posted October 03, 2012 05:25 PM              

or is it impossible that ANYONE might have a beef with palin who is NOT an activist?

why is this word used to denigrate people?

aren't you an activist, jwhop? isn't the tea party a bunch of activists?

posted October 03, 2012 08:11 PM              

the implication is that no one but an idealogue and/or moron could possibly have anything against ms pee-lin.

posted October 13, 2012 09:57 AM            

Yep Caribou Barbie
With fellow bomb-thrower, Sean Hannity.

And naturally Hannity thinks the biggest news to come out of the debate is... Biden's facial expressions. Yep, that's what's important. Forget Ryan's lies. The real scandal is that Biden reacted to them.

PALIN: Well, I believe that Joe Biden was sent in as the attack dog in this debate to compensate for President Obama's atrocious showing in his own debate where he was aloof and arrogant and disconnected and really disengaged with what is very important to the American voter.

So I believe that Joe Biden was sent in to try to compensate for that, but really tough format, Sean, for someone like Paul Ryan or anyone else up against Joe Biden when the moderator allowed one candidate to absolutely run rough shot over the conversation over the opponent.

It reminded me I just told Neil Cavuto of watching a musk ox run across the tundra with somebody underfoot and in this case when it came to style it was Paul Ryan underfoot because of the moderator allowing Biden to do the interrupting, to kind of take control of the conversation. [...]

HANNITY: Well, all I can say is I can't wait to get back to our studio tomorrow night and montage Joe Biden and his facial expressions all throughout the debate.

I think that'll be a big story by the time we get back. There is was instant poll I saw that had Ryan ahead. Every focus group I'm hearing from did not like the tone, the condescension, the arrogance, and the interruption of the vice president.

So we're going to watch very closely. Governor Palin, great to see you as always. Thank you so much for being with us.

PALIN: Thank you, Sean. Let me remind you one thing too though. The truth told can't be all lies when can invent. When Joe Biden told some truths about death panels, but he told it out of context with an intention to skew what the true meaning and the truth behind the policy issues are. That's as bad as actually telling a lie so just keep that in mind when you talk about the verbiage that Joe Biden chose to use tonight.

Obama was aloof and arrogant for not rising to the bait of Romney's lies, sitting back and letting him interrupt and seize control of the debate and flip flop on his positions endlessly, only sticking to a placid review of the facts whenever he got a chance to speak. Biden was arrogant for telling it like it is and preventing Ryan from lying without a direct challenge and demanding real policies with real data from a Vice Presidential candidate. Is 'arrogant' just the new word for 'disagreed with me'?

posted October 13, 2012 12:01 PM            

In that, they agree with Sarah Palin...not you!

Now Node, you talk about "Ryan's lies"..but as usual, you fail to mention a single lie.

So Node, should reasonable, rational people dismiss your comment as the usual leftist, over the top rhetoric?

One other thing Node, you posted this on a thread about Sarah Palin.

posted October 13, 2012 01:24 PM              

of COURSE, if you talk only to people who agree with you, they are going to agree with you.

it might surprise hannity to learn that whle many republicans and conservatives agree with him, the democrat side believes that biden did a great job and "won" the debate.

posted October 14, 2013 11:18 PM            

So while O'Bomber is running all over screeching, howling and shrieking about defaulting on America's national debt, Sarah Palin puts the lie to O'Bomber's scaremongering.

Governor Palin: Obama’s Debt Default is on His Shoulders While We Shoulder His Impeachable Offenses
Posted on October 14 2013 - 4:28 PM

Via Facebook, Governor Palin sheds light on the histrionics of President Obama, and also notes that the US Constitution provides the answer to avoiding default:

Apparently the president thinks he can furlough reality when talking about the debt limit. To suggest that raising the debt limit doesn’t incur more debt is laughably absurd. The very reason why you raise the debt limit is so that you can incur more debt. Otherwise what’s the point?

It’s also shameful to see him scaremongering the markets with his talk of default. There is no way we can default if we follow the Constitution. The Fourteenth Amendment, Section 4, requires that we service our debt first. We currently collect more than enough tax revenue to service our debt if we do that first. However, we don’t have enough money to continue to finance our ever-growing federal government (with our $17 trillion dollar national debt that has increased over 50% since Obama took office). That’s why President Obama wants to increase the debt limit. He doesn’t want to make the tough decisions to rein in government spending. So, he’s scaremongering the markets about default, just as he tries to scaremonger our senior citizens about their Social Security, which, by the way, is funded by the Social Security Trust Fund and is solvent through 2038.

It’s time for the president to be honest with the American people for a change. Defaulting on our national debt is an impeachable offense, and any attempt by President Obama to unilaterally raise the debt limit without Congress is also an impeachable offense. A default would also be a shameful lack of leadership, just as mindlessly increasing our debt without trying to rein in spending is a betrayal of our children and grandchildren who will be stuck with the bill.

posted November 16, 2013 11:46 PM            

Governor Palin: Just to Clarify

Posted on November 14 2013 - 10:41 AM - Stacy Drake

Governor Palin posted the following to Facebook earlier this morning:

Just to clarify my comment to Jake Tapper about Pope Francis, it was not my intention to be critical of Pope Francis. I was reminding viewers that we need to do our own homework on news subjects, and I hadn’t done mine yet on the Pope’s recent comments as reported by the media. Knowing full well how often the media mischaracterizes a person’s comments (especially a religious leader’s), I don’t trust them to get it right when it comes to reporting on the Vatican. I do, however, trust my many Catholic friends and family, including some excellent Catholic writers, who have since assured me that Pope Francis is as sincere and faithful a shepherd of his church as his two predecessors whom I admired. I apologize for not being clearer in my response, thus opening the door to critical media that does what it does best in ginning up controversy.

posted November 17, 2013 11:42 PM            

If you're unsure about your gender acoustic perhaps a chromosome count is in order.

Governor Palin: "Obama Has Failed the Golden Rule of Politics"

In honor of my saint-of- a-mother & her marathon-running bum hip… Enjoy!

posted November 27, 2013 08:48 AM            

They’re still pulling the wool over some eyes, friends..(waves at usual suspects and O'Bomber Kool-Aid guzzlers). So let’s call them out yet again. I was recently interviewed on Fox News Sunday. One question I answered was prefaced with the supposed “fact” that “30 million MORE people will be covered by Obamacare.” That statistic is about as credible a promise as “if you like your health care plan you can keep your health care plan.”

Obamacare is presently hitting people who buy insurance on the individual market because they may not receive health coverage through their employers. It’s hurting millions! But you ain’t seen nuthin’ yet. Just wait until the Obamacare employer mandate kicks in next year. As I told Fox News Sunday, despite what the White House and media report, tens of millions more Americans are set to lose their employer provided insurance plans. The ramifications of this WILL fundamentally transform America.

The article linked today at the top of Drudge confirms my point, which is significant because my point was mocked until this article confirmed it. Headline: “Almost 80 million with employer health care plans could have coverage canceled, experts predict.”

Companies that provide health insurance plans that aren’t compliant with new burdensome Obamacare mandates will obviously decide it’s cheaper to dump employees into the government-run Obamacare exchanges and pay the penalty than try to provide an expensive Obamacare-approved plan.

No one in America will be left unscathed by Obamacare. Please trust me on this. The media can repeat all the bogus White House stats they want about false claims like the individual mandate “only affects 5% of the public,” but they can’t change reality – NUMBERS DON’T LIE – and America is about to get “mugged by reality” very soon, to paraphrase Irving Kristol.

Far from providing more Americans with insurance, Obamacare is ironically hurting the very people it was sold to as some kind of health care savior. More people will choose to pay the IRS penalty and go without insurance because they can’t afford the increased rates slamming them, plus they now have fewer options in this one-size-fits-all expensive bureaucratic exchange which forces people to buy coverage for things they don’t want nor need. We’re talking about one-sixth more of our economy controlled now by big government, remember.

Do not forget that Obamacare contains health care rationing. When I warned America about “death panels,” I was denounced as a liar. But now the reality of “death panels” is openly admitted, even touted by some liberals as their solution. Just yesterday yet another prominent liberal media lapdog joined the chorus in finally admitting that death panel-style rationing is “built into the plan. It’s not like a guess or like a judgment. That’s going to be part of how costs are controlled." This guy and his ilk need to apologize to all of you, NOW, who knew what I was talking about, repeated my warnings, and were mocked and criticized for it. (Don’t hold your breath.)

The truth is the “enlightened ones” knew all along that rationing was in the plan. They were angry with me for saying it out loud. The twin pillars of Obamacare have always been redistribution and rationing. Take away one of those pillars and the whole thing crumbles. That’s why Obamacare is doomed. You were smart enough to know that, while they were arrogant enough to keep up a deceitful ruse until their White House control was guaranteed. They’re busted now, though. And that’s why they’re scrambling to distract you and hope you won’t realize how enormously important upcoming elections are to save our economy.

The redistribution aspect will be Obamacare’s undoing. Not enough young or healthy people will apply for Obamacare because it’s simply unaffordable. It makes NO economic sense for them to voluntarily sign up. They’ll choose to pay the IRS fine instead. This will bankrupt the whole Ponzi scheme, which is premised on young and healthy people paying for those who are sick or have pre-existing conditions. And when Obamacare fails, the left will push to have us move to full socialized medicine under a so-called “single payer plan.” This is exactly what Barack Obama touted as a candidate, as did many of his bureaucratic appointees, but the media glossed over that all these years.

Friends, the only way to fix Obamacare is to scrap this stuffed turkey and start over with genuine free market, patient-centered reforms that allow people to purchase insurance across state lines, enact tort reform, and give individual insurance buyers the same breaks we give employer provided insurance. And we need to elect leaders who will fight for us to get it done.

Keep all of this in mind this week as we break for Thanksgiving. Be warned the White House is arming leftist supporters with “talking points” to try to convince family and friends around the Thanksgiving table that Obamacare is the greatest thing since sliced pumpkin bread. You should politely let them know you’re not swallowing that turkey.

Thank you for doing your own homework, for trusting the truth I’ve expressed, and for refusing to let the “enlightened ones” keep America in the dark.

posted March 05, 2014 10:37 AM            

How embarrassing for delusional misogynists everywhere!

Sarah Palin was right. She predicted in 2008 what Putin did last week

No apologies heard from the Elite Media
March 03, 2014

If the Elite Media had any character whatsoever left in it there would be articles this week going back to 2008 when Sarah Palin predicted the Russian invasion of Ukraine. But if you've found any apologies and admissions of "we blew it when we made fun of you…" you're doing better than we are.

Nothing at any of the Big Three TV networks. Nothing at the Washington Post, New York Times or LA Times. Not even the Chicago Tribune or Boston Globe. Of course not at MSNBC or CNN.

But its not hard to realize why Palin was so correct. Ukraine is simply another result of Obama's ineffective foreign policy. He has no credibility whatsoever and has sacrificed America's standing in the world to the point that we are a laughingstock on the international stage. It was only a matter of time before Putin took advantage of it.

Here's the story of Plain 2008 prediction which came true last week:

Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin says she's "usually not one to Told-Ya-So," but when it comes to her prediction in 2008 that Russia President Vladimir Putin would one day invade Ukraine, she's claiming her bragging rights.

Palin, on her Facebook page this weekend, said that when she was campaigning in 2008 as Republican presidential candidate John McCain's running mate, she was "derided" for predicting that the Ukraine would be invaded should then-Sen. Barack Obama be elected.

"Yes, I could see this one from Alaska," Palin posted on Facebook, saying she said "told-ya-so" in the case of her "accurate prediction being derided as 'an extremely far-fetched scenario' by the 'high-brow' Foreign Policy magazine.

"Here's what this 'stupid' 'insipid woman' predicted back in 2008," Palin said. "After the Russian Army invaded the nation of Georgia, Senator Obama's reaction was one of indecision and moral equivalence, the kind of response that would only encourage Russia's Putin to invade Ukraine next."

Palin's post has been shared by more than 16,000 Facebook users and "liked" by more than 70,000 as of Sunday morning.

Foreign Policy's then-editor, Blake Hounshell, who now is an editor for Politico Magazine, wrote on the magazine's blog that warns Palin's comments were "strange" and "this is an extremely far-fetched scenario."

"And given how Russia has been able to unsettle Ukraine's pro-Western government without firing a shot, I don't see why violence would be necessary to bring Kiev to heel," Hounshell wrote.

Palin made her remarks after Obama's running mate, Joe Biden, had warned Obama supporters to "gird your loins" because, if he was elected, international leaders could test or try to take advantage of the young president.

she told us so
March 04, 2014 | 06:41 PM

Another noteworthy example that reminds us that the thinking, abilities, and wisdom of honest straight-up citizens are often far superior to that of the elitists and narcissistic politicians who preside over us.

If RINOs, 'Walking DEBT' Obama,
Hillary 'Benghazi' Clinton, other democrats/liberals
want to see STUPID, then they should look in the mirror.

The Real Lede
March 05, 2014 | 02:56 AM

That a woman with a genius IQ and an eidetic memory should predict the obvious is not the extraordinary artifact of this episode in the annals of media malpractice. Observing that candidate Obama equivocated between aggressor and aggressed-upon in the Russian incursion into Georgian territory during the South Ossetia crisis, recalling that Vladimir Putin had long made no secret that the former Soviet republic he most wished to reincorporate into a revived Russian Empire was the Ukraine, it follows, like a syllogism, that Putin would make full use of any convenient crisis to exert Russian military dominance over Kiev. The real lede is that Foreign Policy and Blake Hounshell are either incapable of following a ball that bounces twice to its obvious conclusion, or they threw away all journalistic and ethical principles to ridicule the woman whose foreign policy experience dwarfed that of the former Illinois state senator who was their preferred (though inarguably unqualified) head of state. The second lede is that six years after the prediction, in the face of the empirical evidence that Sarah Palin was right about Putin, Obama, and the Ukraine, the 'smart kids' of the 'progressive' movement prefer to deny reality rather than identify their own error in judgment.

posted March 05, 2014 10:52 AM            

The Telegraph Is Latest Publiction To Acknowledge Governor Palin Was Right About Putin
March 04 2014
Brian Lerch

posted March 05, 2014 11:58 AM            

Pity she is right less often than twice a day, like once in a blue moon, but hey, give her credit for taking credit at every bogus opportunity.

"Don't like to say I told you so... BUT I told you so."

posted March 05, 2014 12:46 PM            

As for Sarah Palin, in 2008, she brilliantly predicted Putin would invade Ukraine because of O'Bomber's delusional, weak kneed approach to foreign affairs and his attempt to assign moral equivalence to Putin after he invaded Georgia. Yeah right, the invader and the invaded are morally equivalent. Only in the never, never delusional dream world of unreality which grips the leftist set.

Palin has a genius IQ, has proven to have been right time after time and yet our usual suspects and O'Bomber Kool-Aid drinkers continue with their delusional fantasy that Palin is a substandard intellect.

posted March 05, 2014 03:00 PM            

"When the Soviets went into Budapest in 1956, Dwight Eisenhower did not risk U.S. lives. When the Soviets went into Prague in 1968, Lyndon Johnson did not risk U.S. lives," Beinart said. "This is a tragic situation. We have to do whatever we can for Ukraine. But it has been a long-established fact that the United States is not going to risk significant U.S. casualties to fight a war with Russia near Russia's soil. And that fundamental reality, as much as we can try sanctions, as much as we can try diplomacy, is a fact before Barack Obama and after Barack Obama."

...

Finally, Palin’s statement has little to do with the particular events that led up to the Ukrainian crisis. Putin firmly backed his political ally, Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych, and faced a stinging defeat when protests and broad dissatisfaction led the Ukrainian parliament to unseat him.

Keith Darden, a professor at the School of International Service at American University, said Palin turned out to be correct but for the wrong reasons. In Ukraine, Darden said, Russia’s vital interests are at risk.

"It was not a lack of U.S. credibility that is implicated here, certainly not because of our actions on Georgia," Darden said. "Indeed, if the Georgian war had never happened, we would still see what happened this week."

One last note, while Palin was eager to celebrate her Ukraine "prediction," the other items on her check list have not materialized as she warned. Among other things, Iran now is working within a 6-month pilot treaty to back off its nuclear program and when the U.S. did send troops into Pakistan, it was to kill Osama bin Laden, a move generally supported across the American political spectrum. Iraq remains violent and unstable, but American forces have not returned.
No amount of posturing by Palin or Jwhop is going to change any of this.

posted March 05, 2014 05:16 PM            

No amount of bloviating is going to change the fact O'Bomber and his socialist pals were caught with their pants down when Putin invaded Ukraine.

No amount of bloviating is going to change the fact Iranians see the so called pact with O'Bomber as a victory for Iran or change the fact Iran is still enriching uranium.

No amount of bloviating is going to change the fact Keith Darden is a bloviating whiner who DID NOT predict Putin would invade Ukraine. So much for Darden's expertise in international affairs.

No amount of bloviating is going to obscure the fact Bush had negotiated a status of forces agreement with Iraq and then, O'Bomber dropped the ball and didn't get it signed. Now, Iranians and terrorists are again active in Iraq killing civilians. Way to go O'Bomber.

O'Bomber is the weakest president since James Buchanan. He's not respected or feared in the least by America's enemies and he's not respected as a president our allies can count on.

posted March 05, 2014 05:24 PM            

Which nations did Putin/Russia invade during the presidencies of Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush and/or George W. Bush?

One other thing.