2009.11.04
Palin's 'Going Rogue' tour hits the Star City Nov. 22
Sarah Palin
I don't know where you folks are going to be, but I'll be at Valley View Mall that day, and they'll likely have to clear out half its parking lot for the crowd.
Here's some of the skinny: The 'pitbull-in-lipstick's' handlers tell us that to get press credentials (for a book tour?) journalists will have to show up at 6 a.m. at Valley View Mall.
That's roughly 6 hours before Sarah barracuda is scheduled to get there. And she's likely to be running at least 3 hours late. That's OK, that hurry-up-and-wait stuff is part of this game.
But it shows you the sensational size of the crowds publisher Harper Collins is expecting. That is presidential-candidate early.
Also, Palin is concentrating the tour on locations in "swing" states. Hee, hee. That suggests Palin is either seriously considering a 2012 bid or she's yanking the chains of Mike Huckabee, Mitt Romney and some other real contenders who would like her to stay as far away as possible.
As VVarlock notes in the comments below, there's apparently a 'Going Rogue' parody book being prepared to hit the bookstores the same day. The Nation is putting that together, and it's title is "Going Rouge."
My colleague Katelyn Polantz has more here, She'll have more in tomorrow's paper, too.
And just in case you're interested, here's the concession speech Palin wanted to give, but the McCain campaign wouldn't let her. Thanks to the Daily Beast!
I can't say that I'll waste my time showing up but you "betcha" I'll be waiting with bated breath for your follow up column/blog!
Comment by Lynda K — November 4, 2009 @ 7:04 pm
What did that Atlanta housewife say the other night "I'd rather pull my toenails out one by one and walk down the street in stilettos" or some such. I'm with her! You are a strong man Dan!
Comment by Sandi Saunders — November 4, 2009 @ 7:17 pm
Obviously a strong self made woman like Sarah scares the hell out of you bleeding heart liberals Sandi S. Be afraid,be very afraid!
Comment by Minority Man — November 4, 2009 @ 7:31 pm
Minority Man,
I would bet that Sandi wants Sarah Palin to be a bright and shining GOP star by the time the 2012 primaries roll around -- because she's the most unelectable "name" out there, and she always will be.
Comment by Dan Casey — November 4, 2009 @ 7:39 pm
Minority Man, bring her on! I cannot wait for a second chance at that Pinata! As to who should be afraid, nice try, but it ain't Liberals and it certainly ain't me.
Comment by Sandi Saunders — November 4, 2009 @ 7:43 pm
Does anyone honestly think she will run? My guess is no.
Comment by Lynda K — November 4, 2009 @ 8:09 pm
Yeah Dan, she is unelectable - I bet you believe that. If you did you wouldn't fear her so much and see her as such a threat. You and the rest of your lib buddies saw the size of the crowds she attracted, and you have all spent your time trying to destroy her. You haven't been successful and the size of the crowds they are expecting at Barnes and Noble are the proof. Sarah is like Reagan, she can go above the media, you have no control over her. She talks and people respond.
There is nobody on the Dem side that can attract a crowd like Sarah can. If she runs in 2012, B.O. will be another Jimmy Carter.
Comment by VRWC — November 4, 2009 @ 8:09 pm
Please don't insult genuine 'strong, self-made women' by calling this nutcase that.
Comment by Dennis Milvin — November 4, 2009 @ 8:13 pm
I love how so many insist that because we like a good freak show, we are the ones "destroying" her. She does very well with that all on her own. Sure she generates crowds, she is a rock star (which when it is Obama, you all consider a bad thing) BUT being a rock star or celebrity was not eanough last time and it will not be enough next time. What some of you fail to grasp is that in a center right country, there simply are not enough Conservatives for rock star to translate into President. There are obviously enough Dems, Libs, and persuadeable Independents to do so, but they will not vote for Palin. You have a simple choice, take away the target or accept the hits.
Frankly, I suspect she is headed more for a Limbaugh role than an elected office role. He has made a mint being the titmouse head of the new Republican party and she could certainly follow suit. She already has the following, all she needs is the sponsor dollars and the ditto heads to share the love.
Comment by Sandi Saunders — November 4, 2009 @ 8:57 pm
Dont worry about Palin against Obama....If he keeps his policies up.Bozo could beat im.Hey maybe some of you leftist should run...you sure qualify!
Comment by Tony — November 4, 2009 @ 8:58 pm
I agree Sarah should run for president in the next election because I would love to see Barack Obama get beat by a woman!! I think the country has had enough of Obama Country! Look at the recent election for gov. last night shows me that Virginia is ready for change and that change is real change not that stupid crap Obama promised during his overrated fake campaign. I cant wait to see Obama gone from the white house!! YAY! Too bad I dont live in Roanoke anymore I'd be there at 5:30 am that morning.
Comment by J.T. — November 4, 2009 @ 8:59 pm
You can smell the fear on the liberals. I remember my Democrat friends in college telling me that Reagan was unelectable. If we can elect a lightweight like Obama, we can elect anyone.
Comment by Henry — November 4, 2009 @ 9:06 pm
Time will tell. Henry, you did not elect Obama and I will not elect Palin. So why the "we"? If you think you have the votes, go for it. I have survived plenty of losses and some really bad (R) Presidents and (R) Governors. That fear you smell is the Conservatives who cannot control their bile. Obama has plenty of time to keep making progress and America loves a winner and an optimist (which explains Reagan all the way) especially in the face of adversity. We were facing the abyss in 2008 and still America chose an unknown and vilified man for President. I doubt anyone has been so desperate to hang their hats on Virginia being Virginia in many a year. Obviously it takes very little to get you all excited but beating Obama will not be a cake walk and deep down you have to know that.
I know that feeling JT, I had it twice in recent memory. I feel your pain, but if you think Palin is your answer prepare to feel that way again.
Sorry Tony, but Bozo was who Obama beat in 2008.
Comment by Sandi Saunders — November 4, 2009 @ 9:49 pm
Sandi
Are you opposed to a women?
Comment by Michael A, Howdyshell — November 4, 2009 @ 9:59 pm
Believe what you want to believe. The simple fact of the matter is that 7 out of ten Americans think she unqualified for the job. Have you forgotten how she water boarded the English language in her television interviews? If she can’t even hold her own with Katie Couric, do you really think she can lead a nation? Why would anyone seriously consider supporting a candidate who can't even finish her term as Governor of the 5th least populated state in the nation? The only thing scary about Sarah Palin is the control she exerts over a few desperate tin foil hat wearing Kool Aid drinkers who can somehow rationalize that she’s electable.
http://www.politicsdaily.com/2009/10/28/seven-in-10-say-palin-not-qualified-to-be-president/
Comment by Steve Cadora — November 4, 2009 @ 10:38 pm
J.T.-
Virginia historically elects governors of the party opposite that of the current president. Same with New Jersey. Neither is a surprise result and neither is a referendum on Obama.
Henry-
And I guess this is addressed to anyone pushing Palin. Seriously guys, stop it, you have no idea how foolish you look. I would love to see Obama seriously challenged. I've found his presidency to be a disgrace so far. And he could very well lose in 2012, there is no question there.
But that's a completely separate issue from these two:
1) Liberals are afraid of Sarah Palin
2) Sarah Palin is a viable candidate.
#2 is of course an opinion, but there is no data to support that opinion. She has huge negatives in every poll, 60% of the voting public in 2008 thought she was unqualified to be president, the party establishment doesn't want anything to do with her, and she appears to have mild to moderate brain damage.
#1 on the other hand, is pure clean fact. Liberals aren't afraid of her, they are PRAYING she gets the nomination. Again, whether they are right to not be afraid or not, you are wrong to think they are. The idea of her being a scary opponent is laughable.
Comment by Jason — November 4, 2009 @ 10:42 pm
Here's the scenario: What's left of the moderate Republican base won't touch Sarah Palin with a ten-foot pole. She splits off and forms a Conservative Party, egged on by Limbaugh, Hannity, and Beck. The new Conservative Party and the old Republican Party are so fractured and torn asunder by infighting and competition that a Bag of Doorknobs (or Obama) wins in a landslide. Not only is this entirely probable, it's inevitable if things keep going they way they're going. Personally, I'm pulling for a Romney vs Palin vs Obama presidential contest next time around. If nothing else, it'll be high comedy. Maybe Perot will run again as well, making it one for the ages!
Comment by AF — November 5, 2009 @ 12:36 am
AF,
You have described EXACTLY what happened in the special election for Congress in Upstate New York -- where the Democrat won. It had been a GOP seat for 140 years.
Of course, a similar scenario gave us 8 years of Bill Clinton and it spawned the politician known as Hillary.
But fear not -- I have faith that our ultraconservative brethren on this board will figure it out and come around in time for 2012.
Comment by Dan Casey — November 5, 2009 @ 12:59 am
Please put that unqualified, ignorant, job-quitting, creo-tard on the ticket again. It is the only thing I can think of that will guarantee R's lose in 2012.
Dan you are giving the ultra conservatives too much credit. They just may put her on the ticket of one of their parties. Perhaps the anti-Constitution Party, they are fringe enough to get her, take 10% from whomever the Republicans run and ensure yet another loss for the right.
Comment by VVarlock — November 5, 2009 @ 3:04 am
Who wouldn't love to see Palin at least throw her hat in for a while? She's free comedy and great entertainment.
I'd come to a position somewhere between Minority and Dennis. She's a strong, self-made nutcase.
Comment by Kristen — November 5, 2009 @ 7:47 am
I can't imagine Sarah Palin getting on the republican ticket, but I suppose stranger things have happened. Following her around would be about like watching a political version of MTV's real world. She does, however, remain the very best candidate from whom witches have been cast, so she's got that going for her.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jl4HIc-yfgM&feature=player_embedded
Comment by Mike Scott — November 5, 2009 @ 8:56 am
Initially when I learned she had been selected for VP, I thought it was a good thing. As I learned more about her, that opinion turned the other direction. Until that point, I had been leaning heavily toward McCain, but once I learned how much further ton the right she was than I am, I jumped off that crazy train. And for all the folks who think the absolute world of Reagan and are a bunch of staunch anti-tax folks who applauded McDonnell for opposing raising the gas tax, remember that it was Reagan who had the foresight to double the Federal fuels tax to fund transportation projects for future generations. I guess given the recent tone, that's just something conveniently forgotten about the Reagan legacy.
Comment by Other John — November 5, 2009 @ 9:08 am
Hi Dan,
Maybe I'm missing something. I keep seeing reports that the NY 23rd district has been Republican since the Civil War, but according to Wikipedia, a Democrat held the seat from 1989-1993. Maybe my math is bad, but I don't think 1993 was 140 years ago.
Here's the link.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York's_23rd_congressional_district
Sorry to let facts get in the way.
Comment by Zeke — November 5, 2009 @ 10:01 am
After looking at that link, I think part of the confusion is that the geographic region talked about has been re-districted so many times that it's hard to get a solid feel for the trends there. But, the one thing the article mentioned was that the geopgraphic region in part of the District had not gone Democrat since 1851, so it may be that there is a strong Republican enclave in that part of NY, but through district boundary changes, the person elected or moved into the District through changing the boundary lines has at times not been a Republican. It is interesting though to see how quickly that comment made its way through the circuit though, I heard it on CNN while waiting for a bagel this morning.
Comment by Other John — November 5, 2009 @ 12:03 pm
Dan C. you may be right,but why the morbid obsession from the mainstream media? Sarah P. is now a private citizen not a politician.As far as being the most unelectable "name" out there,stranger things have happend.Look who's prez. now. A complete idiot w/no experience to lead this country.Tell us Sandi,Kristen,how's that hope and change working for you?
Comment by Minority Man — November 5, 2009 @ 6:57 pm
I'm good, thanks for asking, Minority Man! I sincerely wish Obama would yell "bite me" to the Repugnants and bring the troops home now, but I will hang with the one I chose. He is standing up for me and I will stand up for him. No worries!
Comment by Sandi Saunders — November 5, 2009 @ 9:35 pm
#25,Minority Man,
Sarah P. is not a private citizen, she is 100 percent a politician, just no longer an employed politician.
She continues to campaign for other members of her chosen party, continues her speaking engagements, continues to be politically active, commenting on policy, and legislative bills,
Speaking of Bills, would you agree with this statement:
"Dan C. you may be right,but why the morbid obsession from the mainstream media? Bill C. is now a private citizen not a politician, As far as being the most unelectable "name" out there,stranger things have happened.Look who was prez after him, A complete idiot w/no experience who lead this country into not one, but two wars, who's economic policies led the country straight into economic disaster."
Private citizen?
Not hardly.
Comment by joe Mostowey — November 5, 2009 @ 9:59 pm
I think she may have misspelled (or suffered from momentary dyslexia) the title of her book...I think she meant "Going Rouge"--something to do with her lipstick color. You've heard about those French Alaskans..or is that "Half-baked Alaskans"?!
Comment by Morris Fleischer — November 6, 2009 @ 10:25 am
Morris, or is that not funny. Way to explain your joke and then trash fellow Americans.
Comment by mattyr — November 6, 2009 @ 11:05 am
Mr. Fleischer
There is a book called "Going Rouge: An American Nightmare" coming out at the same time as hers. It is counterpoint to her "Going Rogue: An American Life" It is complete satire by the fine people at The Nation. The cover art is worth looking up.
http://a11news.com/images/sarah-palin-going-rouge.jpeg
Comment by VVarlock — November 6, 2009 @ 11:28 am
Really bizarre Palin behavior in Wisconsin:
"But Palin appears to be doing her best to keep a low profile on this trip: no press will be allowed into the Milwaukee auditorium where she will speak and those who have paid the $30 admittance fee are unable to carry in cell phones, cameras, laptops, or recording devices of any kind."
Guess she's afraid she'll say something really dumb.
Comment by gdad — November 6, 2009 @ 11:49 am
Yeah, the press were barred from from her speech in Hong Kong, too.
Comment by Dan Casey — November 6, 2009 @ 11:52 am
or she knows tea baggin d-bags like your self will be there. (or is that not allowed to be said)
Comment by mattyr — November 6, 2009 @ 11:57 am
What a paranoid, YEC moron witch.
And this is the 'great right hope'? Bring her on, 2012 will be yet another Republican nightmare.
Comment by VVarlock — November 6, 2009 @ 12:03 pm
It's a sad day for our nation when we can't laugh at ourselves...
Comment by Morris Fleischer — November 6, 2009 @ 12:08 pm
A look at this blog or any other RT blog makes you wonder why she would do that now doesn't it?
Comment by Walker — November 6, 2009 @ 12:31 pm
Alas - I do think she is making a mistake by barring them!
Comment by Walker — November 6, 2009 @ 12:33 pm
Walker #37
So do I, so does Jon Stewart, Keith Olbermann, Rachel Maddow ...
Comment by VVarlock — November 6, 2009 @ 12:38 pm
VVarlock, please do not associate someone like Sarah Palin with witches in the manner you have done. It is offensive to real witches everywhere, almost all of whom think Palin is dumber than a box of rocks. Thank you.
All sarcasm aside, someone go as a private citizen and write down some shorthand notes of what she says. I'm sure there will be some gems in there, like maybe she'll say that Roanokers are experts in Federal matters because DC is just across the Potomac from Virginia.
Comment by Other John — November 6, 2009 @ 12:42 pm
O J
I apologize to all wiccans everywhere.
I was referring of course to the witch-hunting African pastor who prayed over her so memorably in that you tube vid.
Comment by VVarlock — November 6, 2009 @ 1:03 pm
Not sure if you can post this but I thought this was interesting.
I read this article re: Sarah Palin on "CNN - Political Ticker" this morning:
"...no press will be allowed into the Milwaukee auditorium where she will speak and those who have paid the $30 admittance fee are unable to carry in cell phones, cameras, laptops, or recording devices of any kind.
Wisconsin Democratic Party Chairman Mike Tate told the Wisconsin Radio Network he finds all these restrictions "bizarre."
"You know, for someone who claims to be a rogue and isn't afraid of what other people think it really is sort of hypocritical to not let the media, the press cover your event.""
I wonder what restrictions will be placed on the event here, on the 22nd?
Comment by Lynda K — November 6, 2009 @ 1:13 pm
The press might be barred, but I bet the Frepublican Omedia Xnetwork is not.
Comment by Sandi Saunders — November 6, 2009 @ 1:32 pm
Yes the last thing a politician would want to do is have people recording and repeating what they said.
Comment by Kristen — November 6, 2009 @ 1:40 pm
Thats great! What is your point High Priest of the Gonzo Nation. Good to see you think people care about your opinion as much as those other twits. Including yourself with that trio is like claiming to be the 4th Stooge.
Your sheep are awaiting your sermon for this afternoon's service Oh High and Mighty.
Ha! You are a hoot, dude.
Comment by Walker — November 6, 2009 @ 2:08 pm
Walker, you have lost me.....dude.
Comment by Dan Casey — November 6, 2009 @ 2:15 pm
That was not aimed at you Dan, sorry. It was aimed a VVarlock who seems to have taken over your flock.
Comment by Walker — November 6, 2009 @ 2:18 pm
VVarlock, I figured it was a slight aimed at something else (though that particular reference escaped me at the time)...I was just poking with my comment for the fun of it. But after your reference mention, I do remember that clip. I hope she doesn't come around Radford anytime soon, she might wind up spraying holy water on a bunch of people or bearing a cross trying to ward them off. I might actually like to see that, it would make for a great YouTube addition.
Comment by Other John — November 6, 2009 @ 2:21 pm
Speaking of lost. Sandi et al. quit the ridiculously lame little nicknames. Like whatever Sandi threw off in the previous quote.
Let people worship Palin as you all do Maddow.
Comment by mattyr — November 6, 2009 @ 2:23 pm
Do you mean like this mattyr? "tea baggin d-bags". I have no where near reached your "level" of "lame little nicknames".
Warlock is a star gonzo blogger, no doubt, but he has not attempted to take over anything. We all have a good rapport IMO. Take your insults where they are appreciated if it bothers you.
Bye!
Comment by Sandi Saunders — November 6, 2009 @ 2:35 pm
Matty and Walker, I desperately hope someone has an idea what the heck you're talking about, because I have none.
Comment by Kristen — November 6, 2009 @ 2:35 pm
Kristen, Walker thinks big brain Warlock has usurped Dan's place as our fearless leader and mattyr thinks his/her insults are fine but took exception to my "Frepublican Omedia Xnetwork" smash up. "As the Gonzos turn, So are the days of our lives"...Go figure.
Comment by Sandi Saunders — November 6, 2009 @ 3:33 pm
Walker
Due to the fact that I have more than one post in this thread and your comment's vagueness (#44), I am not 100% certain to which you are responding. I am glad I am a 'hoot', it is my fondest desire to get your goat occasionally.
If you were responding to my #38 (as is my best guess) then my point is that I agree with your point (#37) that many people think she is making a mistake not letting cameras in. Among them are you, me, Jon Stewart, Rachel Maddow, Keith Olbermann, Tina Fey, every late night host, including Letterman ...
Several of those people made a mint off of Palin's ignorance.
If you were responding to some other of my posts please elaborate so I can more fully and appropriately respond.
Also, I do not lead this argument, I merely take what is delivered by our host and moderator or our fellow Gonzo's and run with it. The only material not related to a discussion someone else started that I contributed was in a thread about me, pretty much everything else I have said has been responsive in nature.
I am no more valuable a contributor than anyone else here, just often more ... boisterous and frequent in my commentary than many.
Comment by VVarlock — November 6, 2009 @ 4:04 pm
Sandi. You are a true gem. Isn't that how the game is played? Hey I think All My Children is on, I gotta run. Later tea cup.
Comment by mattyr — November 6, 2009 @ 4:05 pm
oh and not fine Sandi. Just not lame.
Comment by mattyr — November 6, 2009 @ 4:11 pm
Sorry for the vagueness - I try to cram alot using little words as I am working. It seems you have a following was all I was saying. Rather cute, eh!
Comment by Walker — November 6, 2009 @ 4:14 pm
Sandi - I think I will keep on sleeping with the enemy. I've heard it said - If you are trying to sell Ford's you better know plenty about Chevy's. Thanks for the invite to leave, though. BTW haven't seen you around the RTEB threads lately. I guess that's the difference between me and you - I don't take my toys and run home when someone picks on me.
Comment by Walker — November 6, 2009 @ 4:17 pm
Walker
Saying a lot with few words. Not a tactic I am familiar with.
Comment by VVarlock — November 6, 2009 @ 9:11 pm
Walker, I can assure you that few ever get to play with my toys. I am supposing that you are referring to my withdrawal from the RT blog (cause Lord knows I am everywhere else). I chose to leave since my "vitriol" was singled out as bringing down the high level of civil discourse and I was the one accused of picking on people. I hear that nothing much has been achieved towards that high minded goal but no one can blame it on me and frankly, between Dan Casey, Warlock, Kristen, Other John, and the return of Morris and some new friends, I am as happy as a kitten with cream and have no plans to foul the nest of the "high brows" (ha ha) at the RT again. They never needed me and as luck would have it, it was mutual. If that is taking my toys and running home when I am "picked on" you have greatly misjudged me on several levels.
Comment by Sandi Saunders — November 6, 2009 @ 9:48 pm
No Sandi, it's not really too much different over at the RT. Now it's been overtaken by a bunch of right-wing folks who think nothing of facts and will jump at any chance to deride anyone who dares present information that either contradicts what they say, or flat shows that they are wrong. I keep trying, mostly to no avail. The tone improved for a while, but basically a bunch of the regulars either stopped posting or severely cut back, and a crop of newbies has flooded in. I don't post all that often anymore there, and to be honest, I think it's more fun over here with all the Gonzo's Dan's got on the blog and the myriad of topics he throws out.
Comment by Other John — November 6, 2009 @ 11:28 pm