• Tips gratefully accepted here. Thanks!:

  • Recent Comments

    William on What Fate Is Ours?
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on What Fate Is Ours?
    William on What Fate Is Ours?
    William on What Fate Is Ours?
    William on What Fate Is Ours?
    jmac on What Fate Is Ours?
    Beata on What Fate Is Ours?
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on Media-Created “Reality…
    Propertius on Media-Created “Reality…
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on Media-Created “Reality…
    Propertius on Media-Created “Reality…
    Propertius on Media-Created “Reality…
    Beata on Media-Created “Reality…
    Propertius on Media-Created “Reality…
    Beata on Media-Created “Reality…
  • Categories

  • Tags

    abortion Add new tag Afghanistan Al Franken Anglachel Atrios bankers Barack Obama Bernie Sanders big pharma Bill Clinton cocktails Conflucians Say Dailykos Democratic Party Democrats Digby DNC Donald Trump Donna Brazile Economy Elizabeth Warren feminism Florida Fox News General Glenn Beck Glenn Greenwald Goldman Sachs health care Health Care Reform Hillary Clinton Howard Dean John Edwards John McCain Jon Corzine Karl Rove Matt Taibbi Media medicare Michelle Obama Michigan misogyny Mitt Romney Morning Edition Morning News Links Nancy Pelosi New Jersey news NO WE WON'T Obama Obamacare OccupyWallStreet occupy wall street Open thread Paul Krugman Politics Presidential Election 2008 PUMA racism Republicans research Sarah Palin sexism Single Payer snark Social Security Supreme Court Terry Gross Texas Tim Geithner unemployment Wall Street WikiLeaks women
  • Archives

  • History

    September 2010
    S M T W T F S
  • RSS Paul Krugman: Conscience of a Liberal

  • The Confluence

    The Confluence

  • RSS Suburban Guerrilla

  • RSS Ian Welsh

    • What Would Chinese Democracy Look Like?
      A few months ago I read a couple of books by the Singaporean intellectual Kishore Mahbubani. In “Has China Already Won he discusses Taiwan. The one exceptional trigger for a war involving China is Taiwan. Most of the time, the Chinese leaders have a lot of policy flexibility. There are no strong domestic lobbies to worry about. But the one issue where the Ch […]
  • Top Posts

Don’t misunderestimate her

Oh, you betcha!

Mark Halperin gets it:

FROM: Mark Halperin

TO: Coastal Elites, the Media and Establishment Politicians of Both Parties

RE: Sarah Heath Palin

Don’t underestimate Sarah Palin. Yes, she is hyper-polarizing: she sends her fans into rapture and drives her detractors stark raving mad. But she can dominate the news cycle with a single tweet and generate three days of coverage with a single speech (as she did this past Friday in Iowa). Her name recognition is universal.


But the mistake you are making is to assume that Palin needs or wants to play by the standard rules of American politics. Or that it even occurs to her to do so. Trash her all you want (even you Republicans who are doing it all the time behind her back) for being uninformed, demagogic and incoherent, and brandish the poll numbers that show fewer and fewer Americans think she is qualified to be President. Strain to apply political and practical norms to Alaska’s former governor. You are missing the point.


But ask yourself why Palin was in Iowa this of all weekends. Remember that she herself negotiated the date for the Iowa Republican Party’s annual Ronald Reagan dinner. This allowed her to conveniently skip the Values Voter Summit simultaneously going on in Washington, where most of the other potential 2012 Republican candidates appeared. By choosing Iowa over Washington, Palin avoided having to compete head to head with her would-be rivals and dodged the event’s concluding straw poll. Meanwhile, Palin got more weekend coverage than all the other prospects combined. Not everything she has done thus far has been obviously calculated, but her choices overall have been too savvy to be coincidence or luck.

The past 22 months have been replete with situations in which Palin has refused to adhere to the conventional playbook of presidential contenders and party honchos.


Palin is operating on a different plane, hovering higher than a mere celebrity, more buoyant than an average politician.


She is like Obama: the camera loves her and both sides of the political spectrum hang on her every word. She is like Bush: able to communicate with religious conservatives and Middle Americans. Most of all, she is like Bill Clinton: what doesn’t kill Sarah Palin makes her stronger. So as the world gets ready for the midterm elections and for the start of the epic contest in which Republicans will pick their champion to go into battle against Barack Obama, be advised: Palin is very much alive and, despite what you think, extraordinarily strong.

Yep. Love her or hate her, just don’t misunderestimate her. While the rest of the GOP hopefuls are kissing ass and begging for money, she’s kicking ass and taking names.

The Wall Street Journal:

A new comprehensive national survey shows that independent voters—who voted for Barack Obama by a 52%-to-44% margin in the 2008 presidential election—are now moving strongly in the direction of the Republican Party. The survey, conducted by Douglas E. Schoen LLC on behalf of Independent Women’s Voice in late August, raises the possibility of a fundamental realignment of independent voters and the dominance of a more conservative electorate.

Today, independents say they lean more toward the Republican Party than the Democratic Party, 50% to 25%, and that the Republican Party is closer to their views by 52% to 30%. This movement comes in spite of independents’ generally negative views of the GOP—a majority of independents (54%) view the Republicans unfavorably, compared to 39% who have a favorable impression. (The poll also revealed that 48% of independents were either “sympathetic to or supporters of the tea party.”)

Mene mene tekel upharsin:

Men say they are going to vote for the Republican candidate rather than the Democratic candidate in their district by a margin of 45 percent to 32 percent. The numbers are nearly reversed for women with 36 percent saying they will vote Republican and 43 percent saying they will vote Democratic.

Ever since 1980, when Ronald Reagan inspired more men than women, the difference in the way the sexes vote has been a critical part of American politics. Women have been more likely than men to favor Democratic candidates, an advantage Democrats have come to count on. Women also historically outnumber men when it comes to showing up at the polls.

But this year may be different. Even though women are still more likely to vote Democratic, the poll suggests they may stay home this year, giving more of the decision-making to men by default.

So far in this election, women are not nearly as attentive as men and express less enthusiasm about voting, the poll found. Men are more likely than women to fall into the category of voters who say they are paying a lot of attention to the campaign right now. They are also more likely than women to say they are more enthusiastic about voting in this congressional election than they remember being in past mid-terms elections.

The poll suggests that men are angrier than women, and that their anger may be more motivating than the sense of hopelessness expressed by women, particularly on economic issues.

Cue Mama Grizzly with a “conservative feminist” platform:

If Sarah Palin becomes the Republican nominee in 2012 there is only one Democrat who can beat her, and it ain’t Barack Obama.

Simply the best

263 Responses

  1. If I were a wise guy, I’d say we won’t estimate her because it’s so hard to underestimate her.

    • If she was as as bad as the Democratic partisans think, she’d have had her 15 minutes of fame already. Sorta like Ollie North or G Gordan Liddy.

      • Both Ollie and Liddy made problems for the Dems for years — it sometimes takes quite awhile for the MCM (Mainstream jCorporate Media), especially the MCM!, and some of the pubic to get over these charming rogue types (well, Liddy was not charming to me, but Ollie was physically attractive in that boyishly charming way).

        Wish us all luck that she doesn’t catch on with the general public.

        • I never found raygun to be particularly charming, personally. Or funny. The press was all ooh and aahh and haha to his stupid jokes. That’s really when the intensive media coverage stepped up. Cable started.

          We have a runaway viral celebrity culture now, It seems made for old fashioned fascism, complete with charismatic “leader.”

          • I think Palin ‘s populist appeal is much deeper than whatever it is Reagan had.

            The only time I found Reagan remotely interesting was when he gave the surly bonds remarks. The rest of the time he came across plastic to me. And, apparently he lifted the surly bonds line from a poet, so there goes that. ( that’s largely from a child’s POV though, I was born at the beginning of the Reagan years.)

            We have a runaway viral celebrity culture now, It seems made for old fashioned fascism, complete with charismatic “leader.”

            Yes, it is a perplexing set of circumstances we have now.

  2. All the Democratic strategists should watch this clip:

  3. Rasmussen:

    Fifty-two percent (52%) of Likely U.S. Voters say their own views are closer to Sarah Palin’s than they are to President Obama’s, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey.

    Just 40% say their views are closer to the president’s than to those of the former Alaska governor and Republican vice presidential candidate.

    Among the Political Class, however, 68% say their views are more like Obama’s, while 63% of Mainstream voters describe their views as more like Palin’s.

    She’s gonna beat him like a red-headed step-child.

    • Ayup.

    • I’m actually kinda amazed that 52% can figure out what his views are.

      I’m more inclined to believe that a good swath of the 52% would believe he was a socialist thanks to messaging.

      Sarah Palin is another one in regards to figuring out her views. Her record is moderate but her rhethoric is extremist. I find myself asking if the real Sarah Palin will stand up or if when all is said and done is she just a political opportunist who puts her finger into the wind.

    • Yep. Watching the past year has been like watching a slow motion train wreck. A few, like Halperin, are beginning to “get it”, and try to talk sense into the Dems. But it remains to be seen if a) they will listen and b) is it too far gone for them to recover by 2012.

    • Rasmussen did a poll recently before this where most voters said Hillary’s views were more mainstream than Obama’s, Romney’s, Huckabee’s, or Palin’s.

  4. Most of all, she is like Bill Clinton: what doesn’t kill Sarah Palin makes her stronger.

    I like what Afrocity said — watching the left attack Palin is like watching someone try to kill the Terminator. She just keeps coming back, she’s unkillable. The Palinator.

  5. If Sarah Palin becomes the Republican nominee in 2012 there is only one Democrat who can beat her, and it ain’t Barack Obama.

    Amen to that! Clinton is the only Democratic Party candidate that I’d vote for. And it Palin makes it to the top of the Republican ticket, I just might vote for her if Clinton and McKinney aren’t running.

    • Honk Honk Honkity Honk Honk!

    • Sarah Palin strikes me as the female version of Obama: minimal experience, carried along on a wave of hype. I had enough of Obama when he was my “part-time” senator. Hillary and Cynthia have courage, smarts, and experience. Sarah may be a woman, but, as for the person most capable of running the national government, there isn’t even a comparison between Sarah and the two other ladies, IMO.

      • I’m not looking at how good a job she would do, I’m looking at her chances of winning.

        Hillary would win AND govern well.

      • That’s exactly the way she strikes me. Sarah Palin is the Republican Obama. She’s a media creation with a thin resume and few credentials for the top position. She like Obama still offers campaign speak, ripe with generalities, few specifics. But she can get the crowd going, just like Obama [or at least the way he was able to stir a crowd before election].

        But a horse race between Sarah Palin and Hillary Clinton? Now that would be a contest for the ages. Can you imagine the debates?

        And no, there’s no comparison between these two women. Hillary Clinton is clearly in a class of her own.

        • I think that would be a great race.

        • I disagree. I can actually see a core belief set when I look at Palin. I may not agree with her but I definitely don’t view her as a blank slate.

          My biggest concern with Palin is she’d do the opposite of Obama. She’d play to the base that got her elected in the first place. I definitely don’t see her calling for bipartisanship.

        • Palin is two parts Obama (fresh face, policy lightweight), one part genuine populism.

          She is zero parts Hillary Clinton or Bill Clinton when it comes to policy substance. She just doesn’t have it. She’s not a wonk, and I don’t think she wants or expects to be one–the anti-intellectual shtick serves her well in shoring up her base.

          Bill and Hill have been policy wonks from the start. They use their policy smarts to communicate with the people, and vice versa, they use their ability to communicate with the people to make policy discussion accessible to them.

          Neither Sarah Palin or Barack Obama do that. They rely on reducing policy discussion to mindless sloganeering and rah-rahing. Palin actually does it with a genuine populist touch and responds to what her base wants. Obama was only able to pull off the act for so long, his marketing campaign has failed.

          • I was about to comment on this, but you’ve pretty much made most of my points.

            But a horse race between Sarah Palin and Hillary Clinton? Now that would be a contest for the ages. Can you imagine the debates?

            For the ages? Yeah I can imagine the debates. They would be so lopsided it’s gonna hurt.

            I can even imagine the reaction of Fox News and the Rightwing noise machine: “Hillary knows too much, the people want someone who’s genuine not some elitist know it all, blah blah blah…”

          • Agree. It’s about “her” base and agenda.

            I see the Clintons as being the way they were before. Good for this country. She is a female O, to me. Except her agenda couldn’t be further from Hillary. Opposite poles.

          • I don’t think O’s domestic agenda is much on the same pole as Hillary’s either. Hillary would have never done the Stupakistan gambit.. and if she had, the left would be giving her hell for it as they should. imho.

      • True, but with one difference: Obama was carried along by big money, media.
        Palin managed to endure despite the media – and the GOP and some money bet against her.
        I guess she has a bit more character than Little Lord Pissy Pants.

        • I always count media antagonism as a big plus when considering a politician. Historically they have opposed: Bill Clinton, Al Gore, Hillary Clinton, John McCain, John Edwards
          and have fawned over:
          George W. Bush
          John McCain*
          John Edwards*
          Barack Obama
          Mitt Romney

          (*hey, I never said they were consistent)

        • The media turns their objects of hate into antiheroes, but they’ll never learn.

    • Yes on all of the above. as in HONKS…….!

  6. I don’t think my husband is “angrier” than me. I just don’t see the point in voting for either party when it is fairly apparent that they don’t respect my gender whatsoever- and I do mean either party.

    • Yeah, that’s what I was thinking. They forgot to ask the important question about women staying home rather than guessing why.

      In our current system the very rich and (white) men are represented.

      I plan to vote – but I will be voting for women. First, I want women to be represented and then I will worry about issues.

      • OMG! Say it isn’t so!

        • Why the h$ll not? Men have been doing this since women first ran for public office.

          Shoot, look at the TV show, Survivor. The men almost always team with the men. And if the chips are down, the men often ditch the women and forge new alliances with other guys.

          If it’s Palin vs. B0, I will vote for Palin. She governed Alaska moderately and proved in her negotiations with big oil that she was on the side of the people, not the corporations. That’s more than I can say for the current WH resident.

          • Lol That’s also the case on The Real World/Road Rules Challenges. The men on the teams ALWAYS band together to throw challenges to get rid of their own female teammates. They’ve changed the rules and format repeatedly to try and stop them, but they always find a way around the rules. Meanwhile, the girls threaten to do the same, but they never go through with it because they’re afraid of what the boys would then do, plus they’re actual supportive teammates. Then there’s always the one stupid girl who tries to attain “honorary boy” status by helping to screw over the other girls, only to get shoved under the bus in the end.

        • funny! I should admit that this is an easy threat for me since I live in WA… Patty Murray, Maria Cantwell, some dipshit guy that I wouldn’t vote for – he is such a worthless obot. The governor is a woman and our mayor is also a woman. I think there are a bunch of women on our city council as well.

          When the time comes, I’m pretty sure I will vote for anyone who is NOT obama – unless he suddenly becomes a liberal, and then I will eat crow.

          I know this is always a sticky subject, but I want equal pay, protection for women leaving abusers, kids to be fed, healthcare for everyone…

          and honestly, I want abortions available to any woman (of any age) who wants one. If the baby can’t live outside the mother’s body, it is part of her body to do with as she wishes.

  7. Basically, we will know very early on which party wants to win by who they allow to run. If the Rs allow Palin to run and the Ds don’t trot out Hillary, it’s a done deal. If the Rs won’t let a silly girl play with the big dogs, then O and Romney can have robot wars.

    • The one thing I do like about Palin in O’ Donnell is that both women give the “Very Serious people” the vapors.

      You’d think that with the level of screw ups that occur on our government level that they wouldn’t be able to say “she isn’t electable” with a straight face. Whyever wouldn’t these women be electable? They certainly couldn’t do much worse than the present crew hallowing the halls of DC.

      • yes they could.

        • I disagree.

          Palin could what? Outlaw choice? I’ve seen nothing to suggest she would based on her governance of Alaska. run the deficit up? Uh the guys have managed that one rather well? Propel us into war? We’ve already got those going on too.

          No, I don’t see her as doing any worse than the garden variety pol already in Washington.

      • That’s what we said about Bush and his coterie.

        We were wrong.

  8. robot wars! LMAO! Nice visual!

  9. could Romney beat the big zero??

    • Sure. At the rate Obama is going any ol’ Republican might be able to beat him in 2 years.

      • Not Romney. He’s a complete dud. I’d be shocked if the Republican nominate him.

      • No, because Romney will never get the GOP nomination.

        The conservatives (including the tea partiers) hate Romney because he is a moderate.

        The fundies will never vote for him because he’s a Mormon.

        • Except that the GOP machine has already selected him like the Dem machine selected Obama. Given the movement going on, nothing is cast in stone I think, so we’ll see.

          • I’m still betting on Jeb. He’s gonna ride in on the proverbial white horse and save America. (that last bit is total snark if that isn’t already obvious)

          • Oh, that’s a given. If Jeb wants in, he’s the pick. I’ve heard from “king makers” in that party, that it would be a done deal if he steps up. And by done deal, they mean like in 2000 general done deal.

          • Nope.

            The base is mad at the GOP establishment and the Bush name is mierda.

          • Back in 2007 the media were loving them some Mittster. I kept wondering when they were gonna figure out the GOP base were never gonna vote for him.

            Palin will get the conservatives and the fundies. She’s sucking up all the oxygen so none of the others can get any attention.

          • yeah, the GOP machine is doing really well against those Teabot candidates aren’t they?

          • Egg-zactly

          • Romney will never get the R nomination unless the teaparty populist thing completely dies down in the next year, which I doubt.

            They hate Huck, too, and utterly despise Newt. Most (not all) like Palin, but do worry a bit about the experience factor. Paul Ryan would have a good shot, in this year when it’s more about fiscal conservatism. I said over a year ago that he WILL be the R nominee at some point, it’s just a question of when. I’d bet real money on that – BANK on it. 2012 may or may not be too soon.

            But depending on what happens in the house and senate, I wouldn’t be surprised if someone comes out of nowhere. The R voters are in that “outta nowhere” mood.

          • The teapartiers do not like Bush. Jeb is a no go.

          • Agree. The king makers may think they get to chose, but I think that train has sailed. 🙂

          • I don’t believe the Republican machine has selected Romney. They could never win with him either.

          • I think there’s a dark horse in among the potential R nominees, unknown to the wide public.

            The money in the GOP is behind Mitt, he doesn’t have the base but he’s clearly the establishment guy.
            I don’t see Palin getting the nod, it looks like some of the big guns there have other plans:
            Values Voter Summit: Tony Perkins Says Palin Might Be “Cheerleader,” Not Presidential Pick

            I wonder what will happen to the TP once they lose their founding.

    • Romney could have beaten Obama in 2008. He has no problem fighting dirty. He’d use the righty birther stuff and the lefty Reagan stuff and play on people’s fears of a half-Arab president. In 2012, no chance. They’re both the same guy, but now Obama has expereince.

  10. I wouldn’t underestimate the Hillary Clinton Democratic feminist vote. Yesterday I read that Digby Duggar piece.

    The Democratic Hillary voter will never support Palin’s attempted co-op of feminism. Instead? They will get loud.

    By the way, Democratic women are all for education for their daughters. First. Kinda like what Hillary did with hers.

    Hillary could campaign on that alone…

    You betcha.

    She would also support the gay voter?

    I could go on….


    • Heh

      The Democratic feminists put out a little video attacking Palin.

      If they are going to get loud they ought to get loud on something that matters.

      As for co opting- I don’t think they have co opted feminism- at least no more than the Democratic party has anyways. They have the exact same track record at the very least.

      • I wouldn’t underestimate the Hillary Clinton Democratic feminist vote.

        Who are they going to vote for? Obama?


        • Speaking as someone who voted for Palin, I admired her and the Feminists for Life’s work on the Domestic Violence Act. I also appreciated the work done to get Deadbeat Dad laws past Congress. I would have liked to have seen the Elizabeth Cady Stanton Pregnant and Parenting Act become law. I supported her increase in Headstart funds and funding for low income children to get health care.

          I don’t think any of those things are “co opting” feminism. Many of them are the essence of what feminism is, which as I see it is providing support for other women.

          • Don’t bother, cwaltz. Some firmly believe that a woman cannot be a feminist and be pro-life. So nothing else those women have done counts as strong, pro-woman, or empowering. You’re not going to change that mindset, there will just be a fight..

            I’ve had to agree to disagree on that one, myself.

          • My mom is a pro-life feminist.

          • I generally discard the canard pro life- There are actually two lives so the canard ought to be “”pro lives.”

            Unfortunately, that really doesn’t work out when you are literally forcing someone to provide nutrients from their bodies and put their lives on the line without giving them a choice in the matter.

            I completely disagree with Sarah Palin on choice. However, I can do so and respect that she has done more than her fair share to support women and their progeny. Doing otherwise is a losing proposition since there is a broad swath of women who aren’t pro choice who can and will discard the position that she isn’t pro woman because of her abortion view.

            Furthermore, I believe that Hillary Clinton’s position on this would be to discuss differences in opinion and not dismiss someone outright as “not a feminist.”

          • I agree with you cwaltz. But some we won’t convince.

          • Don’t underestimate Stephenie Meyer’s influence on the pro-life pro-choice memes. She has taken choice out of the running for her fans who are often older and the young ones who are getting older. Bella is like many women who continue pregnancies that are life threatening, choosing their babies over themselves. The issue has become very murky indeed. And it is clear that their doctors and/or hospitals would abort them to save their lives in a scenario that would take them to the emergency room. They would not be able to ensure that their choice would be honored.

            In the above case pro-choice is in danger from the opposite point of view. Again the Discourse is changing and no one is noticing.

          • I see nothing wrong with a woman making a choice to continue a risky pregnancy. As long as it is HER choice to make and not some third party who is not going to deal with the consequences of the decision.

            Choice means having more than one option to choose from.

        • Democrats like RD and I?

          We care about Brook. Umm,hmmm.

          Her generation. So does Hillary.

  11. I remember back in 2008, when I kept trying to warn ObamaNation of the disastrous path they had set out upon. Finally, in exasperation, I resorted to this old joke:

    A man was driving up a steep and narrow mountain road. A woman was driving down the same road.
    As they pass each other, the woman leans out the window and yells “Pig!”
    The man immediately leans out his window and replies, “Hag!”
    They continue on their way and as the man rounds the next corner, he crashes into a pig in the middle of the road.

    Anyhoo, one of these days ObamaNation will finally start counting how many freakin’ pigs they’ve got stuck on their collective bumper.

  12. The poll suggests that men are angrier than women, and that their anger may be more motivating than the sense of hopelessness expressed by women, particularly on economic issues.

    Is the article stereotyping women? Most men voters I know don’t understand financial stuff either. Maybe women want to understand the issues when all they need to understand is that the Democratic Party is not into them.

    • That’s the impression I got. I don’t see women as any less angry about the plight of the country then men. I also think people understand enough of the financial stuff to know when they are being bamboozled. They knew it for the bailouts. They knew it for health care. And they know it for the tax cuts and entitlement debate. The sad thing is no one really believes either party has the answers anymore. And seesawing between evil and 2% less evil seems to be a futile exercise for many and that number doesn’t just include women.

      • I talked to my dad today. He was lecturing me on how women weren’t despairing and tired because there were sure a lot of conservative women candidates up for big seats and that there were tons of women at those rallies.

        I think democratic women must be the ones despairing and tired because we’ve been used so much, promised so much, and given so little.

        I don’t like stupakistan any more than I like Sara Palin’s views on abortion. But, since they sold us out to Stupak, what can the Dems say to us that any women in her right mind will believe anyway? We won’t do that next time? yeah, right, read my ovaries … I don’t believe a word yall say.

        • It doesn’t help that the women from the left side of the aisle seem to have their priorities screwed up.

          An example: Daniel Lipinski (D) was able to cruise past a primary with 70%. This is the guy expected to carry the torch for Stupak and codify the conscience clause into law. Where were the Democratic women’s groups on him?Apparently, out to lunch.

          However, they did manage to do a great video spoofing Sarah Palin and the mamma grizzlies. Apparently they are only against women usurping their right to choose. Who knew?

          • Great video? Are you referring to the Ewok video by Emily’s list?

          • until they stop funding the democratic versions of enemies of women, I say a pox on them!

          • Which party has the most women running against male incumbents?

          • Yep

            That’s the sum of the work of the Democratic women on the left regarding choice. A wonderous video attacking another woman who isn’t even actually in government creating laws.

            Pretty sad state of affairs.

          • The far left women are so PC conscious that using the wrong words arouses their ire. I got trashed at dkos once for using retarded.

            retard coming from the Latin meaning tardy (late) and re (again and again). Just because it has been ridiculed and turned into a pejorative term does not make it wrong. So now we have mentally challenged in our mouths.

            I tell you the Discourse is changing and that is where the fight must be waged. Just like Colbert in his Washington Correspondents Dinner speech to the press and the prez.

        • I think democratic women must be the ones despairing and tired because we’ve been used so much, promised so much, and given so little.


          That’s true.
          I agree with all of Hillary’s stances.
          Only hers.

        • Frankly, the only difference there I see between the Dems and Sarah is:

          Dems loudly support abortion rights. And have actually DONE things (as in deeds. as in stuff in the real world) to restrict them.

          Sarah openly speaks of unborn life as sacred to her. And as far as I can tell has never DONE (as in deeds, as in stuff in the real world) a damn thing to restrict choice.

          Hmmmm…… tell me again how one is not only better, but LIGHTYEARS better than the other?

          • the Democratic Party: We give you false hope and aren’t ashamed to do it over and over and over and over

          • Like she said in the debate with Joe the Talking Donkey – she opposes gay marriage but so does Obama.

          • how’s that repeal of DADT working for every one too?

          • I keep reminding myself of that every time they trot out the Sarah Palin boogey monster.

            This is a woman who governed very moderately. If she had a D after her name the Democratic party would adorte her. She increased funds to social programs. She shared the wealth when it came to oil. She turned down a law that violated gay couples civil rights on constitutional grounds(despite her personal opinion) and put a pro choice justice on the bench(again despite her personal opinion). She strikes me as incredibly pragmatic. It’s only recently her rhetoric has put me off. She definitely is playing to the right.

          • I can also appreciate she’s intellectually consistent. When faced with a difficult pregnancy and with a teen pregnancy in both situatiions she chose as she believed.

            Furthermore, unlike many she doesn’t appear to carve out exemptions. She sees life as life whether it be the result of rape or incest or the result of a consensual act.

            No I can’t say I agree with her. However, I can say i respect her opinion and can believe it is coming from a core belief set.

  13. Did you have to label this with one of those Bushisms that make me wince? misunderestimate … argh!!!

  14. Remember the remake of Miracle on 34th street where toward the end the bad guys were secretly supporting Santa and were wearing Santa pins on the inside of their lapels? I have this funny feeling something similar would happen with some Dems if Sarah were the nominee. There’s something about Sarah. Usual disclaimers apply.

  15. Can I be the lone dissenter here?

    I would say don’t oversurestimate her either. I can accompany that with a bunch of polls, ALL carrying bad news as far as her electability goes.

    Before anybody thinks about dismissing those polls, those are the same polls people gleefully link to because they carry bad news for the Ds and good news for the Rs, those are the same polls carrying bad news for Obama, those are the same polls carrying good news for Hillary, and so on and so fort.

    And no, I don’t hate her. I just think her supporters reminds me of Obots because
    – she never deserves criticism
    – anyone seeing anything wrong with her is a misogynist or doesn’t understand how this nation ticks
    – everyone of her faux pas is vigorously justified, she’s the only one allowed to gratuitously dish cheap shots to which the recipient should not respond
    – she shouldn’t be made fun of and she can dictate the course of a discussion with absolute mendacity and so on and so forth…

    • I don’t know if her cult like status will ever translate into votes, but then given this year and the number of teabots that are coming onto the public stage, I don’t think you can discount her either.

      and again, this comes with my usual disclaimer that ends I can’t image the scenario under which I would cast a vote for her in actual support

    • Dissent away. And all good points. I think the main theme here though is about the people thinking she’s a joke and how she shouldn’t be taken seriously. Sort of like what people said about Reagan and Bush, etc.etc.

      Make no mistake, like with McCain, her in office would likely be an economic disaster. At least that’s the way it appears given the recent right wing leanings. But sadly I’m not sure it would be worse than Obama.

      • But sadly I’m not sure it would be worse than Obama.

        Can I confess something here?

        The way things have been going, I have caught myself many times wishing that Obama would come out as some point and say “Fuck it, I’m not running again”. I’m starting to think that’s our only chance to keep the WH.

        Then again, maybe he can turn things around the way Bill Clinton did after a disastrous and the historical shellacking the Dems took in his 1st midterm. Only I don’t think he has the skills and I don’t think he is a fighter.

        • I have the same dream. And if he just turned around and became a real liberal, I would be very happy. I don’t think either will happen though.

          • If he turned into FDR or even Bill Clinton, I’d support him. I don’t care *why* a politician does things–just that they do them.

        • Then again, maybe he can turn things around the way Bill Clinton did after a disastrous and the historical shellacking the Dems took in his 1st midterm

          I want what you are smoking ….you supposing Obama cares to turn anything around. He gives a speech and complains when that’s not enough…that’s it, that’s all he does.. ..sadly

          • Why do you crop my quote, only to wonder what I’m smoking?

          • It’s a bit creepy, imo. What in his record and career would make anyone think he can suddenly change into a liberal?
            It’s a bit like when the battered wife says “if only he could change…” Snap out of it, sister!

          • Go back and read MABlue’s original comment. That isn’t what he said. He said that’s a fantasy and that he wishes Obama wouldn’t run in 2012.

          • My mis. Meant it as a reply to DT.
            It may be a fantasy, but it feeds into the apologia of BO’s “good intentions”, imo.

        • I tend to think now that the big money selected BO to discredit the Democratic party and the “liberal agenda” and the plan was he runs against a GOP establishment dude in 2012 and loses badly.
          And that’s why the GOP establishment & the corporate media hate Palin– they don’t think they can control her.

    • -and Mike Castle was going to zoom into re election in Delaware. So much for polls.

      The only poll that matters is the one on election day.

      Furthermore, I know for a fact she’s been criticized here for her rhethoric on death panels, the loony crowd she hangs with and a whole host of other things.

    • In 1991 Mario Cuomo was considered the front-runner for the 1992 Democratic nomination. Bill Clinton was down around 4th or 5th.

      In 1995 Colin Powell was widely assumed to be running for President and was considered the GOP front-runner but he declined to run.

      In 2006 they said Hillary had “high negatives” and Barack Obama was barely a blip in the polls.

      Lots of things could happen between now and 2012.

      • Right there.

        You’re comparing her to Bill Clinton? Just the time it took me to write this, Bill Clinton lost more political skills than Sarah Palin would ever have.

        Hillary had high negatives in 2006 but she was already turning things around. Check Palin polls, the chasm is widening frighteningly so. Let alone the fact that Hillary convinced people with spectacular debates and just scary knowledge about pretty much everything. She didn’t have to hide behind FB, Twitter or a TV station.

        • You’re comparing her to Bill Clinton?

          Yeah, sure.



        • She DOES have political skills. She has much of the same folksy savvy that Reagan had. Remember that landslide by the clueless fake stupid actor? Yeah, that one.

          mablue, I agree with much of what you say, but I think you make the mistake that because she does not resonate with you culturally, she therefore doesn’t with anyone. And I’m telling you, she DOES. I’ve seen that kind of connection with the people before, and it can ignite like wildfire given the right conditions. It has nothing to do with policy, it is an innate quality that you know it when you see it.

          And BTW, when she first came on the scene, even Bill gave her that. I saw him in an interview, and he point blank said she had political “it factor” out the wazoo,
          like he’d rarely seen.

          • I think you make the mistake that because she does not resonate with you culturally, she therefore doesn’t with anyone

            That’s not what I’m saying at all. I’m going by the aggregate her current polling numbers. The chasm between the people with whom she resonate and the opposing camp has been widening and not narrowing. I think some pollster said the more she tightens her grip on the Rightwing, the more she loses the nation.

            BTW, even I gave her props when she first came to the scene, like many people did. You can check my comments around that period her in our archives. She just lost me like she dis with a substantial amount of open minded people along the way.

          • No one here is supporting her election to the presidency as far as I know. But I think it’s a mistake the way the Dems have attacked her so viciously since day one. They basically *made* her a star. And now they want to make her a bigger star by blaming her for all of Obama’s mistakes.

            I just don’t think it will work.

          • I think mablue makes a good point. Unfortunately, I think that there is a substantial portion of the great vacillating middle who could go either way on many of the issues she is tacking right on. And then there’s folks like me who are so completely disenchanted and disillusioned that I’d vote for her anyway. It’s not like voting for Dems has played in my favor. Unless Clinton or McKinney are on the ballot in 2012, I’d give Palin my vote just to give the Democratic Party a big fat FU.

          • My whole point in this is that people shouldn’t “oversurestimate” Palin either. Things don’t look so bright for her as far as becoming POTUS.

            If Sarah Palin becomes the Republican nominee in 2012 there is only one Democrat who can beat her, and it ain’t Barack Obama.

            Umm, Sarah Palin is so far the only major Republican losing to Obama, poll after poll, whereas other Republicans are either tied or winning.

          • Well, we shall see. I still think she’s a bigger threat than that. My gut was right about Reagan, about Bill, and about Obama, all of whom the first time I ever saw them speak , I pegged immediately as “president one day”, and said so, whether I liked them or not.

            Hillary? I love her. I want her badly as president. I hope with all my heart to have that, and will work my butt off again to make it happen. She does grow on people. But no, she does not have the “it factor” of which I speak. She’d have to win without it.

            My gut is 3 for 3 so far. Sarah Palin and Paul Ryan are the only other 2 that “pinged” that radar immediately. (Bush did not have it) I guess we’ll wait and see how accurate my gut is in years to come. 😀

          • I disagree that Hillary doesn’t have the IT factor.

          • “Most of what I know about what I do today, I learned from her and she has become the best public servant our family has produced.”
            –Bill Clinton, speaking about Hillary Clinton

          • Wonk, she does for ME. I feel more connection with her than likely any politician ever.

            But the quality I’m trying to put my finger on is an elusive one, difficult to explain, that has to do with charming and resonating with the great masses without having to really do anything for it, or work at it It’s an innate thing.

          • I think Hillary has that for most people. Her charisma is of a nerdier variety, but it’s there.

          • imo, Hillary’s IT factor gets greater all the time…and that’s been the case since she showed up on the national stage …at this point, it’s incandescent.

          • I agree with Wonk that Hillary has charisma. It’s just that you have to actually watch and listen to her to see it, because the media won’t report it.

    • In 1994, polls had Bob Dole beating Bill Clinton 60-40. Two years is a loooong time.

  16. I’m trying to piece all this together? I will not support Republican Women based on their positions. I was a Hillary supporter who voted McCain. I investigated the Republicans two years ago for women’s issues and gay issues (being a Dem).

    Now that I have seen the Conservative feminist agenda?

    Nope. I’m a pro-choice, pro-life feminist. Like Hillary.

    I won’t vote for Obama. I won’t vote for Palin.

    I won’t vote for Meg Whitman or Carly Fiorina.

    If it is Obama vs Palin, I’ll vote Green party.

    If it is Hillary Clinton for President 2012, I’ll vote for her — like I did in the primary.

    • If it’s Obama vs. Palin, I’m moving to Canada pronto

      • That is how bad that would be, Dak. Agree completely. That combo would make this country combust I think.

        Hillary is the only one for 2012. Her 18 million plus voters would be there in a heartbeat. Start that process now, Democratic Party.
        Just think, she has been all over the world in her role.


        If you want the Dems, you better put Hillary at the helm.
        Greens won’t win.

    • Sounds pretty reasonable.

    • I think it’s still early for me to be determining my strategy for 2012.

      i don’t have any Republican women running in my neck of the woods. If I did, I’d determine whether to vote for them based on their record and their opponents record. (If I had an anti choice woman running against an incumbent anti choice male/ or pro choice coward then why not vote for her?)

      I have decided that if all else fails I will choose not to choose. I refuse to vote between bad and worse when I believe neither is best for my country.

  17. ps: I’m a heterosexual who is for Gay marriage, too!


    fuck you Palin.

    read their agenda and you will see…..

    signed, a tail end genX (almost) baby boom married DEMOCRAT!

    • I’m a heterosexual . . . fuck you Palin

      Isn’t that inconsistent?

      • MIQ. Her agenda. I can’t wait to see what the gay voter is going to say. It should be obvious how my demographic feels about her by now.

        Nuff said.

        • What is her agenda? I’m still waiting for one of the millions of articles to spell that out. And I still won’t be voting for her. That doesn’t mean I think it’s smart politics for obama to make her the scapegoat of 2010.

          • BBoomer. She is aligned with a giant group of Conservative Republican women who are pro-rape/incest in terms of overturning what is left of Roe. Fiorina out here has stated that. Palin is the Schafley set. I gave you the link the other day. These are women who are fundamentalist in terms of women’s issues. They are the polar opposite of what Hillary Clinton is. And? I don’t even want to unpack what their feelings might be about gays.

            Now, this group of “grizzlies” is going to win all those little burgs. I thought McCain was doing us a favor two years ago. No.

            When you start to unpack the larger agenda of these guys:


            No way. This is about core feminist values. Rachel Maddow has a vid too.

          • She is aligned with a giant group of Conservative Republican women who are pro-rape/incest in terms of overturning what is left of Roe.

            That’s absurd.

          • How is obsessing about a tiny handful of women part of “core feminist values” instead of the usual Blame Women First, Faster and Harder Circle Jerk? Jeebus, no one is asking anyone to support anyone, but this isn’t a freakin’ coincidence. There may be 28 conservative Republican women officeholders for every 280 or 2800 equally-or-more scary Republican men, but god knows those 28 inspire 28 million or 28 billion times the terror. It’s amazing that such a small minority of the political class is such a disproportionate threat.

          • No, MIQ. I know you want to believe things about her?
            But, feminist issues aren’t going to be your exact issues — that’s okay –you’re a guy!

            Women who are feminists know what is wrong. I’ve already begun to investigate. You can see she is aligned with who she is aligned with in the vid above. Ask RD what she thinks one of these days.

            This is a straight woman’s feminist issue. Ask RD. She is trying to assume a “feminist” place. But? She is not one!

          • VB, I don’t know what you’re TALKING about. A) Although this place seems to attract rather a lot of feminists (me among them), I’m not sure that RD has intended it to be a “feminist blog”. You may want to ask her about that. B) MYIQ IS a feminist, as are MANY men I know. I know plenty of women who aren’t feminists. Sex is not gender, gender is not destiny, and feminists come from all over, baby.

          • Wonk — my concerns are that the “rage” being held in the Tea Party is going to increase over the next two years. it’s because of the economy. Last night I had a conversation in a Jacuzzi with a black woman at the Y I go to. She told me she felt that the T Partiers want to overturn Civil Rights — so that is the kind of fear I think about?

            When the therapist hat is on.

            Much has been stirred up. People are so poor in this country right now. When the politicians are big spenders, it increases the rage. Like with that “hell” comment the other day.

            It’s like that.

            I have lots of time to do research, so? No probs.
            Rd, our old “main” blogger talked about what might happen a few years ago? The economy is driving all kinds of things right now. Thanks Dak. I knew you’d spot it! HUGS!

          • The Clinton brand is just fine. It’s the only Dem political brand doing well right now. I don’t think that many people see them as just big spenders. They see Hillary out there working her heart out and Bill out there campaigning trying to keep the center-left alive while O and his band keep trying to drown it.

          • VB,

            No one has said this is about feminist values. And no one here is supporting Sarah Palin or her agenda. We are discussing her effect on the Democrat’s 2010 strategies.

          • VB,

            This is not a feminist blog, and RD is not a passionate feminist in the sense you are talking about. She’s pretty independent. You are patronizing us and talking down to us when we all pretty much agree with you.

            Furthermore, none of us have to ask RD about anything, because it’s our blog too and we can form our own opinions. We also don’t have to agree with each other 100% of the time. So get over it. If you don’t like our blog, then it’s a big internet.

          • Also, just a couple of weeks ago you were saying you were so incensed over Whitman and Fiorina you might end up joining the Jezebel types wearing the c— t-shirts. You’re certainly entitled to do whatever you want, but that’s hardly feminist and doesn’t really give you a lot of credibility to play Feminist Gatekeeper, for goodness sake.

          • so incensed over Whitman and Fiorina you might end up joining the Jezebel types wearing the c— t-shirts

            I remember that t-shirt comment or at least the one that was left on my frontpage post about Palin, Haley, etc.

            I responded to come talk to TC before wearing any such t-shirt so we could talk people down from that ledge, Lol.

          • Oh yeah, that’s right! Lol You’d actually be amazing at that, you’re always so calm and reasonable. “Standing on a ledge? Don’t know what to do? Call Wonk–Hope Against Hope!” 😉

          • Lol. I’m not sure how much more of Mama Grizzly derangement syndrome I can have patience for, though. I’m about ready to start deadpanning that I’ve decided to become a Wiccan every time a bot whines to me about O’Donnell like she’s Robin Tunney in The Craft.

          • I was thinking we could redirect the hysteria by photoshopping photos of all the Repubs in Congress in dresses and wigs. They’ve been lying all this time, it’s not really Jeff and Mitch, it’s Jill and Marie!!! ZOMG, RUN!!!! Dun dun dun..

          • And one last thing–Whitman is pro-choice! So can you understand how lumping her in with the other three women to indicate how close we are to an Eagle Forum takeover with Phyllis Schlafley being declared America’s supreme leader, could sort of look, from a “deep psyche” standpoint, that maybe there’s something else going on here?

          • Also? What’s so wrong with GOP women winning GOP primaries? I mean if you’re a feminist and all? Wouldn’t you welcome having more women to disagree with instead of the same old suits?

            Oops, I think I’ve used up my allotment of questions.

          • I keep thinking about when Deval Patrick ran against Kerry Healey. I didn’t vote for her (I would if I could have that back, you betcha), but it didn’t occur to me to be outraged that a major political party in my state was nominating a woman for one of the very few goddamn times ever, or to be mad at her for killing all my hopes and dreams with this grevious act. Mostly, I was pissed off at Mitt and the Repubs for their crappy treatment of both her and Jane Swift.

          • When Kay Bailey Hutchinson ran against Rick Perry , I was rooting for her to beat Perry. Kay would have been far preferable than Perry. (Bill White, Perry’s Democratic challenger right now, will also be far preferable than Perry.)

          • Someday I’m going to learn the big qualitative difference between having my rights stripped by a bunch of dudes and the much scarier prospect of having my rights stripped by a bunch of dudes plus a handful of token women. 😉 Until then, I’m concentrating on the difference between “annoying, but numerically insignificant” and “scary” as well as between “hypocritical” and “threatening.”

        • You do realize that Palin is actually one up on Obama as far as gay rights.

          She vetoed a bill that would have denied rights to gay couples on constitutionality grounds.

          As far as I can tell the gay folks haven’t even gotten that out of Barack Obama.

          It’s pretty sad that legislatively Sarah Palin is to the left of Barack Obama as far as records go.

        • I’m a queer woman, and I’d vote for Palin over just about anyone except Hillary. I hate her policies, but then the Dems are often gutless and evil and the Repubs are on their VERY BEST DAY merely deeply misguided. All of the options suck. I’ll take the one who is at least symbolic progress. On top of which, even if I don’t agree with her, I believe that she has demonstrated integrity and been faithful to her convictions, and she governed moderately: I honestly believe that she’s a fiscally conservative populist. Which I disagree with, but it’s better than an ass-licking corporate toady.

          And I wouldn’t vote third party if someone paid me to, or stay home. All either of those options does is increase the voting power of everyone else. I’d want to vote AGAINST someone if I didn’t have anyone to vote FOR.

          • I understand where you’re coming from, but very respectfully disagree. I’m done with voting against. I have someone to vote FOR: the American people! We’ve got to start mobilizing the collective voting power of the American people who are deeply dissatisfied with both parties. Both parties are part of the problem at this point. Obama was symbolic progress too. Symbolic progress is not enough for me.

          • So what do you do instead, Wonk?

            Assuming a worst case scenario (a crappy Dem against a crappy Repub), what do you DO?

            Protest voting is a CRAPPY form of protest. In terms of sending a message it’s analogous to yelling to the alien warship from on top of your house. But to my mind, voting third party is the equivalent of barking on the rooftop, and not voting is like sitting in your living room and hoping that someone gets what you’re failing to say.

            We don’t have any really effective forms of protest open to us, though. We’re kind of boned. Protest marches? Waste of an afternoon unless you can mobilize enough people to get on national TV. Petitions? Circular file. Letters to the DNC, our Congressmen, the editor? No impact. Blogging? Fun and interesting, but about as effective as a good dinner party in terms of influencing politics. Unless one of us runs for major office or has a few million to donate, we’ve got no political recourse to years, nay decades, of being dicked around.

          • Symbolic victories don’t necessarily bear immediate fruit, either. The benefits, if any, will be felt years from now. It’s not a lot, but as Sandra says, what else do we have? A symbolic victory is better than a soul-crushing defeat. If we can’t at least try to change the culture instead of hoping it will change of its own accord, we’re really boned.

          • I understand that symbolic progress takes time to bear fruit, that’s why I don’t discount it in O’s case either. It’s just not enough for me to vote for a candidate personally. If it was, I would have voted for Obama over McCain.

            I’m not yet sure what I would do. I empathize with your viewpoints. I wouldn’t ever write another woman off for good if there’s a chance she could evolve and win me over. But, I wouldn’t vote for Sarah Palin over Barack Obama at this point or vice versa. I would hope there was a third party candidate running I could vote for. I don’t see it as throwing my vote away–I see it as throwing the D/R menu away.

          • There just aren’t good choices right now. I think a critical mass of the left is going to have to come around in order to have any leverage – whether that be primarying people or sitting on our hands or voting otherwise. It works if ENOUGH people will do it and not blink and chicken out at the last minute.

            In this sense, our keeping the torch lit here for the past 2 years is helping that to happen. Slowly.

          • Many of my votes have been for third party candidates and the rest for Democratic losers. Bill Clinton was the only winning presidential candidate I ever voted for.

          • Oh, I agree, I don’t think third-party voting is throwing one’s vote away, either. I just support symbolic voting 100% because everyone is always so against it. Ultimately, everybody has to do what they feel is right and what they can live with. And in the full knowledge that whatever it is, it probably won’t make any difference anyway. 😉

    • read their agenda and you will see

      I think we are all pretty much up to speed on that, and have been for years. I don’t think you’ve found any special mystic info down the rabbit hole. But thanks for the tip.

    • Okay, I’ll be the goat. I’ll ask. Because I know others are are wondering..

      Are you just, like, high or stoned a lot or something? That’s not a slam, just curious. Seriously.

      • I’m a California Democrat and a feminist.
        You are looking at how my demographic thinks.

        Obama failed us.
        Palin is not us.

        We’re a really big state, and my state voted for Hillary Clinton. Before that Bill Clinton.

        My generation of Democrats will be on the same page Hillary is on. Just like we were in the primary.

        • I completely agree with everything you just said. That wasn’t my question, but whatever.

        • No one here is supporting Palin–or saying she “is us.” Where is this coming from?

          • This is the beginning of a dialogue about Palin. But, because Whitman and Fiorina may win California — there is a larger group that women who have been feminists need to think about. Also? Because we have gay friends?

            Huffington Post is beginning to have the stories, now.
            And, WMCB — whoever you are, no.

            I’m very serious. And you were not around here when The Confluence started up. I was. I wasn’t too keen on that big wedding, only because I see it as the same excess we see from the Obamas?

            I don’t know what you do, but, I tend to look at things through my MA lens. That would be Depth Psych.

            I’m very concerned for our country right now. In a Depth Psych way.
            It may be way over your head. Bigly.

            It isn’t over BBoomers. I am quite concerned about what the Tea Party is unleashing. I really am. As concerned as I was two years ago when we were all blogging the election. About the narcissism.

            I think you can catch my drift.

          • I have no desire to dialogue with Sarah Palin or any of the Spawn of Concerned Women for America.

          • “It may be way over your head. Bigly.”

            That’s probably it.

          • I will just keep saying it. No one knew what Chelsea’s real wedding costs were. Supposed “experts” the media relied on kept touting increasing figures from 1 million to 3 million to upwards of 5 million. It was all pulled out of the media’s arses wholecloth to sell copy. The Clinton name sells and the more the buildup toward Chelsea’s went, the more elaborate the media’s lies became. A family friend reached out to People magazine and CNN to say that Chelsea’s wedding was in the six figures, not a million or more. (The Clintons themselves never discussed the cost of the wedding.)

            But so what anyway? It was the Clinton’s only daughter’s wedding, paid for entirely privately, plus I’ve no doubt a huge chunk of the cost and efforts went to keeping the wedding as under wraps as possible, and maintaining a semblance of privacy for Chelsea, who did not choose to be the daughter of Bill and Hillary and is basically a very private person, who none of us really knows, except as a young woman we’ve seen grow up very gracefully under some very trying circumstances. She’s been the Clintons’ rock. So what if they had wanted to spend their own hardearned money on giving her her day.

            I don’t care much one way or another about Michelle and O’s vacation costs either. It of course turns off some voters because of the taxpayer dollar issue when it comes to covering the cost of security and it’s tonedeaf when O isn’t doing anything to help people in trying times, but still those are the perks of being president… every president before them has had them as well. There’s enough to criticize by focusing on Obama’s own horrible policies. imho.

          • That would be Depth Psych.

            There could be a misspelling. I think you may have meant Deep Psychosis.

          • VB:

            And, WMCB — whoever you are, no.

            I’m very serious. And you were not around here when The Confluence started up. I was. I wasn’t too keen on that big wedding, only because I see it as the same excess we see from the Obamas?

            WTF?! WMCB has been at TC for a very long time, since the primaries at least. She is also a writer and can post on the FP anytime.

            Now stop insulting people, or I’m going to have to start editing your posts!!!!!

          • VB, excuse the fuck out of me, but I was indeed “around her when the Confluence started up”

            As a matter of fact, I was part of RD’s old gang when she was still Goldberry and we were all on DailyKos.

            And no, what you are saying is not “over my head”. You spout vagaries with no particular connection to anything, and have “conversations” that have no relation whatsoever to what the other person is saying.

            Newsflash: You do not have a monopoly on deeper truth and understanding. You have yet to offer mere cogent thought, much less a higher plane of intelligence. Being muddled and drifty and breathy and airy does not equate to deep wisdom.

          • Oh, and another thing? I haven’t….ummm…done the sentence thing?

            You know?

            Making every statement a hesitant inquiry?

            Siince I was about thirteen and dotted my i’s with hearts?

          • Ralph: LOL

            WMCB: Well said.

          • Yer friendly grammar Nazi here wondering how anyone gets an MA without being able to construct a sentence.

          • To be fair, it is the Internet. Most of these comments are probably quickly dashed off between tasks at work or whatever. They don’t represent samples of our best writing or thinking. (I’m still dumb, just not AS dumb as my comments would indicate).

          • Oh, and another thing? I haven’t….ummm…done the sentence thing?

            You know?

            Making every statement a hesitant inquiry?

            Siince I was about thirteen and dotted my i’s with hearts?

            LOL, perfect! I’ve been wondering about VB and her “communication style” for a long time now.

      • oh! finally!!!
        I have been wishing and waiting and hoping seemingly forever for someone with the ovaries to ask her that.
        back to my corner now.

        • oh and another thing VB, yes WMCB was around from the start, she just had a different name.

          I agree with her that you must be stoned.
          i say so
          i must mean it.

          In over her head. You wish.

  18. Aw shit, another blogstalker is speculating about my sex life again.

    At least this one’s not a drag queen like the last one.

    I hope.

  19. NBER says that the recession was over in June 2009. Phew!

    • Dak, the question I have, if the recession ended in June of 2009, how did much the stimulus help? I believe the stimulus didn’t get into the system until the last quarter of 2009, therefore, from June to September, the economy was picking up steam on its own. My head hurts.

      • Good question. Most economic analysis has said the stimulus helped some. The primary deal with unemployment is that its bottom lags the bottom of a recession. So, even though general economy may turn up, it takes a while to clear up the unemployment; anywhere from maybe 6- 18 months. But that’s given that most of our recessions recently have come from tighter monetary policy so that all that really needed to happen was lower interest rates. (That includes the one from the first Dubya years.) This one is really different since it came from financial crisis. Those tend to be extremely severe and it might take up to seven years for this one to clear up completely.

        I frontpaged the study last Tuesday, but here’s a follow up from Robert Schiller on that thought:

  20. I read that Dario, and started thinking of the good old days.

  21. By the way, for no good reason at all, and yes, it doesn’t add any substance to the discussion, I’m going to quote our own Dr BostonBoomer:

    “Marc Halperin is a dildo.”


    • Does that mean he’s a tool?

    • I said that? Well It’s still true.

      BTW, speaking of dildoes, did you hear that Howard Fineman is going to be some kind of manager at Huffpo now that Newsweek is dying?

      • Boy do they come down fast. Yikes!

        Your quote about Marc Halperin stayed with me. I remember reading that and bursting out laughing. The 2 ladies who actually run this household asked me what was so funny.

  22. Yes she is on a different plane. She does not embrace the ruling political Discourse. Just as Jane Austen jumped over prevailing Discourse (George Eliot, the Brontes, etc) with her sentences, Palin is making political Discourse as we know it irrelevant.

    Stephenie Meyer has done the same with her best sellers. What people don’t get is that our structural changes are coming undone. The way we talk about everything is appearing yesterday. I have been checking the blogs about Pattinson and Stewart and all of a sudden Professional Smiles (read David Foster Wallace on this subject) and red carpet glitz and kissing in public in front of the cameras (selling personal romance) is being seen for what it is, a marketing ploy. Now two young people are avoiding the media and dissing it. These two are not manufactured images. Their fans are ecstatic.

    Run Hillary run.

    • The fact that she isn’t embracing the discourse is actually what is giving her(Palin) the momentum. People that have seen that the Democrats and Republicans as ineffectual in solving their problems are jumping on her bandwagon.
      Sadly, I haven’t seen her do much more than sloganeering to warrant the jump. I guess the thought process is that she is better than doing nothing while Rome burns.

      It’s funny because in studies liberals are supposedly the more adaptive of the species and yet it is the conservatives that have reinvented themselves(and yes the Tea Party is a re invention). Meanwhile liberals seem to be still dithering about what to do about a party that mocks them and refuses to live up to it’s values.

      • It’s because the “liberals” don’t recognize that their leaders are part of the ruling class and therefore inherently invested in the status quo. They want cool change but not enough to discomfit them.

        • I’m more inclined to believe that alot of them are lazy. Things have come easy to them and they naturally are inclined to find the easy route-even when there may not be an easy route.

          I saw it with Barack Obama-media stardom as a reason to adopt him as their candidate.

          I guess that’s kind of mean to say but hey- no worse than assuming someone isn’t smart simply because they haven’t attended a 4 year university(and put themselves or parents into debt in the process).

  23. Everyone says it’s like ’94 for the Dems …well it’s NOT. ’94 happened after two years of horrifying press coverage pounding Bill day in and out. The modern cable news channels ( besides CNN) were created at this time in order to pound Bill 24 hours a day ….Obama and the Dems are looking at a debacle after years of adoring press… There’s a big difference

    • OMG, amen! This is what we’ve been saying. This is nothing like ’94. Dems are trying to say that Obama isn’t in that much trouble because his approval rating isn’t in the thirties yet, but he went -40 on an index after two years of fawning press. There is a big difference between now and ’94.

      • litteisis, they always forget the press pile on Bill….because they have to admit what they did as well ….which was sit on thier hands and agree when the GOP would tear Bill down. They didn’t fight then, they won’t fight now. They hate Bill and Hillary because theyare so crude as to …gasp… fight

        • That’s the one area i see something in common with the Clintons and Palin.

          From an ideological viewpoint they are polar opposites. On an intellectual level Palin is dwarfed by Hillary. However, I get the whole entire “go to the mat for what I believe” vibe from Palin that I got from Hillary.(moreso than Bill).

    • What people forget is that 1994 was a lot about Congress. There was Newt’s contract, but there were decades of corrupt Dems. The House bank scandal pissed off the average voter. People who made 6 figures could go to a government bank and get money any time they wanted and almost never pay it back.

      Republicans who were primaried this year generally voted for TARP. In fact, some of the Senators were made to vote for it because they weren’t up in 2008. Some people still remember 2 years later.

  24. The only way the Democrats will ever get a vote for me again is if Clinton is on the ballot. I’m a Florida voter, similar to the California voter’s situation. The Miami Herald celebrated the Democrat’s Healthcare Plan Sunday with a demonstration of what the beginning of it on Thursday holds for us. They featured a woman whose daughter could not be insured due to epilepsy (pre-existing condition). Thursday, insurance companies cannot deny coverage for this girl’s illness and her mother can purchase it for her. As a result, she will no longer qualify for our state’s medicaid program. The mother is unemployed though so until she works, her daughter will be covered. As soon as mom gets a job. She must purchase coverage for the daughter, no matter the cost. I’m sure she hopes to remain unemployed although she states for the article how happy she is that she will be able to purchase insurance for her daughter. Little does she realize that there are no cost controls on what will be charged for that insurance and nowhere in the article is that mentioned. So we will now have to choose to work or have subsidized health care. We cannot have both. Let the celebrating begin……..
    Palin’s gonna have plenty of ammo by 2012.

  25. Halperin says people at both ends of political spectrum hang on Obama’s every word? WTF? Oh… I get it… He must mean the “don’t ask, just kill” policy we have with American citizens who Obama deems worthy of snubbing out without benefit of even a trial in absentia. Hate Obama sooooo much.

  26. Halperin is a tool. He underestimated Hillary Clinton every step of the way, always giving Barack Obama higher marks on the debates.

    The left should stop with the one-trick pony of running against Palin because it won’t last them all the way to 2012, we’ll find out if it will even last them all the way to this November, which I would not bet on if I were them. (All it’s doing as usual is making Sarah and Mama Grizzly more powerful in the absence of any real leadership on the left.)

    But, Halperin propping up Palin? I smell a rat. He is a beltway creep and don’t forget his book trashing everyone on the Democratic side besides Obama.

    • You could be right, Wonk.

    • Bingo! Halperin has never been right about anything, now he has all this amazing insight? The MSM is going to start rehabilitating her, thinking it’s BO’s only hope. And who’s to say they’re not right? Misogynypalooza/ClassWar the Sequel is the one thing guararanteed to bring out every last member of the BO coalition.

      • yep. And, Halperin and whatever other operatives didn’t just start this. Halperin’s been pushing the “Why Palin’s for real” line for months now.

        • Halperin… July 2010 … I smelled a rat with this too:


          • Ugh. I’m so sure he sincerely believes McCain saw the inspirational side of Palin. Feeling that way, he’ll be oh-so-popular dining out on the media circuit. He should reread Game Change to get back in the swing. 🙂 It’s so transparent not to mention really aggravating that they’re almost certainly going to be proved right. Again. *groans* I just hope she doesn’t run because I don’t want to witness this bs a second time.

          • Seriously… I’m not so sure they’ll be proven right. I think it’s a tossup at this point.

            I honestly don’t think they expect to even run against her per se… they just want to use her as a scapegoat all the way to 2012 and then have Romney or whoever surge against her during the primaries.

            The Obama Left only has something to run against and they are trying to bank on that being enough, but they are in the incumbent position. Obama could win on “running against” when he was running as an ostensible outsider (even though he was the establishment’s choice), but now he IS Washington. He needs something to run on, scapegoating will only get him so far. If the economy does not rebound well before the 2012 primary election cycle is under way, it’s going to be a toss-up. The Obama wing may say they want to run against a Sarah Palin, but I think that’s only the calculation to keep things stringing along until 2012. I honestly bet O would rather run against Romney, O has predicated his entire election stance on neutralizing Romney on healthcare and other issues (another foolish strategy on O’s part… all he’s highlighted is that there’s no point voting for a Democrat when both sides are moderate Republican)

            I say beware what you wish for Obama Left.. you may just end up running against a Nikki Haley instead of a Sarah Palin.

          • I totally respect your opinion, Wonk, but–I’m thinking They’d probably have an even easier time running against Haley. In addition to Misogynyfest the Sequel, they’ll also have “gin up racism against Indians,” “Gin up xenophobia against Indians–they’re taking our jobs!” “Talk about how Indians are well-known racists.” I need to see it with my own eyes and wounded soul before I can believe it, I think. 🙂

          • I’m not saying it so much as a prediction as a warning, and I don’t mean it about Haley specifically, but more broadly of minority women and/or conservative women who can speak policy.

            I just think the left (not Obama, not Democrats, but what’s left of people who still care about liberalism) hasn’t really thought about how the identity politics that they’ve unleashed in 2008 can (and already is) coming back to haunt them.

          • It just scares me because there’s nothing behind the Obamacrats. No boundaries, no principles. They don’t care about engaging in racism. They don’t care about being shamelessly hypocritical and inconsistent. It’s hard to even conceive of how low they’d go against WOC, and of course you’d also have conservatives who are bigoted and/or misogynists AND even the non-Obama liberals and feminists who are like “Conservative women must die! She deserves every bit of this as a Repub!” To go through that and then lose–oy. They’re going to keep going to this well until they get the message, and knowing how quick the Dems are on the uptake, and how willing to hear only what they want to hear….

          • but look at Shirley Sherrod… how she fought back. I was pessimistic before she fought back and thought she would have been better off never even saying anything about the white farmer in the first place, because they’d twist her words in this poisoned toxic environment– but she impressed me by fighting back and getting her story out there. I thought she wasn’t very savvy beforehand and ended up realizing she was far more savvy than I could have ever guessed at the outset.

            Misogyny and racism are tools for the underhanded dirty tricksters in the shortrun but it also hurts them and undermines them in the long run.

          • That’s true, that was really inspiring. And I guess, despite the $)&@(;@ media, there is a lot of value in watching someone go through it all and be brave and fearless and fight back, even if they don’t make it in the end.

    • Wonk, I’m totally with you. Obamamania always bore the tinge of Republican enthusiasm. So many Bushies glommed on to the Big Zero and that always gave me pause. But the so-called “progressive” left never batted an eye.

  27. ROFLMAO… Tweety has on Arianna and Howard Fineman right now… first they were all trying to prop up Clintons (meh… these three opportunists propping up Clintons…)… now they’re saying Obama was able to handle taking the heat today but he’s still a professor? LOL. These shills don’t even care…

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: