Crass: Obama Jokes That A Pitbull Tastes Better Than Sarah Palin

Everyone's been chuckling over Obama's self-deprecating jokes about eating dogs. I guess they haven't noticed that Obama was also telling a vulgar, not to mention sexually degrading, joke at Sarah Palin's expense: 

From the Secret Service to the Kardashians, everything was fair game at the annual White House Correspondents' dinner. But the featured item on the menu was dog ... jokes -- which figured, since Barack Obama's old admission to eating dog as a child was just recently revived as a campaign sideshow. "Last week we learned that the president's two favorite steaks are rib eye and seeing eye," cracked comedian Jimmy Kimmel, the evening's host. 

But even Kimmel got a taste that it's tough to work a room better than the Obama himself. The president touched on Sarah Palin's recent hosting of "Today" to segue into the night's toughest line: "What's the difference between a hockey mom and a pit bull? A pit bull is delicious."

That, of course, echoes Palin's line from her 2008 convention speech: What's the difference between a hockey mom and a pitbull? Lipstick! (rim shot). Very presidential, making jokes about how a dog "tastes better" than a woman. If you watch the video at the link, you will see that Obama says the word "delicious" with a little too much relish for my taste. Kind of reminds me of the time unofficial anti-bullying czar Dan Savage said he wanted to "f*** the sh** out of Rick Santorum." What a couple of closet cases. (I'll leave you to guess the nature of the closet). 


It goes without saying that you never heard Reagan, Nixon or either of the Bushes making cracks like that. Can you imagine Reagan making sexual jokes about Geraldine Ferraro? Not only would he have been slammed as a chauvinist pig, but people would have wondered why he bothered. His ticket won the 1984 election, after all. Unless I missed something, I wasn't aware that Sarah Palin was running for president, or anything else, this year. 


For all the talk about Obama's "cool," there's no denying that he is also an a**hole.

Motorcycle Mama: Sarah Palin Rides With Rolling Thunder

While Democrat "rising star" (hello!) Anthony Weiner spent the day trying to explain how a picture of an erect penis ended up traveling from his Twitter account to that of a busty Seattle co-ed's, (Anthony's Weiner will now be joining El Topo and my dog getting hit by a truck on the list of things I can't unsee), Sarah Palin was riding on the back of a Harley in DC as part of the Rolling Thunder event on the Mall.

Is Palin running for President? I don't know. She's certainly not a "serious" person in the Mitt Romney/Mitch Daniels sense. Nor is she the "adult in the room," which is how we are told to appreciate the President. But, she is certainly something. I take it as a point of pride that she is on "our" side. Democrats can have their Anthony Weiners and like 'em.

Trust Buster: The Betrayal of the California GOP Voter

The Schwarzenegger love child story has triggered the expected sympathetic headlines for "betrayed spouse" Maria Shriver, but there's been relatively little said, at any point in the last 5 years, of the people whom the Governator truly betrayed: the hundreds of thousands of California Republicans who voted him into office. The SF Chronicle provides us with some room to vent:

Sacramento anti-tax advocate Ted Costa looks back at the events he set in motion when he helped kick off California's historic gubernatorial recall in 2003 - culminating in the election of Arnold Schwarzenegger - with more than a little disgust.

"He's betrayed the people who supported him from Day One," said Costa of the former GOP governor, who this week acknowledged betraying wife Maria Shriver by having an affair and an out-of-wedlock child with a housekeeper more than a decade ago. "I don't know why people are shocked."

Melanie Morgan, the former KSFO conservative talk show host who was dubbed the "Mother of the Recall," is also angry. "He squandered his marriage and the good will of the people of California," Morgan said. "And now, he's squandered any legacy."

(Etc.)

If you are only now feeling betrayed, you need to stop voting or participating in public life. Schwarzenegger turned his back on Republicans starting in 2006, but when he began pushing global warming "solutions," high speed rail, and a debt & taxes solution to the state budget crisis, he literally turned into a Democrat. But, no matter how many times CA conservatives rolled their eyes and made little rabbit ears motions with their fingers about the "Republican" governor, the fact is that we were stuck with a guy with an "R" after his name who joined with state progressives to run the Golden State into the ground. I, frankly, don't see why the love child story is some major betrayal compared to the actual damage he did to his party and to the state. It's not like Schwarzenegger ever ran as the family values candidate.

And, as long as we're pointing fingers this morning, I'd like to extend a middle-fingered salute to the state GOP establishment who lined up behind Schwarzenegger back in 2003. Ah-nuld, we were assured, would govern as a fiscal conservative without all of that distracting social con stuff. Plus, he would give us a leg up in the culture wars. Made sense at the time, so more traditional types like Darrel Issa (who originally bankrolled the recall movement with the idea of becoming governor*) and the rock solid Tom McClintock were pushed aside withe the usual rationalization that a moderate Republican would be more electable. The old white guys sure were loud in promoting Schwarzenegger's ambitions, and then they sure were silent when he simply stopped governing as a Republican. Hard to know whether that was the silence of acquiescence or of embarrassment.

Incredibly, now that we have learned that a politician can run as a budget cutting conservative and win, but then lose when he governs as a member of the bi-partisan party of big government, the national GOP establishment seems determined to foist the likes of Mitt Romney or Tim Pawlenty on us while at the same time disparaging people like Herman Cain and Sarah Palin who can actually draw a crowd and whose conservative bona fides are beyond dispute. For heaven's sake Mitt Romney worked to pass left-wing health care reform within the past 5 years, and now he's supposed to be the GOP standard bearer? Why, because he's handsome and has lots of money? That's supposed to make him trustworthy? Forget it.

I get it that not every Republican can be Ronald Reagan. Even Reagan couldn't be Reagan, at least not in the WWRD? sense. But starting around 1994, Republicans have found repeated electoral success in running as conservative budget cutters with an overlay of social conservatism. Yet the results of those elections, whether the Gingrich Revolution or the California Recall or what have you, have been the opposite: revolutionaries (if you can call them that) becoming appropriators, tax raisers and deficit spenders, often within very short order.

The moderate wing of the GOP have gotten the candidates they've wanted for the past 15 years with the result that the size of government has increased along with the depths of our fiscal hole. Arnold Schwarzenegger was the ultimate "electable" Republican and look where that got us. And now we've been cordially invited to make the same mistake on a national scale.

*anyone else remember how an old drunk driving beef came out of nowhere to knock Issa out of contention, but not out of politics? Funny how that worked out.

The Tragedy Of Sarah Palin

The Atlantic has a Big Essay titled "The Tragedy of Sarah Palin," the theme of which is that Sarah Palin governed Alaska in a manner many self-professed liberals would theoretically approve (mostly by taking on Big Oil), but then - for some mysterious reason! - became a "conservative firebrand," thus depriving America of a leader who could have solved all of our problems. No this is not a joke. (although, in a sense, the joke's on us).

From the moment Sarah Palin’s acceptance speech electrified the Republican convention, she was seen as an unbending, hard-charging, red-meat ideologue—to which soon was added “thin-skinned” and “vindictive.” But a look at what Palin did while in office in Alaska—the only record she has—shows a very different politician: one who worked with Democrats to tame Big Oil and solve the great problem at the heart of the state’s politics. That Sarah Palin might have set the nation on a different course. What went wrong?

Give me a break. That information was readily available in August 2008 when Palin hit the national stage. After John McCain first nominated Sarah Palin as his vice presidential running mate, there was a scramble to put any information about Palin on the air. CNBC ran an endless loop of an interview that Palin did with Maria Bartiromo on the topic of energy. Have you ever seen it? I'll bet not, and if you see it, you'll know why. Palin is very impressive, speaking passionately and knowledgeably on energy policy in a way that would impress anyone not on the left side of American politics. Some of her verbal tics are present, of course - I remember chuckling at the time over her repeated use of the phrase "America's hungry markets"- but she goes toe to toe with the Queen of Wall Street, laying out the case for a free market, domestically based solution to America's energy problems - throwing in some criticism of the Bush Administration along the way. Here's the video if you don't believe me

But, we didn't hear much about that back in those days, did we? No, it was all "what's your favorite Supreme Court decision" and "I can see Russia from my house." In September and October 2008 when the American economy literally melted down right before our eyes, and the government's only reaction was to pass a $700 billion bailout opposed by wide majorities while a presidential campaign raged in which the #1 recipient of campaign donations from Goldman Sachs was running around talking about "spreading the wealth," pop culture and the media suddenly decided that the one thing that needed to be broadcast over and over again were "Sarah Palin = dumb" jokes. As if that weren't bad enough, her children were subjected to a level of scrutiny that would have made Bill Clinton's political career wither away to nothing.

Now, the Atlantic, which hosted Andrew Sullivan's literally deranged speculation about Trig Palin's "real" mother, says it's a big tragedy that "we" didn't learn more about the real Sarah Palin. I think most of us figured out well enough, thanks anyway.

Speaking of tragedy, this is what Palin was dealing with today. A family that was harassing her and her parents were hit with a restraining order, but when you see what they were doing, you think that restraining order is cold comfort.

Former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin won another round in court on Monday against a Pennsylvania teenager accused of stalking the outspoken conservative, telling a judge, "I fear for my friends' and for my family's safety."

The three-hour Anchorage court hearing, with Palin and her antagonists testifying by telephone, ended with the judge renewing a previous restraining order against Shawn Christy, 19, and issuing a similar order against his father, Craig.

Shawn Christy admitted in court to having threatened to rape Palin but has denied her allegations he menaced her daughters. He also admitted sending Palin numerous e-mails and gifts, and to traveling to Anchorage earlier this year.

Craig Christy admitted to making more than two dozen early morning phone calls to Palin's parents over a two-day period in March. He also acknowledged organizing a support group for his son to stage protests at events attended by Palin, the 2008 Republican vice presidential nominee, and he maintains a Facebook page with numerous anti-Palin messages.

State Superior Court Magistrate Jonathon Lack said he found the repeated telephone calls to Palin's parents, some of them recorded and played at the hearing, to be "very disturbing."

Lack rejected Palin's request for a restraining order against the teen's mother, Karen Christy, who called Palin's parents only twice.

Honestly, does Mitt Romney have to put up with this sort of thing? Of course not. No one's afraid of him.

The tragedy of Sarah Palin is really a tragedy for the decent people of this country. She was the center of a vicious series of political attacks led by the president himself, joined in gleefully by the full range of the American political, media, entertainment, and academic elite. The predictable result is Palin finds herself dealing with all manner of invasive behavior from lunatic stalkers to hackers peering into her email and all the rest (that hacker kid, btw, went to jail for that caper, but I'll bet he'll be dining out on his antics until he's well into his thirties). No one's so "dumb" or "dangerous" to deserve that, at least as long as Al Sharpton is treated as some sort of elder statesman.

We have a bottomless supply of Mitt Romneys because the Sarah Palins are regarded as less than human and treated as such, even though we would all be better off with her practical approach to public policy, rather than the grand schemes of the bi-partisan party of government. That is indeed a tragedy because our "conservative" representatives end up not being as representative so much as they are able to adopt a passing complexion for the media, which would dehumanize them to the point of being "unelectable" and then lament over the tragedy of it all.

We're Here! We're Clear! Get Used To It!

The most dispiriting part of the last week's worth of fake budget cutting, and backing-away-from-the-brinksmanship was not the wispiness of the "cuts," but the quailing of the GOP leadership, such as they were, in the face of predictable demagoguery about Republicans wanting to kill grandma. With the exception of Paul Ryan, no one on the right side of the Beltway elites seemed at all bothered by the fact that they were being borked en masse. Meanwhile, Donald Trump was the only guy criticizing the President in anything close to the tone that Democrats at all levels use to attack Republicans. You could honestly wonder if anyone out there knows how to play this game.

Well, Sarah Palin was in Madison, WS this afternoon, and she at least knows what she's doing. Watch as she calls out The One and chastises her own party for already betraying the millions of voters who brought them back from the political grave last year.

I'm sure there are plenty of folks out there who will watch the above and think "what a moron." Well I must be a moron, too because that's the most rousing thing I've seen in years. And brave. If you listen to the above, you'll hear a sort of groaning ambient noise in the background. It's the sound of thousands of union rowdies bussed in to Madison specifically to surround the Tea Partiers and yell at Sarah Palin. Honestly, can you imagine Mitt Romney wading into something like that? I can't, but even if you could, no one can imagine him (or any other member of the group of whitebread GOP "front-runners") giving such a rousing speech. Game on, indeed.

Cut Rate: What's Going On With the 2011 Budget Deal?

Yesterday, I was making fun of Paul Krugman for his overwrought objections to the FY2011 budget deal, which he thinks is setting the stage for the GOP's final solution for the problem of old people and children. Well, now I guess it's time for me to make fun of myself because some serious analysts have concluded that the deal is filled with so many gimmicks and money shufflings that the "real" cuts are little more than $14 million.

A close look at the government shutdown-dodging agreement to cut federal spending by $38 billion reveals that lawmakers significantly eased the fiscal pain by pruning money left over from previous years, using accounting sleight of hand and going after programs President Barack Obama had targeted anyway.

Such moves permitted Obama to save favorite programs — Pell grants for poor college students, health research and "Race to the Top" aid for public schools, among others — from Republican knives.

And big holes in foreign aid and Environmental Protection Agency accounts were patched in large part. Republicans also gave up politically treacherous cuts to the Agriculture Department's food inspection program.

The full details of Friday's agreement weren't being released until overnight as it was officially submitted to the House. But the picture already emerging is of legislation financed with a lot of one-time savings and cuts that officially "score" as savings to pay for spending elsewhere, but that often have little to no actual impact on the deficit.

I have a little sympathy for Boehner and other Old Guard types here. They have been around long enough to have seen other periods when the public proclaimed itself to be very concerned with the skyrocketing federal budget. But those periods of fiscal reform quickly gave way underneath an avalanche of howls over cuts to Big Bird, babies, and old people. We saw a replay of it just last week when Democrats were ranting about how the GOP was using the budget process to expand breast cancer rates. Stupid? Yes. But don't tell me that there aren't millions of people out there for whom such arguments are oddly compelling. And in the past, those are the people whose views have prevailed.

Still, the end result of all the negotiating is dispiriting. $14 billion? Out of a budget whose deficits alone amount to over a trillion dollars a year? That doesn't even rise to the level of a pittance.

Yes, it's true that the GOP has "changed the conversation" in DC, meaning everyone is at least talking about budget cutting. But outside of Paul Ryan, no one is talking about what they would cut. That is because Democrats don't want to cut anything - except defense spending, of course, but don't call them unpatriotic! - they just want to raise taxes on "the rich" and "corporations." They don't say that, of course, because they know they would be thrown bodily out of office. So instead, they offer all sorts of hedges and rhetorical feints and claims like "I was wrong about what I said about the debt limit back when George Bush was president." It's those sorts of fine toned pronouncements that gain Democrats their reputation for "nuance" and "precision" - and would be labeled "flip flopping" or "lying" if a Republican dared to try the same.

Oh, and last week, the only major national Republican politician who was out there criticizing the deal was Sarah Palin who declared the deal to be wholly inadequate. I keep reading about how Palin is in decline because, like, her daughter was on Dancing With The Stars. But her philosophy certainly remains robust. Too bad we can't say the same for other elements of the GOP leadership.

Not sure if there's any point in blowing up the deal at this point. There are bigger battles coming up. But, so far we haven't seen much to suggest that those battles will come to a satisfying end.

UPDATE: I thought made a mistake and wrote "$14 million" instead of "billion" in the opening paragraph, but actually I was ahead of the curve. The (all bow) CBO says the actual cuts amount to a little over $352 million. That's "million" with an "M."

Perspective: A Lesson In Political Violence From Lebanon

I haven't been writing much on international news lately, but the latest reports from Lebanon have a certain resonance, given all that we've heard this week about vitriol and political violence in America. It seems that Hezbollah has pulled out of the coalition government there because - get this - the other coalition members were unwilling to go along with a whitewash that would absolve the Hezz for their role in the carbombing of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri:

Lebanon's government collapsed Wednesday after Hezbollah and its allies resigned from the Cabinet in a dispute with Western-backed factions over upcoming indictments in the 2005 assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri.

A U.N.-backed tribunal investigating the truck bombing that killed Hariri and 22 others is widely expected to name members of the Shiite militant group, which many fear could re-ignite sectarian violence that has erupted repeatedly in the tiny nation.

Hezbollah's walkout ushers in the country's worst political crisis since 2008 in one of the most volatile corners of the Middle East.

Hezbollah has its own private army, funded by fundamentalist forces outside the country, and which is much larger and better equipped than the "real" Lebanese army. It maintains a permanent state of war with Israel, the country immediately to the south, lobbing missiles in the hopes of provoking a response. It has murdered Israelis, Americans, and its fellow Lebanese by the hundreds. If any American leftists want to see an example of political violence, go to southern Lebanon for a dose of the real thing. Drop me a line if you make it out alive. (And spare me the line about how groups like Hezbollah are "like" America's fundamentalist Christians. The Hezz combine murder with "good works" in the classic manner of the Black Panthers and other left-wing heroes).

The westernized elements of Lebanese society try against all odds to maintain a semblance of a sophisticated, bourgeois lifestyle. Even now, they have set up a "care taker" government while Hezbollah schemes to place one of its allies in the prime minister's office. Want to make sure everything is legal and constitutional, right? Yeah, like that matters to the Hezz. If they can't take over Lebanon through parliamentary politics, they'll do it through war. That's what political violence looks like.

Provacateur: Fred Phelps Weighs In on the Gifford Shooting

Every media jack-off in the country seems to be looking for his moment in the wake of the attempted assassination of Congresswoman Gifford, but pride of place has to go to the Very Reverend Fred Phelps, who has announced plans to picket the funeral of the nine-year old girl who died in the line of fire:

The Left does some truly despicable things in this world, but this is a new low for Democrats.

Former three-time Democrat gubernatorial candidate Fred Phelps Jr. (commonly called just “Fred Phelps”) and his Westboro Hate Group have announced plans to disrupt the funeral of 9 year-old shooting victim Christina Greene.

Christina was murdered by Jared Lee Loughner yesterday in his assassination attempt on Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords. The little girl was born on September 11th, 2001, so her parents have been cursed with a horrific trifecta of high profile trauma: their daughter born on the worst day in our generations’ lives, their daughter murdered in an assassination attempt on a member of Congress, and Democrat Fred Phelps aiming his hate machine at their family during their daughter’s funeral.

Democrat Phelps (an enormous supporter of Al Gore’s, though the media conveniently leaves off that he’s a Democrat and instead likes to imply he’s a conservative, which he is not…he’s a Democrat, and ran repeatedly on the Democrat ticket unsuccessfully for several elected offices) disrupted the funeral of Elizabeth Edwards last month, because it is what he does.

On a day when a family is hurt the most it could possibly imagine being hurt, this horrible man makes things just a little worse for all involved.

We've been hearing a lot about "vitriol" and the " political climate" that contributed to the deaths of six people and the permanent disabling of a member of Congress. I would hope some of these earnest chin-pullers would reflect on how American law, society and culture ca. 2011 seems better able to protect the rights of Fred Phelps, than it is able to protect those of Christina Greene and her family. That has contributed a lot more to the "climate" than some silly Sarah Palin campaign graphic.

Like Laughner, everyone tries to dismiss Phelps as a nut, a loon. Sorry, but I don't think it's that easy to dismiss him. The man may be scum, but he is scum with a following, a ready-made media platform, and a serious First Amendment case pending before the US Supreme Court. Crazy he's not. Neither was Laughner. He may have been confused, his thoughts muddled; but he had a plan, and a mission, and he carried them both out to their bitter end. That's not crazy; that's evil, plain and simple.

Politics and mass movements have long attracted their share of misfits and losers. Radical politics takes those losers and cranks them up to eleven. Many of them remain trapped in obscurity. But, a chosen few find the immortality they seek. Some find themselves, as if chosen by Fate, at the exact street corner where the Archduke's car paused after making a wrong turn. Some manage to return from their outlaw existence to live a modicum of bourgeois respectability, even hosting dinners where future presidents make their political debut. And, some even manage, against all odds, to seize the commanding heights where they can inflict their sociopathy on nations, rather than their friends and neighbors.

So, yeah, I'd say there was something in the political climate that contributed to the events of last Saturday. It's a political climate where the best educated among us seem unable and unwilling to see the difference between a fundamentally decent person like Sarah Palin and a certifiable member of the lunatic fringe like Jared Laughner. (and isn't it funny how all of our modern-day Edward R Murrows couldn't tell us for hours whether Gifford was dead or alive, whether there was a "second shooter," or how many dead and wounded there were; but they knew instantly that the shooting was Sarah Palin's fault?) In an environment like that, every jerk with a gun and a used-bookstore copy of the Communist Manifesto becomes as important and impactful as one of the leading voices in the Republican Party.

Dumb Like A Fox: When Is Intellect A Disqualifier for Higher Office?

There are a lot of Republican Wise Men (and women) out there who reflexively disparage Sarah Palin's prospects as a presidential candidate because they consider her to be dumb. Leaving aside the fact that these folks almost never comment on the intellect of Democrats like the estimable Maxine Waters or Nancy Pelosi, Jeffrey Lord also reminds them of a recurring theme in American politics: whoever is at the top of the Republican presidential ticket is always too dumb to be president.

Barry Goldwater, the first modern conservative to win a GOP presidential nomination in 1964, would have been lucky to be tagged as being merely too dumb to be president. He was also said to be, according to Time magazine, "psychologically unfit to be president," "emotionally unstable," "immature," "cowardly," "grossly psychotic," "paranoid," a "mass murderer," "amoral and immoral," a "chronic schizophrenic" and "dangerous lunatic." One psychiatrist breezily announced Goldwater had a "strong identification with the authoritarianism of Hitler, if not identification with Hitler himself."

...

Reagan, also pegged as a war-monger, was called an "extremist" at the beginning of his political career and an "amiable dunce" just after his election to the presidency. They were a mere blip in the cascade of insults about his intelligence hurled in Reagan's direction over almost a quarter century as a serious American politician. This particular man who was "too dumb to be president" won the Cold War without, as Margaret Thatcher said, firing a shot. Not to mention launching the American economy on a path to creating some 50 million jobs over the next three decades.

...

George Romney was a liberal Republican, a spectacularly successful business executive as the chairman of American Motors. On the strength of his dazzling business career he was elected Governor of Michigan, where he became a popular political figure with both voters and the national press.

Then a funny thing happened to George Romney. In 1967 he began running for the 1968 GOP presidential nomination. The polls showed he was the man-to-beat for the nomination, the one man in the Republican Party who could take on and beat LBJ, the same LBJ who beat Goldwater in 1964 by a landslide. Then, returning from a fact-finding trip to Vietnam, Romney incautiously allowed as to how he had been "brain-washed" by the Johnson administration on Vietnam. And…. bam.

Within a media cycle the brilliant business executive and innovative Governor of Michigan had become -- you guessed it -- an idiot too dumb to be president. The dumb-as-a-post tag hung around his neck by a media concerned that old George was making just a little bit too much progress and that Tricky Dick, as they called Richard Nixon, would be easier to beat. Romney was finished. His last stint in government was not the White House but the Department of Housing and Urban Development, in Nixon days the equivalent of political Siberia.

...

Perhaps the most instructive case of "too dumb to be president" is that of Gerald Ford. Elected to Congress in 1948, a man with a ready smile and outgoing personality, Ford had won rave reviews from the liberal press when he challenged the House Republican Old Guard following Goldwater's defeat, becoming Minority Leader. All the way through his House career, and on into his surprise accession-by-appointment to the vice presidency following the resignation of liberal bête noire Spiro Agnew, the moderate Republican Ford was pictured as good-ole smiling Jerry, the steady, smart House leader who had not an enemy in the world. He played golf with his old pal House Democratic leader Tip O'Neill. Just a nice, smart, swell guy, said the press.

Then a funny thing happened to good old Jerry Ford. In the wake of Watergate he became president with Nixon's resignation. Within a month he pardoned his predecessor, believing (correctly) that until the nation had rid itself of the Watergate/Nixon obsession he, Ford, would have an impossible time getting things done as president. Nothing dumb there. Ford had no sooner announced the pardon and disappeared from the television air waves than the re-positioning of Ford by the liberal media had begun. The man who had graduated from Yale Law School and been the epitome of openness and hard work was, in the blink of an eye, dumb as a post and a conniving liar to boot. Up from the mists came a Lyndon Johnson quote saying that Ford the college grid star had played too much football without a helmet. An on-camera tumble on the slippery steps leading down from the door of Air Force One led to the depiction of the most athletic president since Teddy Roosevelt as a bumbling fool. On a new program called Saturday Night Live, an unknown writer/actor named Chevy Chase rocketed to fame portraying Ford as dumbly prone to hilarious stumbles and dramatic falls over all manner of furniture. Chase anticipated the Tina Fey as empty-headed Sarah Palin routine by decades.

Much more at the link. The point, of course, is that whoever dares to run against Obama in 2012 will be declared to be too dumb to replace man who has added trillions of dollars of debt, has presided over trillion dollar deficits, passed a trillion dollar stimulus that failed, passed a health care "reform" law that was opposed by a majority of the country and which has thrown the health care system into chaos, has socialized the banking and auto industries, has failed to stop nuclear proliferation in Iran, has lost control of millions of pages of formerly top secret military and diplomatic documents, and so on. Yes, we don't want to get in the way of the Express Train of Intellect & Accomplishment!

We don't know which GOP presidential hopeful will be declared dumb if Palin doesn't run. But it's coming. Maybe Tim Pawlenty's (leaked) college transcripts will be filled with C's. Maybe Bobby Jindal will momentarily falter when asked about SB9353, the pending legislation related to the federalizing of the avocado crop. Maybe Chris Christie will be caught in an open mike referring to the teachers union as a bunch of broads. Maybe Mike Huckabee will fail to display an appropriate reverence for Charles Darwin. Maybe Mitt Romney will fall of a stage. If you've been following politics for any amount of time, you know the sort of "gaffes" that Republicans can be subject to, and which can be put on an endless media loop should it strike the MSM's fancy.

Meanwhile, Democrats are constantly doing dumb things while in office without much public comment, at least in the MSM which still regards itself as the nation's official debating forum. Just yesterday, the lame duck Senate passed a food safety bill that contained a tax provision that properly should have originated in the House bill, rather than the Senate's. (Not that I care, the food safety bill is yet another Big Government disaster). But still, we're talking about a bill that was drafted by human beings who had done this sort of work before. And this is the same crowd that splits their sides over Sarah Palin?

The fact is that it is a rare moment when any Republican of note is portrayed in the media as having a brain. For many casual viewers, the wonder of the Health Care Summit from earlier this year was how the GOP attendees put forward calm rational arguments, while it was the Democrats - exemplified by Louise Slaughter's crazy story about a constituent wearing her dead sister's dentures - who were emotional and dismissive of such concepts as math and reality. (as in, this bill is too expensive and will not accomplish its stated goals). But, some GOP back bencher puts on a prissy face about an ant-covered Jesus at the Smithsonian, and suddenly it's all-hands-on-deck.

When John McCain first nominated Sarah Palin as his vice presidential running mate, there was a scramble to put any information about Palin on the air. CNBC ran an endless loop of an interview that Palin did with Maria Bartiromo on the topic of energy. Have you ever seen it? I'll bet not, and if you see it, you'll know why. Palin is very impressive, speaking passionately and knowledgeably on energy policy that would impress anyone not on the left side of American politics. Some of her verbal tics are present, of course - I remember chuckling at the time over her repeated use of the phrase "America's hungry markets"- but she goes toe to toe with the Queen of Wall Street, laying out the case for a free market, domestically based solution to America's energy problems - throwing in some criticism of the Bush Administration along the way. Here's an excerpt if you don't believe me:

Number of views on Youtube? 2,665. See what I mean? Her intellect has been hiding in plain sight, but no one can see it.

Sarah Palin isn't too dumb to be president. But, it may be that her own party is too dumb to recognize that they believe a chariacature created by their political enemies.

The Further Adventures of THAT WOMAN: Sarah Palin in the News

Sarah Palin is, I wouldn't say back in the news, but she is involved in some unusual news stories today.

First, the on-line gossip/news site Gawker managed to acquire 21 page proofs from Palin's new book, and published them on its website, along with the expected snarky commentary. Palin is unique in inspiring this behavior in her political adversaries, even when said "adversaries" are journalists working for a site known for posting sex videos of the rich and famous. (Gawker also published the hacked Palin emails, which resulted in the recent prison sentence for the college age hacker).

As is usual for this sort of thing, when Palin tweeted that this was not legal, some Gawker mouthpiece sniffed and lectured the governor on "fair use." Which makes total sense. It's why you always see unauthorized leaks of heavily anticipated books before their publication date that are put up on the 'Net with impunity. Oh, wait, no you don't. Gawker probably thought it was enough of a defense to insult Palin's intelligence, but Palin's publisher wasn't convinced. They have sued for copyright violations:

The publisher of Sarah Palin's forthcoming book filed a lawsuit against Gawker Media on Friday for leaking pages of "America By Heart: Reflections on Family, Faith and Flag" before its release next week.

The legal complaint was filed Friday in federal court in Manhattan, said a spokeswoman for HarperCollins Publishers. The filing came two days after Gawker published images of 21 of the book's pages and its dedication page. In response, Palin tweeted, "Isn't that illegal?"

Her publisher contends it is. The lawsuit asks that Gawker be banned from what it terms "further copyright infringement" and that Gawker deliver the source material to the publisher so it can be destroyed. HarperCollins is also seeking financial damages.

Gawker did not immediately respond to e-mails seeking comment Friday evening, but an item published the day before and titled "Sarah Palin Is Mad at Us for Leaking Pages From Her Book" defended the blog's actions and linked to websites defining the fair use doctrine of copyright law.

Where's your fair use now, Gawker? Oh, and a judge has already issued a temporary restraining order directing Gawker to take the pages down.

The other bit of Palin news is daughter Bristol's miracle run on Dancing With the Stars, which has resulted in accusations of voter fraud, tea party conspiracy, TV rage, and now the inevitable discovery of an envelope filled with white powder that was mailed to DWTS production company.

TMZ is reporting that someone sent “white powder” later determined to be Talcum powder to the offices of Dancing with the Stars:

Cops and other emergency responders raced to CBS Television City studio late Friday after a white powder substance was discovered by a member of the “Dancing with the Stars” staff … and sources tell us Bristol Palin may have been the intended target.

This is the second deranged response to the show in the last week. Just a few days ago a man shot his television when Bristol Palin made it to the finals. Police were called and there was an actual stand off for several hours until he surrendered.

Bristol, along with the rest of the Palin family, has been the subject of endless insults and worse from the highest levels of the Democratic Party and their allies in the media and entertainment worlds. They obviously can't stand the fact that this 20 year old woman might succeed at anything, even a televised dance competition.

The problem seems to have been building each week as Bristol managed to hang in there as her supposedly more worthy rivals dropped out one by one. But, things exploded after the semi-final, when Bristol beat out the heavily favored Brandy. Brandy, you see, is a professional entertainer while Bristol is...you know. Excuse me, but I thought the point of DWTS was to pair celebrities with "real" dancers; but in the case of Brandy and the other semi-finalist Jennifer Grey (daughter of Joel Grey. Did you know that?), we seem to have some ringers, and people often don't like ringers, which is how the votes came out. Anyway, what's so great about Brandy? Didn't she kill someone?

Just another day in the media, where "dumb" conservatives must fend off the endlessly absurd attacks of the party of "facts and reason and science."

Inflation Confusion: Sarah Palin Schools the Wall Street Journal

It's been a while since one of Sarah Palin's comments was taken out of context so sophisticates could chuckle over her stupidity, but some reporter at the Wall Street Journal thought he'd caught her in a "durrrr" moment regarding quantitative easing and its effect on the inflation rate. Palin took to her Facebook page to set the guy straight.

Imagine my dismay when I read an article by Sudeep Reddy in today’s Wall Street Journalcriticizing the fact that I mentioned inflation in my comments about QE2 in a speech this morning before a trade-association. Here’s what I said: “everyone who ever goes out shopping for groceries knows that prices have risen significantly over the past year or so. Pump priming would push them even higher.”

Mr. Reddy takes aim at this. He writes: “Grocery prices haven’t risen all that significantly, in fact.” Really? That’s odd, because just last Thursday, November 4, I read an article in Mr. Reddy’s ownWall Street Journal titled “Food Sellers Grit Teeth, Raise Prices: Packagers and Supermarkets Pressured to Pass Along Rising Costs, Even as Consumers Pinch Pennies.”

The article noted that “an inflationary tide is beginning to ripple through America's supermarkets and restaurants…Prices of staples including milk, beef, coffee, cocoa and sugar have risen sharply in recent months.”

I saw that article, too. You know what was frustrating about it? (and what doubtless tripped up Sudeep Reddy?) The inflation articles were on the inside in the "Marketplace" section. But, on the front page, there was a big, above-the-fold story about the Fed's launching into quantitative easing to combat deflation. All you have to do is go to the grocery store, or the coffee shop, or the gas station to know that some consumer prices are on a definite upward trajectory. But, someone in DC thinks the opposite is true.

Maybe real estate or cars or surfboards or whatever are going down in price, but the basics for which people lay out their weekly budgets are going up. (yeah, I know food and gas are not included in the "core" inflation rate. Doesn't mean people aren't seeing rising prices) And, the Fed's worried about deflation? And "journalist" Sudeep Reddy is crowing over Sarah Palin's seeing inflationary ghosts? I'm beginning to worry that "we" know more about what's going on in the world than all of the "thems" who insist they are better able to act on our behalf.

The Day After The Primaries

The GOP Senate primary in Delaware got all of the attention last night, but there were some other remarkable primary results across the nation.

The "unelectable" "extremist" Christine O'Donnell went on Good Morning America and, in the space of a few minutes, declared the scandals against her to be "unfactual," called Karl Rove the "so-called political guru," dubbed Mike Castle an "Obama Republican," and said she thinks she can win without the GOP establishment. Intimidated she is not. And for all the talk of her being an extremist (for being pro-abstinence and anti-porn???) her actual presentation is charming and winning. O'Donnell may lack the star quality of Sarah Palin, but she's got something. Think of her as being Jan & Dean to Palin's Beach Boys.

Some guy named Carl Paladino won the GOP primary for New York governor, defeating moderate Rick Lazio, who was last seen losing to Hillary Clinton in 2000. Palodino is quite a character; a wealthy upstater who has promised to "clean up Albany with a baseball bat" and has gotten in trouble for some off-color emails. Lazio was destined to lose to Prince Andrew, but Paladino is a real wild card. These guys will have to debate, of course, which should be entertaining. Since we're supposed to be so concerned about O'Donnell's tuition bills and Paladino's emails, do you supposed someone could ask Andrew Cuomo about his work on "affordable housing" at HUD?

Charlie Rangel also won his primary. He may be facing an ethics trial, and has clearly been scamming NY's rent control laws, and the IRS, but who cares, right? But, watch out! Christine O'Donnell had to short sell her house!

DC mayor Adrian Fenty lost the Democratic primary, which is the only election that matters in DC. His opponent Vincent Gray explicitly ran against School Chancellor Michelle Rhee's reforms, which I guess means the kids in DC's public schools will be trapped for another 20 years. "Compassion" at work.

Kelly Ayoette narrowly won the GOP Senate primary in New Hampshire. This is being spun as a victory for the Establishment, which is funny as she was endorsed by Sarah Palin, who has been travelling the country upending the Establishment.

Even John Dingell is in trouble!

The Opinionator: Free Will Quick Hits

The GOP primary for Joe Biden's Senate seat has raised the question that has often bedeviled "conviction" voters: do we vote for the person who matches us politically, or for the one who is the "most conservative who can win?" In this case, neither candidate is especially inspiring. Christine O'Donnell has youth and ideas, but she also comes off as amateurish. Mike Castle, on the other hand is a political lifer who will be 77 years old should he choose to run for re-election in 2016. Plus, he's nowhere near the most conservative who can win. At least for this election season, when voters are looking to replace the House and Senate's Old Guard wholesale, I think it's worth a roll of the dice to vote for O'Donnell.

Lisa Murkowski's trial balloon for a write-in third party candidacy should make every moderate in the GOP caucus blanch. How many times have we been told we have to support this or that "moderate" over a better, more conservative candidate. And how many times have those "moderates" turned on the GOP as soon as their hold on power was loosened. Conservatives have shown more loyalty to the GOP than Arlen Spector, Lincoln Chaffee, and now Lisa Murkowski ever have.

Good riddance to Mayor Daley. I'm always hearing about how sophisticated Chicago is, but why its voters prefer to be governed by mayor-for-life acting as potentates dispensing favors like a Tammany Hall ward heeler is beyond me. If it is their destiny to be lorded over by Rahm Emanuel, they deserve every bit of it.

If I put out an invitation to my Facebook friends announcing that I was going to burn a Bible in my backyard, would anyone care? Doubt it. But, call CNN and say you're going to burn a Koran at some podunk "church" and suddenly it's "alert the media" time.

Michael Gross' anti-Palin hit piece in Vanity Fair was apparently self-debunking. What's funny, though, is how easy it was to get through the week without having to read Gross' article. A few years ago, such an article would have been must-see reading. Now, you wonder, "do people still read Vanity Fair?" I used to subscribe - I read it as a satire of upper-crust life - but around 2006 it published one too many "rise of the vulcans" style pieces about the Bush Administration, so I quit.

CNN is apparently replacing Larry King with Piers Morgan, a Brit journalist (he used to be editor of the Daily Mail) turned media personality. He seems like a pleasant, sophisticated guy with a plummy accent, but he's also a firm believer in the BBC brand of leftism, reflected in the fact that he lost his editorship after publishing fake photos of US atrocities in Iraq. You have to wonder why CNN thinks this is the guy to increase its appeal in middle America.

Just watched The Outlaw Josie Wales. It's good, but about 20 minutes too long, plus it has a goofy scene where Clint Eastwood parleys with some Navajo, using the sort of "men good/government bad" rhetoric that probably sounded very profound back in 1976. Worth seeing for the excellent supporting cast, which looks like it just stepped out of a Civil War-era tintype. You have to wonder whether a movie starring an ex-Confederate soldier refusing to surrender would be made today.

One Toke Over The Line: Sarah Palin and the Drug War

Sarah Palin makes a pretty strong statement in favor of decriminalizing marijuana. Will the Left think she's cool, now? Sarah Palin: Marijuana a "Minimal Problem."

Asked about marijuana, Palin said: "If we're talking about pot, I'm not for the legalization of pot. I think that would just encourage our young people to think that it was OK to go ahead and use it...However I think we need to prioritize our law enforcement efforts. If somebody's gonna to smoke a joint into their house and not do anybody any harm, then perhaps there are other things our cops should be looking at to engage in and try to clean up some of the other problems we have in society...and not concentrate on such a, relatively speaking, minimal problem we have in the country."

Wait a minute, did she just say "joint?"

Fatal Vision 2

It's no secret that self-proclaimed conservative intellek-shuls have little use for Sarah Palin beyond trying to figure out a way to tap her popularity. One thing that always draws their ire is her tendency to complain about the manner in which the media has treated her since she was first introduced as John McCain's running mate. This post from Peter Wehner - written after she went on Fox to defend Rand Paul - is typical of the genre: Sarah Palin and the Media

Sarah Palin has undeniable talents — and on many issues, I agree with her. But too often she has become the spokesperson for cultural resentments. Understandably scarred by the 2008 campaign, she is on a quest to clear her name by pounding the media at every turn. They are always to blame — even when, as in the case of Rand Paul, they are not actually to blame. In that respect, and in others, Palin’s style is quite different from, and at times antithetical to, that of Ronald Reagan, who had a charm and winsomeness about him. He made forceful arguments in a winning way. He was blessedly free of rancor and bitterness. Ms. Palin could learn from him, as could we all.

That may be, Petey, but most politicians don't have to deal with the level of scrutiny Sarah Palin faces with much of that scrutiny being insulting, intrusive, and directed at her family more than at her. For the latest Exhibit A, we have the prospect of a well-known author moving into a house next door to Palin as part of his "research" into a book he's writing: She Sees Something Worse Than Russia From Her Backyard

Spring has sprung in Alaska, and with this beautiful season comes the news today that the Palins have a new neighbor! Welcome, Joe McGinniss!

Yes, that Joe McGinniss. Here he is – about 15 feet away on the neighbor’s rented deck overlooking my children’s play area and my kitchen window. Maybe we’ll welcome him with a homemade blueberry pie tomorrow so he’ll know how friendly Alaskans are.

We found out the good news today. Upon my family’s return this morning from endorsement rallies and speeches in the Lower 48 states, I finally got the chance to tackle my garden and lawn this evening! So, putting on the shorts and tank top to catch that too-brief northern summer sun and placing a giddy Trig in his toddler backpack for a lawn-mowing adventure, I looked up in surprise to see a “new neighbor” overlooking my property just a stone’s throw away. Needless to say, our outdoor adventure ended quickly after Todd went to introduce himself to the stranger who was peering in…

Joe announced to Todd that he’s moved in right next door to us. He’s rented the place for the next five months or so. He moved up all the way from Massachusetts to live right next to us – while he writes a book about me. Knowing of his many other scathing pieces of “journalism” (including the bizarre anti-Palin administration oil development pieces that resulted in my Department of Natural Resources announcing that his work is the most twisted energy-related yellow journalism they’d ever encountered), we’re sure to have a doozey to look forward to with this treasure he’s penning. Wonder what kind of material he’ll gather while overlooking Piper’s bedroom, my little garden, and the family’s swimming hole?

Now, Pete, ask yourself: when was the last time a famous American author moved in next door to his subject? And, even if it did happen before, do you think there are any public figures who would have been subjected to this level of obnoxious reporting? Is anyone going to move in next door to Jennifer Granholm? She's a pretty, female governor, after all. She's also one who has had a disastrous term in office, marked by the bankruptcy of her state's industrial base and a state-wide economic depression. How about Jeanette Napolitano? Nancy Pelosi? Maxine Waters? Hillary Clinton? I could go on, but you get the idea.

Even figures on the right don't obtain this level of scrutiny. Who is Mitt Romney's Andrew Sullivan? Why isn't Joe McGinnis going to Mike Huckabee's house next? He's an evangelical former governor with a Fox News contract who is much more likely a 2012 candidate than Palin.

Sure, Reagan set the standard for conservatives to deal with the media. And, Reagan was working in an environment without Fox News or an on-line community that could be an alternative to the liberal MSM. Then again, he only had to worry about three networks and a handful of metropolitan dailies. Plus, media decorum was different back then. Walter Cronkite may have been a liberal, but he wasn't an asshole. Can we say that about many in today's media?

The media has made itself part of the political environment by taking sides against conservatives and conservative politicians. Someone like Sarah Palin is no longer arguing against Democrats, but also CNN, MSNBC, The Atlantic, The New York Times, and the rest. Since they are determined to do oppo-research against her, she is entitled to respond in kind.