Palin on a brokered convention: “I would do whatever I could to help”

posted at 1:25 pm on February 16, 2012 by Allahpundit

Quote: “I cannot predict what will happen in the future, but I know that I have got the fire in my belly to try to help, to try to make a difference. And if that involves running for public office at some point in the future, I’m game for that.” Now all that’s standing between us and the greatest blog story ever is Jeb idly wondering aloud in front of reporters whether the Bush brand might be in better shape these days than everyone thinks. Oh, and I guess we’d need a Gingrich comeback to happen at some point too to make sure the delegates split three ways. Don’t sweat the details, though. Dude, this is happening.

Well … no, it probably isn’t. And even if it did, wonders WaPo, would Palin stand a chance?

One, her clout is dubious. Her popularity peaked long ago, and the supporters she does have won’t necessarily follow her lead. When Palin praised former House speaker Newt Gingrich on her Facebook page, many of her fans balked. While Palin can amplify tea party concerns, she doesn’t speak for or carry that group.

Two, she isn’t what people are loooking for. The names that come up when talk of a brokered convention surfaces — as either candidates or potential dealmakers — are relatively moderate politicians with broad support: former Florida governor Jeb Bush, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels. A polarizing figure like Palin is hardly in the mix.

Fair enough, but go read Ben Domenech’s post posing the provocative question of who Republicans should support if they become convinced that Obama’s going to win in November regardless. I argued the other day that if we get to a brokered convention, the eventual nominee will be so weakened by party chaos that delegates will break for the most electable option simply to give the GOP a fighting chance against The One. But maybe that’s wrong. If the economy starts to hum and O jumps out to a big lead, the calculus for some party powerbrokers might shift towards choosing a sacrificial lamb as his opponent. If they opt for a tea partier and Obama goes on to win, then they can scapegoat the movement as being “too extreme” and unelectable. If they stick with Romney and Obama beats him, then they’ll have the same problem they had after 2008 but only more so — a conservative base convinced that it’s the RINO establishment that’s unelectable and that the party needs to move further right. Palin’s too savvy to offer herself up as a sacrificial lamb if the race looks like a lost cause, but maybe some other conservative isn’t: This would, after all, be a shot at the presidency, albeit a long shot. I wonder what grassroots righties would do in that case. Would you want a conservative candidate to emerge from the brokered convention, even if it appeared likely he/she would lose, or would the calculus shift to supporting Romney and letting him be thrown to the wolves? So much heart-ache in the fact that we’re even thinking about this.



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 4 5 6

So, you’re a monarchist, not a conservative? Thanks for clearing that up.

ghostwriter on February 16, 2012 at 9:51 PM

God you’re dense..:)

idesign on February 16, 2012 at 9:53 PM

idesign don’t you know you are the crazy one, ghostwriter just said so.

jainphx on February 16, 2012 at 9:54 PM

Sounds great. Will she serve out her term in its entirety if she’s elected?

ghostwriter on February 16, 2012 at 9:29 PM

Yes, unless of course the laws are changed and the President of the United States has to personally pay to defend herself on any lawsuits filed against her while in office.

I take it ghostwriter, that’s the way you’d like it.

WisRich on February 16, 2012 at 9:55 PM

rest my case Ghostwriter the genius just proved my point. Slam, slam, insane slam.

jainphx on February 16, 2012 at 9:52 PM

Very nice. I respectfully asked you two legitimate questions, and you responded with childish insults–the hallmark of the intellectually bankrupt.

ghostwriter on February 16, 2012 at 9:57 PM

Yes, I saw it. It was blonde bimbo’s attempt to get the attention off of Palin when she was discussing politics. Bimbo has never had one good thing to say about Palin, in fact has been very nasty at times. She could care less about Trig Palin. Watch the video
again. It is not difficult to analyze her true intentions.

Amjean on February 16, 2012 at 3:46 PM

I know exactly what you mean and expected the big frost. But at that particular sequence, I was hoping, quite charitably I might add, that maybe there was the beginning of a thaw. But if you’re not seeing it, I defer to your intuition. ;)

The thot did cross my mind that this would have been a golden opportunity for Billbo to do the body language segment on each of the 5. But we know that won’t happen and that’s a shame.

AH_C on February 16, 2012 at 9:59 PM

Yes, unless of course the laws are changed and the President of the United States has to personally pay to defend herself on any lawsuits filed against her while in office.

I take it ghostwriter, that’s the way you’d like it.

WisRich on February 16, 2012 at 9:55 PM

What would her excuse be if she was elected?

ghostwriter on February 16, 2012 at 10:00 PM

God you’re dense..:)

idesign on February 16, 2012 at 9:53 PM

I’m not God, you imbecile.

ghostwriter on February 16, 2012 at 10:01 PM

I’m not God, you imbecile.

ghostwriter on February 16, 2012 at 10:01 PM

Do you take everything literlly? LOL

idesign on February 16, 2012 at 10:04 PM

Kataklysmic on February 16, 2012 at 6:19 PM

V7_Sport on February 16, 2012 at 6:38 PM

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/politics/palin_tracker/

Bmore on February 16, 2012 at 10:05 PM

I’m not God, you imbecile.

ghostwriter on February 16, 2012 at 10:01 PM

Thought you were a friendly ghost, guess not.

Bmore on February 16, 2012 at 10:06 PM

What would her excuse be if she was elected?

ghostwriter on February 16, 2012 at 10:00 PM

??

WisRich on February 16, 2012 at 10:10 PM

I’m not God, you imbecile.

ghostwriter on February 16, 2012 at 10:01 PM

Do you take everything literlly? LOL

idesign on February 16, 2012 at 10:04 PM

I would point out the irony of your last post, but I’m pretty sure that it would be lost on you. Since I don’t see much upside for me in winning an argument with a nitwit, I’m moving on to other things. Good night.

ghostwriter on February 16, 2012 at 10:11 PM

You actually believe that she created this wave, don’t you? It had nothing to do with the fact that this country elected a marxist.. the one that we seem intent on re-electing.

V7_Sport on February 16, 2012 at 6:07 PM

simple question. what happened to the wave. We still have a marxist in the WH yet there is no wave building for the 2012 election. why is that? since the results of 2010 came in the gop establishment has down eveything it its power to blunt they wave, they have tried to push Palin off the stage starting with the crap about COd costing us the senate when we needed a perfect storm to win back the senate. even if COd would have won the senate wouold still be in dem hands, they pushed up the primaries, they got people booted off the Va ballot, they have downplayed everything the TEA party stood for, they even accused Palin of Blood libel to make sure the voices on the right that fueld the wave were silenced. while doing that the establishment tried and succeeded in co-opting many of the TEa party elected officals like Nikki Haley, West, Elmers etc. then they used their media sources like Fox news and the “conservative” pundits to further attack its leaders and its views.

But there first order of business was trashing Palin then and only then did they go after the rest of the Tea party. Palin was a big leader if not the leader of that wave. Since she has been off the stage over the last year the wave as disappeared. You figure it out.

unseen on February 16, 2012 at 10:12 PM

I would point out the irony of your last post, but I’m pretty sure that it would be lost on you. Since I don’t see much upside for me in winning an argument with a nitwit, I’m moving on to other things. Good night.

ghostwriter on February 16, 2012 at 10:11 PM

Bye..:)

idesign on February 16, 2012 at 10:14 PM

ghostwriter on February 16, 2012 at 10:11 PM

Don’t leave mad.

Bmore on February 16, 2012 at 10:17 PM

WisRich on February 16, 2012 at 10:10 PM

Look, like I said before, I wanted to like her too. However, it didn’t work out. She seems way too whiny and way too full of excuses to be president. I understand that the lawsuits were unfair–most of the crap that was thrown at her was totally unfair–but if she was up to the job, she would have found a way to weather the storm. Bush didn’t quit, when they were all piling on him. He fought on with a smile on his face, and never complained about the unfair treatment that he got. The president of the United States is not a victim.

ghostwriter on February 16, 2012 at 10:19 PM

unseen===== So very well said, and right over the target.

The base has to come to grips with the agenda of the “establishment” R’s. They are no better than the left. they have to “destroy” the tea party and conservatives to stay in power. The house under the leadership of Boehner, is trying to kill any momentum of the tea partyers, and why the masses of the base can’t see that is puzzling. Romney would go along way toward killing the tea party movement, and blunt the conservative emergence.

jainphx on February 16, 2012 at 10:26 PM

So you admit she accepted the VP nomination soley to advance her career. Her strict conservative ethics and moral values weren’t an issue for her then. A RINO was perfectly fine then but not now…unless of course they invite her on the ticket. Sarah is all about Sarah.

Buttercup on February 16, 2012 at 4:32 PM

Sometimes you have to ride a weak horse to get where you want to go which beats walking there.

AH_C on February 16, 2012 at 10:35 PM

unseen

since the results of 2010 came in the gop establishment has down eveything it its power to blunt they wave, they have tried to push Palin off the stage starting with the crap about COd costing us the senate when we needed a perfect storm to win back the senate.

Where is this GOP establishment? How do I get there?

even if COd would have won the senate wouold still be in dem hands,

Had Joe Miller, Sharon Angle and Christine O’Donnell actually won their seats the Senate would have been tied.

they pushed up the primaries, they got people booted off the Va ballot, they have downplayed everything the TEA party stood for, they even accused Palin of Blood libel to make sure the voices on the right that fueld the wave were silenced.

You sound like Alex Jones. Sorry, that just isn’t reality.

V7_Sport on February 16, 2012 at 10:37 PM

Sarah Palin will lead this nation back. She is alive and well.
Palin-sanity

CoolChange80 on February 16, 2012 at 10:40 PM

Well then back Santorum. He has better numbers than the plummeting Romney. Or is it a “better hair” contest now?

ddrintn on February 16, 2012 at 8:18 PM

No he doesn’t. He REALLY REALLY doesn’t.

In order to be a conservative you need to have 3 legs to the stool: Fiscal, Social and defense. Santorum is only a social conservative. Worse, he’s a big government social con.

V7_Sport on February 16, 2012 at 10:42 PM

In order to be a conservative you need to have 3 legs to the stool: Fiscal, Social and defense. Santorum is only a social conservative. Worse, he’s a big government social con.

V7_Sport on February 16, 2012 at 10:42 PM

How is he not strong on defense?

ghostwriter on February 16, 2012 at 10:48 PM

Sharon Angel was back stabbed by the establishment that some can’t see. She was 4 points up in the polls on election morning. Then a mysterious power outage took place, and not a word from the R’s in complaint. O’Donnell received the most independent votes, enough to win, but the funny thing was the Republicans didn’t vote for her, they voted the DemocRAT, why was that? Were they following “Rove” I think so.

jainphx on February 16, 2012 at 10:55 PM

In order to be a conservative you need to have 3 legs to the stool: Fiscal, Social and defense. Santorum is only a social conservative. Worse, he’s a big government social con.

V7_Sport on February 16, 2012 at 10:42 PM

Boy, Mittens’ feet must hurt from standing all the time.

NoLeftTurn on February 16, 2012 at 10:57 PM

But there first order of business was trashing Palin then and only then did they go after the rest of the Tea party. Palin was a big leader if not the leader of that wave. Since she has been off the stage over the last year the wave as disappeared. You figure it out.

unseen on February 16, 2012 at 10:12 PM

Even if you’re right about all of this, there is nothing to suggest that Palin was capable of leading this movement by becoming the president any time in the near future. She has to do a lot of work to rehabilitate her image after resigning from her last elected position.

Even so, what has changed in Palin’s role since the elections of 2010? Since was on the sidelines sniping in 2009 -2010, and she is still sniping on the sidelines. Are you telling me that conservatives have resigned themselves (no pun intended) to having a Marxist in the WH, because Sarah didn’t run? Really??

ghostwriter on February 16, 2012 at 10:59 PM

Boy, Mittens’ feet must hurt from standing all the time.

NoLeftTurn on February 16, 2012 at 10:57 PM

lol!

ghostwriter on February 16, 2012 at 11:00 PM

But if Palin thinks she can jump in so late and steal the GOP nomination without having to earn it, she’s mistaken. I am a huge SP fan but I will not let her bypass the system for personal reasons and expect to carry my vote and support. Not going to happen, Sarah. You had your opportunity to be on top of the ticket and run months ago and passed. You have not earned the opportunity to be a Presidential candidate and therefore the idea of a brokered convention and throwing your name in hat without having to campaign for GOP votes is unwarranted.

Deep Timber on February 16, 2012 at 5:23 PM

What kind of crap is that? The method for selecting nominees have been evolving since the founding of this nation. Even just 50 years ago, this was being done by insiders in smoke-filled rooms. Is the current method the best way? Not by a long shot, especially when 1/3 of the final delegates won’t even be won until the last two weeks of the primaries. Is it fair for TX and Cali to have the primaries sewn up before they even get a chance?

Look at it another way. The only way a brokered convention happens is if none of the current 4 can get the 1145 delegates on their own.

We almost had something like that in 08, but Schmuckabee folded and passed his delegates off to McVain in order to deny Mittness.

If none of these 4 refuse to fold, then the only remedy is the convention. No matter what happens, I do not want Paul, Rick or Newt to fold and bargain with Romney. Especially when the majority of the GOP are conservatives. At the same time, we see that no one in the current crop excites the base.

The way I understand/see it, the jacuzzi club are running scared. Of the “super delegates”, there are 600 odd members that rode in on and/or side with the TP/conservatives. Does anyone really think that they will just toe the party line? The brokering will be like a caucus of sorts. Assuming Mittness can’t get enough votes to win, the focus will shift to the best conservative that the conservative delegates can put forward. Chances are slim that Newt or Santorum will get it (rational being if they couldn’t get it in the primaries, how could they get in the convention), thus they look out for someone else that a majority can agree on and that the invitee accepts.

In light of the possible outcomes in the delegate tally and their intensity for Party over principle or vice versa, are you saying you would be against Gov Walker, West, Jindal, Martinez or any other conservative favorite is picked? Because they didn’t “earn” it? Get real, the “earning” that any of the candidates did was basically on your dime(s) to their campaign. Well excepting Mittness who put millions of his own fortune into it.

Using your metric, I would find it quite insulting that anyone could think that they could just buy their way to an election. I want them to earn my respect/approval, not just buy it.

‘Nuff said. My overriding priority, more than Oboobi, is to purge the progressive rot out of the GOP jacuzzi club. If it doesn’t work this year, then the GOP is dead to me and I’m pretty confident that millions feel the way I do. Because up until now, it is that club that aided and abetted the progressive decline of all that made America exceptionally great. That includes our Christian socialist, Dubya — great CINC, weak on the domestic front.

AH_C on February 16, 2012 at 11:03 PM

ghostwriter====I may have misjudged you, but the jury is still out.

Over the years the person that the left feared the most, received the most attention. Palin has been in their sights since the election of 08. 26,000 e-mails etc. But the fact that those on our side chose to side with the slanderous left, is a crime. Just once stop with the Palin bashing, she didn’t and doesn’t deserve it.

jainphx on February 16, 2012 at 11:07 PM

Look, like I said before, I wanted to like her too. However, it didn’t work out. She seems way too whiny and way too full of excuses to be president. I understand that the lawsuits were unfair–most of the crap that was thrown at her was totally unfair–but if she was up to the job, she would have found a way to weather the storm. Bush didn’t quit, when they were all piling on him. He fought on with a smile on his face, and never complained about the unfair treatment that he got. The president of the United States is not a victim.

ghostwriter on February 16, 2012 at 10:19 PM

Name ANY Governor that endured what she did? That would be comparing apples to apples. FWIW, she didn’t quit because of the sliming and harassment, she quit because of the personal financial cost.

As for Dubya, being POTUS enabled him to endure the slings. The donks slimed him and everything else, but they couldn’t touch, let alone deplete his personal finances. Sarah as POTUS would have the same protections.

AH_C on February 16, 2012 at 11:12 PM

lol!

ghostwriter on February 16, 2012 at 11:00 PM

See aren’t you glad you didn’t leave mad. Doesn’t that feel a lot better? : )

Bmore on February 16, 2012 at 11:14 PM

Sometimes you have to ride a weak horse to get where you want to go which beats walking there get it across the finish line.

AH_C on February 16, 2012 at 10:35 PM

McLame sure as heck wasn’t going to get there on his own.

alwaysfiredup on February 16, 2012 at 11:15 PM

It’s interesting that the PDSers ALWAYS bring up the same tired unimportant nonsense when Palin is mentioned. I guess that’s all they have because they certainly can’t fault her on her positions like they can Romney, Santorum, Gingrich and especially Obama. Tells you something.

And that is: It’s all phony nonsense designed to divert the discussion from her many accomplishments and virtues.

She is the only “clean” candidate and she is a reformer and the powers that be on both sides of the aisle are trying to do everything they can to prevent her from becoming president cause if she does it’s game over for them.

So let’s ignore the trolls, shall we? Let’s discuss the policies that will help to turn the country around and what we could do to help make that happen. Is there anyone who has better conservative bonifides than Palin?

shmendrick on February 16, 2012 at 11:17 PM

The wacko’s seem to get more deranged with each Palin thread…LOL

idesign on February 16, 2012 at 3:49 PM

It’s getting harder to wade through it. At some point we won’t.

wi farmgirl on February 16, 2012 at 11:20 PM

…FWIW, she didn’t quit because of the sliming and harassment, she quit because of the personal financial cost.

Bullshit. She could have set up a legal defense fund, and the money would have rolled in.

And Dubya endured the slings, because he had the character and fortitude. Lesser men than him were broken in that office (Nixon and Johnson come to mind).

I can’t think of a person less qualified to be president (aside form Obama) than Palin. What exactly are her accomplishments? What makes you think that she could actually do that job.

ghostwriter on February 16, 2012 at 11:21 PM

She seems way too whiny and way too full of excuses to be president.

Sarah Palin takes responsibility for mistakes on a level unheardof in our political culture.

I understand that the lawsuits were unfair–most of the crap that was thrown at her was totally unfair–but if she was up to the job, she would have found a way to weather the storm.

Like Cain? Like Gingrich? Like Perry? It’s impossible to combat that level of deliberate misinformation when her own party not only wouldn’t defend her but got in on the cheap shots.

Bush didn’t quit, when they were all piling on him. He fought on with a smile on his face, and never complained about the unfair treatment that he got.

He should have pushed back. People wouldn’t think Republicans quite the incarnation of true evil if he had.

The president of the United States is not a victim.

ghostwriter on February 16, 2012 at 10:19 PM

There’s a difference between “playing a victim” and standing up to flat-out deliberate lies. Nothing that was being said about her was true. People still believe she thinks the world is 6000 years old (false), she was a social-issues crusader as AK governor (false), she doesn’t know Africa is a continent (still can’t believe people fall for that one) and said she can see Russia from her house.

If people can’t get the most basic facts and positions right, she has every right to insist on accuracy.

alwaysfiredup on February 16, 2012 at 11:22 PM

She could have set up a legal defense fund, and the money would have rolled in.

ghostwriter on February 16, 2012 at 11:21 PM

She did. The Alaska ethics commission decided it was a violation of the ethics law for her to have it.

alwaysfiredup on February 16, 2012 at 11:23 PM

Palin was a big leader if not the leader of that wave. Since she has been off the stage over the last year the wave as disappeared. You figure it out.

unseen on February 16, 2012 at 10:12 PM

Well bet it killed them to see her get all those standing O’s at cpac. The people that packed the rally’s during the last election are just waiting to have someone to cheer for and support in all ways. Just waiting…

wi farmgirl on February 16, 2012 at 11:24 PM

And that is: It’s all phony nonsense designed to divert the discussion from her many accomplishments and virtues.

I’ll stipulate to her virtues. Name these accomplishments that you say that she has. I would appreciate any links that you might supply.

ghostwriter on February 16, 2012 at 11:24 PM

I can’t think of a person less qualified to be president (aside form Obama) than Palin. What exactly are her accomplishments? What makes you think that she could actually do that job.

ghostwriter on February 16, 2012 at 11:21 PM

She ran her state very well for two years and her city very well for six before that, and served on a statewide Oil and Gas commission before that. What have you done?

alwaysfiredup on February 16, 2012 at 11:24 PM

Name these accomplishments that you say that she has. I would appreciate any links that you might supply.

ghostwriter on February 16, 2012 at 11:24 PM

Watch The Undefeated. Make an effort to be informed.

alwaysfiredup on February 16, 2012 at 11:25 PM

ghostwriter on February 16, 2012 at 11:21 PM

If it was between Palin and Obama, would you vote for Obama?

idesign on February 16, 2012 at 11:25 PM

I’ll stipulate to her virtues. Name these accomplishments that you say that she has. I would appreciate any links that you might supply.

ghostwriter on February 16, 2012 at 11:24 PM

Sarah Palin’s accomplishments as Governor.

http://sirdent.hubpages.com/hub/Sarah-Palins-Accomplishments

idesign on February 16, 2012 at 11:35 PM

Sarah Palin takes responsibility for mistakes on a level unheardof in our political culture.

What are you? Her publicist? Please spare me the spin.

Like Cain? Like Gingrich? Like Perry? It’s impossible to combat that level of deliberate misinformation when her own party not only wouldn’t defend her but got in on the cheap shots.

Let me see it was “misinformation that took down: Cain– a pizza magnate, who didn’t know that we were engaged in hostilities Libya; Perry–a guy that scolded his would-be constituents for being heartless; and Gingrich–a politician with a 17-year record of being profoundly unpopular. It isn’t a cheap shot to point out the truth about somebody’s record. (Although I don’t know why we’re talking about these guys…)

There’s a difference between “playing a victim” and standing up to flat-out deliberate lies. Nothing that was being said about her was true. People still believe she thinks the world is 6000 years old (false), she was a social-issues crusader as AK governor (false), she doesn’t know Africa is a continent (still can’t believe people fall for that one) and said she can see Russia from her house.

If people can’t get the most basic facts and positions right, she has every right to insist on accuracy.

I agree that she has the right to set the record straight, when attacked. However, she often handled it poorly, complaining about double standards and such. A big part of being president is finding a way around those kinds of obstacles to connect with the public.

ghostwriter on February 16, 2012 at 11:37 PM

Why bother to argue with some close minded jerk who obviously doesn’t want/can’t cay anything positive about Palin? Quite likely they’re paid not to. So it’s pointless. He/she/it doesn’t matter. What matters is that Sarah has now opened up the possibility that she may run after all.

You can see from the reception she received at CPAC that she was by far the most popular “candidate” there. Why? For, among other reasons, she speaks not to her audiences, she speaks FOR them, and they love it/her for it. Americans are starving for someone to speak for them and Sarah is better at it than anyone else. She’s not afraid to “tell it like it is” and she doesn’t need a teleprompter to do it. She would eviscerate Obama in a debate and I think he knows it.

BTW She was an excellent governor and when the left couldn’t wait to scour her emails for something they could use, all you heard were crickets. That’s because what they found was that she was an excellent governor which was not what they were looking for.

So who cares about these gnat like nay sayers are saying. Lets move on to more substantive issues, like whether O will attack Iran and try to use the old FDR ruse about not changing horses in mid stream.

shmendrick on February 16, 2012 at 11:42 PM

If it was between Palin and Obama, would you vote for Obama?

idesign on February 16, 2012 at 11:25 PM

No, of course I wouldn’t vote for Obama, but I think that she would probably lose the election. And I don’t think that she would be a good president.

ghostwriter on February 16, 2012 at 11:42 PM

Watch The Undefeated. Make an effort to be informed.

alwaysfiredup on February 16, 2012 at 11:25 PM

So, you don’t know either, huh?

ghostwriter on February 16, 2012 at 11:44 PM

So, you don’t know either, huh?

ghostwriter on February 16, 2012 at 11:44 PM

Hey Sparky, I gave you link. Use it.

idesign on February 16, 2012 at 11:48 PM

Well, well, mr negativity has nothing positive to say. Surprise, surprise. Nothing contributed here, time to move on.

Gee the cudo’s keep coming in for Sarah. She was great on the 5 show on Fox. Even old Bob Beckel and Dana Perino had to be gracious. Probably harder for Dana than Beckel.

Makes me wonder about my favorite vp candidate, Allen West. Haven’t heard much from/about him lately. Any news I missed?

shmendrick on February 16, 2012 at 11:50 PM

Sarah Palin’s accomplishments as Governor.

http://sirdent.hubpages.com/hub/Sarah-Palins-Accomplishments

idesign on February 16, 2012 at 11:35 PM

Those are some nice accomplishments–a couple of nice pieces of energy legislation, a couple of executive orders, and firing the chef. It hardly seems to be sufficient preparation for being POTUS. Running the executive branch is a very big job.

Based on what I saw from her in 2008, she wasn’t ready to be POTUS: She couldn’t handle defending conservatism from a lightweight like Katie Couric, and she couldn’t give a straight answer in the VP debate, without trying to twist the subject back to energy issues. Those are the facts, like them or not.

Has she changed since then? I don’t know. Maybe. She had a lot of studying to do, and she may have done it. The primary process could have helped folks determine if she was up to the job of being our nominee, but she opted not to run. A solitary speech at the convention won’t be enough to dispel all the doubts about her.

ghostwriter on February 16, 2012 at 11:59 PM

Where is this GOP establishment? How do I get there?

seriously? you are going to use that old tired opening move? The establishment is those in power and who wish to remain in power by hook or crook. they would be the big money men like Alies, the power brokers like McConell and the Speaker, the Bush family, Mitt and his millions, they control the appratus of the Gop party because they control the money and the levers of power. It will also by the RNSC, RNCC who decide whom they will fund and whom they will force from running in congressional and senate races.

Had Joe Miller, Sharon Angle and Christine O’Donnell actually won their seats the Senate would have been tied.
V7_Sport on February 16, 2012 at 10:37 PM

Which means the dems would still own the senate since biden would be the deciding factor. And Murkowski votes with the gop so Miller had nothing to do with it. Angle was not endorsed by Palin in the primaries. Co senate lost, Ca senate seat, NY senate seat lost, CT seat lost all with RINOS running there is no difference between CA and CO losing their elections and Angle and COD. the establishment lost more seats than the TEA party in the seante elections but we don’t hear about those losses. the bold fact is the establishment knew there was no way the numbers added up for them to retake the senate. They instead decided to form a “talking point” to discredit the TEA party and like the sucker you are you took the bait. Do you understand you and people like you enable these politicans to lie and hoodwink the American people. Please study or do something because your ignorance is the reason the country is going down the drain.

unseen on February 16, 2012 at 11:59 PM

Why bother to argue with some close minded jerk who obviously doesn’t want/can’t cay anything positive about Palin?

shmendrick on February 16, 2012 at 11:42 PM

That is the precise point where I stopped reading your drivel. Why should I bother arguing with a close-minded jerk who obviously can’t have an intelligent discussion without resorting to childish name-calling?

ghostwriter on February 17, 2012 at 12:00 AM

She could have set up a legal defense fund, and the money would have rolled in.
ghostwriter on February 16, 2012 at 11:21 PM
She did. The Alaska ethics commission decided it was a violation of the ethics law for her to have it.
alwaysfiredup on February 16, 2012 at 11:23 PM

LOL.

We need better-informed PDSers- or at least some that can use Google…

cs89 on February 17, 2012 at 12:04 AM

LOL.

We need better-informed PDSers- or at least some that can use Google…

cs89 on February 17, 2012 at 12:04 AM

they really are mind numbed zombies spewing out the media talking points. the real funny thing is they think they are smart and we are the hillbillies. Most of these people believe xrap that a normal person would neve rbelieve. Only the deranged would belive crap like the gop can’t do anything in Dc because they “only” control the house. or that Palin should have stayed gov and gone bankrupt. idiots the whole bunch of them. They should turn off fox and pick up a book. they have no idea how to think critcally or put A + B together to get to C.

They would be the ones on top of the roofs yelling for help when the crisis hits.

unseen on February 17, 2012 at 12:10 AM

We need better-informed PDSers- or at least some that can use Google…

cs89 on February 17, 2012 at 12:04 AM

I’m not a PDSer, douche. I’m somebody that doesn’t drink anybody’s KoolAid–right or left.

BTW, I’m sure that you can correct me if I’m wrong, but I’m pretty sure that that the ethics commission ruling came after Palin resigned.

ghostwriter on February 17, 2012 at 12:12 AM

they really are mind numbed zombies spewing out the media talking points. the real funny thing is they think they are smart and we are the hillbillies. Most of these people believe xrap that a normal person would neve rbelieve. Only the deranged would belive crap like the gop can’t do anything in Dc because they “only” control the house. or that Palin should have stayed gov and gone bankrupt. idiots the whole bunch of them. They should turn off fox and pick up a book. they have no idea how to think critcally or put A + B together to get to C.

They would be the ones on top of the roofs yelling for help when the crisis hits.

unseen on February 17, 2012 at 12:10 AM

Calling people idiots doesn’t make you smart or informed, slick. I politely engaged you earlier, and you ignored me, only to call me an idiot. In all candor, if your little conspiracy theories are an example of “putting A+B together to get C,” then you can keep it.

ghostwriter on February 17, 2012 at 12:20 AM

ghostwriter====I may have misjudged you, but the jury is still out.

Over the years the person that the left feared the most, received the most attention. Palin has been in their sights since the election of 08. 26,000 e-mails etc. But the fact that those on our side chose to side with the slanderous left, is a crime. Just once stop with the Palin bashing, she didn’t and doesn’t deserve it.

jainphx on February 16, 2012 at 11:07 PM

I missed this post earlier. Palin being the target of the left doesn’t mean that she should be our standard bearer. She obviously scares them, because she could have been a huge game-changer. However, it hasn’t worked out that way, so far.

I never sided with the left, and I’ve generally stuck up for her in the past, when she was unfairly attacked. However, on this site I see her being unfairly adulated for scant accomplishments. If she had run in the primaries, I would have given her a fair hearing, but she didn’t. In my view, she doesn’t get to sneak in through the back door. and in fairness to her, I don’t think that she is necessarily trying to do so, but I’m a little tired of her coy, self-promoting games.

ghostwriter on February 17, 2012 at 12:29 AM

The DC guy told him he missed
her, and Matthews got frustrated. He behaved like a
FREAKING STALKER!!!!

What the hell is it about this woman that drives people
to irrational behavior???

I’m serious. Can anybody explain this??

ToddPA on February 16, 2012 at 5:01 PM

I saw that too, it was beyond weird. Tingles like a deer in the headlights. Knowing someone got it on tape too. Made me laugh. I don’t get all the screeching, and basically irrational responses. If she was such a loser, why even bother. If Mitt is a strong candidate , why load these threads with such ugly stuff. Let him stand on his accomplishments, and his appeal to the voting base. But people get a grip. If you don’t we are looking at 4 more years of the Professor.

wi farmgirl on February 17, 2012 at 12:37 AM

unseen===== So very well said, and right over the target.

The base has to come to grips with the agenda of the “establishment” R’s. They are no better than the left. they have to “destroy” the tea party and conservatives to stay in power. The house under the leadership of Boehner, is trying to kill any momentum of the tea partyers, and why the masses of the base can’t see that is puzzling. Romney would go along way toward killing the tea party movement, and blunt the conservative emergence.

jainphx on February 16, 2012 at 10:26 PM

Makes me wonder what the young guns are thinking about going there and getting told to sit down and shut up. I would love to talk to Paul Ryan and Sean Duffy about why can’t they get anywhere. As if they would say anyway. But Ron Johnson might. So will it matter if we send any new TP reps in that cesspool? I don’t think we can change this unless we start another party. When there’s too much salt in the soup you either start over or you have to add much more stock. Who will run in this battle ground of politics? Would you?

wi farmgirl on February 17, 2012 at 12:46 AM

Where is this GOP establishment? How do I get there?

V7_Sport on February 16, 2012 at 10:37 PM

Perhaps it’s leadership positions that make deals and fatten their stock portfolios. It’s the big guys who say’s who can play and who can’t.

wi farmgirl on February 17, 2012 at 12:50 AM

Makes me wonder what the young guns are thinking about going there and getting told to sit down and shut up. I would love to talk to Paul Ryan and Sean Duffy about why can’t they get anywhere. As if they would say anyway. But Ron Johnson might. So will it matter if we send any new TP reps in that cesspool? I don’t think we can change this unless we start another party. When there’s too much salt in the soup you either start over or you have to add much more stock. Who will run in this battle ground of politics? Would you?

wi farmgirl on February 17, 2012 at 12:46 AM

It isn’t as if they haven’t had considerable success thus far. Ryan getting his entitlement reform proposal passed in the House is a step in the right direction. If the Republicans had the Senate, they might be able to pass a version of it. There seems to be bipartisan support for some form of Simpson-Bowles, which is hardly ideal, but it is a great start.

We didn’t get into this mess overnight, and we won’t get out overnight. It’s way too soon to get discouraged.

ghostwriter on February 17, 2012 at 1:03 AM

Well it seems our troll has shifted his attack to trying to justify his “concern” about Palin. Not unusual. An interesting study in studied ignorance. I wonder why?

Our nominee in this election cycle will need to be able to take on the crony capitalists and lobbyists and who has the better resume to do this than Palin? Certainly not Romney or Gingrich or even mr earmark Santorum.

Sarah put these kind of insider crooks in jail in AK, even if they had an R after their name. She is not supported by any special interests like almost every other candidate on either side, especially Obama. She is the perfect one to represent the GOP and while doing so reform it as well. Is this going to welcomed with open arms? Doesn’t look like it. But this is a fight worth having and Sarah is the perfect leader for it and probably the only one who could pull it off. Will the public support such an approach? I think it cold end up with her winning in a landslide.

shmendrick on February 17, 2012 at 1:04 AM

I think it cold end up with her winning in a landslide.

shmendrick on February 17, 2012 at 1:04 AM

Depends, what is the percentage of progressives in the voting base. They hate her. The indy’s either love her or hate her. I am not sure about the progressive conservatives…(i hate saying that but that’s what they are) What is that percentage? I just don’t know if she could pull it off with the all the haters out there. I wish but…

wi farmgirl on February 17, 2012 at 1:13 AM

Well it seems our troll has shifted his attack to trying to justify his “concern” about Palin. Not unusual. An interesting study in studied ignorance. I wonder why?

shmendrick on February 17, 2012 at 1:04 AM

You can’t seem to get through a post without name-calling and ad hominem attacks. Why? Are you that threatened by an opposing viewpoint in the echo chamber? What exactly have I done that is trollish? I have been respectful towards the the people that have respectful towards me, and responded in kind to those who have been insulting.

Really, why don’t you keep the childish insults to yourself?

ghostwriter on February 17, 2012 at 1:17 AM

In 2010 she drew 16,000 people and filled the Boston Common shoulder to shoulder. Last year she drew 1000 people to Manchester, NH while Romney could only get 200 up the street in Concord. More people signed up to be on her email list than showed up at the Romney event. Would she do well in NE? Surprisingly so from my experience. Why?

People want reform very much and she is the ONLY one who can offer it. People know that with the others it’s mostly talk, same as usual. With Sarah it’s not talk, it’s what she has always done and unlike the others she is still, financially and otherwise, special interest and lobbyist clean and she plans to stay that way.

shmendrick on February 17, 2012 at 1:24 AM

The establishment is those in power and who wish to remain in power by hook or crook.

Like… Rance Priebus? Is it he who was so mean to sarah? Wait, was it Michael Steele? They worked for the GOP. They don’t strike me as powerful though.

they would be the big money men like Alies,

Roger Ailes the guy who gave Sarah Palin a contract at Fox? That bastard!

…the power brokers like McConell and the Speaker, the Bush family, Mitt and his millions, they control the appratus of the Gop party because they control the money and the levers of power. It will also by the RNSC, RNCC who decide whom they will fund and whom they will force from running in congressional and senate races.

It just doesn’t work that way. This is one of the reasons we have primaries so we can all get together and democratically chose who is going to be the nominee. Raising money is part of the process. If you can’t persuade people to believe in you it’s not the fault of some nebulous “establishment”. Our enemy isn’t some “establishment” it’s obama.

Which means the dems would still own the senate since biden would be the deciding factor

But committee assignments would be split and the likelihood is that someone like Joe Lieberman could have been peeled off to to side with the GOP on important decisions.

the establishment lost more seats than the TEA party in the seante elections but we don’t hear about those losses.

Mitch McConnell and the Bush Family and Mitt and his money lost us seats? Please demonstrate how that happened. Please prove that.

They instead decided to form a “talking point” to discredit the TEA party and like the sucker you are you took the bait.

did they meet in the establishment bunker or did they just send out a memo? Yeah, it’s not a talking point, it’s the obvious fact.

Do you understand you and people like you enable these politicans to lie and hoodwink the American people. Please study or do something because your ignorance is the reason the country is going down the drain

You sound like a conspiracy theorist. That’s all. There is no establishment out to subjugate you. No Rothschilds, no trilateral commission either. You are creating an all purpose bogeyman to blame for whatever you disagree with,

V7_Sport on February 17, 2012 at 2:17 AM

It’s the big guys who say’s who can play and who can’t.

wi farmgirl on February 17, 2012 at 12:50 AM

There isn’t anyone saying that. There isn’t anyone who could say that.

V7_Sport on February 17, 2012 at 2:18 AM

We need better-informed PDSers- or at least some that can use Google…
cs89 on February 17, 2012 at 12:04 AM
I’m not a PDSer, douche. I’m somebody that doesn’t drink anybody’s KoolAid–right or left.
BTW, I’m sure that you can correct me if I’m wrong, but I’m pretty sure that that the ethics commission ruling came after Palin resigned.
ghostwriter on February 17, 2012 at 12:12 AM

Interesting…

So you are aware of the legal defense fund, ethics complaint etc.

So- when was the complaint filed, and why didn’t the Palin camp spend any of that $?

And, why would you ask “why didn’t she just start a legal defense fund” when you know she did?

(rhetorical questions- but you’re welcome to answer them if you want).

cs89 on February 17, 2012 at 7:23 AM

BTW, I’m sure that you can correct me if I’m wrong, but I’m pretty sure that that the ethics commission ruling came after Palin resigned.
ghostwriter on February 17, 2012 at 12:12 AM

the ethics charge was sumitted during her term which froze the funds until it was decided. After she resigned the committee ruled it could be used because it had the word “offical” in the name. therefore during her fighting and winning the 18 false ethics charges she couldn’t touch the funds and after she left office she had to return every dime that people gave her because the title of the Defense fund had the word “offical” in it. the defense fund was called the offical Sarah Palin defense fund because there were other defense funds popping up around the country with her name on it and Gov Palin wanted people to know which was real and which wasn’t

unseen on February 17, 2012 at 8:27 AM

Like… Rance Priebus? Is it he who was so mean to sarah? Wait, was it Michael Steele? They worked for the GOP. They don’t strike me as powerful though.

who should look at who drove Steele out of the Party leaderhship and the connections Priebus has to those in power.

Roger Ailes the guy who gave Sarah Palin a contract at Fox? That bastard!

what does a contract have to do with being a powerbroker? alies likes to make money. There were many emails and stories about Alies sidelining Palin at fox.

It just doesn’t work that way. This is one of the reasons we have primaries so we can all get together and democratically chose who is going to be the nominee. Raising money is part of the process. If you can’t persuade people to believe in you it’s not the fault of some nebulous “establishment”. Our enemy isn’t some “establishment” it’s obama.

boy are you dense if you think that is how it works. If the eastablishment doesn’t want you to run and you run anyhow they will do whatever it takes to ensure your defeat. perfect example was Murkowski vs Miller.

But committee assignments would be split and the likelihood is that someone like Joe Lieberman could have been peeled off to to side with the GOP on important decisions.

funny but that wasn’t how it worked before when it was tied. Infact a RINO jeffords switched parties to the dems instead of allowing that to happen. You think someone like Muyrkowski or Snowe wouldn’t switch in aheartbeat? You are naive.

Mitch McConnell and the Bush Family and Mitt and his money lost us seats? Please demonstrate how that happened. Please prove that.

Meg whitman the $180 million + the millions funded to her by the RNC and Mitt lost in a landslide to a 60′s reject. The senate candidate in CT lost to a guy who lied about servie in Vietnam. Bush’s handpicked Senator for TX lost her primary to Perry. The handpicked candidate in NV lost to Angle, Buck the establishment choice in CO lost. Mitt lost every congressional race in MA not one seat in MA changed hands. Mike Castle Rove’s guy lost his primary. the establishment pick Crist in FL lost to Rubio and went third party. Dede lost in NY 23 all establishment picks all lost. Carly lost in CA. then there was WA state. the establishment put the same guy up 3 times and he lost 3 times. I’m sure they will run him again in 2 years. All those states could have been won. The establishment cost us the senate more so than the TEA party but you need to read and see what happened in 2010 instead of simply listening to the media. that isn’t even mentioning the lesser races like the NC gov race where the establishment put up a guy that lost to Predue who started out her new admin with a 30% approval rating and who’s prior admin under Easly was considered one of the worse in NC history and the idiots are going to run him again in 2012 against Bob Ethridge Who will win and NC will once again go blue at the state level for another 100 years and will most likely vote for Obama because the rep candidate for the gov sucks.

the list is endless with the bad picks of the establishment that cost us the house in 2006 and the senate in 2010.

All you got is Angle and COD to point too. Yet the media tells you 2 is more than 4 or 6 and you believe it.

You sound like a conspiracy theorist. That’s all. There is no establishment out to subjugate you. No Rothschilds, no trilateral commission either. You are creating an all purpose bogeyman to blame for whatever you disagree with,

V7_Sport on February 17, 2012 at 2:17 AM

and you sound like a mind numbed sheeple that believes everything your betters tells you. I am creating nothing. I am stating facts to contour your “talking point” The facts are for everyone to see. look it up goggle it. See how many establishment picks for the senate lost and compare that to Angle and COD. there is no comparison. that is not a conspiracy theory and knowing that those in power and wealth will work to ensure that power and wealth is a simple truth.

unseen on February 17, 2012 at 9:08 AM

Calling people idiots doesn’t make you smart or informed, slick.

ghostwriter on February 17, 2012 at 12:20 AM

wasn’t really talking to you but if the shoe fits…..

unseen on February 17, 2012 at 9:10 AM

the ethics charge was sumitted during her term which froze the funds until it was decided. After she resigned the committee ruled it could be used because it had the word “offical” in the name. therefore during her fighting and winning the 18 false ethics charges she couldn’t touch the funds and after she left office she had to return every dime that people gave her because the title of the Defense fund had the word “offical” in it. the defense fund was called the offical Sarah Palin defense fund because there were other defense funds popping up around the country with her name on it and Gov Palin wanted people to know which was real and which wasn’t

unseen on February 17, 2012 at 8:27 AM

Thanks for the detailed information. My point simply was that there were ways for a popular conservative like her to raise the money that she needed to defend herself.

Simply stating that the treatment that she got wasn’t fair isn’t enough, when we are talking about a potential candidate for the presidency. All kinds of unfair stuff gets thrown at the president (e.g., Pearl Harbor, 9-11, etc.), and he or she has to find a way of dealing with it, fair or not. At any rate, I’m not interested picking up this conversation again.

ghostwriter on February 17, 2012 at 9:12 AM

ghostwriter on February 17, 2012 at 9:12 AM

For someone who doesen’t care much for Palin, you know very little about her.

idesign on February 17, 2012 at 9:15 AM

wasn’t really talking to you but if the shoe fits…..

unseen on February 17, 2012 at 9:10 AM

Shove it.

ghostwriter on February 17, 2012 at 9:19 AM

My point simply was that there were ways for a popular conservative like her to raise the money that she needed to defend herself.

Simply stating that the treatment that she got wasn’t fair isn’t enough, when we are talking about a potential candidate for the presidency. All kinds of unfair stuff gets thrown at the president (e.g., Pearl Harbor, 9-11, etc.), and he or she has to find a way of dealing with it, fair or not. At any rate, I’m not interested picking up this conversation again.

ghostwriter on February 17, 2012 at 9:12 AM

no there was no way. She tried everything. Even her book deal and book tour were threatened by ethics if she wrote it or toured while gov that was the final straw for her and she resigned. She couldn’t make the money from the private sector and the state of AK would not pay. the fact is that the state of AK changed its law after she left so what happened to her could never happen again. Now if the gov wins the case the state of AK will pay their fees. If they lose the gov has to pick up the tab. the resources a sitting President has drawfs the resouorces of the gov of AK esp one of modest means from a middle class background.

unseen on February 17, 2012 at 9:24 AM

Shove it.

ghostwriter on February 17, 2012 at 9:19 AM

wow such highbrow thoughts coming from you, slick

unseen on February 17, 2012 at 9:25 AM

Depends, what is the percentage of progressives in the voting base. They hate her. The indy’s either love her or hate her. I am not sure about the progressive conservatives…(i hate saying that but that’s what they are) What is that percentage? I just don’t know if she could pull it off with the all the haters out there. I wish but…

wi farmgirl on February 17, 2012 at 1:13 AM

The vast majority of this country is center/right. Don’t let the half dozen haters that relentlessly haunt this blog make you think they represent any large group in the general public. They’re just working for their candidate who in some cases is probably O. The largest group in the public are those who haven’t been paying much attention so far. Except for the obvious things such as the vast unemployment, high gas prices, lowering home prices, increasing food prices, etc. They also know that people go to DC with modest means and in a few years they are millionaires. And they know something is very wrong with this picture.

Even the NYTimes gave Palin kudos for her speech last labor day in which she talked about this problem and Obama’s croney capitalism approach to governing. Palin is perfectly positioned to campaign as a reformer. That would be the best approach to use against Obama because besides being a socialist, he’s a crook and that won’t fly for anyone. So here comes squeaky clean Palin with the message to throw the bums out. The public will eat that up big time. Put West on the ticket with her and we’ve got an unbeatable combination and the racism nonsense is a dead issue as well.

And no one knows how to wow a crowd like Sarah.

shmendrick on February 17, 2012 at 9:48 AM

Personally her sanctimonious party cleansing rhetoric would have a lot more credibility if she hadn’t “endorsed” Newt and tried to paint him as an anti-establishment tea party candidate.
Self proclaimed progressive, healthcare mandate, lobbyist for Freddie and Fannie, unethical, embarrassing Newt.
For the life of me I will never understand why she would spend her credibility on a dirty old school Washington insider like Leroy. Even Big Gov Santorum would have made more sense as a SoCon.
I can only assume she wanted to ride another Big Gov Rino’s coattails as she did with McCain (all in the name of advancing the Conservative ideology of course /)but what is baffling is she picked a loser like Newt’s coattails. There are two other Big Gov candidates on the ticket slightly less yucky.
I expect a pile on of people saying she didn’t endorse him but that is because she has an inability to annunciate anything with clarity and leaves everything open to interpretation. Let me translate and reiterate: She endorsed Newt Gingrich in the name of Conservatism. Party leader she is not for if she were, she’d be running.

Buttercup on February 17, 2012 at 11:36 AM

Get rid of everybody at the dept. of energy an e.p.a. Start over with a new smaller Dept of Energy an put Sarah in charge, this is one place where she knows her stuff an knows how to best manage it to keep it cheap.

DOE started in 1973 with just a hundred or so employees. Now it has almost 110,000 employees an contractors. This is just not right.

Give Sarah $10,000,000 a year to work with an tell her to fix it an drill baby drill. Bet she could make it happen.

By the way the 2009 budget for doe was $24.1 billion

Vodkanockers on February 18, 2012 at 10:12 AM

. I wonder what grassroots righties would do in that case. Would you want a conservative candidate to emerge from the brokered convention, even if it appeared likely he/she would lose, or would the calculus shift to supporting Romney and letting him be thrown to the wolves? So much heart-ache in the fact that we’re even thinking about this.

People are only thinking about it because the RINOs have been fishing a broker ever since the field narrowed. And before. Probably was on the list from Day One under “In Case of Disobedience, Break Glass and pull the Broke”.

There were too many debates and too many cheese bombs. Go into a brokered convention and the sour taste will exceed all the spoiled lemons in Florida

The primary was staged as an election. Unstage it now, because you do not like the results, and the result will be as bad as could be imagined. Everyone is seeking the candidate who is least crooked. Crook the books at the convention, and all bets are off

If they are fanning Palin on this issue, and she bites, it will look bogus, since she ran her Palin mobile across the country like she was running for office, and then bailed. Come back now, and it looks like she never intended to run fair. Palin hard core fans make a lot of noise, like Paul fans, but noise can be amplified to seem louder.

I love Palin’s ability to control the message, but she cannot control the undercurrent that will follow a brok(en) nominating process. No question I will throw in the towel if they play this game

entagor on February 18, 2012 at 1:21 PM

IF Sarah Palin were to somehow, miraculously become our nominee through a brokered convention or by whatever turn of events, money would drain from my accounts directly into whatever PAC is supporting her. I’d be seriously all-in, but for Sarah Palin only. Sadly, I know I’m just wishcasting.

The rest of these chumps might get a token $50 or so out of me after the convention, but there’s nobody else running who truly understands what needs to be done to salvage what’s left of our republic – sudden and relentless reform. Nobody else in the GOP says it, thinks it, or even understands it. Sarah does.

Alas, I think that if God were on speaking terms with us right now, he’d say something like, “I’m coming back to do two things: Work some Miracles, and kick some ass, and I’m fresh out of miracles!” Thanks, GOP establishment. How does that other punchline go? “Well, I sent you a police car, a rescue boat, then finally a helicopter!”

Harbingeing on February 18, 2012 at 5:30 PM

Comment pages: 1 4 5 6