Who?

I don't think she meant Joseph Stalin when she used the term "stalinesque," though. Comparing her opponents to Joseph Stalin would be engaging in the same sort of "politics of personal destruction" that renders the Left so abysmally hollow and wretched, and I just can't see Mrs. Palin doing that. She's many things, some of them possibly negative, but a hypocrite? I don't think so. I think what she meant was that their tactics were "stalling-esque," and she was misquoted (because if there's anything the lamestream media likes to do, it's misquote Sarah Palin). She means they're using stalling tactics to prevent Newt Gingrich from having a fair shake. You know, airing lies and then taking too long to retract them, that sort of thing. Can you really say she's wrong?

Palin savages Romney as "a candidate who admitted to not even supporting or voting for Reagan.

This is hilarious. Apparently the most important thing to being a Republican is not any particular value, but to worship the Deity of Reagan.

Sweetie, he's not picking you for the VP slot...

I'm glad she finally came out and said that the GOP's governing philosophy is to annoy liberals.

Jake Havechek: Who the heck ever told her she was smart or articulate?

Bill Kristol.

GAT_00: Palin savages Romney as "a candidate who admitted to not even supporting or voting for Reagan.

This is hilarious. Apparently the most important thing to being a Republican is not any particular value, but to worship the Deity of Reagan.

Mentat: Jake Havechek: Who the heck ever told her she was smart or articulate?

Bill Kristol.

Which is comforting proof that she's an idiot because Kristol can't even match a stopped clock.

Pocket Ninja: I don't think she meant Joseph Stalin when she used the term "stalinesque," though. Comparing her opponents to Joseph Stalin would be engaging in the same sort of "politics of personal destruction" that renders the Left so abysmally hollow and wretched, and I just can't see Mrs. Palin doing that. She's many things, some of them possibly negative, but a hypocrite? I don't think so. I think what she meant was that their tactics were "stalling-esque," and she was misquoted (because if there's anything the lamestream media likes to do, it's misquote Sarah Palin). She means they're using stalling tactics to prevent Newt Gingrich from having a fair shake. You know, airing lies and then taking too long to retract them, that sort of thing. Can you really say she's wrong?

She clearly said "blahinesque."

PlatinumDragon: What's with the Alinsky obsession?

I have no idea. I would bet serious money she wouldn't be able to cite any of his positions correctly.

hero tag for a Palin?

/does not compute

What Palin targetting something may look like:


/Yeah, I know it's fake and I've already used it today
//Don't care

Jake Havechek: What we saw with this ridiculous opposition dump on Newt was nothing short of Stalin-esque rewriting of history. It was Alinsky tactics at their worst.

She's lost her marbles.

No, she's crazy like a fox. The last sentence of the article gives the game away:
"And if Romney loses in November, well, then it is Palin who will be able to say "I told you so"-as she stokes speculation about a possible 2016 campaign."

This is all about keeping the money taps flowing at Palin Inc. She knew she was becoming increasingly irrelevant in GOP political circles, so now she's positioned herself as Sarah D'Arc, the last defender of the TRUE faith. It's a stance that should keep the embittered 25%, who watch every candidate run away from them in the general after pandering to them in the primary, writing checks for her "campaign"

PlatinumDragon: What's with the Alinsky obsession?

Alphax: Bill Maher had an excellent clip on his show recently.. "Who the Fark is Saul Alinsky?" Been wondering that myself for a long time.


As I understand it, he was a mid-century community organizer who had the audacity to believe that institutionalized power structures fundamentally and unfairly disfavored the poor and underclass, and conceived of a methodology to collectively fight against that fundamental unfairness. Apparently, it's okay for those in power to conceive of and employ Machiavellianism to hold onto power, but the poor aren't allowed their own anti-Machiavelli.

She's going against the Rodina?

"If for no other reason to rage against the machine vote for Newt, annoy a liberal. Vote Newt. Keep this vetting process going, keep the debate going."

And if there's someone who knows first hand about insufficient vetting...

PlatinumDragon: What's with the Alinsky obsession?

He's a "Leftist" and he said some things they hate, so clearly he's The Glorious Leader of All Liberals and anyone who is a democratic obviously carries around his "rule for radicals" like Mao's Little Red Book.

You remember how after 9/11 some asshole adjunct professor at a college in Colorado said some inflammatory and negative things about America? You remember how Fox and its fellow travellers suddenly treated him like he was the intellectual and moral leader of the Democratic Party, rather than an obscure schmuck no one had ever heard of?

It's exactly like that