Daley Blames - Who Else? - The Media For Oprah-geddon
Chicago Gets Googled
Friday Flashback - Old School Oprah
Today's Transgender Day of Remembrance Honors the Dead
Review: Paramount Room
AP Photo/Al Grillo, File
It was bound to happen sooner or later: Sarah Palin, the Republican ex-girlfriend who just won't go away and stop posting on your Facebook page, is going to visit Oprah. You might remember a little over a year ago when rumors swirled about Palin appearing on Oprah ahead of the 2008 election and that Oprah said no due to her support for Obama, a claim that Oprah fully denied. This time, however, it's definitely happening as Palin makes the rounds to support her new tome, Going Rogue. According to a press release from Harpo, Inc., the "world exclusive" will be Palin's first talk ahead of the book release and the show will air live on Monday, November 16; Palin's book hits shelves the next day. Will we be watching? You betcha'.
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
Can't she go Rouge and find a cave somewhere to hide in?
I only sometimes like to point out misspellings, but the image of Palin going rouge is priceless!
I love Sarah Palin. Along with Glenn Beck and the resurgence of Rush Limbaugh she's turned the republican party from a political opponent into a laughingstock. This is a person incapable of finishing a single term in office (all those lucrative speaking engagements!) and yet she's a "frontrunner" for the party nomination in 2012.
I think she needs a bigger audience. Every time she opens her mouth to reveal how empty-headed she is, the left gets a little bit stronger.
I doubt that you have noticed because you never bother to read anything that deviates from your leftist point of view, but the Democrat Party is not all that popular either. There has been a surge of independents away from Obama and the polls show that the country is becoming more Libertarian, not left, as I'm sure you wish were the case.
Glenn Beck is not a Republican, he rails against the Republicans too. Palin is not a "frontrunner" for the nomination, she finished far behind Romney and Huckabee in the latest poll. How many inaccurate statements can you make in one post?
Its always entertaining to see the left come out with such force against Palin. I think the main reasons you can't stand her are because 1) she is a female conservative, 2) is good looking, 3) had multiple children, and 4) didn't abort her special needs child. It can't be explained otherwise. Merely thinking she is stupid is not grounds for the level of hatred you all have for her. There are plenty of ignoramuses in the Democrat Party that you cheer on. I thought that the compassionate Left is supposed to be the party who encourages people from lower/middle class backgrounds to reach for the stars. I guess that's only if that person shares your ideology.
The Democratic Party is a 'center-right' party by any measure.
Are you serious? All joking aside, are you a Communist? That is the only way I could understand you thinking that the Democrats are "right of center." Wow.
Are you Joe McCarthy? Democrats are center right, Republicans are far right. No I am not a communist, I think it's as bad a system as free market capitalism.
Once again, you fail at understanding the political spectrum of American politics and the history of American politics. If you're unaware of the shift towards the right within the Democratic Party (usually attributed to the influence of the DLC) in the last 30 years, then perhaps you should quit reading Newsmax and Drudge and pick up a history book instead.
Oh and regarding Palin: 2008 called and wants her back.
the latest Washington Post (a right-wing paper) poll finds that only 20% of the nation identifies as Republican. This number is much smaller than those who identify as Democrat.
And what polls find the US is more libertarian? Post the source of your poll -- I am unfamiliar.
"Glenn Beck is not a Republican" -- hahaha. Good job.
And I cannot speak for everyone, but as someone who is "against" Palin, I can tell you why: I disagree with her brain dead ideology and I think she's an idiot. I dont give a shit about her gender, appearance, or children -- give me a break.
reasons I don't like/respect Sarah Palin:
1. I prefer politicians (of any party) to have a basic grasp of domestic and international issues. this is actually reason enough not to like or support any politician. politicians make important decisions that effect our everyday lives - i want any politician to be informed. this has nothing to do with class or education level - information is available at the public library for free. a self educated politician can be just as knowledgeable about the issues as am Ivy educated one. i should not be more knowledgeable about US policy than a VP candidate.
2. i do not appreciate any politician telling me that there is a "real america" and "real americans" - a city dwelling lib is just as "american" as a rural dwelling conservative. that kind of rhetoric doesn't help anything or anyone except maybe the politician saying it while running for office.
her gender, looks, children and family life are frankly none of my concern and have nothing to do with my opinion of her. honestly when she was first chosen, i thought she sounds interesting. however, her ignorance of the issues and US policy scared the crap out of me.
Wow, hates someone because they "didn't abort their special-needs child"? Did you look at that statement before you hit "submit," or are you just doing some really, really deep satire?
From pizza parlors to Sarah Palin on Oprah...the top issues of the day get dissected here!
Next up: Jay Cutler or Kyle Orton: Who's the better drinkin' buddy?
Cutler, and I'd even buy as long as he's drinking Bud.
Kyle: if that's you, it's the moustache, man.
Orton.
You forgot the caption for that photo.
"At a campaign rally, Sarah Palin explains the distance between her house and Russia."
Have you heard Palin lately? She has learned a lot since her first nationally-televised interviews, which I admit were debales.
Sure, she was a lightweight in those days but she's come a long way. You betcha.
She is going to be around for a long time. It is delicious to hear liberals mock her. That is only making her stronger!
Has she come a long way since her 'quitting the governorship'? because if she's come a long way since then (which wasn't so long ago) then she just performed a miracle because that speech was not only incompressible, it was delusional.
and I'm too tired to be understood as well...her speech had a complete lack of comprehension.
I will never understand people who defend this woman. What is it about her?
Will I be barfing? You betcha.
And to jess nevins, you call her a "frontrunner" but she is actually way behind the two leading candidates.
According to a new Rasmussen poll, in head-to-head competition among Republican voters, it would be Huckabee 55%, Palin 35%. Against Romney, it would be Romney 52%, Palin 37%.
If she is a frontrunner for anything, it's for another shot at being a veep.
So the GOP plan for 2012 is
-Former Fatty, diet book author and religious nut
-An ex governor so unpopular in his home state his endorsement is turned down by other politicos
-Sarah Palin
You guys better hope they figure out a way to resurrect Reagan. And quick.
You really have an issue with excess weight, don't you? I can't help but wonder what you're compensating for.
I also think you underestimate the kind of coalition Huckabee could gather if the Obama administration continues along its present course of not doing much for the next three years. The far left that added their votes to Obama's totals will likely find an independent candidate or not vote at all. Many of the moderates who swung left last time could easily be enticed by Huckabee's typical message of fiscal responsibility. The far right, which ignored Huckabee in favor of Romney last time largely because they didn't see him as a real contender, could see that he pretty much preaches exactly the sermon they want to hear.
Your declarations of the death of the GOP ignores history. The Democrats weren't looking all that great in 2001 or 2005, if you recall. Things seemed shaky for the GOP in 1993, but then a tear later they had a revolution. And what about the Democrats in 1989?
meh... The Dems lost to Bush TWICE and honestly, I think Obama should have beaten McCain by a larger margin. Combine that with the fact that who ever won the election would only be a one term president, I wouldn't be too confident.
Sarah Palin is the Todd Stroger of conservatives. Conservatives happily fall on their swords for the woman and forgive her most any transgression--including quitting her only real job for the hell of it--despite the fact that there are probably about fifteen better-qualified conservatives and at least five better-qualified conservative women. I can't begin to understand why anyone would want her representing their particular demographic.
You people don't even know why you hate her. So, if I am to understand, she is terrible because YOU can't understand why anyone would want her representing their particular demographic and she is the "Todd Stroger" of conservatives. Very well put. Wow.
Yes, women are much better reprsented by Hillary Clinton. A woman who rode her husband's coattails to her position today, at which she is woefully inadequate and is a laughingstock overseas. She lied about being under sniper fire during the campaign and recently lied about staying in a Belfast hotel years ago that had just been bombed, only the last bombings occurred years before she stayed there. She also said she was named after Sir Edmund Hillary, who wasn't even famous until she was 3 or 4 years old. She is without a single concrete accomplishment in her years in the Senate. Yes, women are much better represented by a hag like Hillary.
Your problem is that you keep assuming that because somebody thinks Palin is a mental midget they must like Hilary Clinton. She sucks too as do most of the Democratic party.
Now what Masked Marauder?
what the hell does Clinton have to do with Palin? Clinton's short comings (whatever they may be) do not change the fact that Palin still sucks.
Nice deflection.
Why are Sarah Palin and Hillary Clinton the only two choices for who can "represent" women?
First of all any politician should be attempting to "represent" all of his or her constituents.
Secondly, what about women like Kay Bailey Hutchinson? She would have been a much better choice if republicans wanted a woman in higher office. She has serious credibility. Even though the republican party still tends to be heavily white and male, there are still talented and knowledgeable republican women who could be compelling legitimate choices for the highest offices.
I have a very long and detailed list of why I don't like Sarah Palin, which I won't bother detailing because you don't care. It largely centers on the fact, though, that her arguments are about as cogent as yours. I also will not bother explaining the Stroger analogy, because you probably think the term "analogy" implies some kind of homosexual practice that frightens you.
I will point out, though, that within the GOP there are very qualified women either in office or running. Two up and coming examples would be Meg Whitman and Carly Fiorina, both highly intelligent, who are planning runs for governor and senate.
Let me ask, though, what exactly it is you like about Palin?
Conservative men have gotta a fantasy girlfriend/mother thing going on with Palin.
You know who I DO hate because they are stupid? Masked Marauder.
I haven't seen debate this heated since yesterday, when some people liked Coalfire's pizza and some didn't.
She is not as stupid as some of you think. Listen with an open mind the next time you hear her. Even if you disagree with her, you have to admit that she's come a long way. People can learn, you know.
Ward, I do tend to listen to people with an open mind, but even if she has learned to recite the Encyclopedia Brittanica backwards in the last year, she started out at a point which permanently excludes her from office in my book. Anybody her age and in public office, for instance, should know right off the difference between a country and a continent. The things she did not know indicate an active resistance to enlightenment.
And my problem with her stems from more than her lack of intelligence, but from her attitude toward the notion of intelligence. It stems from her tendency to vehemently blame others for her failures, and from the antagonistic attitude she takes toward the press, and from her complete lack of a sense of humor and her tendency to blow little things into great outrages. The association she and her husband have with Alaskan secessionists seems at the very least unwise, and at worst an indication of nutcase tendencies. Issues wise, while she knows about energy (you have to in Alaska), she takes almost the exact wrong approach, though that approach has shifted to appeal to the whims of her state's voters.
She also finds herself skirting at the edge of really creepy scandal with an almost Daleyesque frequency. I think there really is something to Troopergate ... which was little more than a redneck tiff argued with the force of a governor's office. She refused to live in Juneau, and instead finagled a hefty daily living stipend to be paid to governors while away from Juneau while staying at her home outside Anchorage. She has a relationship with her state legislature reminiscent of Blagojevich and Madigan. She's being investigated right and left.
And worst of all, on top of everything else, she quit halfway through her term for absolutely no good reason other than that her job detracted from all this national attention she'd garnered. That, more than anything else, is the unforgivable sin.
Yes, quitting in the midst of her first term as governor was really a mind boggling move. How is the voting public supposed to have faith that she would fulfill her duties in any office she may run for in the future?
Combine her resignation with all of the appearances she has committed to and then canceled, she just does not seem very reliable in terms of fulfilling her obligations.
So after we are all on the edge of our seats waiting for your specific and well thought-out reasons for hating her, all you can do is regurgitate liberal talking points?
The country/continent story was a hoax, which the liberal New York Times even admits:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/13/arts/television/13hoax.html
"It stems from her tendency to vehemently blame others for her failures"
Yeah, at least Obama doesn't do that. Wait a second....
"the antagonistic attitude she takes toward the press"
Would that be the same press who reported that she thought Africa was a country, that her daughter was the one who gave birth to her son, and that she was a member of a secessionist party? You're right, she was way off base. She should have been much more accommodating.
"The association she and her husband have with Alaskan secessionists seems at the very least unwise, and at worst an indication of nutcase tendencies"
Another false story. Even if it were true, that is much worse than associating with Reverend Wright, Bill Ayers and Frank Marshall Davis among many others.
"Issues wise, while she knows about energy (you have to in Alaska), she takes almost the exact wrong approach, though that approach has shifted to appeal to the whims of her state's voters"
You state that she takes the wrong approach with such certainty. Since you have such an "open mind", would you ever consider that your approach might be wrong? I thought not.
Also, she was cleared in Trooper Gate, although I know that you liberals don't let that stand in the way of calling her a criminal. Additionally, so mamy ethics complaints were filed because of Alaska law, which allows anyone, including bloggers in their Mother's basement, to file a complaint. She has beaten all of them with one or two minor exceptions.
You left a few things out. She also banned books and screwed one of Todd Palin's friends. Add those to your list next time you spit out talking points.
So that pathetic rant, full of falsehoods, was the best you can do? Try reading something besides the Huffington Post.
Dude, why don't you watch something other than Faux Noise? It will help you think a lot more, and reason a lot more if you do.
Yes, Mr. Marauder, you've stumped me with your sparkling intellect ... though actually, at that point I was talking to people with ears and organic matter between them.
Oh, of course. Like a typical liberal, you resort to sarcasm and petty insults when someone points out your lies and inaccuracies.
I'd say she's been more open to consultants and PR specialists who were hired to mold her into something that she is not. I vote for intelligent leaders and thinkers not puppets.
didn't abort her special needs child
Most conservatives had probably never heard of the term "special needs" before the last election when the RNC tried to shamelessly associate Sarah Palin with special needs advocacy for doing what millions of women and men do -- care for a special needs child. Anyone with an ounce of shame who cares for a special needs kid hates it when people call them heroes or tell them how brave and strong they are. It's condescending and ignorant. Palin ate it up and exploited it.
Conservatives care more about enriching insurance execs than helping people with special needs. Born with autism? Hit by a drunk driver and paralyzed? Tough shit! Get yourself a health savings account and pull yourself up by your bootstraps!
OK, I will concede the point about Palin's resignation. That is a black mark against her.
But what is it exactly that you find so attractive? I just don't get it.
What is it you find attractive about Obama? I just don't get that.
She didn't mention Obama in this article about PALIN, just as I didn't mention Hilary Clinton. Why don't you quit trying to distract with the red herrings?
If you put Palin and Obama toe to toe, Obama will come out ahead every time.
I may not agree with everything he says or does and contrary to what you continue to believe, not everyone here follows him blindly or adores him. That's a twisted, simplistic view that you, for whatever reason, need to keep telling yourself.
You may not realize this, but there are points of view different than yours. Not everybody has to like what/who you like. Its called a difference of opinion.
I realize that, marauder. I enjoy having conversations with intelligent, thoughtful people with opposing viewpoints. I like learning new things.
Methinks it's YOU who do not realize that there are things to learn from the other side.
You are the most myopic person on this website. And all you do is spout and regurgitate things that have been force fed to you like a Peking duck.
Ingrid, what I find "attractive" is her belief (1) that less government is better than more government, (2) that government bailouts of private industries is wrong, (3) that lowering taxes on business and individuals is the way to stimulate the economy.
There's more, but that is the gist of why I like her. I do have to hold my nose when she does the Bible-thumping, but she is not too pushy about that.
Alaska 1st in U.S. Pork Barrel Spending Per Capita:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2008-03-22-earmarks_N.htm
But how did she implement any of those beliefs while governor?
She increased the state budget by 27% over two years (fy07-fy09). She raised taxes on oil companies and increased the amount of money each Alaskan resident received from oil profits - isn't that redistribution of wealth? Then the oil companies pass along that tax increase to us through price increases.
Meanwhile, despite their oil resources and the fact that there is no state income, property, and sales tax, Alaska receives more federal tax dollars than almost any other state. For every $1 Alaska pays in federal taxes, they receive $1.76 of federal spending in return. In other words, between high gas prices and our federal tax dollars, you and I are helping to fund Alaska's low tax lifestyle. That's great for Alaskans, but how can that system work for the country as whole?
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aYdZoyTvFrTc&refer=home
http://www.taxfoundation.org/taxdata/show/22685.html
Well, her record is nowhere near as bad as the Democrat regimes in Illinois, New York, New Jersey, California, Michigan, etc.
That's not the discussion we are having. You asserted in pretty nasty terms why people don't like Sarah Palin. People have presented other reasons why they do not support Palin.
Ward presented the reasons he does support her. Maybe she will live up to Ward's opinion of her, but I think it is perfectly reasonable to compare the impression of what Palin stands for with how she actually governed.
There are plenty of discussions here about the deep flaws of Illinois and Chicago government. Saying that Illinois is more messed up than Alaska does not add to the conversation or shed light on any of the issues. It's the equivalent to saying "I know you are but what am I." You seem pretty certain about why people don't like Palin, yet you seem unwilling or unable to lay out why you think Palin is a good conservative leader. At least Ward was able to express why he thinks highly of her.
Personally, I would love a strong productive opposition party. I am a liberal, but I know that democracy works better when there are multiple strong and productive parties. I fear that conservatives with good ideas are getting drowned out by the Glenn Becks and Sarah Palins, and that doesn't do any of us any good.
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/red-herring.html
If the best reason you have for supporting someone is they are not as loathsome as someone else you might want to look carefully at the horse you're backing.
Honestly, I pity the actual thinking conservatives these days. The small government moderates, sort of in the Illinois Republican (pre-Alan Keyes debacle) mode. They have to contend with people who are simply uninformed. Lindsey Graham is getting shouted down by these people. It's an ideological purging that's gutting the party.
http://www.postandcourier.com/news/2009/oct/19/graham-aims-to-tackle-radical-views/
But then, I'm a far left progressive, watching the right fall upon each other in a fit of baby-eating is kind of funny.
There are lots of conservatives who fit those criteria without the Palinesque baggage.
That's exactly what I was thinking. I'm hard pressed to think of any right now, but there has to be other politicians out there who aren't so distasteful.
I don't mean any disrespect to Ward, but this woman is just not good. All of the hateful rhetoric aside, there has been so much written about her from level headed people exposing what she really is.
It boggles my mind why so many people can't see through her.
http://trueslant.com/jeffhoard/2009/07/08/100-reasons-why-palin-is-the-queen-of-idiocracy/
It would be truly awesome if you could set up word replacement, like in Word, so that any time "Dem, Repub, Lib, Liberal, Conservative... whatever" was used it would change to something funnier. I suggest "Poo Poo Head". It wouldn't take away from most people's argument(s) and it would make me smile. (Yes, I am selfish. It's all about me.)