Tagged: sarah palin Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

 
  • johnpi 12:28 pm on December 6, 2009 Permalink
    Tags: , sarah palin   

    Palin’s father: She left Hawaii because Asians made her uncomfortable.

     
  • johnpi 10:59 am on November 30, 2009 Permalink
    Tags: sarah palin   

    Bad political optics/how to get a label: Palin keeps quitting.

    Sarah Palin, who resigned from her position as Alaska’s governor earlier this year, quit a 5K Turkey Trot charity race in Washington state on Thanksgiving day before reaching the end, citing crowds as the reason.

    Palin also said she wasn’t going to be making a turkey dinner for Thanksgiving because it was “too much work.”

    The former governor is favored by many Republicans to be that party’s candidate for president in 2012.

    Of note: Obviously from the above, I’m politically opposed to Sarah Palin, but an honest appraisal should also be presented here. A look through the Talk Islam archives shows that unlike many other Republican politicians, Palin has never made hate-mongering, Islamophobic comments about Muslims (a low benchmark no doubt), and was actually lauded by Aziz in Spetember for “making sense on Islam” when she rejected the ‘clash of civilizations’ meme and opined on a war within Islam:

    This is a war within Islam, where a small minority of violent killers seeks to impose their view on the vast majority of Muslims who want the same things all of us want: economic opportunity, education, and the chance to build a better life for themselves and their families. The reality is that al Qaeda and its affiliates have killed scores of innocent Muslim men, women and children.

     
    • shams 12:28 pm on November 30, 2009 Permalink | Log in to Reply

      May I helpfully suggest that white evangelical christian Palin regards muslims exactly the same way she regards jews?
      Fungible…….look it up.
      Useful pawns to be manipulated in a millenialist scheme to fulfill the biblical prophecy of the Rapture, and eventually be Converted to the True Faith.
      Jesus-take-the-wheel.
      If you think GW’s Gog/Magog war on al-Islam was bad, just elect Palin and scope out the thermonuclear apocalypse she’d like to engineer in MENA.

    • shams 12:34 pm on November 30, 2009 Permalink | Log in to Reply

      And shez all they got.
      Huck just imploded and Petraeus rebuffed their overtures brutally and repeatedly.
      No one knows who Pawlenty is and a large segment of WEC America would vote a satan ticket before they would elect a mormon.

    • shams 4:42 pm on November 30, 2009 Permalink | Log in to Reply

      Check this out Johnpi and Aziz, and then tell me Palin is “making sense on Islam”.

      “I believe that the Jewish settlements should be allowed to be expanded upon, because that population of Israel is, is going to grow. More and more Jewish people will be flocking to Israel in the days and weeks and months ahead. And I don’t think that the Obama administration has any right to tell Israel that the Jewish settlements cannot expand.”

      She’s working for the Rapture.

      [Ice said,] “Over forty percent of the world’s Jews now live in Israel. What Sarah Palin probably believes is that this is the first regathering,” when the Jews all migrate to Israel.
      “This is a condition for the second regathering, the regathering in belief, when the Jewish nation is converted. Then there will be the battle of Armageddon, because remember, Satan wants to wipe out the Jews to prevent the Second Coming, but Jesus comes to rescue the beleaguered Jews. We believe that the Jews are going to be converted so that they can call on Jesus to rescue them from Satan.”

      • aziz 9:10 am on December 1, 2009 Permalink | Log in to Reply

        what does any of that have to do with Islam?

        • shams 12:27 pm on December 1, 2009 Permalink | Log in to Reply

          Aziz…..she has no respect for Islam….she regards both muslims and jews as sort of subhumans who only real purpose is to be farmed for converts…she believes that both jews and muslims are fungible pawns in the fulfillment of biblical prophecy.
          She believes that the second regathering is the precondition for the apocalypse that brings on teh Rapture.

          Go ahead, bare your throat for the blade.
          Granada was right.

          • aziz 2:22 pm on December 1, 2009 Permalink | Log in to Reply

            lol. she can believe what she likes, but there wont actually be a Rapture, so theres no blade. Just her very large foot in her very large mouth.

            her comments are standardd boiilerplate Left Behind stuff and dont have anything to do with Islam. In fact her views on Islam are irrelevant to her policy. She hasnt yet said anything speccifically islamophbic and actually has said stuff that while not particularly insightful, do put her at odds with theGOP war on Muslims dogma (but she is forgiven by them).

          • aziz 2:23 pm on December 1, 2009 Permalink | Log in to Reply

            that said, her position on the IP conflict is informed by her Rapture beliefs, and thats inane. But its anti-Palestinian, not anti-muslim. If the palestinians were all Budddhists it wouldnt matter to her view.

            • abunoor 3:39 pm on December 1, 2009 Permalink

              That’s one thing that I’ve wondered about from time to time…How come Palestinians haven’t been able to take more advantage of their Christian population and let people view the conflict not just through the lens of arab vs. jewish or muslim vs. jewish but also jewish or Israeli persecution of Christians.

              I do see the attempt to use Palestinian Christian religious spokesmen from time to time to speak about their opposition to the occupation but it just gets no traction among right wing Christians here in US.

              I hate to say it, but it does tend to be an argument in favor of Shams’ wec thing.

            • aziz 12:13 pm on December 4, 2009 Permalink

              I hate to play the card but I think race is an issue. Arab Christians are Arab, and to be a Christian alestinian is to be just a Palestinian. They are only useful as tokens to be trotted out to show how mean Islam is to other faiths and then shut away in teh cupboard again.

              The Eastern Orthodox Church is however far more principled in its advcacy on behalf of Arab Christians than the Protestants or the Catholics are. This does mean, of course, that they arent in lockstep with the pro-israel message. And that i think pretty much sums it up. Fealty to zionism is more important than loyaltyt to fellow religiosists.

          • Buzz 2:27 pm on December 1, 2009 Permalink | Log in to Reply

            Aziz…..she has no respect for Islam….she regards both muslims and jews as sort of subhumans who only real purpose is to be farmed for converts…she believes that both jews and muslims are fungible pawns in the fulfillment of biblical prophecy.

            Politicians don’t believe anything.
            They say whaever they are told to say by there handlers and funders.

            It is easier to digest her statements when you look at it that way.

            • shams 3:07 pm on December 1, 2009 Permalink

              She’s a WEC before she is a politician.
              She does believe that.
              Just like Bush believed in Gog and Magog.

              But its anti-Palestinian, not anti-muslim. If the palestinians were all Budddhists it wouldnt matter to her view.

              You still don’t get it…..her position is anti-EVERYTHING but WEC.
              Anything else is a false faith of delusional subhumans that must be brought to Jesus.
              You seriously think some one that believes in teh Rapture and letting jesus-take-the-wheel is a good idea?
              Jesus is a fuckin’ bad driver. He already drove us into the ditch on the economy and Iraq.
              You want to give WEC a chance in the name of religious tolerance…..well, a Religion of Crazy doesn’t get equal time.

            • Buzz 3:13 pm on December 1, 2009 Permalink

              What I get is that you are WEC obsessed and you have fallen prey to your own meme like a virus that takes over a person’s entire brain and begins warping their behavior (as has been mentioned several times here by several peeps)

            • Buzz 3:15 pm on December 1, 2009 Permalink

              You need a WEC detox and colon cleanse. Check in with Dr. Drew and see if he can deWEC you.

            • Buzz 3:31 pm on December 1, 2009 Permalink

              Palin serves her base. Beck and Limberger listeners (cret’nz)

            • abunoor 3:41 pm on December 1, 2009 Permalink

              Shams,

              How do you know that Palin is wec before she is Christian? Certainly there are many politicians who choose to represent that viewpoint but most of them are essentially politicians.

            • abunoor 3:46 pm on December 1, 2009 Permalink

              Buzz,

              I know your point that politicians don’t believe anything may seem pedestrian and common knowledge to most but I think it’s something that just can’t be repeated enough. I think for people like myself who simply don’t think that way, if I don’t constantly remind myself I always end up confused. So I fall into asking myself okay what is this or that person really believe in and what are they saying just to get elected to do the things they “really” want to do.

              I’ve decided it makes much more sense if I stop trying to think that they “really” believe anything. They have chosen to fulfill a certain function in society. If they were idealogues or true believers of any kind they would not be in politics.

              Which is why I could never be in politics. I can’t even bring myself to so much as vote because that mindset is so contrary to what I think being a human should be all about.

              Allaah knows best.

            • Buzz 3:46 pm on December 1, 2009 Permalink

              On the other hand, she did attend a pentalcostal kookshow in Wasilla a few years back. She was relieved of a bewitching which is something that all of us have to deal with now and then (if we are backwater turnips)

            • Buzz 3:55 pm on December 1, 2009 Permalink

              Abu Noor

              Yeah, I am ashamed to say that one of my relatives was a senior yahoo at Lockheed Martin and sold the gov’t alot of boom boom.

              One thing he repeatedly told me over his long career is that Washington people will do anything and say anything to remain in power. That was their only rule.

              It used to be kind of on the DL, but with Lieberman and his ilk coming out clearly, it is not even an open secret anymore.

              It is obvious.

              I agree with your line of reasoning. It is the clear conclusion.

            • shams 4:44 am on December 2, 2009 Permalink

              One question Buzz…..in the light of Bush’s comments to Chirac on Gog and Magog, and the fact that we know now that Cheney and Rumsfeld capped warbriefings with bible quotes in their presentation, do think Bush’s evangelical christian beliefs affected Gulf II and the occupation of Iraq?
              Do you think Bush’s evangelical christianity and biblical literalism influenced the “Bush Doctrine”?
              White protestants founded this country and ran it until recently.
              Are you saying that Bush’s religious beliefs didn’t shape his administration’s policies?
              Sarah Palin said in her “book”…..

              In everything that happens to her, from meeting Todd to her selection by Mr. McCain for the G.O.P. ticket, she sees the hand of God: “My life is in His hands. I encourage readers to do what I did many years ago, invite Him in to take over.”

              The reason Palin’s religion is important, is that if her primitive anthropomorphic micro-managing “god” told her to bomb Iran, I fully believe she would do it.
              She talks to her god…..Palin’s god told her to run for VP and to quit the governership, among other things.
              You don’t believe her Buzz?
              You think she is just posturing for political gain?

            • shams 8:06 am on December 2, 2009 Permalink

              At what point does religious freedom end and someone elses nose begin?
              Does Palin get a pass on having to detail just how her particular brand of Crazy would impact MENA policy if elected, because her particular brand of Crazy is A Religion?

            • shams 8:13 am on December 2, 2009 Permalink

              The Jews have more sense than Aziz and Johnpi on this….they run from Palin and the GOP like scalded cats.

            • Buzz 11:52 am on December 2, 2009 Permalink

              She talks to her god…..Palin’s god told her to run for VP and to quit the governership, among other things.
              You don’t believe her Buzz?
              You think she is just posturing for political gain?

              Politicians rarely get to their exalted positions of power by being absolute and uncompromisingly principled. People like that (uncompromising) are usually beaten down or killed in public life. There is an unspoken rule against that kind of purpose. And the penalties for breaking the rule are severe. You can think of many examples. “Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely?” People like the Holy Prophets come along once every thousand years. They talk to God (or God speaks to them) and they lead by God’s Will.

              Listen to this part, Shams, closely:

              People usually cannot hide their closeness to God well since it takes up much of their time and thought.. If it doesn’t, they are probably not that close.

              The people in power who sara relies upon to support and financially back her would not place their trust in a religious zealot who can fly off the handle and be unpredictable. There is too much invested and too much expected in return.

              A rising politician has to be all things to alot of different people with different needs. It is a vocation quintessentially defined by the ability to compromise and look sincere doing it.

              Do you really think any god would accept that many partners.

              Sara fooled you shams. You believe the carefully polled and constructed illusion. Maybe you should vote for her too.

            • shams 1:29 pm on December 2, 2009 Permalink

              The people in power who sara relies upon to support and financially back her would not place their trust in a religious zealot who can fly off the handle and be unpredictable.

              But they did.
              She utterly confabulated them when she quit the gonvernorship.
              You dont get it brother buzz.
              The GOP knew exactly what she was…..they just thought they could control her.
              They know she is a religious zealot. They think they can control her.
              They knew she was wholly unfit for office…the vetting only failed on her malleability.

            • Buzz 1:35 pm on December 2, 2009 Permalink

              Nope. All Sara did was exchange a smaller job for the National Stage. And the GOP, I am sure, since they are booking her engagements, spearheaded the decision.

              Sara isn’t Going Rogue. She’s Selling Out and she will sell herself to whatever the conservative base wants her to be.

              Don’t be so gullible.

            • shams 1:37 pm on December 2, 2009 Permalink

              They were going to pygmalion her.
              But she wouldn’t play galatea…..

            • Buzz 1:39 pm on December 2, 2009 Permalink

              But it does seem to suit her persona to appear “Mavericky.”

              Would she appear on SNL making a mockery of her if she was serious about her religion?

              Politician. Pure and simple.

            • shams 1:40 pm on December 2, 2009 Permalink

              Buzz, shez all they got.
              Petraeus turned them down pointedly and repeatedly, Huck just went Willie Horton, and Pawlenty is invisible.
              also, too, a largish segment of the WEC base would vote a satan ticket before electing a mormon.
              She has the nom.

            • shams 1:44 pm on December 2, 2009 Permalink

              look at the body language on her resignation video.
              resentful, angry, incoherent.
              the week before Krauthammer and jonah Goldberg told her publically to go back to Alaska and read some books. I think the GOP leadership told her the same thing behind the scenes.
              Her resignation speech was a Big F.U. to all the old white guys tellin her what to do.

            • shams 1:48 pm on December 2, 2009 Permalink

              So basically, brother buzz, you are saying it doesn’t matter if Sarah says she believes in using the jews as staked goats to bring on teh Rapture, because ……she doesn’t really believe that?
              That is a gamble i’m unwilling to take, tyvm.

            • Buzz 1:50 pm on December 2, 2009 Permalink

              Look. I really don’t care that much about the reality of Sara Palin. She is a telling sign of a desperate GOP, but conservatives don’t bankroll religious whackjobs who hear voices. SINCE THE BEGINNING O’ TIME! On occassion, in a desperate pinch, they bankroll religious charlatans.

              Believe whatever you want. It really doesn’t matter. My original point and all I care about is that you can tell more about what politicians are saying by who they collude with, who funds them and who their audience is than by believing they are the physical embodiment of their (all too temporary) convictions.

            • shams 1:53 pm on December 2, 2009 Permalink

              Stop duckin’ buzzkill.
              answer the question.

              At what point does religious freedom end and someone elses nose begin?
              Does Palin get a pass on having to detail just how her particular brand of Crazy would impact MENA policy if elected, because her particular brand of Crazy is A Religion?

            • Buzz 1:56 pm on December 2, 2009 Permalink

              Don’t care / don’t get cornered into questions.
              Even easy ones like yours.

            • shams 1:59 pm on December 2, 2009 Permalink

              Answer this one, slick boi.
              Did GW’s evangelical christian convictions infuence his actions in office?

            • Buzz 2:06 pm on December 2, 2009 Permalink

              Same issue. You think Bush really was KIng George and made all his decisions on a throne of his own religious beliefs.

              How quaintly naive.

              Would it surprise you to know that Big Foot had a roll in all war decisions? It would explain alot to me.

            • Buzz 2:11 pm on December 2, 2009 Permalink

              Sorry, missed the Bigfoot link

    • FaithinGod 4:22 am on December 30, 2009 Permalink | Log in to Reply

      Jesus is a fuckin’ bad driver. He already drove us into the ditch on the economy and Iraq.

      Why would a believer refer to Isa (pbuh) in such a disrespectful manner?

      Brothers and sisters, please do not be so seduced by the secular left of this country that you would insult and discredit a person of the book who has not afflicted believers or the deen in anyway.

      • shams 1:40 pm on December 30, 2009 Permalink | Log in to Reply

        lol, i mean no disrespect to the real Issa.
        He is a favorite of my Shayyk the Muhayyidin.
        I mock the false WEC stereotypes of the prosperity gospel and Bush’s Gog/Magog invasion and occupation of Iraq.
        The real Issa would have spit on the “christians” in this country and driven them out of his temple.

  • abunoor 3:28 pm on November 17, 2009 Permalink
    Tags: sarah palin,   

    I can’t stand Sarah Palin and am basically happy that she’s treated as a joke as a political figure. Still, I think she’s probably right that the Newsweek cover is sexist.

     
    • pi.info 4:58 pm on November 17, 2009 Permalink | Log in to Reply

      I agree with you in every part of this blog post.

    • shams 5:08 pm on November 17, 2009 Permalink | Log in to Reply

      She pimped herself out for that pic in the runners world spread. It is public domain.
      I wouldn’t write her off just yet.
      The glibertarians like Continetti and Salam are still trying feverishly to rehabilitate her.
      Even razib pulls his punches on her…pretty wierd considering she is YEC.
      If the WECs can get their shiny tasp up and working on the base again, they will.
      She is all they got.

      • shams 5:10 pm on November 17, 2009 Permalink | Log in to Reply

        Petraeus turned them down flat.
        All they have is Romney and 2 WECs, Palin and Huckabee.
        This country will elect a scientologist…..maybe even a muslim (lol), before they will elect a mormon.

      • razib, murtad fitri 5:31 pm on November 17, 2009 Permalink | Log in to Reply

        creature, stop making stuff up about me. i think sarah palin is a fool, as anyone who reads the comments of secular right knows. an open letter to anyone: the thing above regular makes stuff up about my positions. literally makes stuff up.

        basically, unless i use her hysterical and accusatory tone the creature will impute to me the position in direct opposition to her.

        my last comment ever on this weblog, that’s for sure. you make me sick and you creep me out. stop spamming my blogs, it’s tiresome.

    • Naila 6:02 pm on November 17, 2009 Permalink | Log in to Reply

      I don’t think it’s just the Newsweek cover — most of the attacks against Sarah Palin have been sexist! The way her clothes, sexuality, and even her children — her daughters, in particular — was attacked was outright misogynistic.

      I despise Sarah Palin — she is an horrible human being, ignorant, hateful, and vicious.

      But the attacks on her as a woman have left me furious.

      And I don’t understand why anyone had to go there because considering how dim-witted she is, there was so much else that could have been attacked instead.

      But then women in general are routinely sexualized in western media. Femininity is threatening — and women in power have to either be male/butch (hello, pansuits) or safe (maternal, baking cookies). Anything in between is viciously attacked, and the woman is reduced to t-and-a.

      All that said, why on earth are we still talking about Sarah Palin? She’s like so 2008.

      • shams 6:21 pm on November 17, 2009 Permalink | Log in to Reply

        Why do you suppose that is, Naila?
        You don’t think Palin deliberately exploited the starburst factor and paraded her family to score points?
        She deserves absolutely everything that happens to her. Don’t generalize.
        She is an individual in a particular case.
        She drew it down on herself.

        • Naila 7:48 pm on November 17, 2009 Permalink | Log in to Reply

          All politicians parade their families — that’s part of the deal in U.S. politics (not so much in other countries, where, often, you don’t even see the spouse campaigning or know how many kids a politician might have). There is a provincialism to U.S. politics — maybe the product of its “democratic” leanings — which encourages a kind of sharing of family (and family values) that I find disturbing.

          So I don’t think Palin exploited anything by parading her family.

          Maybe she deserves — from a karmic pov — all that has happened to her (not sure what exactly has happened to her since I haven’t been following the news as closely), but I don’t think any woman deserves to be defined or undefined by her sexuality. Palin has been sexualized in the media, and she has been portrayed as a ditzy WOMAN rather than a ditzy moron, irrespective of her gender.

          How has she drawn this on herself? Because she dared to wear nice boots with her skirts instead of soul-crushing pantsuits? That she dared to have nicely styled hair? That she wore body-fitting tops? How did she bring this on herself?

          The media was harsh on her daughter as well. Sure, some of the ire was as the because of the obvious disconnect between Palin’s family values mantra and the reality — but this kind of hypocrisy is nothing new in politics.

          It’s shameful how women on the left have left these sexist attacks on Palin largely uncountered…

          I am not sure what you are referring to when you asked me not to generalize. My observation about how women in power are characterized is not a generalization. Most feminist studies agree that women in the west are highly sexualized. Any first year seminar on women’s studies covers that basic aspect of how women in the west are defined by the male gaze. Eating disorders, plastic surgery, and general low self esteem among women is not something I am conjuring out of boredom and fantasy — these are facts.

          The Madonna – Slut complex when viewing women — especially women who stand out — is nothing new, nor a generalization.

          It’s not just Palin who was attacked, either. Hilary Clinton was attacked for not being sexual enough. Either way, both women’s gender was the elephant in the room.

          Anyway, Shams, I like ya, so I don’t want to argue…

          Cheers?

          • shams 7:11 am on November 18, 2009 Permalink | Log in to Reply

            And let me be more specific about the old white guy wood factor….Palin is the realization of WEC idealized chattel slavery of women….a slighty dim-witted attractive pre-menopausal breeder. Hillary is a hyper-intelligent post-menopausal skilled professional.
            Women like Hillary make old white guys cross their legs in fear and squirm.
            That is why she got all the “balls-cutting bitch” invective.

            • shams 7:31 am on November 18, 2009 Permalink

              While Palin used attacks on her to justify refusing to hold press conferences and interviews. Hillary never whined about sexist attacks and took press conferences and interviews.
              You see Naila…..I have realized that the party I used to belong to…understood full well that Palin was unfit for the high office from the get-go. What they did wrong was they over-estimated her malleability. The reason we are seeing all this “Second-look at Palin” bullshytt is partly her “book”, and partly because Petraeus turned them down flat.
              It is an uneqivicable fact that some part of the WEC demographic (which likely comprises over 75% of the shrunken GOP at this point) would vote a Satan ticket before they would elect a Mormon.

        • shams 6:50 am on November 18, 2009 Permalink | Log in to Reply

          Look Naila…..I dont object to Palin’s sexuality…just that she used it occlude the fact that she was deeply profoundly, unfit for office, and she exploited the attacks as a misdirect. She yelled… VICTIM! SEXISTS ARE ATTACKING ME!
          The truth is, Palin got on the ticket because she gives old white guys wood.
          Lucky for all of us, that is a shrinking demographic.
          lol ;)

          • Shams al-Nahar 3:18 pm on November 18, 2009 Permalink | Log in to Reply

            I <3 you too, Naila, but my point is there are many kinds of sexism and Palin cynically used the sexist attacks against her to avoid exposing her rampant unsuitablity for high office by crying victim and refusing media exposure.

    • Naila 10:34 pm on November 18, 2009 Permalink | Log in to Reply

      You lost me at “old white guy wood factor” and got me back at “I <3 you too" and then lost me again at "but my point is."

      • shams 1:50 pm on November 19, 2009 Permalink | Log in to Reply

        kk….there are two distict types of sexism opperational here….anti-Palin sexism is directed at an attractive, WEC, dimwitted, fertile female….no power competition for aged white christian males, and indeed highly sexually appealing to them. So stereotypically Palin gets called, cunt, whore, slut by her detractors on the left.
        Anti-Clinton sexism is directed at a non-fertile female archetype who is hyperintelligent and definitely competitve with aging white males in the power stucture.
        So she gets called balls-cutting, bitch, icy, etc.

    • Dan 2:28 pm on November 19, 2009 Permalink | Log in to Reply

      I wish she would be sent back to the kitchen. I am sick and tired of hearing about that idiot.

  • aziz 9:18 am on September 30, 2009 Permalink
    Tags: sarah palin   

    Sarah Palin is making sense on Islam:

    This war – and that is what it is, a war – is not, as some have said, a clash of civilizations. We are not at war with Islam. This is a war within Islam, where a small minority of violent killers seeks to impose their view on the vast majority of Muslims who want the same things all of us want: economic opportunity, education, and the chance to build a better life for themselves and their families. The reality is that al Qaeda and its affiliates have killed scores of innocent Muslim men, women and children.

    The reality is that Muslims from Algeria, Indonesia, Iraq, Afghanistan and many other countries are fighting Al Qaeda and their allies today. But this will be a long war, and it will require far more than just military power to prevail.

    Shams took me to task downblog for praising Palin’s intellect. I am NOT a fan of hers but underestimating he is very dangerous. She is the rightwing Bill Clinton. I genuinely think she can mount a serious challenge to Obama in 2012.

     
    • Shams al-Nahar 9:24 am on September 30, 2009 Permalink | Log in to Reply

      Bush continuously asserted that the WoT wasn’t a War on al-Islam also.
      This is nothing new.
      War on al-Islam is a loozer strategy just on the numbers, even evangelicals are smart to realize that.

      Palin has about as much sense of what she mouths as the talking dog with lipstick she styles herself as.
      She is a visual tasp for the christianists.

      • aziz 10:33 am on September 30, 2009 Permalink | Log in to Reply

        Fine, shes a mindless robot. Regardless, Palin’s statements about Islam – public and advertised on her Facebook page – are now in direct opposition to her Islamophobic base, especially the Christianists (who favor Huckabee anyway). Discuss.

        • Shams al-Nahar 12:09 pm on September 30, 2009 Permalink | Log in to Reply

          head fake to differentiate herself from the Huckster.

        • Shams al-Nahar 12:23 pm on September 30, 2009 Permalink | Log in to Reply

          the christianists do not favor Huckabee.
          evangelical republicans support Palin for prez at 84%.
          conservative republicans support her at 80%
          republicans support Palin for president at 73%

          If you think she has any significant support outside of the GOP, you are delusional.

    • Shams al-Nahar 9:55 am on September 30, 2009 Permalink | Log in to Reply

      I genuinely think she can mount a serious challenge

      No.

      Overall, the new poll found that 53 percent of Americans view Palin negatively and 40 percent see her in positive terms.

      If 53% of the electorate view you negatively you are simply never going to be president.
      You need 51% to win.

      • aziz 10:14 am on September 30, 2009 Permalink | Log in to Reply

        You need 51% to win.

        not true. Bush won in 2000 with 50.4%. you are forgetting the electoral college. you are also assuming that approval ratings translate directly to vote share. And you are assuming that these percentages are static in time (and quoting Palin’s approval from back in July)

        • Shams al-Nahar 10:19 am on September 30, 2009 Permalink | Log in to Reply

          Bush didn’t win. ;)

          The reason Palin’s percentages are fixed is that there almost no undecideds.
          So yes, those percentages are static under homosapiens decision mechanics.
          It is exponentially harder to unlearn something than it is to learn it.

          • aziz 10:30 am on September 30, 2009 Permalink | Log in to Reply

            why are undecideds the litmus test? The “strongly” favs/unfavs are only half. About 40% are “somewhat” indicating elasticity.

            Obama’s numbers in that same poll show that the sharp recent decrease in approval came almost entirely out of “Somewhat”. His undecideds are flat and even tighter than Palin’s.

            • Shams al-Nahar 12:11 pm on September 30, 2009 Permalink

              Obama is a completely different situ from Palin.
              Obama was a panic vote, brought on by the perfect electoral storm of Horrorshow Bush, the Econopalypse, and the ridickulous alternative of Sick Grandpa plus Backup Dimbo.
              Buyers remorse.

    • Shams al-Nahar 1:13 pm on September 30, 2009 Permalink | Log in to Reply

      This says it all.

      Here’s what we will face in the future:

      Ms. Palin was booked on grueling interviews with hostile reporters while talk-show hosts such as Glenn Beck couldn’t even get through to her aides. Mr. Beck tells me he was stunned when he picked up the phone one day just before the election to discover Sarah Palin was on the other end of the line. “She explained that she had been blocked from reaching her audience, so she was now ‘going rogue’ and booking her own interviews,” Mr. Beck told me. “I was thrilled she had burst out of the cage they’d built for her and we were finally talking.”

      Translation: we couldn’t get enough infomercials on Fox, but next time we will. The days of open press conferences will be over as Palin narrow-casts only to the base. At the same time, you see the right urging a coup, while all but beating a drum for the assassination of the president, an event that would tip this country into a near civil war. In this climate, establishment conservatism for the most part is fanning the flames and pouring on the gasoline.
      I always thought it would get worse before it gets better. But I never thought it would get this poisonous this soon.

      Rogue, just another word for nothing left to lose maverick.

  • aziz 1:13 pm on August 10, 2009 Permalink
    Tags: , , sarah palin   

    It’s precisely because I think Sarah Palin is no fool that I think she is so craven, in dragging her son to the political fight over health insurance reform. “Obama, don’t kill my baby,” she cries, calculating cynicism personified. The Lady MacBeth of politics?

     
    • Shams al-Nahar 6:37 pm on August 10, 2009 Permalink | Log in to Reply

      Nothing so dignified or dangerous.
      More like the Verukha Salt of politics.

      Bob Wright has a good take on the “Death Panel”.

      More idiocy.
      At what point do conservatives become too stupid to reproduce?
      I grow tired of waiting.

      • BuzzK 6:46 pm on August 10, 2009 Permalink | Log in to Reply

        I’m thinking a little bit more of the Violet Beauregardetype for Sarah. She seems more like the chatty kathy who likes to snap her gum than the rich and spoiled girl.

        ps. how hard did the Tim Burton / Johnny Depp Wonka remake suck! Don’t know if they will ever improve on the Gene Wilder one. It is completely magical.

        • Shams al-Nahar 7:42 pm on August 10, 2009 Permalink | Log in to Reply

          She’s an evangelical.
          She’s done.
          Just wait until it comes out that John Hagee was informing Bush’s Israel/Palestine policy, and Pastor John and GW were planning on using the Jews as staked goats to bring down the Rapture.
          lawlz.

      • BuzzK 6:49 pm on August 10, 2009 Permalink | Log in to Reply

        But I do like the idea of muslimizing the characters. Verukha has an oil sheikh father who has an entire factory of Pakistani and Filipino immigrant labor shelling Wonka bars looking for a Golden Ticket.

      • aziz 6:52 pm on August 10, 2009 Permalink | Log in to Reply

        you underestimate Palin at our peril. she’s got Newt taking his cues from her now

  • johnpi 8:16 pm on August 2, 2009 Permalink
    Tags: , , , populism, , sarah palin   

    Sarah Palin and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad have a surprising amount in common.

    Above all, both are populists who claim to represent the little people against wily and unscrupulous elites, and against pampered upper-middle-class yuppies pretending to be the voice of democracy. Together, they tell us something about dangerous competing populisms in an age of globalization.

    Juan Cole’s insights after delineating the similarities:

    Right-wing populism, rooted in the religion, culture and aspirations of the lower middle class, is often caricatured as insane by its critics. That judgment is unfair. But it is true that such movements often encourage a political style of exhibitionism, disregard for the facts as understood by the mainstream media, and exaltation of the values of people who feel themselves marginalized by the political system. Not all forms of protest, however, are healthy, even if the protesters have legitimate grievances. Right-wing populism is centered on a theory of media conspiracy, a “my country right or wrong” chauvinism, a fascination with an armed citizenry, an intolerance of dissent and a willingness to declare political opponents mere terrorists. It is cavalier in its disregard of elementary facts and arrogant about the self-evident rightness of its religious and political doctrines. It therefore holds dangers both for the country in which it grows up and for the international community.

    Palin is polling well at the moment against other Republican front-runners such as Mitt Romney, and so, astonishingly, is a plausible future president. At least Iranians only got Ahmadinejad because of rigged elections, and they had the decency to mount massive protests against the result.

     
  • aziz 12:18 pm on May 15, 2009 Permalink
    Tags: , , , sarah palin,   

    in a rather brilliant post, matoko explains Palinism, invoking the myth of Kylon of Croton.

     
  • johnpi 9:34 pm on April 14, 2009 Permalink
    Tags: , sarah palin, Wayne Anthony Ross   

    Sarah Palin’s attorney general pick mocked African-American student for her objection to statue of Klansman.

    Dozens of op-eds Ross authored during the 1980s and 1990s surfaced as key exhibits in the case against his confirmation. Among them is a 1993 piece entitled, “KKK ‘art’ project gets ‘A’ for courage,” in which Ross defended a local college student who had offended an African-American classmate by creating a statue of a Klansman with a cross in one hand and a flag in the other.“It might have been fun to see [the African-American student] try to remove the display,” Ross wrote. “Then she could have been arrested and her future as a student of the university could have been resolved through the university disciplinary proceedings.”

    Lovely. What a piece of work.

     
  • c
    compose new post
    j
    next post/next comment
    k
    previous post/previous comment
    r
    reply
    e
    edit
    o
    show/hide comments
    t
    go to top
    l
    go to login
    h
    show/hide help
    shift + esc
    cancel