Did Palin get an invitation or not?

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0610/38505.html

After all, even Margaret Thatcher thinks Palin is “NUTS” according to her handlers.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2011/06/margaret-thatcher-refuses-to-meet-with-sarah-palin.html?cid=6a00d8341c630a53ef01538f05d98f970b

I love how the LAT sleazewads use a picture of Jimmy Carter instead of one of her with Reagan. Despicable wretches.

He suggested in an interview with POLITICO that Bachmann would profit from the contrast.
Bachmann will “be so much more substantive,” Rollins said. “People are going to say, ‘I gotta make a choice and go with the intelligent woman who’s every bit as attractive.’”
“I’m not afraid of Palin,” he said, adding the strategy would have been the same for Mike Huckabee.

Masochistic wants a Palin response via Facebook. Lack of attention from his boss, perhaps?

“Michele Bachmann and others [have] worked hard, she has been a leader of the Tea Party which is a very important element here, she has been an attorney, she has done important things with family values.”

And Palin was the only one who didn’t cancel a certain large Tea Party event, when others fled

It is actually a mistake to claim leadership of a movement which doesn’t elect leaders, but that assumes we understand the motives

Why alienate an influential potential ally before you absolutely have to?

Good question

Answer that question and you win the jackpot

I called Bachmann’s campaign office to express my disappointment in Rollins’ comments. I just received a return call from someone at her office, stating that Bachmann called Gov. Palin to apologize, Bachmann would “never” say such things about Palin, and it was a “mistake.”
Good for Bachmann, I say!

cs89 on June 7, 2011 at 10:34 PM
MB may have called Gov. Palin, however, I “betcha” Palin
did not take the call.
Amjean

Heh. And it looks like the rest of Bachmann’s staff is just as dishonest as Rollins, going by the returned call to cs89. Pretty insane to target Republicans for attack when there’s target rich administration to pound away at to really earn some points and to soften the territory up for the general election.

From the NYT update from mid-January:

[Rollins]cast a pall over her victory by asserting later that the campaign had laid out a half-million dollars in “street money” to discourage get-out-the-vote efforts by black clergy and Democratic workers.

Mr. Rollins later swore he had lied, and after investigators were satisfied that he had, the issue faded.

It turned out, of course, that it was the Democrats who had spent the huge sums on “street money” in the election!.

But s I said in my prior comment, “Michelle Bachmann should be very, very careful of Ed Rollins!”

Anyway, Rollins said the same thing about his new employer.

Don’t believe me, look at your own website.

Many of us vividly remember when he boastfully, stupidly and unnecessarily opened his mouth and touched off a huge controversy here in NJ, back in 1993, immediately following the narrow election victory of Christine Todd Whitman when she took out tax-and-spend mogul, Jim Florio, by making comments that were quickly taken by the media as racially-tinged, and which even suggested that her campaign had done things that they had never done. It actually put her narrow victory under a mini-cloud for a considerable period of time, and was the last thing anyone with any sense would have said!

Rollins is an open mouth, insert foot kind of guy of the first worst order.

Here was one of the initial articles in the NY Times, dated November 10th, that touched off the firestorm of controversy.

he_nile on June 8, 2011 at 4:04 AM
I like “trust but verify,” personally. If she says these statements are inconsistent with her opinion of Palin, good for her.
If Rollins stays in her camp, and pulls this again, I’ll know to write off the bit of credibility she has retained in my estimation.
We’ll see.
cs89 on June 8, 2011 at 7:04 AM

Bachmann forfeited all cred when she hired Rollins. If this was a naive or ignorant decision, she’s not qualified to be dogcatcher. Surprised so many here are willing to give her a pass.

I think any candidate who’s focus is on attacking Republicans instead of Obama should be rejected put of hand.

whatcat on June 8, 2011 at 9:54 AM

X 1,000,000.

Bachmann needs to fire Rollins for this. Extremely disappointing. I favor Palin but I have contributed to Bachmann in the past for Congress and in general. This kind of divisive poison is exactly what we do not need.

DaMav on June 8, 2011 at 9:01 AM

I think any candidate who’s focus is on attacking Republicans instead of Obama should be rejected put of hand.

Petunia flowerchild wrote that about Palin, not me.
I wrote the part where I called Petunia a delusional dumbass.

Amjean on June 8, 2011 at 7:20 AM

Ah, my bad with the wrong attribution! Sorry, Amjean.

I don’t know if Palin is even really interested in running, but if she is she will have to compete with these other people. That means, debates..answering questions and dealing with a certain amount of confrontation. It goes with the territory. Her people need to understand that.

Terrye on June 8, 2011 at 7:15 AM

You are addicted to strawmen. Do you even read news coverage?

Palin has said over and over that she welcomes vigorous primary debate as healthy for the GOP and for the country, and “the more the merrier.” Over and over.

She took questions from reporters on dozens of separate occasions on her bus tour. One of them actually ran out of questions to ask.

And as far as “dealing with a certain amount of confrontation,” I think since Aug 2008 Palin has had just a tiny bit of experience with a hostile media and provocative comments from political opponents and their surrogates as well as every other anklebiter in the country.

So yes, “her people” do understand that “it goes with the territory” and that “she will have to compete with other people.” I’m sure they otherwise appreciate your sage advice, though.

He suggested in an interview with POLITICO that Bachmann would profit from the contrast.
Bachmann will “be so much more substantive,” Rollins said. “People are going to say, ‘I gotta make a choice and go with the intelligent woman who’s every bit as attractive.’”
“I’m not afraid of Palin,” he said, adding the strategy would have been the same for Mike Huckabee.

I wonder if Rollins finds Huckabee every bit as attractive as Governor Palin?

Since it has been a good 1/2 day with no official walkback from MB, I think it’s fair to say “SP/MB 2012″ or “MB/SP 2012″ meme is totally dead.

AH_C on June 8, 2011 at 8:43 AM

Two words: “Voodoo Economics”.

Its going to get nasty. Rollins just took the initiative. It was the smart move. People answering him are just elevating MB to SP levels. All the suckers over-reacting just put Bachmann on Palin’s table.

swamp_yankee on June 8, 2011 at 3:34 AM

You claim that we’re elevating MB to SP’s level. You really think so? I’d say most Palin supporters also ranked her high on their list of contenders. This was a stupid/selfish move on Rollins part to get airtime at Palin’s expense. And did nothing to MB on SP’s table, if anything the opposite.

If you’re going to attack someone, you don’t attack like-minded supporters (in this case, conservatives), because you’re going to need each other as the primaries progresses to the point one or the other will withdraw and endorse the other. The ones you attack are the ones with a diametricaly opposite platform, like Mittens & Obama. Or if you want to abide by Reagan’s 11th commandment, you draw distinct comparisons and contrast with Mitt.

Bottomline, if Ed did this with MB’s blessings, it’s a major screw up and calls MB’s judgment & motives into question. If the latter, then the net effect is that it will sweep MB completely of the table and into the compost pile.

Since it has been a good 1/2 day with no official walkback from MB, I think it’s fair to say “SP/MB 2012″ or “MB/SP 2012″ meme is totally dead.