Comments on: UPDATED II**: The Contradictions Of Palin

By: NJ_Patriot

NJ_Patriot — Wed, 04 Aug 2010 23:38:20 +0000

Ok. Nora, your “argument” seems awfully lacking in intellectual maturity and appears supported by emotion not fact. Can you please expand on your rationale for disrespecting Sarah Palin regarding her use of the said metaphor involving “male genitalia”? Is it that it is a poor representation of “political audacity” as our beloved and ingenious host indicates or is it something more substantive that bothers you?

By: NJ_Patriot

NJ_Patriot — Wed, 04 Aug 2010 23:03:05 +0000

Why focus on the perceived contradictions of Palin? Isn’t there sufficient leftist hypocrisy, lies, inconsistencies, subterfuge etc. to fill the next thousand blog entries or so?
And why toss out the denigration, as in “a stupid statement”? Can’t you just disagree with Palin and leave it at that?

By: Nora Brinker

Nora Brinker — Wed, 04 Aug 2010 14:54:19 +0000

The political essence of the statement aside, on a purely emotional level, a woman who publicly uses male genitalia as a metaphor for a man’s way of doing something has lost my respect.

By: Daniel

Daniel — Tue, 03 Aug 2010 12:14:58 +0000

I have long had mixed feelings about Sarah Palin. I would agree with those who have pointed out how viciously she has been attacked by the liberal media, simply for being a pro-life, white, conservative woman, as opposed to a Hillary-style left-wing hack.

Her political ambition, on the other hand, concerns me. She is a woman with young children, yet she seems willing to push them aside to seek out all this political pomp and glory. Her abandoning her governorship of Alaska also does not reflect well upon her or abilities. She clearly does not have her priorities in order. Nor does she seem to articulate a consistent and coherent political philosophy by which to judge her. Instead she seems to be content with all the usual Republican talking points about “small government”, “low taxes”, and a “strong national defense” without actually bothering to explain what these mean.

Now if it came to it, I could plug my nose and vote for her if she was the candidate against Obama in 2012, but she has a long way to go before I would actually consider her a figure I trust and respect.

By: Van Wijk

Van Wijk — Tue, 03 Aug 2010 10:32:41 +0000

As I’ve stated before, Sarah Palin can be depended upon to do what is necessary to keep herself in power (she was quick to associate herself with the TP when it was gaining traction). What principles she has (if any) are so amorphous that voters have no real reason to trust her.

That being said, if I have to suffer Sarah’s presence on the political stage, I would prefer that we use her for our ends rather than vice versa. If the immigration debate goes where I think it will, Palin will go to bat for the winning side: the restrictionists. She is very charismatic and seems to strike a chord with working-class Americans, those most directly effected by the southern invasion. She can be very useful so long as she is kept in line.

By: Mike Marks

Mike Marks — Tue, 03 Aug 2010 00:04:45 +0000

Obama has the cajones when he wants to do something that supports his statist ideology. Clearly he does not want to enforce he border.

By: Robert Glisson

Robert Glisson — Mon, 02 Aug 2010 22:57:29 +0000

SPO101, got out of kindergarten,(writes like a 18 year old Liberal boy- ie judges by looks) wandered into a Libertarian website and thought he/she was on a Republican site. If he had read the article, he would have noted that it was about Palin and was critical of her and other Republicans. If anything, the writer should have been in agreement with your take on ‘Palin’ but was just another mud throwing attack so popular these days. I doubt if SPO101 is even interested in economics or the tax structure of the country to understand anything. If this is another example of what this country is coming to, I’m packing my bags for Belize.

By: james huggins

james huggins — Mon, 02 Aug 2010 22:26:55 +0000

We can lambast the Republicans all we want to. The Democrats too. But the fact remains illegal immigration is a situation serious enough to adversely affect our total way of life. Urban legends about taxing the rich and the effect of the Bush tax cuts and whatever Jan Brewer did before don’t mean squat. We’ve got a serious situation and at least some people are trying to get it sorted out. All of you wise and learned observers of the passing parade seem to have the attitude that if a situation was caused or advanced by stupidity or corruption or political wrong doings all that is required is writing clever opinions. I feel we should fight it out, get the problem solved and then worry about how it happened. Of course with a significant part of the country, including the government, supporting the criminal situation this problem solving is problematic at best.

By: Myron Pauli

Myron Pauli — Mon, 02 Aug 2010 21:45:49 +0000

(1) PALIN – she is intellectual cotton candy to constitutional libertarians – sweet tasting but completely empty calories. The she gets treated like some oracle of wisdom from Mt. Sinai just shows how debased our media and popular culture has declined. She is a CONSERVATIVE Republican with a talent for gathering attention.

(2) SPO101 seems COMPLETELY IGNORANT of Ilana Mercer who has consistently raked idiotic and hypocritical Republicans (deservedly) over the coals for as long as I can certainly remember. As for “decent wages” for all being a “bad thing” – YES – because they must be earned. It would be nice to have a minimum wage of $ 50 / hour if some benevolent Martians were going to foot the bill – until then, a free people should take responsibility for their own lives. Any other philosophy winds up in a combination of tyranny and/or
bankruptcy.

By: sunny black

sunny black — Mon, 02 Aug 2010 20:48:13 +0000

The cajones is a great remark because it isn’t really about whether Obama has guts on the issue of illegal immigration, as you correctly pointed out. It’s about warming up the country to the idea that Obama is essentially a eunuch. Only Sarah Palin can do this. And if the gross effect of denigrating Obama’s holy ’08 aura is to move 5% of his voters off of him, then I’m all for Palin commenting on huevos or the lack thereof of male pols.

It’s apparent to me that Palin said many things during her August-November romance with Sen. McCain. She was being a team player. Does it mean she doesn’t have first principles? I get the feeling she’s still learning.

By the way, Sarah Palin hasn’t been playing kingmaker for female candidates exclusively. And it’s worth noting that, while democrat candidates are running away from CaptainAmerica, the MammaBear is 24-5 in contests where she endorsed someone (I read that somewhere).

For the other commenter: Let’s not start drawing equivalencies between candidates just because they happen to be politicians. Palin, no matter what I may think of her, is not the same as Obama. Michelle Bachmann, Nikki Haley, Rand Paul articulate a different idea of the role of government in our lives compared to Obama. Period.