Palin hints to Oprah: I might consider a talk show
posted at 9:00 pm on November 11, 2009 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
The great convergence hath come to pass, my friends.
Oprah asked Palin directly whether she wanted to get into the talk show business. Palin demurred and, according to audience members interviewed outside the studio, suggested she was considering the move. Palin did not give a direct yes or no answer.
In addition, at least one audience member noticed tension between Oprah and Palin.
Oprah “kept on her and on her,” said Lauren Espie of Oprah’s inquiries into Palin’s plans to host a talk show. But Palin “bluntly never responded.”
This was the big takeaway from the interview? Not “death panels” or McCain aides kneecapping her or Levi Johnston turning out to be the ultimate D-bag? Way to seize the moment, Oprah. As for the book, Mark Halperin’s got a bullet-point sneak preview (nutshell: heavy on media-bashing, light on policy) but this piece at Daily Finance about how it might not end up being the cash cow everyone expects is more interesting. Hmmmm:
If Palin’s advance is as high as $5 million, then HarperCollins wlll need to sell more than 400,000 copies of Going Rogue to cover the advance and expenses for marketing and overhead…
Within the industry, figures for both print runs and pre-orders are notoriously inaccurate. Publishers inflate print-run figures — a good rule of thumb is that the actual print run is half of what’s reported — so the 1.5 million-copy press run of Going Rogue is likely closer to 750,000. The Amazon-Target-Walmart price war has made cheap copies plentiful, but their sites’ “bestseller” rankings indicate high velocity, not necessarily high sales; if several hundred copies of Going Rogue were rapidly pre-ordered, the book would shoot up in the rankings.
I’m going to inch out on the limb and guess that a book promoted with heavily hyped interviews on Oprah, Barbara, Greta, Hannity, and O’Reilly(!) is likely to end up making money. Dude, she was pledging autographed copies at that pro-life event in return for $1,000 donations. The grassroots is going to eat it up.
Incidentally, if you missed her latest Facebook post, she’s now objecting to the characterization of her comments about “In God We Trust” on American coins, insisting that they had nothing to do with Obama. Fair enough, but even so, her point was that they were part of a trend — and as Fox News demonstrates, that “trend” was short-lived. Exit question: How does a good conservative atheist boy support a candidate who thinks “we too often move God to the side in our public life”?
Update: Ever vigilant for media bias, Palin supporters are accusing me in the comments of having written a misleading headline. All I can do is give you what’s in the story. Quote: “Palin demurred and, according to audience members interviewed outside the studio, suggested she was considering the move.” I added “hints” to the headline. Good enough?
You must be logged in to post a comment.
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: « Previous 1 2 3
And you shouldn’t. If you want to prove that atheists are moral, than more of them should not stand for this coddling by atheist politicians and their policy writers. Utilitarians are the worst atheists that ever existed, I wish there was a hell just so they could burn forever for they’re complicity.
Yet to exact change you have to deal with convention to a certain extant. Moral atheists and antireligionists should use the “sword vs shield” litmus test. Those that feign to be christian and only use it as a shield should be given a pass, those like the Puckabee who use it as a sword to divide and conquer primary voters should be off limits.
LevStrauss on November 11, 2009 at 10:41 PM
Survivor: Camp David
bitsy on November 11, 2009 at 10:42 PM
It is only a matter of time when people will be talking about their memories of Allahpundit, and many will be asking, Who?
WoosterOh on November 11, 2009 at 10:43 PM
OkieDoc on November 11, 2009 at 10:44 PM
He who says most says less.
OkieDoc on November 11, 2009 at 10:45 PM
The other charm school favorite “Well Bless Your Heart” instead of “you f^@#ing imbecile.”
lonestar1 on November 11, 2009 at 10:46 PM
Don’t fret Allah, I don’t think she had you in mind.
donh525 on November 11, 2009 at 10:50 PM
Lolz.
Alaskan Belle: My husband sent me to charm school and I learned to say “I might consider a talk show” instead of “#$^& you, you $^&# commie.”
bitsy on November 11, 2009 at 10:55 PM
I want In Obama We Don’t Trust on the new 3 dollar bills that will soon replace all U.S. currency.
profitsbeard on November 11, 2009 at 10:57 PM
Argh. We don’t need no steenkin talk show.
Maquis on November 11, 2009 at 11:03 PM
We need a government in exile.
Maquis on November 11, 2009 at 11:03 PM
no
please
dont
blatantblue on November 11, 2009 at 11:06 PM
No, I’m satisfied with my lot in life. Just think you live differently if you think the material, mortal dimension is all there is than if you believe there is an afterlife and a supernatural God.
Wouldn’t the “shield” Christians fall into the “utilitarian” camp?
cs89 on November 11, 2009 at 11:14 PM
Hey pb, we just change this : http://www.greatseal.com/mottoes/unum.html
via this: http://www1.assumption.edu/ahc/
To this and we have a wholly appropriate entry:
“Cave canem”
(Beware of the dog)
OkieDoc on November 11, 2009 at 11:19 PM
Yes, but they are the lesser evil, atheists like Palin, and the Leo Strauss loving advisers a plenty are much worse. Don’t get me wrong, the first honest guy or gal that supports small government I am there, but I am not holding my breath, people are just too damn stupid. Bible thumping in the political is a herd gathering tactic, not a strongly held belief. Shepherds gathering up as much sheep as they can.
No if there is a god, that’s all god cares to make clear. And if he only wants to give special information out here and there, then he’s a pretty exclusive pr!ck.
BTW, materialism is a choice.
LevStrauss on November 11, 2009 at 11:25 PM
LevStrauss on November 11, 2009 at 11:25 PM
Or maybe God wants a relationship with His creation, but allows rejection and free will.
But we’re pretty far OT, and aren’t going to convince each other. Have a nice night.
cs89 on November 11, 2009 at 11:28 PM
Stupid. Don’t do it, Palin.
Connie on November 11, 2009 at 11:29 PM
Why is it wrong for a Christian to publicly profess their love of God, or their views on God? What you call “Bible thumping,” I call acknowledging the most powerful, motivating force in my life. Doesn’t the Constitution grant us the right to free exercise of religion and shouldn’t that be respected by atheists of all kinds?
uknowmorethanme on November 11, 2009 at 11:34 PM
Well at least the bold part I can agree with, if a god exists. Its goes to religions. I’ve got nothing against a potential god, but I do have something against all the lies said against a potential god. It’s been said that when a religion comes into power it makes enemies with those that would be its first disciples.
Good night.
LevStrauss on November 11, 2009 at 11:38 PM
Oh you have your freedom just as I have the freedom to call people who actually believe in religions stupid or misguided and those who pretend to believe and coddle the ignorant, evil. If that is the most powerful and motivating force, may I suggest either caffeine, B-12, or an earlier sleep time?
Do you really think that God, chose one small group over another, then banned ham sandwiches, then changed his mind, then favored another small group of people, then decided he wanted to set up more franchises while changing the rituals as it goes, then decided to have a bunch of guys vote on his son’s “true” story and all the bs in between? Oh and then after that short period of miracles, decide to go dark for the next two thousand years? Or do you think that god, if god exists, and if god is the creator of the universe, which is much older than humans, as far as we know, and pretty good science supports that, has been more consistent, for this blink of his eye(human existence), and can deal with larger groups than villages? Do you ever have the feeling you’ve been cheated?
LevStrauss on November 11, 2009 at 11:49 PM
Really? I heard that he enjoyed them just a l i t t l e too much,
(if you catch my drift).
/snark
LegendHasIt on November 11, 2009 at 11:51 PM
For me, God is a word that we use to acknowledge that there is a tremendous power at work in our lives. It is so interesting that no matter where you go in the world, there is faith in something much, much bigger than us.
Religious codes vary. They are followed by most people to signify respect for this power.
In other words, I think you’re characterizing people of faith in a way that is demeaning. They are respectful, not superstitious.
AnninCA on November 12, 2009 at 12:01 AM
Been saving this for Allah’s anti-theist posts. (How dare a public figure think they can talk about their beliefs in public!) How to Find God in 60 days.
Christian Conservative on November 12, 2009 at 12:09 AM
I can’t wait to read the book! I have already pre-ordered several copies, but will also drive down to Albuqurque (5 hours drive from where I live in Telluride, CO) to see her in person at her book signing. The lines will be HUGE, but it will be worth it.
I also heard that Sarah’s appearance today on Oprah went very well, can’t wait to see that either. Probably the highest rated Oprah show in a decade.
Norwegian on November 12, 2009 at 12:14 AM
Here’s another one, Allah
Glenn Beck on who the real extremists are: Go to 2:50 to see the REAL threat.
Christian Conservative on November 12, 2009 at 12:20 AM
<blockquoteExit question: How does a good conservative atheist boy support a candidate who thinks “we too often move God to the side in our public life”?
You have an agile mind. I’m sure if you tried you could find a way to think of it as a positive rather than a negative. Consider it healthy mental gymnastics.
snaggletoothie on November 12, 2009 at 12:35 AM
I have kind of a strange take on the “One Nation Under God” business. If you think about it, the history of most nations of the world has had the royalty or some elite being some God or Another’s vicar on Earth. In other words, where political authority is also vested with spiritual authority.
America is one nation, and spiritual authority is believed by most Americans to come directly from ones God, where every individual is answerable spiritually only to ones God or sense of ethics. It goes back to the guy who said “we have no king but King Jesus.” Not an advocacy of the direct rule of one church or another over the United States, just the opposite: A rejection of the idea of investing political authority with spiritual authority.
Sekhmet on November 12, 2009 at 12:40 AM
I like that take on our reverence for freedom of religious domination. That carries a responsibility, too, to embrace other religions besides our own.
That is a tough one for many people.
AnninCA on November 12, 2009 at 12:44 AM
Good rant by Beck. Thanks for the link… I didn’t know he was back at work.
LegendHasIt on November 12, 2009 at 12:58 AM
Definition of word CONSIDER:
1) to reflect or think carefully
2) regard or treat in an attentive or kindly way
3)respect somebody or something
4) weigh possibilities before deciding
5) examine and discuss in detail
6)take something into account
7) look carefully at something and with concentration
COMMENT:
If I were in Palin’s spot on national TV and I had entertained seriously whether I wanted to do something I would say the same thing, “I will CONSIDER it.”
Nowhere in these various definitions does it even imply Sarah has decided to become a talk show host.
technopeasant on November 12, 2009 at 1:28 AM
Do you really think that God, chose one small group over another, then banned ham sandwiches, then changed his mind, then favored another small group of people, then decided he wanted to set up more franchises while changing the rituals as it goes, then decided to have a bunch of guys vote on his son’s “true” story and all the bs in between? Oh and then after that short period of miracles, decide to go dark for the next two thousand years? Or do you think that god, if god exists, and if god is the creator of the universe, which is much older than humans, as far as we know, and pretty good science supports that, has been more consistent, for this blink of his eye(human existence), and can deal with larger groups than villages? Do you ever have the feeling you’ve been cheated?
LevStrauss on November 11, 2009 at 11:49 PM
your stupidity amazes me. You sound kind of like the old Soviets.
unseen on November 12, 2009 at 1:28 AM
Why isn’t there notice given to the story of when Palin met with a prospective candidate for Governor of Wisconsin on the same day as her pro-life speech that she told the man that she was occupied with the book tour in December but THAT SHE WOULD BE GETTING BACK TO POLITICS AND SUPPORTING CANDIDATES BEGINNING IN JANUARY.
Of course this tidbit does not fit the narrative of this thread.
technopeasant on November 12, 2009 at 1:31 AM
Actually how do we know if the interview even took place.
Boy, if this is the worst thing the Far Left can come up with they know they are in trouble.
Remember there are several topics that are discussed in an hour. You think they could come up with something about Levi or that she sounded like a moron.
technopeasant on November 12, 2009 at 1:35 AM
I couldn’t care less and neither does Sarah Palin.You might also want take it up with the founders of the republic.
Dr. Carlo Lombardi on November 12, 2009 at 1:40 AM
I withdraw my comment that the interview may have not taken place. Just saw Oprah on You tube discussing in general terms what took place.
technopeasant on November 12, 2009 at 1:41 AM
Eat your heart out Meghan McCain – Allah is back with his first love….
callingallcomets on November 12, 2009 at 6:34 AM
No. Stop being such a Palin bashing douche-bag.
If you are as blind as the rest of the GOP and don’t realize the opportunity that is present and instead lament and ridicule the slide from centrism then you are going to be left behind like Zero, Mittens, Ms. Lindsay and the rest.
I don’t expect you to change, once a piece of $#!t always a piece of $#!t.
Mr Purple on November 12, 2009 at 6:39 AM
Of course. Since Sarah Palin is not ATHEIST, Allahpundit will never vote for him.
Allahpundit will only vote an Atheist (or even a Demon), but never a trying-to-be-true Christian candidate.
I hope that it doesn’t hurt or demean you AP. But your question is implying that an atheist is a single-issue voter who will never vote for a believer of God, especially a Christian like Palin.
TheAlamos on November 12, 2009 at 6:50 AM
Suppose AP realizes he is an Evangelical Athiest? Exit question 2: What’s a good Christian boy to do when a “conservative athiest” feels the need to continually push his belief in nothing on everyone with whom he comes in contact? He’s no different than gays trying to push their lifestyle on those who disagree. Guess what? We don’t care about either. How about you keep quiet about your personal beliefs. That would make them, well…personal.
But then, AP needs the traffic to make him useful. This post must be an AP wet dream; Bash Sarah Palin and promote atheism in one post. Now, if we could just find a Meggy Mac quite to put in the story.
mwdiver on November 12, 2009 at 7:37 AM
But I bet you figured it out on your own.
mwdiver on November 12, 2009 at 7:44 AM
The talk show idea is very appropriate. After all, her and her family are like a Jerry Springer episode.
simplesimon on November 12, 2009 at 8:24 AM
Allah, sit in your pajamas in a corner and suck your thumb. We don’t like you. Get it?
suzyk on November 12, 2009 at 8:33 AM
Wow … I don’t get it. What’s he supposed to do, just give us Palin puff pieces all day?
Palin’s a big girl and doesn’t need AP to carry her water.
darwin on November 12, 2009 at 8:45 AM
Kennedy’s take the cake. The Kennedy’s would own the Springer show.
darwin on November 12, 2009 at 8:46 AM
Do you really think that God, chose one small group over another, then banned ham sandwiches, then changed his mind, then favored another small group of people, then decided he wanted to set up more franchises while changing the rituals as it goes, then decided to have a bunch of guys vote on his son’s “true” story and all the bs in between? Oh and then after that short period of miracles, decide to go dark for the next two thousand years? Or do you think that god, if god exists, and if god is the creator of the universe, which is much older than humans, as far as we know, and pretty good science supports that, has been more consistent, for this blink of his eye(human existence), and can deal with larger groups than villages? Do you ever have the feeling you’ve been cheated?
LevStrauss on November 11, 2009 at 11:49 PM
cs89 on November 12, 2009 at 8:51 AM
I don’t see Palin trashing atheists. Why does Allah think he can trash Christians? Not asking for a puff piece. How about if you have a criticism of what she’s done, fine. But why get snarky about her Christian faith? Most of our founders were Christians and most of them were not hesitant to say so in public.
Christian Conservative on November 12, 2009 at 8:52 AM
You don’t have to support her. You’ll never find anyone who shares all your political, socio-economic and religious or non-religious views. If you’re looking for a reason, then maybe you should look elsewhere for a candidate.
Nalea on November 12, 2009 at 8:55 AM
Do you ever think he’s just pulling your chain?
darwin on November 12, 2009 at 9:04 AM
It is certainly reasonable to point to the growth of Christianity and see the Holy Spirit at work. However, God’s role has been less hands-on than it once was.
dedalus on November 12, 2009 at 9:05 AM
If I recall correctly, he urges the GOP to exercise the “Eagleton option” the day she is announced, and then spends the next year or so from his perch high above the blogosphere subtly or not so subtly trying to justify his original bad call.
james23 on November 12, 2009 at 9:08 AM
I would tune into a Palin TV show. Would have to be more interesting than the Huck about Huck hour each weekend.
joedoe on November 12, 2009 at 9:13 AM
If that were even a remotely accurate headline, you can be sure that Drudge would of had a siren and Couric would have lead her news cast with it last night.
Amadeus on November 12, 2009 at 9:13 AM
Interesting that the inane Oprah audience is now considered such a valid source.
In spite of Palin “demurring” some brain dead talk show audience members decided she “was considering the move.” Did they find that on a note under their seats? Or are they mind readers?
Even more astounding that an article would bother to post that ONE member of the audience “noticed” tension. Why wouldn’t there be tension between one of the supreme Obamabots and the candidate who tried to defeat his cakewalk to messiah? I’d be more inclined to assume the tension was on Oprah’s part since it must have busted her chops that she even had to have Palin on her show. No doubt she regretted not being able to make Palin look bad. Or even more likely Oprah hated being made to look like a fat cow compared to Palin.
katiejane on November 12, 2009 at 9:14 AM
BTW, AP,did you possibly make a secret road trip to Wasilla on Dec 12, 2008?
Dr. Carlo Lombardi on November 12, 2009 at 9:15 AM
Excellent point. Unfortunately it is not enough for the foaming-at-the mouth Palin haters. She must be destroyed BEFORE she has an opportunity to present her case for the nomination. Everyone else has the right to make their pitch but somehow Palin doesn’t.
katiejane on November 12, 2009 at 9:22 AM
Wow, Allah, you really are grasping at straws here. This is by far one of the most misleading blog headlines I’ve ever seen on HotAir. But it fits your preconceived notion of Palin (a celebrity lightweight) so you went with it. I see where you are coming from and you are entitled to your passive-agressive snark but quit acting like a martyr every time a Palin supporter calls you on something like this. It’s right out of the liberal play book and it’s very unattractive.
Redneck Woman on November 12, 2009 at 9:39 AM
His beliefs about her and her potential candidacy are also right out of the liberal propaganda playbook too.
I like the fact that he and Ed fair on most of thier posts, but Allah’s constant cynical bashing of Palin is getting boring and predictable; also hallmarks of liberal playbook tactics.
It’s old man, let it go.
B Man on November 12, 2009 at 9:50 AM
Yeah, it is a little strange. Palin has never been treated like any other politician. To listen to liberals and RINO’s, one would think once she announces her candidacy it is all over except for the November election. And, then they rant and rave about how she can never win the presidency, blah, blah, blah.
In reality, she would have to make it through all the caucuses and primary elections. She would have to go head to head in multiple debates with all the other contenders. And, in the end she would have to still be standing when the general election finally comes to fruition.
If she can make it through all of that, while most of the media bashes her every other word, constantly criticizes her clothing, shoes, hair, eyewear and shade of lipstick, she will more than deserve the opportunity to run.
They also like to ignore that she won the Governorship of Alaska by doing just that and she beat all the old pro’s in every debate. Never underestimate Sarah Palin.
joedoe on November 12, 2009 at 10:14 AM
And unfortunately you know that if she doesn’t end up getting the nomination when the process is over, she will be the one who is mocked and ridiculed for having the gall to make the effort. The fact that there will be other potential candidates who didn’t make the cut won’t matter. No doubt we’ll have numerous HA threads highlighting all the “pundits” who KNEW it was foolish for her to throw her hat into the ring. /s
katiejane on November 12, 2009 at 10:24 AM
Why does a post about Sarah Palin maybe demurring about doing a talk show to Oprah turn into a thread about debating the existence of God?
By resigning as Governor of Alaska, Sarah Palin pretty much (pun intended) took herself out of the running for future elected office, and dedicated herself to becoming a kingmaker for others who support her ideas. A talk show would be an ideal forum for her to advance her ideas, and promote those who agree with her, and would also enable her to learn about the issues concerning voters in the Lower 48.
As for debating the existence of God, why does someone calling himself AllahPundit (Allah=God for Muslims) bash believers in God on a conservative blog? Doesn\’t he know that political conservatives are more likely to believe in God than liberals?
To quote a famous philosopher, “a house divided against itself cannot stand”. Stop dividing your own house, Allah Pundit !
Steve Z on November 12, 2009 at 10:25 AM
Rochester is going to be a madhouse. Borders is doing 1000 wristbands only. Have to get there early to get one, then the signing isn’t till 6:00pm.
We’ll be making a day of it.
One of Borders’ rules, which they were apparently reading off of a card, was pretty funny:
“No hugs and kisses.”
LOL, I’m not sure if that’s due to time restraints or the H1N1!
BlueStateBilly on November 12, 2009 at 10:29 AM
Dr. Carlo Lombardi on November 12, 2009 at 1:40 AM
BetseyRoss on November 12, 2009 at 10:30 AM
Steve Z on November 12, 2009 at 10:25 AM
I disagree with you that Palin has taken her name out of the running for 2012.
If the primary voters don’t support her, so be it, but according to the most recent CNN poll of GOP contenders it boiled down to Huckabee 32 Palin 25 Romney 21. Sarah Palin is definitely a major player.
Do you really believe that Palin support among the base and conservatives is going to collapse over the next two years?
Palin supporters are not going anywhere unless she announces that she is not running in 2012. Otherwise they are in for the duration.
technopeasant on November 12, 2009 at 10:32 AM
Consider the source. LevStrauss is the troll who posted vile racist comments here and attributed them to Rush Limbaugh. When cornered, it swore that it HEARD Rush say them (on MSNBC no less) with its own ears. It then lied over and over in post after post, digging deeper and deeper till finally admitting that it lied.
Engaging lying liars is fruitless, so I don’t.
BlueStateBilly on November 12, 2009 at 10:33 AM
Did anyone catch that the vote count in district 23 has changed due to snafus and miscounts. If you remember Owens on election night was leading by 5335 votes with 93% of the vote counted. Now it is Owens 66698 to Hoffman 63672 for a difference of 3026 votes, with roughly over 10,000 absentee ballots still to be counted.
technopeasant on November 12, 2009 at 10:37 AM
If Palin prefers to throw her hat into the talk show ring than that of the blood sport of politics, no worries from moi. After all that she and her family have been through, I hope she makes millions of dollars and becomes the feminine equivalent of Rush Limbaugh in the daytime talk world.
I didn’t realize that they did the interview already. This is what I get for not paying attention. ;-)
itzWicks on November 12, 2009 at 11:05 AM
What did Jesus do that is bad for mankind?
royzer on November 12, 2009 at 11:17 AM
I demand a recount…where,s Frankin when you need him?
royzer on November 12, 2009 at 11:19 AM
God loves you.
faraway on November 12, 2009 at 11:26 AM
Because despite your perspective towards God and his followers; He has commanded his children to look out for you.
shick on November 12, 2009 at 12:17 PM
OH please put her on instead of Huck! Please please please. I just can’t watch Huck knowing how much he hates me personally.
petunia on November 12, 2009 at 12:18 PM
Where did you get this info?
shick on November 12, 2009 at 12:19 PM
Wonder if Allahpundit has the guts to read Sarah’s book.
fossten on November 12, 2009 at 12:21 PM
If said good conservative atheist boy ever thinks “we too often move God to the [front] in our public life”, then wouldn’t it be a simple matter of fairness to allow others to hold (and even express) their own views?
VerbumSap on November 12, 2009 at 12:21 PM
Wow that is some interpetation you’ve got there! Guess you don’t know everything though. God bless.
petunia on November 12, 2009 at 12:22 PM
Boo hoo Levi’s hurt that he barely got a mention on Oprah’s couch. Maybe Tom Cruise will jump up and down and say he’s leaving Katie after reading Playgirl.
alliebobbitt on November 12, 2009 at 12:23 PM
His comments on Mormonism are dorky but I don’t think it’s fair to say he hates all mormons.
I agree with you about Palin though. This pro-gospel, monotheist is greatly annoyed by Huckabee.
shick on November 12, 2009 at 12:23 PM
She’s not talking to you, obviously, but her message hits home with a large segment of the American people who aren’t atheists.
You either ignore her faith and look at the other pluses she brings to the table or beat your atheist feet over to Barack, who’s so averse to (Christian) religion, he won’t choose a church, much less attend one.
Jenfidel on November 12, 2009 at 12:24 PM
Read the following creature of God.
Side note: You made me hungry for a ham sandwich.
shick on November 12, 2009 at 12:33 PM
The latest tidbit? Levi met Jon Gosslin and said that they had a LOT in common. He’s taking Jon’s advice on some stuff.
*hooting*
(You just can’t make this stuff up, particularly noting his latest aggressive comment about how he has “stuff” on Sarah.)
AnninCA on November 12, 2009 at 12:38 PM
I bet Todd would like to take Levi fishing.
joedoe on November 12, 2009 at 12:42 PM
There is no mention in the link of how many people took her up on that offer, so I don’t see the relevance of mentioning it. It’s not proof that the book will sell well, given that we dont know if anyone even paid the grand to get the signed copy.
By the way, I am offering a signed photo in return for a $1,000,000 donation to Doctors Without Borders. This proves my popularity.
orange on November 12, 2009 at 1:21 PM
As a good conservative atheist, why do you care about the delusional fantasies people use to create motivation for their good behavior?
Fighton03 on November 12, 2009 at 1:26 PM
Went to Amazon, didn’t see your photo in any top 10 lists. Care to point it out for me?
cs89 on November 12, 2009 at 1:42 PM
By supporting a candidate who follows the principles of our founders, which included placing God in the public square, so that you can openly embrace your athiesm without persecution. That’s like saying as a Jew, how can I support a Christian, etc. As an atheist, you are far too focused on religion. Are you saying a deeply devout Christian is worse for this country than a deeply devout atheist? Sorry, but this country was never stronger than when God was central in the lives of our leaders and of this country and I for one pray daily that all American’s turn back to Him for guidance and protection. I respect your position, but if your goal is to create a secular America, I am diametrically opposed to your position.
But I still love you AllahP because you love so much to ruffle the feathers of Palin supporters. :)
ihasurnominashun on November 12, 2009 at 1:44 PM
Huh?
Try telling that nonsense to her nearly one million Facebook supports who are begging her, literally, 24/7 to run for POTUS.
I’ve never seen anything like it!
I’ll compare the rabid support, among the base, for Sarah, to the rabid support for Obama during his run. Although, in the end, I think Sarah’s support will be bigger, stronger, and more unstoppable.
Why do I say this?
Well, for one thing, Obama supporters were just zombies who fell for a bunch of pretty words. They knew nothing of the guy, and weren’t about to find out.
On the other hand, even the most casual Palin supporter can quote statistics, speeches, and so on.
Sarah has been under an electron microscope for a year now. Her every move watched, analyzed, mocked, or praised. Her entire record is very well known (to people that want to know it)
Where Obama worship was irrational, based on a lie, wrapped up in slick marketing, support for Sarah is based on knowledge of her record, her ideas, her abilities, and of course, her record.
There’s a REASON why supporters of Sarah Palin are so quick to pounce on those who would smear her. There’s a passion for Sarah Palin. People truly believe in her.
Look around on the various websites where everyone from both sides tend to comment. You’ll be hard pressed to find anyone really defending Obama at this point. Oh sure, the lefties will attack the right, but they do not defend Obama much. Folks who are behind Sarah, will always be behind Sarah, no matter what. Even if she decides being POTUS isn’t for her. There will be a lot of disappointed people, but they will still support her no matter what she ends up doing.
Who knows what Sarah will do, she is as unpredictable as they come, which is why we like her. But she is certainly laying the groundwork to be POTUS, and if she wants the job, I sure wouldn’t bet against her!!
As far as religion, who knows. One either has faith, or they don’t. I feel sorry for those that don’t. Personally, I refuse to argue with them. There are simply too many examples of the existence of God and his miracles for there to be any debate.
gary4205 on November 12, 2009 at 1:45 PM
Will someone please shred AllahP’s “wink” picture of Sarah?
It’s overused, overdone and boring already.
Yephora on November 12, 2009 at 1:58 PM
It’s right next to the $1000 signed edition of Palin’s book.
orange on November 12, 2009 at 2:05 PM
orange on November 12, 2009 at 2:05 PM
You were talking about popularity and I mentioned her book (currently #1 on Amazon).
Logic’s not your strong suit, is it?
cs89 on November 12, 2009 at 2:53 PM
No, I’m afraid reading comprehension is not your strong suit.
I was not talking about her popularity. I was talking about AP bringing up the $1000 signed copy of her book.
I said that AP’s mention of the $1000 signed copy doesn’t prove anything, since we don’t know how many sold. You have not provided any data about how many $1000 signed copies sold, so you have done nothing to demonstrate that AP was wise to use that anecdote.
It’s meaningless unless a lot of people bought the $1K version.
Sarah Palin is, in fact, popular with the far-right. No doubt about that. So I think it’s silly for AP to bring up an irrelevant bit to “prove” her popularity when you could use actual relevant data instead.
orange on November 12, 2009 at 3:07 PM
I told you. Sooooo predicatble. Sarah Palin only cares about Sarah Palin.
Next.
Grow Fins on November 12, 2009 at 6:43 PM
I told you. Sooooo predicatble.
Sarah PalinGrow Fins only cares aboutSarah Palinwho gives a crap?Next.
Grow Fins on November 12, 2009 at 6:43 PM
Brian1972 on November 12, 2009 at 7:19 PM
You criticize the anecdote, say it doesn’t prove the book will sell well, and refer to your “photo” to prove “my popularity” (implying that if she doesn’t sell lots of the $1000 version she’s unpopular). Then you say you were not “talking about her popularity.”
Logically inconsistent.
cs89 on November 12, 2009 at 11:32 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3