The comments on CNN uniformly condemn Palin as an idiot for taking on Michelle’s anti-fat laws but miss entirely the lesson Palin was imparting to Piper about hard work, something I wish I had the wit and common sense to do with my daughter.
Anyone read the comments on the cnn article? Somethings not right. All 300 comments are pro Michele. WTF kind of selective posting of comments does cnn think it can get away with without becoming totally irelevant as a news site asking for public feedback?
Sarah is a hottie and Michelle is a two-bagger. ’nuff said.
Ms. Palin needs to ^internalize^ the fact that the public comments standards are different for Republicans, as compared with those for Democrats. Too many people sre still swayed unconsciously by Ms. Palin’s “lamestream media”.
Democrats can say all manner of things about Republicans that Republicans can only dream about saying about Democrats. Ms. Palin needs to conduct herself accordingly — not because it’s principled, but because it’s practical. It’s reality.
If she’s at all serious about contending for higher office, she needs to beware, to be ^wary^.
That being said, I thought her comment about Ms. Obama was needlessly snarky, emphasis on “needlessly”. The CNN commenters are correct in that Ms. Obama is not saying (now) that the government should outlaw dessert. That may be down the pike, and it’s the sort of thing that Democrats can say about Republicans with impunity — but it’s just not ^smart^ to say it about the Democrat Ms. Obama. It provides ammunition for the left ^needlessly^.
The old adage that when your adversary is destroying himself, stay out of the way, should apply; Ms. Palin is not only ^not^ staying out of the way, she is ^needlessly^ providing ammunition [but I said that already] — and that ammunition will not be “friendly fire”. It affects those independents who may someday be choosing between Ms. Palin and someone else, and they’ll lean just a little more towards someone else as a result of this latest dig.
I liked and still like Ms. Palin, but it’s getting harder and harder to do so. Kinda like that woman who recently complained to President Obama that she’s finding it harder and harder to defend him.
But I’m digressing . . .
By the way, I, too, took a look at those CNN comments — virtually ^all^ pro- Ms. Obama and anti- Ms. Palin. Welcome to life in early 21st century USA.
SteveH – One of the comments said that Michelle “exudes class.” I’m thinking “From WHERE, exactly?”
I’ve come to see that liberals and conservatives have very different definitions of the word “class.”
Most conservatives say someone like George W. Bush has “class” because he refuses to speak ill of his predecessor despite getting routinely trashed by him, shows the utmost respect for our troops and is always ready with a warm smile. Most liberals think W. has NO class because he wears cowboy hats, hangs out on a ranch, has a funny accent and occasionally mangles words.
To liberals, Sarah has no class because she shoots caribou for dinner, smashes halibut into senselessness, drives four-wheelers through the mud and of course, speaks with a funny accent. And Michelle Obama “exudes class” because she…wears expensive clothes and dines in expensive restaurants.
Yes, I’ve simplified it but the reasoning really is fascinating.
MJR said, “Ms. Palin is not only ^not^ staying out of the way, she is ^needlessly^ providing ammunition.”
I had the same thoughts until this TLC program came out. It appears abundantly clear that Palin thrives on giving the left things to complain about. Then she takes their best shots and laughs them off. This may seem unnecessarily combative to some. I’m beginning to see it as Palin’s style. She likes to do the scrum and she senses she is winning. With the amount of bad press she has gotten from the MSM most people would be reduced to footnote status. Palin is more out there and in the news than she was when she was running for VP. For people like me, that is a plus. I like people with convictions and courage. Maybe a touch less snark would improve her image, but as she says, “That’s the way she rolls.”
Is it me or have the Obamas outworn their welcome? Talk about low-rent.
I no get it . . .
For some (me included), they’d worn out their welcome a few minutes after noon, January 20, 2009, when The One treated us to still more of his “we are the ones we’ve been waiting for” bloviating. For others, they’ll never have worn out their welcome.
If you mean welcome by the American public, it’s a matter of shifting proportions in the above. I’d say there’s been a pronounced shift towards “less welcome” among independents.
“”The old adage that when your adversary is destroying himself, stay out of the way, should apply””
M J R
But they aren’t destroying themselves. Not in pop culture media where the battle for hearts and minds is. I say let Sarah shake the boat and experiment. And she’s willing to take the arrows to experiment. God bless her courage.
I felt Obama had worn out his welcome during the inauguration ceremonies. Piped in Yoyo Ma’s group’s music and the no class yahoo-ing of the crowd. Told me all I needed to know. (As if I hadn’t figured it out well before the election.)
At the risk of sounding sycophantic, Sarah is the only potential 2012 candidate that I have any real enthusiasm for. I understand Neo’s point that she’s been (wrongly) characterized to the point where it would be very hard for her to win, but can we be sure that any other republican candidate would have a better shot at winning?
The moment on last night’s episode of Alaska, when Sarah drove an ATV to her old friend Bones’s house, charged up to the elderly man, slapped him on the arm and screamed “WAKE UP” at the top of her lungs made me burst out laughing. This woman is so utterly unapologetic about her entire being. Nearly everything about her drives democrats (and some republicans) insane and she doesn’t give a damn. That shows a strength of character that is really rare and really admirable.
Do the so-called “electable” potential candidates (including minorities like Rubio, West and Cain) believe that they’re safe from the outright demonization that Sarah’s gotten? Here are the facts:
1. Liberals will not vote against Obama, no matter how horrible he is or how bad off the country is in 2012. They will ALWAYS return to the flock.
2. The republican candidate WILL be “Palinized” by the media. The lies and slander will begin to rain down as soon as the primary is over. Because Sarah was such a bigger star than McCain, it’s easy for republicans to forget how badly HE got trashed in the media. On The View, Whoopi Goldberg asked him point blank if he was going to make her a slave again. Of course McCain answered in the squishy and apologetic way that became his trademark during the campaign.
Sarah Palin has been through this and emerged more influential than ever. I don’t think any of the other candidates will be able to say the same.
“”I’ve come to see that liberals and conservatives have very different definitions of the word “class.”
Jim
Yep. The liberal definition can’t include honesty, which is just a sign of unsophisticated gullibility in dealing with a world stripped of all things sacred. Can’t be the least bit out of step with fashion as defined by pop culture liberals in charge of telling the collective what fashionable is. And they can’t have quirky things like independent thoughts that fall outside of what the collective deems acceptable.
Jim points out, correctly, “Liberals will not vote against Obama, no matter how horrible he is or how bad off the country is in 2012. They will ALWAYS return to the flock.”
In a simplified world of no third parties or Perot-like independent candidacies, 3/8 will always vote D and 3/8 will always vote R. The game is fought out among the middle 2/8. (In some observers’ accounting, it’s 40-20-40; the game is played between the two 40-yard lines.)
The Republican will be Palinized no matter who is nominated, but to me, Palin has begun to approach unelectable (by the middle 2/8 or 20%), whereas the others are still electable. Palin has this way of giving them too much to Palinize, too easily (needlessly?).
And given how vulnerable is The One, I’m just not big on forfeiting when we could be rolling the socialism back. It’s terribly hard to undo whatever collectivization gets done. Let’s do something ^before^ it gets done.
It’s a long way to Tipperary!!
Palin will be the next presidential candidate of the Republican party is she chooses to run AND is able to hold her own in the many debates that will precede and take place during the primaries. She will then have the opportunity to run HER campaign and demonstrate her smarts without being bridled by incompetents and malcontents. One thing for sure is that her many appearances on FOX and on her Alaska travelogue on TLC have made her more comfortable in front of the TV camera and, thus, a lot more polished. She is proving to be a lot smarter than most of the pundits are giving her credit for being and, most likely, will be the one to beat.
I waded through the anti-Palin comments, as much as I could stand. My first thought was: “Don’t you folks understand what she’s saying? She’s not against good nutrition, she’s against the government telling you what to eat and what not to eat!”
My second thought was: all those commenters will be very surprised, won’t they, to see how many votes Sarah Palin can actually get. “But nobody I know voted for her!”
Time will tell. For my money, we tried a milquetoast candidate in 2008; Gov. Palin tried to bring up the ticket, but the MSM and Sen. McCain wouldn’t let her. I think the time has past for milquetoast; let’s go for fire in the belly instead.
respectfully,
Daniel in Brookline
I’m an admitted Palin devotee, but I’m not one who thinks she’s a shoo-in or can win in a landslide. She will have a very hard time. But I base my support on her leadership ability, not her “electability.”
If she runs, she’ll have to make some changes – tone her voice down, make her rhetoric a LITTLE less combative, but I think she still has a chance. Many republicans think her candidacy would be a disaster, but are we really going to wait around for the republican to emerge that possesses unshakable conservative values, decades of relevant experience, proven leadership quality, an impeccable image, perfect speaking skills, and enough “electability” to appeal to independents?
One thing I believe – if the establishment repubs can somehow convince Sarah not to run, their chosen candidate had BETTER win in 2012, or it’s time for a third party. There will be NO excuse for failure.
Leave a Reply
HTML tags allowed in your
comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>
The comments on CNN uniformly condemn Palin as an idiot for taking on Michelle’s anti-fat laws but miss entirely the lesson Palin was imparting to Piper about hard work, something I wish I had the wit and common sense to do with my daughter.
Anyone read the comments on the cnn article? Somethings not right. All 300 comments are pro Michele. WTF kind of selective posting of comments does cnn think it can get away with without becoming totally irelevant as a news site asking for public feedback?
Sarah is a hottie and Michelle is a two-bagger. ’nuff said.
Ms. Palin needs to ^internalize^ the fact that the public comments standards are different for Republicans, as compared with those for Democrats. Too many people sre still swayed unconsciously by Ms. Palin’s “lamestream media”.
Democrats can say all manner of things about Republicans that Republicans can only dream about saying about Democrats. Ms. Palin needs to conduct herself accordingly — not because it’s principled, but because it’s practical. It’s reality.
If she’s at all serious about contending for higher office, she needs to beware, to be ^wary^.
That being said, I thought her comment about Ms. Obama was needlessly snarky, emphasis on “needlessly”. The CNN commenters are correct in that Ms. Obama is not saying (now) that the government should outlaw dessert. That may be down the pike, and it’s the sort of thing that Democrats can say about Republicans with impunity — but it’s just not ^smart^ to say it about the Democrat Ms. Obama. It provides ammunition for the left ^needlessly^.
The old adage that when your adversary is destroying himself, stay out of the way, should apply; Ms. Palin is not only ^not^ staying out of the way, she is ^needlessly^ providing ammunition [but I said that already] — and that ammunition will not be “friendly fire”. It affects those independents who may someday be choosing between Ms. Palin and someone else, and they’ll lean just a little more towards someone else as a result of this latest dig.
I liked and still like Ms. Palin, but it’s getting harder and harder to do so. Kinda like that woman who recently complained to President Obama that she’s finding it harder and harder to defend him.
But I’m digressing . . .
By the way, I, too, took a look at those CNN comments — virtually ^all^ pro- Ms. Obama and anti- Ms. Palin. Welcome to life in early 21st century USA.
SteveH – One of the comments said that Michelle “exudes class.” I’m thinking “From WHERE, exactly?”
I’ve come to see that liberals and conservatives have very different definitions of the word “class.”
Most conservatives say someone like George W. Bush has “class” because he refuses to speak ill of his predecessor despite getting routinely trashed by him, shows the utmost respect for our troops and is always ready with a warm smile. Most liberals think W. has NO class because he wears cowboy hats, hangs out on a ranch, has a funny accent and occasionally mangles words.
To liberals, Sarah has no class because she shoots caribou for dinner, smashes halibut into senselessness, drives four-wheelers through the mud and of course, speaks with a funny accent. And Michelle Obama “exudes class” because she…wears expensive clothes and dines in expensive restaurants.
Yes, I’ve simplified it but the reasoning really is fascinating.
MJR said, “Ms. Palin is not only ^not^ staying out of the way, she is ^needlessly^ providing ammunition.”
I had the same thoughts until this TLC program came out. It appears abundantly clear that Palin thrives on giving the left things to complain about. Then she takes their best shots and laughs them off. This may seem unnecessarily combative to some. I’m beginning to see it as Palin’s style. She likes to do the scrum and she senses she is winning. With the amount of bad press she has gotten from the MSM most people would be reduced to footnote status. Palin is more out there and in the news than she was when she was running for VP. For people like me, that is a plus. I like people with convictions and courage. Maybe a touch less snark would improve her image, but as she says, “That’s the way she rolls.”
Is it me or have the Obamas outworn their welcome? Talk about low-rent.
I no get it . . .
For some (me included), they’d worn out their welcome a few minutes after noon, January 20, 2009, when The One treated us to still more of his “we are the ones we’ve been waiting for” bloviating. For others, they’ll never have worn out their welcome.
If you mean welcome by the American public, it’s a matter of shifting proportions in the above. I’d say there’s been a pronounced shift towards “less welcome” among independents.
“”The old adage that when your adversary is destroying himself, stay out of the way, should apply””
M J R
But they aren’t destroying themselves. Not in pop culture media where the battle for hearts and minds is. I say let Sarah shake the boat and experiment. And she’s willing to take the arrows to experiment. God bless her courage.
I felt Obama had worn out his welcome during the inauguration ceremonies. Piped in Yoyo Ma’s group’s music and the no class yahoo-ing of the crowd. Told me all I needed to know. (As if I hadn’t figured it out well before the election.)
At the risk of sounding sycophantic, Sarah is the only potential 2012 candidate that I have any real enthusiasm for. I understand Neo’s point that she’s been (wrongly) characterized to the point where it would be very hard for her to win, but can we be sure that any other republican candidate would have a better shot at winning?
The moment on last night’s episode of Alaska, when Sarah drove an ATV to her old friend Bones’s house, charged up to the elderly man, slapped him on the arm and screamed “WAKE UP” at the top of her lungs made me burst out laughing. This woman is so utterly unapologetic about her entire being. Nearly everything about her drives democrats (and some republicans) insane and she doesn’t give a damn. That shows a strength of character that is really rare and really admirable.
Do the so-called “electable” potential candidates (including minorities like Rubio, West and Cain) believe that they’re safe from the outright demonization that Sarah’s gotten? Here are the facts:
1. Liberals will not vote against Obama, no matter how horrible he is or how bad off the country is in 2012. They will ALWAYS return to the flock.
2. The republican candidate WILL be “Palinized” by the media. The lies and slander will begin to rain down as soon as the primary is over. Because Sarah was such a bigger star than McCain, it’s easy for republicans to forget how badly HE got trashed in the media. On The View, Whoopi Goldberg asked him point blank if he was going to make her a slave again. Of course McCain answered in the squishy and apologetic way that became his trademark during the campaign.
Sarah Palin has been through this and emerged more influential than ever. I don’t think any of the other candidates will be able to say the same.
“”I’ve come to see that liberals and conservatives have very different definitions of the word “class.”
Jim
Yep. The liberal definition can’t include honesty, which is just a sign of unsophisticated gullibility in dealing with a world stripped of all things sacred. Can’t be the least bit out of step with fashion as defined by pop culture liberals in charge of telling the collective what fashionable is. And they can’t have quirky things like independent thoughts that fall outside of what the collective deems acceptable.
Jim points out, correctly, “Liberals will not vote against Obama, no matter how horrible he is or how bad off the country is in 2012. They will ALWAYS return to the flock.”
In a simplified world of no third parties or Perot-like independent candidacies, 3/8 will always vote D and 3/8 will always vote R. The game is fought out among the middle 2/8. (In some observers’ accounting, it’s 40-20-40; the game is played between the two 40-yard lines.)
The Republican will be Palinized no matter who is nominated, but to me, Palin has begun to approach unelectable (by the middle 2/8 or 20%), whereas the others are still electable. Palin has this way of giving them too much to Palinize, too easily (needlessly?).
And given how vulnerable is The One, I’m just not big on forfeiting when we could be rolling the socialism back. It’s terribly hard to undo whatever collectivization gets done. Let’s do something ^before^ it gets done.
It’s a long way to Tipperary!!
Palin will be the next presidential candidate of the Republican party is she chooses to run AND is able to hold her own in the many debates that will precede and take place during the primaries. She will then have the opportunity to run HER campaign and demonstrate her smarts without being bridled by incompetents and malcontents. One thing for sure is that her many appearances on FOX and on her Alaska travelogue on TLC have made her more comfortable in front of the TV camera and, thus, a lot more polished. She is proving to be a lot smarter than most of the pundits are giving her credit for being and, most likely, will be the one to beat.
I waded through the anti-Palin comments, as much as I could stand. My first thought was: “Don’t you folks understand what she’s saying? She’s not against good nutrition, she’s against the government telling you what to eat and what not to eat!”
My second thought was: all those commenters will be very surprised, won’t they, to see how many votes Sarah Palin can actually get. “But nobody I know voted for her!”
Time will tell. For my money, we tried a milquetoast candidate in 2008; Gov. Palin tried to bring up the ticket, but the MSM and Sen. McCain wouldn’t let her. I think the time has past for milquetoast; let’s go for fire in the belly instead.
respectfully,
Daniel in Brookline
I’m an admitted Palin devotee, but I’m not one who thinks she’s a shoo-in or can win in a landslide. She will have a very hard time. But I base my support on her leadership ability, not her “electability.”
If she runs, she’ll have to make some changes – tone her voice down, make her rhetoric a LITTLE less combative, but I think she still has a chance. Many republicans think her candidacy would be a disaster, but are we really going to wait around for the republican to emerge that possesses unshakable conservative values, decades of relevant experience, proven leadership quality, an impeccable image, perfect speaking skills, and enough “electability” to appeal to independents?
One thing I believe – if the establishment repubs can somehow convince Sarah not to run, their chosen candidate had BETTER win in 2012, or it’s time for a third party. There will be NO excuse for failure.