Yes, Palin Backed the Bailouts

By
Friday, November 20, 2009 at 1:33 pm

Why has MSNBC embedded one of its top on-air talents with Sarah Palin’s book tour? That’s a good question, but I thought Norah O’Donnell’s grilling of a young Palin fan was a fair use of the network’s time. O’Donnell asked Jackie (no last name given), who was wearing a T-shirt criticizing the bailouts, if she knew that Palin had supported them. Jackie refused to believe it.

“The reason I ask you,” said O’Donnell, “is that I think there’s some confusion about Sarah Palin’s policies.”

It wasn’t a man-on-the-street interview with a dopey tourist being asked a surprise question, of the kind John Ziegler conducted with Obama supporters to “prove” that they had no idea what Obama believed. Jackie was a political activist with a political message. And the history of the bailouts has really been mangled by conservative spin since September 2008, when, in a panic, most Republicans (in Congress) supported them. When former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney gave a speech at the Value Voters Summit this year and attacked “bailing out banks,” few people in the crowd remembered that Romney had supported the bailouts.

By and large, I’ve found that Tea Party activists and conservatives do not forgive Republicans who supported the bailouts — there is a lot of anger toward former President George W. Bush, and more toward former Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson. And here is what Palin said about the bailouts in her debate with Joe Biden.

John McCain thankfully has been one representing reform. Two years ago, remember, it was John McCain who pushed so hard with the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac reform measures. He sounded that warning bell.

People in the Senate with him, his colleagues, didn’t want to listen to him and wouldn’t go towards that reform that was needed then. I think that the alarm has been heard, though, and there will be that greater oversight, again thanks to John McCain’s bipartisan efforts that he was so instrumental in bringing folks together over this past week, even suspending his own campaign to make sure he was putting excessive politics aside and putting the country first.

In September 2008, McCain suspended his campaign to go to Washington to help negotiate a government response to the financial crisis, resulting in a $700 billion bailout bill.

And here is what Palin says in “Going Rogue” about the bailouts, on page 270.

[T]he House of Representatives rejected a Bush-backed economic bailout plan in a vote in which two-thirds of Republicans voted no. The impression this made on the electorate was not helpful to our cause. Millions of Americans were poised to go bankrupt or lose their savings, and the perception was that Republicans had failed to respond.

I don’t think you can avoid the conclusion that Palin supported the bailout package. If a Palin supporter doesn’t know this, it’s perfectly legitimate to find out why. And yet The Weekly Standard, not alone in the conservative media, takes this exchange and makes it all about a brave 17-year-old girl battling back against an “ambush” from MSNBC.

Follow David Weigel on Twitter


Comments

80 Comments

Tweets that mention Yes, Palin Backed the Bailouts « The Washington Independent -- Topsy.com
Pingback posted November 20, 2009 @ 1:39 pm

[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by daveweigel and Jason Pye, WashIndependent. WashIndependent said: Yes, Palin Backed the Bailouts http://bit.ly/642ur9 [...]


Dug Gyles
Comment posted November 20, 2009 @ 2:03 pm

If she gets some implants and a video phone, she can be the next Carrie Prejean!


lynnmcdaniel
Comment posted November 20, 2009 @ 2:03 pm

Palin supports prove their stupidity without any ambush. I argued with one yesterday regarding the health bill and it's always the same thing., When you hit them with facts they get mad and go away.


monkey99
Comment posted November 20, 2009 @ 2:14 pm

This sort of thing showcases how little regard the Palin sycophants have for the truth and how little they really know about this woman.

I suppose they were dazzled by the book(s) that weren't even her own words (it's nice to have a ghost writer, huh Sarah?). If they were, I doubt many of these people would even understand what in the H**l she's saying.

My niece (who lives in Wasilla) was once enthralled by Palin, because of the Hockey-mom reference, but when allowed to actually speak, Palin spouted that beatnik trash, and that was that. And my niece is a Repub! Go figure.


Herrence Meritocracy
Comment posted November 20, 2009 @ 2:50 pm

“Jackie” also models herself after her idol, Palin. Just see her blog post where she describes how she “fell prey to liberal bias” and a “gotcha question.” Maybe if one doesn't want to “get gotten” (“get gotcha'ed”?), then one should not wear a slogan-filled t-shirt to a public book signing that directly contradicts the record of the author at the signing…


Palin fan responds to O’Donnell interview | Obama Biden White House
Pingback posted November 20, 2009 @ 2:50 pm

[...] Dave Weigel thinks O’Donnell asked a fair question Share this on del.icio.usDigg this!Share this on [...]


Bryan White
Comment posted November 20, 2009 @ 2:52 pm

1) Jackie Seal's name was mentioned via an on-air caption.
2) “Jackie was a political activist with a political message.” It was a book signing event. That O'Donnell went to the book signing event with the notion that Palin supporters supposedly had confusion about their political views shows an editorial bias in the approach. It was not “news.” It was editorial masquerading as news.
3) You had to have noticed that O'Donnell's quote/paraphrase supposedly from the vice-presidential debate was apparently made up.
4) Seal stated her belief that Palin does not *now* support the TARP program, and the other interview subject provided a reasonable explanation.

Face it: O'Donnell made a fool of herself. She did try to set up Seal, and she did come to the event with an editorial agenda.


texasag03
Comment posted November 20, 2009 @ 3:20 pm

I don't see either quote as support of bailouts. The first quote is praising McCain “putting the country first”. It was in response to the following question:

“The House of Representatives this week passed a bill, a big bailout bill — or didn't pass it, I should say. The Senate decided to pass it, and the House is wrestling with it still tonight.

As America watches these things happen on Capitol Hill, Sen. Biden, was this the worst of Washington or the best of Washington that we saw play out?”

The transcript is here: http://is.gd/4ZT5E

The second quote seems to be a comment on perception. She could just be arguing that Republicans were perceived wrong on the issue. I don't see anything promoting bailouts in that statement.


monkey99
Comment posted November 20, 2009 @ 3:22 pm

Herrence,

It makes you wonder, though, if “Jackie” wore a shirt with Palin's beatnik verse on it, if the result would have been worse?

Heck, Palin's even snubbing her loyal sycophants now………..


Herrence Meritocracy
Comment posted November 20, 2009 @ 3:27 pm

1) If she gave her full name, then she agreed to be interviewed. If one does not want to face “gotcha questions,” all one has to do is say, “No, thank you, I don't want to be interviewed.”
2) An interviewer would be doing a poor job if he/she did not ask obvious questions, for example seeking clarification on a policy statement made on the interviewee's t-shirt.
3) Mr. Weigel put up the quote from the debate in his article above. Any confusion about this point is on you alone.
4) This is a rather lame excuse. Palin supported the TARP when it was passed, and Seal's t-shirt references the $700 billion authorized by the TARP bill (Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008) under Bush/Paulson. Since Palin has never taken back support of bill creating TARP in any meaningful way, this position is untenable.

Make an about face: you are wrong. The best that could be said is that it's unfair to embarrass ignoramuses at a Palin event, because it is like shooting fish in a barrel.


dbogdan1960
Comment posted November 20, 2009 @ 3:28 pm

Of course Sarah Palin backed the bailout when she was running as VP on the ticket. What was she supposed to do – oppose McCain (the top of the ticket) in his effort to push the ill-advised bailout. It's called campaigning for office. From what I've been able to glean, there were lots of things that Sarah did and said WHILE CAMPAIGNING that she didn't want to do or say (Katy Couric anyone?). For Ms. O'Donnell to not understand the context of Sarah Palin's erstwhile support suggests either a willing suspension of disbelief (thx H. Clinton!) or sheer stupidity. Either way, I congratulate her for having the kajones to “go on the attack” with a 17-year-old supporter of Sarah Palin. Incidentally, the teenager seemed to me to have come out on top in the discussion%Pr


mantis
Comment posted November 20, 2009 @ 3:38 pm

Of course Sarah Palin backed the bailout when she was running as VP on the ticket. What was she supposed to do – oppose McCain (the top of the ticket) in his effort to push the ill-advised bailout. It's called campaigning for office. From what I've been able to glean, there were lots of things that Sarah did and said WHILE CAMPAIGNING that she didn't want to do or say (Katy Couric anyone?).

She wrote about it in her book, long after the campaign was over:

[T]he House of Representatives rejected a Bush-backed economic bailout plan in a vote in which two-thirds of Republicans voted no. The impression this made on the electorate was not helpful to our cause. Millions of Americans were poised to go bankrupt or lose their savings, and the perception was that Republicans had failed to respond.

If she didn't support the bailouts, and was just backing McCain up, then why doesn't she say that in her book?

For Ms. O'Donnell to not understand the context of Sarah Palin's erstwhile support suggests either a willing suspension of disbelief (thx H. Clinton!) or sheer stupidity.

Yeah, she's so stupid for pointing out what Palin said, and repeated in writing months later. Everyone knows you're supposed to assume a politician believes the opposite of what he/she says, and never bring up their actual words!

Either way, I congratulate her for having the kajones to “go on the attack” with a 17-year-old supporter of Sarah Palin

Just because teabaggers, Palinites, and birthers think that someone asking them questions about their beliefs constitutes an “attack,” doesn't make it so. If you can't explain yourself, it's your own fault for opening your mouth.

Incidentally, the teenager seemed to me to have come out on top in the discussion

If by “on top” you mean “completely ignorant about the people and policies you express support for,” then yes, she did.


scottyp
Comment posted November 20, 2009 @ 4:37 pm

That is Romney for you, He thinks the Americans are so dumb they will not remember Romney supported bail outs, of course this is an example of another flip flop by the flipper flopper.


scottyp
Comment posted November 20, 2009 @ 4:41 pm

” few people in the crowd remembered that Romney had supported the bailouts.”

Romneys motto, say what ever he thinks the public wants to hear, or whatever the group he is speaking in front of wants to hear, like Romney is a vermin. Oh, sorry, Romney hunts varmint, and is a life long member of the NRA. So, that must mean Romney will be hunting himself.


brendanm
Comment posted November 20, 2009 @ 5:13 pm

Wow, mantis was quite effective in making you look like the jackass you are. We'll see if you even bother replying.


dbogdan1960
Comment posted November 20, 2009 @ 6:39 pm

My momma told me, “Never argue with an idiot. People will have a hard time figuring out who is who…” ;-) P.S. Thanks for the gratuitious ad hominum attack!! Quid pro Quo.Pr


dbogdan1960
Comment posted November 20, 2009 @ 6:45 pm

And I'm absolutely certain that when YOU were 17, you were articulate, STUNNINGLY informed, well-versed in ALL things political, and able to discern the subtleties and permutations of political campaigning. The reporter didn't seem to be “asking [her] questions;” rather she seemed to be trying to preach to the young lady how woefully wrong she was in having and – GASP! – espousing a political view favorable to Sarah Palin. P.S. And thanks for the gratuitious ad hominum attacks, although I congratulate you in constructing a point-by-point “rebuttal” of my original post. ;-%Pr


dbogdan1960
Comment posted November 20, 2009 @ 6:51 pm

Even the author describes the “dialogue” between the reporter and the interviewee as “a grilling.” On the other hand, he describes Norah O'Donnell as “…one of [MSNBC's] top on-air talents…” So, I guess it's a wash, then. Perhaps Mr. “Tingle Up My Leg” wasn't available? MSNBC = More Snotty News By ChicPr


bjobotts
Comment posted November 20, 2009 @ 7:18 pm

She was the one wearing the T-Shirt advertising her opposition to the bail outs so the question almost has to follow when standng inline to buy Palin's book if she knew Palin supported it.

It's like wearing a t-shirt that says I hate black people while standing inline to buy a book from Eddie Murphy…what question immediately comes to mind?

So many Paliens to justify and explain and apologize to the MILLIONS who reject her and just wish she'd go away because she's such an embarrassment to our national discourse. Air-heads were never intended for politics


chrisjay
Comment posted November 20, 2009 @ 7:20 pm

Your momma should have told you, “Better to be thought a fool than to open your mouth & remove all doubt”
I agree with mantis & brendanm on this one!


chrisjay
Comment posted November 20, 2009 @ 7:23 pm

I heard the audio of this “grilling”
LOL
You righties are all about the sob-sister victim routine, aren't 'cha?
Palin has provided quite the role-modelling on that count…


monkey99
Comment posted November 20, 2009 @ 7:50 pm

chrisjay,

I put this below yours so as to keep the continuity, here. Yah, it's as you say, the passive-aggressive victim routine.

dbogdan1960,

I'd say MSNBC handles the truth better than FOX, Full-On Xenophobia.


dbogdan1960
Comment posted November 20, 2009 @ 8:09 pm

MSNBC = Mindless Sycophant News By Collectivists. And boy, you people here sure display all the classic signs of liberal tolerance for diversity… Thanks for all the affirmation! It is clear to me that few, if any of you, are interested in an intellectually honest discussion about this topic, since one after the other has pounced upon my comments and replied with off-topic, derisive, demeaning remarks. And you say Right Wingers are intolerant! HAH! Like I said earlier, Mindless Sycophants… if anyone “strays off the plantation,” they'd better beware%Pr


monkey99
Comment posted November 20, 2009 @ 8:51 pm

Try the other Palin blog here.

I've already seen the intellectually honest discussion from you palin-worshippers.

You can't discuss something you don't know anything about.

As I said in the other blog, watch out, your hypocracy is showing.


monkey99
Comment posted November 20, 2009 @ 8:53 pm

By the way, judging by the way you worship this ridiculous woman, YOU are the sycophant.


Bryan White
Comment posted November 20, 2009 @ 9:38 pm

1) Weigel misreported the name issue in his story, above. I couldn't care less about your point.
2) O'Donnell's question was not an obvious one. She admitted the reason she asked the question during the recorded segment, and it revealed her editorial bias. It would be obvious to ask a question about the shirt, not to try to use the shirt and question to prove her thesis that the Palin supporters are confused about the issues. This is beyond obvious.
3) If you can find any significant similarity between the quotation from Weigel and the one that O'Donnell used that was supposedly from the debate, then I must tip my hat in honor of your imagination.
4) I stated a fact, and you can verify it from the video.

You're not very good at the objectivity thing, Herrence.


Bryan White
Comment posted November 20, 2009 @ 9:42 pm

I find it amusing that bjbotts makes the same assumption O'Donnell apparently did about Seal's shirt.

The shirt more opposes the results of the TARP program than it does the intent of the program. Some of you must be aware that the program has run astray of how it was originally supposed to work?


dbogdan1960
Comment posted November 20, 2009 @ 9:43 pm

You know what “They” say… “Opinions are like…” well, you know. Anyhoo! Thanks everyone for all the flatulence! K Then! Peace Out! :-%Pr


chrisjay
Comment posted November 20, 2009 @ 9:51 pm

Late-nite Palin one-liner of the day——
Sarah freely admits that she just doesn't like vegetarians one bit: thinks they should all go back where they came from—–
Vegetaria

…gotta love the twit


chrisjay
Comment posted November 20, 2009 @ 9:57 pm

whole 'nother discussion: the two different segments of TARP, Paulson's original draft vs the final bill, the back-pedaling any number of politicians have done to distance themselves, the mischaracterizations of both segments of TARP by both sides of the aisle…wish I had time for that discussion. This thread is about what a craven hypocrite Palin is on this (and many other) topic(s).


monkey99
Comment posted November 20, 2009 @ 10:09 pm

chrisjay,

See? In the face of the truth and legitimate criticism, it's “Let's quit!”

A true Palin fanatic if ever I saw one.

Typical.


Bryan White
Comment posted November 20, 2009 @ 10:21 pm

Really. Not about O'Donnell and Seal for you, eh? Take a stab at illustrating Palin's hypocrisy on the TARP bailout, if you would. All I've seen so far seems like qualified support. Enlighten us.


dbogdan1960
Comment posted November 21, 2009 @ 12:16 am

That's right! Keep it classy, folks! Spewing opinions to shout down others is soooo classy%Pr


monkey99
Comment posted November 21, 2009 @ 1:00 am

Shout down?

Do you even know what you're talking about?

Taken as a whole, the article spells it out clearly. Why do you have such a hard time believing that this woman is selfserving, and does nothing “beneficial” unless it's in HER best interest. That much was spelled out.

Same as her book tour. She could have easily said no to the scheduling of the book signings, but it's obvious she didn't do the math. So 175 or so people were left literally out in the cold. Palin supporters, like you!
There was even a supporter in the other blog who stated the who, what when, where and how. They were disillusioned, and for their efforts, was attacked by other Palin supporters.

All tolled, you people don't really know what's going on, do you? Take off your rose colored glasses long enough to see that your precious Sarah doesn't give two whits about those who support her. You were only good to her as a vote in 2008. Now it's about the cash. You people? suck on it, pal. She's laughing at you all the way to the bank!


babyboomer1960
Comment posted November 21, 2009 @ 3:55 am

First, I changed my user name. It's on purpose. I'm still the same guy, not trying to lurk or anything…

Second, you're right. I'm wrong. It's obviously a mental defect on my part why I can't understand what an evil and malicious force Sarah Palin is and how toxic her viewpoints are for America. She's really, really way out there on the fringes. So much so that she couldn't possibly, POSSIBLY gain any traction with the REAL America that we all know and love. That being said…

So why do you and those who share your political points of view spend so much time and energy to destroy and vilify her? She can't be both a wacko fringe non-starter and a dangerous loose cannon ready to blow your world apart… can she?

Like I said. I'm wrong. You're right. I know I'll sleep better tonight having said that. I hope you do too… Love and kisses, Monkey99. I'll keep you in my prayers – and my dreams…

Peace Out…


babyboomer1960
Comment posted November 21, 2009 @ 4:00 am

If you find the characterization of the dialogue as “a grilling” to be disingenuous, you can take it up with the author. He penned it, not me… As for sob-sister routines, the Dems have that locked up with the Rev. Al Sharpton, Rev. Jesse Jackson, ACORN,et. al. I have no idea where that concept fits into the context of this discussion. I never considered Sarah Palin a victim – she's DEFINITELY a survivor!


monkey99
Comment posted November 21, 2009 @ 10:51 am

Oh man.

This is why so many get so fed up with you folk.
It's also why Palin won't really get anywhere.

The woman is not political material in any sense. It's not your defense of her, it's the refusal to see the caustic influence she has on America.

As I stated before, my niece has seen this woman up close, BEFORE all the political hoopla about how she's this , and how she's that, but no one is taking into account how this woman really is. If her stint as Governor is any indication, how does that translate into someone this country can be proud of?

My niece is a Republican. I respect that, heck, I was once Republican, myself. She told me about the things she's seen this woman do and say, and she was taken by her mom references, even if she wasn't really what she claimed to be. Now, would you rather have the real thing, or a cheap knock-off?
Since that time, my niece has changed her view because she had caught Palin in a few lies about her time in Alaska. It doesn't mean my niece will cease being a Republican, she's just not one of these extremists that you seem to be. Not all Republicans see her as you do.

Palin is bad for America in so many ways that it surprises everyone why she's defended so vigorously.
I just wish you could see it, too.


thesheriffsani
Comment posted November 21, 2009 @ 11:15 am

Survivors finish out their terms of office.


chrisjay
Comment posted November 21, 2009 @ 2:04 pm

“…destroy and vilify her” LOL
Palin's own mouth is her worst enemy.


chrisjay
Comment posted November 21, 2009 @ 2:11 pm

Oh, its about O'Donnell & Seal as well—Palin's compulsive finger-pointing (you have read her book, right?) is the recurring theme :'McCain made me support the bailout', 'Couric ambushed me' 'Letterman raped my daughter'—it just never ends! Whether Palin comprehends anything about TARP or it's objectives is, indeed, a whole other discussion.


BOSMAN
Comment posted November 21, 2009 @ 2:36 pm

Don't tell this to the Palin Supporters, This could lead to MASSIVE DEPRESION!

Her followers are NO DIFFERENT than the KOOL-AID sippers, who B L I N D L Y supported Obama. I don't blame her for this, It just proves she supported it, LIKE EVERYONE ELSE!


Herrence Meritocracy
Comment posted November 21, 2009 @ 2:58 pm

1) Good for you, Mr. Factchecker! You get a gold star!
2) What in the world is more obvious than asking about an interviewee about a t-shirt he/she is wearing? (A facial tattoo, perhaps?). Seal was there as a supporter of Palin, her shirt criticized the funds authorized to the TARP, the creation of the TARP was supported by Palin. Obvious discrepancy to any informed individual. I suppose softball questions about if she wants to be like Palin when she grows up would have satisfied you though, Mr. White.
3) Context context context. Let's see here, “thanks to John McCain’s bipartisan efforts that he was so instrumental in bringing folks together over this past week, even suspending his own campaign to make sure he was putting excessive politics aside and putting the country first.” What was McCain doing over that “past week”? Negotiating and voting for the bill that created the TARP and authorized it $700 billion. Palin is thus voicing support for his efforts at creating the TARP, $700 billion and all. I tip my hat at what is either your ignorance or intellectual dishonesty, though.
4) The circumference of the Earth is 24,860 miles. Hooray, I stated a fact too! But, like yours, it turns out to be an irrelevant one. A more relevant fact would be that Palin supported the authorization of $700 billion to TARP, which Seal's t-shirt criticizes. It is much less relevant that Palin is now critical of how the money is being spent.

Thanks for playing, but better luck next time!


Bryan White
Comment posted November 21, 2009 @ 4:30 pm

Please highlight for me the portion of your response that illustrates Palin's hypocrisy on the bailout. I can't seem to find it. You did claim that Palin was “a craven hypocrite” regarding TARP, didn't you?


Bryan White
Comment posted November 21, 2009 @ 4:38 pm

1) What's a gold star from you worth, Herrence? Half a dollop of bird dookie?
2) It's fine for O'Donnell to ask about the shirt. I already said that (“It would be obvious to ask a question about the shirt, not to try to use the shirt and question to prove her thesis that the Palin supporters are confused about the issues”). It is not an obvious discrepancy because there is not necessarily any discrepancy at all, as I have also already pointed out. This is fun. We discuss and you ignore what I write! :)
3) Yes, “context context context.” I was talking about the two sentences that O'Donnell appeared to present as quotations of Palin “She said …”). It is also obvious that the remark you're trying to hang your hat on is praise of McCain's bipartisanship, not any praise for the bill or its results (see latter portion of #2, above).
4) lol
You're the expert, Herrence. It's not like it's politically relevant how our government maintains accountability over its spending.


brendanm
Comment posted November 21, 2009 @ 7:48 pm

And you think Sarah Palin is qualified to be president, right? I rest my case.


babyboomer1960
Comment posted November 21, 2009 @ 8:50 pm

What I find freakishly perplexing is why people who think like you apparently do, spend so much time speaking in disparaging terms about people like Sarah Palin and, similarly, Rush Limbaugh. You can't have it both ways. Correct me if I'm wrong, but your argument as I understand it, your point of view, is that they are: a)dangerously out on the political fringe in their beliefs and statements;
b)not up to the “big league” in terms of Washington DC/Beltway “Movers and Shakers”;
c)divisive, mean spirited, inciting hatred and divisiness everywhere they go;
d)not worth listening to or following if you're a reasonable American (as you would see fit to define).

But to people like me, who never heard of Sarah Palin until she was picked by McCain to run for VP, something in the picture I'm seeing & hearing since then doesn't make sense. I see the most vicious, organized, incessant effort to assassinate someone politically that I've ever seen in my life since October of 2008. I see a full-bore orchestrated effort on the part of the “Mainstream” Media news outlets, pop culture icons, advertising agencies, Hollywood script writers, late-night TV personalities, and Democrat Party spokespeople to spread horrid lies, rumors, and allegations on a scale that was shocking in its scope. So why are all these people and organizations dedicating so much time and energy to disparage, belittle, discount, humiliate, embarrass, ostracize, neutralize, shunt, or otherwise silence her and what she's saying? Please, honestly give me a clue. Believe it or not, I'm not a “Palin-fanatic” in the sense of how it was expressed by another poster. I don't believe she's ready for a run 4 Prez. Does she have potential as a politician? Sure. Whatever “fanatical” feeling I do have for her are coming more from my innate sense of rooting for the underdog. I'm told it's a distinctly American thing. Perhaps you share that as a citizen. I just feel like someone set the hounds of hell out on her from the get-go and still wonder why… The article that started this thread is, to my universe, another perplexing example of the organized campaign to belittle Ms. Palin. I remain, humbly, perplexed…


thesheriffsani
Comment posted November 22, 2009 @ 12:33 am

Somewhere, Dan Quayle is asking where you were twenty years ago.


thesheriffsani
Comment posted November 22, 2009 @ 12:35 am

Palin quit on Alaska. That's a fact, not an opinion.


txshep
Comment posted November 22, 2009 @ 2:24 am

Palin said in a FOX interview that she supported the promises of shovel ready jobs and finacial help for Americans in economic pain. She then said that we can all look back now and realized that we were being lied to and none of those things came to pass. Palin points out the corruption of both Rep and Dems… She is about the truth. Oh… BTW… Now that Palin has been unleashed and the ground swell is driving us towards a huge backlash… please remember all the pundits who have been telling us we do not have to pay any attention to Sarah Palin. Send for my favorite receipes on how eat crow… LOL.


babyboomer1960
Comment posted November 22, 2009 @ 1:25 pm

That's right txshep: The pundits are telling us that we do not have to pay any attention to Sarah Palin. They're telling us that we're nuts if we do! She's sooo marginalized and out-there on the periphery of politics that NOBODY in their right minds could possibly be interested in what she has to say, right? Right? RIGHT!!!

So why are the books flying off the shelves and why is she drawing record crowds pretty much everywhere she goes? Are we/they ALL out of our minds? And most importantly: why are media pundits, who keep telling us how she's a non-starter, so obsessed with following her everywhere she goes and hanging upon her every word in an effort to find something they can use to destroy her? For someone who's so irrelevant in the world of politics, the media sure is focusing a lot of time and energy on her. What does that REALLY say about Sarah Palin? Or the media?

The media seems intent on falling into the same self-made booby-trap they use with Rush Limbaugh. They keep talking about him day and night, assuring us how dangerous he is for America, and assuring us that he's so far-right that he's “irrelevant.” Yet by doing so, they bestow a huge amount of publicity… hence, relevance, to him and his rating continue to soar. Note to Mainstream Media “Reporters”: The more you focus you efforts on telling us how wrong Sarah Palin is for America, the more America looks at you in disbelief, and take a second look at Ms. Palin.We wonder why, if she's so wrong, are you spending so much energy to try to convince us of that opinion? It's not working. We have eyes. We have ears. Believe it or not, we don't all drink the MSM Koolaid. Nor do we sip from some sycophantic well of GOP Juice. My overall take on this MSM strategy is, to paraphrase a noble bard, “We fear thou doth protest too much…”

By focusing so much time, energy, and attention on Sarah Palin, the MSM is telegraphing to the world who they fear the most. Sarah is like some incessant itch they just can't keep themselves from continuing to scratch in an endless effort to quell their nervousness about her… Time will tell, but… I'm with you on the recipes for eating crow at this point!!! LOL


confused09
Comment posted November 22, 2009 @ 11:25 pm

If by survivor you mean that she is still alive, then yes, I agree with you. I saw video of her allegedly shot last weekend and she was standing and talking. She has not survived politically in any way yet, since she holds no office of any kind and maybe never will again. She is just a pop icon author at this point.

I'm not sure I understand this support for Palin. She has repeatedly shown herself to be under-informed and outmatched and she chose not to finish her term of office as governor, voluntarily! How can that be seen as a good thing? Maybe she'll get elected President and quit after the first 100 days. Can you do that? This book deal just seems like a grab for cash that she couldn't do as governor.

She's vindictive (with the trooper-gate story) and her family's religious conservative lifestyle couldn't even keep her own teenage daughter from getting knocked up. I'm sure there will be cameras pointed at her for years to come, but I can't see her as a legitimate political contender for national office anymore.


confused09
Comment posted November 22, 2009 @ 11:39 pm

That exchange was ridiculous. Herrence wins.


Bryan White
Comment posted November 23, 2009 @ 12:33 am

Oh.

You must be his mom. Happy Thanksgiving.


Babyboomerskilledtheplanet
Comment posted November 23, 2009 @ 9:28 am

Because people like you are morons…


mantis
Comment posted November 23, 2009 @ 12:44 pm

It is also obvious that the remark you're trying to hang your hat on is praise of McCain's bipartisanship, not any praise for the bill or its results (see latter portion of #2, above).

Yeah, don't try to use your magic decoder ring to determine that Palin supported the supposed outcome of McCain's efforts. Objectives and results don't matter, only the process does! Palin was praising McCain's bipartisan efforts to pass something she hates and would never vote for, obviously. Anyone who thinks differently is just a big meanie.


smilek
Comment posted November 23, 2009 @ 4:40 pm

I've been disappointed to discover that the hate towards Palin that can easily be found online is not limited to crazy blog commenters and leftist media. I have a few close relatives who are those impossible to explain Democrat voters who are otherwise entirely conservative. They seem to hate Palin (i.e. they don't just dislike her). I think this is depressing evidence of a parasitic effect the that left is having on regular Democrats. The Democratic party must be taken back from the leftist nuts who currently control it. The future of our country depends on the leftist Pelosi crowd remaining marginalized.


joker5679
Comment posted November 23, 2009 @ 4:47 pm

If you read Sarah Palin comments during the debate, they are say nothing about supporting the bail out rather supporting John McCain The reporter from MSNBC miss quotes Sarah Palin (what a shock)
“John McCain’s bipartisan efforts that he was so instrumental in bringing folks together over this past week, even suspending his own campaign to make sure he was putting excessive politics aside and putting the country first”

She was supporting the Presidential candidate but did not give support to bail out. The real point is President Obama and John McCain both supported these bail out although a majority were againts it. Sarah Palin may not be fit for office by


joker5679
Comment posted November 23, 2009 @ 4:49 pm

If you read Sarah Palin comments during the debate, they are say nothing about supporting the bail out. The reporter from MSNBC miss quotes Sarah Palin (what a shock)
The reporter say that Sarah Palin praise John McCain for bring folks together to pass the bill and in time of crisis and (studder) government that is the time to step in. (watch the interview yourself- this is my transcription) Funny that it is different from what was actually said.

“John McCain’s bipartisan efforts that he was so instrumental in bringing folks together over this past week, even suspending his own campaign to make sure he was putting excessive politics aside and putting the country first” Sarah Palin comments for the debat

She was supporting the Presidential candidate but did not give support to bail out. The real point is President Obama and John McCain both supported these bail out although a majority were againts it. Sarah Palin may not be fit for office but John McCain and the Barrack Obama have proven they are not fit as well. As for MSNBC, these bunch of people condem Sarah Palin but misquote her to make a point with a little girl, I think they are the ones spreading misinformation,


Is This How Sarah Palin Got Through College? She Uses Cheat Notes For Tea Party Speech
Pingback posted February 7, 2010 @ 1:22 pm

[...] I don’t care that Sarah Palin read notes off her hand. So her ideas aren’t logical, consistent and coherent enough to answer a question without prompting – is this news to anyone [...]


Todd Isbeing Emasculated
Comment posted February 8, 2010 @ 3:30 pm

The books are “flying off the shelves” because she's buying them, 63,000 and counting…


mitchelllangbert
Comment posted February 11, 2010 @ 8:05 pm

It's unfortunate that Palin supported the bailout as of last year. It is even more unfortunate that Obama not only carried this policy forward, but amplified it and has allowed the Federal Reserve Bank to run riot with subsidies to investment banks. Investment banks are not institutions that depend on fractional reserve banking so that their failure would not have implications for the money supply. Rather, derivatives, which are private contracts, have been allowed to create a public interest. This is a mistake. America would be best off were all investment banks to fail. They are corrupt, unproductive institutions. This is self evident because they have needed a bailout that some insiders say has now exceed $14 trillion. The public ought not to foot the bill. Doing so is corrupt.. They should be allowed to fail. It is sad that Palin was uneducated in 2008, and perhaps she is just as bad now.


mitchelllangbert
Comment posted February 12, 2010 @ 1:05 am

It's unfortunate that Palin supported the bailout as of last year. It is even more unfortunate that Obama not only carried this policy forward, but amplified it and has allowed the Federal Reserve Bank to run riot with subsidies to investment banks. Investment banks are not institutions that depend on fractional reserve banking so that their failure would not have implications for the money supply. Rather, derivatives, which are private contracts, have been allowed to create a public interest. This is a mistake. America would be best off were all investment banks to fail. They are corrupt, unproductive institutions. This is self evident because they have needed a bailout that some insiders say has now exceed $14 trillion. The public ought not to foot the bill. Doing so is corrupt.. They should be allowed to fail. It is sad that Palin was uneducated in 2008, and perhaps she is just as bad now.


pollytix
Comment posted April 23, 2010 @ 4:19 am

Romney did NOT support the bailouts. Supporting Bush's emergency TARP measures is not the same as supporting the bailouts. Romney opposed all of the auto bailouts and the AIG bailout. Most people with any knowledge of economics supported TARP.


delivers the latest breaking news and information on the latest top stories, weather, business, entertainment, politics, and more.
Pingback posted May 7, 2010 @ 2:25 pm

[...] corporations and drill, baby, drill. Heck, even try to get a Tea Partier to explain choosing bailout-lover Sarah Palin to keynote their convention, especially when that movement once had at least some [...]


Is Your Senator a Bankster? | The Big Picture
Pingback posted May 7, 2010 @ 5:14 pm

[...] corporations and drill, baby, drill. Heck, even try to get a Tea Partier to explain choosing bailout-lover Sarah Palin to keynote their convention, especially when that movement once had at least some [...]


FTSN News » Blog Archive » Is Your Senator a Bankster?
Pingback posted May 7, 2010 @ 7:24 pm

[...] corporations and drill, baby, drill. Heck, even try to get a Tea Partier to explain choosing bailout-lover Sarah Palin to keynote their convention, especially when that movement once had at least some [...]


Planner Reads » Blog Archive » Is Your Senator a Bankster?
Pingback posted May 7, 2010 @ 7:41 pm

[...] corporations and drill, baby, drill. Heck, even try to get a Tea Partier to explain choosing bailout-lover Sarah Palin to keynote their convention, especially when that movement once had at least some [...]


Dylan Ratigan: Is Your Senator a Bankster? | Goo News
Pingback posted May 8, 2010 @ 2:48 am

[...] corporations and drill, baby, drill. Heck, even try to get a Tea Partier to explain choosing bailout-lover Sarah Palin to keynote their convention, especially when that movement once had at least some [...]


Guest Post: Is Your Senator A Bankster | Finance Blog
Pingback posted May 8, 2010 @ 4:18 am

[...] corporations and drill, baby, drill. Heck, even try to get a Tea Partier to explain choosing bailout-lover Sarah Palin to keynote their convention, especially when that movement once had at least some [...]


Guest Post: Is Your Senator A Bankster | Stocks!
Pingback posted May 8, 2010 @ 7:02 am

[...] corporations and drill, baby, drill. Heck, even try to get a Tea Partier to explain choosing bailout-lover Sarah Palin to keynote their convention, especially when that movement once had at least some [...]


Is Your Senator a Bankster? : Invest My Money
Pingback posted May 8, 2010 @ 6:05 pm

[...] corporations and drill, baby, drill. Heck, even try to get a Tea Partier to explain choosing bailout-lover Sarah Palin to keynote their convention, especially when that movement once had at least some [...]


Is Your Senator a Bankster? « Coreys Views
Pingback posted May 9, 2010 @ 3:01 pm

[...] corporations and drill, baby, drill. Heck, even try to get a Tea Partier to explain choosing bailout-lover Sarah Palin to keynote their convention, especially when that movement once had at least some [...]


Who Supported TARP, And Why? - US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum
Pingback posted July 12, 2010 @ 4:04 pm

[...] can't even back emergency unemployment relief! And then there is Pallin, and in the Debates! Yes, Palin Backed the Bailouts The Washington Independent "Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!" (It's probably easier to see bigger banks, from [...]


Is Your Senator a Bankster? « Dylan Ratigan
Pingback posted August 10, 2010 @ 4:28 pm

[...] corporations and drill, baby, drill. Heck, even try to get a Tea Partier to explain choosing bailout-lover Sarah Palin to keynote their convention, especially when that movement once had at least some [...]


Lisa
Comment posted January 25, 2011 @ 3:29 pm

Romney did Romneycare in Mass and made it mandated to get health insurance or pay fines and now look at Mass state. NO ROMNEY !!! NONEWT !!!!!!!! AND NO Giuliani.. They prey on us as they are politicans of Washington fakes !!!!!!!!!!! My vote is for Sarah Palin 2012 she is the only one who is not corrupted !!


Tom
Comment posted January 25, 2011 @ 3:43 pm

MSNBC ARE LIARS ! WHERE IS THE DEBATE TAPE ? Where is the tape of her saying this.msnbc go back into your dark deep hole. You want to spread your lies. very very sick media. People wake up MSNBC has been caught into so many lies and sniping of tapes. MSNBC are liars. i am now waken up of who MSNBC NBC CNN ABC ARE. I SHUT THEM DOWN …IT WILL MAKE ME SICK TO EVEN WATCH THEM KNOWING WHAT EVER COMES FROM THEIR MOUTHS ARE LIES !!!!!!!!

LOVE Sarah Palin ! She is the only one who says what she means and does it at that. She is the only one who does not flip flop or say what she thinks people want to hear,unlike Rommey, Giuliani and yes Newt. They all say here is our chance now… well noway!

My bet is on Sarah Palin for 2012


venapro hemorrhoids treatment
Comment posted February 26, 2011 @ 8:13 am

Thanks for a marvelous posting! I actually enjoyed reading it, you could be a great author.I will always bookmark your blog and will often come back down the road. I want to encourage you continue your great job, have a nice afternoon!


Jon C
Comment posted June 19, 2011 @ 11:09 am

The funny thing, Tom, is that they are not lying.  They are spinning.  Nowhere in those quotes does Palin back the bailouts.  She supported John McShame suspending his campaign to attend the negotiations on the bailouts…but McShame was not supportive of the bailouts…until he voted for them.  He had been against them on the campaign trail, and gave every indication that he was going to oppose them at the negotiations.  THIS ACTION is what Palin praised.

As for the excerpt from her book.  She STILL did not support the bailouts.  She said that 2/3 of republicans voting against them gave the voters the IMPRESSION of inaction.  But if you read the book, nowhere does she support those bailouts.  SHE WAS RIGHT.  Many voters did get that IMPRESSION because republicans are not as good at slinging mud and projecting their shortcomings as the democrats are.


Jon C
Comment posted June 19, 2011 @ 11:12 am

Are you out of your mind?  TARP WAS THE FIRST ROUND OF BAILOUTS!  Romney DID support the bailouts.  Romney is also all about mandated health care.  He would NEVER repeal Obamacare.

We need a REAL conservative candidate to win the nomination.  Palin, Bachmann, perhaps a few others (NOT RON PAUL – HE IS NUTS), but NOT Romney.  I would vote for any of them against Obama, but let’s get a SOLID CONSERVATIVE candidate in the primaries so that we do not have to hold our noses and vote for another damn RINO.


RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.