E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSBACHMANN: At the Faith and Freedom Coalition conference in Washington, D.C. on Friday, Rep. Michele Bachmann ended her speech with a prayer. “‘We do pray for our president, we pray for the Supreme Court, we pray for the members of Congress, we pray for those who are in authority, because this is not a political scorecard,’ said the Minnesota congresswoman. ‘This is about the very life and future of our nation,’” the Minneapolis Star Tribune reports.
CAIN: The New York Times on Herman Cain’s rising momentum as a Republican primary star: “If few people think Mr. Cain can win the nomination, he is satisfying voters’ desire to fall in love with a candidate. Their passion for him says as much about what the Republican field is lacking as it does about any specifics he is offering.”
CHRISTIE: “South Carolina state Rep. Phyllis Henderson (R) wants to draft New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie into a 2012 presidential run,” Roll Call writes.
GINGRICH: Newt Gingrich will return to Iowa during the July 4 holiday, having not visited the first primary state since May 21, the Des Moines Register reports. In addition, the director of Gingrich’s Iowa grassroots campaign, Will Rogers, has resigned to return to his job as the director of government affairs for the Iowa Nebraska Equipment Dealers Association, although he will continue to volunteer for the Gingrich campaign.
GIULIANI: In the years between now and his last presidential run, Rudy Giuliani’s support in New Hampshire has dissipated, McClatchy writes. “[H]is dilemma was obvious last week. He spoke Thursday at an Italian restaurant in North Conway, while about 90 miles away, Doug and Stella Scamman, influential Giuliani supporters in 2008, hosted 400 eager Mitt Romney backers for the former Massachusetts' governor's campaign kickoff.”
HUNTSMAN: Jon Huntsman told the AP that he would not compete in Iowa “for a reason,” first and foremost his opposition to subsidies for corn-based ethanol, which are considered a deal-breaker for many Iowans. He said he would compensate in New Hampshire, South Carolina and Florida, which he called his “make-or-break state.”
The Los Angeles Times points out, however, that Tim Pawlenty, whose campaign is counting heavily on a strong showing in Iowa, has already come out against continued ethanol subsidies and “drew applause at the Faith and Freedom event Friday night when he said Republicans must have the courage to tell voters the truth, even if it comes with risk.”
PALIN: “Sarah Palin insisted Sunday that history was on her side when she claimed that Paul Revere’s famous ride was intended to warn both British soldiers and his fellow colonists,” the AP writes. “‘Part of his ride was to warn the British that were already there. That, hey, you’re not going to succeed. You’re not going to take American arms. You are not going to beat our own well-armed persons, individual, private militia that we have,’ she added. ‘He did warn the British.’”
Bloomberg writes “Palin said she didn’t mean to steal media attention from Mitt Romney by appearing in New Hampshire at the same time he formally announced his bid for the Republican presidential nomination in the state. “‘I didn’t mean to step on anyone’s toes,’ Palin, the former governor of Alaska, said on ‘Fox News Sunday.’”
A documentary about Sarah Palin set to be released next month shows the former Alaska governor in a positive light, shifting the narrative away from some of the more controversial episodes from her political career, The Hill writes after a screening of the film was shown to reporters just outside Washington D.C. “An outsider, Palin climbs up Alaska's political ranks and along the way evolves into tough ‘Mama Grizzly’ willing to fight for her beliefs, according to the film. The word ‘courage’ is frequently used to describe her willingness to shake up the status quo; whether Palin is taking on corrupt oil executives and politicians, liberals, the media and the elites within her own party.”
ROMNEY: The New York Times’ Harwood writes that Mitt Romney, who tailored his presidential announcement for the 2008 cycle to fit the current ideological trends including condemning “radical violent jihad” and invoking “the sanctity of life.” Now running in 2012, however, Mitt Romney is shifting gears once again to accommodate the dominant issue on voters’ minds, jobs, which he didn’t even mention in his last presidential announcement speech.
We noted that Romney on Thursday had dropped the social conservative rhetoric of his announcement four years ago during his announcement this time around in New Hampshire. Some of that rhetoric, however, reappeared a day later at a conservative confab in Washington, before Romney pivoted back to the economy. “We’re united in our belief in the sanctity of human life,” Romney said, per the Boston Globe. We’re united in our belief in the importance and significance of a marriage between one man and one woman.”
SANTORUM: Ahead of Rick Santorum’s presidential announcement today, the New York Times looks at his campaign strategy so far, in which he has touted not only his work the social issues that he is known for but also what he did in Congress on national security, foreign policy and entitlement programs. “Nonetheless, the social issues are the ones that fire up the segment of the Republican primary base to which Mr. Santorum most appeals. And he has yet to address fully the issues that likely voters in a general election tell pollsters are most important: jobs and the economy. His core message now is his belief in American exceptionalism, a philosophy that he says President Obama does not share. The Obama presidency, he said, ‘has been a disaster’ in almost every respect.”
“Santorum, the former No. 3 Republican in the U.S. Senate and a favorite among his party's anti-abortion rights bloc, planned to make official his White House aspirations from the western Pennsylvania coal fields where his Italian immigrant grandfather worked,” the AP writes.
Leave a Comment:
I read these names of the potential GOP candidates and know that Barry Goldwater is spinning in his grave looking down at what the right wing religious right and other neo cons have done to his party.
paul revere did not ride to stop the british from taking our guns..........they were going to arrest john Hancock. and he didn't ring any bells or shoot guns. that's why it was a secret ride. does palin know anything? everytime she opens her mouth in goes her foot.
Sara Palin makes up her own history, then the GOP/TP pundits go on the talk shows and try to back her up by changing history. You GOP/TP nuts seem to be losing more and more credibility every time you try to back up Palins revision of history the way she remembers it.
Hey I'm a staunch conservative, and even I think Palin is a complete idiot. She is is a distraction to what really matters. Palin, please for the good of your country, Shut UP!!!!!!
But before you do, you owe Mitt Romney a huge apology. What you did to him is unconscionable.
Perhaps along with residency and other such requirements it is time to add some educational requirements, maybe an IQ test, maybe a practical exam, maybe a Sat's exam for legislator's. We have a former Governor and VP candidate that recently said in reference to Paul Revere:
"He who warned, uh, the British that they weren’t going to be taking away our arms uh by ringing those bells and making sure as he’s riding his horse through town to send those warning shots and bells that we were going to be secure and we were going to be free and we were going to be armed"
Wow! Maybe politicians should at the very least be required to pass the same test that people applying for US citizenship must pass before their name goes on any ballot. Many professions and trades require board exams or licensing exams or some sort of practical exam to prove a level of proficiency, to protect the public from the unqualified, or just plain shady operators. We have plenty of laws to protect us from an unqualified plumber but none to protect us from unqualified politicians that create and enact the laws and policies of the nation. Go Figure.
I remember when I graduated from the eighth grade we had to pass a test on the constitution and US history before we could graduate. I guess this wasn't a requirement in Alaska when Palin was in the eighth grade. Or she copied off of someone else.
I thought her dad was supposed to be a teacher?
Mr. Grump has hit the nail on the head! Why should we expect MORE from our new citizens than we expect from our political representatives? It doesn't make sense! An IQ test would clearly eliminate an abundance of the Republican/Tea Party crowd.....
Agreed. The Reps want to take away the vote by voter repression, even talking about a literacy test for voters.....well, I would say that a lot of the T-Publications need a little REAL, not fabricated, history and literacy testing and even some leadership teaching so they will not lie all the time, but especially if they just don't know any better, that they come up with some actual historical fact. They think they can say anything and if they say it often enough and repeat it often enough and get others to repeat it, that it becomes true! Only in Rep/Tp minds is it true, although I do believe they are trying to rewrite actual history books, so our children may never know the real truth or how stupid some of these candidates and/or elected officials are.
An IQ and literacy test would eliminate most of the posters here.
Speaking of Christie. Why did ripping off the taxpayer for a helicoptor ride end up being a one day story?
Because he reimbursed the cost.
so the Claire McCaskill issue is a dead one, then, right?
I'll be sure to mention that as she campaigns next year,...
Thanks for the joke, Groucho. The Republican Party is in great shape, and will take both branches of Congress and the White House in 2012.
Of course, in MSNBC lefty land, the Republicans are in perpetual crisis.
Big insight by liberal media NY Times: Mitt Romney didnt discuss 'jobs' in his 2008 Presidential announcement, and he did so in 2012.
Is this a flipflop? Or just a reflection of reality---thanks to Obama, the unemployment rate is now 9.1%?
The party's in WONDERFUL shape. Now, forget about all that, and let me tell you about the midnight ride of Paul Revere...You know- where he hopped in his Mini Cooper and fired phosphorous flares to warn the British the Pizza Man was coming...
I notice you forgot to mention that the republican party and George W. Bush are responsible for $10 Trillion of our $14 Trillion deficit and the Great republican Recession and it's resulting high unemployment.
bob the GOP is not in great shape. there is a huge schism in the party between the tea party and mainstream republican. if you can't see that then you need to drink something other then tea. you will lose the house, the dems will retain the senate and obama will crush the nominee. and when you wake up after the election and realize this you may then go to the hospital and have your heart attck and Psyche eval. got it pal?
Dude what land do you live in? can't you see that nothing is getting done as long as there are party politics? Screw the Dem's or the GOP until they work together to come up with solutions and stop all this BS this is friggin crazy, and the GOP is screwing over the working man harder than ever, and the Dem's are just as bad at times. Atleast they are not so forthwith about it!
Isn't it funny that Romney merely has to say the 'buzz' word Economics and the media and party faithful fall all over themselves to 'boost' his credibility?
I mean if we REALLY looked at his 'prowess', he bought companies (with his daddy's fortune), sold off the assets and killed a PLETHORA of jobs. But BOY HOWDY did he bank some cash in the process.
As a Dem I say LET HIM RUN ON HIS ECONOMIC RECORD. And don't forget he supported and SIGNED MA state legislation that required a healthcare MANDATE. You can run but you can't hide from your ACTUAL record, Romney.
Clara, get your facts straight before you start spouting them. Romney I'm sure inherited some money from his dad but his father was not as wealthy as you might think. Did you know that his father George Romney, as CEO of American Motors capped his own salary at $60,000 a year, declaring it obscene for any CEO to make more than that. George Romney did become a millionare when he took AM stock from $7.00 a share to $90.00 But when he recieved his stock payout he decided that this again was just too much money and gave most of it back to the Company. (How many of you would have done the same?) Still a great income in 1960 but it did not put him in a position to leave each of his 4 children millions of dollars.
I do agree that Mitt should run on his economic record though.
Lets see, Became a VP at Bain Consulting where he saved many companies from bankruptcy. Then became CEO of Bane Capital where not only did he provide great business advice he invested his own money to save companies. Companies like Dominoes Pizza, and Staples. Those of you who love to say Mitt just bought companies and fired all the people, pull your head out. How many jobs exist today because Domino's and Staples didn't go out of business 10 years ago. And those are just 2 of dozens of similar success stories. I should also point out that one of the companies Mitt saved was Bain Consulting itself. After he left to run Bain Capital, the company began to struggle without his leadership. The board begged him to come back and turn things around for them. He shrewdly negotiated a salary of $1.00 a day and came back and did exactly that. Mitt didn't care about the money. (they would have gladly payed him millions) He cared about the people working for the company.
Then Mitt went on to SLC Olympics, where contrary to a previous poster, he did more than just tell people to not look at the past. What he did was to take an Olympics that was nearly 500 million in debt and turn it into the most profitable Olympics of all time. All while handling and paying for the extra security that was required in a post 9/11 world. Something no previous Olympics had ever dealt with.
Then he went on to become Governor of MA where he took a state with a nearly 3 Billion dollar short fall and in the course of 4 years turned that into a 2 billion dollar rainy day fund and instituted health care reform for his state, which is exactly the level health care reform should be handled at. (if you don't know why then try reading the constitution).
During the Olympics Mitt accepted a total compensation package of exactly $1.00 During his term as Governor he donated his salary to help augment the salary of the people on his staff whom he felt were under paid.
Not only is Mitt a genius, he is generous. You will find no better man of character, no man more qualified to be our president.
I will put down my pom poms down now.
Rhino - thanks for the info, but then Mitt should run on his record, and on his own ideals, rather than scewering himself further and further to the right to please the Tpers. Maybe if he ran on his actual record rather than courting the religious right, he might make some headway, instead of producing the huge "yawn" that he does produce, even within his own party.
Cathy, In order to run for president, you must first win a party nomination. Mitt needs to win the Republican party nomination before he can run for President. So yes, he has to pander a little. That said, he is not pandering very much. Please actually listen to what he is saying. If all he cared about was pandering for votes he would have disavowed Romney care. But he won't do it. He would denounce his religion in order to curry favor with the Evangelical right, but again, he won't do it. The man has too much integrity. He will not sacrifice his integrity, even for the most powerful job in the world. I think that says a lot about his character.
The democrats did not focus on jobs immediately, and paid the price, the republicans got the nod and are making the same mistake, only worse they are lowering what little purchasing power people had left. They are going to pay the same price, if they don't get some movement. Congress is running out of time, and people are running out of everything. But don't be surprised if Obama is the last man standing after 2012, because the longer Congress plays their games, the less people blame him, and they are not going to replace him with any current republican presidential candidate
Agreed. The Republicans ran the economy in the ditch, the Democrats so far have been unable to get us out of the ditch and all the Republicans are offering is to double down on the policies that got us into the diitch while eliminating Medicare, extended unemployment and other policies to help the victims of theur failed economic policies.
Former Gov. Romney, former Speaker Gingrich, former Mayor Giuliani and Herman Cain are all at or close to the age of having Medicare. Could they talk about their own personal experience with Medicare? How they plan to have health care in retirement? Whether or not they would voluntarily forego Medicare to prove that they can manage insurance on the private market? Whether or not Medicare was useful to their parents? Rep. Bachmann, former Ambassador Huntsman, former Sen. Santorum, former Gov. Pawlenty, former Gov. Palin are all of the generation that does not immediately qualify for Medicare -- what experience do they have with the program? How does that experience affect their policies for health care? The other relevant comment here is that, as I prefaced, most of these candidates are FORMER public officials (Bachmann and Gov. Christie would be the exceptions) and in spite of the economy they are doing quite well, living off of investments and public speaking engagements and book sales. None of them are trying for a job in the private sector right now, and most likely none of them are skilled in the kinds of jobs available.
When an elected official (Barbour)says in public that he would rather vote to have Sarah Palin in office or anyone other than Barack Obama, that lets me know one of two things! They want another puppet in office and two they have no intentions on working on the issues that are disrupting and or destroying all american's lives as long as Obama is President. Are these the kind of people we need making policies that will affect lives for generations to come. Haven't they let there feelings be known long enough? What a sad state AMERICA has become. Do and say anything possible to make a sitting president fail instead of doing everything to make America succeed.
Most of us republicans and conservatives, who do actually think instead of parrot some democrat moron's garbage, don't want a puppet in the Presidency. We want someone who also thinks, who loves the U.S. and isn't trying to ruin it everyday, who actually does what he or she says they will do, who doesn't lie at every opportunity, who doesn't have a handler telling them how to think and what to say, and who will try to do what's right for the country. In short, the exact opposite of that effing idiot in our White House now.
Every candidate for President of the United States, and high political office should be required to disclose to the American public if they signed the Grover G. Norquist pledge not to increase taxes, as most current GOP members of the House of Representatives have done. That disclosure should aid the public in determining just what their real agenda is, the best interests of the Nation and the People or the GOP's true hidden agenda, the real goal of radically smaller Federal Government at any cost, up to and including ending Medicare through a bogus voucher system, privatizing Social security, and actively promoting a Federal default on our National Debt.
Wake up America, the GOP is not the salvation of our nation, but is in fact working towards radical changes to turn it into the worlds largest Banana Republic, with them in charge, of course.
Your precious obozo has almost accomplished that now.
"Commonsense" doesnt have any. Worked yourself into a lather because a Republican said he would rather have a Republican in the White House ?
I agree; I would rather have a real common sense conservative in the White House than the leftist radical Obama, whose policies have demonstrably failed.
Take a deep breath, moonbat...
Lately Obama's policies haven't failed because he doesn't have any. He has suffered so much critisism from his blunders, his latest strategy is to simply do nothing. 71 rounds of golf so far this year coupled with his exotic vacations. Add to that his campaign/ photo op trips. How much time does that leave to "work" as President??
No, he is done in 2012, and he knows it. He will milk this presidency for every trip and freebie he can before he is shown the door.
Never again in this century will America make the mistake of electing such a flaming liberal to a position of responsability.
Bob-1887910
Barbour would rather have an idiot in office than an intelligent Democrat?
Does that explain the pathetic field of idiots, attention-mongers and narcissists running for the Republican nomination, or what?
Bob, you and your kind are the reasons dynasty fall, families are in turmoil and the educational system is failing. You are short sighted, tunnel visioned and a follower of an agenda that doesn't even have your best interest at stake. sorry for you! You need to get some commonsense and stop being spoon fed lies.
Edward,
Petty party of one, your table is ready,...did you hear this one?
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/04/us/politics/04golfdate.html
or this one?
http://politicalinsider.blogs.heraldtribune.com/12053/boehner%E2%80%99s-sarasota-golf-outing-not-going-over-well-in-dc/
Isn't it funny that I only hear complaints when President Obama is involved with the entertainment factor? It sure seems petty to me. PS. Golf happens to be a place where some ideas get shared and even (gasp) work can get done. I worked for an optometrist to put myself through college and his office was closed every Thursday afternoon, for golf. I used that afternoon to work on my coursework. And guess what - that ultra conservative Right Wing boss of mine,...he paid me for a 40 hour week because he didn't think it fair for me to not earn because he wasn't there. Boy, you sure wouldn't see THAT behavior in this day and age!
PS. He is NO WHERE close to the absenteeism of your former 'standard' bearer, "W". That must really GALL you, no?
GW Bush had Johnny Cash entertain at the white house, I heard he shot a man in Reno just to watch him die, how despicable to invite somebody like that.
“Sarah Palin insisted Sunday that history was on her side when she claimed that Paul Revere’s famous ride was intended to warn both British soldiers and his fellow colonists,” the AP writes....
What state run media AP , and MSDNC, wont tell you:
Boston Herald: Revere’s own account of the ride in a 1798 letter seems to back up Palin’s claim. Revere describes how after his capture by British officers, he warned them “there would be five hundred Americans there in a short time for I had alarmed the Country all the way up.”
Boston University history professor Brendan McConville said, “Basically when Paul Revere was stopped by the British, he did say to them, ‘Look, there is a mobilization going on that you’ll be confronting,’ and the British are aware as they’re marching down the countryside, they hear church bells ringing — she was right about that — and warning shots being fired. That’s accurate.”
The lazy media and liberals rely upon the Longfellow poem, not written until the next century for their history...typical.
There you go again Bob, rewriting history. Did you even take US history in High School?
Bob, you and Sarah are correct, Revere did warn a group of British soldiers who stopped him. And there were shots and bells. BUT all of this happened AFTER the initial ride, where Revere went in secret, using lantern signals to alert him, to warn Hancock and Adams that the British were coming to arrest them and sieze their arms and munitions.
If the entire operation depended on stealth, why would Revere have alerted the very group that he was intent on keeping the secret from?
Sarah has mangled the timeline and confused the initial ride with the later one.
Spin, spin, spin.... re-write history. Typical.
See 1.2 above.
Bob,
The question was in regards to the midnight ride on April 18,1775. The issues she managed to inject, out of context to the question, occurred later and the letter quoted was written 23 years after the fact. She could just as easily answered with what he had for dinner and possibly been correct. That does not, however, answer the question asked.
Now she's on TV saying it was another "gotcha" question. It must mean that any question asked without prior warning is a gotcha question. Comic gold all around.
"What state run media AP , and MSDNC, wont tell you:" As for this ridiculous conspiracy theory, this "information/excuse" has been all over the media since Saturday.
Bob, what a disappointment, coming from someone from Massachusetts! Paul Revere was making his ride to warn John Hancock and Samuel Adams, something not unexpected because people did expect the British to get to Concord and try to get their cannons back....that's right, members of the militia had STOLEN British cannons and rumor was that the cannons were in Concord (perhaps buried on a farm). The main reason for his ride was to get to Hancock and Adams, but along the way he spread word about the troop movements of the British regiment.
The real point is: why would Gov. Palin go to Boston, go to the Old North Church, visit Paul Revere's home....if she didn't learn anything useful there? She claims that this trip is to highlight the foundations of our country, but if she doesn't know the foundations, AS SHE SAYS, we can't use them as guideposts for the future. What do you suppose the Liberty Bell can tell her about the foundations of the country? That the young US government SPENT MONEY for a symbol??
Bob did you go to school in Alaska?
That was a gotcha question for a first or second grader for a third grader or above not so much. The British are coming the British are coming one if by land two if by sea, three if by tour bus. I guess today is the aniversary of the normandy invasion that liberated the Germans form France right Sarah.
Grump,
AWESOME! My brother in law posted the SAME sentiment on his facebook status yesterday. hee hee!
It ain't about issues or even sound bites anymore. It's all about how physically attractive the candidate is, and it's been that way since the TV came into living rooms in the 1960s. For example:
1960, Kennedy vs. Nixon. Kennedy won. Why? Because Nixon was uglier, that's why.
1964, Johnson vs. Goldwater. Johnson was no movie star, but a bulldog would have been better looking than Barry G.
1968, Nixon vs. Humphrey. Again, Nixon wasn't a ladies man but Hubert Humphrey looked like he fell out of an ugly tree.
1972, Nixon vs. McGovern. Nixon got lucky the Democrats couldn't find anyone with decent looks.
1976, Ford vs. Carter. Jimmy Carter looked goofy, but Ford looked even goofier.
1980, Reagan vs. Carter. Hollywood leading man walks away with a landslide.
1984, Reagan vs Mondale. Hollywood leading man again.
1988, Bush(41) vs. Dukakis. Neither one was all that and a bag of chips, but Dukakis you just had to point and laugh at.
1992, Clinton vs. Bush(41). Clinton's boyish good looks easily beat out tired old Bush.
1996, Clinton vs. Dole. The warhorse looked like he was rode hard and put up wet, so of course Dole lost.
2000, Bush(43) vs. Gore. Gore was, at the time, the ugliest cuss to ever try for the office in the modern era.
2004, Bush(43) vs. Kerry. The Democrats actually ran Lurch from The Addam's Family.
2008, Obama vs. McCain. Another warhorse that looked like warmed-over cowpies, Obama wins easily.
Do I believe that Americans are so shallow that looks tell who's going to be elected or not? Absolutely! People who look funny, dress funny, talk funny or anything else is funny about them haven't got a shot if the other guy is more attractive.
What does former Sen. Santorum think about immigration? After highlighting the fact that his grandfather came here for freedom (and to escape Mussolini), he repeats the idea of people "working hard" to make a better life for their children. So what does Sen. Santorum think about political asylum? about the Dream act? about how to handle the many millions of people here working hard to give their families a better life.....does he want to deport all of them? Is that why his grandfather came here?
His grandfather became an American, unlike the worthless illegals who won't even try to learn English. Immigrants of that era had a different attitude. For example, my grandmother was a full-blown German immigrant from WWII. She would never speak that vile German language in front of the children. The household spoke English and only English. There was nothing German about the house, and great efforts were made to make it completely 100% English-Speaking American.
Illegals are not "working hard", they're speaking different languages in their households and ruining their kids futures because a kid who goes to school and doesn't speak English probably won't make it to graduation.
Illegals need to be deported. Only people who really want to become American, speak English, learn American history and sever all ties with the land they hated so much they left it should have a shot at being citizens, and even then only if they've never committed a crime, not even so much as a jaywalking ticket.
Only people who really want to become American, speak English, learn American history
Well MeanGene that eliminates Palin right there.
Palin is eliminated because of the height curse on the Presidency. The tallest candidate almost always wins, and Palin is only 5'5" tall, far too short to be a President. Very few Presidents have ever been under the 6' tall mark. Candidates (and their handlers) know this which is why if you ever watch a Presidential debate, you will notice pedestals to try and shore up the shorties.
One of the more infamous examples of this was had in the Bush(41)/Dukakis debates where W. Bush purposely strode behind Mike Dukakis' podium and "tripped" a bit on it to point out that Mike Dukakis was basically a shrimp.
To be fair, this wasn't actually true because Mike Dukakis, at 5'7" tall, was right at the average height for an American male. However, he was not 6'2" tall like George H.W. Bush is. Bush(41) played his Presidential height advantage to full effect, while Dukakis was portrayed as a shorty unfit for the office, a little Napolean type brat of a guy.
You just watch these games, because once you know what to look for they are no end as a source of amusement. Palin's height will come into play, and if she gets a little bit fatter being out on the road then you can watch that game get played too.
and this explains the crushing defeat of "W" by Gore; which was promptly overturned by the US Supremes,...thanks for the reminder.
So its ok to rip off the taxpayer, so long as you pay it back when you are caught red handed? Strange morals.
Did you ever consider that Palin's gaffe was on purpose? That maybe it was intended to steal the limelight from Romney's announcement? In point of fact, that's exactly what it accomplished. So, perhaps Ms Palin was recently slighted by Mr Romney. Her traveling circus was in the neighborhood. Maybe she asked to be on-hand when Mitt made his announcement and was re-buffed. What better way to take revenge than to steal his thunder? From a damage control perspective, she lost nothing. After her Paul Revere comments, her detractors, who believe she's an idiot, will not change their minds. Her staunch supporters, who ignore these gaffes because they believe in her ideals, will continue to ignore these types of gaffes.
So, what do you think?
The detractors will say I am giving her too much credit and her supporters will be insulted for insinuating their beloved could be capable of a Machiavellian plan.
The alternative is to accept that she has no knowledge of one of the most famous stories in American history.