What does Going Rouge have in common with the progressive agenda?
posted at 10:12 am on October 22, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
So the editors of The Nation, the venerable progressive political magazine, are releasing a copycat book timed to make a little cash off of their bête noir, Sarah Palin. Palin’s book, Going Rogue, will hit bookstores in mid-November, and so Richard Kim and Betsy Reed are rushing a “collection of essays” about Palin through the publication process to match her book — and match its cover as well, as Allahpundit noted last night. Their promotion of this book is rather telling, in a couple of ways:
The most honest, revealing account of the Palin story to appear this fall? You betcha!
Sarah Palin has many faces: hockey mom, fundamentalist Christian, sex symbol, Republican ideologue, fashion icon, “maverick” populist. But, above all, Palin has become one thing: an American obsession that just won’t go away. Edited by two senior editors at The Nation magazine, this sharp, smart, up-to-the-minute book examines Palin’s quirky origins in Wasilla, Alaska, her spectacular rise to the effective leadership of the Republican Party, and the nightmarish prospect of her continuing to dominate the nation’s political scene.
Would “the most honest account” have to be wrapped in a deceptive cover, intended to confuse consumers into buying the wrong book? If it doesn’t start out with an honest approach, why should we trust that the same people who made that decision will be honest inside the covers? For an answer to that, we only need see the list of essayists included in this rehash of old Palin-opposing material, who include such straight-arrow observers as Amanda Marcotte, Max Blumenthal, Eve Ensler, and Jane Hamsher. Hamsher made her biggest political splash when she put Joe Lieberman in blackface during his re-election campaign. Marcotte got fired from the Edwards campaign for her vilification of religious believers in language bad enough to actually embarrass Edwards — and given Edwards’ history, that’s saying something indeed.
The whole thing looks like a bad Mad Magazine takeoff of a book, which is the impression that The Nation leaves with its Going Rouge cheapie. And the bottom line is this: after 150 years of publication, The Nation has to piggyback off of a Republican VP candidate to achieve relevance. Have The Nation’s editors become so insecure about their product that they feel they can only sell it through deception? In that, it has a lot in common with their progressive agenda.
Note: For the FTC or the clueless (but I repeat myself!), sales through Amazon links result in compensation to me.










Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
They just can’t help themselves.
Accomplished, conservative women MUST PAY FOR THEIR CRIMES.
What crime, you may ask?
Leaving the plantation.
Good Lt on October 22, 2009 at 10:14 AM
Hmmmmm…hmmmm…hmmmmm.
publiuspen on October 22, 2009 at 10:16 AM
This is their idea of “Honest account”? Wow.
If she were so stupid (like her Tina Fey characture would suggest), then why are they so afraid of her that they have to call an “honest account” a “nightmare”?
crazy_legs on October 22, 2009 at 10:16 AM
FIFY
Juno77 on October 22, 2009 at 10:16 AM
Hope she goes (I) independent….
PatriotRider on October 22, 2009 at 10:16 AM
Does a bear ____ in the woods?
~
The Nation’s editors hate Palin. End of story. They will use any measure to destroy her, attack her family, sue her unjustly, and yes, try to publish a companion collection of crap to sidetrack her book.
IntheNet on October 22, 2009 at 10:17 AM
Will the back inside cover have a Mad fold-in to creare some new malevolent image like Sarah Palin tculling the Caribou.
WashJeff on October 22, 2009 at 10:17 AM
Sarah really scares them, doesn’t she.
tarpon on October 22, 2009 at 10:18 AM
Every day the liberal loons remind us who is the best candidate to take on Obama.
They’re all wee-weed up over Sarah.
NebCon on October 22, 2009 at 10:19 AM
buuuuurn.
BadgerHawk on October 22, 2009 at 10:19 AM
Not to mention that the title itself is horribly misogynist and un-progressive.
Liberals, your slip is showing!
rockmom on October 22, 2009 at 10:19 AM
Palin, Bachmann, Cheney, all moms, all accomplished, all targets of the left…
right2bright on October 22, 2009 at 10:19 AM
Well said. My only quibble is that the real analogy is to a bad Cracked takeoff, which was a pale imitator of Mad (IMO).
rbj on October 22, 2009 at 10:19 AM
If they are this afraid and she’s not running for anything right now think what they will become if she decides to run.
Buy stock in straightjacket manufacturers; just like Obama and gun manufacturers, boom times ahead.
johnsteele on October 22, 2009 at 10:20 AM
Going Ruse
LibTired on October 22, 2009 at 10:21 AM
If Breitbart had edited/published Sarah Palin’s real book, it would already contain everything necessary to embarrass the sh1t out of the writers/editors of this cheap copy.
Daggett on October 22, 2009 at 10:21 AM
I thought imitation was the highest form of flattery. Leave it to the liberals to mess up that eternal truth along with all the others.
RedRedRice on October 22, 2009 at 10:21 AM
Huh? Polls show Sarah Palin running behind Huckabee and Romney for the 2012 GOP primary, and she is its “effective leadership”?
Democrats control the White House and both houses of Congress, and Nation believes that Palin “continues to dominate” the political scene? Methinks they protest too much.
Well, maybe later. Lots of people have bought Sarah Palin’s real book, but nobody has read it yet. Let’s see what happens when they do.
Steve Z on October 22, 2009 at 10:21 AM
The Nation has been around for 150 years and only three or four of those years have shown a profit; they exist because of a donor charity group which props them up.
Little wonder they have to steal from an irrelevant, has-been, conservative quitter to get noticed.
Bishop on October 22, 2009 at 10:22 AM
Haven’t seen the left wing t@rds this scared since Reagan
bill30097 on October 22, 2009 at 10:22 AM
The media tells us who the true conservatives are don’t they?:)Isn’t it strange how I don’t hear them run down Huck or Rom? Why should they? They, so far,are not a threat. I sure hear alot about Palin,Baughman and Cheney:)
ohiobabe on October 22, 2009 at 10:22 AM
Ah, a Palin post from Ed. So nice…
Darksean on October 22, 2009 at 10:23 AM
Mad Magazine was the first thing I thought of when I saw the story yesterday!
mbs on October 22, 2009 at 10:23 AM
What’s funny to me, is that it will probably end up being the best selling liberal book in years by accident.
After all, if liberal books sold well, they wouldn’t need, or want to deceive people, They would want them to know it’s a liberal book.
It seems the only way to get people to buy liberal crap is to disguise it as conservative.
I love that.
MagicalPat on October 22, 2009 at 10:24 AM
Folks that is the money quote right there. The left is deathly afraid of Palin and they are going to do anything, and I mean anything to stop her. We ain’t seen anything yet.
Johnnyreb on October 22, 2009 at 10:25 AM
Smacks of desperation to me.
Go Sarah!
bridgetown on October 22, 2009 at 10:25 AM
Is that really what the FTC is wanting? Good grief.
Also among the essayists contributing to this smear job is ankle-biter Shannyn Moore, who has been riding the Palin-hate into a gig at HuffPo. That says it all for me with regard to the quality of this compilation.
Snowed In on October 22, 2009 at 10:26 AM
Fortunately, their show is slipping too.
Patrick S on October 22, 2009 at 10:26 AM
It seems the only way to get people to buy liberal crap is to disguise it as conservative.
I love that.
///
Sounds alot like their boss ,meaning the o,doesn’t it?:)
ohiobabe on October 22, 2009 at 10:27 AM
I just saw a book in Borders called, “Dreams of Killing My Father,” by Barack Hussein Obooba.
Akzed on October 22, 2009 at 10:27 AM
I hope they include those hilarious jokes from Letterman about raping their daughter…and all those great jokes about Trig…and the stories about Sarah’s marriage on the verge of breaking up…those are soooo funny.
Don’t forget all the faux images created, those are right up the liberals alley of true reporting.
Yeah, they have a lot of information they could put in the book…and that comment from Bill Maher about throwing her daughter on the desk and F*in her, great, I am sure that will be in there, that is about the style they are looking for.
right2bright on October 22, 2009 at 10:27 AM
Can’t you just smell the desperation?
JammieWearingFool on October 22, 2009 at 10:27 AM
As being venerable, my understanding of cold war history, has been, that the publication known as The Nation was bank rolled for years along with several others of its ilk, by the soviets as part of their obviously successful if all to late for they, the soviets themselves, to subvert the American political system from with in.
But I’ll be sure and double check my copy of Stanton Evans’s Blacklisted by History.
Nyog_of_the_Bog on October 22, 2009 at 10:27 AM
Capitalism is evil, and profits are bad and heartless. So let’s try to capitilize on this evil, heartless woman and make a quick profit!
JamesLee on October 22, 2009 at 10:27 AM
how much?
jp on October 22, 2009 at 10:27 AM
But liberals keep insisting that they want Palin to be the nominee in ’12 because she’s so stupid she’d be easy to beat and be so fun to ridicule.
Bobbertsan on October 22, 2009 at 10:29 AM
Not surprising…it’s generally how Betas get through life.
I’m guessing Richie’s mother was very domineering.
Asher on October 22, 2009 at 10:30 AM
Holy crap! The book is only 9 bucks on Amazon? Thankfully they adjusted the price on my preorder, but I’m shocked they lowered it to that amount given the incredible sales it’s generated so far.
Doughboy on October 22, 2009 at 10:30 AM
Good post, Ed.
Now back to the regularly scheduled HA programming of a dozen or so AP snarks on all things Palin ….
cs89 on October 22, 2009 at 10:31 AM
It’s the cheap socialist copy..
the_nile on October 22, 2009 at 10:32 AM
Where are the rip offs of Huck and Romney’s books since they are the top candidates of the GOP for 2012?
crickets…..
davek70 on October 22, 2009 at 10:32 AM
CALL TO ACTION:
I personally will visit at least 5 book stores and any that are going to carry this copy cat trash will find me taking those books and carrying them to the childrens section to be buried behind the lastest release from Barney or Disney.
I strongly encourage everyone to do the same! No more sitting by while these pigs destroy America!!!!!
SDarchitect on October 22, 2009 at 10:34 AM
I know you can’t generally copyright a book title. However can Harper Collins sue for trademark infringement? The Rouge cover may cause confusion with potential customers?
Caper29 on October 22, 2009 at 10:34 AM
“Going Khmer rouge, Obama an American nightmare”
the_nile on October 22, 2009 at 10:35 AM
I think they’re even more scared of Palin than they were of Reagan. That doesn’t make much sense – as much as I like Palin, Reagan was still better.
They SHOULD be terrified of Liz Cheney, but I probably shouldn’t give them any ideas.
Daggett on October 22, 2009 at 10:35 AM
Please don’t give LGF any easy ones to repost.
MadisonConservative on October 22, 2009 at 10:36 AM
I’m waiting for a compilation of the Nation’s articles supporting Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot.
Oh, and their support for Faurisson, Chomsky’s Holocaust-denying friend was a hoot, as well.
It seems there isn’t a leftist mass murderer these c*&ts don’t support.
The Nation is less reputable source for information than Weekly World News.
PimFortuynsGhost on October 22, 2009 at 10:37 AM
I think we should all buy a bunch of them and then DEMAND OUR MONEY BACK when we receive them because we were deceived.
stenwin77 on October 22, 2009 at 10:38 AM
If only the left/media/ACLU hated terrorists as much they hate Sarah Palin…
perroviejo on October 22, 2009 at 10:38 AM
Gouging Rubes.
Terrie on October 22, 2009 at 10:39 AM
They hold fundraisers like every week. And almost every subscriber gives more to the rag than the subscription fee. They’re like the Oliver Twist of political mags–empty porridge bowl held aloft-’Please sir, I want some more’. Yeah, it’s kept alive by ignorant celebutards and the like.
RepubChica on October 22, 2009 at 10:39 AM
Isn’t she that fat sow that was mocking Trig’s handicap?
PimFortuynsGhost on October 22, 2009 at 10:40 AM
It’s all about the money. Sarah Palin sells. She gets hits. Everyone takes advantage where they can. Even so-called “progressives.” Hell, I’d probably do it myself. There are no angels in this kind of thing.
.
RWG (ever the cynic)
RWG on October 22, 2009 at 10:40 AM
I’m going to retract for now, my statement about the Nation as having been fronted by the Soviets until further review of my histories. Sorry about that.
Nyog_of_the_Bog on October 22, 2009 at 10:41 AM
What it shows is that just 10 months into Obama’s term, there’s nothing positive on the left they can point to to excite their base. The only thing that will do it is to try and gin up the same sort of hatred the left had prior to last November’s election.
But with George W. Bush gone and the Republican leadership in Washington having the charisma of a wet noodle, the only targets out there to get the left into that same special place of anger they had from 2000 through 2008 is by using Palin, or Rush, or Glenn Beck, or Fox News to excite the readers and viewers. It’s the same way as 30 years ago, when the left figured out you could only kick Nixon around for so long after he’s already left office, and with virtually nothing positive to say about the Carter Administration had to spend their time demonizing Ronald Reagan in hopes of galvanizing the voter base in 1980.
jon1979 on October 22, 2009 at 10:42 AM
Um, I just want to thank Ed for a non-snarky/snobby/elitist post about Palin. I always look forward to your posts. Although, I’m still waiting for that other “shoe to drop.” Heh.
Anyway, I really like Palin a lot. I’d vote for her in a heartbeat, but I wasn’t going to buy the book. This would be the last straw though. So, I’ll go ahead and buy it, then lend it to someone I know who probably would have never considered reading it. Every time these jackasses pull a stunt like this, I’m gonna make it work against them. All they know how to do is trick people into believing them. Even Al Gore said it wasn’t important if the Global Warming facts are right – the ends justify the means.
Dongemaharu on October 22, 2009 at 10:43 AM
This effort simply reflects the left’s poor and unsubstantial attempts to define Sarah Palin in their own terms. She is outflanking them, raining fire on their corrupt and immoral positions and all they can do is say, “we’ve got a book too!” like Obama did during the debates with his “i..i’ve got a bracelet too” in order to try to gain some credibility.
The left is flailing, and conservative book authors are soaring as I am sure conservative blogs are as well. The left routinely takes something good, perverts it, and tries to make it appear good when it actually is bad. Sounds like someone in the garden of Eden doesn’t it. The snakes are trying to get people to read that book, they’re simply revealing how disdainful and stupid they think people really are. Let the books go head to head, and we’ll compare sales like on Nov 18th?
Has this lefty trash piece had any pre-sales orders that have shown up on the amazon or b/n sales leader sites yet?
doubt it.
ted c on October 22, 2009 at 10:43 AM
Interesting parallel in tactics:
Go to whitehouse.gov, and you get the whitehouse.
Go to whitehouse.com (a common mistake), and you get a porn site.
They understand human nature, and the most likely mistakes, and the porn industry uses that knowledge to trick people into viewing their smut.
Looks like The Nation has picked up on the strategy. How fitting.
iurockhead on October 22, 2009 at 10:44 AM
Sure smells like resentful fear to this gal. And oh yeah, of course the opportunity to make a cheap buck.
RepubChica on October 22, 2009 at 10:45 AM
Like a burning beer fart in a crowded elevator.
UltimateBob on October 22, 2009 at 10:45 AM
Why? There is solid evidence they a) employed Stalinist-apologists, b) editorialized in favor of the USSR in the Cold War, c)openly cheered for the Viet Cong during the Vietnam War, d)tried to cover up and then obfuscate the crimes of Pol Pot and when that failed, argued he was misunderstood. Do I need to go on?
Financial support from the USSR (or Mao, for that matter) wouldn’t be much of a stretch for these sub-human trash that works there or subscribes to this bastion of left-wing hate speech.
PimFortuynsGhost on October 22, 2009 at 10:48 AM
ted c on October 22, 2009 at 10:43 AM
Johnnyreb on October 22, 2009 at 10:49 AM
It is composed of essays they can get for free on the web? Why would they pre-order it?
.
RWG (why would anyone?)
RWG on October 22, 2009 at 10:49 AM
The communists can’t compete in the arena of ideas so they do what they do best … attack.
darwin on October 22, 2009 at 10:52 AM
I wonder what the liberated women over at Glamour Magazine think of this title.
Confutus on October 22, 2009 at 10:53 AM
They aren’t nearly as clever as their authors think they are?
Proud Rino on October 22, 2009 at 10:53 AM
The People’s Cube Obama’s War On Fox News Becomes A Quagmire.
Dr Evil on October 22, 2009 at 10:54 AM
Looks like the sort of book David Letterman or Chris Mathews would have sitting on their coffee table during a cocktail party in their home to prove to their pseudo intellectual liberal friends what good little progressives they are.
Hellrider on October 22, 2009 at 10:56 AM
InTheNet on October 22, 2009 at 10:17 AM
THE NATION’S EDITORS HATE SARAH PALIN. END OF STORY.
COMMENT:
I would disagree with you. It is only the beginning of the story. I would suggest that the word HATE does not really reflect the magnitude of how the Far Left feels about Palin. Let me submit 10 other words that better explain their attitude and the attitude of the Far Left:
1)DESPICABLE
2)DISGUSTING
3)ANATHEMA
4)ABOMINATION
5)ANTAGONISM
6)CONTEMPT
7)MORONIC
8)DISDAIN
9)UNHINGED
10)SADISTIC
technopeasant on October 22, 2009 at 10:56 AM
Has this lefty trash piece had any pre-sales orders that have shown up on the amazon or b/n sales leader sites yet?
It is composed of essays they can get for free on the web? Why would they pre-order it?
.
RWG (why would anyone?)
RWG on October 22, 2009 at 10:49 AM
In fairness, I have bought books that are compilations of essays by conservatives, i.e. Coulter. These may have been available on free sources, but I value it as a good reference. Of course she wasn’t trying to feed off someone else’s work by coopting their book cover design.
SKYFOX on October 22, 2009 at 10:57 AM
Apparently, the publishing company (O/R) only sells books when ordered online:
So, as far as I can tell, it shouldn’t be on any bookstore shelves, unless the bookstore decides to buy some and eat the cost of all the unsold volumes.
rising21 on October 22, 2009 at 10:57 AM
I think it’s supposed to be a parody, Ed. I don’t think they’re actually trying to trick people who want to buy a pro-Palin book into buying an anti-Palin book – do you seriously need this explained to you?
Proud Rino on October 22, 2009 at 10:58 AM
coopting = co-opting?
SKYFOX on October 22, 2009 at 10:58 AM
If this was already said it needs to be said again.
Thanks ED
Clyde5445 on October 22, 2009 at 10:58 AM
Sarah smells fear from her house.
CDeb on October 22, 2009 at 10:59 AM
Ok, I’ll try not to!
Thanks for lookin out for us babe!
Akzed on October 22, 2009 at 11:00 AM
What other way would it be possible for that roster to actually get people to buy their work?
Further thoughts here.
petertheslow on October 22, 2009 at 11:04 AM
please stop this barbaric grammar.
sesquipedalian on October 22, 2009 at 11:06 AM
I am going to the bookstore and deliberately buy the wrong book and then make a scene when I return it!!!
barnone on October 22, 2009 at 11:08 AM
Kind of like when the POTUS says FNC is not a news network. Small.
Angry Dumbo on October 22, 2009 at 11:08 AM
Well, it does consists of a bunch of old Palin bashing columns that no one read when they were first published. They have to lie if they want people to actually pay for that tripe.
RadClown on October 22, 2009 at 11:08 AM
You only parody something that is already known and established in society. Not at the same time it’s released.
That’s not a parody.
Elisa on October 22, 2009 at 11:09 AM
The Nation
*The oldest and most leftwing of all popular American weekly magazines
*Supported the Russian Revolution and was first U.S. magazine to publish the Soviet Constitution
*Opposed America’s Cold War policies after World War II and generally supported the Communist bloc
Founded in 1865 by politically radical abolitionists, The Nation is the oldest weekly magazine in the United States and the farthest Left of all popular American magazines.
This periodical today is overseen by Victor Navasky, a former Columbia University journalism professor and editor at the New York Times Magazine who assembled a handful of investors in 1995 to buy the magazine from investment banker Arthur Carter.
At the time, The Nation was losing $500,000 per year. Experts advised Navasky to close the magazine and sell its mailing list of 100,000 readers, which alone was worth an estimated $2 million to direct marketers. Unless it changed its far-Left views, business advisors agreed, the magazine was unlikely to become profitable. In fact it had lost money every year for more than 125 years.
Navasky decided instead to seek investors willing to subsidize its leftist views. The investors he gathered included, among others, the present Editor, Katrina vanden Heuvel, multi-millionaire granddaughter of Jules Stein; former Corporation for Public Broadcasting Chairman Alan Sagner; novelist E.L. Doctorow; actor Paul Newman; and Peter Norton, computer software creator of Norton Utilities.
The magazine’s first major backer, who helped it launch in 1865 with $100,000, was the Boston lead pipe manufacturer who had supplied John Brown with munitions for his raid on Harper’s Ferry in 1859. Its first literary editor was the son of abolitionist William Lloyd Garrison.
By 1881 The Nation had shrunk to little more than a book review insert in Henry Villard’s New York Evening Post newspaper, as it wallowed through a succession of editors. In 1918 Henry’s son Oscar Garrison Villard (who helped found the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People) took over The Nation and shifted it politically far to the Left, where it remains today. The Russian Revolution was underway, and the magazine was the first in America to publish the Soviet Constitution.
Villard retired in 1932. He was succeeded by Freda Kirchwey, a Stalinist who moved the magazine to the far left on issues of birth control and sexual freedom, and supported the Communists in the Spanish Civil War. She became a target of radical wrath, however, when she refused to endorse the pro-Soviet Progressive Party campaign of Henry Wallace in 1948, which was launched to oppose the Cold War.
Carey McWilliams replaced Kirchwey as The Nation’s Editor in 1955. The magazine took the Soviet side in challenging America’s Cold War policies, attacking the U.S. defense program and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). It also provided a platform for pro-Soviet Marxists like Gabriel Kolko and Howard Zinn, and for a young consumer advocate named Ralph Nader. (In 2004, however, the Editors of The Nation would ridicule Nader and his presidential campaign, favoring instead Democratic candidate John Kerry.)
In 1977 The Nation was purchased by a group of investors brought together by Hamilton Fish V. Fish and his investors sold The Nation in 1995 to former Wall Street investment banker Arthur Carter, who in turn sold it to Navasky, vanden Heuvel and their group.
Arthur Carter is now a member of the Board of Trustees of The Nation Institute, a tax-exempt non-profit entity closely linked to The Nation magazine and designed to increase the profits of the periodical. The Institute’s book-publishing affiliate features titles like the I Hate Republicans Reader; The Bush-Hater’s Handbook: A Guide to the Most Appalling Presidency of the Past 100 Years; and the I Hate George W. Bush Reader. Fish is President of its Board of Trustees.
Akzed on October 22, 2009 at 11:10 AM
Please stop this juvenile omission of capitalization.
BuckeyeSam on October 22, 2009 at 11:11 AM
I just want to say that she is so beautiful that even in the fake book with the ominous dark clouds overhead, she still inspires hope.
God bless Sarah and her family and may He continue to give her strength.
Elisa on October 22, 2009 at 11:11 AM
Reminds me of Kirk Cameron’s creationism insert into Origin of the Species.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oM0oBuhTLRI
MatthiasReynolds on October 22, 2009 at 11:11 AM
Nightmarish….
Do these progressives ever have nightmares about terrorists, I wonder? Or use the same term.
How many nightmares did their hero, Mao, inflict.
reaganaut on October 22, 2009 at 11:11 AM
No, Proud Rino, a parody would be a book written that emulates and pokes fun at the text, not the cover and the title. Unless you want to argue that the contents of Going Rouge are a joke. It’s probably true, but not an intentional one.
Ed Morrissey on October 22, 2009 at 11:11 AM
Alinsky Rule #12 only works if we allow it to.
Stand with Sarah Palin!
HondaV65 on October 22, 2009 at 11:12 AM
Hope there are as many that will be as angry as I was when overseas a few years ago and bought a bottle of ‘CUTTY SHARK.’
TimBuk3 on October 22, 2009 at 11:13 AM
LOL
Elisa on October 22, 2009 at 11:13 AM
Absolutely fantastic.
LibTired on October 22, 2009 at 11:13 AM
Mispelling in the title there, bub. ;)
That should be ‘rogue’ not ‘rouge’.
Midas on October 22, 2009 at 11:15 AM
Wonder if her contribution was whether or not Trig was really Palin’s son?
katiejane on October 22, 2009 at 11:16 AM
Whoa, I’m dense, and missed the entire point. LOL @ self! Sorry!
Midas on October 22, 2009 at 11:16 AM
Read the post.
Edit: I see you have — you posted your correction at the same time as this comment. Thanks!
Ed Morrissey on October 22, 2009 at 11:17 AM
Desperate communists will do anything.
darwin on October 22, 2009 at 11:19 AM
little cash off of
to piggyback off of
please stop this barbaric grammar.
sesquipedalian on October 22, 2009 at 11:06 AM
Have YOU figured out how to use apostrophes yet?
NJ Red on October 22, 2009 at 11:21 AM
You don’t read much do you Midas?
Jason Coleman on October 22, 2009 at 11:21 AM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »