Palin’s Attorney Threatening Lawsuits

Politics • Views: 5,053

The Washington Post has an open letter from Sarah Palin’s attorney (PDF), threatening to sue Alaskan blogger Shannyn Moore and several media sources:

To the extent several websites, most notably liberal Alaska blogger Shannyn Moore, are now claiming as “fact” that Governor Palin resigned because she is “under federal investigation” for embezzlement or other criminal wrongdoing, we will be exploring legal options this week to address such defamation. This is to provide notice to Ms. Moore, and those who re-publish the defamation, such as Huffington Post, MSNBC, the New York Times and The Washington Post, that the Palins will not allow them to propagate defamatory material without answering to this in a court of law. The Alaska Constitution protects the right of free speech, while simultaneously holding those “responsible for the abuse of that right.” Alaska Constitution Art. I, Sec. 5. These falsehoods abuse the right to free speech; continuing to publish these falsehoods of criminal activity is reckless, done without any regard for the truth, and is actionable.

Jump to bottom

932 comments
1 Shug  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 12:53:24pm

Cha ching

2 theheat  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 12:53:26pm

I don't see why Palin should take any less action against lies than, say, Tom Cruise.

3 Dianna  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 12:54:17pm

Good heavens.

I guess, since the libel is public, the response needs to be.

But...wow, that really seems like a bad move to me.

4 quiet man  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 12:54:29pm

Good for her. Just like Obama did here in Missouri during the election

5 neomexicon  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 12:54:35pm

Go get em Sarah! I would do no less if someone went after my family like they did hers.

6 karmic_inquisitor  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 12:55:04pm

How stupid would that be?

Politicians can't get anywhere on a tort claim.

Better if she just used the attacks as more fuel for her admirers.

7 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 12:55:30pm
8 theheat  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 12:55:38pm

The FBI even 'fessed there is no investigation. People need to buy a clue.

9 quiet man  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 12:55:44pm

re: #6 karmic_inquisitor
I dont think we Palin supporters need such fuel...I don't.

10 stuck in california  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 12:56:28pm

Go Sarah!

11 Baier  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 12:56:45pm

I don't know if it'll work out for her, but I wish I could sue Saturday Night Live for sucking 99% of the time.

12 Dianna  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 12:57:08pm

re: #6 karmic_inquisitor

How stupid would that be?

Politicians can't get anywhere on a tort claim.

Better if she just used the attacks as more fuel for her admirers.

An accusation that a governor is under federal investigation for embezzlement - particularly if it's not true - is a vile thing. I don't know much about law, but I'd seriously hesitate to call someone a thief without good evidence.

13 Shug  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 12:57:13pm

from shannyn moore's latest blog entry

Sarah Palin, if you have a problem with me, then sue me. Shannyn Moore will not be muzzled

be careful what you wish for shannyn.

14 Ron Bacardi  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 12:57:20pm

The attorney is pretty much stating the obvious. The media and bloggers already know what's the score when it comes to defamatory suits

15 Charles Johnson  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 12:57:34pm

The Republican Party's vice presidential nominee is threatening to sue a blogger?

Really, really bad move.

16 Dianna  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 12:58:06pm

re: #11 Baier

I don't know if it'll work out for her, but I wish I could sue Saturday Night Live for sucking 99% of the time.

Sturgeon's Law: 90% of everything is crap.

17 Ron Bacardi  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 12:58:28pm

re: #6 karmic_inquisitor

Yes she can. The bar is very VERY high for public officials, but it is still possible to win.

18 capitalist piglet  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 12:58:45pm

I once had a stalker on a sports website. I complained to the management; they took cosmetic measures (suspension, banning, but not by IP)...and he continued to harass me beyond belief.

I'm not one to cede ground to someone like that, but it was really getting to me. Finally, I found and publicly quoted the federal law about internet stalking, and within minutes, it was all over.

Maybe that's all she's doing here. Calling their bluff.

19 Shug  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 12:59:03pm

250 dollars an hour adds up really quickly.

(ask anybody who's been divorced)

20 quiet man  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 12:59:17pm

re: #15 Charles
Maybe so..yet again..Obama did the same thing.

Note that it is on one topic only. The libs can still opine about her kids when they run out of issues..which was..last year sometime if I recall.

21 turn  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 12:59:17pm

Was there a consensus here over the weekend on that Palin thread about what her intent was in stepping down? If she simply intended to blend back into a private life then this just doesn't quite jive with threatening to sue somebody. Wouldn't it be better to just let these comments go and get on with your private life rather then dwell on them? I think she is going to run in 2012 personally, I don't think she stands a very good chance of getting picked though. And if you thought the MSM was brutal to her as a VP running mate, just wait and see them frothing at the mouth if she runs for POTUS.

22 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 12:59:28pm
23 tommygum  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 12:59:35pm

re: #6 karmic_inquisitor

How stupid would that be?

Politicians can't get anywhere on a tort claim.

Better if she just used the attacks as more fuel for her admirers.


Maybe that's why she resigned.

No longer a politician then.

24 Dahveed  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 12:59:39pm

It seems rather small and petty. I mean a potential presidential candidate should have a thicker skin. She'll be accused of a lot of things and can't sue everyone.

25 Sharmuta  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 12:59:45pm

This reminds me of someone else who likes to cry they'll fetch their lawyer.

26 FurryOldGuyJeans  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 12:59:54pm

re: #15 Charles

The Republican Party's vice presidential nominee is threatening to sue a blogger?

Really, really bad move.

Just me, but I see this pre-emptive threats of legal action as only adding fuel to the fire. This will only make a number of people think there really is something to the allegations.

27 Kenneth  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 12:59:56pm

re: #15 Charles

The Republican Party's vice presidential nominee is threatening to sue a blogger?

Really, really bad move.

A blogger nobody reads. Until now, that is.

28 quiet man  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:00:12pm

re: #24 Dahveed
Who is more thinned skinned than Obama?

29 karmic_inquisitor  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:00:16pm

re: #9 quiet man

I dont think we Palin supporters need such fuel...I don't.

But a lawsuit? I guess I am conflicted. Abuse of the courts is something that bugs me. I expect it from the left, and I expect the right to point out the abuse.

This seems to be engaging in it.

30 karmic_inquisitor  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:01:00pm

re: #12 Dianna

An accusation that a governor is under federal investigation for embezzlement - particularly if it's not true - is a vile thing. I don't know much about law, but I'd seriously hesitate to call someone a thief without good evidence.

That is because you are a decent person.

Don't confuse the courts and decency.

31 redstateredneck  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:01:09pm

I don't know if it's a good move or a bad move on her part, but I can understand that she's sick of the shit. She and her family have been through more than any other candidate ever.

32 quiet man  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:01:28pm

re: #29 karmic_inquisitor

Her lawyer put the scumbags on notice that she will not tolerate this lie.

I think supporting liars is a poor decision.

33 theheat  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:01:44pm

re: #25 Sharmuta

That's a pretty big field of candidates!

34 Baier  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:01:48pm

re: #24 Dahveed

It seems rather small and petty. I mean a potential presidential candidate should have a thicker skin. She'll be accused of a lot of things and can't sue everyone.

I wonder if she thinks she has to put some fear into the media if she wants to have a shot. I absolutely think the MSM is despicable concerning her, but I'm just trying to figure out the thought process here...

35 capitalist piglet  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:02:33pm

re: #15 Charles

She may be a little more than just a blogger. Her HuffPo bio:

Shannyn Moore is an award winning progressive radio broadcaster based in Anchorage, Alaska. Born Alaskan. Patriot. Constitutionalist. Lover of Freedom. Giving hell to the establishment. Standing up to fascism and tyranny...both foreign and domestic. Shannyn loves Jesus and knows the devil.

I also thought I read somewhere that she had an official connection to the Democrats in Alaska, but I can't confirm that quickly. It may not be accurate, but I thought that's what I read.

36 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:02:33pm
37 Barb42  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:02:34pm

Go, Sarah! This is not about thick skin - I want her to kick a$$ and go for the top. Thank God we have one Republican with the guts to stand up to the Left and its process of personal distruction! Too many gutless wonders out there now.

38 quiet man  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:02:51pm

re: #34 Baier
Recall again, it iosn't all the insults..just the one lie that will be shouted out by the lettermans and the Frankens of the world.

39 pre-Boomer Marine brat  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:02:59pm

Accountability is something which too few in the media and on the Web understand.

Even more important, too few of those seem to have any sense of personal honor.

For them, it's about emotion.

/which is why I'm here and not out there!

40 quiet man  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:03:28pm

re: #37 Barb42
So true. upding!

41 midwestgak  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:03:30pm

". . . and is actionable." Falsehood is actionable? Not since Carol Burnett sued the tabloids and won. Different era now.

42 DaddyG  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:03:33pm

There is a special place in (insert eternal torment of your choice here) for those bloggers and reporters who savaged Governor Palin and her family.

However, sometimes its best to let the defamation die of its own lack of substance.

If her aim at resigning was to spare Alaskans the red tape and cost of legal suits this defeats her purpose.

If her aim at resigning was to prepare for another run at a national office this defeats her purpose.

Even a legal victory will be a PR nightmare for her and the Republican Party as the words "Federal Investigation" and "Corruption" keep getting circulated over and over.

43 OldLineTexan  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:03:38pm

re: #3 Dianna

Good heavens.

I guess, since the libel is public, the response needs to be.

But...wow, that really seems like a bad move to me.

Bad move if it's true.

If it's a lie, it's a measured attempt to do her political harm, and it fits the pattern of attack used against Palin since she hit the national stage. She seems to have not chosen the McCain Middle Way, to coin a term.

It's just as disgusting as nirth certifikit nonsense.

44 J.D.  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:03:46pm

re: #12 Dianna

An accusation that a governor is under federal investigation for embezzlement - particularly if it's not true - is a vile thing. I don't know much about law, but I'd seriously hesitate to call someone a thief without good evidence.

I agree.

45 harrylook  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:03:56pm

re: #15 Charles

The Republican Party's vice presidential nominee is threatening to sue a blogger?

Really, really bad move.

Why? Is she going to lose any supporters over this? As a Palin supporter, I love it. Palin-haters will never lack for reasons to hate the woman. And this is not abuse of process, as karmic seems to imply. If someone lies about another person, in an attempt to slander them, they should expect to get sued. Being a hate-filled moronic left-wing blogger isn't a defense.

46 karmic_inquisitor  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:03:59pm

re: #23 tommygum

Maybe that's why she resigned.

No longer a politician then.

But the tort will have occurred while she was and has to do with her as a Governor, not as a private citizen.

Now if someone wants to hassle her as a private citizen, that is a different story. But I am not sure I want public officials to have access to "cease and desist" orders against their critics. If Palin gets to do that then so can Pelosi. Then we all are well and truly screwed.

47 CommonCents  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:04:52pm

re: #1 Shug

Cha ching

Filling the campaign coffers one judgement at a time. That's a new approach... I think.

48 Russkilitlover  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:05:12pm

If that blogger was a moose, her head would be on Sarah's wall. She should feel fortunate it's just a lawsuit.

I heard on someone's radio show last week a caller who was a local Alaskan radio host. He was saying how the left in Alaska has been vicious to Sarah and repeatedly, her family. And that ever since the DNC (or Obama) sent their goons up there after her nomination, it's been continued nastiness with no holds barred.

I hope she sues the crap out of that blogger.

49 OldLineTexan  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:05:14pm

Hey, MSM, it might be a good time to quit lifting news from blogs.

/just sayin'

50 Danny  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:05:20pm

re: #15 Charles

I'm not convinced that blanket statement is true. I'd say it all depends on the facts.

51 Ron Bacardi  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:05:38pm

re: #46 karmic_inquisitor

Again, public officials CAN win in a defamatory tort; however, the bar for them is set extremely high. They have to show not just damages and intent, but ACTUAL MALICE as well.

52 Sharmuta  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:05:47pm

re: #45 harrylook

And if it was CAIR whining they'll get their lawyer, would you support that?

53 Rancher  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:05:53pm

re: #15 Charles

The Republican Party's vice presidential nominee is threatening to sue a blogger?

Really, really bad move.


If she was still Governor probably, but she isn't, or at least won't be soon. Aside from now being able to raise money to pay legal fees stemming from frivolous lawsuits, allowing her picked subordinate to effectively govern where she couldn't, and hopefully shielding her family from further abuse Sarah can now seek redress from slander just like any other private citizen. Whether any of this is good or bad vis a vis her future political career is probably irrelevant to her right now.

54 CEQAttorney  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:05:59pm

I've been a huge Sarah Palin supporter. I thought the media attack on her were patently ridiculous and mean spirited. I had hoped she would remain as a viable candidate for the Presidency. While she was governor, she said and did the right things. She spoke out against corruption, even in her own party, she criticized our failures at a fuel policy, and she was against the extreme spending measures that our current President is forcing on the public.

However, now? She's pretty much done. Quitting in mid-term, regardless of the motivations, does not look good. Attacking members of the media does not look good. How can she maintain herself in the public eye without a significant platform.

Our greatest President of the past 80 years, Ronald Reagan, stayed as Governor of California until his term was done. He didn't quit when the going got tough. He kept doing his job.

Sarah Palin says the right things, but I am not convninced anymore that she will do the right things.

55 Charles Johnson  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:06:09pm

I think it's a terrible precedent to set, for politicians to start suing people who write mean or untrue things about them.

And she has almost no chance of winning such lawsuits, as a very public figure.

56 Killgore Trout  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:06:10pm

I'm furious that McCain put her on the ticket. This is so embarrassing.

57 Honorary Yooper  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:06:11pm

re: #15 Charles

The Republican Party's vice presidential nominee is threatening to sue a blogger?

Really, really bad move.

Depends. If the accusation is not true, and she can back it up, then the blogger's accusations have become libel, and therefore, subject to libel laws. If the accusation is true, then she has not legal basis from which to sue.

58 J.S.  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:06:12pm

CNN this morning had on its "ticker" a note (not quoting verbatim) to the effect that "The FBI is not investigating Sarah Palin"...(hmm...if this is all just a PR stunt or some way to get one's "name in the news", I'd have to say, this really isn't the way to go about it...)

59 quiet man  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:06:14pm

re: #51 Ron Bacardi
Spreading of a deliberate lie after being warned would be malice

60 doppelganglander  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:06:46pm

re: #48 Russkilitlover

If that blogger was a moose, her head would be on Sarah's wall. She should feel fortunate it's just a lawsuit.

That is today's phrase that pays.

61 quiet man  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:07:18pm

Yes, it could be a trend....I wonder what the end result would be if that were the case...

62 capitalist piglet  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:07:22pm

re: #56 Killgore Trout

I'm furious that McCain put her on the ticket. This is so embarrassing.

You didn't vote for them. Why are you embarrassed?

63 debutaunt  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:07:30pm

re: #26 FurryOldGuyJeans

Just me, but I see this pre-emptive threats of legal action as only adding fuel to the fire. This will only make a number of people think there really is something to the allegations.

Hummmmm. I'd wonder if she let the rumors run rampant.

64 midwestgak  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:07:34pm

re: #56 Killgore Trout

I'm furious that McCain put her on the ticket. This is so embarrassing.

Would you have known who she was if he hadn't? just askin.

65 pre-Boomer Marine brat  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:07:35pm

bbl

66 Russkilitlover  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:07:44pm

re: #42 DaddyG

If her aim at resigning was to spare Alaskans the red tape and cost of legal suits this defeats her purpose.

If her aim at resigning was to prepare for another run at a national office this defeats her purpose.

Everyone has the right to say "F&ck this Sh*t, I'm outta here" on occasion. I think she exercised that right.

67 Sharmuta  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:07:46pm

If this was anyone but Sarah- I don't think you guys would support this.

68 Ron Bacardi  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:08:06pm

re: #59 quiet man

Perhaps; it's all about facts and circumstances.

69 Son of the Black Dog  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:08:11pm

As a family, the Palins have had to endure more trash talk than any political family I can remember. She can now set up a legal fund that will draw a lot of money in contributions, then turn around and start costing her opponents big bucks in lawyers' fees and lost time for depositions and document production.

70 tommygum  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:08:11pm

re: #46 karmic_inquisitor

Good point.

71 SixDegrees  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:08:19pm

Probably not a smart move. Public figure. Almost impossible to win a libel claim.

Not to mention that one of her own reasons for resigning was the excess of frivolous lawsuits brought against her. Doing what you just got done roundly criticizing your opposition for doing will be labeled "hypocrisy" in short order.

Worse: now that she's made the threat, she'll add the "all talk and no action" to the "quitter" label already being pinned on her if she doesn't follow through with it.

72 Rancher  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:08:30pm

re: #55 Charles
Being a "very public figure" doesn't matter, ask celebrities who have successfully sued the National Enquirer.

73 quiet man  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:08:33pm

re: #68 Ron Bacardi

True and that is the rub, isn't it?

74 Russkilitlover  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:08:39pm

re: #52 Sharmuta

And if it was CAIR whining they'll get their lawyer, would you support that?

If Rush Limbaugh or other commentator alleged criminal acts that were not true and hammered that point endlessly, then yes, I would support that.

75 lawhawk  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:09:01pm

All this will do is fan the flames of those conspiracy minded folks who think she has something to hide. Were those comments really going to affect Palin that much claiming that there were pending investigations when the FBI already stated explicitly that no such investigation was underway? I think it was a bad move on her part, but then again, it's not my character being assassinated by the bloggers and media outlets that repeat this nonsense.

I think Palin got bad advice here on how to deal with this.

Meanwhile, how long are we into the recession and the so-called financial wizard Mayor Mike Bloomberg is now getting around to calling for a City hiring freeze? What took him so long to realize the stunningly obvious.

76 Ron Bacardi  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:09:12pm

re: #73 quiet man

Indeed. This is why I don't plan on becoming a tort lawyer.

77 Killgore Trout  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:09:14pm

re: #62 capitalist piglet

Because we need a viable alternative to the Dems. The Republican brand is suffering huge damage at its own hands.

78 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:09:19pm
79 OldLineTexan  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:09:31pm

re: #63 debutaunt

Hummmmm. I'd wonder if she let the rumors run rampant.

And there you have it; damned if you do, and damned if you don't.

She lost any future vote of mine by resigning (although for folks who are worried about wasting money on lawsuits, that was the reason she gave), so I have no dog in this fight.

But just making up that rumor to toss around, and waiting for it to be picked up by the MSM, is beyond the pale.

80 J.S.  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:09:35pm

re: #71 SixDegrees

Sarah Palin's moves here just keep getting dumber and dumber...(increasingly bizarre.)

81 reloadingisnotahobby  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:09:37pm

Ahem.....Gov Palin could have asked for a duel .............
I wonder who I'd bet on?
/

82 Danny  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:09:44pm

re: #55 Charles

I agree with "mean." Disagree with "untrue," especially if it can be demonstrated the blogger KNOWS it is untrue.

83 FurryOldGuyJeans  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:09:54pm

re: #67 Sharmuta

If this was anyone but Sarah- I don't think you guys would support this.

I certainly am not supporting her threatening legal action.

84 Spider Mensch  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:10:08pm

re: #45 harrylook

Why? Is she going to lose any supporters over this? As a Palin supporter, I love it. Palin-haters will never lack for reasons to hate the woman. And this is not abuse of process, as karmic seems to imply. If someone lies about another person, in an attempt to slander them, they should expect to get sued. Being a hate-filled moronic left-wing blogger isn't a defense.

the answer to your question lies in the rest of your answer. all of the lizards here on a regular basis know Charles is not a big fan of Palin, as is his right. and he's entitled to his opinions as much, if not more, than anyone. His opinions, his site.

85 capitalist piglet  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:10:16pm

re: #77 Killgore Trout

Because we need a viable alternative to the Dems. The Republican brand is suffering huge damage at its own hands.

Are you a Republican? Forgive me - I honestly don't know. I would never have guessed that, though.

86 looking closely  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:10:46pm

re: #55 Charles

I think it's a terrible precedent to set, for politicians to start suing people who write mean or untrue things about them.

And she has almost no chance of winning such lawsuits, as a very public figure.

Depends on what's said.

Being an elected official doesn't give anyone the right to slander or libel you, nor should it.

Anyway, threatening to sue doesn't mean she will sue. This is just a pointed way to get the libellers to STFU.

87 harrylook  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:10:49pm

re: #52 Sharmuta

And if it was CAIR whining they'll get their lawyer, would you support that?

That depends entirely upon the facts of the case. Did someone lie about CAIR? In that case, they have a right to sue. Whining that someone brought up CAIR's well-documented connections to terrorists is not the same as publishing articles about a federal investigation that never existed. Apples v. Oranges.

88 kynna  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:11:18pm

I don't know that a lawsuit would accomplish anything, but some bloggers and the news media that reprint the 'controversy' have really crossed the line with Palin, it seems to me. If nobody else is going to stand up for her, then she has to stand up for herself with the weapons she has.

All the blogger has to do is word the whole thing as a question. That's how the MSM gets away with it.

I don't think this is a bad move any more it's been a bad move to ignore the radicalization of the media over the past several decades.

Time will tell, I guess.

89 CommonCents  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:11:27pm

re: #15 Charles

The Republican Party's vice presidential nominee is threatening to sue a blogger?

Really, really bad move.

What would be the appropriate move? Between the internet and anti-republican lie machines like CBS, NYT, HuffPo who will repeat anything without validating sources, what other recourse is there.

90 DaddyG  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:11:33pm

re: #66 Russkilitlover

Everyone has the right to say "F&ck this Sh*t, I'm outta here" on occasion. I think she exercised that right.

...and if that was truly her intent, to get out of the limelight and stay out. Then the suit may be a good move...

The sad coda to all of this is the lasting wet blanket it throws over many good candidates for public office. Which Mr or Mrs. Smith wants to go to Washington for the priveledge of dealing with crap like this?

91 midwestgak  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:11:36pm

re: #28 quiet man

Who is more thinned skinned than Obama?

Biden. Pelosi. etc.

92 Honorary Yooper  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:11:36pm

re: #55 Charles

I think it's a terrible precedent to set, for politicians to start suing people who write mean or untrue things about them.

And she has almost no chance of winning such lawsuits, as a very public figure.

I'm not so sure she can't win this. The accusation is that she is under federal investigation, therefore she resigned. That should be easy enough to prove or disprove. If she's not under investigation, then Ms. Moore is in the wrong, and deserves what she gets. It is libel if that is the case. Granted, libel in the US is tough to prove (compared to Britian), but it has been done.

93 Killgore Trout  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:11:42pm

re: #85 capitalist piglet

Nope. I'm independent.

94 Conservative in Liberal Hands  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:12:06pm

My initial reaction to the news that Gov. Palin was going to resign from public office was "the attack of the hyenas does work against a GOP politician." I do want to see if it will work against a Democratic one...

There has been a long standing tactic for larger and better funded organizations to wage "legal warfare" upon smaller and less deep pocketed foes. Perhaps through her attorney, Ms. Palin is "Raising the bar" while putting a warning shot towards a left-wing blogging community?

95 SixDegrees  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:12:14pm

re: #12 Dianna

An accusation that a governor is under federal investigation for embezzlement - particularly if it's not true - is a vile thing. I don't know much about law, but I'd seriously hesitate to call someone a thief without good evidence.

It certainly is vile, but passing along rumors isn't illegal; it happens every day in news articles around the world.

If someone had written that Palin had actually engaged in illegal activity, stating it as a first-hand fact that was shown to be false - and if it could be proven that the person making the statement knew it was false - then it might be actionable. Even then, libel claims involving public figures are extremely difficult to prosecute successfully.

96 MJ  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:12:16pm

As if her resignation didn't call into question her judgment, she now compounds the error.

97 quiet man  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:12:18pm

re: #91 midwestgak
Not so much as Obama...those two are just scared of the truth coming out.

98 Shug  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:12:31pm

re: #28 quiet man

Who is more thinned skinned than Obama?

the TOTUS is so thin you can see right through it

99 RunningBare  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:12:44pm

This decent, honorable, good woman and her family have put up with more vile hatred and crap than any politician in recent memory - the words used by the Left to describe her, including the 'C' word, were bad enough, but to then go after her teenage daughters with sex jokes on national television, and the shit they spewed about her son Trig, well, fuck the political left in my humble opinion.

If she wants to start holding these fuckers accountable for their disgusting lies, then all I have to say to Sarah is, YOU GO GIRL!

100 BeerDrinking_VictoryMonkey  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:12:54pm

re: #98 Shug

the TOTUS is so thin you can see right through it

He did promise to be transparent, after all.

101 capitalist piglet  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:13:09pm

This woman is a talkshow host on the radio in Alaska. She has a wider audience, I presume (but you never know), than a few people reading her blog.

I think it is intended to be to her benefit that she now identifies as just a "blogger".

102 quiet man  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:13:18pm

re: #100 BeerDrinking_VictoryMonkey
Hah! One of the promises he kept

103 Fenway_Nation  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:13:24pm

I question the timing....

/

104 capitalist piglet  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:13:30pm

re: #93 Killgore Trout

Nope. I'm independent.

Then you have no reason to feel embarrassed.

105 Ben Hur  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:13:43pm

re: #92 Honorary Yooper

I'm not so sure she can't win this. The accusation is that she is under federal investigation, therefore she resigned. That should be easy enough to prove or disprove. If she's not under investigation, then Ms. Moore is in the wrong, and deserves what she gets. It is libel if that is the case. Granted, libel in the US is tough to prove (compared to Britian), but it has been done.

FBI spokesman: We're not investigating Palin

(CNN) -- The FBI, in a rare response to rampant rumors on the Internet, said it is not investigating Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin on public corruption charges.


Alaska's Sarah Palin is stepping down as governor at the end of the month.

"Normally, we don't confirm or deny those kind of allegations out there. But, by not doing so, it just casts her in a very bad light," said FBI Special Agent Eric Gonzalez, who confirmed for CNN the statement he made to the Anchorage Daily News. "There is just no truth to those rumors out there in the blogosphere."

106 Killgore Trout  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:13:48pm

re: #99 RunningBare

Would you also be cheering if Obama was doing this?

107 Russkilitlover  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:13:52pm

re: #77 Killgore Trout

Because we need a viable alternative to the Dems. The Republican brand is suffering huge damage at its own hands.

But you have posted your pleasure with many of Obama's policies, so......why are you upset?

108 debutaunt  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:14:06pm

re: #79 OldLineTexan

And there you have it; damned if you do, and damned if you don't.

She lost any future vote of mine by resigning (although for folks who are worried about wasting money on lawsuits, that was the reason she gave), so I have no dog in this fight.

But just making up that rumor to toss around, and waiting for it to be picked up by the MSM, is beyond the pale.

I have hated politics for many years.

109 kynna  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:14:27pm

re: #52 Sharmuta

And if it was CAIR whining they'll get their lawyer, would you support that?

I always support that. Because it shines a light on the allegations they want to shut down.

In this case, the allegations aren't true, so why not shine a light on that aspect? In the case of CAIR, I'd love to see these allegations get a public viewing.

As I said before, it's all in how things are worded. Bloggers and the media are pretty protected as long as they pay attention to how they present information. Charles gets accused of taking certain positions all the time and all he ever has to do is highlight exactly what he said and he's exonerated.

110 sphincter  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:14:28pm

Kilgore Trout

Explain in detail why you are embarassed by Sarah Palin being on a ticket you did not vote for. Be specific. Is it because she didn't attend an Ivy League School? Is it because of the "folksy" language? She's fly-over country?

Get it out on the table. You've assumed the elitist mantle and and I'd be interested in discovering what the foundation of that is based on.

I will set back and return to listen mode now.

111 Killgore Trout  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:14:35pm

re: #104 capitalist piglet

I see this as an embarrassment to the country.

112 Fenway_Nation  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:14:49pm

re: #99 RunningBare

I'm with you, but this undercuts her chances in 2012....

/Fenway understated greatly.

113 tommygum  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:14:53pm

re: #67 Sharmuta

If this was anyone but Sarah- I don't think you guys would support this.

Perhaps.

But no one in the history of politics has had this much shit flung at them.

Its about time some one finanally decided to stop grabbing ankles.

114 Danny  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:14:59pm

re: #111 Killgore Trout

I see this as an embarrassment to the country.

I see the Michael Jackson coverage as an embarrassment to the country.

115 OldLineTexan  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:15:12pm

re: #106 Killgore Trout

Would you also be cheering if Obama was doing this?

I think it would be funny as hell if Obama sued some Nirthers.

Suing happens all the time, as do THREATS of suing.

116 J.D.  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:15:26pm

re: #105 Ben Hur

"Normally, we don't confirm or deny those kind of allegations out there. But, by not doing so, it just casts her in a very bad light," said FBI Special Agent Eric Gonzalez, who confirmed for CNN the statement he made to the Anchorage Daily News. "There is just no truth to those rumors out there in the blogosphere."


It was decent of him to set the record straight.

117 quiet man  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:15:34pm

Look, Obama had Missouri prosecutors threatening US citizens on any number of libels...no lib made any noise about it.

118 Shug  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:15:57pm

I hope Sarah just goes away.
Take Todd Bristol, track, Minnow, Pippy, etc with her.
I'm tired of them all

She is the future of the republican party like Matt Millen was the future of the Detroit Lions

119 Fenway_Nation  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:16:08pm

re: #106 Killgore Trout

If the MSM and entertainment industry were going after 0bama's children with the ferocity and frequency that they did Palin's....then yes.

120 Killgore Trout  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:16:30pm

re: #110 sphincter

Because she was very close to being second in line to the highest office in the most powerful country in the world. She never should have gotten even close.

121 SixDegrees  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:16:47pm

re: #72 Rancher

Being a "very public figure" doesn't matter, ask celebrities who have successfully sued the National Enquirer.

There's a difference between passing along a rumor and making a positive claim of fact that the utterer knows to be false. The latter was the basis for several successful claims filed against tabloids. You'll notice that such prosecutions - successful ones, that is - have all but disappeared, as the tabloids have become more careful about their phrasing.

The blog article, on the other hand, simply repeats what has been circulating on the Web for weeks and months now in various cesspools. Palin can bring suit if she wants, but prevailing will be extraordinarily difficult.

122 quiet man  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:16:51pm

re: #115 OldLineTexan

I don''t think I would go crazy over Obama suing some nirthers...and I think the guy is a weasel

123 RunningBare  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:17:04pm

re: #106 Killgore Trout

Would you also be cheering if Obama was doing this?


If the late night shows (Letterman, et al) were making sick vile sex jokes about Obama's daughters, or if he had a son with Downs Syndrome and it was something being used as political or comic fodder? You bet your ass I would.

It would never happen though, unless Obama decides to become a republican, so it really is a moot point.

124 SanFranciscoZionist  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:17:18pm

re: #31 redstateredneck

I don't know if it's a good move or a bad move on her part, but I can understand that she's sick of the shit. She and her family have been through more than any other candidate ever.

I don't know. Andrew Jackson took a pretty good beating, and that was without bloggers. He always insisted the press and the scandal killed his Rachel.

125 sphincter  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:17:21pm

re: #120 Killgore Trout


Yeah, Joe Biden's doing a great job.

A three letter word; JOBS

please!

126 CommonCents  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:17:24pm

re: #120 Killgore Trout

Because she was very close to being second in line to the highest office in the most powerful country in the world. She never should have gotten even close.

The feelings magnified from my perspective about the current.

127 Roger  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:17:34pm

re: #15 Charles

The Palin's also mention the MSNBC, the New York Times and The Washington Post; not just a blogger.

I think it is time someone fought back on these vultures; spent some of their money which they don't have. Then President Obama can bail them out some more.

128 VegasRick  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:17:35pm

re: #93 Killgore Trout

Nope. I'm independent.

LOL!
Oh, wait! You were serious?

129 Conservative in Liberal Hands  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:17:54pm

re: #118 Shug

She (Palin) is the future of the republican party like Matt Millen was the future of the Detroit Lions

i want to go on the reco0rd and state that Mr. Millen is a fine and upstanding person, who has had the misfortune to be saddled with a "Mission Impossible".

/ Bear's fan

130 quiet man  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:17:54pm

What of the CIA sued Pelosi?

131 Russkilitlover  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:18:09pm

re: #98 Shug

the TOTUS is so thin you can see right through it

Huh. I can see right through Obama, too.

132 Fenway_Nation  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:18:34pm

re: #117 quiet man


Weren't they called 'truth squads' or something like that?

133 Son of the Black Dog  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:18:37pm

And she can sue them on friendly turf, I'm sure that in Alaska she is still very popular on a personal level, and a very sympathetic figure. Whole family, too. Some legal person refresh my memory, a majority of the jury is all that's needed in a civil suit. Correct? She can probably get a majority of any randomly selected jury in Alaska on her side of these disputes, considering that all the ethics charges have been dismissed and that the FBI saw fit to state that there is no investigation of her.

134 Shug  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:18:46pm

re: #120 Killgore Trout

Because she was very close to being second in line to the highest office in the most powerful country in the world. She never should have gotten even close.

that's up to the voters.

and the voters f*** up sometimes.

the voters gave us Obama, after all ( with an even bigger Idiot than Palin who DID make it to the VP position )

135 karmic_inquisitor  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:18:48pm

With all of the real and substantive issues confronting the country, the Republicans seem to get pulled into what are playground attacks and back biting.

If you get into politics, understand that people will lie to you and about you. All. Of. The. Time.

Life is unfair in the world of politics.

The true stars ignore it all as background noise and drive a message about what affects us all.

Right now, Sarah Palin is cultivating a message: "I am a victim and so are you."

Sorry - I'll pass.

136 Dianna  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:18:54pm

re: #26 FurryOldGuyJeans

Just me, but I see this pre-emptive threats of legal action as only adding fuel to the fire. This will only make a number of people think there really is something to the allegations.

You have a very good point. However, I'd never threaten to sue if there was the remotest chance discovery would show there was any possible truth to the accusation.

137 RunningBare  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:19:08pm

re: #120 Killgore Trout

Because she was very close to being second in line to the highest office in the most powerful country in the world. She never should have gotten even close.


Good thing, too, cuz now Joe Biden is in that role. Phew, we sure dodged a bullet there!

Do I really need the sarcasm tag? ;)

138 CommonCents  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:20:05pm

re: #129 Conservative in Liberal Hands

i want to go on the reco0rd and state that Mr. Millen is a fine and upstanding person, who has had the misfortune to be saddled with a "Mission Impossible".

/ Bear's fan

As a Buc fan by choice and a Lion fan by birth I have to say...
Yeah right. We'll see how impossible it is when the Lions are in Super Bowl CCCXIV!
/

139 Russkilitlover  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:20:18pm

re: #105 Ben Hur

"Normally, we don't confirm or deny those kind of allegations out there. But, by not doing so, it just casts her in a very bad light," said FBI Special Agent Eric Gonzalez, who confirmed for CNN the statement he made to the Anchorage Daily News. "There is just no truth to those rumors out there in the blogosphere."/blockquote>

You go, Sarah. Sue the crap out of her.

140 pingjockey  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:20:25pm

re: #120 Killgore Trout

KILLGORE! WTF! 2 words..Joe Biden.

141 wintercat  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:20:32pm

We went away for the 4th and didn't find out about Palin's resignation until last night. My first reaction was of sadness. I had hoped Palin had the hide of a rhino and was going to slog her way through the political morass until the end. But, seemingly, that was not meant to be.

Maybe, just maybe, she is fed up with playing politics and just said to herself, "critics...screw this, I am taking you down like a bull moose." Since she can't get an even shake in the press, perhaps she is hoping to be vindicated in the courts. Only time will tell whether or not this was a sound move on her part. I will say that I cannot recall any individual in American politics who has had to endure more personal attacks (or attacks on their family), slander, defamation, and hate than Palin (I think even the Bush kids made out better than Palin's brood). It has been absolutely stunning to observe how much people love to hate her and how readily they will accept and revel in any negative morsel (true or not) about her they can find.

142 SixDegrees  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:20:49pm

re: #92 Honorary Yooper

I'm not so sure she can't win this. The accusation is that she is under federal investigation, therefore she resigned. That should be easy enough to prove or disprove. If she's not under investigation, then Ms. Moore is in the wrong, and deserves what she gets. It is libel if that is the case. Granted, libel in the US is tough to prove (compared to Britian), but it has been done.

Actually, no, that isn't what needs to be proven. What needs to happen is to show that when Moore published the article, she did so knowing it was false. This is a much more difficult hurdle to clear. Moore has literally scores of websites she can draw upon to show that the story was already circulating; some elements of it - of an ongoing Federal investigation, for example - have been out there for months. Passing that information along isn't a crime. Knowingly publishing a malicious lie might be, but is much, much more difficult to prove.

143 BeerDrinking_VictoryMonkey  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:20:52pm

re: #140 pingjockey

KILLGORE! WTF! 2 words..Joe Biden.

Two words, five letters
/

144 quiet man  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:21:02pm

re: #132 Fenway_Nation I do not recall that..tho is sounds like something from Tehran

It was STL prosecutors and some sheriffs

145 kynna  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:21:32pm

re: #121 SixDegrees

You're right. She probably won't win. But if she sues someone then her side of the story might actually get a chance at seeing the light of day. As it stands now, the fact that 15 bogus 'investigations' on her have been thrown out is more secret than our troops' movements in a war zone.

146 Killgore Trout  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:21:40pm

re: #134 Shug


the voters gave us Obama, after all ( with an even bigger Idiot than Palin who DID make it to the VP position )


Politicians are only a symptom of the problem. The Republican base that still idolizes Palin despite the fact that she's incapable of holding even state office is the sign of a very serious problem. At least Obama's not going to quit office. He's going to serve his term.

147 Walter L. Newton  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:21:42pm

re: #111 Killgore Trout

I see this as an embarrassment to the country.

Really? I see it as proof of the freedoms that we have in this country. The ability to redress what we feel is damaging to our self. The freedom to speak, out loud, and make a stand.

The issue of whether it is good for her or bad for her, or if it will hurt or help the conservative movement, that's secondary.

This sort of action is what make me PROUD of our country, PROUD of the tools that our Founding Fathers gave us and PROUD that we can sit here and discuss this without worrying about a knock on our door by the police as we saw recently in Iran.

Embarrassed... hell no.

148 karmic_inquisitor  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:21:47pm

Ross Perot would have been President if he hadn't quit the campaign over lies about his daughter.

149 LGoPs  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:21:47pm

When lies are told - and I consider accusations of federal investigation for embezzelment to be lies - thay need to be fought, early and often.
Otherwise they stick and even if eventually withdrawn the stigma remains.
President Bush learned this the hard way. I say fight back and call the liars on their lies.

150 eschew_obfuscation  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:22:06pm

re: #140 pingjockey

KILLGORE! WTF! 2 words..Joe Biden.

I have two other words..... Barack Obama

151 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:22:28pm
152 Killgore Trout  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:22:39pm

re: #140 pingjockey

Biden can hold on to his job. How long did he serve in the Senate? He may be a dope but he's not a quitter.

153 pingjockey  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:22:48pm

re: #150 eschew_obfuscation
Yep, and 3 more...we are fucked.

154 Sharmuta  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:22:57pm

re: #109 kynna

Charles gets accused of taking certain positions all the time and all he ever has to do is highlight exactly what he said and he's exonerated.

But that hasn't stopped certain people from threatening Charles with lawyers.

Perhaps it's from having watched this play out elsewhere- threatening legal action in the hopes it will intimidate your critic(s). I have no idea if that's what is going on here- I don't know the facts in this case. There's no need to sue if the facts will exonerate her, though. In fact- if the blogger is lying, the blogger will be the one to lose credibility- without lawyers being involved at all.

155 Racer X  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:22:58pm

I don't see this so much as "Sarah vs. The Blogger". I see this as Sarah letting the MAIN STREAM FUCKING MEDIA know that they cannot promote these false stories as fact.

156 kynna  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:23:41pm

re: #128 VegasRick

LOL!
Oh, wait! You were serious?

He's a member of the Contrarian party. He disses everything. Not a lot of suggestions on what would be better, but a lot of bile regarding what is.

157 Kenneth  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:23:50pm

Think of the thousands of stupid, ugly, baseless and perfectly libelous things various bloggers have written about George Bush. Did he sue any of them? No he did not. Why not? Because suing them is stupid and only brings them more attention than they deserve.

158 quiet man  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:23:52pm

re: #149 LGoPs

So true...Since she is a real leader, I am glad to see her slapping the l;iars back a few notches...

Again, if some of this scum were made to watch what they said, maybe some better people would become our politicians and leaders.

159 OldLineTexan  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:24:00pm

re: #130 quiet man

What of the CIA sued Pelosi?

I'm pretty sure "the CIA" has no standing.

160 KingKenrod  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:24:04pm

Sometimes the purpose of a lawsuit is not to win, but to expose a corrupt process.

Palin might shine a light on the editorial process of these publications, including getting sworn testimony from MSM decision makers, as well as expose who is behind the "leaks" that led to accusations of federal investigation in the first place.

161 avanti  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:24:08pm

re: #98 Shug

the TOTUS is so thin you can see right through it

Who did BHO sue over the nirter comments, or that he backed infanticide and the rest ? Did McCain sue when he was accused of having black kids out of wedlock or being a traitor as a POW. Did Bush sue over the National Guard records BS ?

Bloggers and the MSN will be unfair to politicians, politicians will be unfair to each other, it's the nature of the game. If you can't stand the flack without suing, you are not ready for prime time IMHO.

162 Throbert McGee  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:24:22pm

re: #15 Charles

The Republican Party's vice presidential nominee is threatening to sue a blogger?

Really, really bad move.

Unless this was a calculated "good cop, bad cop" act -- that is, the lawyer who sent the letter with the implicit lawsuit threat is cast as the heavy, while Sarah gets to demonstrate her magnanimity towards the blogger by publicly repudiating the lawyer's action.

163 MJ  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:24:33pm

re: #114 Danny

I see the Michael Jackson coverage as an embarrassment to the country.

He’ll do shows as a hologram

05/07/2009

JACKO could go on tour from beyond the grave.

[Link: www.newsoftheworld.co.uk...]

164 Son of the Black Dog  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:24:35pm

re: #120 Killgore Trout

Because she was very close to being second in line to the highest office in the most powerful country in the world. She never should have gotten even close.

And yet... she's more qualified than Obama. Has more backbone, too.

165 quiet man  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:24:56pm

re: #159 OldLineTexan

Probably not, yet one can hope..

166 sphincter  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:24:58pm

re: #152 Killgore Trout

What precisely does that mean? seriously?

I'm going to go ahead and drop out of this discussion. Enough has been said.
Too obvious to even bother.

167 OldLineTexan  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:25:09pm

re: #152 Killgore Trout

Biden can hold on to his job. How long did he serve in the Senate? He may be a dope but he's not a quitter.

Aw, c'mon ... you were frothingly anti-Palin way before she quit.

Don't short yourself.

168 pingjockey  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:25:09pm

re: #152 Killgore Trout
Tell ya what, let us have all your personal info and make shit up, slam your kids, etc... for months and see how you like it. Have David Letterman make rude jokes about your daughter, mother, wife, whatever. Frivolous lawsuits from the neighbor hood watch, all kinds of other BS. Maybe she's just had enough. Hillary never got this level of vitriol.

169 capitalist piglet  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:25:16pm

re: #111 Killgore Trout

I see this as an embarrassment to the country.

Interesting.

I see the treatment Governor Palin has received since McCain introduced her as his running mate as an embarrassment to the country.

I see the video circulating of American voters openly declaring their ignorance of the candidates and their positions, while disparaging Governor Palin for things she didn't even say, as an embarrassment to the country.

Sarah Palin exercising her right to legally fight defamation? Not so much.

170 Racer X  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:25:26pm

Sarah speaks. Liberals wet themselves.

171 Flyers1974  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:25:40pm

re: #142 SixDegrees

Actually, no, that isn't what needs to be proven. What needs to happen is to show that when Moore published the article, she did so knowing it was false. This is a much more difficult hurdle to clear. Moore has literally scores of websites she can draw upon to show that the story was already circulating; some elements of it - of an ongoing Federal investigation, for example - have been out there for months. Passing that information along isn't a crime. Knowingly publishing a malicious lie might be, but is much, much more difficult to prove.

I agree 100%. I think some people will confuse the common usage of malice with the legal definition. I'm sure it has happened on a local level somewhere, but I can't recall any nationally known politician winning such a lawsuit.

172 SixDegrees  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:25:48pm

re: #105 Ben Hur

Unfortunately for any suit Palin might choose to bring, the FBI's denial of any investigation comes long after the original blog publication in question. Subsequent developments don't matter; it's a question of what the facts were and what the publisher knew of them at the time of publication that determines guilt in a libel suit.

And frankly, if Palin had a case her attorney's would have simply filed it without comment, leaving exposure of their legal position to the discovery process and the courts. Publicly firing across the bow like this indicates that Palin knows her threat is empty, apart from punitive value - one of the things she claims she resigned over herself.

173 J.S.  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:26:06pm

re: #157 Kenneth

although, I suppose we need to remember that this is only a lawyer threat -- the Palins are saying that they're looking into defamation, exploring the possibility...

174 kansas  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:26:31pm

re: #67 Sharmuta

If this was anyone but Sarah- I don't think you guys would support this.

I was thinking if this was anyone but Sarah you guys would support this.

175 Roger  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:26:46pm

I think their lawyer's objective is to make MSNBC, the New York Times and The Washington Post think twice before they use Shannyn Moore as a 'reliable' source.

176 Killgore Trout  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:27:17pm

re: #164 Son of the Black Dog

Has more backbone, too.


Lol @ U!

177 midwestgak  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:27:17pm

re: #67 Sharmuta

If this was anyone but Sarah. I don't think you guys would support this.

You have a point. Reagan didn't sue because the press characterized him as "aged". Bush did not sue because they characterized him as a stupid hick. Even Carter didn't sue because he was called a peanut farmer, among other things.

178 kansas  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:27:25pm

re: #152 Killgore Trout

Biden can hold on to his job. How long did he serve in the Senate? He may be a dope but he's not a quitter.

He never had to put up with so much shit.

179 debutaunt  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:27:45pm

re: #141 wintercat

We went away for the 4th and didn't find out about Palin's resignation until last night. My first reaction was of sadness. I had hoped Palin had the hide of a rhino and was going to slog her way through the political morass until the end. But, seemingly, that was not meant to be.

Maybe, just maybe, she is fed up with playing politics and just said to herself, "critics...screw this, I am taking you down like a bull moose." Since she can't get an even shake in the press, perhaps she is hoping to be vindicated in the courts. Only time will tell whether or not this was a sound move on her part. I will say that I cannot recall any individual in American politics who has had to endure more personal attacks (or attacks on their family), slander, defamation, and hate than Palin (I think even the Bush kids made out better than Palin's brood). It has been absolutely stunning to observe how much people love to hate her and how readily they will accept and revel in any negative morsel (true or not) about her they can find.

You just described the embarrasment thet I feel about all of this.

180 RunningBare  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:28:06pm

re: #178 kansas

He never had to put up with so much shit.

Not since the hair plugs, anyway. ;)

181 Kenneth  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:28:16pm

re: #161 avanti

BHO does have a thin skin, but he also has the self-control not to jump at every provocation. Palin is showing both a thin skin and poor judgment in this instance.

182 quiet man  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:28:22pm

Palin didnt sue when Letterman and others made jokes about her kids

Many of us would have went to see them with a baseball bat for such nastiness.

183 Sharmuta  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:28:27pm

re: #177 midwestgak

You have a point. Reagan didn't sue because the press characterized him as "aged". Bush did not sue because they characterized him as a stupid hick. Even Carter didn't sue because he was called a peanut farmer, among other things.

Dubya didn't sue over the coke in college rumors.

184 Walter L. Newton  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:28:40pm

re: #168 pingjockey

Tell ya what, let us have all your personal info and make shit up, slam your kids, etc... for months and see how you like it. Have David Letterman make rude jokes about your daughter, mother, wife, whatever. Frivolous lawsuits from the neighbor hood watch, all kinds of other BS. Maybe she's just had enough. Hillary never got this level of vitriol.

Are you kidding. He can't even deal with someone disagreeing with him here on LGF. Imagine if it was all public?

185 Gearhead  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:28:43pm

Wishing 'the other shoe' - if there is one - would go ahead and drop...

186 quiet man  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:29:20pm

re: #181 Kenneth
You are wrong there..Obama left wright when it got personal..and answers every personal comment made about him..the guy is vindictive

187 Russkilitlover  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:29:30pm

re: #169 capitalist piglet

Interesting.


I see the video circulating of American voters openly declaring their ignorance of the candidates and their positions, while disparaging Governor Palin for things she didn't even say, as an embarrassment to the country.

.

And don't forget the classic shamefulness that was our Congress not reading the massive bills they voted on.

188 Son of the Black Dog  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:29:32pm

re: #145 kynna

You're right. She probably won't win. But if she sues someone then her side of the story might actually get a chance at seeing the light of day. As it stands now, the fact that 15 bogus 'investigations' on her have been thrown out is more secret than our troops' movements in a war zone.

Not with Grealdo around.

189 redstateredneck  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:29:37pm

re: #177 midwestgak

You have a point. Reagan didn't sue because the press characterized him as "aged". Bush did not sue because they characterized him as a stupid hick. Even Carter didn't sue because he was called a peanut farmer, among other things.

He was a peanut farmer, wasn't he?

190 CommonCents  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:29:39pm

re: #177 midwestgak

You have a point. Reagan didn't sue because the press characterized him as "aged". Bush did not sue because they characterized him as a stupid hick. Even Carter didn't sue because he was called a peanut farmer, among other things.

That's a weak basket of charges. Reagan was old. Bush did have a reputation given his misspeaks and having a ranch. Carter was a peanut farmer. Duh.

191 Dianna  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:30:00pm

re: #67 Sharmuta

If this was anyone but Sarah- I don't think you guys would support this.

I don't know. I know that embezzlement is an accusation I'd react badly to. re: #148 karmic_inquisitor

No, he wouldn't!

192 monkeytime  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:30:02pm

OT: If anyone lives in LA and wants my MJ Memorial Tickets let me know.

193 kansas  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:30:13pm

re: #181 Kenneth

BHO does have a thin skin, but he also has the self-control not to jump at every provocation. Palin is showing both a thin skin and poor judgment in this instance.

What kind of provocation has BHO had, MSM blow jobs?

194 wintercat  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:30:19pm

re: #179 debutaunt

You just described the embarrasment thet I feel about all of this.

Embarrassment? Over Palin? The press? Not sure I follow...

195 J.D.  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:30:23pm

re: #189 redstateredneck

He was a peanut farmer, wasn't he?

Yes, he was.

196 debutaunt  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:30:32pm

re: #152 Killgore Trout

Biden can hold on to his job. How long did he serve in the Senate? He may be a dope but he's not a quitter.

What a perfect campaign slogan!

197 quiet man  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:30:36pm

re: #190 CommonCents
And Sarah didnt steal money from her state

198 Russkilitlover  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:31:02pm

re: #177 midwestgak

You have a point. Reagan didn't sue because the press characterized him as "aged". Bush did not sue because they characterized him as a stupid hick. Even Carter didn't sue because he was called a peanut farmer, among other things.

That's different from saying that a federal investigation was under way against you.

199 Dianna  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:31:04pm

re: #168 pingjockey

Tell ya what, let us have all your personal info and make shit up, slam your kids, etc... for months and see how you like it. Have David Letterman make rude jokes about your daughter, mother, wife, whatever. Frivolous lawsuits from the neighbor hood watch, all kinds of other BS. Maybe she's just had enough. Hillary never got this level of vitriol.

Actually, Hillary did. It made me ill, and I intensely dislike her ideas.

200 J.D.  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:31:10pm

re: #192 monkeytime

OT: If anyone lives in LA and wants my MJ Memorial Tickets let me know.

How much?
Why do you have them?

201 quiet man  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:31:39pm

re: #196 debutaunt

Biden is a dope..and thinks being proud of his country is *corny*...too bad he isnt a quitter.

202 monkeytime  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:31:43pm

re: #200 J.D.

Yes I still have them. I don't know how to turn my nick green so you can email me.

203 monkeytime  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:31:52pm

Free.

204 redstateredneck  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:32:00pm

Gotta go work out.
Later, lizards.

205 capitalist piglet  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:32:02pm

re: #187 Russkilitlover

And don't forget the classic shamefulness that was our Congress not reading the massive bills they voted on.

Well, yes. There are many things to be embarrassed about these days. A woman who is beginning to fight back after months of being treated like a fat cow carcass in the desert just doesn't make me that upset.

206 SixDegrees  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:32:05pm

re: #145 kynna

You're right. She probably won't win. But if she sues someone then her side of the story might actually get a chance at seeing the light of day. As it stands now, the fact that 15 bogus 'investigations' on her have been thrown out is more secret than our troops' movements in a war zone.

I don't see how it's a secret. It's been reported in several mainstream media outlets. The actual number cited is more like 33.

And your premise is that she is engaging in exactly the same behavior that she derided as out of bounds when resigning. This is a point her opponents will gleefully seize upon to hang the placard "hypocrite" around her neck with.

A smarter move, frankly, would have been for Palin to contact the FBI and confirm for herself that there was no investigation, then allow the FBI's public statement on the matter made yesterday do all the talking. Given the FBI statement - nearly unprecedented, by the way, as the FBI typically responds only by saying that they don't comment on their business, giving it a great deal of weight - her opponents look like carping fools. The threat of a lawsuit shifts the focus back onto Palin, and tosses a whole cartload of new ammunition into their hands.

207 RunningBare  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:32:09pm

re: #189 redstateredneck

He was a peanut farmer, wasn't he?


And deathly afraid of rabbits. Of course, it was no orrrrrdinarrry rrrabbit, but still. LOL@Carter

[Link: en.wikipedia.org...]

208 Walter L. Newton  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:32:19pm

re: #177 midwestgak

You have a point. Reagan didn't sue because the press characterized him as "aged". Bush did not sue because they characterized him as a stupid hick. Even Carter didn't sue because he was called a peanut farmer, among other things.

Big difference from being called old, stupid or a farmer versus being tagged as a person who is under criminal investigation.

I don't know what you do for a living, I don't know how visible you are in your community, but, if an article appeared in you local paper saying you were being investigated for, oh, let's say, prostitution, would that have a negative effect on your life.

209 Russkilitlover  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:32:21pm

re: #183 Sharmuta

Dubya didn't sue over the coke in college rumors.

He may have if the rumors were advanced saying that he was under investigation for it.

210 Kenneth  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:32:29pm

re: #186 quiet man

BHO never sued anybody, and he has the political shrewdness to take advantage of his critics by choosing the ones to respond to (eg. Rush), while ignoring others.

Even if she has a case, suing critics is a bad political strategy.

211 J.D.  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:32:33pm

re: #203 monkeytime

Free.

That's a good price! LOL!

I don't want them.
I was just curious.

212 Racer X  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:32:51pm

re: #192 monkeytime

OT: If anyone lives in LA and wants my MJ Memorial Tickets let me know.

Tito? Is that you?

213 CommonCents  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:32:55pm

re: #197 quiet man

And But Sarah didnt steal money from her state

Fixed it for ya.

214 quiet man  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:33:21pm

re: #210 Kenneth

Palin hasnt sued anyone yet either..only threatened to sue..same as Obama did

215 avanti  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:33:21pm

re: #117 quiet man

Look, Obama had Missouri prosecutors threatening US citizens on any number of libels...no lib made any noise about it.

I have heard that several times, but could I get a link that shows Obama threatening to sue anyone. I know some folks from the Missouri campaign talked about that, but nothing from Obama like the Palin announcement.

216 turn  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:33:27pm

re: #204 redstateredneck

Have a good work out and check out my comment to ya on the last thread, it's at the bottom.

217 monkeytime  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:33:33pm

re: #212 Racer X

lol

218 Kenneth  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:33:48pm

re: #214 quiet man

Good of you to clarify. Thanks.

219 kansas  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:34:22pm

re: #210 Kenneth

BHO never sued anybody, and he has the political shrewdness to take advantage of his critics by choosing the ones to respond to (eg. Rush), while ignoring others.

Even if she has a case, suing critics is a bad political strategy.

There are critics, and then there are those who have broken laws. I think she deserves to have the rights of an American.

220 FurryOldGuyJeans  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:34:34pm

What seems to be getting lost in all the heat is that these threatened lawsuits are very specific:

Sarah Palin attorney warns press on 'defamatory material'
By: Jonathan Martin
July 4, 2009 10:23 PM EST

Ratcheting up her offensive against the news media, Gov. Sarah Palin’s attorney threatened on Saturday to sue mainstream news organizations if they publish “defamatory” stories relating to whether Palin is under federal investigation.

In an extraordinary four-page letter, Alaska-based attorney Thomas Van Flein warns of severe consequences should speculation that until now has largely been confined to blogs — about whether Palin embezzled funds in the construction of a Wasilla, Alaska, sports arena — find its way into print.

“This is to provide notice to Ms. Moore, and those who republish the defamation, such as Huffington Post, MSNBC, The New York Times and The Washington Post, that the Palins will not allow them to propagate defamatory material without answering to this in a court of law,” Van Flein warned, citing Alaska liberal blogger Shannyn Moore.

These are not nuisance suits, they are against very specific reports of Palin under investigation by the Feds for embezzlement.

221 badger1970  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:34:45pm

Bad move? At least she is doing something. The old coot who put her on the ticket made her a sitting duck for bo and the DNC. She was a threat. Now six months later, the DNC and MSM still can't leave well enough alone. As a mother, what choice does she have? Alaska is stuck in neutral, her family gets unfairly savaged for no reason by the DNC and MSM, and is ridiculed even by so-called allies on the right, so what can she do?

Libel is serious. And Palin is just fed up with the over-the-top attacks 24/7. She's giving notice to back the eff off.

222 Greengolem64  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:35:01pm

re: #55 Charles

I think it's a terrible precedent to set, for politicians to start suing people who write mean or untrue things about them.

And she has almost no chance of winning such lawsuits, as a very public figure.

So, by definition...being a very public person allows MSM and bloggers (of either side) to write patently false and defamatory statements about people (of either side)? Wow....

Senator blah-de-blah was reportedly seen engaging in (fill in the blank) with (fill in the blank)...published by (fill in the blank) with full knowledge that the statement was FALSE and DEFAMATORY...only to cause political and potentially personal 'damage' to said Senator...

I am all for free speech...but what happened to decency?

Blogger, TV personality, or MSM venue...that should NOT be an exception or defense for writing the garbage that has been printed about politicians and public individuals over the past xx decades...or whenever this decline in decency in the press started.

I really wonder if 'real time' media outlets such as blogging, twittering, or youtube are not more of a detriment to society. No longer is there the 'take a deep breath' time involved with writing and reporting...we have individuals writing stream of consciousnesses and real time tweet's while others are happily (or not) attacking... People get lost in the heat of the moment...things get said that can't be taken back thanks to the internet.

Just sayin'...

GG

223 starsfan914  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:35:02pm

I believe this is the right thing to do because we saw how many falsehoods were orginally published in blogs then reported as "fact" by CNN, MSNBC, etc. If there were retractions I never saw them.

"News" organizations should do their fact checking before publishing a story. This seems like Journalism 101 to me. If the published stories are in fact not true, proper fact checking was not done, and the stories were published to defame someone then they definitely should be held liable.

If you don't want to get sued, check the facts before publishing. And if she wins it will further demonstrate that these media outlets are not credible.

224 J.S.  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:35:23pm

re: #206 SixDegrees

(for a long time now, I've been wondering just who is advising Palin...)

225 Honorary Yooper  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:35:27pm

re: #198 Russkilitlover

That's different from saying that a federal investigation was under way against you.

Well, we'll have to see where this goes, and if it goes anywhere. To be honest, the evidence has not been presented, much less has this gone to court.

226 quiet man  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:35:30pm

re: #215 avanti

Sorry the minions argument doesnt wash
He supported it with his silence..Where is Sarahs statement on this?

this is cutting hares just like Jimmah did

227 kansas  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:36:02pm

re: #215 avanti

I have heard that several times, but could I get a link that shows Obama threatening to sue anyone. I know some folks from the Missouri campaign talked about that, but nothing from Obama like the Palin announcement.

Obama used prosecutors and a sheriff's office to threaten to go after anyone would spoke untruths. Need a link? Google it.

228 theheat  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:36:04pm

re: #181 Kenneth

I think that sums it up, whether pro Palin or otherwise. Personally, I don't see a problem with a lawsuit to prove the truth, but in her position, particularly after her abrupt resignation, it makes her look like a whiny, thin-skinned quitter.

She has a big book deal in the hopper. I probably would have quietly disappeared, spent some quality time with my kids and family, made mondo money off my book, laughed at my critics, and looked at my options in the political future.

She decided to sue, instead. Her decision, but it does give ammunition to her detractors. Maybe virtuous, but notsosmart.

229 quiet man  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:36:19pm

re: #220 FurryOldGuyJeans
Glossed over by zeal..but not lost

230 kynna  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:36:31pm

re: #154 Sharmuta

But that hasn't stopped certain people from threatening Charles with lawyers.

Perhaps it's from having watched this play out elsewhere- threatening legal action in the hopes it will intimidate your critic(s). I have no idea if that's what is going on here- I don't know the facts in this case. There's no need to sue if the facts will exonerate her, though. In fact- if the blogger is lying, the blogger will be the one to lose credibility- without lawyers being involved at all.

Not true. As I said in another post, the facts of her repeated exoneration from bogus investigations have seen no editorial play at all.

I do NOT think she's 'silencing critics'. I think this is about the only way someone like Palin has of getting the truth out.

231 RunningBare  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:37:36pm

re: #227 kansas

Obama used prosecutors and a sheriff's office to threaten to go after anyone would spoke untruths. Need a link? Google it.

Well, when Obama does it, he's a "decisive, manly leader". When Sarah does it, she's just a "C**T".

Who says sexism is dead?

232 LGoPs  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:37:38pm

re: #111 Killgore Trout

I see this as an embarrassment to the country.

I see Clinton dragging this country into a Constitutional crisis over his personal life and lying under oath an embarrassment
I see Al Gore dragging the country into an unprecedented crisis over the Florida recount an embarrassment
I see the Democrats en masse aiding and abetting our enemies to gain political advantage over President Bush in a time of war to be an embarrassment at the very least and treasonous at worst
I see Christine Gregoire and the Democrats in WA state stealing the election for governor an embarrassment
I see Al Franken stealing the election in Minnesota an embarrassment
You and I have very different defintions of embarrassment.
You and I don't live on the same planet.

233 quiet man  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:37:48pm

re: #230 kynna
So true..like the government run media will speak the truth as it applies to her

You know it wont

234 A Man for all Seasons  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:37:51pm

re: #215 avanti

I have heard that several times, but could I get a link that shows Obama threatening to sue anyone. I know some folks from the Missouri campaign talked about that, but nothing from Obama like the Palin announcement.

Hi Chief....He never threatened a lawsuit...And *cough* Now that he is the most powerful man on the face of the Earth....I think the threat is moot....

235 capitalist piglet  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:38:17pm

re: #210 Kenneth

BHO never sued anybody, and he has the political shrewdness to take advantage of his critics by choosing the ones to respond to (eg. Rush), while ignoring others.

Even if she has a case, suing critics is a bad political strategy.

No, Obama, the President of the United States, merely attacks private citizens from the stump.

But he doesn't sue. That would be wrong.

236 Who Watches the Watchmen?  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:38:37pm

Pardon me, is this where I catch the Crazy Train?

237 SixDegrees  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:38:50pm

re: #160 KingKenrod

Sometimes the purpose of a lawsuit is not to win, but to expose a corrupt process.

Palin might shine a light on the editorial process of these publications, including getting sworn testimony from MSM decision makers, as well as expose who is behind the "leaks" that led to accusations of federal investigation in the first place.

The FBI's categorical denial of an investigation yesterday did all the exposing that was necessary. It is still top-line news at CNN and elsewhere. Palin would have been a lot smarter to have waited until after the announcement, then waited a bit more for some other blogger to concoct yet another fantasy about her criminal activities (which would have taken all of three minutes, at most) then issuing a statement to the effect of "Look - Leftard bloggers have been hallucinating about all manner of criminal activities I'm supposedly involved in for months, and even after the FBI has issued a categorical denial of any wrongdoing they're still making shit up." In other words, a paraphrase of Reagan's cheerful but mildly exasperated "There you go again" comment.

This has not been well played, whatever the purpose was.

238 kansas  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:38:50pm

re: #215 avanti

I have heard that several times, but could I get a link that shows Obama threatening to sue anyone. I know some folks from the Missouri campaign talked about that, but nothing from Obama like the Palin announcement.

OK. Here are around 4 million links.[Link: www.google.com...]

239 zombie  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:39:01pm

re: #15 Charles

The Republican Party's vice presidential nominee is threatening to sue a blogger?

Really, really bad move.

But the way the modern mediascape works, slanders and lies published on "mere blogs" rapidly get picked up and repeated in the legitimate media. This has been especially true in Sarah Palin's case, where the craziest "blog rumors" have entered the mainstream.

I agree it's bad for her public image, but what other recourse does she have? The liberal blogomediasphere is doing the ol' whipsaw-maneuver on her, in which they attack her baselessly, and then scream in outrage if she tries to stop it.

240 pingjockey  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:39:07pm

re: #199 Dianna
Oh bullshit. Chelsea never was brought into the spotlight and slammed. Hillary had an absolute crap load of stuff in here closet and it got at most a cursory look.

241 quiet man  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:39:22pm

re: #235 capitalist piglet
Testicle centered hit there....Obama does go after citizens himself.

Bush never did and he was treated like dirt

242 jamie  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:39:42pm

re: #221 badger1970

Bad move? At least she is doing something. The old coot who put her on the ticket made her a sitting duck for bo and the DNC. She was a threat. Now six months later, the DNC and MSM still can't leave well enough alone. As a mother, what choice does she have? Alaska is stuck in neutral, her family gets unfairly savaged for no reason by the DNC and MSM, and is ridiculed even by so-called allies on the right, so what can she do?

Libel is serious. And Palin is just fed up with the over-the-top attacks 24/7. She's giving notice to back the eff off.

She's also a public figure, and as such, has the incredibly high bar of "actual malice" to cross before she can make a credible libel claim. This move is just posturing, and I think only fuels the meme that she's now got a few toys in the attic.

Not that your points about McCain hanging her out to dry aren't valid (and I spoke to a campaign insider who, long before recent reports, noted that Steve Schmidt had taken to blaming Palin for everything and derisively referred to her to her face as "Honey" in the waning weeks of the campaign), but if she hasn't gone off the deepe end, she is doing a good impression of one who has.

243 Walter L. Newton  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:39:44pm

re: #236 Who Watches the Watchmen?

Pardon me, is this where I catch the Crazy Train?

If you are embarrassed about Sarah Palin, then the conductor KT will take your ticket.//

244 jvic  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:39:47pm

re: #3 Dianna

Good heavens.

I guess, since the libel is public, the response needs to be.

But...wow, that really seems like a bad move to me.

It seems like a bad move to me if she wants to be elected to national office.

If she wants to get on radio, TV, or the speech circuit, it might help her.

If she wants a job in a combative NGO or an appointment like Secretary of Commerce in a future Republican administration, I don't think it hurts her.

245 kansas  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:39:49pm

Obama Missouri Truth Squads

Youtube Video
246 debutaunt  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:40:07pm

re: #194 wintercat

Embarrassment? Over Palin? The press? Not sure I follow...

Since she can't get an even shake in the press, perhaps she is hoping to be vindicated in the courts. Only time will tell whether or not this was a sound move on her part. I will say that I cannot recall any individual in American politics who has had to endure more personal attacks (or attacks on their family), slander, defamation, and hate than Palin (I think even the Bush kids made out better than Palin's brood). It has been absolutely stunning to observe how much people love to hate her and how readily they will accept and revel in any negative morsel (true or not) about her they can find.

I'm embarrased for our country. We used to stand for fair play.

247 FurryOldGuyJeans  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:40:22pm

OT:

Uh oh, Fox News is reporting CA bonds got downrated yet again, 2 steps above junk bond rating.

No link as of yet, developing......

248 quiet man  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:40:23pm

re: #240 pingjockey
Look how far back they have to go to find any example at all...

249 alegrias  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:40:31pm

re: #155 Racer X

I don't see this so much as "Sarah vs. The Blogger". I see this as Sarah letting the MAIN STREAM FUCKING MEDIA know that they cannot promote these false stories as fact.

* * * * *
John McCain spent 4 decades schmoozing the media and wooing the media in the back of his bus & plane, and all he got was stabbed in the back for his 100% "media availability".

Governor Palin got trashed from the get go by these freaks.

Let the media get a dose of their own. They can dish it out, but they can't take it, because mostly media people are cowards.

250 kansas  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:40:37pm

re: #243 Walter L. Newton

If you are embarrassed about Sarah Palin, then the conductor KT will take your ticket.//

KT.? Kos Troll?

251 Racer X  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:40:45pm

re: #238 kansas

OK. Here are around 4 million links.[Link: www.google.com...]

Liar!

There are only 440,000 links.

You are so pwned!

-avanti

252 CommonCents  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:40:50pm

re: #236 Who Watches the Watchmen?

Pardon me, is this where I catch the Crazy Train?

Going off the rails?

253 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:41:12pm
254 Kenneth  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:41:16pm

re: #228 theheat

If Palin really wants to be POTUS, she should have served out her term and ran in 2016. Obama will likely beat anybody in 2012, barring complete & utter disaster. The biggest criticism against her was a lack of experience. Now she has compounded that with a lack of judgment, a thin skin and an unseemly ambition.

I was her first supporter here at LGF and predicted McCain would pick her before anybody else did (it's true, you can look it up) but this last week has really turned me off.

255 redc1c4  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:41:18pm

re: #192 monkeytime

OT: If anyone lives in LA and wants my MJ Memorial Tickets let me know.

i'll take them!

256 Walter L. Newton  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:41:33pm

re: #250 kansas

KT.? Kos Troll?

LOL. (here comes the stalking claims).

257 babes  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:41:51pm

re: #221 badger1970

Bad move? At least she is doing something. The old coot who put her on the ticket made her a sitting duck for bo and the DNC. She was a threat. Now six months later, the DNC and MSM still can't leave well enough alone. As a mother, what choice does she have? Alaska is stuck in neutral, her family gets unfairly savaged for no reason by the DNC and MSM, and is ridiculed even by so-called allies on the right, so what can she do?

Libel is serious. And Palin is just fed up with the over-the-top attacks 24/7. She's giving notice to back the eff off.

I agree with this. I believe that she has no other choice. Six months of vile and vulgar remarks. I believe that she should go on the offensive now and start serving notice to the MSM: Do your fact checking. And, lay off my family. And, MSM or blogger - get ready and be responsible.

258 avanti  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:42:03pm

re: #170 Racer X

Sarah speaks. Liberals wet themselves.

Yep, she is a awesome example of the best and brightest the conservatives can come up with, a skilled and consummate politician, another Reagan perhaps. /s

259 theheat  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:42:04pm

re: #240 pingjockey

Actually, there was a skit on SNL that was pretty cruel regarding Chelsea and Hillary, after the Clinton scandal. I believe Madonna re-enacted the famous Marilyn Monroe "Happy B'day Mr. President" skit, singing to Clinton.

It was less than flattering.

260 Kosh's Shadow  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:42:09pm

re: #249 alegrias

* * * * *
John McCain spent 4 decades schmoozing the media and wooing the media in the back of his bus & plane, and all he got was stabbed in the back for his 100% "media availability".

Governor Palin got trashed from the get go by these freaks.

Let the media get a dose of their own. They can dish it out, but they can't take it, because mostly media people are cowards.

After this last election, most of the MSM should be fined by the FEC for illegal campaign contributions to the Obama campaign.

261 Russkilitlover  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:42:13pm

re: #220 FurryOldGuyJeans

What seems to be getting lost in all the heat is that these threatened lawsuits are very specific:

Sarah Palin attorney warns press on 'defamatory material'
By: Jonathan Martin
July 4, 2009 10:23 PM EST

These are not nuisance suits, they are against very specific reports of Palin under investigation by the Feds for embezzlement.

Also lost in the anti-Palin bashing is that this is pretty clearly a threat. I seriously doubt anything will be filed but I'm glad to see a target of continuous vicious attacks say "Enough!"

262 zombie  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:42:14pm

re: #55 Charles

I think it's a terrible precedent to set, for politicians to start suing people who write mean or untrue things about them.

And she has almost no chance of winning such lawsuits, as a very public figure.

The same people who went ballistic with outrage over blog rumors about Obama (that he attended a Muslim school in Indonesia, that he knew exactly who Bill Ayers was before 2008, etc.) are now acting like it's perfectly OK to spread patently false slanders against Palin. Obama is admirable for fighting back, Palin is vilified for fighting back. Why the double standard?

263 Ben Hur  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:42:18pm

Ousted Honduran president expected in Washington

WASHINGTON (AP) - Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton plans to meet with deposed Honduran President Manuel Zelaya this week as the Obama administration weighs responses to his ouster.

Heavy Meddle.

264 Greengolem64  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:42:23pm

re: #161 avanti

Who did BHO sue over the nirter comments, or that he backed infanticide and the rest ? Did McCain sue when he was accused of having black kids out of wedlock or being a traitor as a POW. Did Bush sue over the National Guard records BS ?

Bloggers and the MSN will be unfair to politicians, politicians will be unfair to each other, it's the nature of the game. If you can't stand the flack without suing, you are not ready for prime time IMHO.

Here again is the 'problem'...we as the PUBLIC who these individuals and entities (MSM) are supposed to server SHOULD NOT LET THIS TYPE OF BEHAVIOR CONTINUE!

Are we saying by allowing this type of behavior to be 'de-riguer' that it's OK to slander and libel each other as long as we achieve the goal? Come on folks...we're better than that.

LGF is a great blog...one of the few I read and enjoy (very seldom posting)...but even with Blog's the format seems to be reactionaryin nature. Isn't it time for a little pro-active effort? Rather than constantly reacting to the news and other blogs, it sure would be nice to see pro-active efforts in ousting (by voting out) this current lot of so-called politicians and getting some folks in that are not all about the power.

/s

OK...so I'm a dreamer... :)

265 Kenneth  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:42:28pm

re: #235 capitalist piglet

BHO also has most of the media on his side to pile on when he does counter-attack.

266 Kragar  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:42:48pm

re: #247 FurryOldGuyJeans

OT:

Uh oh, Fox News is reporting CA bonds got downrated yet again, 2 steps above junk bond rating.

No link as of yet, developing......

We'll get some IOUs to cover the shortfall, so it'll be OK

/

267 funky chicken  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:42:54pm

re: #79 OldLineTexan

And there you have it; damned if you do, and damned if you don't.

She lost any future vote of mine by resigning (although for folks who are worried about wasting money on lawsuits, that was the reason she gave), so I have no dog in this fight.

But just making up that rumor to toss around, and waiting for it to be picked up by the MSM, is beyond the pale.

agree, on all counts

and I had some hope that Palin could be a good compromise candidate in the future for the GOP, but she won't get my support again. you can't be a tough, female trailblazer and a damsel in distress at the same time, and I think Palin's played the damsel in distress card a couple of times since the election rather than dealing with crap attacks in a strong, straightforward fashion.

268 alegrias  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:43:00pm

re: #210 Kenneth

BHO never sued anybody, and he has the political shrewdness to take advantage of his critics by choosing the ones to respond to (eg. Rush), while ignoring others.

Even if she has a case, suing critics is a bad political strategy.

* * * *
Barack's media friends (for example at the L.A. Times) HIDE unflattering Barack-Rashid Khalidi video so Barack need not waste his time or breath denying unflattering UNSAVORY friendships.

Obama kisses up to Iran's murdering mullacracy and the media say little.

Sorry but the media cover Obama's ass for him.

269 _RememberTonyC  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:43:17pm

Suing a blogger? While I have great sympathy for what Sarah and her family have gone through, this makes her look small-time.

270 Flyers1974  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:43:40pm

She would also have to prove that she suffered damages and that those damages were caused by the stories of the federal investigation. Among other things, it would be very hard to prove that any damage she incurred was the result of these specific stories as opposed to other stories not subjects of the lawsuit.

271 monkeytime  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:43:41pm

Do you live in LA - you have to pick them up at dodgers stadium.

272 Dianna  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:43:43pm

re: #256 Walter L. Newton

Out of line, Walter.

273 doppelganglander  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:43:45pm

re: #254 Kenneth

If Palin really wants to be POTUS, she should have served out her term and ran in 2016. Obama will likely beat anybody in 2012, barring complete & utter disaster. The biggest criticism against her was a lack of experience. Now she has compounded that with a lack of judgment, a thin skin and an unseemly ambition.

I was her first supporter here at LGF and predicted McCain would pick her before anybody else did (it's true, you can look it up) but this last week has really turned me off.

I remember you mentioning her as early as the spring of 2008, when I had never heard of her. I think you're right that this destroys any chance she had of being president, but I increasingly believe that's not what she has in mind anyway.

274 kansas  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:43:46pm

re: #254 Kenneth

If Palin really wants to be POTUS, she should have served out her term and ran in 2016. Obama will likely beat anybody in 2012, barring complete & utter disaster. The biggest criticism against her was a lack of experience. Now she has compounded that with a lack of judgment, a thin skin and an unseemly ambition.

I was her first supporter here at LGF and predicted McCain would pick her before anybody else did (it's true, you can look it up) but this last week has really turned me off.

I'm not sure how you can accuse someone who has taken this level of abuse as having a "thin skin".

275 Killgore Trout  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:43:59pm

re: #239 zombie

The liberal blogomediasphere is doing the ol' whipsaw-maneuver on her, in which they attack her baselessly, and then scream in outrage if she tries to stop it.


How many right wing blogs and news outlets are pushing completely bogus stories these days about the Obama administration? DHS memo, closing Republican car dealerships, Nirth Certificate, FEMA camps. There's a new bogus story every week. Obama doesn't sue, he lets his critics embarrass themselves. There's no need to stifle free speech.

276 pingjockey  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:44:16pm

re: #259 theheat
One SNL skit does not equal the savaging Palin has recieved for the last 9 mos.

277 Who Watches the Watchmen?  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:44:19pm

re: #155 Racer X

I don't see this so much as "Sarah vs. The Blogger". I see this as Sarah letting the MAIN STREAM FUCKING MEDIA know that they cannot promote these false stories as fact.

What was it Sir Elton John said about the press? Something like, "You can write that I'm a fat, grouchy poofter, but you MUST NOT LIE."

278 LGoPs  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:44:21pm

The people that mindlessly hate Palin and parrot the media line on her are the worst kind of sheep. Dangerous, unthinking ones and it is they I am embarrassed for.
I think for myself. I am not a fucking sheep.

279 itellu3times  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:44:33pm

Mebbe they have to sue the blogger so they can also name deep pockets wapo under joint and several? Is there "conspiracy" in tort law?

Is this civil, or criminal? Civil, I guess. Yeah, more like uncivil.

280 quiet man  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:44:36pm

re: #267 funky chicken
I just do not see the damsel in distress part...If she defends herself it is somehow wrong?

Obama does far worse and his doting sycophants find ways to still kiss his butt

281 FurryOldGuyJeans  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:44:39pm

OT:

Not good, not good, not good......

Monday, July 06, 2009
Fitch Cuts Calif. Long-term Bond Rating To 'BBB'
Sue Chang
MarketWatch Pulse

SAN FRANCISCO -- Fitch Ratings on Monday lowered California's long-term general obligation bond rating to BBB from A- and kept the bonds on Rating Watch Negative. The downgrade is due to the state's continued inability to achieve timely agreement on budgetary and cash flow solutions to its severe fiscal crisis, Fitch said. The Rating Watch Negative also reflects the short-term risk from a prolonged institutional impasse which could further aggravate the state's severe economic, revenue and liquidity challenges and weigh on the state's credit. BBB-rating is one grade above junk bond status.

282 kansas  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:44:44pm

re: #258 avanti

Yep, she is a awesome example of the best and brightest the conservatives can come up with, a skilled and consummate politician, another Reagan perhaps. /s

I wonder what Reagan would have done if the liberals had thrown this amount of shit at him?

283 babes  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:44:53pm

re: #262 zombie

I agree - Obami has always had a team of lawyers -- and, now she will be a private citizen. Go for it Sarah!

284 Kenneth  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:44:57pm

re: #268 alegrias

I agree completely.

285 Kragar  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:45:13pm

re: #263 Ben Hur

Ousted Honduran president expected in Washington


Heavy Meddle.

Obama will be giving him chest oilings tips, shirt ripping techniques and proper heroic posing lessons. How does one say "ADORE ME!" in Spanish?

286 avanti  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:45:18pm

re: #227 kansas

Obama used prosecutors and a sheriff's office to threaten to go after anyone would spoke untruths. Need a link? Google it.

I found no such link proving your contention that BHO was involved as you suggest. It appeared to be a isolated incident in one state, and far from a personal statement that BHO was going to sue anyone.

287 quiet man  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:45:21pm

re: #282 kansas
The bombing starts in 5 minutes...*laughter and applause*

288 justabill  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:45:32pm

You know, we might be missing whats really going on. Were viewing her recent resigning and this lawsuit from the perspective of politician Palin. From this perspective, these actions are hard to fathom.

Perhaps, what really happened was that the Letterman bit was the last straw for her. She may have reached the point where the price her family was having to pay in terms of the media was more than she could put them thru. She may just want her life back...

289 kansas  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:45:38pm

re: #275 Killgore Trout

How many right wing blogs and news outlets are pushing completely bogus stories these days about the Obama administration? DHS memo, closing Republican car dealerships, Nirth Certificate, FEMA camps. There's a new bogus story every week. Obama doesn't sue, he lets his critics embarrass themselves. There's no need to stifle free speech.

Let's see what happens when the MSM goes after his kids.

290 Walter L. Newton  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:45:47pm

re: #258 avanti

Yep, she is a awesome example of the best and brightest the conservatives can come up with, a skilled and consummate politician, another Reagan perhaps. /s

And how would you react if someone published a newspaper article about you being under an investigation for selling car parts to, oh let's say, Cuba, and it wasn't true.

How would you deal with that, especially if the reporter or the new source refused to retract the statement even after the authorities clarified that the charge was false.

What would Avanti do?

291 quiet man  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:46:06pm

re: #286 avanti
Find the link where Obama said he was against this and did not like it for us now.

292 Killgore Trout  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:46:12pm

re: #281 FurryOldGuyJeans

Not surprising. The started issuing IOU's a few weeks ago.

293 SixDegrees  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:46:19pm

re: #207 RunningBare

And deathly afraid of rabbits. Of course, it was no orrrrrdinarrry rrrabbit, but still. LOL@Carter

[Link: en.wikipedia.org...]

When this story originally broke, there was a photograph published in most newspapers of Carter, taken from the opposite bank, face on, paddle raised behind his head with look of abject, I'm-peeing-my-pants terror on his face as the rabbit approached; it was obviously his intent to whack that little bunny to Rabbit Kingdom Come, if he was able to overcome his fear-induced paralysis. The photo is still vivid in my mind all these years later, and I have searched for a copy of it on the Web for years, without success.

Turns out it was taken by one of Carter's Secret Service agents, not the press. As such, it was deemed Presidential material, and was yanked from the public realm under a barrage of legal threats that wiped it from public existence very, very thoroughly.

I keep meaning to dig through the library stacks of news magazines and papers from that time, trying to find a copy. Although like the famous National Lampoon add featuring a floating VW Beetle with the caption "If Ted Kennedy had owned a Volkswagon, he'd be President today," I suspect part of the purge involved physically clipping the photo from all published copies it appeared in, and there will be nothing but a big blank space where it once appeared.

If anyone knows what I'm talking about and can direct me to a copy of it, please let me know. A priceless image that captures the weak-kneed Carter spirit perfectly.

294 theheat  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:46:35pm

re: #276 pingjockey

The question was whether Chelsea was ever picked on, not whether Palin/Palin kids were or weren't. The answer: yes.

295 Dianna  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:46:36pm

re: #262 zombie

Because Palin has to prove that she's got thicker skin than any man. Because Palin is not from an elite background. Because Palin is good looking. Because Palin has a large family. Because...

It's because she exists. It's a sorry commentary on where we've gotten to.

296 Racer X  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:46:45pm

re: #275 Killgore Trout

How many right wing blogs and news outlets are pushing completely bogus stories these days about the Obama administration? DHS memo, closing Republican car dealerships, Nirth Certificate, FEMA camps. There's a new bogus story every week. Obama doesn't sue, he lets his critics embarrass themselves. There's no need to stifle free speech.

KT - one big difference: The MSM is ignoring all of these allegations against Obama, and running front page with the ones against Palin.

297 babes  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:46:52pm

Just as an aside - a lawyer from a large DC law firm is around $500 an hour.

298 Russkilitlover  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:47:01pm

re: #247 FurryOldGuyJeans

OT:

Uh oh, Fox News is reporting CA bonds got downrated yet again, 2 steps above junk bond rating.

No link as of yet, developing......

We're currently above junk rating? That's surprising.

299 avanti  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:47:07pm

re: #262 zombie

The same people who went ballistic with outrage over blog rumors about Obama (that he attended a Muslim school in Indonesia, that he knew exactly who Bill Ayers was before 2008, etc.) are now acting like it's perfectly OK to spread patently false slanders against Palin. Obama is admirable for fighting back, Palin is vilified for fighting back. Why the double standard?

Good point, when did Obama fight back by threatening to sue as Palin is doing ? link ?

300 alegrias  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:47:26pm

re: #260 Kosh's Shadow

After this last election, most of the MSM should be fined by the FEC for illegal campaign contributions to the Obama campaign.

* * * *
Guess they nearly bankrupted themselves illegally supporting Obama, and now resort to whoring themselves at intimate soirees such as those at the WashPost heiress' Weymouth-Graham mansion for $25,000 or $250,000 a session.

301 quiet man  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:47:35pm

re: #295 Dianna
very well said and so true...She has to be 20 times better than any man..

But then I think she already knows that.

302 A Man for all Seasons  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:47:38pm

re: #240 pingjockey

Oh bullshit. Chelsea never was brought into the spotlight and slammed. Hillary had an absolute crap load of stuff in here closet and it got at most a cursory look.

Nobody ever gives props to Chelsea....It's completely unfair...
That girl grew up in the white hot spot light and turned out pretty cool...She is smart..(Stanford) and grew up to be a wonderful woman.. I am impressed with that young lady...Please never trash her here....She doesn't deserve it...
I'm quite impressed with her.....

303 pingjockey  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:47:40pm

re: #294 theheat
What ever.

304 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:47:46pm
305 Russkilitlover  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:47:49pm

re: #263 Ben Hur

Ousted Honduran president expected in Washington

Heavy Meddle.

KT - Head's up! Now THAT'S embarrassing.

306 redc1c4  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:47:57pm

re: #258 avanti

and yet, you are terrified by the very thought of her running for office.

307 kansas  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:47:57pm

re: #286 avanti

I found no such link proving your contention that BHO was involved as you suggest. It appeared to be a isolated incident in one state, and far from a personal statement that BHO was going to sue anyone.

Nah, he just stood by while prosecutors and law enforcement threatened voters.

308 KingKenrod  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:48:10pm

re: #281 FurryOldGuyJeans

OT:

Not good, not good, not good......

Monday, July 06, 2009
Fitch Cuts Calif. Long-term Bond Rating To 'BBB'
Sue Chang
MarketWatch Pulse

I don't know why this is bad. It makes it harder/more expensive for CA to borrow money and forces them to behave more responsibly if they want their rating to improve.

309 zombie  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:48:20pm

re: #275 Killgore Trout

How many right wing blogs and news outlets are pushing completely bogus stories these days about the Obama administration? DHS memo, closing Republican car dealerships, Nirth Certificate, FEMA camps. There's a new bogus story every week. Obama doesn't sue, he lets his critics embarrass themselves. There's no need to stifle free speech.

That's because he's already president. He's pretty much insulated from the rumors -- they can't really affect him now. But he was just as thin-skinned during the election as Palin is now. And moreover, Obama had thousands of attack dogs that did the fighting back for him during the campaign.

310 FurryOldGuyJeans  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:48:28pm

re: #295 Dianna

Because Palin has to prove that she's got thicker skin than any man. Because Palin is not from an elite background. Because Palin is good looking. Because Palin has a large family. Because...

It's because she exists. It's a sorry commentary on where we've gotten to.

The blatant misogyny was so over-the-top, and shows NO sign of abating.

311 Killgore Trout  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:48:39pm

re: #296 Racer X

Don't expect some kind of Fairness Doctrine. Republican will not get equal or fair treatment from the MSM.

312 Roger  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:48:40pm

Me thinks we will see Palin on a ticket with a democrat some day. I'm convinced she knows she's got to work outside the GOP to get anywhere in the messy future of our country.

She stated her primary reason for resigning. I think a second unstated reason is she knows she cannot represent the GOP in good conscience. The in-crowd of the GOP thinks the failures of President Obama are manageable and [in their thinking] leads to GOP power-as-usual. The future is messier than their greasy [[Link: www.brillig.com...] [Link: www.brillig.com...] hands can imagine.

313 SanFranciscoZionist  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:48:43pm

re: #110 sphincter

Kilgore Trout

Explain in detail why you are embarassed by Sarah Palin being on a ticket you did not vote for. Be specific. Is it because she didn't attend an Ivy League School? Is it because of the "folksy" language? She's fly-over country?

Get it out on the table. You've assumed the elitist mantle and and I'd be interested in discovering what the foundation of that is based on.

I will set back and return to listen mode now.

I can't speak for Killgore, and I'm not embarassed by Mrs. Palin, but I am offended by the idea that her 'folksy' accent is the only thing anyone could object to about her. Not everyone who was underwhelmed with Sarah Palin is an 'elitist'.

314 HippieforLife  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:48:46pm

She should defend herself. The garbage spewed by bloggers, the MSM, RNC operatives, DNC operatives, etc was way beyond what could be described as legitimate dialog. Not only her but her ENTIRE FAMILY. I am glad that she said that enough was enough.

315 kansas  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:48:53pm

re: #299 avanti

Good point, when did Obama fight back by threatening to sue as Palin is doing ? link ?

You can't sue someone for telling the truth.

316 babes  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:48:56pm

re: #307 kansas

Nah, he just stood by while prosecutors and law enforcement threatened voters.

Yes, and how many off-the-record phone calls were made by his team of lawyers.

317 WinterCat  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:49:06pm

re: #246 debutaunt

I'm embarrased for our country. We used to stand for fair play.

Well, I agree, there was a time when one could have a reasoned discussion with someone who held a different opinion. But, that time is gone, I fear. I have seen too many people I might otherwise consider intelligent good people devolve into screaming maniacs since Bush took office. And the hate rhetoric has escalated ever since -- reaching it's apex during the Obama campaign. Neighbors screaming at neighbors. People slinging insults. Friendships ending over politics. And not just a few cases. Too many in fact. Sad.

318 filetandrelease  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:49:16pm

re: #254 Kenneth

I don't know ken, I was pretty early on the Palin band wagon.

Then again, I think she should sue the b%&*h. At some point conservatives need to fight back. This may not be the way, but at least it is something.

319 nightlight  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:49:18pm

Sorry if this is a repeat, but didn't the lawyer say why he singled out Moore?


Van Flein's letter threatening legal action specifically pointed the finger at Alaska blogger Shannyn Moore as "most notably" claiming as "fact" that Palin resigned under federal investigation.

Van Flein, asked why he singled out Moore, said it's because she went on national television and talked about it. Moore was on with MSNBC's David Shuster on Friday, the day Palin said she will resign


[Link: www.adn.com...]

320 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:49:28pm

re: #297 babes

Just as an aside - a lawyer from a large DC law firm is around $500 an hour.

Well, less than a good hooker.

321 pingjockey  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:49:33pm

re: #302 HoosierHoops
I'm not. I'm saying Palins kids got nuked by the msm and no one elses kids have got that level of utter crap.

322 Kragar  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:49:51pm

re: #308 KingKenrod

I don't know why this is bad. It makes it harder/more expensive for CA to borrow money and forces them to behave more responsibly if they want their rating to improve.

Obviously, you dont know how the whiney bitches and the unions who keep their balls in a vice work in Sacramento.

323 redc1c4  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:49:54pm

re: #271 monkeytime

Do you live in LA - you have to pick them up at dodgers stadium.

just a few miles from there....

324 BeerDrinking_VictoryMonkey  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:50:02pm

re: #319 nightlight

Sorry if this is a repeat, but didn't the lawyer say why he singled out Moore?

Van Flein's letter threatening legal action specifically pointed the finger at Alaska blogger Shannyn Moore as "most notably" claiming as "fact" that Palin resigned under federal investigation.

Van Flein, asked why he singled out Moore, said it's because she went on national television and talked about it. Moore was on with MSNBC's David Shuster on Friday, the day Palin said she will resign

[Link: www.adn.com...]

National television = MSNBC? Who knew?
/

325 FurryOldGuyJeans  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:50:18pm

re: #308 KingKenrod

I don't know why this is bad. It makes it harder/more expensive for CA to borrow money and forces them to behave more responsibly if they want their rating to improve.

Bad because it destabilizes the entire US economy. What just happened in CA will ripple out and impact on the rest of the states, and reverberate throughout the Federal government. If anything CA showed vast amounts of fiscal restrait compared to Congress.

326 LGoPs  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:50:19pm

re: #299 avanti

Good point, when did Obama fight back by threatening to sue as Palin is doing ? link ?

Obama didn't have to fight back. He had the entire MFM shilling for him. They were his Praetorian Guard.

327 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:50:19pm

re: #304 buzzsawmonkey

That should be accompanied with a banjo.

Not calling Sarah a hick. Just the song lends itself to bluegrass.

328 haakondahl  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:50:38pm

re: #154 Sharmuta

But that hasn't stopped certain people from threatening Charles with lawyers.

Perhaps it's from having watched this play out elsewhere- threatening legal action in the hopes it will intimidate your critic(s). I have no idea if that's what is going on here- I don't know the facts in this case. There's no need to sue if the facts will exonerate her, though. In fact- if the blogger is lying, the blogger will be the one to lose credibility- without lawyers being involved at all.

True, but with an infinite supply of bloggers and a media happy to let the accusations stand and pass into popular record, the only recourses are law and violence. So good for her.

329 debutaunt  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:50:46pm

re: #247 FurryOldGuyJeans

OT:

Uh oh, Fox News is reporting CA bonds got downrated yet again, 2 steps above junk bond rating.

No link as of yet, developing......

The bad is just starting. California is the poster child for the country.

330 redc1c4  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:50:54pm

re: #272 Dianna

Out of line, Walter.

hardly: i thought it was dead on target.

331 Flyers1974  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:50:55pm

re: #222 Greengolem64

So, by definition...being a very public person allows MSM and bloggers (of either side) to write patently false and defamatory statements about people (of either side)? Wow....

Senator blah-de-blah was reportedly seen engaging in (fill in the blank) with (fill in the blank)...published by (fill in the blank) with full knowledge that the statement was FALSE and DEFAMATORY...only to cause political and potentially personal 'damage' to said Senator...

I am all for free speech...but what happened to decency?

Blogger, TV personality, or MSM venue...that should NOT be an exception or defense for writing the garbage that has been printed about politicians and public individuals over the past xx decades...or whenever this decline in decency in the press started.

I really wonder if 'real time' media outlets such as blogging, twittering, or youtube are not more of a detriment to society. No longer is there the 'take a deep breath' time involved with writing and reporting...we have individuals writing stream of consciousnesses and real time tweet's while others are happily (or not) attacking... People get lost in the heat of the moment...things get said that can't be taken back thanks to the internet.

Just sayin'...

GG

Lowering the bar for proving defamation against politicians would have a chilling effect on criticism of politicians. If the bar was lowered and politicians could do this, many people would not criticize politicians on account of the expense of defending lawsuits, even if they thought they would ulitimately win.

332 Danny  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:51:00pm

If you like Palin, this makes her look tough. If you don't like her, it makes her look petty. It's zero sum game in the political arena. But it's not zero sum game in the personal lives of Shannyn Moore and Sarah Palin.

333 Wendya  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:51:02pm

re: #18 capitalist piglet

.

Maybe that's all she's doing here. Calling their bluff.

In language they can understand.

334 JarHeadLifer  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:51:02pm

re: #72 Rancher

Being a "very public figure" doesn't matter, ask celebrities who have successfully sued the National Enquirer.

Actually, it does matter, very much. The Enquirer's stock and trade is printing libelous stories, every day. There's only been a handful of successful cases against the NE, and most of those were settled out of court. The threshold a public figure must reach when litigating a libel or slander case is very high.

Plus, the founding fathers weren't too kean on beuarocrats using what became to be known as SLAPP suits to silence their opposition. There's a reason America doesn't now and never did have a "star chamber". The first amendment is a powerful protection, for just this reason.

I can't think of a single case, at least not in the last 100 years, where a sitting Governor has brought a defamation case and won. Palin's chances of success with such an action are very minimal, at best. Plus, she then exposes her self to all manner of discovery and deposition. I'm guessing on this issue, she's a paper tiger.

335 Dianna  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:51:03pm

re: #280 quiet man

I just do not see the damsel in distress part...If she defends herself it is somehow wrong?

Obama does far worse and his doting sycophants find ways to still kiss his butt

If she defends herself - in any way - she is accused of playing the victim or of being shrill.

I won't vote for her because she ducked out on her duties. I understand her anger and frustration. It doesn't excuse not doing her duty.

336 Racer X  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:51:19pm

re: #311 Killgore Trout

Don't expect some kind of Fairness Doctrine. Republican will not get equal or fair treatment from the MSM.

Heh.

Thats an understatement!

337 monkeytime  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:51:32pm

re: #323 redc1c4

just a few miles from there....

I need to email them to you but I don't know how to turn my nic blue so you can email me and when I click yours I just get your website and it says I can't email you cause I'm don't have a log in.

338 Outrider  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:51:36pm

This isn't a case of a blogger bringing up the normal "trashtalk", they are alleging criminal activity and corruption from a future candidate for POTUS. Given the viciousness the MSM has displayed in the past there is every probability they will run with these allegations despite any comments from the FBI.

Merely ignoring the story or denying it is a total waste of time as the only ones who will read it are her fans.

For example, far too many people chose to base their opinion of her on a single solitary interview. The same will happen with these false allegations if permitted to continue.

339 Wendya  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:51:40pm

re: #262 zombie

Obama is admirable for fighting back, Palin is vilified for fighting back. Why the double standard?

For the same reason there is a double standard on every issue when it comes to Palin.

340 kynna  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:51:55pm

re: #268 alegrias

* * * *
Barack's media friends (for example at the L.A. Times) HIDE unflattering Barack-Rashid Khalidi video so Barack need not waste his time or breath denying unflattering UNSAVORY friendships.

Obama kisses up to Iran's murdering mullacracy and the media say little.

Sorry but the media cover Obama's ass for him.

Comparing Palin's ability to take a hit with Obama's ability to do the same is absurd. The man had the media, David 'astroturf' Axelrod, and countless leftist bloggers spinning, threatening and piling on his critics.

Obama didn't have to ask government workers to expose Joe the Plumbers private information. They did it willingly. The man has never had to take a hit. Ever.

Remember when there were a couple of books out against Obama? One by wacky troofer Corso(?) and one by the more respected David Freddoso? When a radio station tried to do interviews the Obama Campaign didn't send anyone to counter (although they were invited to), they sent out an e-mail to get their supporters to jam the stations phone lines, short-circuiting the interview.

Now that's silencing critics.

People are rewriting history when they say he handled criticism with dignity and a thick skin. Sheesh!

341 avanti  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:52:04pm

re: #290 Walter L. Newton

And how would you react if someone published a newspaper article about you being under an investigation for selling car parts to, oh let's say, Cuba, and it wasn't true.

How would you deal with that, especially if the reporter or the new source refused to retract the statement even after the authorities clarified that the charge was false.

What would Avanti do?

If I was a politician, I'd have to ignore it legality, but correct the statement. Not only would I have to prove it untrue, I have to prove the accuser knew it to be untrue and posted it with malice.
For a few 100 years, politicians have talked shit about each other with free speech protections.

342 Mad Al-Jaffee  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:52:24pm

re: #293 SixDegrees

Probably not exactly what you're looking for:

Image: rabbit_original_3000x2254.jpg

343 KenJen  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:52:31pm

"We are not retreating. We are advancing in another direction"- General MacArthur. This is Palin's last sentence in her announcement from Fri.

344 theheat  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:52:32pm

re: #302 HoosierHoops

I was very impressed with Chelsea and McCain's daughter during last year's elections. Different sides of the aisle, but both very interesting and really exciting young gals in the political scene. Their parents should be proud.

345 Wendya  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:52:40pm

re: #334 JarHeadLifer

I can't think of a single case, at least not in the last 100 years, where a sitting Governor has brought a defamation case and won. Palin's chances of success with such an action are very minimal, at best. Plus, she then exposes her self to all manner of discovery and deposition. I'm guessing on this issue, she's a paper tiger.

Palin won't be a sitting governor much longer and any attacks on her that occur after she steps down are fair game for litigation.

346 Roger  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:52:45pm

re: #275 Killgore Trout

How many right wing blogs and news outlets are pushing completely bogus stories these days about the Obama administration? DHS memo, closing Republican car dealerships, Nirth Certificate, FEMA camps. There's a new bogus story every week. Obama doesn't sue, he lets his critics embarrass themselves. There's no need to stifle free speech.

I'm all for President Obama resigning so he can go after them.

347 monkeytime  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:52:53pm

testing

348 Charles Johnson  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:52:57pm

re: #262 zombie

The same people who went ballistic with outrage over blog rumors about Obama (that he attended a Muslim school in Indonesia, that he knew exactly who Bill Ayers was before 2008, etc.) are now acting like it's perfectly OK to spread patently false slanders against Palin. Obama is admirable for fighting back, Palin is vilified for fighting back. Why the double standard?

I'm not vilifying her. And there's no double standard. My position is consistent -- I wouldn't like it if Obama started threatening lawsuits against bloggers and media, and I don't like it when Sarah Palin does.

349 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:53:00pm
350 FurryOldGuyJeans  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:53:02pm

re: #343 KenJen

"We are not retreating. We are advancing in another direction"- General MacArthur. This is Palin's last sentence in her announcement from Fri.

I saw that and all I could do was cringe.

351 capitalist piglet  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:53:13pm

re: #263 Ben Hur

Ousted Honduran president expected in Washington


Heavy Meddle.

Oh good grief. You have got to be kidding. (In fact, I'm pretty sure someone made that very joke earlier today - that he would end up in Washington.)

352 babes  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:53:15pm

re: #345 Wendya

Palin won't be a sitting governor much longer and any attacks on her that occur after she steps down are fair game for litigation.

this is what people are forgetting.

353 monkeytime  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:53:20pm

OK - now email me - you have to pick the tickets up today.

354 SanFranciscoZionist  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:53:38pm

re: #177 midwestgak

You have a point. Reagan didn't sue because the press characterized him as "aged". Bush did not sue because they characterized him as a stupid hick. Even Carter didn't sue because he was called a peanut farmer, among other things.

Well, Reagan was aged, and Carter was a peanut farmer. Truth is an absolute defense against against slander, no?

355 pingjockey  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:53:44pm

Nap time. Y'all fight nice!

356 J.S.  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:54:16pm

re: #275 Killgore Trout

there's a difference between stating that the Obama administration is takin' over Republican car lots (yes, they may be a falsehood) vs saying that Obama is a criminal or Obama has committed Crimes X, Y, Z...(as I'm sure you're aware, defamation is not, repeat not, protected speech; defamation doesn't fall into the Free Speech, First Amendment, category...)

357 Kenneth  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:54:21pm

re: #351 capitalist piglet

A good analysis of what happened in Honduras here.

...it is disappointing to know that the international community - including the UN, Organization of American States, and the US - was quick to condemn the removal of Zelaya and announce its disapproval of the existing government, given the background of Zelaya and what prompted his removal. A review of what happened in Honduras shows that it was Zelaya who first committed constitutional shortcuts by disregarding the Honduran Congress in calling for a referendum to amend the constitution. The Honduran Supreme Court, backed by the attorney general, ruled that Zelaya’s call for a referendum was unconstitutional. Zelaya defied the Supreme Court ruling by firing the army chief who refused to support Zelaya’s self-initiated referendum. This prompted the military, in support of the Supreme Court’s ruling, to arrest Zelaya. As a result of this the Honduran Congress installed Roberto Micheletti, the constitutional successor to the president. …

The idea that Zelaya ought to be supported by Washington because he is considered by some NGOs to be a “man of the people” may or may not have moral validity. But even if he were, restoring him in violation of Honduran laws also has a downside. Those who worked for years to restore the semblance of constitutional rule in a Third World after a dictator has torn them up know how that it is much easier to scramble an egg than to unscramble it. Once the laws of Honduras are circumvented with a wink and a nod the temptation to circumvent them again will be irresistible. Honduras and the Honduran constitution may not mean much beyond a narrow circle in Washington, but to the Hondurans, it is all they have.

There are probably a great many ambitious leaders in the Third World who are watching how Washington handles the Honduran crisis. It is all the more reason to act carefully and wisely.

Is it any wonder Hugo Chavez supports Zeyala?

358 quiet man  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:54:34pm

time for me to hit it and get it

later Lizards!

359 haakondahl  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:54:35pm

re: #236 Who Watches the Watchmen?

Pardon me, is this where I catch the Crazy Train?

No. Trains traveling in both directions departed months and years ago, respectively. Obviously, some missed their train.

360 LGoPs  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:54:37pm

re: #338 Outrider

This isn't a case of a blogger bringing up the normal "trashtalk", they are alleging criminal activity and corruption from a future candidate for POTUS. Given the viciousness the MSM has displayed in the past there is every probability they will run with these allegations despite any comments from the FBI.

Merely ignoring the story or denying it is a total waste of time as the only ones who will read it are her fans.
For example, far too many people chose to base their opinion of her on a single solitary interview. The same will happen with these false allegations if permitted to continue.

Good point. How many idiots out there voted against Palin because Tina Fucking Fey said "I can see Russia from my house".........
Sheesh.

361 Sharmuta  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:54:46pm

re: #275 Killgore Trout

How many right wing blogs and news outlets are pushing completely bogus stories these days about the Obama administration? DHS memo, closing Republican car dealerships, Nirth Certificate, FEMA camps. There's a new bogus story every week. Obama doesn't sue, he lets his critics embarrass themselves. There's no need to stifle free speech.

How is pamela any different than the lefties spreading false stories?

362 JarHeadLifer  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:54:52pm

re: #315 kansas

You can't sue someone for telling the truth.

You can sue anyone for anything. Not to put words in your mouth, but I believe you meant, you can't sue someone for telling the truth, and expect to win.

Which is why many states (not enough however) have enacted anti-SLAPP legislation. It keeps politicians from suing their opposition into submission. If pols don't like what's being said about them, they shouldn't get into politics in the first place.

363 A Man for all Seasons  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:54:56pm

re: #321 pingjockey

I'm not. I'm saying Palins kids got nuked by the msm and no one elses kids have got that level of utter crap.

Oh I'm feeling you bro...It is unfair the barrage Sarah's children have taken...
It's wierd.. We as Americans will protect our children with our life...I mean Shit Even Carter's girl was off limits....
The Attack on Children is new in this election process.. It's sick....
/Shut up hoopster....

364 Racer X  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:54:59pm

re: #263 Ben Hur

Ousted Honduran president expected in Washington

Heavy Meddle.

I am so embarrassed.

365 Shr_Nfr  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:55:00pm

re: #269 _RememberTonyC

If the blogger had just said something nasty, it would have been one thing. Accusing her of a criminal charge is quite another. Especially when parts of the MSM picked it up and broadcast it. I can say that I think Joe Biden is an idiot. I can say that I think Chris Dodd should be prosecuted for his "friends of Mario" stuff. That is opinion. But to say that a federal charges will be pending is libel if you do not have good reason to think so. The good reason would be a defense provided that you published a retraction later saying that you have since learned that it was not the case. Given the amount of effort the media has made to dig through her trash (literally) I hope she prevails in court.

366 Flyers1974  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:55:05pm

re: #313 SanFranciscoZionist

I can't speak for Killgore, and I'm not embarassed by Mrs. Palin, but I am offended by the idea that her 'folksy' accent is the only thing anyone could object to about her. Not everyone who was underwhelmed with Sarah Palin is an 'elitist'.

And I'd add that it wasn't her folksy accent that turned many people off, it was the perception that the folksy accent was exaggerated for political purposes, kind of like Clinton's accent getting more southern when he was down south.

367 SanFranciscoZionist  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:55:37pm

re: #201 quiet man

Biden is a dope..and thinks being proud of his country is *corny*...too bad he isnt a quitter.

Oh, that's not fair! He may have said it was corny, but he also said he felt it.

368 avanti  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:55:54pm

re: #306 redc1c4

and yet, you are terrified by the very thought of her running for office.

Absolutely, scared shitless, the entire left and middle fear her.

369 SanFranciscoZionist  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:56:01pm

re: #367 SanFranciscoZionist

Oh, that's not fair! He may have said it was corny, but he also said he felt it.

And he called Saddam an SOB, which I appreciated.

370 CommonCents  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:56:15pm

re: #275 Killgore Trout

Obama doesn't sue, he lets his critics embarrass themselves. There's no need to stifle free speech.

Except using his middle name.
Except talking about HIS family.
Except talking about his college years.
Except talking about his past acquaintences.
Except....

371 Walter L. Newton  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:56:17pm

re: #341 avanti

If I was a politician, I'd have to ignore it legality, but correct the statement. Not only would I have to prove it untrue, I have to prove the accuser knew it to be untrue and posted it with malice.
For a few 100 years, politicians have talked shit about each other with free speech protections.

And it appears that Sarah is going to take your advice and try to prove it's untrue and it was done with malice. I'm glad you agree with what she is doing.

There is not unlimited free speech in this country.

372 redc1c4  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:56:34pm

re: #337 monkeytime

I need to email them to you but I don't know how to turn my nic blue so you can email me and when I click yours I just get your website and it says I can't email you cause I'm don't have a log in.

just add '@sbcglobal.net' to my nic here and we're golden.

373 Fenway_Nation  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:57:04pm

re: #357 Kenneth

Didn't some of these genius NGOs and State Dept Mensa candidates also have Mao and Castro portrayed as a 'man of the people' or 'agrarian reformers'?

374 Danny  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:57:07pm

I like what James Taranto said about it: "Why should anyone be mystified that a mother, in the face of such indecent treatment of her children, would finally say enough is enough?"

375 Gearhead  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:57:34pm

re: #357 Kenneth

A good analysis of what happened in Honduras here.

Is it any wonder Hugo Chavez supports Zeyala?

And if Obama also supports Zelaya, where does that leave us?

(Fernandez has been one of my favorites since before his PJM days)

376 Shr_Nfr  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:57:42pm

re: #351 capitalist piglet

Probably will sleep in the Lincoln Bedroom.

377 VegasRick  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:57:45pm

re: #289 kansas

Let's see what happens when the MSM goes after his kids.

EXACTLY! I keep reading comments here equating the viotrol as even between Palin/Obama. Has KT, The big "A" (avanti) or any of the other Palin haters EVER found the link/video/story/anything showing zero's kids being treated the way that Palin's were?

378 3 wood  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:57:51pm

Democratic Senator Sheldon Whitehouse wants a 2nd stimulus bill


A second stimulus bill is "probably needed," Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) argued Monday.

Going further than some fellow Democrats — including Vice President Biden — who haven't ruled out a second stimulus, Whitehouse said that such a package is "on the table."

"We may very well need to do a second stimulus," Whitehouse said during an appearance on ABC's "Top Line" webcast Monday afternoon. "I think that it is probably needed."

"We're going to need to have some further discussion, probably before the end of the year," he added, saying the Congress would need to look at the economic indicators at that time.


Here it comes.

379 CommonCents  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:57:51pm

re: #358 quiet man

time for me to hit it and get it

later Lizards!

tmi

380 Wendya  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:58:07pm

re: #335 Dianna

I won't vote for her because she ducked out on her duties. I understand her anger and frustration. It doesn't excuse not doing her duty.

I don't know that she plans on a future run or if I'd vote for her. As for her not doing her duty, neither did the republican party. Where the hell were they for the last year when she and her children were being attacked? They were breathing a sigh of relief that it wasn't them and they were keeping their heads down for fear of being attacked themselves. 18 groundless ethics claims in 8 months, all requiring taxpayer and her personal money to defend is not what any state needs. When the laws are written in such a way that every single wacky allegation is investigated on the taxpayer dime, there's something seriously wrong with the system.

381 tommygum  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:58:15pm

re: #232 LGoPs

SNAP!

382 Yashmak  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:58:18pm

All I have to say on this matter is, if she does take legal action, and fails to get a jury to find in her favor, the publicity fallout will be far worse for her than the babblings of a blogger. She's taking a very big risk here.

383 Outrider  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:58:23pm

re: #341 avanti

If I was a politician, I'd have to ignore it legality, but correct the statement. Not only would I have to prove it untrue, I have to prove the accuser knew it to be untrue and posted it with malice.
For a few 100 years, politicians have talked shit about each other with free speech protections.

Again, this isn't merely "talking shit". This is stating clearly, in print, the person is resigning due to criminal activity while seated as Governor; even after the FBI denies the rumors of an investigation.

Malice? Uh huh. That's going to be a hard one to prove!

384 Walter L. Newton  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:58:37pm

re: #348 Charles

I'm not vilifying her. And there's no double standard. My position is consistent -- I wouldn't like it if Obama started threatening lawsuits against bloggers and media, and I don't like it when Sarah Palin does.

Well, bloggers, just like the rest of the public, rest of the media, rest of the pundits and well, like the rest of the citizens of this country, have this option if they feel it's a needed avenue to pursue.

I like it.

385 Ben Hur  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:58:40pm

re: #263 Ben Hur

Ousted Honduran president expected in Washington


Heavy Meddle.

Maybe they're calling him in for some advice:

US-Russian Arms Negotiators "Under the Gun," Might Temporarily Bypass Senate Ratification for Treaty

MOSCOW -- With the clock running out on a new US-Russian arms treaty before the previous Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, or START, expires on December 5, a senior White House official said Sunday said that the difficulty of the task might mean temporarily bypassing the Senate’s constitutional role in ratifying treaties by enforcing certain aspects of a new deal on an executive levels and a “provisional basis” until the Senate ratifies the treaty.

386 3 wood  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:58:53pm

re: #370 CommonCents

Except using his middle name.
Except talking about HIS family.
Except talking about his college years.
Except talking about his past acquaintences.
Except....

His big ears, don't forget his big ears.

387 pbird  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:59:27pm

re: #114 Danny

I see the Michael Jackson coverage as an embarrassment to the country.

Damn right. I can't bear it myself.

388 SixDegrees  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:59:31pm

re: #281 FurryOldGuyJeans

OT:

Not good, not good, not good......

Monday, July 06, 2009
Fitch Cuts Calif. Long-term Bond Rating To 'BBB'
Sue Chang
MarketWatch Pulse

Not good at all. Now is not the time for any state, especially California, to be inviting Federal intervention. And that's almost sure to follow, as the state's government is effectively incapable of operating in any fashion; partisanship has frozen the legislature, and the state's constitution doesn't give the governor any powers to intervene and break the logjam. External management is on the horizon, brought to you by the same people who flushed Chrysler and GM down the drain and who can't manage the banking system.

Anyone know what the law says about Federal oversight of a dysfunctional state? To my knowledge, it says nothing - a blank slate for the Feds to write upon.

And once the Feds take over California's budget, over half of the remaining states in the Union will be falling over themselves to be next in line.

If I lived in California, I would be urging every citizen to find out where their state representatives live, and camp outside their homes with airhorns blasting away all night long until this crisis got resolved, either through higher taxes or (gasp!) a reduction in spending.

389 Gearhead  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:59:38pm

re: #373 Fenway_Nation

...'man of the people' or 'agrarian reformers'?

Archaic terms for 'Community Organizers'

390 JarHeadLifer  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:59:43pm

re: #345 Wendya

Palin won't be a sitting governor much longer and any attacks on her that occur after she steps down are fair game for litigation.

Not at all. Even though Palin will step away from elected office, she will remain a "public" figure for the rest of her life, with the added element of the public figure doctrine and it's relevant absence of malice clause applying to any litigation she may initiate.

It's true, however, that it will get incrementally for her to bring a case, but not by very much.

391 Kragar  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:59:44pm

Ayatollah: Western 'lies' depict Iranians as 'rioters'

To a gathering in Tehran, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei accused Western governments of having "clearly meddled in the internal affairs of Iran" and the American and European media of depicting Iranians "as rioters," according to Fars News Agency.

He warned that meddling from presidents, prime ministers and foreign ministers would hurt those nations' relations with Iran, according to Fars.

He said Iranians would see through the "lies" of Western governments and "know that your objective is to create doubt amongst them and propagate hate against the system of the Islamic Republic."

392 Ben Hur  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:59:45pm

re: #369 SanFranciscoZionist

And he called Saddam an SOB, which I appreciated.

I actually liked the "split up Iraq" argument when he first floated it.

393 haakondahl  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 1:59:58pm

re: #335 Dianna

If she defends herself - in any way - she is accused of playing the victim or of being shrill.

I won't vote for her because she ducked out on her duties. I understand her anger and frustration. It doesn't excuse not doing her duty.

I am assuming that when she quit, she meant it. On that basis, I support her completely.

394 debutaunt  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:00:10pm

re: #288 justabill

You know, we might be missing whats really going on. Were viewing her recent resigning and this lawsuit from the perspective of politician Palin. From this perspective, these actions are hard to fathom.

Perhaps, what really happened was that the Letterman bit was the last straw for her. She may have reached the point where the price her family was having to pay in terms of the media was more than she could put them thru. She may just want her life back...

I suspect things went over the top when she was accused of embezzlement.

395 kansas  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:00:10pm

stopthesmears, mediamatters, those ring a bell?

396 FurryOldGuyJeans  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:00:15pm

Updated July 04. 2009 10:11AM
Marion man already driving around with Sarah Palin 2012 poster
By James Q. Lynch
The Gazette

Harlan Muth isn’t organizing Sarah Palin’s presidential campaign, but pledges as soon as someone does, “I’ll be with ’em.

In the meantime, the Marion maintenance contractor is turning heads with his “Sarah Palin 2012” poster prominently displayed on his van.

“It’s getting a fantastic response,” Muth, 63, said. “So many people give me the thumbs up or honk when they see it. Some people get out of their cars and ask me where they can get a poster.”

397 SanFranciscoZionist  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:00:22pm

re: #240 pingjockey

Oh bullshit. Chelsea never was brought into the spotlight and slammed. Hillary had an absolute crap load of stuff in here closet and it got at most a cursory look.

Chelsea wasn't brought into the campaign as much by her parents, either. The Palin kids were. I can see why a campaign manager might have thought it was a good idea, but it turned out to be a very bad one.

398 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:00:30pm
399 LGoPs  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:00:41pm

re: #389 Gearhead

Archaic terms for 'Community Organizers'

Community Agitator is more apt and descriptive.

400 JacksonTn  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:00:52pm

re: #215 avanti

I have heard that several times, but could I get a link that shows Obama threatening to sue anyone. I know some folks from the Missouri campaign talked about that, but nothing from Obama like the Palin announcement.

Avanti ... while you were busy reading Obama's books ... we were doing some checking on Obama ... Obama did throw the 1st under the bus in Missouri ...

Link for you:

[Link: littlegreenfootballs.com...]

401 reine.de.tout  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:01:20pm

re: #275 Killgore Trout

How many right wing blogs and news outlets are pushing completely bogus stories these days about the Obama administration? DHS memo, closing Republican car dealerships, Nirth Certificate, FEMA camps. There's a new bogus story every week. Obama doesn't sue, he lets his critics embarrass themselves. There's no need to stifle free speech.

Obama's children, though, have been off-limits.
Palin's kids - not.
I would have lost patience too, with all of it. Maybe she just figures it's time to put a stop to it, to try to protect herself AND HER FAMILY.

402 ShanghaiEd  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:01:25pm

re: #4 quiet man

Good for her. Just like Obama did here in Missouri during the election

Unless I'm mistaken, that was not an action by Obama. It was two Obama supporters. Big difference.

403 CommonCents  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:01:31pm

re: #396 FurryOldGuyJeans

“It’s getting a fantastic response,” Muth, 63, said. “So many people give me the thumbs up or honk when they see it. Some people get out of their cars and ask me where they can get a poster.”

No offense, but those aren't thumbs.
/s

404 Wendya  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:01:34pm

re: #348 Charles

I'm not vilifying her. And there's no double standard. My position is consistent -- I wouldn't like it if Obama started threatening lawsuits against bloggers and media, and I don't like it when Sarah Palin does.

DENVER (AP) - Barack Obama is striking back fiercely and swiftly to stamp out an ad that links him to a 1960s radical, eager to demonstrate a far more aggressive response to attacks than John Kerry did when faced with the 2004 "Swift Boat" campaign.

Obama not only aired a response ad to the spot linking him to William Ayers, but he sought to block stations the commercial by warning station managers and asking the Justice Department to intervene. The campaign also planned to compel advertisers to pressure stations that continue to air the anti-Obama commercial.

[Link: www.breitbart.com...]

405 J.D.  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:02:00pm

re: #370 CommonCents

Except using his middle name.
Except talking about HIS family.
Except talking about his college years.
Except talking about his past acquaintences.
Except....

Say! Speaking of his college years...
Obama Has Gotten It Wrong for Twenty-Five Years

Those who suspect the president is engaged in a bit of dangerous self-delusion and denial about certain unpleasant realities regarding the threats from rogue states won’t be heartened to read that his current non-proliferation fetish stems, at least according to the New York Times, from his college infatuation with the nuclear freeze movement. Apparently, youthful Obama did not focus on the results from Ronald Reagan’s refusal to buy into the fantasies of liberals –namely the fall of the Soviet Empire. That lesson has entirely eluded now-president Obama. Is it any wonder his critics find his posture fraught with peril and entirely out-of-touch with the threats we face?

As the Times reports:

“This is dangerous, wishful thinking,” Senator Jon Kyl, Republican of Arizona, and Richard Perle, an architect of the Reagan-era nuclear buildup that appalled Mr. Obama as an undergraduate, wrote last week in The Wall Street Journal. They contend that Mr. Obama is, indeed, a naïf for assuming that “the nuclear ambitions of Kim Jong-il or Mahmoud Ahmadinejad would be curtailed or abandoned in response to reductions in the American and Russian deterrent forces.”

In the interview, the president described his agenda as the best way to move forward in a turbulent world.

“It’s naïve for us to think,” he said, “that we can grow our nuclear stockpiles, the Russians continue to grow their nuclear stockpiles, and our allies grow their nuclear stockpiles, and that in that environment we’re going to be able to pressure countries like Iran and North Korea not to pursue nuclear weapons themselves.”


But what is naïve, of course, is to think that Iran and North Korea will be impressed by our disarmament efforts. No consideration is given, just as none was given by the nuclear freeze crowd a generation ago, to the possibility that disarmament will only embolden our adversaries and confuse our allies. But apparently Obama’s worldview has not matured much since his Columbia days:....


And really, what excuse is there for Obama’s ludicrous worldview? Unlike student Obama, President Obama knows how the Cold War ended. And it wasn’t by disarming America.
406 kansas  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:02:13pm

re: #402 ShanghaiEd

Unless I'm mistaken, that was not an action by Obama. It was two Obama supporters. Big difference.

Yeah, Obama had nothing to do with any of that.

407 Outrider  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:02:21pm

re: #386 3 wood

His big ears, don't forget his big ears.

those ears were the first item placed "off limits" weren't they?

408 haakondahl  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:02:42pm

re: #357 Kenneth

A good analysis of what happened in Honduras here.

Is it any wonder Hugo Chavez supports Zeyala?

I wish more people would call it a counter-coup. The Supreme Court of Honduras is not required to wait until they live disarmed in another communist dictatorship shithole before acting against tyranny.

409 Charles Johnson  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:02:42pm

re: #404 Wendya

[Link: www.breitbart.com...]

Right -- and I didn't like that.

410 Shr_Nfr  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:03:03pm

re: #361 Sharmuta

The question is one of stating that the person has committed a crime or is under investigation for it. That is where the line is crossed.

411 Sharmuta  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:03:17pm

re: #328 haakondahl

True, but with an infinite supply of bloggers and a media happy to let the accusations stand and pass into popular record, the only recourses are law and violence. So good for her.

I agree with karmic-inquisitor. This is glorification of right-wing victimization. The left cried victim for 8 years. I'm not interested in participating in the right-wing version.

412 J.S.  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:03:28pm

re: #348 Charles

Many, many years ago I stopped counting the number of times that G W Bush was (imo maliciously) defamed. He was constantly called "a criminal"; how many times were there public posters proclaiming him to be a "war criminal", etc., etc. (I found the whole thing infuriating; yet, GW Bush to his enormous credit, never once (to my knowledge) threatened a lawsuit...which, I believe, those defamers so richly deserved...Now George W Bush was incredible in this regard...)

413 Fenway_Nation  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:03:34pm

re: #402 ShanghaiEd

Which I'm sure 0bama denounced as soundly as he did the Iranian militiamen roving the streets of Tehran and beating unarmed women with bats and chains....

414 Kragar  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:03:37pm

re: #385 Ben Hur

"WE'RE OK WITH THAT!" - Reid, Pelosi, Frank and the rest of the crew

415 SixDegrees  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:03:42pm

re: #308 KingKenrod

I don't know why this is bad. It makes it harder/more expensive for CA to borrow money and forces them to behave more responsibly if they want their rating to improve.

They are incapable of acting more responsibly - that's what has triggered this action. The legislature has been deadlocked for weeks now, refusing to cut spending and refusing to raise taxes; meanwhile, the expenses keep piling up and there is no money to pay the bills. The state is now issuing worthless IOUs on their debts; ala Wimpy from Popeye, they'll gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today, but they won't do the responsible thing and agree to balance their own budget.

See my post just above for where this could possibly lead if not resolved quickly.

416 Racer X  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:04:07pm

re: #397 SanFranciscoZionist

Chelsea wasn't brought into the campaign as much by her parents, either. The Palin kids were. I can see why a campaign manager might have thought it was a good idea, but it turned out to be a very bad one.

Not sure I'm following. How did Sarah bring her kids into the political scene as fair game? It seems to me the Media dragged them in.

417 pbird  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:04:27pm

re: #146 Killgore Trout

Politicians are only a symptom of the problem. The Republican base that still idolizes Palin despite the fact that she's incapable of holding even state office is the sign of a very serious problem. At least Obama's not going to quit office. He's going to serve his term.

My, aren't we lucky!

418 Shr_Nfr  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:04:42pm

re: #386 3 wood

'ear 'ear

419 SanFranciscoZionist  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:04:51pm

re: #282 kansas

I wonder what Reagan would have done if the liberals had thrown this amount of shit at him?

Smiled kindly, and kept on going.

420 Kragar  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:05:05pm

re: #392 Ben Hur

I actually liked the "split up Iraq" argument when he first floated it.

Sounded good at first thought, but it would have ended up bringing in the Turks and Iranians into a shooting war when the administration was trying to run damage control.

421 babes  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:05:40pm

re: #417 pbird

Just like Ted Kennedy is representing his state so well right now.

422 avanti  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:05:47pm

re: #400 JacksonTn

Avanti ... while you were busy reading Obama's books ... we were doing some checking on Obama ... Obama did throw the 1st under the bus in Missouri ...

Link for you:

[Link: littlegreenfootballs.com...]

I'm aware of that, but never saw any proof that it was not just the action of the members of the state campaign. If there was ever a publicly announced threat against the press or bloggers as Palin is doing, I'm unaware of it.

If Obama was trying to sue LGF or any right wing blog for example, I suspect you'd feel differently about the issue.

423 Shr_Nfr  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:05:50pm

re: #411 Sharmuta

I think that it would be one thing if she just stated it on a blog and it got buried. Its quite another for the MSM to pick it up and give it air time.

424 reine.de.tout  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:06:07pm

re: #402 ShanghaiEd

Unless I'm mistaken, that was not an action by Obama. It was two Obama supporters. Big difference.

Obama campaign, not just random "supporters".

425 CommonCents  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:06:23pm

re: #409 Charles

Right -- and I didn't like that.

Damn you man! Buy into the group think!
/s

426 OldLineTexan  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:06:43pm

re: #258 avanti

Yep, she is a awesome example of the best and brightest the conservatives can come up with, a skilled and consummate politician, another Reagan perhaps. /s

I see a day where "Joe Biden" will mean the same as '"STFU".

427 Flyers1974  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:06:49pm

re: #383 Outrider

Again, this isn't merely "talking shit". This is stating clearly, in print, the person is resigning due to criminal activity while seated as Governor; even after the FBI denies the rumors of an investigation.

Malice? Uh huh. That's going to be a hard one to prove!

Malice in the legal sense is different from the common usage of malice. Also, she would have to prove the statements regarding the investigation are what damaged her. Opposing attorneys would turn conservatives' MSM rhetoric against palin, i.e., - she was damaged by Letterman and the rest of the MSM, not the target in this suit. If the media has been against her for so long, why do you belive these specific statements are what damaged her? That would be one of many defenses, I believe.

428 LGoPs  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:07:01pm

re: #405 J.D.

Say! Speaking of his college years...
Obama The Democrats Has Have Gotten It Wrong for Twenty-Five Years


Those who suspect the president is engaged in a bit of dangerous self-delusion and denial about certain unpleasant realities regarding the threats from rogue states won’t be heartened to read that his current non-proliferation fetish stems, at least according to the New York Times, from his college infatuation with the nuclear freeze movement. Apparently, youthful Obama did not focus on the results from Ronald Reagan’s refusal to buy into the fantasies of liberals –namely the fall of the Soviet Empire. That lesson has entirely eluded now-president Obama. Is it any wonder his critics find his posture fraught with peril and entirely out-of-touch with the threats we face?
As the Times reports:

“This is dangerous, wishful thinking,” Senator Jon Kyl, Republican of Arizona, and Richard Perle, an architect of the Reagan-era nuclear buildup that appalled Mr. Obama as an undergraduate, wrote last week in The Wall Street Journal. They contend that Mr. Obama is, indeed, a naïf for assuming that “the nuclear ambitions of Kim Jong-il or Mahmoud Ahmadinejad would be curtailed or abandoned in response to reductions in the American and Russian deterrent forces.”

In the interview, the president described his agenda as the best way to move forward in a turbulent world.


“It’s naïve for us to think,” he said, “that we can grow our nuclear stockpiles, the Russians continue to grow their nuclear stockpiles, and our allies grow their nuclear stockpiles, and that in that environment we’re going to be able to pressure countries like Iran and North Korea not to pursue nuclear weapons themselves.”

But what is naïve, of course, is to think that Iran and North Korea will be impressed by our disarmament efforts. No consideration is given, just as none was given by the nuclear freeze crowd a generation ago, to the possibility that disarmament will only embolden our adversaries and confuse our allies. But apparently Obama’s worldview has not matured much since his Columbia days:....


And really, what excuse is there for Obama’s ludicrous worldview? Unlike student Obama, President Obama knows how the Cold War ended. And it wasn’t by disarming America.

Besides being the most radical left wing politician this country has ever elected, Obama displays phenomenally bad judgement. And he's been doing it all his life. As his party has for all my life.
We will pay the price for Obama's education.

429 capitalist piglet  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:07:13pm

re: #416 Racer X

Not sure I'm following. How did Sarah bring her kids into the political scene as fair game? It seems to me the Media dragged them in.

She brought them into the campaign no more than Obama did his.

430 kynna  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:07:26pm

re: #386 3 wood

re: #370 CommonCents

Except using his middle name.
Except talking about HIS family.
Except talking about his college years.
Except talking about his past acquaintences.
Except....


His big ears, don't forget his big ears.

Or the financing of his house.
Or his votes in the senate.
Or his 'successes' as a community organizer.

431 SixDegrees  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:07:27pm

re: #282 kansas

I wonder what Reagan would have done if the liberals had thrown this amount of shit at him?

Publicly chuckled and said something like, "Well, there you go again..."

432 calcajun  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:07:45pm

re: #424 reine.de.tout

Obama campaign, not just random "supporters".

These aren't the supporters you're looking for. Move along.//

(That kinda came out wrong, didn't it?)

433 zombie  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:07:55pm

re: #299 avanti

Good point, when did Obama fight back by threatening to sue as Palin is doing ? link ?

Obama didn't have to personally sue, because he had thousands of lawyers, supporters, advisors etc. who jumped on each issue and fought back in all sorts of other ways -- either through the politics of personal destruction against the persons spreading the rumors, or by having a sympathetic media complex go to extreme lengths to try to debunk the rumors, or to spend a lot of money, time and effort setting up anti-rumor information sites, etc. Palin has none of those resources available.

Imagine for a moment if someone publicly and very loudly accused you, by your real name, of committing a serious felony crime, with no evidence to back up the claim -- and the media happily repeated that accusation, repeatedly. What would you do? What would anybody do?

Again, I agree with Charles that threatenting to sue is probably not the most media-savvy thing for Palin to do, but I can't bring myself to blame her for taking extreme measures against extreme defamation.

434 Wendya  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:08:04pm

re: #416 Racer X

Not sure I'm following. How did Sarah bring her kids into the political scene as fair game? It seems to me the Media dragged them in.

Again, the double standard. If Obama's kids are on the campaign with him or appear on stage with him, they are off limits. If Palin's kids are on the campaign with her or appear on stage with her, she brought them into the political scene and they are fair game.

Kinda tough to wrap your mind around...

435 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:08:06pm
436 reine.de.tout  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:08:26pm

re: #422 avanti

I'm aware of that, but never saw any proof that it was not just the action of the members of the state campaign. If there was ever a publicly announced threat against the press or bloggers as Palin is doing, I'm unaware of it.

If Obama was trying to sue LGF or any right wing blog for example, I suspect you'd feel differently about the issue.

Avanti - it was Obama's campaign. Are you suggesting he had no knowledge of what his own campaign was doing in his name?
that's a stretch.

437 SanFranciscoZionist  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:08:52pm

re: #370 CommonCents

Except using his middle name.
Except talking about HIS family.
Except talking about his college years.
Except talking about his past acquaintences.
Except....

Has he sued over any of these things, or in fact, stifled free speech in any way about them except by complaining?

438 haakondahl  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:09:02pm

re: #426 OldLineTexan

I see a day where "Joe Biden" will mean the same as '"STFU".

It was a Thursday in 1993.

439 redc1c4  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:09:11pm

re: #368 avanti

Absolutely, scared shitless, the entire left and middle fear her.

the worthless, America hating, left, yes.

the middle has only heard your lies.

you fear the truth.

440 babes  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:09:19pm

re: #430 kynna

Or exactly what cases he handled at the law firm.
Or the a complete set of his college records.
Or, (one of the eternal questions) what passport did he use to visit Pakistan.

441 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:09:49pm
442 SanFranciscoZionist  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:09:51pm

re: #386 3 wood

His big ears, don't forget his big ears.

Nah, he jokes about the ears on Colbert.

443 calcajun  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:10:06pm

re: #427 Flyers1974

"Malice" in that sense means publishing a falsehood with no reasonable basis for believing it to be true--it's the Sullivan v NY Times standard for libel actions brought by public figures. It's a tough standard to prove.

444 DEZes  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:10:14pm

re: #435 buzzsawmonkey

Obama likes to be the big ear man.

Kids can use them as umbrellas.

445 theheat  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:10:24pm

re: #412 J.S.

Not only that, but Bush poked fun of himself. Plain's still wrapped up in responding to hostility.

I liked it better when she went head-to-head with Tina Fey. So did the ratings. And it did nothing to reduce Palin's popularity. I don't believe, as many people do, Fey's "I can see Alaska from my house" is what lost Palin votes. In fact, Fey's comments didn't deviate all that greatly from what Palin, herself, had said. Like Biden, Plain had a tendency to be a bit of a gaff machine.

Palin's on the defensive, now, and stands to lose a lot depending on how it goes. There may be more to "Never let them see you sweat" than Palin recognizes. If she pulled a Bush, and laughed it off, I think more people would get behind her.

446 OldLineTexan  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:10:25pm

re: #438 haakondahl

It was a Thursday in 1993.

ROTFLMAO. Is it seared into your memory, like Christmas in Cambodia?

447 FurryOldGuyJeans  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:10:45pm

re: #442 SanFranciscoZionist

Nah, he jokes about the ears on Colbert.

And giggles about the economy on late night shows.

448 zombie  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:10:53pm

re: #348 Charles

I'm not vilifying her. And there's no double standard. My position is consistent -- I wouldn't like it if Obama started threatening lawsuits against bloggers and media, and I don't like it when Sarah Palin does.

Sorry, I wasn't referring to you when I said "Double standard," I was talking about the double standard of the liberal media and the Obama machine.

No offense intended.

Sorry!

449 haakondahl  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:11:04pm

re: #433 zombie

... I can't bring myself to blame her for taking extreme measures against extreme defamation.

Hell, filing a lawsuit doesn't sound that extreme anyway. Does that make her a right-wing extremist?

450 Fenway_Nation  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:11:16pm

re: #433 zombie

There's the 'truth squads' in Missouri (I'm wary of anybody who insists they have a monopoly on the truth) and weren't 0bamanauts instructed to flood the lines at WGN Radio when they were interviewing the author of a book critical of the 0?

451 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:11:23pm

re: #384 Walter L. Newton

Your smile both frightens and intrigues me....

452 theheat  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:11:39pm

re: #445 theheat

Geez. PIMF. Palin, not Plain. My typing fingers have dyslexia today.

453 sphincter  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:11:52pm

re: #440 babes

That is the question that must never be asked. No US Visa in 1981.

"Or, (one of the eternal questions) what passport did he use to visit Pakistan"

So don't ask it, alright?

454 Yashmak  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:11:54pm

re: #383 Outrider

Again, this isn't merely "talking shit". This is stating clearly, in print, the person is resigning due to criminal activity while seated as Governor; even after the FBI denies the rumors of an investigation.

Malice? Uh huh. That's going to be a hard one to prove!

While I don't disagree with you, I can't help but recall a similar episode from our nation's past, in which Andrew Jackson's wife was called an outright whore by his political opponents. She died after the election, but before the inauguration, of a stroke many (including Jackson himself) believed a direct result of the massive slander against her character. In spite of this, Jackson (a man definitely known for his toughness) never pursued legal action against those who defamed her.

There has rarely been a more blatant, remorseless, and provably false accusation in American politics, yet Jackson still did not take legal action. I'm not saying his choice was right or wrong, or that Palin taking action is right or wrong now. Hell, I don't even know if the whole idea of civil suits was in place at that time (I'm not a legal scholar afterall). . .just offering a different perspective.

455 Rancher  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:11:57pm

re: #334 JarHeadLifer
My point was that she won't be a sitting Governor, and then the bar is lowered although they might have some coverage by saying that their allegations pertained to her while she was Governor. In any case she doesn't have to win, they have to decide if the slander is worth the time and expense they will have to expend to defend it.

re: #121 SixDegrees
Mt understanding is that some blogs were reporting it as fact.

456 zombie  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:12:26pm

re: #450 Fenway_Nation

There's the 'truth squads' in Missouri (I'm wary of anybody who insists they have a monopoly on the truth) and weren't 0bamanauts instructed to flood the lines at WGN Radio when they were interviewing the author of a book critical of the 0?

Great example!

457 haakondahl  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:12:54pm

re: #446 OldLineTexan

ROTFLMAO. Is it seared into your memory, like Christmas in Cambodia?

"I revert to my previous statement."

458 CommonCents  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:12:56pm

re: #437 SanFranciscoZionist

Has he sued over any of these things, or in fact, stifled free speech in any way about them except by complaining?

No, but you cannot deny the implied suppression of the use of his middle name with the 'racist' smears that were thrown about during the campaign. And how would you explain the utter lack of reporting about his history from the 'news'. Granted Fox News did some but the lefties practically granted William Ayers a noble title to protect President B. Hussein.

459 Flyers1974  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:13:13pm

re: #443 calcajun

"Malice" in that sense means publishing a falsehood with no reasonable basis for believing it to be true--it's the Sullivan v NY Times standard for libel actions brought by public figures. It's a tough standard to prove.

As her damage claims would as well.

460 SixDegrees  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:13:15pm

re: #383 Outrider

Again, this isn't merely "talking shit". This is stating clearly, in print, the person is resigning due to criminal activity while seated as Governor; even after the FBI denies the rumors of an investigation.

Malice? Uh huh. That's going to be a hard one to prove!

Actually, the blog article was published before the FBI issued their denial of any investigation.

This dog ain't gonna hunt. Proving malice aforethought - a requirement in successful libel prosecution - would be all but impossible, even if this involved an ordinary citizen. Palin's status as a public figure raises the bar of proof required even higher.

The FBI statement says all that needs to be said in rebuttal to such articles. It would have been smarter for Palin to keep her mouth shut and let the statement address whatever issue there was. Instead, she has moved the allegations onto the front page and handed her enemies even more powerful ammunition they can use against her in the immediate future.

461 badger1970  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:13:30pm

re: #419 SanFranciscoZionist

RWR wise beyond his years. He may have gotten a bit irked though when the MSM criticized Nancy.

462 redc1c4  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:13:45pm

re: #422 avanti

the nuance of spin..............

463 SanFranciscoZionist  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:13:45pm

re: #416 Racer X

Not sure I'm following. How did Sarah bring her kids into the political scene as fair game? It seems to me the Media dragged them in.

She travelled with them, they were highlighted, and discussed, they were presented as another proof of her remarkable character and amazing personal story.

That did NOT make them fair game, and I do not want to imply that it did or should have, but it raised their profile considerably.

464 haakondahl  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:13:57pm

re: #447 FurryOldGuyJeans

And giggles about the economy on late night shows.

Don't be so harsh. It could happen to anybody who is punch-drunk.

465 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:14:17pm
466 VegasRick  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:14:24pm

re: #442 SanFranciscoZionist

Nah, he jokes about the ears on Colbert.

Thats just like calling Palin a slut?.
You folks are funny.

467 ~Fianna  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:14:39pm

re: #397 SanFranciscoZionist

Chelsea wasn't brought into the campaign as much by her parents, either. The Palin kids were. I can see why a campaign manager might have thought it was a good idea, but it turned out to be a very bad one.

I wondered aloud about this in another thread here.

If a candidate is running on a specific family values platform and makes their kids and their role as a parent part of their campaign, is that opening the family up for extra scrutiny?

No other national politician has made being a parent a centerpiece of their campaign, so the kids weren't actively involved which might explain why those other kids didn't get the kind of scrutiny.

The crap about Trig is utterly beyond the pale - he's a baby and there's nothing that he, or anyone else could have done about his condition. But is Bristol's pregnancy a different issue because of Palin's family values/abstinence stance?

Would bloggers have been just as bad to Chelsea, Jenna or Barbara they were pregnant?

I'm curious about consensus or opinion on this. I'm not sure how I feel about it myself, to be honest.

468 calcajun  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:14:44pm

re: #454 Yashmak

yet Jackson still did not take legal action.

That's right. He challenged them to duels, and when that didn't work, he set out to ruin them publicly. Old Hickory was not a "forgive and forget " type.

469 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:14:45pm
470 avanti  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:14:51pm

re: #436 reine.de.tout

Avanti - it was Obama's campaign. Are you suggesting he had no knowledge of what his own campaign was doing in his name?
that's a stretch.

OK, would we be having this discussion if the Alabamians for Palin had threatened to sue a blog and not Palin personally ?
I just agree that politicians should expect to take some heat without legal threats. Clinton was accused of murder as I recall, Bush of avoiding the draft and so on.

471 kansas  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:15:08pm

re: #419 SanFranciscoZionist

Smiled kindly, and kept on going.

This amount of shit? I doubt that.

472 Greengolem64  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:15:13pm

re: #331 Flyers1974

Lowering the bar for proving defamation against politicians would have a chilling effect on criticism of politicians. If the bar was lowered and politicians could do this, many people would not criticize politicians on account of the expense of defending lawsuits, even if they thought they would ulitimately win.

So, then you are agreeing that it is OK to knowingly and willfully lie and slander/defame politicians or public individuals...because they are public individuals.

I don't disagree with your idea about 'chilling effects' with respect to criticizing our politicians...but are you saying we cannot criticize and question without having the ability to lie and defame?

Surely we are better than that...

GG

473 Ben Hur  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:15:25pm

re: #414 Kragar (proud to be kafir)

"WE'RE OK WITH THAT!" - Reid, Pelosi, Frank and the rest of the crew

Prix

474 haakondahl  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:16:01pm

re: #454 Yashmak

While I don't disagree with you, I can't help but recall a similar episode from our nation's past, in which Andrew Jackson's wife was called an outright whore by his political opponents. She died after the election, but before the inauguration, of a stroke many (including Jackson himself) believed a direct result of the massive slander against her character. In spite of this, Jackson (a man definitely known for his toughness) never pursued legal action against those who defamed her.

There has rarely been a more blatant, remorseless, and provably false accusation in American politics, yet Jackson still did not take legal action. I'm not saying his choice was right or wrong, or that Palin taking action is right or wrong now. Hell, I don't even know if the whole idea of civil suits was in place at that time (I'm not a legal scholar afterall). . .just offering a different perspective.

I wonder how many of his wife's detractors survived her by more than a year.

/I'm sorry, Mrs. Jackson!

475 SanFranciscoZionist  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:16:06pm

re: #436 reine.de.tout

Avanti - it was Obama's campaign. Are you suggesting he had no knowledge of what his own campaign was doing in his name?
that's a stretch.

Did Bush know about the whispers being spread about McCain's youngest daughter in 2000? Maybe, maybe not. These are big campaigns.

476 Yashmak  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:16:08pm

re: #468 calcajun

That's right. He challenged them to duels, and when that didn't work, he set out to ruin them publicly. Old Hickory was not a "forgive and forget " type.

I think Palin would stand a better chance in a duel, than legal action on this would stand in court. A far better chance.

477 Wendya  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:16:20pm

re: #460 SixDegrees


This dog ain't gonna hunt. Proving malice aforethought - a requirement in successful libel prosecution - would be all but impossible, even if this involved an ordinary citizen.

Bloggers make it easier by showing clear intent to bring down their target. At least with newspapers, the editors and journalists don't generally open their diatribes by calling the target a slut and declaring they've made it their mission to "get rid of that person".

478 zombie  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:16:33pm

re: #440 babes

Or exactly what cases he handled at the law firm.
Or the a complete set of his college records.
Or, (one of the eternal questions) what passport did he use to visit Pakistan.

Why wouldn't he have just used a US passport? Where's the mystery? Anyone can get a passport when they turn 18 -- Obama was 20 when he visited Pakistan.

re: #453 sphincter

That is the question that must never be asked. No US Visa in 1981.

"Or, (one of the eternal questions) what passport did he use to visit Pakistan"

So don't ask it, alright?

Also, I don't know if a visa was technically required to enter Pakistan in 1981, but I do know that it was very easy to cross the border into Pakistan at that time -- it was part of the hippie hashish route through central Asia.

479 Charles Johnson  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:16:44pm

re: #448 zombie

No problem...

I have to say, though - I really think Palin is blowing it big-time with these latest maneuvers, unless she has no intention of running for President or any other major office.

If she does plan on being a regular old world-famous private citizen, then more power to her. Sue the bastards for all they're worth.

But if she's planning to run, this is political suicide.

480 Sharmuta  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:16:51pm

re: #410 Shr_Nfr

The question is one of stating that the person has committed a crime or is under investigation for it. That is where the line is crossed.

If it's a crime- call the DoJ.

481 badger1970  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:17:06pm

re: #476 Yashmak

If she can get the ammo. Even .22 is getting scare in the big box stores.

482 SixDegrees  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:17:20pm

re: #455 Rancher

My point was that she won't be a sitting Governor, and then the bar is lowered although they might have some coverage by saying that their allegations pertained to her while she was Governor. In any case she doesn't have to win, they have to decide if the slander is worth the time and expense they will have to expend to defend it.

re: #121 SixDegrees
Mt understanding is that some blogs were reporting it as fact.

To be found guilty of libel, they have to not only publish it as fact; they have to do so while knowing it is false, with malicious intent. This is a very high bar to clear.

483 SanFranciscoZionist  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:17:21pm

re: #441 Iron Fist

Of course not. That would be wrong. OTOH, a Republican's downs syndrome never-should-have-been-born "child" (really just an over-developed fetus) is fair game for anything. She should have thought of that before she didn't have an abortion stepped into politics.

[/Not just the moonbats on this one]


Who actually said that? Serious question. I've heard this mentioned, but don't know the source.

484 JacksonTn  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:17:22pm

re: #422 avanti

I'm aware of that, but never saw any proof that it was not just the action of the members of the state campaign. If there was ever a publicly announced threat against the press or bloggers as Palin is doing, I'm unaware of it.

If Obama was trying to sue LGF or any right wing blog for example, I suspect you'd feel differently about the issue.

Avanti ... you are still truly in love ...blinded by it actually ... you said almost the same thing about many many other things ... I guess Obama never has to accept responsibility for anyone or anything that happens around him ... I guess everyone just works on their own ... I guess Rahm and Axelrod never take orders from The Boss ...

you keep dreaming ...

485 Fenway_Nation  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:17:53pm

re: #476 Yashmak

Still waiting on that Zell Miller/Chris Matthews duel....

486 haakondahl  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:18:13pm

re: #467 ~Fianna

I wondered aloud about this in another thread here.

If a candidate is running on a specific family values platform and makes their kids and their role as a parent part of their campaign, is that opening the family up for extra scrutiny?

No other national politician has made being a parent a centerpiece of their campaign, so the kids weren't actively involved which might explain why those other kids didn't get the kind of scrutiny.

The crap about Trig is utterly beyond the pale - he's a baby and there's nothing that he, or anyone else could have done about his condition. But is Bristol's pregnancy a different issue because of Palin's family values/abstinence stance?

Would bloggers have been just as bad to Chelsea, Jenna or Barbara they were pregnant?

I'm curious about consensus or opinion on this. I'm not sure how I feel about it myself, to be honest.

I don't believe you.

487 J.D.  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:18:18pm

re: #485 Fenway_Nation

Still waiting on that Zell Miller/Chris Matthews duel....

I'd have taken Zell.

488 calcajun  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:18:21pm

re: #476 Yashmak

I think Palin would stand a better chance in a duel, than legal action on this would stand in court. A far better chance.

Nah. Todd would fight for her--and kick the snot out of these people.

489 3 wood  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:18:55pm

re: #412 J.S.

Many, many years ago I stopped counting the number of times that G W Bush was (imo maliciously) defamed.

They also made movies imagining assassinating President Bush.

490 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:19:01pm
491 sphincter  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:19:19pm

re: #478 zombie

"but I do know that it was very easy to cross the border into Pakistan at that time -- it was part of the hippie hashish route through central Asia."

yet another one of the reasons the State Department did not allow travel to Paaakistan at that time. Anymore than you could have bought cigars in Havana at that time.

No worries though.

492 babes  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:19:19pm

re: #478 zombie

Also, I don't know if a visa was technically required to enter Pakistan in 1981, but I do know that it was very easy to cross the border into Pakistan at that time -- it was part of the hippie hashish route through central Asia.

No - there are certain countries where US citizens are not allowed to go. The list changes. From what I have read from many sources, Pakistan was one place, at the time that Obami went there, was off limits to US citizens.

493 Kragar  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:19:43pm

I really feel sorry for these people who actually think Obama gives a damn

Russian civil society leaders to appeal to Obama

Russian civil society leaders will appeal to President Barack Obama on Tuesday to focus a spotlight on the country's democratic deficit and lack of transparency.

Obama plans to dedicate several hours to dozens of organizations, entrepreneurs and NGOs who operate in Russia as part of his two-day visit -- a session his Russian counterpart Dmitry Medvedev turned down, sources said.

After signing a series of bilateral agreements on Monday, including on nuclear arms reduction and Afghanistan, Obama said he would turn his attention to more human issues.

"I look forward to broadening this effort, to include business, civil society, dialogue among Americans and Russians," he said.

U.S. leaders' comments on Russian democracy and civil society have received a cold reception in the past.

But Medvedev, since becoming president just over a year ago, has made repeated pledges to improve civil society and encourage openness and pluralism in both the business and social spheres.

Good luck with that. Dont forget that Obama would hate to be accused of meddling though.

494 Yashmak  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:19:57pm

re: #485 Fenway_Nation

Still waiting on that Zell Miller/Chris Matthews duel....

I'd have paid to see that.

495 haakondahl  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:20:35pm

re: #477 Wendya

Bloggers make it easier by showing clear intent to bring down their target. At least with newspapers, the editors and journalists don't generally open their diatribes by calling the target a slut and declaring they've made it their mission to "get rid of that person".

I was thinking exactly the same thing. This woman seems to be the definition of an incautious writer. My guess is that the malice afore is plastered all over Google's cache. Or was, before they cleaned it up.

496 calcajun  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:20:57pm

re: #479 Charles

No problem...

I have to say, though - I really think Palin is blowing it big-time with these latest maneuvers, unless she has no intention of running for President or any other major office.

If she does plan on being a regular old world-famous private citizen, then more power to her. Sue the bastards for all they're worth.

But if she's planning to run, this is political suicide.

No--she is done for years to come. This is her way of saying that she is exiting the public stage and that she will have the protection of the libel laws that protects simple folks like us.

If I had to hazard a guess, I think she decided to put her family first. Once the kids are grown, she might be back. But, she is gone from the spotlight.

497 capitalist piglet  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:20:57pm

re: #397 SanFranciscoZionist

Chelsea wasn't brought into the campaign as much by her parents, either. The Palin kids were. I can see why a campaign manager might have thought it was a good idea, but it turned out to be a very bad one.

The Obama kids were too, yet it would make me very, very angry to hear David Letterman tell a joke about them having sex with an adult.

I'm funny that way.

498 Wendya  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:21:08pm

re: #493 Kragar (proud to be kafir)


Good luck with that.

Apparently they haven't been following the news or they would have known better than to ask.

499 3 wood  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:21:17pm

FWIW, I think Palin just got fed up with her family being targets of the left wing attack machine. I think she is leaving office to go after some of these people as a private citizen.

Just my 2 cents as someone who was in the public sector for a lot of years an knows what it is like to be attacked by cowards

500 Tatterdemalian  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:21:29pm

Sheesh. There are a lot of better things to become famous for than as "the ex-Governor who sued a blogger and won." Not to mention what the precedent set if she wins... I'd hate to see LGF sued by Dan Rather and Reuters for "defamation."

501 DEZes  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:21:52pm

Charles.
Did you see the science report of a 35,000 year old flute?

502 badger1970  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:22:02pm

I don't see her running for any office anytime soon. What's that quote about getting the world entire but losing your soul?

The cost of office is not worth it for most people. She has a loving family and a huge heart. Let the hyenas feast on themselves in DC. She gave notice to back off, no more warning shots.

503 Lynn B.  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:22:10pm

re: #299 avanti

Good point, when did Obama fight back by threatening to sue as Palin is doing ? link ?

Did Obama announce he's resigning as POTUS? No? Too bad. But then let's try to compare apples and apples.

........

A lot of people seem to be assuming that Sarah Palin still has aspirations for national office. I see no evidence of that. In fact, her actions recently lead me to believe that she doesn't and any opinions I've formulated about her resignation and this threat of legal action are based on that premise. If, OTOH, she thinks she still has a political career ahead of her (at least an elected one) then I would seriously question her judgment, if not her sanity.

That said, accusations of felonious criminal activity are libel (or slander) per se, which means they can't be compared to accusations of, say, supporting fascist parties in Europe. And while being a public figure does indeed raise the bar quite a bit, the nature of the defamation also has to be taken into consideration. The threat to "explore legal options" is, to me, a rational and reasonable response here.

Since we now know (per the FBI) that the accusation is false, it will be interesting to see where this goes from here and who backs down.

504 Kragar  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:22:11pm

re: #498 Wendya

Apparently they haven't been following the news or they would have known better than to ask.

I wonder if they know they're questions are being prescreened?

505 Kosh's Shadow  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:22:18pm

re: #493 Kragar (proud to be kafir)

I really feel sorry for these people who actually think Obama gives a damn

Russian civil society leaders to appeal to Obama

Good luck with that. Dont forget that Obama would hate to be accused of meddling though.

Everyone who meets Obama will end up with a visit by the successor to the KGB, I'm sure.

506 reine.de.tout  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:22:27pm

re: #470 avanti

OK, would we be having this discussion if the Alabamians for Palin had threatened to sue a blog and not Palin personally ?
I just agree that politicians should expect to take some heat without legal threats. Clinton was accused of murder as I recall, Bush of avoiding the draft and so on.

The FBI issued a memo saying she wasn't under investigation, and I think the better move for her would be to use use use use that memo, quote it, plaster it everywhere.

I don't know if we would be having this discussion if the Alabamians for Palin had threatened to sue a blog - THAT NEVER HAPPENED.

What did happen was Obama's campaign (not random"supporters") tried to shut down criticism in Missouri, no indication of anything false.

507 Yashmak  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:23:05pm

re: #468 calcajun

That's right. He challenged them to duels, and when that didn't work, he set out to ruin them publicly. Old Hickory was not a "forgive and forget " type.

Right, I'd be far from suggesting she forgive OR forget. But I think that taking this to civil court is a very bad idea if she's planning on pursuing higher office. The best revenge is success, afterall.

508 SixDegrees  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:23:18pm

re: #477 Wendya

Bloggers make it easier by showing clear intent to bring down their target. At least with newspapers, the editors and journalists don't generally open their diatribes by calling the target a slut and declaring they've made it their mission to "get rid of that person".

Matter of that sort are peripheral to any libel case, at best. If the prosecution can't show that the information published was false, that those publishing it knew it to be false and that they published it with the intent of harm, the case is circling the drain. I can't think of a single libel case of this nature, or anything even distantly related to it, that has prevailed in the courts.

The predisposition of the publishers has little, if any bearing. And if raised, any defense attorney would seize on the appearance of prosecution driven by a political agenda being brought against their client and shut such a line of attack down immediately. The law is not equivocal; it is distinctly biased in favor of the defendant, whose innocence is taken as a given.

509 reine.de.tout  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:23:42pm

re: #499 3 wood

FWIW, I think Palin just got fed up with her family being targets of the left wing attack machine. I think she is leaving office to go after some of these people as a private citizen.

Just my 2 cents as someone who was in the public sector for a lot of years an knows what it is like to be attacked by cowards

Yes, that's what I think too.

510 haakondahl  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:24:00pm

re: #479 Charles

No problem...

I have to say, though - I really think Palin is blowing it big-time with these latest maneuvers, unless she has no intention of running for President or any other major office.

If she does plan on being a regular old world-famous private citizen, then more power to her. Sue the bastards for all they're worth.

But if she's planning to run, this is political suicide.

Agreed. I hope I'm not naive in taking her at her word that she has quit.

511 kynna  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:24:15pm

re: #470 avanti

OK, would we be having this discussion if the Alabamians for Palin had threatened to sue a blog and not Palin personally ?
I just agree that politicians should expect to take some heat without legal threats. Clinton was accused of murder as I recall, Bush of avoiding the draft and so on.

Good point on Bush. His full military records are out there for all to see. And yet still accusations abound (backed up by throbbing memos, even). John Kerry's military record is still under wraps for the most part, and he ran on the damn thing.

The FBI made a strong statement that she's not under investigation. I did not see that in any of the headlines on AOL or Yahoo today even though the statement was made yesterday.

It's not enough. If the media would report fairly nobody would have to go to these extremes. Unfortunately that's not the world we live in.

512 DisturbedEma  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:24:20pm

re: #34 Baier

I wonder if she thinks she has to put some fear into the media if she wants to have a shot. I absolutely think the MSM is despicable concerning her, but I'm just trying to figure out the thought process here...

It is a sad thing to have to choose between staying silent amid horrific personal attacks on your children or being accused of being a cry baby when you try to make people accointable for what they post. . .sad indeed put up AND shut up seems to be her only acceptable course for many

513 Yashmak  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:24:28pm

re: #503 Lynn B.

Total agreement.

514 Flyers1974  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:24:36pm

re: #472 Greengolem64

So, then you are agreeing that it is OK to knowingly and willfully lie and slander/defame politicians or public individuals...because they are public individuals.

I don't disagree with your idea about 'chilling effects' with respect to criticizing our politicians...but are you saying we cannot criticize and question without having the ability to lie and defame?

Surely we are better than that...

GG

I don't think I made any statement about my personal feelings regarding this practice, much less that I think it is o.k. And it is possible to defame a politician. However, proving this is incredibly difficult, and I think it should be. Put it this way, if it were easy to prove defamation, I'd guess political blogs, or at least blogs which allow a great many people to post on them, would cease to exist, or would exist in a very sanitized form.

515 ~Fianna  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:24:40pm

re: #486 haakondahl

I don't believe you.

Believe me or don't. I'm not shy about stating any position that I have, whether I think it's popular or not.

It's easy to say 'leave the kids out of it' and in general that should be the policy. But when a politician paints themselves as a family values candidate, doesn't the public have a right to know something about the family?

If a candidate is running on a platform of knowing what's best for people's families, should we question how their own family is working?

I don't like it when people use their kids as props for anything. I don't shop at businesses that put their kids in their ads, either. Car dealerships and lawyers seem to be the most guilty of doing that and I find it very, very distasteful.

516 Wendya  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:24:40pm

re: #506 reine.de.tout

The FBI issued a memo saying she wasn't under investigation, and I think the better move for her would be to use use use use that memo, quote it, plaster it everywhere.

There is an assumption being made that her attorneys are threatening people who made past statements. I'm pretty sure they're smarter than that (or at least I hope they are) and this declaration is targeted to future attacks.

517 haakondahl  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:24:55pm

re: #501 DEZes

Charles.
Did you see the science report of a 35,000 year old flute?

Made in China.

518 LGoPs  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:25:00pm

re: #500 Tatterdemalian

Sheesh. There are a lot of better things to become famous for than as "the ex-Governor who sued a blogger and won." Not to mention what the precedent set if she wins... I'd hate to see LGF sued by Dan Rather and Reuters for "defamation."

If there was any truth behind what Rather did he would have sued. He didn't becuase he was caught trying to manipulate an election with manufactured documents. He had no ground to stand on.

519 ~Fianna  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:25:19pm

re: #488 calcajun

Nah. Todd would fight for her--and kick the snot out of these people.

About the only thing that I've ever liked about Sarah Palin is that she doesn't need Todd to fight for her.

520 kynna  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:25:37pm

re: #475 SanFranciscoZionist

Did Bush know about the whispers being spread about McCain's youngest daughter in 2000? Maybe, maybe not. These are big campaigns.

To this day he's blamed for those whispers even though McCain's campaign manager (after four freakin' years) admitted they hadn't been able to find any connection to Bush's campaign.

A good example how waiting for the media to set the record straight is waiting for Godot.

521 sphincter  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:25:47pm

re: #507 Yashmak

"if she's planning on pursuing higher office"

Maybe she just wants to kick their asses into poverty. I would do the same thing. Come after my family, I'm going to hurt you and hurt you where it hurts most. She might be more practical than we're giving her credit for.

Take off the gloves and kick some ass! Might educate some folks and do the whole process a lot of good in the process.

522 JarHeadLifer  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:25:52pm

re: #479 Charles

But if she's planning to run, this is political suicide.

Political suicide, or unbridled hubris?

In this last week, Sarah Palin has come across as arrogant, grandiose and most of surprisingly, entitled. I'm disappointed. I didn't think she was ready for the VP job, but assumed she would work in earnest to shore up her weaknesses and build a foundation upon which she could launch a legitimate campaign. If she would have put forth the effort, she perhaps could have inherited Reagan's mantle.

As it stands, it appears Palin doesn't believe she has any weaknesses, including the biggest one - experience. That is a troubling development.

Conservatism isn't about charisma or celebrity, it's about meeting the responsibility of your commitments and getting ahead based purely on your own merits. It's a political philosophy based on meritocracy, not entitlement.

523 callahan23  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:26:00pm

re: #501 DEZes

Charles.
Did you see the science report of a 35,000 year old flute?

Yeah thanks for the reminder - - - - -

Archeologists in Germany have uncovered what they think is a 35,000-year-old bone flute, making it the oldest known instrument in the world.
524 LGoPs  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:26:18pm

re: #501 DEZes

Charles.
Did you see the science report of a 35,000 year old flute?

I thought that was a 35,000 year old oboe.........
/

525 eschew_obfuscation  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:26:20pm

re: #385 Ben Hur


MOSCOW -- With the clock running out on a new US-Russian arms treaty before the previous Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, or START, expires on December 5, a senior White House official said Sunday said that the difficulty of the task might mean temporarily bypassing the Senate’s constitutional role in ratifying treaties by enforcing certain aspects of a new deal on an executive levels and a “provisional basis” until the Senate ratifies the treaty.

He's trashing the constitution!..... totally trashing it! ..... There go our civil rights! .....Fascist!

What? He's not talking about Bush?

Never mind.

526 ShanghaiEd  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:26:40pm

re: #460 SixDegrees

Actually, the blog article was published before the FBI issued their denial of any investigation.

This dog ain't gonna hunt. Proving malice aforethought - a requirement in successful libel prosecution - would be all but impossible, even if this involved an ordinary citizen. Palin's status as a public figure raises the bar of proof required even higher.

The FBI statement says all that needs to be said in rebuttal to such articles. It would have been smarter for Palin to keep her mouth shut and let the statement address whatever issue there was. Instead, she has moved the allegations onto the front page and handed her enemies even more powerful ammunition they can use against her in the immediate future.

This may be a dumb question, but...the only rumor I've read said that Palin was under, or about to be under, federal investigation.

The latest statement in response is that the FBI is not investigating her.

IANAL, but aren't there a whole ton of other federal agencies that investigate people, not just the FBI? Could this point have been missed in the uproar?

527 haakondahl  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:26:49pm

re: #504 Kragar (proud to be kafir)

I wonder if they know they're questions are being prescreened?

I just hope the Basij don't show up.

528 doppelganglander  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:27:11pm

re: #523 callahan23

Hi, callahan! That link isn't working.

529 callahan23  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:27:26pm

re: #517 haakondahl

Made in China.

Germany actually, ;-)
See my: re: #523 callahan23

530 Yashmak  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:27:26pm

re: #518 LGoPs

If there was any truth behind what Rather did he would have sued. He didn't becuase he was caught trying to manipulate an election with manufactured documents. He had no ground to stand on.

I thought he in fact tried, against his employer, and lost. Maybe I was misinformed.

531 DEZes  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:27:30pm

re: #517 haakondahl

Made in China.

Heh, not quite.

35,000 year old flute

532 DisturbedEma  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:27:43pm

re: #479 Charles

No problem...

I have to say, though - I really think Palin is blowing it big-time with these latest maneuvers, unless she has no intention of running for President or any other major office.

If she does plan on being a regular old world-famous private citizen, then more power to her. Sue the bastards for all they're worth.

But if she's planning to run, this is political suicide.

Her entire persona has been deemed political suicide. . . I think she now plans to go down fighting any way you can I guess. . .LOOK at the people who claim she cost McCain. . .I believe she lost more by keeping her mouth shut while this was all going on. . .

533 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:28:04pm
534 Lynn B.  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:28:46pm

re: #460 SixDegrees

Actually, the blog article was published before the FBI issued their denial of any investigation.

This dog ain't gonna hunt. Proving malice aforethought - a requirement in successful libel prosecution - would be all but impossible, even if this involved an ordinary citizen. Palin's status as a public figure raises the bar of proof required even higher.

The FBI statement says all that needs to be said in rebuttal to such articles. It would have been smarter for Palin to keep her mouth shut and let the statement address whatever issue there was. Instead, she has moved the allegations onto the front page and handed her enemies even more powerful ammunition they can use against her in the immediate future.

The standard is "actual malice," not "malice aforethought" (different legal standard). And actual malice is only required if the object of the alleged libel is a public figure, so her status does not raise the bar "even higher" than actual malice.

The allegations were already on the front page. That's why the FBI responded.

535 DisturbedEma  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:28:48pm

re: #511 kynna

Good point on Bush. His full military records are out there for all to see. And yet still accusations abound (backed up by throbbing memos, even). John Kerry's military record is still under wraps for the most part, and he ran on the damn thing.

The FBI made a strong statement that she's not under investigation. I did not see that in any of the headlines on AOL or Yahoo today even though the statement was made yesterday.

It's not enough. If the media would report fairly nobody would have to go to these extremes. Unfortunately that's not the world we live in.

Do we have A thesis TITLE from zero. . .anyone?

536 calcajun  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:28:50pm

I have to correct myself. It's the "actual malice" standard of NY Times v Sullivan--knowingly printing a falsehood or doing so with the reckless disregard for the truth--which governs in defamation cases for public figures. For the rest of us, it's publishing a statement with "no reasonable basis for believing it to be true."
So, Palin would have a claim if the person in question published a statement which was demonstrably false. However, to bring such an action would and usually does, backfire on public figures.

This kind of threat is made as a parting shot as someone is exiting the public stage.

537 Kragar  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:28:56pm

re: #527 haakondahl

I just hope the Basij don't show up.

No no no. Do you think this is Iran?

Russia will simply surround them with plainclothes police and usher them into a waiting car and thats the last they'll be seen alive. Much more civilized.

538 Kosh's Shadow  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:29:04pm

re: #515 ~Fianna

Believe me or don't. I'm not shy about stating any position that I have, whether I think it's popular or not.

It's easy to say 'leave the kids out of it' and in general that should be the policy. But when a politician paints themselves as a family values candidate, doesn't the public have a right to know something about the family?

If a candidate is running on a platform of knowing what's best for people's families, should we question how their own family is working?

I don't like it when people use their kids as props for anything. I don't shop at businesses that put their kids in their ads, either. Car dealerships and lawyers seem to be the most guilty of doing that and I find it very, very distasteful.

OT, but the only ad I can remember with kids in it by a local car dealer re-did the opening of the Jetsons - drops off his kids at soccer practice, etc., then drops off his wife, takes money out of his wallet to give her, and she takes the wallet.

Now if he just had some flying cars to sell....

539 A Man for all Seasons  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:29:23pm

re: #531 DEZes

Heh, not quite.

35,000 year old flute

Where the hell is the 35,000 year old Fender Strat?
What a jip!

540 jcm  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:29:28pm

re: #470 avanti

OK, would we be having this discussion if the Alabamians for Palin had threatened to sue a blog and not Palin personally ?
I just agree that politicians should expect to take some heat without legal threats. Clinton was accused of murder as I recall, Bush of avoiding the draft and so on.

How many points did GWB need during his TANG service?
How many did he have?
How many did he need in '72, his last year?
How many did he have?

What was the the insulting nic name the the F-102 had based on one of flight characteristics?

541 Ojoe  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:30:08pm

Late to the thread, but

Go Sarah!

Get those slimy media-politico bastards and bitches, Letterman and all the rest.

I am so tired of them, and the complete lack of decency anymore.

Go get them!

542 calcajun  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:30:15pm

re: #501 DEZes

Charles.
Did you see the science report of a 35,000 year old flute?

Yes, but did they have the true sign of an advance civilization--a kazoo.

543 DEZes  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:30:20pm

re: #539 HoosierHoops

Where the hell is the 35,000 year old Fender Strat?
What a jip!

This one time at band camp....

544 SixDegrees  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:30:34pm

re: #511 kynna

Good point on Bush. His full military records are out there for all to see. And yet still accusations abound (backed up by throbbing memos, even). John Kerry's military record is still under wraps for the most part, and he ran on the damn thing.

The FBI made a strong statement that she's not under investigation. I did not see that in any of the headlines on AOL or Yahoo today even though the statement was made yesterday.

It's not enough. If the media would report fairly nobody would have to go to these extremes. Unfortunately that's not the world we live in.

It's been a main headline on the CNN news site since yesterday; it's still up this afternoon.

545 LGoPs  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:30:46pm

re: #530 Yashmak

I thought he in fact tried, against his employer, and lost. Maybe I was misinformed.

You're right. I heard that too - that he sued CBS for firing him I believe. But I don't believe he made the case that the documents were legitimate only that their action was unwarranted IIRC.

546 Kosh's Shadow  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:30:56pm

re: #537 Kragar (proud to be kafir)

No no no. Do you think this is Iran?

Russia will simply surround them with plainclothes police and usher them into a waiting car and thats the last they'll be seen alive. Much more civilized.

Or give them a nice lunch afterwards with polonium soup.

547 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:31:13pm
548 Tatterdemalian  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:31:13pm

re: #493 Kragar (proud to be kafir)

I really feel sorry for these people who actually think Obama gives a damn

Russian civil society leaders to appeal to Obama


Good luck with that. Dont forget that Obama would hate to be accused of meddling though.

Depends. He'll meddle quickly and vociferously if some Central American would-be President-for-Life gets deported when he refuses to submit to impeachment because he's too popular to go to jail.

Iran, on the other hand...

It's not the meddling in other countries' affairs that bothers him, it's the people who keep thinking he should speak up for democracy rather than "benevolent" dictatorship.

549 Honorary Yooper  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:31:23pm

re: #531 DEZes

Heh, not quite.

35,000 year old flute

A flute with no holes is not a flute,
and a donut with no hole is a danish.

550 Kragar  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:31:55pm

re: #543 DEZes

This one time at band camp....

Well, that explains the limp at least.

551 ~Fianna  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:32:06pm

re: #538 Kosh's Shadow

OT, but the only ad I can remember with kids in it by a local car dealer re-did the opening of the Jetsons - drops off his kids at soccer practice, etc., then drops off his wife, takes money out of his wallet to give her, and she takes the wallet.

Now if he just had some flying cars to sell....

There are a couple of "call my daddy" type billboards up in Vegas for lawyers and car dealerships. I don't know why it makes me so uncomfortable but it really does. I guess part of it is "i have a cute kid"!= "i'm good at what i do" and the other part of it is it seems somehow exploitative to me.

552 jcm  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:32:08pm

OT a little Bollywood for ya 'all this afternoon....

Superman and Spiderwoman....

Liveleak Video
553 SanFranciscoZionist  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:32:19pm

re: #547 Iron Fist

It was never said quite that bluntly, of course, but it was the subtext to a lot of what was said. I get 26000 hits for "Trig Palin abortion" on google. I think you'll find plenty of confirmation there.

This isn't the first time this has come up. On other occasions, other Lizards stepped in and helpfully provided links before I even had the oppertunity to respond (this may be happening right now, for that matter). It wasn't something that was said once and slipped away. It was one of the broad fronts that Palin was attacked on. I'm curious. What election did you watch that you didn't see this?

I don't know, because I did not. I saw a lot of attacks, but certainly in the respectable bloggers and mainstream press, I never heard such a thing said.

554 haakondahl  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:32:22pm

re: #515 ~Fianna

Believe me or don't.

Fair Enough.

I don't like it when people use their kids as props for anything. I don't shop at businesses that put their kids in their ads, either. Car dealerships and lawyers seem to be the most guilty of doing that and I find it very, very distasteful.

I have a bigger problem with it because I don't want to be lectured by a seven year old about which car to buy.

For the corporatization of children, no place has Japan beat. Everything has to be so damned cute, you just spend half the day choking back the bile.

555 kynna  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:32:57pm

re: #522 JarHeadLifer

Nonsense.

556 WinterCat  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:33:13pm

re: #532 DisturbedEma

Her entire persona has been deemed political suicide. . . I think she now plans to go down fighting any way you can I guess. . .LOOK at the people who claim she cost McCain. . .I believe she lost more by keeping her mouth shut while this was all going on. . .

I believe there is an element of truth in what you say. Palin is not the type to keep her mouth shut. She is less of a politician because of this, perhaps, but is she less of a leader? I don't know. Time is going to be the only thing to tell.

Maybe by taking the road less traveled she will forge new ground in this wasteland we call American politics. Whatever her future, I wish her well. If, despite the odds, she is able to kick some ass along the way, well, I say more power to her.

557 calcajun  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:33:14pm

re: #501 DEZes

Charles.
Did you see the science report of a 35,000 year old flute?

You mean that Neanderthals had band camps?

558 SFGoth  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:33:19pm

re: #362 JarHeadLifer

You can sue anyone for anything. Not to put words in your mouth, but I believe you meant, you can't sue someone for telling the truth, and expect to win.

Which is why many states (not enough however) have enacted anti-SLAPP legislation. It keeps politicians from suing their opposition into submission. If pols don't like what's being said about them, they shouldn't get into politics in the first place.

I've won a bunch of SLAPP suits in California; even made new law with one. They're fun!

559 haakondahl  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:33:37pm

re: #519 ~Fianna

About the only thing that I've ever liked about Sarah Palin is that she doesn't need Todd to fight for her.

But she would let him.

560 Mostly sane, most of the time.  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:33:38pm

re: #554 haakondahl

I have a bigger problem with it because I don't want to be lectured by a seven year old about which car to buy.

For the corporatization of children, no place has Japan beat. Everything has to be so damned cute, you just spend half the day choking back the bile.

They have cute little panda-face cookies. We have a lot of fun screaming, "No! Don't eat me," then popping that cute little chocolate filled nugget in.

561 eschew_obfuscation  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:33:42pm

re: #543 DEZes

This one time at band camp....

Are you suggesting that something could be learned by inspecting the flute for fecal matter?

562 OldLineTexan  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:33:50pm

re: #539 HoosierHoops

Where the hell is the 35,000 year old Fender Strat?
What a jip!

Dude, it was pawned 34,999 years ago for weed money.

/

563 Kosh's Shadow  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:34:14pm

re: #551 ~Fianna

There are a couple of "call my daddy" type billboards up in Vegas for lawyers and car dealerships. I don't know why it makes me so uncomfortable but it really does. I guess part of it is "i have a cute kid"!= "i'm good at what i do" and the other part of it is it seems somehow exploitative to me.

Those sound worse than the one I described.
But I don't know why car dealers always have to film ads making it look like they're on top of their sign.

564 keeping it simple  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:34:36pm

I'm always a bit surprised when Palin is attacked for bringing her kids into the spotlight. She only did what every politician does when they first enter the public arena. Let the voters see the family. Simple.

Just imagine what would have happened if she had never allowed her children to be seen. The liberal haters would have attacked her viciously by saying she was a bad mother for leaving a very young child while she campaigned and that she was ashamed of her Down's Syndrome baby and that she was a coward for hiding Bristol's pregnancy.

She was going to be trashed no matter what she did.

565 callahan23  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:34:53pm

re: #528 doppelganglander

Hi, callahan! That link isn't working.

So sorry :-(
I was not me via the google result page you can still reach the DW (Deutsche Welle) article. Here is an article from CBS.

566 babes  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:34:58pm

re: #478 zombie

Just as an FYI for US citizens traveling to 'forbidden' countries - here are the current ENTRY/EXIT REQUIREMENTS /TRAVEL TRANSACTION LIMITATIONs for Cuba:

ENTRY/EXIT REQUIREMENTS /TRAVEL TRANSACTION LIMITATIONS: The Cuban Assets Control Regulations are enforced by the U.S. Treasury Department and affect all U.S. citizens and permanent residents wherever they are located, all people and organizations physically located in the United States, and all branches and subsidiaries of U.S. organizations throughout the world. The regulations require that persons subject to U.S. jurisdiction be licensed in order to engage in any travel-related transactions pursuant to travel to, from, and within Cuba. Transactions related to tourist travel are not licensable. This restriction includes tourist travel to Cuba from or through a third country such as Mexico or Canada. U.S. law enforcement authorities have increased enforcement of these regulations at U.S. airports and pre-clearance facilities in third countries. Travelers who fail to comply with Department of Treasury regulations could face civil penalties and criminal prosecution upon return to the United States. For the latest information on travel to Cuba and to view the most accurate and updated travel restrictions information, please see: [Link: www.treas.gov...] licenses are granted to the following categories of travelers, who are permitted to spend money to travel to Cuba and to engage in other transactions directly incident to the purpose of their travel, without the need to obtain a specific license from the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC):

[Link: travel.state.gov...]

567 ~Fianna  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:35:06pm

re: #554 haakondahl

I have a bigger problem with it because I don't want to be lectured by a seven year old about which car to buy.

For the corporatization of children, no place has Japan beat. Everything has to be so damned cute, you just spend half the day choking back the bile.

Japan has some aspects of its culture that are very, very creepy. The schoolgirl panty vending machines, for one. [Link: www.snopes.com...]

568 A Man for all Seasons  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:35:07pm

re: #543 DEZes

This one time at band camp....

Do you think the 35,000 year old flute influenced the Thick as a Brick Album?
I'm just teasing you....

569 Kragar  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:35:17pm

re: #554 haakondahl

I have a bigger problem with it because I don't want to be lectured by a seven year old about which car to buy.

For the corporatization of children, no place has Japan beat. Everything has to be so damned cute, you just spend half the day choking back the bile.

There are some commercial where they have kids begging "Please do this for me so I can have a better future." That kind of shit makes me nauseus. I literally have to change the channel. The kids singing in a chorus to a corporate or state slogan are particularly disturbing.

570 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:35:27pm
571 calcajun  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:35:28pm

re: #543 DEZes

This one time at band camp....

Eww. Cavemen did not wash, either.

572 Ojoe  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:35:34pm

re: #556 WinterCat

She is less of a politician because of this, perhaps, but is she less of a leader?

A very good question.

We have enough politicians, and an extreme dearth of leaders.

I would say not one leader at the moment.

573 SanFranciscoZionist  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:36:10pm

re: #553 SanFranciscoZionist

I don't know, because I did not. I saw a lot of attacks, but certainly in the respectable bloggers and mainstream press, I never heard such a thing said.

I've now searched about a dozen of the top Google hits. All of them are about the accusation that Trig is being attacked, not attacks. The attackers referenced are some Canadian pediatrician, and some guy I've never heard of from the Center for the Promotion of Capitalism or some damn thing who sounds demented. I'm not convinced.

574 Killgore Trout  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:36:11pm

re: #532 DisturbedEma


. . .LOOK at the people who claim she cost McCain. . .I believe she lost more by keeping her mouth shut while this was all going on. . .


Probably not. I know she and her supporters claim that McCain's handlers were hindering her. I doubt it. Look at she's committing political suicide all on her own here. There's no one else to blame.
It seems to be the common theme with Palin; She's always the victim. It's always someone else's fault. The MSM is unfair. Nobody else gets treated this way. Nobody else has to put up with this much criticism. Etc.
I really think it would be best for conservatives to pick themselves up and soldier on. Embrace self reliance. Life is not fair. Toughen up.

575 Kosh's Shadow  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:36:37pm

re: #568 HoosierHoops

Do you think the 35,000 year old flute influenced the Thick as a Brick Album?
I'm just teasing you....

Really don't know why you picked that one out...

576 kynna  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:36:44pm

re: #544 SixDegrees

It's been a main headline on the CNN news site since yesterday; it's still up this afternoon.

Because of the FBI statement or because of the statement in conjunction with the lawyer's letter?

This is what I'm saying.

577 reine.de.tout  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:36:49pm

re: #511 kynna

Good point on Bush. His full military records are out there for all to see. And yet still accusations abound (backed up by throbbing memos, even). John Kerry's military record is still under wraps for the most part, and he ran on the damn thing.

The FBI made a strong statement that she's not under investigation. I did not see that in any of the headlines on AOL or Yahoo today even though the statement was made yesterday.

It's not enough. If the media would report fairly nobody would have to go to these extremes. Unfortunately that's not the world we live in.

Avanti's original point in #215 and #422 was that Obama never did anything similar.
Which is incorrect.
When it was pointed out that Obama, through his campaign in Missouri, tried to shut down criticism of him (not shut down false accusations), Avanti changed the subject to whether or not we would be having this conversation if Alabamians for Palin had taken a similar action to Obama's Missouri campaign.

My head is spinning.

578 ~Fianna  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:36:54pm

re: #563 Kosh's Shadow

Those sound worse than the one I described.
But I don't know why car dealers always have to film ads making it look like they're on top of their sign.

No clue. Car ads of all types don't really make sense to me. They're often loud or stupid and really irritating. Being yelled at doesn't make me want to buy something.

579 zombie  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:36:57pm

re: #479 Charles

No problem...

I have to say, though - I really think Palin is blowing it big-time with these latest maneuvers, unless she has no intention of running for President or any other major office.

If she does plan on being a regular old world-famous private citizen, then more power to her. Sue the bastards for all they're worth.

But if she's planning to run, this is political suicide.

You might be right. But I think Palin is re-defining the rules of what is possible. I have no idea what her plans are, and speculation is pointless. But even if she becomes a private citizen, and alienates X% of the population by suing a blogger, I think she'll still have a lot of star power that will make her a force in politics in 2012 or even 2016.

Think Ross Perot -- 20% of the vote, and he was also just a private citizen. Palin may be planning that route -- starting some "pure conservative" third party to appeal to the anti-government crowd, and run as an outsider in 2012 -- maybe not even with the intention of winning, but of maklng a statement. However many mistakes Obama makes, it's very difficult to unseat a president running for a second term -- see Bush in 2004, Clinton in 1996, etc. Both got re-elected despite intense hatred from the opposing side. So Palin may sense: Obama's untouchable in 2012, so I'll run as the ultimate outsider, and become the heroine of the conservative movement, despite losing.

580 DEZes  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:37:02pm

re: #568 HoosierHoops

Do you think the 35,000 year old flute influenced the Thick as a Brick Album?
I'm just teasing you....

Must have been a rock group, ;)

581 Ojoe  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:38:01pm

re: #570 buzzsawmonkey

But the gleeful pile-on to which the Palins were subjected had a particularly nasty edge because it allowed people to jump on the Palins for having failed to live up to their own standards, which is always a huge comfort to people who have no standards at all.

True, true true.

582 LGoPs  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:38:35pm

re: #554 haakondahl

I have a bigger problem with it because I don't want to be lectured by a seven year old about which car to buy.

For the corporatization of children, no place has Japan beat. Everything has to be so damned cute, you just spend half the day choking back the bile.

I'm not necessarily bothered by kids in ads. E-trade has a particularly good series running with a baby doing trades on line. Pretty clever if you ask me.
What I detest is political ads using kids - which IMO - is the exclusive domain of democrats. Forlorn looking kids asking for more taxes for schools for example.
The most vile one I recall was shortly after the 2000 election when the Democrats ran a series of ads showing kids drinking water and complaining about the arsenic levels. Levels which Clinton had doubled days before he left office just to force Bush to roll them back because the cost of compliance would have been ruinous. That was a low-life thing to do.

583 Flyers1974  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:38:35pm

re: #522 JarHeadLifer

Political suicide, or unbridled hubris?

In this last week, Sarah Palin has come across as arrogant, grandiose and most of surprisingly, entitled. I'm disappointed. I didn't think she was ready for the VP job, but assumed she would work in earnest to shore up her weaknesses and build a foundation upon which she could launch a legitimate campaign. If she would have put forth the effort, she perhaps could have inherited Reagan's mantle.

As it stands, it appears Palin doesn't believe she has any weaknesses, including the biggest one - experience. That is a troubling development.

Conservatism isn't about charisma or celebrity, it's about meeting the responsibility of your commitments and getting ahead based purely on your own merits. It's a political philosophy based on meritocracy, not entitlement.

Two very big things were in her favor: she had the spotlight, for amomg other reasons, because she was such an unexpected pick. She had the opportunity to define herself before her opponents did, or at the minimum, the opportunity to blunt her opponents attacks. She also had the base locked down. She just didn't have Reagan's abilities. No shame there, most politicians don't. But she's not even in the ballpark.

584 A Man for all Seasons  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:38:51pm

re: #575 Kosh's Shadow

Really don't know why you picked that one out...

It's the only rock album I've ever heard with a flute as the lead...Seriously...I could Google other alternatives....But that's all I got.. :)

585 eschew_obfuscation  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:38:59pm

re: #580 DEZes

Must have been a rock group, ;)

Jethro Tull? Lots of flute....

586 Killgore Trout  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:39:23pm

Koskidz goofing on the Tea Parties....
Despite Fox hype, turnout shrivels at July 4 teabag parties

587 jcm  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:39:46pm

PDS.....

If you want to live in a country run by a woman who tries to silence the media, uses public resources for her own personal projects, believes in her own lies as if they are true, and pretends to be God, there’s already a country like that.

It’s called North Korea.

588 LGoPs  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:40:01pm

re: #564 keeping it simple

I'm always a bit surprised when Palin is attacked for bringing her kids into the spotlight. She only did what every politician does when they first enter the public arena. Let the voters see the family. Simple.

Just imagine what would have happened if she had never allowed her children to be seen. The liberal haters would have attacked her viciously by saying she was a bad mother for leaving a very young child while she campaigned and that she was ashamed of her Down's Syndrome baby and that she was a coward for hiding Bristol's pregnancy.
She was going to be trashed no matter what she did.

The fuckers did attack her - saying that she was a bad mother since she was putting her 5 kids needs behind her ambitions.
Bastards.

589 Dianna  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:40:20pm

re: #479 Charles

She already committed political suicide with this resignation - at least, for someone who was provisionally willing to consider supporting her.

590 scarshapedstar  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:40:34pm

So much for tort reform, eh?

591 Kosh's Shadow  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:40:35pm

re: #584 HoosierHoops

It's the only rock album I've ever heard with a flute as the lead...Seriously...I could Google other alternatives....But that's all I got.. :)

My line was a play on the first line of Thick as a Brick
"Really don't mind if you sit this one out"

592 haakondahl  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:40:41pm

re: #522 JarHeadLifer

Political suicide, or unbridled hubris?

In this last week, Sarah Palin has come across as arrogant, grandiose and most of surprisingly, entitled. I'm disappointed. I didn't think she was ready for the VP job, but assumed she would work in earnest to shore up her weaknesses and build a foundation upon which she could launch a legitimate campaign. If she would have put forth the effort, she perhaps could have inherited Reagan's mantle.

As it stands, it appears Palin doesn't believe she has any weaknesses, including the biggest one - experience. That is a troubling development.

Conservatism isn't about charisma or celebrity, it's about meeting the responsibility of your commitments and getting ahead based purely on your own merits. It's a political philosophy based on meritocracy, not entitlement.

Sorry, we in the hive-mind cannot hear you. We are far too cloistered, and at any rate, ignorant, to follow your argument.

593 WinterCat  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:40:50pm

re: #574 Killgore Trout

Probably not. I know she and her supporters claim that McCain's handlers were hindering her. I doubt it. Look at she's committing political suicide all on her own here. There's no one else to blame.
It seems to be the common theme with Palin; She's always the victim. It's always someone else's fault. The MSM is unfair. Nobody else gets treated this way. Nobody else has to put up with this much criticism. Etc.
I really think it would be best for conservatives to pick themselves up and soldier on. Embrace self reliance. Life is not fair. Toughen up.

I don't think Palin has ever played the victim. She pushed back on the BS. And it is true, nobody else has ever been treated the way she has been. She took it for as long as she could and then said, F* this.

594 SixDegrees  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:41:19pm

re: #576 kynna

Because of the FBI statement or because of the statement in conjunction with the lawyer's letter?

This is what I'm saying.

It was run yesterday, before the news from Palin's attorney broke. It was deemed newsworthy in and of itself - rightly so, given the rarity of such categorical denials from the FBI.

It was also mentioned on BBC America early this morning, with no mention at all of Palin's threats. BBC-A tends to record a block of headlines and repeat them over the course of the news day, so I'm not certain when it began airing.

595 JarHeadLifer  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:41:40pm

re: #592 haakondahl

Sorry, we in the hive-mind cannot hear you. We are far too cloistered, and at any rate, ignorant, to follow your argument.

I wondered what that buzzing was. I thought my monitor was going on the blink.

596 J.D.  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:41:42pm

re: #582 LGoPs

E-trade has a particularly good series running with a baby doing trades on line.


I love those!

597 kawfytawk  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:42:15pm

re: #56 Killgore Trout

I'm furious that McCain put her on the ticket. This is so embarrassing.

I hated that McCain was on her ticket. He only got my vote because Palin was on it.

598 haakondahl  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:42:23pm

re: #551 ~Fianna

There are a couple of "call my daddy" type billboards up in Vegas for lawyers and car dealerships. I don't know why it makes me so uncomfortable but it really does. I guess part of it is "i have a cute kid"!= "i'm good at what i do" and the other part of it is it seems somehow exploitative to me.

Maybe because the appropriate response is "Who's your Daddy?"

599 doppelganglander  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:43:16pm

re: #565 callahan23

So sorry :-(
I was not me via the google result page you can still reach the DW (Deutsche Welle) article. Here is an article from CBS.

No problem. DEZes posted the CBS link and I saw that.

600 jcm  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:43:25pm

re: #590 scarshapedstar

So much for tort reform, eh?

Given the predominance of lawyers inside the Beltway?

Is there not a fundamental conflict of interest in practicing law, then making law?

Fox guarding chicken coop?

601 Kragar  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:43:59pm

Hamas cartoon mocks captured Israeli soldier

JERUSALEM (AP) — Hamas TV in Gaza has broadcast a short animated movie mocking an Israeli soldier captured by the militant Islamic group three years ago.

Israeli media played excerpts of the movie Monday. It depicts 22-year-old Israeli Sgt. Gilad Schalit chained to a jail cell wall pathetically pleading with a Palestinian boy to be set free.

The boy refuses, saying he has relatives in Israeli prisons.

[deleted]

602 freedomplow  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:44:10pm

Seems it's already working. MSNBC Hardball just mentioned it briefly without using Shannyn Moore's (who has been on MSNBC a number of times) name or the allegation.

603 Greengolem64  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:44:15pm

re: #514 Flyers1974

I don't think I made any statement about my personal feelings regarding this practice, much less that I think it is o.k. And it is possible to defame a politician. However, proving this is incredibly difficult, and I think it should be. Put it this way, if it were easy to prove defamation, I'd guess political blogs, or at least blogs which allow a great many people to post on them, would cease to exist, or would exist in a very sanitized form.

Which leads me back to my original post...maybe individuals should be held to a little higher standard. Maybe it shouldn't be OK to have diarrhea of the mouth such that we can say Senator so and so had sex with (fill in the blank) ad nauseam...when posting on a PUBLIC forum.

Along with the ability to voice one's opinion such that the WORLD can read it and have it stored for all eternity, there should be a reasonable expectation that said poster will exercise some modicum of judgment when writing about someone. It is one thing for you and I to sit in a bar and have an 'off color' discussion about our most disliked politician and very different for that same discussion to occur in a public forum where things can/will/are taken out of context or intentionally mis-quoted for political gain/harm.

It's ok to say those things about Sara Palin...she is a PUBLIC figure. Imagine being one of her kids or family and reading the constant CRAP that is spewed forth...oh, that's ok...Sarah is a PUBLIC figure...she should get used to being called a C--t for the whole world to see. Yep...good ole' politics. That's crap.

GG

604 Sharmuta  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:44:34pm

re: #579 zombie

Pure conservative party?

605 ~Fianna  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:44:51pm

re: #570 buzzsawmonkey

Bristol's pregnancy was made an issue for two reasons: first, the media love scandal; second, there is unrelenting hostility in liberal (i.e., media) circles towards any mention of the concept of abstinence.

Advocacy of abstinence is hated by the media because most of what the media purveys is sex; sex scandals as a substitute for news, rutting as a substitute for writing in popular entertainment. In addition, the position of "people should refrain from having sex until they are married," the accepted default position of social mores prior to the late 1960s/early 1970s, has been taking a beating for the last 4 decades, to the point where you are considered a hopelessly naive fool--or worse, a square--for even suggesting it.

Abstinence is seen as "the troglodytic religious right position on sex," i.e., something to be dismissed with contempt and without a second's consideration. That the Palins are, in fact conservative and Christian was, to the media, a literally Heaven-sent opportunity to pound both conservatives and Christians by saying, "See? See? Even they can't keep to their own standard! Hypocrites!"

Of course, even when abstinence was the social standard it was often honored more in the breach than in the observance, and people often got caught out in their failure to live up to the standard. Had Chelsea Clinton gotten pregnant out of wedlock, a media for which sex scandal is red meat would have surely been given a hard time. But the gleeful pile-on to which the Palins were subjected had a particularly nasty edge because it allowed people to jump on the Palins for having failed to live up to their own standards, which is always a huge comfort to people who have no standards at all.

Really good analysis.

One historical quibble - for most people abstinence until marriage wasn't the default until the 19th c. Especially in rural areas, the ability to have kids was really important, so pregnant brides were more the norm than not. It became a social crisis post-industrial age. Too many young people were moving to the city, away from the protection of the small village awareness of what was going on when young people were "keeping company". Normally, when a girl turned up pregnant, everyone in town knew who's it was and if the boy wouldn't step up to the plate, the rest of the men and the girl's family would apply the pressure. Once people moved to town, that social system fell apart, but behavior didn't change, so the rate of out of wedlock birth rose dramatically and became an issue.

Puritans in America had some similar ways of handling things. Women could and did sue for child support and "crying out" was legally binding. If an unmarried woman named the father during childbirth in front of witnesses, it was deemed undeniably true. There is a lot of testimony from women, particularly midwives, who were the general witnesses to childbirth and what was done/said.

Puritan culture was definitely not what it was stereotyped to be. It's a really interesting era in history.

606 kynna  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:44:51pm

re: #594 SixDegrees

It was run yesterday, before the news from Palin's attorney broke. It was deemed newsworthy in and of itself - rightly so, given the rarity of such categorical denials from the FBI.

It was also mentioned on BBC America early this morning, with no mention at all of Palin's threats. BBC-A tends to record a block of headlines and repeat them over the course of the news day, so I'm not certain when it began airing.

I read about their intention to sue in the LA Times article about the FBI statement late Saturday night. I have to go, but if I have time later, I'll find that article and post it.

607 Dianna  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:45:20pm

re: #526 ShanghaiEd

That's a great way to explain why Palin felt the need to sue.

Thanks for the example.

608 jcm  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:45:49pm

re: #582 LGoPs

I'm not necessarily bothered by kids in ads. E-trade has a particularly good series running with a baby doing trades on line. Pretty clever if you ask me.
What I detest is political ads using kids - which IMO - is the exclusive domain of democrats. Forlorn looking kids asking for more taxes for schools for example.
The most vile one I recall was shortly after the 2000 election when the Democrats ran a series of ads showing kids drinking water and complaining about the arsenic levels. Levels which Clinton had doubled days before he left office just to force Bush to roll them back because the cost of compliance would have been ruinous. That was a low-life thing to do.

Evian babies....

Youtube Video
609 A Man for all Seasons  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:46:05pm

re: #591 Kosh's Shadow

My line was a play on the first line of Thick as a Brick
"Really don't mind if you sit this one out"

*wink*
I remember in high School and we had a stupid little band called the electric Bananas we could play everyone of their songs in the Key of E....
I mean seriously...Any Beatles song had to be E flat with a half step down to sing it....Yet we tried and failed....Fucking Beatles...What studs!

610 haakondahl  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:46:22pm

Perhaps it's a good thing that the left cannot stand the second amendment. If it were a cause of theirs, they would encourage pre-teens to shoot each other, so long as they put a sheet of paper in between the shooter and the victim.

611 kynna  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:46:23pm

re: #606 kynna

I read about their intention to sue in the LA Times article about the FBI statement late Saturday night. I have to go, but if I have time later, I'll find that article and post it.

Addendum: This is also why I'm surprised that everyone here is so surprised by this letter and the Palins' intent to sue people for blatantly false reporting. It's not totally new news.

612 SanFranciscoZionist  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:46:46pm

re: #605 ~Fianna

Really good analysis.

One historical quibble - for most people abstinence until marriage wasn't the default until the 19th c. Especially in rural areas, the ability to have kids was really important, so pregnant brides were more the norm than not. It became a social crisis post-industrial age. Too many young people were moving to the city, away from the protection of the small village awareness of what was going on when young people were "keeping company". Normally, when a girl turned up pregnant, everyone in town knew who's it was and if the boy wouldn't step up to the plate, the rest of the men and the girl's family would apply the pressure. Once people moved to town, that social system fell apart, but behavior didn't change, so the rate of out of wedlock birth rose dramatically and became an issue.

Puritans in America had some similar ways of handling things. Women could and did sue for child support and "crying out" was legally binding. If an unmarried woman named the father during childbirth in front of witnesses, it was deemed undeniably true. There is a lot of testimony from women, particularly midwives, who were the general witnesses to childbirth and what was done/said.

Puritan culture was definitely not what it was stereotyped to be. It's a really interesting era in history.

I have no problem with the Palins about the pregnancy. They did fine.

I am still mad at Bill O'Reilly, who trashed Britney Spears' little sister and her parents when she got pregnant, and then gave the Palins a gracious pass.

613 J.S.  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:46:50pm

CNN people this morning, btw, were quoting from something Palin had written (I don't know if it was in an email, on a Palin FaceBook page, a tweet, etc.), but the CNN people were insisting that Palin was planning to continue in politics...that she wants to rally the Conservative base, etc. (I don't know if this is just CNN political spin or merits something more..)

614 Sharmuta  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:46:58pm

How's the book coming along, haak?

615 zombie  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:47:25pm

re: #604 Sharmuta

Pure conservative party?

Or whatever. Not sure of its exact dimensions or definitions, but some kind of Ross Perot-esque "outsider" party designed to appeal to the hardcore of Palin fans: social conservatives, Christians, anti-government advocates, etc. The kind of people who think the Republican Party is lousy with "RINO"s and not conservative enough any more for their tastes.

616 haakondahl  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:47:36pm

re: #590 scarshapedstar

So much for tort reform, eh?

She's no tort!

617 SanFranciscoZionist  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:47:55pm

re: #610 haakondahl

Perhaps it's a good thing that the left cannot stand the second amendment. If it were a cause of theirs, they would encourage pre-teens to shoot each other, so long as they put a sheet of paper in between the shooter and the victim.

Ummmm...is this some sort of gag about condoms? Because otherwise, I'm sort of confused.

618 kawfytawk  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:48:03pm

re: #613 J.S.

I think everyone is just speculating what her next move is...I hope she keeps em guessing.

619 callahan23  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:48:10pm

re: #601 Kragar (proud to be kafir)

Hamas cartoon mocks captured Israeli soldier

[deleted]

I hate these [deleted] with a vengeance these [deleted] and [deleted] and [deleted] shall sod off.

/rant off tkssssss

620 Vicious Babushka  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:48:22pm

re: #582 LGoPs

I'm not necessarily bothered by kids in ads. E-trade has a particularly good series running with a baby doing trades on line. Pretty clever if you ask me.
What I detest is political ads using kids - which IMO - is the exclusive domain of democrats. Forlorn looking kids asking for more taxes for schools for example.
The most vile one I recall was shortly after the 2000 election when the Democrats ran a series of ads showing kids drinking water and complaining about the arsenic levels. Levels which Clinton had doubled days before he left office just to force Bush to roll them back because the cost of compliance would have been ruinous. That was a low-life thing to do.

Daisy nuke 1964 LBJ political ad

621 Kosh's Shadow  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:48:23pm

re: #601 Kragar (proud to be kafir)

Hamas cartoon mocks captured Israeli soldier

Israeli media played excerpts of the movie Monday. It depicts 22-year-old Israeli Sgt. Gilad Schalit chained to a jail cell wall pathetically pleading with a Palestinian boy to be set free.

The boy refuses, saying he has relatives in Israeli prisons.


[deleted]


Israel should declare Hamas prisoners to be war criminals and not subject to the Geneva convention, and hold them incommunicado.
Actually, [deleted], but that would have the same effect

622 Roger  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:48:33pm

re: #602 freedomplow

Cool! They got the message.

623 SFGoth  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:48:55pm

re: #570 buzzsawmonkey

So they got nailed for their hypocrisy too?

624 Sharmuta  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:49:04pm

re: #615 zombie

Or whatever. Not sure of its exact dimensions or definitions, but some kind of Ross Perot-esque "outsider" party designed to appeal to the hardcore of Palin fans: social conservatives, Christians, anti-government advocates, etc. The kind of people who think the Republican Party is lousy with "RINO"s and not conservative enough any more for their tastes.

Maybe they can get funding from the Discovery Institute.

625 JarHeadLifer  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:49:05pm

re: #612 SanFranciscoZionist

I have no problem with the Palins about the pregnancy. They did fine.

I am still mad at Bill O'Reilly, who trashed Britney Spears' little sister and her parents when she got pregnant, and then gave the Palins a gracious pass.

I don't disagree with you at all. But, I am fascinated that someone was able to weave Britney Spears into a Sarah Palin Resignation thread. Very impressive.

626 ~Fianna  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:49:08pm

re: #582 LGoPs

I'm not necessarily bothered by kids in ads. E-trade has a particularly good series running with a baby doing trades on line. Pretty clever if you ask me.
What I detest is political ads using kids - which IMO - is the exclusive domain of democrats. Forlorn looking kids asking for more taxes for schools for example.
The most vile one I recall was shortly after the 2000 election when the Democrats ran a series of ads showing kids drinking water and complaining about the arsenic levels. Levels which Clinton had doubled days before he left office just to force Bush to roll them back because the cost of compliance would have been ruinous. That was a low-life thing to do.

Every political organization puts kids in ads. I've gotten plenty of D, R and issue advocacy ads from the left and the right with kids in them.

America has a big "for the children" problem. Censorship for "the children"! Taxes "for the children", etc. I think people should raise their own children and let the adults be adults and make decisions for themselves.

627 Fenway_Nation  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:50:00pm

re: #626 ~Fianna

Nah....I'd rather blame Canada...

628 Tatterdemalian  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:51:02pm

re: #518 LGoPs

If there was any truth behind what Rather did he would have sued. He didn't becuase he was caught trying to manipulate an election with manufactured documents. He had no ground to stand on.

But he DOES think he has legal ground to stand on to file a lawsuit against CBS for his dismissal over the Rathergate scandal, including charges of defamation over their investigation of the TANG memo. He's spent $20 million on it, last I heard.

629 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:51:04pm
630 Kragar  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:51:14pm

re: #621 Kosh's Shadow

Israel should declare Hamas prisoners to be war criminals and not subject to the Geneva convention, and hold them incommunicado.
Actually, [deleted], but that would have the same effect

Some people deserve to be crushed utterly.

631 haakondahl  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:51:18pm

re: #587 jcm

PDS.....

If you want to live in a country run by a woman who tries to silence the media, uses public resources for her own personal projects, believes in her own lies as if they are true, and pretends to be God, there’s already a country like that.
It’s called North Korea.

Not so ronery after all.

632 jcm  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:53:03pm

Robert McNamara, Architect of Vietnam War, Dies at 93

Robert S. McNamara, the former secretary of defense whose record as a leading executive of industry and a chieftain of foreign financial aid was all but erased from public memory by his reputation as the primary architect of U.S. involvement in the war in Vietnam, died early this morning at age 93.
633 Throbert McGee  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:53:12pm

Yo, zombie!

To finally answer your question about the super-terrific experience you're missing by not being active on FaceBook, here's the results of a Google Image search for "facebook profile" -- which returned umpteen million screengrabs of various people's FB front pages. Obviously, these are just static JPEGs that you can't click on, but at least it'll give you a pretty good idea of what the layout is. (And you'll notice that there are only a few ways in which individual users can alter the layout -- it's much less flexible than blogging software.)

As you may glean from the pictures, FB can in some ways serve as a sort of personal blog for people who find the learning curve of blogspot too difficult. (Though the social networking functionality does make it more than merely a "dumbed-down blogging interface")

634 ~Fianna  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:53:32pm

re: #612 SanFranciscoZionist

I have no problem with the Palins about the pregnancy. They did fine.

I am still mad at Bill O'Reilly, who trashed Britney Spears' little sister and her parents when she got pregnant, and then gave the Palins a gracious pass.

That's one thing that jumped out at me in terms of the sexism and classism of the whole issue. Middle class white kid is pregnant and keeping the baby, it's a sign of commitment to their values. Urban or rural poor kid gets pregnant, it's time for trailer trash jokes.

635 Dianna  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:53:39pm

re: #614 Sharmuta

How's the book coming along, haak?

Indeed! And when are you sending it to me?

636 capitalist piglet  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:54:19pm

re: #587 jcm

PDS.....

Funny. Much of that could apply to Obama.

637 SixDegrees  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:54:31pm

re: #606 kynna

I read about their intention to sue in the LA Times article about the FBI statement late Saturday night. I have to go, but if I have time later, I'll find that article and post it.

I thought you said there had been

no

coverage of the story at all in the MSM.

The FBI made a strong statement that she's not under investigation. I did not see that in any of the headlines on AOL or Yahoo today even though the statement was made yesterday.

Perhaps you could clarify just what it is you're trying to say.

638 Kosh's Shadow  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:54:51pm

re: #632 jcm

Robert McNamara, Architect of Vietnam War, Dies at 93

He screwed up DoD and the Vietnam war big time. We were discussing him on the dead thread, and if anyone thinks you should only speak kindly of the dead, don't read those comments.

Still trying to come up with a song based on the old "MacNamara's Band".

639 LGoPs  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:55:08pm

re: #626 ~Fianna

Every political organization puts kids in ads. I've gotten plenty of D, R and issue advocacy ads from the left and the right with kids in them.

America has a big "for the children" problem. Censorship for "the children"! Taxes "for the children", etc. I think people should raise their own children and let the adults be adults and make decisions for themselves.

There is no one in the world that loves my children more than I do. To the point of giving my life for them. Your's not so much (not your's personally but your's generically). Politicians that claim they care as much or manipulate kids to manipulate me are scoundrels and beneath contempt.

640 doppelganglander  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:55:49pm

I am astonished to see a 600+ post thread that's still on topic after more than 2 hours.

641 Flyers1974  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:56:02pm

re: #603 Greengolem64

It seems that your post is a call for more decency in the media realm regarding politicians. Hard to say that is a mean-spirited idea or that it has no merit. But consider, under a lesser standard, could people who have posted that Obama is a socialist be sued successfully? He doesn't appear to fit the dictionary defintion of a socialist. Nor to my knowledge do any socialist organizations claim him as a socialist. If socialist party leaders were called into court to testify on his behalf, they may well state that Obama is closer to a Republican than a socialist. Would you be prepared to accept a lawsuit such as this, even if Obama eventually lost?

642 jcm  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:56:21pm

re: #638 Kosh's Shadow

He screwed up DoD and the Vietnam war big time. We were discussing him on the dead thread, and if anyone thinks you should only speak kindly of the dead, don't read those comments.

Still trying to come up with a song based on the old "MacNamara's Band".

That's why I only linked and quoted.

No comment.

643 haakondahl  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:56:24pm

re: #614 Sharmuta

How's the book coming along, haak?

Bogged down for the foreseeable future. I love the idea, and the book, but I seem to have gotten the point in the first thirty pags, The subsequent hundred have therefore been tough sleding. Currently reading Helicopter Theory by Wayne Johnson. Chewy.

644 WinterCat  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:56:29pm

re: #640 doppelganglander

I am astonished to see a 600+ post thread that's still on topic after more than 2 hours.

Love her or hate her, Palin makes for a great discussion!

645 LGoPs  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:56:29pm

re: #640 doppelganglander

I am astonished to see a 600+ post thread that's still on topic after more than 2 hours.

I can change that. What about Michael Jackson......hunh?
///

646 kansas  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:57:07pm

re: #570 buzzsawmonkey

But the gleeful pile-on to which the Palins were subjected had a particularly nasty edge because it allowed people to jump on the Palins for having failed to live up to their own standards, which is always a huge comfort to people who have no standards at all.

Interesting. The media doing the Alinsky " make your enemies live up to their own standards. "

647 ~Fianna  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:57:40pm

re: #639 LGoPs

There is no one in the world that loves my children more than I do. To the point of giving my life for them. Your's not so much (not your's personally but your's generically). Politicians that claim they care as much or manipulate kids to manipulate me are scoundrels and beneath contempt.

I think if we could all make a deal that unless either of us is doing something terribly wrong and abusive, you raise your kids your way, I'll raise my kids my way and we can stop arguing about a large portion of what politicians argue about and then we can focus on the real issues.

/don't have kids, but if I did, I'd raise them myself, not let Washington, the TV or the neighbors do it.

648 LGoPs  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:57:48pm

re: #644 WinterCat

Love her or hate her, Palin makes for a great discussion!

I love her and respect her. And the more the left attacks, the stronger I feel.

649 Kragar  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:57:55pm

re: #644 WinterCat

Love her or hate her, Palin makes for a great discussion!

or one can ignore her and discuss other topics

650 jcm  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:58:10pm

re: #643 haakondahl

Bogged down for the foreseeable future. I love the idea, and the book, but I seem to have gotten the point in the first thirty pags, The subsequent hundred have therefore been tough sleding. Currently reading Helicopter Theory by Wayne Johnson. Chewy.

Overthinking the subject....

Helos vibrate so badly the earth rejects them....

/;-P

651 Throbert McGee  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:58:28pm

Following up to #633: Now that I've done my best to explain Facebook to our darling zombie, could someone please fucking fill me in on what the fuckity fucking appeal of fucking useless-ass Twitter is?

'Coz I iz mystificated.

652 LGoPs  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:58:33pm

re: #647 ~Fianna

I think if we could all make a deal that unless either of us is doing something terribly wrong and abusive, you raise your kids your way, I'll raise my kids my way and we can stop arguing about a large portion of what politicians argue about and then we can focus on the real issues.

/don't have kids, but if I did, I'd raise them myself, not let Washington, the TV or the neighbors do it.

Agreed.

653 ~Fianna  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:58:53pm

re: #651 Throbert McGee

Following up to #633: Now that I've done my best to explain Facebook to our darling zombie, could someone please fucking fill me in on what the fuckity fucking appeal of fucking useless-ass Twitter is?

'Coz I iz mystificated.

If you find out, let me know please?

654 SixDegrees  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:59:05pm

re: #645 LGoPs

I can change that. What about Michael Jackson......hunh?
///

Opinion is running slightly against the idea that he will pop out of his coffin tomorrow during the gigantic media event that is his funeral and perform takes from his upcoming tour for the delighted and astonished crowd.

But only slightly.

655 J.D.  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:59:15pm

re: #640 doppelganglander

I am astonished to see a 600+ post thread that's still on topic after more than 2 hours.


that didn't involve...
Never mind.

656 kansas  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:59:41pm

re: #651 Throbert McGee

Following up to #633: Now that I've done my best to explain Facebook to our darling zombie, could someone please fucking fill me in on what the fuckity fucking appeal of fucking useless-ass Twitter is?

'Coz I iz mystificated.

Twitter is facebook on crack.

657 OldLineTexan  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:00:05pm

re: #647 ~Fianna

I think if we could all make a deal that unless either of us is doing something terribly wrong and abusive, you raise your kids your way, I'll raise my kids my way and we can stop arguing about a large portion of what politicians argue about and then we can focus on the real issues.

/don't have kids, but if I did, I'd raise them myself, not let Washington, the TV or the neighbors do it.

Ha. "It takes a village ..."

658 jcm  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:00:21pm

re: #540 jcm

How many points did GWB need during his TANG service?
How many did he have?
How many did he need in '72, his last year?
How many did he have?

What was the the insulting nic name the the F-102 had based on one of flight characteristics?

300
960
50
52

Lawn Dart.

659 LGoPs  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:00:23pm

re: #654 SixDegrees

Opinion is running slightly against the idea that he will pop out of his coffin tomorrow during the gigantic media event that is his funeral and perform takes from his upcoming tour for the delighted and astonished crowd.

But only slightly.

ROTFLMAO........

660 Kosh's Shadow  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:00:55pm

re: #635 Dianna

Indeed! And when are you sending it to me?

As for yours, Dianna, I finished it; now I need to put together my comments. (I have to get them out of mobipocket reader, which is how I read it on my Blackberry)
Most of my comments are typos, which might actually be due to converting from pdf to mobi.
I'll write up some in addition.

661 OldLineTexan  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:01:00pm

re: #654 SixDegrees

Opinion is running slightly against the idea that he will pop out of his coffin tomorrow during the gigantic media event that is his funeral and perform takes from his upcoming tour for the delighted and astonished crowd.

But only slightly.

He won't if they remember to "burp" the Tupperware casket.

662 zombie  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:01:07pm

re: #633 Throbert McGee

Yo, zombie!

To finally answer your question about the super-terrific experience you're missing by not being active on FaceBook, here's the results of a Google Image search for "facebook profile" -- which returned umpteen million screengrabs of various people's FB front pages. Obviously, these are just static JPEGs that you can't click on, but at least it'll give you a pretty good idea of what the layout is. (And you'll notice that there are only a few ways in which individual users can alter the layout -- it's much less flexible than blogging software.)

As you may glean from the pictures, FB can in some ways serve as a sort of personal blog for people who find the learning curve of blogspot too difficult. (Though the social networking functionality does make it more than merely a "dumbed-down blogging interface")

Wow, that is crazy! Look at all that content!

That is exactly what I imagined Facebook is supposed to look like, from all the descriptions I read, but for some completely impenetrable reason, I am and have been never able to actually see that content from my computer. (Aside from the photos of the content you just posted.) Every Facebook page I ever go to is devoid of any of that -- just mostly blank, with at most a list of the person's friends.

Anyway, as I said at the end of the last thread -- I now officially permanently give up trying to decipher Facebook!

663 J.D.  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:01:11pm

re: #654 SixDegrees

Opinion is running slightly against the idea that he will pop out of his coffin tomorrow during the gigantic media event that is his funeral and perform takes from his upcoming tour for the delighted and astonished crowd.

But only slightly.

LOL!
I shoulda taken those free tickets!

664 Sharmuta  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:01:35pm

re: #643 haakondahl

I took a couple of breaks too. It's heady stuff, but I'm thinking of going through it again, so there might be more talk on it and I hope you join.

665 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:02:05pm
666 Russkilitlover  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:02:29pm

Medvedev, not looking very adoring....

Drudge has a great pic of Obama and Medvedev. BHO looks positively puckered up ready to plant a big wet one on Medvedev, while Medvedev looks.......

667 SanFranciscoZionist  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:02:45pm

re: #634 ~Fianna

That's one thing that jumped out at me in terms of the sexism and classism of the whole issue. Middle class white kid is pregnant and keeping the baby, it's a sign of commitment to their values. Urban or rural poor kid gets pregnant, it's time for trailer trash jokes.

One of my students was pregnant year before this last. Somehow, I didn't think Bill O'Reilly was gonna support her decision to bear a child, or say nice things about her family. (They deserved nice things said, BTW.)

668 Greengolem64  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:03:00pm

re: #641 Flyers1974

It seems that your post is a call for more decency in the media realm regarding politicians. Hard to say that is a mean-spirited idea or that it has no merit. But consider, under a lesser standard, could people who have posted that Obama is a socialist be sued successfully? He doesn't appear to fit the dictionary defintion of a socialist. Nor to my knowledge do any socialist organizations claim him as a socialist. If socialist party leaders were called into court to testify on his behalf, they may well state that Obama is closer to a Republican than a socialist. Would you be prepared to accept a lawsuit such as this, even if Obama eventually lost?

:)

Apples and oranges. And I would argue that he is closer to the definition of a socialist than not. But, that is an opinion...opined by someone...whereas so much of what is being spewed about Palin is out-and-out lies. I have nothing special for or against Palin...it is as you say more a call for more decency in the media. We seem to be swirling down the 'bowl' with what is now accepted behavior by the media and those that are on the media periphery.

gg

669 brockton808  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:03:11pm

The Presidency is just a glorified "beauty" contest now. Obama's "experience" was limited (and questionable), but he's black and liberal. The elites and the media backed him, so he won.

Although she'll be fighting an uphill battle against the MSM and her own party, Sarah has just as good a chance of winning in '12 as BHO did in '08. It's not so much about what she has or hasn't done, or what she will or won't do in the next couple years. What sets her apart is what she STANDS for.

I'll take her any day over losers like Dole, McCain, et. al.

670 doppelganglander  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:03:50pm

re: #651 Throbert McGee

Following up to #633: Now that I've done my best to explain Facebook to our darling zombie, could someone please fucking fill me in on what the fuckity fucking appeal of fucking useless-ass Twitter is?

'Coz I iz mystificated.

Beats me. Who in hell thinks they're important enough to broadcast their every move to the entire world? And who's stupid enough to waste time reading their tweets?

671 babes  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:03:52pm

re: #666 Russkilitlover

Medvedev, not looking very adoring....

Drudge has a great pic of Obama and Medvedev. BHO looks positively puckered up ready to plant a big wet one on Medvedev, while Medvedev looks.......

This is really good enough for a caption contest.

672 Racer X  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:04:27pm

re: #651 Throbert McGee

Following up to #633: Now that I've done my best to explain Facebook to our darling zombie, could someone please fucking fill me in on what the fuckity fucking appeal of fucking useless-ass Twitter is?

'Coz I iz mystificated.

I just took a crap!

:tweet:

673 Fenway_Nation  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:04:33pm

re: #670 doppelganglander

20-something Persians getting their asses beat by the militia?

674 SanFranciscoZionist  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:04:36pm

re: #651 Throbert McGee

Following up to #633: Now that I've done my best to explain Facebook to our darling zombie, could someone please fucking fill me in on what the fuckity fucking appeal of fucking useless-ass Twitter is?

'Coz I iz mystificated.

Gets the word out when you're battling the Baseej in the streets of Tehran. What its use is if you're in a stable non-theocratic nation, unclear at this time.

675 Ward Cleaver  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:04:59pm

re: #666 Russkilitlover

Medvedev, not looking very adoring....

Drudge has a great pic of Obama and Medvedev. BHO looks positively puckered up ready to plant a big wet one on Medvedev, while Medvedev looks.......

Medvedev's thinking, "pwned!".

676 kansas  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:05:12pm

re: #658 jcm

How many points did GWB need during his TANG service?
How many did he have?
How many did he need in '72, his last year?
How many did he have?

Here's one:
What type of national service did BHO do?
What were his grades at Columbia?
What were his grades at Harvard?
How did he get in?
Who paid for his education?
What were some of the topics he wrote on for the Law Review?
What is in his medical records?

677 zombie  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:05:14pm

re: #669 brockton808

The Presidency is just a glorified "beauty" contest now. Obama's "experience" was limited (and questionable), but he's black and liberal. The elites and the media backed him, so he won.

Although she'll be fighting an uphill battle against the MSM and her own party, Sarah has just as good a chance of winning in '12 as BHO did in '08. It's not so much about what she has or hasn't done, or what she will or won't do in the next couple years. What sets her apart is what she STANDS for.

I fully agree.

People say that Palin is now doomed and has no chance -- but the exact thing could have been (and was) said about Obama.

678 OldLineTexan  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:05:17pm

re: #672 Racer X

I just took a crap!

:tweet:

Gee, I always leave one.

Remind me to never shake your hand (jes call me Medvedev).

/

679 Kosh's Shadow  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:05:39pm

re: #671 babes

Medvedev, not looking very adoring....

Drudge has a great pic of Obama and Medvedev. BHO looks positively puckered up ready to plant a big wet one on Medvedev, while Medvedev looks.......


This is really good enough for a caption contest.

"I have him eating polonium out of my hand"

680 The Shadow Do  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:05:44pm

One thing is clear, Sarah is temperamentally no George 'insult me some more' Bush. More like Truman.

On the one hand I am glad to see her push back - hey, I like 'em feisty (sexist comment of the day) - on the other hand it just ain't very Presidential now is it?

681 Greengolem64  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:05:53pm

re: #629 Iron Fist

Memebers of the Press are public individuals, right? (Arguable, but bear with me). The answer to speech is always more speech, too. So the answer is simple. All of these "reporters" have families, and all families have black sheep. The mission is to discover these black sheep and publish their connections to a given reporter everywhere, always asking what the "reporter" knows that they aren't telling. Again, no one ever tells everything they know, so this is "truth".

Have they got a kid with a drug problem? Publish it. Their daughter get knocked up? Publish it along with questions about her fitness as a mother. They got a brother-in-law in jail? Cool! I wonder how they were involved with his crimes?

Do that and the Press would come unglued. But it is just doing to them what they do to everyone else. I'd say it is our turn.

I see your point...but I would rather not go down that road. I believe we can communicate our ideals without having to sink to the level of the liberals.

Take the high road, turn the other cheek. Take your pick. Eventually the public will get the message. Crap is crap and those that spew crap aren't worth a good crap. :)

682 Buster  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:06:25pm

I see the Secretary of State plans to meet with Zelaya in Washington this week. Our goverment won't "meddle" in in Iran, where a sham election and subsequent protests, leads to massacre. But when the "President " of Honduras attempts to subvert his countries constitution and is ousted by the other two branches of government for doing so...we jump right in. I can't figure these folks out!

683 Racer X  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:06:25pm

re: #671 babes

This is really good enough for a caption contest.

Bury you? You are burying yourselves.

684 OldLineTexan  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:06:33pm

re: #680 The Shadow Do

One thing is clear, Sarah is temperamentally no George 'insult me some more' Bush. More like Truman.

On the one hand I am glad to see her push back - hey, I like 'em feisty (sexist comment of the day) - on the other hand it just ain't very Presidential now is it?

Boosh was too stoopid to answer his critics!

/damned if you don't

685 JarHeadLifer  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:07:28pm

re: #636 capitalist piglet

Funny. Much of that could apply to Obama.

I personally feel that they each have much in common. Obama just happens to be an exponentially better speaker. But, Obama had the opportunity to attend some of the best schools in America, Palin didn't.

They are both compelling and repelling at the same time. That is an unusual characteristic to possess. They also both exude a tremendous amount of self-confidence and self-assuredness, to the point that you get the feeling they're both masking a larger sense of self-doubt with a pinch of fear and a touch of uncertainty.

And finally, their biggest similarity; Their respective supporters project what they wish to be true about their idols, not what is necessarily the factual reality.

686 SanFranciscoZionist  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:08:04pm

re: #657 OldLineTexan

Ha. "It takes a village ..."

It does. It's just a question of which village you turn to.

687 Tats66  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:08:15pm

Wow, I know alot of people are always asking of the GOP, "Why do they just take the bullshit and lies without fighting back?" Now Palin has put those on notice that they just might pay a cost for their reckless and intentional defamtions...and some dont like that either...I just find it weird.

And to the inevitable questions posed by those like KTrout, such as "Uh, well, if it were Barack would you still support it? huh? huh? would ya?" and the answer is YES, even then. If its a LIE and not true, then sure people need to be held responsible for espousing lies.....

But if somthing is true, say about CAIR, The Big "O", or even Palin thats TRUE, then its open season...I have no problem with that.

688 doppelganglander  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:08:38pm

re: #673 Fenway_Nation

20-something Persians getting their asses beat by the militia?

That's a good point, but it wasn't what the developers had in mind, or what umpty million people use it for.

689 J.S.  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:09:28pm

re: #662 zombie

that's sorta weird, isn't it? here you want to be incognito and then, inexplicably, everybody else, suddenly, also become incognito..(zombie karma? cue the Twilight Zone music)

690 Dianna  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:09:49pm

re: #660 Kosh's Shadow

I think the typos have been caught, but I'm always happy to see more of the pesky things hunted down.

691 LGoPs  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:10:23pm

re: #665 buzzsawmonkey

Which "they" are you referring to?

It is not "hypocrisy" to believe that one should not have sex before marriage and fail to live up to one's beliefs. A personal failure to live up to one's standards does not make one a hypocrite. "Hypocrite" is defined as someone who pretends to beliefs that s/he does not have--and at no time did anyone in the Palin family disavow the notion that premarital pregnancy was not something they approved of. That said, they also did not reject their daughter for falling short of the ideal they believed in, which to me shows large-heartedness rather than "hypocrisy."

The Palins also oppose abortion, and they were true to that belief by not having the pregnancy terminated--something which got lost in gleeful crooning over Bristol's supposed "hypocrisy", largely because the fact that the Palins held true to their beliefs in this regard enraged those who accept the validity of abortion for convenience.

I think you said earlier up-thread that those who take joy in labeling conservatives as hypocrites for falling short of their standards are people who have no standards.
The fact that the standards of the much decried '50's and earlier are today looked at with disdain and contempt speaks volumes about our slow degradation as a society. Those standards which are criticized as unrealistic and corny at least set the goal high. Not everyone or even most could reach the goal but even when they missed they were still generally in the target area.
When the standards were lowered during the '60's and '70's all of society's goals were lowered and not surprisingly many of us are hitting the target, or very close to it. And society in general suffers from a coarsening of everything.

692 A Kiwi Infidel  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:10:26pm

re: #666 Russkilitlover

Medvedev, not looking very adoring....

Drudge has a great pic of Obama and Medvedev. BHO looks positively puckered up ready to plant a big wet one on Medvedev, while Medvedev looks.......


'tis indeed appropriate that your post and reference to THAT photo is numbered 666

693 debutaunt  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:10:47pm

re: #499 3 wood

FWIW, I think Palin just got fed up with her family being targets of the left wing attack machine. I think she is leaving office to go after some of these people as a private citizen.

Just my 2 cents as someone who was in the public sector for a lot of years an knows what it is like to be attacked by cowards

It will continue to get more difficult to find normal people who will go into politics.

694 BartB  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:11:31pm

Whether or not she wins in court, Sarah will have cost the defendant major money. Do you really expect the NYT to disavow the remarks of that
blogger? Will ABC, et al, condemn the slander? Fat chance.
OTOH, after the blogger spends a few thousand dollars just to hire some lawyers, they may see the error of their ways.
Did the people who filed 15 unbased allegations of ethics violations against Sarah (probably with other people's money) concern themselves with
any harm that might come to the Palins? I doubt it.
Obama thinks that being a nice guy is the way to get the Iranians to see the light. Does anyone here expect that to work?
Why, then, is there so much animus against the victim of slander? How many of you would turn the other cheek? 16 times?

I'll contribute to her legal defense fund.

695 Flyers1974  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:11:33pm

re: #668 Greengolem64

:)

Apples and oranges. And I would argue that he is closer to the definition of a socialist than not. But, that is an opinion...opined by someone...whereas so much of what is being spewed about Palin is out-and-out lies. I have nothing special for or against Palin...it is as you say more a call for more decency in the media. We seem to be swirling down the 'bowl' with what is now accepted behavior by the media and those that are on the media periphery.

gg

Actually, legally speaking, the better argument in favor of the "Obama is a socialist" posters would be lack of damages, i.e., even if false, so what, the socialist are just another political party, perfectly legal, etc... . I'd be careful about the "just an opinion argument." Socialism has a technical definition and legally speaking, I think it is possible to prove that a president is not a socialist. But I get the spirit of your post, and I think the sentiment is a good one.

696 OldLineTexan  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:11:52pm

re: #683 Racer X

Bury you? You are burying yourselves.

C'mon by the White House later. We're having pie!

/

697 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:12:01pm
698 brockton808  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:12:21pm

re: #687 Tats66

Totally agree. The libs play for keeps. She's not rolling over and playing their game. They're trying to run her out of the limelight because they know she's a threat.

699 OldLineTexan  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:12:24pm

re: #686 SanFranciscoZionist

It does. It's just a question of which village you turn to.

I disagree.

700 debutaunt  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:12:24pm

re: #500 Tatterdemalian

Sheesh. There are a lot of better things to become famous for than as "the ex-Governor who sued a blogger and won." Not to mention what the precedent set if she wins... I'd hate to see LGF sued by Dan Rather and Reuters for "defamation."

The Alaska blogger said Palin had embezzeled money.

701 doppelganglander  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:12:29pm

re: #693 debutaunt

It will continue to get more difficult to find normal people who will go into politics.

Unfortunately, it leaves the field to narcissists, opportunists, the power-hungry, and the corrupt. In other words, typical politicians.

702 Buster  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:12:36pm

re: #666 Russkilitlover

Medvedev, not looking very adoring....

Drudge has a great pic of Obama and Medvedev. BHO looks positively puckered up ready to plant a big wet one on Medvedev, while Medvedev looks.......

Isn't meeting with Medvedev like meeting with Ahmadinejad? Shouldn't he be looking behind the curtain and talking to the one pulling the strings?

703 kansas  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:12:47pm

re: #696 OldLineTexan

C'mon by the White House later. We're having pie!

/

Medvedev, not looking very adoring....
Dude, get a tic-tac.

704 LGoPs  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:12:53pm

re: #681 Greengolem64

I see your point...but I would rather not go down that road. I believe we can communicate our ideals without having to sink to the level of the liberals.

Take the high road, turn the other cheek. Take your pick. Eventually the public will get the message. Crap is crap and those that spew crap aren't worth a good crap. :)

I disagree. politics is a knife fight and the stakes are very high. the future of our country for one. Turning the other cheek in a knife fight is crazy. it's time to hit back and hit back hard.
I'm tired of this fight being a one way street.

705 anotherindyfilmguy  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:12:57pm

I hope she takes the time to sue into oblivion any and all elements of the MSM and purposefully lying bloggers who have happily dragged her and her family deeper through the muck than any other politician in recent memory.

706 Kosh's Shadow  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:13:17pm

re: #690 Dianna

I think the typos have been caught, but I'm always happy to see more of the pesky things hunted down.

Some of them are formatting; no new line when the speaker changes, for example.
The new version really filled in gaps in the draft and answered many questions about why the main character did or didn't do something. (no spoilers)

707 SanFranciscoZionist  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:13:44pm

re: #699 OldLineTexan

I disagree.

Well, OK. I can't imagine raising a child in total isolation, just my immediate family and me, nor would I want to, but I suppose it could be done.

708 A Kiwi Infidel  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:13:58pm

coffee, bbiaw

709 J.S.  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:14:06pm

re: #702 Buster

CNN was terming it: "To Russia, with Love"

710 OldLineTexan  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:14:07pm

re: #686 SanFranciscoZionist

It does. It's just a question of which village you turn to.

Plus, the biggest proponents of that theory always want to prescribe the village for you, in my experience.

711 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:14:16pm
712 Buster  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:14:38pm

re: #697 Iron Fist

True dat.

713 SanFranciscoZionist  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:14:41pm

re: #710 OldLineTexan

Plus, the biggest proponents of that theory always want to prescribe the village for you, in my experience.

Well, that's a different battle.

714 Kosh's Shadow  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:15:06pm

re: #702 Buster

Isn't meeting with Medvedev like meeting with Ahmadinejad? Shouldn't he be looking behind the curtain and talking to the one pulling the strings?

Medvedev looks like he's using Obama as a sock puppet.

715 OldLineTexan  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:15:46pm

re: #707 SanFranciscoZionist

Well, OK. I can't imagine raising a child in total isolation, just my immediate family and me, nor would I want to, but I suppose it could be done.

It's been done, but I clarified my position. The people who want "the village" to raise your child always have a "village" in mind.

I've participated as a father in raising five children; I'm not speaking from a theoretical basis.

716 OldLineTexan  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:16:15pm

re: #713 SanFranciscoZionist

Well, that's a different battle.

It wears the same name of late.

717 WinterCat  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:16:31pm

re: #714 Kosh's Shadow

Medvedev looks like he's using Obama as a sock puppet.

Is there any opponent of freedom, democracy or capitalism that Obama won't meet with?

718 OldLineTexan  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:17:15pm

re: #717 WinterCat

Is there any opponent of freedom, democracy or capitalism that Obama won't meet with?

The Potus is kind of stuck with meeting with the Russkis since about 1941 ...

719 SanFranciscoZionist  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:17:23pm

re: #714 Kosh's Shadow

Medvedev looks like he's using Obama as a sock puppet.


Medvedev IS a sock puppet. This is getting into deep layers of socketry here.

720 OldLineTexan  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:17:47pm

re: #719 SanFranciscoZionist

Medvedev IS a sock puppet. This is getting into deep layers of socketry here.

Shaking Putin's hand by proxy?

;)

721 kansas  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:17:55pm

re: #718 OldLineTexan

The Potus is kind of stuck with meeting with the Russkis since about 1941 ...

Something else he can bitch about inheriting?

722 Bobblehead  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:18:24pm

re: #703 kansas

Medvedev, not looking very adoring....
Dude, get a tic-tac.

He looks like he's thinking.." It's bad enough to have to stand in front of an American flag but to have to shake this idiot's hand..OMG.

723 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:18:29pm
724 Roger  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:19:18pm

I find it hilarious and a good time passing by the group of Anti-Bush-former-Obama-supporters back out on the sidewalk in State College with their definitely-worn-but-recently-dusted-off anti-military signs; they look even more pissed off. [most of them are on the public dole and mistakenly imagine their take would be greater if there was no US military.]

725 jvic  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:19:25pm

re: #467 ~Fianna

Would bloggers have been just as bad to Chelsea, Jenna or Barbara they were pregnant?

My guess is that the Left and Right have nasty people who would be as cruel as possible wrt a pregnant First Teen in the opposing side.

The MSM is somewhat different IMO. They couldn't resist runing the story obsessively, but I think they'd have pretended to be enlightened, compassionate and understanding (24/7, of course) about a pregnant teen Chelsea whereas with Jenna or Barbara little effort would have been made to hide the viciousness.

726 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:19:44pm
727 J.S.  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:20:02pm

re: #720 OldLineTexan

Did you hear the first question ? asked by an American reporter.. priceless...

728 Roger  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:20:46pm

re: #500 Tatterdemalian

Sheesh. There are a lot of better things to become famous for than as "the ex-Governor who sued a blogger and won." Not to mention what the precedent set if she wins... I'd hate to see LGF sued by Dan Rather and Reuters for "defamation."

I'd love it! The discovery phase would be revealing and the counter-suit highly profitable.

729 callahan23  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:21:22pm

re: #726 buzzsawmonkey

They call the wind "Messiah."

That liberating wind was called Kamikaze in Japanese.

730 Bobblehead  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:21:45pm

In other news Hillary is meeting with the ousted Honduran president this week and ladies tell me what Michelle has on in that photo?

731 kansas  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:21:50pm

re: #729 callahan23

That liberating wind was called Kamikaze in Japanese.

It's called flatulence in this case.

732 OldLineTexan  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:21:59pm

re: #721 kansas

Something else he can bitch about inheriting?

He won't ... it's Roosevelt's fault.

;)

733 Buster  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:22:04pm

re: #714 Kosh's Shadow

Medvedev looks like he's using Obama as a sock puppet.

I get a picture of Putin with Medvedev on his knee, and on Medvedev's knee, sits Obama...

734 alegrias  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:22:15pm

OT

Senator Harry Reid said he wouldn't "use" Senator Al Franken to "ram through" legislation in the Senate (now that Dems have a VETO PROOF majority).

Cough cough, something's stuck in my throat.

735 Greengolem64  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:22:17pm

re: #704 LGoPs

I disagree. politics is a knife fight and the stakes are very high. the future of our country for one. Turning the other cheek in a knife fight is crazy. it's time to hit back and hit back hard.
I'm tired of this fight being a one way street.

Then we are no better than our opponent. I feel the same way you do...believe it or not...but I think we can realize victory without unsheathing the knife.

gg

736 babes  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:22:29pm

re: #730 Bobblehead

a big caboose from the looks of things.

737 SixDegrees  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:22:44pm

re: #709 J.S.

CNN was terming it: "To Russia, with Love"

The BBC had an interesting commentator on this morning. He pointed out that the Kremlin is currently filled, top to bottom, with ex-KGB members, all of whom share an intense hatred of the United States. Flat out hatred. And for the last eight years, they've been able to excuse themselves by claiming that it was just George Bush that was causing the problems. Now, they're faced with an American President who is well-liked around the world, for the most part. It'll be interesting, indeed, to see what excuses they come up with, or if they'll confront their biases directly.

It was not an overly cheerful assessment.

738 SanFranciscoZionist  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:22:51pm

re: #720 OldLineTexan

Shaking Putin's hand by proxy?

;)

Like Cortez, speaking Spanish to the guy who spoke Maya, who spoke Maya to the girl who spoke Nahuatl, who spoke Nahuatl to Montezuma. And then, of course, back again...

739 callahan23  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:23:23pm

re: #731 kansas

It's called flatulence in this case.

A dangerous flatulence indeed, very dangerous.

740 alegrias  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:24:00pm

OT
US lost several soldiers in Helmand Province, Afghanistan today.

Sorry we have to spend blood sweat & tears to look for that soldier that walked off his base last week.

741 OldLineTexan  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:24:01pm

re: #734 alegrias

OT

Senator Harry Reid said he wouldn't "use" Senator Al Franken to "ram through" legislation in the Senate (now that Dems have a VETO PROOF majority).

Cough cough, something's stuck in my throat.

I think Franken would be GREAT for ramming stuff ...

742 Throbert McGee  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:24:08pm

re: #666 Russkilitlover

Medvedev, not looking very adoring....

Drudge has a great pic of Obama and Medvedev. BHO looks positively puckered up ready to plant a big wet one on Medvedev, while Medvedev looks.......

Medvedev's surname derives from medved, meaning "bear-as-in-grizzly." Which reminds me of this image, which is sorta-kinda the Russian Web-meme version of the original and iconic "I can haz cheezburger" LOLcat.

The bear's voice balloon reads preved, a deliberate LOLese misspelling of privet, which means "greetings." Thus it's exactly analogous to "O hai!!!"

743 JarHeadLifer  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:24:12pm

re: #730 Bobblehead

In other news Hillary is meeting with the ousted Honduran president this week and ladies tell me what Michelle has on in that photo?

That's an ass wrapped in a table cloth. I think.

744 SanFranciscoZionist  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:24:29pm

re: #730 Bobblehead

In other news Hillary is meeting with the ousted Honduran president this week and ladies tell me what Michelle has on in that photo?

It's a print dress with a short-sleeved cardigan sweater over it. Why do you ask?

745 LGoPs  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:24:45pm

For those that argue that conservatives need to avoid the tactics of the left I disagree and offer the following analogy. There is a maxim in military tactics that says that the side that wins is the side that establishes fire superiority. Not accuracy, not head shots mind you, but sheer volume of fire. You force the enemy's head down and then you close with and destroy him.
The principle applies to politics as well with the fire being the arguments you make. If conservatives focus only on well aimed, overly-vetted shots, they will be drowned out in the volume and repetition of the left. As was evidenced during the last 8 years.
The point is to shoot and shoot often. Eventually the volume will be heard and voters will respond. Not a guarantee but what is guaranteed is that if conservatives restrict themselves only to well aimed low volume fire they will lose. Every time. IMHO.

746 rightymouse  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:24:48pm

re: #726 buzzsawmonkey

They call the wind "Messiah."

lol!
Why, oh why, did they ever let Clint Eastwood sing in that movie?

747 Achilles Tang  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:25:06pm

re: #614 Sharmuta

How's the book coming along, haak?

Hear that whooshing sound?

748 kansas  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:25:10pm

re: #743 JarHeadLifer

That's an ass wrapped in a table cloth. I think.

Shows what a jarhead knows. That is a shower curtain from the Motel 8.

749 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:25:38pm
750 callahan23  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:25:42pm

re: #743 JarHeadLifer

That's an jackass wrapped in a table cloth. I think.

FTFY
;-)

751 The Shadow Do  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:25:48pm

I'll bet Michelle is so proud of her Country now that she could just pop!

America is becoming a Reverand Wright wet dream.
* screw the juice
* hug a community organizer (Castro, Hugo, Zeleya, Putin, etc, etc)
* roosting chickens with apologies to those we have offended on this planet and beyond.

Proud, proud, proud....

752 ~Fianna  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:26:05pm

re: #657 OldLineTexan

Ha. "It takes a village ..."

In some wayre: #686 SanFranciscoZionist

It does. It's just a question of which village you turn to.

Well put.

I'm not even that much older than the kids in my neighborhood, but the difference is striking.

When I was a kid, if a neighbor saw us doing something we shouldn't be, we knew our parents would know about it by the time we got home and we'd get in trouble.

Now, if an adult dares to question kids' behavior, the kid mouths off and the parents take their side.

The community of responsible local adults is the right village, and it is needed. The prattling talking heads in the state capitol telling parents how to raise their kids not so much.

753 JarHeadLifer  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:26:25pm

re: #748 kansas

Shows what a jarhead knows. That is a shower curtain from the Motel 8.

Whatever you want to call it, I'm sure it came from my grandmother's closet.

754 rightymouse  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:26:32pm

re: #730 Bobblehead

....and ladies tell me what Michelle has on in that photo?


Wallpaper?

755 avanti  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:26:36pm

re: #693 debutaunt

It will continue to get more difficult to find normal people who will go into politics.

Hopefully, we'll never choose ordinary people, we need exceptional leaders, not someone we'd just like to share a beer with.
I think the GOP is suffering from the "Just like me POTUS" syndrome, with a touch of anti-intellectual bias. Reagan was not ordinary, far from it. Like Palin, he was popular, but had much more substance. Not to mention, he could inspire us with his speeches, not make us giggle.

756 WinterCat  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:27:11pm

re: #730 Bobblehead

In other news Hillary is meeting with the ousted Honduran president this week and ladies tell me what Michelle has on in that photo?

By posing this question, do you mean to suggest that Michelle is not the fashion plate that the fawning media tells us she is? Why, for shame.

//

757 rightymouse  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:27:11pm

re: #749 buzzsawmonkey

It's not like Lee Marvin had a great set of pipes, either.


Truly surreal.

758 kansas  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:27:43pm

re: #755 avanti

Hopefully, we'll never choose ordinary people, we need exceptional leaders, not someone we'd just like to share a beer with.
I think the GOP is suffering from the "Just like me POTUS" syndrome, with a touch of anti-intellectual bias. Reagan was not ordinary, far from it. Like Palin, he was popular, but had much more substance. Not to mention, he could inspire us with his speeches, not make us giggle.

Reagan was a stupid dipshit. Didn't you read the MSM back then?

759 OldLineTexan  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:27:54pm

re: #752 ~Fianna

The prattling talking heads in the state capitol telling parents how to raise their kids not so much.

That's the one that's on TV and political campaigns.

Not Ward and June Cleaver down the street.

760 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:28:01pm
761 ~Fianna  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:29:00pm

re: #725 jvic

My guess is that the Left and Right have nasty people who would be as cruel as possible wrt a pregnant First Teen in the opposing side.

The MSM is somewhat different IMO. They couldn't resist runing the story obsessively, but I think they'd have pretended to be enlightened, compassionate and understanding (24/7, of course) about a pregnant teen Chelsea whereas with Jenna or Barbara little effort would have been made to hide the viciousness.

You're probably right on both counts and that's pretty f**ked up.

762 LGoPs  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:29:24pm

re: #760 buzzsawmonkey

Charisma and narcissism do not an exceptional leader make. But it is what we're stuck with.

They do for sheep.

763 The Shadow Do  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:29:31pm

re: #755 avanti

...with a touch of anti-intellectual bias

Just had me a Gordon moment there. Keep up the good work Avanti.

764 Buster  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:30:02pm

re: #746 rightymouse

lol!
Why, oh why, did they ever let Clint Eastwood sing in that movie?

Kingston Trio did it best. My parents had all their albums but that song, and the one about the guy trapped in the Boston subway always stuck out.

765 rightymouse  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:30:07pm

re: #756 WinterCat

By posing this question, do you mean to suggest that Michelle is not the fashion plate that the fawning media tells us she is? Why, for shame.

//


One of my liberal friends who suffers from Palin Derangement Syndrome was railing about the designer clothes the RNC bought for Sarah last year (and gave back) and how Michelle buys her clothes mostly off-the-rack. I replied "she looks like it too". He became really offended. Go figure.

766 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:32:24pm
767 WinterCat  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:32:39pm

re: #765 rightymouse

One of my liberal friends who suffers from Palin Derangement Syndrome was railing about the designer clothes the RNC bought for Sarah last year (and gave back) and how Michelle buys her clothes mostly off-the-rack. I replied "she looks like it too". He became really offended. Go figure.

The rack? I'd say it is more like the Iron Maiden! ;)

768 ~Fianna  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:33:24pm

re: #759 OldLineTexan

That's the one that's on TV and political campaigns.

Not Ward and June Cleaver down the street.

As I said elsewhere yesterday, the problem with American politics at this point is that we have one party with two mouths. One half of this party, in general, wants to tell us how to live our lives because they think we're immoral; the other half, in general, wants to tell us how to live our lives because we're stupid.

I don't like either option.

769 hous bin pharteen  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:33:32pm

Loader. Sabot!..........
Gunner......200 Yards.................
FIRE!

770 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:33:33pm
771 Throbert McGee  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:33:33pm

re: #715 OldLineTexan

It's been done, but I clarified my position. The people who want "the village" to raise your child always have a "village" in mind.

It takes a Village of People to raise a fa-a-a-bulous child...

772 OldLineTexan  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:33:58pm

re: #766 buzzsawmonkey

Had Palin worn off-the-rack stuff, she'd have been dumped on for being dowdy.

Yes, "slutty flight attendant" was better.

773 Roger  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:34:25pm

re: #766 buzzsawmonkey

She could wear a burlap bag and not look dowdy. Just sayin'

774 rightymouse  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:35:39pm

re: #764 Buster

Kingston Trio did it best. My parents had all their albums but that song, and the one about the guy trapped in the Boston subway always stuck out.

That was before my 'cognitive' time musically. Awareness began with the Beatles. :)

775 OldLineTexan  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:35:39pm

re: #768 ~Fianna

As I said elsewhere yesterday, the problem with American politics at this point is that we have one party with two mouths. One half of this party, in general, wants to tell us how to live our lives because they think we're immoral; the other half, in general, wants to tell us how to live our lives because we're stupid.

I don't like either option.

You shouldn't.

I look forward to hearing from you if/when you do have children. I mean that in all sincerity.

776 Greengolem64  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:35:43pm

re: #745 LGoPs

For those that argue that conservatives need to avoid the tactics of the left I disagree and offer the following analogy. There is a maxim in military tactics that says that the side that wins is the side that establishes fire superiority. Not accuracy, not head shots mind you, but sheer volume of fire. You force the enemy's head down and then you close with and destroy him.
The principle applies to politics as well with the fire being the arguments you make. If conservatives focus only on well aimed, overly-vetted shots, they will be drowned out in the volume and repetition of the left. As was evidenced during the last 8 years.
The point is to shoot and shoot often. Eventually the volume will be heard and voters will respond. Not a guarantee but what is guaranteed is that if conservatives restrict themselves only to well aimed low volume fire they will lose. Every time. IMHO.

I think there might be some folks in the SOF world that would have a different viewpoint on that...

Just sayin'...

777 rightymouse  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:36:01pm

re: #766 buzzsawmonkey

Had Palin worn off-the-rack stuff, she'd have been dumped on for being dowdy.


You betcha.

778 hous bin pharteen  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:36:15pm

re: #758 kansas

The Communist in the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact think so!

.....................What?............................................
The Warsaw Pact is gone?..............
Holly sit!.........
................Never mind....................

779 Buster  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:36:20pm

re: #765 rightymouse

In Paris stores opened by special arrangement on Sunday, so she could shop "off the rack".

780 Throbert McGee  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:37:54pm

re: #746 rightymouse

lol!
Why, oh why, did they ever let Clint Eastwood sing in that movie?

To make Jean Seberg's voice sound good by comparison?

781 Eowyn2  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:38:06pm

re: #521 sphincter

"if she's planning on pursuing higher office"

Maybe she just wants to kick their asses into poverty. I would do the same thing. Come after my family, I'm going to hurt you and hurt you where it hurts most. She might be more practical than we're giving her credit for.

Take off the gloves and kick some ass! Might educate some folks and do the whole process a lot of good in the process.

sue for 10.00.
Make it obvious that it isn't about money but princip

782 Buster  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:38:42pm

re: #774 rightymouse

That was before my 'cognitive' time musically. Awareness began with the Beatles. :)

Think of them as old school "Bare Naked Ladies".

783 Rancher  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:39:39pm

re: #482 SixDegrees

To be found guilty of libel, they have to not only publish it as fact; they have to do so while knowing it is false, with malicious intent. This is a very high bar to clear.


Malicious intent applies to newspapers but I'm not sure it does to bloggers. If you are being accused of something illegal you don't have to prove damages, it's Libel per se.

784 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:42:51pm
785 rightymouse  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:43:16pm

re: #779 Buster

In Paris stores opened by special arrangement on Sunday, so she could shop "off the rack".

More power to her, actually. Hopefully, she'll get some nice things and throw out the what-is-this stuff. :)

786 rightymouse  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:44:00pm

re: #780 Throbert McGee

To make Jean Seberg's voice sound good by comparison?

I believe that's a major upding. lol!

787 LGoPs  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:46:34pm

re: #776 Greengolem64

I think there might be some folks in the SOF world that would have a different viewpoint on that...

Just sayin'...

No. SOF didn't storm Omaha Beach. They didn't win the Battle of the Bulge or finally defeat the Nazis.
SOF has it's specially defined purposes but is more a surgical tool used for work requiring finesse rather than blunt force.
My analogy applies to winning the big battle, not specialized small unit missions.

788 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:48:16pm
789 Throbert McGee  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:48:29pm

re: #749 buzzsawmonkey

It's not like Lee Marvin had a great set of pipes, either.

Yeah, but Marvin's character was a grizzled old coot who'd been sustaining on a strictly liquid diet of whiskey and tabacky juice since he got out of diapers -- so his off-key talk-singing fit the role perfectly.

Whereas Eastwood's clean-cut farmer character should have been played (or at least dubbed for the songs) by a dashing young tenor.

(Was there ever a male version of Marni Nixon in Hollywood?)

790 SpaceJesus  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:48:56pm

re: #784 Iron Fist

God-Emporer of America.

sorry but that sounds fucking awesome

791 Greengolem64  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:51:28pm

re: #787 LGoPs

No. SOF didn't storm Omaha Beach. They didn't win the Battle of the Bulge or finally defeat the Nazis.
SOF has it's specially defined purposes but is more a surgical tool used for work requiring finesse rather than blunt force.
My analogy applies to winning the big battle, not specialized small unit missions.

Exactly...and in each of those cases...without SOF...there might not have been the opportunity to win those big battles.

Regardless, while I understand your view (and my wife agrees with you) I still think we have to get out of the knife fight mentality...otherwise we'll devolve from knife fighting to gunfighting, to TANK fighting to all out TNW...and nobody wins.

792 debutaunt  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:52:35pm

re: #640 doppelganglander

I am astonished to see a 600+ post thread that's still on topic after more than 2 hours.

I can't stand the unfair attitude of so much of this country.

793 LGoPs  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:56:10pm

re: #791 Greengolem64

Exactly...and in each of those cases...without SOF...there might not have been the opportunity to win those big battles.

Regardless, while I understand your view (and my wife agrees with you) I still think we have to get out of the knife fight mentality...otherwise we'll devolve from knife fighting to gunfighting, to TANK fighting to all out TNW...and nobody wins.

Heh. I love thermonuclear combat.....toe to toe with the Russkies - MAJ Kong....///
It's the left that has had the knife fight mentality. They have perfected it. The right doesn't even fucking know it's in a knife fight.
Time they wake up.

794 Ojoe  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:57:26pm

re: #792 debutaunt

IMHO much is explained by Palin having a real faith and much of the country having none anymore.

795 Greengolem64  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:57:38pm

re: #793 LGoPs

Heh. I love thermonuclear combat.....toe to toe with the Russkies - MAJ Kong....///
It's the left that has had the knife fight mentality. They have perfected it. The right doesn't even fucking know it's in a knife fight.
Time they wake up.

Good movie...

796 rightymouse  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:58:12pm

re: #782 Buster

Think of them as old school "Bare Naked Ladies".


Do I have to? :)

797 Buster  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:58:55pm

re: #784 Iron Fist

God-Emporer of America.


That would look so cool on a business card!

798 LGoPs  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 4:00:36pm

re: #791 Greengolem64

Exactly...and in each of those cases...without SOF...there might not have been the opportunity to win those big battles.

Regardless, while I understand your view (and my wife agrees with you) I still think we have to get out of the knife fight mentality...otherwise we'll devolve from knife fighting to gunfighting, to TANK fighting to all out TNW...and nobody wins.

I forgot to address your first point. The only thing that SOF, in this case, the Rangers, did was assault Pointe du Hoc looking for German artillery that could have threatened the beachhead. As it turns out the guns had been displaced to the rear, although the Rangers eventaully found them and spiked them.
There were no notable Ranger operations in the Bulge or anywhere else in the Norhtwest European campaign. This is not to take away from their bravery or their exploits but they were a very small factor in WWII.
They were much more prominent in the intial campaign in Afghanistan of course and deserve great credit.

799 Promethea  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 4:02:53pm

Apparently the Democrats have been using their unlimited Soros funds to destroy Palin as a viable candidate. One might also see these attacks on her as a form of the Cloward/Piven strategy.

Apparently Palin has had to spend thousands of dollars of her family money and huge amounts of Alaska's time and money in order to defend herself against frivolous lawsuits that must be answered according to Alaskan law.

I hope that Palin will find a way to support conservative candidates. Maybe she can help the Tea Party movement to go somewhere. According to the links on Instapundit, many thousands of Americans went to Tea Party protests on the 3rd and 4th of July.

The Republicans have not done anything to energize these people. Maybe Palin will be able to do so.

Our Glorious Republic is going down the tubes unless political leaders help us stop the destruction. It's not a Democrat or Republic issue. It's a small government v. behemoth government issue. We're at a crossroads in this country. Let's all wish Palin well. Maybe she can save the United States from the likes of Soros and his ilk.

I hope some of you have read the article about Sarah Palin in Runner's World. This woman is not a quitter. I doubt that she is engaged in lawsuits as a frivolous way to get revenge. I think she is using the same Alinksy/Cloward/Piven strategy that they have been using.
I hope she raises lots of money for her future endeavors.

800 tommygum  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 4:04:18pm

re: #398 Iron Fist

Exactly. Left unchallenged these allegations would become the narritive no matter what their truth or falsehood. I can even hear the propaganda in my head :-)


And the "fake but accurate" media would run with it. Lible and slander are not free speech. I think that a good lawyer could prove actual malice here, which is really bad news for the blogger. You can't just print a retraction and be done if you have commited slander with malice.


I concur.

You can't resist...

the iron fist.

801 babes  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 4:04:23pm

re: #799 Promethea

I agree. She is not stupid and I hope she raises alot of money.

802 tommygum  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 4:06:34pm

re: #400 JacksonTn

Avanti ... while you were busy reading Obama's books ... we were doing some checking on Obama ... Obama did throw the 1st under the bus in Missouri ...

Link for you:

[Link: littlegreenfootballs.com...]


...reading Obama's books...

with one hand.

803 Adrenalyn  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 4:08:28pm

it's all Bush's fault

really

if he had only had the FCC revoke CBS' license after the fucking guard doc's story then this shit would have sharply dimished

instead, the left is emboldened by Bush (and republican's in general) weakness

I'd like to hope she is done with elective office
and decides to use her energy to take on the media/democrat establishment and make money off speaking fees and lawsuits

804 Bloodnok  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 4:27:37pm

re: #803 Adrenalyn

it's all Bush's fault

really

if he had only had the FCC revoke CBS' license after the fucking guard doc's story then this shit would have sharply dimished

instead, the left is emboldened by Bush (and republican's in general) weakness

I'd like to hope she is done with elective office
and decides to use her energy to take on the media/democrat establishment and make money off speaking fees and lawsuits

Revoke their license? You must be joking. And what would you say if the FCC went after Fox News for giving airtime to a nirther or a website for promoting nirth. I'm guessing you wouldn't like it very much.

The guard memo sucked. It was wrong. More people should have been fired. But revoke a broadcast license? That makes the Fairness Doctrine look positively tame in comparison.

805 Bubbasbbq  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 4:33:07pm

as far as I am concerned, I hope she bankrupts them all. Now that she will no longer be governor, she can raise money and go on speaking tours for big bucks. Plus go after the big zero and his crap policies in a big way on whatever talking head show that will have her. All from the outside.

For all you genuises who till haven't either read or heard her speech, she is leaving because a) She accomplished all her goals as governor b) she is so busy trying to address those baseless ethic charges, she was useless as governor and on top of that $500K in debt and c) she is trying deflect the shit her family was taking and is protecting THEM. She isn't doing this because of what they are saying about HER, she is doing it to protect her FAMILY. Never once in her speech did she ever talk about her as being a victim. Reagan, as governor, never had to have his family subjected to to anything like Palin has had to endure. She did it for these reasons, nothing more, nothing less.

And for all you who are whining and caterwauling about what a bad move this is and how she blew 2012, I honestly don't think she gives a flying fuck about 2012 or being president. Or what any of you think for that matter. her family comes first.
And that is her only care right now. The Dems used every vile trick in the book and , her own fuckin party stabbed her in the back. WHo needs that shit. I defy any of you to step in her shoes and take it.

Right now the only people in politics are losers who can't hack it in the dreaded private sector and politics is the only place they can hold a job, by hood or crook. No sane person with a real job would take such bullshit.

we need more real people in politics, not less. But instead we get more phoney elitists who think they shit cinnamon rolls. And we allowed this to happen. We do have the government we deserve.

806 Adrenalyn  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 4:38:09pm

re: #804 Bloodnok

Revoke their license? You must be joking. And what would you say if the FCC went after Fox News for giving airtime to a nirther or a website for promoting nirth. I'm guessing you wouldn't like it very much.

The guard memo sucked. It was wrong. More people should have been fired. But revoke a broadcast license? That makes the Fairness Doctrine look positively tame in comparison.

no, I would play hardball
they should not have run the story within 90 days of the election, first of all

second, those doc's were fake and they knew it

but they can't go trying to influence an election, and so blatantly and with forged doc's

revoke it for 30 days (suspend may be a better term)

500 million dollar fine

something to get their attention

but the media were not scared by it at all as far as I recall

and even ABC responded with what, a 2 hour special on the heroism of John Kerry in the Vietnam war, in the same prohibited time frame

just look at how emboldened the press is now because of it

and how do you punish someone if they had indeed influenced an election in such a way

if not for LGF's Charles.......

indeed it was a close call
then again, we're likely fucked now anyway
so why bother

807 jet2nc  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 4:45:13pm

Gov. Palin has as much right as any citizen to sue for defamation. If news organizations cannot prove they performed due diligence on potential libelous statements which they presented as news they should be in deep trouble.
Unfortunately for the MSM viewing public, the FAX machines with DNC talking points seem to be directly connected to the News Teleprompters at CBS, CNN, MSNBC, NBC and ABC. The MSM news rooms have been outsourced to the DNC spin doctors and the doctors are committing malpractice. Any resemblance of fairness by today's left leaning MSM news anchors is fiction. Its a sad day today when commercials are more strongly vetted and truthful than the Dem spin being presented as news.

808 Macker  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 4:59:30pm

re: #106 Killgore Trout

Would you also be cheering if Obama was doing this?

Oh, to be a Fly on the Wall of the White House right about now....

809 placeholder  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 5:08:37pm

re: #768 ~Fianna

As I said elsewhere yesterday, the problem with American politics at this point is that we have one party with two mouths. One half of this party, in general, wants to tell us how to live our lives because they think we're immoral; the other half, in general, wants to tell us how to live our lives because we're stupid.

I don't like either option.

I couldn't agree with you more. One party wants to tell us how to live based on their religious beliefs which they consider superior and which leads to "family values." The other wants to tell me that I'm too stupid to know what's good for me, and learned elders will make it all better. Both are prone to the worst sin of all: hypocrisy. Ultimately, I think what people really hate is not any particular strain of political theory or belief - but hypocrisy. Everyone knows that politicians are obviously imperfect human beings, who likely have psychological problems for getting into the line of work in the first place. But the least that I expect is not to be lectured to by politicians or judged by them based on a self-created set of beliefs that they themselves can't even follow.

I don't judge Mark Sanford for sleeping with an Argentine mistress, I judge him for moralizing for the last decade about family values. I don't dislike Larry Craig for his conservative views, I dislike him for lecturing me about homosexuals and family values while engaging in bathroom-stall blowjobbing. And ultimately, I really don't dislike Sarah Palin's fundamental positions - I dislike her for knowingly, and willfully thrusting herself into the harshest limelight on the planet, and then bitterly complaining about her treatment. Its obscene.

What I want to know is....where's MY party? I'm a social progressive fiscal conservative. Where do I go? I am not religious, and am generally uncomfortable with ANY system that is based on religious beliefs. I think that government is fundamentally incompetent, and is unqualified to do anything but national security and tax collection. Where's my Party? Where's the party of reason and fiscal restraint, that does not club intellectualism as something to be ashamed off, while acknowledging that this country's greatest asset is the sheer opportunity afforded its population in terms of business creation and growth. Where's THAT party? Because if it exists, I'll be a member. I am so sick and tired of the choices we have.... creationist biblethumpers on one side who I'd rather chew glass than have a conversation with on one side - moralizing, patronizing ignorants on the other who have never dealt with any issue beyond a blog post or a fundraiser.

bleagh.

/rant.

-PH

810 kynna  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 5:19:56pm

re: #637 SixDegrees

Perhaps you could clarify just what it is you're trying to say.

Just getting back in. I was talking about AOL and Yahoo -- which are major sources of front page news stories. More people get their news from clicking on those sites for their e-mail than go to CNN.

And the LA Times story? I didn't get it from the LA Times website, I got it from a conservative aggregator site. But I haven't seen that one linked anywhere else.

So, back to the actual point of what I'm saying. Does the lawyer's letter, and the notion of the Palin's intent to sue inspire the media to be more fair with them across the board lest they find trouble they don't need if they slip up? I think it does.

811 ~Fianna  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 5:24:27pm

re: #794 Ojoe

IMHO much is explained by Palin having a real faith and much of the country having none anymore.


This is the kind of statement that makes many of us in the center really uncomfortable with Palin and politicians like her.

812 capitalist piglet  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 5:26:38pm

re: #811 ~Fianna

This is the kind of statement that makes many of us in the center really uncomfortable with Palin and politicians like her.

Define "the center", please. Everyone likes to claim it.

813 ~Fianna  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 5:29:12pm

re: #809 placeholder

I couldn't agree with you more. One party wants to tell us how to live based on their religious beliefs which they consider superior and which leads to "family values." The other wants to tell me that I'm too stupid to know what's good for me, and learned elders will make it all better. Both are prone to the worst sin of all: hypocrisy. Ultimately, I think what people really hate is not any particular strain of political theory or belief - but hypocrisy. Everyone knows that politicians are obviously imperfect human beings, who likely have psychological problems for getting into the line of work in the first place. But the least that I expect is not to be lectured to by politicians or judged by them based on a self-created set of beliefs that they themselves can't even follow.

I don't judge Mark Sanford for sleeping with an Argentine mistress, I judge him for moralizing for the last decade about family values. I don't dislike Larry Craig for his conservative views, I dislike him for lecturing me about homosexuals and family values while engaging in bathroom-stall blowjobbing. And ultimately, I really don't dislike Sarah Palin's fundamental positions - I dislike her for knowingly, and willfully thrusting herself into the harshest limelight on the planet, and then bitterly complaining about her treatment. Its obscene.

What I want to know is....where's MY party? I'm a social progressive fiscal conservative. Where do I go? I am not religious, and am generally uncomfortable with ANY system that is based on religious beliefs. I think that government is fundamentally incompetent, and is unqualified to do anything but national security and tax collection. Where's my Party? Where's the party of reason and fiscal restraint, that does not club intellectualism as something to be ashamed off, while acknowledging that this country's greatest asset is the sheer opportunity afforded its population in terms of business creation and growth. Where's THAT party? Because if it exists, I'll be a member. I am so sick and tired of the choices we have.... creationist biblethumpers on one side who I'd rather chew glass than have a conversation with on one side - moralizing, patronizing ignorants on the other who have never dealt with any issue beyond a blog post or a fundraiser.

bleagh.

/rant.

-PH

I regret that I only have but one upding to give.

I think this is why we have so few eligible voters voting at all. I don't miss an election because I know that we only have a republic as long as we can keep it. But it's rare that I'm enthusiastic about my choices.

814 ShanghaiEd  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 5:33:47pm

re: #809 placeholder

Excellent, excellent post. Amen.

815 ~Fianna  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 5:34:05pm

re: #812 capitalist piglet

Define "the center", please. Everyone likes to claim it.

For my definition, see Placeholder's #809, that's pretty close.

I define myself as fiscally conservative, socially liberal. Classical liberal is getting close.

I think America has been an amazing experiment. We were founded on some great ideals and the story of America has been our history of constantly moving closer to living those ideals and extending them as far as possible.

I don't think most American adults need people to tell them what to do.

I have a broader definition of what the role of government should be than a Libertarian does, but not as encompassing an idea as either our current 2 parties do.

816 Flyers1974  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 5:35:14pm

re: #807 jet2nc

Gov. Palin has as much right as any citizen to sue for defamation. If news organizations cannot prove they performed due diligence on potential libelous statements which they presented as news they should be in deep trouble.
Unfortunately for the MSM viewing public, the FAX machines with DNC talking points seem to be directly connected to the News Teleprompters at CBS, CNN, MSNBC, NBC and ABC. The MSM news rooms have been outsourced to the DNC spin doctors and the doctors are committing malpractice. Any resemblance of fairness by today's left leaning MSM news anchors is fiction. Its a sad day today when commercials are more strongly vetted and truthful than the Dem spin being presented as news.

I haven't heard too many people say Palin does not have the right to sue. Anyone has the right to file a lawsuit. Her chance of winning that lawsuit however, is dubious. Too understand why this is, you must look at the elements contained in the tort of defamation and the relevant court cases. Aside from this, I bet the last thing Palin would ever want is to follow through on these threatened suits. That would open her up to the Defendant's discovery process, i.e. interogatorries and depositions, and god only knows what that would reveal about her.

817 LGoPs  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 5:37:49pm

re: #811 ~Fianna

This is the kind of statement that makes many of us in the center really uncomfortable with Palin and politicians like her.

I don't understand your unease. It's not like they're going to come to your house and make you go to Church at gunpoint. Hell, I don't go to Church. But I respect those that do.
And I think it is better to have some standards than to have none. Society has demonstrably coarsened over the last 40 years. We have children being shot down in the streets and schools with metal detectors for crying out loud. Ethics and honorable behavior are quaint concepts that many think are corny. But thankfully we don't have to hear God's name mentioned or celebrate anything other than Winter Holiday parties///.
Yeah, I guess we've avoided lots of horrors but we've replaced them with a different kind.
I'm not trying to get down on you, just perplexed that those things that should be forces for good or at the very least tolerated are mocked and feared and driven out of the public realm.
Whatever.

818 LesLein  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 5:40:28pm

Does anyone have a link to what Moore wrote or said?

Since the FBI stated that Palin isn't under investigation, Moore would be very foolish to continue with her allegation.

819 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 5:40:39pm
820 ShanghaiEd  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 5:51:28pm

re: #817 LGoPs


I'm not trying to get down on you, just perplexed that those things that should be forces for good or at the very least tolerated are mocked and feared and driven out of the public realm.

Why do matters of faith have to be in "the public realm" to be effective?

There are those (such as me) who would argue that trying to meld the two realms lessens the effectiveness of religion, because of human nature's tendency to make it into politics-by-other-means.

Also...you're right that adherence to religion is optional in today's society. But there are millions of people, many of them powerful and well-funded, who would like to correct that fault. That's why I mock and fear them, and want them driven out of the public realm.

821 BARACK THE VOTE  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 5:55:51pm

re: #818 LesLein

Does anyone have a link to what Moore wrote or said?

Since the FBI stated that Palin isn't under investigation, Moore would be very foolish to continue with her allegation.

I can find one if you want. Moore mentioned that there were 'allegations and rumours' on her blog, and she was also on some show and mentioned the allegations and rumours there. In both places she described them as speculations and rumours, and she never presented them as fact.

These rumours had also been around for many months and talked about a lot in AK and on various blogs, so Moore wasn't making up the claim that these rumours existed.

Palin's lawyer's statement has only served to draw attention to these rumours and to Moore, and now people who never heard of either are aware of both. Moore is loving it, and has issued a statement daring Palin to sue her.

822 LGoPs  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 5:59:31pm

re: #820 ShanghaiEd

Why do matters of faith have to be in "the public realm" to be effective?

There are those (such as me) who would argue that trying to meld the two realms lessens the effectiveness of religion, because of human nature's tendency to make it into politics-by-other-means.

Also...you're right that adherence to religion is optional in today's society. But there are millions of people, many of them powerful and well-funded, who would like to correct that fault. That's why I mock and fear them, and want them driven out of the public realm.

I do not see those millions of well funded people bringing on a theocracy. I've lived in a theocracy and while this country faces many threats and challenges, theocracy is not one of them.
On balance I see religion as a benevolent force, particularly in this country and certainly nothing to be feared. It is man, unbridled by any belief in a higher good, that I see as a far greater threat.

823 kynna  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 6:01:38pm

re: #821 iceweasel

As I said in my first post on this subject: time will tell.

If she's not planning on running for anything, then all this political suicide talk is pretty pointless. And arrogant. Let's just see what happens, why don't we?

824 LGoPs  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 6:03:42pm

Gotta run. Later Lizards.

825 ShanghaiEd  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 6:05:48pm

re: #824 LGoPs

Gotta run. Later Lizards.

Take care, LGoPs. And thanks for your replies.

826 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 6:06:31pm
827 OldLineTexan  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 6:09:19pm

re: #820 ShanghaiEd


Also...you're right that adherence to religion is optional in today's society. But there are millions of people, many of them powerful and well-funded, who would like to correct that fault. That's why I mock and fear them, and want them driven out of the public realm.

Don't worry about Al Gore like that.

828 kynna  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 6:09:47pm

I have to say I'm concerned about the ID/Creationism in the science classroom. In public school at all, as a matter of fact. This is something that has infested the GOP and it needs to stop.

----

But how did it happen? Charles has pointed out many of the misleading materials and false evidence of the ID powers that be.

Now, imagine you're a governor who takes nothing but flak all day long. Either someone criticizing or someone with their hand out or someone threatening. Ridiculing. And you meet some guy at a fundraiser and he's really nice and he runs the local food bank and he's got church cred and ... cut to ... he gets a meeting, shows you all these materials that say something very compelling and all they want is equal time. Or just teach the controversy or be "honest" with the theory of evolution. Sounds doable.

And in response you get applause from the guy his equally polite, respectful, and service minded friends. Meanwhile those who disagree with you and those nice, respectful, taxpayers who run the local foodbank, throw snark and insults at you.

Hmm. Now why is it so hard to reach these governors to keep them from making a big mistake? I wonder. // Not really

829 BARACK THE VOTE  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 6:10:03pm

re: #823 kynna

As I said in my first post on this subject: time will tell.

If she's not planning on running for anything, then all this political suicide talk is pretty pointless. And arrogant. Let's just see what happens, why don't we?

I didn't mention political suicide.

The shrewdest comment I've seen about Palin's resignation ironically came from a lefty blogger who can't stand her. He pointed out that Palin has never played by conventional rules, and she can't be judged by conventional rules. While the conventional wisdom says that a politican who does this is committing political suicide, the conventional wisdom has never applied to Palin. She thrives on defying it, and that is part of her charm to her supporters.

As you mention, she might not even be planning on running for anything. (My guess is that you're right, but I'm only guessing.)

None of this affects my opinion that the threat of a lawsuit is a bad idea.

830 kynna  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 6:10:22pm

re: #824 LGoPs

Gotta run. Later Lizards.

*waves*

831 kynna  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 6:11:47pm

re: #827 OldLineTexan

Don't worry about Al Gore like that.

Or the One.

832 ShanghaiEd  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 6:12:12pm

re: #826 buzzsawmonkey

In the days when religion was a far stronger influence on the daily life of this country than anyone born in the last 30+ years can possibly imagine, what did we suffer from?

Divorce was harder to get; abortion was harder to get. Neither of these things is likely to get substantially harder to get even if the influence of religion increases. Homosexual behavior was more overtly frowned upon. The openness where that is concerned is not likely to substantially change.

What the hell are these people who are so terrified of "religious influence on public life" so afraid of?

I really would like to know.

One example of many that I'm personally afraid of is the contingent who wants to see the U.S. Constitution brought into accordance with "God's law, rather than man's law." And these are not scattered crazies in the wilderness. Mike Huckabee is only one of many high-profile subscribes to this philosophy.

You don't have a problem with that?

833 placeholder  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 6:12:48pm

re: #819 buzzsawmonkey

What utter and complete claptrap. You don't like hypocrisy? Fear the mirror.

There is every indication that you would judge Sanford, Craig and Palin just as harshly if they lived up to all of your after-the-fact standards; your reference to "biblethumpers" being a dead giveaway.

No, I don't like the idea of legislating morality--but I also don't like the current practice of letting the social fabric go to hell for fear of appearing to do so. In the meantime, tell me: how does Sanford's cavorting with his mistress relate to any of his legislative stands? Why is Craig, falling to an urge which he himself does not regard as worthy, somehow beyond the pale for acting on it in a clandestine (albeit monumentally stupid) way--and how is that at odds with his stance on any issue? Why should Palin not complain, not of being subjected to "harsh limelight," but to a limelight uniquely harsh in ways well over and above that to which anyone else in the race was subjected? Is there no limit whatever to how depraved the media are permitted to be if someone has the temerity to run for office?

Pfui.

Sure - happy to explain myself:

I am not judging Craig's, Sanford's, Pailn's, or for that matter Pelosis', or Obama's political beliefs. I am judging the level to which they live up to their own political beliefs in their daily lives and actions. If you preach morality, you should not cheat on your wife. If you strongly STRONGLY condemn homosexuality - you should not get blowjobs from men in airport bathrooms. If you preach bipartisanship, than you should perhaps do more than ram spending proposals through congress because you can. What part of this is unclear? I am not judging their political positions - I may agree or disagree with some of them, but that is irrelevant. I am judging them based on their utter obliviousness to their own hypocritical actions.

If you are fine with a set of leaders who consistently fail to even remotely achieve their own lofty ideals - than that's your choice. I am not. I do not require perfection from my political leaders - I require humility. I require some level of common sense and perspective. And frankly, I couldn't give a shit if Larry Craig is horribly disappointed in himself for his actions - or if Obama tells me in 3 years that he tried bipartisanship, but hey, you know, it didn't work out. If you can't accomplish something yourself, you are disqualified from telling others how to achieve it.

And as far as your morality issue - you can't have it both ways. Either you legislate it, or you don't. If you do - whose morals are you using? If you don't - then you'd better hope to god that parents and society at large have learned enough lessons to be able to do the job for you.

My use of the term "biblethumpers" is nothing to draw conclusions from - its as common as "born-again" or "evangelicals". Its a descriptive term for a type of person I fundamentally disagree with - and last time I checked, this country was still founded on the principle that I am well within my rights to ignore them and to demand that my government not be influenced in its legislative process by any set of religious beliefs.

-PH

834 OldLineTexan  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 6:13:27pm

re: #831 kynna

Or the One.

Him you can worry about.

/

835 Achilles Tang  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 6:13:39pm

re: #784 Iron Fist

That was essentially the reason given for hereditary nobility and even the Devine Right of Kings. Only those born to rule are fit to rule. Sadly, that is where we appear to be headed. Many politicians (on both sides of the asile) basically inherit their position from a parent or, in some cases, as spouse.

I gather that you think that this is as it should be. When do we breing back the titles? Duke sounds much more impressive than "Congressman", and Princess would just about fulfill Nancy Pelosie's opinion of herself.

Then there is Obama, God-Emporer of America.

Lovely.

You are right in many regards. We, humans at least, have a tendency to go with the familiar. I presume it has something to do with a youthful wish for stability and familiar authority and it is but a small step to describe it as a hereditary, then God given, talent.

I assume that you are not one who will even for a moment entertain the thought of Jeb Bush reappearing on the political scene, let alone Hillary Clinton.
;=)

836 ShanghaiEd  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 6:13:41pm

re: #827 OldLineTexan

Don't worry about Al Gore like that.

I see what you did there. Substituted "Al Gore" for the subject. Sneaky. :)

837 Flyers1974  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 6:14:21pm

re: #829 iceweasel

I didn't mention political suicide.

The shrewdest comment I've seen about Palin's resignation ironically came from a lefty blogger who can't stand her. He pointed out that Palin has never played by conventional rules, and she can't be judged by conventional rules. While the conventional wisdom says that a politican who does this is committing political suicide, the conventional wisdom has never applied to Palin. She thrives on defying it, and that is part of her charm to her supporters.

As you mention, she might not even be planning on running for anything. (My guess is that you're right, but I'm only guessing.)

None of this affects my opinion that the threat of a lawsuit is a bad idea.

Hey IW. I'd add that while discussing this may be pointless, when has that stopped anyone of us before? Question for you, if I may. I've heard recently about Palin not playing by conventional rules. I admit i'm not up on this. How has she been unconventional?

838 OldLineTexan  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 6:16:43pm

re: #836 ShanghaiEd

I see what you did there. Substituted "Al Gore" for the subject. Sneaky. :)

AGW is one of the more interesting new religions, in my opinion.

839 Achilles Tang  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 6:17:45pm

re: #797 Buster

God-Emporer of America.

That would look so cool on a business card!

Spelling aside, don't you think it sounds kind of limiting? You know, God Emporer of Korea, God Emporer of Mecca, and so on. Think BIG!

840 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 6:18:32pm
841 ShanghaiEd  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 6:19:19pm

re: #833 placeholder

Placeholder, my hat is off to your #833. For a hatchling only days old, I have to say you're on a roll today. Your arguments contain dangerous levels of reason.

842 BARACK THE VOTE  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 6:21:11pm

re: #837 Flyers1974

Hey IW. I'd add that while discussing this may be pointless, when has that stopped anyone of us before? Question for you, if I may. I've heard recently about Palin not playing by conventional rules. I admit i'm not up on this. How has she been unconventional?

Hey Flyers! S'up?

A neutral example of how she doesn't play by conventional rules would be how she doesn't take the advice of her handlers and managers-- often didn't, during the McCain campaign. She relies on her formidable charisma and her own instincts more than she does outside advice.

I'm not a Palin fan, so hopefully one of her fans will pop in with a positive list of what they consider unconventional about her, because the list I would give would be negative (and tempers are running too high on Palin for me to want to rehash all the reasons why I personally don't like her.)

843 OldLineTexan  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 6:22:01pm

re: #841 ShanghaiEd

Placeholder, my hat is off to your #833. For a hatchling only days old, I have to say you're on a roll today. Your arguments contain dangerous levels of reason.

"Biblethumper" is intended and used as a pejorative, and to claim otherwise is to be disingenuous or ignorant.

844 kaymad  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 6:23:52pm

Remember Chelsey Clinton campaigning for her mother? She is around 27 years old and was declared off limits despite being prominently displayed around colleges and the press obediently obeyed.

I wish I could think like a moderate or fiscal conservative and not see the hypocrisy in the treatment of an Al Gores Troubled son (virtually nothing about his legal and drug troubles), Hillary Clinton's daughter who the press wasn't allowed to ask questions of. Supposedly there are pictures of Joe Biden's daughter nose first in a pile of coke to name just a few.

Sarah Palin and her entire family is dragged through the mud on an ongoing basis and she should just take it. In fact, why not have members of John McCains campaign team add fuel to the fire? She deserves it for being foksy, self-made and a successful woman.

Sheesh, no wonder normal people don't go into politics.

845 placeholder  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 6:23:59pm

re: #826 buzzsawmonkey

In the days when religion was a far stronger influence on the daily life of this country than anyone born in the last 30+ years can possibly imagine, what did we suffer from?

Divorce was harder to get; abortion was harder to get. Neither of these things is likely to get substantially harder to get even if the influence of religion increases. Homosexual behavior was more overtly frowned upon. The openness where that is concerned is not likely to substantially change.

What the hell are these people who are so terrified of "religious influence on public life" so afraid of?

I really would like to know.

So you think today's ills were any less common back then? Divorce was harder to get - that doesn't mean that there weren't just as many miserable, loveless marriages. Abortion was harder - that doesn't mean there were any fewer people taking responsibility for their actions.

We didn't invent moral corruption. We just outed it. We live in an instant information world - and we know a lot more and a lot faster than we ever did. That doesn't mean that those problems never existed.

You want reasons to be terrified of religious influence on public life, I'll give you some: Prohibition, Iran, Crusades, the British Empire, Salem Witch Hunts, Terrorism, etc. etc. The only reason you welcome it, is that you think OUR religious principles are somehow better than everyone else's. That we won't make the same mistakes everyone else made. But unfortunately - history has proven you wrong many times over.

-PH

846 OldLineTexan  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 6:25:52pm

Hey buzz, don't worry ... I don't think I can read your mind.

;)

847 ShanghaiEd  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 6:27:14pm

re: #837 Flyers1974

Hey IW. I'd add that while discussing this may be pointless, when has that stopped anyone of us before? Question for you, if I may. I've heard recently about Palin not playing by conventional rules. I admit i'm not up on this. How has she been unconventional?

Speaking of Palin, I came across what I consider an insightful article on a website whose audience is apparently young, female, and feminist: Jezebel. I don't buy every word of it, but I'd be interested in you guys' reaction...

jezebel.com...]>3 Reasons Sarah Palin Was Good--and Bad--for Women in Politics.

848 BARACK THE VOTE  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 6:27:30pm

re: #833 placeholder


I am not judging Craig's, Sanford's, Pailn's, or for that matter Pelosis', or Obama's political beliefs. I am judging the level to which they live up to their own political beliefs in their daily lives and actions. If you preach morality, you should not cheat on your wife. If you strongly STRONGLY condemn homosexuality - you should not get blowjobs from men in airport bathrooms. If you preach bipartisanship, than you should perhaps do more than ram spending proposals through congress because you can. What part of this is unclear? I am not judging their political positions - I may agree or disagree with some of them, but that is irrelevant. I am judging them based on their utter obliviousness to their own hypocritical actions.

If you are fine with a set of leaders who consistently fail to even remotely achieve their own lofty ideals - than that's your choice. I am not. I do not require perfection from my political leaders - I require humility. I require some level of common sense and perspective. And frankly, I couldn't give a shit if Larry Craig is horribly disappointed in himself for his actions - or if Obama tells me in 3 years that he tried bipartisanship, but hey, you know, it didn't work out. If you can't accomplish something yourself, you are disqualified from telling others how to achieve it.

PH-- i second Ed's praise. Excellent stuff.

849 placeholder  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 6:28:09pm

re: #841 ShanghaiEd

Placeholder, my hat is off to your #833. For a hatchling only days old, I have to say you're on a roll today. Your arguments contain dangerous levels of reason.

Thanks. Been reading you guys for a long time... learned from the best :)

850 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 6:28:49pm
851 Achilles Tang  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 6:29:11pm

re: #826 buzzsawmonkey

In the days when religion was a far stronger influence on the daily life of this country than anyone born in the last 30+ years can possibly imagine, what did we suffer from?

Divorce was harder to get; abortion was harder to get. Neither of these things is likely to get substantially harder to get even if the influence of religion increases. Homosexual behavior was more overtly frowned upon. The openness where that is concerned is not likely to substantially change.

What the hell are these people who are so terrified of "religious influence on public life" so afraid of?

I really would like to know.

You gloss over many things and seem to assume that the religiosity to which you refer was a universal creed. One can mention things like slavery, supported by religion. Womens lack of rights, supported by religion. Prohibition and its effects, supported by religion.

The main point however is that not ALL religions supported all of the above, and worse, and that most of the religious who came to the US did so to escape precisely the uniformity of religious beliefs that you dismiss as insignificant to daily freedoms.

Those who advocate more religion want more of THEIR religion, not everyone else's.

I'm surprised you ask that question.

852 hous bin pharteen  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 6:29:14pm

Why worry about Palin and the Republican party? If it is up to "The One" there in not going BE an electiion in 2012. There is going to be a "crises" so there is not going to be a reelection. We have elected a radical leftist president, and we are going to regret it. Nothing to see here. Move along.

853 nyc redneck  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 6:29:21pm

all these bogus lies and incessant harassment lawsuits against sarah by the o operatives are strictly designed to wear her out. they want to annihilate her.
shut her up and shut her down.
that is not going to happen.
as a private citizen, on a speaking tour/campaign to educate the people of this country she is o's worst nightmare.
the dems are worrying abt 2010 and 2012.
and o must know that his charade cannot go on much longer.
and the msm cannot protect him much longer.
sarah is a rock star of politics. and her star is rising. she will get huge crowds.
she will talk plainly.
she is o's worst nightmare.

854 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 6:29:28pm
855 Flyers1974  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 6:31:26pm

re: #840 buzzsawmonkey

I have an immense problem with someone who wants to change the Constitution. I also am enough of a political realist to know that it is highly unlikely that someone who espouses altering the Constitution to coincide with "God's law" is going to get very far in doing it; the Constitution is extremely difficult to amend.

I am all for it being difficult to amend, and I am utterly opposed to efforts to make the Constitution correspond to someone's vision of "God's law" because, as a member of a religious minority, I know damn well that I will get screwed if that happens.

That said, to the extent such people as Huckabee discuss the nature of public morality, I frankly support them--because I think our public morality has gone to pot precisely because people who are terrified at being confronted by any morality whatsoever have made sure that anyone who does raise such issues is marginalized. And you are assisting in this effort.

I'm not sure our morality has gone to pot, i'd say it has changed. For example, consider the racism regarding blacks that occurred and was acceptable by many people in the 1950's and 60's. Whether or not racism is a problem today, I don't know many people who want to see blacks lynched or killed or segregated. Likewise, consider the treatment of women regarding employment and other issues in the 1950's v. today. Aside from that, I'd say issues like the modernation of society effect morals more than anything else - I can be a lying bastard, steal, all those things, but no matter - I can very easily move to where people don't no me. Couldn't do this easily in the old days, thus your morality was crucial to your well-being.

856 BARACK THE VOTE  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 6:34:57pm

re: #847 ShanghaiEd

Speaking of Palin, I came across what I consider an insightful article on a website whose audience is apparently young, female, and feminist: Jezebel. I don't buy every word of it, but I'd be interested in you guys' reaction...

3 Reasons Sarah Palin Was Good--and Bad--for Women in Politics.

Ed-- I'm a semi-reluctant reader of Jezebel. I have a bit of a love/hate relationship with the site, but that article seemed spot on to me.

From a feminist POV, another tragedy is that Palin embodies feminism in her personal life in so many ways -- yet not in her politics.

857 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 6:35:26pm
858 placeholder  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 6:36:28pm

re: #843 OldLineTexan

"Biblethumper" is intended and used as a pejorative, and to claim otherwise is to be disingenuous or ignorant.

ok... make it religious extremists. i agree that biblethumper is overly negative and broad.

859 Flyers1974  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 6:37:06pm

re: #842 iceweasel

Hey Flyers! S'up?

A neutral example of how she doesn't play by conventional rules would be how she doesn't take the advice of her handlers and managers-- often didn't, during the McCain campaign. She relies on her formidable charisma and her own instincts more than she does outside advice.

I'm not a Palin fan, so hopefully one of her fans will pop in with a positive list of what they consider unconventional about her, because the list I would give would be negative (and tempers are running too high on Palin for me to want to rehash all the reasons why I personally don't like her.)

I should have clarified, I indeed meant positive examples of her unconventional ways, as I'm hearing this repeated in an outside-the-beltway context. Thank you.

860 Achilles Tang  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 6:38:55pm

re: #857 buzzsawmonkey

I get so tired of people bringing up "slavery supported by religion, subjugation of women supported by religion."

I can only assume these are children who have grown up reading nothing but Howard Zinn--otherwise they would know that slavery, which has not existed in this country for almost 150 years, was opposed by religion also, and that there has been no argument against women's equality on a religious basis for well over half a century, probably twice that.

It's like the anti-Israel crowd constantly dredging up Deir Yassin--it's utter and complete bullshit.

OK, so let us not generalize and be talking at cross purposes. Just define which time period of the "good old days" of religious observance that you yearn for, and then you won't have to be tired of generalizations outside your time frame.

861 ShanghaiEd  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 6:39:20pm

re: #843 OldLineTexan

"Biblethumper" is intended and used as a pejorative, and to claim otherwise is to be disingenuous or ignorant.

Pejorative? Unlike "lib loons"?

862 jaunte  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 6:40:25pm

re: #857 buzzsawmonkey

... slavery, which has not existed in this country for almost 150 years, was opposed by religion also...


[Link: memory.loc.gov...]

863 OldLineTexan  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 6:42:08pm

re: #861 ShanghaiEd

Pejorative? Unlike "lib loons"?

Pejorative exactly like "lib loons", except people who use "lib loons" rarely try to excuse it as a common, harmless term.

Now, if you will be so kind as to show me where I used "lib loons" without the scare quotes today, you may call me a "hypocrite".

Fair enough?

864 BARACK THE VOTE  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 6:42:33pm

re: #855 Flyers1974

I'm not sure our morality has gone to pot, i'd say it has changed. For example, consider the racism regarding blacks that occurred and was acceptable by many people in the 1950's and 60's. Whether or not racism is a problem today, I don't know many people who want to see blacks lynched or killed or segregated. Likewise, consider the treatment of women regarding employment and other issues in the 1950's v. today. Aside from that, I'd say issues like the modernation of society effect morals more than anything else - I can be a lying bastard, steal, all those things, but no matter - I can very easily move to where people don't no me. Couldn't do this easily in the old days, thus your morality was crucial to your well-being.

There's no doubt whatsoever that the increasing mobility of our society --and the disintegration of the old bonds of community, familiy, town--leads to a general disinhibition. Community/societal bonds form a large check on our behaviour. When you can pick up and move clear across the country you can reinvent yourself as many times as you need to, in as many ways as you need to.

Ironically, the very factors that are distinctive of "America" -- the mobility, the freedom to reinvent yourself, the ability to define who you are, the lack of interest in where a person comes from, only what they can do and who they are -- are all factors that make it easy for certain sorts of crime and general bad behaviour to flourish.

Christopher Lasch has an old book about how American culture encourages and in some ways fosters narcissism: The Culture of Narcissism, written in the 70's.

865 J.S.  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 6:42:43pm

re: #857 buzzsawmonkey

the same old canards are brought up over and over and over again...(no matter how many times something's refuted, it's brought up again...)

866 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 6:43:47pm
867 Flyers1974  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 6:44:25pm

My prior post regarding slavery, etc... weren't blaming religion, but for the record, I think some religions or some followers of those religions, supported slavery. Other religions, were opposed.

868 Achilles Tang  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 6:44:35pm

re: #862 jaunte

.......Which was not a universally held opinion, or the argument would not have needed to be made.......

869 BARACK THE VOTE  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 6:46:16pm

re: #859 Flyers1974

I should have clarified, I indeed meant positive examples of her unconventional ways, as I'm hearing this repeated in an outside-the-beltway context. Thank you.

Okay, let me try to round up the positive spin for you on her unconventional ways, with the caveat that I'm playing Devil's Advocate and presenting the views of her supporters, not my own. :)

870 ShanghaiEd  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 6:47:31pm

re: #857 buzzsawmonkey

I get so tired of people bringing up "slavery supported by religion, subjugation of women supported by religion."

I can only assume these are children who have grown up reading nothing but Howard Zinn--otherwise they would know that slavery, which has not existed in this country for almost 150 years, was opposed by religion also, and that there has been no argument against women's equality on a religious basis for well over half a century, probably twice that.

It's like the anti-Israel crowd constantly dredging up Deir Yassin--it's utter and complete bullshit.

Nope. I never even heard of Zinn until I was 50 years old, but I know that religion has done some horrible and some wonderful things, and slavery and suffrage are an example of both aspects. Very complicated.

The argument you're making--including the point about Deir Yassin--sounds disturbingly like "Ignore that stuff; it happened a long time ago."

History isn't either/or...it's and/and. Otherwise it's revisionism.

871 wintercat  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 6:47:34pm

re: #856 iceweasel

Ed-- I'm a semi-reluctant reader of Jezebel. I have a bit of a love/hate relationship with the site, but that article seemed spot on to me.

From a feminist POV, another tragedy is that Palin embodies feminism in her personal life in so many ways -- yet not in her politics.

Care to elaborate with specifics?

872 Achilles Tang  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 6:47:45pm

re: #866 buzzsawmonkey

Try the third quarter of the last century; the 1940s, '50s, and '60s.

You might want to consider, when doing so, that it was fundamentalist Christianity that drove the original Civil Rights Movement--the one actually concerned with winning civil rights.

You might want to consider that it was back in the days when religion was a common thing in public life--freely referred to by politicians from the President on down--that the armed forces were integrated, restrictive covenants on housing and miscegenation laws invalidated, and that women first began to attend college in significant numbers.

And I said as much in my first post on this issue. My argument was against your rose colored generalization, as it seemed to me.

Who do you think the Christians who did support civil rights were opposed by? Muslims, Atheists, Pagans?

873 jaunte  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 6:48:34pm

re: #868 Naso Tang

I'm not sure any opinion has ever been universally held. That would lead to shorter discussions, certainly.

874 claire  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 6:48:51pm

I think the main reason politicians don't usually fight back is that they all have skeletons in their closets and they can't stand the scrutiny that will come their way in the backlash. People with shit to hide will never go on the offensive. Too risky.

Sarah's taking the fight to them. Good for her. Could it be that she's not a hypocrite and she's fearless? I hope so.

875 placeholder  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 6:50:09pm

re: #850 buzzsawmonkey

You are within your rights to be the proud bigot you wish to be--no question. For the rest, you are grotesquely confused. You have no right to demand that your government not be influenced by any set of religious beliefs; you merely have the right to not have an established--i.e., state-sponsored, state-favored--religion. You do not have the right to demand that everyone else be as areligious as you choose to be.

Laws do legislate morality; to what extent they do, and which morality controls, is a matter of political consensus. I have no problem with the various competing moralities of different groups fighting it out in the political arena. I do have a problem with rudderless amorality being the guiding light of our politics--whether local, state or national.

Your attempt to impose your own personal brand of morality upon politicians is rather disgusting in light of your refusal to let them deal with their own moral issues and failings. Clearly, forgiveness--which means understanding that people do fall short of the standards they set for themselves--is not something you feel troubled by. Not a great advertisement for your form of public morality, in my opinion. In the meantime, what the hell difference does it make if Craig "condemns homosexuality" (whatever that means) and--if he practices it (he was hardly caught en flagrante)--practices it in a way which mirrors his own condemnation? That's more consistent than not--but since you have designated yourself a Licensed Hypocrisy Hunter, you are too f*cking dense to see that.

Completely absurd. First of all, I am not areligious - this is an assumption you are making. I am Jewish - my religion, although similar to Judeo-Christian morality is quite different in key ways. We do not believe in salvation as the Christians define it. We do not believe in God the way Christians define Him. We do not believe in forgiveness the way Christians do. All of these issues put me in direct conflict with the theological underpinnings of evangelical christian arguments, as well as many of the foundational beliefs driving this argument.

While I do not believe in religious orthodoxy I am deeply spiritual and am by no means an agnostic.

All that said - your argument that I am trying to impose MY morality on elected officials is completely false. I am not. What I am expressing, is my frustration with anyone who preaches to me about morality and cannot even live up to their own ideals. I do not impose my own morals on other people - I know that I have not lived up to my own standards, and it would be incredibly patronizing of me to lecture other on what they should or should not do. Yes, call me crazy or hypocritical, but I do not think people who fail in achieving their own moral goals are qualified to judge me, or to tell me that I should live up to the moral goals they have set. This is the very definition of hypocrisy.

This may be the road to moral relativism, but I prefer that, to religious moral absolutism.

-PH

876 Flyers1974  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 6:53:22pm

re: #866 buzzsawmonkey

Try the third quarter of the last century; the 1940s, '50s, and '60s.

You might want to consider, when doing so, that it was fundamentalist Christianity that drove the original Civil Rights Movement--the one actually concerned with winning civil rights.

You might want to consider that it was back in the days when religion was a common thing in public life--freely referred to by politicians from the President on down--that the armed forces were integrated, restrictive covenants on housing and miscegenation laws invalidated, and that women first began to attend college in significant numbers.

Black members of churches supported civil rights. Many of those church leaders were more concerned with rocking the boat than with the movement, at least in the beginning. And certainly MLK invoked christanity as motivating him and as a rationalization for civil rights. Other than black churches, I don't know how integral churches were overall to the civil rights movment. And many of the rights that were gained in the 1950's were from the then liberal supreme court.

877 ShanghaiEd  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 6:54:08pm

re: #866 buzzsawmonkey

Try the third quarter of the last century; the 1940s, '50s, and '60s.

You might want to consider, when doing so, that it was fundamentalist Christianity that drove the original Civil Rights Movement--the one actually concerned with winning civil rights.

You might want to consider that it was back in the days when religion was a common thing in public life--freely referred to by politicians from the President on down--that the armed forces were integrated, restrictive covenants on housing and miscegenation laws invalidated, and that women first began to attend college in significant numbers.

But, fundamentalist Christianity also fought the Civil Rights Movement, and sheltered those who abused blacks. As a young kid, I was personally at a deacon's meeting in our church when they voted to lock the doors and go home "if any n***ers try to show up."

My church was also against the other improvements that you list. And we were far from alone.

History: not either/or...but and/and.

878 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 6:54:57pm
879 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 7:01:05pm
880 ShanghaiEd  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 7:01:57pm

re: #878 buzzsawmonkey

They were opposed, in many cases, by other Christians--which is precisely why the broad-brush condemnation of "religion" in the public sphere is complete and utter bullshit.

Why does the fact that religious people fall on both sides of most controversial topics mean that any of those people should be given the levers of political power based on their faith?

881 voirdire  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 7:02:39pm

There are no repercussions for hate-speech and lies unless you're a member of a protected class.

882 Achilles Tang  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 7:04:23pm

re: #873 jaunte

I'm not sure any opinion has ever been universally held. That would lead to shorter discussions, certainly.

My comment was not directed at your post; rather to what prompted you make it.

883 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 7:05:04pm
884 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 7:05:44pm
885 BARACK THE VOTE  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 7:05:58pm

re: #859 Flyers1974

I should have clarified, I indeed meant positive examples of her unconventional ways, as I'm hearing this repeated in an outside-the-beltway context. Thank you.

Here we go with some examples: unconventional actions/positive spin

1: As governor, she steadfastly refused to live in Juneau after her first year there, instead residing at her home in Wasilla 600 miles away.

Positive spin: This shows her commitment to her family, her small town, and her desire to keep a distance from the legislature and politics as usual.

2. She resigned from her last state office, chair of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission.

Positive view: She did this to file an ethics complaint, and indeed two others wound up resigning, and one had to pay a fine.

3. She's had no problem going against both Democrats and members of her own party, both as mayor and governor. (this is the big one, and I'd have to go dig up a list of decisions she made and details)

Positive view: This shows she's a maverick and not beholden to any party or special interest.

4. She nominated Wayne Anthony Ross for Attorney General, despite the fact that he would be nearly unanimously rejected by the legislature.

Positive view: this shows she puts certain principles over politics (I guess?)

I guess I'll leave those for now, and hopefully a fan of Palin's can add to the list.

886 jaunte  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 7:07:12pm

re: #882 Naso Tang

It's a very interesting sermon, if you can read through the 'effef.'
[Link: memory.loc.gov...]

887 ShanghaiEd  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 7:08:18pm

re: #881 voirdire

There are no repercussions for hate-speech and lies unless you're a member of a protected class.

Example, please?

888 Flyers1974  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 7:08:22pm

re: #847 ShanghaiEd

Speaking of Palin, I came across what I consider an insightful article on a website whose audience is apparently young, female, and feminist: Jezebel. I don't buy every word of it, but I'd be interested in you guys' reaction...

3 Reasons Sarah Palin Was Good--and Bad--for Women in Politics.

Regarding the issue of Republicans discussing sexism: My guess is that generally speaking, they will never talk about sexism again after Palin is no longer an issue. Regarding motherhood, I think this issue is no longer used anyway, a bit stale for political use. Regarding a role model for young women, I don't think young people in general listen to any politicians. Since I believe young people don't listen anyway, I don't think she is a bad influence on them eather.

889 Flyers1974  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 7:10:33pm

re: #885 iceweasel

Thank you, IC. Interesting.

890 Achilles Tang  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 7:12:02pm

re: #878 buzzsawmonkey

They were opposed, in many cases, by other Christians--which is precisely why the broad-brush condemnation of "religion" in the public sphere is complete and utter bullshit.

You sound as if you think I am one of those condemning.

I am not; but what I am against is anyone who thinks that their faith is a badge of qualification for anything, or that their particular faith is a solution to everything, if only everyone else would only share it.

As an atheist I would remind you that I have voted for self proclaimed believers (Christians as it happened) all my life, knowing full well that none of them would be likely don't to vote for me.

Don't lecture me about higher principles.

891 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 7:12:46pm
892 ShanghaiEd  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 7:13:50pm

re: #883 buzzsawmonkey

Why does the fact that any person has faith mean that they have to throw it out the window when they get into the political arena? Such a claim is absurd. Nobody, including myself, has suggested they should be "given the levers of political power based on their faith"; that is a chimera in your own head.

I am merely stating that the fact that someone's faith informs their thoughts and decisions is not reason for disqualifying them from active political participation; you, on the other hand, seem to think it does.

Take care, buzz. Hope to see you online again. One more thought, while it's on my mind...

Vote-for-a-religious-person is definitely not a chimera in my own head. Did you miss the religious right pastors who endorsed Bush from the pulpit because he would be "our first true Christian president," which they equated to be a world-changing event.

I didn't say faith needed to be thrown out a window...but that in a secular country, it necessarily takes a back seat to the Constitution. Always.

893 Eclectic Infidel  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 7:14:57pm

re: #27 Kenneth

A blogger nobody reads. Until now, that is.

Yup. I'm at her blog now.

894 Achilles Tang  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 7:17:44pm

re: #886 jaunte

It's a very interesting sermon, if you can read through the 'effef.'
[Link: memory.loc.gov...]

I read the first part, and noted "inferiours", but then it got better. I've saved it and will try to look closer later. Thanks.

895 BARACK THE VOTE  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 7:18:11pm

re: #889 Flyers1974

Thank you, IC. Interesting.

No problem. It was an interesting exercise to take some of what I consider to be bad decisions and try to view them from the lens of the other side.

896 Roger  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 7:21:36pm

As early as 1688...
Germantown Mennonites went against their beliefs and became political for a time; they believed the abolition of slavery called for them to break from their apolitical standard of life. Many would mock their "fundamental" lifestyle and be compelled to express disgust at the thought of living the way they do. But they did.do live good. Murder rate is non existent, negligible crime and wholesome living; many would wrinkle their noses thinking how horrible to live with one wife yet let me give you a hint; they enjoy it very much because they can "do it" without being skunk drunk.

The Germantown Mennonites wrote up their thoughts:

1) If the despised Muslim Turkish deal in the slave trade, is it not worse that Christians do also?

2) Why does the color of one's skin become the dividing line of who is fair to enslave?

3) If we are to 'do unto others as we would have them do unto us', what message are we sending to God?

4) What is the difference between a man who would rob a man and one who would steal the man himself? And, stolen from their homes and families, should we as Godly men purchase stolen goods?

5) There are those slave owners who commit adultery with their slaves, and sell their own children to others as slaves.

6) If the slaves were suddenly to become the masters, and the masters the slaves, would the white man not take up a weapon and fight for his life? Then why shouldn't the black man do the same?

Side note: If President Obama would have went to German Town and had coffee with the descendants he would have avoid his troubles in Pennsylvania and won it at a very high percentage but he was/is ignorant of this history and instead went with gun and religious clinging bigots line.

897 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 7:21:51pm
898 sagehen  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 7:22:10pm

re: #883 buzzsawmonkey

I am merely stating that the fact that someone's faith informs their thoughts and decisions is not reason for disqualifying them from active political participation; you, on the other hand, seem to think it does.


If that faith requires they take specific positions on the basis of "G-d says so," that doesn't leave a lot of room for reasoned discussion. Religious logic isn't like our earth logic, and the 1st Amendment was specifically written to protect us from each other's religious beliefs.

Nothing will ever convince my grandmother that cheeseburgers aren't actually an abomination in the eyes of the Lord; nothing will ever persuade her that lobster is an acceptable meal. She once smelled bacon in my kitchen, and ran out of the house yelling "unclean! unclean!" Aren't you glad she doesn't run the Health Department, with her faith informing her decisions?

I certainly wouldn't want my marital and reproductive decisions subject to the beliefs of a religion that directly contradicts mine. My grandfather found it embarrassing enough to have to apply for religious exclusions to drink Sabbath wine during prohibition; I'd be mortified if I had to bring a rabbi's note and detail my sex life to some stranger to be able to buy pills.

899 ShanghaiEd  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 7:24:56pm

re: #896 Roger

As early as 1688...
Germantown Mennonites went against their beliefs and became political for a time; they believed the abolition of slavery called for them to break from their apolitical standard of life. Many would mock their "fundamental" lifestyle and be compelled to express disgust at the thought of living the way they do. But they did.do live good. Murder rate is non existent, negligible crime and wholesome living; many would wrinkle their noses thinking how horrible to live with one wife yet let me give you a hint; they enjoy it very much because they can "do it" without being skunk drunk.

The Germantown Mennonites wrote up their thoughts:

Side note: If President Obama would have went to German Town and had coffee with the descendants he would have avoid his troubles in Pennsylvania and won it at a very high percentage but he was/is ignorant of this history and instead went with gun and religious clinging bigots line.

Roger: A fascinating story, that I was completely ignorant of. Thanks for posting it.

900 ShanghaiEd  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 7:28:16pm

re: #898 sagehen

If that faith requires they take specific positions on the basis of "G-d says so," that doesn't leave a lot of room for reasoned discussion. Religious logic isn't like our earth logic, and the 1st Amendment was specifically written to protect us from each other's religious beliefs.

Nothing will ever convince my grandmother that cheeseburgers aren't actually an abomination in the eyes of the Lord; nothing will ever persuade her that lobster is an acceptable meal. She once smelled bacon in my kitchen, and ran out of the house yelling "unclean! unclean!" Aren't you glad she doesn't run the Health Department, with her faith informing her decisions?

I certainly wouldn't want my marital and reproductive decisions subject to the beliefs of a religion that directly contradicts mine. My grandfather found it embarrassing enough to have to apply for religious exclusions to drink Sabbath wine during prohibition; I'd be mortified if I had to bring a rabbi's note and detail my sex life to some stranger to be able to buy pills.

sagehen: Excellently said, I think. You make this point much more clearly than my fumbling attempts, above.

901 Flyers1974  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 7:30:00pm

re: #895 iceweasel

No problem. It was an interesting exercise to take some of what I consider to be bad decisions and try to view them from the lens of the other side.

My take is that the media repeats what is handed to them. Palin supporters have been stating that she is unorthodox. The media repeats like a parrot. Same with John McCain and "maverick." I'm with those who say the media is more lazy and incompetent than biased.

902 BARACK THE VOTE  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 7:33:48pm

re: #901 Flyers1974

My take is that the media repeats what is handed to them. Palin supporters have been stating that she is unorthodox. The media repeats like a parrot. Same with John McCain and "maverick." I'm with those who say the media is more lazy and incompetent than biased.

Exactly. I completely share your view on the media. They're essentially vacuous lazy hacks whose only true interest is maintaining proximity to power and access to the Beltway cocktail circuit. They'll go whichever way the wind blows, and the only surety is that they will always, always be lazy rather than do what are supposed to be their real jobs.

The Village, or the "chattering class", as the lefty/prog blogs call them. That's all they are.

903 kynna  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 7:36:24pm

re: #892 ShanghaiEd

Did you miss the religious right pastors who endorsed Bush from the pulpit because he would be "our first true Christian president," which they equated to be a world-changing event.

I know I did. I'll have to spend some time Googling that one.

I didn't miss the pastors openly endorsing Gore, Kerry, and Obama from the pulpit.

904 Roger  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 7:41:23pm

Earlier forefathers of the German Town Mennonites and other "fundamentalists" date in the 1200's with amazing philosophy:
[Link: www.xenos.org...]
[Link: www.xenos.org...]

The church and the state should remain as separate authorities.

for one. They were heretics in their day with such modern/ancient thinking and they paid for it dearly.

905 ShanghaiEd  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 7:41:57pm

re: #903 kynna

I know I did. I'll have to spend some time Googling that one.

I didn't miss the pastors openly endorsing Gore, Kerry, and Obama from the pulpit.

kynna, while you're Googling, be sure to check out the DVD "George W. Bush: Faith in the White House." His campaign sent thousands of free copies to pastors across the U.S. Among the scenes is a split-screen showing a Bush portrait on one side, and Jesus on the other. Subtle, they weren't.

906 Flyers1974  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 7:44:25pm

re: #902 iceweasel

By the way, when we were back and forth on the dead/dying thread the other day, my observation, and probably an obvious one to many, was that in the whole Palin thing, when all is said and done, Palin is not the issue. The underlying issue is the Republican/MSM issue boiling over. It'll be interesting where this goes.

907 Achilles Tang  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 7:47:49pm

re: #892 ShanghaiEd


Vote-for-a-religious-person is definitely not a chimera in my own head. Did you miss the religious right pastors who endorsed Bush from the pulpit because he would be "our first true Christian president," which they equated to be a world-changing event.

Is there an implied disdain for the founders and those presidents who actually created the country in that attitude?

//

908 sagehen  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 7:48:01pm

re: #902 iceweasel

Exactly. I completely share your view on the media. They're essentially vacuous lazy hacks whose only true interest is maintaining proximity to power and access to the Beltway cocktail circuit. They'll go whichever way the wind blows, and the only surety is that they will always, always be lazy rather than do what are supposed to be their real jobs.

The Village, or the "chattering class", as the lefty/prog blogs call them. That's all they are.


They also have an interest in keeping the horse race as close as possible, and drag it out as long as possible. The Democratic primaries were a cable ratings bonanza, so they pushed a storyline that it was still competitive long after it wasn't -- Hillary could still come back, there's the superdelegates, anything to keep it going through all 57 [*g*] states.

(which probably did end up, accidentally, increasing Obama's November margin -- all those North Carolina and Indiana first-time voters who'd only registered because "OMG the primaries are getting to us this year!" were then invested enough to turn out in November and narrowly flip their states from red to blue. And it gave Obama months more chances to practice his stage manner, enthrall more and larger audiences, fundraise, and show off his organizational chops).

909 Achilles Tang  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 7:48:59pm

signing off. Goodnight.

910 ShanghaiEd  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 7:50:03pm

re: #904 Roger

Earlier forefathers of the German Town Mennonites and other "fundamentalists" date in the 1200's with amazing philosophy:
[Link: www.xenos.org...]
[Link: www.xenos.org...]

for one. They were heretics in their day with such modern/ancient thinking and they paid for it dearly.

Wow. I love these folks more and more. No wonder they didn't exactly fit in with their times/surroundings...

911 BARACK THE VOTE  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 7:53:06pm

re: #908 sagehen

They also have an interest in keeping the horse race as close as possible, and drag it out as long as possible. The Democratic primaries were a cable ratings bonanza, so they pushed a storyline that it was still competitive long after it wasn't -- Hillary could still come back, there's the superdelegates, anything to keep it going through all 57 [*g*] states.

(which probably did end up, accidentally, increasing Obama's November margin -- all those North Carolina and Indiana first-time voters who'd only registered because "OMG the primaries are getting to us this year!" were then invested enough to turn out in November and narrowly flip their states from red to blue. And it gave Obama months more chances to practice his stage manner, enthrall more and larger audiences, fundraise, and show off his organizational chops).

Completely true. They were flogging a Hillary comeback long after it was clear to anyone doing the math that it was impossible. And I fully agree with you that it actually helped increase primary turnout and ironically helped Obama ultimately win.

It's an excellent and recent example of the way the media invents a narrative purely because it fits their agenda-- which is driven far more by their corrupt idea of what makes for 'a good story' (and hence ratings) than it is a partisan bias.

912 Flyers1974  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 8:01:22pm

re: #911 iceweasel

I know studies have been done concerning media bias. It seems to me though, that such a study would have to be awfully big and cumbersome to be accurate. So many issues: How does the media treat Democrats v. Republicans; very conservative Republicans v. "moderate" Republicans; what is the definition of a moderate; Is the media biased against communists, facists or Whigs for example, as their views are not addressed, etc... . I'd like to see that study. Problem is, whoever didn't like the results, would no doubt say it was biased.

913 ShanghaiEd  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 8:09:37pm

re: #909 Naso Tang

Goodnight, NT: Enjoyed the conversation.

914 jvic  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 8:13:02pm

re: #691 LGoPs

The fact that the standards of the much decried '50's and earlier are today looked at with disdain and contempt speaks volumes about our slow degradation as a society. Those standards which are criticized as unrealistic and corny at least set the goal high. Not everyone or even most could reach the goal but even when they missed they were still generally in the target area.
When the standards were lowered during the '60's and '70's all of society's goals were lowered and not surprisingly many of us are hitting the target, or very close to it. And society in general suffers from a coarsening of everything.

My upding is not because I necessarily agree but because your point is interesting and cogent.

I've wondered how the country would have developed if Vietnam hadn't provided a pretext for the Great 1960s Boomer Tantrum.

I like today's cultural laissez faire but it's not an unmixed blessing. Maybe the constraints of the 1950s came about because the Great Generation wanted stability after the Depression and WW2. To date the tradeoff has been worth it afaic, but I'm not sure that it will remain so indefinitely. As a libertarian, I hope so; as someone with refugee parents, I'm not sure.

915 ShanghaiEd  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 8:13:27pm

re: #911 iceweasel

Completely true. They were flogging a Hillary comeback long after it was clear to anyone doing the math that it was impossible. And I fully agree with you that it actually helped increase primary turnout and ironically helped Obama ultimately win.

It's an excellent and recent example of the way the media invents a narrative purely because it fits their agenda-- which is driven far more by their corrupt idea of what makes for 'a good story' (and hence ratings) than it is a partisan bias.

Yes. The media's agenda, IMHO: take one part "junior high clique," add one part "everybody loves a winner," add one part "don't cut off my access, bro!" and raise to the tenth power.

Or in campaign season, the hundredth power.

916 Alberta Oil Peon  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 8:38:11pm

re: #203 monkeytime

Free.

Too much.

917 formercorpsman  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 9:08:06pm

Predictably late as usual. (My son's team won though)

I think much if this also stems from the Alaskan Legislature rolling out investigations perhaps politically motivated.

Time will tell if she seals her fate with this move, but even if you hate her, you would not be fair in saying she has not been the intense focus of probably the biggest political hit job since her VP selection.

The sheer number making the trip to Alaska in an effort to dig up dirt was unprecedented. I wish they put in 10% of the effort for her political opponents.

I still don't know how I feel about this. I see both sides of the argument. There are 2 sides to this argument.

918 Alberta Oil Peon  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 9:10:02pm

re: #402 ShanghaiEd

Unless I'm mistaken, that was not an action by Obama. It was two Obama supporters. Big difference.

And Mafia dons don't do their own hits, either. They have supporters, aka "hit men" to do the dirty work. Plausible deniability and all that.

919 formercorpsman  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 9:16:36pm

re: #911 iceweasel

I would say in some instances, that may be the case. I think looking back at the Clinton / Lewinski scandal, the wagons eventually started circling him, but other Democrats did as well knowing they carried the water only to be refuted by DNA.

All in all, I still believe the media's leftist leaning trumps their yearning for a "good" story. Obviously political operatives all put out their talking points, but I recall hearing some kind a montage (admittedly a Limbaugh creation) really iced this cake for me.

One example I would mention is the Mark Foley case. This information was held until a certain time for release. I'm glad he was busted. Creep. He does not deserve to be a member of the legislature. But when the guy who replaced him was caught, it was met with a tin ear by the media.

If that is not a salacious story, following a story they beat to death, I don't know what is then.

920 RexMundi  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 11:39:18pm

I despise Sarah Palin, but good for her for standing up for herself. Libel/slander/defamation has been far too rampant since about, oh, the 2000 election in which a lot of Democrats (especially the liberal nutjobs) just went completely off the deep end in their baseless and insane attacks against George Bush.

921 Sol Berdinowitz  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 11:42:56pm

It's a matter of standards, I do not see blog entries as news. They are expressions of opinion. At best building blocks from which news can be made. The fact that twitters and blog entries get picked up by the news media and treated as God's Word indicates the decline in standards among the media and the viewing public.

922 Linda Mae  Mon, Jul 6, 2009 11:49:00pm

Just spent an hour on the Alaska state web site downloading news articles about Palin's ethics challenges. In each one, some one mentions the cost of money and time stolen from the citizens of Alaska and the personal cost to Palin. She is not as rich as other governors. She gave up her raise this year. The challenges are just plain ridiculous. She - and the state of Alaska - are being harasses by Alinsky's Rules for Radicals #4: make someone walk their talk. Palin has made her name from the ethics reforms she brought forth in the state so she is being harassed with phony ethics violations. Once filed, they are supposed to be private until resolved. The bloggers who file them - paid for by DNC - then make them public contrary to the law. I can see the concern of Palin and those who have to deal with the charges - 15 silly ones so far - with more on the horizon. If only the State could sue those bloggers who file them but they can't. Ironically, Palin runs a transparent government. Unlike someone we know.

923 ShanghaiEd  Tue, Jul 7, 2009 12:26:37am

re: #922 Linda Mae

Just spent an hour on the Alaska state web site downloading news articles about Palin's ethics challenges. In each one, some one mentions the cost of money and time stolen from the citizens of Alaska and the personal cost to Palin. She is not as rich as other governors. She gave up her raise this year. The challenges are just plain ridiculous. She - and the state of Alaska - are being harasses by Alinsky's Rules for Radicals #4: make someone walk their talk. Palin has made her name from the ethics reforms she brought forth in the state so she is being harassed with phony ethics violations. Once filed, they are supposed to be private until resolved. The bloggers who file them - paid for by DNC - then make them public contrary to the law. I can see the concern of Palin and those who have to deal with the charges - 15 silly ones so far - with more on the horizon. If only the State could sue those bloggers who file them but they can't. Ironically, Palin runs a transparent government. Unlike someone we know.

Linda: Interesting info, but much of it is confusing to me. Do you have links?

I can't find any information about the DNC paying bloggers. How do you know this?

I understand actions have been taken on a number of these ethics complaints, so they can't all be "phony."

When you say Palin "runs a transparent government," what do you base that on? Aren't some of these cases FOIA requests, for information the state won't release? Didn't Palin's office try to charge $88,000 for releasing e-mails in the trooper case?

I consider myself following this case fairly closely, but much of the info in your note is new to me or contrary to what I've read. Links to your points would be much appreciated.

924 ShanghaiEd  Tue, Jul 7, 2009 12:41:58am

re: #921 ralphieboy

It's a matter of standards, I do not see blog entries as news. They are expressions of opinion. At best building blocks from which news can be made. The fact that twitters and blog entries get picked up by the news media and treated as God's Word indicates the decline in standards among the media and the viewing public.

I'm with you, on Twitter. Seeing these feeds of texted trivia alongside regular news (with the exception of situations such as the Iran violence) seems ludicrous to me. I hope it's a novelty that wears off soon.

I disagree that blogs can't do news, though. Some do it very well; they just have to bring facts and sources to the table, the way journalists have always done. Some blogs do only opinion. Some do both.

What do you mean by "building blocks from which news can be made"?

925 Render  Tue, Jul 7, 2009 3:47:54am

re: #923 ShanghaiEd

The DNC has been paying bloggers (and blog readers) since at least 2004. That's not really a secret and links to such are rather easy to find with a simple Google search.

[Link: www.ojr.org...]

"I read blogs from time to time," (Howard) Dean said. "Not because I sit down and intend to, because I don't have that much time, but because supporters send me e-mails with various blogs that they read...We have two people that we pay to read blogs, 25 or whatever it is per day."

"So even Dean, a politician out of the running who made a name for himself via the blogosphere -- and who was speaking to a room full of bloggers -- still admits he has to pay staffers to read them for him."

===

People who knowingly and maliciously print or otherwise publish lies about other people, public persona's or not, should be punished for their lack of basic human decency. At the very least they should be publicly exposed and held up to widespread ridicule.

But I'm one of those who thinks that Fred Phelps and his cult of lunatics should be viciously attacked with baseball bats every time they show their putrid faces in public...

SO
THERE,
R

926 Flyers1974  Tue, Jul 7, 2009 4:29:29am

Without making a judgement on the merits of these issues for the moment, some of these comments illlustrate to me how highly charged the Palin/MSM thing is - I would have assumed that as a general principle, conservatives would be absolutely terrified of and vehemently against the prospect of politicians suing blogs, or even msm outlets. I'd think mainly because conservative blogs, etc..., would not be immune to the same thing.

927 kywrite  Tue, Jul 7, 2009 5:04:55am

It doesn't matter whether she can win or not. No one knows better than Gov. Palin how much just fighting a lawsuit meritless or not, can cost. This blogger has been picked up by multiple mainstream media including the WaPo and MSNBC -- also listed in her lawsuit threat -- and is one of the main people filing frivolous and subsequently dismissed ethics complaints against her, making her at least an enormous headache.

I imagine Palin sees this as a win-win-win: either the blogger will cease and remove a large part of her liberal attack dog problem -- or Palin will win a lawsuit and, ditto, get rid of a large part of the problem in the judgment -- or Palin will lose (with her legal fund covering her costs), costing said blogger a tidy chunk of change and a huge headache to boot, and probably still getting rid of the problem (because no one wants to keep facing lawsuits like this).

928 Sol Berdinowitz  Tue, Jul 7, 2009 5:21:59am

Shanghai,

I mean that blogs are more often the raw material of news, many of them they do not cite sources or make any effort to check them. There was a time when no respectable journalist would publish an article without doing so. Those standards have eroded greatly.

929 Flyers1974  Tue, Jul 7, 2009 10:15:27am

re: #927 kywrite

Your statement does not take into account the discovery process Palin would have to go through in the event a lawsuit is ever filed. Not something a regular person wants to go through, much less a politician. Without even considering the dubious chance of her winning, knowing the discovery process she will have to go through makes me think these threats are bluffs.

930 American Sabra  Tue, Jul 7, 2009 11:07:35am

Sarah Palin is a bully and this proves it. Sending out her attorney to make meritless threats to bloggers. Shannon Moore never committed libel. What she said is there are RUMORS about the indictments. Never once did Moore state it as a fact. In fact, the whole issue about the impropriety between the builders of the Wasilla complex and the Palin residence has been rumored for so long, they have a name for it in Alaska. It's called "Housegate". Google "Palin Housegate" and you get 121,000 hits. Is Palin going to sic her attack dog lawyer on all those other 1000s of bloggers too?

I hope and pray that this is the final end to this dreadful woman.

931 ShanghaiEd  Tue, Jul 7, 2009 11:56:40am

re: #925 Render

The DNC has been paying bloggers (and blog readers) since at least 2004. That's not really a secret and links to such are rather easy to find with a simple Google search.

[Link: www.ojr.org...]

"I read blogs from time to time," (Howard) Dean said. "Not because I sit down and intend to, because I don't have that much time, but because supporters send me e-mails with various blogs that they read...We have two people that we pay to read blogs, 25 or whatever it is per day."

"So even Dean, a politician out of the running who made a name for himself via the blogosphere -- and who was speaking to a room full of bloggers -- still admits he has to pay staffers to read them for him."

===

People who knowingly and maliciously print or otherwise publish lies about other people, public persona's or not, should be punished for their lack of basic human decency. At the very least they should be publicly exposed and held up to widespread ridicule.

But I'm one of those who thinks that Fred Phelps and his cult of lunatics should be viciously attacked with baseball bats every time they show their putrid faces in public...

SO
THERE,
R

R, I read your link and don't see any reference to the DNC paying bloggers. Readers? Sure. Every large organization pays a few people to track their field by following the press...TV and newspapers...so I don't see why reading blogs should be any different.

But where does it say that the DNC pays bloggers to blog?

932 ssn697  Tue, Jul 7, 2009 3:14:19pm

re: #920 RexMundi

I despise Sarah Palin, but good for her for standing up for herself. Libel/slander/defamation has been far too rampant since about, oh, the 2000 election in which a lot of Democrats (especially the liberal nutjobs) just went completely off the deep end in their baseless and insane attacks against George Bush.

I got a good chuckle out of this. You never read the newspaper attacks on John Adams I take it? We are MUCH more civil now then we used to be. It is the nature of the political beast. Pretty funny that people think it just got nasty a few years ago.


This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal Cash.app
Recent PagesClick to refresh
The Pandemic Cost 7 Million Lives, but Talks to Prevent a Repeat Stall In late 2021, as the world reeled from the arrival of the highly contagious omicron variant of the coronavirus, representatives of almost 200 countries met - some online, some in-person in Geneva - hoping to forestall a future worldwide ...
Cheechako
2 days ago
Views: 92 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 1
Texas County at Center of Border Fight Is Overwhelmed by Migrant Deaths EAGLE PASS, Tex. - The undertaker lighted a cigarette and held it between his latex-gloved fingers as he stood over the bloated body bag lying in the bed of his battered pickup truck. The woman had been fished out ...
Cheechako
2 weeks ago
Views: 259 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 1