New Hampshire: How ’bout we blow your minds and hold our primary three months from now?

posted at 8:15 pm on September 30, 2011 by Allahpundit

Nothing’s set in stone up north, but Florida officially moved its own primary to January 31st today so the early-state dominoes are about to fall. Here’s the first domino, already wobbling. New Hampshire’s potentially much more of a Christie state than a Palin state, so of the two late entrants, this would hurt him more than her. But of course, if New Hampshire moves up to December, Iowa’s going to move too to retain its pride of place. And Iowa’s probably a must-have for her if she gets in.

This year, it’s a Christmas caucus!

New Hampshire Secretary of State Bill Gardner, who has unilateral control to set the Granite State’s date, moved up the presidential primary filing period to begin Oct. 17 and ending October 28, signaling the New Hampshire primary contest will be moved up in the calendar.

“Unfortunately, we’ll be unable to have the upcoming presidential primary on the second Tuesday in March and will continue to honor the tradition of our first-in-the-nation presidential primary,” Gardner told NBC News. “Because we cannot rule out of the possibility of conducting the primary before the end of this year, we are, regrettably, as we were four years ago, forced to move the presidential candidates filing period to October.”

Until today, the first ballot deadline was Florida’s on October 31. New Hampshire just shaved three days off that window. (There’s no deadline for Iowa because it’s a caucus.) And even for the later primaries, there’s not as much time left as you think:

Furthermore, the number of hoops candidates must jump through to get on some states’ ballots means it is likely already too late to enter the 2012 fray, said Matthew Sanderson, who helped with balloting issues for Sen. John McCain’s 2008 presidential campaign. In Virginia, for instance, candidates have until Dec. 22 to submit the signatures of 10,000 qualified voters, including 400 from each congressional district. The Virginia State Board of Elections recommends that candidates collect 15,000 to 20,000 signatures and 700 from each district “because many people who are not registered to vote will sign a petition.”

Mr. Sanderson said the drop-dead date is fast approaching. A late entry, he said, is not “impossible, but it does make success harder to achieve.”

Christie could get this done, I assume, because some of his core support is coming from fabulously wealthy Republican donors who can bankroll the staff needed to get the petitions done. Palin, whose organization is more DIY and heavily dependent on small donors, may have a tougher time. As for why Florida would move its primary up knowing that the RNC will penalize it by subtracting half of its delegates, two reasons. One: New Hampshire and South Carolina will also lose half their delegates by moving up to stay ahead of Florida, so to some extent the cost is spread. Two: Who cares about the delegates? Unless the GOP race goes down to the wire in the spring, the nomination won’t turn on those lost delegates. It’s more important for Florida to be seen as an early kingmaker than to retain all of its convention votes.

Via Newsbusters, here’s video of NRO’s Robert Costa, who hears from Christie’s people that you-know-who is “closer now to running than he ever has been.” The AP and the Newark Star-Ledger are hearing more or less the same thing. The decision might be made this weekend or early next week, but we’ll know soon. As for Palin, I’ve seen no signs. But Red State is keeping a solitary vigil

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 2 3 4 5

So, is it a “game plan”, or does she really, really want to be President? That is not a game.

Of course it’s a game…insofar as strategy is required. Or are you trying to imply that the use of the phrase “game plan”…which is universally recognized as being synonymous with “strategy” suggests a lack of seriousness and resolve?

If so, you’re either being deliberately obtuse or misleading.

P.S. Both you and Palin should both stop blaming the media.

Buy Danish on September 30, 2011 at 10:09 PM

Recognizing the media is not a disinterested third party…and that they have an agenda… is not a blame game.

But you know that already.

powerpro on September 30, 2011 at 10:16 PM

Would be good to see Christie/Romney votes divided in NH.
Rock on Herman Cain.

balkanmom on September 30, 2011 at 10:18 PM

Sarah Palin: I’ve got your nose! Yes I do! I got your nose!

 

Palin Supporters: *TeeHee*

FlatFoot on September 30, 2011 at 10:20 PM

P.S. Both you and Palin should both stop blaming the media.

Buy Danish on September 30, 2011 at 10:09 PM

Did Sarah say something whiny about the media that I missed?

listens2glenn on September 30, 2011 at 10:20 PM

So if Christie runs, can we expect the “quitter” meme and the “half-term governor” meme to migrate south from Alaska? And if not, why not?

Is New Jersey really in the bully shape Christie insisted — effusively promised — he would put it in and from which he can now freely leave to pursue higher more ego-gratifying roles?

rrpjr on September 30, 2011 at 9:55 PM

Only an idiot cannot figure out the difference. This Nista line is tiring.

CW on September 30, 2011 at 10:22 PM

Sarah Palin: I’ve got your nose! Yes I do! I got your nose!

Palin Supporters: *TeeHee*

FlatFoot on September 30, 2011 at 10:20 PM

I’m a supporter…

…but, that was funny. Good humor!

Saltysam on September 30, 2011 at 10:23 PM

Sarah Palin: I’ve got your nose! Yes I do! I got your nose!

Palin Supporters: *TeeHee*

FlatFoot on September 30, 2011 at 10:20 PM

I guess that’s all there is left to say, huh?

Lose the debate, call the opposition a bunch of toddlers.

listens2glenn on September 30, 2011 at 10:24 PM

Only an idiot cannot figure out the difference. This Nista line is tiring.

CW on September 30, 2011 at 10:22 PM

What’s the Palinista line you’re referring to? That her resignation was a selfless act for the good of her state and her family…and that Christie’s non-resignation would be viewed as transparently self-serving and opportunistic?

Oh wait.. no that would be called factual.

powerpro on September 30, 2011 at 10:27 PM

Not a game plan…It’s a WAR…
idesign on September 30, 2011 at 10:14 PM

A Civil War? Gosh, I can’t wait.

Recognizing the media is not a disinterested third party…and that they have an agenda… is not a blame game.
But you know that already.
powerpro on September 30, 2011 at 10:16 PM

Palin has an agenda. But you know that already. Let me know when she decides if she wants the job or not. No reputable employer would hire someone who has demonstrated such little enthusiasm for a job they’re kinda sorta interested in. Especially if they have a history of being a quitter. Why should we?

Buy Danish on September 30, 2011 at 10:28 PM

It’s gamesmanship. Nothing wrong with it, and it does seem to be working. All the criticism from you anti-palinistas is all the evidence I need to make that assertation.
listens2glenn on September 30, 2011 at 9:59 PM

You didn’t just call unseen an anti-palinista did you?
gophergirl on September 30, 2011 at 10:01 PM

You’re quick gophergirl! Can we frame that comment for posterity? That was one funny typo listens2glenn. ;-)

conservative pilgrim on September 30, 2011 at 10:28 PM

My problem with this particular gamesmanship is that we are moving the primaries too far ahead of the elections. Lots of things can happen that can impact how primary voters will cast their ballots. There is no substantive benefit to the goal of selecting the best candidate from what these states are dong.

GaltBlvnAtty on September 30, 2011 at 10:33 PM

dong is right, but I meant doing.

GaltBlvnAtty on September 30, 2011 at 10:34 PM

Did Sarah say something whiny about the media that I missed?
listens2glenn on September 30, 2011 at 10:20 PM

Virtually every time she opens her mouth she complains about the media. The latest example was during her interview with Greta about Herman Cain. Just before that it was with Hannity in the disastrous interview when she said she didn’t need a title.

Buy Danish on September 30, 2011 at 10:34 PM

Of course it’s a game…insofar as strategy is required. Or are you trying to imply that the use of the phrase “game plan”…which is universally recognized as being synonymous with “strategy” suggests a lack of seriousness and resolve?
If so, you’re either being deliberately obtuse or misleading.
powerpro on September 30, 2011 at 10:16 PM

Yes, she demonstrates a lack of seriousness and resolve.

Buy Danish on September 30, 2011 at 10:36 PM

Palin has an agenda. But you know that already. Let me know when she decides if she wants the job or not. No reputable employer would hire someone who has demonstrated such little enthusiasm for a job they’re kinda sorta interested in. Especially if they have a history of being a quitter. Why should we?

Buy Danish on September 30, 2011 at 10:28 PM

Quitting the Governorship was as much gamesmanship as anything else she’s doing (or not) right now; and it’s WORKING.

But that doesn’t mean you’re not allowed to criticize it. By all means, have at it.

listens2glenn on September 30, 2011 at 10:36 PM

Palin has an agenda. But you know that already.

Yes she does. And?

Let me know when she decides if she wants the job or not. No reputable employer would hire someone who has demonstrated such little enthusiasm for a job they’re kinda sorta interested in.

She’s displayed quite a bit of enthusiasm for it. Just because she doesn’t drool over the idea obsessively doesn’t mean she doesn’t have the fire in her belly to do what she believes is right.

Especially if they have a history of being a quitter. Why should we?

Buy Danish on September 30, 2011 at 10:28 PM

Palin has never given up on anything in her life.

Whenever she hits a roadblock, she finds a way around it or through it. All you have to do is spend a few seconds looking at her bio to know this is true.

Unless you think maintaining her huge paycheck and seat as chair of the Oil and Gas Commission was more important than exposing corruption at the highest level of Alaskan government.

Unless you think staying on the government payroll was more important than honoring her commitment to put the people and the business of Alaska first.

Just because a move is unconventional, doesn’t mean it’s illegitimate or a sign of a character flaw, as you’re implying.

powerpro on September 30, 2011 at 10:37 PM

Yes, she demonstrates a lack of seriousness and resolve.

Buy Danish on September 30, 2011 at 10:36 PM

How?

powerpro on September 30, 2011 at 10:38 PM

Virtually every time she opens her mouth she complains about the media. The latest example was during her interview with Greta about Herman Cain.

Are you suggesting that the media doesn’t lift someone up so they can smack them back down for the sake of ratings and their own agenda?

Palin recognizing their bias and their motivations just means she’s paying attention and is willing to call them out.

Just before that it was with Hannity in the disastrous interview when she said she didn’t need a title.

Buy Danish on September 30, 2011 at 10:34 PM

She’s right. She doesn’t need a title to be effective. She’s proven that.

And she’s helped empower people all over the country to follow that lead and get involved.

That said…she knows that while she can be effective without a title, she also knows in certain cases she can be more effective with one, depending on the cause and the title.

powerpro on September 30, 2011 at 10:42 PM

Virtually every time she opens her mouth she complains about the media. The latest example was during her interview with Greta about Herman Cain. Just before that it was with Hannity in the disastrous interview when she said she didn’t need a title.

Buy Danish on September 30, 2011 at 10:34 PM

Can’t agree with you on the “every time she opens her mouth” part of that.
I didn’t see or hear the Greta and Hannity interviews, so I can’t argue with you on those.

listens2glenn on September 30, 2011 at 10:43 PM

Only an idiot cannot figure out the difference. This Nista line is tiring.

CW on September 30, 2011 at 10:22 PM

Of course. I must be an idiot for not seeing the “difference.” That’s always how it works, isn’t it.

rrpjr on September 30, 2011 at 10:45 PM

Re: “Palin would have a harder time”

From you and others who don’t know one single thing about
her campaign strategy should she run.

As of now, you haven’t even figured out that her not announcing
yet is part of her strategy.

Amjean on September 30, 2011 at 10:48 PM

powerpro on September 30, 2011 at 10:37 PM

Nice speech. It doesn’t address the here and now.

How?
powerpro on September 30, 2011 at 10:38 PM

You’re kidding right? She quits her job as Governor for a reality show and to work as a less than staellar analyst for Fox News. She’s had 3 years to make up her mind whether she wants to be President of the United States and blames her indecision on family considerations. Then she says “she doesn’t need a title”!

If she wants to be an influencer and promote the conservative* agenda – FINE! Just do it! Being President is not about having a title, it’s about doing a job. The job.

*Populist is a better word. Conservatives don’t go around dissing “Big Corporations” and use bromides about the “Special Interests”.

Buy Danish on September 30, 2011 at 10:53 PM

stellar not staeller.

Buy Danish on September 30, 2011 at 10:54 PM

Who’s mad at Erick?
RedState September poll..:)

Michele Bachmann 1.2%
Herman Cain 21.1%
Chris Christie 0.9%
Newt Gingrich 2.1%
Rudy Giuliani 0.1%
Jon Huntsman 1.0%
Gary Johnson 0.6%
Sarah Palin 52.3%
Ron Paul 10.1%
Rick Perry 7.5%
Buddy Roemer 0.1%
Mitt Romney 2.5%
Rick Santorum 0.6%

https://www.surveymonkey.com/s_thankyou.aspx?sm=6X51iJe6uJp66VYQzS7l%2faLEH330fqmNmZ%2bujH3wYu4%3d
LOL

LOL

idesign on September 30, 2011 at 8:37 PM

The problem with Eric as with most pundits is that they are
trying to be kingmaker for their candidate.

As for Palin – I picture her standing with her arms crossed
while the Seven Plus Dwarfs and their “handlers”
keep kicking her shins as she glares at them.

Amjean on September 30, 2011 at 10:56 PM

Just before that it was with Hannity in the disastrous interview when she said she didn’t need a title.

Buy Danish on September 30, 2011 at 10:34 PM

Titles (and higher education pedigrees) too often are nothing more than artificial social status. Since perception is reality, it will always be in the eyes of the beholder who’s genuine and who isn’t.

But at least we have this great blog-site to argue about it, right?

listens2glenn on September 30, 2011 at 10:58 PM

Palin’s job interview: “I’m going to keep repeating, though, Greta, through my process of decision-making with my family and with my close friends as to whether I should throw my name in the hat for the GOP nomination or not for 2012 — is a title worth it? Does a title shackle a person? Are they — someone like me, who’s a maverick — you know, I do go rogue and I call it like I see it.”

Employer: You’re not hired, so you don’t have to worry about being fired.

Buy Danish on September 30, 2011 at 10:59 PM

Because, this isn’t about Palin, its about so many of Palin’s most strident supporters who have been adamant that this was all part of some grand strategy for a late entry to the primaries, and have relentlessly attacked anyone who disagreed with them. Palin said she would decide by the end of September; not Erick Erickson, not the lamestream media, no one else but Sarah Palin. And you all preached the gospel about how she would be in by today. Hell, I thought she might get in for a little bit after Perry imploded in the debates, but its not happening. RedState’s hoopla today isn’t about Palin; Erickson is calling out her supporters.

Lawdawg86 on September 30, 2011 at 8:46 PM

Why do you give a “rat’s ass”?

Amjean on September 30, 2011 at 11:02 PM

listens2glenn on September 30, 2011 at 10:58 PM

We’re not talking about social status! We’re talking about having the desire and fortitude and discipline to be President of the United States. Does she have it or not? Tick Tock.

Buy Danish on September 30, 2011 at 11:03 PM

Nice speech. It doesn’t address the here and now.

Of course it does.

Your argument was that her past actions suggest she’s not trustworthy because if she gave up before, what’s to say she won’t give up now. And I’m pointing out that she never gave up in the first place…and therefore the conclusion you draw is a false one.

You’re kidding right? She quits her job as Governor for a reality show and to work as a less than staellar analyst for Fox News.

Okay I’ll try again. She didn’t quit her job for a reality show and to work at Fox News. Just because she ended up doing those things does not mean that those were motivating factors.

At this point I feel like you’re being deliberately obtuse and misleading.

She’s had 3 years to make up her mind whether she wants to be President of the United States and blames her indecision on family considerations.

She’s not blaming anything. lol I think she’s made a decision long ago but cannot hint at what it is or she’ll reveal her hand.

But I’ve said this already and you disregarded it then so why bother repeating myself.

Then she says “she doesn’t need a title”!

Already responded to this one.

If she wants to be an influencer and promote the conservative* agenda – FINE! Just do it! Being President is not about having a title, it’s about doing a job. The job.

Yes that’s right. But what it takes to get to that job is what she’s talking about. The common way of doing things leads politicians to sell too much of themselves for deep pocket donors…and I think this is something she’s looking to avoid. Kind of like how she ran in Alaska for Governor.

*Populist is a better word. Conservatives don’t go around dissing “Big Corporations” and use bromides about the “Special Interests”.

Buy Danish on September 30, 2011 at 10:53 PM

There is a populist edge to her rhetoric but she is a constitutional conservative. And if you think talking about special interests is a bromide then you might be too naive to be involved in politics.

powerpro on September 30, 2011 at 11:06 PM

This is idiotic. It is WAY too early to hold primaries. If they are going to hold primaries this early, fine, make the rule that there are no “winner take all” primaries. Delegates are split according to vote.

crosspatch on September 30, 2011 at 11:17 PM

You’re kidding right? She quits her job as Governor for a reality show and to work as a less than staellar analyst for Fox News. She’s had 3 years to make up her mind whether she wants to be President of the United States and blames her indecision on family considerations. Then she says “she doesn’t need a title”!

If she wants to be an influencer and promote the conservative* agenda – FINE! Just do it! Being President is not about having a title, it’s about doing a job. The job.

*Populist is a better word. Conservatives don’t go around dissing “Big Corporations” and use bromides about the “Special Interests”.

Buy Danish on September 30, 2011 at 10:53 PM

LOL, what’s hilarious is your getting your panties in a wad over someone you not only don’t support but someone you think would have no chance even if she DID get in. You’re pathological. Get help.

ddrintn on September 30, 2011 at 11:18 PM

powerpro on September 30, 2011 at 11:06 PM

Really well done. It’s hard to see how this can’t be understood, yet at the same you can expect that it won’t be.

rrpjr on September 30, 2011 at 11:18 PM

We’re not talking about social status! We’re talking about having the desire and fortitude and discipline to be President of the United States. Does she have it or not? Tick Tock.

Buy Danish on September 30, 2011 at 11:03 PM

I was talking about individuals having conflicting/contradictory perception about a given person/situation etc.

I don’t hardly believe that her “lack-of-announcing-intentions-to-run-before-now” constitutes any lack of sufficient desire, fortitude, or discipline (especially discipline) for the job of POTUS.

listens2glenn on September 30, 2011 at 11:24 PM

powerpro on September 30, 2011 at 11:06 PM

Your argument was that her past actions suggest she’s not trustworthy because if she gave up before, what’s to say she won’t give up now. And I’m pointing out that she never gave up in the first place…and therefore the conclusion you draw is a false one.

Really? She resigned.

Okay I’ll try again. She didn’t quit her job for a reality show and to work at Fox News. Just because she ended up doing those things does not mean that those were motivating factors.

So what? Why should I care? Other than writing facebook posts, what has she done to prepare for the White House since she quit?

At this point I feel like you’re being deliberately obtuse and misleading.

You already made that claim. You’re being repetitive.

She’s not blaming anything. lol I think she’s made a decision long ago but cannot hint at what it is or she’ll reveal her hand.

Whatever. She keeps telling us it’s about her family. Over and over again, blah blah blah.

Then she says “she doesn’t need a title”!Already responded to this one.

Your response was irrelevant to why that statement from her was so disqualifying. Any idiot knows there are plenty of things she could do other than be President.

Yes that’s right. But what it takes to get to that job is what she’s talking about. The common way of doing things leads politicians to sell too much of themselves for deep pocket donors…and I think this is something she’s looking to avoid. Kind of like how she ran in Alaska for Governor.

If she doesn’t want to “sell herself” then she should say she’s not interested and be done with it. But she’s too busy selling herself to do that.

There is a populist edge to her rhetoric but she is a constitutional conservative. And if you think talking about special interests is a bromide then you might be too naive to be involved in politics.

If you don’t think her talking points aren’t bromides then maybe you don’t know what the word means:

A bromide is a phrase or platitude that, having been employed excessively, suggests insincerity or a lack of originality in the speaker employing it.

She is both insincere and displays a lack of originality. Special interests
is a bromide. Constitutional conservative is a bromide. As is her b.s. about family considerations. What is a “special interest” exactly (other than a Democrat talking point)? The Heritage Foundation or The Unions? The Oil Companies or Environmentalists? We all have our own special interests. That’s why we elect people to represent us. Your special interest? Sarah Palin.

Good night.

Buy Danish on September 30, 2011 at 11:27 PM

And again… the media and the other candidates want her to reveal her game plan and she’s not going to until it’s right for her to do so.
powerpro on September 30, 2011 at 9:12 PM

So, is it a “game plan”, or does she really, really want to be President? That is not a game.

P.S. Both you and Palin should both stop blaming the media.

Buy Danish on September 30, 2011 at 10:09 PM

Palin has never “wanted”
to be president. She just wants to straighten out the mess
that is this country’s government and that is the path that
is open to her.

Amjean on September 30, 2011 at 11:28 PM

HOLY BALLS!

BYU wins in the last 15 seconds of the game after trailing Utah St for all of it.
Now THAT’S my kind of football!

listens2glenn on September 30, 2011 at 11:29 PM

I don’t hardly believe that her “lack-of-announcing-intentions-to-run-before-now” constitutes any lack of sufficient desire, fortitude, or discipline (especially discipline) for the job of POTUS.
listens2glenn on September 30, 2011 at 11:24 PM

Her wavering most certainly does. She is the one who talked about not needing a title. That betrays a lack of commitment to the job.

nite..

Buy Danish on September 30, 2011 at 11:30 PM

Moving up the FL primary helps Herman Cain, who can probably become the anti-Romney and then defeat him where he is expected to win. After expectations become thus flipped (and if HC has become better informed about foreign relations) Herman Cain will have momentum and begin to become recognized as the anti-Obama. He has a wider path to the Presidency today.

exdeadhead on September 30, 2011 at 11:31 PM

This is tired and repetitive…

Palin Supporter: All Hail Queen Sarah. She saw all that coming. Wonderful!

Palin Detractor: Quitter! Quitter! Quitter!

It’s a broken record.

Enough.

dforston on September 30, 2011 at 11:33 PM

One makes money off attacking a person in the same political party (EE). The other “makes money” off of conservative ideas and principles (SP). Yes, making money and succeeding are a part of the American dream, but how these two achieve that goal couldn’t have more contrast.

conservative pilgrim on September 30, 2011 at 9:27 PM

Palin’s made as much money “attacking person(s) in the same political party” as anyone. In fact, it’s an integral part of her persona (hoity-toity Bushes, contested primaries for House Freshman, Krauthammer, the Santorum dust-up, etc., etc.).

She’s a rogue!, rogue!, rogue!, and the Republishment establishment quivers in fear at the very mention of her name (or so her supporters say).

Dreadnought on September 30, 2011 at 11:35 PM

Palin has never “wanted”
to be president. She just wants to straighten out the mess
that is this country’s government and that is the path that
is open to her.
Amjean on September 30, 2011 at 11:28 PM

Oy. Before I go: I get it, she’s just like a Saint who selflessly answers a calling. I don’t think she’s particularly qualified to straighten out messes in any case.

Buy Danish on September 30, 2011 at 11:35 PM

Republishment = Republican.

Sorry

Dreadnought on September 30, 2011 at 11:36 PM

If anyone is interested Herman Cain is on the Tonight Show this evening

bluefox on September 30, 2011 at 11:37 PM

Republishment = Republican.
Dreadnought on September 30, 2011 at 11:36 PM

I think you just made up a new word for the Palinistas:)

Buy Danish on September 30, 2011 at 11:38 PM

Okay, back to the subject at hand: I personally won’t mind one bit if she stays out of it or if she gets in and loses big time.

She is still being very effective conducting herself the way she is whether her goal is to “throw her hat in the ring”, or run interference for someone else.
A LOT of liberal-leaning resources are being used to track her every move, and it’s WORKING.

On the other hand, if she announces that she’s in and wins the nomination, that’ll be just peachey by me too. :)

listens2glenn on September 30, 2011 at 11:44 PM

Really? She resigned.

Yes she did. Do you really eel there are no legitimate reasons for resigning a governorship or are you ignoring the facts because they don’t fit your narrative?

So what? Why should I care? Other than writing facebook posts, what has she done to prepare for the White House since she quit?

Why should you care? And yet you do. Interesting.

As for doing little to prepare, I guess you missed out on the whole 2010 election thing, huh? Or how she’s taken the lead on pretty much every major issue? Or that she’s composed extremely well thought out policy positions on complex issues such as the debt, quantitative easing and oh yes…Obamacare, for starters?

You already made that claim. You’re being repetitive.

Stop pretending that the questions you’re raising haven’t been asked and answered and I won’t have to be.

Whatever. She keeps telling us it’s about her family. Over and over again, blah blah blah.

And? Does everything have to be a blame thing? I think her family were a major consideration. I also think that since she can’t show her hand yet, she’s forced to give some kind of response.

Your response was irrelevant to why that statement from her was so disqualifying. Any idiot knows there are plenty of things she could do other than be President.

No it’s not. It’s called reality. As for any idiot knowing these things…you seem to not understand what she was saying. So who’s the idiot again?

If she doesn’t want to “sell herself” then she should say she’s not interested and be done with it. But she’s too busy selling herself to do that.

Two things. Not wanting to be beholden to special interests does not mean she’s not interested. She just wants to do things the right way and for the right reasons. Two…how is she selling herself now?

If you don’t think her talking points aren’t bromides then maybe you don’t know what the word means:

A bromide is a phrase or platitude that, having been employed excessively, suggests insincerity or a lack of originality in the speaker employing it.

I’m quite familiar with what a bromide is. Thank you Captain Condescension.

Do you know her story at all? How she had to go toe to toe with big oil and how she took down major political figures? There’s nothing insincere about it. That you suggest otherwise tells me you don’t know a thing about her actual record.

She is both insincere and displays a lack of originality. Special interests is a bromide. Constitutional conservative is a bromide. As is her b.s. about family considerations. What is a “special interest” exactly (other than a Democrat talking point)? The Heritage Foundation or The Unions? The Oil Companies or Environmentalists? We all have our own special interests. That’s why we elect people to represent us. Your special interest? Sarah Palin.

Good night.

Buy Danish on September 30, 2011 at 11:27 PM

What utter drivel.

I’m obviously wasting my time trying to educate you with facts. You’re too interested in engaging in demagoguery to care or be swayed by the truth.

Ciao.

powerpro on September 30, 2011 at 11:45 PM

If she does get in, it won’t be until after her vid hits the stores. It’s part of her political promo, imo.

And that’s fine with me.

predator on September 30, 2011 at 8:51 PM

I like it when a plan comes together..:)

idesign on September 30, 2011 at 8:54 PM

You have got to be kidding.

Are you all still waiting for that straight-to-DVD movie to turn things around?

First everybody was going to see it in the theaters and it was going to bring in the converts.

Except it lasted for about a week in the theaters, and only the true-believers bothered to see it.

Then Pay-Per-View was going to be the ticket.

Obviously that didn’t work out either.

Now she’s going to time her entry to when it “hits the stores”.

??????????????

You can’t really believe that, can you?

If you are waiting for Bannon’s heavy-handed piece of agit-prop to bump up Palin’s poll numbers, you are going to be waiting a very, very long time.

Dreadnought on September 30, 2011 at 11:48 PM

Republishment = Republican.
Dreadnought on September 30, 2011 at 11:36 PM

I think you just made up a new word for the Palinistas:)

Buy Danish on September 30, 2011 at 11:38 PM

Heh. No, I’m not that clever. Just a bad typist.

Dreadnought on September 30, 2011 at 11:50 PM

Her wavering most certainly does. She is the one who talked about not needing a title. That betrays a lack of commitment to the job.

nite..

Buy Danish on September 30, 2011 at 11:30 PM

I don’t perceive anything about her as “waivering”, but that doesn’t mean you’re not allowed to.
I have already addressed this “not needing a title” buisness above and don’t know why you’ve mentioned it again.

listens2glenn on September 30, 2011 at 11:55 PM

I can’t believe this thread hasn’t gone any further than it has till now.

Maybe we’ll pick it up again tomorrow.

Nite all.

listens2glenn on September 30, 2011 at 11:59 PM

You have got to be kidding.

Are you all still waiting for that straight-to-DVD movie to turn things around?

Dreadnought on September 30, 2011 at 11:48 PM

Turn what around? She’s not a declared candidate and she trails Obama by 12 points. That’s better than Perry was doing as an undeclared. When she was trailing O by 25, you were saying THEN that that was etched in stone.

ddrintn on October 1, 2011 at 12:12 AM

You can’t really believe that, can you?

Dreadnought on September 30, 2011 at 11:48 PM

They do.

Knucklehead on October 1, 2011 at 12:26 AM

You have got to be kidding.

Are you all still waiting for that straight-to-DVD movie to turn things around?

Dreadnought on September 30, 2011 at 11:48 PM

Turn what around? She’s not a declared candidate and she trails Obama by 12 points. That’s better than Perry was doing as an undeclared. When she was trailing O by 25, you were saying THEN that that was etched in stone.

ddrintn on October 1, 2011 at 12:12 AM

Come on. The person I was responding to thought Palin was going to time her entry with the release of Bannon’s movie to the stores.

Obviously this person believes that the movie is powerful enough to boost her numbers when she declares.

Very frequently over the past year, I have heard similar things from Palin’s supporters on this board; how one event or action was going to bring in the converts:

Her embrace of social media.

The bus trip.

The movie.

The speech in Iowa.

Yet none of those things has caused her numbers to budge.

They are gimmicks.

The latest CNN poll was Obama +21 vs. Palin.

It reminds me of a rooting for a football team that doesn’t have sound fundamentals and is outclassed by the opposition and is hoping to win with mirrors: flea flickers and fake punts.

Gimmicks.

Dreadnought on October 1, 2011 at 12:34 AM

Obviously this person believes that the movie is powerful enough to boost her numbers when she declares.

It could, if she gets in. It would draw much more attention. You need to get your head out of your anti-Palin ass every now and then.

Yet none of those things has caused her numbers to budge.

They are gimmicks.

The latest CNN poll was Obama +21 vs. Palin.

Dreadnought on October 1, 2011 at 12:34 AM

The RCP average is -12. Marist has her 5 behind Obama. And she’s not even a cnadidate. So? The numbers have budged.

ddrintn on October 1, 2011 at 12:40 AM

You can’t really believe that, can you?

Dreadnought on September 30, 2011 at 11:48 PM

They do.

Knucklehead on October 1, 2011 at 12:26 AM

It’s no sillier than fantasizing about President Herman Cain.

ddrintn on October 1, 2011 at 12:42 AM

It could, if she gets in. It would draw much more attention. You need to get your head out of your anti-Palin ass every now and then.

ddrintn on October 1, 2011 at 12:40 AM

Gosh, I wonder why you’re so testy?

Dreadnought on October 1, 2011 at 12:47 AM

Would be good to see Christie/Romney votes divided in NH.
Rock on Herman Cain.

balkanmom on September 30, 2011 at 10:18 PM

Christie will not run against Romney. Romney helped him win his primary election when he was a no name. Romney is a large part of the reason New Jersey has a Republican governor.

scotash on October 1, 2011 at 12:48 AM

Dreadnought on September 30, 2011 at 11:35 PM

And don’t forget that she sided with Bachmann and her stupid accusation about Perry and Merck.

-Aslan’s Girl

Aslans Girl on October 1, 2011 at 12:51 AM

It could, if she gets in. It would draw much more attention. You need to get your head out of your anti-Palin ass every now and then.

ddrintn on October 1, 2011 at 12:40 AM

Gosh, I wonder why you’re so testy?

Dreadnought on October 1, 2011 at 12:47 AM

It could be from reading the 1,334th iteration of your usual copy-and-paste anti-Palin comment. It changes less than any Palin poll number.

ddrintn on October 1, 2011 at 12:51 AM

And don’t forget that she sided with Bachmann and her stupid accusation about Perry and Merck.

-Aslan’s Girl

Aslans Girl on October 1, 2011 at 12:51 AM

We don’t know if it was “stupid” or not. It’s not been thoroughly investigated as yet, especially the tie-in with the RGA. Perry’s got his cronyism problems. PerryKrishna devotion, touching as it is, just can’t accept that fact.

ddrintn on October 1, 2011 at 12:53 AM

It’s no sillier than fantasizing about President Herman Cain.

ddrintn on October 1, 2011 at 12:42 AM

He’s out there running a campaign, he’s a serious candidate. Sarah Palin is not.

Who are you going to support when she breaks your heart and her DVD is pushed to the bargain bin at WalMart?

Knucklehead on October 1, 2011 at 12:55 AM

He’s out there running a campaign, he’s a serious candidate. Sarah Palin is not.

Who are you going to support when she breaks your heart and her DVD is pushed to the bargain bin at WalMart?

Knucklehead on October 1, 2011 at 12:55 AM

LOL, it would’t break my heart. I hope she runs just for the joy of seeing your sourball head explode.

ddrintn on October 1, 2011 at 12:56 AM

And don’t forget that she sided with Bachmann and her stupid accusation about Perry and Merck.

-Aslan’s Girl

Aslans Girl on October 1, 2011 at 12:51 AM

She did? I was out of the country, tell me more.

Knucklehead on October 1, 2011 at 12:56 AM

LOL, it would’t break my heart. I hope she runs just for the joy of seeing your sourball head explode.

ddrintn on October 1, 2011 at 12:56 AM

Aside from your usual old and tired snark, you still didn’t say who you would support if she doesn’t get in. Why is that?

Knucklehead on October 1, 2011 at 12:58 AM

If Christie does jump in, will his supporters be known as Christienistas?

Adjoran on October 1, 2011 at 1:00 AM

Aside from your usual old and tired snark, you still didn’t say who you would support if she doesn’t get in. Why is that?

Knucklehead on October 1, 2011 at 12:58 AM

Maybe I’ll do like you and just go with the latest flavor.

“Same old tired snark”, from someone who does nothing more apparently 24/7 at whatever mention of Palin’s name.

ddrintn on October 1, 2011 at 1:02 AM

If Christie does jump in, will his supporters be known as Christienistas?

Adjoran on October 1, 2011 at 1:00 AM

There aren’t enough of them to justify a nickname.

ddrintn on October 1, 2011 at 1:04 AM

ddrintn on October 1, 2011 at 1:02 AM

You are not a serious person and not worth dealing with. Just an ankle biter.

Knucklehead on October 1, 2011 at 1:07 AM

She did? I was out of the country, tell me more.

Knucklehead on October 1, 2011 at 12:56 AM

In Palin’s Sept 3rd speech, she mentioned crony capitalism. Subsequently in Perry’s 2nd debate, Bachmann attacked him on his Merck connections and the Gardasil mandate. Immediately following the debate, Greta interviewed Palin and asked if Perry had a crony capitalism problem vis a vis Merck and Gardasil. Palin said that she thought he did. Immediately AFTER Palin was on, Greta brought on Bachmann who shared a dubious anecdote involving a woman approaching her after that 2nd debate and telling her that Gardasil caused mental retardation in her daugher. Where it gets murky is some Palin detractors took have tried and tie Palin to both the Merck crony capitalism charge and the Gardasil causing mental retardation charge when Palin had only spoken about the former.

Kataklysmic on October 1, 2011 at 1:09 AM

should read:

Where it gets murky is some Palin detractors took have tried and to tie Palin to both the Merck crony capitalism charge and the Gardasil causing mental retardation charge when Palin had only spoken about the former.

Kataklysmic on October 1, 2011 at 1:09 AM

Kataklysmic on October 1, 2011 at 1:12 AM

If Christie does jump in, will his supporters be known as Christienistas?

Adjoran on October 1, 2011 at 1:00 AM

I’m thinking “Christie Kremes” might be a little more apropos.

Kataklysmic on October 1, 2011 at 1:14 AM

ddrintn on October 1, 2011 at 1:02 AM

You are not a serious person and not worth dealing with. Just an ankle biter.

Knucklehead on October 1, 2011 at 1:07 AM

Better than being a sour, lying smear artist playing out-of-context games.

ddrintn on October 1, 2011 at 1:14 AM

should read:

Where it gets murky is some Palin detractors took have tried and to tie Palin to both the Merck crony capitalism charge and the Gardasil causing mental retardation charge when Palin had only spoken about the former.

Kataklysmic on October 1, 2011 at 1:09 AM

Kataklysmic on October 1, 2011 at 1:12 AM

They don’t care. The Witch from Wasilla lifted her hand against the Lord’s Anointed. She has to be destroyed. Similar to the O-bot reaction, in fact.

ddrintn on October 1, 2011 at 1:17 AM

Kataklysmic on October 1, 2011 at 1:12 AM

Thanks, I knew I could get a straight up answer from you, one of the more reasonable supporters. I had logged into HA while I was in Prague and did quickly read about the Bachmann/mental retardation thing (what she thinking??) but I had no idea that Palin had done an interview about the Perry stuff.

Sometimes it’s good to get away from some of this crap, you know what I mean?

Knucklehead on October 1, 2011 at 1:30 AM

It could be from reading the 1,334th iteration of your usual copy-and-paste anti-Palin comment. It changes less than any Palin poll number.

ddrintn on October 1, 2011 at 12:51 AM

Actually it was the “1,334th iteration” of something called reality.

For some people it’s obviously a new concept.

And it certainly wasn’t the 1,334th time I posted the results of the CNN poll that showed Palin -21 vs. Obama.

That only came out earlier this week.

Dreadnought on October 1, 2011 at 1:32 AM

Throwing ones name in the hat is for a chance to be selected by random drawing. Throwing one’s hat in the ring indicates a challenge to the boxer or wrestler champion. This is the kind of metaphor faux pas Obambi would make. It suggests a lack of American socialization, or stupidity.

borntoraisehogs on October 1, 2011 at 1:32 AM

I am so tired of all the primary crap. They should pass a law that primaries for Federal offices must be held between March 1st and May 31st(3 month window). That gives each party 6 months to run their candidate before the general election. Also, this would let most states be relevant in the selection of each parties candidate, instead of the later primaries (June and later) being pointless.

pennjazz on October 1, 2011 at 1:40 AM

Sometimes it’s good to get away from some of this crap, you know what I mean?

Knucklehead on October 1, 2011 at 1:30 AM

I know exactly what you mean. About once a week I fantacize about throwing my laptop and cell phone off a bridge.

Kataklysmic on October 1, 2011 at 1:50 AM

I think Florida is telling Palin and Christie to fish or cut bait. They are hurting the process now with the coy act.

Good for Florida this is just stupid and old.

Lou Dobbs said today we should be very skeptical of the billionarie money trying to pull Christie in.

Christie is a fool if he allows them to do it. There is some motive there that just stinks to high heaven.

petunia on October 1, 2011 at 1:54 AM

pp,

You’re trying to have a discussion with a Mitt supporter…

As far as these States trying to play “King of the Mtn”, it’s stupid. Set a schedule and stick to it…

Gohawgs on October 1, 2011 at 1:55 AM

Kataklysmic on October 1, 2011 at 1:12 AM

Thanks, I knew I could get a straight up answer from you, one of the more reasonable supporters. I had logged into HA while I was in Prague and did quickly read about the Bachmann/mental retardation thing (what she thinking??) but I had no idea that Palin had done an interview about the Perry stuff.

Sometimes it’s good to get away from some of this crap, you know what I mean?

Knucklehead on October 1, 2011 at 1:30 AM

I found Palin’s interview disgraceful, but she has toned it down since then and I kind of feel sorry for her right now, so I’m not as mad as I was after the interview. What I also didn’t like about the interview is how she brushed off Cain so quickly.

Here is the video of Greta’s interview:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C3mk-a4wTz0

I kept my post about the interview, when someone asked why I thought it was disgraceful. It was long, so I’ve edited it.

My feelings that night were, if she cared about the cause more than her own ambition, then she should have waited to see if Perry seriously stumbled and wouldn’t win the nomination before she entered. Instead, Perry surged, so she stuck out her foot to trip him. The problem is, Perry might be nimble and not fall even after tripping him. But the rest of us (who thought better of her) have now seen her try and trip him.

Palin was nodding her head and saying, “I noticed that too,” when Greta said Newt was the “only one” to bring up government waste. Piping up immediately with “crony capitalism” and “permanent political class,” saying that these were “at the root of our economic problems.”

But this wasn’t true. Newt was the first one who was asked the question about government waste. He didn’t bring it up and at least 2 others followed by talking about it. One of which was Perry who talked about how he actually cut waste in Texas.

Then Palin arrogantly said that she hoped that what Newt said would, “teach his colleagues up there on stage” about government waste. As if all the others care about it and/or have never done anything to fight it. They may all have their faults but most of them have fought government waste. Who was Palin to be lecturing them about it?

She then actually said that “some of them don’t want to go there because they have been participants in some of the waste . . . go along to get along . . .” She went on and it made me sick. Watch it; because it’s making me mad quoting her. So, who exactly is she talking about? Shouldn’t she name names? Because now she has painted all of them with her broad brush. Except for Huntsman and Romney, the others have all tried and done their part against government waste. Maybe even those 2 a little bit; I don’t know. I’m not a fan of Ron Paul, but I would never say he didn’t try to cut waste. Santorum didn’t fight waste? Please. I’m annoyed at Bachmann right now, but she certainly has done her part. Perry actually cut waste in Texas.

Then Greta said that according to Palin’ “theory” the only one up there who wouldn’t be part of what Palin was criticizing must be Herman Cain, since he never held office, he was the only “non guilty party as far as fraud and waste” up there. Greta asked Palin if she agreed or disagreed. Did Palin say that she didn’t mean to imply that the others were “guilty of fraud and waste?” No. Did Palin praise Cain for his conservatism and integrity and how he always talks about government waste? Nope. She actually stammered at first and then looked like she was forced to succinctly admit that being in the business world Cain “does have a very strong record in making sure that there were efficiencies within the businesses that he ran and that’s commendable, that’s great.” That is how she quickly dismissed Cain’s record and then moved on to criticizing the others with a broad brush again. “that’s great” in a tone that sounded forced and clipped.

Then it moved into Perry and Gardasil and Palin wasted no time in labeling it “crony capitalism” and did so with enthusiasm. Very animated. Like she was eager. As if she was attacking Obama. There was no hesitation. No “I hate to say this” or “I was a bit concerned or troubled.” No, she was guns blazing like she was waiting for it and talked about “true reform” and “fighting corruption.” So I guess Perry has moved from “crony capitalism” to “corruption,” which is what Palin has meant to imply all along when she raised the subject of “crony capitalism” these past couple weeks. To paint Perry as corrupt, quid pro quo, dirty politics. With no facts that Perry ever made any decisions or appointments because of money. Or that Perry ever did anything that went against the best interests of his state or appointed unqualified people or companies. Just her innuendo. But she didn’t even act like it was simply innuendo. She acted like it was a done deal that Perry was corrupt.

Greta tried to change the subject and asked if Palin was pleased with the field up there. Palin quickly gave a throw away that she was please, but she wanted to get back to Perry.

She actually started gossiping like an old fish woman how when Perry made his executive order she thought that “there had to have been something to that whole issue” because it didn’t’ sound like something Perry would do. (Like Backmann she ignored the fact that there was an opt out. I was against the mandate and would have preferred an opt in, but it is disingenuous to ignore the opt out. Also Palin ignored that Perry said his EO was a mistake.) Then she said, “so I knew there was something to it.” SHE KNEW. So it must be true. She decided all on her own. No facts. SHE KNEW. What is this? The National Inquirer? Like the trash that has been written about Palin? Shame on her. I guess I was naive about her, but I expected better from her. And one more time she added, “I knew, even at that time, something was up with that issue and now we are finding that, yeah, something was up with that issue and it was kind of an illustration or a bit of evidence of some crony capitalism .” (and her face was disgusting when she said it.)

“Evidence?” Because she “knew” the reason why Perry did it. For the money. He actually would have young girls injected for the money. That’s worse than other business favors. Don’t you think?

Elisa on October 1, 2011 at 2:07 AM

She did?

unseen

Yes, she did. Start at about the 2:30 mark for the condensed version.

From the Iowa State Fair:

Female Reporter: “When’s a good time line?”

Palin: “I have said that that August to September time line is important for logistical and legal reasons.”

Jake Tapper(I think): “So by next month?” which would be September.

Her response?

Palin: “I think that practically speaking that would have to be it, that drop dead date. Also, in fairness to supporters who are standing on the sidelines, this is what I’ve told Todd over and over again, I don’t want to be perceived as stringing people along.”

“That’s not fair to them, you know, after another month or two goes by. They need to know who it is that they can jump behind..”

She was supposed to announce in September. Hot Air knows it, I know it, you know it, and everyone in your psych ward knows it.

xblade on October 1, 2011 at 2:22 AM

Knucklehead on October 1, 2011 at 12:56 AM

Palin appeared on FNC directly after the debate where Bachmann accused Perry of signing the EO for Gardisil b/c Merck had donated $$ to Perry’s campaign — Palin agreed with Bachmann. With NO evidence whatsoever. Palin pulled a Bachmann that night.

-Aslan’s Girl

Aslans Girl on October 1, 2011 at 2:24 AM

Perry signed the EO for money? Or because Perry’s former staffer lobbied the Governor’s office? Or because another staffer’s Mother was involved with Merck? Take your pick. I lean towards Door #2…

Gohawgs on October 1, 2011 at 2:34 AM

Palin appeared on FNC directly after the debate where Bachmann accused Perry of signing the EO for Gardisil b/c Merck had donated $$ to Perry’s campaign — Palin agreed with Bachmann. With NO evidence whatsoever. Palin pulled a Bachmann that night.

-Aslan’s Girl

Aslans Girl on October 1, 2011 at 2:24 AM

This looks like pretty good evidence to me

dforston on October 1, 2011 at 2:35 AM

Key quote…

“Chief of staff Deirdre Delisi’s calendar shows she met with the governor’s budget director and three members of his office for an HPV vaccine briefing. The meeting was on Oct. 16. That day, New Jersey-based Merck’s political action committee donated $5,000 to Perry. Merck’s PAC also gave $5,000 total to eight state lawmakers.”

dforston on October 1, 2011 at 2:36 AM

Kataklysmic on October 1, 2011 at 1:09 AM

I have never posited that Palin agreed with Bachmann on the retardation charge. I always thought it was bad enough of Palin to agree with Bachmann on the cronyism charge where there is no evidence. It was low and underhanded.
But it served Palin right that Bachmann immediately took it too far with the retardation thing because Palin was the one who tied herself to Bachmann.

-Aslan’s Girl

Aslans Girl on October 1, 2011 at 2:40 AM

I have never posited that Palin agreed with Bachmann on the retardation charge. I always thought it was bad enough of Palin to agree with Bachmann on the cronyism charge where there is no evidence. It was low and underhanded.
But it served Palin right that Bachmann immediately took it too far with the retardation thing because Palin was the one who tied herself to Bachmann.

-Aslan’s Girl

Aslans Girl on October 1, 2011 at 2:40 AM

Yeah, I know you aren’t one of the people trying to tie Palin to the Gardasil causes retardation claim. It’s no secret you’re not a fan of hers, but you don’t obsess about her the way some do and I don’t ever recall you deliberately misstating facts to smear her. As far as whether or not there is any evidence of Perry being too cozy with Merck (keep in mind I’m taking about questionable ethics, not illegality) then we are going to have to agree to disagree on that one.

Kataklysmic on October 1, 2011 at 2:49 AM

Sarah can still make my Thanksgiving doubly blessed. No hurry. The agenda is all from somebody else.

Meanwhile, Obumbler continues.

Caststeel on October 1, 2011 at 3:17 AM

This has Romney’s fingerprints all over it.

Lawdawg86 on September 30, 2011 at 8:18 PM

Here’s an urgent press release from The Establishment:

Rumors that one Mitt Romney is behind the scheduling of the FL primary are false and completely without merit. That was OUR doing. Who do you suppose pulls Mitt’s strings, hmmm? Now that we have OUR puppet in place, The Establishment will not tolerate late entries in to this race. Let this be a lesson to all those who harbor ambitions to challenge the control of The Establishment. We see all. We know all. We control all.

MJBrutus on October 1, 2011 at 5:25 AM

Don’t be so sure..
316,500 New Hampshire citizens voted for Palin

New Hampshire Rep. Sam Cataldo
http://bcove.me/cf4qrnw8

Viator on October 1, 2011 at 6:05 AM

powerpro on September 30, 2011 at 10:37 PM

Good gravy! The leaps into delusion you Palin worshipers make the craziness of the Paulnuts look almost sane.

Here you dolts are telling the rest of us what St Palin the Victimized really, really, REALLY meant to say, when rational folks only need to use a dictionary to define her words to determine her intent.

csdeven on October 1, 2011 at 7:41 AM

Turn what around?

ddrintn on October 1, 2011 at 12:12 AM

Hahahahaha!!!

It is hilarious that you Palin worshipers infested Hot Air with your ridiculous rants about how Palins propaganda movie would change the landscape and scare the rest of the candidates out of the nomination process. Now that her movie has been shown to be a disaster and only her sycophantic lunatic supporters went to see it (Exactly as I and many others predicted) you want to pretend it doesn’t matter. lol!

St Palin the Victimized must cringe every time she reads the comments of loons like you and hopes that you will eventually stop damaging her chances by being a vocal supporter.

csdeven on October 1, 2011 at 7:53 AM

Just before that it was with Hannity in the disastrous interview when she said she didn’t need a title.

Buy Danish on September 30, 2011 at 10:34 PM
Titles (and higher education pedigrees) too often are nothing more than artificial social status. Since perception is reality, it will always be in the eyes of the beholder who’s genuine and who isn’t.

But at least we have this great blog-site to argue about it, right?

listens2glenn on September 30, 2011 at 10:58 PM

You want titles? How about Harvard law School “professor” or those two Rhodes’ Scholars; Clinton (of the blue dress fame) and Cater (of the American Embassy/love our enemies fame)

I’m reminded of that bit in “The Wizard of Oz” where he hands out “titles” without any special qualifications. Sorry, after seven decades plus on this planet I’ve come to believe that titles, too often, are but mere evidence of the Peter Principle. What more proof do we need than “President Obama”as the epitome of the foolishness of title equals performance.

Don L on October 1, 2011 at 7:56 AM

csdeven on October 1, 2011 at 7:53 AM

I’m reminded of those professional atheists who spend their entire lives and energy fighting a God they insist doesn’t exist. Then they display their ignorance by assuming for themselves the highest of intelligence. I see the same thing when I read your anti-Palin rants of how weak of a candidate she is, while perpetually insisting she couldn’t possibly win.

I have to quote Shakespeare: “Methinks thou doth protest too much!”

Get over the fear-you’ll sleep better.

Don L on October 1, 2011 at 8:03 AM

Someone called unseen an anti-Palinista?

Well, that’s it folks. We’ve reached the event horizon. Stock up on gold, ammo and canned goods, we can’t be long for this world.

Good Solid B-Plus on October 1, 2011 at 8:10 AM

This whole thing got stupid a long time ago.

Nothing but a bunch of prideful egotistical arrogant people out trying to outdo other prideful egotistical arrogant people! It’s all so stupid and is just harming the primaries!

JellyToast on October 1, 2011 at 8:11 AM

Gee. Florida or New Hampshire. I wonder where they’ll campaign…

Ronnie on October 1, 2011 at 8:16 AM

Good Solid B-Plus on October 1, 2011 at 8:10 AM

That’s like calling csdeven rational.

kingsjester on October 1, 2011 at 8:19 AM

Palin has never “wanted”
to be president. She just wants to straighten out the mess
that is this country’s government and that is the path that
is open to her.
Amjean on September 30, 2011 at 11:28 PM

Oy. Before I go: I get it, she’s just like a Saint who selflessly answers a calling. I don’t think she’s particularly qualified to straighten out messes in any case.

Buy Danish on September 30, 2011 at 11:35 PM

I don’t think your postings have exhibited the intellectual
thoughtfulness required for anyone to take your Palin bashing
seriously. Your postings are mostly a joke.

Amjean on October 1, 2011 at 8:21 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5