First Beck, then Boortz, now Palin
by Kevin_Foley
 Politics Progressive
January 31, 2013 08:20 AM | 1592 views | 13 13 comments | 13 13 recommendations | email to a friend | print | permalink
Sarah Palin, the far right's darling, lost her soap box last week after Fox News let her contract expire.
 
It was a great ride while it lasted for the half-term Alaska governor, who was chosen by John "Country First" McCain as his running mate when the senator ran for president in 2008. It looked like a bold game changer at the time but it ended up backfiring on McCain. Big time.
 
Rather than attracting tens of millions of evangelical and women voters to the ticket, Palin almost single handedly destroyed McCain's presidential campaign, revealing on the trail her utter ignorance of important issues of the day and her contempt for serious reporters who refused to toss the would-be Veep softball questions.
 
When memorably asked by Charlie Rose to discuss the controversial Bush Doctrine, covered extensively by Fox and every other major news media outlets, Palin had no clue what the newsman was talking about.
 
Fortunately, Palin could rely on Fox News and others in the right wing media to prop her up through one public catastrophe after the next while she whined incessantly about those bad people in the "lamestream" media asking her "gotcha" questions.
 
Palin was a huge embarrassment, a monumental mistake, but the conservative and even some mainstream media continued to cover for her, spinning Palin as a maverick hockey mom who would cut through the Washington B.S. if she became vice president.
 
Thankfully she didn't.
 
The notion of a vapid, empty headed dolt anywhere near the nuclear codes was scary enough when W was president. That someone like Sarah Palin could have been just a heartbeat away from them was truly terrifying.
 
After McCain's failed bid, Fox News' boss Roger Ailes rushed to sign Palin to a big contract and put a camera in her Wasilla, Alaska home, where she could opine about the events of the day with incisive wisdom like "Nancy Pelosi is a dingbat" and, President Obama is surrounded by "Chicago thugs."
 
As Republican journalist David Frum noted after Barack Obama's decisive 2012 re-election victory, Palin was part of the "conservative entertainment complex" that wrecked Mitt Romney's chances, driving moderates, young voters, women, Hispanics and Latinos, gays, and African-Americans away.
 
Palin did her part, mouthing racist gems like, "President Obama’s shuck and jive shtick with these Benghazi lies must end."
 
Ailes must have gotten the message because he finally let Palin go. For her part, Sarah now says "conservatism didn't lose" in 2012 and that she no longer wishes to preach "to the choir." Instead, she promises to "shake up the GOP machine" in the months ahead.
 
I'm sure Republicans can't wait.
Comments
(13)
Comments-icon Post a Comment
Lib in Cobb
|
February 03, 2013
@DA: I think you are too sensitive. The conservative movement needs the criticism, Bobby Jindal has explained why, ie, "Stupid Party". Without criticism, there can be no improvement, perhaps over the next 12 years the GOP will change enough not to be so insignificant on the presidential stage. The GOP decided to elect a tired old man with tired old ideas as their presidential candidate in 2008. That candidate then compounded the already failing campaign by picking Sarah Palin as his running dope. Just a brilliant move. In 2012 the best the GOP could do was Mittens and another toxic running mate. You don't see the need for criticism? OK, stay where you are and don't change at all.
Kevin Foley
|
February 03, 2013
@ Adams - Like NRA pooping draft dodger Ted Nugent, Palin's one of yours.

And thanks, finally, for noticing this blog is called "Politics Progressive."
Devlin Adams
|
February 02, 2013
Kevin said "This blog is about Palin. Focus"

Wrong Kevin. This blog, like all your others. is about using anything you can twist into an attack on conservatives. I know it, you know it. All the readers know it.
CobbCoGuy
|
February 02, 2013
Oooooooohhhhhhhhh; sorry 'bout that.

Palin.

The one from Alaska, right?

Turns out the US Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is in a tiff with the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission (AOGCC). Here are a few nuggets from the Juneau Empire site...

"Earlier this year, the state Legislature passed a resolution urging BLM to properly plug and reclaim the well sites as soon as possible, saying they pose “significant risk to surface vegetation, groundwater, fish, land mammals and sea mammals.” BLM manages the abandoned wells, drilled under the government’s direction as part of an exploratory program between 1944 and 1981."

"One project that BLM-Alaska and AOGCC have agreed should be tackled next is a well site about 20 miles southeast of Barrow, known as Iko Bay No. 1, which has been emitting gas. Gilliard called it a low-level emission that doesn’t pose an environmental threat..."

So, I guess it is acceptable for Big Gubmint to emit gas (or is it hot air?).

"[AOGCC Commissioner] Foerster has criticized what she considers to be the hypocrisy of the federal government in wanting to protect the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge from drilling while leaving a mess at the petroleum reserve."

So who is worse? Big oil or Big Gubmint?

I report; you decide.
Kevin Foley
|
February 01, 2013
Cobb Co Guy - This blog is about Palin. Focus.

CobbCoGuy
|
February 01, 2013
The Bureau of Labor Statistics released job numbers for January that show the unemployment rate rose to 7.9%. To be fair to our progressive friends, that number will most likely be revised in a way that supports their "the economy is recovering" agenda.

What is not acccounted for in this one metric is the actual headcount of those NOT IN THE WORKFORCE - 80.5M when Obama was handed the keys, to the current 89M - an INCREASE of 8.5M. So, as the population grows, so does the number of unemployed.

And the President's Jobs Council was disbanded.
CobbCoGuy
|
February 01, 2013
"60 Minutes" - the hard-hitting, probing, no holds barred, investigatory news magazine recently broadcast a Steve Kroft interview with Obama and Hillary. Watch it, if you have the stomach for it. Perhaps drinking a bottle of your favorite gastro-intestinal beverage before you watch will mitigate the oncoming volcanic eruptions in your system.

Media bias?

Nah, no way.

Read Conor Friedersdorf's recent article in "The Atlantic."

The final sentence summarizes all you need to know: "Due to his [Kroft's] shameful willingness to conduct fluff interviews, journalists who'd ask Obama tougher questions never get the chance, and the public is less informed than it would otherwise be."
CobbCoGuy
|
February 01, 2013
Interesting.

From the WSJ...

"Labor unions enthusiastically backed the Obama administration’s health-care overhaul when it was up for debate. Now that the law is rolling out, some are turning sour.

Union leaders say many of the law’s requirements will drive up the costs [ya think?!!?] for their health-care plans and make unionized workers less competitive....

...To offset that, the nation’s largest labor groups want their lower-paid members to be able to get federal insurance subsidies while remaining on their plans."

Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), March 9, 2010: "We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of controversy.”

I guess we're now finding out, aren't we?
CobbCoGuy
|
February 01, 2013
Right.

In other news, the IRS issued final rules relating to the mandate requiring us to either purchase health insurance or face a penalty. Federal rules generally display example calculations to illustrate how the rules are applied to individuals or families and the calculations often require assumptions.

For these illustrations, the IRS assumes a family of four or five will pay, on average, $20,000 per year in 2016 for the Bronze Plan.

Ok.

Mr. Foley, as a business owner, your insight could be beneficial. Is the $20K/year a fair number?
Lib in Cobb
|
February 01, 2013
@EX: Your comment involving Palin's intelligence. speaks volumes of yours. Palin's own party has run in the opposite direction from her. You may have noticed she was not invited to the 2012 GOP convention.

I will ask again, where were all of the top tier GOP candidates in 2008 and 2012?

In 2008, you folks picked a tired old man with a tired old message to be your candidate. McCain then compounded an already failing candidacy by picking a running dope with no message at all. In 2012 you folks picked a candidate who was blind to who and what the electorate is. Mittens then picked a caustic running jerk with a toxic message.

There should be no wonder why the GOP is in the current state of deterioration.

You are an Ex Dem, good.
Lib in Cobb
|
January 31, 2013
Cobb Guy:

Barack Obama is the President of the United States. Get it!

The GOP put up the best they had. McCain and his Running Dope and Mittens and his Mini Me. Two times the GOP lost big! If the GOP had anyone better, where were they? Caine, Perry , Santorun, Bachmann? No matter who the GOP put on the ticket, the results would have been the same.

I do admire McCain for throwing himself to the lions.

President Obama is indeed very qualified for most anything.
Ex Brainwashed Dem
|
January 31, 2013
This article is a Leftist hit job on Palin just like the whole 2008 campaign was. Sarah Palin has more common sense and true intelligence than most politicians. Softballs questions? You mean like the ones Obama has gotten for 6 years? This article wasn't so sad it would be funny. This writer actually believes this stuff. The whole reason we now have a Communist dictator and not a REAL patriot as president.
CobbCoGuy
|
January 31, 2013
Right.

I've been gone for a bit. Miss me? :)

In other news, Obama's Jobs Council is shutting down. It was created for pure optics following the 2010 "shellacking." The group has not met in over a year and had met only 4 times during its existence.

In my eyes, this is proof of one or more of the following:

1. Obama was truly concerned about jobs, but he just didn't know what to do with this "council" thingy he created. Ergo, he is not executive material and has no business occupying the White House. But, yes, progressive friends, he did win the election.

Or...

2. Obama could care less about jobs and the millions of suffering unemployed and underemployed citizens of this great country.

Or...

3. Obama didn't care for the few recommendations that were called for - cutting regulations and corporate tax rates and making good use of our natural resources for energy.

So, folks, which is it?
*We welcome your comments on the stories and issues of the day and seek to provide a forum for the community to voice opinions. All comments are subject to moderator approval before being made visible on the website but are not edited. The use of profanity, obscene and vulgar language, hate speech, and racial slurs is strictly prohibited. Advertisements, promotions, and spam will also be rejected. Please read our terms of service for full guides