Did Sarah Palin really say Mitt Romney is our weakest candidate?

posted at 4:50 pm on January 10, 2012 by Tina Korbe

On “Hannity” last night, Newt Gingrich responded to the news that Todd Palin had endorsed him for president — and made a point to mention that Sarah Palin has said recently that “Mitt Romney is our weakest candidate.” But did Sarah Palin really say that?

Not exactly. On the Fox News show “Justice with Judge Jeanine” Saturday, Palin said she thinks the mainstream media wants Mitt Romney to be the nominee so as to enhance Barack Obama’s chances at reelection.

Palin said the mainstream media would take a hands-off approach to Romney “in order to bolster Romney’s chances” to “finally face Obama.”

According to Palin, the mainstream media and Obama would then portray Romney as someone who is out of touch with regular Americans in the general election.

“They are already gearing up to portray him, accurately or inaccurately … as being out of touch with the working class,” Palin said, noting that Romney’s wealth and perfect family may make it easy to paint him as someone “being a bit out of touch from working and middle class Americans and from the challenges we all face.”

 

How did that become Sarah Palin saying Mitt Romney is the weakest candidate? Simple: Rush Limbaugh referenced SP’s comments in connection with remarks from NBC/MSNBC’s Donna Brazile, who did say Democrats think Romney is the GOP’s “weakest candidate.” Here’s the transcript:

RUSH: There is a story on the Drudge Report today from Sarah Palin in which Sarah Palin says that the White House wants Mitt Romney to be the Republican nominee. Now, not only did I tell you that the Broncos were gonna beat the Steelers, for months I have been telling you that the Democrats want Romney — and you all know it. You’ve been listening here and you’ve heard people call me and tell me I don’t know what I’m talking about, that I’m full of it, that they’re scared of Romney. “Romney is the only guy who can win.” And I have said, “No,” and I’ve stood tough, and I’ve said, “They can’t wait for him. What’s Occupy Wall Street all about but running against Romney? He’s the Wall Street guy on our roster — and then Romneycare,” and I’ve laid it all out. So here comes Palin, she says it, and makes news — and Donna Brazile has said it. This is post-debate coverage on ABC Saturday night. George Stephanopoulos, Democrat Party hack disguised as the debate moderator on ABC, had this discussion with Jon Karl and Donna Brazile.

BRAZILE: Mitt Romney won tonight because no one touched him — and for Democrats, you know what? It was good news for us.

KARL: Why is that?

BRAZILE: Because we believe that the weakest candidate is the candidate that the Republicans are not attackin’, and that’s Mitt Romney.

So, it was Rush who connected the dots for Newt. Rush assumes Democrats would want Republicans to nominate their weakest candidate. Sarah Palin has said she thinks Democrats want the GOP to nominate Romney (and, lo and behold, per Brazile, they actually do!). Thus, Sarah Palin must think Romney is the GOP’s weakest candidates.

But that’s not actually airtight logic. Perhaps Sarah doesn’t think Democrats would want Republicans to nominate their weakest candidate. Maybe she just thinks Democrats think Mitt is the weakest, but she herself thinks she’s strong.

So, Newt technically said Sarah said something she didn’t exactly say. At this point, though, he’ll say whatever to weaken Romney. Still, Newt’s comment didn’t come out of nowhere; Palin has given the impression she thinks Romney is a weak enough candidate to be effectively discredited as a presidential potential by the MSM.

All of that aside, the bigger issue is: Are Sarah and Rush right? Was Donna Brazile speaking truth? Do Democrats want Romney because they’re confident Obama would destroy him in the general? And, if so, would any of the other candidates stand a better chance?

Update: This post originally incorrectly identified Donna Brazile as primarily affiliated with ABC, when she is, in fact, an NBC/MSNBC contributor. The post has been corrected above.


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 2 3

Don’t throw me in that briar patch.

pedestrian on January 10, 2012 at 4:53 PM

Romney the weakest candidate says Brazille? Yeah, that’s why Barry and his minions have been attacking the guy relentlessly for months.

therightwinger on January 10, 2012 at 4:53 PM

Oh boy. Here we go.

WisRich on January 10, 2012 at 4:54 PM

But did Sarah Palin really say that?
====================================

Close enough!
(sarc).

canopfor on January 10, 2012 at 4:55 PM

On the Fox News show “Justice with Judge Jeanine” Saturday, Palin said she thinks the mainstream media wants Mitt Romney to be the nominee so as to enhance Barack Obama’s chances at reelection.

It can be inferred that Palin thinks Mitt is a weak candidate.

Newt took it further.

Mitt isn’t the weakest candidate.

portlandon on January 10, 2012 at 4:55 PM

I have a great idea. Let’s flush the toilet and start over. This time, Sarah, you have to take to the stage as well. I thought you’d be a fantastic candidate Even if you did not win, you would have driven the debate far more effectively than you are doing now. You have that effect on those around you.

This afternoon of fratricide is just to depressing to contemplate as an Obama reelection is absolutely the end of our Republic.

turfmann on January 10, 2012 at 4:56 PM

Uh, yes?

davisbr on January 10, 2012 at 4:57 PM

Second look at no longer caring?

caverduc on January 10, 2012 at 4:57 PM

Mitt isn’t the weakest candidate.

portlandon on January 10, 2012 at 4:55 PM

A few months ago, I would have bet my life that he was. However, after watching the rest of the field over the past couple of weeks, well…

Kataklysmic on January 10, 2012 at 4:57 PM

Yes she did. Paul-Palin 2012!

abobo on January 10, 2012 at 4:58 PM

Jeez. It’s like a political telephone game. “Newt told Sean who heard from Todd who said Sarah heard Donna tell Karl that she heard Rush said…”

p.s.
in b4 “politics aint beanbag”. Btw. what is beanbag?

Go RBNY on January 10, 2012 at 4:58 PM

Rush assumes Democrats would want Republicans to nominate their weakest candidate.

That’s generally a safe assumption.

squint on January 10, 2012 at 4:58 PM

Romney the weakest candidate says Brazille? Yeah, that’s why Barry and his minions have been attacking the guy relentlessly for months.

therightwinger on January 10, 2012 at 4:53 PM

You mean the transparent-haven’t-seen-it-but-you-say-it’s-there-so-it-must-be relentless attacking?

Midas on January 10, 2012 at 4:58 PM

I suppose Donna Brazile could have been speaking the truth. There’s a first time for everything.

rockmom on January 10, 2012 at 4:59 PM

Romney is the weakest candidate.

Head-to-head polls against Obama are meaningless at this point. The question is, who will stand strongest once hundreds of millions of negative ads have been thrown at a particular candidate?

Given the ammunition that exists against Romney which will hurt him among independents and the fact that millions of conservatives despise him already, he has the biggest downside by far.

Norwegian on January 10, 2012 at 4:59 PM

Not exactly. On the Fox News show “Justice with Judge Jeanine” Saturday, Palin said she thinks the mainstream media wants Mitt Romney to be the nominee so as to enhance Barack Obama’s chances at reelection.

*facepalm* C’mon Tina

Flapjackmaka on January 10, 2012 at 4:59 PM

Romney the weakest candidate says Brazille? Yeah, that’s why Barry and his minions have been attacking the guy relentlessly for months.

100% incorrect. Our formerly free press has been propping Mittens up for months while running all his opponents thru the meat grinder.

The attacks on Romney and his religion begin the day after he accepts nomination.

DeweyWins on January 10, 2012 at 4:59 PM

But that’s not actually airtight logic.

Logic yes, logic no — logic maybe, squash like grape.

Axe on January 10, 2012 at 4:59 PM

I guess Stephanopoulos didn’t get the memo.

Ronnie on January 10, 2012 at 5:00 PM

Palin is an airhead dingbat and an anti-endorsement from her is gold. Keep it coming snow queen. Perhaps your boy Newt will rise above 4th place tonight.

hanzblinx on January 10, 2012 at 5:00 PM

Democrats must be practicing some extreme reverse psychology…relentlessly smear and attack Romney because he’ll be so easy to beat…

therightwinger on January 10, 2012 at 5:00 PM

All of that aside, the bigger issue is: Are Sarah and Rush right? Was Donna Brazile speaking truth? Do Democrats want Romney because they’re confident Obama would destroy him in the general? And, if so, would any of the other candidates stand a better chance? posted at 4:50 pm on January 10, 2012 by Tina Korbe

The democrats are gonna turn this into Obama/FDR against Romney/Hoover…OWS was a dry run test.

yep.

workingclass artist on January 10, 2012 at 5:01 PM

The attacks on Romney and his religion begin the day after he accepts nomination.

DeweyWins on January 10, 2012 at 4:59 PM

I’m pretty sure obama doesn’t want to play the comparative religion game.

Ronnie on January 10, 2012 at 5:02 PM

Yes, I am sure analysts such as Donna Brazille, Roland Martin, Ed Schulz etc. are going to put transparency and honesty before a democtratic agenda. I am sure that crew honestly believes Ron Paul and Rick Perry have better odds against Obama than Romney despite polling data consistently proving otherwise.

Sorry Rush, wrong on this one.

kmalkows on January 10, 2012 at 5:02 PM

A few months ago, I would have bet my life that he was. However, after watching the rest of the field over the past couple of weeks, well…

Kataklysmic on January 10, 2012 at 4:57 PM

It’s shocking how self destructive the rest of the pack have been.

Romney may be fools Gold, but at least many of us are smart enough to know the difference between Fools Gold and Real gold.

Some of these slobbering Mitt apologists think Mitt is a genetic super hero made with Reagan & Jesus DNA.

portlandon on January 10, 2012 at 5:03 PM

I’m pretty sure obama doesn’t want to play the comparative religion game.

Ronnie on January 10, 2012 at 5:02 PM

The media does.

Flapjackmaka on January 10, 2012 at 5:03 PM

Palin is an airhead dingbat and an anti-endorsement from her is gold.
hanzblinx on January 10, 2012 at 5:00 PM

A distinct majority of her endorsement folks would say you’re full of crap there, bub.

Midas on January 10, 2012 at 5:04 PM

I’m pretty sure obama doesn’t want to play the comparative religion game.

Ronnie on January 10, 2012 at 5:02 PM

Why not, the press while cover for Obama just like in 2008.

idesign on January 10, 2012 at 5:04 PM

The media does.

Flapjackmaka on January 10, 2012 at 5:03 PM

I say bring on Rev. Wright.

Ronnie on January 10, 2012 at 5:04 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d39FBRxBM8k

IHR SEID VERFLUCHTE HUNDE!

Sound the battle horn!!!

*runs away from this battle*

Meat Fighter on January 10, 2012 at 5:04 PM

I’m pretty sure obama doesn’t want to play the comparative religion game.

Of course he does – only Mittens will be attacked.

Were have you been ?

DeweyWins on January 10, 2012 at 5:04 PM

Why not, the press while cover for Obama just like in 2008.

idesign on January 10, 2012 at 5:04 PM

A little hard to do when you’re making it about religion.

Ronnie on January 10, 2012 at 5:05 PM

Democrats must be practicing some extreme reverse psychology…relentlessly smear and attack Romney because he’ll be so easy to beat…

therightwinger on January 10, 2012 at 5:00 PM

You keep using that word; I don’t think it means what you think it means.

Relatively speaking, Dems and the media have been very kind to Mitt – for now.

Midas on January 10, 2012 at 5:05 PM

Tina is working hard today to become the next Jennifer Rubin.

besser tot als rot on January 10, 2012 at 5:06 PM

“The president has voiced support for recent protests against the financial industry and his campaign aides have said they plan to use the Occupy Wall Street movement to help build momentum for his reelection.”

two months ago

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/mf-global-ties-awkward-for-obama-campaign/2011/11/02/gIQA9w5ogM_story.html

Obama told us who he wanted to face. Doesn’t matter, Mitt can beat him.

DanMan on January 10, 2012 at 5:06 PM

Relatively speaking, Dems and the media have been very kind to Mitt – for now.

Midas on January 10, 2012 at 5:05 PM

Relative to what? Which candidate has been destroyed by the media?

Ronnie on January 10, 2012 at 5:07 PM

hanzblinx on January 10, 2012 at 5:00 PM

Why the need to show how little you know about Palin? I don’t care if you disagree with her but the name calling is shameful.

Fallon on January 10, 2012 at 5:07 PM

They’re ALL weak candidates. Even Huntsman, who would probably be the best candidate in a general election ON PAPER, couldn’t figure out how to appeal to northeastern Republicans.

They’re all weak. Which is why all the non-Mormon candidates collapsed.

Romney is no worse than the others. And like perfectly acceptable candidate John Kerry before him, he will ride the anti-incumbent wave into the White House.

YYZ on January 10, 2012 at 5:08 PM

Tina is working hard today to become the next Jennifer Rubin.

besser tot als rot on January 10, 2012 at 5:06 PM

She’s working hard to become a successful, respected journalist?

Go RBNY on January 10, 2012 at 5:08 PM

Romney the weakest candidate says Brazille? Yeah, that’s why Barry and his minions have been attacking the guy relentlessly for months.

100% incorrect. Our formerly free press has been propping Mittens up for months while running all his opponents thru the meat grinder.

The attacks on Romney and his religion begin the day after he accepts nomination.

DeweyWins on January 10, 2012 at 4:59 PM

Yep!

Newt & Perry have blown the electability prop wide open.

Anybody with an ounce of commonsense and historical perspective can see it.

Obama will run this like FDR & the nominee better have the record & the style to match his liberal populism with conservative populism because like it or not this is what this economic climate demands just like it did during the Great Depression.

Newt & Perry see that.

workingclass artist on January 10, 2012 at 5:09 PM

Who cares what Sarah Palin says? I’m patiently waiting for the coveted Levi Johnston endorsement.

JPeterman on January 10, 2012 at 5:10 PM

Tina is working hard today to become the next Jennifer Rubin.

besser tot als rot on January 10, 2012 at 5:06 PM

She’s working hard to become a successful, respected journalist?

Go RBNY on January 10, 2012 at 5:08 PM

Anyone bored, please explain this reference to me? :) I don’t get the joke.

Axe on January 10, 2012 at 5:10 PM

All of that aside, the bigger issue is: Are Sarah and Rush right? Was Donna Brazile speaking truth? Do Democrats want Romney because they’re confident Obama would destroy him in the general? And, if so, would any of the other candidates stand a better chance?

Yes, yes, yes and yes.

ddrintn on January 10, 2012 at 5:10 PM

I don’t care what Palin thinks. She has backed losers before and she will again. Her political prognosticating skills are suspect at best.

echosyst on January 10, 2012 at 5:10 PM

I am sure that crew honestly believes Ron Paul and Rick Perry have better odds against Obama than Romney despite polling data consistently proving otherwise.

Sorry Rush, wrong on this one.

kmalkows on January 10, 2012 at 5:02 PM

Ah, but the point you Romney folks continue to miss – for months now – is that blunt fact that Romney as candidate removes Obama’s LARGEST vulnerability from the debate entirely: Obamacare.

With Romney as candidate, there will be no daily grind reminding voters of how much they detest Obamacare – it simply will not be an issue. If Romney even mutters the word, he’ll be so resoundingly nuked and humiliated as a stark-raving hypocrite by every news channel and comedian, he won’t know what the hell hit him.

Romney’s the only GOP candidate who can serve this up on a platter for Obama.

And he knows it.

And Obama & Co. know it.

And the media knows it.

Midas on January 10, 2012 at 5:11 PM

It’s shocking how self destructive the rest of the pack have been.

Romney may be fools Gold, but at least many of us are smart enough to know the difference between Fools Gold and Real gold.

Some of these slobbering Mitt apologists think Mitt is a genetic super hero made with Reagan & Jesus DNA.

portlandon on January 10, 2012 at 5:03 PM

Please study up on this list of logical fallacies I have provided for you: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies

Please also pay special attention to the “straw man” (Mitt apologists think…) and the “ad hominem” (slobbering) sections:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

Your test will be your next post, portlandon. Good luck!

kmalkows on January 10, 2012 at 5:11 PM

“Swim not in the waters of the primaries, for thou art tasty and crunchy with ketchup,” said the republican votes to their candidates.

BruthaMan on January 10, 2012 at 5:11 PM

Tina is working hard today to become the next Jennifer Rubin.
besser tot als rot on January 10, 2012 at 5:06 PM

She’s working hard to become a successful, respected journalist?

Go RBNY on January 10, 2012 at 5:08 PM

Anyone bored, please explain this reference to me? :) I don’t get the joke.

Axe on January 10, 2012 at 5:10 PM

Jennifer Rubin is a pretty rabid Mittbot. I dunno about Ms Korbe there.

ddrintn on January 10, 2012 at 5:12 PM

If she think he’s weak, then she should have run. Personally, I wish she would just shutup.

rubberneck on January 10, 2012 at 5:12 PM

I don’t care what Palin thinks. She has backed losers before and she will again. Her political prognosticating skills are suspect at best.

echosyst on January 10, 2012 at 5:10 PM

… which is why a distinct majority of the folks she’s endorsed were elected to office, of course – because she’s so terribly bad at ‘prognosticating’.

Midas on January 10, 2012 at 5:12 PM

Regarding Religion, if they try to attack Mitt on his Mormonism will they do the same to Harry Reid?

sandee on January 10, 2012 at 5:13 PM

Who cares what Sarah Palin says? I’m patiently waiting for the coveted Levi Johnston endorsement.

JPeterman on January 10, 2012 at 5:10 PM

You might be on the wrong web site, try The Huffington Post….

idesign on January 10, 2012 at 5:13 PM

BruthaMan on January 10, 2012 at 5:11 PM

lol

Midas on January 10, 2012 at 5:13 PM

Obama’s reelection committee has been gearing up for Mitt for the past two years. OWS is the first visable volley, but there will be more. It doesn’t help how nicely the unforced error, “I like to fire people” soundbite fits into their plans. Is he the weakest candidate? He’s Obama’s chosen candidate. He’s the one they have done most of their opposition research on… Make of it what you will.

Fallon on January 10, 2012 at 5:13 PM

Actually, Ron Paul is the weakest GOP candidate because he basically alienates everyone except a few Jew-haters and 9/11 truthers.
Mitt is weak because most conservatives loathe him and because his opinions change as much as my religion Chicago weather. He’s like a used-car salesman. You wanna believe that he’s on the level but you can’t shake the feeling that he’s saying what’s needed only to make the sale-even if it isn’t the full truth.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 10, 2012 at 5:13 PM

Regarding Religion, if they try to attack Mitt on his Mormonism will they do the same to Harry Reid?

sandee on January 10, 2012 at 5:13 PM

Is Reid a Republican?

The answer to your question is the same as the answer to mine.

Midas on January 10, 2012 at 5:13 PM

Speaking of Sarah Palin, when is the last time in a general election the least charasmatic candidate won?

Here are my views on charisma for the last 15 elections.

Obama7-McCain4
Bush Jr7-Kerry3
Bush Jr7-Gore3
Clinton8-Dole3
Clinton8-Bush Sr4
Bush Sr4-Dukakis2
Reagan9-Mondale4
Reagan9-Carter5
Carter5-Ford4
Nixon5-McGovern3
Nixon5-Humphry4
Johnson6-Goldwater4
Kennedy9-Nixon5
Eisenhower8-Stevenson4
Eisenhower8-Stevenson4

And Obama vs. Romney???

Obama7-Romney3

Don’t think charisma is a major factor? Do tanks and surf boards ring a bell? I like Ike? Have a beer with GW. Al Bore. And nobody can deny the star appeal of Kennedy and Reagan. We live in the TV age and we want to win.

Yes Mitt is a weak candidate.

KMav on January 10, 2012 at 5:13 PM

I can’t find a video of Donna Brazille’s statement. I could have sworn when I saw it live she turned and winked at someone who groaned. Maybe not but I’d like to look at it again.

rhombus on January 10, 2012 at 5:14 PM

Wasn’t Sarah Palin the one the left really wanted to face? I guess Mitt’s the weakest only because Sarah didn’t run.

Ronnie on January 10, 2012 at 5:14 PM

Yes she did…You can spin it all you want

liberal4life on January 10, 2012 at 5:15 PM

As a supporter of Newt, I am impressed by the way these things can be manipulated.

Kind of reminds me how they took out Cain once they found a soft spot.

Newt’s been here before though and tomorrow’s another day.

Suddenly Mitt is the guy?

NOT FOR ME!

golfmann on January 10, 2012 at 5:15 PM

All you had to do is to listen to Chris Matthews after Sunday’s debate and see how the Left is scared as hell of Romney. Praise the Lord for John Sununu and his ability to put Chris and friends in their place.

Romney is a great candidate, and I think when he will beat Obama, we may see a Reaganesque type period again. Will it be 100% Conservative, well, maybe not. In order to negotiate and get what you want, you need to be flexible on the small things, in order to achieve big things.

Romney will get the Independents like no other candidate we have, and that translates a big win for the Republican Party, and bye, bye, to Obama.

mark cantu on January 10, 2012 at 5:15 PM

logical fallacies

kmalkows on January 10, 2012 at 5:11 PM

Mittbots engage in every one. Actually portlandon is off just a little bit in that analysis. Mittbots usually are and were just nasty toward any possible competition for Romney rather than doing anything to extol the guy…which can’t be done much beyond praising him for his educational and business background. Romney’s a weak candidate, and they know it.

ddrintn on January 10, 2012 at 5:16 PM

Jennifer Rubin is a pretty rabid Mittbot. I dunno about Ms Korbe there.

ddrintn on January 10, 2012 at 5:12 PM

Thank you, thank you, thank you.

Now I get to pretend I always knew :)

Axe on January 10, 2012 at 5:16 PM

Ah, but the point you Romney folks continue to miss – for months now – is that blunt fact that Romney as candidate removes Obama’s LARGEST vulnerability from the debate entirely: Obamacare.

With Romney as candidate, there will be no daily grind reminding voters of how much they detest Obamacare – it simply will not be an issue. If Romney even mutters the word, he’ll be so resoundingly nuked and humiliated as a stark-raving hypocrite by every news channel and comedian, he won’t know what the hell hit him.

Romney’s the only GOP candidate who can serve this up on a platter for Obama.

And he knows it.

And Obama & Co. know it.

And the media knows it.

Midas on January 10, 2012 at 5:11 PM

I dont know about all that. Mitt has mentioned Obamacare an awful lot in these debates and he has not been humiliated, nuked, or labeled stark raving mad. Also, the people being polled for a presidential preference already know about the Mass. health care plan, so the numbers should already reflect this — and he still has the best numbers. What say you to that??

kmalkows on January 10, 2012 at 5:16 PM

You might be on the wrong web site, try The Huffington Post….

idesign on January 10, 2012 at 5:13 PM

No, sounds about right. Only a fragmented minority such as yourself still have loony blind devotion to this woman.

You-Eh-Vee on January 10, 2012 at 5:16 PM

golfmann on January 10, 2012 at 5:15 PM

Cain’s downfall was partially Cain’s doing.
I’ll vote for Mitt if he’s the nominee-but I’d rather he not be.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 10, 2012 at 5:17 PM

The guy can barley get 25 % of the Republicans to back him even though he’s been running longer than the rest of the field. Republican voters have turned to every other conservative however briefly since this campaign began and you wonder why Mitt could be considered the weakest candidate to run against BO. HELLO!

chickasaw42 on January 10, 2012 at 5:18 PM

Can we all scratch Perry off our lists now….he’s been eliminated from CNN’s South Carolina debate.

Romney vs. Santorum now.

Deep Timber on January 10, 2012 at 5:18 PM

I realize from yesterday that Palin’s husband Todd endorsed Newt…and far as I know Sarah hasn’t backed anyone yet. Thing is, she said she would run if she thought the candidate field was weak. So in order for her to be truthful, she must have someone in mind, or she would have jumped in the race.

If she was simply bs-ing, then nothing she has to say about this race and it’s candidates means very much.

JetBoy on January 10, 2012 at 5:18 PM

Palin is an airhead dingbat and an anti-endorsement from her is gold. Keep it coming snow queen. Perhaps your boy Newt will rise above 4th place tonight.

hanzblinx on January 10, 2012 at 5:00 PM

Christine O’Donnell endorsed Mitt Romney. ‘Nuff said.

alwaysfiredup on January 10, 2012 at 5:18 PM

Yes she did…You can spin it all you want

liberal4life on January 10, 2012 at 5:15 PM

Feel free to point out where she said that. What she said was in accordnace with the left’s tactic of going after “the rich”, they’ll attempt to portray Romeny as a “1%er” … out of touch with mainstream America.

I wish the democrats good luck with that … they have a guy in the White House right now who wipes his ass with arugula.

darwin on January 10, 2012 at 5:19 PM

JetBoy on January 10, 2012 at 5:18 PM

Someone has to be the weakest candidate, JB.

alwaysfiredup on January 10, 2012 at 5:19 PM

No, sounds about right. Only a fragmented minority such as yourself still have loony blind devotion to this woman.

You-Eh-Vee on January 10, 2012 at 5:16 PM

I support Sarah Palin. I don’t let liberal popularity contests deter my support for those who care about our country.

BruthaMan on January 10, 2012 at 5:20 PM

BRAZILE: Mitt Romney won tonight because no one touched him — and for Democrats, you know what? It was good news for us.

Maybe I’ve watched “The Princess Bride” too many times, but doesn’t that sound like a line from Vizzini? Why would a staunch democrat tell us who they wanted to compete against in the general election? Could it be that she is trying to influence our choice away from Romney? Or is it that she is so confident in her candidate she feels that both glasses are poisoned and we are dead no matter who we choose?

Komsomoletz on January 10, 2012 at 5:20 PM

Who cares what Sarah Palin says? I’m patiently waiting for the coveted Levi Johnston endorsement.

JPeterman on January 10, 2012 at 5:10 PM

You mnean there’s ytet another one who cares so little what Sarah Palin says that they have to click on a Palin story to tell us how little they care what Palin says?

ddrintn on January 10, 2012 at 5:20 PM

Deep Timber on January 10, 2012 at 5:18 PM

If Perry’s out…then I dunno. I don’t like ANY of the rest.
Santorum is a religious statist and Mitt was the author of Masscare.
* Bobby Jindal, please pick up the red phone…NOW!*

annoyinglittletwerp on January 10, 2012 at 5:21 PM

Feel free to point out where she said that. What she said was in accordnace with the left’s tactic of going after “the rich”, they’ll attempt to portray Romeny as a

“1%er” … out of touch with mainstream America.

I wish the democrats good luck with that … they have a guy in the White House right now who wipes his ass with arugula.

darwin on January 10, 2012 at 5:19 PM

Well that is a true statement..

Romney is a 1% er and he is out of touch with middle class.

Romney has NEVER been a middle class. He was born with a silver spoon in his mouth!

liberal4life on January 10, 2012 at 5:21 PM

Can we all scratch Perry off our lists now….he’s been eliminated from CNN’s South Carolina debate.

Deep Timber on January 10, 2012 at 5:18 PM

Oh damn.

Kataklysmic on January 10, 2012 at 5:21 PM

Where is Romney in defending himself? I was joking about the poll testing thing but…..

Flapjackmaka on January 10, 2012 at 5:22 PM

Oh damn.

Kataklysmic on January 10, 2012 at 5:21 PM

Gingrich is the last bulwark against Romney.

alwaysfiredup on January 10, 2012 at 5:23 PM

No, sounds about right. Only a fragmented minority such as yourself still have loony blind devotion to this woman.

You-Eh-Vee on January 10, 2012 at 5:16 PM

We don’t have “blind devotion”. You just have “blind hatred”. Projection.

ddrintn on January 10, 2012 at 5:23 PM

No, sounds about right. Only a fragmented minority such as yourself still have loony blind devotion to this woman.

You-Eh-Vee on January 10, 2012 at 5:16 PM

That’s why HotAir has a Palin story on a daily basis…LOL

Idiot!

idesign on January 10, 2012 at 5:23 PM

You mean there’s yet another one who cares so little what Sarah Palin says that they have to click on a Palin story to tell us how little they care what Palin says?

ddrintn on January 10, 2012 at 5:20 PM

lol … what would really surprise me is if that happened even one more time!

Axe on January 10, 2012 at 5:23 PM

Yeah, that’s why the dems have been attempting to destroy Romney for months, and sat back and laughed as Newt destroyed himself, hoping he waited until after he got the nomination to do it.

1punchWill on January 10, 2012 at 5:23 PM

liberal4life on January 10, 2012 at 5:21 PM

Ann Richards-is that you?
Aren’t you dead?
I don’t begrudge someone for being rich. Rich people pay taxes and start businesses that hire people. I wish this country had MORE rich citizens.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 10, 2012 at 5:24 PM

Tina Korbe,
Snarky Attitude towards Sarah Palin Check
Shilling for Mitt Romney Check

Tina Korbe are you superficial, an elitist, or just not conservative, or have you bought into the lie that Romney is most electable?

Tina Korbe, my guess is superficial. Most of Romney’s supporters are superficial and don’t give a crap about substance or conservative principles. Though some have bought lie.

CoolChange80 on January 10, 2012 at 5:24 PM

Mittbots engage in every one. Actually portlandon is off just a little bit in that analysis. Mittbots usually are and were just nasty toward any possible competition for Romney rather than doing anything to extol the guy…which can’t be done much beyond praising him for his educational and business background. Romney’s a weak candidate, and they know it.

ddrintn on January 10, 2012 at 5:16 PM

Please see: Fallacy of composition – assuming that something true of part of a whole must also be true of the whole.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_composition

I support Romney and do not engage in fallacies. I have also extolled his virtues in many posts and have seen others do the same.

Good luck on your next post ddrintn

kmalkows on January 10, 2012 at 5:24 PM

Well that is a true statement..

Romney is a 1% er and he is out of touch with middle class.

Romney has NEVER been a middle class. He was born with a silver spoon in his mouth!

liberal4life on January 10, 2012 at 5:21 PM

And Obama’s never had a job outside of politics. Mr. Arugula would do well to remember that.

darwin on January 10, 2012 at 5:24 PM

Yes she did. Paul-Palin 2012!

abobo on January 10, 2012 at 4:58 PM

You’re joking right? Ron Paul can’t stand Palin…

Redford on January 10, 2012 at 5:24 PM

Nothing new about inaccurate reporting when it comes to Palin.
I make it a practice to go back and listen to the actual audio
or video before I believe anything said about her.

Thanks for the clarification tho.

Amjean on January 10, 2012 at 5:24 PM

How can Romney connect with the tea party? isn’t most of the tea party middle class hard working Americans? When was the last time Romney was a middle class? NEVER!

liberal4life on January 10, 2012 at 5:24 PM

I support Sarah Palin. I don’t let liberal popularity contests deter my support for those who care about our country.

BruthaMan on January 10, 2012 at 5:20 PM

Ooof!

ddrintn on January 10, 2012 at 5:24 PM

Cain’s downfall was partially Cain’s doing.
I’ll vote for Mitt if he’s the nominee-but I’d rather he not be.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 10, 2012 at 5:17 PM

I agree.

`Just think it’s all morphed from just the MSM feeding fests to now, across the board poundings.

Not sure if that is surrogates in the cloud or what, but it couldn’t be much more coordinated without a baton…

golfmann on January 10, 2012 at 5:25 PM

How can Romney connect with the tea party? isn’t most of the tea party middle class hard working Americans? When was the last time Romney was a middle class? NEVER!

liberal4life on January 10, 2012 at 5:24 PM

When was Obama middle class? Who paid for his education?

darwin on January 10, 2012 at 5:26 PM

Yep; Mitt is the weakest candidate… that why he lost Iowa, and is losing NH…

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on January 10, 2012 at 5:26 PM

And Obama’s never had a job outside of politics. Mr. Arugula would do well to remember that.

darwin on January 10, 2012 at 5:24 PM

Obama lived a middle class life with Michelle Obama in a 1 bedroom apartment in the south-side of Chicago. Romney has lived in mansions his whole life. This is not an argument your side can win.

liberal4life on January 10, 2012 at 5:26 PM

Mittbots engage in every one. Actually portlandon is off just a little bit in that analysis. Mittbots usually are and were just nasty toward any possible competition for Romney rather than doing anything to extol the guy…which can’t be done much beyond praising him for his educational and business background. Romney’s a weak candidate, and they know it.

ddrintn on January 10, 2012 at 5:16 PM

Libs ran a guy win zero record and won. Oh, he has a record now and it sucks. Romney is far more impressive than Obama. At least he did actual management and governing, unlike Obama who voted present or campaigned for his next job. Don’t give me an BS about Romney having a weak record.

rubberneck on January 10, 2012 at 5:27 PM

Please see: Fallacy of composition – assuming that something true of part of a whole must also be true of the whole.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_composition

I support Romney and do not engage in fallacies. I have also extolled his virtues in many posts and have seen others do the same.

Good luck on your next post ddrintn

kmalkows on January 10, 2012 at 5:24 PM

Maybe you could throw in there the “fallacy of over-literalism so as to appear to be a whiz at logic.”

Good luck to you, too.

ddrintn on January 10, 2012 at 5:27 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3