regard to forwarding or attacking various policy positions or showing her support for candidates.

            So if she didn’t approach her AG…which I don’t know that she didn’t… then just by watching how she responds to challenges, I would have to say that it was because she was legally forbidden from doing so.

            As for the RICO thing that you posted elsewhere… doesn’t that apply to organized crime? I know that Naked Emperor News did a bang up job last year connecting the dots to show a connection between the anklebiters and the Obama White House, but I think it would be pretty difficult to lay it out as a RICO violation.

          • acat

            but it does appear to cover conspiracies pretty well – and even if it couldn’t be *proven*, if there is outside money or aid feeding the anklebiters, an A.G. clearly going on a fishing expedition and serving some warrants outside the state would get outside money shut off real fast…

            As for being legally forbidden to approach the A.G., that’s one theory. The other theory is that she didn’t because she knows she can’t – because the issue is not one that is related to the office.

            I’m not saying she’s a quitter – I agree she was forced out. I’m asking what drove the decision to fight elsewhere instead of staying and fighting this fight…. and what does that mean for President Palin?

            Mew

          • Mary Beth

            This….

            http://www.conservatives4palin.com/2010/12/why-governor-palin-resigned.html

            … might help answering some or all of them.

            Like you mentioned above, it’s not about her leaving. It’s the why. Either you (and by “you” i mean the general populace) accept the reasons she and others have laid out and determined them to be a reasonable response or you reject them. That’s up to you to decide.

            It’s also up to Candidate Palin to make that case as well. She’s made it with me so I’m looking at it from the other side.

            As for how a President Palin would respond…I don’t understand why this is even a question, to be quite honest. The tools provided to a President in matters like this are substantially different than those provided to a Governor of Alaska, especially those in office prior to the new changes to the Ethics Law that will be taking effect soon.

            So I’d say what drove this decision is exactly what she said it was. That her hands were tied given the specifics of the law in place…one she helped put there and that is now being revised to close loopholes taken advantage of by leftist stooges.

            And her response as President would be to use the tools available to the Presidency that would protect her from that kind of sabotage. I mean how many times was Bush attacked? How many times will any GOP or conservative be attacked?

            My interest here is in her response. She took what must have been a very difficult path for her. Anyone who watches even a few seconds of Sarah Palin’s Alaska sees what a fighter she is and how much she loves her state.

            So to take this specific path knowing how some would twist it to be a negative … but doing it because it was the right thing to do for her state, her agenda and her family … that makes me respect her more.

            To me it says it was more important to her to do the right thing than it was to hold onto a title. Even one she really loved.

          • AceInTX

            Let’s concede she had no choice but to leave…I could see myself doing so under similar circumstances…so…let’s give the pro side that argumenrt for the sake of this argument…

            Given the fact that the lefties were successfull in ejecting her with such tactics…is it not reasonable to believe they would be emboldened into believing they could do so again were she to acheive the highest office in the land?

            Let’s say she becomes POTUS…and lets say a couple years into her first term she is faced with a Dem supermajority in the House and’or Senate…is it legitimate to assume…since the Alaska Dems were so successful in driving her out by swamping her with ethics charges…that the Dems will be emboldened to try the same thing in Washington…

            In such a case…isn’t it legitimate to not want to have to face a feeding frenzy and to put her down the list as a candidate?

            Again…questions and concerns…She’s not at the top of my list…nor am I about to react to her possibly being POTUS like a vampire sudenly faced with a Crucifix or the first break of the sun on the horizon as some of the antis insist on!

          • Scope

            http://criticalpolitics.wordpress.com/2009/07/03/transcript-sarah-palin-announces-resignation-july-3-2009/

            Please read her resignation speech again, and, see if you think that her resigning was only and solely because of the ethics violations. As I said in a comment above, I read her going in another direction, which she could not do while being the Governor, was as important, if not more important than the ethics violations reasons. I’m looking at her resignation speech in hindsight, as not many could deny that she has remained involved, and has helped much with the mid-terms. Do you remember right after her speech, how many said they would wait and see what she did, and what she accomplished with helping other candidates get elected to, to judge her on her resignation? I remember many people here saying that. That is of course, among those that believed her words.

          • AceInTX

            my question goes purely at what we can expect from the Democrats….

            It seems to me her actions in AK invites the same to be done in Washington….The Dems would look at the fact that they got her to leave by such tactics in AK therefore they could do the same in Wash…

            As such…they would cripple this country with their shennanigans…

            That’s not to say we should let Dems dictate to us what’s best for this country…or that we should let Democrats decide how Republicans should vote in their primaries…I’d be the first one to jump on anyone that suggested we do so…

            my only question is…isn’t it reasonable to consider the effects of such behavior on a national scale and on this country as a whole were she elected…and are those who do take this into consideration worthy of being accused of PDS?

            Saying that…let me separate some from others on this…I would put Goldwater Conservative’s posts in the PDS category….Jsobs not so much…therefore I would say accusing Goldwater Conservative of PDS given his posts as I listed above is spot on and definitely within the bounds of legitimate debate on this subject…

            It is illigitimate to atack others who argue issues and stay off the personal attacks you would expect from KOS, HuffPo etc. as I’ve seen folks do on the Pro Palin side of this.

            Again…I’m in the rare position on this where I could stake out ground and make my characteristic fight on either side if the argument so I’m acting as an arbiter here…I see both sides tearing at each other in bad faith and I don’t think anything is gained in the exchanges at this point.

          • Scope

            that you are currently supporting Barbour first and Pence second. I’m sure you are aware that Barbour has made similar “truce” statements as Daniels-

            http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/win-independent-votes-by-neglecting-social-cons-bad-strategy/

            I find it fascinating that Daniels has gotten taken to the cleaners on his truce statements (which I don’t agree with) but Barbour seems to have escaped that wrath. Pence has come out against the truce speak.

          • Scope

            that ask if Huckabee could be Palins biggest threat. Now the question has become, could Pence be Palins biggest threat. He’s strong on all three planks, but, has a unique way of selling his social conservatism that is not offensive to those that are not evangelicals.

          • acat

            Other than the, again, limited amount of government executive experience that one can pick up in the legislature, I don’t know enough about Pence to have an opinion .. yet.

            acat

          • AceInTX

            aside from that I have no reason for supporting him…

            In a perfect world that wouldn’t be reason enough…and it a perfect world I’d have him as my number one…

            But this isn’t a perfect world…and conventional wisdom becomes such for a reason….and I’ve come down on the side that the conventional wisdom is correct here.

            Pence should run for Gov and come back in 16 or 20…I’d be all in then

            I love the way he looks like Race Bannon from Johny Quest…heh

          • Jim Tomasik

            I have not noticed anyone saying anything about him being from the House and how those never win POTUS.

          • Scope

            and in these times, for me conventional wisdom, and precedence is out the window. There has been nothing conventional about the last two years. Two years ago the Tea Parties didn’t exist. If you agree that they have had an impact or not, there is a trend away from politics as usual, as desired by the people anyway.

            In Pence’s case, I’m actually happy that he has been in the House for the past 10 years, rather than the Senate. I am happy that he has government experience. One of the things that attracts me to Pence is the fact that over the 10 years he has been in Washington, he has never given up on his conservative principles. DC didn’t change him. During the Bush years, he never got suckered in with No Child Left Behind, Medicare Part D, or any of the other Bush projects that grew government. He voted against TARP. From many articles I’ve read about him, those posting in the comments sections, that know him, say that he is very authentic. What you see, is who he is. What he says, he really believes. He is principled, and has never sold out on those principles. I know everyone is tired of the O’s speechifying, done from a teleprompter, messing up when the prompter misfires, or crashes to the floor. We know he is not saying anything he really believes, and in a classless manner. On the other hand, Pence is terrific at giving great speeches, doesn’t need a prompter, and says what he does from his heart, and would never knock America. Imagine if Bush was a good speechifier. It is an important part of the job to relay your policies and plans to the people in a manner that you win them over. I’m not into anyone that believes that the only important issue is the economy, and nothing else should be addressed at this time. I prefer someone who is strong on all three planks of conservatism, not just one or two. I have done much research on Pence, and, have read everything out there that I can find on him. At this time, he is my first choice. Of course you will do your homework on anyone that enters the race, and will make your own choice, as it should be. I just wanted you to be aware of Barbours position on the social issues.

          • AceInTX

            a simple answer would be…I trust Barbour…I don’t trust Daniels…but that’s avoiding the issue isn’t it?

            If Barbour said it out of the blue with no prompting as Daniels did…then I would consider recalibrating my picks…

            Can you give me more on this?

          • Scope

            http://www.lifenews.com/2010/09/09/nat-6685/

            I actually think his statements were even a little worse than Daniels. To say that candidates need to talk about issues that are important to voters, as though pro-life isn’t important, is a bridge too far. Also, to say that resources would be wasted on social issues is just wrong. I agree totally that economic issues are critical, but, last I checked conservatives were able to walk and chew gum at the same time.

          • Mary Beth

            If it were possible for her to take the route you’ve espoused?

            I can’t imagine him not making sure that she knew every legal angle available to her.

          • gop2010

            http://www.touchngo.com/lglcntr/akstats/Statutes/Title39/Chapter52.htm

            “AS 39.52.160. Improper Representation.

            (a) A public officer (e.g., Attorney General) may not represent, advise, or assist a person (e.g., Palin) in any matter pending before the administrative unit that the officer serves (e.g., Department of Law), if the representation, advice, or assistance is …

            (2) without compensation, but rendered to benefit a personal or financial interest of the public officer.”

            Palin hires the AG so there’s a personal benefit involved.

            Also Section 190: “AS 39.52.190. Aiding a Violation Prohibited.
            It is a violation of this chapter for a public officer to knowingly aid another public officer in a violation of this chapter.”

            If the AG represented Palin and she was found guilty, the AG would then be guilty of violating the statute. That’s not a foundation for a great lawyer-client relationship.

            Read the whole act. The AG is statutorily required to do a lot of other clerical and investigative tasks that could be compromised if the AG were also representing the accused.

          • acat

            This seriously alters the relationship between A.G. and Governor …

            What else was in this bill that made signing it worthwhile?

            Mew

          • jimmyg

            She chose not to because it would have been too difficult to serpaerate the political legal bills she had incurred from the bills incurred in defense of the ethics complaihttp://doa.alaska.gov/dop/fileadmin/PersonnelBoardReports/ChatamReport-2010-06.pdfnts. (See Section C par. 1-3) It has become an urban myth that she has no one to pay her legal bills and was near bankruptcy because of the ethics complaints. She admits that the State of Alaska could have paid her bills, she chose not to submit them becuase her attorney also handled her political legal business.

          • acat

            I’m sorry, but .. that’s just .. wow.

            Separation of duties, i.e. keeping people from accessing stuff they shouldn’t see, keeping records straight, distinction of who is responsible for what is .. kind of a big deal.

            Once she became aware that she was going to have to fight these challenges, she needed to bring in separate counsel. The attorneys should, of course, talk and plan, but .. having one firm do all the lifting creates more problems than it solves… and in this case it was the wrong thing to do.

            Mew

          • gop2010

            Before your problem was that she had an outside attorney and now it’s that she didn’t have two? I’m getting dizzy.

            There was no statutory authority that AK would pay her legal bills. There’s also not a bright line between what is “personal” and what is “official”. The personal is political now, you see. She should have been able to raise private political money to pay her political legal bills and all would have been fine had they not invalidated her legal defense fund on truly specious grounds.

          • acat

            My problem with her having outside counsel is with the law that makes it necessary – it’s part of the A.G.’s job to defend the legitimate actions of the executive branch, including the governor.

            My problem with her not having a second outside counsel is because it’s just bad practice. Once it became apparent that she was going to face multiple ethics charges (about the time the third one arrived…) she ought to have realized this called for separate counsel from the one she used for campaign purposes.

            Also, if jimmyg’s post above is correct, it would have made submitting the non-political bills for reimbursement possible…

            Mew

          • jimmyg

            Gov. Palin admits that the State of Alaska had prepared a contract for her attorney, Thomas Van Flein, to provide legal services to Gov. Palin to defend herself from the ethics charges. She chose not to have her attorney enter into this contract due to the fact that he represented her in political matters. This admission by Gov. Palin was made in the consent order she entered into with the Personnel Board, it is also known as the Petumenos Report.
            From my perspective, the myth that Palin would go bankrupt from the legal bills were interviews given by Gov. Palin’s then press secretary Meg Stapleton, then C4P took up that line, as the reason she resigned. Her Attorney, Thomas Van Flein seems like a straight shooter, and gave an interview as to the trust fund, stating that he counseld her to run it by the Attorney General’s office, before starting the legal fund. He was overruled by other attorney’s from the lower 48. http://doa.alaska.gov/dop/fileadmin/PersonnelBoardReports/ChatamReport-2010-06.pdf

          • gop2010

            The AG isn’t the judge there; as we have established, he has to step aside and the Personnel Board’s appointee makes the decision.

          • gop2010

            a) Jimmy

          • jimmyg

            I have always thought that the compliants against Gov.Palin in large part were minor in nature, fact driven, and easily answerable in one or two paragraphs. The only complaits of any substance were the Monahan/Troopergate investigation, and the legal fee fund. I have a hard time imagining that Gov.Palin’s attorney compiling $500,000.00 in legal fees representing the Gov. for what amounts to silly complaints on their face which do not involve novel legal issues.

          • acat

            had she hired a second attorney, eh?

            Mew

          • JSobieski

            So the idea that this is somehow old news that “keeps coming back to life” is not accurate. If you can point to a single comment or diary on RS citing FOIA requests, I would be surprised.

            I should also point out that the White House is also subject to FOIA requests.

            I realize that raising any of the facts above will likely result in me being accused of “visceral hatred” but I nonetheless raise them.

          • Mary Beth

            That post goes into more of the details as to what she and her staff were facing and doing…but she did make it pretty clear that the costs and the time she and her staff was forced to waste dealing with the endless attacks from the anklebiters were the key reasons for her decision.

            Oh and raising legitimate and honest inquiries is usually respected by most folks supporting a candidate.

            It’s the endless parroting of empty media memes that will cause folks to get a little testy. Speaking for myself of course.

          • speciallist

            if I wanted to hear empty media memes that would cause me to get a little testy, I could just walk into my living room :)

          • JSobieski

            I have said that I would vote for her against a number of other potential candidates.

            I am merely trying to raise the issues that she will need to overcome if she is to win.

            You seem so intent on putting words into my mouth, and then complaining about those words.

            I am not putting words in your mouth. Why not give me the same courtesy? Why get upset about an argument that isn’t even real? You are mad at me about things I didn’t even say!!!

          • Scope

            If the comment was “she quit her job”, that is indisputable. Then to add, “that the people entrusted her with” is just for sensation. To add, “to go make alot of money” is speculation, not provable by anyone, and, without any doubt a smear.

          • JSobieski

            To say that people entrusted her with the job is true (it is surely more accurate than the opposite proposition—did electing Palin constitute a reluctance to entrust her with the job of governor?). The people of Alaska had a choice, and they entrusted her—not the other candidate to be Governor. When there is only person filling a position at a time, you are entrusting the person. Hire a baby sitter for the evening, and you are entrusting her to stay until you return. She has reasons for what she did, and I for one do not accuse of her of basing decisions on poor reasoning.

            I fully agree that to impugn monetary motices is both unfair and untrue. Nothing in Palin’s life has pointed to a motivation based on money.

            I realize that Jack will consider all of this to be passive aggressive smears, but I attempting to identify strengths and weaknesses of candidates before we have a nominee is an important part of the process.

            Even Reagan had weaknesses, He was reluctant to fire people–it was a material liability that resulted in his close advisers trying to protect Reagan, which sometimes involved taking out each other. W Bush had a similar weakness, see FEMA.

            I think Palin is doing alot of things right in building a candidacy. I think the Haiti trip is a success, and that her show conveys a sense of who she is to people who may have been previously closed off to her. I think that Palin endorsing the Ryan Roadmap was an act of leadership that we need.

            It does not help anyone if terms like “visceral hatred” and “bot” are tossed around loosely.

          • azaeroprof

            that she “quit the job the voters entrusted to her”. No disputing that. But as I argued above, the state of Alaska has probably been better served since July 2009 with Sean Parnell than it would have been with Sarah Palin, given the post-’08 environment.

            She does, and should, take something of a hit for having stepped aside. But the fact that she recognized what was best for her state and was willing to risk her potential political career in doing so, needs to be in the calculus there as well.

            Plus, she easily could have quit, written her book, made her millions, and sat on her duff enjoying a lifetime of prosperity and spending time with her family. She didn’t.

          • Scope

            she quit will never be settled with some, even with her statement of why she was quitting. Surely there was something in that statement that she was hiding. Yet, Daniels calls a “truce” on social issues, advocates for a VAT, wants the feds to cut defense spending cut beyond the Gates proposals, but, he walked back the truce statement, which he didn’t. Some believe that a VAT is the way to go. Some believe that we are “wasting” money on defense, well because, the economy can be the only focus. I thought that it was a Democrat thing to strip the defense budget first.

          • JSobieski

            People should absolutely weigh those factors into their decision making process.

            I don’t see Mitch fans going around accusing such folks of “visceral hatred” or asking that they be quiet about it. There have been some pretty good discussions on Mitch, with the discussions focusing on what he has done and what he has said.

            Not sure why one person (Palin) is supposed to be off limits for some reason, or why questions about her are obviously the result of “hatred” while its perfectly ok to talk about other candidates in a frank manner.

            Now is the time to investigate the weaknesses of the candidates.

          • Goldwater_Conservative

            based on what they do, not what they say. I believe that when you decide to run for Senate or Govenor, you are committing yourself to that full term if elected just as you would in military service. If the people elect you to a higher office then you go on and serve in that capacity to its full term. But no matter what, you dont just quit. And if you do quit, you go hide in shame because thats what you should have is shame.
            And if you want to argue that Alasaka is better off with her gone from the executive seat, I dont see how you can say she needs to run for President of the US.

          • Jack_Savage

            On whether they are qualified to wash the underwear of the person they attack.

            You aren’t.

          • Goldwater_Conservative

            palinista, always avoid the question and attack the person making the statement.

          • Jack_Savage

            Or is that a question you will avoid?

          • powertothepeople

            and do you realize it has been overused already? At least Tbone adds his own flair to this comment when he used it, you just added nothing but regurgitated nonsense.

            Try to understand this even with your PDS issues. A person can 100% support a woman being an equal, being in Congress, being president without falling behind Palin lock stock and barrel. I know you think you are clever with little snide remarks like that or may even feel more liberated than the rest of us “cavemen,” but reality is you are not. Palin is not all the is women, and people can chose to not support her without have numbnuts act as if their decision is an attack on women or a failure to support women in what they chose to do.

            And quite frankly, I find the Palin love and complete inability to see any shortcoming in her, which there are plenty, as being a disservice to all the women in the party who work hard to do the right thing, stand strong on conservative principles, and do not cut and run when the going got tough.

            Support her, do not support her, fine. But do not assume you are somehow more supportive of women because you choose to support her than the rest of us, because I can assure you that you would be wrong and out of touch with reality. Not too mention the whole argument is reminiscent of the way black folks talk when you dare say you do not support their black messiah.

          • speciallist

            why don’t you pipe down

          • powertothepeople

            ???? Would you be another that has nothing to offer but nonsense and an example of PDS? Or are you this stupid all the time?

          • speciallist

            hi!

          • powertothepeople

            are going to have to help me out. While I would love to be a mentor or friend to all of the Southbury Training School attendees, no way I can keep them all entertained.

            Speciallist, maybe someone will step up and be your friend, but if not, feel free to hang around and add such “brilliant comments” to the discussion. But do not worry, I never turn a friend request away, and your will be no different.

          • speciallist

            your Fly is open…

          • powertothepeople

            a clever one got free from the guards at the school. Here, come with me and I will get you safely back for medicine and chow time.

            But man let me take a picture, such a “clever” little one you are!

          • speciallist

            you just whistlen dixie?

          • powertothepeople

            “Palin is not all the is women, and people can chose to not support her without have numbnuts act as if their decision is an attack on women or a failure to support women in what they chose to do”

            Should be

            “”Palin is not all that is women, and people can chose to not support her without having numbnuts act as if their decision is an attack on women or a failure to support women in what they chose to do.

          • speciallist

            my high school hall monitor on steroids

            and your fear of Sarah is hilarious

          • powertothepeople

            what it is I or anyone else who does not fall in behind the Palin hysteria fear?

            Will she take my career from me?

            Will she have me thrown in jail for not supporting her?

            Will she send thugs down to teach me to support her at all times?

            What is it I am supposed to be fearing about her.

            Or is this yet another regurgitated rhetoric poorly stated that is supposed to mean anyone who questions her ability to be president must be a woman hating redneck who beats his own wife the moment she tries to better herself? You wouldn’t be trying to push that line of thought would you. Especially on someone so supportive of a women running for Gov in their own state. But then again the difference may be the woman in their state was actually qualified to be in power.

          • Goldwater_Conservative

            MSM lover, huffington post troll, or anyone who speaks ill of Palin is automatically a RINO and therefore they are quilty of treason.

            My top candidates for President at this point are Pence, Daniels, Ryan and Jindal. But if you want to state an oppinion about them and its not a good one, I’m fine with that and wont care. But if anyway says anything bad about Palin then her supporters take that as if you just insulted them personally and they will then attack you personally and say you started it. Its very perverse and dangerous.

          • powertothepeople

            but what the Palin addicts do not understand is that most of do not hate her or want her to disappear. We simply are not convinced her qualifications are high enough to be president yet.

            Most of us also recognize the outstanding job she has done in promotion of conservative candidates, raising money, pissing off the left, etc. In fact I would go as far as saying she is better than almost anyone at these things and is doing the job we so desperately need her to do. But president, not so sure at this point.

            But while I can debate with most of them concerning the merits of her being ready to be president, it is the idiots like above that make me laugh/

            If I were to go down the line of their thought process, I would have to assume that since they can see no other than Palin as president and are not supporting other just as unqualified candidates for president then:

            since they are not yelling for Rubio to be president, they must be anti- hispanic or scare of them,

            since they are not supporting West for president, they must be anti-black or scared of them,

            since they are not supporting Christie as president, they must be anti fat people or scared of them,

            etc, etc, etc.

            Guess they do not think when they type or form thought processes.

          • Goldwater_Conservative

            by the Obama supporters. If you speak ill of Obama you must be a racists. Meanwhile, Obama’s supporters love him because of his words, the way they can project what they want on him because he is a motivational speaker with a nearly blank slate.
            You see these cultlike followings all the time. Multi-level marketing business are filled with these. Many cult leaders use reliegion to exploit their followers, and of course you see it in politics with certian leaders.

          • speciallist

            to Obama supporters and cults?

            unbelievable

          • speciallist

            Palin addicts do not understand

            it is the idiots like above that make me laugh

            I would have to assume that since they can see no other than Palin as president and are not supporting other just as unqualified candidates for president then

            Guess they do not think when they type or form thought processes.

            and you’re quite the elitist also…

          • Scope

            ole’ Goldwater here has the nerve to remark, over at the Ron Paul diary, that he just doesn’t understand why there is so much animosity against Ron Paul. Try to make sense of that one in light of his comments here.

          • speciallist

            they have become the embodiment of what this diary is all about

            that’s whats funny

          • gekster

            Some people just can’t stand some one who likes Mrs. Palin.

            Makes me miss Achance in a way.
            Now he knew how to bash Mrs. Palin “and” her supporters.
            It was like it was his job.
            These guys seem like amatures.

          • speciallist

            Achance had some fresh material

          • gekster
          • gekster

            That I’m posting comments to quickly, slow down.
            What the heck is that?

          • Scope

            That is something I don’t miss, being on the other end of some of that bashing, as many here know. I have been thrilled that that name has not come up on this diary, and many other recent diaries that have anything to do with Palin, though his ghost still lives with some, as you have acknowledged. Funny thing is, I am not a Palinbot by any stretch, but, in fact was put on the crap list for even questioning some of the claims against Palin. It unfortunately proved that once on the crap list, always on the crap list, and, with some, I still remain there. Oh well. I survived that.

            I think it is very funny, actually, as some who are anti-Palin, or who are not sold on Palin, are having a hard time with being called names, and are saying that they have the right to ask questions (which they do) . I wish they would have been on the other end when he who shall not be named did all but decapitate those that did not agree. Heh- he left just enough blood flowing to torture them at his will.

          • gekster

            The Great War Buzzard of Mt. Alaska.

            We will never forget him, as long as the name Palin is mentioned.

            Well…Maybe after she becomes President.

          • Jack_Savage

            I was answering the continuation of a jackass argument with a jackass comment. Thanks for your reasoned response, but a few lines into the sanctimony and strawmen I heard Charlie Brown’s teacher droning on, and lost interest.

            I am well aware of Palin’s shortcomings. I am also well aware that the bashers here on Redstate are turning this place into firedoglake.com when it comes to Sarah Palin. I am happy to debate her policy positions, her tireless work for candidates across this country, and even her resigning from her post as governor just as soon as anyone with brains enough not to continually parrot “She quit! Aaark! Aaark! She quit!” shows up. So far I have not seen a lot of intelligence or a different schtick from the smearbots, so I try to keep my comments to the insulting and demeaning level that seems to be accepted as legitimate debate re: Palin around here.

            I’ll end with this question, to you and all the other people who are so very concerned about Sarah Palin. Assuming you have ever had a job, have you ever quit a job? Why? And do you think that makes you unfit to hold another one?

            Got to run. Have a blast.

          • speciallist

            that just made the list..

          • acat

            ….isn’t whether I think it makes me unfit to hold another one. What matters is whether any potential future bosses think I’m unfit to hold another job because of it.

            And as I am one of Palin’s potential bosses … I’m asking questions to see whether I think it’s an issue or not.

            Mew

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine
          • acat

            because a Tbone and a string bass and a singer with really great pipes putting some soul into holiday classics sounds good right about now….

            Mew

          • AceInTX

            My general impression of you is that we agree on most issues…take this as me being helpfull.

            First off…I think you are reacting to Jack saying Goldwater Conservative is afraid of strong women…

            As I read Jack…and I’m sure he’ll correct me if I’m wrong…he is saying that employing a technique Rush calls “demonstrating absurdity by being obsurd.

            If you’ll peruse this thread…and others…Mister Goldwater Conservative has a particular way of being a borish loudmouth who loves to hurl poop from the peanut gallery because he loves getting a rise out of people…As such, the argument Jack is reacting to fits into the category of “you’re just afraid of strong women”

            The smart aXXed crack is intended to illicit a resonse…which you uncerominiously provided with the above…

            As for Specialist…which is the real reason I’m responding here….you’d do well to know who you are speaking with before you spew the tripe you’ve unleashed below…

            Spec is one of us…and I wouold most definitely take his bac “as a friend” I think the reason he’s saying pipe down here is because the above shows how easily you were pulled into Jack’s rhetorical devise and you’ve let your emotions rull your response….

            as such…you completely missed the point of Jack’s reply to Glodwater Conservative as he did in this instance.

          • AceInTX

            I can’t figure out what moderates find so appealing about not having an opinion on something…

            I feel icky…but at the same time…I can’t make myself decide on a position concerning Palin in this argument…yet I’m drwn to the argument like a moth to a flame

          • Jack_Savage

            That “Palinista” and “drinking the kool-aid” do little to advance the debate either. I know, I know – I started it, you are logical, I never said that, yada yada yada, so save your fingers to type “I just want to discuss rationally”.

            When the imbecilic “she quit, and is therefore not qualified for anything” argument is put to rest, I will put “smearbot” and “visceral hatred” in the archives. I try to engage people on their level, and any Palin debate around here seems to be in that general tone.

          • Jack_Savage

            Hardly worth a keystroke.

          • acat

            Just kidding.

            Mew

      • chihank

        This coming Friday, Palin will be interviewed by Robin Roberts on “Good Morning America”. It seems Palin is beginning to step out of her comfort zone of Facebook and Fox News,

        • Jack_Savage

          The media has been very fair to her, so I am not sure why she hasn’t ventured out more.

          • azaeroprof

            To be viable in the general election, she needs to get her numbers up among so-called independents (though not as much as some think, IMHO). GMA, Today Show, etc is where these unprincipled folks hang out (metaphorically).

          • JSobieski

            Palin is doing the rights things, and I think she is going to run or is at least not ruling it out.

          • Jim Tomasik

            .

          • azaeroprof
    • speciallist

      geez….we frickin know already

      Are we gonna have to endure this drumbeat every time there is a diary about her?

      I can’t tell you how LAME it sounds after hearing it 5000 times

      think up some thing fresh

      • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

        500 hundred times got lame, so I started limiting myself to venues that didn’t play it all the time…smile

        But I do admit, and have said since she did it, that she would never get elected President. She probably never would have in any event, but

        And I loved Palin on the issues and courage, etc before she was in the spotlight, and I am sure that she would a great President if elected, ..but, not finishing her term was terrible. I have to admit it.

        And the only reason I think it ought be brought up often is because we must weigh that negative of hers in deciding whether she or a candidate that is just as good as her on issues, courage, but has never resigned an executive position is just as electable or more so.

        There are scores of Republicans that could beat Obama in 2012. We can be choosy and should.

        And really, I think our main focus should be the recession and Congress.

        Rocky the Squirrel: And now for something FRESH you’ll really like: btw, I was ONLY responding to the issue of her resignation in your comment. After reading the title of the blog and first few lines, I knew the substance. Obviously I revile the leftist sickos.

        I miss the regular season of college football…survive until Opening Day for the Braves…

        Go Ducks!

        • speciallist

          with a red velvet rope and well dressed security guard to aggressively pat-down whomever approaches…

          WE GET IT!!!!!!!!!!! lol

          (and you’re kicking butt on your Pro picks but Vlad the impaler seems untouchable)

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine
          • David123

            for America and for the conservative movement.

            In August 2009 Sarah Palin publicized the sinister death panels in Obamacare. She delayed the passage of Obamacare and almost managed to have it fail to pass. She created the environment that made Scott Brown’s election possible. She helped conservatives win elective office in 2010. I say she was more effective in fighting for America as citizen Palin than she would have been as Governor Palin. So as Americans we should be glad Sarah Palin resigned as governor, but stepped up the fight for Americanism. Sarah Palin certainly hasn’t “quit” so she could hide in a corner – she has come out swinging, and landed blow after blow on the destructive leftist agenda for America.

            Now, considering Sarah Palin personally – she had a job – as governor. She quit that job to take a much better paying job as an author. Have you ever quit a job to take a better paying job? I certainly won’t hold it against you if you have, and I won’t hold it against Sarah Palin either.

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

            in Superman II…it did pay more than!…smile

          • acat

            Some other politician would have gotten there and .. who knows, maybe done a better (less lightning-rod-esque) job of it.

            I do think that “death panels” is uniquely Sarahcuda… she has a gift for throwing verbal right hooks like nobody else out there at the moment… very akin to Reagan’s “There you go again”….

            I don’t hold her decision to quit a job against her personally – gotta do what’s right for the family. Now, though, she wants a different job – and as one of the people in the interview process, I do have a right to ask questions.

            Mew

      • azaeroprof

        As I argue above, her quitting left Alaska better off, the conservative movement better off, and she & her family better off.

        It is a gross stretch of logic to assume that, because she resigned as Gov in AK, that she would be prone to quitting the presidency. I think that just makes a convenient “justification” for those who don’t want to support her anyway.

        Personally, I would put the probability that she would resign an elected term as president at pretty darn close to 0%. No more likely than any other potential candidate.

        • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

          It was atrocious, political calculating, judgment. The difference in how well off Alaska would have been had she remained in office vs how well off they turned out to be is quite indeterminate. and in any event trivial.

          Come on man, this was about issues that at worst have been delayed for a few months. So what? seriously

          What her resignation represents is the antithesis of the values we saw in her before the resignation. You finish what you start and persevere. It showed a character flaw.

          All that said, it is not dispositive of her being nominated. I am a Palin fan.

          • Tbone

            Heck, 99.2% probably don’t know she quit.

            Besides, her quitting bothers me a whole lot less than these guys who stay in office and draw their paychecks while they run for another office.

          • speciallist

            5

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

            by too many. But I reject the notion that there is not a large minority now and what would be a majority if she were a strong contender for the nomination. She was elected to serve 4 years, and she quit. That is a fact.

          • Tbone
        • acat

          …and I’m not particularly worried about Palin flat out quitting, going back to Alaska, and living a peaceful, quiet life writing her memoirs.

          I’m wondering what a stymied President Palin would do. When stymied by Alaska politics the first time, she quit and ran for office.

          When stymied the second time, she quit, and helped a bunch of other guys run for office.

          What’s she going to do when she’s stymied by the Alphabet Soup agencies whose career-track employees all loathe her and refuse to go along? Fire everyone? (very Reaganesque… but potentially nightmareish)

          What about when she can’t shout down the national media? Just having the bully pulpit doesn’t mean she’s the only one speaking… and the journos are not going to go quietly.

          Her actions, when stymied, do have a “retreat, think, then attack” pattern that I like .. but that I want to happen in a very fast time in a commander-in-chief…. and Palin doesn’t seem to operate that quickly. I don’t think she’d quit, but .. I don’t think she could have a long time to think about the decisions as she seems used to either.

          Mew

      • Jack_Savage

        They’ve got nowhere else to go.

    • http://pocketchangeproductions.net/ anotherindyfilmguy

      A pictures worth a thousand words until you add an accurate snarky comment. Then it’s just priceless…

    • earlgrey

      I don’t know why conservatives take so much delight in tearing each other down, but maybe that is why the left has been able to do some much damage. We conservatives either have our nose stuck in the ground or a finger stuck in the face of another conservative.

      • runner12

        are we talking about the viability of a Palin candidacy right now when we still have the Leftists trying to shove a repeal of DADT, Porkulus Part 3 or 4 (I’ve lost count), and a crummy tax bill? They already ticked me off last Christmas with the healthcare bill and now THIS? We should be uniting and shouting from the rooftops regarding what they are trying to do. We can discuss Palin after we take the House in Jan.

  • azaeroprof

    The whackos on the left are hoping that we will eventually tire of pointing out their PDS and their hypocrisy. For Sarah’s sake, and for the sake of ALL conservatives, we must return every one of their serves.

    Thanks!
    :)

  • aesthete

    As a progressive, Michael Shaw probably wasn’t familiar with all of the sanitary procedures that we are used to in the West.

    In all seriousness, I agree that Michael Shaw is a petty, mindless lemming afflicted with PDS, but is he really sexist? I don’t want to defend the guy (and in fact, I won’t), but should be careful not to read “code words” into what people say. It hurts our cause, diminishes otherwise good arguments or takedowns, and somewhat hypocritical in the face of our well-warranted complaint of leftists’ tendency to play the games of false consciousness, group politics, and personal politics.

  • irishgirl

    What gets me is the way the crazies on the left never look before they leap. This is not the first time, nor will it be the last, where they make complete fools of themselves in their hurry to blast Palin. One look at the photo and it’s clear her “stylist” is her daughter. And, WOW, can you imagine having the nerve to wash your hands in a cholera camp. You’d think That Woman had common sense or something (which the left never seem to possess.)

  • bobbymike

    that is my choice. But on the other hand I may just get into a fist fight with anyone who continues to denigrate her.

    The more I see stories like this the more I think Palin may be one of the bravest most genuine people I have ever seen. I look on Sarah like she’s my sister and the last time people treated my real sister this poorly………..

    But the real point to this whole story, in short, is that the media has moved from biased……….to corrupt…………….to criminal starting from the 2008 election cycle.

    • Jim Tomasik

      4 years of being called a racist should be replaced with 4 years of everyone acting like Sarah Palin is their little sister and she needs to have her honor saved via testosterone laced pugilistic chivalry.

      So who will be the one commissioned to constantly climb the water tower with a bucket of paint to save her good name?

      • Bill S

        Palinist.

        “You can’t talk that way about Sarah, you Palinist, you!”

        • Jim Tomasik

          National Assoc. for A**whippin’s ‘cuzza Sarah Palin.

      • Jack_Savage

        Here’s what a real man would do – stand by and laugh while a comedian encourages Palin to come to New York and be gang raped by “the brothas”. Or maybe point and giggle while Palin’s church is being burned down with people inside. Or here’s a good one – be silent while the abortion crowd comes up with the bumper sticker – “Trig Palin – if that’s not what abortion is for, then what is abortion for?”. I mean just THINK of the good times we’ve already had, with more to come! And remember, it says nothing about us to let these things slide. Yuck yuck!

        The water tower reference is pretty funny too – the cheerleader who gets gang banged by the football team, then gets her name painted on the outskirts of a backwater town – like Wasilla!. That’s what I think of when I think of Sarah Palin. You know, her big boobs (are they real? did you see her at the Kentucky Derby?) and all.

        Thanks for the tip. Let the revelry begin – why let the left have all the fun!

        • Jim Tomasik

          • speciallist

            geez….you are just proving our point

          • Jim Tomasik

            I don’t think you can get there from what I wrote.

            I never said a bad word about her. Her going to Haiti was very benevolent and the fact that they could only come up with the “Hair Stylist” bit is just silly.

          • Jack_Savage

            But since Republicans are jumping on the bandwagon, he’ll run out of paint pretty soon.

            Have you heard the latest joke about Willow Palin? Email me – it’s GREAT!

          • Jim Tomasik

            What’s the address?

          • Jack_Savage

            My new buddy Keith Olbermann just called and said he had one about Trig, Willow and Alex Rodriguez meeting in a bar. Let me get that one and I will get back to you with both. Better yet, I’ll make them all into a diary. It’s been a while since one of mine got recommended, and that would be a sure fire winner. I’ll cross post it at HuffPo.

          • Jim Tomasik

            is your buddy? I never watch him but I heard he does not like Sarah Palin at all. You should ask him about that.

          • williamjameson

            Next year, 2011, Groundhog Day and Obama’s State of the Union address will occur creating controversy. One event involves a meaningless ritual in which we look to a creature of little intelligence for prognostication, while the other involves a groundhog.

        • speciallist

          if some of these folks even remember what diary they are on…

          too funny

  • JadedByPolitics

    has the same reaction to “some” as the actual diariest at Huffington Post. I love to watch the free for all, I expect snark you will end up with 300+ comments by the end of the week :)

  • qurys

    what is happening to her has become the new vicious American blood sport. We may have lost out on the Olympics and the World Cup Soccer, but we are certainly doing an embarrasingly world class job of throwing a Palin (any Palin) to the lions. I am listening to pundits on the left and the right talk about her chances of success in 2012 as minimal because she has all this “negative baggage”. Well exactly how much of this baggage is her own and how much has been fabricated by the media as the photo in this article indicates. BTW…to the AP photographer….nobody “gets her hair done” by somebody with bare hands. I looked only at the photo, not the video and said…Somebody probably is fixing a hair clip. Didn’t even need to know it was her daughter. What is happening to the Palins is shameful and the American people better be very, very afraid. The media is defining our candidates for us. Of course many people will look at RedState and see this for what it is. But millions more will chalk it up to just another piece of “baggage” Palin carries and deem her unfit to run for public office. The American electorate soon will have NO CANDIDATE fit for any public office from President to dog catcher that has not been thoroughly and falsely vetted by the left media. As for myself, I prefer to make up my own mind with the words I hear, and the actions I see from any candidate. I do not want this “analysis” shoveled into my brain by the left garbage disposal….much of it conveniently located on the financially and morally bankrupt East and West Coast.

  • 2warabnvet

    Bush Derangement Syndrone (BDS) has become a minor condition compared to Venomous Sarah Hatred.

    • Jewels

      And Palin is clearly a threat to them. It’s idiotic because if they really wanted her to go away, all they’d have to do is STOP TALKING ABOUT HER.

  • arnold1

    you clearly demean yourself. (Your higher self if you want to get metaphysical.) It is obvious that many of us are here for the first time since we have not learned the lessons (oh, so many lessons) of the last time. The attacks fly back and forth as we try to make ourselves feel good about . . . attacking. The hate, fear, jealousy, and pain that comes pouring out of HuffPo – and Red State – is a symptom of our own self loathing. It’s not going to be cured any time soon, but we can at least recognize it for what it is.

    Now. Back to the trenches.

  • williamjameson

    I don’t know which is worse, the writers or the readers of the degenerate scumbag haven for the godless souls of liberalism.

    I wonder how the scumbags would react knowing Barack Obama was hated and harassed with the same language continuously for over 2 years?.

    Liberals are same race racists. Yes it exists, search google. Only scumbags, degenerates and friends of Arianna Huffington would lower themselves into the trough of liberalism while thinking what they are doing is not BIGOTRY against women. See the second connotation of bigotry because it defines liberals as good if not better than sexist.

    Liberals like this are a disgusting reminder why the democratic party kept slaves in the south and why Jim Crow existed into the 20th Century, black voting rights and the “N Bomb” used in the news up till the 1960″s………….its easy for them to hate, despise and judge people harshly just for living.

    Is it no wonder the mostly all white male run pMSNBC welcomes HuffPo degenerates?

  • simplyright4me

    The more all of those jealous, fat, brain dead, hippy, has beens, never beens, horrible, sick, twisted, good for nothing, lousy, simple minded, stupid, envious, arrogant, snobs put Sarah down the more I love her.

  • bk

    They love the “you do it too” arguments.

  • JSobieski

    So much of what they do backfires, if it gets big enough. They are their own worst enemies when it comes to Palin. Palin is so much more real than any of them, yet they insist on projecting their own weaknesses onto her. They are fools, dangerous fools, but fools nonetheless.

  • Dan McLaughlin

    Palin’s unlikely to lose much sleep over looking like a woman.