Quantcast FiveThirtyEight: Politics Done Right: Sarah Palin (R, Asterisk)

7.06.2009

Sarah Palin (R, Asterisk)

I really didn't want to spend the Fourth of July weekend thinking about the personal-slash-political saga of Sarah Palin. But the thing about Palin, whether you adore or despise her, is that she forces you to deal with her--which, when you think about it, is a quintessentially American trait.

The reasons for her resignation, whatever they turn out to be, will matter to the present and unfolding story, but not to her larger fate. The fact that Palin resigned now--no less the elliptical and sometimes eerie way she announced her intentions--likely signals the end of her career as a national politician to be taken seriously and the start of her transformation into a political novelty. Yet Palin's personal saga will continue to attract attention and garner headlines. Maybe she'll become a television personality, a career she pursued at one point in her life. So, yes, we may still have to deal with Sarah and all that she represents.

Why? What is it about Palin that we find so compelling, even fascinating? Why is her every move scrutinized? Why can we not look away?

The short answer may be that she is a late-stage warrior in a culture war that, while still ongoing, has diminished into something more of a skirmish. Abortion aside, many of the polarizing issues of the past two generations--Vietnam, race, sexual mores, feminism, popular culture--have lost a lot of their capacity to galvanize and divide us. For those still fighting that war, in 2008 Palin emerged as an icon and a vessel for restoration; for those who had grown tired of that war she was like a political burr, an uncomfortable reminder of a political time thought to be happily put behind us.

The longer answer has to do with the fact that she is young and a woman, which only magnifies sentiments on both sides of the Palin divide. It was easy to dismiss with a polite smile or a roll of the eyeballs the late-stage career grumblings of Jesse Helms or Strom Thurmond; you knew their days were numbered, that they were walking anachronisms slated to join other curiosities in the museum of post-war American politics.

Not so with Sarah. She is younger than Barack Obama, after all. She is attractive. (I stopped counting how many women have mentioned to me, unsolicited and unprompted, Palin's cheekbone structure.) And so we have in her a woman cheerily and cheekily railing against the Great Society even though she was still in diapers the day Lyndon Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act. As colleague Phil Klinkner and I have argued, the 2008 coalition that beat her and John McCain was in many ways LBJ's revenge for the politics that devoured his presidency by 1968 and set into motion the culture war that dominated American politics for the next 40 years. All of which makes Palin the oddest of political hybrids: the spritely scold, the young curmudgeon.

I don't like to talk about politics at social functions with family and friends, especially during holidays. But of course Palin's name was on many lips this weekend. Hearing people speak at length about her for the first time since last autumn, I was reminded just how strongly people feel about her. Other than perhaps Ted Kennedy, I cannot think of another living politician who generates such passionate, unambivalent opinions. (And yes, I include George W. Bush and Barack Obama in that accounting.) It's cliche to say so, but she really is a one-woman American political Rorschach test. And just as I find it painfully difficult to converse with Palinites, I can see them looking back at me like I'm some alien as I explain why she so offends me.

Palin's decision to resign may push her off the presidential election stage, but not out of our collective consciousness. She will soon become an asterisk in presidential politics, even as her grip on the national psyche persists.

161 comments

Pragmatus said...

Your "R*" led me to think you were positing that she would go flying off into party independence, taking the most radical nutwings with her. Boy would that be a boon for the Democrats.

Ian said...

* = etarded.

John said...

Sorry, I think people over analyze the debate here. She's dumb and dangerous, it's not even an argument, and she feeds off the ignorance of her supporters in ways that are rarely seen in American politics, which is saying a lot. To this day, the best illustration I can say to support this is my best friends for over 20 years (who is a weekly church going, somewhat conservative Republican, with a brain) called me a month after she was nominated to be V.P. and his exact words were "she scare the **** out of me, I can not believe someone that crazy and stupid could possibly be Vice president. Sorry, this isn't some epic culture struggle, unless you mean a struggle between thinking people and people who think being smart is somehow a bad thing, which they seem to have a whole political movement based on now.

PorridgeGun said...

Honestly, I've never read so much bollocks in one post @ 538. This was almost Wolf Blitzer-esque in it's unfounded hype and fascination with this blithering idiot. I had at least half a dozen WTF?!? moments while reading this. Tom, you should be fucking ashamed of yourself. Post this shit over at Free Republic or FOX nation.


As for Nate's last post on Mooseburger and President Obama. Obama is an exceptional figure in modern American politics, no question. That's why he defeated the Clinton machine and rose to the top in four short years. McCain needed something to excite the conservative nutbase, and Rick Davis persuaded him to pick an unknown and inexperienced running mate who indeed excited the base but turned off moderates. Everyone knows who he wanted to pick, but he panicked. To even compare the two is ridiculous.

Nylund said...

Palin has very substantial legal bills from a series of lawsuits against her. She tried to raise money to pay them but only got about 25% of what she needed. One theory is that these bills are quite enormous on a governor's salary (which although decent, isn't nearly enough to pay the bills). But, get a show on Fox News or do the lecture circuit and she can probably get the wingnuts, rubes, and whatnot to pay good money to see her. In short, she needs lots of cash, quick, and her job was getting in the way. Its just one theory.

Bradford said...

Palin is also exceptional, and has just as much capacity to get people excited (luckily, thos people are few, but listen to Rush and they watch Fox).

Her next step? She will be Glenn Beck, but even less intelligently.

liberal_defender_of_freedom said...

In Palin's world:

Quitting = Winning

Ignorance of the World = Real American

Dysfunctional family = Strong Family Values

The lady is a train wreck that jumped the track a long time ago.

PorridgeGun said...

BTW, Ted Kennedy has the respect of almost everyone. Wungnuts of course hate his politics with a passion, but still kinda respect the guy and how he conducts himself. Can the same be said of Mooseburger (aka the Paris Hilton of politics)? The Wasilla Hillbillies are like a friggin MTV reality show.

Obama, on the other hand, is more popular worldwide than Michael Jordan, Tiger Woods and Johnny Depp.



Maybe 538 should make that distinction and give it a rest with these posts.

小橋川 純苔 said...

I like that you now have a SarahPAC.com ad in the sweet spot of your banner ads.

Scott said...

BTW, Ted Kennedy has the respect of almost everyone. Wungnuts of course hate his politics with a passion, but still kinda respect the guy and how he conducts himself.

Not at all. He killed a woman while he was drunk driving and called his lawyer instead of an ambulance. His politics aside, he was an awful human being who was only a Senator because of who his family was.

The Daily Pander said...

"But the thing about Palin, whether you adore or despise her, is that she forces you to deal with her."

Paying attention to her is a choice. One need not read stories about her, they can be ignored. The press covers her because people watch, read and listen (i.e., the press covers her because the press covers her).

She was a fool before she got horrifically mean press, but the press intended to savage her before they knew her full doltocity (see MZ on today's Morning Joe). Such is life. Next topic, please.

And, yes, I get the irony of criticizing Palin coverage by commenting on a Palin post.

STepper said...

This is yet another worthless post. And, the following is certainly Palinesque (and total bullshit):

. . . whether you adore or despise her, . . . she forces you to deal with her--which, when you think about it, is a quintessentially American trait.


What the hell does it mean? It's meaningless. Complete crap. Just like the rest of the post.

Nate -- please don't allow these meaningless posts to pollute 538 dot com!

Pragmatus said...

I have to disagree with all those people who contend that Sarah Palin is smart. Grasping, naïve, incurious, fatuous; yes, but smart? No way.

A smart person, if suddenly thrust upon the national stage, would carefully assess where she might run into trouble, and immediately set about studying those topics she wasn’t so familiar with. Palin however thought all she had to do was keep up the “pitbull-hockey mom” shtick, and if confronted by a topic on which she knew nothing all she had to do was fly off in a different rhetorical direction. You’d think after her disastrous interview with Charles Osgood she would realize something was terribly wrong, and that it might be a good idea to hunker down and try to ramp up her knowledge in a crucial area or two, but no. She turned diva instead, screaming at the very people who were trying to help her then hopping off to Barney’s of New York to shop away her blues.

Friday she had another, perhaps the last, chance to demonstrate that she doesn’t have an empty room upstairs. But she did what she always does, serving up a mix of platitudes, talking points and pity-party gripes that would seem coherent only to a meth addict.

Sarah Palin is not bright. She’s not even in the same neighborhood, country or even hemisphere as bright. She is what she was picked for the GOP ticket to be—a pretty face. Listening to her opine is like listening to, oh, I don’t know—Carrie Prejean, perhaps.

PorridgeGun said...

@Scott

Laura Bush also killed someone while she was drunk driving. Between the two, I'm pretty sure Ted Kennedy is the better person.

paddynoons said...

At least this whole thing allows me to walk down the Palin memory lane once again...

Remember this? -- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=reRTXJSyTjo

The Daily Pander said...

Hey Porridge:

Yikes. Laura was 17 and it was an accident. Police reports at the time indicated no drinking. Teddy the Hutt was an adult, and drunk. He did have the common decency to swim across the channel, change his clothes and take a little nap before NOT reporting the incident. Nice guy.

I'm sure Laura's parents could pull the same strings Teddy's could.

Mary Jo Kopechne remains unavailable for comment.

David said...

As I mentioned before, Huckabee and Palin share the same constituency. If Palin runs for any national office, she's running against Huckabee for this constituency, and I cannot see Palin beating Huckabee.

Huckabee has many of the same viewpoints, but strikes less ire from his opponents who actually find him quite likable. You can see this when he spars with Jon Stewart on the Daily Show.

Palin's problem is that she is too polarizing a figure. I don't think it is because she's a young woman. In fact, I think that would give her an advantage. What turned people off was her complete lack of interest in finding out why people disagree with her on particular issues. Instead, she sees things as "real Americans" vs. those pinko liberal latte sippers who rather be in Europe.

This goes well with the Fox crowd, but when Dunkin Donuts and McDonalds goes around serving latte, you can't use it to plummet your political opponents as elitists without looking not only narrow minded, but simply out of step with the majority of Americans. It goes down as well as Quayle's complaint that Gore recommend farmers grow Belgian endives did. (Quayle's emphasis).

Again,the main problems Democrats had with her was her sudden rise, and the sudden strength and unity the Republicans showed after their convention. It scared the bejeebers out of Democrats who thought the election was going to be a cake walk.

They saw her at that time as a danger to their chances of victory. For a few weeks, the McCain ticket ran on par with the Obama ticket in polls, and Obama was stumbling a bit. It would be much like the way the English looked at Joan of Arc. Except that Joan of Arc did prove to be a true danger while Palin ended up hurting the ticket.

Palin will be around for a while, but I think the resignation shows that she simply doesn't have the inclination to be a major national political figure.

There is no reason why Palin couldn't have used her political connections to help raise money for any legal expenses. She has strong, well connected defenders. She simply didn't want to bother with the lobbying or maybe she felt it was too much beneath her dignity.

What Palin had in Alaska was an excellent opportunity to show she's not that ignoramus premadona the left made of her. That she has the ability to hunker down and change. That she could turn the situation in Alaska around and thus should be consider a national contender. Such a move would have won over many of her right wing detractors and made her someone to contend with.

Look at Nixon after the California Governor's race. He even did an awful concession speech (You won't have Dick Nixon to kick around anymore). He spent the next few years raising money for congressional representatives and senators. He hobnobbed with Democratic and Republican governors. He changed the tone of his speeches. By 1968, he was a new Nixon and ready to take on the country.

Look at Reagan who was a hated person in his party for challenging Ford for the nomination. He was too far out to the right. Instead, he cultivated an image of a pragmatic politician who has an affinity with people. He gained support from many Republicans and even Democrats.

Look at Clinton. How many setbacks did this guy come back from? He lost his reelection bid for Governor, then came back two years later and won again, then got reelected. He gave a disastrous speech at the Democratic convention, then ran all around TV to talk about it and apologize for it. He setup the DLC, helped get Democrats elected, and became a powerful figure in the Democratic party.

Clinton doesn't have Obama's discipline, but when he has to, he can be the most driven and determined person in the world.

No, Palin has blown it. She has shown that she really doesn't have the stamina to be taken seriously as a national political figure. She may start fading almost as quickly as she rose.

Bradford said...

I don't think she has the intellect or maturity to manage a daily radio or TV show.

Time will tell.

donna said...

Don't misunderestimate Sarah... ;^)

We're not done with her yet.

jon said...

When she's no longer a "hottie" her looks won't distract from her words nearly as much. Yes, this is sexist, but you should blame the cynical GOP masterminds who thrust her into the limelight because of her presumed "appeal to women."

She may be a Twinkie, but she's got a finite shelf life and the clock is ticking.

c said...

I fear that the punditocracy is closing the door to her professional and political future prematurely. They wrote off Nixon, laughed at Jesse Ventura, and we elected Rod Blagojevich twice. Both ends of the political spectrum get fascinated with personality and slogans, and can muster plenty of influence from the middle. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see her become a public voice of conservatism and resistance to the left, and to eventually be "dragged" back into national electoral politics.

X. A. Smith said...

I have to join in the sentiment that Tom is not a good writer, and I would like for him to go post somewhere else. It has nothing to do with whether I agree with him or not, it's just that what he says is vacuous. It would fit in with the Today Show or The View or something of that ilk.

JD Rhoades said...

Ted Kennedy has the respect of almost everyone. Wungnuts of course hate his politics with a passion, but still kinda respect the guy and how he conducts himself.

I;'m sorry, but this is simply not true. They don't. As you've seen here, you can't even mention his name without someone calling him a murderer.

Davy said...

Well now we know why the SarahPac ads are still running. We just don't know why they're running on 538. It beats the red meat ad...wait, it's kinda the same thing.

That was really tacky of me.

soozzie said...

David -- "She has shown that she really doesn't have the stamina to be taken seriously as a national political figure."

Or a state figure, for that matter. Back to the small town?

Cugel said...

The most truly horrible thing about Sarah Palin is that she simply came along too late. All the ignorance and bile would never have stopped her from becoming Vice President in Reagan's America.

If she and McCain had run in 2000, they could have won. Even more troubling, it's hard to argue she could have been a worse Vice President than Darth Cheney.

But America in 2008 is not the same country as in 2000. Eight years of 9-11 jingoism, Bush's wars, natural disasters and economic collapse have soured the public on the empty-headed triumphalism of the right wing.

We're not in the mood for another village idiot in the White House. It's going to take at least a generation to dig us out of the mess created by the last one.

She's the last gasp of the "White Backlash" -- that working class white anger at Democrats and Liberals over the civil rights movement, integration, women's rights, and the anti-war movement, along with opposition to all forms of the "counter-culture."

In the words of Hunter S. Thompson: "a vicious reaction against anybody who didn't appear to be natural material for the Elks Club." Racist, Xenophobic, militaristic, ignorant, in-bred Americana in all it's worst forms.

I.E. the "Reagan Revolution." And America is tired of their crap. 2008 -- From all the women, urban dwellers, youth, minorities of all kinds, gays, lesbians, immigrants, environmentalists, and everybody else who has been getting the big middle-finger from all the Culture Warriors of the right wing since 1968: your 15 minutes are up.

We're taking over now and we don't care what you think anymore. There's no future for Sarah Palin because, like the Dinosaurs, the asteroid has hit and her time is up. She can make a lot of noise, but it's over.

PeteKent said...

Sister Carrie

Andrew Brietbart (at RCP) has it exactly correct in terms of media bias and the threat the Democrat Party and "movement" feminism saw in Palin.

http://tinyurl.com/qfo8j2

I think the Carrie analogy is as trenchant as it is apt. Stephen King's telekinetic heroine derived her power from the hatred of others which she internalized and then turned on her tormenters in a blast of fury that obliterated them.

Sarah Palin alone knows what is in her mind and what her motives and intentions are. Whether she can ever achieve higher office is debatable, but one thing is not: She is a Giant Killer on the Right. She has a real and devoted constituency which no other politician of either party, save perhaps the "Anointed One" himself can claim.

Her power and influence has yet to be felt and will only build.

With each new series of attacks, the legend grows.

And rest assured this woman will not be pushed off the stage: She owns it, dripping with blood and all.

petekent01 (on twitter)

Todd Dugdale said...

Mr. Schaller wrote:
"The short answer may be that she is a late-stage warrior in a culture war that, while still ongoing, has diminished into something more of a skirmish. "

The Culture War has changed since the 60's and 70's, but it is still being fought and it still galvanises people. The issues are different, but the fight is still there.

For the Right, the fight is now over the ability to insulate themselves from the effects of their loss in the conflict.

Gays, for example, are not going back in the closet, but they don't want to work with them, have their children taught by them, have to see them on television, or have their tax dollars go to them in any form (e.g. public employees or military).

For the Left, the issue is complacency.

Palin presents an aggressive stance on the Culture War, which the conflict's partisans on the Right love, but she is essentially doomed to failure. We are not going back into the conformity and standards of the 1950's.

Palin is a cheerleader for this side. Nobody blames the cheerleader when a team loses, but neither do they look to the cheerleader for insight on plays or line-ups.

PeteKent said...

Obama Deficit Disorder

While you all screech and scream like a bunch of furious apes over the Palin monster rearing her pretty head again, while half the articles today at RCP concern this most unlikely heroine of the right, you must feel a certain sense of calm, of not having to worry about the future and what the leader of your own party is cooking up.

Even as unemployment continues to soar and week after week brings more dismal jobs news, when less contraction in the economy is hailed as good news (despite there being negative growth!), you all need something to console yourselves as to the justice of your cause.

May I offer the fiscal soundness of Obamanomics as a cause for cheer?

Not hardly.

From Bloomberg:
http://tinyurl.com/nb3yg8

“The federal picture is so bleak because the Obama administration is the most fiscally irresponsible in the history of the U.S. I would imagine that he would be the intergalactic champion as well, if we could gather the data on deficits on other worlds. Obama has taken George W. Bush’s inattention to deficits and elevated it to an art form.

The Obama administration has no shame, and is willing to abandon reason altogether to achieve its short-term political goals. Ronald Reagan ran up big deficits in part because he believed that his tax cuts would produce economic growth, and ultimately pay for themselves. He may well have been excessively optimistic about the merits of tax cuts, but at least he had a story.

Obama has no story. Nobody believes that his unprecedented expansion of the welfare state will lead to enough economic growth. Nobody believes that it will pay for itself. Everyone understands that higher spending today begets higher spending tomorrow. That means that his economic strategy simply doesn’t add up. ”

His strategy doesn’t add up! Mmmmmm, when that message starts to percolate, y’all better head for the hills—the pitchforks will be charging down Broadway poking lots of skinny behinds in designer clothes on the Upper West Side of Manhattan!

Enjoy your shiny little distraction from inevitable failure -- you will need a new one soon.

petekent01 (on twitter)

Todd Dugdale said...

Pete Kent wrote:
"Whether she can ever achieve higher office is debatable, but one thing is not: She is a Giant Killer on the Right."

Would you care to mention the names of a few of the "Giants" that Palin has "killed"?

Wow. The wingnuts are now reduced to magical thinking and horror film plots. I had thought they would have gone through comic book clichés first.

Bradford said...

Sarah - unfettered on Twitter.

HILARIOUS!

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/2009/07/tweeting-with-sarah.php?ref=fpb

PeteKent said...

More Distractions from the Tyranny of Governance

Perhaps it is not enough for Sarah Palin to take your minds of the looming political failure of the Democratic Party as it is led over the brink by Obama-Biden. You may enjoy this discussion I found ion the comments pages of the WaPo today about Obama’s Muslim faith:

“In his autobiography, "Dreams From My Father," Obama mentions studying the Quran and describes the public school as "a Muslim school."


According to Tine Hahiyary, one of Obama's teachers and the principal from 1971 through 1989, Barry actively took part in the Islamic religious lessons during his time at the school. His teacher was named Maimunah and she lived in the Puncak area, the Cianjur Regency. "I remembered that he had studied "mengaji" (recitation of the Quran)" Tine said.


Obama himself recalls, "In the Muslim school, the teacher wrote to tell mother I made faces during Koranic studies."


Our guy in Jakarta writes: "The actual usage of the word 'mengaji' in Indonesian and Malaysian societies means the study of learning to recite the Quran in the Arabic language rather than the native tongue. "Mengagi" is a word and a term that is accorded the highest value and status in the mindset of fundamentalist societies here in Southeast Asia. To put it quite simply, 'mengaji classes' are not something that a non practicing or so-called moderate Muslim family would ever send their child to. To put this in a Christian context, this is something above and beyond simply enrolling your child in Sunday school classes."


"The fact that Obama had attended mengaji classes is well known in Indonesia and has left many there wondering just when Obama is going to come out of the closet."


"As I've stated before, the evidence seems to quite clearly show that both Ann Dunham and her husband Lolo Soetoro Mangunharjo were in fact devout Muslims themselves and they raised their son as such."”
Y’all wring your hands with glee over the next shoe to drop with Palin (your fascination with her belies your sense of her potency), well you ought to be worrying about what will be coming out and when about Barry Soetoro, Citizen of the World - -or at least Kenya, the US and Indonesia, aka Barack Hussein Obama, pretender to the presidency of the United States of America.

petekent01 (on twitter)

Deep blue shirt said...

You are drastically over estimating how much anyone cares about Sarah Palin. No she is not some kind of figure in our collective super-egos, no she is not going to be a significant figure in our political dialogue going forward.

During the campaign we had to pay a certain amount of attention to her... but since then she's only stayed in the limelight by gradually escalating levels of bizarre behavior. She's reached the end of that unless she start to really plumb the tabloid depths, and we'll all forget about her soon.

Bradford said...

PeteKent-

Why would I care if Obama studied Islam, or was a Muslim any more than I would care if you are Catholic, Protestant, or Atheist? It is irrelevant...

JMNorris said...

I have to admit that I feel sorry for Palin. She stumbled into a place totally unsuited to her. After all, the national political stage is no place for a totally incompetent, ignorant and proud of it, narcissistic diva. Was it her fault that, when McCain invited her to be on the ticket, she was to stupid to say no? I don't think so; I think she was born that way. Sarah bashing differs from clubbing baby seals in only one detail. Baby seals are cute and cuddly. So, yes, I feels sorry for her.

PeteKent said...

One Distraction too Many: No Film at 11

http://tinyurl.com/ndyoje

Seven more soldiers died in Afghanistan today. All of last week seven servicemen died there. As in Iraq over the past few weeks/months the death toll in what are now Obama’s wars is rising.

But have no fear. There will be scant coverage, little media exploration. No outrage from Keith Olbermann. George Bush won these wars right? Nothing to worry about.

Why isn’t the left protesting the continued violence being perpetrated by US troops and the president on the innocent people of Iraq and Afghanistan? Where is the fury over the stubborn policies of Obama leading to the death of the flower of our youth in a lost cause?

All of that has vanished in your own hypocrisy!

petekent01 (on twitter)

J. III said...

'Asterisk' spelled out.
'slash' spelled out.

Does your keyboard have punctuation keys, Tom? Or are you merely committed to furnishing us with a shoddy simulacrum of colloquial speech instead of lucid prose?

J. III said...

Additionally, can you please, for the love of God, stop with the mealy-mouthed anecdotal interjections. I don't care how many women have commented on Palin's cheekbones, or whether or not you discuss politics with your cousins at the Schaller clan's semiannual sweater-vest invitationals.

Here I was, naively thinking we were rid of Sean Quinn.

PeteKent said...

Bradford,

Obama's sudden affinity for all things Islam stands in stark contrast to the man whose campaign refused to seat women in Muslim garb in line of sight with Obama for fear of people making a connection. BHO took pains to portray himself as the product of white folk from Kansas during the campaign and self-consciously identified himself as a Christian (tho he has since never gone to Church or brings his kids to God). I find revelatory the contrast now. it says something about his hypocritical character, don't you think?


petekent01 (on twitter)

Raymond said...

Many respondents to this column seem to miss the difficulty anyone has in explaining Ms. Palin's appeal. Tom's essay appears vacuous not necessarily because of his writing style or content, but perhaps because he is trying to analyze a person utterly lacking in substance. Sarah Palin is the political equivalent of a Today Show host, like Couric, or Norvill or a host of other empty-headed. know-nothings who presume to tell us what's going on in the world and why. It's truly an epistemological conundrum.

Personally, Palin reminds me strongly of the political career of a local San Francisco boy whose career, although only briefly nationally notorious, followed a similar arc in many ways to hers - Dan White, San Francisco Supervisor, cultural crusader, assassin, and suicide. They share the same pride in ignorance; the same messianic fervor that they are called to a higher purpose; the same castigatory disdain of the press and mainstream culture; the same paranoia that strangers (albeit liberal, pinko, commie, gay, traitorous strangers) have targeted her and her family; the same self pity; the same focus on personal financial failure; and most importantly they share the same lack of fortitude, the inability to give their opponents the finger and keep buggering on. In essence they are both self absorbed, narcissistic quitters who learned too late in life what it means to have character and lived to regret the consequences.

In Dan White's case, it lead to the cold blooded murder of San Francisco's Mayor George Moscone and Liberal, gay Supervisor Harvey Milk. Talk about culture Warrior! Let's hope Ms. Palin doesn't suddenly realize what a stupid mistake that she's made. It was just such a thing that set off Dan White's inner Warrior Only this time, the people Ms. Palin blames for her merriment of miseries are highly placed national politicians, civil servants, and news people.

Karl C said...

Nate, I'm pretty much done coming here to read if this is the new low that you're going to let the site end up at. Mr. Schaller repeatedly poor attempts at political commentary wholly devoid of anything approaching useful statistical evaluation is not what I come here to read. I'd rather wait for someone else to paraphrase a point that you make in the numbers than have to wander through this dung-filled field at 538.com that you've let develop as a result of Schaller's posts.

Good luck to you and your site, Nate.

Todd Dugdale said...

Pete Kent's economic analysis link at Bloomberg was written by Kevin Hassett.

Who is this man?

"Kevin Hassett, director of economic-policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute, is a Bloomberg News columnist. He was an adviser to Republican Senator John McCain of Arizona in the 2008 presidential election."

Okay. So someone who works for AEI and was an adviser to McCain does not like Obama's economic policy and has some grim predictions. This is truly shocking. Here all of us thought that right-wing think tanks approved of Obama, but PK has set us straight.

And, par for the course, PK has provided us with more "appropriate" topics as a distraction from the Palin disaster:

- impending economic collapse!
- secret Muslim!
- There's a war going on!

A few years ago, PK's description of Afghanistan as a "lost cause" and his demand for attention to the casualties there would have his fellow wingnuts branding him as a traitor and terrorist sympathiser. His harping on alleged hypocrisy rings a bit hollow in that light.

Weren't Republicans the one who claimed that criticism of a sitting President in a "time of war" was treason? So weird...

Bradford said...

Pete-

Be a patriot, we are at awar.

GROG said...

Sarah Palin is getting almost as much play on 538 as other hard hitting topics such as gay marriage, Starbucks, and Rush Limbaugh. The things liberals truly care about.

Bradford said...

"Halfway through her first term as Alaska's Governor, Sarah Palin has done so much for her state and her nation ... Still, there is much left to be done, so let's help Governor Palin continue the job she was elected to do without all these petty distractions."

From the presumably soon-to-be-revised 'About' page at the Sarah Palin Legal Expense Fund website.


THIS IS TOO EASY.

Bradford said...

Gov. Ed Rendell, (D-Penn), who is a lams duck as he is constitutionally prohibited from running for re-election, laid into Palin for what he deemed a "ridiculous" rationale for resigning and for "abandoning" the state in a time of crisis.

"To resign after two-and-a-half years in office and somehow to say that she was going to be a lame duck and lame ducks can't get anything done and governors just go on junkets during her lame-duck period is ridiculous," Rendell told MSNBC. "First of all, she's a first-term governor, not a term-limited, second-term governor, and if she hadn't announced she was leaving, she wouldn't have been a lame duck, she would have been in a pretty strong executive position, number one. Number two, this is not the time for governors to abandon their states.... Everyone of us is facing severe financial challenges brought about by the international recession and this is not a time to leave. We pledged to our folks when we asked them to elect to us, we pledged that we were going to serve four years and we serve in the good years, but we also serve in the bad years as well. And for her to leave and turn the state over to a lieutenant governor with less than a month's notice, in the midst of difficult financial times, I think it's just dead wrong."

"Again," Rendell added, "had she just said I'm not running for re-election and announced that, I think that would perfectly fine. But she's really abandoning her state at a very difficult time. And I appreciate the pressures on family. All of us in public life have that. You guys in the media have the same pressures. I appreciate all of that, but I think she made the wrong decision to leave her state. If you want to help Alaskans, lead during tough and challenging times."

liberal_defender_of_freedom said...

zomg I just had a revelation. Palin is going through menopause and doesn't know how to handle it! Depression, anxiety, irritability, inability to handle stress, lack of concentration, foggy and fuzzy thinking, mood swings, memory lapses or memory loss.

You heard it first here folks.

Pragmatus said...

Karl C…

While I would encourage you to continue to visit 538 “dot” com, you are free to come and go as you choose. However wouldn’t it be better to open the site up, and if you see any name other than Nate’s at the top, to just go elsewhere?

Lots of sites (DailyKos f’rinstance) feature diaries and posts that hold no interest for me whatever, however I keep going back because most of the content is good, and some of it is truly outstanding.

Same at 538.

markymark said...

Ahhh PK makes me laugh sometimes. One post going on about how attacking Palin was a distraction so we don't talk about the economy, next post he is trying to concern us with the idea that Obama is a muslim. (Though he did admit in that post that Obama is a US citizen, so we are making progress!)

On young Mrs Palin, I am not so sure that she is done in national politics just yet. I think she has made herself a much less serious figure with this move, and I think it will be interesting to see how Gov Romney takes her apart in a primary campaign if this is a prelude to 2012. (I don't exactly remember for instance when Gov Romney signed healthcare legislation in Massachusetts, but I have a memory of it being late in his term!)

I have a feeling that in many ways Palin is a kind of Repubican Bill Clinton. Controversy will swirl around her whatever she does, so she may decide that she might as well run anyway. The odd heartfelt interview here and there, and hey presto, she could, could mind, make a strong showing. I think that whatever she wants to do, she will have to provide a more intelligent and competent explanation of why she is stepping down.

I still think her speech was more Nixon in 74 than Nixon in 62, in the way of being confused rambling but still with a sense of something being unfinished in her own mind.

Berkeley Bear in Illinois said...

Ask anyone in Illinois what losing a governor mid-term does to the state. Blago had to go, but Quinn has been in over his head from day 1 and now we are all suffering for it.

Unless she's admitting she wasn't going to do any work anyways for the next 18 months, Palin is screwing her home state. Period. That sort of irony free, what's best for me must be good for you is exactly the sort of thing she specializes in and what makes people who think of government as a career that should be about serving others nuts.

Think about it - at every step in her life, she's done what she wanted, consequences be damned. By comparison, whether you think its genuine or calculated, Obama took the path of service to others at every chance. Did his books make him money? Yep. But did he ever quit his multiple day jobs (civil rights law, teaching, State Senator, US Senator) to take a payday from Rupert Murdoch and Fox? Nope.

Mike in Maryland said...

Scott,

Ever been in an incident where you suffered a concussion?

Waiting...

Waiting...

Waiting...

Waiting...

Didn't think so.

Then you have absolutely no idea what can happen when a person suffers a concussion, how their thought process can be affected, and what that affected thought process can change their actions and behavior, both on a short-term and long-term basis.

Mike in Maryland

My Blogger ID is http://www.blogger.com/profile/02848893412251095965

jerry25 said...

How much advance $ did Palin get for her book??

Am I the only one who believes that part of the reason she is resigning is because she is now a millionaire and just wants to have a comfortable life for her family. This is why her children were in favor of her decision.

Sure she will make more appearances during the next couple of years, but she will never admit that she is done with running for President. As long as some people believe she might run for President, she will make millions more when her book comes out.

People in the media just don't understand that some people don't want to live such a hard life.

The truth is that people were correct to question whether this woman could handle a big family (they were called sexist), still be Governor and a VP candidate. The truth is that she couldn't handle it (her husband was co-Governor), not to mention have time to study to make up for her poor knowledge base.

Now she will enjoy life. Republicans will be disappointed when they find that out in a few years.

robojadison said...

Mike in Maryland said...

Then you have absolutely no idea what can happen when a person suffers a concussion, how their thought process can be affected, and what that affected thought process can change their actions and behavior, both on a short-term and long-term basis.


Excessive alcohol consumption can do a number on your thought process too...

harold said...

Porridgegun, Mike in MD, Wingnuts, etc -

Here's how it works with Ted Kennedy.

He drove a car into water, almost certainly drunk, and left a young woman to die.

Although emergency services were not what they are now, forty years ago, the only possible defense is that he suffered a concussion or some similar kind of trauma, and acted as best he could. That's essentially what the courts found at the time.

The courts may have been biased by his family name, or, far more likely, by the fact that both his brothers had recently been gunned down by assasins, which would cause normal people to feel sympathy.

On the other hand, the courts may have been right, and we'll never know.

It's also true that his nephew William, now a physician, was once accused of rape, and that Ted Kennedy was present at the social event that led to this. William was found not guilty and is now a physician. Justice or injustice? We'll never know.

Despite all this, Ted Kennedy has been a hard-working senator and done many decent things in the years since the tragedy. If you don't like his politics, tough.

I don't know what happened at Chappaquidick, and presumably never will. I don't know what Ted Kennedy lives with. I hope that justice was done but will never know. I do know that, whatever he did that night, he has served his country as a senator for years, one who actually does the job, and incidentally, one who has co-sponsored a lot of legislation with Republicans.

That's really all there is to it.

Nickname unavailable said...

Ted Kennedy - Well, someday the truth was going to come out. This is thatd ay.

Mary Jo was a wallflower who didn't like parties. An hour ito the party she went out to Teddy's car. And took a nap in the back seat. Teddy came out with his GF a little while later. They didn't notice Mary Jo in the back seat, and they drove down to the beach to neck.

They arrived, got out and went down to a secluded place on the beach. Mary Jo apparently woke up, saw where she was, panicked, and got in the front seat to start the car. She released the brake and the car slid into the water.

After she had drowned, Teddy came back to where he had parked the car and saw it was gone. He had the car's keys in his pocket. (They were never found.)

Teddy called Ted Sorenson, the family's consigliari, and came home and made up the story which covered his indiscretion but was much much worse than the truth.

Now you know the rest of the story.

Andrew said...

I'm having trouble understanding the angry reaction by some people here. I thought Tom's post was well-done. In particular, I think he's onto something when he says that liberals view the culture war as ancient history while a certain faction of far-right conservatives want to reopen it. Liberals are simply offended by the existence of someone like Palin, because her combination of youth and ultraconservatism is viewed as a kind of abomination, while far right wingers cheer it on as the way of the future.

PeteKent said...

Vegas Odds

Everyone wants to project some aspiration on Palin, but Palin will be Palin thus confounding us all.

What I think Palin will wind up being "the Opposition". Free from the shackles of the duty she owed her home state -- which prevented her from acting on her instincts because they might cause some short term dislocation to her citizens -- Palin will emerge is the principled voice of opposition to Obama. The very leader the party is looking for.

I doubt she will run for anything -- she will wait once more to be drafted. If I were she, I would wait until asked to be VEEP again by a Romney like figure of competence and conservative bona fides. Palin will mop up with blue collar voters, predominantly but not exclusively white, and will make inroads with moderate to conservative women, including suburban women.

If she can make reasoned and political arguments against Obama's policies (which are ripe for picking), then it is only a short step to ridicule of the man, either outright or by inspiring it in another's. Obama is acting very Peter Lawford in a very un-Peter Lawford era. He is ripe for ridicule.

If Palin can unmask Obama in this fashion she would be a force to be reckoned with, with a Hillary-like right to the crown.

Palin is young and can be patient. Being Veep or a redeemed candidate as Veep could be an excellent stepping stone to the White House.

Who has better odds than Palin to be America's first woman president?

That's a tide that is not easily resisted. All of this is sideshow and will seem meaningless if Palin can demonstrate leadership for her cause at this time.

I bet she can do it.

petekent01 (on twitter)

joenotcharles said...

WE would be happy to look away. It's YOU who won't shut up about her.

Matt said...

@Berkeley Bear in Illinois:

I'll see your Blago, and raise you one Spitzer.

Have you seen the mess that my NY Senate is in right now? It's an embarrassment of self-centered, juvenile behavior for the sake of petty politics. And it's Spitzer's fault--to a degree.

See, when he had to resign the governorship, and Paterson took over, NY was left without a Lt. Governor--and thus nobody to break a tie in the NY Senate. So at 31-31, the NY Senate has been deadlocked for four weeks now. They've been squabbling and getting nothing done. It's pathetic.

This is a genuine constitutional crisis, for which nobody can figure out a fix--thanks to Spitzer's abdication.



wv: forhoris: why Spitzer left public office.

Pragmatus said...

PeteKent…

I think I’ve finally figured you out. Since in every post you come up with a different scenario for the future, I’m guessing your plan is to pile up enough posts outlining possible futures that one of them is bound to come true, and then you can eventually say “I told you so!”

Alternatively you can simply be a crank.

Hmmm…….

amyers said...

So if I'm following this logic correctly, Sarah Palin can become President if she keeps pointing out that Obama has class. No wonder people out there are paying PeteKent the big bucks.

Matt said...

@Harold:

Hear, hear.

It was 40 fuppin' years ago. It's probable that Teddy made a horrible mistake and likely that he panicked. Said panic made him ineligible for the presidency, in many people's eyes (including mine; living in MA in 1980, I didn't vote for him in the primaries). Butt he's been an incredibly effective senator. Though family connections got him his position, his own hard work has made him someone fully deserving of that position.



wv: inglys: a foreign language for Caribou Barbie

PeteKent said...

Pragmatus,

At least I can be recognized as having a POV.

You, by contrast, are simply a crank.

PS: This is a fucking blog; its real time, my thinking is allowed to evolve!

petekent01 (on twitter)

PeteKent said...

What Palin will point out, amyers, is Obama's hypocrisy and otherness.

Paranoia and failure will do the rest.

petekent01 (on twitter)

Mike in Maryland said...

harold,

I was NOT castigating Senator Kennedy, but using the example of a concussion (which the court affirmed Kennedy suffered) of how a concussion can make a person's action seem strange or 'out of character'.

I've been in an accident and suffered a concussion during that accident. I know how a concussion can cause problems - because of how I was acting after the accident, the police thought I might have been drinking prior to the accident, and that if I had been drinking, that might have contributed to the accident. I had not been drinking - I was on my way home from work (a federal government office where mere possession of alcohol is a fireable offense), had not stopped to pick up any alcohol, let alone drink any.

All the witnesses to the accident told the police that even if I had been drinking, the accident was NOT my fault in any way, shape or form. It was two weeks after the accident that the concussion was diagnosed, and sufficiently cleared all doubts the police might have had about the cause of the accident.

I really would appreciate it if you didn't throw me in with the Wingnuts. I find that association to be (at the very, very least) quite unwelcome. And I'm sure that Porridgegun has the same or similar thoughts on the subject of that type of association.

Mike in Maryland

My Blogger ID is http://www.blogger.com/profile/02848893412251095965

Mike in Maryland said...

Pragmatus,

WHY did you have to encourage the TROLL PK to post more garbage?

Oh well, I guess I'll just get more practice in scrolling past TROLL posts.

Mike in Maryland

My Blogger ID is http://www.blogger.com/profile/02848893412251095965

kingbeauregard said...

"Liberals are simply offended by the existence of someone like Palin, because her combination of youth and ultraconservatism is viewed as a kind of abomination,"

Actually, no -- what is so offensive is that she is so completely unfit for office and yet she came way too close to the Presidency. We need a president who tries to understand and actually solve problems, not find ways to frame crises into whatever ideology best helps them win elections.

If Sarah Palin were made VP or CEO of whichever company you work for, would you worry about whether she'd run the company into the ground? That's really what it is; it's not ideological, unless you consider the ability to assess a situation and formulate a reality-based response an ideological thing.

Hu Chi said...

Palin is a couple of crab legs short of a Captain's Platter.

She's the Nicole Kidman character in "To Die For", in which physical attractiveness makes up (temporarily) for a serious disorder.

Pragmatus said...

Sarah Palin wouldn’t last 72 hours at any company worth its salt. BS on the campaign trail is one thing, in the boardroom quite another. Nobody’s going to pay for her brand of ignorance, self-importance and hypocrisy.

Memo to PK & GROG, who frame every debate in terms of “hate”: This post does not express hatred of Sarah Palin, its sole purpose is making light of the claims made here of her “intelligence” and “competence”.

GROG said...

The amazing thing is that you all would rather talk about Rush Limbaugh, Starbucks, and Sarah Palin instead of how Obama's spending is going to bankrupt the country and how Americans are starting to realize it.

And you think Palin's the dumb one.

simbol said...

It's a known fact that "Resurrection" only happens to politicians.

Pragmatus said...

GROG…

We have to watch Palin and Limbaugh et al, the same way nobody could look away when the Hindenburg was crashing.

GROG said...

What happens when the Obama economy crashes like the Hindenburg? Are you going to be able to look away then? Or are you going to continue to focus your attention on Palin and Limbaugh?

Unimportant topics like the economy are rarely discussed here. But if you want some hard hitting Palin bashing, this is the place to be.

Quixote said...

"If she can make reasoned and political arguments against Obama's policies..."

...then we can take a break from political discussion to watch Hell host the Winter Olympics.

beavis said...

The amazing thing is that you all would rather talk about Rush Limbaugh, Starbucks, and Sarah Palin instead of how Obama's spending is going to bankrupt the country and how Americans are starting to realize it.

I see you still can't see the difference between the wasteful spending of Bush and spending money to get people working, fix credit markets, etc. I am not surprised, neo-cons are anything but intelligent or curious about the world.

Does it hurt you to go outside and face reality? You and your fellow numbnuts like PK should start up a website and see how many people you can get to visit more than once.

Pragmatus said...

GROG…

Palin and Limbaugh have been making laughingstocks of themselves for quite some time, so our fascination is over faits accompli. Your crystal-gazing about a crashing economy, and who will be held to account for it, is merely speculation. Just because you wish and wish and wish and wish and wish for something doesn’t mean it will come true.

Quixote said...

"Who has better odds than Palin to be America's first woman president?"

Jesse Ventura has better odds of being America's first woman President than Palin does.

GROG said...

Biden said today that the economy is worse than they thought. "The worst economy since the Great Depression" and he didn't realize it was this bad.

Obama said unemployment wouldn't go over 8%. Well, it's 9.5% and going up. He's going to be forced to raise taxes on everyone. He continues to reward failure and punish success. The list goes on.

And all the left wants to do is bash Palin.

Pragmatus said...

GROG…

Yet another dire prediction from you.

You and PK are stuck in a time machine with the dial stuck on “future: wishful thinking mode”.

Matt said...

I think 538's analysis of why liberals like me hate Palin got it basically right. She would be the apotheosis of Bushism. It's not just that she's dumb or paleo-conservative. It's that we've seen how destructive that can be, and that Americans in the right mood will vote for it--or have the election stolen and be forced to live with it.

She is in the tradition of Republican dummies, yes, like Reagan, Quayle, and Bush II. But it's what her beliefs might lead her to do that would be most dangerous.

Mike in Maryland said...

GROG said...
Biden said today that the economy is worse than they thought.

Well blow me down. GROG (watered down wine?) finally found out how to do some research!

But in the typical TROLL method, GROG (watered down wine?) couldn't even do proper research and/or report it correctly.

Vice President Joe Biden (that title associated with that name REALLY grates on your nerves, doesn't it GROG [watered down wine?]?) made that comment on Sunday, not Monday, and definitely NOT on Tuesday (when you post appeared at 538.com).

So GROG (watered down wine?), why don't you go back under the bridge you infest and stay there for a few decades. We don't want you to strain your TROLL brain by doing proper research.

Mike in Maryland

My Blogger ID is http://www.blogger.com/profile/02848893412251095965

Matt said...

Matt (Err...the other one): I agree, but I think it's also that she comes across as being significantly less intelligent than Bush. Bush speaks horribly, and doesn't seem to be terribly bright, but I can't picture him so completely flubbing a softball interview with Katie Couric.

On a side note, to anyone who attacks Katie Couric for that interview... Asking which newspapers she reads is a gotcha question? If Palin doesn't read newspapers, she could have said so, and then said where she does get her news from, assuming she gets it from anywhere. Lying in response to such a minor question is just a bad idea.

Bradford said...

PK and GROG-

Lets see, PK is hating on the president in a time of war (exactly what he argued against last year at this time) and GROG is arguing that the economy should crash and rooting against the USA (like a good conservative should I guess).

Funny how an election changes their moral compass.

Matt said...

@Matt & Matt:

There are (at least) three Matts posting here. I posted about the NY Senate and Teddy Kennedy; the other two Matts posted more directly on point, about why damnlibruls hate on Sarah.

For the record, I don't hate her. I don't respect her, because of her anti-intellectualism, hypocrisy, lying, and etc. I did hate GW Bush, largely because of his arrogance, fratboy lack of respect for those in his presence, and because he was born on third base and thought he'd hit a triple. There's a lot of overlap between my assessment of the two; perhaps I can't actually hate on Sarah because she's cuter than Dubya. All I can say is that her voice doesn't rip through my consciousness the way that Dubya's did.

Hey, I've got an idea: why don't all posters register as "Matt?" We could have our own Malkovich moment.

markymark said...

On the whole economy thing. I think Biden's point is that the economy was much worse than they expected coming in. I think that he was saying that things haven't picked up a lot yet simply because Bush left the economy worse than they had expected!

GROG said...

markymark:

Isn't that a pretty big mistake? I mean, the Great Depression was pretty bad, and all we heard during the election that Bush created the "worst economy since the Great Depression", and yet they still underestimated it.

Shouldn't someone on the left forget about Palin or Limbaugh for a few minutes and try to find out why they were so terrribly wrong?

Boing said...

Pragmatus - yes, talking bullshit is certainly unheard of in any boardroom.

EmonOkari said...
This post has been removed by the author.
Tony C. said...

Palin's Irrelevancy Shall Be Televised...


Bradford says: I don't think she has the intellect or maturity to manage a daily radio or TV show.

OMG, have you ever read anything about media personalities, divas, the entertainment folk? Trust me, no intellect or maturity are needed; in fact both can be a hindrance, they get in the way of those good free publicity stunts.

Palin has national name recognition and is adored by 20% of the population, she has star power. The top pundits on cable make millions per year, each, and they do not enjoy her level of fame.

Somebody (probably Rupert) will pay millions in cold cash for her face, body, voice, cute mannerisms, and demonstrated willingness to say absolutely anything and commit verbal assassination with that beauty queen fake concern. In my opinion, Palin is just a cynical whore that got lucky because a decrepit old fool was desperate and facing political death.

Along with the millions in direct salary will come another few million to cover her ghost and joke writers, managers, assistants, makeup and wardrobe crew and round-the-clock nannies so she never actually has to do any work raising Trig or her kids.

Staff is fairly cheap in Hollywood; $50K a month should cover her personal staff, and $125K a month the professional staff for a talk show.

What is not cheap is "talent," by which they mean the ability to draw a crowd. That is something she has, for now, so I have no doubt she will get a show. She as much as told us in her announcement; bringing up the $500K in legal bills they face.

So she will be televised, and that is wonderful news for Rupert, for her own financial position, for her supporters, and ultimately for Democrats.

Because the big loser will be the Republican Party. Like her cohorts Limbaugh and Hannity, Palin will further polarize and split the Republicans into two permanent minority parties that cannot reconcile. Then, like her cohorts, she will be vocal but irrelevant on the national stage, just another of the village idiots exercising the right of free speech they would deny to others.

In the village idiots stage show: She will be the one dressed like an Eskimo.

EmonOkari said...

Isn't that a pretty big mistake? I mean, the Great Depression was pretty bad, and all we heard during the election that Bush created the "worst economy since the Great Depression", and yet they still underestimated it.

Some here would argue that the lesson to be learned in all this is: "NEVER again underestimate the colossal magnitude to which Republicans can completely f@%# over the economy."

Mark Hussein in VA said...

I think of Palin like an asteroid. No one (other than hard-core astronomers) pays a lick of attention to a huge chunk of detritus wandering the universe--unless you think it might be on a collision course with Earth. The possibility of Palin ascending to POTUS is no less fearful than imagining watching the massive object that slammed down at the KT boundary as it approached. However, once I'm certain her trajectory will miss the Presidency (or Vice-Presidency), I'll be delighted to again ignore her on-going soap opera just as I ignore the countless rocks wandering the universe it darkness.

PeteKent said...

Hey Pragmatus,

You are very sloppy in your ctitiques and crnakiness. I never frame my posts in terms of "hate" as you stated above.

In fact, it is the left wing fringe here who in fact are over the top in their hatred and the venom they spew about Palin that are the real haters.

BTW the Prez is doing a sucky job back in the USSR. No one went to his speech today and Putin and Medvedev dissed him royally.

He looks tired . . . .

"Let's hear it for the Rainbow Tour, its been an incredible success . . . . "

petekent01 (on twitter)

PeteKent said...

How could Obama and Biden have "misunderestimated" how bad the economy was? Did they not believe their own campaign speeches from the Summer and Fall? Jeez, they ran for election on how bad things were. Don’t y’all remember?

Were they lying then or now?


It’s only a matter of time before hypocrites are unmasked. The day of reckoning is coming sooner now that the opposition has a leader: Sarah Palin (who btw unlike the Prez has been doing some excellent Press avails all of a sudden).

petekent01 (on twitter)

PeteKent said...

By Mark Husseins logic Palin must be a leading contender for prez. The media and the public cannot get enough of her.

Glad to see she still sends shivers down your spines. Me? I get a thrill up my leg -- but at least I am not a homo like Chris Matthews about it!

petekent01 (on twitter)

Dave said...

@Matt, the one who posted about the NY Senate (mine too):

Another person to blame for the deadlocked NY Senate is Senator Dean Skelos, the Republican leader who seeks to regain his Majority Leader post. He is the one who, in 2002, added a seat to the senate so it would contain an even number (62) of senators when it had previously contained an odd number (61), greatly increasing the chance for a tied chamber. As the Republican in charge of redistricting in 2001-2002, he did this because he needed to protect all his upstate GOP incumbents from having even one district erased due to population shifts (to NYC) in the 1990s. Adding a seat to NYC enabled him to do this.

It would be abhorrent for him to benefit from his actions stemming from his purely political motives.

P.S. Like you, Matt, there is another poster here with a username which matches mine (Dave). I rarely post here, and my twin doesn't appear to, either, and he doesn't post anything too controversial.

murphro2 said...

I understand the desire to be thoughtful when talking about Palin, or any polarizing political figure. When each side holds opinions it considers 'obvious' yet those opinions are mutually incomprehensible to the other side, then there is a place, even a desperate need, for reasoned analysis. Alas, this post while very level-headed is not particularly illuminating beyond the culture war point.

One could say Palin is quintessentially American, but then what does this mean? Does it mean Americans love stupid? Does it mean we are apt to have stupid foisted upon us, especially when it comes in attractive clothing?

I think any analysis of Palin has to deal with two psychological aspects: 1. her psychology, and 2. the psychology of the reaction to her. In the first case the tangled web of her ideas and emotions could take a lifetime to untangle, if it were even possible. The latter case is truly the more interesting one and as this posts hints at the more cogent aspect of the whole Palin celebrity.

I think on a truly gut level Palin says all the things this generation of conservatives want to hear. Everything from saying her husband and family come first to everyone who disagrees 'pals around with terrorists'. On the other side, none of the facts seem to line up. Those who disagree with her politically see in her sanctified ramblings the fundamental disconnect between conservatives and reality. She is given a lot of credit by her supporters for having Trig (or "Trig" as Palin refers to him), but one wonders is that so extraordinary? The first implication of this celebration is that liberals revel in aborting such pregnancies (a straw man if ever there was one). The other is that few take such pregnancies to term. But is that true? I have not seen any statistics on this but my sense is that it is not.

Any long look at the Palin house shows that Sarah is not a particularly attentive mother. Not to say she is a bad mother, but just not any sort of role model. In particular while she plays up that she has a special needs baby she has not, to this point, made any effort to set aside her life in order to meet those needs. Much like John Edwards trying to get all the sympathy for his wife's condition while not actually altering his life much to address it. I think after other explanations for leaving office meet with derision and/or skepticism we should prepare to hear her said she left in order to care for Trig -as she flies off to the next conference celebrating her.

The difference between Palin and other politicians like Sanford or Edwards is that she seems to have a well of these contradictions just lying around waiting to be alternately exploited and exposed.

Palin will not go quietly now that so many have pumped up and fed into her napolean complex. She thinks now that she has earned it, despite what so many others think. How can one explain such comments as 'I am fighter not a quitter' right after quitting her job as governor? There is no explaining it. It is simply a hint of the price her supporters will pay when the bill comes due.

GROG said...

Tony C's angry rant is typical of the left's criticism of Palin. They don't criticize her policies or beliefs. Instead they call her a dumb whore and accuse her husband of being a drug dealer. Great analysis.

In the meantime, the brilliant President and his band of geniuses didn't know how bad the economy was.

But that's OK, because Palin's a whore.

Andre said...

GROG-

What ARE her policies? THAT is the main criticism of her. She's just an empty talking head, I'd think she'd be better off as one of the pretty lady talking heads on Fox News. And no, I don't mean the usual Republican talking points. She's had plenty of opportunities to sit down and communicate her vision for America and instead she chooses to get in verbal feuds with talk show hosts. I have far more respect, even though I disagree with them, for politicians like Mitt Romney or Mike Huckabee, because at least I get the sense that they know what they're talking about. I truly believe this woman has absolutely no clue what's going on...and that's scary.

PeteKent said...

Murphro2 begins his anti-Palin screed by suggesting that everyone else holds extreme and mutually contradictory opinions and that he is going to treat us to a balanced view.

Oh, well!

He calls her and her supporters stupid, mischaracterizes her positions and castigates her for some inflammatory language on the campaign trail (contrast this with Obama-Biden who all of a sudden forgot in January how we were facing depression—the depression they campaigned against for months).

Frankly, I don’t buy that hers is a “tangled web of her ideas and emotions” at all. I think she is straight forward and consistent in her views and although in a couple of seminal moments may have expressed herself badly in the face of media hostility that she was clearly unprepared for (but is more than well-armed against now, btw she is giving successful, interviews to all the nets again at the moment and since you are not seeing any clips of gaffes you can be sure they are going well indeed), she has no problem getting across her ideas or where she stands. Contrast this with the fraud Obama who took pains to conceal his left wing ideology and affinity for all things Muslim when he ran for office. Don’t expect Palin would govern any differently from what she says she will do.

Murph says, “Any long look at the Palin house shows that Sarah is not a particularly attentive mother.” On what is that based? Because her daughter happened to get pregnant under her roof? Shit happens in families and I suspect many in middle America and the heartland can relate to this particular bit of business, so why bring it up? Like baby Trig is brought up. Is there something unsettling to you about a real person dealing with real problems? One need only watch the extensive filmed interactions of Palin with her children and you can see a naturalness to her motherhood and family. Leave it alone. That her daughter may have wound up pregnant does not by any means suggest she cannot be a role model. We are will have issues in our lives – we are judged not by avoiding them but by how we deal with them and ion that level thus far Sarah Palin remains a success.

In her life I see no contradictions like with Sanford or Edwards. Nice try, murph, perhaps you should have thrown Blago into the mix for good measure. Or Larry Craig – okay, lets leave that comparative to Obama it suits him better!

Palin is authentic and unconventional. Thanks to the long list of enemies who are consorting against her it became impossible for her to be an effective governor. She did this for the people of Alaska and the nation. When she finally unmasks Obama as the Emperor with No Clothes and exposes all of his short comings, she will be hailed by the people as a hero, then she can write whatever ticket she wants.

petekent01 (on twitter)

Charles said...

At this stage, I doubt many people on the left HATE Palin. She's blown her chance of getting to the White House and no longer is a threat. It's more political reality TV on the lines: "Gee, heard of Palin's latest antics?"

I quite agree she's now more a political novelty than a serious contender for national office. Sure, she has her vocal fans, but they're not even enough to in a GOP primary. I trust she'll get a lot of publicity during the primaries (I don't see her not running), but trust she'll end up empty-handed. In that respect similar she'll be similar to Dean.

RWD said...

I'm sure wondering how the "Obama economy", which is all of 6 months old (almost) can crash and burn worse than Bush economy already has. Bush left us a legacy of corporate fraud, unsustainable and value-free growth, and debt. The Bush legacy will haunt this economy for years no matter what Obama does or doesn't do.

RWD said...

I don't really care about Palin's family life and I don't really think it has any relevance to discussing her as a politician.

What bothers me is her obvious incompetence in public life. She is a quitter who refuses to live up to her committments. She is also horribly dishonest. The fact that she can't even fulfill her oath of office as Governor is prima facie evidence of this.

Despite this, some conservative idiots like Pete Kent continue to lionize her as if she is some hero. It's a really sad statement about this country that quitting is somehow considered heroic.

markymark said...

GROG, they are. I don't suppose that the White House is spending every waking hour thinking about Palin. But it is intersting, if slightly silly season stuff, for those of us who don't have to worry about the economy.

And why didn't the Dems realise just how bad the economy was? Well for a start there is information that the administration keeps to itself, but on top of that, maybe they were underestimating just how much of a screw up had been made of the economy. Now here I am not specifically blaming the Bush administration. Perhaps the Obama administration had missed just how many banks and businesses had put themselves into real trouble.

Or perhaps its just the Obama adminstration letting Biden off the leash to make an early defense for when things don't pick up as quickly as the American voters would like. All administrations say that kind of thing 'oh things were much worse than we expected'. No one ever comes in and says 'you know something, the last bunch didn't screw up nearly as much as we thought they had.'

PeteKent said...

RWD--
Obama is the one who is ruining the economy with his false economic plan and unsustainable deficits. Bush did not create the financial bubble that burst -- these things have been part and parcel of the business cycle for years. In fact, he lifted the nation out of the Clinton recession he inherited with the tried and true remedy of tax rate cuts.

Economic problems can be fixed if you know what you are doing.

Obama on the other hand is seemingly heedless of the people's misery, signing a pretend stim-u-less bill that was really just a cover for a big special interest give way to the likes of ACORN (virtually nothing in the way of infrastructure spending) and pushing forward with new taxes on energy and everything we make (cap and trade) while seeking to re-make health care in accordance with his European welfare state vision in the face of unsustainable budget deficits.

True Obama, like Reagan, inherited a bad economy, but unlike Reagan who knew what to do - cut taxes and incentivize the creation of private sector jobs, Obama clings to an ideological vision that was discredited in the 70s.

As America awakes to slow-no growth future and millions upon millions remain dissatisfied with their personal and their neighbors’ employment situations the voters will turn against him.

The turn will begin with the drubbing of the Pelosi-Reid Democrats in 2010 and will end when Obama is ushered out of office, a once popular but now failed curiosity.

PS: Politicians quit all the time -- they are forever moving up and on. So it will be with Palin. If she can make plain the failures and hypocrisies of the Obama administration, then the fact that she left her job as governor will be but a footnote in her glorious history.

petekent01 (on twitter)

Anna said...

Peter Kent: Stop scaring yourself to death with this Muslim thing: Obama's mother was an anthropologist so she would have had her kid studying whatever the local culture was doing. If they had been in Canada, it would have been ice hockey.

Furthermore, his first school in Indonesia was Catholic. Is it your view that chanting the Koran in a language you do not understand is so much more persuasive than whatever part of Catholic doctrine Obama was exposed to?

RWD said...

"True Obama, like Reagan, inherited a bad economy, but unlike Reagan who knew what to do - cut taxes "

Pete, please tell me: what was the highest marginal tax rate when Reagan took office? And how does that compare to the highest marginal tax rate when Obama took office?

It seems like you are the one who is clinging to the 1970s. When Reagan took office, the highest tax rates were so high that you could cut taxes and incentivize growth. That wasn't true 6 months ago when Obama took office.

Contemporize, man.

PeteKent said...

On Obama and the economy -- go back and listen to his speeches.

No way he did not realize how bad things were -- he kept trumpeting it every day. He might have made things worse with his rhetoric on how bad things were it was so negative.

Obama lied to the people in his stim -u-less bill when he said it would keep unemployment from topping 8% (it's now 9.5% and climbing). He lied again in his budgets which projected growth of 4% -- not gonna happen and he knew it. Every economist criticized those projections.

Obama needed to lie about how bad the economy was so he could fool us into buying into his massive rebirth of the US into a European "social" democracy. Otherwise people would ralize we could not afford his spending which is his real agenda (wait till he endorses paying “reparations” for slavery).

Chances are now that everyone is figuring out what an incompetent liar he is (he can't even spend out his fake stimuless) or get the economy to react to his massive economic engineering and confiscation of industries, he won't get health care reform either.

Good! I hope he fails!

petekent01 (on twitter)

PeteKent said...

RWD:

There is plenty of opportunity to cut taxes -- lets start with corporate rates and certainly no room to raise income taxes.

It is Obama and you who are mired in the past, stuck in a 1970s time warp that will only lead to misery, stagflation and politcal defeat.

Good. I hope he fails!

Oh, and Anna, Obama's mother was a Muslim-loving welfare queen who spirited her kid into the country illegally and lied about his place of birth in order to assure she could collect a check for him too!

petekent01 (on twitter)

RWD said...

Wow, Pete. So far you've brought up "Obama is a muslim", ACORN, and "reparations for slavery".

Nice work. Now how does this relate to...well, anything, really, but especially to the topic at hand, which is Palin the quitter?

Bradford said...

Palin's positions are but a breeze blowing through her head, and can change at any minute. Is being gov the most important, or least important, thing?

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/7/7/750634/-Once-upon-a-time,-Palin-wanted-to-be-governor

Bradford said...
This post has been removed by the author.
RWD said...

Pete, you still didn't answer the question. What was the highest marginal rate when Reagan took office? And how does that compare to the current rate?

And if you think cutting corporate taxes will make a difference, well, you're dreaming. Do you think the problems with GM, with Wells Fargo, or any of the many troubled companies in our economy are caused by corporate income taxes? LOL. You have to make a profit to pay taxes, Pete.

archer said...

Sometimes I try to imagine her on my side of the political fence--feisty union gal, union parents, struggled through college, climbed the political ladder out of some small town in, Vermont, delightfully and tartly pro-choice and pro-public option, and those cheekbones. I'd probably have such a crush on her it wouldn't even be funny. It might be so bad I'd vote for her. I'm telling you, guys have their brains in their pants.

sagethoughts said...

Isn't it obvious what Palin has in mind? She knows she has no chance to win election to the White House and is not even likely to win a republican presidential nomination.

On the other hand her educational background in communications and journalism, her working experience in local t.v. and her family debts all make her next move obvious. She will end up with a talk show on Fox News. It complements all her strengths and her lack of a sophisticated knowledge of public affairs won't be a problem at all!

joehandyla said...

The reason I think so many people are afraid of Palin is that we'll never forget the 2000 and 2004 elections when somehow enough idiots were fooled by Bush/Cheney to vote for him and despite how obviously unprepared Palin is for any elected position, that doesn't seem to matter to a lot of voters. Go figure, but we'll never get too complacent again, it's too important. You can only shudder to think of McCain/Palin being in charge of things now. It would be a disaster and we would have missed out all of the wonderful progress Obama is already making on so many fronts.

Palin is like that bad driver on the road...you can tell by their driving that you can't trust them and they will inevitably get into an accident...so you better keep an eye on them, so their accident doesn't involve you.

PeteKent said...

RWD-
If you don’t think cutting taxes for corporations when our businesses are among the highest taxed in the world and that is a principal reason for outsourcing, then my educating you about marginal tax rates under Reagan won’t help you.

This is clear: Obama is spending recklessly and uselessly and his one tax cut of $8 a week is not helping!

petekent01 (on twitter)

PeteKent said...

josefhandyla:

LOL "wonderful progress we are making" under Obama. ROTFALMAO

I think one reason why you all fear Palin so much is that Obama proves anybody, no matter how inexperienced and how extreme their politix can be president as long as they are good communcicators!

petekent01 (on twitter)

joehandyla said...

I personally think she is going to try the Joe Scarborough approach, getting some kind of TV show to make the money she wants and start to form some kind of base from which to operate. And she'll find enough candidates to pay her to come to their rallies (to bring larger crowds). Kind of like Newt Gingrich, who likes the idea of being a power broker, but has no chance personally of ever being a viable candidate again themselves.

Tom's right, she's more likely to become a political novelty, the way Ann Coulter is and others. I don't see her getting a new political life, like Nixon did.

harold said...

Mike in Maryland -

Please read my post again.

I didn't think or say that you were castigating Ted Kennedy.

I understood that you were taking the opposite stance of the right wing posters. It is a rather serious insult to my intelligence to imply that I did not understand this.

I really would appreciate it if you didn't throw me in with the Wingnuts. I find that association to be (at the very, very least) quite unwelcome. And I'm sure that Porridgegun has the same or similar thoughts on the subject of that type of association.

It is not logical to assume that, if a post is addressed to multiple readers, that the author is implying that all addressed readers are identical.

You, I, Porridgegun, and everyone else here is associated with the wingnuts I referred to - we are reading the same blog.

I addressed my post to everyone else who was discussing the subject.

RWD said...

" my educating you about marginal tax rates under Reagan won’t help you"

LOL. Since I already know the answer, why don't you then educate yourself about it? it might be informative to you.

And I reiterate: if you think corporate income taxes are any sort of cause of the current economic problems, you are absurdly out of touch. Let me educate you again: companies that are not making a profit pay nothing in corporate income tax.

Cricket said...

IP banning would be such a boon to this site, really. I'm finding it difficult to find the comments that pertain to the post through all of the dreck. Lessee, the comments started out on topic, then veered onto Ted Kennedy (?!?), and seem to have crash-landed on who is more to blame for the current economic mess.

Bleh.

I miss when the commenters here spent time discussing statistics. granted, this post was pretty thin gruel, but this sort of OT mess has become typical. Nothing said by either the liberal or conservative commenters on this thread really varies from ideological boilerplate (with PK as the most egregious offender).

And now I've posted the obligatory "I miss the good old days" post :).

Todd Dugdale said...

PK wrote:
"Oh, and Anna, Obama's mother was a Muslim-loving welfare queen who spirited her kid into the country illegally and lied about his place of birth in order to assure she could collect a check for him too!"

Yes, go ahead and slander a dead woman, Mr. Kent.

It makes it more humorous when you rake others over the metaphorical coals for "attacking" Palin.

Way to keep it classy, PK!

Maybe the Right should go after Michelle Obama. You know, call her "Stokely Carmichael in a dress", or make fun of her bare arms, laugh about her garden, or go nuts about her etiquette around the Queen.
Oh, yes, that's already been done, hasn't it?

If "unconventional" and "out the box" are such winning qualities for a politician to have, then what is the Right's problem with Franken?
It's only a good thing when Republicans are "unconventional", isn't it?

And Obama didn't "lie" about unemployment, nor did he "promise" it would be under 8%. He made a prediction - kind of like when you, PK, predicted that the Greek columns on the stage of the DNC would cause Obama to lose the election. The difference here being that his prediction was based on facts and real-world analysis, and yours was based on the Voices In Your Head and magical thinking.

sagethoughts:
I think it is obvious she will go into media. That is where she will "fight", in the same way that Beck, Hannity and Limbaugh "fight". See how difference they have made?

The Right is under a delusion that, if only their "message" can be heard, then Obama will be despised.
It's as if the months of Republicans screeching about "secret Muslim" and "terrorist connections" never happened. Each new hyperbolic assault appears in a vacuum to them, and each is the one that will break Obama wide open.

The missing ingredient is credibility.

A new voice (in this case, Palin) shouting the same old lines will not have any effect. The base is already "energised" into apoplexy. If there is much more "energising", they will have massive wingnut strokes on their hands. Those outside of the base have heard this all a thousand times before, and merely yawn. And this is how they imagine that they can win it all back: by shouting more.

peglyn61 said...

for anyone curious, Nate made it through to Day 2B at the WSOP with 61,550 in chips- above average. He'll play again tomorrow.

Pragmatus said...

I see PeteKent is now claiming everyone “fears” Sarah Palin instead of “hates” her. Nobody fears Sarah Palin, except perhaps for those who worked for the State of Alaska at her sufferance. She’s a poodle. Nobody is afraid of poodles.

Petey, you need to get out in the world more.

Stephen said...

She has prominent cheekbones, but I don't think she is particularly attractive physically.

Putting her knocked-up unmarried teen daughter and the boy who knocked her up on stage and running as a "hockey mom" made the failures of abstinence-only education at home a legitimate issue. The lack of educational attainment of her sons should have been, and we'll see if her 16-year-old daughter makes it to 20 without getting knocked up.

And she decided to bear a Down's Syndrome child. Taking care of Trig's special needs—or even those of a generic infant—somehow didn't make it into the stream of reasons for quitting her job as executive of a state with a small population.

Pragmatus said...

This should send GROG and PeteKent fleeing to the solace of the crack pipe…

Pragpro said...

If Palin had nailed that speech on the third she would have successfully implemented her tactic. She did not. Even the ducks were quacking, "No!"

Who cares? The GOP sharps want Romney. Palin will split votes with Huckabee. She might win Iowa, but there is nothing to suggest her ground game will be sound, let alone epic. Romney would win New Hampshire where she might finish fourth. Huckabee and Palin would split South Carolina.

Rush Limbaugh might want to be scuuuurd. She could be a media marm, but if she thinks she can communicate her way into millions, she's in for a shock. She's a bad communicator. So maybe she recognizes that she can maximize he bully pulpit as de facto GOP leader, but it's a bad plan, and it makes Obama look really, really good.

Winner: Obama.
Loser: My sanity.

Dwight said...

Come on folks, there is no scandal that is going to chase her to resign. She's already been coughing up cash to cover some of her improprieties. But resigning doesn't get you out of serious legal jams, it just cuts you off from a power base you can use to try fight them.

No, she's headed somewhere. Cashing in is the most likely though I'm still not convinced that she doesn't have some wacky scheme to get elected outside Alaska (as I suggested a wildcard run at Texas Gov, a state where she definitely has money support and where there appears to be already two strong candidates to have a way to win through a split vote situation) if only within the GOP's internal administration (as someone suggested, Steele's job) or just a de facto cheerleader for those running for reelection in jurisdictions where she wouldn't be a boat anchor for candidates.

Jesse said...

Let me guess...Tom is a white straight guy? I don't think any one who is a person of color, a woman, or a queer person (like myself) would agree that issues of race, sexual mores, or feminism are behind us. One election (during a major economic crisis) - where some of these issues took a back seat - does not translate into putting the culture wars behind us. This post will not stand the test of time, I'd wager it would not stand the test of even one election cycle.

harold said...

Matthew said -

Mule Rider is at the WSOP and intends to do Nate bodily harm after hours.

If that's true he'll be taken down by security or LVPD, and then end up behind bars.

Opus 132 said...

Score another victory for PeteKent!

Once again he sucks in otherwise intelligent commentors (Pragmatus,markymark,Todd Dugdale,Bradford,Boing,etc.) to respond to his trolling.

And what is particularly amazing is that,as far as I can gather as I have him blocked,he posts the same thing every day and still gets people to respond!

If there were a Troll Of The Year Award he would win it hands down.

If anybody wants to block his posts,go to:

http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/43818

EmonOkari said...
This post has been removed by the author.
EmonOkari said...

Putting her knocked-up unmarried teen daughter and the boy who knocked her up on stage and running as a "hockey mom" made the failures of abstinence-only education at home a legitimate issue. The lack of educational attainment of her sons should have been, and we'll see if her 16-year-old daughter makes it to 20 without getting knocked up.

And she decided to bear a Down's Syndrome child. Taking care of Trig's special needs—or even those of a generic infant—somehow didn't make it into the stream of reasons for quitting her job as executive of a state with a small population.


And I personally commend her family for that decision. Perhaps raising a special needs child isn't viewed as such a 'nuisance' to them, that it would ever be viewed as a viable reason for resigning public office.

Many have stated (including the sitting president) that attacks on family have no place in American politics. There's certainly enough arguments that cast doubt on Palin's ability to be an effective national leader...one surely has no need to bring her children into it. (No more so than Meghan McCain, Liz Cheney, Jenna Bush, or Sasha Obama)

Delorian said...

'for anyone curious, Nate made it through to Day 2B at the WSOP with 61,550 in chips- above average. He'll play again tomorrow.'

Good news. Is there a way for us (the general public) to track the progress of individual players online, or do you know this from (non-public) inside information?

Todd Dugdale said...

Opus 132 wrote:
"Once again he sucks in otherwise intelligent commentators"

Well, in my defence, this is what happens whenever there is a prolonged gap between posts; it degenerates into PK versus reality. And Pete Kent is off his game here, too. There's plenty of crazy and idiocy left in that well, but he's chosen to go for quantity over quality.

Also, GreaseMonkey does not work in my browser (Mozilla Seamonkey), so I can't really use the script.

PK serves a purpose in the "There but for the grace of God go I" sense. He is a clear example of the delusions, contradictions, hateful hopes, and wild hyperbole that must be embraced these days to be considered a "Real American" in the eyes of the Right.

The "middle ground" has been replaced by a gaping abyss that requires a profound leap of faith in either direction. Sadly, that situation plays out in the microcosm here.

For my part, as an "otherwise intelligent commentator", I will refrain from taking PK's bait any further on this thread and will try to exercise more restraint in future.

DermottTrellis said...

New Rasmussen poll: 40% of Republicans say resigning HURTs Sarah Q. Palin for 2012, 24% HELPs, 28% no impact.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections2/election_2012/40_of_gop_voters_say_resignation_hurts_palin_s_chances_in_2012

Delorian said...

Thanks, Matthew. I am a 'long-time reader, first time poster' who hopes to comment more frequently going forward.

Let me start with this:

'The "middle ground" has been replaced by a gaping abyss that requires a profound leap of faith in either direction.'

I sadly agree that this is what much of the political discourse has become today. I would like to think that I am part of this middle ground who refuses to jump. Although I voted for George W. Bush both times, I soured on his administration during the second term. I initially supported McCain in the primaries (as a most moderate, therefore electable, option) but I soured on him when he (unexpectantly to me) shifted rightward during the general election and especially when he nominated Palin. I voted for Obama (first vote for a Dem since becoming eligble in 1992). I generally support him as president going forward, although the size of post stimulus projected deficit concerns me. I am open to the Republicans winning me back, but for that to happen I would need to see more fiscal conservatism and less wingnut social rhetoric.

Pragmatus said...

Opus 132…

Well, if we’re keeping score, you’ve chalked another point up for PK with your post too. See how hard it is to resist? You don’t get any points for “nobility”—you have made a post on the topic of PK the same as anyone else.

PK will be with us, I’m afraid, whether people ignore him or not. My purpose is to poke fun at him, easy enough to do. Nothing upsets the self-righteous like not being taken seriously.

The only thing that will get rid of him (and his ilk) is terminal apoplexy. I’m just trying to hasten the process along…

PeteKent said...

DFelorian,

I suspect you are never going to be won back by the GOP if you are "generally supporting" what Obama is doing now (Cap & Trade, his version Health Care Reform, coddling dictators, wasteful unstimulative spending). None of that is at all consistent with GOP priciples or fiscal conservatism. Then again, perhaps you are not a very keen observer of what is going on . . . in which case STFU!

PeteKent said...

Prgmatus,

Do you actually have anything to say or do you just exist to criticize my posts and those of the other posters you disagree with?

I am here to afficted the comfortable, by pointing out the falacious dream world you all live in.

With NBC News at the van, you all live in some sort of reversed lens of the Truman Show or something.

You all just want to dismiss Palin as some sort of money hungry Neandethal. I am here to remind you of her charming authenticity and the fact that the conservative majoirty in the is country loves her - - a majority that is growing larger everyday.

Did you all notice in Rasmussen's numbers Obama has sunk back to where he was on election day? A marginally successful candidate. He reached his peak in Janaury and its been all downhill from there.

As his economic programs are unmasked as failures, and as people continue their very real suffering under his wrong-headed policies they will turn on him in droves.


petekent01 (on twitter)

markymark said...

Pk wrote
Obama is the one who is ruining the economy with his false economic plan and unsustainable deficits. Bush did not create the financial bubble that burst -- these things have been part and parcel of the business cycle for years. In fact, he lifted the nation out of the Clinton recession he inherited with the tried and true remedy of tax rate cuts.
--------------------------

Wow, that was almost Palinesque in its flipping back on itself as comments go.

What PK seems to be saying is that 6 months of Obama has ruined the economy that Bush had no hand in. And in fact Bush helped the economy recover from the 'Clinton recession'. I mean wow. So Obama and Clinton were the cause of economic failure, Bush was not. In fact Bush helped the eceonomy recover!

I have no issue with the argument that actually a President can't do that much to help the economy, but if your going to make that argument, you have to accept that a succesful economy is not the President's achievement.

(And I haven't even mentioned that the 'Clinton Recession' is somewhat of a myth. You could I suppose blame the recession which started once Bush was in office on Clinton's economic policies, but again to do that and then turn around and claim that Bush has nothing to do with the current economy is somewhat inconsistent.)

Put it this way PK, honestly if you had taken over as President in January, what would you have done? How would you have handled the economy differently?

I have a personal theory that this economic downturn has had little to do with politicians. I think this is an economic collapse that has a lot to do with a very short term view on lending and capital having been taken by the financial industry. I have a feeling it was probably 20 years in the making, at least, and short of more regulation of financial activities and the financial industry I can't really see how government could have acted to avoid it. I am not entirely convinced that any government activity is going to improve the economy, unless some kind of massive public works program could happen, maybe for instance building sources of renewable energy. I think what is needed is activity to make sure that its worst excesses aren't that bad. I think that does involve government investment and it does involve making sure that as many people as possible have adequate health insurance. It might be better that this wasn't done as deficit spending, but short of huge tax rises thats probably inevitable.

Pragmatus said...

PeteKent…

I accused you yesterday of having an education. I hereby take that back. I was wrong. Anyone who can’t find his way through the thicket presented by the word “Neanderthal” deserves all the sympathy he can get.

markymark said...

And PK points out that Obama's popularity is the same as it was on election day. When he won, remember. And he quotes the most right wing of pollsters to make that point. Do we dare compare his popularity rating now with George W Bush's a year ago?

Vern said...

Palin as "social warrior" totally misses the point. Social issues have never been a major part of her politics. Palin's appeal is a variation on Ron Paul's appeal, and more linked to the still misunderstood Tea Party phenomenon (where they now actively BOO most Republicans who show up).

She represents a populist uprising against both parties, against the monied well-connected elites who run Washington more or less the same way no matter which party wins. The irony here is that most of these populists hate Bush as much as anyone. How people could see her as some kind of Bush redux is baffling to her supporters.

Palin is the anti-candidate. Everything she does that upends, confuses or undermines the traditional political approach only furthers her appeal.

In a nation of dysfunctional government in places like CA and NY, not to mention DC, a true radical that doesn't play by the same rules has an appeal the pundits can't fathom.

History shows these types of figures are the truly transformative ones, either for good or bad.

Pragmatus said...

PeteKent…

One more thing—you claim that “the conservative majoirity [sic] . . . is growing larger every day”. This is a slight misstatement. The conservative majority isn’t growing; it’s the conservatives themselves. They’re getting fatter. It’s what happens when you sit around fulminating in front of a computer screen all day, stuffing yourself with chips and HoHos.

Mike in Maryland said...

Palin will only be able to make it:

1. In print, and only then with an iron-fisted editor who has the power to edit Palin's ramblings to a somewhat coherent semblance of unity and intelligence - in other words, to completely rewrite what Palin writes; or

2. On Faux News, where the 'viewers' are only viewing, not listening.

She has no hope of making it on radio, as her scatter-shot, rambling, incoherent and inconsistent 'information' will drive people away. After all, when a person is on the radio, there are no visuals to entice a person to stay tuned.

Mike in Maryland

My Blogger ID is http://www.blogger.com/profile/02848893412251095965

Todd Dugdale said...

Delorian,
I'm glad that you decided to comment here. There is a lot of assertion and speculation from both sides (and certainly from me) as to what will and will not appeal to voters such as yourself. Hopefully you can make the discussion more "empirical" as you weigh in more frequently.

You have already seen the response from one side regarding your 'apostasy'. I'd be interested in how persuasive you find this approach to be.

Delorian said...

I have been insulted by Pete Kent. Is my initiation complete, or are there any other steps I need to take before joining the club?

For the benefit of the rest of the readers:

Cap & Trade - I believe we need to encourage conversion to renewable energy, through a combination of tax breaks for production/use of renewable methods, and regulations/taxes to discourage fossil fuel use. My biggest concern regarding cap and trade is that we can't control what others (India and China) do, so it may encourage outsourcing, rather than reducing, of fossil fuel production. However, the fact that any bill is being discussed is a good thing, as this is an issue that will need to be addressed, and the sooner the better.

Health Care Reform - I support this. Health care should be a right, not a privilege.

Coddling Dictators - This is not what he is doing.

Wasteful unstimulative spending - This does concern me, as I alluded to previously.

So that's one thumbs up, one thumbs down, one in between, and one 'not applicable'. In other words, somewhere in the middle, like I said.

Dwight said...

BTW if Fox News is getting ready to pay Sarah Palin a bag of cash for a regular show Liz "both, if we could" Trotta sure didn't get the memo.

Pragmatus said...

Delorian…

You sound a lot like me, except I am very unoptimistic that cap and trade will provide any meaningful relief from CO2 buildup. You are correct in pointing to India and China as the biggest obstacles, while I would add the possibility of homegrown shenanigans that would render such a system equally ineffective. (I’m also one of those guys who thinks global warming doesn’t matter in the long run—we will have another Ice Age before we will have a runaway greenhouse.)

And although I am concerned with the ballooning deficit too, keeping it in context is helpful to my nerves. Ronald Reagan ran up three trillion dollars of debt in the 1980s, and remember those were 1980s dollars. His shortfall was massively larger than the current one in terms of percentage of GDP, and it was Dick Cheney who stated, at the outset of George W. Bush’s tax cuts, that “Ronald Reagan proved that deficits don’t matter.” So for the time being I will take Mr. Cheney at his word, and also take comfort in the fact that World War II expenditures by the US reached a heart-stopping 200% of GDP in 1944 and ’45, yet the post-war inflation had been brought under control by 1950. If I understand macro economics, sometimes money needs to be shoveled willy-nilly into the furnace.

I sincerely hope you come back and post here again. I’m always quite interested in alternate points of view.

Anna said...

Yeah, I know not to feed the trolls but Peter Kent is too funny!

Peter, you explained that Obama's mother was Muslim-loving does seem to me to be an inadequate reason for enrolling him first in a Catholic school. (I'm paying you a tremendous compliment of assuming that you believe even some of what you are saying.)

Secondly, if you meant that the two men that she married were Moslem wrong again:Obama's father was an atheist as was she.

Thirdly, first time I heard that welfare depended on where an American citizen was born -- Presidency yes, welfare no.

Keep it straight.

BlueRevolution said...

PeteKent's comments about Obama's mother and his ancestry just prove my point about the Palin wing of the Republican Party today---insular, isolated, proudly racist. It is not an accident that most the worst excesses of the McCain-Palin campaign occurred at HER rallies. Among the attendees at her politcal gatherings, there was a curious obsession with the 'American values', the 'patriotism', and the 'ancestry' of the Democratic nominee. Even Palin herself repeated the mantra of 'terrorist' over and over again.

So I ask all you conservative bloggers the same question Colin Powell asked---should it really matter to have an African Muslim father? It should not. Obama is as genuinely American as any white person whose ancestors came here in 1620. That anyone still actually questions his constitutional legitimacy to govern is tyical of today's GOP.

Nixon's 'Southern Strategy' of 1972, which forged a lasting conservative coalition largely along racial lines, has at last borne its ugliest fruit. Today's fervent GOP footsoldiers, underneath all of the rhetoric, are just afraid of America's demographic future.


Either you believe that America's values are transcendent and are not tied to the accomplishments and continued presence of a European-descended majority, or you are a white nationalist and believe that America is going into the tiolet because the torch has been passed to 'lesser, darker' folk. You can't have it both ways. Palin's most fervent followers lie clearly in the latter group. If the GOP wants to be relevant into the 21st century, they are going to have to rid themselves of that racist lot and re-cast modern conservativism as universal.

As for the GOP candidates in 2012? Good luck with that.

Matt said...

@Pragmatus:

Opus 132…

Well, if we’re keeping score, you’ve chalked another point up for PK with your post too. See how hard it is to resist? You don’t get any points for “nobility”—you have made a post on the topic of PK the same as anyone else
.

Oh, Prag...

You miss the point.

By occasionally posting when PK gets more out of hand than usual, Opus directs who-knows-how-many people to his invaluable troll-blocking GreaseMonkey script. I don't know how he can better inform new 538'ers about it. So, if I give you your point (that his post increased PK's troll count by 1), then it would be fair of you to admit that his script, and his promotion thereof, reduces many users' views of trolls' trollery. If you give him that, you must agree that the net effect of Opus' post on the Troll Topic is positive.

Thanks, Opus. Based on the latest analysis of all available polling, the consensus is that you do, in fact, rock.

Mike in Maryland said...

Well stated, BlueRevolution.

Mike in Maryland

My Blogger ID is http://www.blogger.com/profile/02848893412251095965

geek said...

The GOP should be looking for a prior Miss America with brains and maturity and beg her to run for political office.

The only attraction of Sarah Palin is a more than decent body for a mother of 47 and a face that does not show the ravages of middle age.

Clearly some lust for women who gives new meaning to the phrase stimulus package and John McCain was seduced by the package ignoring that the contents were missing.

Instead the GOP is confronted with a President of color who can actually communicate thoughtfully and in full sentences and the GOP is stuck holding out hope that Palin will somehow drink from the fountain of knowledge and emerge as smart.

I still look in the mirror everyday hoping that my hair will grow back and the lines of old age will somehow change. The GOP and I have unrealistic expectations and reality bites.

Reoul said...

Palin - I'll be honest. I don't like her. I don't like her personally. I don't care what she says her policies are. I don't like her fake smile, I don't like her phony presentation, I don't like how she plays the victim all the time, I don't like how self-righteous she is, I don't like how she prostitutes her children to gain political points, I don't like how in the VP debate she flustered through the first half and then snapped out her remaining replies like she was an animal backed into a corner, I don't like how she can't address her answers to the questions that she's asked - unless of course it's about the three topics she know a little about.

I'm jaded - I don't trust any politician to really adhere to their campaign promises. All we have is the circus of the media and the candidates performance art to base our judgments on. And based on her performance art - I'd rather have George W. back in office than see her any where near the presidency. And I don't like George W's performance art either. I say it truthfully, my vote this past election was AGAINST PALIN.

What really bothers me the most is the thought that other people do like her. That there is a subset of the population that doesn't want to pray to the porcelain goddess every time she says something. That people think that a false smile, professing christian values, and not even completing her term as governor of a state that has less population than baltimore qualifies her to be president.

I do like PeteKent though. I like petekent because he hates Obama like I hate Palin and yet still feels like he's justified in his hatred by "rational" "arguments". I like PeteKent, because like a elementary school student he feels the need to personally attack anyone who disagrees with him - in fact, you don't have do anything except not hate on Obama for him to personally attack you. I like how he talks about the future as if it were fact. I like his arrogance - that he thinks that he's educating all us "dupes", like he is the only one has Truth with a capital T. PeteKent makes for some really entertaining performance art. Of course, I wouldn't vote his ass into any position of power, either.

I hope PK has some smarmy comment about my post. Keep entertaining me, Pete!

Mark Hussein - That was the best simile ever. I hope you don't mind me quoting it. As PK pointed out the comparison does tacitly imply that she is a leading contender for the presidency. What he willfully ignores is the direct implication that if she won the presidency it would be a catastrophe on a global scale.

Bob X said...

@Delorian: "I have been insulted by Pete Kent. Is my initiation complete, or are there any other steps I need to take before joining the club?" Nope, you're a full-fledged member now!

@Pragmatus: I have to disagree sharply on a couple of points. First of all, you think the next Ice Age will come before global warming kicks in? No, the glaciations are on cycles of tens of thousands of years; the warming will be doing a lot of damage this century.
Secondly, the Reagan deficits sucked out trillions of dollars from the investment pool: all those trillions of dollars invested into non-productive Treasury paper mean trillions of dollars of plant that did not get built or renovated, and the absence of that plant is a scar on our economy to this day. Like lots of people, I heard rumors about an economic boom under Reagan, but did not actually know anybody who was doing well; it depended on where you lived. In some parts of the country, military bases or extractive industries fueled a boom during those years, but that was transitory, while the deindustrialization of the nation was permanent.

PeteKent said...

Palin Finis?
I frankly take her at her word. She had lost her effectiveness as Governor as her enemies made a tormented target out of her to the point where in good conscience she could not continue and discharge her duty. She is right that the state of AK does not need her -- others can do the job. And if she wants to make a difference for the Nation, she is right too that she does not need to cling to her platform as governor to do so.

It is rank speculation at this point as to the impact all this will have on her political ambitions -- whatever they may be. The chattering classes are in an uproar, they cannot fathom it. The CV is that she has committed political suicide. Who knows? In the Age of Obama anything is possible.

I suspect she will not run 2012 but will from this moment on be an active and perhaps leading part of the Opposition to Obama. If she is successful at this, I think she can sit back and wait to be drafted as VEEP. It would be, I think, too great a stretch for her to be elected President after the savage treatment she received. She knows this too, I bet.

But there is no reason why she could not fulfill ably and even spectacularly the role that John McCain first cast her in. Once in the West Wing she becomes an heir apparent and our presumptive first woman president.

Let the wailing and gnashing of teeth continue!

petekent01 (on twitter)

Aversiera said...

But what else should we judge politicians on besides their cheekbones? Policy Schmolicy

wmf48 said...

The media, among others, are lending far too much credibility to SP. Her words are a jumbled, nonsensical mess. It's like throwing a bunch of words in the air and attempting to assemble them into something meaningful once they land, with rare success. We have already seen where it leads the country if our leader has niether the common sense nor intelligence (W) to understand his/her duties as President. Have we not learned any lessons from the Bush Admin? It is frighteningly frustrating to watch all of this unfold...helpless in avoiding a President Palin someday. She may be a fine mother, sister, wife etc. But she falls far short of having the qualifications to run our country.

freefun0616 said...

酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店經紀,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店工作,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,

,