QuoteFAIRBANKS, Alaska – Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin steps down Sunday giving few clues about her political future, which has been clouded by ethics probes, mounting legal bills and dwindling popularity.
A few things are known: She is scheduled to speak Aug. 8 at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in California, and has said she plans to write a book, campaign for political candidates from coast to coast and build a right-of-center coalition.
She also plans to continue speaking her mind on the social networking site Twitter.
"Wrapped up Anch Gov's Picnic, awesome," she wrote in a message posted Saturday. "Now road trip to Fairbanks for farewell speech/changing of the guard. Camper full of kids & coffee."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090726/ap_on_re_us/us_palin_resignation
Twitter. :lulz:
So long, Sarah. We won't be seeing you again.
She was demonstrably more moronic and vapid than W, and was almost one heartbeat away from being potus. That was a bit of a mindfuck. There are decent odds that McCain won't survive Obama's first term, at which point that issue will be revisited in more horrifying detail. She still has support, but without a national stage to reinforce it, that's surely going to dwindle?
Overall, I think she did great work undermining faith in the established political systems and the media who were compelled to treat her candidacy seriously by the restrictions of the two-party game. I mean, yes - her contributions weren't a game-changer, but every little helps.
Her Twitter account: http://twitter.com/AKGOVSarahPalin
Wonder if she'll change it now that she isn't the AK GOV.
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_8Hh8uMDr9hg/Rg9CpTHa9aI/AAAAAAAAAAM/ytV624o1lMI/s320/so_long_and_thanks_for_all_the_fish.jpg)
I don't know all the ins and outs of US politics, can someone explain to me why her dropping out makes her seem MORE likely for the presidential candidacy in the future?
To me a quitter is just a quitter.
Because if you're going to be President, you'll have to give up your previous seat of office anyway. Plus it shows boldness, giving up a position you've already got to go after a very difficult one to obtain, and no-one gets to be President without at least a bit of crazy risktaking in their behaviour.
Also because Bill Kristol, who started the idea that her resignation was the beginning of a Presidential bid, is a nutter who has lost the ability to engage critically with reality, and doesn't realize that Palin is essentially useless and unreliable.
Quote from: Hoopla on July 28, 2009, 09:14:48 PM
I don't know all the ins and outs of US politics, can someone explain to me why her dropping out makes her seem MORE likely for the presidential candidacy in the future?
To me a quitter is just a quitter.
I think most of America is in the same situation as you.
Quote from: Hoopla on July 28, 2009, 09:14:48 PM
I don't know all the ins and outs of US politics, can someone explain to me why her dropping out makes her seem MORE likely for the presidential candidacy in the future?
To me a quitter is just a quitter.
Yeah, but she is quitting for them. To save them from the horrible expenses of all those ethic charges which actually weren't extra expenses because the state of Alaska keeps counsel on payroll whether or not they are used.
If your career and reputation is ruined by the truth of all your shortcomings being told, then you can't make bukoos of money by writing books and launching a speaking tour.
Just ask Mark Foley, Mark Sanford, or any other would be politician that's fallen from grace and missed the neverending paychecks.
her running for president: awesome
here's why
1. her constituency (primarily) consist of goobers who are easily swayed by putting your hand over your heart and saying "America", "Mother", and "God".
2. if the right wing manages to put forth a candidate with a shot at winning, Palin's camp will be divided and confused. Where's the republican party? Won't somebody please think of the children?
3. I mean seriously, she's not going to win. Go ahead and run. That's term 2 for mah man Barack, who is still looking better than those other stooges the left wing came up with.
Beaucoup.
It means "much".
FYI.
Har. The Bill Kristol/Jon Stewart interview last night was AWESOME. http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-july-27-2009/bill-kristol-extended-interview
Quote from: Jenne on July 29, 2009, 05:16:11 AM
Har. The Bill Kristol/Jon Stewart interview last night was AWESOME. http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-july-27-2009/bill-kristol-extended-interview
I saw an excerpt of that one on Countdown last night, the part where Jon Stewart very adeptly cornered Kristol into admitting that the government can operate a top-class health care system (for the military) and that they can do it very well.
I knew, as soon as they flashed the "WATCH TEH WHOLE INTERVIEW ONLINE" that Stewart was going for the kill. That was some awesome television. I stood up and clapped. It was such an expertly laid trap and Kristol went for it hook line and sinker.
His backpedaling was awesome to watch. I don't know WHY people like him go on that show, or the Bill Maher show for that matter, but damn it's good TeeVee.
Someone in the comment section made a good point about where Jon Stewart missed a pretty big opportunity. When Bill Kristol commented on how the Health Care proposal was over 1000 pages and no one has read it, the follow up question from Stewart should've been: "Um, so how do you know the bill is bad if you haven't read it?"
Yeah, I'm not sure he meant "no one" but maybe no one in Congress...I would have to listen to it again, since context is always everything. But I think Stewart did a great job of harping on a lot of where Kristol obviously has a brain deficiency.
Oh yes indeed. He did a masterful job indeed. It's kind of sad that only the comedians on TV are actually asking the tough questions of these spags.
And from Colbert to Stewart to Maher, they are pointing that out. Maher actually said he was tired of the flak from his own camp on how hard he is on Obama, that it was his JOB to be on his ass, since he was such a big proponent during his campaign.
Absolutely. I voted for him, so he better do what I voted him for.
Holy shit. I have no idea how to fix that sentence.
:lulz: I hate it when I do that too.
I may have to start watching Maher.
I haven't watched his "Overtime" spots yet...I should. They answer viewer questions on that part of it.
15 minutes later, did anybody see Colbert interview Orly Taitz (apparently, the head of the Birther movement?) It was so spot on. I don't think she's familiar with Colbert. The tongue-in-cheek nature of the show went right over her head. By being "on her side", he got her to say some pretty crazy stuff. I think Jon and Stephen should be given the nobel prize for journalism.
Quote from: Cramulus on July 29, 2009, 03:17:26 PM
15 minutes later, did anybody see Colbert interview Orly Taitz (apparently, the head of the Birther movement?) It was so spot on. I don't think she's familiar with Colbert. The tongue-in-cheek nature of the show went right over her head. By being "on her side", he got her to say some pretty crazy stuff. I think Jon and Stephen should be given the nobel prize for journalism.
(http://exe.leet.googlepages.com/orly.jpg/orly-full.jpg)
Quote from: Cramulus on July 29, 2009, 03:17:26 PM
15 minutes later, did anybody see Colbert interview Orly Taitz (apparently, the head of the Birther movement?) It was so spot on. I don't think she's familiar with Colbert. The tongue-in-cheek nature of the show went right over her head. By being "on her side", he got her to say some pretty crazy stuff. I think Jon and Stephen should be given the nobel prize for journalism.
Yes, though I missed most of the Daily Show last night.
Quote from: Cramulus on July 29, 2009, 03:17:26 PM
15 minutes later, did anybody see Colbert interview Orly Taitz (apparently, the head of the Birther movement?) It was so spot on. I don't think she's familiar with Colbert. The tongue-in-cheek nature of the show went right over her head. By being "on her side", he got her to say some pretty crazy stuff. I think Jon and Stephen should be given the nobel prize for journalism.
I agree 169%, and no I didn't see the interview--didn't have time to watch it last night. Damn my work schedule! I will be watching it today--maybe on my break in 10 mins...hm...
Quote from: Jenne on July 29, 2009, 03:16:08 PM
I haven't watched his "Overtime" spots yet...I should. They answer viewer questions on that part of it.
I tried, but they seem to be tied into some windows codec which I couldn't get to run in linux. Or rather, I figured that by the time I could get it working it'd probably be over.
I'll have to check and see if the DVR got it, there was an outage during Stewart and I missed the second half of that. :x
Quote from: fictionpuss on July 29, 2009, 03:20:43 PM
Quote from: Jenne on July 29, 2009, 03:16:08 PM
I haven't watched his "Overtime" spots yet...I should. They answer viewer questions on that part of it.
I tried, but they seem to be tied into some windows codec which I couldn't get to run in linux. Or rather, I figured that by the time I could get it working it'd probably be over.
I just wonder if it's as good as the rest of the show...because sometimes his show's pretty fucking good, and sometimes the panel falls flat or short of expectations. So I often wonder how the rest of it goes...or if it's a waste of time.
Quote from: Requia ☣ on July 29, 2009, 03:21:25 PM
I'll have to check and see if the DVR got it, there was an outage during Stewart and I missed the second half of that. :x
It's usually online the next day.
Quote from: Jenne on July 29, 2009, 03:21:49 PM
Quote from: fictionpuss on July 29, 2009, 03:20:43 PM
Quote from: Jenne on July 29, 2009, 03:16:08 PM
I haven't watched his "Overtime" spots yet...I should. They answer viewer questions on that part of it.
I tried, but they seem to be tied into some windows codec which I couldn't get to run in linux. Or rather, I figured that by the time I could get it working it'd probably be over.
I just wonder if it's as good as the rest of the show...because sometimes his show's pretty fucking good, and sometimes the panel falls flat or short of expectations. So I often wonder how the rest of it goes...or if it's a waste of time.
Eh, I have a hard time with Mahr's delivery, especially the way he laughs at his own jokes; it's a smarmy, self-important laugh that irks me. Plus, he's been known to deliberately distort the facts if they get in the way of a joke. That's just lazy.
Quote from: LMNO on July 29, 2009, 03:25:41 PM
Eh, I have a hard time with Mahr's delivery, especially the way he laughs at his own jokes; it's a smarmy, self-important laugh that irks me. Plus, he's been known to deliberately distort the facts if they get in the way of a joke. That's just lazy.
Valid points. If you can get past the smarminess though there is some value to be gained. For example, I think he deserves some credit for taking a chunk out of Obama last month
Quote from: Cramulus on July 29, 2009, 03:17:26 PM
15 minutes later, did anybody see Colbert interview Orly Taitz (apparently, the head of the Birther movement?) It was so spot on. I don't think she's familiar with Colbert. The tongue-in-cheek nature of the show went right over her head. By being "on her side", he got her to say some pretty crazy stuff. I think Jon and Stephen should be given the nobel prize for journalism.
(http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a29/RWHN/untitled-10.jpg)
He's a typical Hollywood-type who's full of himself...I got over that a long time ago, mostly because he is one of the few leftwingers who is 1) out of the closet about his rampant pot-smoking and pro-pot legalizatin 2) talks about CA politics and knows wtf he's talking about when he does it 3) has some kick-ass people on his panel and during on-show interviews and 4) love his new rules.
I used to watch him on ABC before his ass got fired.
The ABC show sucked because it was too damned short, only 1/2 hour. He or someone on the panel would really start ripping into Anne Coulter and they'd have to go to commercial.
I liked the set-up though, and he copied that for the HBO show he now does. He's perfect for HBO, though.
I made up my mind about Maher after watching Religilous.
Don't get me wrong, I'm all about poking people in the belief system
I'm just not a smug condescending prick when I do it.
...as far as you know...
:lol: He does bug me from time to time, I won't lie. But I think his show supersedes him in a lot of ways, so I just ignore it.
Cram has a show!?!?
Quote from: Cramulus on July 29, 2009, 07:42:10 PM
I made up my mind about Maher after watching Religilous.
Don't get me wrong, I'm all about poking people in the belief system
I'm just not a smug condescending prick when I do it.
what LMNO said
As soon as you poke someones belief system you automatically become a smug condescending prick to them. So I figure if you're going to do it you might as well go all out...
as for Cobert, Maher, ect.
I don't really watch them often cause I tend not to watch or read people I tend to more or less agree with. Im weird like that. If it's on a subject I don't know a lot about then yes, but I tend to watch or read stuff I know I probably wont agree with.
If Stewart and Colbert weren't on at the same time as Countdown I'd probably watch them. I kinda like watching Olbermann get all frothed up. He goes a bit overboard at times, but it's good TV nonetheless. But boy howdy does his substitutes suck when he is on vacation. You'd think Howard "YEEAAAHHH!" Dean would be a good TV host, but he's stiffer than Al Gore in a freezer.
The nice thing is, they are on the internet...so if you miss them and want to watch them, you just go to the comedy central website.
Quote from: Cramulus on July 29, 2009, 03:17:26 PM
15 minutes later, did anybody see Colbert interview Orly Taitz (apparently, the head of the Birther movement?) It was so spot on. I don't think she's familiar with Colbert. The tongue-in-cheek nature of the show went right over her head. By being "on her side", he got her to say some pretty crazy stuff. I think Jon and Stephen should be given the nobel prize for journalism.
That's exactly what I thought. No way she would have gone on Colbert's show if she actually knew what he was all about.
Actually, from the piece I read about her, she'll go on any show and she'll talk to everybody. Just don't interrupt her.
She's certainly a 15-minute-famer.
and taekwondo instructor!
TRIPLE BLACKBELT.
The REAL reason she quit: Divorce
http://alaskareport.com/news39/x71283_divorce_palins.htm
QuoteAlaskaReport has learned this morning that Todd Palin and former Alaska governor Sarah Palin are to divorce. Multiple sources in Wasilla and Anchorage have confirmed the news.
A National Enquirer story exposing previous affairs on both sides led to a deterioration of their marriage and the stress from that led to Palin's resignation as governor of Alaska.
The Palins were noticeably not speaking to each other at last Sunday's resignation speech in Fairbanks. Sarah ditched Todd (MSNBC) right after the speech and left without him. Sarah removed her wedding ring a couple of weeks ago.
Sarah has recently purchased land in Montana and is considering moving the family there. Sarah Palin is originally from Idaho.
Todd Palin told Fox News last week that he was heading back to his job in the oil fields of Alaska, yet Sarah recently signed a book deal reportedly worth $11 million.
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on August 01, 2009, 08:54:58 PM
The REAL reason she quit: Divorce
Disappointingly banal if true - no major sources are running with it yet:
http://news.google.com/news?um=1&ned=ca&hl=en&q=palin+divorce&cf=all&scoring=n