Why is this guy still in business?
Sheriff Joe Arpaio's volunteer investigation into documents pertaining to President Barack Obama's place of birth and citizenship now includes the services of a taxpayer-funded ...
The lies roll off the man's lips like music off Yo-Yo Ma's cello. Both are virtuosos - one a cellist, the other a liar.
A partial list.
Bush had nothing to do ...
Happy Friday.
The best from Political Humor‘s collection of the week’s late night political humor.
"Barack Obama supports same-sex marriage. Mitt Romney doesn't even support same-sex car pools." –David Letterman
"The head of ...
Republican Rep. Mike Coffman at a Saturday afternoon fundraiser in Colorado.
I don't know whether Barack Obama was born in the United States of America. I don't know that. But I ...
Rand Paul:
Call me cynical, but I didn’t think his [Obama's] views on marriage could get any gayer.
We won't call Rand cynical. Ignorant, bigoted asshole is more fitting. An adult using ...
Happy Friday.
The best from Political Humor‘s collection of the week’s late night political humor.
"President Obama came out with approval of same-sex marriage. He said that over the years, he has ...
I've never understood Log Cabin Republicans - gay conservatives who give their support to a homophobic political party that derides their sexuality and refuses to grant them equal rights under ...
Finally.
“I have to tell you that over the course of several years as I have talked to friends and family and neighbors when I think about members of my own ...
Election roundup:
Indiana.
As polls forecast, the Tea Party's efforts to cleanse the GOP of any impure conservatives has Dick Lugar out and teabagger Richard Mourdock in. Mourdock is the new Republican ...
There are lies...and then there are lies.
My own view, by the way, was that the auto companies needed to go through bankruptcy before government help. And frankly, that’s finally what ...
From the papers captured last year at Osama bin Laden's Pakistani hideout comes this.
Like any public figures, bin Laden and his advisers were mindful of the media. Adam Gadahn, one ...
The best from Political Humor‘s collection of the week’s late night political humor. Happy Friday.
"Today Mitt Romney visited a firehouse here in New York City. Of course, he was disappointed ...
It happened to Kerry. Can it happen to Obama? Nope says Margaret Carlson.
Obama’s belief system -- in that hopey-changey business and the post-partisanship thing -- has been altered by reality. ...
Sullivan:
What do Republicans call a gay man with neoconservative passion, a committed relationship and personal courage?
A faggot.
Exactly right, but then could one expect anything different from a political party that ...
And they claim that atheists are immoral?
The ugly side of religion shows its face once again. The words below were spoken at a Sunday sermon by Sean Harris, a pastor ...
It's been fun watching conservatives and Romney twist themselves into pretzels trying to undo Mitt's past words on GM and bin Laden.
Romney, April 2007:
It’s not worth moving heaven and earth ...
In an op-ed piece in the Washington Post, a couple of scholars from liberal and conservative think tanks, discuss the state of American politics.
We have been studying Washington politics and ...
Romney's VP-in-waiting, Marco Rubio, is perfecting the conservative sleaze play.
He has proposed his version of the Dream Act in which people who entered the country illegally as children will be ...
Beyond the rhetoric, the political BS, the lies - that is, the concerted effort by the right-wing noise machine to distort and misinform at every opportunity - is the very ...
Matthew Dowd, a former Bush strategist, makes the case that while not likely, a President Palin (I just shuddered at the sight of those last two words side by side) is a possibility.
Polls show that Palin’s favorability numbers are a mirror image of those of Obama. She is respected and loved by the Republican base, while Democrats despise her. Granted, independent voters have significant reservations about her capability to be president, and this would be a hurdle in the general election. But to win the Republican nomination, Palin needs only to get enough support from the base to win early key states. Already, in nearly every poll today, she has a level of support that makes her a viable primary candidate. Just look at the crowds and the buzz her book tour is drawing.
[...]
Like it or not, if Sarah Palin decides to seek our nation’s highest office, she has a shot. The probability of her success depends on her ability, and that of President Obama, to admit and learn from their mistakes as we head into 2012.
At first thought, I’d laugh at any possibility of Palin ever making it to the White House…and then I remember George W. Bush. I have a clear recollection of the first time I heard Bush being interviewed and thinking, nah, never in a million years could this dolt draw enough votes to become president. There aren’t enough sheep in the country that this jackass could ever possibly fool. I was wrong. Not once, but twice.
As we are all painfully aware, there are more than enough fools out there who were willing to put the welfare of their country into the hands of a complete imbecile. I can sort of understand the first time with the Clinton mess still stinking the joint…but a second time?
Enough sheep, fools and misguided simpletons out there to vote Sarah Palin into office? Perhaps. Here’s some of ‘em. .
.
___
To receive email notifications of new posts from MarioPiperniDotCom, click on Subscribe.
I know I’m stupid, but didn’t I make this exact observation a few days back on one of the many “Palin Bashing” Posts? (I would go back and look for the exact one but there are just way too many posts slamming Palin to make the attempt.)
“Polls show that Palin’s favorability numbers are a mirror image of those of Obama. She is respected and loved by the Republican base, while Democrats despise her.”
Of course TN leaves out the next line of the quote.
“Granted, independent voters have significant reservations about her capability to be president, and this would be a hurdle in the general election.”
Doesn’t take much effort for cons to be manipulative liars always trying to deceive. That’s what happens when your political philosophy has no basis in common sense or truth.
sigh….I truly get so weary of dealing with comprehension challenged people.
Please, don’t do to me as you do to others. Don’t add YOUR thoughts and suspicions to MY words.
I had no reason to add OR leave out the next line. I was making the observation that I made this precise comment about the similarities between Palin at this point and Obama at the same point in his run up to the Presidency.
I don’t mind absorbing your ridicule and scorn. But please. Try to be intelligent with it.
What are you talking about? There is no similarities between Palin and Obama at any point in their history. Obama always had the support of independents which grew in time. Palin’s only support is from the republican base.
Lisa, what you said was not relevant to my comment. I didn’t ignore you. But please enlighten me. YOU tell ME what I cannot defend about my words. Please bear in mind that the ONLY thing I said was that I made the same observation several days ago that Mr. Dowd has made.
Now, tell me where I’m wrong to make that comment, please?
(Advice: You would do well to find someone more mature to agree with. Look at his comment. Is that how YOU wish to be perceived?)
TN says: “I was making the observation that I made this precise comment about the similarities between Palin at this point and Obama at the same point in his run up to the Presidency.”
LisaT says: “What are you talking about? There is no similarities between Palin and Obama at any point in their history. Obama always had the support of independents which grew in time. Palin’s only support is from the republican base.”
TN says: “Lisa, what you said was not relevant to my comment.”
TN, please review this sequence of comments and then define “relevance”.
Frances, Read more closely my comment. It’s simple. Dowd made a statement. That statement is the subject of this post. I didn’t comment on the accuracy or any other aspect of his comment. I simply said I made the same observation he did several days ago.
That was the entire subject of my comment. I didn’t attempt to make any dissection or analysis of the accuracy of Dowd’s comment. She made an attempt to draw me into an argument I had not stated nor wished to get into at the time.
Now, I do think I drew what I felt were similarities in my original comment. If she were to ask me how “I” thought there were similarities, then the explanation would be on.
I don’t think she did that. I don’t think that was her intention. Her subsequent comments bore that out.
It’s not that hard. The answer to “What are you talking about?” in this instance is, “I was stating I had made a similar comment several days earlier.”
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Roberta Warshaw, Erin Johnson. Erin Johnson said: RT @mariopiperni: On sheep and fools: President Sarah Palin? http://twurl.nl/xi4rga [...]
I know I’m stupid, but didn’t I make this exact observation a few days back on one of the many “Palin Bashing” Posts? (I would go back and look for the exact one but there are just way too many posts slamming Palin to make the attempt.)
“Polls show that Palin’s favorability numbers are a mirror image of those of Obama. She is respected and loved by the Republican base, while Democrats despise her.”
Of course TN leaves out the next line of the quote.
“Granted, independent voters have significant reservations about her capability to be president, and this would be a hurdle in the general election.”
Doesn’t take much effort for cons to be manipulative liars always trying to deceive. That’s what happens when your political philosophy has no basis in common sense or truth.
sigh….I truly get so weary of dealing with comprehension challenged people.
Please, don’t do to me as you do to others. Don’t add YOUR thoughts and suspicions to MY words.
I had no reason to add OR leave out the next line. I was making the observation that I made this precise comment about the similarities between Palin at this point and Obama at the same point in his run up to the Presidency.
I don’t mind absorbing your ridicule and scorn. But please. Try to be intelligent with it.
What are you talking about? There is no similarities between Palin and Obama at any point in their history. Obama always had the support of independents which grew in time. Palin’s only support is from the republican base.
Don’t bother Lisa. This guy is as thick skulled and ignorant as they get. He is unable to ever say “I’m wrong.” Typical repub thug.
Lisa, take issue with Mr. Dowd. I’m only stating I made the same observation and conclusion he has reached several days ago.
I see what you mean, anteater. He ignored what I wrote and took cover. That’s what happens when one cannot defend their own words.
Lisa, what you said was not relevant to my comment. I didn’t ignore you. But please enlighten me. YOU tell ME what I cannot defend about my words. Please bear in mind that the ONLY thing I said was that I made the same observation several days ago that Mr. Dowd has made.
Now, tell me where I’m wrong to make that comment, please?
(Advice: You would do well to find someone more mature to agree with. Look at his comment. Is that how YOU wish to be perceived?)
TN says: “I was making the observation that I made this precise comment about the similarities between Palin at this point and Obama at the same point in his run up to the Presidency.”
LisaT says: “What are you talking about? There is no similarities between Palin and Obama at any point in their history. Obama always had the support of independents which grew in time. Palin’s only support is from the republican base.”
TN says: “Lisa, what you said was not relevant to my comment.”
TN, please review this sequence of comments and then define “relevance”.
Frances, Read more closely my comment. It’s simple. Dowd made a statement. That statement is the subject of this post. I didn’t comment on the accuracy or any other aspect of his comment. I simply said I made the same observation he did several days ago.
That was the entire subject of my comment. I didn’t attempt to make any dissection or analysis of the accuracy of Dowd’s comment. She made an attempt to draw me into an argument I had not stated nor wished to get into at the time.
Now, I do think I drew what I felt were similarities in my original comment. If she were to ask me how “I” thought there were similarities, then the explanation would be on.
I don’t think she did that. I don’t think that was her intention. Her subsequent comments bore that out.
It’s not that hard. The answer to “What are you talking about?” in this instance is, “I was stating I had made a similar comment several days earlier.”
TN, blah, blah, blah.
Your turn.
Awwwwww….how cute. You DID miss me.