About us Login Get email updates
Quick Clip
Print

Cupp: Liberals fear Palin because she's "authentic" and "The whole point of liberalism is to pull the wool over your eyes"

November 20, 2009 9:12 pm ET

From the November 20 edition of Fox News' Hannity:

Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.

EMBED
Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by ReasonAndResolve (November 20, 2009 9:14 pm ET)
      26 1
      Yes, that's the ticket. Keep thinking we fear Palin...lol. We love her. We are absolutely ecstatic at the prospect of a Palin candidacy.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by bruce1ace (November 20, 2009 9:32 pm ET)
        8 1
        Sarah Palin is less electable than Dan Quayle. She will not be a factor in 2012.

        Sorry.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by ReasonAndResolve (November 20, 2009 9:58 pm ET)
          13 1
          I know that - but they don't seem to. Let them waste their time and money dividing their party and driving the moderates away.

          My point is that as long as the talking heads on Fox and AM radio keep pushing the notion that we progressives fear Sarah Palin, we win.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by bruce1ace (November 21, 2009 9:32 am ET)
            2 5
            I don't think that stuff matters at all. What matters is if the economy starts turning around and the job numbers improve. If those things don't happen Democrats don't win.

            The Palin stuff is just entertainment, it has nothing to do with Democratic success. Your success will be determined by how you govern.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by ReasonAndResolve (November 21, 2009 9:34 am ET)
              7  
              How does that explain 8 years of Bush?
              Report Abuse
              • Author by bruce1ace (November 21, 2009 10:16 am ET)
                6  
                The first election was very close, the majority of the public didn't blame Bush for 9/11, the Iraq war was popular in the beginning and it hadn't been determined clearly that Iraq didn't have WMD's as of the 2004 election.

                Also Kerry was for the Iraq war so there wasn't a big difference there between the two and the economy didn't really start tanking until after 2004.

                The public caught up to the bad decisions by the 2006 midterms.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by ReasonAndResolve (November 21, 2009 11:03 am ET)
                  6  
                  Elections in this country are often about choosing the perceived lesser of two evils. I think a stronger economy would help, but a weak economy is not necessarily the end of the road for Democrats.

                  The Republican party continues to scare moderate voters with their intractability and their willingness to embrace far right factions in the party. Social conservatives - those who seek to enforce their "Christian" values on the population - are slipping from the mainstream. As long as the Republicans continue to fear the far right, kowtowing to them at every turn, Democrats should be able to pull a good many moderate votes.

                  It isn't a clear path, and it may be difficult for incumbents of both parties, but Republicans will hold a distinct disadvantage if they allow their "bi tent" to continue to shrink.

                  In addition, with the census approaching and fewer than 20% of Americans willing to identify as Republicans, re-districting could actually shrink the GOP even more. They are in danger of becoming a regional party by 2016.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by bruce1ace (November 21, 2009 12:01 pm ET)
                    3  
                    There's nothing wrong with Christian values. It's liberal stuff for the most part. People certainly abuse it and that's the problem.

                    I agree that the party that appears more moderate will probably win. A majority of people want governing from the center. Clinton did that, I believe that Obama will be reelected in 2012 because he is mainly in the center and he has great comunication skills. I don't see a Republican out there that could beat him at this time.

                    The backlash of the bad economy and no jobs will likely hit the Congress if things don't turn around soon.

                    As the Republican Party loses moderates to the Democratic Party, progressives become a smaller faction of the Party. People may be changing parties but they don't change their personal ideology that much. The Democratic Party will naturally want to hold these new voters by becoming more centrist which is fine by me. Whichever party occupies the center is the one I will vote for.


                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by ReasonAndResolve (November 21, 2009 12:12 pm ET)
                      5 1
                      There's nothing wrong with Christian values. It's liberal stuff for the most part. People certainly abuse it and that's the problem.


                      That is why I put it into quotation marks - true Christian values are a positive thing. The Right has hammered Christianity to fit their world view. All life is sacred (unless it is a Muslim, or a murderer, or an innocent baby conceived through rape or incest)...these types of convenient moralities that we see consistently with the Right.
                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by punkin (November 22, 2009 9:25 am ET)
                           
                        I believe the lack of Christian values on the right goes beyond the skewed right-to-life-when-I-say-so. Greed and a lack of concern for their fellow man (not their brother's keeper) are traits far too common amongst the out-spoken right wingers.
                        Report Abuse
                    • Author by Sharpe (November 23, 2009 1:31 am ET)
                         
                      yea except the more centrist a party is, the less things actually get done. Someone who is trying to cater to everyone ends up accomplishing nothing important. A centrist would do close to nothing about global warming, would not address the spiraling out of control health costs, would not advocate for equal rights for all, would not regulate wall street to try to prevent the next financial collapse and basically would do nothing about afghanistan until the entire country's opinion is swayed on it eventually. Sounds like a pretty horrendous government to me. A president that does nothing is not a good president.
                      Report Abuse
                  • Author by hoosier (November 21, 2009 12:30 pm ET)
                    1 13
                    Except more people are identifying as conservatives and that in no way means they are less likely to vote for the Republican candidate. And independents are shying away from favoring Democrats more and more with each passing month, along with growing unease about the Democrats in office being more and more responsible for the economy.

                    It's one thing to say you don't fear Palin as being a threat to be President; it's quite another to claim she won't be some kind of influence that could be quite positive for the Republican party. But it's absurd to claim liberals don't fear her. Just the number of times she's discussed on this website is a testament to that.
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by ReasonAndResolve (November 21, 2009 12:41 pm ET)
                      10  
                      Why would you equate our discussion of her with fear? That is completely illogical.
                      Report Abuse
                    • Author by mjh (November 21, 2009 1:47 pm ET)
                      9  
                      "It's one thing to say you don't fear Palin as being a threat to be President; it's quite another to claim she won't be some kind of influence that could be quite positive for the Republican party."



                      Hm, she was "some kind of influence" in the NY-23 race, after publicly backing the Con candidate -- but apparently not a good one, as the district was won by a Dem {for the first time since the Grant Administration} . . .


                      "But it's absurd to claim liberals don't fear her. Just the number of times she's discussed on this website is a testament to that."


                      LOL -- once again, wingnuts confuse simple amusement with "fear."

                      Someday, I'd love for one of Sarah's wingnut followers to explain why I'm supposed to "fear" someone who

                      - couldn't handle being mayor of a town of 5,000 people herself and had to hire a city manager

                      - ran that same town from zero to $20+ million into debt

                      - got SMOKED in her lone national campaign for high political office by a nearly 3-1 electoral vote margin and 7+ million popular votes

                      - resigned her only statewide executive office experience mid-term amidst a slew of ethics violation accusations

                      Really, someone's gotta explain that . . .


                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by ReasonAndResolve (November 21, 2009 1:57 pm ET)
                        9  
                        Well, now you are asking her followers to be rational. I'm sure you realise how silly that is.
                        Report Abuse
                      • Author by Don Hussein Fabuloso (November 21, 2009 2:42 pm ET)
                        7  
                        Someday, I'd love for one of Sarah's wingnut followers to explain why I'm supposed to "fear" someone who... (mjh)


                        I ask that question, and if I get an answer, it's usually based on her being an influence or a viable candidate. Which is a scary thought to anybody who cares about the country.

                        The funniest part (and, yeah, it's amusement, not fear, as Palin's popularity seems to decline with every day of exposure) is that the only thing that could make that "fear" real is the possibility of there being enough very stupid Americans to make Palin relevant.

                        Typical exchange here:

                        -MMFA item illustrating Palin's incompetence and/or dishonesty, or her fans' ignorance.

                        - Librul poster : Boy, Palin and her fans sure are morons.

                        Palin fan: Yeah, but there are a lot of us, so you better be scared!

                        They're threatening us with teh stoopid.
                        Report Abuse
                        • Author by mjh (November 21, 2009 3:07 pm ET)
                          5 1
                          -MMFA item illustrating Palin's incompetence and/or dishonesty, or her fans' ignorance.

                          - Librul poster : Boy, Palin and her fans sure are morons.

                          Palin fan: Yeah, but there are a lot of us, so you better be scared!

                          They're threatening us with teh stoopid.



                          LOL, Col.; reminds me of the old expression: "Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups" . . .

                          Thing is, are they REALLY that large? I realize they're vocal, but merely being loud doesn't necessarily equate to large numbers, as the twenty percenters who were loyal to Dumbya at the end of his reign amply demonstrated . . .

                          Report Abuse
                          • Author by Don Hussein Fabuloso (November 21, 2009 3:28 pm ET)
                            7  
                            Thing is, are they REALLY that large?

                            Some of them are pretty large, but that comes with the sitting around watching Fox and eating donuts all day. But there aren't as many of them as they think there are. That's part of the stupid.

                            They're not very good at math, and if they have a rally with a small fraction of the average crowd for a baseball game, they think they're a majority of Americans.
                            Report Abuse
                    • Author by bintx (November 22, 2009 1:19 pm ET)
                         
                      You are using your false interpretation of "conservatism." I'm a conservative and I disagree with most of the Fox and hate talk drivel you post here daily. Most true conservatives DO.
                      Report Abuse
                    • Author by New Frontier (November 22, 2009 2:08 pm ET)
                         
                      It's not fear of Palin. It's our sheer amazement and disbelief at how many gullible, willfully ignorant people on the right gravitate to someone who, by her own actions and words, is clearly not qualified to hold (or even fulfill terms of) a higher office.
                      Report Abuse
                    • Author by Laxplyr43 (November 22, 2009 4:56 pm ET)
                         
                      I'm a liberal and I love her. shes doing great things to the Republican party, driving away moderates to the Democrats if my favorite part. I really hope they nominate her for president, I have my fingers crossed, because only she will save the Democrats
                      Report Abuse
            • Author by Tbone Slickens (November 22, 2009 9:33 am ET)
                5
              Unemployment will hit 12% if not higher. The sharks are circling for midterms...If Propeller Beanie Barry doesn't put in full rudder, it will be disaster in '12.

              It's time for a return of the Misery Index. I wonder if the dutiful water boys at the MSM and CNN/MSNBC will start a running report?
              Report Abuse
              • Author by mjh (November 23, 2009 1:03 am ET)
                   
                "Unemployment will hit 12% if not higher. The sharks are circling for midterms...If Propeller Beanie Barry doesn't put in full rudder, it will be disaster in '12.

                It's time for a return of the Misery Index. I wonder if the dutiful water boys at the MSM and CNN/MSNBC will start a running report?"



                Anyone care to translate the above into English from wingnut babble?


                Report Abuse
        • Author by open_mind (November 20, 2009 11:04 pm ET)
          10 2
          To be honest, I am pretty frightened of Palin, but it is because we have elected a Palin before in 2000 and I pray it doesn't happen again. Not because she is "authentic". That's laughable. You would think that conservatives would actually get good at reading our minds considering how frequently they try to do it and go so far to present it as "analysis".
          Report Abuse
          • Author by ProgLib (November 22, 2009 3:16 am ET)
            2  
            i really hope majority of americans learned a lesson when they voted in that first palin in 2000 (and 2004), and you would hope it doesnt happen again.
            Report Abuse
        • Author by manndan (November 21, 2009 12:03 am ET)
          9  
          Don't tell them that.
          Report Abuse
        • Author by Marker (November 21, 2009 7:01 am ET)
          7  
          Quayle was NEVER electable. Palin stands zero chance of being president.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by bruce1ace (November 21, 2009 9:34 am ET)
            4  
            I agree.
            Report Abuse
          • Author by Easy to refute wingnuts (November 21, 2009 2:53 pm ET)
               
            Quayle was NEVER electable.
            The only reason George HW Bush chose Dan Quayle as his running mate was because every other person the the GOP at the time who was qualified to be VP was more qualified than GHWBush to be President.
            Report Abuse
        • Author by papa bear3 (November 21, 2009 11:16 am ET)
          5  
          We are missing the point here. She is a factor in 2010 in the mid term elections. Her and Beck's quasi- "common sense" appeal to people in some districts that are borderline might swing the district Republican, or keep Democrats and Independents away because they see no problem.

          All politics is local!
          Report Abuse
          • Author by ReasonAndResolve (November 21, 2009 12:14 pm ET)
            6  
            They run the risk (and we saw it in NY-23) of splitting the vote and making it even easier for Democrats to win.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by Tbone Slickens (November 22, 2009 9:38 am ET)
              1 3
              I think you're taking the wrong impression from NY23. The Republican was more liberal on issues than the democrat running. It was a win win for democrats unless the Conservative candidate won (which he probably would have given more time). Of course the "moderate" democrat (who said he would vote against ObamaCare) turned around and lied to the people of NY and voted against their wishes. Win for you, not for them.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by bintx (November 22, 2009 1:20 pm ET)
                   
                She was a conservative who believed in the tenets of the Constitution. People like Palin and Hoffman are not conservatives.
                Report Abuse
              • Author by mjh (November 23, 2009 1:18 am ET)
                   
                "Win for you, not for them." -- T-boned


                Even though it was "them" that cast the votes.

                The wingnut world of fantasy and delusion . . .

                Report Abuse
        • Author by Hermann_Hesse (November 21, 2009 3:09 pm ET)
             
          Hilarious
          Report Abuse
        • Author by mari2jj (November 22, 2009 1:01 am ET)
          3  
          I find that my disdain of McCain's running mate choice was what sealed his doom and made him completely unelectable. I wrote in McCain for the last two election periods that Bush Jr. won so to say Republicans would not vote for McCain is incorrect. I would gladly vote for McCain if he chose a running mate that had enough brains and common sense to help him win the ticket. As it was, when he chose Palin, I could NOT vote for him since Palin would have been a heart beat away from the presidency. That idea truly made me shudder!!!!!!
          Report Abuse
        • Author by DellDolly (November 22, 2009 1:06 am ET)
          3  
          Sarah Palin is very unelectable. The bigwigs in the Republican Party all know it.

          But she will be a factor. Her presence will drive every other candidate to the right.
          Report Abuse
      • Author by snewkirk (November 20, 2009 10:05 pm ET)
           
        Honestly, the one way I would be absolutely sure of Obama's prospects in 2012 is if he's running against Palin. So, I think you're right on ReasonAndResolve -> Palin 2012 !

        Or maybe we shouldn't underestimate the Bush electorate's ability to bring out the vote. Crap.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by kalentros (November 21, 2009 12:29 am ET)
        14  
        Liberals do fear a Palin presidency. We also fear werewolves, the Loch Ness Monster, Klingons, and 2012 being the end of the world.

        And now in the news from Reality......
        Report Abuse
        • Author by mari2jj (November 22, 2009 1:03 am ET)
          3  
          You expressed that much better than I did in my feeble attempt to explain why McCain could never be elected with Palin as his Veep candidate.
          Report Abuse
      • Author by sally009 (November 22, 2009 2:58 am ET)
           
        You might reconsider. Her strongest leverage comes from the attacks... the more personal and vicious the attacks, the more people who would not vote for her anyway also become put off by the attackers and their arguments, the less they listen to other arguments they may have.

        You may enjoy getting your frustrations out, but remember people you need on your side in 2010 and 2012 are listening to your tone ...
        Report Abuse
    • Author by Publius39 (November 20, 2009 9:20 pm ET)
         
      We progressives are not afraid of Palin, we just want her to go away. A lot of people thought that W was authentic and genuine, and he and Cheney continued to pull the wool over the American people's eyes for eight years. I think that these ladies have everything twisted and do not truly know what political ideology they truly are supporting.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by vysotsky (November 20, 2009 9:42 pm ET)
      22 1
      Palin is authentically what exactly? She's authentically interested in prioritizing her own fame over continuing her job as governor? She's authentically ignorant of the Bush Doctrine? She's authentic in reversing her position on bailouts? Certainly the failure of her campaign with McCain was authentic...
      Report Abuse
      • Author by mjh (November 20, 2009 10:01 pm ET)
        15 1
        "Palin is authentically what exactly?"


        An authentic quitter . . .

        Report Abuse
        • Author by blk-in-alabam (November 20, 2009 11:38 pm ET)
          14  
          Sara Palin is a tool used to pull the wool over people's eyes.The money she gets is authenic,real cash
          Report Abuse
      • Author by kalentros (November 21, 2009 12:41 am ET)
        12 1
        She's perfectly authentic. What you see is what you get, and what you get is the equivalent of getting a vacuum for your anniversary.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by wookie (November 21, 2009 11:08 am ET)
        6 1
        She's an authentic puppet for the right wing to control. She is a rehash of the "someone you can have a beer with" swill that got us the Bush disaster. Except she doesn't even have the pretense of a political background.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by my4cents (November 20, 2009 10:00 pm ET)
      14 1
      There is the fair and balanced Hannity, with two, kind of, attractive ladies as his panelists.
      All three are arguing to agree with each other.
      Who can he be catering to?
      Report Abuse
      • Author by hurricaneyankee52983 (November 20, 2009 10:44 pm ET)
        8  
        He's catering to his bosses,RUPERT AND ROGER.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by ProgLib (November 22, 2009 3:12 am ET)
        2  
        actually, cupp and guilfoyle are just short of drop dead gorgeous, but their lack of brain cells and bigotry is probably the biggest pet peeve any male political buff can handle listening to. they can be buck-naked, for all i care, but if they go out there shilling for frauds like sarah palin, they are as good as the gum at the bottom of my shoe. and i stand by that sentiment very strongly.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by epkklk851 (November 20, 2009 10:04 pm ET)
      15 2
      Insanity and the Boobie Twins! Every time I see Wanna be a C Cupp, I remember that old kids joke-"Spell cup!" The whole point of Conservatism is to pull the wool over peoples eyes. How many times has Fox gotten caught lying or doctoring film? How many C Street politicians got caught with their pants down? How many times have Teabagger organizations been backed by corporate dollars which insist on staying hidden. Sarah Palin is authenic for the trailer trash crowd, but for most others, she's just authentic for the trailer trash crowd. And liberal women are usually treated much worse than Sarah has been treated. We don't describe her hands as paws, or make constant references to Botox. Nor do we comment on the shrillness of her voice. We may say she is stupid and a quitter, but guess what. She is, and she proves it....often. And on the subject of voices, her weird diction is annoying. Some of the time, she wants to be a trailer trash queen and drop her g's, and others, she over pronounces words, like some of her TV training is coming back.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by pete592 (November 20, 2009 10:06 pm ET)
      17 1
      I don't fear Palin. I alternate between being disgusted or amused by her.

      Today, I was mostly amused...

      Angry supporters boo Palin for leaving in the middle of her book signing: 'Quittin' on the job!'
      Report Abuse
      • Author by ReasonAndResolve (November 20, 2009 10:14 pm ET)
        10  
        Classic.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by Don Hussein Fabuloso (November 21, 2009 12:39 am ET)
        7 1
        Pete, I saw some of the coverage of the Palinistas who got wristbands, and didn't get to meet her. What an emotional bunch of suckers.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by Publius39 (November 22, 2009 4:35 pm ET)
           
        Yeah, they had that on the local news because she did it in my state. It just goes to show you her true character.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by hurricaneyankee52983 (November 20, 2009 10:42 pm ET)
      12 1
      PALIN,authentic? what a joke.If anything is pulling the wool over the peoples eyes it's the CONSERVATIVES,not the LIBERALS.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by snoopy (November 21, 2009 9:02 am ET)
        8 1
        Actually, the whole point of reichwhine fundamentalism is to pull the sheet over your head...
        Report Abuse
    • Author by Boxer1979 (November 20, 2009 10:50 pm ET)
      11 1
      Cupp: Liberals fear Palin because she's "authentic" and "The whole point of liberalism is to pull the wool over your eyes"

      Coming from somone who thinks GWB policies kept us safe. LOL! Cupp is a joke who would get destroyed if she debated a real conservative or progressive/liberal.

      Psst. She stated on a C-Span interview that she likes living in a all liberal area and she an Atheist.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by ProgLib (November 22, 2009 3:06 am ET)
        2  
        she, along with the deplorable monica crowley, is just a shill for sarah palin to help advertise her popularity... as if she doesnt already have enough outlets and megaphones to do that for her.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by pilotx (November 20, 2009 10:58 pm ET)
      11 1
      Oh boy where to start. I hear Sean himself attack the speaker of the house constantly so there goes his first argument. As a big time liberal I have no fear of straight talk but sometimes there is actually racism and sexism in this country. I have never seen so much whining before in my life, for a woman who called herself a pitbull and pretty much called the president a terrorist these guys are really playing the victim card. Also, why do they continuously try to get into my head and tell me why I don't like her. I know why I don't like her and it is far from the reasons these two cite. Jon Stewart sums it up pretty well.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by pilotx (November 20, 2009 11:06 pm ET)
      12  
      On second thought hypocrisy and false equivalency alert. One, Michelle Obama is not the public figure, her husband is so why would she be the one who is attacked? Is Todd Palin being attacked? That is the true equivalent but on that same note a frequent Hannity guest, Michelle Malkin, viciously attacked Michelle Obama. So Sean you are both a hypocrite and a false equalentcier.<new word>
      Report Abuse
      • Author by The_Cat (November 21, 2009 11:15 am ET)
        7  
        One tiny suggestion? Spell your new word thusly: equalenciere. It looks French that way, and we all know how the FauxCons feel about all things French. ;) Freedom (fries)!
        Report Abuse
    • Author by donwelty (November 21, 2009 3:05 am ET)
      5  
      I'm not afraid of Sarah Palin. I am afraid that there is a possibility that she could get elected. Listening to these people, I get the feeling that they may think that could come to pass.

      I have the feeling that She would not make it at all. I think the American people would see through her.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by captfoster2 (November 21, 2009 3:32 am ET)
      10 1
      Cupp: Liberals fear Palin because she's "authentic" and "The whole point of liberalism is to pull the wool over your eyes"

      I watched this dumb bimbo on Larry King try and go up against Stephanie Miller a few nights ago... what a joke this lady is!

      Mrs. Cupp is like Sarah Palin, only not as dangerous, but just as worthless!
      Report Abuse
    • Author by clearstate (November 21, 2009 8:04 am ET)
         
      So what are these "vicious attacks" that you keeping talking about Sean? Ever notice that he always brings it up but he never gives any examples of what they are? That's because that all that we're doing is pointing out her lies and her quitting everything that she starts. That's all. No one has ever said about Palin half the things that Rush and talk radio say about Pelosi. Another great false equivalency from the right.

      You have it wrong again Sean. Liberal women have never been "out of bounds". You can criticize them all you want. The only problems we have are when you guys say stuff about Pelosi doing everything but selling her body to pass something , all the botox in her face, or that her face is like a reptile.

      The only person that is out of bound to you, in your little world, is Palin. You're only allowed to suck up to her 24/7 and give her softball questions during interviews like "What is your favorite color?".

      By the way, great job on not pointing out that she bailed on her book signing crowd. Yet another example of something that she's quit on!
      Report Abuse
    • Author by canaanxing9025 (November 21, 2009 8:22 am ET)
      9  
      I guess Ms. Cupp got the memo.

      Yesterday afternoon Michele Malkin was on Hannity. She and Hannity were talking about the pictures of Sarah Palin in Newsweek, and how they cheapened the image of the former Governor.

      Malkin specifically cited "page 32" in the Newsweek article of a picture of a doll representing Palin dressed up as a Catholic school girl - buttoned up shirt, tie, glasses etc. Malkin called the "sexualzation" of Palin

      Remember Ms. Cupp's dress up from a few days ago:?
      Report Abuse
      • Author by epkklk851 (November 21, 2009 9:50 am ET)
        7  
        Yes, I do. It was only the first time I saw her. I still don't know the name of the other half of the Boobie Twins. Fixed Spews has no right to comment on the sexualization of a prominent female. That describes their whole line of women, except for Greta, and even the full facelift didn't help.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by bintx (November 22, 2009 1:26 pm ET)
           
        The "sexualization of Palin" was started by Palin and the RNC during the 2008 campaign. The hair, the makeup, the clothes . . . they were all geared to make Palin look more appealing. Palin was nominated because she was an attractive woman . . . For them to scream sexism now is asinine. They WELCOMED it.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by MickD (November 21, 2009 9:07 am ET)
      8 1
      What depresses me is that they are finding more and more women willing to go the Coulter/Malkin route because they can make easy money (good looks = neocon cash), never understanding or caring about their Judas Iscariot-ism.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by papa bear3 (November 21, 2009 11:21 am ET)
        6  
        Remember that variation of the "Peter Principle," ..."an ounce of image is worth a pound of performance."
        Report Abuse
    • Author by caels (November 21, 2009 2:41 pm ET)
      1  
      Why can't conservatives understand that progressives / rational people just think she's a moron? It's not something particularly hard to understand, we think she is stupid.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by fantagor (November 21, 2009 4:46 pm ET)
      3  
      Another bodacious misuse of the word "authentic". One cannot hurl it out there without some hint of context. But that's just it. The word, as a compliment, has a very shaky contextual history. It's the equivalent of saying a black man "speaks well". It’s not so much a compliment as an attestation that the person in question has a mastery of some minimal set of qualifications.

      In other words, Sarah Palin is authentic, as in she’s a real human being, not an alien lizard disguised as a human being. I think.

      Randy
      Report Abuse
    • Author by Handyman (November 21, 2009 9:45 pm ET)
      2  
      I still believe that Sarah was chosen to pull what percentage of the vote she could away from Clinton Supporters, and to appeal to Industry Concerns so that the Republicans could dominate in campaign contributions as they always had. What the Republican Party did not anticipate was Obama's use of the internet as a campaign tool. Before they figured out what was happening it was to late to stop the momentum. I don't think we will see them let that happen again, or at least not as easily.

      Alaska has a very short history as a State, most of the growth happened during the development of the Trans Alaska Pipeline and the Prudhoe Bay Oil Field. Oil still drives the economy in Alaska and employs the highest percentage of workers, followed by commercial fishing, tourism, etc. Without the Oil Industry Alaska would experience a collapse of their economy. In this case Industry has a made profound difference in peoples standard of living. Alaska has one of the best education systems in our country, even the remote villages have their own high schools all paid for using oil royality monies.

      I think that Sarah believes this model could be expanded througout our whole country to pump up our economy - Hence Drill Here Drill Now!! She does have her supporters in industry regardless of her personality. I don't think we can pass her off just quite yet, just depends on what happens in the economy. If things start to turn around in the job market her chances diminish - if they don't she will gain more and more supporters as people get desperate for work, that's reality.

      Let's hope the alternative energy market or manufacturing picks up soon, we cannot rely on oil forever.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by marco21 (November 22, 2009 2:54 am ET)
      3  
      The people continue to attack Hillary Clinton 17 years and running are now claiming Palin is getting picked on unfairly?

      Waaah!
      Report Abuse
    • Author by ProgLib (November 22, 2009 3:04 am ET)
      2  
      what is the point of bringing on two gorgeous, yet ignorant, conservative women (when are they not ignorant?) to defend another ignorant conservative woman who quit her post as governor and is now doing everything other than selling her body (sorry, i had to use laura ingraham's material on this one) to get her book sold? its like an orgy of agreement with boobs and tight outfits all over the place.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by Handyman (November 22, 2009 9:18 am ET)
        1  
        Point made - on the other hand who would have thought Glen Beck would have several books on the best sellers list. The same argument and principals he expounds on can be found in any book related to the concepts of the John Birch Society.

        Republicans are masters at deception, how else can you justify Bush got elected or we let him stay in office for 8 years?

        Sometimes I feel we are just pawns in someones chess game. All the outlandish accusations being made now by the Republican Party serve several purposes - to avert attention from past administration accusations to accusations made against this administration (this buys them time and refocuses what the nation is talking about), and last but definitely not least is the response they receive from posts like MMFA. They evaluate our responses to their actions and use this information to fine tune their strategies - kind of like having a perpetual poll without having to pay for it.

        Report Abuse
    • Author by bintx (November 22, 2009 1:17 pm ET)
      1  
      I don't know anyone who "fears" Sarah Palin on the right or the left because she is authentic [not false or copied; genuine; real:]. She's not authentic, for one, and I never have been able to wrap my head around the idea that laughing at her incompetence and her dishonesty was "fear."
      Report Abuse
    • Author by New Frontier (November 22, 2009 1:58 pm ET)
      1  
      Yes, just like The Terrorists hate us for our Freedoms, libruls are afraid of Sarah Palin because she's so authentic.
      Report Abuse