5
Spiro Palin
Sarah Palin slams Barack Obama for ‘palling around with terrorists who would target their own country.’ Pretty rum stuff, as Tbogg points out, coming from a woman who happens to be fucking a traitor herself.
Meanwhile, Pam Atlas likee Nasty Sarah, and demonstrates her love by getting right down to teh stupid:
Palin comes out swinging and starts telling the folks what’s at stake here. Why McCain is so damn polite when the very country is at stake confounds me. These are dangerous people and we need a leader, unafraid of the media, unafraid of the leftwing bullies — we are counting on you McCain and you are failing us.
Pammycakes really doesn’t get that a presidential campaign, even one as ineptly run as McCain’s, has a thing called a ’strategy’, in which different people play different roles and often even say different things to different listeners. But when all you do day in and day out is overreact massively to the feeblest of stimuli, it’s tough to understand higher-order thinking.
WereBear said,
October 5, 2008 at 16:16
Especially if you’ve never done it.
D. Aristophanes said,
October 5, 2008 at 16:24
Poor Pam. When you’re getting out-thunk by John McCain and Sarah Palin, you probably drink coffee by pouring coffee grounds into your mouth followed by boiling water.
N__B said,
October 5, 2008 at 16:36
Spiro Palin: “Natterin’ nay-hooeys of nega-whatsis.”
J— said,
October 5, 2008 at 16:40
You have to understand. Pamela Geller thinks the term “division of labor” refers to something that only happens under a Marxist command economy.
EnfantTerrible said,
October 5, 2008 at 17:00
… a presidential campaign, even one as ineptly run as McCain’s, has a thing called a ’strategy’ …
I think you meant “Stratego”.
g said,
October 5, 2008 at 17:01
I love this story:
Palin misquotes Albright
“I’m reading on my Starbucks mocha cup, ok? The quote of the day… It was Madeleine Albright, former Secretary of State [crowd boos] and UN ambassador. … Now she said it, I didn’t. She said, ‘There’s a place in Hell reserved for women who don’t support other women.’”
Actually, Albright said “There’s a place in Hell reserved for women who don’t help other women.”
As someone on the comments put it – “Sarah, honey, she was talking about women like you.”
El Cid said,
October 5, 2008 at 17:02
Even though Atlas’ Juggs might like it, I think even the right wing ‘base’ would get tired of the primal scream candidate the right wing bloggers prefer. Imagine John Bolton yelling at you and throwing staplers at your closed door — forever.
ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®© said,
October 5, 2008 at 17:03
You, too, can interview Bible Spice.
Joe Max said,
October 5, 2008 at 17:03
But “Viva La Barracuda” doesn’t have Pat Buchanan as a speech writer, like Spiro!
“In the United States today, we have more than our share of the nattering nabobs of negativism. They have formed their own 4-H Club — the hopeless, hysterical hypochondriacs of history.”
Now that’s demagoguery you can believe in! I don’t think she could even pronounce “nattering nabobs.”
g said,
October 5, 2008 at 17:03
Actually, I think the story is funny on several levels –
1) did she miss the talking points about liberals being latte sippers? Sarah, ix-nay on the Arbuck’s-stay!
2) she goes before her base quoting a woman they all hate? Is she still going for the Puma vote? how stupid can she be?
3) as soon as she realizes the crowd hates Albright, she runs from her words.
El Cid said,
October 5, 2008 at 17:04
By the way, speaking of terrorists, how is it that people like John Negroponte and Elliot Abrams are not just sitting on city-sponsored commissions but in high positions of governance (or having left them recently) instead of rotting away in some Nicaraguan or Honduran prison?
Rhetorical question, I know, but it’s pretty funny that the party of Guatemalan anti-Mayan Indian genocide is lecturing the American public on who is to be allowed to be in a room with a former attempted bomber.
mikey said,
October 5, 2008 at 17:05
Pam is what we refer to as a “one issue voter”.
Her issue is to use every weapon in America’s arsenal to kill a significant number of muslim men, women and children every single day. Anytime that does not happen is perceived as a failure of leadership.
The sickening horror is twofold. First, that she has been satisfied by the amount of muslim blood spilled by the American armed forces in the past, even if not recently, and second that we are close enough to following her prescription for holy war that she feels that it may only be a presidential election away.
mikey
g said,
October 5, 2008 at 17:05
Palin, after misquoting Albright: “And now, California, let’s see what a comment like I just made, how that is turned into whatever it’ll be turned into tomorrow with the newspaper.”
Oooh, snap! way to show the media, girlfriend.
How about they just quote you verbatim?
ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®© said,
October 5, 2008 at 17:09
How about they just quote you verbatim?
Nasty, tricksy lieberal media!
montysano said,
October 5, 2008 at 17:09
So Pammy tries to rally the troops, saying “Now is the time for citizen soldiers!@11″
And just below, we see:
Fucking ouch….. Looks like it’s just Pammy and the Pamettes, done up in coonskin caps and muskets, manning the ramparts alone.
Joe Max said,
October 5, 2008 at 17:10
Just like her mention of Hillary in her first stump speech. It drew instant boos as soon as the cursed name left her pie hole. But she just carried on (I guess her teleprompter didn’t fail.) However, she never used that in her stump speech again, once she realized that PUMAs don’t come to her speeches. So I doubt we’ll hear any more about Albright either. Or Starbucks.
tigrismus said,
October 5, 2008 at 17:14
“Leftwing bullies?” Ooh, the big mean, scary pacifists, who will point out when you say something wrong or stupid! BOO.
(Lex) Palianated said,
October 5, 2008 at 17:19
OK, Palin is the exact sort of woman that Pamela and I used to bitch about. Constantly. So I wrote Pamela to ask what she thinks about this whole issue, that Palin is everything we usually hate in terms of those “other moms”, the over-active PTA mom who always has her hair done up and is willing to step all over you to get ahead, etc.
Anyway, mail immediately rejected. So I tried my personal email address with the same message. Rejected. I’m officially spam now. Why? For still hating this beast while watching the very person I used to have around to kvetch about these women glow over her while holding up the Party Line? Oh well. Pamela, if you’re reading this one, you got some ’spainin to do.
WereBear said,
October 5, 2008 at 17:20
The only thing I can think of is that she appeals to women who are happy to see a woman on the ramparts, so long as it isn’t them.
Doesn’t matter how she got there, or how she’s treated, or what she does once she’s there.
She’s playing with the Big Boys!
Ahem.
FGFM said,
October 5, 2008 at 17:20
I think you meant “Stratego”.
After the election, Sen. McCain will be reduced to saying in a mournful voice “You sunk my battleship!”
henry lewis said,
October 5, 2008 at 17:21
Some questions:
-If elected, will you continue with Bush’s doctor?
-Do you recycle or burn your newspapers?
-In ‘The Big Lebowski’, Jeff Bridges’ character was constantly drinking White Russians. Will you be calling on him for foreign poicy advice?
-What is your favorite Supremes’ song?
g said,
October 5, 2008 at 17:23
This is a great article about the Palin phenomenon, the winking and the nose wrinkling and the folksy stuff.
“Her success in her political career has been based on being able to project this enormously friendly, enormously appealing physical presence — and, some people would argue, use it to conceal this very much more ruthless and nakedly political character.”
Tagg said,
October 5, 2008 at 17:24
“These are dangerous people and we need a leader…”
Was she gazing at herself in lily pad pool of Absolut Citron in the backyard when she said that?
Mr. Wonderful said,
October 5, 2008 at 17:27
“Palin, after misquoting Albright: ‘And now, California, let’s see what a comment like I just made, how that is turned into whatever it’ll be turned into tomorrow with the newspaper.’”
Maybe we’ve got her all wrong. Maybe her patron saint isn’t some Know Nothing right-wing pseudo-populist, but Jerry Lewis. Maybe what she meant was:
“And now, California, with the flag with the bear and the Gold Rush and the Hollywood and the movies, let’s see what a comment I just made with the talking and the campaign waving hello vote-for-me nice Independents, how that is turned into whatever it’ll be turned into tomorrow with the newspaper and the printing and the paper with the articles and the op-ed writing and the thing.”
(Lex) Palianated said,
October 5, 2008 at 17:39
Aww, Wordpress ate it.
Pamela has turned me into SPAM. She was the one I used to bitch about women like Palin with. The “other moms”, the over-active bitchy PTA ones who’d step all over you and your kids to get ahead. I tried to write just because this was one of our main subjects and was rejected on both emails. I’ve been “rejected”! Damn my Obama-LGFWatch-Sadly,No lovin’ ways.
Anyway, anyone who hates Palin on principle want to start emailing and not turn me into SPAM? LOL
(Lex) Palianated said,
October 5, 2008 at 17:41
Oh, and it’s so nice to see old ‘friends’ abandon their normal ideals to cheer the Party Line like this. Palin was everything we hated. Pamela, if you read this, you got some spainin’ to do.
WereBear said,
October 5, 2008 at 17:41
At this point, I’m not sure we wouldn’t be better off with Jerry Lewis.
I don’t know about his economic policies or how he’d deal with Pakistan. But he’s very well regarded in France, and he would simply levy taxes once a year, on Labor Day.
And if we laugh at his speeches, I’m sure he won’t kill us. So there’s that.
Rightwingsnarkle said,
October 5, 2008 at 17:41
The McCain campaign released a new poster/bumper sticker in conjunction with their final month’s full-court press of negative advertising.
I snagged one and posted it on my blog, for anyone who wants a copy.
Frankly, I think it makes them look desperate.
(Lex) Palianated said,
October 5, 2008 at 17:42
3rd try…
Oh, and it’s so nice to see old ‘friends’ abandon their normal ideals to cheer the Party Line like this. Palin was everything we hated. Pamela, if you read this, you got some spainin’ to do.
Jennifer said,
October 5, 2008 at 17:47
Heh. I’m watching To the Contrary on PBS, and Bo-Peep Carpenter and some other rwing chick (Tara Setmeyer) are getting completely pwn3d by Eleanor Holmes Norton and the other sane panelists. Every time they spout some nonsense about how “average women” are energized by Palin, the other panelists uncivilly remind them that Obama is leading among women.
Wow, this Tara chick is really unpleasant. We should be hearing a lot more out of her in the future. She’ll probably be given a plum column in the NYTimes or some such, since she’s proven her lack of understanding of just about everything.
Nimrod Gently said,
October 5, 2008 at 17:52
Since you mentioned Sarah Palin having sex, Gary Ruppert’s going to be too busy pulling himself off to reply to this topic. Good going.
Jennifer said,
October 5, 2008 at 17:53
Hoo-boy, it turns out this Tara chick is on the staff of Dana Rohrbacher.
J.D. Rhoades said,
October 5, 2008 at 17:59
“Now is the time for Citizen Solidiers.”
No I did not make that up…
ohioans everywhere said,
October 5, 2008 at 18:05
In fairness to Pam, she probably had to delete a lot of comments to get to that lonely number.
Snorghagen said,
October 5, 2008 at 18:14
The bubbling buboes of Buchanan’s bukkakistic bombast burst upon the lily-livered limp-limbed left-liberal lepers like a spasming spout of spiteful space-age spooge.
I love the old Spiro style, but it’s the wrong mode for Palin. Her ‘by gosh’s and winking would just break up the alliteration.
Candy said,
October 5, 2008 at 18:14
I thought of Pammalammadingdong today, when I read the article about the Modesty Patrols in Israel forcing their own ultra-Orthodox version of sharia on women and burning down stores that sell MP4s. They wouldn’t dig Pam’s mode of dress, at all, at all. Spin this Pammykins. I’m thinking of that bikini pic, young lady!
Now, I can clearly see that this is only a small subsectilon of Jewish men, in a specific fundamentalist community, (albeit a subset of a powerful majority in this case), just as I know that Muslims practicing genital mutilation are a small subset of Muslims and Christians who speak in tongues and force 14 year old girls into Mormon harems are a small fraction of Christians. But can Pam make such distinctions when it comes to Islam? Not so much.
Not Sarah Palin said,
October 5, 2008 at 18:17
I don’t think she could even pronounce “nattering nabobs.”
“Natterin’ nabobs. Try again? In what respect, Charley?”
MzNicky said,
October 5, 2008 at 18:18
g: Jesus F. Christ, McPalin couldn’t even get the quote right when she said “Madeleine Albright said, quote unquote, now these are her words, not mine!” and then proceeded to read it from her notes. That is seriously the last Palindrone clip I’m going to subject myself to. Her voice is like icepicks stabbing into my eardrums. She’s just painful.
Candy said,
October 5, 2008 at 18:19
albeit a subset of a powerful majority in this case
should read powerful “minority”
Candy said,
October 5, 2008 at 18:21
Yeah, MzNicky, if I have to listen to Palin for four to eight years I’m going to buy a heavy duty set of earplugs to wear in public and I’ll be throwing out my TV so I won’t accidentally hear her voice. Jebus.
Our Dead Selves said,
October 5, 2008 at 18:28
That is seriously the last Palindrone clip I’m going to subject myself to. Her voice is like icepicks stabbing into my eardrums. She’s just painful.
I actually turned off the VP debate because I couldn’t hack the sound of her voice. I tried to picture Marge Gunderson ever time she opened her mouth, but to no avail.
g said,
October 5, 2008 at 18:32
I can do a pretty good Palin imitation when I’ve had a glass of wine or two that horrifies my husband.
hell, it horrifies me, too.
NutellaonToast said,
October 5, 2008 at 18:33
Soldiers are awesome and we all aspire to be them.
Now we just gotta find a war to fight, so we can be soldiers.
Cause we all wanna be soldiers.
…rummages through the internet…
AH HA! I’ve found a war! Onward to Muslamia! We shall crush our enemies and be soldiers because that is what we all want to be!
Our Dead Selves said,
October 5, 2008 at 18:37
OT, but I thought I’d plug my sister’s Cafe Press store.
Curiosity Ink– Nerds for Obama.
Buskertype said,
October 5, 2008 at 18:53
Palin is like Kinky Friedman or Jesse Ventura. It’s cute to see them flapping their mouths and arms and doing a little populist song and dance in state politics… but come on, you don’t send them out to do grown-up work in national politics.
Bob Wise, former Gov. of WVa used to tap-dance down the street in parades as his primary campaign tactic. Worked great. But then we find out that he was screwing one of his secretaries, whose husband (Icky Frye, I swear) ran a campaign against him under the slogan “does his job, not his staff.” I think it’s perfectly acceptable to keep these people around the state as pets, but please, keep them in the yard.
Loneoak said,
October 5, 2008 at 18:56
I truly hope that the O/B campaign starts asking questions and making commercials about Todd Palin’s traitortude.
Steve said,
October 5, 2008 at 18:59
You are allowed to just call out McCain/Palin’s bullshit arguments without debasing yourself by making even more childish bullshit arguments about the other side.
Being a memeber of a political party that is peacefully trying to bring about some political change makes you a “traitor”? Sounds pretty liberal to me!
Buskertype said,
October 5, 2008 at 19:08
I dunno, steve. Last I checked the case law on seceding from the union was pretty clear.
Righteous Bubba said,
October 5, 2008 at 19:15
Being a memeber of a political party that is peacefully trying to bring about some political change makes you a “traitor”?
You have a point. That the party’s founder was found wrapped peacefully in a tarp after a botched sale of peaceful plastic explosives can have no relevance.
ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®© said,
October 5, 2008 at 19:17
Peacefully bringing the KKK spirit to Alaska!
Fuk that noise.
owlbear1 said,
October 5, 2008 at 19:21
- we are counting on you McCain and you are failing us.
Hey Pam, Irony is already dead. You can stop with stiletto heels.
owlbear1 said,
October 5, 2008 at 19:24
Steve, how do the CURRENT residents of Alaska have ANY right to declare the Oil theirs?
That is what all of the “Free Alaska” amounts to, a money grab. So, what is the “holy Claim” of the current residents of Alaska?
g said,
October 5, 2008 at 19:29
secession = “peaceful political change”
Nice one, Steve.
Loneoak said,
October 5, 2008 at 19:30
From the founder of the AIP, a party which Todd Palin recently belonged to: “The fires of hell are frozen glaciers compared to my hatred for the American government. And I won’t be buried under their damn flag. I’ll be buried in Dawson. And when Alaska is an independent nation they can bring my bones home.”
Also: “I’m an Alaskan, not an American. I’ve got no use for America or her damned institutions.”
To me that sounds like a traitor party. At the very least, it exceeds the standards set by the McCain campaign for raising questions about the candidates’ characters. Why should we have to tolerate a Vice President who recently endorsed a secessionist traitor party? At the very least, Palin must be forced to explain her and Todd’s relationship with these traitors, because truly patriotic citizens of the USA should recoil at those statements.
Do you support Joe Volger’s statements, Mr. Steve? You want a debate or are you just trolling?
Candy said,
October 5, 2008 at 19:37
Do you support Joe Volger’s statements, Mr. Steve? You want a debate or are you just trolling?
I’d guess the latter. Steve seems to have been a hit ‘n run.
noen said,
October 5, 2008 at 19:44
From Pammy’s comments:
OH please please please make pammy cakes McCains campaign manager. Please please please….
ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®© said,
October 5, 2008 at 19:49
At least, the Pammy should be a McCain spokesharpy.
~
larkspur said,
October 5, 2008 at 19:51
Yeah, Candy, it’s been many years since I was last in Israel. Sounds like things have gotten even more polarized there, as they have everywhere else. The Orthodox right wingers have always been a small part of the population, with a heavy hand in the coalition governments. For a long time they’ve had a stranglehold on the entire country, which is, by temperament, really pretty secular. I don’t recall that there was so much overt hostility, but I do recall knowing that it wasn’t a good idea to travel through some parts of Jerusalem in shorts and sleeveless shirts. I guess Pammy doesn’t get it that they would so be throwing rocks at her.
And she doesn’t seem to get it that she’s allying herself with American Christianists who hope to see her and every Israeli Jew annhilated when the big holy rumpus comes down.
g said,
October 5, 2008 at 19:53
With friends like these
What McCain didn’t mention is that he has his own Bill Ayers — in the form of G. Gordon Liddy. Now a conservative radio talk-show host, Liddy spent more than 4 years in prison for his role in the 1972 Watergate burglary. That was just one element of what Liddy did, and proposed to do, in a secret White House effort to subvert the Constitution. Far from repudiating him, McCain has embraced him.
Loneoak said,
October 5, 2008 at 19:58
I sure does sound like the nuts in Israel have gotten worse. I spend some time with an Orthodox family while I was living there and got to play Shabbat goy. It was actually really nice how the neighborhood would put up little sawhorse barriers in their side streets for Shabbat to keep people from casually driving through. I wish I could do that one day a week in my neighborhood and I’m pretty damned irreligious. A few times I saw the black-hatters protesting during Shabbat in order to yell at secular Jews who were driving past their Jerusalem enclaves. But stone-throwing and beatings? Yikes. The government better clean that shit up, pronto.
Candy said,
October 5, 2008 at 20:08
And she doesn’t seem to get it that she’s allying herself with American Christianists who hope to see her and every Israeli Jew annhilated when the big holy rumpus comes down.
Yeah. I just don’t get why the cognitive dissonance doesn’t make Pam’s head asplode.
Smiling Mortician said,
October 5, 2008 at 20:09
when the big holy rumpus comes down.
I’d like to see the artwork Maurice Sendak could create to accompany this idea.
Sockpuppet #47 said,
October 5, 2008 at 21:00
Urg. Religious people. It doesn’t matter what religion it is, if people crazy enough to believe in a big invisible man in the sky get it into their heads that they ought to be able to make the rules, it always ends up like the taliban. Doesn’t matter what the holy book says, doesn’t matter how the religion started out.. It ends in facism.
Steve said,
October 5, 2008 at 21:07
From the founder of the AIP, a party which Todd Palin recently belonged to: “The fires of hell are frozen glaciers compared to my hatred for the American government. And I won’t be buried under their damn flag. I’ll be buried in Dawson. And when Alaska is an independent nation they can bring my bones home.”
Also: “I’m an Alaskan, not an American. I’ve got no use for America or her damned institutions.”
To me that sounds like a traitor party. At the very least, it exceeds the standards set by the McCain campaign for raising questions about the candidates’ characters. Why should we have to tolerate a Vice President who recently endorsed a secessionist traitor party? At the very least, Palin must be forced to explain her and Todd’s relationship with these traitors, because truly patriotic citizens of the USA should recoil at those statements.
Do you support Joe Volger’s statements, Mr. Steve? You want a debate or are you just trolling?
Do I support them? No, I am not Alaskan, and personally I could care less if Alaska was a state or not. Joe Volger died in 1993, and I have no idea when he made the statements that you quote.
The Alaskan Independence Party is a peaceful politcal party. They believe that the vote for Alaskan statehood was flawed, and want another vote. I’m guessing most members of the AIP would vote for secession. I’m guessing they know that even if a vote ever did happen, that Alaska is going to remain a state. They do not espouse violence or other means to attain their goals. Does that make them traitors? Guilty of treason? With how I’ve seen the Republicans throw around these terms so freely in the last decade, saying that anyone that opposes their views gives “aid and comfort to our enemies”, I’m personally pretty wary of using those types of words.
This is just a trend I’ve seen on a lot of blogs. An attack is made against Obama. May be meaningful or not. In this case, Mr. Obama has had a pretty superficial political relationship with someone who was a radical in the 1960’s who committed bombings that resulted in the destruction of a statue. It is what it is. In this case, instead of just making the case that this is a meaningless attack, you make an even more foolish (at least IMO) argument to try to turn things around and question Palin’s patriotism. All I think you end up doing is legitimizing the original attack on Obama.
Righteous Bubba said,
October 5, 2008 at 21:13
This remains on the AIP website:
“The problem with you John Birchers’ is that you are too damn liberal!”
~ Joseph Vogler, Founder Alaskan Independence Party
Righteous Bubba said,
October 5, 2008 at 21:14
Joe Vogler, hero: http://www.akip.org/memorial.html
Matt T. said,
October 5, 2008 at 21:26
The AIP reminds me of the League of the South and the other sorts of neo-Confederate outfits. The reason it can be called a “peaceful political party” is because the upper-middle-class white people that make for the bulk of the organization are too chickenshit to actually risk losing the comforts being upper-middle-class white people in America should they actually, you know, act on their ranting and raving. They’re really not so much traitors, since they don’t have to stones to get their hands dirty, as they’re just another group of whiny, priviledged jackoffs who’re pissed the rest of the country demands they play by the rules. Pitiful and laughable.
Matt T. said,
October 5, 2008 at 21:29
And seriously…seccessionism in 2008? Come on, be serious. There’s not a state in the union that could last more than two years as a seperate entity. If anything, Caribou Barbie should mocked and ridiculed at every opportunity just for palling around with such a bunch of whiny dingbats. It’s like that free-state movement horseshit the Libertarians ran with a couple years ago, which naturally fizzled once they realized no one else took their hoo-hah seriously.
Fucking grow up.
atheist said,
October 5, 2008 at 21:34
Thanks g! I’m using that info now.
atheist said,
October 5, 2008 at 21:37
Ya know what… maybe you don’t want to exaggerate like that.
Sockpuppet #47 said,
October 5, 2008 at 21:44
I think there are states that could survive quite happily on their own.. And even do very well for themselves in comparison with the rest of the US, if the US gets stuck with Mcain.
But Alaska isn’t one of them. It has less people than a medium sized city, and receives far more federal money than it pays in taxes. In terms of industry, It has a little oil which it doesn’t have the cash to extract itself, so must enter into a ruinous deal with a multinational oil company if it wants to capitalise on it.. And they have fish. That is it. NOTHING else.
The best they could manage is earning a little money by being an offshore tax haven for American corporations. That is hardly the basis of a strong economy though.
The AIP are far right wingnuts. Simple as that. Blaming DC for everything because they dont like government of any form, and complaining that GWB isn’t right wing enough.
Sockpuppet #47 said,
October 5, 2008 at 21:47
Atheist:
Please explain to me the functional differences between theocracy and facism. Oh wait. Both of them are authoritarian nightmares, one using nationalism as a tool of fear and coercion, and the other does exactly the same using god.
So no, I do not exaggerate.
Matt T. said,
October 5, 2008 at 21:51
I think there are states that could survive quite happily on their own.. And even do very well for themselves in comparison with the rest of the US, if the US gets stuck with Mcain.
Which ones? New York? Texas? California? That’s about it, and that’s only if the rest of the world played along and what was left of the U.S. didn’t extract some sort of economic revenge, which would most definately happen if the seccesion was as ugly as the last attempt (which it would most assuredly be). And that’s also assuming the disseperate elements within the state play along, which didn’t happen the last time. The bulk of the South secceeded, but places like East Tennessee told ‘em to fuck off and stayed union, and there was more than one county that secceeded from the CSA.
The only thing dumber than nationalism is being overly proud of the state where your dad neglected to pull out. E.pluribus unum and all that.
Arky The Islahomobamaist said,
October 5, 2008 at 22:04
That is a horrible thing to say about Friedman and Ventura.
Actually, I’d LOVE to hear what Kinky thinks of Palin. Maybe his next book will feature a perky Alaskette with a dark side.
Sockpuppet #47 said,
October 5, 2008 at 22:04
Matt T -
Yes, there may only be a handful that could really make a go of it, and there are several more that could survive collectively. I have always though that the east coast liberal states could do well for themselves if they broke away. They have the economic base necessary to survive if it happened, but it won’t happen so it is merely idle speculation.
Really, it isn’t even a remote possibility for ANY state to secede in the foreseeable future. The current political and social climate doesn’t allow for it. No argument there.
Point being, Alaska is right at the bottom of the list of states which could survive outside the union. They may be amongst the most willing to secede, but they are the least likely to survive if they managed it.
Freshitt said,
October 5, 2008 at 22:11
Our response to Palin’ Palin’s remark about Obama’s terroist pal (untrue) is that we’ve caught Sarah palling around with secessionists of the Alaska Independent Party when she found the US too imperfect. Todd for one!
How the truth can come ’round and bite you in the butt.
Matt T. said,
October 5, 2008 at 22:12
Sockpuppet,
Agree totally, particularly about Alaska. Hell, I’d think my home state of Mississippi would be better off were it to secceed than Alaska would be. There’s at least more people than deer in the Magnolia State. Still, anyone who associates with seccessionist dingbats in this day and age deserves the type of scorn and mockery usually reserved for furries and libertarians. Calling ‘em “traitors” is being too generous. ‘Course, I know the Woman From Wassila is trying to get some mileage out of the Ayers nothing while ignoring the beam in her own eye, but whatareyagonnado…the sky is blue, puppies are cute, Elvis is awesome and conservatives are hypocrites. Some things are just axiomatic.
Matt T. said,
October 5, 2008 at 22:14
Actually, I’d LOVE to hear what Kinky thinks of Palin. Maybe his next book will feature a perky Alaskette with a dark side.
Only thing I can think of is his tune “Get Your Biscuits In The Oven (And Your Buns In The Bed)”.
Freshitt said,
October 5, 2008 at 22:15
Correction: It’s the Alaskan Independence Party.
Sockpuppet #47 said,
October 5, 2008 at 22:19
I think the bottom line is that in Alaska, the secessionist dingbats have some measure of influence, and Palin pandered to them because ultra right wingers with daft ideas are her base!
I think Palin is entirely in favour of Alaskan independence, if there is a chance of her getting appointed Queen. If however, she has a shot at the presidency of the USA, she is against it.
Matt T. said,
October 5, 2008 at 22:30
The more I see her, the more I think Sarah Palin doesn’t have a friggin’ clue as to what she is and isn’t in favor of, she just goes out and does what she’s told. Man alive, how close to a nub you reckon Christine Todd Whitman’s ground her teeth watching this vaccuous, Bible-thumping ninny pretty much submarine conservative women’s chances of ever getting this close to the Big Show?
Smiling Mortician said,
October 5, 2008 at 22:42
No kidding, Matt T. I was just about to say that Sandra Day O’Connor must be spinning in her grave, but alas, she’s still with us and is therefore probably banging a ceremonial gavel repeatedly into her forehead. Which is fine by me, given her performance in her last big SCOTUS case . . .
MzNicky said,
October 5, 2008 at 23:23
Palin the Hapless Ninny would be bad enough. Frank Rich’s column in the NYT today paints a much worse picture of the woman who would be
vicepresident.http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/05/opinion/05rich.html?_r=1&hp=&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print
Arky The Islahomobamaist said,
October 5, 2008 at 23:48
Nuh-uh. She’s in favor of things that benefit Sarah Palin.
She’s lazy and ignorant. She may or may not be dumber than a box of moose antlers. However, she’s cunning as all hell when it comes to getting what she wants.
Hmmm. Does this remind you of anyone?
Snorghagen said,
October 5, 2008 at 23:57
He told a Dallas Morning News photo editor “Sarah Palin is Ronald Reagan in a dress, and she struck a chord with the American people.” Since Friedman was once a Reagan supporter – and perhaps still is – I’m assuming that’s intended as a favorable comment. Link.
I am not an admirer of Kinky Friedman.
Abraham Fucking Lincoln said,
October 6, 2008 at 0:20
Look, I explained this to you once already…
Candy said,
October 6, 2008 at 0:48
I am not an admirer of Kinky Friedman
I positively loathe him. My partner finds him entertaining, for some reason.
Lesley said,
October 6, 2008 at 1:14
Why McCain is so damn polite when the very country is at stake confounds me.
He’s on the verge of blowing his gasket here and this isn’t polite. Calling your wife a cunt, in public no less, isn’t polite either but maybe that kind of thing turns Pam on.
Steve said,
October 6, 2008 at 1:38
Abraham Fucking Lincoln said,
October 6, 2008 at 0:20
The Alaskan Independence Party is a peaceful politcal party.
Look, I explained this to you once already…
Must have missed it….
N.C. said,
October 6, 2008 at 2:49
Shorter The Truth: The Republican Party of Helms, Thurmond, Fosselli, Vitter, Foley, Craig, DeLay, Doolittle, Ney, et al ad inf are the moral paragons of American politics since a couple people tangentially related to local politics did some stuff in the Sixties. It is to laugh, libs, indeed, heh.
RobW said,
October 6, 2008 at 3:45
As someone else here pointed out, but I’m too lazy to look up:
If Alaska actually managed to become independent, it would be a large oil-rich country with a population too small to field a real military force and thousands of miles of unprotected coastline. Good luck with that.
Matt T. said,
October 6, 2008 at 3:47
I positively loathe him. My partner finds him entertaining, for some reason.
See, I like the Kinster’s art. I like country music a lot and I’ve got a particularly special affection for the post-Dylan, post-Stax/Hi/American, post-Elvis era of “country music for people who’ve read a book or two.” Kinky, Ray Wylie Hubbard, Merle Haggard’s MCA years, Waylon’s Tompall-Glaser’s-best-buddie era, Billy Sherril making David Allan Coe and Johnny Paycheck sound fucking brilliant and beautiful even though they’re scary-ass rednecks, with all those funky bass-lines and nifty Chips Moman big-ass lead Tele solos, Billy Joe Shaver, Joe South, Tom T. Hall…all that shit. Plus, I like detective fiction and Kinky’s a pretty quick read. His first two records are bad-ass, tweaking country music tropes with affection not scorn like that goddawful Ween abortion (and most rock attempts at country), and his first three books are pretty good. After that, cocaine wrecked the first and taking himself too goddamn seriously ruined the latter.
However, he seems like he’d be a smug, irritating son of a bitch in person. Plus, the cigar thing. Sure, a good one tastes good, I’ll give ya that, but they all smell like burning horse turds, and you know this.
ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®© said,
October 6, 2008 at 3:57
The Truth reiterated a wingnut lying point for the bazillionth time, October 6, 2008 at 2:20
Yawn. Get some new material, d00d.
CatStaff said,
October 6, 2008 at 5:14
I say let’s allow Alaska to secede, then invade them, take their oil, and convert their leaders.
Or something.
Matt T. said,
October 6, 2008 at 5:20
For those who’ve missed it, the “Michelle Obama says ‘whitey’” video, via John Cole:
http://www.balloon-juice.com/?p=10570
It’s pretty heavy stuff, so don’t come bawling to me if it upsets your widdle sensibilities.
D.N. Nation said,
October 6, 2008 at 5:47
You’re boring as fuck, Troof.
Bina said,
October 6, 2008 at 5:48
The KKK characterization was much too kind. Next time, just say she’s Nanook of the Nazis.
jim said,
October 6, 2008 at 6:03
Pammycakes is in league with Rachel Ray!
Just not sure what “evi” is – Extra Vile Infiltration?
The Lie:
Isn’t KKK, hasn’t been for decades – & has regretted his prior association with them, as is well known.
You’re welcome.
Oh, & kudos for the umptillionth evocation of Chappaquidick, in relation to a pol respected if not outright revered by BOTH parties, who’s now dying of brain cancer. Real classy, dude. Thanks for showing everyone just what sort of person you really are.
Not long until November now, fuckhead.
MaineMan said,
October 6, 2008 at 6:27
My state gave up on seceding when it was widely realized that no one would notice or care.
Especially the forecasters on the Weather Channel.
Sigh.
Snorghagen said,
October 6, 2008 at 6:28
Friedman’s music has never interested me in the least. Politically, he’s basically a muddle-headed rightwinger – Burnt Orange Report has plenty of details. His 2006 joke run for governor mostly sucked votes away from the Democratic candidate and helped the detestable Rick Perry win by a substantially larger margin.
Like I said, I’m no fan of the guy.
Matt T. said,
October 6, 2008 at 6:44
Like I said, I’m no fan of the guy.
And like I said, he comes off like he’d be a smug sonofabitch. But his second album is killer bee.
ThinkingMeat · Sarah Palin: Sleeping with the enemy said,
October 6, 2008 at 13:54
[...] write a post on the utter silliness of Sarah Palin’s latest attack against Barack Obama, when Sadly, No took care of it in two [...]
mmm...lemonheads said,
October 6, 2008 at 15:38
I wonder if McCain finds it at all emasculating that the strategery in play is Paling being the attack dog. Or alpha, if you will.
The Truth's Dwindling Bag o' Wingnut Talking Points said,
October 6, 2008 at 15:47
Ted Kennedy’s a drunk! Robert Byrd was in the KKK! Boogity boogity boogity!
El Cid said,
October 6, 2008 at 17:01
The only disagreement right wingers have with Robert Byrd having been in the KKK is that he denounced the philosophy which led him there.
Had he been a lifelong, public, committed racist like Strom Thurmond or Jesse Helms or Trent Lott, and maintained his close connections to all the Klan-lite groups such as Conservative Citizens Council’s, etc., Byrd would still be a hero to them.
And in order for Chappaquiddick to be like John McCain’s involvement in Keating 5 corruption, Ted Kennedy would not only have gotten off fairly easy from any charges, he would have remained a life-long advocate of drunk driving itself.
Because John McCain’s worst crime in helping destroy our Savings & Loan banking industry wasn’t personally pressuring regulators to keep away from one S&L, but helping to fight for the anti-regulation, crime capitalism that killed the entire S&L industry and has currently brought the global economy to the brink of collapse.
No, there’s little comparison between the crimes of Republican association with Democrats, because the Republicans always manage to embrace whatever crime they were committing as being the correct philosophy and their only crime getting caught being involved personally.
Rick Massimo said,
October 6, 2008 at 17:53
New rule: You cannot talk about “the country” being “at stake” or “the end of America” without spelling out exactly what you mean. No more elections? No more free speech? No more dying of curable diseases because you don’t have health care? Or because your insurer doesn’t want to pay?
Because you might find that “the destruction of America” might not actually happen, or that a lot of people might want it.
Not Sarah Palin said,
October 6, 2008 at 18:22
“the destruction of America”
In what respect, Charley?
Mo's Bike Shop said,
October 6, 2008 at 18:42
So, you are just a stupid cunt.
http://www.nps.gov/archive/liho/secession.htm
mouthbreather.
jim said,
October 6, 2008 at 19:15
Why? Is Google illegal on Planet Fucktard?
Look up “Tony Zirkle” sometime, if you want to talk about pandering to extremist scum. Lulz aplenty.
I used to have a friend who was an ex-Skinhead. He’d been a hardcore Neonazi, & a real nasty specimen. When he dummied up, he became a really wonderful person. So yeah, if you light up your frontal lobes & get a fucking clue, even with a REALLY gruesome prior POV, you win the prize in my book.
Try it sometime.
Let’s face facts: you’re fishing like a motherfucker to score some cheap spite-points because you know damn well you’re on the losing team now. Kennedy went off a bridge into cold water in the dead of night & fought for his life to save himself, & he’s to be condemned by slimebags like you because he wasn’t enough of a bloody hero to float your boats? Been in that exact same situation & did better? No? Then piss off.
Laura Bush killed someone outright – you’re welcome to take her on first. I’m sure you’re JUST as outraged & sickened by that, right?
Poor pinhead.
bernard quatermass said,
October 6, 2008 at 19:45
“You’re boring as fuck, Troof.”
You got the “dull” part right, but don’t forget “white, pasty and unable to see his own genitals for decades.”
bernard quatermass said,
October 6, 2008 at 19:47
“Been in that exact same situation & did better? No? Then piss off.”
The Truth forgot to clean the lipstick from around his fly & that is one reason his ex hates him. But let’s be fair: there was a lot of lipstick because there was a lot of desperate fumbling around to even _find_ the measly, flaccid little thing.
Steve said,
October 7, 2008 at 2:38
So, you are just a stupid cunt.
http://www.nps.gov/archive/liho/secession.htm
mouthbreather.
Let’s see. I say the Alaskan Independence Party is a peaceful organization. I base this on the fact that all they do is sit around and talk about how it would be great if Alaska were independent. They don’t support violence, and have never done anything illegal to support their point of view.
The result of state seceding from the Union may or may not have a violent ending. Maybe if you were not a mouthbreathing stupid cunt, you would realize that that does not in any way contradict the fact that the AIP is not a peaceful organization.
Mo's Bike Shop said,
October 7, 2008 at 16:13
Steve,
If you just want to trade insults, then at least come up with your own damned insults you unimaginative little peckerwood.
If you want to defend your insipid assertions, get bailing whistleprick:
Wrong. You have no evidence to support the contention that a state can secede from the union without violence.
Whereas, real Americans, those who support the Constitution, have made a very clear precedent that such traitors will get their asses handed to them:
Exhibit A: Abraham Lincoln
Exhibit B: Ulysses S. Grant
Exhibit C: William Tecumseh Sherman
Q.E.F.D.
Go play with your militia dolls.