Top Leaderboard, Site wide
July 31, 2014
Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
Help us grow by sharing
and liking Truthdig:
Sign up for Truthdig's Email NewsletterLike Truthdig on FacebookFollow Truthdig on TwitterSubscribe to Truthdig's RSS Feed

Newsletter

sign up to get updates


Hydropower Illuminates a Piece of History
Report Criticizes EPA Oversight of Injection Wells






Truthdig Bazaar
Hands Washing Water

Hands Washing Water

By Chris Abani
$11.70

more items

 
Report

Our Rogue Evita

Email this item Email    Print this item Print    Share this item... Share

Posted on Nov 16, 2009

By Eugene Robinson

No force on earth can stop Sarah Palin from becoming our very own “lite” version of Eva Peron—a glamorous and tragic legend, minus the tragedy. Eventually, some clever composer will write a blockbuster musical about her life and times. Stage directions will include: “SARAH fires gun. MOOSE dies.”

It’s futile to try to ignore Palin, however noble the effort may be. She’s a phenomenon, and it hardly matters that so many people believe she augurs the final dissolution of American politics into a big, frothy bowl of mush. The republic will survive even her.

Anyway, she’s unlikely ever to become—shudder—commander in chief. A new Washington Post-ABC News poll shows that 60 percent of Americans believe Palin is not qualified to be president, and 53 percent “definitely” would not vote for her. 

You do have to wonder about the 37 percent who’d think about it, though. And as for the 9 percent who definitely would vote for Palin, that’s enough people to qualify as a movement—the equivalent of Evita’s fervid descamisados, or “shirtless ones,” who entrusted her with their hopes and dreams.

Palin’s followers can afford shirts. But evidently they feel so disenfranchised, so ignored, so put upon by forces beyond their control, that they are willing to look past her every shortcoming and forgive her every betrayal. What matters is “Going Rogue”—not the cleverly titled book itself, but Palin’s willingness to thumb her nose at political and social convention.

Advertisement

Square, Site wide
So what if she displayed no real grasp of the issues in interviews during last year’s campaign? Those reporters were being beastly, trying to show her up. So what if the inside-the-Beltway crowd thinks she’s an airhead? The state of mind called “Washington” is the problem, and she’s the solution. So what if she quit as governor of Alaska with a year and a half left in her term? “Only dead fish go with the flow,” she explained, demonstrating once more her sassy roguishness.

Palin’s knack for being cleverly transgressive is almost like performance art. Her doppelganger, Tina Fey, did a hysterically prescient bit, right before Election Day, in which “Palin” vowed that she was never going away. Fey’s “Palin” predicted that she’d become either president or “a white Oprah.” So on whose show does Palin launch her book? Oprah’s, of course—adding to the long list of Palin lore that you simply couldn’t make up.

Palin indeed would be a terrific talk-show host, but she has much bigger ambitions. I think her ultimate impact, like Evita’s, may be more sociological than political.

She taps into several broad currents of discontent. She speaks for social conservatives, long taken for granted by Republicans who brandish their opposition to issues such as abortion and gay rights at election time but never actually do anything about them. She speaks for small-town and rural Americans who feel their concerns are ignored. She speaks for hunters who fear that “Washington” wants to take their guns away.

Unlike so many of her detractors—Republicans as well as Democrats—she didn’t go to an Ivy League school. She scrapped and scraped her way through college, as a lot of people do. And she’s a woman who juggles a complicated family and a demanding career. This is one of the most important elements of the Palin persona, because it resonates with so many other American women who see their own daily struggles in Palin’s.

Of course, Palin’s feminism is highly situational. She has expressed sisterly solidarity with Hillary Clinton, of all people, on the added burden that female candidates must bear in deciding what to wear on the campaign trail. But that burden was lightened for Palin by the $150,000 in designer clothing bought for her and her family with campaign funds.

True believers will not mind. Palin’s unconventional trajectory and unkempt mind are seen as authentic, in the sense that we all know people who’ve had ups and downs in their lives and who couldn’t point to Kazakhstan on a map. Her success to date represents a triumph of authenticity over accomplishment. In the final analysis, I believe, that’s not enough to make her president. But others seeking the 2012 Republican nomination underestimate her at their peril.

Toward the end of her life, Eva Peron gave a famous speech in which she vowed, “I will return, and I will be millions!” Sarah Palin, our Evita, has returned—and she will make millions. 

Eugene Robinson’s e-mail address is eugenerobinson(at)washpost.com.

© 2009, Washington Post Writers Group


New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, December 30, 2009 at 11:19 am Link to this comment

Shenonymous, December 30 at 5:50 pm,

Shenonymous said:  “What is your game, ThomasG
if not just to trap me into some foolish canasta card game?

ThomasG’s answer:  Yeah, yeah, sure, sure; it is all about Shenonymous——————Right?????? 

Here is the original post to Anarcissie:

By ThomasG, December 29 at 6:57 pm #

Anarcissie, December 29 at 2:27 pm,

Might I suggest “Science and Human Behavior” by B. F. Skinner, [actual name is Burris Frederic Skinner], published by The Macmillan Company of New York.

I, also, draw your attention to the monkeys in Stanley Kubrick and Arthur C. Clark’s “2001: A Space Odyssey”; the obelisk did not reason with the monkeys, the obelisk irritated and provoked the monkeys into action, and their own activity and actions caused their mental capacity to evolve and increase into what became humanity, that then moved out into space in pursuit of the irritant that provoked them to evolve, and started their journey beyond earth.

If evolution of understanding is to be achieved by the masses, it will be by the masses being provoked into evolved mental capacity and understanding by something external to them and by the force of their own will or a combination of the two, reasoning with a monkey did not work in 2001: A Space Odyssey and reasoning will not work with the masses of the American Population.

What is needed is people who will take a leadership role like the obelisk and provoke the masses of the American Populace into evolved understanding that will allow them to better lead themselves on their journey, rather than to be led against their best interests by demagogues.”

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, December 30, 2009 at 10:50 am Link to this comment

Nada, observation showed zee monkieez vent on viss der lifes az uzual.

I correct my earlier self.  Revisiting my recollection, that monumental story and
film was so long a time ago and I was a very impressssssionable young woman. 
Not comfortable with being wrong about things, although I am plenty of times,
but when I detect it I try to correct my understanding, I pulled out my copy of
the book and reread about the things (there were more than one) from outer
space.  I have never minded admitting on Truthdig I made a mistake!  I have on
several occasions.

The obelisk was not quite inert.  It radiated a hummm.  It was not explained
what the hum was about except that earlier when it was uncovered buried on
the moon it alleged sent a message to a moon of Saturn that humans had
developed space flight, crude as it was.  Now that entire idea is suspect
because how would anyone know what the message was to the moon of
Saturn, was it sent in English?  How odd that would have been that the
recipients would understand English.  Oh, yeah, there would of course have
been an intergalactical translator.  As if it would be needed?!  That might also
imply, however,  that the obelisk was not sent from outer space at all but was
invented on earth, but then that would have been anachronistic since the scene
with the monkeys supposedly took place at the dawn of history. So go
figure…Clarke and Kubrick did play with odd time sequencing to make a
dramatic point about the march of time.  While I admit to having been riveted
by Clarke’s book first then the Kubrick movie, it also had some lapses that
leads the intellect to question in terms of logic even though logic is a subject
that was often ejected.  So I am wondering why you are so riveted on this story
and the incoherent obelisks and the fascination of the monkeys the idea was
that it was the hum that attracted them. But since the obelisk did nothing else,
the monkeys were vexed and became quite hysterical.  Monkeys are known to
become hysterical by things other than obelisks.  What is your game, ThomasG
if not just to trap me into some foolish canasta card game?  What kind of melds
are you trying for?

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, December 30, 2009 at 10:39 am Link to this comment

Shenonymous, December 30 at 2:03 pm,

And, exactly, what does the chattering of the monkeys mean to the obelisk??????

Good Day to you.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, December 30, 2009 at 10:03 am Link to this comment

Your superiority complex is being brandished, ThomasG.  How arrogant.  YOU
in the soma of a creator?  It is called the God Complex.  You make me laugh.  I
admit I am simian at times, and my progeny could be called apelike at times as
well, but my line comes from the naked ape not from monkeys.  Perhaps
though you feel kinship with them? 

You might read Plato more thoroughly if you think you can act as a gadfly.  You
are very clumsy at it so far.  You do not stimulate any progressive thought only
reactive thought and response.  That is the root of the breakdown in
communication.  You speak garbled God Complex evangelicalisms and are out
of touch with reality.  You show symptoms of severe narcissism and you ought
to get yourself to a psychiatrist as soon as possible. 

By the way, Good Morning.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, December 30, 2009 at 9:53 am Link to this comment

BR549, December 30 at 2:31 am,

It is unnecessary to apologize and say you are sorry for telling the truth; rant on and tell your detractors to “get used to it”.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, December 30, 2009 at 9:48 am Link to this comment

Shenonymous, December 30 at 1:07 am,

Shenonymous said: “For the monkeys the obelisk was an inert object.  They had no idea it came
from somewhere else.”

ThomasG’s answer:  You have taken the perspective of the Monkeys and I have taken the perspective of the Creator.  This is the root problem in the breakdown in communication between the two of us;  I am the obelisk, you are one of the monkeys, and I am stimulating a response in you to help you evolve the same way the obelisk did with the monkeys.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, December 29, 2009 at 9:07 pm Link to this comment

Agreed with your definition of demagogue up to a point.  The subjectification is
irrelevant to that definition.  How the demagogue comes to their own beliefs is
a separate metaphysic. 

For the monkeys the obelisk was an inert object.  They had no idea it came
from somewhere else.  For all they possibly knew it was always there and
always would be.  They had no thought of its odyssey.  Even when the obelisk
soared off they had no idea what had happened nor questioned what had
happened.  That is obviously what I meant.  It had its own power of movement,
or, we don’t really know that, as whatever was its creator could have been its
guidance system.  Unless you want to believe it was its own creator.  It was not
said.  The object in itself was not inert, but for the monkeys it was.  For them it
was the paradigm of the immoveable, the unmoveable. 

You can liken me to whatever suits you and if it makes you feel superior to
liken me to a demagogue that is what you will do.  But what you think or say or
do is not the epitome of truth.  It is your own subjective perception, your own
unique and idiosyncratic ideal that puts yourself on a self constructed throne of
The Observer.  You think you understand my mind and my conceptions and
you do not.  You also think you know what is good for this country.  You think
you know a lot of things.  You have continually misread me since the first
encounter.  Your logic is faulty based on a narrow set of erroneous premises
that you repeat over and over without any progress.  The minor distinction you
might be intending with your triple redundancy of metaphor, has no real effect
since the distinction is so minor.  It is hardly dynamic, it has no progress.  The
conclusions you come to are from your own world of shadowy perceptions, a
reflection of a distortion you do not see because of your blinding hubris.  I am
quite sure there are many things beyond my comprehension and differences
beyond my current insight, but your power of language is slight and for
naught.  I have always said, uncountable times, on these blogs one must begin
with knowing one thing, that one knows nothing.  It is you who believes you
know.  And it is you who should study the midwifery of Socrates to see how
skilled he was with dialogue to bring about seeing through the folly of beliefs. 
To see the wind eggs that are really in your mind.  For if you really thought you
knew nothing, your posts here would stop.

Report this
Night-Gaunt's avatar

By Night-Gaunt, December 29, 2009 at 8:58 pm Link to this comment

No problem BR549 you are the only one that I have seen that our resident mechanical ranter ThomasG has ever complimented. Amazing, but look out if you fall off the razor blade edge of his narrow road you will again become the enemy. I hope not. He is actually communicating and I like it!

The cancer of corruption and incipient fascism has riddled our body politic and will bring down our Republic if it isn’t stemmed. From our forced 2-party system leaving out all others gave it a two-headed one body fusion. Easier to take over by another source. Why we have two choices and their both crap. The poison: one straight (Republican) and the sweetened poison (Democrat) so you see why our last two Democratic presidents aided those in the Republicans but it was really for the crypto-fascists who damage our republic and get their billions for the war economy that has been growing since 1950. While they make their plans to rebuild a new shiny empire on the ruins of the Republic they have hated for many years. {They last tried to take over more directly in 1934—FDR punished no one, and they aided their pals in the Axis.}

Welcome to our group, register and join in!!!

Report this

By BR549, December 29, 2009 at 7:31 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

ThomasG,
Alas, I confess. If they seemed all too familiar it was because I was a loyal
Republican for some 27 years. Then things started to seem “fishy” and I
disaffiliated. I wasn’t conscious enough to see Bush41 porking the same
population that had voted for him, but I sure as hell saw the same pattern in
Bush43 that I saw in Clinton.

That is when the lightbulb went on (a bit late) and I realized that there were no
parties anymore. And now that the jig is up and more and more people are
realizing that these idiots at the top are stealing all the lifeboats, they’re
forgetting that we still have the oars .... so to speak.

I suppose that I could have done a detailed dissection of the Democratic side,
but it doesn’t make any difference. Unless people see that while we are arguing
back and forth here, at the bottom, about which party is going to “save” us, the
douchebags in Washington will just be using that as a maneuver to keep us
occupied while they rob us blind ......... and, well, look.

It’s like the word “integrity” just vanished, and the oath these clowns took was
just something they had to lip synch in order to get elected.

Sorry, I’m ranting again.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, December 29, 2009 at 6:52 pm Link to this comment

BR549, December 29 at 8:09 pm,

You seem to have a wide, deep and Noble understanding of Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMISTS that I cannot find fault with.

Keep up the good work.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, December 29, 2009 at 6:35 pm Link to this comment

Shenonymous, December 29 at 8:11 pm,

A demagogue, one who leads the populace by appealing to prejudices and emotions,  subjectifies the objective based upon the idealism of the demagogue.

Your post states that the “obelisk was an inert object”; the object that was apprehended by the senses was inert, lacking independent power to move or resist applied force; the object moved to the earth from somewhere else, from the earth to the moon and from the moon to Saturn——  the object was not inert.  From your subjectification of the objective fact that the obelisk was inert, you make an idealistic determination of the other qualities of the obelisk that are based upon a subjectified false conclusion.

A demagogue subjectifies objective facts based upon their preconceived idealism in the same way that you subjectified the objective reality of the obelisk as presented in 2001: A Space Odyssey.

When I say “the certainty of subjective idealism”, I am making reference to the fact that the demagogue presents subjective idealism as objective fact and then makes conclusions based upon subjective idealism as if subjective idealism was objective fact; this is what “the certainty of subjective idealism” means.  You, with “the certainty of subjective idealism” make conclusions that you present as objective that are based upon your own subjective idealism.

Perhaps your demagogic subjectification of objective facts is based upon ascribing literal, emotional, and static context to that which is abstract, figurative and dynamic; and it may be beyond your mind to comprehend the difference; perhaps not———I don’t know.

However, this is an attribute that you have demonstrated from my first discourse with you to the present time and only you know whether it is contrived or is just beyond your literal, emotional and static understanding to comprehend the difference with regard to both the combined subjective and objective reality of the obelisk as well as the combined subjective and objective reality of other things that have both subjective, “abstract, figurative and dynamic” context, as well as objective, “literal, emotional and static” context.  It would facilitate discourse between the two of us if you could learn from Socrates and understand that the beginning of wisdom is the understanding that you know nothing.  I came to this understanding many years ago when I was still a child and for me, this understanding has not changed; I do not consider that I know anything and the more I learn the more I am convinced that I know nothing.

Nietzsche said the wasteland grows and I do what I can to retard the growth of the wasteland.  Perhaps, you will understand what I have said and perhaps you will not.  All that matters to me is that I have made the effort.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, December 29, 2009 at 4:11 pm Link to this comment

Sorry ThomasG, you are an obstinate bellows.  You really get nowhere in your
comments.  Nowhere is a huge place for those who wind up fooling themselves
thinking the direction they chose to go is really a cul-de-sac.

BTW:  abstract figurative metaphor is a triple redundancy of words, it is like a
stutter.

It is impossible that a demagogue deals in the Certainty of Subjective Idealism,
a solipsism of a sort.  Why?  The demagogue directs their sophistry to an
objective other.  It would be pointless to direct it to the subjective idealistic
self.  So while you think your post is straight forward and explicit, it is
your self-delusion that it is and if you let what YOU say stand, then you have
only imprinted yourself as an accuser of empty terms. You and your kind
always make empty accusations.  Perhaps you are the solipsist raving only to
yourself.

Report this

By BR549, December 29, 2009 at 4:09 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

ThomasG,
I think we’re getting our Right Wing Extremists mixed up here. There are the
old school, hard core Goldwater conservatives, which, back then would have
voted for Chicken Little. That post McCarthy clan would now be having a field
day with the current antics of Obama.

Then, there are the ignorant, tattooed, and near toothless skin heads who still
haven’t figured out that the Native Americans were here first, but think that
this is THEIR country just because their ancestors happened to beat the
majority of Blacks and Jews off the boat.

Then we have that group of blisteringly naive neo-cons who believe that if they
can just schmooze their way into that Washington and Wall Street crowd, they
will have 40 virgins in the afterlife and a perpetual supply of gas for their BMWs
to whisk back and forth to and from their country club. This last group has no
idea that the train has already left town and they weren’t on it.

I was referring more to that crowd of older Prairie Home Companion groupies
throughout the midwest, who really do have a very traditional set of moral and
ethical values and couldn’t give a rat’s pitooty about politicians except that they
want to have someone in office who would hopefully help to preserve those
values.

I should have dissected that group earlier.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, December 29, 2009 at 3:44 pm Link to this comment

Shenonymous, December 29 at 7:15 pm,

Here is the post again:

“Shenonymous said:  “The obelisk was an inert object.”

ThomasG’s answer:  You start out with the certainty of a fool in the above statement from your post.  Can you say abstract figurative metaphor or does your Conservative Certainty prevent conception by abstract figurative metaphor?

A demagogue, like the words in your post, deals in the Certainty of Subjective Idealism; perhaps you would like to rethink your statements in your post, lest you brand yourself as a demagogue by your own declaration. “

Shenonymous said: “You will have to be less cryptic ThomasG ....”

ThomasG’s answer:  I did not do as you say; I said that your own words would brand you as a demagogue and that, for that reason, you should rethink what you said. 

To me my post is straight forward and explicit.  What is it in my post that you find cryptic?

If you choose to let what you say stand, you yourself have imprinted yourself with the name demagogue, don’t blame me for YOUR OWN behavior———but, I know that is not going to happen, “you people” always blame others for YOUR OWN behavior.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, December 29, 2009 at 3:15 pm Link to this comment

You will have to be less cryptic ThomasG otherwise your accusation is blurted
nonsense.  You have a strong penchant for accusation.  It has to be read as old
and miserable family dynamics.  Instead of growling as you do, perhaps you would
like to rethink your statement to me?  You have not said anything that would
brand me as declaring myself as speaking like a demagogue.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, December 29, 2009 at 2:49 pm Link to this comment

Night-Gaunt, December 29 at 6:29 pm,

Consenting to be killed will not stop violence against others by those who would be violent.  World War II was not ended by appeasement, it was ended by violence, the violence that went around from the Axis Powers [Germany, Italy & Japan] came back around by the combined forces of the Allies arrayed against the Axis Powers, and it is fitting that violence was used to put an end to Axis Powers violence; the same is true for Capital Punishment, when it is not used as a political expedient, and is used as a legitimate deterrent to violence.

Report this
Night-Gaunt's avatar

By Night-Gaunt, December 29, 2009 at 2:29 pm Link to this comment

ThomasG you simply justified violence because others have done it. Then it will never stop. Killing should only be the last defensive measure not the first an only measure. What do you think the terrorism is but a tit-for-crash response to violence like in Iraq an Afghanistan by us and others by tiny groups in retaliation? Do you agree with Lenin when he thought the idea of revolution without firing squads were ridiculous? One cannot be without the other in his mind. He was violent of mind even if he never personally killed anyone. He ordered others who would do it for him. A dark road that is just like our adversaries believe. Holy cleansing of the body politic (god’s own)with violence. Read the Truthdig article by Stan Goff from 2006 titled, “Sowing the Seeds of Fascism in America.” is worth reading and pondering.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, December 29, 2009 at 2:22 pm Link to this comment

Shenonymous, December 29 at 5:45 pm,

Shenonymous said:  “The obelisk was an inert object.”

ThomasG’s answer:  You start out with the certainty of a fool in the above statement from your post.  Can you say abstract figurative metaphor or does your Conservative Certainty prevent conception by abstract figurative metaphor?

A demagogue, like the words in your post, deals in the Certainty of Subjective Idealism; perhaps you would like to rethink your statements in your post, lest you brand yourself as a demagogue by your own declaration.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, December 29, 2009 at 1:45 pm Link to this comment

The obelisk was an inert object.  It just stood there and the monkeys made of it
what they could with their underdeveloped brain (mind).  Kubrick’s vision was
theatric not fully based on fact.  Which is dangerous for if fiction is believed to
be truth, the search for The Truth is thwarted.  There is no evidence that
humans evolved from monkeys.  There is evidence however of both humans
and monkeys evolving from pre-simians.  There is not much evidence that
monkeys evolved a mind much more than what they had in prehistoric times. 
For instance their tool making ability has not advanced.  I learned that both
humans and other simians evolved from tree shrews! 

If the analogy is tight then the masses will only be motivated by something
external to them and it will be inert as well.  Just standing there for curious
minds to ponder.  And whosoever hopes those minds will have epiphanies
might turn out to be a hollow of unfulfilled wishes.  The fact that people, the
American Populace, must be led speaks to the need for education so that when
an obelisk is presented they will be able to stretch their minds and make
rational choices.  That is the only way to anihilate demagogues.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, December 29, 2009 at 1:18 pm Link to this comment

Night-Gaunt, December 29 at 3:59 pm,

Night-Gaunt said:  “Violence begets violence and we don’t want to go down that road.”

ThomasG’s answer:  Those who do not want to be treated violently should not engage in violence; when those who do not want violence engage in violence, what goes around comes around, and it is fitting that the violence that goes around comes back around to those who are violent.

Report this
Night-Gaunt's avatar

By Night-Gaunt, December 29, 2009 at 11:59 am Link to this comment

Thanx Anarssisa for the analysis of Palin’s book. Also for Shenonymous for the 2006 look a voters education (schooling) I found interesting. Though I am aware that various IQ tests are limited, depending on what they are set up for, still show a curious lack of thinking skills and curiosity of the takers in general. I do wonder if the person on the street testing of knowledge isn’t winnowed a bit to keep the more educated ones off air. [See the Flynn Effect where every year the general IQ scores go up 2-3 points but without any appreciable rise in intellectual capacity for the overall population.] We can learn from our experiences too and should continue to till our brains cease functioning.

The USA is known for its scientists and general anti-intellectualism. But maybe the various TV shows with the highly intellectual character types (Big Bang Theory, Bones, House, The Mentalist, Criminal Minds, etc) may have some positive effect.

To bad we get types like Palin who wish to maintain that volkisch turn to the heartlands & the mythical “Real American” while she hobnobs with the wealthy and powerful who want her ear. As to the herd in stampede we must either corral them or redirect them to a safe place but no violence. Violence begets violence and we don’t want to go down that road.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, December 29, 2009 at 11:57 am Link to this comment

Anarcissie, December 29 at 2:27 pm,

Might I suggest “Science and Human Behavior” by B. F. Skinner, [actual name is Burris Frederic Skinner], published by The Macmillan Company of New York.

I, also, draw your attention to the monkeys in Stanley Kubrick and Arthur C. Clark’s “2001: A Space Odyssey”; the obelisk did not reason with the monkeys, the obelisk irritated and provoked the monkeys into action, and their own activity and actions caused their mental capacity to evolve and increase into what became humanity, that then moved out into space in pursuit of the irritant that provoked them to evolve, and started their journey beyond earth.

If evolution of understanding is to be achieved by the masses, it will be by the masses being provoked into evolved mental capacity and understanding by something external to them and by the force of their own will or a combination of the two, reasoning with a monkey did not work in 2001: A Space Odyssey and reasoning will not work with the masses of the American Population.

What is needed is people who will take a leadership role like the obelisk and provoke the masses of the American Populace into evolved understanding that will allow them to better lead themselves on their journey, rather than to be led against their best interests by demagogues.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, December 29, 2009 at 11:22 am Link to this comment

I do have high esteem for the tit for tat reciprocal theory to negotiate differences,
especially if those differences erupt into heated or more violent exchange.  I do
believe that is the only way to neutralize the battering of the head that you often
propose, ThomasG.  I understand it could be a platform for war.  But it would be
defensive rather than preemptive.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, December 29, 2009 at 11:13 am Link to this comment

It is the argument, then, of nature vs nurture Anarcissie and it looks like you
think political perspectives are imprinted on the genes.  That is about as
preposterous a theory as I’ve heard.  Even Pinker’s theory of inborn traits in his
The Blank Slate I don’t think would support that theory.  I think there is more
evidence that people learn their political views from post-natal experiences
and family teachings.  So if, as I hold, it isn’t a matter of being born with
political proclivities (for what if the gene pool a person is born with is from
parents whose genetic makeup are completely opposite, say a father who is
conservative and a mother who is liberal, my oh my what a conundrum for the
newborn that would be!), which I came to believe a long time ago based on
watching and talking with the now hundreds of people who have gone through
my classes and seeing a great many of them alter their opinion as they became
more educated, I admit not all.  In the case a mind did not change there would
be in my estimation a psychological explanation since political opinion is
based on beliefs.  As higher education is supposed to do, I think a value-free
education would be less an attempt to produce a particularly slanted
personality change one way or an other, liberal or conservative, I think an
unbiased, objective education tends more to produce one who looks more
clearly at the options, that is, think critically, about the world.  Not that
experience doesn’t have its effect, but that is just more on account of nurture
not nature.  So I think with good penetrating argument, people can be
educated to either liberal or conservative perspectives.  It is the “nature” of
learning that gives the nurturing effect of mental growth.  It is called by some,
indoctrination.  It is irrelevant if that growth is toward one polar view or the
other.

I agree that Dixit’s article from Psychology Today was not as scientifically tight
as it should have been for a professional journal.  But it was broad and
encompassing in its covering the topic.  Enough so that more debatable
thought could easily be generated.  I don’t expect scripture from a psychology
journalist.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, December 29, 2009 at 10:30 am Link to this comment

Shenonymous, December 29 at 2:00 pm,

So—————— If Palin is a demagogue that is engaged in stampeding the herd for the political benefit of the Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMISTS, it is fair game to stampede the herd over Sarah Palin, the demagogue who initiated the stampede.

I would not agree with initiating the stampede, but once a demagogue has initiated a stampede with intent to destroy a political opponent, it is fair game to use that stampede to politically destroy the demagogue or demagogues in the case of the Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Movement, that started the stampede for political gain.

Report this
Anarcissie's avatar

By Anarcissie, December 29, 2009 at 10:27 am Link to this comment

Shenonymous—the research described in the Psychology Today article seems to have been fairly sloppy, but I do think it pointed to a truth, to wit, that people’s political stances are mostly determined by deep personality traits rather than reason and can probably be predicted in childhood.  (I like this idea because I thought of it myself a long time ago.)  If so, then education is not going to produce the desired personality changes; rather, the personality will acquire educational experiences or not, as it works its way through the world.  That being the case, we can’t educate, i.e. indoctrinate people into being liberals.  They won’t accept it.  If they do accept education it will be only that education which confirms ideas they already strongly favor.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, December 29, 2009 at 10:22 am Link to this comment

BR549, December 1 at 5:46 pm,

If two thugs are busy clubbing you over the head, one has a large club and one has a smaller club; should the offense of the former thug be forgiven or diminished by the actions of the latter thug hitting you with a smaller club.

This is the logic of diminishing the actions and activities of Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST thugs based upon the complicit cooperation of a lesser thug, Bill Clinton, does not work for me as a part of Back Street America, the American Populace, and I doubt seriously this logic will work for anyone else in Back Street America, the American Populace.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, December 29, 2009 at 10:22 am Link to this comment

BR549, December 1 at 5:46 pm,

If two thugs are busy clubbing you over the head, one has a large club and one has a smaller club; should the offense of the former thug be forgiven or diminished by the actions of the latter thug hitting you with a smaller club.

This is the logic of diminishing the actions and activities of Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST thugs based upon the complicit cooperation of a lesser thug, Bill Clinton, and does not work for me as a part of Back Street America, the American Populace, and I doubt seriously this logic will work for anyone else in Back Street America, the American Populace.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, December 29, 2009 at 10:00 am Link to this comment

The NYRB of Palin’s book is thought provoking but its charismatic allure to the
provincially minded huddled masses is to be anticipated.  It is not unusual for
demagogic-conscripted, wannabe-politician individuals to appeal to what is in
reality a more conservative general public than they are thought to be.  People
generally hear exactly what they want to hear and the demagogue intones that
exactly.  Surprisingly inverse, I’ve found statistically*, the more educated the
less conservative a mind is.  The antidote to a Palin offensive is education.  This
is not what is desirable by the conservatives who will impede every effort to
educate the general public.  Palin’s lacking social polish and is her ticket to the
mediocre but many in number voting public.  38% of the voting population
have less than a high school diploma, 43% have some high school education is
significant in having educated critical thinking skills to make informed choices
and decisions.  Of a voting population of about 225 million voters (2006
census), the number of the minimally educated is staggering.**

*http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/200612/the-ideological-animal?
page=3

*www.civicyouth.org/PopUps/FactSheets/FS_08_exit_polls.pdf

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, December 29, 2009 at 10:00 am Link to this comment

BR549, December 1 at 5:46 pm,

The thing about the Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMISTS is that they are so few of them and so many of us, the American Populace, Back Street, that when the American Populace becomes aware “en masse” of the offenses that the Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMISTS have committed and perpetrated against the American Populace, that the Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMISTS, like Louis XVI will have no place to hide.

Report this
Anarcissie's avatar

By Anarcissie, December 29, 2009 at 8:14 am Link to this comment

There is an actually interesting, although somewhat unsettling, review of Palin’s book and a book about her in the current New York Review of Books:
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/23532

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, December 29, 2009 at 8:09 am Link to this comment

Sarah Palin is much ado about a side show, a pig dressed up as a princess that is a pretender to the throne of the Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Movement.

Report this
Go Right Young Man's avatar

By Go Right Young Man, December 29, 2009 at 6:14 am Link to this comment

ITW,

FOX News and Limbaugh have no role to play here.  You’ll have to come up with some other mythical demons to protest against. 

Show us the data from something other than the Daily Kos, please.  Do that and make your argument if you find what you seek.  Failing that I will completely dismiss your assertions.

-

Men can disagree while being agreeable and respectful of others points of view.  Yes?

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, December 4, 2009 at 12:19 am Link to this comment

GRYM:
You are simply another Re-thuglican liar who calls Dems “liars” to confuse the issue.
You deliberately misquote me, bend statistics to meet your needs “I stand by my 13%” and call others liars.

Now this may play well with all your fellow ditto-heads on Limbaugh’s forum on the Fox Noise ones, but I guarantee you won’t get any traction from it here on TD…even those of “The Contingent” who detest me and most of my posts won’t buy your nonsense.

Fox “stats” don’t fly here, and pretending they do won’t get you anywhere here.

You, of course, are welcome to keep subjecting yourself to ridicule, saying to everyone “I detest your dishonesty” when we all know that me merely means “I detest you for challenging my bullshit analysis, my invented “facts” and for not accepting my Fox Noise premises at face value.”

Report this

By BR549, December 1, 2009 at 10:46 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Look guys, let’s not trash the right TOO much. There were many very well-
meaning, loyal and patriotic Republican Americans .......who just could not
identify with the Democratic platform in 2000. I mean, looking back, we now
see just how complicit the Clintons were in this whole NWO crap. Who would
have understood back then the extent to which the conservative party had
been hijacked by the twisted thinking of the socially dysfunctional Neocons? Only recently have so many Americans come to realize that the two party
system is a joke.

Who would have thought that this group of neocons would practice incessant
bible thumping and then posture this country to kill over a million people?

The real issue here is helping to educate BOTH sides of the voting public as to
what is really happening in the corruptive sewer we call a legislature. If you’re
still stuck throwing stones at one particular party, then YOU are still a part of
the problem. Get over it. We were all duped. Now get educated and move on.

The more we argue amongst ourselves, we stay divided and are are more easily
conquered by the legislature, which, by the way is planning on raising the U.S.
in-country military readiness population from 20,000 to over 300,000. Wrestle
with that tidbit for a while.

Remember, REX84-Alpha was designed under the guise of “continuity of
government”. They then renamed it FEMA, and FEMA isn’t about responding to
hurricanes of tornadoes. It was creating another way to funnel tax dollars to
support a hidden agenda; not unlike the way Social Security was created.

The feds idea of a real emergency is when the population storms the steps of
the capitol building, threatening to hang the traitors in $3000 suits with their
imported silk ties. That’s THEIR idea of an emergency. They could give a shit
how many blacks drown in a hurricane.

So, get your heads on straight and start realizing how much you have in
common and focus on the real war, and I’m not talking about Afghanistan.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, December 1, 2009 at 10:12 am Link to this comment

Percentages are most important for the GOP, because their favorite percentage is covered by using the word “most”!

Several advantages for the GOP is they do not have to remember what they said and they have a copycatted sound bites for morons to remember.  Example: The GOP insists most people in the USA do not want a government Medical Plan.

Using the word “Most” is so much easier and better than using silly percentages, even though neither can be substantiated, of course finding anyone who gives a rats ass, may support the well known fact, most Americans don’t give a shit!

Report this
Go Right Young Man's avatar

By Go Right Young Man, December 1, 2009 at 9:55 am Link to this comment

Inherit The Wind,

A Daily Kos poll conducted about republicans is your definitive answer?  Excuse my blitheness, however, you have got to be kidding!

You want my admission of wrongness from that?  Tell me quickly you’re trying to be funny.

This is absurd.  Why not quote a few real polling entities? I’ll tell you why very simply and plainly.  Because what you found, repeatedly, did not support your asinine theory. The Daily Kos? Give this one up.  You look absolutely foolish.

FACT:  Polling date showing the highest number of Republicans who believed the President was not born in the U.S., by a RESPECTABLE polling company, was 28%. Jag off! That number, in my opinion, is too high.  I stand solidly by my 13% contention.

28% is roughly the same number of democrats who believe President Bush knew of the 9/11 attacks before it happened.  An equally absurd conspiracy theory which proves one thing.  There are Moonbats everywhere.

-

And, yes, you did attempt several times to claim Fey quoted Palin VERBATIM.  It’s clear for all to see right IN THIS THREAD!

I detest your dishonesty!

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, November 28, 2009 at 3:41 pm Link to this comment

Night-Gaunt, November 28 at 6:41 pm,

Night-Gaunt said: ‘By that you mean they sucker them in then get their vote then renig on their promises then yes.

ThomasG’s answer:  By “that”, as you say, I mean what I said in my post.  As the American Populace becomes aware that they are being subjected to fulminating, equivocating, anti-populace, sophism and propaganda that is being inflicted upon them by political duopoly, the American Populace will seek redress, much the same as American Colonists sought redress for taxation without representation in the British Parliament; I do not see a difference between the plight of the 21st Century American Populace and their lack of representation in both houses of the United States Congress, and the lack of representation experienced by American Colonists in the British Parliament.

Report this
Night-Gaunt's avatar

By Night-Gaunt, November 28, 2009 at 2:41 pm Link to this comment

By that you mean they sucker them in then get their vote then renig on their promises then yes.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, November 28, 2009 at 12:22 pm Link to this comment

Shenonymous, November 23 at 2:42 pm,

According to you, you are a fence sitter.  Perhaps, while you are lukewarm up there sitting on your comfortable fence, you could do a little talking about “anti-populace populism”.  Both the Left and the Right, the Democratic Party and the Republican Party are heavily engaged in “anti-populace populism”.

If the “populace” of the United States could be brought to awareness that they are being manipulated by “anti-populace populism”, it would improve conditions for the American populace on both sides of your perch, there on the fence, and in that respect improve your circumstances, if you happen to fall or get pushed off of your perch there on the fence.

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, November 23, 2009 at 4:28 pm Link to this comment

Go Right Young Man, November 23 at 12:22 pm #

Inherit The Wind, - “When the “birther” movement was in full swing a few months ago, ALL polls showed the well over 50% of Republicans bought into.”

-

13% TOPS. Dishonesty will not further your agenda.  Or, conversely, check your facts before you post. Either way you appear foolish.

-

You did, in fact, begin an attempt to claim that Fey quoted Palin “VERBATIM” (post below).

It’s much simpler, and a great deal more honest, to simply admit when you’re wrong.

****************************************************

Check this out, sparky!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/07/31/new-poll-less-than-half-o_n_248470.html

I await your admission that you are wrong (again).

As for the Tina Fey “verbatim” routine: No matter how you try to Fox-spin it, I only ever was referring to her spoof on the Couric interview. Period.  There’s nothing you can twist, turn, bend or fake to change that.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, November 23, 2009 at 10:42 am Link to this comment

If by pilgrim you mean I am journeying to some sacred place of extreme left,
you are wrong ThomasG.  I have always been a lukewarm liberal keeping a
steadiness of mind under stress instead of being a caustic reactionary.  While
you are in that extreme mental location, I don’t mind it that I agree with you
now and then and this time, that if the left and liberals don’t make sure Palin is
“known and recognized” for what she is, they are doomed to suffer her
populism.  It is up to the guides of humanity to keep the rabble on high octane. 
A very interesting commentary was posted on the Lipstick on a Rogue forum by
tdbach that I think gives the most luminous description given so far.  If only
there were more minds like that about and who act on their illumination, then
the mass migration of the general public would be safe in their callow
participation in life.  It isn’t a matter of holding ones’ hands over one’s head.

My journey is always on a straight path, left of center.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, November 23, 2009 at 9:03 am Link to this comment

And now for Intermission!

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, November 23, 2009 at 8:49 am Link to this comment

For this “innocent” bystander, please say where the “13% TOPS” statistic comes
from.  Is that of all people polled, which are whom, or just Republicans polled and
by whom? 

Yeah the 50% is not substantiated either.  So are you two just exhibiting your
braggadocio?  Or do you have any substance to your boasting?  And to what
importance are these percentages anyway?  Can they be translated into real
numbers? 

ThomasG, I am just getting back from some preoccupation called life in the real
world and have a response to your last post directed at me, but it has to be a bit
later.

Report this
Go Right Young Man's avatar

By Go Right Young Man, November 23, 2009 at 8:22 am Link to this comment

Inherit The Wind, - “When the “birther” movement was in full swing a few months ago, ALL polls showed the well over 50% of Republicans bought into.”

-

13% TOPS. Dishonesty will not further your agenda.  Or, conversely, check your facts before you post. Either way you appear foolish.

-

You did, in fact, begin an attempt to claim that Fey quoted Palin “VERBATIM” (post below). 

It’s much simpler, and a great deal more honest, to simply admit when you’re wrong.

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, November 21, 2009 at 7:52 pm Link to this comment

“Capitulation” you say?

Sorry, pal, getting facts straight isn’t capitulation—like your 13% of Conservatives believe….is nonsense.  When the “birther” movement was in full swing a few months ago, ALL polls showed the well over 50% of Republicans bought into.  Tell me, did YOU buy into it (and now feel foolish)?  Were you one of the ones saying “Let Obama produce his REAL birth certificate” and other silliness?

Sarah Palin has shown a combination of meanness and ignorance that are funny until someone holds real power.

Report this

By BR549, November 21, 2009 at 10:32 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Let’s see if I’m getting this straight ...... Fox News?  24/7? My mother does that,
and when I try to ask her about relevant issues, all she does is parrot O’Reilly’s,
Hannity’s and Beck’s drivel-speak.

That explains everything.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, November 21, 2009 at 10:15 am Link to this comment

Ahh Wow!  A fanatics fanatic, most interesting. Revelations like this usually only come on Fox News, which I watch 24/7/24/7, 70 percent of the time!

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, November 21, 2009 at 9:55 am Link to this comment

Shenonymous, November 21 at 10:40 am,

You are sounding less like an equivocating fence sitter and that is a good thing.

As you can probably tell, I am deeply concerned about what you and others think,———— NOT!!!

Although, I don’t give a rat’s ass what you and your friends think, I do care about the level of awareness of the Common Population and whether or not the 70% MAJORITY Common Population is represented in the U.S. Government and both houses of Congress, and to the extent that you get off the fence and support this agenda, I will support you; to the extent that you do not, what you and your friends think is irrelevant to me.

I am not blogging to win friends, my interest is political awareness and representation that is forthright, NOT equivocating, lukewarm fence sitting that serves emotional and social needs, rather than political necessity.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, November 21, 2009 at 8:17 am Link to this comment

If Palin’s book starts showing up in my dumpsters, I will find a new profession, been thinking about becoming a brain surgeon, just from reading posts here, seems many people need lots of work done in that department.

Report this
Anarcissie's avatar

By Anarcissie, November 21, 2009 at 8:10 am Link to this comment

Go Right Young Man, November 21 at 12:00 pm:
’... Right-wing populism scares the left….’

I suppose it should, given 20th-century European history.

Report this
Go Right Young Man's avatar

By Go Right Young Man, November 21, 2009 at 8:00 am Link to this comment

Inherit The Wind,

People certainly do tend to lean toward what’s comfortable for them. At the same time it’s intriguing to consider that over 70% of progressives believe the “Russia from my porch” misquote while only 13% of conservatives believe President Obama is not an American.

On the unhinged and hypocritical hatred the left display toward someone, anyone, like Ms. Palin

Right-wing populism scares the left since grassroots movements are supposed to reflect democracy and the instant expression of popular will. And that is supposed to be good all the time. Yet average Joes listen to Rush Limbaugh in their cars, not Air America, and watch Bill O’Reilly, not MSNBC, and for the first time in history a single individual holds five best selling books on the New York Times list (Glenn Beck) and progressives can’t stand it.

Barack Obama was supposed to be a populist phenomenon, by virtue of being an African-American organizer, and we were to like him for his supposed ease with hoi polloi. But we surely cannot be consistent, and extend that notion of authenticity to a Christian, moose-hunter from the snow-bound, wacko far north who talks like the clerk at Wal-Mart — and draws crowds as large as Obama’s.

And while progressives LOVE to point out foibles from the right it’s almost always ignored that candidate Obama once bragged on his having visited each of America’s 57 states. I personally can’t recall Ms. Palin saying anything quiet that, well, off the mark?.

Yes, people do lean toward what’s comfortable for them

-

I will be more careful when reading posts here. The problem was honestly not my public education but rather, during our conversations over the last week, I’ve been traveling and reading and posting from a blackberry. I completely missed your capitulation over the Fey skit.  Again my apologies.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, November 21, 2009 at 6:40 am Link to this comment

If you were not so completely off the map ThomasG you would have seen that
both KDelphi and I have been on the left side of the dividing line, she much
more to the left that I, but we have been consistent for years.  What you think is
really not important, I believe to either of us. 

Everybody who has a thinking brain thinks they know what Palin is up to.  I
think she has cooked her goose.  She struts like a turkey that doesn’t know it’s
time has come.  But pissing off everybody and their mother in her comic
tabloid book that some groups are just giving away (which won’t put any money
into her stocking), and after awhile I am convinced it will be on the used books
of amazon dot come for one cent, or lining that trash dumpster Leefeller
checks out now and then.  I believe the grayheads of the Grand Old Party are
going to take care of her themselves.  She eclipsed Glenn Beck and Rush
Limbaugh, and I bet they just loved it.  But that ought not to mean Democrats,
and otherwise leftists, ought to depend on the GOP to be an instrument of her
deserved doom. 

That is always the problem with Democrats is that they can’t see beyond the
end of their front yard.  They want to be the party of the people but don’t have
any real convictions.  They keep pulling up on their sagging jock straps. They
ought to get rid of the BlueDog Democrats with marbles for brains and replace
them with Liberal Democrats.  They don’t know how to get the people
galvanized, but then neither do the socialists!

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, November 21, 2009 at 6:02 am Link to this comment

Go Right Young Man, November 21 at 2:05 am #

Inherit The Wind,

I missed you agreeing that Fey’s words had been attributed to Palin. I deeply apologies.
***************************************

Accepted.  Please try to read what people say before you attack. Tina Fey’s humor was an exaggeration of what Palin actually said in the Gibson interview—but most humor is exaggeration.

Americans believe what they want.  Liberals believe Palin said “I can see Russia…”. Conservatives believe Obama wasn’t born in America and isn’t an American citizen.  Others here believe Israel is acting as puppet-master of our American government.  You believe that 8 years of Bush’s policies didn’t lead us to the financial mess we are in, but 10 months of Obama did.

It is comforting to believe such crap. We all do it. I try to purge myself of it when I can.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, November 21, 2009 at 5:53 am Link to this comment

Shenonymous, November 20 at 8:25 pm, and KDelphi, November 20 at 7:37 pm,

Shenonymous said:  “Is it the liberals who are focusing on Palin, or is it the media forcing the world to focus on Palin?”

KDelphi said: “If “liberals”  keep foscusing on Palin and the like, we’ll all be living in dumpsters..


ThomasG’s answer:  Them’s mighty enlightened and strong words in your posts, pilgrims.

Have you fallen off of the fence and are you trying to adopt a position that is more than lukewarm in support of the Left and liberals?

BTW, Sarah Palin is trying to take Ronald Wilson Reagan’s mantle as the leader of America’s “blockheads and dummies” against their best interest, as George H.W. Bush told Mikhail Gorbachev, that was reported September 2009 by The Nation magazine; if Sarah Palin can cloak herself in Reagan’s mantle and get a complicit Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Media Echo-Chamber to trumpet her cause, as did Reagan; Palin has a shot, if the Left and Liberals do not make certain that Sarah Palin is known and recognized for what she is,——one more demagogue trying to lead the “blockheads and dummies” against their best interest for political advantage for the Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMISTS, against the best interests of the Left and Liberals. 

Is your journey veering to the Left, or what?

Report this
Go Right Young Man's avatar

By Go Right Young Man, November 20, 2009 at 10:05 pm Link to this comment

Inherit The Wind,

I missed you agreeing that Fey’s words had been attributed to Palin. I deeply apologies.

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, November 20, 2009 at 8:28 pm Link to this comment

Go Right Young Man, November 20 at 9:39 am #

Inherit The Wind,

This is downright ludicrous and beginning to be a waist of my time. Either Sarah Palin said she could see Russia from her front porch or she dd not. It’s that simple.

Now show us all in your next post exactly how you were referring to Tina Fey quoting Palin VERBATIM in the SNL Katie Couric interview. Show us all when and where Palin said she could see Russia from her front porch.

I hate to be so abrasive, however, either put up or shut up.
**************************************************

Are you a complete moron?  What part of
“1) I agreed and AGREE SP never said “I can see Russia…”—that was Tina Fey in an SNL skit about the VP debate with Biden.”
do you not understand?

Yeah, I agree it’s a “waist” of time.

Report this

By BR549, November 20, 2009 at 5:21 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Shenonymous said, “Democrats ought to be putting all their attention on
glamorizing their own stables by passing legislation that makes the general
population feel like they are cared about.”

You managed to put it all in a nutshell. Contrary to most politicians feeble
understanding, not everyone in the population has been dumbed down with
fluoride. Many of us actually expect our elected officials to develop a social
conscience and do something for the good of the Republic ......... for a change.

BTW, I always found it interesting that E.D. was caused by stress, since
reproductive functions were always at the bottom of our energy totem pole, so
to speak. But rather than change our lifestyle, take a back road to work, or
ditch the five cups of coffee at work, too many men try to go for it all and then
expect the little guy to jump to attention after his nutritional necessities have
been continually ignored ........ so to speak.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, November 20, 2009 at 4:25 pm Link to this comment

I think there are some now who could make seasonal apartments out of a
dumpster, meaning vacating on trash collection day, then moving back in
afterwards.  And soon as the next trash collection has taken place, there might
be lucrative reason to dig in the trash.  But don’t get your hopes up too much
Leefeller.  Men don’t throw their blow up dolls out very often.  But with the
unbelievably huge campaign by the pharmaceuticals to get men to have
erections (and of course the drugs being the holy grail for the guys who have
had chronic problems, which seems to be in the double digit millions! and
which could really just be mother nature’s way of controlling population) blow
up dolls might just be ways to unleash when guys are still not found attractive
to flesh and blood women (or other men, depending on whether they are gay or
straight).  Nobody said dolls have to be femme. 

Is it the liberals who are focusing on Palin, or is it the media forcing the world
to focus on Palin?  The media are so desperate to have news 24/7 that they
gush over the most innocuous events.  KDelphi is probably right about 2012,
but I don’t think anyone will even be saying “Sarah who?”  A flash in the pan is
just that.  Democrats ought to be putting all their attention on glamorizing
their own stables by passing legislation that makes the general population feel
like they are cared about.

Report this

By KDelphi, November 20, 2009 at 3:37 pm Link to this comment

If “liberals”  keep foscusing on Palin and the like, we’ll all be living in dumpsters..

If you are an Obama fan, you should be praying that the GOP will “show Sarah some respect”.

That is how Obama will win again..by Fux News convincing the GOP to put up someone totally ridiculous.

I have nothing against state educated rural governors, Id like to see one in the presidency in our lifetime, but Palin is a strange female Bush..Palin is stupid like Dubya, who knew exactly how to pull at those country fiddle strings of Merkins hearts, bought two elections and gave neo-cons everything their heart’s desired.

If the Democrats, with majorities in the presidency and both Houses of Congress, and, all they do is escalate bush wars and prop up Wall St, people will not bother to vote.

But I stll think that , in 2012, you will all be saying, “Sarah who”??? I could be wrong…

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, November 20, 2009 at 12:18 pm Link to this comment

Ever since my discovery of a rubber blow up doll wearing a hooters outfit in the dumpster behind the Republican headquarters, I have been hooked ever since Anarcissie!

Report this
Night-Gaunt's avatar

By Night-Gaunt, November 20, 2009 at 10:54 am Link to this comment

I don’t know what USA you live in but fascism is the merger of business/state/church similar to what we found in Europe in the 1930’s but in other places since then. It is relevant here too. We have seen it in operation beginning in 1980 and we still see its continuing effects now. They don’t have full control but they have too much control and it needs to be stopped now before we lose the Republic. It is hardly my opinion.

Report this
Anarcissie's avatar

By Anarcissie, November 20, 2009 at 10:33 am Link to this comment

Still rummaging in the dumpster, Leefeller\

Report this

By BR549, November 20, 2009 at 10:15 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Well, I went to Wikipedia and found a bulletproof explanation of “fascism”. The
only problem is that it basically describes what we have in this country right now,
while we’re pretending to have a democracy. See the first two to three paragraphs
of the following.:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, November 20, 2009 at 7:39 am Link to this comment

Universal opinion sounds nice, my universal opinion is what everyone else agrees with! Most of the time when one gives plain old dusty opinion, placing universal in front really knocks it up a few knotches!

Yeh!  Sort of like if I say this about Fox news, Fox News gives the universal news and the majority of the people in the world agree with it, because this is my universal opinion.

Me myself and I now have universal opinion! Knotch, Knotch!
Inflation now has a new meaning.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, November 20, 2009 at 6:57 am Link to this comment

***************
***************
What is Fascism?

FASCISM is Corporate Governance with the counterfeit face of God.

****************
****************

Report this

By BR549, November 20, 2009 at 6:29 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Shenonymous, I hadn’t meant to infer that the people were the terrorists; I
meant that the “politicians” were the terrorists. They are the ones who have
squeezed into office by whatever means necessary, to somehow convince us of
their increased level of wisdom and foresight. Nothing could be further from
the truth.

In actuality, politicians are in a class with used car salesmen. They are parasitic.
They are middle men in the system who only seem to reproduce themselves uncontrollably in an attempt to cloud the reasonings by any sane working man
as to why we need so many people who basically do ....... well, nothing.

It is the men and women on the assembly lines and in the fields who are doing
the work that keeps this engine running, and yet, given only a short time,
politicians always seem to slither out from under a rock to convince a group of
their worth.

The amount of schmoozing that goes on in Washington is mind-boggling, and
certainly, relative to the average working man, would have investors desire to
invest all their money in Vaseline. I can see USA Today in the near future,
“Obama Announces That U.S. Is Now Under The Rule of the U.N.” (basically, that
he signed our sovereignty rights right down the toilet) and petroleum jelly
futures skyrocket as the average U.S. citizen bends over to brace for what’s
next.

We’re getting a little off track here. We were talking about Sarah Palin. I tried to
imagine how I would handle being a position like that and about what it takes
for a person to stand up and just say no. No to the schmoozing, no to the graft
and corruption. What does it take? Our forefathers devised this absolutely
brilliant set of documents that still needed a little work, but it had a solid
foundation.

Unfortunately, we still had legislators back then who went along with the lowly
colonial’s revolution and all, but like Prescott Bush and Joe Kennedy, were
businessmen first and their only allegiance was to their wallet. They were
whores. Prescott Bush’s involvement with the Nazis is no different than
Cheney’s doing business with Iran through Halliburton’s foreign subsidiaries.
And although I don’t feel that Iranians are doing anything more than trying to
posture themselves against Israel’s interests of dominance, Cheney was still
trading with Iran when Iran was on the no-no list.

It’s S.S.D.D. in Washington and, so far, the bumbleheads that work(?) there
aren’t giving the population any reason to avoid doing what populations have
historically done in the past when their leaders turn into useless parasites. I
don’t have any personal animosities toward any of them, but if they aren’t doing
what they said they would .... get them the hell out.

Report this
Go Right Young Man's avatar

By Go Right Young Man, November 20, 2009 at 5:45 am Link to this comment

Night-Guant - “Fascism these days is right wing—-sometimes called a corporatocracy.”

-

That is not a universal understanding of fascism. That is clearly your opinion. An opinion that is not shared by anything close to the majority of Americans as a whole. Only the majority of Leftists in America. Which is, by the way, the minority.

Report this
Go Right Young Man's avatar

By Go Right Young Man, November 20, 2009 at 5:39 am Link to this comment

Inherit The Wind,

This is downright ludicrous and beginning to be a waist of my time. Either Sarah Palin said she could see Russia from her front porch or she dd not. It’s that simple.

Now show us all in your next post exactly how you were referring to Tina Fey quoting Palin VERBATIM in the SNL Katie Couric interview. Show us all when and where Palin said she could see Russia from her front porch.

I hate to be so abrasive, however, either put up or shut up.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, November 20, 2009 at 5:13 am Link to this comment

I think, BR549, you are close to the truth.  But here is what I’ve discovered: 
when you said “ANY type of government could conceivably be humanitarian
and perpetual, even though, ?so far, greed, corruption, and deceit seem to just
creep out of every politician’s veins and eventually condemn every form of
government to an early grave,”
this is a condition of most every society since
humankind first formed societies.  There may have been completely altruistic
communities where strife had been eliminated and they lived in peace, but they
are far and few between.  As a society they never got the press, from ancient
times to now.  Archaeologists have had to pull that information out of digging
deep.  And eventually these tribes were decimated by marauders.  This
aggressive behavior has not left any civilization untainted, in every ethnic race.

Then again you say, “we can’t seem to get our collective heads out of our
asses to elect someone with any degree of integrity.”
  Again, I think you are
right, well figuratively speaking, but politicians, every single one of them, even
that wonderful Representative from Florida, Alan Grayson, have the affliction
called political malaise, i.e., corruption and we have know about that disease of
politicians since recorded history.  The Romans are famous for it, but so were
the royal houses of Assyria, Babylon, Egypt, later in Greece, all the way up to
today.  It is a human condition.

It is the case that there is “no form of government that will fairly serve a
stupid and dumbed down population.”
  That too is a human condition when
the population on the whole are not educated to think for themselves.  To
educate them to be able to make informed decisions is the herculean struggle
of those in education.  It is a monstrous task.  Some countries even in the 21st
century will not educate their people because as that god in the garden knew,
if you educate them, the rabble will revolt.  As the story goes, it was not for
nothing the biblical man/women were prohibited from the tree of knowledge.

While you humorously characterize the Republicans and the Democrats (though
it isn’t really funny) those who elected Bush, twice, were more than just the
midwesterners and it was also the Supreme Court.  Twice.

Your analysis of the 2004 and 2008 elections, does show that if people are
informed, the dummies will vote more in the public’s favor rather than
corportocracrats. Those not informed (yes the lack of real news is a huge
problem) will vote conservative.  Not Republican so much, but to preserve what
they think they have.  It is well known that as people age they become more
conservative, even Democrats!

Yes, people are “sheeple” and yes politicians do spoonfeed them crap about
not just terrorism but everything.  That is a chronic condition again since
mankind formed societies.  I don’t agree that the public are the terrorists.  I
think they are just plain ignorant. I watched some of the people interviewed at
the Palin booksignings and the reasons given why they were there, by the
hundreds mind you, thousands, and these ordinary people have their provincial
reasons.  She ‘seems’ ordinary.  It is a good politician’s trick.  It is ancient.

Report this
Night-Gaunt's avatar

By Night-Gaunt, November 19, 2009 at 10:47 pm Link to this comment

You do remember that they blocked the impeachment of both those men don’t you Go Right Young Man? What does that make them? By-the-way socialism can and does function in the full spectrum of political systems so it isn’t automatically “liberal” at all.

Unlike the hakencrutze/swastika the fascese is still an honored symbol both here and in France. It was originally represented democracy. Note its multiple thin rods support the thin rod that holds the ax head. You will find it in the arms of France and in our Congress—-large ones at that. Ironic no?

Fascism these days is right wing—-sometimes called a corporatocracy. Where the state and corporation meld and help each other over the people. The Nazis were the same way however in Russia and China it was the party that owned the means of production and the elites in those parties who got the wealth—-not the workers. Promises never kept.

Report this

By BR549, November 19, 2009 at 10:28 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Better yet ........ Send them all to the pen in 2010!

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, November 19, 2009 at 9:16 pm Link to this comment

GRYM:

I didn’t change ANYTHING I posted.  The fact that you don’t know how to parse what you are reading is your failing, not mine.

I STILL insist that Tina Fey’s most BRILLIANT routine was quoting Palin VERBATIM in the SNL Katie Couric interview.  That’s what I’ve said all along.  Please take a reading comprehension course.

But…it goes along with the rest of your “history”.  Hitler destroyed the more socialist wing of the NSDAP, purging the Strassers and later Roehm.  He also murdered tens of thousands of Communists and Socialists.

Mussolini had been a Marxist Socialist and ABANDONED it with his Roman-symbol inspired Fascists (from Fasces—the symbol he used was Roman).

I’m just plain tired of the right-wing bullshit lies that started with the Willie Horton ad (BTW, Ronald Reagan, as Governor, freed a man on work release who then murdered someone…his own “Willie Horton”.)

See what I mean, folks? It’s IMPOSSIBLE to work with most Republicans today. The Dems in both houses should just stop, use their super-majority power and just CHANGE THE RULES to stop their deliberate obstructionism—that they hated so much in Democrats…And brought us Alito and Roberts.

Report this

By BR549, November 19, 2009 at 8:14 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Shenonymous, no offense taken. I was merely trying to point out that ANY type
of government could conceivably be humanitarian and perpetual, even though,
so far, greed, corruption, and deceit seem to just creep out of every politician’s
veins and eventually condemn every form of government to an early grave.
Ideologic as I may sound, I was pointing more at what was missing from our
“elected” officials, not espousing any particular form of government.

It isn’t the type of government that is the problem, but that we can’t seem to
get our collective heads out of our asses to elect someone with any degree of
integrity. If that’s the case, there is no form of government that will fairly serve
a stupid and dumbed down population, and worse, governed by one of their
own.

Those bible and grain belters that sit around their midwest tables and chat
about the “good ole’ days” and vote for Bush because he makes them “feel safe”
are part of the problem because they just don’t seem to be able to get much of
any relevant news out there. Same with hard core democrats who wouldn’t
recognize a corrupt politician if he cleaned out their bank accounts, which is
more truth than fiction.

After the 2004 and 2008 elections, I did an overlay of which counties voted red
vs. blue, against the known cities that broadcast Amy Goodman’s “Democracy
Now” program. In all but two broadcast cities out of over 800, EVERY county
that aired the show voted Blue, even where all the surrounding counties were
Red. Interestingly, Kansas had no stations airing that show, but Kansas City,
Kansas’s county went Blue because the adjacent city (Kansas City, MO) did air
the show.

People are, as is commonly referred to, “sheeple”. Politicians spoonfeed them
some crap about terrorism, while they themselves are the terrorists, yet the
sheeple scramble and cower like timid animals, never questioning one iota of
what was fed to them. And when they vote, they want their vote taken
seriously. Maybe people just deserve the politicians they vote for, I don’t know.

Report this
Go Right Young Man's avatar

By Go Right Young Man, November 19, 2009 at 8:01 pm Link to this comment

ThomasG,

I’m sorry but you sincerely do not understand what your talking about on this issue. May I suggest you read Mein Kampf?  And, if you like, I can direct you toward multiples of dozens of sources and sundry reading materials.

Do I guess correctly that you are shocked and appalled to learn that you hold a strong affinity for the ideology of Adolf Hitler?

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, November 19, 2009 at 7:17 pm Link to this comment

We should be showing EVERY soldier coming home in a box on TV, if for no
other reason than to help the families with closure and giving those soldiers the
recognition they deserve.
I almost agree with you BR549.  I think the reason is
to show the Americans the price of war, not in money (of which we all are feeling
the repercussions),  but to show the price in human beings. 

For the first part of your post, I think it is overreaching to try to pull the weeze in
to your perspective.  (The weeze is the plural of we)  I decline to join you in your
capitulation to whatever “ruling body shows wisdom, etc.,” might be in charge. 
The melange of alternatives of forms of government just ain’t m’cup o’tea.  Sounds
to me like a lot of sloganisms in your comments.  No disrespect intended.

Report this

By BR549, November 19, 2009 at 6:34 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Hey people, let’s keep our eye on the ball. Whether we’re discussing Obama,
Reid, Palin, Palosi, or Reagan or the whole dysfunctional Bush Family, they’re all
cut from the same cloth. If ANY ONE of them had any patriotic tendencies other
than steeling greenbacks from voters, they would have attempted to provide us
with MORE information instead of trying to hide it. 

Here we are again, picking nits over this party vs. that, when that is EXACTLY
what wastes our energies come election time. I don’t think itamounts to squat
whether we live in a fascist state, a socialist state, a monarchy, or a republic,
so long as the ruling body shows wisdom, compassion, and can think about
the human race instead of keeping their own family members in a perpetual
state of power. So the issue still comes back to truth, honesty, and integrity
....... no matter who is in office or power, and the path there starts with
transparency.

We should be showing EVERY soldier coming home in a box on TV, if for no
other reason than to help the families with closure and giving those soldiers
the recognition they deserve. The terrorists that took us to Iraq and
Afghanistan reside right here at home and are currently sitting in all three
branches of government and big business. The rest is smoke and mirrors.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, November 19, 2009 at 6:18 pm Link to this comment

GRYM, Nov.19 at 9:26pm,

Hitler and Mussolini were not Socialists, both were Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMISTS, more like Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMISTS of the Republican Party.

Hitler’s political party was The National Socialist Party, but the name was a misnomer, Adolph Hitler was in no way a socialist.  Hitler was a Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST that was a Nationalist.  How on earth could you conclude that Hitler was a socialist?  The very concept that Hitler was in any way connected with Socialism is ludicrous.

Report this

By KDelphi, November 19, 2009 at 5:41 pm Link to this comment

MarthaA—Please stop humiliating socialism by pretending that people like Sarah Palin are socialists just because Elizabeth Warren said that the bailout had been socialisym for the rich.. ???? You just get stuck on these ideas…GRYM—I am a Socialist and more are becoming so every day. Except in the south, of course.

GRYM—what is a “nationalist socialist”? (I thought it would be a National Socialist, but maybe not))Why would they have fought with a self-proclaimed “socialist” (which he was not)—Stalin?

This melding of socialfascism is the mark of a true ideologue.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, November 19, 2009 at 5:27 pm Link to this comment

A bit retarded one says, I will be polite!

Percentages mean so much, especially when they are hand picked and selected to support ones argument, when reality of the numbers becomes suspect if they do not jive with ones personal reality or fantasy , but what the heck they are just numbers.

Since I like some things and do not like some others, lets put the high numbers on what I like and the low numbers on what I do not like. Works for me!

Guess we are waiting for the sounds of buckets falling, sort of like the Moose bellowing in the woods thing. Sarah may become only a glimmer in me eye or is that just more chaff?

Report this
Go Right Young Man's avatar

By Go Right Young Man, November 19, 2009 at 5:26 pm Link to this comment

ThomasG,

I’m sorry but your knowledge of history is sorely lacking.  Hitler and Mussolini were active and boisterous nationalists socialists.  A great deal more like today’s “progressive” than anything akin to what you believe to be today’s American conservative.

I’m betting you’re a young man with little understanding of current and historic global events?

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, November 19, 2009 at 4:56 pm Link to this comment

Leefeller, Nov.19 at 7:56pm,

Leefeller said:  “Socialism with Sarah Palin, may mean the witch doctor is in town or a house has fallen on her and the muchkins do not know wheather to cry or rejoice?”

ThomasG’s answer:  What is it you are talking about with regard to Sarah Palin and Socialism?  Sarah Palin is a Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Republican, the same as Hitler and Mussolini, to equate Sarah Palin with Socialism seems a bit on the retarded side.

Report this
Go Right Young Man's avatar

By Go Right Young Man, November 19, 2009 at 4:48 pm Link to this comment

ThomasG,

It pleases me tremendously to know that your positions are so far left that 97% of Americans wouldn’t recognize you as American (assuming you are).

It pleases me to know that the majority in America lean Right of Center.

It pleases and comforts me to know that a full 97% of Americans believe very passionately in the capitalist system.

I am pleased beyond all description knowing full well that it’s you who holds the extremist position here in the United States.

Wholly crap!

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, November 19, 2009 at 3:56 pm Link to this comment

A blind eye is the only way this accused Right Wing Republican can stand to look at Sarha Palin, (She seems to always be staring at me)  from her books cover to her pictures everywhere even here on TD, how about the glaringly missing pom poms on the Newsweek Cover picture!

Most fortunate are those very hard of hearing folks, seems almost like winning the lotto,  beatifically lucky has a new meaning, especially soon as she starts speaking and the finger nails start scraping on the chalk board.

Socialism with Sarah Palin, may mean the witch doctor is in town or a house has fallen on her and the muchkins do not know wheather to cry or rejoice?

Report this

By CaptRon, November 19, 2009 at 3:23 pm Link to this comment

I smell Republican input here..All these comments have gotten away from the subject of the article by Gene Robinson, that being Sarah!! Sarah!! Sarah!! Off on a tangent to confuse. Don’t comment on the subject-redirect it toward what they feel more comfortable talking about. Spin-you know that process in the brain of a republican which they feel are new ideas? Using all the titles and intense vocabulary. All talk—-no substance. Their feeling is that all people who don’t believe like they do are ignorant. I admit to my ignorance, but also to the fact that many of my ignorant comrades majoritized our thoughts with substance and elected people who do have thought and direction. The subject of this article, Sarah Palin, talks and talks and talks the talk, but only wants others to walk the walk. Just the problem with republican spin. no substance.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, November 19, 2009 at 3:17 pm Link to this comment

Proclamations from the king or ones self, do not make them true! Experts on socialism self proclaimed as they are, seem a tad suspicious.

If one was to say Palin was a socialist, they would be stretching the truth, but that would also be true for the word intellegent.

Report this

By KDelphi, November 19, 2009 at 3:03 pm Link to this comment

GRYM—really..cause I have had it happen alot, and not just on this site…

I think David Frum (bad as I dislike him) said it well on cnn: “This is a woman who has got into a position of leadership by sending very powerful sexual signals,” Frum told reporter Judy Woodruff.  “And we see that in the way that men like her much more than women do.”

“There is a thinness of skin, and an anger, and a vindictiveness that is very dangerous,” Frum said.

I dont know if Frum means it or is playing political games (because he knows she cant win the presidency) , but complaining about sexism when you ran on it is just a joke. Palin IS sex on a stick to alot of red state guys and you might as well admit it. (You could also say that Obama is the same to some diehard Dems)

I mean, look at that pic of her again..and again..as you probably do. You cant run in beauty pageants and then claim sexism. My mom used to try to do that with her crown hanging on the dresser…it comes off very wierd….

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, November 19, 2009 at 2:37 pm Link to this comment

Go Right Young Man, Nov.19 at 6:00pm,

You must be talking about some alternate reality that exists in your subjective delusions; Pelosi and Reid were, are and will continue to be cooperators with the Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Republican Party that enabled the Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Republican Party Agenda and Movement.

Report this
Go Right Young Man's avatar

By Go Right Young Man, November 19, 2009 at 2:00 pm Link to this comment

Night-Gaunt,

Reid and Pelosi are far from being “right wing”. In fact Nancy Pelosi was, until becoming Speaker, a self proclaimed socialist.

The two are not protecting Bush and Co. They’re protecting themselves.

Report this
Night-Gaunt's avatar

By Night-Gaunt, November 19, 2009 at 12:22 pm Link to this comment

BR549, you missed the right wing lunatics that have infiltrated the Democratic party too like Reid & Pelosi who protected the Bush/Cheney Axis of Evil from war crimes violations as well as impeachable offenses. We have been compromised.

Report this

By BR549, November 19, 2009 at 10:21 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Martha A, I’ve been enjoying your commentary and yes, too many of the
“blockheads and dummies” were voting Republican, but let’s not forget the
Democratic Blockheads and Dummies who blindly voted for Obama because he
was the democratic candidate and for no other reason.

I don’t think it makes any difference which party a candidate represents; what
is missing is truth, integrity, and honesty and I doubt we are going to see those
attributes coming from Washington any time soon. As for the Republicans who
had voted for Bush, particularly the SECOND time around, I can only guess that
since the Dems were too far left for them, and their own party had been
unknowingly hijacked by that gang of lunatics, they had no one else to vote for.

I’m not going to get into the issue of whether Obama has lied, but having voted
for him, I am incredibly disappointed in his lack of follow-through on his
campaign promises. I think that, while he may be very well educated and may
have had a commitment to community at some point, so far, his decisions have
been too closely aligned with the Bush Administration for me to feel warm and
fuzzy.

When it comes right down to it, too many in our voting population are still too
embroiled in this battle between which side is right. Meanwhile, the
corporations are walking away with the candy store. Obama isn’t some naive
idealogue who is green about the workings of Washington. I think he knew very
well what he had to say to the population to get into office.

If Obama’s message was really about giving the American citizens HOPE, he
would have first focused on pushing to repeal the Patriot Act, restoring Posse
Comitatus, and explaining to the American people WHY we needed to dump
NAFTA, ACFTA, and all this NWO crap. He has done none of that, and in fact
has taken our country even further away from having the civilian voting
population understand what led to the demise of our manufacturing base. So
far, he has only proven to be a part of the problem instead of the solution.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, November 19, 2009 at 9:24 am Link to this comment

My undermining Obama is showing great success ever since I have been dangling teabags from each ear.

Deluded it seems, reality in Mertha A world seemingly takes a back seat or is it really a lack of comprehension Mertha A,  constantly calling others on what really seems a personal problem, or is it just a tactic?

Comprehension can be a wonderful thing, if one is inclined or even capable.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, November 19, 2009 at 9:24 am Link to this comment

As an outside, “objective” observer, how is it concluded that Leefeller’s comments
in any way undermines Obama?  Please point to the sentences where that has
occurred.  There seems to be a lack of ability to apprehend what is said,
particularly with Leefeller’s usual comical figurative speech.  His form of old time
Will Rogers in a homily vein of humor does go over the heads of those imbued
morbidly with their own arcane ideology I imagine.  To help your psyche, I direct
you to the bibliography at
http://www.compedit.com/checklisthumor.htm
Personally I like Kurt Vonnegut who was much more brutal than Leefeller, who
shows to be more a gentle man.

Report this
MarthaA's avatar

By MarthaA, November 19, 2009 at 8:59 am Link to this comment

Leefeller, Nov.19 at 12:17pm,

Still trying to undermine President Obama with sophist propaganda, are you?  What is your objective evidence that President Obama lied about anything? All you sophists propagandists elaborate on subjective crap expecting people to accept what you say as objective evidence, when it is nothing more than crap.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, November 19, 2009 at 8:17 am Link to this comment

“Nobody here has explained why Obama felt the need to lie about his relationship with Ayers and Dorn. Care to field that one too?”

Kicking off instead of fielding here! Obama has a much longer relationship with Ayers, then is well supposed.

When Obama was 3 years old Ayers would read bomb making manuals to Obama over the telephone, because Obama had trouble sleeping when younger, for he was ambitiously planning to become president, even then,  all presidents have had mentors, not just Obama. For instance Ronald Ragain, had a Chimpanzee, though later on they had a falling out over who was the brightest light in the room!

By the way, how did we get onto Obama and his drinking coffee with Ayres story again?  Why not, Birthers, Ayres, God damn America and of course the grand daddy of all, Obama is only half black or half white? The perpetually stuck in the craw topic of self proclaimed enlightened ones. Now one can insert teabags for a disgustingly overly stuffed craw,  doctors are warning, over stuffed craws can lead to additional delusions! 

Accepting reality seems assuming when one is handed their arse in a hand basket.

Back to the winking Imbecile please!

When I was in town the other day, Palins book was every where I went, it was like her book was chasing me.  The price of the book was dropping like a Republican Senators brain at a convention.  One store they were even paying people $3.00 to take Palin’s books out of the store, now I heard the same store is doing a recall, because they don’t want people to feel insulted and hold a gruge!  Since I went to Starbucks, hope they don’t not want their money back?

Report this

By BR549, November 19, 2009 at 7:44 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

The only tragedy here is that she made it as far through the political process as
she did. What were the Republicans thinking? If she was supposed to be an
example of Republican ideologies, we’re in real deep doo-doo. It’s embarrassing,
as an American, to think that she was the best we could for that party, and I was a
long-time former Republican.

Report this
Go Right Young Man's avatar

By Go Right Young Man, November 19, 2009 at 4:54 am Link to this comment

ITW, - “When Tina Fey did her imitation of Palin in the Katie Couric interview she DID recite Palin’s remarks to Couric VERBATIM.”

-

Well, what can I say? That is not what you originally wrote. It’s not what you were responding to. There was no reference to the Couric interview in your first response to what I wrote.

My post: It’s interesting that, when polled, almost 70% of democrats believe Sarah Palin claimed to be able to see Russia from her back yard.

Your post: Tina Fey’s GREATEST impersonation was when she repeated Palin’s answers VERBATIM on SNL.

I’m sorry but, your screwed the pooch on this one.

-

Leefeller is right. I was wrong. It was the “front porch” comment from Tina Fey that has been attributed to Palin.

-

Bill Ayers:  According to the New York Times two attendees of the “coffee” in the home of Bill Ayers, an event held to kick off the senatorial campaign of Mr. Obama, have confirmed the event. All others have refused comment.

I have seen no denials concerning the event in the Ayers home. I think you missed the mark on this one also but, I would be glad to see any verifiable information to the contrary.

Nobody here has explained why Obama felt the need to lie about his relationship with Ayers and Dorn. Care to field that one too?

Report this
racetoinfinity's avatar

By racetoinfinity, November 19, 2009 at 2:08 am Link to this comment

“Her success to date represents a triumph of authenticity over accomplishment.”

Authentic?!  Ya’ gotta be kidding.  She’s about as authentic as a Disney greeter.

Report this

By CaptRon, November 18, 2009 at 8:16 pm Link to this comment

For those who like Sarah Palin-it is your right-she has some likeable points about her.
For those who can’t take this person (I admit I lean this way)she continues to fuel this fire for dislike.

I feel that she, and a parallel life named Carrie Prejean, have like traits. They outwardly present an image of strength forged by having been wronged by others unlike themselves since any wrong they might have done is acceptable because of naivete. Latest example from Palin comes from Newsweek cover. My personal thought, when seen, was of an aging woman who takes very good care of herself. Nothing in the nature of sexist as she responds. “If I would have known this would appear on Newsweek, I would never have allowed Runners World to do this.” Carrie Prejean says that due to her age she is allowed to make mistakes like sex tapes and many photos in all states of undress, certainly she didn’t know what was happening. Is this the same response she would give for the young lady that was raped by Polanski? Where were the parents that allowed her to do this? Abortion is wrong she says, but aren’t mistakes then allowed to be forgiven? Ladies, get off the soap box and just live your lives in a quieter and non-judgemental fashion of others.
I hope Levi (as in Johnson) just blabs all. There will be truth and there will be fiction and there will be banter back and forth. I hope so much so that we get tired, no irate, at the sound of their voices.They can be “rock star type” celebrities if people want them, nothing wrong there (at least for someone else). For me, I hope they all disappear and I certainly don’t want any of them making decisions for me or my country.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, November 18, 2009 at 7:29 pm Link to this comment

Where does everyone get this crap, come on folks, wake up!  It was from her front porch! Palin said she could see Russia from her front porch! I know this as fact for this is were Palin skins and guts her hunting trophies and conceives her children at the same time!

Now that I think of it, Britney Spears cannot hold a candle to Palin when it comes to important stuff like this!

Report this

Page 4 of 5 pages « First  <  2 3 4 5 >

 
Right 1, Site wide - BlogAds Premium
 
Right 2, Site wide - Blogads
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion   Publisher, Zuade Kaufman   Editor, Robert Scheer
© 2014 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.

Like Truthdig on Facebook