• RSS
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
nicole473 On November - 16 - 2009

palinLIARWe’re all pretty weary of hearing about Tundra Tart, and I know that most of you think that she isn’t a serious political threat.  I happen to disagree with that assessment, and when I read Shannyn’s post on this particular issue, I felt that it should be known far and wide.
The article by Ms. Moore is the back story to yet another Palin lie in ‘Going Rogue’  regarding the Exxon oil spill, and the SCOTUS case it engendered.  By the way, this article is also posted on HP, but I snagged it from Shannyn’s site.

curly quote I know facts aren’t going to matter to many people buying Sarah Palin’s, Going Rogue. Facts certainly didn’t matter to folks who voted for her.
According to the “fact checkers“:

PALIN: Welcomes last year’s Supreme Court decision deciding punitive damages for victims of the nation’s largest oil spill tragedy, the Exxon Valdez disaster, stating it had taken 20 years to achieve victory. As governor, she says, she’d had the state argue in favor of the victims, and she says the court’s ruling went “in favor of the people.” Finally, she writes, Alaskans could recover some of their losses.

THE FACTS: That response is at odds with her reaction at the time to the ruling, which resolved the long-running case by reducing punitive damages for victims to $500 million from $2.5 billion. Environmentalists and plaintiffs’ lawyers decried the ruling as a slap at the victims and Palin herself said she was “extremely disappointed.” She said the justices had gutted a jury decision favoring higher damage awards, the Anchorage Daily News reported. “It’s tragic that so many Alaska fishermen and their families have had their lives put on hold waiting for this decision,” she said, noting many had died “while waiting for justice.”

When Sarah Palin was asked by Katie Couric what Supreme Court decisions other than Roe v. Wade she disagreed with, she couldn’t think of one. NOT ONE! Sarah squandered an opportunity, the perfect chance to tell America our story, an Alaskan story: dozens of suicides, thousands sick from clean up, tens of thousands bankrupt from a dead fishery.

Sarah Palin is to Alaska what Velveeta is to cheese; sadly unsatisfying and empty of nutrition. She had the national stage to plead Alaska’s case to citizens who had long forgotten the images of a once pristine Prince William Sound turned into a thick, black, rolling sea; the oiled sea otters and birds; unrecognizable seals and whales; an initially deformed and diseased herring run that became extinct — costing Cordova $100 million a year. Exxon exploited Alaska and turned pain into profit.

palinliesAND NOW, Palin is claiming to be part of a victory for the people of Alaska? Reality Deficit Disorder…now in book form.

The Exxon Shipping Co. v. Baker Supreme Court decision in June 2008 all but pardoned Exxon’s negligence. The highest court in the land condoned the half-assed cleanup. (My radio interview on the day of the ruling with Greg Palast). Exxon, the company that set and broke Planet Earth’s quarterly profit record three quarters in a row, was let off the hook. Because of this unprecedented landmark decision, future corporate punitive damages are now forever minimally capped at literally pennies on the dollar!

The Roberts Court based its activist ruling on 19th century maritime law. Really! 21st century corporations can now view punitive damages as the small cost of doing business. Due to Exxon’s negligence and the corporate sympathy of the Supreme Court, one the largest acts of environmental terrorism in history was treated like an accidental littering. The RATS — Roberts, Alito, Thomas and Scalia, (Alito recused himself, confident that Souter and Kennedy would fill the business-friendly void) winked at their corporate masters as the Judas Court betrayed Justice.

Exxon doesn’t have marked offices in Alaska. There are some pretty hard feelings even 20 years later for some pretty good reasons. When Palin was pointing fingers at Letterman in July of this year, she did it from Houston, Texas. She was there to sign a deal with Exxon on behalf of Alaska. The state’s willingness to do business with Exxon was like having your parents rent the basement to the guy who date raped you on prom night. Am I clear?

So Sarah was against the decision before she couldn’t remember it before she was for it. And now, courtesy of Going Rogue, Sarah Palin manages to insult and injure Alaskans who will never be made whole with yet another one of her documented lies.

The jury originally punished Exxon with $5 billion in punitive damages — a year’s profit at the time. In 2008, nearly 20 years later, Exxon reported the largest annual profit in US history at $45.22 billion. The company shattered its own record set the previous year. Would the original $5 billion in punitive damages been punishment enough? The answer is now slowly dripping onto victims at 10 cents on the dollar. Opening your mailbox to an Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Settlement check is like getting a royalty payment for the snuff film your kid brother was in. Hey, you’re getting paid, but he’s still dead and you got to watch.

curly quote(above) Then Governor Palin’s appropriate reaction to the Exxon v. Baker decision June, 2008

curly quoteCandidate Palin’s stunning memory lapse of Exxon v. Baker just 3 months later…
Look for Going Rogue in the revisionist history section of your local bookstore on Tuesday…

http://shannynmoore.wordpress.com/2009/11/14/palins-oily-lies-drip-from-the-pages-of-going-rogue/

Categories: Featured, News & Politics

161 Responses so far.

Click here to leave a comment
  1. bitohistory says:

    Palin/Beck to run our country?

    This has to be a dream ticket —for the dems.
    Yet pretty damn scary for the country and the world.
    http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/palin_beck_2012_ticket/2009/11/17/287568.html
    “I can envision a couple of different combinations, if ever I were to be in a position to really even seriously consider running for anything in the future, and I’m not there yet,” Palin tells Newsmax. “But Glenn Beck I have great respect for. He’s a hoot. He gets his message across in such a clever way. And he’s so bold ? I have to respect that. He calls it like he sees it, and he’s very, very, very effective.

    I will, somehow, leave this country.

  2. LITU says:

    Channel 6 News, Boise, yesterday evening encouraged viewers to watch the Oprah interview, where the newscaster (female) said, “Sarah doesn’t pull any punches.”

    And I dare wonder why Idaho is still living in the 50’s?

    • AdLib says:

      I’m sure you’re well aware that Idaho is the most Republican state in the nation.

      Why, I’m not too sure but while every other part of the nation moved away from Bush and The GOP towards Obama and the Dems, Idaho stayed planted as potatoes in the GOP camp.

      Do you know historically why the state is so Republican? I’m curious.

    • bitohistory says:

      I do hope you called them a registered a complaint. Some thing like “Stick to the news” or Get a subscription to “The Nation “(grin)

      • LITU says:

        Good luck with that! I’ve done that sort of complaining in the past, to no avail. And believe me, in this neo-con town, dissent is deemed evil.

        As an afterthought, my favorite newsletter is Hightower Lowdown, followed closely by Mother Jones.

  3. bitohistory says:

    A short message from Brave New films on the “other book ” “Going Rouge-An American Nightmare”
    http://www.orbooks.com/index.php?/goingrouge/watch-going-rouge-the-movie/
    The real SP?

    Read the intro to the book:
    http://www.orbooks.com/index.php?/goingrouge/read-the-introduction/

  4. TheLateGrardini says:

    Quite honestly I don’t see her as a threat, mainly because the people she will be facing in a GOP presidential primary will not be shy about taking off the gloves and letting her have it. There are a lot of skeletons in the various GOP closets, and she has as many as the rest. What will she say when a Republican asks to see medical records? It’s one thing to refuse a Democratic request, another to refuse your own party. Or let her go third-party--she will be the Nader/nadir of the GOP.

    • HITO says:

      I don’t know Great. If the GOP perceives her to be “The One” due to popularity, they may team her up with Pawlenty as veep again, to garner the women’s vote. Liz Cheney is another contender for that slot. GOP would never allow a woman to run for president however.

      Either way, Palin is the gift that keeps on giving. It’s just a matter of time before she embarrasses herself with her ignorance. I truly hope she is part of the GOP ticket in 2012.

      • javaz says:

        Good morning Hito and anyone else that’s here this morning!

        OMG.

        Liz Cheney as VP?
        What are her qualifications?
        A job that was made specifically for her during GWB’s term?

        Anything is possible with the Republican Party.

        • HITO says:

          Hi Javaz…good to see you.

          Liz Cheney. The blood line runs strong in that one. That’s all the GOP care about. And besides, she’s a lying bitch just like her father.

          (Think that was my first “bad” word posting. Felt pretty good.)

          And now off to work I go. Hope I see you later.

  5. AdLib says:

    As frightening as the concept of Palin as president is, so is the concept of 2012 being the end of the world.

    But both are imaginary and not worth the energy worrying about.

    Palin has no crossover potential with moderates, independents, minority voters, younger voters and on and on.

    Her image is cemented in the minds of voters and that’s not a good thing. She’s crying “Death Panels” while the majority of the nation calls out, “Public Option”.

    She is melded to the Teabagger movement which alienates her from anyone who graduated high school or isn’t mandated to attend Anger Management classes.

    So, though the prospect would be horrible, the possibility of ever having to seriously deal with it is infinitesimal.

    • Khirad says:

      By the way whenever I see ads for that movie, I’m reminded of those Chicken Little’s bemoaning and hysterically raving that Obama’s been a failure since hour one.

  6. Khirad says:

    I only have one question (besides help remembering the latest nickname I heard for her which made me laugh -- aargh!).

    When is Bill Shatner gonna be reading from this brilliant, policy tome? Ah, if only William F. Buckley Jr. could have had a ghostwriter too!

    I give you Sarah Palin’s America, in an alternate reality, where she has a chance of winning the general (I have doubts about the primary as the head of a ticket).


  7. KevenSeven says:

    Is Sarah451 stupid, or just proudly and blissfully ignorant?

    I think the latter. I don’t think she is literally stupid. Rather, she is just incurious and ignorant, and arrogant and proud, kind of like W(orthless).

  8. nellie says:

    In response to kesmarn’s request:

    Buzzflash ran an interview with Dr. Justin Frank, who did a psychiatric analysis of George Bush and published it in a book titled “Bush on the Couch.” I would only add that my grief therapist agreed with Dr. Frank. We had a president with a serious antisocial personality disorder.

    The author always emphasizes that he never spoke to Bush in person, and that this analysis is done based on his observations of Bush’s behavior, family history, and decision making. He talks about Bush’s competitiveness with/contempt for his father, his indifference to suffering, his anger. There are childhood experiences that are chilling — things that Bush did and things that happened to him that made things worse. It’s a frightening portrait. It would be tragic if the man were not so destructive. And Dr. Frank does not take Bush for an idiot. This is an intelligent, but highly destructive, and highly contemptuous person. What Frank writes, imo, is consistent with Bush’s presidency. I think we were lucky he didn’t do more damage.

    You can read the interview here: http://blog.buzzflash.com/interviews/049

    • LITU says:

      “The Family” is also a worthwhile read.

    • kesmarn says:

      That was an interview well worth reading. (It was done in 2007.)
      Frank doesn’t pull his punches:

      “A lot of people would disagree with me. I really think that Bush is not competent to be President. He is unconsciously destructive. He is out of touch with his cruelty. He is unable to think clearly when presented with new information. He cannot do it. He cannot read. He cannot pay attention to the Baker-Hamilton Report. He never looked at that report. He looked at the opening title, about a new way forward or something, and that

      • nellie says:

        And after eight years of enduring Bush, we chose a man who is mature and compassionate. A much needed remedy for what was left behind.

        • kesmarn says:

          Really the polar opposite of Bush in virtually every way. Which was, as you said, exactly what we needed. I still stand amazed at the amount of damage W did in a relatively short time frame…with virtually no area of the economy, foreign or domestic policy, or the national psyche left totally intact. BHO has possibly a bigger repair job to do than even FDR. God help him!

          Now the midnight hour approaches, so I’ll have to say good night to all!

    • KQuark says:

      While I agree personally with many findings in this analysis. I think it’s pretty irresponsible for a profession to present an analysis like these. I’m not saying the facts should not be presented, but the disclaimer is a farce. We all know who W is based on his actions alone. History will be the judge of the man and his presidency.

      It now begs the question based on this interview what if President Obama sends more troops to Afghanistan is he doing it to punish the American people?

      We already have enough kooks out there like Alex Jones. The last thing we need is to give some legitimacy to any of the shoddy pop-psych books or films.

      • nellie says:

        I’ve heard this man speak with more than one interviewer. And I understand what you’re saying, but I find him persuasive. Historians have done the same kind of analysis of every president — psychology from a distance. They’ve done it with Truman, Nixon, Clinton, our founding fathers, Lincoln. It’s not an uncommon practice.

        • KQuark says:

          Sorry I really was not clear. The timing and mixing in current events is the problem I have. Every historical figure should be analyzed after the time they had their most influence on history.

    • kesmarn says:

      Thanks so much, nellie. I’m going to go read the interview now. This site is the most amazing source of support and info I’ve come across on line! A terrific group of people.

  9. Kalima says:

    I have to get ready to go out, and all being well, I might pop in later. Bye for now. *waves*

  10. kesmarn says:

    nicole, I have to say I share your uneasiness with the Palin situation. She reminds me of Ronald Reagan (only even dumber, if that’s possible) in her ability to captivate her base.

    To me, the worst case scenario would be Palin as a third party candidate who could pull in the racists, the disillusioned, the religious fanatics, and the pro-business cynical types who could have her working for them the way she has worked for Exxon.

    And I really do believe she’s testing the waters for a third party. It’s clear she’s not afraid to burn bridges with mainstream Republican figures. I don’t think she cares in the least whether they support her as the Repub candidate or not. I have a feeling she thinks she’ll build her own base over the next three years and when she runs, she’ll be running the show completely herself…as a rogue.

    I sincerely hope the American voting public isn’t dimwitted enough to fall for her, but after two terms of W, nothing would surprise me.

    • nicole473 says:

      Well said, Kesmarn. You made some good points. I fear a similar scenario.

      Btw, I watched the debates when Reagan ran, and I was in complete and utter disbelief when he won the Presidency.

      I will never again overestimate the intelligence of the voters in this country.

      • kesmarn says:

        Reagan was a piece of work all right. He looked so bloody genial! Rosy cheeks, hearty laugh, who could have believed him capable of all the dastardly havoc he wrought? He was a sort of stealth destroyer of the American Dream, in the guise of the good guy in the white hat.

        • escribacat says:

          I could never understand what voters saw in Reagan. He seemed so slow — just like Palin. Remember they called him the Teflon President. I don’t think Palin has that “teflon” quality. She makes a lot of enemies, is constantly quitting and not showing up and lying and denying. She has a lot more instability about her than Reagan did.

          • kesmarn says:

            You could say she’s demonstrated a certain amount of “teflonism” already (as in surviving Tina Fey :0)), but it might be primarily with her base. The hard part is getting a grasp of exactly how big that base is. One thing that has surprised me since President Obama’s election is the amount of racism that’s still out there. Call me naive, but I thought we were a little more enlightened than it seems we are. If there are millions of disgruntled folks lurking in the wings, she could provide some unpleasant surprises.

            I have to hope that you’re right, cat, when you mention her instability and the fact that she may well self-destruct before she can do much damage. Let it be soon!

  11. KevenSeven says:

    Oh, I would not say that Sarah451 is no threat.

    I am concerned about all cheap-assed demagogues.

    But you need to ask yourself: which of the Rethug pos that you know would give Obama the strongest challenge?

  12. nellie says:

    A caller on Stephanie Miller gave Sarah’s autobio an alternative title:

    The Book to Nowhere

    I’m one of those people who thinks Sarah Palin has already worn out her 15 minutes of fame. If this is the best the GOP can do as a nominee for 2012, then the party is already dead. If she is, as I suspect, a throwaway candidate because they already know Barack Obama cannot be defeated, then they’re playing it smart.

  13. Kalima says:

    That’s odd, I was under the impression that people buying Ms. Mooseburger’s book only look at pictures and many would mistakenly buy the book coming out on the same day,” Sarah Palin

    • KQuark says:

      Actually I’m amazed Palin’s book is not a pop-up book.

      • Kalima says:

        With a turkey slaughter in the middle, a pair of daisy printed waders, and a helicoper you can blow on to make the propeller spin, with SP clutching her AK bb gun aimed at helpless wolves. I did read however that she can’t even shoot a gun. “You LIE Sarah!!”

      • nicole473 says:

        😆

        me too, kq.

    • nicole473 says:

      Good morning, Kalima!

      I am so angry with Oprah after that damn interview that I have decided never to watch her again, and I have been a fan for at least 15 years. 🙁

      • Kalima says:

        Good afternoon/evening nicole, it just seemed rather odd considering her avid campaigning for the Sen. Obama. As I said before, Oprah is not dumb and it might have been to expose SP total lack of anything resembling intelligence or maybe for the majority of us to be treated to a good, old fashioned belly hurting laugh.

    • bitohistory says:

      Hello Kalima, First things First!
      How are you feeling? Your family here wants to know.

      • Kalima says:

        Good afternoon bitohistory, I trust that you enjoyed your programs last night?

        Thank you for your concern, I’m slowly getting ready for my trip and wish that it was behind me already. You will know what I mean when I say that after all these years, I am tired of hospitals, seeing sick people, of the smells and sounds and waiting for long periods parked in a wheelchair that is too short for my legs. Rant over!

        How are you?

        • bitohistory says:

          Just “tikkity-boo”. Good today. Yes the mystery was good. BBC has good shows on they keep me stumped, not like the formula ones usually seen on regular tv.

          • Kalima says:

            I miss the Beeb but could get their extra cable channel for drama and comedy shows, however cable is not cheap here and I’m still deciding if it’s worth the extra $20 odd dollars on my monthly cost. At the moment I have BBC World News and Radio 4 Friday Comedy Hour downloaded on my ITunes podcasts every Friday, the “News Quiz” is a hoot.

    • javaz says:

      Good morning, Kalima!
      (is it morning by you and how are you today?)

      Oprah is only interviewing her for the ratings.

      From what I’ve read online, the entire interview seemed staged.
      Oprah never brought up anything about Sarah -- during her campaigning when her followers would yell out after she mentioned Obama, things like “Go back to Kenya!” or “He’s a terrorist!” or “He’s a n-!”
      I had hoped that Oprah would have asked Sarah why she never tried to ease her followers’ racist bigotry by telling them that Obama was not a terrorist and that he was an American citizen.

      I never watch Oprah, and never will after this sham interview.

  14. bitohistory says:

    Andrew Sullivan has also been a major fact-checker on Sister S’ahra:
    http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2009/07/the-odd-lies-of-sarah-palin-a-roundup.html
    If any one in the MSM would have read or read this she wouldn’t even have a book let alone a book tour.

    • nicole473 says:

      Yeah, Andrew is completely in hate with Palin. 🙂

      • KQuark says:

        Any conservative with half a brain should hate the lack of principles and intellectual curiosity Palin personifies. Conservatives like David Brooks know Sarah Palin represents the “bridge to nowhere” for the GOP.

        • nicole473 says:

          Yeah. A number of conservative bloggers were Palin haters during the campaign. Even Peggy Noonan wrote a slam piece.

          • nellie says:

            Noonan let it slip when her mike was live and she didn’t know it. After that, there wasn’t much she could do but tell the truth — we all knew how she really felt.

        • Kalima says:

          Well as long as they keep plugging her as “The great white hope” or does this only apply to pasty faced, old white geezers, they really have about as much chance of winning the 2012 elections as a pig with wings would.

          • KQuark says:

            Right and she’s suppose to attract Hillary voters too.

            It amazes me how the REAL Republican base white men patronize woman and minorities.

            • nellie says:

              Hillary voters have intellect. Palin will never get anyone with that quality to vote for her.

            • KQuark says:

              Face it the average GOP voter thinks most women are dingbats. The women that vote for the GOP against about every self interest they have deserve that moniker.

              BTW I’m just generalizing for the sake of humor.

            • nicole473 says:

              Exactly right. I voted for Hillary in the primaries, and I was infuriated that McCain thought that just any woman would do. Grrrr……

            • Kalima says:

              You are of course right nellie but I would have to exclude the rabid PUMA gang, about 20, some of who unfortunately made me feel positively ready to smack them when they posted on Huff.

              Btw, did you see who joined our site’s Facebook Page as a fan, Andrea C, who our newer members just “love” so much. 🙂

    • KQuark says:

      Andrew Sullivan is one of the few sane conservatives out there for sure.

      • nicole473 says:

        He is a peach, too. Last August I started blogging politics because Palin scared the hell out of me, and he linked to several of my articles….most bloggers in his exalted position wouldn’t be bothered with an unknown blogger such as myself.

        Gave me ginormous traffic boosts, I might add.

  15. SeeknDestroy says:

    Good morning folks….
    Pardon my silliness….

    Take your index finger and put it between your lips..move up and down rapidly….bbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbb

    There ya go, Sarah Palins next book…..

    ~smile~

  16. bitohistory says:

    Since the 2008 campaign (after McGrumpy selected) I have been reading The mudflats http://www.themudflats.net/ They, and affiliated blogs in Alaska, have been on to her and her lies since she first got into politics. Shannyn Mroore has long been affiliated with this site. Today, they have another good post on Falin’ Palin. On page 76 S’arah brings up a story about “Letter about S’arah” http://mudflats.wordpress.com/2008/09/04/a-letter-about-sarah-palin-from-anne-kilkenny/ This was written in 2008 by some one who lives in Wasilla. Enlightening indeed! One line from the letter I really liked: “She is savvy. She doesn

    • nicole473 says:

      Thanks for posting that, bito. I read and published Kilkenny’s letter last August or September. At that time I thought that we were very lucky to have a few intell people such as Anne, Jeanne and Shannyn to inform us re Palin.

      • bitohistory says:

        couple of problems with this information. How does it get out in the mainstream, and who is going to interview her and confront her on any of these points?
        I gather that the O interview was fluff or did she give her some rope?

        • nicole473 says:

          Well, the Kilkenny letter has been out for a long time. And a lot of liberal bloggers worked their asses off (myself included) to get the info out there.
          Personally, I have kept a log of all Palin articles, all anti-Palin blogs, etc., so that if push comes to shove, I will be well-armed.
          Geoffrey Dunn is writing a book about her and her shenanigans, and it’s due out in the spring.

          Oprah asked some of the right questions, but, as could have been predicted, Palin lied, and Oprah never called her on it.
          Really sucky interview.

          • nellie says:

            The Anchorage Daily News does a fantastic job reporting on Palin. That’s where I read about all of her scandals — the day after she spoke at the RNC convention.

            • nicole473 says:

              They were an excellent source for me last year as well. But when it ocmes to the back story, no one beats Shannyn and Jeanne (mudflats).

    • nicole473 says:

      I read Mudflats throughout the campaign once Palin was nominated. Jeanne and Shannyn were a precious resource for those of us blogging politics at the time…..love both of them!!

    • escribacat says:

      Thanks for the link. Pretty revealing letter. Sarah seems to embody all the worst qualities you can find in a politician.

    • KQuark says:

      Cheers, brilliant, I have not been to the site in a while. It’s absolutely fabulous.

      • bitohistory says:

        KQ, another thing “the letter” pointed out was she claimed she was a fiscal conservative. When she was Mayor the town debt went from $0 to -$20 mill in debt. Sounds like W.

  17. nicole473 says:

    I have to go out, but will be back early evening and will post my opinion on this issue.

    I’d love to hear some of your reasoning in thinking that she can’t possibly be the GOP nominee, or perhaps even worse, the vp nominee.

    I’m watching Oprah by the way, and I am pissed off. Oprah basically softballed it. She asked some of the right questions, but it was obvious that it was scripted, that Palin had rehearsed, and Oprah hasn’t called her on ANY of her bs so far.

    Oprah used to be a decent interviewer.

    • javaz says:

      Too bad Oprah didn’t ask her about her rallies on the campaign trail, where Sarah’s speeches inspired followers to shout racist remarks, and worse, about then candidate Obama.

      • nicole473 says:

        My thoughts exactly, javaz. I don’t understand how Oprah can even speak to that freak with a smile on her face. I don’t think that I could.

  18. javaz says:

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20091116/ts_alt_afp/uspoliticsmediapalin_20091116181349

    “If she grows, she’ll be the Republican nominee. More than anybody else in the party, her future is in her hands,” former Republican speaker Newt Gingrich said.

    Another senior Republican, Senator Lamar Alexander, says Palin, regardless of her weaknesses, has a priceless quality in the business of politics: “She’s interesting.”

    “A new Washington Post-ABC News poll found that 53 percent would not consider voting for Palin in 2012 against nine percent who definitely would. Another 37 percent would consider it.

    Sixty percent believe she is not qualified to be president.

    However, among Republicans she retains a strong following, with a positive rating of 76 percent.”

    76% positive rating among Republicans is notable.

    • nicole473 says:

      Thanks for posting this, javaz. 🙂

      76% is impressive, unfortunately.

      • nellie says:

        It’s 76% of 20% of the population — which is 15% overall. That’s not too hard to believe.

        • nicole473 says:

          It is when you consider that she was a virtual unknown this time last year.

          Additionally, she may also appeal to the disillusioned independents.

          I think you are counting your chickens, Nellie. Did you ever think that McCain or anyone, for that matter, would nominate a person such as Palin for veep? I didn’t. Did you believe that Dubya would be defeated in 2004? I did.

          It’s always good to keep an eye on your enemy and not discount them to your own detriment.

          • nellie says:

            I had my doubts about Kerry winning — but the truth is, he did win. He won Ohio and the state was stolen, as was Florida in 2000.

            When McCain nominated Palin, I knew he had lost — and would lose big. If he had nominated someone like Kay Bailey Hutchinson, we would have had some real trouble.

            I truly believe Palin is a media creation. The woman has no substance, no ethics, no poise, no intellect. I just can’t take her seriously. I should also say that I’m one of the few people who does not believe George W. Bush is a stupid man. I always saw him as a formidable candidate — in both elections. But I can’t see Palin as more than a flash in the pan.

            But you are right to be vigilant. We never know what can happen.

            • bitohistory says:

              A few surprises off the top: Dukakis wining the nomination, Clinton beating George I, midterms in ’94.

            • nellie says:

              I wasn’t surprised that Clinton won or at the turnaround of the 94 midterms — considering the beating Clinton was taking in the press. But Dukakis was a surprise. He’s a smart smart man, but he never struck me as someone who could win the presidency.

            • KQuark says:

              Well said and agreed. Bush was ignorant by choice but his political acumen was actually very good. It ironic but Bush was impulsive and rigid at the same time.

            • nellie says:

              Yes — I’ll start a new comment because we’re squeezed to the margin!

            • kesmarn says:

              nellie, if you have a spare moment, could you elaborate on that analysis of Bush by Frank?

            • nellie says:

              There’s a book out called Bush on the Couch by Dr. Justin Frank that presents a pretty alarming character analysis. All of it rings true, at least for me.

            • kesmarn says:

              You really nailed it when you said Bush was impulsive and rigid at the same time. For a guy who looked and acted like a simpleton, he was incredibly complicated. I think it’ll take many years before historians figure him out--if ever. He certainly mystified me…not in a good way!

    • KQuark says:

      I don’t think Palin has a chance in hell of becoming the GOP nominee. I’m certain Romney will be the GOP nominee because that’s the way they work. The next one in line ALWAYS wins the nomination. Romney was 2nd last time around.

      • bitohistory says:

        Huckabee was second, KQ, and he has led in most of the GOP polls.
        FWIW

      • nicole473 says:

        Winner-Take-All Primaries Could Make Palin GOP Nominee In 2012
        http://www.politicsdaily.com/2009/11/16/walter/

        • KQuark says:

          Interesting article. I hope she does win the nomination but I still doubt it.

          • nicole473 says:

            Be careful what you wish for, KQ……. 😆

            Seriously, I have seen some weird stuff happen in politics in my lifetime. I have learned never to say never. And, if she were to win the nomination, it could be a problem, depending on how popular Obama is at the time.

      • Beachchick says:

        I agree, KQ. There is no way the GOP will nominate Palin. This is all politicking to appeal to the wingnut base. The GOP will probably bribe Palin with a lucrative bully pulpit that will keep her voters amped and get her out of the way at the same time.

      • javaz says:

        I do agree with you, but I also have my doubts, too.

        We all know the GOP’s base are the evangelicals, and they love Sarah Palin.
        They do not like Mitt Romney because he is a Mormon.

        It just depends on how much the GOP want to keep their radical religious right base.

        Either way, it’s going to be a fun ride!

        • KQuark says:

          Huckabee is also the wild card in the South and will challenge Palin for the evangelical base.

          • escribacat says:

            I’m not privy to their thought processes (nor do I want to be) but I don’t imagine the evangelicals care for the Mormons or vice versa. Hopefully, this will split their party even further.

  19. KQuark says:

    All politicians lie, hell all people lie in some way but Sarah Palin is a pathological liar who lied the first time she spoke to a national audience.

    On the contrary I’m glad you brought up this topic. We may be sick of Sarah Palin but it is important when she rears her ugly head that we make a point to show people what the GOP is all about. No one really personifies the GOP as a political party like Sarah Palin a liar, a hypocrite, a quitter, corrupt to the core, a divider, [add your least favorite GOP trait here].

  20. escribacat says:

    I used to see Palin as a threat (especially during the campaign) but lately she just seems to be more interested in being a celebrity than in holding office. I think she is very popular among 10 to 20% of the conservative population (for reasons I cannot fathom) but I don’t see her as being electable to the presidency. Of course, things could change. I cannot imagine this erratic extremist with access to the nuclear button. We would be in very deep trouble if it happened.

    • nicole473 says:

      Escriba, I paid virtually zero attention to politics for years until McCain nominated Palin. That scared the hell out of me, and I blogged my heart out for Obama prior to the election, and for some time afterwards.
      By February, I was feeling like I didn’t need to concern myself about her any longer.
      When she quit her job, and started with the FB crap, I realized that she could still be a threat in the future.

      I hope not. I hope I am completely wrong. But I am very uneasy about her.

    • KQuark says:

      The ironic part was she personified what the Repugs said about Obama when he was running for office. She loves celebrity, had no experience, was the radical, was someone we could not trust, was weak minded and cold not take the pressures of the media let alone the job etc.


Leave your Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.


Back to top
PlanetPOV Tweets
Ongoing Stories
Features