Top Ten Reasons...

A friend of mine had posted on Facebook that Sarah Palin, for some reason, said that she would be up to debating President Barry anytime and anywhere. Now, I wasn't so much aware that just regular citizens could debate the President. I didn't know that was something that we're doing now. But good for her if that's what she wants to do. Actually, I take that back. She needs to not say things like that as to not make herself look like a buffoon. And really, this is the woman who, when preparing for the Vice Presidential debate in 2008, couldn't stop herself from calling Joe Biden "Joe O'Biden". Does she really want to go up against President Barry? Because say what you will about the guy, you can't deny that he is a brilliant public speaker and would probably wipe the floor with Sarah Palin's hot little Alaskan MILF ass. But are there reasons why she should go ahead and debate him? (Hypothetically, of course, as a Palin-Obama debate is never going to happen.) Of course there are. There are at least ten. Here we go.

The Top Ten reasons that Sarah Palin should debate President Barry.

Number Ten: She'd show him a thing or two when the topic turned to snow machine racing or moose skinning.

Number Nine: Perfect opportunity to point out that none of his daughters are knocked up yet, while one of hers already accomplished that AND given birth.

Number Eight: Might finally have come up with an answer to that age old question "What do you read?"

Number Seven: Could point out Russia from her house.

Number Six: Perfect time to give Michelle Obama tips on how to improve her 'sexy librarian' look.

Number Five: It'd be a good time to finally break out her Tina Fey impersonation that she's been working on.

Number Four: Wouldn't accidentally call him "Grandpa" like she did with McCain that one time.

Number Three: Could always have a pit bull wearing lipstick stand in for her in case something came up at the last minute.

Number Two: If it was a foreign policy debate, they could have it at the International House of Pancakes in Wasilla.

And the Number One reason Sarah Palin should debate President Barry: Everyone loves a train wreck!

Sphere: Related Content

She Won't Win, Old Man

Well. Pretty much, I can't stress enough how glad I am that we did not elect Old Man McCain as President and instead went with now-President Barry. Who knew that McCain would turn out to be as delusional as I think he might have proven himself to be yesterday? (Don't get me wrong. I don't think that the guy is senile or anything like that. But I was never fully convinced about how in tact all of his critical thinking faculties really were. I have a much better idea now and the answer is "not entirely".)

It's pretty easy to see. Here's what went down": McCain was on something called "Fox News Sunday" yesterday and was asked if former almost-half-of-a-term governor of Alaska, the super hot Sarah Palin, could beat Barack Obama in a 2012 Presidential election. Let's not forget that Palin was McCain's running mate in 2008. Let's also not forget that they lost fairly handily. President Barry won with about 66% of the vote. I know that from all of the pre-election hooplah with how he was supposed to be our savior and all that you would have thought that it would have been around 96%. But still, 66% of the vote is a pretty good ass-whooping.

According to the Political Ticker blog over yonder at CNN, McCain responded "Of course she can. She can. Now, whether she will or not, whether she'll even run or not, I don't know...But she certainly is a major factor and I believe she can be very competitive." Wait. Those...those are just a bunch of words and I'm not sure that they make a lot of sense. Let's break that down a little bit and try to figure out what's going on there.

So he starts out stating "Of course she can. She can." Sooo...is he saying that it was HIM who was the problem in 2008? Because if I had to pick an office for Sarah Palin to be in, I sure as hell would rather have her as a Vice President than the freaking President. It's nothing personal, but she just doesn't have the knowledge that she would need to be President. You could have someone who is comatose for your Veep and it'd be all right. Look at Joe Biden. He looks barely conscious most of the time and I'm perfectly OK with that. If he was President though, I'd be moving to Canada, America's Hat.

So McCain has just stated that Sarah Palin can win against Barack Obama. Then, in the very next sentence, he says "...whether she will or not... I don't know." What does that even mean? He's not even a sentence removed from saying that she can win before he says that he doesn't know if she will win?! That's not flip-flopping. That's putting your opinion in a blender and watching it go 'round and 'round really fast and when it stops, it ends up resembling nothing like what you shoved in there in the first place. He JUST said he thought that she could win! I guess it's the little things that start to go first.

And what's all this about her being a "major factor"? A major factor in...what? Yeah, a lot of people like her. I get that. She's very likable. (Even if you don't personally like her, you can't argue that she's not likable. She is. You might not agree with some of the things that she says (like if she insists that it's Tuesday when it's really Friday), but she's likable.) But what is she a major factor of? An election? Her own candidacy? I don't know what that means. Could her endorsement of a Republican candidate help boost that individual to a victory over President Barry? I doubt it. If it could, then Old Man McCain would be President right now. If you can't boost the guy on your own ticket into office, good luck doing it with someone else.

Seriously, if McCain is this delusional, not just about Sarah Palin becoming President, but about Sarah Palin beating President Barry in the next election, then we really dodged a bullet with that guy. Again, I like John McCain. But it won't take many more statements like that one for him to go from being the aging Senator of Arizona to that doddering old man in the desert. I'm just saying.

Sphere: Related Content

She Won't Be The President

Sarah Palin's back. I don't know why, exactly, but I have the feeling that it has something to do with trying to run for President in an election that she will surely lose. And truthfully, I don't know how much of her I can take. Don't get me wrong; I think that I like her as a person. I think that she'd be a swell neighbor. But those people that are just so gung-ho about anything that she does need to be realistic. She's not qualified to be President. Do I think that she was qualified to be Vice President had Old Man McCain won? Let me put it to you this way: When was the last time you heard about Joe Biden doing anything? That's my point. She would have been fine as Vice President because the Vice President doesn't DO much. The President? He's got stuff to do.

She currently seems to be on some sort of a schizophrenic bus tour. She doesn't appear to really have a list of the states or the places that she is planning on visiting. She kind of just seems to be showing up at things as they happen. I guess that's one way to do it. And due to the lack of letting anyone in on where she plans on going, I find it hard to make a guess as to what she's really doing. I mean, I could guess that she's seeing how much support she might be able to drum up from the various places that she visits. But I would think that if someone was being genuine about something like that that they would go to places where they aren't sure if they are loved or not. It's one thing to do a book tour and know that everywhere that you go the people that are there want to see you. It's a completely different thing to just show up to someone's house at dinner time and see if you'll be invited in.

And while I can't judge what she's doing, I can assess the bus that she'll be traveling in to do this little jaunt. You know how rock stars always have those enormous tour buses? OK, now imagine Thomas Jefferson doing one of those tours. This seems like the kind of bus that he'd be riding around in. Behold!
Well, it's very patriotic. And gaudy. I guess it's a pretty good way to announce yourself, but only if people know that you're coming. Look, I really don't understand the point of any of this, so I'm going to keep making fun of her ridiculous bus. And here's a close-up picture of it to aid me in that goal:
That's a mighty fine lookin' Constitution you've got there. Can I just ask a question that I haven't heard anyone ask? And I'm sure that I'll sound incredibly un-patriotic, but I'm willing to risk it. When did the Constitution get so darned popular? How many of those folks who are Sarah Palin lovers (not literally, I hope) who go around spewing all the time about the Constitution and our rights have any idea as to what they are talking about? Is it even that important to mention when you're running for President? I suppose some aspects of it are. I don't know. How about more bus pictures? Behold! See, that's why I don't give to any sort of political person. That's quite the bus. Paid for by her PAC. She made about $20 million in the six months after she bailed out of being the governor of Alaska. I know that it's all fine and good that donations to a PAC can be used for something like this. I guess my issue is more with folks who donate to these things. You want to give you money away, you hit me up instead. It would probably be about as well used. Well, I just hope that she figures out that she isn't going to be President any time soon and disbands this little project. It's over 500 days until the Presidential election. I can't have all of those days being taken up with talk about Sarah Palin. I can't. Do you hear me? I can't.

Sphere: Related Content

It's Not Her Fault

While people are still running around trying to "figure out" what caused the loser who went on a shooting rampage in Arizona to go on said rampage, I'm going to mention something to you that I really didn't think would ever come up in the conversation. I mean really. In fact, when I heard this particular aspect voiced, I was actually stunned. I was actually surprised at how dense some people actually are. Me. Surprised. At the stupidity of people! I know! It seems unimaginable! But yet, it happened.

It's pretty simple and I'm just going to put it out there the way that I read it. Over at ABC News, it actually says "Facebook executive Randi Zuckerberg bluntly asked, "Is Sarah Palin to blame?"

::: blink :::

::: blink :::

::: blink :::

::: blink :::

Um, what now? Sarah Palin? To blame? For shooting? She didn't shoot anyone! How is this Sarah Palin's fault? This Randi Zuckerberg needs a helmet. One of those industrial strength ones that I was talking about yesterday. Sarah Palin? Are you dry shaving me?! For cryin' out loud, what is wrong with you?!

I don't know what this whole Sarah Palin phenomenon is, but it needs to be studied by someone more capable than me. (Yes, I know. It's a tall order to fill. Moving on!) Let me say this in very simple terms. Sarah Palin is not responsible for the shootings in Arizona. Sarah Palin is not responsible for a lot of things. I am tired of hearing about Sarah Palin. I don't understand why she is either so beloved or so hated by so many. I really don't understand why she won't go away! She was barely a governor for half a term and an unsuccessful Vice Presidential candidate. Why does that give her so much attention after the fact?! Please. Let her go away. Fine, if her kid wants to dance in some TV dancing contest, that's one thing. But please let her go away.

Wow. If you hear about this sort of violent act taking place and your first thought is that it is somehow Sarah Palin's fault, there is something wrong with your thinking. There's also probably something wrong with you, but that's a whole different story. Also, if you are the sort of person that thinks that Sarah Palin is to blame for things like this (or for anything, really) please, for the love of God, please do not vote. Ever. (And don't "Rock the Vote", either. That was a bad idea from the get go.) Please just go about your daily business. You can even go about your daily business and continue to blame Sarah Palin for everything. That's fine. But for the love of God, please do not vote. Ever. And make sure you get a snug fitting helmet. You're going to need it.

Sphere: Related Content

Idiotic Things I Read Today

You'd think that I'd be happier, what with the election finally over. Finally, I can have the TV on for more than 5 minutes without being bombarded with an ad by Meg Whitman or Jerry Brown telling me why their version of hell is better than their opponent's. But I'm irritated. I started perusing the Innerwebs this morning and just found idiocy after idiocy. Let's review.

My semi-beloved San Jose Mercury News ran a piece detailing the most awesome victory parade in San Francisco for the World Champion San Francisco Giants after they won the World Series in most excellent fashion on Monday. When describing the size of the massive crowd, the article read: "Those arriving in downtown San Francisco -- where police officers gave crowd estimates ranging from 200,000 to 1 million -- were greeted by gigantic orange and black balloons that bobbed on the traffic signals."

That's the BEST you can do?! Somewhere between 200,000 and a freaking million? OK, that's not really an estimate. That's just pulling numbers out of your arse. Anyone could come up with an estimate like that! What good does that do anyone? That's just a ridiculous way of saying "The crowd was very, very large". You morons.

Then there was an article over at Politics Daily. I'm not going to bag on the writer of the article so much, as I do kind of like what she tends to write. She was probably just having an off day. The point here is that the article focuses on the folks that Sarah Palin endorsed. The title of the article reads "Sarah Palin's Midterm Scorecard: A Winning Record, but Some Key Losses". In essence, it goes on to detail how Sarah Palin supported "...more than 100 conservative candidates during the primary and general elections." Um, OK. I guess she can do that being how she's being whatever it is that she's being these days. (I still haven't quite figured that out yet.) It then goes on to say, "A Politics Daily tally puts Palin's Tuesday successes at 62 wins, 23 losses and seven contests that are still too close to call, with Palin's candidates trailing in five of those races."

Let's do the math. She supported more than 100 candidates. She currently has 62 wins, 23 losses and 7 undecided. That's 92! That's not more than 100. What gives? On top of that, what makes these "wins" or these "losses" Sarah Palin's to absorb? Aren't there a lot of people out there who would support just about any conservative candidate, no matter how wacky they appeared (Christine O'Donnell, I'm talking about you)? I think there are. Since when did the wins and the losses of the conservative candidates fall squarely on the shoulders of Sarah Palin? She's a former half-term governor who once spent a couple of months running for Vice President! (And don't get me wrong. For the most part, I like Sarah Palin. But her endorsement of someone certainly isn't gold by any means and it shouldn't be construed as such.)

And finally, I'm really getting tired of how any time an animal attacks a human, it is made into some sort of sensationalistic news, as if something like that is so shocking and so unheard of that we should all just be in a state of disbelief that it ever occurred. Take this headline from The Huffington Post: "Peter Evershed KILLED by 5 Lions in Zimbabwe." Um, yes. I would imagine that five lions WOULD kill a man.

To begin, I get thoroughly annoyed when the media runs the name of some person afflicted by tragedy in a way that makes the reader feel as if something horrendous has happened to someone that they knew. Does anyone know who Peter Evershed was, other than people who actually knew him? No. He was a 59-year-old businessman from Zimbabwe. But the headline makes the reader initially feel as if they've just read "Brad Pitt KILLED by 5 Lions in Zimbabwe". (And, in this example, it wouldn't be much of a stretch for Brad to have actually been in Zimbabwe. He could have been over there buying another child to complete his collection. They don't have one from Zimbabwe yet, do they?)

See, animals eat meat. Humans are made of meat! Of course they're going to eat a human if they're given the chance. It's a big piece of meat! Why is that so shocking to people? Or maybe it's only shocking to the media. I'm not sure. But in another example of the inexplicable shock that this article tries to convey is when they quote some Zimbabwe guy as saying, "We appeal to everyone to exercise extreme caution. Animals have become extremely unpredictable." Wait. What now?

Have become? Animals have become unpredictable?! They're animals! Aside from that, since when is a wild animal eating human considered "unpredictable"? Seems pretty predictable to me. If you showed anyone a picture of a human standing in the wild with a bunch of lions walking around and you asked that person to guess what might be about to happen, I'd guess that nine times out of ten (with the tenth being the moron who wrote the article) the person you are asking would correctly infer that the chap in the picture is about to become lion lunch! HOW is that unpredictable?!

I've had enough. I'm going to go watch a little TV without a political ad in sight to try to make myself feel better.

Sphere: Related Content

The Elusive Contracts Of Sarah Palin

So, Sarah Palin is scheduled to speak at Cal State Stanislaus in June. (Yes, there is a Cal State Stanislaus. I live in the freaking state and I had no idea.) The thing is that she was being awfully secretive about things like what she was getting paid. Normally, I wouldn't think much of it. After all, plenty of people have spoken at universities for commencement addresses or whatever and it doesn't necessarily mean that they're getting paid. But this whole dealio with Sarah Palin had gotten a little weird. Very secretive. It's like she's a CIA operative or something.

Now, rumor has it that she's getting somewhere in the neighborhood of $100,000 per speaking engagement. If you're unfamiliar with our currency system here in the US, that's a hell of a lot of money. It's a hell of a lot more money when you consider who she is and what she's receiving the money for. From what I can tell, she's a fairly hot hockey mom who has a folksy way of speaking that a certain group of people really like. And at the beginning, she really seemed to me like she could have gotten something along the lines of a third party all riled up. But then, I think what happened is she became acclimated to this faux rock star climate that circled her and decided to just rake the bucks instead.

Not only did she decide to command the pay of a rock star, she also decided that she needed some of the perks of a rock star. According to The Huffington Post and The San Jose Mercury News , a couple of CSU students recovered a bunch of documents from a campus dumpster the other day. Among those documents were six of the nine pages of Sarah Palin's contract rider for when she speaks. (For those unfamiliar with the term, a rider is basically one's list of "demands", though I think they would call them "requirements" in order for them to speak and/or perform.) Some of the things that she asks for have a rather elite feel to them. Personally, I find the whole thing outrageous and it's not because she's making a ridiculous amount of money on all of this. It's because people are PAYING her a ridiculous amount of money to do...something! I don't know what the something is. I don't know what the something is about. I don't know if the people who pay to listen to her speak know. I don't know if she knows.

She doesn't appear to be organizing anything. She doesn't appear to be gearing people up in any specific direction. She doesn't have a lot of facts on her side. She certainly doesn't have a lot of experience on her side. I can't tell who is guiding her and in which direction she is being pointed. It's just all very, very weird. Not as weird as some of the things that the requires in her contract, but still very weird.

Where to begin?

SATELLITE EVENTS: Customer agrees to provide a 2-way satellite broadcast. For Q&A, the questions are to be collected from the audience in advance, pre-screened and a designated representative (by Customer and approved by Speaker via WSB) shall ask questions directly of the speaker to avoid delay time with a roving microphone in the audience. (The WSB is the Washington Speaker's Bureau, by the way. I guess that's like her agent or her people or something.)

Well, that's convenient. It's a good thing that they're screening all questions in advance of them being asked. You know, to avoid a time delay. Uh-huh. That's it. Actually, I'm guessing it's to avoid an answer delay on Mrs. Palin's part, but they can call it what they want, I suppose. She does seem to have a difficult time with impromptu questions that she hasn't been prepped for. That Katie Couric question about what she reads really threw her for a loop. She wouldn't want to be unprepared like that again, I would imagine.

COMMERCIAL AIR: Customer shall be responsible for roundtrip, first class commercial air travel for two between Anchorage, Alaska and event city and full, unrestricted roundtrip coach airfare for two between event city and the lower 48 US States. At the Speaker's discretion, the departure/return city may vary for the first class airfare."

OK, so she wants to fly first class. I don't have a problem with that very much. I find it a little odd that she and whoever she travels with (I'm guessing Todd) get to go first class, but for her two handlers or whoever the other two are, coach is perfectly fine for them. All right, then. But what about when she doesn't fly commercial?

The private aircraft MUST BE a Lear 60 or larger (as defined by interior cabin space) for West Coast Events; or, a Hawker 800 or larger (as defined by interior cabin space) for East Coast Events and both are subject to the Speaker's approval. The Speaker reserves the right to change the flight plans at any time.

Now, it doesn't seem to specific when private aircraft would be used. But, given how it says that the "Speaker reserves the right to change the flight plans at any time", I'm guessing that it might be up to her if she wants a Learjet or not. The Lear holds up to 9 people and the Hawker holds up to 13 from what I can tell. Given as how she only needs 4 people to travel with her commercially, it would appear that this is just when she wants to show the fam this lovely country of ours and take them with her. That's pure speculation. That Sarah Palin can ask for a Learjet whenever she wants to is absolutely ludicrous to me. She wasn't even a governor for an entire two years!!

Customer agrees to provide the Speaker and traveling party with ground transportation in both originating city and event city. Transportation will be by SUV(s) from a professionally licensed and insured car service. lf SUV(s) are not available, black town cars may be substituted. WSB wrll arrange all of the Speaker's ground transportation. Only representatives of the Speaker or WSB are to meet the Speaker at the arriving/departing airport. In addition, for those events that do not take place at the hotel where the Speaker and traveling party are slaying, the cars and drivers will need to wait at the venue for the duration of the program.

So, she's expecting (and getting) an entourage similar to that of President Barry? What's with the black town cars may be substituted for the SUVs? Since when can you substitute an SUV with a black town car? Not often.

PRIVATE BUSINESS: The Speaker reserves the right to participate in private business including but not limited to book or political events during their visit. For any other event which is subject to media coverage, the Customer will be advised of such event. For international events, the Speaker also reserves the right to visit privately with the host government's Head of State, Head of Government, Ministerial-level officials, the U.S. Embassy and others as necessary. The Speaker reserves the right to accept the invitation of host government to overnight at an official residence.

Good to know that if the Queen comes calling while she's speaking in one of the lower 48 states that she'll be able to sit down with Her Majesty for a little chat as per her contract here. Is there a chance in hell of that happening? Seriously. If she's off speaking somewhere and there's some Head of Government from a foreign land, does she really think that they're going to want to meet with her? For what purpose? Amusement? (Vladmir Putin would have her for lunch. Then again, he's kind of an outdoorsy guy. Maybe they could bond over ripping the guts out of a deer or something.)

Presentation: Customer to provide a tall, wooden lectern with lip and fixed microphone in addition to a hand-held microphone. An overhead light, either from the ceiling above the lectern or a spotlight, directed at the Speaker's notes on the lectern is required along with a back-up lighting system for the lectern. Lighting should be at a comfortable, but appropriate, production- level for the Speaker to be able to see the full audience from the lectern/stage without interference. A spotlight directly on the Speaker should be avoided.

No spotlights directly on her. Just shine them on her notes. What about her hands? Should there be lights there so that she can read those notes as well?

Unopened bottled still water (2 bottles) and bendable straws are to be placed in or near the wooden lectern. A representative of WSB or the Speaker's party will open the water at an appropriate time prior to the Speaker's participation in the program. No Plexiglas or thin lecterns please. If Speaker is seated on-stage at a table customer to ensure that the table is skirted.

She doesn't even open her own water? I don't give a fat rat's ass about the skirted table. Skirt whatever you want. But for cryin' out loud, can't she open her own damn water? And what's with the bendy straws? Are we six? Oh, wait. Is it so she doesn't mess up all of that lipstick or something? I have no idea. It's a little odd if you're asking me. Most "regular people" (which is what she's selling herself to be) can open their own damn water.

And look, I know that there are plenty of people out there who have riders in their speaking or performing contracts. I get that. I find this absurd because it's Sarah Palin. She hasn't really done anything and I don't know what in the world she's doing...other than making a gazillion dollars off of a bunch of people who wouldn't be able to tell you what in the world she's doing either. (And a copy of these documents can be viewed here. Enjoy.)

Sphere: Related Content

Satire is Fine

It was only a matter of time before one of Sarah Palin's gaffes (moronic statements, asinine spoutings or whatever else you'd like to call them) came back to bite her in the proverbial arse. Such has happened with her claiming that Rush Limbaugh using the term "retard" was OK because it was "satire", but Rahm Emanuel using the term "retard" should be grounds for his firing. If you say that something is OK if it is satire, do you know what's going to happen? You're going to get a whole hell of a lot of satire, that is correct.

Enter The Family Guy and its creator, Seth MacFarlane. According to the huffy folks over there at The Huffington Post, last night's Family Guy episode had the dim and inept Chris out on a date with a character that could be said to resemble one with Down Syndrome. Aside from the cartoonish physical resemblance, there was also the character's assertion that her father was "...an accountant and my mom's the former governor of Alaska." Now, never mind that Sarah Palin's child with Down Syndrome is a male named Trig. This, after all, is satire. Thus, according to Sarah Palin herself, it's perfectly OK.

Sarah Palin has not yet come out and shrieked her disappointment or her dislike of this episode and the obvious reference to herself and her family. Give her time. After all, it took her over six months before she came out and said that Rahm Emanuel should be fired for saying "retard" back in August. She might be outraged, but she's not exactly the quickest runner off the blocks.

But let me explain why she might want to think twice about asserting that this episode mocks fun at those who have mental/intellectual disabilities. In this episode, Chris takes this girl, Ellen, on a date to a restaurant. Ellen has to remind him to pull out her chair for him after he rudely just sits down at the table and leaves her standing there.. Once seated, she has to practically explain to him what proper date etiquette consists of, ie, asking the girl things about herself. That's when he asks her what her parents do and that's when she gives the answer that could be interpreted to be referencing Sarah Palin. Mind you, there are lots of former governors of Alaska. (And I don't think that Todd, the former First Dude, was an accountant. I also don't think that we ever really did know what in the heck he actually did, either.)

The scenario described above does not indicate that there is any sort of mocking being done toward the individual with the Down Syndrome. In fact, it's quite the opposite. The episode could be interpreted to be saying that there is a lot that we can learn from folks with Down Syndrome. Clearly, Chris could, as Chris has an IQ that is slightly lower than that of my left shoe. On top of that, Chris really likes this girl. He had been wanting to tell her that he liked her for a long time. Had he and Stewie not gotten lost in that forest and thought they were going to die, he likely never would have avowed to tell her that he liked her if he made it out of the forest alive.

And at the end of the episode, after being told to do all night long, Chris finally snaps and says that he has heard his whole life that people with Down Syndrome are different than everyone else, but it turns out that they're just the same as everyone else! Now, isn't that the message that Sarah Palin wants folks to know? That they're just the same as everyone else? (Granted, in this episode, Ellen is somewhat of a bitch. But it's not like we all don't know a bunch of bitches in our life, right? See? So it's still not out of line!)

I don't know that she's going to come out and comment on this issue this time. I'm pretty sure that it would be in her best interest (or at least in her image's best interest) if she didn't. You can only take certain causes just so far when you're such an easy target as Sarah Palin. What with the Interwebs and Photoshop and everything, the potential for her own self sanctioned satire is enormous. I'm going to lay two-to-one odds that she doesn't comment on it. Besides, they never used the word "retard" and isn't that what she wanted in the first place? Looks like she got her wish. Granted, she never said anything about a half hour of animated teasing....

Sphere: Related Content

Rahm = Bad; Rush = Good

Yesterday I discussed Sarah Palin's belated and delayed reaction to the elf-life Rahm Emanuel's use of the term "effing retards" to describe a bunch of liberal groups who wanted to publicly attack those who would not go along with health care reform (as they seemed to be completely oblivious to the fact that they would likely need these same members cooperation on matters other than health care in the future and publicly ostracizing them for their health care stance is not exactly a proven method for winning friends and influencing people). My conclusion was that I sort of saw her point, but since Rahm made the comment almost six months ago and in a private conversation none the less, that she needed to pipe down and go back to whatever it was that she was doing before she started doing all of the piping in the first place. What she really needs is to start receiving some sort of consistency schooling.

Look, I'm all for someone who takes a public stance on something. But being in the public eye is a tricky thing. You have to pick your battles and know when to fold them. (Or you have know when to hold them or something like that. I think I was mixing metaphors and country western songs there and it didn't work out so well.) Consistency is key. Not being ridiculous is also key. And not saying that something is not OK for one person to say but that it is perfectly fine for a different person to say is not going to go over very well at all.

See, it was brought to Mrs. Palin's attention that "Palin's fellow media star Rush Limbaugh has repeatedly used the word "retards" to describe those he disagrees with", that according to the undercooked folks over there at The Raw Story. Oooohhhh! Buuusssteeeedddddd!! Eh, not so fast.

Still according to The Raw Story, when Mrs. Palin appeared on Fox News Sunday and this subject was brought up and it was mentioned that it seemed as if she were criticizing Rush Limbaugh for his using of the word "retards". Now, I was a little puzzled by that line of questioning. I mean, obviously if Limbaugh used the term "retards" that she would obviously be criticizing him for that in the same manner that she criticized Rahm Emanuel for using the term "retards" and in the same manner that I would expect her to criticize anyone using the term "retards". But that's not exactly what she said she was doing. No, she instead decided to (wait for it) defend Rush Limbaugh's use of the term. Wait. She what now?

Correct. She defended him. In the context that Rush used the term, she said that "They are kooks, so I agree with Rush Limbaugh," Palin said, claiming Limbaugh was merely "using satire." Um, satire? How is calling a group of people that you disagree with "retards" and having that qualify as satire? No, see, satire is like when you're making fun of something in a manner that closely relates to the thing that you're making fun of. Like when Family Guy did a satire of Star Wars. Rush Limbaugh saying "retards" is nothing like Star Wars (though he is incredibly similar to Jabba the Hutt).

She continued along her line of inexplicable justification of Limbaugh's words by saying "I didn't hear Rush Limbaugh calling a group of people whom he did not agree with 'f-ing retards,' and we did know that Rahm Emanuel, as has been reported, did say that...There is a big difference there." There is? There is a big difference? I'm not so sure that there is. In fact, I know that there is not.

Let's take a gander at just what Limbaugh said, shall we? He said "Our political correct society is acting like some giant insult’s taken place by calling a bunch of people who are retards, retards. I mean these people, these liberal activists are kooks. They are looney tunes. And I’m not going to apologize for it, I’m just quoting Emanuel. It’s in the news. I think their big news is he’s out there calling Obama’s number one supporters f’ing retards. So now there’s going to be a meeting. There’s going to be a retard summit at the White House." Yeah, see, that's not satire.

And I'll admit, she could have almost gotten away with defending his use of the term right up until he got to the last sentence. By saying "There's going to be a retard summit at the White House" he has stepped out of the realm of paraphrasing and stepped into the realm of what Sarah Palin had deemed to be derogatory speech. Oh, but it's OK if a Republican blowhard like Limbaugh says it, but it's not OK if a Democrat elf like Rahm Emanuel says it? Spare me.

If Sarah Palin is going to lead the conservative movement anywhere besides into the ground, she's going to have to be a little more consistent. And if she can't be consistent, could she at least try to not sound like a moron when she's being inconsistent? Seriously, all eyes are on her. She is going to need to be at the top of her game and then some because any little flub or any little slip that she makes is going to be reported ten, twenty, thirty times more than it would be for anyone else. She HAS to pay more attention to what she is saying and how she says it otherwise she's going to take something that has semi-potential and decimate it to the point where nothing is ever going to get done and it's going to be status quo for the rest of our pathetic lives.

Sphere: Related Content