Fortunately this woman no longer seems to dominate the News Cycle. It's not like when she whined about a "Blood Libel" being perpetrated against her after 6 People were Shot, including Rep. Gabrielle Giffords in Pheonix, after she had placed a target sight over her Office and that Office had be vandalized with a rock thrown through the window. Nobody said she was responsible for the shooting, just the fact that 11 out the 20 Representatives she targeted received acts of vandalism and death threats against them that Summer.
These days Sarah seems to have lost that kind of power.
It's not exactly like when she defended Dr. Laura use of the N-Word a dozen times. It's not like the time she attacked Rahm Emmanuel for saying Liberals who criticized the President had "Retarded" ideas, then defended Limbaugh for saying that "Liberals are Retarded", and doubled-down with the bonus that they were "Kooks" as well herself. Or when she defended Limbaugh for his vicious attacks on Sandra Fluke. It's not like when she ignited a fire-storm of comment when she said Paul Revere was trying to warn the British... that they were coming - or something.
No, it's not like any of that - this time she didn't make nearly that much sense. This time she only said that President Obama besides being a Secret Muslim, Athiest, Un-Christian, Saddamist-Lovin', Anarchist, Fascist, Commie and just plain Icky - that as a bonus, she said President Obama is also a Secret Confederate.
Now, it has taken all these years for many Americans to understand that that gravity, that mistake, took place before the Civil War and why the Civil War had to really start changing America. What Barack Obama seems to want to do is go back to before those days when we were in different classes based on income, based on color of skin.
President Obama wants to put Black people back into bondage? He wants to return us to
Slavery?
Seriously?
I mean really, this is just weak sauce. This is all she's got? This and endorsing that Nutbagger Allen West for Veep? Is the fact that "Game Change" is debuting on HBO tonight really throwing you that far off your game, Sarah?
Tsk. tsk. tsk.
Pardon my crude mock-up, but does the Reality Distortion Field generated by her hairspray plume make Palin thinks this is who the President Is?
He's Jefferson Beauregard Davis O'Bama the Third?
And not this:
I mean, does that really make any damn sense? Is that not patently ridiculous?
Does anyone recall that this is the same woman who, after defending Dr. Laura, called David Gregory a Racist?
Yeah, David Gregory. Why? Because Gregory had the Temerity to try and Corner Gingrich on his "Food Stamp President" attacks on Obama.
Palin: Well, talk about Racism. That was a racism-tinged question from David Gregory. He made it sound like if you're black - you're on Food Stamps and the President is saying you're on Food Stamps. Enough of this, obviously it's done to end the conversation and divert attention from what the real substance is.
Why do we let the press, or the media personalities get away with this. Let's call 'em out on 'em and start concentrating on what the real issue is. The issue is we have 47 Million Americans on Food Stamps, y'know why? Because we don't have a robust economy allowing the private sector to grow and have jobs provided, via the private sector, because government has overreached, overtaxed, overspent and got us in debt and there isn't enough private sector money out their creating jobs
So it seems it was a "Racism-Tinged" question by Gregory to ask Gingrich what he meant by "Food Stamp President", it wasn't Racist for Gingrich to claim Obama
is the "Food Stamp President" especially when the greatest rise in the need for Food Stamps happen
on George W. Bush's Watch.
No, that's not racist or bigoted or coded language at all.
And gee, since the Economy has been roaring back, creating over 1 Million Jobs over that last 6 months this little talking point gem is out the window isn't it?
Hey, you like apples?
In the last year under Obama's policies more jobs have been created than were created by George W. Bush's low-tax, low-regulation, Robber-Barons Gone Wild policies during His. Entire. Eight. Year. Presidency.
How you like Dem Apples?
It seems like way back then - which was less than a year ago - Palin was much more on her game. Even when she was saying Ridiculous Crap, it at least made sense as way to dodge factstm and insert her own talking points about lower taxes, lower government regulation, private sector money, yadda, yadda, yadda into the "debate". Not that any of her Libertard 1%er BS is true, but it was a smooth-er pivot than this.
What's the point of saying "Obama wants to take us back to before the Civil War"?
What, because he hugged a Black Professor at Law School? Because he spoke up and defended that Professor? Pathetic.
With all her blather about "Hard Work" and umm, "Hard Work" in this particular rant, was she trying to say that Professor Bell didn't work hard? That he didn't deserve his position on the faculty at Harvard? That his decision to take a leave of absence because for some reason he was still the ONLY person of color on their faculty in 1991, and he felt that he needed to take a stand about it?
It's seems like she's trying to grasp for the kind of "Reverse Racism" charge we typically hear from Pat Buchanan, or Dinesh D'Sousa. Y'know - the argument that the only racists left in the country are black people who dare to point out racism when they see it. It's not a potential sign of either racism or abject laziness that Harvard couldn't find one other qualified person of color to ad to their staff, it's got to be that every other person of color simply isn't qualified.
Yeah, that's the ticket.
Each and every other one of them is lazy. Looking for a handout. Trying to take something away from a better qualified white (or male) person who obviously must have been working harder than they were, because every white person is obviously better than them aren't they?
Uh huh.
So her view is that because he said nice things about Prof Bell, it's President Obama who wants to take us all the way back to the time before the 15th Amendment which - following the Civil War - granted black people the right to vote. It's not all the Republican Measures in State after State that are requiring tougher and tougher Voter ID requirements, which essentially amount to a Poll Tax on Poor People, Students and the Elderly. Many of whom proportionally tend to be people of color, and also - Vote Democratic.
Yeah Right, it's not the Republican Party doing that - it's President Obama.
Her view is that it's President Obama who is out to challenge the 14th Amendment, which granted all persons within the jurisdiction of the State the "equal protection of the laws", as well as the rights of "birthright citizenship" which had been denied to Free and Enslaved Blacks alike by the Dred Scott Decision - it's not the GOP who have been making rumblings about striping birthright citizenship out of our laws in defiance of the 14th Amendment, purely to lower the "enticement" for dark skinned pregnant Mexican women to cross the border so their children are born here, and are therefor native born Americans with all the rights and privileges therein.
Native Born Americans, just like Obama.
Clearly that's the reason Obama has increased the number of troops and deployed Predator surveillance drones on the border. And it's the reason the total number of so-called "Illegal Immigrants" has actually gone down for the first time in 20 years on President Obama's watch.
It's not Republicans such as Ron and Rand Paul who have risen in united opposition to the Civil Rights Acts Public Accommodation Provision, arguing that Private Businesses have no Responsibility to Respect the Rights of their patrons not to be discriminated against.
That also happens to be the view of Dinesh D'souza who claimed in his Libertarian Screed "The End of Racism" 15 years ago that the only true solution to all our racial ills was to Repeal the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts. Yes, if we could just simply go back to those simpler, happier Jim Crow, Literacy Test and Lynch filled times. Wouldn't it be nice?
Also "taking us back" seems to have been, until now, your own manifesto as you wrote in your book "America By Heart".
The epitome of progressive thinking was Barack Obama's promise, just before the 2008 election, that "we are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America." I guess you could say he warned us! But the problem is that Americans don't want a fundamental transformation of their country. Americans are awakening to the fact that, of course our country has changed a great deal since it was born, but our Founders hit on some timeless truths that will never change and should never change. More and more of us view our founding truths as a bulwark, not just against bigger government, but against losing that fundamental sense of decency that Senator Smith fought for. If we forget these truths—or reject that they are timeless—we lose something fundamental about ourselves. No, "transformation" won't save America; "restoration" of our honor, dignity, and freedoms will save America.
So what
principles of the founders did she want to return to? You mean the founders who twelve of whom later became President
owned slaves? 8 of those 12 did so, while they were President.
George Washington owned more than 200 slaves
Thomas Jefferson owned more than 100 slaves
James Madison owned and sold slaves all his life
James Monroe owned 30-40 slaves
Andrew Jackson owned about 160 slaves
Martin Van Buren owned at least one slave
William Henry Harrison had several slaves
John Tyler had slaves
James K. Polk had 15 slaves
Zachary Taylor owned more than 100 slaves
Andrew Johnson owned 8 slaves
Ulysses S. Grant freed his slaves
Are these the founding principles she means? Yes, certainly they wrote "All Men Are Created Equal" in the Declaration of Independence, but they also wrote a Constitution that
doesn't include that language. One of these things is truly NOT like the other. They are not interchangeable. Instead the Constitution included the 3/5ths clause, and the Fugitive Slave Clause - both of which were the basis of the Dred Scot decision and weren't erased until the ratification of the 14th Amendment after the Civil War - is that what she means? That we should
restore that? Those Principles of Compromise between the North and South forged the nation on a cracked bedrock of injustice, she knows it - we all know it. The fact that John Quincy Adams, who was nine while the Declaration of Independence was written, later became the lead attorney for the Amistad case doesn't change or erase
any of this.
This little Neo-Mentalist Hypnotism Jedi Mind-Trick she's trying to play on the American People is a Dead, Stone, Fail. It's not Obama that's trying desperately to Drag America Back to the "Good 'Ole Days" of open bigotry and racism. It's your Party and it's You Sarah.
It's All You.
And as far as an attempt to distract us all from this: I think it too, is all Fail.
And yes that is Danny "Jonathan" Strong former member The Trio from Buffy who wrote the teleplay. Times have changed.
Vyan