Bitch Fest on Bill O' Reilly


Laura Inghram and Ann Coulter apparently played who-can-be-meaner-to-Sarah-Palin on Bill O'Reilly last night. Here are tidbits from their exchange:

Coulter: "She's become sort of the Obama of the Tea Party…She's just 'The One' to a certain segment of right wingers. And the tiniest criticism of her—I think many of your viewers may not know this. No conservative on TV will criticize Palin, because they don't want to deal with the hate mail."

Ingraham agreed that Palin is too thin on policy to be a credible presidential candidate. She said people were "desperate" for "real substance" and that Palin doesn't seem "all that interested in digging really, really deep on that stuff."

To which Coulter adds: "You know, we used to all love Sarah Palin, conservatives like me, for her enemies….I'm starting to dislike her because of her fans….It's true that liberals will call even smart conservatives stupid. That doesn't mean that when a liberal calls you stupid it makes you smart."

The last comment might actually be the first genuinely smart thing that Coulter has said. But there is one thing that Sarah Palin can be certain of as she weighs her presidential run: If you've lost Coulter, you've pretty much lost the bitch vote in America.


NEXT: Climate Change Cloud War

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 or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Coulter: “She’s become sort of the Obama of the Tea Party?She’s just ‘The One’ to a certain segment of right wingers. And the tiniest criticism of her?I think many of your viewers may not know this. No conservative on TV will criticize Palin, because they don’t want to deal with the hate mail.”

    I hope the Paulettes are taking notes.

    1. Cry me a river. Who is Coulter kidding. Coulter has made an entire career out of saying outrageous things and offending people. And to her credit, she is really good at it. And now she claims she can’t go after Palin because she might get some bad mail. Give me a fucking break.

      1. Sounds like she *is* going after Palin. And explaining why *other* people won’t, no? But then I didn’t RTFA either.

        1. “No conservative on TV will criticize Palin”

          Doesn’t Coulter’s mere existence disprove that statement?

          1. She could of said “nobody but me” but since we all got her point why bother with the extra words?

            1. Her and Ingram were just doing it. Clearly, it isn’t too hard.

            2. Or, She could have said “nobody but me” but since we all got her point, why bother with the extra words?

              Sorry, head just exploded from reading “could of” or “would of” too many times. Are we really that illeterate? Would’ve is the contraction of would have. Could’ve is the contraction of could have. Damn.

              1. Are we really that illeterate?


                1. I love joe’z law.

                2. And he didn’t even feel enough shame to blush. It always warms my heart to see someone try to be a grammar Nazi and fail. It makes us true grammar Nazi feel that much better about ourselves.

                  1. And it really makes me laugh when I do it to myself because I didn’t bother to proofread.

                3. Ouch is right.

                  Note to self: When pointing out someone’s lack of language skills, take that extra minute to notice the four fingers pointing back at me.

                  1. Well, maybe three fingers. The thumb seems to have its own agenda. Disclosure: I hesitated a few moments to check the proper use of “its”

              2. It is a good thing you are concerned there citizen. At least you got that going for you.

                1. God damn it, it’s “your” not “you are”.

                  1. actually it is “you’re” but you are is a perfectly acceptable way to say it. I am not using it in the possessive.

                    1. Its a joke, son.
                      That was on purpose to.
                      So was that.

            3. Yeah pretty retarded of me but I was trying to say it is not really important on a cable news station (or internet commentary) as long as people understand what you are trying to say. Also, I probably say “could of” instead of “could have” all the time in everyday speech without noticing it.

              1. I have a friend that consistently uses the phrase “that begs the question” the same way most journalists do, wrong.

                1. Worst often used phrase by the cable news talking heads (and politicians): “The fact of the matter is…” (especially when the fact of the matter “isn’t”)

                  Worst often used phrase by “smarter than thou” college hippie types: “…as it were”. Still don’t know what that means.

      2. “”Cry me a river. Who is Coulter kidding. Coulter has made an entire career out of saying outrageous things and offending people. And to her credit, she is really good at it””

        By saying “saying” you really mean whining. She’s the queen of whining, so yeah, her whining about hate mail, is priceless. She loves it.

        I think Coulter’s problem is now Palin has become the darling of liberal hate. Coulter feels Palin is taking her turf and has to get all bitchy to defend it. Coulter probably feels like it’s Jr. High all over again.

        1. Back in my column-writing days, the hate mail was the best part of the job. I enjoyed a good, spittle-flecked e-mail much more than the “Oh, I agree with you 100 percent” stuff. I’m sure I’m not alone.

  2. The last comment might actually be the first genuinely smart thing that Coulter has said

    Meowww. Your claws are showing Shika.

    1. John, thank you. Its the one thing about this piece which I thought merited some comment.

      Have you ever watched Coulter on Hannity’s program or listened to Sean interview her on his radio show? I get the impression that he half flirts with her in the sense that he knows his wife may be watching and that he can only go so far in his flirtatiousness with the leggy Ms. Coulter.

      1. coulter is exceptionally smart. she’s histrionic (on purpose) and to some extent – it’s a schtick, but she;s said lots of very smart stuff and serves a useful purpose, if at a minimum just to drive progressives bonkers

        look at it this way – she’s had several top bestsellers and the NYT book review iirc has never reviewed ONE of her books.

        that’s quite an accomplishment

        and btw, if you want to see her think on her feet, watch this interview.

        she absolutely makes the interviewer (a very popular and “respected” paxman (at least in england)) look ridiculous

        1. really gets good at 5:50

          1. Her comments regarding Darwin are idiotic but nonetheless she kicked that interviewer’s ass. And she’s finally got it right about Palin.

        2. The absolute worst thing about Ann Coulter is her disgustingly annoying voice. I don’t know why anyone would want to listen to her for more than 20 seconds.

        3. Yeah, she handed Paxman his ass during that interview.

        4. It takes a special kind of lady to kick someone’s ass in an interview and look bored while she’s doing it.

    2. “Meowww. Your claws are showing Shika.”

      Such a charmer. You’re a real catch Johnny boy.

      1. Did I hurt your delicate feelings. I am just so sorry about that.

  3. To which Coulter adds: “You know, we used to all love Sarah Palin, conservatives like me, for her enemies

    You know, I’m actually starting to feel this way about the Tea Party.

  4. Whatever the truth is, I’ve a feeling that what drives Coulter is loosing out to Palin as the ideal conservative Prom date.

    1. The grapes are a bit sour. When was the last time Coulter or Ingram ever talked to Palin? How do they know she is thin on the issues? The whole thing boils down to a “she won’t come on our TV show” bullshit.

      1. They know she is thin on the issues from LISTENING TO HER.

    2. Yes. Ann Coulter is from the Olivia Munn School of Being Mildly Attractive and Then Immersing Yourself In A Field Where You Are The Only Woman.

      If Palin went back to sportscasting, Erin Andrews would be talking smack about her.

      1. Who ever found Coulter attractive? The nasty straight hair, the bone thin body, she is like Gweneth Palthrow’s nasty bitter sister. No thanks.

        1. She was pretty hot when she was younger. Her problem is just the particularly unappealing way she is facing middle age. She’s also become ever zanier in her commentary, probably in an attempt to keep getting attention in a crowded media world.

          1. As she got older, she got thinner and thinner and looked more and more harsh. Even when she was young she was at best a right before they turned the lights on at the bar kind of woman. But now she is a full fledged arm chewer.

            1. coulter has driven TONS of progressives and liberals to criticize her for her looks. check out DU for example

              many even constantly make the claim she’s had a sex change, that she’s “mannish” etc. which makes them betray a lot of their own principles about gender, etc.

              that is how successful she is.

              condi rice got a similar reaction quite often . that’s an instant “win”

              1. Coulter is very smart. Read her books. She is a fantastic polemic writer. Her books are whip smart. I would love to be able to insult people like Coulter can. I just don’t think she is very pretty.

                1. nor do i. but i think for many conservatives WHAT she says makes her a lot hotter.

                  palin otoh is quite good looking and still very fit (look at those pics of that recent half marathon she ran).

                  1. “”(look at those pics of that recent half marathon she ran).””

                    Half marathon? Really?

                2. If Coulter possessed a smile rather than a smirk, she might actually be attractive.

                  1. It wasn’t until I posted that I noticed War Child had already used “smirk”. I think once is enough per thread. I apologize.

                    So let me move on to voices. Coulter’s is bad, dripping with disdain, and a weird accent, where is that from?

                    Laura’s is like nails on a blackboard. If she’s not from Michigan, she should be. Sounds just like my relatives. Thank Odin I wasn’t raised there.

              2. Sorry, but ms. rice, along with the rest of the chimpster court, smirked. After eight years of being smirked at I was glad to see them all go.

                1. That’s no excuse for the constant racist polemic hurled at her by the left for daring to be on the wrong side.

      2. Did you just juxtapose the terms “Olivia Munn” and “mildly attractive”? You, sir, have no taste in the female form. Whereby ‘no taste’ I mean a very different palate than I.

        1. mmmmm….freckles

  5. john will spend the thread proving coulter right. lulz.

    1. You bring so much to the threads rather.

      1. try again, detective.

        1. We know it is you rather. SF figured out you are behind all of the annoying sock puppets on this board. Now on that note, I will stop feeding you.

          1. There are actually more sock puppets out there. Many of us are hard working sock puppets and we take pride in what we do.

            Every time someone makes a comment like that I have to explain to my children why their father is attacked everyday for simply doing his job. Please be more respectful in your commentary, because a lot of good people work as sock puppets. America was built on sock puppets. Just look at the federalist papers and the anti-federalist papers.

            Now excuse me while I go add Newt Gingrich on Google+.

            1. This does sound slightly too coherent to be rather or the Ohio anus.

              1. It’s probably Derpisiarch.

        2. Are you able to see that white line painted on the floor directly behind you, 655321? You’re toes belong on the other side of it!

  6. The more Coulter and Palin snipe at each other, the less time they spend having a threesome with John.

    1. Sock puppet is boring.

  7. I am entertained whenever John defends Palin.

    1. Same here. I keep tuning in hoping that this will be the episode where we find out where this deep, abiding, love came from. We never do, of course, but it’s still top-notch entertainment.

      1. I guess John hearts Palin more than he hearts Coulter. The question now is, does he heart Bachmann even more?

        I also love watching what I call “The Palin Reaction”.

        1. SIV got Bachmann in the draft.

          1. Right, right, I forgot that Bachmann is SIV’s and Palin is John’s.

        2. I defy you ever to find one place on here where I ever said I would vote for Palin for President. I just refuse to join the douche bag herd. Making fun of Palin is a way for stupid people to feel smart. And I don’t like stupid people. I don’t think they should ever feel smart. So, I am not fond of people making fun of Palin for that reason.

          1. Your vehemence belies your denial.

            1. Whatever, Episiarch. Because you are making fun of Palin, then you must be stupid. All smart people love her.

            2. I don’t defend her any more vehemently than I do anyone else. It just rubs more people the wrong way because people are fucking nuts when it comes to that woman.

              1. Your projection is strong, John. Very strong. But no, it’s us who are obsessed. Of course. Whatever you have to tell yourself.

              2. i think palin is a bit dense, but this is epi’s schtick.

                recall the comments about michael bay where he criticized people who may enjoy some bay bombast as stupid, etc.

                he likes to feel superior to people and calls people dumb who like different things than him, whether it be food, movies, etc.

                it’s part of the whole “i’m the cultural elite” schtick.

                1. Or maybe it’s not only empirically observable that dumb people like Palin and Michael Bay movies, but logically causative.

                  1. No heller, dumb people who want to feel smart make completely irrational criticisms of Palin.

                    1. I don’t know of any criticism of Palin I’ve ever made that wasn’t completely rational.

                      Help me out here.

                      It’s good that we have Michelle Bachmann now, because it helps deflate John’s claims that everyone who says Palin is dumb is motivated by “elitism”, or by “hatred of conservative women” or what have you.

                      Because personally I think Bachmann is crazy, but not dumb. I think Palin is dumb, though. Or at least has extremely modest intellectual gifts and has gone very far in politics based more on a little geography and a lot of luck than on high intelligence.

                    2. Fluffy,

                      You are the person who swears that anyone who votes for a government funded road project is a slaver. You would last ten minutes in politics. They would consider you sane next to Bachmann. And no offense, you are not that bright either. You are smarter than Tony and MNG. But if it comes down to you versus Palin, I am taking Palin.

                    3. Fluffy,

                      You are the person who swears that anyone who votes for a government funded road project is a slaver. You would last ten minutes in politics. They would consider you sane next to Bachmann. And no offense, you are not that bright either. You are smarter than Tony and MNG. But if it comes down to you versus Palin, I am taking Palin.

                    4. John,

                      I can guarantee you that I would test with a higher IQ than Palin.

                      And unlike Palin, the most elementary literary references don’t pass right over my head.

                      Absolutely, I’d be considered much more of a political radical than either Bachmann or Palin. That’s not what we’re talking about.

                      I don’t think Bachmann is crazy because of her policy positions. I think Bachmann is crazy because she subscribes to a bevy of fringe fundie pop lifestyle fads. She’s the fundie equivalent of the flake you meet who tells you that she’s unschooling her children and refuses to vaccinate them. Sorry, those people are crazy, whether they’re of the crunchy or fundie variety.

                    5. I think Palin is dumb, though. Or at least has extremely modest intellectual gifts and has gone very far in politics based more on a little geography and a lot of luck than on high intelligence.

                      “Luck”? You just know she’s dumb and you can’t explain why eh? What about divine intervention? Or quantum hidden variables? You discount the entire basis for others’ not thinking she’s dumb–i.e. her impressive career success from very humble beginnings–with a complete lack of an argument, just a hand-waving towards the unknown.

                2. Don’t be so butthurt, dunphy. Just because you like Michael Bay movies doesn’t mean you’re stupid. It means you’re a tasteless buffoon.

                  1. except in your post criticizing those who like his films you made the claim.

                    i have taste, epi. i’m just not a ‘snob’ who only professes to like what is oh so cool.

                    we all know people like that. heck, most of us fall into that trap.

                    i played in punk bands in high school. i really did not like to admit that i liked billy joel. god knows that wasn’t as cool as liking the Jam, Dead Kennedys, etc. however, i did like all of the above.

                    bay makes some entertaining movies.

                    i don’t think of them like a think of a ridley scott flick, or kubrick, or even scorcese, etc.

                    but i enjoy them. UNLIKE you, i am not “too cool for school” and can admit to liking basic pop “dirty water hot dogs” without fear of losing my hipster cred.

                    grow up.

                    1. God, you’re butthurt. I love it.

                      Your insistence that I don’t like Bay movies because I’m “too cool” for them, and not because they are abysmal, just indicates that you are a tasteless buffoon.

                      There are plenty of fun, low-brow movies out there that I love; shit, I liked The Skulls. That’s crap I can enjoy.

                      Bay’s work is shit. Try not to be so butthurt.

                    2. you miss the point. it wasn’t your criticism of bay’s work.

                      it was your oh so cool abject dismissal of anybody who likes his movies as stupid and beneath contempt that is the issue.

                      example: X’s movies suck
                      Epi: everybody who likes X’s movie is a dumb mouthbreather and beneath contempt, heck barely even human.

                      (subtext: i epi am SO cool )


                    3. But you are too cool for caps?
                      Jesus, is that irritating.

                    4. Dunphy is the reincarnation of e.e. cummings.

                    5. A cockroach writes all of dunphy’s posts?

                    6. A coproach, yes.

                    7. kafka or cummings?

                    8. Whoosh! goes the Don Marquis reference.
                      Click on warty’s link sometime, dunphy. Archy and Mehitabel is good stuff.

                    9. From an intro by E.B. White to a Marquis book:
                      I mention this because the capitalization of Archy is considered the unforgivable sin by a whole raft of old Sun Dial fans who have somehow nursed the illogical idea that because Don Marquis’s cockroach was incapable of operating the shift key of a typewriter, nobody else could operate it. This is preposterous. Archy himself wished to be capitalized–he was no e. e. cummings. in fact he once flirted with the idea of writing the story of his life all in capital letters, if he could get somebody to lock the shift key for him. Furthermore, I capitalize Archy on the highest authority: wherever in his columns Don Marquis referred to his hero, Archy was capitalized by the boss himself. What higher authority can you ask?

                    10. I like good films. I also enjoy a good action movie as much as the next guy. Michal Bay’s Moira are Th equivalent of a slow fireworks show going on while someone with bad delivery and timing fucks up a Larry the Cable Guy act. I use Larry not because I find him funny it the least, but because he’s one step below you tube nut shots on the comedy sophistication staircase. His movies really are that bad. They have no redeeming value and are an insult to anyone’s intelligence. If his and Bruckheimer’s movies were wiped from the planet we would all be better off.

                    11. Yes. No one here is being “elitist” by calling Bay horrible. We just recognize the difference between a bad movie that someone actually tried to do their best on and actually have redeeming entertainment value, and Bay’s movies, which are an insult to the audience.

                    12. Without Michael Bay, it’s not likely we would have ever had Team America. Credit where credit is due!

                      Also, The Rock is fun. If you’re a retarded 10yr old, its Pure Genius. If not, you get to sorta *feel* what it would have been like to be developmentally disabled. Thats an achievement.

                      Hating on Bay too much does reveal an elitist streak. The most valid criticism I could think of is that he *doesn’t even go far enough*. He falls a few slo-mo-explosions short of Profoundly Stupid.

                      Like, Ok, I hate John Woo for abominations like *Face/Off*….

                      but Hard Boiled!? Dude. Chinese cop named *Tequila*? the man who invented the whole diving-two-gun-slo-mo-shot? (and proceeded to turn most of his other films into excuses for them) Where he can kill 200 extras in a gunfight…*with a single clip of ammo*?? My POV is if you’re going to go Full Retard, do it all the way. When you shoot people, have shit around them inexplicably EXPLODE too!

                      …lol… titled, “Best Action Sequence Ever Filmed”


                      Its definitely *something*

                    13. and note.

                      matt and trey make fun of BAY. they do not say that everybody who likes his movies is stupid and subhuman a la epi.

                      matt and trey also make fun of everybody, are FAR from elitist, and for example in the nascar episode made fun of hipsters like epi who would say that not only is nascar stupid but anybody who watches it is stupid.

                      grok the distinction?

                    14. again, for the studio audience

                      i am not criticizing the hating on bay

                      i am criticizing epi’s criticism of those who enjoy a bay movie (which doesn’t mean they may not also enjoy the kind of haute cinema that epi likes AS WELL) as stupid, etc.

                      epi was not being elitist for hating bay

                      i hate pirates of carribean

                      that’s not the issue

                      if i said “all people who like those movies are dumb and beneath contempt” that would be the issue


                    15. and i’m not calling epi elitist for criticizing bay or his movies.

                      jesus fucking christ. how many times do i have to explain this?

                      the elitism is when epi said that people who dared to enjoy a bay film are stupid, etc.

                      it is NOT the criticism of bay’s films.

                      it is the oh so superior dismissal of people who LIKE his films

                      do you grok the difference?

                      i fucking HATE the pirates of the caribbean movies.

                      i do not say “anybody who likes these movies is a fucking stupid mouthbreather” a la epi and of course it’s all because epi wants to be too cool for school and feel superior to people who simply want to watch a fun action flick, not fellini

                    16. Get over yourself, already dunphy. He said this on another post a few days ago and you’re still sore??

                      In any case, there are great movies like the Godfather or Annie Hall. Then there’s good shit and bad shit. Michael Bay movies are mostly bad shit. Though I actually thought Pearl Harbor was good shit.

                    17. It isn’t elitism that drives this and every other political chat room. It’s narcissism. Get your terminology straight, fellas.

                    18. i’m not sore. it’s a recurring theme. his elitism. i am calling him out for it. ignore me or not.

                      i could not care less.

                      what i found annoying is the misrepresentation of my claim.

                      i did not say he was elitist because he hates michael bay movies.

                      the elitism came from his claim that anybody who liked a bay film was dumb and beneath contempt etc.


                    19. Narcissistic personality disorder is a mental disorder in which people have an inflated sense of their own importance and a deep need for admiration. Those with narcissistic personality disorder believe that they’re superior to others and have little regard for other people’s feelings. But behind this mask of ultra-confidence lies a fragile self-esteem, vulnerable to the slightest criticism.

                    20. Thanks for the info doc. But I’m just here for the pills.

    2. There isn’t much to defend. Who are Coulter and Ingram and what do they know? This is just them bitching and moaning that Palin doesn’t do the media rounds and come on their shows. That is all it is. I guarantee if Palin called Ingram tomorrow and asked to be a guest on her radio show, Ingram would be kissing her ass.

      And the irony of someone like Coulter, a career bomb thrower, whining about hate mail is just priceless.

      1. Yes, more please.

      2. Yes, agreed. But, (see my post up-thread) don’t you think that some guys in the media, like Sean Hannity, find Coulter attractive?

        Is she my womanly ideal? No, but she is tall and leggy.

        1. I am sure they do. But they are reporters. So that means they are dorks.

        2. In a country where “average” means “fat”. She’s is way above average in looks for here age.

  8. Um. They are making pretty legit-sounding criticisms/assessments, regardless of whether one agrees with them or not. It’s a bit ridiculous to call that “meanness” or bitching just because it’s two women talking. I am no fan of Ingraham or Coulter, just sick of the “mean girls” stereotype.

    1. Rowr. Dagny’s getting all catty with Shika.

      1. Uh oh, I think someone’s on her period.

        Women. Ha.

        1. I just hope they have a slow-motion pillow fight.

            1. Lime Jello.

              1. Edible panties.

                1. Edible panties are made of gelatin. Edible panties are Jello.

                  Did I just blow your mind?

                  1. Not everything made with gelatin is Jello dude…

                    1. You have a curiously inflexible mind.

                    2. You know what other part of me is inflexible right now?

        2. See, this is why we need the “period tent” from the Bible. It would make it so much easier to figure out who is being upset because they’re hormonal and who has a problem that will exist the other 25-28 days in the month.

      2. Sug, you don’t even want to see my slambook page on you.

        1. I’m thinking it’s a pic of me with dripping fangs drawn in and “SLUT” written in glitter pen.

        2. Isn’t a slambook where you record who you want to bang? I might not be up on all that newfangled slang, so bare with me.

          1. Slambook is where a cohort of girls makes an insulting scrapbook chronicling sexual escapes/fashion mistakes, etc of a low or high-status (or merely lateral status out-group) girl cohort and circulates it to humiliate. They are also often a collaborative project, with each girl adding to the base work when it is comes to them in rotation.

            1. I was being facetious. I was in high school in the 90s you know…

              1. Oh, OK. I see your game, heller: “I’m going to fake not knowing something and then piss all over the guy who dares to be helpful.”


                  1. Problem?

                    Yes, because the proper blow-off was “u mad bro?” 10 points from heller.

            2. For all your claims to be a fat bearded guy, SF, you sure know way too much about the darker side of the female of the species. You sure you’re not fronting as a fat man just to be in the club?

              1. He is like the chick whisperer. There’s gotta be a way to translate that into a profitable career.

                  1. Does knowledge of girl culture get you laid? It might if you’re even 10% less douchey than Mystery.

                    1. I did OK in high school, but I wasn’t as proficient then. I’m more of a serial monogamist in practice. Now I’m just married. 🙁

                  2. Mystery is totes a virgin.

                    1. I doubt he has his behymen.

    2. What was the criticism other than a few Palin supporters have (gasp) written some mean letters?

      1. Her lack of substance?

        1. From two people who have never interviewed her or met her. Again, she won’t come and kiss our ass and we don’t like. BFD.

          1. Sarah Palin is welcome to say something of substance in a public forum. Anytime she likes. There are always microphones for her.

          2. John has never interviewed or met Obama, therefore he is not qualified to speak about his substance or lack thereof.

            1. You may have missed this heller, but Obama has been President for the last two and a half years. It was in all of the papers. So anyone, including me, is free to way in on his actual performance in the job.

              1. And the same ability to criticize is not appropriate for Palin because…?

                I mean, getting back to what you originally said, why is it necessary to interview/meet Palin to weigh in on her lack of substance?

                1. Because Palin is not an office holder. She is a private citizen. I don’t know what she does with her time and neither do Ingram and Coulter. Unless they have talked to her I don’t see how they can say she is “thin” on the issues. How do they know that?

                  1. Well you may have missed this John, but Palin used to be campaigning for Vice President, and is still a political figure, regardless of whether she holds office. Her words, in a number of political contexts, is a matter of public record.

                    1. Then show me heller what she has said recently that is so “thin”. I don’t pay much attention one way or another. If she is so dumb, you should be able to quote some dumb things she has said recently or at least some views she holds that are shallow.

                      I don’t hear Ingram or Coulter giving any examples. Maybe you can.

                    2. OMG Heller, a politician gave a speech full of platitudes. I mean that has never happened. This woman is the devil or something.

                    3. Epic goalpost moving John. First you say that her words are beyond criticism, then you say I can’t find her saying something that merits the “thin” criticism, then when I did, you say “Well everyone does that!”

                      Nice try, you lose.

                  2. So once someone leaves office it is no longer possible to have an opinion on what they say and do as private citizens?

                    That’s a novel theory. I know of many former office holders who would likely pay you good money if you could somehow induce journalists, pundits, talking heads and others to adopt it.

                    1. Well Jew,

                      I would say if someone leaves office, and you call them “X” you ought to have some evidence and reason to believe that other than “that is what all right thinking people believe.”

                    2. She says stupid, substance-less shit every week, yet John makes believe there is a dearth of evidence.

                    3. Heller, I don’t that speech is anything other than a typical campaign speech. I don’t see it as any different than any speech made by any other candidate. So right now you have showed me that she is making campaign speeches. So what?

                    4. I showed you an example of her substance-less rhetoric. Which you claimed did not exist. Now if you would like to try for a consolation prize, show me an example of Palin saying something smart, original, or deep.

                    5. Hmmm, I wonder why this is taking John so long…

                    6. You have just showed me that she is exactly like every other politician in America. Great. Can you just admit she is an average politician and call it a day and call off the jihad?

                    7. No, some politicians in America have original thoughts or say smart things every once in a while. Palin does not.

                    8. But again, you are trying to move the goalposts. This is not about other politicians, this is about Palin.

                    9. What John has failed to do is name a single thing of substance she’s ever said.

              2. Weigh to go, John.

                Sorry, couldn’t resist.

      2. Here’s the closest thing that comes to a plan from her NH speech on labor day:

        “The Tea Party has to focus on the broader, more important goals of this movement:

        1. Replace Obama.

        2. Return power back to “We the People” and grow this movement without compromising principles.”

        You can read her whole speech here:…..4514/posts

        The closest thing to a policy proposal is “restore america.”

    3. When I visit my parents, I have to sit through O’Reilly and Coulter, et al.
      Coulter is a Harradan. It’s her style with everything and everyone. Respectfully submitted.

      1. This is why I don’t visit family any more. I fear I’ll slip and beat the living fuck out of their TV with a baseball bat.

    4. Good call, Dagny.

  9. Ingraham/Coulter slashfic? I’m at work so I won’t google it, but it’s sort of a natural (or unnatural) concept.

  10. Going strictly off of the Palin Facebook postings I’ve read, she seems reasonably specific on policy. Certainly as much so as any of the announced GOP candidates other than Paul and Johnson. And I don’t see Coulter or Ingraham going all medieval on Rick Perry for being another Texas GOP empty suit…

    That said, I can’t say I’m a Palin supporter. She reminds me more of Bill Clinton than she does Obama. Constantly surrounded by drama and chaos. I don’t see her being a particularly good chief executive for “the world’s largest enterprise.” Her prime talent is drawing attention to herself, not putting together a good executive team or crafting and guiding a workable executive vision.

    1. I think it’s a pretty large assumption to think she writes all her stuff on Facebook. Anymore than you should think Obama wrote his books all by himself.

      1. I certainly don’t assume that. But I also don’t assume that it’s all generated by other people. She strikes me as a bit of a control freak, so I doubt she’s letting staffers post stuff without her approval or input.

        I’m certainly not saying she’s an intellectual. That may be an overrated trait to seek in chief executives, however. The problem is that Americans have come to seek ever more monarchical traits in their presidents–not merely an executive officer, but also a policy generator. The Constitution vested that authority in Congress, but people have an instinctive desire to have such policy initiated (or at least announced) by a singular voice.

        1. So you think Palin wouldn’t be a policy maker? That she wouldn’t be a monarchical president? Really?

          And approval of posts doesn’t mean she generated them.

          I don’t think she’s an actual idiot, but I refuse to believe that she is some sort of genius. She’s a run-of-the-mill populist running as a fake outsider. Who does that remind you of? Hint: It starts with “O.”

          1. That’s about the truest thing I have ever read about Sarah Palin.

          2. When was Obama ever so much as even a “fake populist”?

            The reason why I defend Palin is not because I think she is a genius. It is because I refuse to believe the contrition that only some super genius can be president. In fact, I think the opposite is the case. The super geniuses (Wilson, Nixon and Carter to name 3) have been the worst President. I would rather have someone with average intelligence but the right values and beliefs than some super genius out to change the world.

            I thought it was liberals who believed that we need the top people in the right places to run society. Since when do libertarians buy into that bullshit.

            1. Is Ron Paul too smart to be President? What about Gary Johnson?

              Your obsession with “the elite” has made you think that stupid is a virtue. Stupid is stupid, whatever the politics.

              1. it is not a question of being too smart to be President. It is a question of what the person believes. I don’t know that Paul or Johnson are that smart. Paul is a doctor, but you don’t have to be a genius to be a doctor. But I don’t care. To me all of this “our guy is smarter than yours” is just horsehit branding. It is turning politics into fashion and sports.

                I doubt Barny Frank is a dumb guy. But you will never meet anyone who did more damage to this country than Frank. it is about values and beliefs not who had the best SAT.

                1. Politics has been about fashion and sports since the very beginning. It’d be funny if it didn’t have the power to fuck over our lives.

                  1. Hollywood for ugly people.

            2. “”I thought it was liberals who believed that we need the top people in the right places to run society. Since when do libertarians buy into that bullshit.””

              It’s all about definition. Some might define the “right” person as someone with average intelligence but the right values and beliefs than some super genius out to change the world.

              Just sayin.

          3. Oh, I absolutely think she would try to be a monarchical president. Heck, I think the term cult of personality is not too strong. I have MAJOR reservations about Palin in many ways. Don’t mistake my views about her merely because I take issue with calling her stupid or lacking in substance.

    2. Bill Clinton has more smarts in his left nostril than Sarah Palin. She has no talents. She is yet another Republican affirmative action failure. The only thing she’s taught us is exactly how backwater Alaska really is.

      1. You need to start smoking some better-grade shit, Tony.

        Clinton’s talents were his gift for gab and his photographic memory, not his raging intellect. He could take someone else’s idea and talk it up, but he was hardly a Big Thinker.

        I’ve noticed a tendency for leftists to confuse glibness with intelligence. It’s even more glaring when dealing with perceptions of Obama.

        I’ve also noticed a tendency for leftists like you to call anyone who disagrees with you “stupid.” Apparently validating some inner need to always feel superior to others. Which probably results from deep-seated insecurity.

        Do you *really* think a person who rose from obscurity to the political heights so quickly is “stupid?” Bullshit. I think that Palin is a craven opportunist (like Clinton) and has a strong messianic complex, but she’s clearly quite intelligent and shrewd. Which is, frankly, a combination of traits that worries me the most about her.

        1. *Sigh* – I hate to even add to this thread, but I have to agree with this. Palin has been playing footsie with the ‘pubs – never quite committing to running. She manages to stay in the limelight, but to what ends (other than her pocketbook) I cannot fathom.

          She’s a political dick-tease. And some of the public gobble it up.

          1. I’m pretty convinced now that she’s running.

            The modern electronic media monster has given ever more publicity to the early stages of the presidential race, but the reality is that it’s still early.

            To a degree, the traditional rules of presidential politics don’t apply to Palin. It’s not like she has to spend the next six months slogging around Iowa and NH “introducing” herself. She’s already the most well-known Republican in the land. She has also demonstrated an ability to raise loads of cash very quickly.

            I do think she needs to announce within another month or so, simply to shut down the emerging media meme about her being indecisive. Based on GOP-leaning commentary, that is starting to become a perception about her that could dampen enthusiasm among the base if she continues to stall.

        2. The only thing separating Sarah Palin’s obscurity and her political heights is John McCain saying “fuck it, go with the woman from Canada or whatever.” After which she promptly proved to John McCain and everyone else that it doesn’t take smarts to get elected governor in some parts of this country.

          1. the idea that palin isn’t smart is silly. she certainly is less than cosmopolitan, well educated, or intellectually curious about the rest of the world, but those are not the same thing

            regardless, this idea that the intellectual elite (whoever they are) or the very intelligent make better politicians/leaders is simply not supported by evidence.

            carter and nixon – probably the two smartest presidents in recent memory.

            ’nuff said

            1. I’d say at the very least intelligence is necessary but not sufficient. Bush was dumb and possibly the worst president ever.

              1. Intelligence is far less important that principles. I’ll take corky from the facts of life over a genius sleazeball any day of the week.

                1. Dumb people with principles is a very dangerous thing.

                  1. What about dumb people with no principles, like yourself, Tony?

                    1. Then you don’t have to worry about what their principles entail.

                    2. You’re right, I don’t give a shit about you.

                  2. Smart People with bad principles even more dangerous. Can you say Doctor Evil?

                    1. Sorry, I meant to say, Can you say Barry Obama?

          2. Tony, apparently you were too busy showing off your glistening intellect on the Interwebz in 2008 to remember all of the hype around Palin as a potential VP pick well before McCain made his decision.

            You apparently also don’t remember that her popularity following the announcement and the convention in 2008 was the only reason that McCain even got within striking distance of Obama in the polls.

            Or, you’re just being disingenuous.

            Her public standing now might be entirely different. Nobody knows. And we can’t know for sure unless and until she actually enters the race.

            There’s a long time to go until the election, and it’s increasingly apparent that even a really bad GOP candidate would have a very good shot against Obama.

            1. Well I’ve read books that claim to have insider accounts that basically amount to the McCain people assuming, since she was a governor, that she’d have minimum qualifications for the job of VP candidate–and they were horrified at how mistaken they were.

              1. She almost dragged McCain’s sorry ass across the finish line in 2008. That’s a substantial accomplishment, I’d say.

                McCain did next to nothing to help himself once he secured the nomination, other than naming Palin as his VP choice.

                BTW, I believe there are other accounts saying that McCain’s insiders were a bunch of free-spending hacks who didn’t know how to help out the new political star they acquired by accident.

                Palin is a major political talent. You have to be willfully naive to ignore that. Would she also be a good president? I have my doubts.

                Of course, it’s not like you’d vote for a Republican under any circumstances, so I’m not sure why we should bother with your opinions about them.

    3. Chris,

      You can’t talk like that. You don’t understand. Palin is the stoopid. You can’t expect people to go out and read her facebook page or make any effort. No facts that contradict the narrative are allowed.

    4. I read somewhere that while Governor she rocked the boat and pissed off the old boy network big time. Got things done. I’ll take that over Obama, Romney, Bachman, or Perry.

      1. That’s quite an endorsement there, CC.

      2. She got things done in a fairly narrow subject area. In other ways, I find her convictions to be muddled in relation to her actions, particularly when it comes to issues of government spending and federalism.

        I also wonder how well she would be able to do in dealing with Congress. Whatever her rhetoric, her personality doesn’t seem to be one of working well with those who have other agendas. Obama has found to his chagrin that the president can’t simply dictate his will, even within his own party. Palin would probably discover that the hard way, also.


          1. That would be the only way I’d ever watch a state of the union address.

  11. so it taken nearly 3 yrs to see thru palin’s grifting? who sez the wingnutz arent smart?

  12. : If you’ve lost Coulter, you’ve pretty much lost the bitch vote in America.


    John|9.7.11 @ 2:23PM|#
    I defy you ever to find one place on here where I ever said I would vote for Palin for President. I just refuse to join the douche bag herd. Making fun of Palin is a way for stupid people to feel smart. And I don’t like stupid people. I don’t think they should ever feel smart. So, I am not fond of people making fun of Palin for that reason.

    And I don’t like stupid people.And I don’t like stupid people.And I don’t like stupid people.And I don’t like stupid people.

    But, hold on… so, you like Palin though?

    You shouldn’t get so uppity and prim. We understand. You like her tits. Its OK. Just dont pretend its some moral stance and that you’re an *excellent* judge of intelligence…cause its not looking good on that score.

    1. Uh oh, Gilmore, you just proved you’re dumb because…uh…because you called Palin dumb…uh wait, you didn’t…but you hate her! Because…uh…you’re stupid!

      The above is your whole argument, John. Everyone can see it but you. But keep on squirming; at least it’s funny.

      1. You are the worst poser I have ever known EPI. I am shocked you were not an Obama backer. I guess you found it better to pose as being anti hipster than to support obama. But you make up for it saying stupid shit about Palin. It is your way of posing.

        Well fuck you. I don’t pose for any body. I don’t think Palin is that bad.

        1. I actually don’t really say much about Palin, John, but you’re so delusional on this subject (which is what I do say something about and you can’t stand it) that you just make it up in your head as you go along.

          Note how you now go “I am shocked you were not an Obama backer”, when you know how much I despise him too? Because you’re in your KULTUR WAR mode and when someone disagrees with you, they must be TEAM BLUE.

          That’s pretty stupid, John. In fact, it’s really stupid. Enjoy being stupid. And don’t think it isn’t obvious. But please, keep squirming. I know you will.

          1. I know you are not an obama backer. But, you seem to be enough of a poser to have been one. That was the point. And what have I ever said about Palin other than she is not stupid and says a lot of things I agree with? What is so outrageous about that?

            1. The fact that you are all over this thread more than rectal during a manic period doesn’t cause you to rethink that, John? Because it’s incredibly obvious to the rest of us.

              But hey, go KULTUR WAR FULL RETARD. You’re good at it and clearly work really, really hard at your job.

              1. You are the one who screams kulture war on every thread. But I am the one obsessed with kulture war.

                I will be honest. Part of me would like to see Palin be President not because I think she would be that good or that bad, but just to watch people like you suffer. It would be funny watching her give you some of what you claim to want and see you have to still explain how horrible she allegedly is.

                1. They’ll just refudiate everything she does when her policies prove to be failures, like libertarians did with Bush. “The tax cuts weren’t tax cuttish enough!”

                2. You are really, stunningly stupid, John. I used to think you were smarter than “U HATEZ PALIN LIKE TEAM BLUE”, but you’re not.

                  If you’re so fucking one-dimensional, that me merely pointing out that you go apeshit whenever she’s mentioned (and please, spare me your ultra-weak “it’s you that goes apeshit, not me!” crap; just count your number of posts on this thread) causes you to ascribe every belief you think liberals and TEAM BLUE have to me, even though you know I detest TEAM BLUE as much as TEAM RED, means you’re so fucking stupid that you can’t even separate those things in your head.

                  You’re a partisan to the bone, John. And that means you’re fucking stupid; you don’t think for yourself.

                  But hey, keep telling yourself that you do.

    2. It has nothing to do with her looks. She says a lot of things I agree with. And I refuse to join doucheousie and pretend she stupid when she self evidently isn’t.

      1. Short list of things you agree with?

        I missed her list of core policy proposals.

  13. Palin is an idiot. So what? I am sure that most member of congress are at the low end of the bell curve. I don’t think Coulter is all that smart either. If stupid assholes like her are ghost writing supreme court opinions, no wonder things are so fucked up. So I don’t give a fuck what any of them has to say and don’t lose any sleep when they open their pie holes.

    You know we could keep coulter quiet by sticking a cock in her mouth. I nominate useing Epi’s. It isn’t like it is getting any used anyway.

    I wonder if Bachman is dirty in bed?

    The only thing relevant about these three women is their fuckability. And I would rate them thus:

    1. Bachman

    2. Palin. ( a close 2nd)

    3. Coulter ( A very distant 3rd).

    1. Where would Romney and Perry fall on your list, Troy?

  14. This thread is more than I wanted to read about Coulter, Inghram, and Palin.

  15. So who’s the smart one, Rick Perry? Ms. Bachmann? Palin has made about $12 million since she bailed as governor? How much have Coulter and Inghram made? By the way, have you sent in your donation?

  16. Also, despite her cult, Sarah Palin is one of the least popular public figures in the country, with very high “will never vote for” numbers. The Tea Party is also the least popular demographic in the country, below Muslims and atheists. Just in case anyone was confused on this point by the fact that raging idiots like Palin are taken seriously by anyone.

    1. Really, Tony? Well if that’s the case, I guess you leftists don’t have anything to worry about. Your comments reek of fear, however.

      Y have no idea about the tidal wave that is probably going to hit the Democrats next year. The GOP could run some random schizo homeless guy against Obama and have a very good shot.

      Just for the record, I am NOT a Palin supporter. Would I vote for her against Obama. Sure. Would I vote for her against Ron Paul. Not a fucking chance.

      1. That should read “You have no idea.” Proofreading is a great idea.

      2. I’m terrified of a Sarah Palin nomination or win to the extent that I’m not sure this country isn’t just that dumb.

        But it remains a fact that Palin and her Tea Party are the least liked people in American politics today.

        1. And apparently that makes them bad because politics is life.

          I think you might be underestimating the average person’s hatred of all things political these days.

          1. They’re bad because they’re dumb and want to turn my country into an apocalyptic hellscape.

            But you’ve hit on something interesting: the Republicans want people to be fed up and angry about politics in general, because they think this means they can swoop in with their “rah! government = bad!” stuff and win power by default, even if their party abstractly is the most hated of all–they thrive on people being disgusted by politics as, no doubt, do libertarians. Sarah Palin’s too dumb to understand this strategy, of course.

            1. And Obama didn’t win on the wave of resentment liberals felt towards Bush, right.

              1. There’s a difference between being against one party’s policies and being against policymaking in general. The GOP has perfected the art of proving themselves right about how awful government is, then turning around and capturing all the people who hate government as a result. I’d be impressed if it weren’t the political equivalent of psychopathy.

                1. Still the exact same thing liberals do. Whoever is out of office is anti-government. It’s only a matter of time before the anti-war, constitutional limit liberals come out to protest President GOP. And the seasons turn, turn, turn!

                  1. The only ones who are consistently antigovernment are you guys; conservatives just get confused, and for some reason think that Republicans in charge means small government and Democrats in charge the opposite (big government defined as giving their handouts to negroes).

                2. Ah, there it is at last. I was waiting for it. Anyone who disagrees with a leftist is deemed either “stupid” or “crazy.”

                  It doesn’t really matter whether the Tea Party itself is popular. The core ideas espoused by the Tea Party are more popular right now than the ideas espoused by the left, based on last year’s election results.

                  But I guess that a leftist has to have something to pin his hopes on, given all the recent bad news.

                  1. “handouts to negroes”

                    Actually, it’s “handouts”, period. Skin color is a liberal hangup.

        2. You have an interesting notion about what constitutes a “fact,” Tony.

          The Tea Party is so unpopular that they swept the GOP back into the power in the House. If their unpopularity continues to grow that way, there’s a good chance they could sweep the Senate and White House next year.

          1. Their unpopularity could be a result of their actually holding that power for 2 years. Besides, 40 million fewer people voted in 2010 than in 2008.

            1. If we could just keep that going now. If somehow every two years we could convince another 40 million people that it really doesn’t matter who they vote for and they should just stay home. It shouldn’t take that many cycles to get everyone to just give up on voting.

              1. It’s distressing that you don’t find something wrong with the fact that your political goals require fewer people voting to happen.

        3. “Terrified”?

          Are you uncomfortable around powerful women, Tony?

          (No – wait… FUCK, no… I’m not supporting or voting for Palin. Just turning the tables on you.)

        4. Tony: “But it remains a fact…”. Very close to my nomination of “The fact of the matter is…” as the worst often used phrase in political commentary (see my post somewhere above).

          This explains why Tony has always struck me as a bit douche’ “as it were”.

      3. Random, schizo, homeless guy, you say? I am intrigued; tell me more about this rising political star.

        1. The voices in his head are a better set of advisers than McCain apparently had in 2008, so he’s got that going for him.

  17. What the hell do Coulter and Ingrahm bring to the table that Sarah doesn’t? Not much. Tea Partiers are just trying to put the fiscal house back in order–get off their asses!

  18. The Tea Party is also the least popular demographic in the country, below Muslims and atheists.

    Anybody besides the sockpuppet got a cite for this? My perception is a bit skewed, since I live in one of the reddest parts of Texas. The Tea Party gets much play around me.

    1. Cite.

      Yet we don’t have entire cable TV channels and a punditocracy obsessed with every bodily noise coming from the Muslim and atheists communities.

      1. Funny that link doesn’t provide a source for the data for the poll. It’s hard to come to any real conclusions without knowing the actual questions asked and responses allowed or the sample demographics, etc. A 20/40% approval/disapproval rating leaves 40% unaccounted for.

      2. Wow, Tony, you actually have the balls to cite a New York Times editorial that mentions (without details) a NYT/CBS poll, but which also includes the following highly instructive statement:

        The strange thing is that over the last five years, Americans have moved in an economically conservative direction: they are more likely to favor smaller government, to oppose redistribution of income and to favor private charities over government to aid the poor. While none of these opinions are held by a majority of Americans, the trends would seem to favor the Tea Party.

        So, in other words, Americans increasingly hold the same views as the Tea Party, they just don’t like the Tea Party itself. I suspect most Tea Partiers would accept that trade-off.

        1. I also like this gem:

          As a result, we can look at what people told us, long before there was a Tea Party, to predict who would become a Tea Party supporter five years later.

          We predict who Tea Party members are and their demos based on a survey we took before there was a Tea Party? This seems methodologically unsound, to say the least.

      3. Jesus. Like the posters above me said, that whole NYT article was a piece of garbage. No I know where your ridiculous political views and hatred comes from. You take shit like that seriously.

    2. I’d bet a study comparing the favor-ability of religions and the Tea Party does not even exist.

  19. John is just committed to defending Palin because he’s convinced we think she’s not that bright because she hunts, and goes to church, and has cultivated a rural image.

    He just refuses to accept that I think she’s not so bright because I sat there during a debate and watched the “dumb chick look of nonrecognition” spread across her face when she was asked to name her Achilles’ heel. Because she had no idea what an Achilles’ heel was.

    After a handful of such moments I concluded she wasn’t that bright. As any reasonable person must.

    I don’t like the fact that she believes in witches, but that’s not why I think she’s not that bright. I think she’s not that bright because of her Jaywalk All-Stars moments.

    But to John it’s always going to be about how elitists hate rural God-fearing ‘Mericans. He’ll never back off that for a moment.

    1. I certainly am not trying to defend Sarah here, but let’s not confuse knowledge with intelligence. They aren’t the same.

      1. She’s a woman in her 40’s who has lived her whole life in the United States.

        She should know her some stuff.

        There’s a difference between knowledge and intelligence, but if you’re hanging out with a bunch of people and one of them is a pretty girl with big tits who thinks that Canada is a state, she’s probably not that bright. That particular data point proves only a lack of knowledge, but it’s also a pretty damn good clue that she’s not very smart.


        1. Agreed. I don’t think she’s as dumb as people make her out to be but she’s also not as smart as other people make her out to be. She seems like a nice lady but there is something about her, something I can’t quite pin down, that makes me believe she would be a bad president.

          1. I’m with you on this, Sparky. I think she has the intellect for the presidency, but not the right personality.

            People complain about Obama’s speeches being peppered with first-person pronouns. I believe Palin would be even more self-obsessed as president. She has already created a cult of personality around herself, and I do find that worrying.

    2. The funny thing is, the last couple of two-term Republican presidents were also cast as being unintelligent by their opponents. It’s a standard part of the leftist playbook, which I discount almost automatically as a result.

      There are plenty of reasons to doubt Palin’s suitability for the presidency without buying into that tired old canard. And Sparky is wise to point out the difference between knowledge and intelligence.

      Americans vote for president, not for quizmaster general. And my observation has been that they tend to vote based on certain intangibles. That’s why I think Palin still has a good shot despite all of the PR wounds (some self-inflicted) she has suffered over the last three years.

      1. I never discounted Poppy Bush’s intellect.

        I realize that some Palin defenders want to paint this as just a standard tactic used against all conservatives, but let’s consider that for a second:

        Do you think I thought William F. Buckley was dumb?

        Or how about that execrable ass Bill Bennett? Do you think I think he’s dumb, or just a piece of crap?

        Basically, you’re proving Coulter’s point.

        1. I think Bill Bennett is dumber than he thinks he is.

          Of course, I think that about a lot of people.

        2. Poppy Bush didn’t serve two terms. I stated that specifically to show that Reagan and Bush Jr. were crucified for their supposed stupidity, and yet somehow were political juggernauts anyway.

          I don’t know that much about you, Fluffy, but you don’t strike me as the standard-issue MSNBC desk-pounding leftist. You seem more libertarian-ish, rather than a Democratic shill.

          There are simply too many examples of leftists portraying conservatives as “stupid” for it to be a coincidence. It’s not a tactic, simply because it’s a deeply held belief. One that says more about the speaker than the subject.

          It’s also worth noting that shrewd politicians LOVE to be underestimated by their opponents.

          1. Trust me, Fluffy isn’t any kind of leftist.

            You seem to be making the argument that since leftists like to portray republican candidates as stupid, that that somehow means none of the accused actually are stupid. Sure, it’s a buckshot argument, because they try to hit everybody with it, but that doesn’t mean it’s not true sometimes.

            As Fluffy clearly stated earlier, he did not derive his opinion from Slate articles, he derived it from her deer-in-the-headlights moments over the course of several interviews and debates. That isn’t agit-prop: it’s his personal observation.

            1. No, that’s not quite accurate. I’m saying that leftists’ statements about conservative “stupidity” are irrelevant mouth noises that have no connection to the real world.

              There are dumbasses of every possible persuasion.

              Fluffy’s observations are worth noting, and you are correct. I was not lumping him in with Tony and his ilk.

              I do agree with Sparky’s comment that Palin has more of a knowledge gap than an intelligence gap. Should a college-aged person of high achievement know what an Achilles’ heel is? Yes. Her education seems substandard to me.

              In 2008, I also observed her unease in unscripted public speaking, such as debates and interviews. If she does run in 2012, it will be interesting to see whether her TV work and constant speechifying has improved her performance in debates and TV interviews.

              1. I do agree with Sparky’s comment that Palin has more of a knowledge gap than an intelligence gap.

                I get the broad-stroke argument here (unintelligent = not able to learn, unknowledgable = hasn’t chosen to learn), but I’m not sure how one can actually know such a thing (unless her school teachers are willing to speak up in a non-political context?).

          2. To be fair, I’ve heard the right attack Obama’s intellect, and Carter’s.

            It’s not just in the left’s playbook. It’s politics 101 because it appeals to the lowest denominator. Which is what most politicians think of the general public.

            1. True. However, it seems more prevalent on the left. Hardcore conservatives are more likely to characterize their opponents as evil and immoral, rather than stupid. It fits the narrative.

              Personally, my own bias is that most people who run for offices higher than the local school board are probably malignant narcissists. But I believe that across the board.

              1. Depends on who you’re talking about. Pundits on both sides love using words synonymous to stupid or stupid its self. Pretty much equally. We could go tit for tat all night looking up who called who stupid.

                Politicians general don’t throw that word around. As if it’s too low for them. lol.

                1. Yeah, they almost always outsource the dirty stuff.

                  I’ve certainly done enough name-calling over the years, myself. It’s just human nature. I try not to denigrate people I disagree with. Heck, we’ve all got our cornball beliefs.

                  American politics has always been a form of entertainment and sport above and beyond the policies at issue. People will say they want civility, but what they really want is entertainment and to feel a sense of tribal loyalty that political parties provide. My late grandmother was the most conservative person I ever knew…and yet she voted for Jimmy Carter because he was a Democrat.

  20. The reason why I defend Palin is not because I think she is a genius. It is because I refuse to believe the contrition that only some super genius can be president. In fact, I think the opposite is the case.


    This is the correct counterargument to claims that Palin is not that bright.

    He should stick with this.

    I’ll bet Krugman has a much higher IQ than Palin. That just goes to show that IQ isn’t everything.

    Unfortunately, John can’t quite take the next step and stop trying to defend Sarah’s IQ. He can’t find the compulsion to defend it, even after he’s defined away its usefulness or value.

    1. “I refuse to believe the contrition that only some supergenius can be president.” Contrition? You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

  21. Here’s what I think about Palin: She does occasionally make small government noises. I like that, as few national political figures even bother. That’s how I even noticed her in the first place (as governor of Alaska, pre-McCain). She also, as others have noted, pisses off the right people far out of proportion to anything she’s actually said or done. That continues to amuse me.

    That all said, we can do much better, if she ever decides to run for president. I think she’s at least as qualified as Obama to be president, but ask me whether I think Obama is qualified even after being in office for nearly three years.

    1. +1

      Obama ought to be a huge warning against ever again picking a president from the junior varsity team. Palin’s executive experience (not just as governor) trumps Obama’s complete lack of such prior to 2009. But not by enough to matter when it comes to choosing a president.

      In fact, as much as I respect Ron Paul, his similar lack of executive experience worries me and causes me to tilt more to Gary Johnson. It’s so depressing that Johnson has been shut out by the media and has been a dud in his few chances before the cameras.

      1. Bill Clinton was a three term governor, lots of experience.

        1. Oh, it’s no guarantee of competency, to be sure. At least with Clinton, there was a long record for the media to largely ignore. With Obama, there was a whole lot of nothing other than a rather premature autobiography.

          Look at Rick Perry. The man’s been governor of Texas longer than anyone else in the state’s history, and he’s mostly known for his bad ideas that even his own party rejects. I think we know *exactly* what we would be getting with a President Goodhair, regardless of the mouth noises he emits over the next year.

          1. “”I think we know *exactly* what we would be getting with a President Goodhair, regardless of the mouth noises he emits over the next year.””

            LOL. I’m not sure if the % that supports him now knows.

            But wasn’t that like the last republican from TX that went to the Whitehouse?

            1. But wasn’t that like the last republican from TX that went to the Whitehouse?

              Yes, but with now with 30% fewer gaffes!

              1. But I love the gaffes!

          2. Oh, I forgot. Perry’s also known for his epic level of “doing bidness” with his cronies, as they say in Texas. Like I said, we know exactly what to expect.

            Palin’s record, by contrast, is thinner and makes her less predictable.

            1. I take it you’re from the great Texian Empire? May I ask whereabouts? I’m in Plano, myself. We seem to have several Houston-area posters, but only one other Dallas-area guy (that I’m aware of).

              1. I’m a Texan by marriage. My remarkably patient wife is from San Antonio, so I’ve gotten a good education on Texas politics, even though I’ve never lived there.

                1. Good job then, SA definitely gets the benefit of the doubt in the looks dept. when discussing females.

          3. For me, it’s less about proving competency than about giving me a track record to judge from. Johnson definitely walked the small government walk as governor.

            Clinton’s corruption and other failings were visible during his governorship(s), but the media decided it would be better to downplay that. Last time they could get away completely with doing such things (though they were able to do it less opaquely with Obama), thanks to the Intertubials.

            1. A track record is obviously important. I also like to see evidence that the candidate is capable of running a large organization, whether business or government.

              I don’t believe that the presidency is a “starter job.” I enjoy giving Rick Perry all kinds of crap, since he sets off most of my warning detectors, but I also believe that his experience in serving as governor and lieutenant governor puts him in a better position than, say, Michele Bachmann.

              Ron Paul is an interesting person to look at as a possible exception. I so badly want to vote for someone I actually agree with 80% of the time, that I’d be willing to overlook this, even though I know he might have epic problems transitioning to an executive position. It’s worth noting that his congressional office has the lowest turnover on the Hill. Some of that might be lack of other places to go, but it makes an instructive contrast to Bachmann’s supposed little shop of horrors on the Hill.

          4. “”Oh, it’s no guarantee of competency, to be sure.””

            Is it ever? GWB had executive experience. So did FDR.

            1. FDR was quite competent at getting his agenda through. The problem was the agenda.

              Anyone who looked closely at the gubernatorial terms of either man could figure out what sort of president they’d be. It usually ends up being a case of willful ignorance.

            2. If they’re actually competent, sure. It’s absolutely relevant experience, and if a voter takes the time to look at what the governor did during his term, he might learn something. I knew enough about Bush II to know not to vote for him in the primaries (and, of course, I voted LP in the general).

              What doesn’t appear to be very useful unless they’ve been in office a long while is time in Congress. You just can’t get a gauge on someone by a few years voting on bills that happen to come up.

              While I wouldn’t want to legally require this, there was something to the old Roman Republic practice of requiring politicians to follow the cursus honorum, that is, the practice of having to go through a course of lower offices before being eligible for higher office.

              In our system, we probably should generally expect candidates to have been governors and maybe even have held legislative office before running for president. Again, not for experience so much as for us to know what we’re getting. Same thing goes for even being governor.

              Of course, I say this when planning to vote for Ron Paul, but I think my reasons for doing so are obvious and, for a libertarian, entirely justifiable.

              1. In practice, we have usually observed the cursus honorum in this country. Prior to Obama, the rare exceptions were typically war heroes, or the occasional senior-level senator or congressman.

                With Eisenhower, you can make a good case that running the entire wartime U.S. military was excellent preparation for the presidency. And (IMHO) he was a far better president than any who have followed him.

                Grant was obviously a different case. He succeeded as a general despite his personal failings, but those failings were more a problem for trying to run the government.

  22. I think John, Fluffy, and Episiarch should set a series of deadly traps for eachother, each more ingenious than the last. They, along with Sarah Palin, will then be set loose, and whoever makes it out alive can be deemed to be the “more intelligent than Palin” (on the assumption that Palin won’t make it out).

    I will be watching on a series of hidden video cameras and masturbating furiously.

  23. turn my country into an apocalyptic hellscape

    No, we’ll just let the DNC go ahead with that bit of utopian Hope and Change.

    1. Oh, and as scared as some are of Palin, imagine President Biden sclepping his way around the Oval Office.

      As fucktarded as Palin is… Biden’s almost her equal.

      1. Please replace “almost” with “more than”

        1. And what happened to Tony after Chris0 bitch-slapped him at 4:24?

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.