Media

Reason Writers Around Town: Nick Gillespie on Sarah Palin in The Washington Post

|

Writing in The Washington Post, Reason's Nick Gillespie reviews two new books about everybody's favorite/most-hated pol, Sarah Palin. A snippet:

No recent political figure has ignited the fury of the chattering classes like former Alaska governor and Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin.

Shortly after she injected signs of life into the zombified McCain campaign with a rousing speech at the 2008 Republican National Convention, the little-known figure was dissed by Salon's Cintra Wilson as a "power-mad, backwater beauty-pageant casualty" whose conservative ideology made the liberal, feminist writer "feel as horrified as a ghetto Jew watching the rise of National Socialism."

Martin Peretz, the editor in chief of the New Republic, sniffed that the candidate "was pretty like a cosmetics saleswoman at Macy's" and that it was "good to see that the Palin family didn't torture poor Bristol [unmarried, pregnant and 17 at the time], at least in the open."

The Atlantic's Andrew Sullivan, a self-identified conservative who calls his Daily Dish "the most popular one-man political blog site in the world," persistently claimed that Trig Palin, the governor's then-4-month-old baby with Down syndrome, was not Sarah's biological child and requested the full release of her obstetrical records, stopping just short of demanding he be sent the placenta for genetic testing. (If President Obama is hounded by a small group of reality-challenged "birthers," who doubt he was born in Hawaii, Palin is certainly the only politician to have given rise to what might be called "after-birthers," who doubt that she delivered her own children.)

Even Palin's defenders had issues with modulation and mental balance. Watching last year's vice presidential debate, National Review's Rich Lowry squealed that Palin's smile "sent little starbursts through the screen and ricocheting around the living rooms of America."

[Sarah from Alaska and The Persecution of Sarah Palin…] attempt to explain why the hockey mom from Wasilla, Alaska, drives both detractors and fans alike to something approaching insanity. Each is serious, well researched and well written, but neither quite fully explains the oversize reaction to Palin.

Read the whole review at the Post.

Advertisement

NEXT: We're Not Saying We Want Special Treatment, We're Just Saying That There Could Be Consequences if We Don't Get Special Treatment

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Writing in The Washington Post, Reason’s Nick Gillespie reviews two new books

  2. The left is obviously scared to death of her. If I thought they had any brains I’d be supporting her, but they don’t have a clue.

  3. While she’s nowhere near as bad as her detractors make her out to be and not as good as her supporters want us to believe, I like the effect she’s having on politics right now. She’s unpredictable. We need a little of that, even if she remains on the fringes and never takes office again.

    1. We need a little of that, even especially if she remains on the fringes and never takes office again.

  4. “If Richard Nixon could come back from a famously non-mediagenic presidential run, a humiliating gubernatorial defeat and the most god-awful retirement speech in history,”

    Is there not one leftist historical myth that Reasonites don’t buy into? That is a bullshit story Nick. The famous “you won’t have Dick Nixon to kick around anymore” statement was a joke. If you ever watch the film, Nixon winked when he said it and the reporters in the room laughed.

    It was only later that his opponents created the myth that Nixon gave this horrible bitter diatribe. He didn’t. The entire speech was actually pretty gracious.

    1. True. And the people who call him some sort of conservative need their heads examined or they need to just stop bullshitting.

      1. Those tend to be the same people who think he is responsible for the Vietnam War. Sadly, history is not one of most people’s strong points.

    2. Right, John. Nixon was magnanimous in defeat. He didn’t have a vindictive bone in his body. And all those White House tapes? An impersonator!

      1. What do the Whitehouse tapes have anything to do with his speech in California in 1962? The fact is that speech was magnanomous and the idea that it wasn’t is a myth. The fact that Nixon later did nasty things, doesn’t change that fact.

        1. Sorry, but that comeback doesn’t quite cut it. See, @ used sarcasm AND a bit of a straw man. You just can’t beat that. joe would be proud.

      2. Oval Office conversations have been recorded since the time of FDR. Are you suggesting presidential time travel or somethng?

  5. I do not get the whole love or hate obsession with Sarah Palin.

    1. She is the lightening rod of the culture war going on in this country between the cosmopolitian self proclaimed elites and everyone else. The idea that a nobody from Alaska who went to community college could be a major political figure drives certain people absolutely insane.

      1. To echo Bryan Caplan, if you are a libertarian and you live in a modern democracy then you are an elitist.

        http://econlog.econlib.org/arc….._of_l.html

        1. I am actually an elitist to. The problem is not with “elites” as a subset. The problem is with our society’s elites. Our elites are incredibly broken. We have spent 40+ years now of putting all of the wrong people at the top in nearly every sector of society.

          1. Tulpa’s Axiom #1: The wrong people are always on top.

            I picked that up from a gay friend.

            1. are we pretending that you have friends now?

        2. The libertarian who refuses to overrule popular statism is saying, “Individual freedom will have to wait until the majority thinks it’s a good idea.” That’s more tedious than waiting for Godot.

          bon mot. I think I heard this very sentiment echoed on WWE last week.

          1. I have a problem with that statement. There are certain fundemental rights that no government, no matter how popular, should be able to violate.

            But beyond that, people have a right to determine what kind of government they have. Yeah, I think social security and OSHA are bad ideas. But, I don’t think that having them is so aggregous that it gives me the right to circumvent the majority. As much as I value the principle of limited government, I value the principle of self government more.

            I think Caplan is a nasty little shit if he thinks that it is okay to circumvent democracy and self government to create his ideal society.

            1. I think the majority of my fellow Americans are complete morons. But I’m no elitist!

            2. Yeah, I think social security and OSHA are bad ideas. But, I don’t think that having them is so aggregous that it gives me the right to circumvent the majority.

              What gives us the right to circumvent the majority is that both these programs are unconstitutional, because neither is an enumerated power.

              Are you saying that the majority has the right to oppress everyone else pretty much however they want?

              1. If it is truely against the constitution, then it should be struck down. But, is it? You say it is, some say it is not. In the end, what the constitution says has at least something to do with what the majority of the country thinks it says.

                But that is besides the point. Caplan seems to be saying that we should short circuit democracy to get what we want. Bullshit. Even if those things are “unconstitutional”, then fine. But there is nothing to say the majority can’t ammend the constitution. I don’t have a problem with that. Caplan would. Caplan is just as an unprincipled jackass as the worst statist.

            3. As much as I value the principle of limited government, I value the principle of self government more.

              I think you are confusing self-government with majority rule, John.

              Elevating majority rule over limited government is not consistent with libertarian outcomes.

              1. If the majority has to govern by a set of rules it never agreed to, how is there any self government?

                Libertarians make an enormous mistake if they think that the world would be paradise if only they were in charge and no one else had any say in the government. I don’t want a dictatorship or an oligarchy even if I agree with it and it claims to be enlightened. Ultimately, people have a right, within certain boundries of fundemental human rights, to have the government they chose to have.

                If you don’t believe that, you are an authoritarian. It doesn’t matter how much you claim to want to save the proles from themselves and grant them freedom, you are still an authoritarian.

              2. “Elevating majority rule over limited government is not consistent with libertarian outcomes.”

                No kidding. But Libertarians have no more right than vegitarians or anyone else to shove their vision of government down the people’s throat.

                Take the constitutional agrument out of it. If 2/3s of this country voted to amend the constitution to have say socialized medicine, I think that would be a terrible mistake. But it would be a bigger mistake to say that 2/3s of the country have no right to set up the healthcare system they want.

                1. Take the constitutional agrument out of it. If 2/3s of this country voted to amend the constitution to have say socialized medicine concentration camps, I think that would be a terrible mistake. But it would be a bigger mistake to say that 2/3s of the country have no right to set up the healthcare ethnic cleansing system they want.

                  Take the constitutional agrument out of it. If 2/3s of this country voted to amend the constitution to have say socialized medicine slavery, I think that would be a terrible mistake. But it would be a bigger mistake to say that 2/3s of the country have no right to set up the healthcare cotton harvesting system they want.

                  So many ways to FIFY.

                2. I thought the whole idea of libertarianism is not to shove gov’t down anyone’s throat.

                  Are you suggesting that liberty can be forced on people?

      2. She is the lightning rod of the culture war going on in this country between the cosmopolitan self proclaimed elites and everyone else. The idea that a nobody from Alaska who went to community college could be a major political figure drives certain people absolutely insane.

        They’re the exact same type of people who way, way back in the day laughed at Reagan and dismissed him as nothing but a second-rate B movie actor.

        They just can’t help it; it’s how these types prop themselves up in their own minds.

  6. “Even Palin’s defenders had issues with modulation and mental balance.”

    Mental balance? I am not aware of any of her supporters who think she is mentally unbalanced. Just what is that supposed to mean?

    1. I think it means Matt Welch ghost wrote this story.

    2. That sentence brought me up short at first, too. But I think he was referring to Rich Lowry’s mental balance, in getting all googly over Sarah.

      1. Yes. That is it. I misread it. That is what he was talking about.

        1. John and Sarah sittin’ in a tree…

          1. D-R-I-L-L-I-N-G!

  7. Andrew Sullivan = afterbirth.

    1. The fact that they haven’t fired him for it is pretty sad. Imagine if someone at the Atlantic was a birther. They would have a job for about five seconds and would have to grovel and renounce for years to get back into the mainstream. Yet, Sullivan unapologetically believes in just as crackpot of a theory and still has a job. If feminists actually cared about women versus leftist causes, Sullivan would have been run out of polite society.

      1. Maybe he keeps his job by blaming his writing on the hormone treatments? Has he ever released his medical records on that?

      2. And he can be my friend and not get deported.

  8. It appears that someone signed “Nick Gillespie” to some nameless interns’ insight-free mash-up of Postly commonplaces. When’s the lawsuit?

  9. I tend to like Palin more than most well known politicians because she seems to be more for personal responsibility. However, she also seems too willing to engage the power of government. What I’ve never been able to figure out is what the left is scared of. Is bringing a little more freedom, a bit more fiscal restraint, and a pretty face such a terrible thing?

    1. They don’t like what she represents. An America that doesn’t see the beauty of economic engineering. To them, she’s an embodiment of a backwoods, redneck, hillbilly culture that has some disdain for government involvement that they can feel, but can’t articulate. The liberal elites look at these people as misinformed and in need of changing. The fact that they can’t convert these folks leads them to detest them for their “ignorance.”

      What they fail to understand is that they are the ignorant ones who cannot grasp the culture of middle America.

      Of course, there are plenty of those who support her that think she should use government to expand or push that culture. That’s where we differ.

      1. I’d be hated today. My friend Davey Crockett too. And Meriwether Lewis. William Clark…

        1. With a name like Mariwether, he probably got beat up a lot in school…

  10. I think the big initial reaction to Sarah Palin from both ideological sides was because of her potential. She was a seemingly blank canvas (although not as blank as Obama) and charismatic. The Right loved her potential to be the next Ronald Reagan, while the Left hated her potential to be the next Ronald Reagan.

    These days, the oversize reactions are simply driven by the other side’s oversize reactions.

    1. That is very true. If the left hadn’t gone insane and started eating the furniture, people would have forgotten about Palin after the election. Liking her has become a way to give the finger to the media and the beltway establishment.

      1. It’s the sensationalistic media that’s keeping her alive on both sides.

    2. One of the the more amusing ironies of the election season was the left screaming that Palin was unqualified to take the mantle of president if needed. I agree with that, BUT, Obama supporters are the last people on planet Earth with the right to make that point. A loser* who had spent his entire career playing penny ante poker in the back waters of the Illinois state house who had the fortune of having the right look at the right moment.

      Add to that, on a purely superficial level he does not reek of the dirty deals of Jackson and Sharpton, but came into the public imagination with a lemony fresh scent that covered his own long history of graft within a movement that long ago degenerated into a royal scam of Balkanized feudal privilege.

      With just the right amount of beige that Madison Avenue sells as our future, a multicultural orgy around an awe inspiring bonfire of hope (going up in the smoke of burning money), the Obama moment was irrepressible.

      And God do I hate Walt Whitman. Verse as grotesquely creepy as anything out of Lovecraft.

      * say chief, what have you called the man who got sober around forty and then entered politics on his daddy’s name? Well, though his biography is different, Obama’s background is no better than that guy’s.

  11. I do love me some redneck chicks with guns. There’s no denying that.

    Even if its just a simulation gun.

    1. Rule 3, Sarah, rule 3.

  12. We’re allowed to say redneck here? What if someone gets offended?

    1. I’m cool with it.

      1. I think Tony is the teabaggee based on how much he uses the ‘teabagger’ word.

    2. Rednecks are white and therefore oppressors. It doesn’t matter if they’re offended; in fact it’s a net gain. Maybe they’ll go away. Racists. Why aren’t rednecks taxed more?

  13. While there are reasons to be less than thrilled with Palin as a politician, I have to wonder whether someone hated so much by both the Democrat and Republican establishments can really be all bad.

  14. There’s no “there” there, yet gobs of ink continues to be spilt.

  15. I like to think that the secret of Sarah Palin’s success is the same as that of the Sirius Cybernetics corporation – her superficial flaws completely overshadow her fundamental flaws.

    People concentrate on her accent, mannerisms and non-hoity toity education and completely overlook facts such as, eg she cannot speak in coherent sentences. If she had more of her speeches read out by William Shatner, we’d all be able to focus on her incoherence without getting distracted by stuff like the accent.

    1. She can’t speak in coherent sentences? I keep hearing people say this, and I’ve seen a few examples, but the vast majority of what she has said has been perfectly coherent.

      Obama was hailed as a great orator, but he uttered more incoherent sentences then she has. He just said them in more pleasing tones, and they were more ideologically palatable to the media and political elite.

    2. One more thing, many of the examples of her poor speaking ability were pulled from SNL, not from statements or speeches made by Palin.

    3. …she cannot speak in coherent sentences.

      Take away their teleprompters, and this describes 80% of Congress. So she cannot ad lib as well as the best of them…if this disqualified people from office then we’d have a lot of empty offices.

      1. Including the presidency.

      2. Yes, but this is the stuff she puts on her teleprompter.

      3. And it describes the president perfectly.

        1. Stupid user-failed-to-refresh error.

  16. She is hot. All the rest is meaningless.

    1. Realistically, she has maybe 8 years to obtain high office, because after that, her strongest assets will start sagging.

  17. What is the Left afraid of? I don’t know. What is the Right afraid. More specifically, the moderate Right. Gubernatorial candidate Chris Christy told SP he didn’t want her support in the NJ Governor’s race.

    1. That’s because NJ is pretty much a lost cause if you’re anything resembling a modern Republican. So if you run for public office in NJ with that little (R) after your name, you have be “moderate” and “centrist” – both things that people perceive Palin as not being.

      Glad I got out of that state over seven years ago.

  18. Sarah Palin might have actually been palatable to the libertarian crowd had McCain’s people never gotten their hands on her.

    1. I doubt it. She’s far too socially conservative.

      1. Really? How so? Because she didn’t kill her unborn son? Everyone says she is a “social conservative” but they never provide links showing just how she is. I have never seen her come out one way or another on social issues.

        I am serious, what makes you say that? Maybe she is. But, I never seem to see any proof attached to the claims that she is.

        1. How can you be serious by throwing out Because she didn’t kill her unborn son?

        2. I can’t speak for Libertarians, but if Abstinence Only education isn’t socially conservative, I don’t know what is.

          1. Was she for government mandates on that?

          2. Why? First I would argue that the Libertarian position is that there shouldn’t be sex ed at all in schools. What the fuck business is it of the government what I teach my kid about sex? None. Second, study after study shows that school sex ed does nothing to reduce teen pregnancy and the like and that abstinence programs are just as effective.

            The right answer is that schools have no business doing any sex ed. But, I don’t see how abstinence only is any worse answer than having third graders taught courses in condom use and proper gay sex.

            1. “study after study shows”

              Just admit it, you pulled this from your ass.

              1. http://www.heritage.org/resear…../wm738.cfm

                shove it up your ass and enjoy it, you pervert.

                  1. The studies go both ways dumb ass. Again, the right answer is not to do it. But saying absistance only is no more wrong than anything else.

                    1. You said “study after study” implying there was some sort of consensus, when really there was one study by the decidedly non-objective Heritage foundation that contradicts the consensus that abstinence-only doesn’t work.

                      Which shouldn’t be a surprise considering the motivation for abstinence-only is entirely faith-based rather than scientific.

                    2. And the motivation of the other side isn’t to tear down the family or keep people from (gasp) teaching their kids their own values rather than the state’s.

                      Tony you are the dumbest person ever to comment on reason. You make Lonewacko look like a statesman.

                    3. Tony is dumb, but that is a stretch. Have you ever clicked on one of lonewhacko’s links?

                      they are not what they promise and they are unintelligible.

                    4. Abstinence does seem to solve all the problems normally associated with having sex, ie STDs, pregnancy, ext.

                      Don’t see how pragmatism couldn’t be scientific.

                      The majority of it may be faith based, but you can’t really argue with that fact that by not having sex, you avoid all the problems that may come with it.

                    5. We could prevent car crashes by having “don’t ever drive” drivers’ ed classes! Not that I support sex ed in public schools, hell I don’t like the existence of public schools, but if kids are going to be taught sex ed stuff, it had damn well better not be abstinence only.

                    6. We prevent car crashes for drivers under 16 by keeping them from getting behind the wheel. Sounds like abstinence to me.

                      And we need more classes teaching kids how to smoke if we are going to teach them how to have sex. And how to handle their liquor.

                    7. Agreed, my argument may have been extreme.

                      However, encouraging fewer sexual partners rather than more, seems to be a wiser course of advice.

                      At least compared to the “here’s a box of condoms, go bang anything that moves” approach.

                      But I agree that kids need to be aware of what exactly the sexual environment is like, hopefully without exaggerating one extreme or the other.

                    8. You need to read more closely. The study wasn’t “done by the decidedly non-objective Heritage [F]oundation”; it was merely reported by Heritage. The study was *done* by Robert Lerner and published in Adolescent & Family Health.

            2. Huh? The libertarian position is there shouldn’t be schools. Period.

      2. As are at least half the libertarians in the US

  19. She’s no less competent then 99% of other politicians. I know Democrats here in Columbus that like her. Of course we don’t go around smelling our own farts here either.

  20. Sarah Palin is a moron. She was also a big fat gift to the Obama campaign tied in a pretty pink bow. Because most Americans were frightened of her stupidity and still are. That she has so much respect and adoration on the fringe right should tell us everything we need to know about the right.

    1. That is right she is a moron. I hear she can’t give a speech without using a teleprompter and thinks Austrians speak Austrian. And of course she is a mental midget compared to a genius like Joe Biden.

      1. I’d say that’s about right, although I doubt she’s ever heard of Austria. Maybe her handlers could put it on a flash card for her?

        1. Tony, she can see Austria from her house.

          And they probably have a trade delegation with Alaska so she’s a foreign policy expert on Austria.

          And if you think of all the magazine articles on Austria then she’s read them all. She reads all magazines.

          1. Why do you feel the need to lie? She never said she could see Russia from her house. Tina Fay said that on SNL. Further, the governer of Alaska does deal with Russia. Natives go in and out of both countries. There are also some pretty complex fishing rights issues up there. Also, Alaska has a huge land border with a country you may have heard of, Canada. I don’t know if liberals realize it, but Canada is a different country.

            1. I can hardly think of a more useless line of discussion to pursue.

              See, here’s where the threaded comments come in handy.

            2. Liberals do realize it, but they don’t like it. They want the U.S. to become jut like Canada, but with a warmer climate.

              1. I thought our liberals were trying to get our climate cooler? Wait, they are trying to unchange it or something. What’s the latest?

                1. the latest is I’m fucking freezing my balls off homebound in 60 cm of snow. Can we have global warming already?

  21. There seems to be several references to the notion that the left is scared of Palin. I’m not sure where this comes from, as it seems to me the left is licking it’s chops over the prospect of a faceoff with Palin.

    The most fearful of her are center-Right and libertarians, who know a Palin candidacy will translate into a continuation of Nixonian culture war politics at best, but most likely just squander away yet another election cycle.

    1. I think that notion comes from the big hissy fit the left throws whenever her name is mentioned. It is like saying FOX to them, or throwing Holy Water on them, or vampires.

  22. Look, Palin hid from the media in a way I’ve never seen.

    Biden gave interviews pretty much non-stop. His gaffe per hour speaking ration is much lower than Palins.

    I can only applaud conservative support for Palin. Let’s hope she is the nominee in 2012.

  23. They let her talk a few times and she was so terrible they hid her for weeks and weeks.

    My favorite was the “what magazines do you read.”

    “All of them.”

    1. I don’t read one magazine other than the one the NRA sends me. Seriously. Why the hell would anyone spend anytime reading Time or Newsweek or Useless News and World Distort. All of them are worthless pieces of shit and a waste of my time.

      Palin did more damage to Obamacare in a facebook post than any other single person has done. She is not stupid. More importantly, she is right about a lot of things. It doesn’t do any good to be smart if you are wrong. History is filled with geniuses who were dead wrong. In fact, smart people with bad ideas are the most dangerous.

      1. Yeah, but you wouldn’t answer “All of them” would you?

        The funny thing about Palin is she is the GOP’s Obama. Were Obama white and Palin a man they would be Congressperson’s at best.

        1. I might if you caught me at the wrong time. It is harder to speak in public than you think. As much as I tweak Tony about it, honestly do you think that Obama doesn’t know they speak German in Austria? I don’t. Gaffes happen. But they usually say nothing about the person making them. Every politician says stupid things occasionally. But for some reason Palin is the only one ever held accountable for it. And that pisses me off.

        2. I would. Why? Because I do. Everything from JAMA to Seventeen to Reason to Highlights.

          Now do I think Sarah Palin reads as I do? No. But some folks do read a lot, so “All of them” can be a relatively accurate response.

      2. Surely you can find someone who is also right but more accomplished and capable though…

  24. John
    I’m curious as to why you spend so much energy defending her. Do you think she is the smartest, most capahle conservative politician your side can run? If not then you should find out who that is and support them, right?

    1. Because the attacks on her are just so untrue. Honestly, she is a very smart and savy woman. And she is probably smarter than most politicians, which granted says very little. And she is certainly smarter than nearly every journalist out there, which again says nothing.

      Like I said above, she is a lightening rod for the culture war in this country. Peggy Noonan, of all people (I was as shocked as anyone to agree with her), said it best last Friday. We have a political class of unimaginiative children who have no idea that the lights could some day go out and that they could kill the country through their incompetance. The idiotic and hyperbolic attacks on Palin are a sign of how stupid and incompetant our political and media class has become. People hate Palin as much as anything because they think that being clever in your speech and giving a good interview is more important than being right about the substance.

      1. But John surely you can find someone on your side who is both correct in substance and in style!

        1. Maybe they can. I dont’ know. I don’t follow state level Republican poliics enough to tell you. But, I would take Palin, who seems to actually believe in something, over some ass kissing I want to be loved by liberals Washington Republican any day.

          1. Jesus. I’m with MNG in that I think Palin should be the GOP nominee (although I have a hunch she’s going to spearhead some sort of 3rd party effort), because I’m pretty confident most of the country isn’t as much of a GOP bootlicker as you as to seriously consider giving Sarah Palin the keys to our nuclear arsenal. But having her even as close as she already was is enough to give someone who cares about the future of humanity heartburn.

            1. They already gave the keys to Obama and Biden, who combined seem to have all of the wisdom and judgement of a house plant. Anyone who voted for Obama can claim to worry about giving the keys of anything to anyone.

              1. FUCK YOU, SPECIESIST!

                1. FUCK YOU, SPECIESIST! KINGDOMIST!

                  FTFY.

  25. The funny thing about Palin is she is the GOP’s Obama. Were Obama white and Palin a man they would be Congressperson’s at best.

    This is probably true. Yo, fuck affirmative action or political correctness or whatever you want to call it.

  26. Many of the statements made about Palin by the left were made well before anyone realized she wasn’t up to the job. We’re already seeing some revisionist history being written by those who want us to think opposition to Palin was based on the rather sensible conclusion she wasn’t ready rather than simple leftist bigotry and prejudice against a non-Northeast-elite without an Ivy League sheepskin.

    1. As someone who likes to see more women in positions of power, I was definitely intrigued by the selection. Then she opened her mouth.

      1. STFU Tony. Stop lying. You started foaming at the mouth the moment she was selected and you got your marching orders.

        1. perhaps tony reads all magazines too?

    2. It doesn’t have to be about elitist schools and such. It has to do with the fact that she seemed to have slight accomplishments (she was 3rd runner up for Ms. Alaska), then said some foolish things, and then cowardly hid from the media for weeks and weeks. Then she cowardly resigned. Those things combined made people, not all frothing Democrats mind you, think she was a lightweight.

      1. She didn’t cowardly resign. If only people like Pelosi and Spector who spend their whole lives in craven pursuit of public office would resign. In the end, she had other intrests beyond Alaska. If she didn’t want to be governor anymore, she owed it to them to resign. It is not like they can’t get another one. If you quit your job for a better opportunity are you a coward? Bullshit. To say that she was a “coward” is to hold being an elected office up as some kind of noble job, which it clearly isn’t.

        As far as her not being up for the job. First, she was running for VP not President. And second, the last 8 months has clearly shown that at least one of the four major candidates was not up for the job of President, and it isn’t Palin, McCain or Biden.

      2. She resigned because her enemies in Alaska filed baseless ethics complaint after baseless ethics complaint against her, and she was going broke trying to defend against them.

  27. I didn’t start liking her until I saw how much the left hates her.

    Anyway, after watching Obama for ~10 months, I think high intelligence is overrated as a qualification for the presidency. It’s probably pretty easy to be a mediocre president.

    1. Oh I don’t hate her, I love her. I hope she rises to the very top of the GOP. Really I do. I would vote for her in a GOP primary for sure.

      1. Be careful what you wish for. By 2012, Obama will be so unpopular that virtually anyone from the GOP might win. Moreover, the worse Obama looks, the more people will start to wonder about the slime job on Palin. Palin might end up being the symbol of 2008 buyer’s remorse. The same people who claimed that Palin is a moron are the ones who claim Obama is a genius. Since they were clearly wrong about the second, their judgement in the first claim will become suspect.

    2. I didn’t start liking her until I saw how much the left hates her.

      I too wonder why the left hates her so much.

      I thought her speaches in the campaign were ok and I feel she gave a lift to the McCain campaign.

      Is she and airhead or is she qualified for higher office? Time will tell. I don’t see what all the hubbub is about.

  28. John
    She quit because she wants to run for President and a sitting governor has to make unpopular choices. She told the voters she was the woman for the job and then she backed out on them. It was pretty cowardly.

    1. I was lead to believe that she quit under the weight of all the frivilous law suits the Left was filing against her.

      1. That and she knew she could make a lot of money on the outside. She quite for a better job. Who cares? If only more politicians would quit sooner.

  29. As someone who likes to see more women in positions of power, I was definitely intrigued by the selection.

    This is because a person’s beliefs, experiences, and other individual attributes don’t matter to you when compared to what identity group they happen to belong to. Thus, you find skin color or gender or other such characteristic a more important signifier of the worth of a person than the contents of his or her skull. In other words, you are collectivist swine. Fuck off.

    1. I believe I said just the opposite. Her gender was reason enough to be intrigued by the selection. I think minorities in positions of power is a net benefit for society, all else being equal. Unfortunately she proved to be a drag on women’s empowerment because she turned out to have not much going on in her skull, and thus was nothing BUT and affirmative action pick by the McCain camp.

  30. I mean the woman couldn’t keep a four year committment? Not much character there…

    1. You ask me why I defend her. Let me ask you, why you feel the need to lie about her and give bullshit attacks like that? If she is so obviously bad, why do you have to resort to bitching about resigning as governor of a state you don’t even live in?

    2. Kathleen Silbius and Janet Napolatano both quit being governors of states for what they considered to be better jobs in the Obama Whitehouse. Do you think they have character issues?

      1. Nobody would have faulted her for quitting to be VP or a cabinet member. Quitting so she could make money on a book deal? Not exactly statesmanlike.

        1. The people who elected Sibileus and Napolatano might. Further, Sibileus is the most ghetto cabinet member there is. HHS is not quite like being Secretary of State.

          But it is their choice. You just bitch about Palin because you are a hack who doesn’t know any better.

          1. So you’re admitting that Palin quitting to make money on a book deal is at least as disrespectful as Sebelius and Napolitano quitting to join the cabinet?

            1. No dumb ass. I am saying neither is disrespectful.

              1. Really? Pretend she has a (D) after her name, then ask yourself if it’s seemly for her to quit halfway through her term to score a book deal.

                1. No really. I don’t care that Sibilieus or Napolitano quit. Why would I care if a Dem quit? That just means a Republican has a chance to replace them early.

                  1. “You ask me why I defend her.”

                    no, i ask you what happened to all the hand lotion.

                    on second thought, nevermind.

        2. Oh, I see – Napolitano and Sebelius quit because of genuine, deep-rooted, altruistic, statesmanship.

          Palin resigned because she’s a money-grubbing, book deal-whore.

          Napolitano and Sebelius resigned because they perceived the assignments to be a step up – from the state/local scene to the national scene – an elevation in power and visibility. Precisely what all career politicians crave. And if a Republican gets elected next go-round, they can step down gracefully, having “honorably served our country”, yadda yadda, and go on the lecture circuit, write books, and get peachy consulting gigs.

          Either way, they all moved on to what they perceived would be better and ultimately higher-paying gigs.

          Why is it somehow dishonorable to ditch a committment to your voters to go into the private sector, but somehow honorable to just as much breach a committment to voters, as long as you’re moving up into the federal government.

          Oh yeah – lest we forget – who else do we know that ditched a committment to his voters to pursue what he perceived to be a better gig? Could it possibly be the junior senator from Illinois, who promised his voters he would not run for president, but then did so not even 2 years into his term?

  31. I don’t like sitting anyone running for office. Everyone last election was holding office and neglecting their duties. Bah. Might help if politicians had to quit their current position to run for another.

    1. We have a politcal system full of calicified incumbants and idiot sons of calcified incumbants. I don’t see how any politician resiging is ever a bad thing.

      1. If you hate politicians as much as you say, then what the fuck do you care if everyone’s ripping on the soup du jour?

  32. Tony, the only minority that matters is the smallest minority of all: the individual. Unless you’re able to comprehend (i won’t hold my breath) that this is the basis for libertarianism, all you’re doing around here is parading your ignorance.

    1. I understand that’s what you think. I happen to think it’s ridiculous and that people everywhere are involuntarily born into various groups, and that these groups are not, as you claim, completely irrelevant to how individuals fit into society.

      1. Hah, hah
        Falling mountains just don’t fall on me
        Point on mister liberal yuppie,
        You can’t dress like me.
        Nobody know what I’m talking about
        I’ve got my own life to live
        I’m the one that’s gonna have to die
        When it’s time for me to die
        So let me live my life the way I want to.

      2. Collectivism in a nutshell.

  33. Palin comes across as authentic (never mind if she is or not), which scares the hell out of all the other politicians who are layer after layer of facade.

    They’re afraid the voters will acquire a taste for someone who doesn’t bullshit them.

    Not saying that Palin doesn’t bullshit, but that she seems to sometimes say something she actually believes in.

  34. Judge Land and now judge Carter, smack down the crazies (case dismissed), poor little Birthers.

    Not even “Fake News” Bill O’Reilly believes the crazies, how funny.

    http://belowthebeltway.com/200…..rly-taitz/

    To all the birthers in La, La Land, it is on you to prove to all of us that your assertion is true (TOUGH WHEN YOU KEEP LOSING CASES), if there are people who were there and support your position then show us the video (everyone has a price), either put up or frankly shut-up.

    In my opinion the Republican Party has been taken over the most extreme religious right (people who love to push their beliefs on others while trying to take away the rights of those they just hate) and that is who they need to extract from their party if they real want to win. Good Luck, because as they said in WACO, “We Ain’t Coming Out”.

    I heard that she now wants to investigate the “Republican 2009 Summer of Love” list: Assemblyman, Michael D. Duvall (CA), Senator John Ensign (NV), Senator Paul Stanley (TN), Governor Mark Stanford (SC), Board of Ed Chair, and Kristin Maguire AKA Bridget Keeney (SC).

    I wonder if she is a mail order bride, just like her law degree? She is perfect reporter material for “Fake News”, where unfounded rumors and innuendo reign supreme , unlike a our US courts of law, where you need to present documented facts, not half baked lies (prepare for more failures).

    A lawyer, dentist, realtor and black belt, WOW I must say a JACK of all trades master of none.

  35. The reason so many “liberal” feminists react so viscerally and so negatively to Sarah Palin is that she is their worst nightmare: she reveals, to men everywhere, that a woman can be strong, independent, competent, hot, and very conservative. And did I mention hot? Quite simply, she makes them feel inadequate, and they’re worried that the already small pool of men (pathetic, limp wristed intellectuals) who are attracted to women like them (you know, women who have hair anywhere below their eyebrows) will shrink due to the realization that women like Sarah Palin exist.

    1. You should have stopped at “worst nightmare.” She was the anti-feminist. A woman elevated to a high position because she is a woman, not because she was competent or qualified.

      It’s ironic that when Republicans engage in affirmative action they do their best to confirm their reasons for hating the concept.

      1. Yeah, she got elected Governor of Alaska because she was a woman. All those mouth breathing oil workers and fisherman felt the PC need to vote for a woman.

        This as opposed to feminist icon Hillary Clinton who got ahead the feminist way, by marrying the right person. Jesus Tony, do you even try anymore?

        1. I meant specifically her elevation to the VP ticket. Wouldn’t have happened if she weren’t a woman, and you know it. That she was elected governor taught me a lot about the state of Alaska that I wasn’t aware of before.

          1. Just shut the fuck up Tony. You are not even trying today. Yeah, you are so concerned about women getting ahead by affirmative action. That is why you find Sonya Sotomayor so appalling. That is why you find the idea of the least qualified black politician in the country getting elected President so appalling. It doesn’t even pass the giggle test. It isn’t even good performance art.

            1. Saying Obama benefited from affirmative action is just dumb and yes on the racist side. He ran and won a legitimate election and nobody gave him extra electoral votes because of the color of his skin.

              Sotomayor WAS picked in part for her race and gender, but only after she passed the threshold of being eminently qualified for the job.

              Sarah Palin was picked without regard to her ability to handle the job, but because she was a woman. Republicans treat affirmative action the same way the treat government: bitch about how bad it is and then go on to prove themselves right.

    2. hair anywhere below their eyebrows

      * Well, okay. A “landing strip” is acceptable.

    3. She also has kids and a career. Think about someone like Maureen Dowd, childless, over 50, looks heading south by the day, career in a business that is dying, must think when she sees Palin, a nobody from Alaska who didn’t even go to a good college, with a husband, kids and a successful career? It drives her nuts.

  36. I happen to think it’s ridiculous and that people everywhere are involuntarily born into various groups, and that these groups are not, as you claim, completely irrelevant to how individuals fit into society.

    Society is the sum of the individuals who make it up, not some entity that is separate from them. Anyway, you think that’s a good thing, to judge people by the color of their skin, or what their genitalia look like, or who they’re wired to find attractive?

    1. All I said is that, all else being equal, diversity is a net benefit to society.

      1. That’s basically an insult to all people everywhere.

        I judge people, and their worth to society, by the words they speak and by their actions.

        Diversity of mind is valuable – creativity, different view points, etc.

        Diversity of skin color or sex or sexual orientation is completely useless.

        The very fact that you actually take that into account when building your opinion of a person means you discriminate.

        1. “””Diversity of mind is valuable – creativity, different view points, etc. “”

          Not all points of views are valuable. Communism is a point of view which is not valuable. There are many others which are also not valuable

          “”””The very fact that you actually take that into account when building your opinion of a person means you discriminate. “””

          I discriminate everyday in everything I do

          1. Agreed.

            I was using the term discriminate in its popular definition – as in, with respect to race, sex, or sexual orientation.

      2. diversity is a net benefit to society

        Diversity, in and of itself – i.e., diversity for nothing more than the sake of diversity, is a “net benefit to society”? You have stated the proposition; now explain, support, quantify.

        At what cost? All benefits have costs.

        1. Yes, diversity for nothing other than the sake of diversity–again, all else being equal. Having previously underrepresented groups in positions of power serves as evidence that society is moving beyond past prejudices, which might just encourage others to excel. It’s for the children, yo.

          1. Bullshit. How about if people in positions of power deserved to be there?

            I think it’d be much more a lesson to children to show them that if you want something that’s worth anything, you’re going to have to work for it. Don’t rely on others to get what you want.

            You know that whole “I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine” thing.

            1. Are you missing the “all else being equal” part I keep repeating?

              1. First of all, “all else being equal” is never going to actually occur in reality.

                Secondly, if you have a line up of a white guy, a black guy, and an asian guy, and you have to pick which one of them to hire.

                “All else being equal”, if you choose the asian guy, simply because you already have a black guy and a white guy working for you, you have simply reduced your decision down to the very definition of race discrimination.

                You decision was solely based on the color of the applicants’ skin. You’ve just racial discriminated in the name of diversity.

                Saying “all else being equal” takes everything BUT race, etc out of the equation and forces you to discriminate on a genetic basis.

                1. Just to be clear, I’m going to apply this to “diversity for diversity’s sake”…

                  Think of it like picking out a shirt. If you have to choose between a red shirt and blue shirt, this would equate nicely to your “all else being equal” scenario.

                  The purpose of a shirt is to provide you protection from the elements. Nature doesn’t give a fuck if the shirt is blue or red.

                  So “diversity for diversity’s sake”, with “all else being equal” is at best completely useless and gives no “value” to society other than a meaningless statistic, and at worst is a bleeding-heart liberal’s wet dream that is utterly meaningless to any person who values a hard day’s work and has self respect.

                2. By what other criterion would you decide if they were truly equal in all job-relevant respects?

                  1. Let me spell it out for you…

                    Diversity for diversity’s sake when “all else is equal” logically can not provide any net benefit to society because all the useful qualities of the individuals are the same (as stated by “all else is equal”).

                    Abilities provide the net benefit, not skin color, etc. Therefore, if all abilities are equal, diversity can not provide a net benefit.

                    Sniff glue much?

    2. If she had big sloppy beef curtains, then yes, it is acceptable to judge by the appearance of her genitalia.

  37. Those goalposts are moving pretty fast there, Tonester.

  38. To use a baseball metaphor, Palin hadn’t even made it to Triple A yet.
    All parties, including the LP, need to develop their bench strength so they don’t throw obviously not-ready-for-prime-time candidates onto the ballot.
    I mean, couldn’t Palin have been sent on a few trips to visit Alaskan National Guard troops in the Middle East? Couldn’t she have been picked to co-chair some GOP Governors Committee on Health Care Reform?
    Polish the credentials of six or ten fast trackers so they don’t look like smacked asses when the run up against, of all people, Katie Couric.

  39. If Palin were ugly no one would be jumping to defend her. She isn’t remotely libertarian, though her conservative populist rhetoric will, occasionally, put her on the side of the good. Her appeal is that she is so polarizing, to like her is to shout a loud “Fuck you” to a majority of our rulers. I don’t care for much of her politics, and I think there is certain anti-intellectual quality to her persona, I could imagine her saying that when she hears the word “culture” she reaches for her gun.

    1. to like her is to shout a loud “Fuck you” to a majority of our rulers

      Yup, heh heh heh.

    2. I think she could be ugly and still have the same effect. She is basically the same polarizing figure on the right that Hillary Clinton is on the left. Not being attractive hasn’t stopped Hillary Clinton.

      But you are right that liking her is a way in fact the way to shout fuck you to a majority of our rulers. I will freely admit that is one of the biggest reasons I defend her. There are few things more subversive and contrarian than defending Sarah Palin. For that reason he enemies are doing nothing but helping her. As our rulers get less and less popular, more and more people are going to want to say fuck you.

  40. The Onion of intricacy that is the Palin Obsession. To some like Tony, there is no point too petty to make. To John, there is nothing too petty to defend. Those of us not struck w/ palin fever are left wondering: Why?

    1. See my 2:20 comment above. Defending Palin is one way of saying fuck you to a lot of people who need that said to them.

    2. And also, I like her. She is great in a lot of ways. I have to admire a woman who can stick it to the media and the establishment the way she has.

      1. “I have to admire a woman who can stick it to the media” by cravenly hiding from them???

        1. Hiding from them my ass. Like Obama has ever done a confrontational inteview in his entire career. The media was more worried about Palin’s OBGYN records than they were Obama’s connections to the Chicago mob. And further, fuck the media. After the way they have treated her, I wouldn’t blame her if she didn’t give them the time of day. She can accomplish more with a facebook entry than she can by talking to the media. They are a dying and increasingly irrelevent entity.

  41. Defending Palin is a way of saying fuck you to a lot people who need it in what way?

  42. Defending Palin is a way of saying fuck you to a lot people who need it in what way?

    1. Because is no different than any other politician. She is no less intelligent or articulate than any of them. And unlike most of them, she actually does seem to believe in a few things and most of those things make some sense.

      Yet, the establishment, who are no better or worse, have totally trashed her for sins that they excuse among their own. They hate her because she is not one of them. She didn’t go the right school. She didn’t come from the right family. And worst of all, she appeals to people the establishment considers beneath contempt. Mike in PA said it above better than I can. He said

      Mike in PA|11.3.09 @ 10:24AM|#
      They don’t like what she represents. An America that doesn’t see the beauty of economic engineering. To them, she’s an embodiment of a backwoods, redneck, hillbilly culture that has some disdain for government involvement that they can feel, but can’t articulate. The liberal elites look at these people as misinformed and in need of changing. The fact that they can’t convert these folks leads them to detest them for their “ignorance.”

      What they fail to understand is that they are the ignorant ones who cannot grasp the culture of middle America.”

      Middle America built this country. The assholes that hold Palin in such contempt are destroying it. Yeah, they need to be given the finger.

  43. I don’t think Palin quit for the book deal, she quit because she did not want to lose any popularity by governing. She wants to be President. It’s hilarious to pretend otherwise.

    Far from being some kind of frank gutsy real character Palin cowardly hid from the media when she flubbed her first post-VP selection interviews. Now she cowardly deserts her committment. She hopes all this hiding will increase her chances of being President. She’s probably right because the more of her the public sees the less they like. She’s her own worst argument.

    1. But it was okay for Obama to run for Senate promising not to run for President and then breaking the promise? Come on MNG, you are usually a lot better than Tony.

  44. If she cares about her so-called conservative principles she would be working to enact them as governor of Alaska. She could still write Op-eds and all that.

    She’s all about getting elected Prez, that’s her “real character” which seems demonstrated by her actions.

  45. That makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. She is no different from them, so by defending her we are spiting them. An exercise in futility at best.

    1. She is different from them. I meant that she is no different in the sense that she is neither genius nor baffoon.

    2. by defending her we are spiting them

      You say that like it’s a bad thing.

  46. What is the difference? I get the fact that she is not a genius, and public office by modern standards inherently repels intelligent people. At the same time she’s not mentally challenged. What I don’t understand, is how defending or slurring her does anything to further the cause of Liberty?

    1. Because she is about the only person who can actually articulate and connect with people about a vision of the country that doesn’t involve government running everything. She is very good on issues of economic freedom. And she is the only politician who is good on it who can score above 2% on the Q scale. That is worth something.

      But what the hell. Destroy her. Maybe you can run Nick Gillespie’s leather jacket.

  47. What annoys the shit out of me about people dissing on the intellect of Palin is the fact that NONE of them have taken the time to actually check whether or not she is an idiot. They just assume that she is based on a few “gotchya” moments from the MSM.

    I watched the Alaska Gubernatorial debate with Palin from 2006, and I defy anyone to say that she is either unintelligent or unskilled politically after watching her performance in that debate. She knew the local Alaskan issues and how they were affected nationally and won the debate in a landslide, which may be why she ended up winning the election.

    Pissants like Tony just take what they are spoonfed about the GOP and assume that they are right. Palin has more experience and intelligence politically in her left nipple than Tony has in his whole body.

    The debate is here, for those interested.

    http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/195195-1

  48. Personally, I would prefer a president who played with a Slinky for hours every day, slept through cabinet meetings snoring loudly, and threw every bill that came from Congress into a pile of his/her own feces and urine that he or she masturbated atop every night before curling up beneath a Care Bears blanket for the night.

    I’m 100% certain that under such a non-wit, our economy would be recovering significantly faster than under the half-wit currently in the White House.

  49. This is my point: Sarah Palin has yet another personality cult. This is no different than the people who care more about Ron Paul, than Ron Paul’s message. There are more people that care about Sarah Palin than what she represents. I haven’t researched Sarah Palin’s Policy Suggestions, but I have seen the Policies she enacted in Alaska w/ the Oil Revenues. Not only was it not freemarket, it would make your average house democrat salivate. In fact her energy policies resembled that of the Democratic Candidate Barack Obama.

    To me, Sarah Palin is a non issue. If people want to waste their time slurring her for no reason, I say let them waste all the time and effort. To those of you defending her against even the pettiest charges, enjoy the futility.

    When you’re ready to actually advance things like Capitalism and Liberty let me know.

    1. Why is she a cult of personality? If she comes out tommorow for Obamacare I will be trashing her. As I said above, she is very good on economic issues and seems to have the ability to connect with a lot of people. That seems like a good reason to defend her. Why wouldn’t you defend her?

  50. Tulpa- George W. Bush can’t run for a third term. Unfortunately w/ a president like that, their caretakers make all the policy decisions.

  51. Tulpa- George W. Bush can’t run for a third term. Unfortunately w/ a president like that, their caretakers make all the policy decisions.

    1. Yes the evil Cheney was running everything. Speaking of stupidity.

  52. The biggest problem I have with her is that I don’t think I’d want a president who was “cute.”

    I’d rather have a presidential candidate who would sooner give you a verbal punch in the mouth when you say something incorrect, than wink at you.

  53. John- I’ve seen posters post(not on this board) everything from Sarah Palin is a Foreign Policy Guru, to an Economic Expert, to a Social Conservative hero. Much like Reagan or Ron Paul, people are going to defend her out of reflex irregardless of what she says or does. I have yet to see Sarah Palin come out and propose Freemarket, Libertarian Policies. Can you name one freemarket, liberty oriented policy? The GOP’s response to Obamacare isn’t freemarket.

    So why would I support her? Because she’s better at attracting supporters than Mitt Romney or John McCain?

    1. She thinks that we ought to drill for oil wherever it is found. That is free market. She has consistently supported the idea of lower taxes and smaller government. Read her facebook post on the election today. It sounds pretty reasonable to me.

      http://www.nationalreview.com/finalcountdown/

      Read what she has to say. And read it understanding that saying Palin is stupid is nothing but a way for stupid people to fit in and feel smart in certain circles.

  54. It just happens to be chance that George Bush’s cabinent is filled w/ people from The Project For a New American Century. By chance we began embarking on every Trotsky Wet Dream in the Foreign Policy Arena. Ya, George W. Bush, the man who hadn’t finished a book since Highschool, was a NeoConservative Visionary all on his own. If you believe that you’re reading too much Fred Barnes.

    1. Sorry, but you can’t use the term “neo conservative” unless you can define it.

      1. A neoconservative is a conservative that wears a black leather trench coat and dark sunglasses.

  55. George W. Bush, the man who hadn’t finished a book since Highschool

    You couldn’t hold GW’s jockstrap when it comes to reading books. The man was and is a VORACIOUS reader and your slander is about as inaccurate as possible.

  56. The Folks at PNAC should quit calling themselves NeoConservatives than.

  57. “I like my buddies from west Texas. I liked them when I was young, I liked them then I was middle-age, I liked them before I was president, and I like them during president, and I like them after president.” ? Nashville, Tenn., Feb. 1, 2006

    The words of a voracious reader

    1. Yes Lee, obviously a misspoken comment shows his lack of reading.

      Again, I would bet money that Bush has read orders of magnitude more than you have.

  58. With all this posturing I’m surprised I still haven’t gotten one Policy Suggestion from our new Republican Messiah that is actually freemarket/Libertarian.

    1. Did you read the links?

      1. Why would he read the links? He prefers hyperbolic nonsense to make his points, and if he had to read something he would look even MORE idiotic.

  59. I wonder if I am an elitist.

    I do think most my countrymen are idiots. I think most of the world is.

    I believe in the golden rule and smaller government and all that stuff, (i mean i could list it, but it is probably not necessary on this website).

    Still my ex girlfriend in DC thinks that I am crazy, and so do most the Europeans that I talk politics with.

    I like Sarah Palin, I would have voted for McCain if just to get her into the whitehouse were it not for the bailouts.

    I like that she drives the “elites’ crazy. And that at once they can’t believe anyone takes her seriously and at the same time that they are afraid of her.

    So I think that most people are idiots. I think pretty much all the democrats and most of the Republican are either evil, corrupt, or stupid. So that might make me elitist.

    But then most people on the left (and that includes most people in the world) think that my ideas are crazy and dangerous.

    Most the people who actually rule are elitist of me.

    1. I should qualify that. Most people are idiots when it comes to government and power.

      Many of them are geniuses in other areas that I am stupid in.

      Anyone can be made to look like an idiot if you pick a subject that they are not strong in.

    2. I agree. The problem is not that we don’t need elites. The problem is that the ones we have, at least in the political realm, are completely craven and corrupt.

  60. I’m on an MWR computer, so sometimes links won’t load up like Mises.org etc etc. The National Review link didn’t load up. But the Real Clear Politics one did. There was nothing there that was libertarian. The Libertarian Case minus the case.

    Tman I’d call you pedantic but you’d have to actually use hyperbolic correctly before I actually gave you that title. So got anything you can copy and paste for me, like say.. a policy suggestion. I couldn’t pull that other link but if there is say.. a policy or something to that effect.. highlight me.

  61. I am mindful not only of preserving executive powers for myself, but for predecessors as well.

    It is clear our nation is reliant upon big foreign oil. More and more of our imports come from overseas.

    Natural gas is hemispheric. I like to call it hemispheric in nature because it is a product that we can find in our neighborhoods.

    You teach a child to read, and he or her will be able to pass a literacy test.

    1. It is clear our nation is reliant upon big foreign oil. More and more of our imports come from overseas.

      No, it is not. We get most of our oil from Canada. The next biggest is Mexico, followed by Venezuela.

      http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil…..mport.html

      Are you sounding uninformed on purpose or is this like some kind of strategy?

  62. There was nothing there that was libertarian.

    Really? Things like this don’t qualify?

    -“vetoed 300 pork projects in Alaska in her first year in office.”

    -When it comes to healthcare, Palin says she wants to “allow free-market competition and reduce onerous government regulation.”

    -She’s a hunter, and a firm supporter of the 2nd amendment

    -On Creationism in schools “”I won’t have religion as a litmus test, or anybody’s personal opinion on evolution or creationism.”

    It sounds like you just want to ignore all the points that are raised until you get the policy suggestion that YOU want, not the ones that have been noted.

    But let’s look at her history-

    “In 2008, Wasilla’s mayor credited Palin’s tax cuts and infrastructural improvements with helping the local economy, “bringing the big-box stores to Wasilla, … helping Wasilla grow and draw 50,000 shoppers a day.”

    “She used her veto power to make the second-largest cuts of the construction budget in state history. The $237 million in cuts represented over 300 local projects, and reduced the construction budget to $1.6 billion.[89] In 2008, Palin vetoed $286 million, cutting or reducing funding for 350 projects from the FY09 capital budget.”

    Yeah. Nothing good enough for Lee though.

    1. well, to be honest, conflating hunting as a justification of the 2nd amendment is a misunderstanding of libertarianism (and the 2nd amendment).

  63. Hey Tman-

    Sweetie those quotes were from your ever so literate hero George W. Bush.

    Freemarket would be things like, repealing all federal regulation of healthcare. Disbanding the FDA, AMA etc etc. Reduce onerous government regulation such as? What regulations would she keep? You don’t even know what the freemarket is.

    Is she for repealing all Federal Gun Laws? What Gun laws does she support? Which one does she not support? You’re just making this up as you go along.

    This is just easy pickings now: So when when we send kids to schools that are controlled by the state through licensing or are directly ran by the State, we won’t make religion an issue.

    As for the budget cuts, I applaud her for that. That doesn’t make her a libertarian, but you can say that makes her a good steward of 286 Million dollars.

  64. Lee,

    Sweetie those quotes were from your ever so literate hero George W. Bush.

    Huh? What are you talking about? Read it again.

    Freemarket would be things like, repealing all federal regulation of healthcare.

    So if she says she wants to “allow free-market competition and reduce onerous government regulation” that’s not good enough for you? You want her to either disband the FDA or she isn’t good enough?

    You don’t even know what the freemarket is.

    Who are you? My 3rd grade history teacher? Fuck off, I know what the free market is just fine thanks.

    Is she for repealing all Federal Gun Laws?

    No.

    What Gun laws does she support?

    The 2nd amendment, for starters.

    You’re just making this up as you go along.

    No, I am not. And you’re being an elitist asshole by pretending you are the arbiter of what constitutes “real free market libertarianism.”

    So when when we send kids to schools that are controlled by the state through licensing or are directly ran by the State, we won’t make religion an issue.

    What part of “I won’t have religion as a litmus test” is so hard for you to understand?

    As for the budget cuts, I applaud her for that. That doesn’t make her a libertarian, but you can say that makes her a good steward of 286 Million dollars.

    Gee thanks. I’m sure she feels better knowing that Lee Cruz, the official Libertarian Authority on What Makes a Politician A Libertarian, has applauded her for cutting down on government waste.

    Douchenozzle.

  65. Slow and Angry. I bet you’re ugly too.

  66. I am fucking HORRIFYINGLY ugly Lee. I break mirrors all the time.

  67. Lee,

    Really? How libertarian-ish do you have to be in order to considered a libertarian candidate?

    You’re not going to find anyone running for public office on pure, heart and soul, Libertarian policy. You just can’t get elected that way.

    So, for the time being, Palin may well be a libertarian-leaning possible candidate.

    Ron Paul talked about abolishing Homeland Security, the FBI, and public schools and everyone thought he was crazy.

  68. Dear Lord, why are we still talking about this woman?

    1. because she is a God

    2. Asking why we are talking about her counts as talking about her.

  69. “In 2008, Wasilla’s mayor credited Palin’s tax cuts and infrastructural improvements with helping the local economy, “bringing the big-box stores to Wasilla, … helping Wasilla grow and draw 50,000 shoppers a day.”

    “She used her veto power to make the second-largest cuts of the construction budget in state history. The $237 million in cuts represented over 300 local projects, and reduced the construction budget to $1.6 billion.[89] In 2008, Palin vetoed $286 million, cutting or reducing funding for 350 projects from the FY09 capital budget.”

    David Mayer
    ebooks

  70. Very nice stuff and all guys contribute their best and valuable views.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.