Krauthammer to liberals: Conservatism is bigger than just Sarah Palin

posted at 3:30 pm on November 27, 2010 by Allahpundit

Via the ‘Busters, here’s the first and last time that a Krauthammer critique of the left will end up irritating more conservatives than liberals. His basic point is unobjectionable — every movement is bigger than its most charismatic champions, as the endless number of lefties who are disappointed in Obama could tell you — but his obvious exasperation with Palin’s present status as de facto conservative spokesman-in-chief has commenters in Headlines buzzing. Kraut famously said in July 2009 that she wasn’t a serious candidate for president, which means there’s already a strike against him in the minds of those who are forever grumbling about “Beltway establishment” Republicans like Rove. This, er, won’t help matters. And let’s face it: While no one would claim that conservatism begins and ends with Palin, some of her more devoted supporters do seem to regard her as an avatar of the movement. In which case, what better way to promote it than to have lots and lots of coverage of her? So long as it’s fair/flattering, it’s practically impossible for there to be too much, right?

Exit question: Colbert King’s trying to bait Krauthammer here, right? I think he is.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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 7 8 9

And, she has, in the past, acknowledged that she has Aspergers’ Syndrome, which is on the mild end of the Autism spectrum.

massrighty on November 28, 2010 at 3:30 PM

Sorry, but we all have personal challenges and issues that prevent us from being perfect commenters.
Claiming an infirmity for one’s contrarianism after being soundly defeated in a fair debate isn’t kosher.

Jenfidel on November 28, 2010 at 3:38 PM

Saying she’s “head and shoulders above” most Republicans id nice, but it also isn’t saying much if you know what I mean.

toliver on November 28, 2010 at 3:32 PM

I have no idea what you mean.
I do know that you try to discredit Governor Palin and her supporters any way you can but your efforts are rather feeble.

Jenfidel on November 28, 2010 at 3:40 PM

Saying she’s “head and shoulders above” most Republicans id nice, but it also isn’t saying much if you know what I mean.

toliver on November 28, 2010 at 3:32 PM

For a further elucidation of what “head and shoulders above” means, please see posts 1 through 750. Thank you.

steebo77 on November 28, 2010 at 3:43 PM

Claiming an infirmity for one’s contrarianism after being soundly defeated in a fair debate isn’t kosher.

Jenfidel on November 28, 2010 at 3:38 PM

You.Are.Sick.

At least annoyinglittletwerp acknowledges her shortcomings and can laugh about it. I admire her for that. You’re just plain vicious.

Now jump in and start calling me names again because it’s the only thing you know when challenged on your nastiness.

CannedTomatoes on November 28, 2010 at 3:45 PM

CannedTomatoes on November 28, 2010 at 3:45 PM

Whose rarely used sock are you?

Inanemergencydial on November 28, 2010 at 3:47 PM

You’re just plain vicious.

CannedTomatoes on November 28, 2010 at 3:45 PM

Vicious?
You’re all over that.

And politics is a form of war and is a blood sport.

Jenfidel on November 28, 2010 at 3:49 PM

CannedTomatoes on November 28, 2010 at 3:45 PM

I find it odd that the same people who are keen to criticize Gov. Palin for responding to the smears against her are some of the quickest to play the victim card when they are unequipped to argue the facts.

steebo77 on November 28, 2010 at 3:52 PM

Saying she’s “head and shoulders above” most Republicans id nice, but it also isn’t saying much if you know what I mean.

toliver on November 28, 2010 at 3:32 PM

So, on fiscal matters, you would not concede that Gov. Palin has a far better record than the other so-called frontrunners, Romney and Huckabee?

steebo77 on November 28, 2010 at 3:53 PM

Are you fxcking kidding? You think Nixon was more honorable than Big Dawg b/c he resigned? You think Big Dawg resigning and giving us POTUS Gore would have been honorable?

I call bullshit. It would have weakened the country even further. The GOP weakened us with the ridiculous fxcking crusade against Bill for sex. That is why the country said F-U to the GOP after that and Newt resigned. He lost. Bill was a great POTUS. Economy great, foreign ‘affairs’ great.

You will never get the middle with that kind of reasoning. Hey Sarah fxckin resigned, you think that resigning is great,. uh no we need a FIGHTER. You dont QUIT when it gets tough. I love Sarah, but she quit, they will crucify her as they did Hillary, the media I mean. If she wants on the ticket she needs to be VEEP IMO.

Unreal, Nixon is better than Big Dawg, HA HA Now Ive heard it all.

ginaswo on November 28, 2010 at 11:01 AM

Wow, just wow.

Look, I know you are a recovering democrat, but you need to ween yourself off the Koolaid still.

First off, Nixon had problems. That’s well established. But his resigning was the SECOND time he did the right and honorable thing.

Many people forget that Kennedy pretty much stole the 1960 election. I was close, close, close. In fact, until 2000, it was the closest in history.

Voter fraud was rampant, and could be proven. Many of Nixon’s advisers begged him to contest the race, but he felt it would be bad for the country. He showed character there, and class.

Contrast and compare this to Al Gore, who lost, then tried to steal the 2000 election.

Now on to Bill Jeff. Clinton wasn’t impeached for having sex with that fat chick, he was impeached for lying under oath and suborning perjury.

Clinton is a serial sexual predator. He’s a brutal pig and should be on the sexual offender’s list.

Anyhow, when Paula Jones sued him, Clinton lied under oath.

He also tried to get Lewinsky to lie under oath.

These both fall under the “high crimes and misdemeanors” part of the Constitution that speaks to impeachment.

The only reason he wasn’t kicked out of office was no one had the guts to do it. PERIOD.

To quote Obama’s BFF Bill Ayers, Bill Clinton is: “Free as a bird, guilty as hell”!

gary4205 on November 28, 2010 at 3:56 PM

CannedTomatoes on November 28, 2010 at 3:45 PM

I find it odd that the same people who are keen to criticize Gov. Palin for responding to the smears against her are some of the quickest to play the victim card when they are unequipped to argue the facts.

steebo77 on November 28, 2010 at 3:52 PM

I’m afraid this one’s way in too deep now for rational thinking. You on the other hand have added much sanity to this thread; good for you.

Keemo on November 28, 2010 at 3:57 PM

Sunday, November 28, 2010

Sarah Palin fans lined up early for the former Republican vice presidential candidate and Alaska governor’s book signing today.
Some stood in the windy cold as early as 11 p.m. Saturday night for the Sunday visit.

The book signing begins today at 11 a.m. the Dillions Marketplace in Andover located at 225 East Cloud Avenue just south of Kellogg and Andover Road. Palin will sign books until 2 p.m.

The 46-year-old is promoting “American by Heart,” subtitled
“Reflections on Family, Faith, and Flag.” The book came out Tuesday and is her first since the million-selling memoir “Going Rogue.” Palin will be joined by her husband, Todd, and other family members.

KAKE News will be at the book signing. Watch for details at KAKE News Sunday at 5:30 and 10 and here on our web channel, KAKE.com.

yeap she stands no chance of winning an election../s…meanwhile i think mitt was spotted giving away some free pizza somewhere…and chrisite was spotted running towards the Mitt place for some reason….

unseen on November 28, 2010 at 3:59 PM

I find it odd that the same people who are keen to criticize Gov. Palin for responding to the smears against her are some of the quickest to play the victim card when they are unequipped to argue the facts.

steebo77 on November 28, 2010 at 3:52 PM

You have not heard me criticize Sara Palin once in this thread and you have no idea where I stand with regards to Sara Palin. I tend to stay out of these threads and most others.

You are barking up the wrong tree.

CannedTomatoes on November 28, 2010 at 3:59 PM

Sunday, November 28, 2010

Sarah Palin fans lined up early for the former Republican vice presidential candidate and Alaska governor’s book signing today.
Some stood in the windy cold as early as 11 p.m. Saturday night for the Sunday visit.

The book signing begins today at 11 a.m. the Dillions Marketplace in Andover located at 225 East Cloud Avenue just south of Kellogg and Andover Road. Palin will sign books until 2 p.m.

The 46-year-old is promoting “American by Heart,” subtitled
“Reflections on Family, Faith, and Flag.” The book came out Tuesday and is her first since the million-selling memoir “Going Rogue.” Palin will be joined by her husband, Todd, and other family members.

KAKE News will be at the book signing. Watch for details at KAKE News Sunday at 5:30 and 10 and here on our web channel, KAKE.com.

unseen on November 28, 2010 at 4:00 PM

oops sry double post

unseen on November 28, 2010 at 4:00 PM

You.Are.Sick.

At least annoyinglittletwerp acknowledges her shortcomings and can laugh about it. I admire her for that. You’re just plain vicious.

Now jump in and start calling me names again because it’s the only thing you know when challenged on your nastiness.

CannedTomatoes on November 28, 2010 at 3:45 PM

I see Jenfidels up to her old ruling class tricks. Insulting and namecalling all who dare disagree with her, lol. Were you not here during her Odonnell meltdown? She had the most epic meltdown in the history of Hot Air, all because she was convinced a socialist was a far better choice than Christine Odonnell. Her meltdown was so epic that after she realized what a fool she had made out of herself she decided to hide for a few weeks. She has earned the status of Hot Air’s nastiest person. Even outdoing the liberals she claims to hate. The following are some choice quotes during her meltdown. Keep in mind there was far more than this. Her psychological tendencies are well known and well documented:

She’s not married–why not? (Well, I know why not, but still…)

Christine is mentally unstable

BTW, why isn’t Christine married?

O’Donnell is a delusional liar and a “conservative” snake oil saleswoman.

And you are backing Christine because she babbles about being a conservative and tells you what you want to hear when she lives like a thief, a liar and a fraud.

Tammy Bruce is all over the place politically: she apparently supports any woman running for office (especially if TB finds them attractive *cough*lesbianlust*cough).

Sarah will look ineffectual and it will tar both her and the TP Express for backing such a crazy, phony liar like Christine.

I don’t see how conservatives can support a lying, unstable idiot like O’Donnell

O’Donnell’s a proven liar and a flim-flam woman.

And I see no evidence of Miz O’Donnell’s “conservative commitment” at all except her lying lips which are for $ale.
Rumor has that Christine’s vote can be bought with a new mattress.

Jenfidel on September 9, 2010 at 7:03 PM

Is it really worth blowing all of your credibility on this website to prop up that lying dirtbag O’Donnell?

I don’t like O’Donnell one bit–she’s a loathesome woman.

This woman virtually says:”I’m open to bribes and my influence can be bought.”

Speaking of selling one’s soul to Satan, don’t look now, but I hear some people call Christine “Satan in a skirt.”
It’s those dimples that get them every time!

it seems that the man who ran his campaign is now running Crazy Christine’s.

Her looks are her only real asset.

Wretching over a crazy skank like Christine the Con doesn’t make me a RINO.

No, we’re screwed for supporting an unelectable idiot like O’Donnell whose history is so shady, she’s practically a criminal.

So what’s to like about Christine besides her dimples, her perky “Super enthusiastic!!!eleventy!!!” cheerleader pep rallies and her inappropriate laughter?

If she offers herself for money, isn’t that the classical definition of a whore?

Sooner or later, this Christine b-yatch is going to get her head handed to her.

This race isn’t worth handing it over to a delusional liar and a con artist like O’Donnell

Her looks are her *only* asset besides her fake conservatism.

Spark it up, honey, because Christine is a bimbo who uses her looks to con people out of their money.

Christine cannot begin to present an equally acceptable, if not distinguished record, as these gentlmen possess, of achievement and accomplishment.
She’s done nothing except stay one step ahead of the law and her creditors.

The only way you could lie about Christine is to make her look honest–kinda like Levin does…and you and her other suitors.

The woman is radioactive.

What is Christine providing the voter besides her good looks in exchange for their money?

Jenfidel on September 13, 2010 at 1:53 AM

Read over that again and notice the venom. Lucifer himself would have a hard time outdoing the embittered one (Jenfidel).

True_King on November 28, 2010 at 4:02 PM

Keemo on November 28, 2010 at 2:13 PM

I hope that the properly give some credit to the media for being lead astray.

Cindy Munford on November 28, 2010 at 4:10 PM

they properly, sorry.

Cindy Munford on November 28, 2010 at 4:15 PM

True_King on November 28, 2010 at 4:02 PM

I wasn’t around for that, I was busy working on a campaign at the local level and barely had time to check my e-mail, let alone check in here and at other blogs.

That’s just lovely///

And since I wasn’t able to keep up all the news, didn’t Sara Palin endorse Christine O’Donnell?

CannedTomatoes on November 28, 2010 at 4:19 PM

CannedTomatoes on November 28, 2010 at 4:19 PM

Yes, she did. I would ask that you please don’t let a commenter or two jade your view of the majority of comments that while disagreeing, don’t trade personalities. Taking people to task is usually a thankless job. Telling people to be quiet in most cases makes them yell louder.

Cindy Munford on November 28, 2010 at 4:28 PM

That’s just lovely///

CannedTomatoes on November 28, 2010 at 4:19 PM

Your first comment in this thread was to call someone an idiot. You’re no saint.

darwin on November 28, 2010 at 4:31 PM

unseen on November 28, 2010 at 3:59 PM

Wait, idiots stand outside all night to have a book signed by someone they love and adore and cherish…does that mean Harry Potter has a legit chance of becoming president?

TheBlueSite on November 28, 2010 at 4:47 PM

Your first comment in this thread was to call someone an idiot. You’re no saint.

darwin on November 28, 2010 at 4:31 PM

Never said I was, but if you’re talking about my comment regarding this statement…

I bet Palin has read at LEAST as much as Reagan had at this point in his life.

You have to admit that statement is pretty idiotic.

Cindy Munford on November 28, 2010 at 4:28 PM

Thanks so much. I guess I missed alot. Now I’m off to read my great book.

CannedTomatoes on November 28, 2010 at 4:47 PM

CannedTomatoes on November 28, 2010 at 4:47 PM

There is no reason to believe that Gov. Palin and Pres. Reagan have widely disparate amounts and types of reading at the age of 46 years.

Cindy Munford on November 28, 2010 at 4:56 PM

You have to admit that statement is pretty idiotic.

Cindy Munford on November 28, 2010 at 4:28 PM

Thanks so much. I guess I missed alot. Now I’m off to read my great book.

CannedTomatoes on November 28, 2010 at 4:47 PM

That’s it? That is your big “gotcha”? You think it is idiotic to think that someone may have read more then someone else?
The way to allow us to know of your supreme knowledge is simple…you tell us how much more reading Reagan has done then Palin.
50% more? Twice as much, four times…

right2bright on November 28, 2010 at 4:59 PM

I hope that the properly give some credit to the media for being lead astray.

Cindy Munford on November 28, 2010 at 4:10 PM

Yeah, that was going on for sure. Surprised the heck out of me, and gave me some hope that the old media will die the death it so richly deserves…

Keemo on November 28, 2010 at 5:05 PM

Keemo on November 28, 2010 at 5:05 PM

I think this latest Wikileaks deal is probably going to give NYT a little bit longer on its’ life lease. I guess there was not way to balance the Obama love and the competition.

Cindy Munford on November 28, 2010 at 5:10 PM

Surprised the heck out of me, and gave me some hope that the old media will die the death it so richly deserves…

Keemo on November 28, 2010 at 5:05 PM

Nice Post!..I agree with that 100%..:)

Dire Straits on November 28, 2010 at 5:12 PM

Back on topic. Sarah Palin had no positive effect on the congressional races. Except for McCain.

PrezHussein on November 28, 2010 at 5:21 PM

Read over that again and notice the venom. Lucifer himself would have a hard time outdoing the embittered one (Jenfidel).

True_King on November 28, 2010 at 4:02 PM

I worship Jesus by the way, not Lucifer.
And what I said about O’Donnell wasn’t untrue, wasn’t motivated by venom and turned out to be the reason she didn’t have a good chance of winning the election.
But she won the GOP primary, was as qualified as anyone else running to be a Senator, and was the best conservatives could hope for in that race.
So I put my criticism of her behind me and got behind the Tea Party and Sarah Palin in backing Christine.

Jenfidel on November 28, 2010 at 5:23 PM

Back on topic. Sarah Palin had no positive effect on the congressional races. Except for McCain.

PrezHussein on November 28, 2010 at 5:21 PM

You lie!
At least 52 of the conservatives she endorsed won on November 2, including McCain.

Jenfidel on November 28, 2010 at 5:25 PM

Back on topic. Sarah Palin had no positive effect on the congressional races. Except for McCain.

PrezHussein on November 28, 2010 at 5:21 PM

You’re incredibly astute. Please apply for a position with Obama’s campaign.

darwin on November 28, 2010 at 5:26 PM

I worship Jesus by the way, not Lucifer.
And what I said about O’Donnell wasn’t untrue, wasn’t motivated by venom and turned out to be the reason she didn’t have a good chance of winning the election.
But she won the GOP primary, was as qualified as anyone else running to be a Senator, and was the best conservatives could hope for in that race.
So I put my criticism of her behind me and got behind the Tea Party and Sarah Palin in backing Christine.

Jenfidel on November 28, 2010 at 5:23 PM

Woah, you have read people the riot act for saying that it was a mistake for St.Sarah to endorse that moron and yet you wrote that about Christine O’Donnell? Wow… Just wow… What a whack-job.

Boxy_Brown on November 28, 2010 at 6:00 PM

Woah, you have read people the riot act for saying that it was a mistake for St.Sarah to endorse that moron and yet you wrote that about Christine O’Donnell? Wow… Just wow… What a whack-job.

Boxy_Brown on November 28, 2010 at 6:00 PM

She was against O’Donnell then supported her when she won the primary.

darwin on November 28, 2010 at 6:16 PM

She was against O’Donnell then supported her when she won the primary.

darwin on November 28, 2010 at 6:16 PM

What she wrote in her “meltdown” was the unvarnished truth. I am actually a bit relieved to read it. However when other people point out that it was -STUPID- for Palin to endorse such a basket case they are evidentially committing a crime against humanity.

Boxy_Brown on November 28, 2010 at 6:23 PM

She was against O’Donnell then supported her when she won the primary.

darwin on November 28, 2010 at 6:16 PM

But why didn’t she support her when Palin endorsed Christine O’Donnell which was on September 9th? and Jenfidel is bashing O’Donnell on September 13th???

Hmmm………..

CannedTomatoes on November 28, 2010 at 6:29 PM

But why didn’t she support her when Palin endorsed Christine O’Donnell which was on September 9th? and Jenfidel is bashing O’Donnell on September 13th???

Hmmm………..

CannedTomatoes on November 28, 2010 at 6:29 PM

All I know is she supported O’Donnell as soon as she won the primary.

darwin on November 28, 2010 at 6:32 PM

But why didn’t she support her when Palin endorsed Christine O’Donnell which was on September 9th? and Jenfidel is bashing O’Donnell on September 13th???

Hmmm………..

CannedTomatoes on November 28, 2010 at 6:29 PM

I got fully behind Christine after she won the GOP primary.
End of story.
(My comments are recorded accordingly here at HA with dates and times.)

Jenfidel on November 28, 2010 at 6:58 PM

I got fully behind Christine after she won the GOP primary.
End of story.

Jenfidel on November 28, 2010 at 6:58 PM

But you recognized that it was a mistake for Palin to endorse her… Then you henpecked the hell out of anyone who had the audacity to do the same. LOL. guess you are either a “concern troll” or a hypocrite. :-D

Boxy_Brown on November 28, 2010 at 7:07 PM

does that mean Harry Potter has a legit chance of becoming president?

TheBlueSite on November 28, 2010 at 4:47 PM

If harry potter was running against Mitt it would.

unseen on November 28, 2010 at 7:41 PM

does that mean Harry Potter has a legit chance of becoming president?

TheBlueSite on November 28, 2010 at 4:47 PM

Harry Potter is not a natural-born citizen and he is not yet 35 years old. So no.

steebo77 on November 28, 2010 at 8:20 PM

steebo77 on November 28, 2010 at 8:20 PM

unseen on November 28, 2010 at 7:41 PM

Careful, you might give old blue anxiety. And then what will he do?

Inanemergencydial on November 28, 2010 at 8:25 PM

But you recognized that it was a mistake for Palin to endorse her… Then you henpecked the hell out of anyone who had the audacity to do the same.
Boxy_Brown on November 28, 2010 at 7:07 PM

No, I didn’t.
In fact, I was pretty viciously attacked by O’Donnell supporters.
There was no hen-pecking to be done.
You obviously weren’t here at HA or haven’t read the threads.

BTW, I’m not sure it was a “mistake” for Sarah to endorse Christine–it was just a bit of waste of Sarah’s political capital, but…Sarah had her reasons which were that Christine was unjustly attacked on her personal issues by the Media particularly (and yes, by fellow conservative folks like me, I guess, and Karl Rove, various bloggers, etc.) because she was a conservative and a woman.
Christine was an improvement on Castle, no doubt about it.
And she was unjustly demonized by the MSM without having Sarah Palin’s record in public office to fall back on.
I do believe that Christine might have been a good Senator had she won and certainly couldn’t be as bad as Coons.

Jenfidel on November 28, 2010 at 8:27 PM

Boxy_Brown on November 28, 2010 at 7:07 PM

One more point: What Palin put up for examination with her endorsement of Christine was the Media-created meme of who is and isn’t “qualified” to be a U.S. Senator or to hold any other office.
I found in the course of the O’Donnell primary debate here, that even my own notions were Media-created.
The Founders gave us a republic that was meant to be manned by citizens, not by Ivy League graduate school policy wonks.
Once that becomes clear to you, you can see that there’s no more reason that Alvin Green and Christine O’Donnell shouldn’t run for office than anybody else…like you or me.
Thus, Palin’s endorsement of Christine wasn’t a “mistake” because O’Donnell ran on conservative ideas and values and promised to implement the same in the U.S. Senate.
Works for me.

Jenfidel on November 28, 2010 at 8:33 PM

does that mean Harry Potter has a legit chance of becoming president?

TheBlueSite on November 28, 2010 at 4:47 PM

Harry Potter is not a natural-born citizen and he is not yet 35 years old. So no.

steebo77 on November 28, 2010 at 8:20 PM

heh

What’s the age requirement for British PM?

/And who would win the popularity contest between Harry Potter v. Prince William? William can count his engagement lucky stars for the win.

maverick muse on November 29, 2010 at 8:54 AM

Glad to see that we’ve moved on past Christine O’Donnell.

Forty years from now Jenfidel will be sitting in a corner drooling her strained peas and mumbling, “Christine… O’Donnell… a proven liar… flim-flam woman….”

Akzed on November 29, 2010 at 9:29 AM

I picked my handle because I’m wildly mildly autistic.

annoyinglittletwerp on November 27, 2010 at 11:05 PM

FIFY.

Jenfidel on November 27, 2010 at 11:08 PM

Thanks for the kind praise. I’ll wear this new badge with pride.
*smiles sweetly*

annoyinglittletwerp on November 29, 2010 at 9:40 AM

RE.Jenfidel

No, I didn’t.

YES, you obviously did. It was a mistake to endorse that idiot and you knew it.

In fact, I was pretty viciously attacked by O’Donnell supporters.

They were wrong and you were right. Now you want to pretend that endorsing O’Donnell was the correct thing to do, you also want to call people who disagree with that “liars and trolls”. I fellow could get the idea that you just like to nag.

There was no hen-pecking to be done.

Palin stupidly endorsed a basket-case grifter…. Say it.

You obviously weren’t here at HA or haven’t read the threads.

That whole living a life thing must have gotten in the way.

BTW, I’m not sure it was a “mistake” for Sarah to endorse Christine

Yeah, it’s always a great idea to endorse a:

“mentally unstable, delusional liar and a “conservative” snake oil saleswoman who babbles about being a conservative and tells you what you want to hear when she lives like a thief, a liar and a fraud”, indeed a “crazy, phony liar and a lying, unstable idiot”, “a proven liar and a flim-flam woman” with no evidence of “Miz O’Donnell’s “conservative commitment” at all except her lying lips which are for $ale and whose “vote can be bought with a new mattress”! “A lying dirtbag O’Donnell” who is a loathesome woman who says:”I’m open to bribes and my influence can be bought.”“Satan in a skirt.”!!!! (LOL! Don’t sugar coat it, tell us how you really feel!)
Wretching over a crazy skank like Christine the Con doesn’t make me a RINO, we’re screwed for supporting an unelectable idiot like O’Donnell whose history is so shady, she’s practically a criminal…her dimples, her perky “Super enthusiastic!!!eleventy!!!” cheerleader pep rallies and her inappropriate laughter?If she offers herself for money, isn’t that the classical definition of a whore? this Christine b-yatch is going to get her head handed to her…delusional liar and a con artist like O’Donnell! Her looks are her *only* asset besides her fake conservatism. Christine is a bimbo who uses her looks to con people out of their money. She’s done nothing except stay one step ahead of the law and her creditors.The woman is radioactive!

LOL!

because she was a conservative and a woman.

Oh yeah.. It was sexism, not recognizing that she was a MORON.

Christine was an improvement on Castle, no doubt about it.

Amazing how you can convince yourself of whatever you need to believe at any given moment. Are you for real? Do you work for Obama 2012?

And she was unjustly demonized by the MSM without having Sarah Palin’s record in public office to fall back on.

Did they call her “Satan in a skirt whose vote can be bought with a new mattress?” Just curious, I think I missed that on Good Morning America.

I do believe that Christine might have been a good Senator had she won

Well now that you have forced yourself to get your mind right and think ill of St.Sarah…

and certainly couldn’t be as bad as Coons.

Too bad that wasn’t the original choice… Face it, Palin showed bad judgment and that helped cost us the Senate.

Boxy_Brown on November 29, 2010 at 10:13 AM

RE;Jenfidel

I found in the course of the O’Donnell primary debate here, that even my own notions were Media-created.

So you couldn’t be trusted then… So what’s creating your notions now? Hero worship? Bandwagon hopping? Need?

The Founders gave us a republic that was meant to be manned by citizens, not by Ivy League graduate school policy wonks.

So grifters who run for office to pay their rent aren’t a threat to the republic? Just them Ivy league types….

Once that becomes clear to you, you can see that there’s no more reason that Alvin Green and Christine O’Donnell shouldn’t run for office than anybody else…

Other then they are unelectable morons and grifters who have discovered that they can move out of their parents basement by putting on a campaign.

Thus, Palin’s endorsement of Christine wasn’t a “mistake” because O’Donnell ran on conservative ideas and values and promised to implement the same in the U.S. Senate.

Nice rationalization. Don’t sprain yourself with thise logical backflips. The O’Donnell endorsement was a mistake and you know it.

Works for me.

The only ones this worked for was the bearded marxist, Obama, Reid and the DNC.

Boxy_Brown on November 29, 2010 at 10:20 AM

Face it, Palin showed bad judgment and that helped cost us the Senate.

Boxy_Brown on November 29, 2010 at 10:13 AM

You’re a friggin’ moron.

darwin on November 29, 2010 at 10:33 AM

You’re a friggin’ moron.

darwin on November 29, 2010 at 10:33 AM

Well thought rebuttal, perfectly in keeping with the Palin toadies. You better hope she doesn’t stop short, you might break your nose.

Boxy_Brown on November 29, 2010 at 10:50 AM

Boxy_Brown on November 29, 2010 at 10:50 AM

So Boxy, Who Do YOU Support In 2012?

Let’s not forget that it was the ELECTORATE who VOTED FOR those Senate candidates who lost, not Sarah. Also, let’s not be in a rush to forget that the ELECTORATE across AMERICA refused to vote for the RINO. Indeed, I know for a fact that people ONLY votef for MsLame because he selected Sarah to be his running mate.

Sarah has done more to fight against the Communist styled 0bamanation than any possible POTUS candidate we know of today. Do you have a better offering? If so let’s ‘hear’ it. :o)

DannoJyd on November 29, 2010 at 11:07 AM

Well thought rebuttal, perfectly in keeping with the Palin toadies. You better hope she doesn’t stop short, you might break your nose.

Boxy_Brown on November 29, 2010 at 10:50 AM

It’s not a rebuttal.

darwin on November 29, 2010 at 11:19 AM

t’s not a rebuttal.

darwin on November 29, 2010 at 11:19 AM

No it wasn’t, it was yet another tantrum. For the record; I think your insistence on slavish, mindless devotion to the cult of Palin demonstrates a needy streak in your personality that is kind of pathetic.

Boxy_Brown on November 29, 2010 at 3:59 PM

No it wasn’t, it was yet another tantrum.

Boxy_Brown on November 29, 2010 at 3:59 PM

lol … no, I was calling you a friggin’ moron. There are no lines to read between.

“You’re a friggin’ moron”.

Get it? It’s not rocket science.

darwin on November 29, 2010 at 4:31 PM

Yes, as a tantrum because I pointed out the obvious, something that you are too infantile to acknowledge.
Sorry if you (over)identify with her… some of us are not willing to be slacked jawed lemmings just because you are.

Boxy_Brown on November 29, 2010 at 4:55 PM

Boxy_Brown on November 29, 2010 at 4:55 PM

Oh, good grief. Do you anti-Palin zealots work in shifts? Who is it you’re trying to convince?

ddrintn on November 29, 2010 at 5:26 PM

Yes, as a tantrum because I pointed out the obvious, something that you are too infantile to acknowledge.

Boxy_Brown on November 29, 2010 at 4:55 PM

Yeah sure, whatever.

Maddow: Well Boxy, I understand you’ve done research that shows without a doubt that Sarah Palin lost the Senate.

Boxy: Yes Rachel (gasping with excitement), my research shows that every race we lost is directly attributeable to Sarah Palin. Either she endorsed them or didn’t endorse them. That seems to be the key (still panting).

Further more, I can show that Todd Palin has had a negative influence on many races. My recommendation is to exile the Palin’s to Tonga. I think that’s only fair for my candidates.

Maddow: Thanks Boxy … great research. There you have it folks, Sarah Palin’s entire family is a direct threat to democracy!

Boxy: (gasping, can’t say good-bye, collapses onto the floor).

darwin on November 29, 2010 at 5:36 PM

No, Maddow wouldn’t want to interview me, I’m not the one trying to ensure another 4 years of barack Obama by nominating someone to run who endorsed that basket case and then lied about the seat already being lost regardless of who the GOP ran. As such, you would be more to her interest.
Why don’t you get Palin to interview with Maddow? Seeing as Katie Couric and Charles Gibson proved to be too much for her maybe this would go better?

Boxy_Brown on November 29, 2010 at 6:01 PM

then lied

Boxy_Brown on November 29, 2010 at 6:01 PM

Mighty strong words Boxy. It seems your anti-Palinism has affected your judgement and perception.

The only known cure for cases as bad as yours is bourbon, and lots of it. Orally, anally … however you can get it in you. Treatment should last at least a full month.

Check back in then and we’ll run you through a series of tests.

Good luck!! Cheers!

darwin on November 29, 2010 at 6:27 PM

Mighty strong words Boxy.

True words, The seat went from “Safe Republican” to “Safe Democrat” overnight. To say otherwise is a lie.

The only known cure for cases as bad as yours is bourbon, and lots of it. Orally, anally … however you can get it in you. Treatment should last at least a full month.

Thanks anyway, getting drunk isn’t the answer. Have a look at this though, you might want to follow your own advice:

MONDAY, NOVEMBER 29, 2010
Palin not seen as electable
Sarah Palin might think she could get elected President in 2012, but few Americans agree. Only 28% of voters in the country think that Palin is capable of defeating Barack Obama while 60% think she is not and 12% aren’t sure.

What might be most troubling for Palin within those numbers is that less than half of Republicans think she’s capable of beating Obama..

Boxy_Brown on November 29, 2010 at 7:18 PM

Too bad that wasn’t the original choice… Face it, Palin showed bad judgment and that helped cost us the Senate.

Boxy_Brown on November 29, 2010 at 10:13 AM

Sarah endorsed the conservative woman Republican–where’s the bad judgement call in that?
As for “costing us the Senate,” there’s nothing to say that Castle would have won the seat even had he won the GOP primary.
And if Sarah’s such a brainless nothing and her endorsements don’t and shouldn’t matter to anyone, why do you care?

Jenfidel on November 30, 2010 at 12:11 AM

Re:Jenfidel

“Sarah endorsed the conservative woman Republican”

You mean a: “mentally unstable, delusional liar and a “conservative” snake oil saleswoman who babbles about being a conservative and tells you what you want to hear when she lives like a thief, a liar and a fraud”, indeed a “crazy, phony liar and a lying, unstable idiot”, “a proven liar and a flim-flam woman” with no evidence of “Miz O’Donnell’s “conservative commitment” at all except her lying lips which are for $ale and whose “vote can be bought with a new mattress”! “A lying dirtbag O’Donnell” who is a loathesome woman who says:”I’m open to bribes and my influence can be bought.”“Satan in a skirt.”!!!!
Wretching over a crazy skank like Christine the Con doesn’t make me a RINO, we’re screwed for supporting an unelectable idiot like O’Donnell whose history is so shady, she’s practically a criminal…her dimples, her perky “Super enthusiastic!!!eleventy!!!” cheerleader pep rallies and her inappropriate laughter?If she offers herself for money, isn’t that the classical definition of a whore? this Christine b-yatch is going to get her head handed to her…delusional liar and a con artist like O’Donnell! Her looks are her *only* asset besides her fake conservatism. Christine is a bimbo who uses her looks to con people out of their money. She’s done nothing except stay one step ahead of the law and her creditors.The woman is radioactive!

…Yeah, where could there be bad judgment in endorsing that?

“As for “costing us the Senate,” there’s nothing to say that Castle would have won the seat even had he won the GOP primary.”

Again, the seat went from “safe republican” to Safe democrat” over night. There was nearly a 30 something point switch with the nomination of Satan in a skirt. (man that cracks me up.) Yeah, Castle would have won and yeah stopping Obama is too important to be screwing around with the likes of O’Donnell.

“And if Sarah’s such a brainless nothing…”

I never wrote that and don’t think it. I just don’t think she has shown good enough judgment in her political career to be a good president.

Boxy_Brown on November 30, 2010 at 7:29 AM

After scanning through 9 pages, the most important thing I noted is that Jenfidel’s a woman.

As for what Krauthammer said about Palin, I agree.

For me personally, I have my own ideas of what I want for this country and I look for a person with the same ideas and Palin (for me) doesn’t fit all of my expectations. If she does for you, that’s great, but stop the immature bashing of people who don’t agree with you.

moonsbreath on November 30, 2010 at 12:04 PM

moonsbreath on November 30, 2010 at 12:04 PM

I’ve tried to discuss things reasonably with jenfidel but she’s a shrill, angry, true-believer.
I’d best be careful or she’ll accuse me of ‘trollery’ again.
*smirk*

annoyinglittletwerp on November 30, 2010 at 12:28 PM

Comment pages: 1 7 8 9