Please post all the ****faced Bitch Slut Palin dialog here.

Sarah Palin and the Argeo-nauts

By Margery Eagan


| Friday, November 7, 2008 | http://www.bostonherald.com | 2008 Campaign

Photo by AP
I guess you didn’t like it when I called Sarah Palin “a whack job,” did you, Argeo Paul Cellucci?

Or compared her to Ann-Margret in “Kitten with a Whip.”

Or obsessed over Sister Sarah’s double piercings and $89.96 Naughty Monkey Double Dare red open-toed patent leather pumps.

Former Massachusetts Gov. Cellucci apparently thinks it’s too much to expect a would-be vice president to know what a vice president does.

In a State House News Service story Wednesday, Cellucci singled me (moi?) out among the national media types who slimed the new shining star of his beleaguered Republican party.

Well, excuuuuuse me.

I have no choice but to defend my moonbat self, especially after the latest from those cheerleaders for all things Republican at Fox News: Ms. Sarah thinks Africa is a country, not a continent.

She doesn’t know which countries comprise North America, either. She threw temper tantrums on the trail, hurled objets at staffers and, according to Newsweek, greeted McCain aides at her hotel room in a towel.

Ooooo la la!

So I caught up with Cellucci in a cab in Toronto yesterday, and he diagnosed my problem right away: “gender bias.”

“I saw it with Jane Swift and Hillary Clinton and now with Sarah Palin,” Cellucci told me.

So does that mean you don’t think the Alaska governor’s a whack job, I asked.

“No, I don’t,” he said.

And what about Africa - the continent?

“Look, she’s not an expert. But look at her record in Alaska,” said our former ambassador to Canada.

Tell me true, Mr. Ambassador, wouldn’t you be nervous knowing Sarah the Barracuda had her finger on the button?

“She’s got judgment and she’s tough,” he said. “I’d like to see how many people could’ve walked out and given that convention speech.”

I must point out here: Jane Swift - seven months pregnant with twins and a baby at home - was sworn in as acting governor the day before Cellucci left us for the Great White North.

Maybe he thinks Ms. You Betcha can run the country for the same reasons he thought Swift, with three kids under 3 and a six hour daily commute, could run the state. Women can do the impossible. Or anybody can govern anything. Which one, I cannot say.

I do know this. Sarah Palin accepted John McCain’s offer knowing full well she slept through Civics 101. And now the GOP’s already talking her up for 2012.

Sorry, Argeo, but I’d take Jane Swift over an affirmative action fraud like Sarah Palin any day.

Article URL: http://www.bostonherald.com/news/politics/...ticleid=1130611

Another attack of Palin derangement syndrome. This ought to launch Sarah's presidential aspirations nicely.

What's she wearing today?

They used to say politics was show business for ugly people. The lesbos want to keep it that way and drive Sarah out.

Now it's PALIN derangement syndrome?

Palin and the GOP

Love Sarah Palin or hate her -- and there seems to be little in between -- the Alaska Governor has become a national political figure. She could have a big political future, assuming she and the many Republicans now trashing her learn something from their recent misadventures.
Last August we advised John McCain not to select a relative unknown like Mrs. Palin, in part because we remember the way Dan Quayle was treated. The media haze GOP candidates in a way they never do Democrats. (See Joe Biden, unreported gaffes of.) Any national-campaign novice was bound to be chewed up. Mr. McCain nonetheless decided to take one of his celebrated leaps off the high bar. (Our track record this campaign was perfect: If we proposed it, Mr. McCain did the opposite.)


Associated PressIn the event, Mrs. Palin's contribution to the McCain ticket was mixed. Her bravura convention speech defied the early media mockery and made her an instant hero among rank-and-file Republicans. Her reform credentials and social conservatism inspired a GOP base that was angry with its wayward party and wary of Mr. McCain. The exit polls show that conservative turnout was strong, and Mrs. Palin deserves some credit for that.

Yet Mrs. Palin was clearly thrust into the spotlight before she was prepared for the rigors of a national campaign. The McCain camp also did her no favors, initially keeping her under a quarantine that raised the stakes for any media interview she did do. When it finally handed her over to Charlie Gibson and Katie Couric, Mrs. Palin was set up to fail with ground rules that let CBS dribble out her uncertain answers night after night.

The nasty leaks and gossip about Mrs. Palin that are now emerging from sources inside the McCain campaign have the ring of score-settling. Staff aides who mishandled her, or set her up for the Couric embarrassment, are now saying she refused coaching. Perhaps these were the same advisers who told her to cite Alaska's proximity to Russia as a foreign-policy credential.

No one really cares by now who did what to whom. The important point is that Mrs. Palin isn't responsible for Tuesday's defeat. The sages who urged Mr. McCain to "suspend" his campaign and throw himself in the middle of bailout talks on Capitol Hill can take far more credit for the loss.
Mrs. Palin is of course responsible for her own campaign performance, and this was uneven at best. A generation ago, a candidate might have been able to get away with the missteps in the Couric interview, but not in the age of YouTube. On the day she was chosen, the Governor wasn't conversant enough with many of the biggest national security and economic debates. Amid the financial panic, all she could offer were populist bromides about "greed and corruption." Voters who heard those answers were no doubt among the 60% who told exit pollsters on Tuesday that they didn't feel she was ready to be Commander in Chief.

Only 44 years old, and now with a loyal conservative following, Mrs. Palin is nonetheless well-positioned to help shape the Republican future. Her grasp of energy policy suggests she's capable of mastering subjects when she wants to, and if she wants a national future she's going to have to do the same on national issues.

Our advice would be that she also broaden her appeal beyond the politics of cultural division. One unfortunate campaign decision was to turn Mrs. Palin's initial response to press criticism into a consistent theme. The Governor's stump speech took on an us-versus-them cast, framing the election as a battle between the "real America" and blue-state elites. Hard as it may be to believe, New Jersey is part of America too.

This was an odd turn for Mrs. Palin, given her reputation in Alaska of taking on her own party and reaching across the aisle. Her commitment to a set of principles -- cleaning up government, taking on crony capitalism -- is what earned her 90% job approval. Her decision to jettison that appeal in favor of a base-rallying cultural pitch turned off many independents and suburbanites. Mrs. Palin will need those Americans if she wants to rebuild a party that must win in places like suburban Philadelphia, Orlando and New Hampshire to retake the White House.

As for Mrs. Palin's Republican critics, they might consider if they can afford to write off a young leader with such natural political talent. We don't see a large constellation of other GOP stars on the horizon. Mr. McCain was right to understand that his party needs a new generation of leaders who haven't grown comfortable with the perks of Washington. Especially as Democrats once again grow the Beltway, the next GOP leaders will need to make a better case for entrepreneurship and limited government. Mrs. Palin deserves a chance to see if she has the skill and work ethic to become that kind of leader.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1226025422...s_wsj#printMode

Just to get into the spirit of things, pics of the clothes along with catty comments from the salesgirls at Saks.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/165227

Not Every Woman Supports Women's Rights

August 29, 2008

Statement of NOW PAC Chair Kim Gandy on the Selection of Sarah Palin as John McCain's Vice Presidential Pick

Sen. John McCain's choice of Alaska governor Sarah Palin as his running mate is a cynical effort to appeal to disappointed Hillary Clinton voters and get them to vote, ultimately, against their own self-interest.

Gov. Palin may be the second woman vice-presidential candidate on a major party ticket, but she is not the right woman. Sadly, she is a woman who opposes women's rights, just like John McCain.

The fact that Palin is a mother of five who has a 4-month-old baby, a woman who is juggling work and family responsibilities, will speak to many women. But will Palin speak FOR women? Based on her record and her stated positions, the answer is clearly No.

In a gubernatorial debate, Palin stated emphatically that her opposition to abortion was so great, so total, that even if her teenage daughter was impregnated by a rapist, she would "choose life" -- meaning apparently that she would not permit her daughter to have an abortion.

Palin also had to withdraw her appointment of a top public safety commissioner who had been reprimanded for sexual harassment, although Palin had been warned about his background through letters by the sexual harassment complainant.

What McCain does not understand is that women supported Hillary Clinton not just because she was a woman, but because she was a champion on their issues. They will surely not find Sarah Palin to be an advocate for women.

Sen. Joe Biden is the VP candidate who appeals to women, with his authorship and championing of landmark domestic violence legislation, support for pay equity, and advocacy for women around the world.

Finally, as the chair of NOW's Political Action Committee, I am frequently asked whether NOW supports women candidates just because they are women. This gives me an opportunity to once again answer that question with an emphatic 'No.' We recognize the importance of having women's rights supporters at every level but, like Sarah Palin, not every woman supports women's rights.

###

For Immediate Release
Contact: Mai Shiozaki, 202-628-8669, ext. 116; cell 202-641-1906
Sign up to receive press releases by email | by RSS

Copyright 1995-2008, All rights reserved. Permission granted for non-commercial use. National Organization for Women
(This was printed from http://www.now.org/press/08-08/08-29.html)

There's no business like blow business...

whoops... no lipstick



Sarah Palin, Democratic Underground PLANT

I used to get Newsweek back when it was a news magazine.

This thread has all the class of a flasher at a Girl Scout picnic. No, wait, that would be holding that flashers had any class.

Personally I think that the lipstick lesbians should become the poster face of gay marriage. It would appeal more to heterosexual men.

They definitely need some sort of change. If even CA is voting against gay marriage it's going to be tough sledding making it acceptable across the country.

Any chance of going back to working on civil unions, or is it all or nothing on the gay side?

It was very very sad. The irony is that the same effect that elected Obama, doomed California marriage. The increase in African-American and Latino voters is what killed it. Had that increase not occurred, it would have been defeated (in this case a defeat would have keep marriage rights). I'm still confident that it will eventually come to pass in my lifetime. I personally think that civil unions that have ALL the rights and responsibilities of marriage - essentially a difference in name only - would probably be the most logical first step approach, even though "separate but equal" is rarely so.

farking black homophobes.

They aren't all socially liberal. Go figure the unintended consequences. Last time the ammendment failed here, so you may be right. I heard almost no ads against the ammendment in AZ and I don't think the outcome was all that lopsided. Means with some effort what was done could be undone.



I always figured civil union was the compromise both sides might go for, but seems to me both have become entrenched. I figured early on I'd vote for marriage given the chance, but fully expected unions to be as good as it gets. Real unions that pretty much give everything marriage does outside of some religious trappings and a title, not some watered down visitation and property rights.

Generally I think people ought to be able to work out any contract they agree to with another human adult. Call it what you want.

I think that gay people would have gone for civil unions as a first step had religious conservatives accepted the distinction. The problem is that in general they don't accept civil unions either. I agree that the crucial issue with civil unions is that the rights and responsibilities are not watered down. If the choice is between nothing and nothing, one might as well reach for the brass ring.

It's brass alright. I thought it was gold.

I assume this will be a long process. AZ is 1-1 on the question so there's still a shot.

I suspect that gays are simply using the issue to force acceptance of their lifestyle. From a religiously(Christian) moral perspective the notion of marriage has little to nothing to do with secular rights and responsibilities but is rather a spiritual union between a man and a woman. It is this diametric opposition that will prevent an acceptable resolution for all involved.

Unfortunately, from my perspective, I see the Christian approach to moral absolutes as the ultimate loser. It may seem ridiculous, for instance, to think that entities like NAMBLA may gain social acceptance, that murder might be an enjoybable video experience on youtube, or that a single consenting agency in a group is sufficient.

For some reason, we think that our society has somehow the ability to freeze contemporary notions of perversion ... it really don't work that way.

“The Palin phenomenon is actually the result of a practical joke gone haywire,” admitted Rick Davis, former McCain campaign manager. “John was a guest on the Morning Madness radio show on Phoenix’s KZZP, hosted by Fireball Frantic and Gene the Bean. When Frantic asked McCain which political figure was the least qualified to be his running mate, McCain mentioned an obscure governor from who was an ex-beauty queen. Frantic insisted McCain prove he was still young enough to be ‘with it’ and insisted he make that call to Alaska.”

“It was just a joke,” McCain recalls, “but she was so sincere and so excited, I didn’t have the heart to tell her I was just kidding. The hardest thing about it,” admits McCain, “was having to tell my real selection, Joe Lieberman that he was, well, not a chosen person when it came to being the veep.”

PALIN PUNK’D BY McCAIN
http://ptsd1.blogspot.com/2008/11/palin-pu...-j-shulman.html

This is what the right is reduced to? Friggen Palin defenders? wow.

Yes sir.


Brainless zealots.

Sad, ain't it.

The whacked-out, left-wing nuts just can't get enough of Palin.

I think The Baby Jesus ordered his campaign managers at CBS, ABC, NBC, MSNBC, FOX, CNN, ESPN, NPR and the like to keep the Palin stories going to keep the heat off of The Baby Jesus's decision making process in choosing a new puppy for the White House.

Ouch

It isn't about your opinion of perversion, but about what's your buisness and what isn't.

They gotta stop using the same word, though. The legal issue is not about the sacrament.

Amen.

Btw, 99.99% of people would like what they hold (ahem, at any given time) as 'absolute standards' to be so held by everyone else, as well.

Sarah Palin's attacks on Barack Obama's patriotism provoked a spike in death threats against the future president, Secret Service agents revealed during the final weeks of the campaign.The attacks provoked a near lynch mob atmosphere at her rallies, with supporters yelling 'terrorist' and 'kill him' until the McCain campaign ordered her to tone down the rhetoric.

http://www.opednews.com/maxwrite/link.php?id=74947

For argument's sake, the defining of who's business it may be is at the heart of the problem. Your position is likely to be that whatever happens between consenting adults is "their business"...which is not always a logical posture.

A stretched example may be one in which two consenting adults are building a nuclear bomb in the privacy of their own home...a conceivably real example, in which case it would have been nice for the majority if others had known their business.

A second, and more troubling example, is that the current notions of "adult" and "consent" are likely to change...making the actions of individuals difficult to define, reward, or punish in terms of even a sliding moral scale.

So, I whole-heartedly disagree ... it is about my opinion of perversion. Not because it's mine ... but because it's foundation is absolute.

Perhaps that's one reason why, ahem, there SHOULD be an absolute.

who decides?

It was decided some time ago, bozo.


Btw, you finally made an appropriate selection of an avatar.

who decided and when, mr charming?


look what I pulled outa my ass

I wonder how long the mindless Obama ass-kissing will go on?

Another day at least is appears.

The first time voters that were too lazy to pick up a paper and study or register in the past are going to be the first to go back to their old ways. That youtube lady doesn't get her mortgage and car paid for and ain't voting for the good of the country is going to be the most disappointed earliest.

OYEZ !

Life would be so much easier if I were incharge of everyone else's too....





Your example isn't stretched. it isn't an example to distinguish what is your buisness from what is not.
It is not comparable on any basis whatsoever. Your inability to distinguish the two is part of your problem.




Inyer you're so dam funny, I wish I had your computer skills





Some time yet, no doubt. This is an example of actual political support as distinguished from the manufactured kind we've been seing for too long now. I admit it's a little unnerving, but Obama doesn't seem to be letting it affect him.



Their defense coud be seen, is being seen as contributing to her peak performance - she seems to have done as well as she ever could being elevated to it by McCain. She would not have gotten there on her own, even with political and career maturing - assuming she gets a chance to grow she may yet be back, but I doubt she'll be at the top of the game even among the Reps, and if she is it'll just be an example of how irrelevant they'll be if she is.

She's a marker for failure.

I wish all those Reps booing during McCain's concession knew how much they were part of his defeat and more important in his defeat than Palin ever was.

That's lefty thinking, and why I'm no Obama fan.

Obama would be nothing without crooked Chicago politics and a shot at a big speech early on. There's always some luck involved.

She's not who I'd support, but the unequal treatment in the press leads me to take her side over theirs. Or Obama's for that matter.

Lefty thinking? Bush and the pubes set up damned near a dictatorship undermining the Constitution and the rule of law, demanding EVERYONE either comply or be labeled as unpatriotic terorrist lovers and you say nothing.

You are one twisted puppy.

Wah, wah, wah.


She was not treated unfairly. It's not our fault the ignorant assholes didn't vet her any better than they did.

She is unqualified.

Obama is unqualified and he's prez. So all that matters is votes.

That's Repub Bub's thinking too, and he means it more sincerely than I do and I recognize the imposibility of it, the undesireability of it, and don't invoke God's will to put it forward.

cheney was qualified so we got 911

Actually, lets compare shrub's qualifications versus Obama's

son of cia

Obama's leadership skills got him from nothing to where he is today. Granted Chicago politics, the luck of a shot at the Demconvention in '04, granted, the worst President ever and all of the administrations works falling down around their ears as the campaign progressed, granted too, the clear inability of the GOP to get it's candidates' best features forward and make them relevant keep them there even assuming that would have been enough.

Articulate intelligent calm leadership surrounded by wisdom is a far cry from anything we've had this last eight years, and better, I think, than what we had for so many years before: Clinton only the best President between Nixon and the end of the century.

I'll take that ahead of anything either party offerred this time around as a choice or any choice in my imagining.

No question.