Really?
Yep, Sarah scares the hell out of them, and it is so much fun to watch them hissing and sputtering like an overheated cappucino machine. If anyone is to be compared to a life support system for a sexual organ, evie and her ilk are it.
I don’t really understand Debra Saunders angst she is usually a pretty good writer but women can be catty. I’m sure they think that because they believe themselves smarter than Palin they feel a bit of jealousy at her rise and the appearance that she has it all. All the things they were told they couldn’t have together in one package. Beauty, a large family, a manly husband, a political career, a down syndrome baby. Sarah Palin presents an uplifting story of hope and faith, she didn’t listen to anyone telling her what she could or couldn’t have she like most Americans just went out and got it and took responsibility for her life as well as those she brought into this world. What the left and even some in the GOP wish to sell is a set of false premises that rope us into a rigid faithless worldview of the planned and “perfect” world they would have for us. Sarah Palin’s shouldn’t exist without them. That she does exist makes them irrelevant and what else do individuals who many times have no progeny of their own being too narcissistic to even find a committed mate have if they are irrelevant? They have their rage like the spoiled children they really are they throw temper tantrums in the presence of angels.
Sarah has been glowingly compared with Ronald Reagan and John F. Kennedy and Franklin D. Roosevelt? Seriously? By sentient humans? I don’t see it. I see Sarah as another Obama, an Affirmative Action Selection, with followers and fans who confuse presentability with competence. I mean, if the young, photogenic, conservative governor of Alaska had been a man, would McCain’s VP selectors (or I) have ever even heard of him?
Scientologist. Sorry but anyone who can believe in that should never hold any public office.
Really?
May Ensler's nightmares worsen for the rest of the 21st Century.
By comparing her to this filthy, you dirty Palin.
It would be interesting to see how much of her readership has dwindled since her anti-Palin broadsides. She probably picked up a few squishy moderates who hated Palin too, but I'll bet her currency at conservative gatherings has deterioted drastically. I used to read her occasionally, but refuse to read anything she writes now. I started feeling ill towards her in 2007 when she wrote that Hillary was "well qualifed to be president." I put her well down my list of "conservatives" to read after that remark of hers.
Sarah Palin, who is refreshingly and wonderfully normal,True.
Well, I know of at least 2,500 Vietnam War Vets who might sign on if the right woman was chosen as their audience...
I’m naturally skeptical, especially of politicians. They get elected on style, not substance.
Palin, however, can think on her feet; she doesn’t stammer and rely on the teleprompter (has anyone forgotten the malfunction she overcame?) She has demonstrated her ability to answer a question in a complex sentence without losing her way, and when she’s done you know you’ve heard a reasonable thought expressed properly.
She has convinced me, too, of her conservativism.
And that makes two criteria of intelligence. So don’t try to tell me she is not bright. It’s just that when a woman so attractive arrives on the scene, 9 times out of 10 you’re going to be disappointed when she opens her mouth.
Palin is that 1 in 10 exception among attractive women, and among politicians she’s 1 in 1,000.
That said, I’ll be amazed if the majority of voters in this country have the good sense to put her in the White House. :(
Washington as Mordor-on-thePotomac... That’s funny! Accurate, but funny.
Exactly, exactly, exactly.
I could not care less what adults do voluntarily with each other's organs and orifices. My whole problem is with gay culture, which has completely sexualized the larger culture.
Now, in every medium, the expression of affection between two people can only mean that they wish to have sex with each other. There is no other possibility. There is no such thing as agape,, there is only eros. House and Wilson? Harry Potter and Ron Weasley? Their friendships are only sybmolic of their desire to sodomize each other--in the contemporary there can be no other interpretation.
The real problem, as I always say, is not just an aesthetic one. It's that, when all relationships between people are sexualized, you must keep in mind that children are people too. And the long-term implications enrage me.