Reynolds is right. I'd go a little further. It's not just that the press, and many other liberals, don't like Palin. They detest people like Palin. It's a categorical judgment first, and an individual one second.

Mencken wrote, "Puritanism: The haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy." Neo-liberalism, the paranoid suspicion that someone, somewhere may be driving an SUV to church.

Me? I think Palin has a nice ass and nice hips. I think she'd defend the nation and the Constitution. I can get behind all of that.

I haven't seen too many movement feminists do anything other than rationalize and find ways to trash Palin. So score one against Mangu-Ward. But then, while I dislike Biden, I think his years and years of service and even his daily commuting to parent his kids shows a good deal more intelligence than what we've seen so far from Palin. So score one against Reynolds. The Republicans did eat their leadership corn and could have trained Palin and brought her along. So score one more against Mangu-Ward. And Palin does seem to be saying she's a leader of the Iquitarod, so score one against Reynolds.

So there you have it, Mangu-Ward -2, Reynolds -2, and I win.

Palin has two problems: 1) an unbelievably vicious, hypocritical liberal media that will stop at absolutely nothing to smear her, and 2) a rather broad perception that she is just an intellectual lightweight, pretty but not much else.

Neither of the two commenters mentioned her strongest (IMHO) point: the way she took on corruption in both parties in Alaska and largely won. That's a big deal, but she'll need more than that to prove she has heft.

> his years and years of service

What, he wasn't paid? There was nothing in it for him, not even satisfied ambition? He ran for the Senate to be nice, as a favor to us?

> even his daily commuting to parent
> his kids shows a good deal more
> intelligence than what we've seen
> so far from Palin.

Five kids, none of them went to prison. One went to Iraq, one was mocked by a nationally televised comedian but didn't grumble, one charmed the shit out the country by licking her little brother's hair into place during the convention, one of them is mentally retarded, and one of them got pregnant too soon....

...So now you wanna pretend that this woman is obviously a bad parent? Do you think that's going to jell as conventional wisdom? This is just like when the Democrats called Dubya stupid... Even though he'd gotten better grades at Yale than Gore got at Harvard, and then got his own Harvard MBA besides. The implicit insult to the typical Bush-receptive voter, who didn't have such achievements, was stinging. And this woman is the Democratic standard for incompetent motherhood? What will the average voter imagine a Democrat thinks of his or her kids?

Can we talk about the heroin-addicted Kennedy punks, or (per Paglia) Chelsea getting piss-drunk in Europe, or that time the Gore kid got bust for speeding drunk (or wut-evaaaaar)?

Her failure to find excellent support may be a function of never having worked in a large organization... People in big companies learn how to exploit the work of others without shame, and she may not have this reflex. (For this, the Right may love her even more.)

Besides, we're all kind of assuming Palin has tremendous personal ambition and wants to take over the world (see the title of that last post from Amy: "Shrewed Move").

(And could someone please check the web publication dates?... I want credit for anticipating, by at least several hours, Paglia's thoughts about Palin not be protected by her peeps. Such a scalding insight is far too distinctive to be conventional wisdom, don't you think?)

While I think Palin's cute just like Jeff does, and the photos at his link are no cheesier than the beach photography we saw of Obama last year, they still kind of creep me out. She's plenty attractive, but she's looking straight at us... As if she were a grown human being who expects to have a genuine encounter with us or something. The American media eye is not accustomed to this lack of guile.

She didn't spend her girlhood studying Hollywood glamour and its manipulations of sexual allure... She learned to bring home things to eat.

Jeff, I'm interested to know what makes you think that she'd defend the nation and the Constitution. Everything I've seen from and read about Palin suggests that her first priority is, well, Palin. This isn't deadly on its own - it's silly to criticize politicians for being ambitious, since it's pretty much a necessary quality for anyone in politics. But the problem with Palin seems to be a complete lack of any overarching motivation, knowledge, or perspective on anything BUT her own ambition. She doesn't appear to understand the federal government in the least (other than running the same tired GOP game of "gobble up as much taxpayer money as you can while loudly yelling about how terrible big government is"), and her actions in Wasilla demonstrated a lack of respect for the First Amendment, as well as for any kinds of limits on or transparency of executive power. (Constant use of non-state email addresses for state business, widespread political firings, use of state resources to persecute personal enemies, etc.) Resigning the governorship and trying to spin it as some kind of favor she was doing for the Alaskan people ("you'd be better off without me being a bad governor!" well, how about you make an effort to be a GOOD governor?) seems to be kind of the last straw in demonstrating her lack of fitness for any kind of elected position.

And it seems obvious that Palin needs better advisors, but "perhaps those GOP potentates might have offered a bit more help" is a ludicrous idea. They had every incentive to see Palin succeed, and provided her with quite a bit of support - she appears to have alienated almost all of these advisors just as she did with the ones she had in Alaska. At a certain point, one has to wonder why all of this potential isn't being realized.

Great article by Dahlia Lithwick on Palin - "Lost in Translation"

http://www.slate.com/id/2222523/

>>Great article by Dahlia Lithwick on Palin - "Lost in Translation"

CB,
That was great. Nimble and funny and spot on!

Yes, people in politics need thick skins, but what Palin was put through is beyond the pale. What other politician, ever, had people wearing "____ is a cunt" shirts? Talking about their kids getting raped? There is a certain amount one should be expected to take, and the leftists went way, way past that this time. And having gotten away with it, I doubt they'll ever stop now.

uh, how about people calling you a terrorist and comparing you to Hitler? Still going on, by the way.

Palin and her children were viciously attacked by the media more than any political figure I have ever seen. And no one has ever really explained their attacks.
Because people never say the real reasons they attack I will have to speculate the real causes.
1. She is a woman that doesn't support abortion. Femiminsts and liberals can't have this as this is their ultimate power, deciding who lives or dies.
2. She is a conservative and conservatives are supposed to be old prejudiced white guys.
They did the same thing to Clarence Thomas if you remember.

I'm guessing the two things above make her appear as a traitor to liberals and thus the vicious attacks. I really can't find any other reasons.

I agree Bush got a lot, but it wasn't as personally nasty.

Hey, when you hold yourself out to be a champion of traditional family values, and then it turns out your teenage daughter is pregnant, and your son might have had drug problems, people are going to find it relevant.

The American media eye is not accustomed to this lack of guile.

Who wants a lack of guile in their politicians?

Here's the thing about running for office: People are going to talk a lot of smack about you. This is how it has always been, especially in America, where even our founding fathers (and their press surrogates) were masters of the insulting putdown.

Talking smack is one thing.

Alaska law requires all ethics complaints to be investigated, no matter how silly. The accuser does not have to pay if the complaint turns out to be bogus.

But the object of the complaint has to pay (for lawyers, etc.) on every complaint. The state does not pay - even if the complainst are politically-motivated.

Palin's opponents have been filing numerous nuisance complaints against her. She's racked up over $500,000 in legal bills due to these complaints.

Saying harsh things about her is one thing. Trying to bankrupt her with legal bills and smear her with "look how many ethics investigations she has been the subject of while governor" is another.

For all her faults, who makes a better un-Obama than Sarah? Didn't Reagan win landslides because he was the un-Carter? No more malaise, no more mush from the wimp? If Obama has a successful first term, he'll be invincible in 2012. If he continues on his current trajectory, spending billions he doesn't have every day while unemployment keeps rising, then whoever makes the best un-Obama should win.

Mangu-Ward is completely missing the point. Yes, running for high office makes you a target. But McCain was the one running for President, and he was an erratic old man who'd been in politics forever & had piled up an endless list of things his opponents could have used against him. Instead of focusing on him, the opposition launched all-out war on his VP. Why, if not for the fact that she was, and still is, Obama's natural opposite?

Who wants a lack of guile in their politicians?

One who makes vague campaign promises and champions "change" but who, when in office, lets the special interests dictate the direction of his adminsitration while handing over freshly nationalized industries to them.

One who deals with our country's actual and potential enemies by apologizing to them and who allows third-world thugs to publicly insult him to his face.

While Palin's not yet ready for prime time, I find her lack of guile on the campaign trail and pragmatic approach to governance a nice contrast to The One's international "Kick Me" sign abroad and "Big Brother is your friend" publicity campaign at home.

Hey, when you hold yourself out to be a champion of traditional family values, and then it turns out your teenage daughter is pregnant, and your son might have had drug problems, people are going to find it relevant.

You mean she might be...human! Her family might have the same frailties and flaws the rest of us have?

She didn't hold herself out as a champion of traditional values as if she were some saint or infallible icon. She championed traditional values.

And how did she (and her family) champion those traditional values? She bore her Down's Syndrome son instead of having an abortion. Her teenage daughter didn't have an abortion and made plans to marry the father of her child - all while graduating from high school. Her "junkie" son joined the Army and is deployed to Iraq.

Those hypocrites!

You're seeing a lot of commentary like RMW's right now, most of which willfully ignores the nature and extent of the attacks against the Palin family. These strike me as attempts to reframe the history of what has occurred.

Anyone who's paid any attention to this situation knows that it's gone far beyond the conventional hard-ball of politics.

There seem to be a lot of people who've suddenly been confronted with the reality of what they've been complicit in, and would prefer not to be remembered that way.

Her family might have the same frailties and flaws the rest of us have?

The point is that if all your churchifying and piety doesn't keep your daughter from getting knocked up or your son from getting a drug habit, what good is it? The Palin's are 0 for 2 in getting kids through their teenage years without serious problems.

Is God against drugs, Cheez? You know so much about religion, do let us know.

How is it ok for the President to have admitted doing drugs, but when her son might have, it's damning?

The point is that if all your churchifying and piety doesn't keep your daughter from getting knocked up or your son from getting a drug habit, what good is it?

Perhaps because it gives you (and your family) guideposts along the way to help you deal with these types of issues. "My son's on drugs and I don't know what to do."

Perhaps because it gives you a goal toward which to strive. "I want to be a good person, but I'm not there, yet."

Perhaps because it teaches forgiveness. "My daughter screwed up and I'm very disappointed in her, but I still love her and I want to help her get through this."

If you believe the purpose of going to church and praying is to have a perfectly ordered life and conformist children, you've sadly misinterpreted a few things.

The Palin's are 0 for 2 in getting kids through their teenage years without serious problems.

Yet, they're both alive, healthy, and seem to be well-grounded, despite any mistakes they may have made along the way.

Cheez, than you for perfectly illustrating the liberal mind.

See, it goes like this: Republicans have standards, therefore they must live up to them - completely and perfectly - or else everything they say, believe, and do is meaningless. BECAUSE OF THE HYPOCRISY!

Whereas liberals/Democrats have no standards, and therefore cannot have failings. Therefore, they can say whatever they want, and being free of the taint of hypocrisy, must be taken seriously.

In other words, if you as a conservative do not believe in pre-marital sex, and your child gets knocked up, then you are a failure, and everything you say must be disregarded because, after all, you failed to instill your morals in your child.

Whereas a liberal can claim to be against teen pregnancy, and if his daughter has three abortions, well, he wins because he did something about teen pregnancy.

Nuance. SPIT!

Heh. And here I thought that traditional family values were all about raising your kids in such a way that they avoid the pitfalls of sex and drugs and all that. But I guess it's just about not having abortions. Thanks for the clarification!

> Nimble and funny and spot on!

Frogwash.

> Her meteoric rise and dubious fall

Riiiiiiiight... It's over. They've been trying to say she was over since before their own convention had adjourned.

> will say less about America than
> you think, beyond the fact that
> America likes its politicians to
> communicate their ideas clearly.

There is zero, zero doubt in my mind that everyone knows exactly what Palin means. That's why the attacks on her have been so personal: She's got the power. They want to pretend she doesn't, because she doesn't use typical lefty apple-polishing language. It offends liberals to learn that all their prissy language isn't good for much. They paid a lot of money for those skills... Studied hard, went to good schools... And suddenly people don't care? Unfair!

I've always been revolted by Lithwick, from the first words she ever wrote on that site. Silly little weasel-woman. Blech ptoooie.

Now, let's have some more pictures of Palin with dead animals. Here's a twofer!

By the way, why is everyone talking like they're certain one of her kids has drug problems?

So the Obama's can say, "leave my kids alone" and the compliant media will genuflect and nod with in lock-step approval and furthermore, elevate them to the good protective parents status; while Palin, gets called a whinny little girl.

I think Palin is a big girl, and I'm with Paglia, she should have left the responses to advisors and PR people (who haven't been serving him well) - this of course from a political aspect.

Not having children, I couldn't speak from experience...but I would imagine from my observations of others, that good parents will always defend there kids (it's kinda in the coding). To their last dying breath.

I think her actions defending her kids are 100% forgivable, but going forward, if she plans on continuing her political career, she needs to have faith that the majority of American's find this sort of viciousness completely disgusting...and let her team of PR people take the bullets.

Talking about Palin without taking in into consideration the double standard is doing a disservice to the argument, because that is in fact WHY (she’s a conservative and a woman) the argument is here to begin with, that is WHY what happening is happening. Calling Palin a whinny girl is not the best place to start with “what’s going on”.

It’s the brutality of a partisan media, throwing sucker punches while asking us to look away. No dice. I’m not buying it. I’m calling them on their shit and continue to do so until they stop slinging turds and playing fair.

Preferential treatment has no place in our media. We need to hold their feet to the fire. This shit is unacceptable in a so called "civilized" society.

"By the way, why is everyone talking like they're certain one of her kids has drug problems?"

THANK YOU. I can't figure this out either.

"Problem" would indicate somekind of incapacitation, dependency ... and in need of some sort of rehab?

This just doesn't sound like an applicable statement to someone who just went off to service in the military...ya know?!

There is zero, zero doubt in my mind that everyone knows exactly what Palin means.

"They are also building schools for the Afghan children so that there is hope and opportunity in our neighboring country of Afghanistan."

"It's very important when you consider even national security issues with Russia as Putin rears his head and comes into the air space of the United States of America, where—where do they go?"

"I know that John McCain will do that and I, as his vice president, families we are blessed with that vote of the American people and are elected to serve and are sworn in on January 20, that will be our top priority is to defend the American people."

"There is zero, zero doubt in my mind that everyone knows exactly what Palin means....."

You know what, I take what I said back about conservative and woman. Those are the angles as they play but not WHY they play them. I'm with you Crid. I see this clearer now.

"The Palin's are 0 for 2 in getting kids through their teenage years without serious problems. "

Serious problems, now it's serious. Like gravely serious, or like, seriously ser-e-awhs?

Look everyone has problems. But from what I can tell, no one was killed or maimed. No one robbed a liquor store, no one was sent to rehab, no one painted themselves naked and ran through the streets clutching a bible, no one's been arrested, no ones been caught selling drugs or is a violent member of society.

If you are trying to equate "serious problems" to underage fucking and taking a toke of some herb, I think MOST of us would have to own up to having "serious problems" by the time we were 21, no matter what our home life was like.

Cheeze, your posts are so "connnvvvviiieeeeenent".

HA! Correction. I meant to say, no one painted themselves red and ran through the streets naked. (How exactly would one paint themselves naked...) Gotta laugh at myself for that one!

Cheezy — It hurts that people don't care, doesn't it? All those weekends you spent diagramming sentences while the other boys were playing ball....

And there she is, out there, shamelessly talking wrong, with absolutely zero consequences!... Except your hurt feelings. She's much prettier than you are, and that's not fair either.

Tough times for a forlorn little sniggler!

And there she is, out there, shamelessly talking wrong, with absolutely zero consequences!... Except your hurt feelings. She's much prettier than you are, and that's not fair either.

My feelings aren't hurt in the slightest; you guys are the ones getting all worked up over here. It is pretty fun that I can tweak you simply by quoting her.

Although I must say I don't get the conservative cult of ignorance. It's like you guys prefer your people to not know things or be well-spoken. We'll show you, smart guys! We shoot from the hip and got God on our side! Who needs braining? Bummer for the competent and intelligent Republicans out there, I must say. Too bad, Tim! Sorry Bobby! We want Sarah!

>>Cheezy — It hurts that people don't care, doesn't it? All those weekends you spent diagramming sentences while the other boys were playing ball....

Jeepers, that's an odious pose for you, Crid!

Tho' I'm fascinated how far you're gonna push this - sittin' on your porch there with your whittlin' stick, saying "gosh, darn, but that Palin's one fine lady who don't put on no airs!".

> It's like you guys prefer your
> people to not know things or be
> well-spoken.

I don't think you, as a Bay Area lefty, are smarter than other people... You are in fact less worldly than a Todd or a Sarah, people who've answered challenges, building businesses and a family from the ground up. I don't think you're more articulate to any meaningful degree. And I sure don't think you're any more decent. (And that goes double for Katy Couric.) You went to school, got some good grades, and expected the world to love you for the rest of your life... But here we are.

The fascination lefties have with edjumicated-type language is such a transparently self-aggrandizing ploy that I can't understand why they aren't ashamed.

Listen, go read some history, history of anything from about 150 to 200 years ago, something in English. You'll see the same puffed tone you bring to your own rhetoric, that same certainty that brains are where it's at: "As I ambled down the thoroughfare on my evening constitutional, cogitating upon the wretchedness of the negro soul and the inferiority of the feminine character for anything but babymaking, I happened upon my old friend Theordore. Together we paced alongside the river, mocking the latest foolishness from Pasteur and Darwin...."

You are so certain that your tastes in deportment are the gold standard. And I am so certain that there's no good reason to trust your judgment.

Jody, don't be cuntlike.

>>Jody, don't be cuntlike.

Up yours too, Crid.

Bungled the ">first link. It was a rerun anyway.

so this 900 pound gorilla just stepped on my foot, seems like a lot of people just don't like seeing it. IFF Palin were primetime ready for the GOP, they would go down swinging to defend her. Don't think the ENTIRE party is ready for a woman yet [especially one who isn't frumpy and old.] The percentage that are cool with Palin aren't enought to sway the others. And? they're punishing her and McCain both for going that direction. On the other side of the aisle?

The curtain is torn for the Dems. They aren't ready for a woman either, NOR are they ready to be shown up for not being ready for a woman. The ways in which their own party savaged Hilly, showed what they are willing to do. The fact that they use the same tactice, WITH the addition of having Palin be an enemy should not surprise.

The Dems have a unique understanding of just where to place the knife with a woman, anyone wonder why that is? They will blather on about how they value this or that, but I'll BET our first woman VP or Prez is a republican, but not for 20 years yet. Palin will be old enough for the GOP then, if she's still interested... The Dems seem to know far better how to appeal to emotions in what they say and do, IMHO, which means they also know far better how to destroy with emotions. An irrascible old ba$tard isn't going to care. A woman who loves her children, might be a much more tempting target. Is Palin tough enough in the long run? Don't think it matters. Not enough people are ready for her.

As for CheezB? Heh, we'll just have to see how Obama's kids do for comparison. My sainted mother raised 3 kids with identical valuse, but that didn't stop one from going on her own tangent. Got her act together as an adult, but as a teen? Not good. ALL parents go through that to an extent. And? I'd have to bet that if you polled Palin and O about family values going to church and whatnot, THEY ARE PROBABLY IDENTICAL IN VIEW. He isn't that different, NOR is Biden. Nor is Clinton. They may believe in Woman's choice personally, where Palin doesn't, but, as a matter of Public Policy [as currently legislated] They are similar.

so what exactly IS it you are insinuating?

You are in fact less worldly than a Todd or a Sarah, people who've answered challenges, building businesses and a family from the ground up.

Yep, I know nothing, nothing about building a business, or family life or anything else. I haven't done anything but go to school in my 35 years. Just got that Ph.D. and then sat around sneering at people. Yeah, you know me, Crid.

You are mechanically, deliberately, self-defeatingly closing yourselves off to a remarkable political vector which you admit (however backhandedly) is not going to go away.

My beef with Palin is that she represents two intertwined and pernicious threads in American politics: fundamentalist Christianity, and no-nothingism.

That all you need to do is be born again, go to the right church, and let God take care of things. Nobody expects her to actually know anything or be able to articulate policies clearly. It's enough that she's a straight shooter and is in good with the Lord. Being plain spoken and a God-squadder is enough to garner her a big chunk of the Republican base. These are people who I really do have very little in common with, and whom I wish to see denied any sort of political power outside of their pockets of regional hegemony. She's like a more authentic version of the character George W. Bush played. I think his Presidency was an unmitigated disaster, and if she were to get it, would be even worse.

I think the Obama administration is very likely heading toward disaster, and I want a sane Republican who knows a little something about the world opposing him in 2012. She ain't it.

> My beef with Palin is that she
> represents two intertwined and
> pernicious threads in American
> politics: fundamentalist
> Christianity, and no-nothingism.

I don't believe you. It's plainly not true. If it were, you'd have been much more troubled by Obama's years (decades!) at Trinity United. The Palins haven't been walking around doing faith healing. And they obviously know plenty of things... They just don't wear their learning liberal-style, like ribbons on a military uniform, so that loyal plebes such as yourself will know when to salute.

> These are people who I really do
> have very little in common with

Keep saying it! Keep saying it! If you believe it very hard, maybe then twinkly magic fairies will make it so, because they love you very much!

"But it's the hate that I find hard to understand", says Reynolds. Well, I have a theory. Did I ever mention that book by Sagan? Why yes, I did. A great deal of life's energy is spent making distance from others, composing a culture that draws imaginary lines between us.

And that's what Democrats do nowadays. 'Bush is stupid, Palin's a bad mom, and these common people are so beneath me!' The intellectual zest is gone, and all that's left is the teenage love of prom court formation.

But this is an intimate need, a form of social support not of interest to the typical conservative, who came to the statehouse with more important matters on his mind.

I don't believe you. It's plainly not true

Aw, Crid. Thanks for telling me what I think! Appreciate the clarity. I feel much better now.

The Palins haven't been walking around doing faith healing.

You haven't seen the video where she receives a blessing to keep her free from witchcraft?

www.youtube.com/watch?v=iwkb9_zB2Pg

Neither Sarah nor Todd were DOING faith healing in that video. What's your point?

My beef with Palin is that she represents two intertwined and pernicious threads in American politics: fundamentalist Christianity, and no-nothingism.

I'm assuming your beef is with "know-nothingism" rather than with any organized opposition to nothing.

Regarding the Palins, they know a few things the Bidens and Obamas have yet to learn.

Sarah has been an effective mayor and an effective governor - despite her homespun style and rambling oratory. She's taken on entrenched political elites of her own party as well as the opposing party - and prevailed each time.

Todd runs a fishing boat business (which, while not requiring him to deconstruct Melville, does require him to know the things Melville had to research). I imagine he'd also be a fairly handy guy to have around if you found yourself stranded in the Alaskan wilderness.

Biden and Obama, on the other hand, are unclothed emperors with few individual accomplishments and little actual experience outside of politics. Maybe Palin is the no-nothing candidate.

Please go to Drudge right this very minute and observe that phorograph, thanks

The general who advances without coveting fame and retreats without fearing disgrace, whose only thought is to protect his country and do good service for his sovereign, is the jewel of the kingdom.

- Sun Tzu

http://www.alaskadispatch.com/palin-watch/1282-palin-is-now-free-to-exercise-her-real-power-

RE: Drudge - HA!

Yonder, too, if the link rots.

The more I think about it, the more I like Reynolds' line about eating the seed corn

Neither Sarah nor Todd were DOING faith healing in that video. What's your point?

Merely participating in that ceremony = crazy

I imagine he'd also be a fairly handy guy to have around if you found yourself stranded in the Alaskan wilderness.

Sure, the Palins know Alaska. There's no evidence they know anything else.

Funny picture of Obama. Bet Sarko told him to check out that ass!

Cheezy. No more crazy than some of the wierd shit I see "educated" kids participating in during any given pledge week on Alphabet Row in Berekely....

So... Cheezburg, are you saying that Obama ISN'T a Christian? even a fundie? O belongs to the United Church of Christ. You should check out his congregation some time. PLUS he has been going to every church in DC to find one that he likes. Joe Biden is Roman Catholic.

Hate to tell you this, pal, but they's all Christians, and could easily all sit in the same church.

Know-nothing? Do you want to talk FACTS?

Dude, they freaking speak in tongues at her church!

Cheezy. No more crazy than some of the wierd shit I see "educated" kids participating in during any given pledge week on Alphabet Row in Berekely....

Frat and sorority types acting the fool ain't the same thing and you know it.

To be a politician in the big time in the US, you gotta go to church or synagogue. But you don't have to go to one where people talk about witchcraft and the rapture. Assemblies of God, Pentacostals, and the like are all flat out nuts.

yeah, and?

If you are in the Christian church at this juncture in the US, pentacostals are a matter of intrepretation, just like the Apocrypha is to if you are a Catholic, just like Calvinst pre-destination is for United Church of Christ. go talk to the Amish about being hexed, go talk to any about Satan. Talk to the Jews about gholem.

I think for Amy's money or Crid's money or a Wiccan's money, these things are less important than if a leader was to come out and say "...you must believe in this or I will send the Army to MAKE you."

Private faith is inmaterial as long as a public official doesn't try to make or enforce too many laws about it. And THAT isn't a prefect system anyway.

Importantly? What would you say if Palin was a full fledged Wiccan, heading off to Stonehenge for the solstice? Do you freak out about communion, or if the bread is actually becoming the Body of Christ?

To an Atheist it is ALL bunk, and speaking in tongues is no different than believing there is any kind of god at all.

Straw.
Man.

Face it, your dislike of her is irrational.

Dude, they freaking speak in tongues at her church!

The practice of glossolalia is very common in Black evangelical churches as well, though they often stylize it a bit. I wouldn't be surprised to learn that many people who attend Obama's church in Chicago perform this. That's what all the moaning, swaying, and falling over is about.

Actually Reverend Wright's style of preaching - with the strange jutting around, hopping, and shouting - has similar foundations. He's presenting himself as being consumed by the spirit, who's speaking through him, or at least inspiring his thoughts.

So unless you're willing to have the whole country run by Episcopalians and reformed Jews, you're going to have to tolerate some weirdness.

> Reverend Wright's style of preaching

Fun times on Reverend Wright's Wiki pages, where some enterprising (or handsomely compensated) wordsmiths have typed many, many words to excuse the crazyshit ranting at Trinity United, without actually paraphrasing it as 'a black thing.'

No, it's a matter of what I'm willing to take. You gotta draw lines somewhere. I think that people who believe the Bible is the literal word of God, and who do weird shit like speak in tongues, are kinda crazy.

Well, then you better dump Obama and Biden then.

Cheez, you need to look in the mirror and face reality. You hate Palin because she scares the shit out of you.

You are terrified that some snow-billy with five kids knows more about life than you ever will. And you hate her for reminding you of that fact.

You live in your little cocoon by the bay, and anything that deviates from the worldview you had crammed into your head at University is to be considered a Bad Thing by default.

You want people who think just like you in government because you think that they would be competent.

Me? I want people in power who think government is at best a necessary evil, and who will do everything in their power to keep it out of my life and out of my way.

Sarah Palin represents that worldview. And it scares the crap out of people like you who worship government. Sarah Palin stands before your God, sword in hand, ready to smite Him before your eyes. And you are afraid.

You should be. Your God ISdead. It just hasn't figured it out yet.

Plain speaking Palin? Or Palin speaking in tongues? Who knows?

I've read the transcript of her (prepared?!) resignation speech a couple of times now and still the conclusion makes no real sense.

...

"My decision was also fortified during this most recent trip to Kosovo and Landstuhl, to visit our wounded soldiers overseas, those who sacrifice themselves in war for OUR freedom and security... we can ALL learn from our selfless Troops... they're bold, they don't give up, they take a stand and know that LIFE is short so they choose to NOT waste time. They choose to be productive and to serve something greater than SELF... and to build up their families, their states, our country. These Troops and their important missions - those are truly the worthy causes in this world and should be the public priority with time and resources and NOT this local / superficial wasteful political bloodsport.
May we ALL learn from them!...First things first: as Governor, I love my job and I love Alaska. It hurts to make this choice but I am doing what's best for Alaska. I've explained why... though I think of the saying on my parents' refrigerator that says "Don't explain: your friends don't need it and your enemies won't believe you anyway." But I have given my reasons... no more "politics as usual" and I am taking my fight for what's right - for Alaska - in a new direction.Now, despite this, I don't want any Alaskan dissuaded from entering politics after seeing this REAL "climate change" that began in August... no, we NEED hardworking, average Americans fighting for what's right! And I will support you because we need YOU and YOU can effect change, and I can too on the outside.We need those who will respect our Constitution where government's supposed to serve from the BOTTOM UP, not move toward this TOP DOWN big government take-over... but rather, will be protectors of individual rights - who also have enough common sense to acknowledge when conditions have drastically changed and are willing to call an audible and pass the ball when it's time so the team can win! And that is what I'm doing! Remember Alaska... America is now, more than ever, looking North to the Future. It'll be good. So God bless you, and from me and my family - to ALL Alaska - you have my heart.And we will be in the capable hands of our Lieutenant Governor, Sean Parnell. And Lieutenant General Craig Campbell will assume the role of Lieutenant Governor. And it is my promise to you that I will always be standing by, ready to assist. We have a good, positive agenda for Alaska.In the words of General MacArthur said, "We are not retreating. We are advancing in another direction."

Dunno, Jody. She uses metaphoric language to indicate she wants to go outside the current power structure numerous times and ways. It's long winded but it makes sense. I am leaving, not in defeat, but as a choice of new direction...

>>I am leaving, not in defeat, but as a choice of new direction...

SwissArmyD,

I'll give you that, sure. But what does it mean?

Point taken.

Well, then you better dump Obama and Biden then.

Though I'm no fan of either, neither is a fundamentalist. That you guys don't know the distinction is surprising.

I don't trust fundamentalists because they are constantly trying to pass laws to shove their religion down people's throats. Take away a woman's right to an abortion. Teach creationism in schools.

You are terrified that some snow-billy with five kids knows more about life than you ever will. And you hate her for reminding you of that fact.

No, I'm terrified that fools might put her in charge of our executive branch.

I live a pretty full life with lots of interesting people and challenges, good friends and a family I'm pretty close to. I'm doing OK.

And it scares the crap out of people like you who worship government.

Worship. Yeah. Once again, your talent for hyperbole shines through.

> That you guys don't know the distinction
> is surprising.

It's not that we don't know, it's that we don't care. You came in late: I've been hounding Amy about this for years.

> I live a pretty full life with lots
> of interesting people and challenges,
> good friends

I wanna mock you anyway. You're far too proud of your schoolin'

Worship. Yeah. Once again, your talent for hyperbole shines through.

Hey, I'm not the asshole that wants the government to dictate terms when it comes to his health.

You know what I want from government? I want it to FUCK OFF AND DIE. Outside of the enumerated powers of the Constitution, the Federal Government needs to go the fuck away.

Palin gets that. You do not. That you want the government to take over a large part of my and everyone else's life makes you my enemy.

Revel in that for a while. Then think about what it says about you.

oh, yes, I know this trope very well CheezB. It might interest you to note that people who wish for power accomplish their goals in many different ways. O may not be a fundie, but he wants to give me government healthcare regardless if I want it, in the full gonzo of Father Knows Best. How is that different than a fundie telling anyone that an abortion is bad? Simply because Natl. healthcare isn't in the Bible? The definithion of fundie conveniently shifts around a lot, but last I checked, pentacostalists AREN'T aren't considered that. On the other hand President Obama's former minister for 20 years, Rev. Wright started out a Baptist, and his father was the minister in a Baptist Congragation. Baptists are generally considered "Fundamentalists"... His preaching has not much changed from that contention.

Fundamentalists, are not necessarily a politically right leaning sort of thing, they are "conservative" at both ends of the political spectrum.

And? Your comments about Creationsim, and Palin's view on public abortion policy, have both been de-bunked.

These things are not directly related to a person's religion, rather their will to have the government control things. You may well think that abortion right, and teaching evolution are necessarily the correct way to think on those subjects, but IMPOSING them on people makes you no different than a fundie. It's JUST the opposite term. When I say impose, I meant that my tax dollars go to helping poor women have abortions, regardless of how I feel on the subject. Evolution, on the other hand, is scientific, so it SHOULD be taught in school, regardless if I think that God actually created anything. I can't prove that, but there is a good case for evolution, so what should be taught to kids in a public school? The stuff you can prove. I got a problem with that? I'll put my kids in a church school.

You fear that fools will put Palin in power? How is that actually different from putting Biden in power? Do you really know what religious rites he practices in private? As a Catholic, doesn't he have to be against abortion defacto? IN FACT AGAINST CONTRECEPTION? Obama is the same way too, except HIS pastor might've kinda been a little nutty, and a racist to boot.

Isn't THAT more dangerous?

ps. Jody? It means "...stay tuned." Why would she reveal her whole hand right away? Maybe she doesn't really know what it will be until she see's what's playing in Peoria. Would it be better if she said one concrete thing and did something else entirely? I am mystified that this bothers you so. It may not be the same as every other politician, who lays out all their plans, and then goes with the flow instead, but it might be a bit refreshing for that.

Not to cruel but I'd rather spend money on killing non viable infants then on a life time of welfare, social services, jail, and medicade for unwanted, uncared for people

Its cheaper

>>ps. Jody? It means "...stay tuned." Why would she reveal her whole hand right away?

Because this isn't Las Vegas?

After some consideration, I've concluded that this is another slow-motion political suicide.

Sanford was the first. He might have been able to salvage his career after "hiking the Appalachian Trail". The dereliction thing would have been tough to overcome, but he might have been able to do it. The repeated disrespect for his wife and children, however, destroyed any chance he had. This was intentional.

Palin is the second. She's been thoroughly rebuffed by the Republican leadership. She's been savagely and personally attacked by the media. She's been under continuous assault from the Democrats since she took office. In my opinion, she's concluded (rightfully so) that the American people neither want nor deserve the nation she envisions. She is now in the process of making herself SO politically unpalatable that nobody bothers her again.

They've gone 'Galt'.

This is not something that is going to become less prevalent over time. This is the beginning of the "So, you wanted communism/socialism/fascism, fine. You can have it without me."

>>In my opinion, she's concluded (rightfully so) that the American people neither want nor deserve the nation she envisions. She is now in the process of making herself SO politically unpalatable that nobody bothers her again.

Brian,
If you extracted any of that from her resignation speech (the same speech SwissArmyD says shows us Palin "...wants to go outside the current power structure numerous times and ways"), it confirms she's nothing if not opaque!

I neither listened to nor read her resignation speech. But the fact that she has been pretty much invisible except for the attacks on her, and her response to Letterman was minimal at best, tells me all I need to know.

Like GWB, she intends to slip back into obscurity.

I don't trust fundamentalists because they are constantly trying to pass laws to shove their religion down people's throats.

Funny, that's why I don't trust Democrats.

I'm an anti-statist fundamentalist, and I'm not alone.

"I don't trust fundamentalists because they are constantly trying to pass laws to shove their religion down people's throats. Take away a woman's right to an abortion. Teach creationism in schools"

You keep saying this, despite the lack of ANY evidence that she has done or will do this.

" You may well think that abortion right, and teaching evolution are necessarily the correct way to think on those subjects, but IMPOSING them on people makes you no different than a fundie. "

Right on, Swiss!!! Tell you what, Cheez, we'll give you evolution and take prayers out of school if you leave our healthcare alone. Deal?

From Brian: "I want people in power who think government is at best a necessary evil, and who will do everything in their power to keep it out of my life and out of my way. Sarah Palin represents that worldview."

What on earth makes you think that she represents that worldview? She was the governor of Alaska, which as of 2005 was ranked third of "federal beneficiary" states - i.e., Alaskan taxpayers were receiving almost twice as much in federal funding as they were paying in taxes ($1.84 for every dollar). She took all but a tiny amount (3%) of the stimulus money offered to Alaska, after announcing that she would accept a much smaller percentage. As mayor of Wasilla, she hired an expensive lobbying firm to lobby for federal funds, successfully receiving over $8 million for the city. She also raised sales taxes to fund a sports complex in Wasilla, which became more expensive after a lawsuit was filed challenging the city's exercise of eminent domain. As governor, she made a big deal of stopping the "bridge to nowhere" - however, Alaska declined to return any of the federal funding (over $400 million) it had received for the project.

And when it comes to actual exercise of power over the liberty of others, rather than just their property, Palin looks even worse from a libertarian perspective. She has regarded her executive positions as suitable tools for exercising personal favoritism - ordering state resources used against her ex-brother-in-law, appointing completely unqualified personal friends to rich state positions. (A classmate appointed to head the Dept. of Agriculture despite no experience or training cited her "childhood love of cows" as qualification for the position; more at http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/14/us/politics/14palin.html?_r=1&ref=us)

Yes, I'm sure you can find lots of examples of Palin TALKING about how bad government is, and how she supports a traditionally conservative worldview. I'm interested in her actions, though, and from what we've seen, it's clear that Sarah Palin is only an opponent of government when she isn't in some kind of executive role. She's attractive and by all accounts an extremely powerful and engaging speaker, but I hope that the libertarians aren't allowing themselves to believe whatever the pretty lady tells them.

Because this isn't Las Vegas?

No, it isn't. The stakes are much higher here.

>>No, it isn't. The stakes are much higher here.

Conan,
That's what I was getting at in my comment.
(Sorry if I'm misconstruing your own point!)

Jody,

You think she should reveal her hand now...because this isn't Vegas.

I think she's wise not to...because this isn't Vegas.

The stakes are higher. Letting her political enemies know her next step is to let them get ahead of her and try to thwart her plans.

Lose big in Vegas and you lose the mortgage payment. Lose big in politics and you lose your shot at the White House.

>>The stakes are higher. Letting her political enemies know her next step is to let them get ahead of her and try to thwart her plans...

Neatly put, Conan.

But it's tricky for those of us trying to work out what sort of player she is from all these winks and insider "tells"! I can't even deduce whether she's sticking or folding...

(That's about the limit of my own card knowledge too!)

Jody -

Ultimately, it doesn't matter what Palin does. The die has been cast. The next candidate to make waves already knows what to expect; and won't make waves.

This is how a corrupt system stays corrupt. Eventually, the price for fighting corruption becomes too high. So the "good" politicians stay bought, and they assist in the destruction of the "bad" politicians that want to derail the gravy train.

It's as though the dealer always has a face card showing, and the political outsider just got a 16. Do you hit?

With the deck increasingly stacked against noobs, the answer is no. You fold and walk away from the table.

Regardless of what Palin decides to do, it is ultimately irrelevant. The Democrats hate her. The Republicans have made it clear they won't back her. And there's no way to get a serious third-party going with the way the states have stacked the rules.

I never knew you could fold in 21 brian

I'm just making shit up. This has devolved into silliness of the highest order.

The number of people who supported Palin wasn't even enough to drag McCain over the line. She's really got no chance of creating a larger movement, there's no way the Republicans will ever nominate her for anything, and if she tries to create a third party, the Democrats and the Media (but I repeat myself) will go right back to pushing the personal lies until she either withers away, or her supporters abandon her because they don't want to be attacked by proxy.

What waves did she make that were worth making? This is a person who openly derides "facts and policies" as not mattering. She represents the triumph of irrationality and nationalist sentimentality over reasoned and limited governance. She's a fascinating character for sure, but I just don't get why anyone other than "Bush conservatives" (i.e., people who want to both take your money AND tell you how to live your life - for all the faults of the liberals, at least they only want your money) actually supports whatever vague stab at a message she's presented to us.

> for all the faults of the
> liberals, at least they only
> want your money

Whhhaaaaaaaattttt???

See the picture at the top of Amy's blog on Friday morning? That's Santa Monica. Meet me on that beach for a cigarette, and well talk this over.

Would that I could, Crid...I used to live in Santa Monica and it is a beautiful place indeed. If I'd never had to go anywhere else in LA (overall miserable), maybe I wouldn't have come back to the East Coast!

You missed my point... You fire up a Camel on the sand, and you'll be arrested. It ain't all about money.

After a Sunday morning review, this is a contender for the Weirdest Thing of the Month on Amy's blog:

> for all the faults of the
> liberals, at least they only
> want your money

I mean, had you ever thought that even once before the time when you thought it to type it?

Well, don't I feel sharp...I didn't spend much time at the beach while I was out there, so I'd forgotten about that particular rule. I'm kind of torn on restrictions regarding cigarette use: on the one hand, I don't like the idea of anyone legally restricting our personal choices that don't harm anyone else, but on the other hand, there is a reasonably strong argument that cigarette use DOES in fact harm others and can therefore be restricted by a society that respects individual liberty. (Is it truly fair to expect people to have to breathe toxic gas being voluntarily emitted by your neighbor?)

Frankly, the whole thing will be solved by electronic cigarettes, so long as Philip Morris doesn't manage to have them made illegal. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_cigarette

"I mean, had you ever thought that even once before the time when you thought it to type it?"

Yes, and I'm sticking by it. Are there any other counter examples you'd like to discuss?

In the words of General MacArthur said, "We are not retreating. We are advancing in another direction."

Just a little nit, those were not the words of Army General Douglas MacArthur, but are generally attributed to Marine General Oliver P. Smith (who in defiance of MacArthur's "rush to the Yalu" did not let his forces get spread out and thereby managed to prevent them from being annihilated at Chosin).

The point is that if all your churchifying and piety doesn't keep your daughter from getting knocked up or your son from getting a drug habit, what good is it?

Ashley Biden.

My feelings aren't hurt in the slightest

Of course they're not, dear. You have a Ph.D.!