Palin’s Resignation Provides Further Insight into “Political Faith” of her Adversaries
It seems serendipitously synchronous that I’ve been reading Jamie Glazov’s United in Hate: The Left’s Romance with Tyranny and Terror during a week in which Sarah Palin has been back in the headlines. In the first half of his book, Glazov details the political pilgrimages various intellectuals, artists and assorted left-wingers have made over the years to tyrannies and proclaimed their rulers to be enlightened despots, describing those brutal tyrants in terms mythologies reserved for deities and heroes of ancient legend.
They did not portray Stalin, Mao, Ho Chi Minh or Fidel Castro as not the actual man who respectively presided over Russia, China, North Vietnam and Cuba, but the heroic figure of their imagination. The political pilgrims just projected characteristics of an imaginary, benevolent wise man onto the actual presence of a tyrant who was trying to remake a nation in the image of the ideology to which he subscribed. The intellectuals saw each tyrant as they wanted to see him, eager to have a ruler adversarial to their nation embody all the noble qualities they found lacking in their own leaders.
And just as they project benign qualities onto our nation’s adversaries, they project malign ones onto conservative leaders in the United States. From Ronald Reagan to Sarah Palin, charismatic conservatives have been a particular object of their scorn.
Governor Palin’s resignation has become yet another chance to just how obsessed they have become with this good woman. Just consider all the conspiracy theories they are spinning about theabout her recent decision. They don’t seem to allow facts to interfere with their analysis.
Just as the Zorastranians had a benign (Ahura Mazda) and maleficent (Angra Mainyu) deity, so do today’s liberals have their benign and malign deities, yet, unlike followers of this ancient tradition, they describe real life human beings in terms the faithful reserved for beings who did not no longer assumed human form on this earth.
Just wonder at how they refused to let go of Mrs. Palin even when her ticket was defeated last fall and she departed from the national stage. What is it about her which gets them so upset and causes them to spin so many conspiracy theories?
80 Comments
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
While we’re at it, you’d think the littleletter JAFOs like ghillie, nutlicker, boob etc. would be delighted in passing on the “current truth” from Central Planning. However, they’re only keen on telling us that we’re wrong.
I mean, is it because they don’t want to be made an arse like Jeff a few posts back? They pop up with inane comments and then go back into hiding. Doesn’t seem like their proud of their Chairman of the Council of People’s Commisars.
Comment by ThatGayConservative — July 6, 2009 @ 4:27 am - July 6, 2009
Contrary to rumors being spread by left-wing jackasses, The FBI is not investigating Sarah Palin.
(TGC, I seldom even read boob, gillies, or crosseyedbuttlicker’s comments anymore. They’ve been exiled to scrollover country.)
Comment by V the K — July 6, 2009 @ 6:49 am - July 6, 2009
The littleletterpeople do provide a scary reminder of what passes for logic among the flying monkeys on the left.
Right now, they are frantically searching for talking points. Some of them are dead certain that news of a major scandal is going to break in a day or two. Others are just dazed.
I am particularly amused by the news people (including FOX) who are fit to be tied that she made her move on a Friday of a holiday weekend. The news bureaus had gone into skeleton crew mode and they got blindsided. So what! The news was made and it spread like wildfire. They didn’t have their big dogs in place to get the conventional wisdom template drawn up. What a shame. Now, back to Michael Jackson and his latest career move.
Comment by heliotrope — July 6, 2009 @ 7:56 am - July 6, 2009
Instead of Sarah Palin, We got this drunken doofus … whom the littleletterpeople seem to regard as some kind of a genius politician.
Comment by V the K — July 6, 2009 @ 8:12 am - July 6, 2009
Now that the dust has settled on this a little, I think what bugs even the righties in the Washington establishment is that Sarah Palin is playing by her own rules. No one knows what her plans are, and it’s making them crazy. The uncertainty is what scares them because they can’t refer to the poltical playbook for guidance on their reaction.
Despite all the projection and bloviation out there, I don’t get the sense that she “needs” to be in public office. She strikes me as someone who sees she is in a position to make a difference. With all the disappointments lately, I could be proven wrong. In the meantime, I anxiously await news of her future plans.
Comment by Jeff — July 6, 2009 @ 8:18 am - July 6, 2009
Jeff, I agree. I don’t even think she necessarily wants to be president. But she has a whole world of opportunities now. I think the bitter hags like Maureen Dowd, Liz Trotta, and Andrew Sullivan are going to have a lot more to be bitter about.
Comment by V the K — July 6, 2009 @ 8:39 am - July 6, 2009
My experience with Christian fundamentalism and the gay community shows me that both can be grouped as “authoritarianism.” Both are filled with people with weak identities who seek an authority figure to give them identity. They will give up their reason and authentic experience to follow the authority figure and become part of the group. Gays are left-wing authoritarians who promote a mythology of sexual liberation, gender confusion, drugs, etc. To be a part of the group you have to say you were always different and it’s only through the group that you discovered who you really were–sort of like Harry Potter being accepted at Hogwarts. To be a Christian fundamentalist, you have to believe you were always a sinner and it’s only through the group that you found the means to salvation–again, the Harry Potter experience. You never fit in, but the group identified you as one of them.
When you grow out of the group–when you realize that the gays or the born-agains don’t have all the answers–then the authoritarians in that group try to shame you into returning by accusing you of backsliding or self-loathing.
So, if an authority figure targets an enemy, such as Sarah Palin or Rick Warren for the gay leftists, or Adam Lambert or Hillary Clinton for the Christian fundamentalists, your identity rests on your following your leader. Since you are not strong enough to face the shame of leaving the group where you’ve found your identity, you conform. Michelangelo Signorile is just as authoritarian as James Dobson. Pride rallies and pro-life rallies appeal to the same conformist instinct in each group’s adherents.
Comment by Ashpenaz — July 6, 2009 @ 8:50 am - July 6, 2009
#7
“the Harry Potter experience”
That, is funny. Reasonably apt and I laughed out loud.
Well done
Comment by gillie — July 6, 2009 @ 9:04 am - July 6, 2009
#4
I am pretty sure that is not Biden and I don’t even think that person is drunk as he appears to be out for a run.
But of course, for someone who acknowledges that he purposely keeps his head in the sand (see comment # 2) I suppose we shouldn’t expect accuracy.
Comment by gillie — July 6, 2009 @ 9:13 am - July 6, 2009
gillie shows up with no talking points. The left has to drum up something better than the “quitter” charge and they are stuck in that broken groove. So far, Sarah Palin is a dumb quitter. Come on, gillie, ramp it up just for the sake of interest.
Comment by heliotrope — July 6, 2009 @ 9:32 am - July 6, 2009
The nasty punditry on the left was given an engraved invitation by the nasty punditry on the right (and the perfect cover because it allowed these leftists to appear even-handed in being able to praise high-profile rightists who agree with them, i.e. “See? Even Peggy Noonan agrees with me!”)
And so here we are reading about Ahura and Angra, but not Athena. Sorry, you can’t have it both ways.
Comment by Ignatius — July 6, 2009 @ 10:34 am - July 6, 2009
Ignatius,
A quick google search shows at least one instance where I called her wrong
I didn’t dig deeper, but I’d say that ‘Athena’ has been critiqued by others here as well.
Comment by The Livewire — July 6, 2009 @ 11:21 am - July 6, 2009
Resigning halfway through your term is an erratic decision and it should be questioned. Nothing wrong with questioning it. I’m sure they have insane ideas about it though.
Comment by Mitchell Blatt — July 6, 2009 @ 11:25 am - July 6, 2009
[...] any site start a (soon to be former) Gov. Palin post “It seems serendipitously synchronous” other than Gay Patriot? And, yes, you Zorastranians get a shout [...]
Pingback by MinFail Blog Views: July 06, 2009 | MINIMUM FAILURE — July 6, 2009 @ 11:48 am - July 6, 2009
#10 –
“So far, Sarah Palin is a dumb quitter”
What else is there to say? You have said it all
Comment by gillie — July 6, 2009 @ 11:52 am - July 6, 2009
!Goodness Ashpenaz, your comments are so predictable! Do all your thoughts revolve around “Christian fundamentalists”? Are you so totally obsessed? Pity.
BTW, I’m not one, but I recommend a bit more balance.
Comment by Man — July 6, 2009 @ 11:53 am - July 6, 2009
Whenever I watch gillie, I am reminded of a scene from my student teaching days, in which a child who was a known cheat managed to singlehandedly depopulate an entire playing field with his blatant misbehavior.
The final frame was him, all alone, red-faced, screaming at the kids on the other field who had picked up their own game and were having a blast.
And do you know what he was screaming?
“QUIIITTTEEERRRRS!!!!!”
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — July 6, 2009 @ 12:09 pm - July 6, 2009
Unfortunately, I see most gays also united in hate, the right as well as the left.
Until we can do something about our own hate, we can’t expect to have any dialogue with those who may disagree with us; and without dialogue we can’t expect to have any chance of changing other people’s minds. Most gay people want to live ordinary peaceful and fulfilling lives. Just as do straight people. I believe what we can agree upon can be stronger than what we may disagree upon.
“Christian fundamentalists”, suffer from a defensive mentality. So do we. But many gays also have a herd mentality,and follow their pack leaders. CFs follow their leaders, but I suspect most, if given the chance to actually know and learn to like gay people, can change their minds. (cf: Broadway Baptist).
Besides, if hatred is the only thing that holds people together, it’s a sad world.
Comment by Man — July 6, 2009 @ 12:18 pm - July 6, 2009
#16: LOL. So true.
Comment by V the K — July 6, 2009 @ 12:32 pm - July 6, 2009
Christian fundamentalists have just as much chance of learning to like gay people as gay leftists have a chance of learning to like Republicans. As far as I can tell, no amount of contact with Republicans has ever changed a leftist’s mind. In fact, most leftists come away from their contact with Republicans sure that their prejudices are founded in fact.
I see no evidence that gay visibility has led to tolerance of gays–most people leave their meetings with gays believing that the gays are exactly like they thought they would be. Can you imagine a Christian fundamentalist becoming more tolerant of gays after seeing a Prop 8 protest or a Pride rally? I don’t think so.
Similarly, I see no evidence that Republican visibility has led gay leftists to tolerate Republicans. No matter how many time Sarah Palin goes on talk shows or gives speeches, leftists will still hate her and her followers.
Christian fundamentalists and gay leftists have already swallowed the predigested prejudices of their communities and have no interest in expanding their awareness. Expanding their awareness would separate them from their communities and the identity which comes with it, so they fear new information. A Christian fundamentalist who discovers that evolution is not incompatible with belief in God recoils with the same terror that gay leftists have when faced with gays who believe in abstinence before marriage. Neither one can face the rejection of their community, so they reject the facts instead.
Comment by Ashpenaz — July 6, 2009 @ 12:32 pm - July 6, 2009
It’s interesting to me that Barack Obama served barely 18 months as a Senator and then began campaigning for President. As you recall he missed a record number of votes in the Senate. But he is the holy one, he is the perfect one. He is beyond reproach. The double standard is ridiculous and a little bit sexist.
Comment by Gene in Pennsylvania — July 6, 2009 @ 12:38 pm - July 6, 2009
Hooray for gillie! He has endorsed “dumb quitter” as the length, breadth, height and depth of PDS thinking. A simple mantra that should be more than enough for simple minds. It is right up there with John Kerry saying “I can’t believe I’m losing to this idiot.” Words you can rally around.
Comment by heliotrope — July 6, 2009 @ 12:50 pm - July 6, 2009
My partner and I hosted an Ice Cream social this weekend for 38 people complete with a hymn sing-a-long. In attendance were 2 fundamental ministers with their wives, children and grandchildren. All the people there were from the same fundamentalist religion. There were 3 families with 4 generations present. Your view of Christian fundamenalists is a narrow one filled with stereotypes. Shame on you. Over-laying the views of Reverend Wright onto all Christian fundamentalists is as wrong as over-laying RuPaul’s lifestyle onto the gay community. Shame on you.
Comment by TnnsNE1 — July 6, 2009 @ 12:52 pm - July 6, 2009
“Neither one can face the rejection of their community, so they reject the facts instead.”
Ash, I take your point that fundamentalists and left wing gays are more similar than dissimilar, but I am also aware of those of the gay left and the christian fundamentalist backgrounds who have modified their positions .
And Ash, I stand by my point that I see in your blogs a seeming obsession with fundamentalists. Isn’t that a display of hatred also?
Doesn’t shared hatred make your point, and are you confident you are not engaging in it?
My experience with fundamentalists is that often instead of sermons showing God’s love, they hear sermons about what to be “against”. Not all Christians are of that narrow stripe. Most in fact are not.
Gay leftists are often also “against” anyone and anything that may upset their own received opinions.
So, both fail the intellectual integrity test .
Recommendation; To advance the causes in which we believe and to make allies, let’s find what we can agree with.
Comment by Man — July 6, 2009 @ 1:11 pm - July 6, 2009
TnnsNE1, thanks for your blog!
Unfortunately, too many gays and straights just don’t reach out to others outside of their own narrow communities. I applaud what you guys did!
I truly believe we can win this battle if we follow you and your partner’s lead. Reaching out . . . sharing our humanity, and finding what we can agree upon.
Comment by Man — July 6, 2009 @ 1:25 pm - July 6, 2009
Ash, I have reread your post #7. Much of what you said has validity, such as some people being weak and seeking group validity. I also agree many are too subject to, as you put it, “authoritanism”. Certainly, there are some leaders who prey upon the weak.
But I don’t believe that all are like that.
As a mainstream christian, I do not believe the group confers salvation. As a christian, I believe it is Christ alone, not the group, who does that. Undoubtedly there may be some churches who hold that salvation is conferred by the church itself.
Comment by Man — July 6, 2009 @ 1:52 pm - July 6, 2009
Conservatives, charismatic like Ronald Reagan and Sarah Palin and the not so charismatic, Rush Limbaugh are the object of scorn from the radical left because they are the watch dogs of our precious liberties which the radical left wants to curtail. Yet they abuse the First Amendment to demonize by using innuendo and outright lies. Following Saul Alinksy´s Rules For Radicals, tell a lie aften enough, people will believe it is the truth.
Comment by Roberto — July 6, 2009 @ 2:09 pm - July 6, 2009
The reasons for her resignation was a big fat whine-fest.
Well, she had legal investigations. What do you expect when you act in a maverick fashion. You don’t follow normal protocol, you get called for it. And she also blames the media. Gee, there’s a surprise. One of the most over-used GOP whines. The media is liberal. Get used to it. And the Letterman thing, like so many of the other brough-ha-ha’s, would have died if you just left it alone. It was a stupid joke. Does she realize she’s admitting that she can’t handle the attention and burden of public office. But there are already bloggers who are running with this sad excuse as a legit reason to quit. As governor. Of a state with a population only slightly larger than the city of Fresno.
Reagan had one hell of a time tying to get things accomplished in California. He face a very tough press corps during that time. Though the press may not have been as harsh against him, if it were, do you think Reagan would have EVER quit? Anyone want to stand up and say yes?
Bottom line – she quit ’cause she couldn’t govern and couldn’t stand the pressure.
And that sports analogy? She’s not passing the ball here – she’s tanking the game! Instead of working on ways to become a better governor, she’s quitting!!! She’s spitting in the eyes of all those who voted for her because they thought she could govern. Well, turns out, she can’t. And someone please tell me, if she’s doing this to further her political career, is this really any different than Specter switching parties?
Comment by Sonicfrog — July 6, 2009 @ 2:11 pm - July 6, 2009
I always wondered how gay Repukes got laid. I thought the two just slept with each other. Now I realize there’s a boat load of you insane people. JEEZ! Do you have your own bars and shit? Please stay out of ours. And please, please stay in the friggin red states. Signed: A Gay Liberal
Comment by John Bob — July 6, 2009 @ 2:12 pm - July 6, 2009
I’m an ELCA Lutheran, and my church has been very open and accepting. I think there is a movement toward inclusion of gays in the church, but the most visible forms of Christianity are not accepting of gays, no matter how much contact with gays they have. Anglican gays have been in contact with the Nigerian Church, and that church just excludes them more.
Similarly, the gay community has largely been just as non-accepting of conservative Christians, no matter how visible we are. How many United Methodist or Joy of Monogamy floats did you see at the last Pride parade? I experience the exact same rejection from gays as I do from Fundamentalist Christians.
If gays were accepting of Republicans and conservatives, this blog wouldn’t be necessary. So this blog is proof of what I’m saying.
This is why leftist feminists reject Sarah Palin. Although she has many qualities they would typically admire, she doesn’t buy into their mythology.
Comment by Ashpenaz — July 6, 2009 @ 2:14 pm - July 6, 2009
“Your view of Christian fundamenalists is a narrow one filled with stereotypes. ”
I think some people tend to use the word fundamentalist and Evangelical interchangeably. That is not correct. There can be fundamentalists in any Christian denomination, any religion or anti-religion for that matter. I would even divide further and distinguish between fundamentalist and fanatic. On the other hand the term Evangelical (capital E) is used to describe a specific (though not strictly defined) set of denominations and independent churches. One could go further and break out Pentecostals, Holiness, Charismatic etc. as well as the numerous types of Baptists.
Fact is , though, no matter how tightly you define the group you are speaking of many will read it as meaning all Christians. An ignorant way of thinking but the only way possible for those who can only see “either/or”. Makes intelligent discussion with those folk nearly impossible. I’m not referring to Ashpenaz or TnnsNE1, so no insult intended to either. TnnsNE1, I think it’s great that your social circles include a variety of people one might consider in opposition. Too bad it can’t be that way for all of us, better said, some will never allow themselves to be part of it.
Comment by a different Dave — July 6, 2009 @ 2:16 pm - July 6, 2009
“If gays were accepting of Republicans and conservatives, this blog wouldn’t be necessary. ”
Yes it would be because a significant number of those who comment here are unable to be civilized with Democrats, liberals and most of the gay communities. Blame goes both ways.
Comment by a different Dave — July 6, 2009 @ 2:20 pm - July 6, 2009
Mitchell’s right. We should question this decision. As we do, we needn’t do as those in the “fever swamps” are doing and jump to absurd and and “accusatory” conclusions.
It’s one thing to wonder why she did this. It’s another to reach conclusions based not on evidence, but animus.
Comment by GayPatriotWest — July 6, 2009 @ 2:28 pm - July 6, 2009
And that sports analogy? She’s not passing the ball here – she’s tanking the game! Instead of working on ways to become a better governor, she’s quitting!!!
This is akin to arguing that, if you’re playing in a basketball game in which the other side is traveling, double-dribbling, fouling with impunity, and being cheered on by what would ordinarily be the people who called out such behavior, that you are at fault and should try to be a better player.
Palin was the target of frivolous ethics claims that were filed with the sole purpose of bankrupting her and harming her financially. That is lawsuit abuse. Why does she need to change to respond to it?
Palin was the target of hateful media attacks about raping her daughter, grotesquely distorting her disabled son, claiming she was having an affair, claiming her husband was having an incestuous affair with her daughters, claiming she was under Federal indictment, and that she faked her pregnancy. That is slander and libel. Why does she need to change to respond to it?
Palin has figured out that people are going to whine and namecall her regardless of what she does. As a result, she’s doing what is best for her and what she holds important: she is removing herself from a position that allows for lawsuit abuse and prevents her from countering the lies spread about her in the media that directly attack her career and her family. She’s picking up the ball and finding another court where people follow the rules and don’t need to cheat.
Bully for her for doing it.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — July 6, 2009 @ 2:31 pm - July 6, 2009
Yes it would be because a significant number of those who comment here are unable to be civilized with Democrats, liberals and most of the gay communities.
Not all of them. Just with the parasites like yourself, adDave, who give Democrats, liberals, and the gay community a bad name.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — July 6, 2009 @ 2:33 pm - July 6, 2009
Mitchell’s right. We should question this decision.
Why? If she is going back into private life, then her decision is really none of our business. If she seeks another office, question it then. But if she’s leaving public service, then speculation amounts to gossip.
By the way, Note how one member of the fair, objective, and completely unbiased MSM tweeted her resignation.
Comment by V the K — July 6, 2009 @ 3:35 pm - July 6, 2009
Please stay out of ours. And please, please stay in the friggin red states. Signed: A Gay Liberal.
Gee, sounds like somebody can’t cope with the horrifying idea that others may challenge his prejudices.
Comment by V the K — July 6, 2009 @ 3:37 pm - July 6, 2009
Ash I agree we have a long way to go. But as a mainline presbyterian, I’ve found acceptance in a biblically oriented church, just as you have in yours.
So I remain hopeful.
Maybe you and the many other gay christians out there will have some impact. I hope to.
Doesnt mean that all the groups that teach being gay is a sinful lifestyle choice will change their opinions, but I’m hoping for a more civil and compassionate discourse.
With leftist gays and straights too.
Comment by Man — July 6, 2009 @ 3:49 pm - July 6, 2009
On #34.
This isn’t a basket ball game. This is the governorship. No one had any idea how vicious and mean the press would get in response to her nomination. Part of it was a response of the Governor being over her head on national issues (something that even Dan acknowledges), but I agree she got much harsher treatment than one might expect. OK. That said……
Then why quit? Why not finish your term.
Most of the investigations are over. Done. Troopergate was the most expensive. But again, it’s done. With AFAIK only one small legal bit still on the docket, there’s not much money to be spent on that anymore. And she has several legal defense funds set up to help defray the costs. AND, if costs were such an issue, then why is she threatening to initiate slander lawsuits against various people all over the media and the web?. That will cost more money. So she didn’t quit because of law expenses.
And about lawsuits. Just because she won the cases doesn’t mean they were frivolous. Again, one of the reasons she found herself being investigated was because she didn’t follow protocols…. she’s a maverick. Deserved or not, mavericks tend to get into trouble from time to time because… well, they’re Mavericks.
Resigning from her post stops any of this how?????? Even after she leaves office, nothing prevents lawsuits from being brought against her over something that occurred while she was governor, or any frivolous suit at any other time. And the media is going to stop…. why? I mean really, did the fact that she was not elected VP stop anyone from keeping the bullseye on Palin? By quitting in this fashion, she has basically said “Yep, you guys won. I don’t have what it takes to stand up to your stupidity and frivolousness”
You ask, twice, “Why does she need to change to respond to it?”. Well, she has changed. She’s revealed to us that she is not up to the task of handling the pressure that comes with leadership.
In response, I ask this: “Why does she need to quit to respond to it?
Why quit? Why not finish your term. Her answer seems to be because she can not get the Alaskan legislature to cooperate with her; she can’t get her agenda passed; she can’t get things done. So she’s leaving so next guy in charge can try?!? Well, that gives me great confidence in her leadership abilities. “When the going gets tough, Sarah Palin quits!” Not the best Presidential campaign slogan. I just hope she chooses someone much more capable than her for VP when she runs.
Comment by Sonicfrog — July 6, 2009 @ 4:08 pm - July 6, 2009
Then why quit? Why not finish your term.
Because there was absolutely no benefit to staying put.
Best explanation I’ve seen as to why:
The media/pundits in 2008:
Being the Governor of Alaska doesn’t mean much. The state has a small population, it is far away from the lower 48, and it is controlled by the oil companies. Therefore, being the governor of that state means little. Palin’s executive experience is “not enough” to fill the role of Vice President of the United States.
The media/pundits now:
Palin resigning as Governor of Alaska is, “political suicide.” If Governor Palin had finished out her term as governor, she would be in position to run for higher national office.
Why stay four years in a position where you can’t defend yourself, where frivolous lawsuit after frivolous lawsuit can be filed without the filers actually having to pay for it or you being able to even publicly comment on or respond to it — and for which you will get absolutely zero credit from the people who are currently bashing you?
Palin now has the capability to respond to attacks. She can countersue, which she will be doing, at a time and place of her choosing. Since she is no longer in office, she is not bound by Alaska governmental ethics laws. She can travel when and where she pleases, speak when and where she pleases, and raise funds as she pleases.
If staying in office actually had value, I’m sure she would have. But what she’s figured out, Sonic, is that the people who are bashing her were going to bash her regardless of whether she stayed or not. You belittled and pooh-poohed her experience as governor when she ran before; what exactly should have made her believe that you were going to pay attention to it in another year?
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — July 6, 2009 @ 4:20 pm - July 6, 2009
Is Palin rewarding her attackers by fulfilling their goal? Does it matter, as she ostensibly has her family and herself to protect, considerations whose priorities rightly outweigh politics? From a purely political perspective, does it harm or help her future? Depends upon what she does. She has earned both the ire and good will of many and struck me as someone who would not reward her enemies with resignation, but as is true with all lightning rods, she draws projections from both sides — our hopes, their fears.
Palin is unpredictable and politically this is both good and bad. I want to see her fulfill my wishes for her career and for the GOP, so I hope she proceeds with the difficult work of learning, the time in the trenches building experience and relationships, and all while leavening her credentials with the freshness that I know she has and that politics needs. If she can accomplish this contradiction, she’ll be in a very good position. But those are only my wishes.
Comment by Ignatius — July 6, 2009 @ 4:25 pm - July 6, 2009
Well, she has changed. She’s revealed to us that she is not up to the task of handling the pressure that comes with leadership.
This demonstrates your bigotry quite nicely, Sonicfrog.
You admitted that she was treated unfairly. You admitted that what was done to her was wrong. But you just wanted her to sit there and take it. You make excuse after excuse after excuse for what was done to her, and then call her a “quitter” for deciding she wasn’t going to put up with it any more.
Do you tell people who are in abusive relationships to stay there and “take it”? Do you tell people who are harassed at their jobs that they’re “quitters” if they leave?
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — July 6, 2009 @ 4:34 pm - July 6, 2009
Meanwhile a bungling idiot dispatches “truth squads”, sets up a website to dispel “lies” and has minions calling anybody who disagrees with him “racist” becomes POTUS.
Hey no problem there. I tend not to patronize establishments filled with hate-filled, angry bigots like you.
Comment by ThatGayConservative — July 6, 2009 @ 4:37 pm - July 6, 2009
#35 yawn, more NDT bile. Your friends Sally Kern, Matt Barber, Peter LaBarbera and Doug Giles must be soooooooo proud of you.
Comment by a different Dave — July 6, 2009 @ 4:45 pm - July 6, 2009
And we know your friends Frank Lombard, Craig Faunch and Ian Wathey, and Richard Hudler are proud of you, adDave.
Let’s see; side with child molesters, or with people who disagree with me on my sexual orientation. Think I’ll take the latter; the former are just sick people, despite the support and endorsement they have from the “real gays” like adDave.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — July 6, 2009 @ 4:57 pm - July 6, 2009
John Bob #29: You come here, lay a turd like that and then call US insane? That was simply rude and childish. I have every intention of staying in a red state. In case you hadn’t noticed, the red states are the prosperous ones.
Comment by Jeff — July 6, 2009 @ 5:05 pm - July 6, 2009
[...] Action Jenn Q. Republican: Palin Haters: Still So Classy and No Time For This Non-News GayPatriot: Palin’s Resignation Provides Further Insight into “Political Faith” of her Adversaries and Obama & Palin: Blank Slates on Which “Journalists” Project Their Biases Leigh Scott, [...]
Pingback by Nevada Poll: Majority Want Sen. Harry Reid Out, Sarah Palin in Nevada Senate or White House « Frugal Café Blog Zone — July 6, 2009 @ 5:06 pm - July 6, 2009
palin’s 15 minutes are OVER. She always be seen as a loser and a quiter. good riddance to that hypocrite.
Comment by buckeyenutlover — July 6, 2009 @ 5:53 pm - July 6, 2009
OMG, OMG–I lo-o-ove Doug Giles! He’s my kind of guy, except for the anti-gay part. I find I agree with him on most issues. And he looks great in camoflauge.
Comment by Ashpenaz — July 6, 2009 @ 6:18 pm - July 6, 2009
I think we can learn from these mean and evil liberal Democrats. For example Rep John Conyers of Michigan is a long serving liberal. His wife was recently convicted of accepting bribes. Did her husband know and participate in said bribes? Time to find out. There is some evidence he is neck deep in this scandal. Let’s get the clock ticking. Time for a media exam of Mr Conyers. Also Charlie Rangel…..Democrat Rep from NY. His corruption investigation has been dragging along in the House, time to demand a Justice Dept review of the process.
In short, there’s many many liberal Democrats to investigate here. They stink like rotting fish. Let’s get it cranked up people. Play some hardball.
Might be fun.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0709/24545.html
Comment by Gene in Pennsylvania — July 6, 2009 @ 6:20 pm - July 6, 2009
Uhm, hello. She won all but one of the inquiries brought against her. Looks like she defended herself quite nicely to me. And where she was wrong, she rightly settled for state incurred campaign costs. Why stay four years? because that fills a gap in your resume. The one that opponents will use against you in the campaign.
Couldn’t respond…. are you kidding????
Lets take Troopergate. Try here and here and here. And she could have said even more… if she wasn’t running for VP. AND, if she can’t defend herself as Governor of Alaska, how the hell is she going to defend herself when she’s President. And on that note, I guess you and Bill Clinton agree about frivolous lawsuits after all .
Great, a lawsuit happy candidate. That’s what I want in a candidate.
Great, she doesn’t have to be ethical anymore. That’s what I want in a candidate.
Gee, maybe the fact that she stuck it out and accomplished at least some of her goals under the extremely difficult circumstances you’ve documented, proving that she is tougher than her critics, and well, gaining another year of valuable executive experience; that could have made a difference. Yes, one of my main beefs against Palin was her limited time as Governor. Explain to me how this latest is going to help her win the argument of experience. Right now, because of her actions this week, she’s stuck exactly where she was six months ago. At this point, when she runs for President, instead of being able to campaign on and promote her accomplishments over a full four year term as Governor, she’s going to be bombarded with questions about quitting in the middle of her first term to run for President. If you think the press and her critics have been tough on her before, just wait for the next round. And unlike the last time, where she was thrust into the spotlight through invitation, this time it will be all of her own doing.
PS. You’re happy that she quitting the Governorship, breaking her commitment to the people of Alaska, to pursue political ambitions and campaign. She would have had PLENTY of time to do that after her term was up. Again, you all beat Arlen Spector to death because he took actions that were for purely for political reasons. I guess it’s OK do do that if the political reasons are to your liking. Some display of ethics there.
Comment by Sonicfrog — July 6, 2009 @ 7:38 pm - July 6, 2009
I think the more profound question is, what is wrong with our politics that good and decent people like Sarah Palin are forced out, while sewer trout like Barney Frank, Charlie Rangel, and John Murtha thrive?
Comment by V the K — July 6, 2009 @ 7:41 pm - July 6, 2009
“Great, a lawsuit happy candidate. That’s what I want in a candidate.”
Sonicfrog,
Good to know you voted for Sen McCain. After all Obama’s record of suing to keep people off the ballot has been well documented.
Comment by The_Livewire — July 6, 2009 @ 8:12 pm - July 6, 2009
She wasn’t forced out. Unlike, say, Sanford, there is nothing on the radar that says “Sarah, you have to quit”. She quit of her own accord, apparently to pursue higher office.
That said, I do agree with the last part, and add Pelosi and Ried to the list please.
Comment by Sonicfrog — July 6, 2009 @ 8:16 pm - July 6, 2009
Hello! I didn’t vote for either one. I wrote in Paris Hilton. Fiscally, she made about as much if not more sense than the other two.
Comment by Sonicfrog — July 6, 2009 @ 8:17 pm - July 6, 2009
there is nothing on the radar that says “Sarah, you have to quit”.
Except that the left was attacking her children, and apologists were saying it was okay. If she put her children ahead of her ambition… which seems likely… that’s a very honorable thing to do. But maybe you can’t appreciate that unless you’ve been a parent and had to put your kids needs ahead of your own goals.
She quit of her own accord, apparently to pursue higher office.
That’s pure speculation. We don’t know what she’s going to do next. But freed from the constraints of public office, she has a lot more options now.
Comment by V the K — July 6, 2009 @ 9:07 pm - July 6, 2009
Sonic, by now, people have figured out that you’re bigoted and prejudiced against Palin, so why not just admit it?
For example:
Right now, because of her actions this week, she’s stuck exactly where she was six months ago.
Wrong. She has six months more experience and several things under her belt, including the recent pipeline deal. But you wouldn’t recognize that. Again, why should we believe that you care about her experience when you won’t judge it honestly now?
Next example:
Great, a lawsuit happy candidate. That’s what I want in a candidate.
So now you’re bashing her for filing lawsuits to defend against baseless lawsuits that are being filed against HER?
Notice again how you blame Palin. Not a word about the people attacking her. Not a word about their tactics. It’s all Palin’s fault. Everything is Palin’s fault.
You are a bigot.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — July 6, 2009 @ 11:12 pm - July 6, 2009
Says the guy who claims marriage isn’t a choice, isnt a social contract, but is a direct order from God.
Fixed it for you. Pretty much what Jesus says, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.” Hence the word “fundamentalist” in the phrase. Every fundamentalist church I know of teaches thus, but I am unaware of any Christian group that teaches that salvation comes through being part of a group, unless by “group” you mean “people who believe Jesus meant what he said.”
From the guy who ranted at length about how much he IDENTIFIED with Adam Lambert. How Adam Lambert as the flamboyant theater kid with oh so much talent was rejected not because he shrieks like a banshee gutting live cats, but because of his sexuality by the cruel normal people. (never did it cross your mind that Lambert was rejected because the vast majority of people don’t enjoy being screamed at). They threatened your identity by rejecting the figure you identified with.
Ash, you border on self-parody.
Comment by American Elephant — July 6, 2009 @ 11:26 pm - July 6, 2009
I’m sorry, Sonic, but is your position that a person who is being baselessly defamed and slandered in the media should never sue?
The public figure defense only works were there is an “absence of malice.” Sarah Palin should have no problem proving malice.
Comment by V the K — July 6, 2009 @ 11:58 pm - July 6, 2009
You’re not going to Palin me off this blog! Just for the record, I am the first to use Palin as a verb.
Ronnie Dunn shrieks like a banshee with a twang.
Comment by Ashpenaz — July 7, 2009 @ 12:55 am - July 7, 2009
A bigot is a person who is intolerant of or takes offense to the opinions, lifestyles or identities differing from his or her own, and bigotry is the corresponding attitude or mindset. Bigot is often used as a pejorative term to describe a person who is obstinately devoted to prejudices, especially when these views are either challenged, or proven to be false or not universally applicable or acceptable.
A bigot??????
Have I ever attacked Palin on her opinion? lifestyle? or identity?
The answer would be “Absolutely No”. This accusation is displaying the same type of emotionally driven identity politics used by the left when they accuse Republicans, or anyone who supports Republicans, of being racists and homophobes.
Good that she got the pipeline deal done. Kudo’s for getting that wrapped up. But that was part of her resume from the last election cycle. She will now have no new executive accomplishments because she quit after two and a half years. In another two years Obama would have more time as an executive than her. He’s not doing a great job now (did I just win the understatement of the year award) but, I’m sorry, you can’t count on Obama being another Carter. Odds are the economy will improve despite his fiscal blunders, and, if he’s nothing else, he’s a great campaigner. It will take the best candidate the Republicans have to defeat him.
OK, V. It would impress me a HELL OF A LOT MORE if would finish her job despite the virulent press. Who exactly is she going to sue. Sullivan??? For exercising his right to free speech??? Aren’t we already fighting against that battle with the stupid effort to reimplement the fairness doctrine? Are you and NDT going to be the first ones out of the gate to defend Sen. Al Franken (bleh) against vicious slander from Limbaugh or Hannity or Savage????
Malice cases are extremely hard to prove. If she tries to sue someone today, right now, she could, if the case doesn’t get thrown out as frivolous, which would be bad for Palin, she may very well still be in court during the election season which would also be bad for Palin.
Sorry, a Governor who couldn’t stand the heat of political office is NOT the best the GOP can offer.
That’s my assessment and I’m sticking to it.
Comment by Sonicfrog — July 7, 2009 @ 1:33 am - July 7, 2009
PS. On proving malice:
Comment by Sonicfrog — July 7, 2009 @ 1:37 am - July 7, 2009
I’ve always liked Palin, but I find myself agreeing with Sonicfrog on this one. Palin felt the wrath of lefty hate for 10 months. George W. Bush lived with it for 8 years. Bush never complained, nor did he ever respond to his critics in in kind (if only the same could be said about his thin-skinned successor). He also never thought about giving up.
Palin may have a very good reason for leaving office now, but if she does, I haven’t heard it. She might feel she doesn’t need to explain because her friends will understand. That could be, but it’s hard not to read this decision as one of giving a lot of ground to her critics.
She didn’t have to run for a second term, but why not finish this one? She knew that there were personal and professional costs (including costs to her children and her family) to running for and holding elected office. If she wants to hold a higher office someday, she needs to show the voters who aren’t already in her camp that she has the will and the fortitude to stick with the job no matter how unpleasant it becomes.
Comment by Kurt — July 7, 2009 @ 2:10 am - July 7, 2009
Are you and NDT going to be the first ones out of the gate to defend Sen. Al Franken (bleh) against vicious slander from Limbaugh or Hannity or Savage????
Again, why are you demanding that we defend Franken, but insisting that Palin should simply shut up and bear it?
If she wants to hold a higher office someday, she needs to show the voters who aren’t already in her camp that she has the will and the fortitude to stick with the job no matter how unpleasant it becomes.
Are you out of your mind? Why should she let her family be destroyed and attacked to prove this point?
Again, notice how both Sonic and Kurt blame Palin. It’s all Palin’s fault; she should have just sat there and let people abuse her.
The real problem here is that the insane shrieking left is allowed to attack and attempt to destroy peoples’ lives, families, and livelihoods. But apparently Kurt and Sonic consider that normal.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — July 7, 2009 @ 3:30 am - July 7, 2009
Are you and NDT going to be the first ones out of the gate to defend Sen. Al Franken (bleh) against vicious slander from Limbaugh or Hannity or Savage????
If Frankenfurter has minor children, and Rush Limbaugh of Sean Hannity calls them whores or drug addicts on his show, I will have the decency to say they’re wrong and Frankenfurter has the right to be outraged.
Who exactly is she going to sue. Sullivan??? For exercising his right to free speech???
So, now you’re defending Trig Trutherism? Pathetic. Milky Loads has been pretty weaselly about his allegations, couching them in the “I’m just asking questions” pose of the cowardly little gossip queen he is. But the left-wing bloggers who’ve been claiming that the FBI is about to frog-march Palin from the capitol on the basis that she bought building materials from the same place the contractor for the Wasilla Sports Complex bought building materials may not be so lucky.
Comment by V the K — July 7, 2009 @ 5:18 am - July 7, 2009
Why should she let her family be destroyed and attacked to prove this point?
Maybe he hates Sarah so much, he wants to see her family destroyed. I don’t know. I don’t think he really has a clue how much it hurts a parent to see their kids attacked day after day. Imagine Piper or Willow going to school and having all the kids repeat to her the terrible things they’ve heard about her mother, her sister, her brothers… I think Sarah’s tough enough to take it, but she’s not power hungry enough to put her kids through that.
Comment by V the K — July 7, 2009 @ 5:22 am - July 7, 2009
No. What I’m asking is for you to be consistent. If it’s wrong to attack Sarah Palin, then it’s wrong to attack Sen Al Franken (bleh).
I’m a teacher. I see how much it hurts the kids. First hand. I had to send a student to the office for repeatedly calling a girl in the class a stoner. I also see how much they joke about the same things between themselves.
I also have another perspective. I WAS that kid. Mine wasn’t family problems per se, but being short and cross-eyed. Got picked on all the time. I have the wonderful memory of being beat up by a girl in eight grade. I didn’t fight back because I was taught you never hit a girl. If you’re going to be a public figure, your kids are going to hear bad stuff about you and your family. It’s sad, but it goes with public life. Do you have the same sympathy for the Obama kids, who go to school and hear that their father is a lying, corrupt, socialist marxist commie?
So are you saying that she should not seek the office of the Presidency? Because despite all the kvetching and moaning that is done over the mean-spiritedness and unfairness of the press, it’s not going to change. If she runs for President, her family will be the recipient of the same / similar treatment. I wish I were wrong, but unfortunately, the dynamic is pretty much set in stone.
PS. As I discussed in a previous post, the Trig Truthism thing is weird and irrational, just as the “Obama not a citizen” thing is. But these people have every right to make themselves look stupid and express their thoughts, or does the conservative movement now support thought police?
Comment by sonicfrog — July 7, 2009 @ 4:27 pm - July 7, 2009
No. What I’m asking is for you to be consistent. If it’s wrong to attack Sarah Palin, then it’s wrong to attack Sen Al Franken (bleh).
Alinsky Rule #4; make people play by their own rules. You are trying to get us to apply a standard of decency to Franken that you mock when it comes to Sarah Palin.
So I’ll throw that back on you. Since you state that having your family savaged as Palin’s was is a fact of political life, that she should just shut up and take it, and that any complaining or acting against it is playing the victim card, be consistent yourself and state that it is perfectly OK to savage Franken, that he should just shut up and take it, and that if he complains or acts against it, he’s whining and playing the victim card.
I’m a teacher. I see how much it hurts the kids. First hand.
But apparently, it doesn’t hurt them enough to make you actually do anything about it when the end result — getting rid of Palin — is what you want to happen.
Again, the Alinskyite left is hilarious. They talk about the pain namecalling causes children while they’re casually calling others retards and whores. You have to wonder what kind of parents produced children who honestly believe that everything they do is right and that the ends justify the means, regardless of how disgusting.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — July 7, 2009 @ 5:19 pm - July 7, 2009
#45, never heard of any of them NDT, but that won’t change your lying about me and the majority of other gay folk. Hate know no reason…
#46 Giles would look good in (or out of) anything! His latest Townhall column is beyond disgusting though. Every right wing lie about the “hate crimes” bill is there. But according to NDT lying and hating is ok when it’s against gays.
FIFY is so incredibly juvenile, right up there with “I know you are what am I” and “I’m rubber you’re glue”. If you want to refute what someone said have the intelligence to spell it out don’t use the blog form of graffiti.
Comment by a different Dave — July 7, 2009 @ 7:03 pm - July 7, 2009
NDT – lame.
I shake my head. I, along with Michael Barone, am arguing that Palin, through this latest action, got rid of herself by ditching the last part of her term. Why are you so intent on setting up Sarah Palin as a martyr? Do you think that is going to make her a more appealing character to those who already would not vote for her? Yes, Palin and her family has had tons of crap thrown her way. But it’s the way we handle the crap and the adversities that separate the exceptional from the common man. Right now I don’t see exceptional in the act of quitting her publicly elected post.
BTW – You realize Alinsky is simply warmed over Art of War and The Prince by Sun Tzu and Machiavelli. Nothing original or ground-breakingly frightening in his playbook. But since you’re quoting….
RULE 12: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions. (This is cruel, but very effective. Direct, personalized criticism and ridicule works.)
Except it only works if you let the criticism get under your skin.
You tried that on me with the “Bigot” accusation, and this dumb notion that I am happy Palin has quit. I’m disappointed she quit. I would have liked to she what her record was after a full term. Doesn’t mean I would have voted for her, but it would have been nice to see.
RULE # 12 – The left has used it against Pailn. The right has used it against Letterman. We’re all Alinskye’s now.
Comment by sonicfrog — July 7, 2009 @ 7:31 pm - July 7, 2009
But it’s the way we handle the crap and the adversities that separate the exceptional from the common man.
So you would be impressed if she had put her entire family through abuse that even you admit was hateful, violent, wrong, and completely unwarranted, just to hold on to a political position.
What I think Palin recognized is that people like you are not worth impressing. And that is what makes her truly exceptional; she refused to sacrifice her family to hold on to a political position only to impress people like you and Barone.
That’s what you fundamentally don’t get about Palin, Sonicfrog. In the minds of people like yourself and the punditocracy, politics is what rules, and power is the coin of the realm. You simply can’t understand how someone could have values above and beyond holding onto a position.
Sarah believes politics should be subordinate to her family’s needs, not the other way around. And what that makes clear to the rest of us is that being a politician and holding power is less important to her than doing what’s right.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — July 7, 2009 @ 9:15 pm - July 7, 2009
Re NDT #64, no I’m not out of my mind. My point is that if by attacking her family as the left has, they have driven her out of office, then they’ve also found her Achilles Heel. They know how to defeat her and to get under her skin. They know what it takes to get her to quit.
Maybe she has some compelling reason for leaving office, but if so, I still haven’t heard it. She might envision having more of an impact outside of the system than inside it, and perhaps she’s right, but I’m still skeptical.
Like Sonicfrog, I’m disappointed that Palin quit. If by some chance she were to be the Republican nominee in 2012, I’d most likely vote for her because she’d certainly be many times better than Obama, but the press would have a field day with her for having quit, and I’m sure that once again the public would be persuaded into re-electing Obama.
Comment by Kurt — July 7, 2009 @ 9:25 pm - July 7, 2009
My point is that if by attacking her family as the left has, they have driven her out of office, then they’ve also found her Achilles Heel. They know how to defeat her and to get under her skin. They know what it takes to get her to quit.
Damn straight it’s her Achilles heel. If you’re willing to turn your family over to be destroyed publicly just so you can hold on to political power, you’re some kind of sociopath, and you should not be in public office.
Again, I doubt anyone would call me a quitter for walking away from a poker game that was rigged, or for refusing to stay in a job that was harming my partner. People understand fundamentally that there is no dishonor in leaving an unwinnable situation or choosing someone else’s welfare over your own.
Palin now has a simple answer for the MSM nitwits: “Would you stay in a job where people were publicly stating on national television that they were out to bankrupt you, calling your daughters whores, claiming your husband was having incestuous sex with them, and openly stating that your disabled son should have been aborted?”
And if they stammer that they would, she pounces: “Why? Do you consider political power more important than your family? Would you allow your children to be abused just for a title? What’s your motivation there?”
What both you and Sonic are missing, Kurt, is that what was done to Palin was not normal. It was disgusting. The more obvious it is made how disgusting it was, the less people care about her leaving the job.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — July 7, 2009 @ 9:37 pm - July 7, 2009
Hmmmm, never been described as part of a “punditocracy” before. If I wasn’t a non-conforming-non-conformist, I might like it. Politics don’t rule. Keeping and honoring the public trust they place on you when serving in office does.
And if she runs for President, the same abuse is not going to happen why?
I would have been much more impressed with this line of argument if she would have dropped out of Politics altogether. But here’s a new quote from Palin:
OK fine. Like I said, she’s had no problem beating back the legal stuff. But then she continues:
If she runs for President, she will be putting her children in the exact same position they were in before, as fodder for a scandal hungry media machine. The metrics of the legal situation will change, yes. But do you really think that Andrew Sullivan will decide in a couple of years that Trig is now off limits? Of course he won’t. The press are like the scorpions in the “Scorpion and the Frog” allegory. They’re going to behave like the scorpions they are. To expect anything different in two years would be nuts.
That said, we’ll see what the future holds.
I think this is my last word on this subject, as we both know you’re not going to even consider or think about any of the points I’ve brought to the table.
Comment by sonicfrog — July 7, 2009 @ 10:03 pm - July 7, 2009
If it’s wrong to attack Sarah Palin, then it’s wrong to attack Sen Al Franken (bleh).
My position has consistently been it’s wrong to attack Sarah Palin’s kids. Why do you have such difficulty understanding that?
Comment by V the K — July 8, 2009 @ 6:55 am - July 8, 2009
Do you have the same sympathy for the Obama kids, who go to school and hear that their father is a lying, corrupt, socialist marxist commie?
Has David Letterman made jokes about Obama’s daughters being whores? Getting “knocked up?” Have the Republicans sold T-Shirts reading “Obama’s Daughters are Whores?” Have crude Photoshops of Obama’s daughters been displayed on the websites of official RNC bloggers? Have they been called dykes, vandals, and drug users?
Comment by V the K — July 8, 2009 @ 6:59 am - July 8, 2009
Tell me, how many jokes has Letterman made about Joe Biden’s cokehead daughter?
Comment by V the K — July 8, 2009 @ 7:45 am - July 8, 2009
Do you have the same sympathy for the Obama kids, who go to school and hear that their father is a lying, corrupt, socialist marxist commie?
Also, I am pretty sure those are all considered compliments at Sidwell Friends Academy.
Comment by V the K — July 8, 2009 @ 9:47 am - July 8, 2009
And if she runs for President, the same abuse is not going to happen why?
Read that again, Sonic.
So you would be impressed if she had put her entire family through abuse that even you admit was hateful, violent, wrong, and completely unwarranted
Instead of pointing out that Barack Obama paid for, pushed for, and is driving this abuse, you sit back and whine that there’s nothing that can be done about it.
That’s awfully convenient.
The irony is that, whatever candidate you’re pushing, if they go up against Teh One, they’re going to get this same kind of treatment. Do you really intend to put every single candidate for office through that, or are you willing to stand up and say that Barack Obama is the ultimate example of pond scum for funding and pushing people like Andrew Sullivan?
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — July 8, 2009 @ 11:07 am - July 8, 2009
spam filter.
Comment by sonicfrog — July 8, 2009 @ 8:35 pm - July 8, 2009