@Mark: Palin-Bachmann 2012

Defund Texas.

I, for one, welcome the Obama-haters to the ranks of the anti-war movement.

(sarcasm alert!)

Since "America's Nightmare" is being featured on this page, here's a comment on Sarah Palin as she continues her book tour. On one stop recently, admirers marveled how she “understood” them, and how “Godly” she was; that may be true only in relation to Palin’s belief in her own “divinity.” It does say a great deal about the people who “identify” with Palin, and who they are (unless, of course, they don’t really know her as much as they think).

How people have forgotten--or have a twisted idea of "godliness." The real Palin, as Troopergate demonstrated, is prone to abuse power for petty personal interest. As her attacks on Obama during the campaign indicated, she is not “above” using racism, fear and paranoia to “advance” her agenda. As her book demonstrates, she is not “above” engaging in dishonest personal attacks, refusing to take personal responsibility, and being incapable of distinguishing fact from fiction. One reviewer of her book noted that she seemed incapable of “introspection,” meaning the inability to rationalize her beliefs, or reflect on her own errors of judgment and correct them (like, say, George Bush); she prefers to blame others for her mistakes and shortcomings. Perhaps because Alaska is so backward and isolated from civilization, only there could someone like Palin advance from a mayor’s office that resembled a “Louisiana bait shop” to the governor’s “mansion” by stepping on numerous toes, making more enemies in her own party than the opposition, and fooling a lot of people.

Obama represents what people can aspire to; Palin represents something altogether different, although what that can be is a matter of debate.
All anyone remembers is the Couric interview, but there was, of course, much more. After a 2007 interview with a Pittsburgh radio station, Tribune-Review columnist Dimitri Vassilaros called Palin the Republican's "beacon of light." He stated that she was "pragmatic" and "principled," and was "the brightest light in the land of the midnight sun." He went to say that Palin regarded the Constitution as her "Bible for governing." The amusing part of this report was that Vassilaros was not jesting. During the interview Palin's response to the repeated question if she was planning to run for president was giggling, laughing nervously, behaving as if a 10-year-old being asked if she has a crush on some boy. She never said yes, but she didn't say no, either. Vassilaros called it "self-deprecation"; it sounded to me more like an embarrassing lack of self-discipline, forthrightness and firmness.

However, radio jockeys in Florida did peg Palin correctly when they exposed her massive ego and lack of common sense when the “President of France”—actually two Canadian pranksters—called in to engage in small chit-chat—the ridiculousness of which Palin utterly failed to catch-on to; she actually believed that the “President of France” would call her on some small-time radio show with a less-than-serious news format.

On the campaign trail, in between the annoying, rude speech mannerisms in the same vein as the gut-churning spectacle of other white people trashing a black man in a demonizing and dehumanizing manner, Palin spoke as if she wasn't aware of media revelations that called into question her "maverick" status. She talked about battling the "good old boys" and ethics reform, yet she was being investigated over unethical actions in the "good old boy" vein in the firing of the public safety commissioner, who had the temerity to not to fire her sister’s ex-husband. She then claimed she stood up to oil companies, yet neglected to mention she is sought to weaken the Endangered Species Act to facilitate drilling in ANWR. More outrageously, she claimed to oppose earmarks, yet media reports say she repeatedly sought--and received--them.

Another reality Palin's "fans" seem to like about her is that like Dick Cheney, Palin really is a rogue operator who believes she is above the law and even her own self-proclaimed "ethics"--especially given her limited “knowledge” of the Constitution. During the vice presidential “debate,” Joe Biden had to correct her belief that the Constitution didn’t apply to her. One might recall as well during that so-called “debate” the moderator tossed out cream puff questions (abortion wasn’t even mentioned) that were easy for Palin to digest, but at least Biden respected the debate format; his opponent behaved as if this was a campaign speech, interrupted occasionally by someone else talking. Palin’s arrogance (and perhaps a tacit confession of incompetence) was on full display when she announced she wasn’t going to answer questions “the way you want me to.” This apparently happened quite frequently, considering the shallowness of her responses throughout when she wasn’t completely off topic. This “maverick,” “agent of change” and “Washington outsider” repeated the same “folksy” clichés, right-wing talking points and fear propaganda we had been force-fed by the Bush administration for eight years.

It is also interesting to note that while Palin felt she had an “obligation” to denounce “radical” black preacher Jeremiah Wright and “expose” the “full extent” of his influence over Obama to frightened white people, the media paid little attention to Palin’s “anointment” by a Kenyan preacher named Thomas Muthee as the future governor of Alaska. Muthee was known as a “witch-hunter” in Kenya, accusing at least one woman of being a “witch,” her possession by the devil causing a car accident. References to Muthee’s “witch-hunting” expertise could be found on the website of Palin’s church, until it was removed after she announced that she was running for governor. Is this the “godly” woman Palin's "fans" are referring to?

Is this what Palin’s “fans” see in themselves?

Research - hydrocarbon law and various countries ie Iraq

Since this is comment page and not a chat room, I'll comment on Ed Schultz's disagreement yesterday with a black female caller who was offended by the idea that the Lakewood police officers should be “deified,” considering how cheaply the lives of people in her community were regarded not just by police, but by white society in general; all-white inquest juries say as much. Although there are exceptions, in general there is a vast disconnection in viewpoints in a society where the business of police is to protect the “haves” against the “have-nots,” largely denoted along racial lines.

But then again, I wouldn’t expect some people to fully comprehend this, living in a world of what they know is what they see in the television news world. The television world doesn’t tell you things like these hard economic times are hitting minorities much harder than whites, and joblessness—especially for blacks—is already at depression levels, and if the past is any example, will have to wait much longer in line than whites.

Do Senators even pay attention??

Last night, after the President's Afghanistan policy speech, we all heard the Senior gentleman from Arizona say that while he supported the escalation, he did not support the decision to establish a timetable for withdrawal (What??!! You want to go to war with an EXIT STRATEGY??).

This morning, I got an e-mail from, Russ Feingold's office (one of few folk who work on Capitol Hill that I used to have some respect for), stating that he cannot support the President's decision to escalate WITHOUT a timetable for withdrawal!

http://feingold.senate.gov/record.cfm?id=320330

I've gotta wonder - did Russ' office write up two responses, one assuming a timetable, the other assuming none, and send the wrong one out this morning? I sure hope that's the case.

@Richard

I had to leave yesterday to get some last minute yard work done or I was looking at a "spanking" from the wife. I wanted to respond to your comments regarding John Edwards. Amen.

Even though I live in Minnesota, I volunteered to canvas in Iowa for Edwards. Trudging thru the snow in Northern Iowa in Dec & Jan. getting doors slammed in your face was less than fun. Edwards was the only viable candidate who got it, when it comes to the inequalities in our system and the threats posed by corporations. He had everything. Except, ultimately, self control. A real tragedy. Yes, Richard, I agree, I would take him, human weaknesses and all, in a heartbeat.

Poverty rate keeps growing but the press is blind to it. I have read that 50% of our children will qualify for food stamps. Something is not right in our country.

we've become a nation of cowards and it began 50+ years ago.We're afraid to look them in the eyes because like an animal they will sense the fear and attack without consequences.

Oh yeah, one more thing....on that Facebook page where I posted the MM letter? I wrote Why does the President read Thomas Fried Man and not Thomas Hartmann?

Yeah ! Get em!

I am sorry about the standoff, Quark and the Prez announcement not what we had hoped for.