Tag Archives: Sarah Palin

Uncategorized

Surprise! Most GOPers favor impeachment

4 Comments

A part of me is glad the talk of impeaching President Obama keeps percolating.

It serves to remind much of the country that today’s Republican Party is being dominated by nutty zealots who would impeach the president for passing gas in a public elevator if they thought they could get away with it.

Poll: 35 percent say impeachment justified

A new poll shows that 68 percent of Americans who call themselves Republicans believe Obama has done something merit impeachment by the House of Representatives. The poll, sponsored by YouGov and the Huffington Post, reports that 8 percent of Democrats think it’s a bad idea.

Wow. I’m shocked, shocked!

Reasonable Republicans — and there remain some of them in high public office — think otherwise about impeachment. House Speaker John Boehner says it won’t happen. House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte of Virginia says the president hasn’t committed the type of crime that merits impeachment.

That hasn’t stopped the likes of former half-term Alaska Gov. Sarah “Barracuda” Palin from weighing in with impeachment talk.

I rather like Attorney General Eric Holder’s response to Palin’s recent demand for an impeachment. He quipped that the former Alaska governor “wasn’t a particularly good vice presidential candidate.” Holder said Palin was “an even worse judge of who ought to be impeached and why.”

I figure that as long as the media keep reporting this impeachment nonsense, the better it is for those who oppose the idea of proceeding with such idiocy. It exposes the modern GOP as a party dominated by fruitcakes who, absent any constructive agenda for governing, are left to talk openly about an issue intended solely to stoke its fire-breathing base.

Uncategorized

Impeachment talk is ridiculous

Put a sock in it, Sarah “Barracuda” Palin.

You too, U.S. Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Loony Bin. Same for the rest of the clowns on the far right wing of the Republican Party who believe Barack Obama has committed an impeachable offense.

At least one leading Republican, the speaker of the House of Representatives, is sounding a note of sanity.

Boehner says no to impeachment

John Boehner knows better. He was there when the House commenced impeachment proceedings against President Bill Clinton and then watched as Republicans took it on the chin in the 1998 mid-term election.

Palin, the ex-half-term Alaska governor, says Obama should be impeached because of the immigration crisis on our southern border. Someone needs to ask the former GOP vice-presidential nominee: What “high crime” and “misdemeanor” has the president committed?

I think I know the answer: none.

She wrote in an op-ed: “The many impeachable offenses of Barack Obama can no longer be ignored. If after all this he’s not impeachable, then no one is.”

Let’s allow the grownups to run the country. Speaker Boehner said simply to the impeachment calls, “I disagree.”

Enough said.

Uncategorized

'Non-story' still gets attention

Now we have Sarah “Barracuda” Palin, the former half-term Alaska governor, weighing in on one of the most bizarre political escapades in recent history.

It’s a “non-story,” she declared this week while throwing her support behind a tea party challenger to U.S. Sen. Thad Cochran, R-Miss.

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/senate-races/207821-palin-dismisses-non-stories-as-she-stumps-for-mcdaniel

What, then, is the “non-story”? It deals with efforts to video-record Cochran’s bed-ridden wife in the nursing home where she lives to use in an attack video against the veteran Republican lawmaker.

My question is this: What in name of all that is holy is the purpose of such a disgraceful deed?

The challenger, Chris McDaniel, disavows any involvement. The cops have arrested four supporters, alleging criminal conspiracy and criminal trespass for breaking into the nursing home where Mrs. Cochran resides.

Cochran, of course, is outraged. He should be.

I keep wondering about the end game here. What are the pro-McDaniel goofballs seeking to illustrate by showing Mrs. Cochran in the nursing home; she’s been under 24-hour care for more than a decade.

It’s one thing for the tea party to target someone such as Sen. Cochran, who’s been a reliably — and largely reasonable — conservative for his entire Senate career. The tea party wing already has taken down other GOP stalwarts, such as Indiana Sen. Dick Lugar and Utah Sen. Bob Bennett. The tea partiers went after Kentucky’s Mitch McConnell, but got thumped. Now they want Thad Cochran’s scalp?

As for the one-time GOP vice-presidential nominee, Palin is showing yet again her habit of blaming the media for keeping a so-called “non-story” alive.

It most certainly is a story when political operatives working on behalf of a candidate for an important public office stoop to gutter-level tactics.

Uncategorized

Hey, didn’t Russia invade Georgia … in 2008?

The criticism of President Obama’s handling of the Russia-Ukraine crisis of 2014 ignores the Russia-Georgia crisis of 2008.

Six years ago, Russian dictator/president Vladimir Putin invaded Georgia, another one of those former Soviet satellite states. The U.S. president at the time, George W. Bush, let it happen. What could President Bush to stop Putin? Nothing. What should he have done? Go to war? That’s a tough call, given that the United States was already involved in two shooting wars at the time, Iraq and Afghanistan.

I’m left to wonder: Where was the criticism from the right back then? It was silent.

Move forward to the present day. Russian troops are sitting in Crimea, a region of Ukraine. There might be more military involvement from Russia, which is nervous over the ouster of pro-Russia president by insurgents in Ukraine.

What’s President Obama supposed to do? What can he do? Does he go to war with Russia? Well, of course not.

Yet the criticism is pouring in from the right, from the likes of Sen. John McCain, former defense boss Donald Rumsfeld, former half-term Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, every right-wing talking head this side of Sean Hannity. They’re all bemoaning the “invasion” of Russian troops of a sovereign country, Ukraine.

Oh, but wait. Didn’t this country invade a sovereign country, Iraq, in March 2003 because — we were told — the late dictator Saddam Hussein had this big cache of chemical weapons?

President Bush told us once that he peered into Putin’s “soul” and saw a man of commitment and integrity. Well, that soul also belongs to a former head of the KGB, the former Soviet spy agency.

I’m thinking another key Republican, former Defense Secretary Robert Gates, has it right. He’s telling his fellow GOPers to tone down the criticism while the president tries — along with our allies — to manage a dangerous crisis.

Uncategorized

Palin cheapens MLK memory with blast at Obama

It strikes me that some commemorations deserve dignity and decorum.

Honoring the late Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. ought to be one of those occasions … isn’t that right former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin?

The former half-term governor and 2008 Republican vice-presidential nominee, took a swipe today at President Obama ostensibly while honoring the memory of the slain civil-rights icon.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2014/01/20/palin-slams-obama-in-mlk-post/?hpt=hp_t2

“Mr. President, in honor of Martin Luther King, Jr. and all who commit to ending any racial divide, no more playing the race card,” she said in a Facebook post.

She didn’t offer a specific example of how the president was “playing the race card.” Some have suggested that Obama’s remarks in a New Yorker magazine interview provided the grist for Palin’s attack.

Obama told The New Yorker that some Americans just don’t like him merely because he’s black. Umm, I think he’s correct on that one. Denying as much is to ignore the reality that race still does matter in the hearts and minds of millions of Americans.

My larger point, though, is that Dr. King’s memory deserves to be honored only on its merits — and not used as a cheap political weapon by someone who doesn’t deserve the national political attention she continues to get.

Uncategorized

MSNBC’s Martin Bashir had to go

Martin Bashir, the fire-breathing left-wing commentator for MSNBC, has resigned from the network over remarks he made about former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin.

Good bye and good riddance.

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/12/04/21760779-msnbc-host-martin-bashir-resigns-over-palin-remarks?lite

Let me stipulate something now that I’ve made that statement. I happen to agree with most of Bashir’s political philosophy, which he would reveal without apology on his weekday afternoon talk show. What I find objectionable about the man was his occasionally crass commentary about those with whom he disagrees.

Such as Sarah Palin. In November, Bashir took Palin to task for remarks she had made that equated the national debt to slavery. I, too, thought Palin’s analogy was a bit of a stretch. Bashir took the opportunity, however, to detail on the air some of the torture that slaves actually endured, such as being forced to eat human excrement.

He then suggested Palin should do the same.

Bashir apologized for his remarks shortly afterward. Now, though, he has left the network.

Fine. See you later.

Bashir has been fond of criticizing — correctly, in my view — the over-the-top criticism of President Obama by his critics. He has called for civil discourse among political foes. His call for collegiality among opponents is worthwhile.

However, he destroys any moral high ground on which he could stand by making statements such as those he spewed out about Sarah Palin.

Don’t misunderstand me here: I dislike Palin’s politics intensely. I, too, have been hard on her in the past and will keep speaking out in strong terms in the future when it believe she is wrong — which is just about all the time. Bashir’s disgraceful commentary, though, went far beyond the bounds of decency.

I’m glad he quit.

Uncategorized

Alec Baldwin gets hosed; Martin Bashir survives

I’ve already declared my disgust with two MSNBC hosts, Alec Baldwin and Martin Bashir.

Baldwin needed to get fired for his hideous outburst against a photographer in which he yelled a homophobic slur against the man. It was disgraceful, disgusting and thoroughly degrading. MSNBC decided to ax his 9 p.m. (CST) show that aired each Friday. So long, Alec.

Then he fired back at the network for what he said is uneven treatment of his transgression and that of Martin Bashir, another MSNBC talking head.

Bashir did something that also was vile and disgusting. While offering a comment one afternoon on his show, he referred to former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as a “world-class idiot,” and then said she should be degraded with feces and urine. Bashir challenged Palin’s assertion that the national debt is akin to slavery; he made some point about the kind of torture and degradation that slaves endured, which included being soiled with human feces and urine.

Bashir went on the air shortly after his hideous rant and apologized. Palin said she accepted his apology.

He’s still offering his commentary … on the air.

Baldwin said the network is being unfair because it fired him for his spontaneous outburst, which occurred off camera, while keeping Bashir on the job for reciting a scripted critique of a one-time elected official.

Doesn’t Baldwin have a point here? Martin Bashir’s ghastly rant, it could be argued, was more egregious, given that it was a pre-meditated act.

Why, then, aren’t both men banished from the same network?

Uncategorized

Apology offers clear lesson in good manners

Martin Bashir is an MSNBC talk-show host and liberal commentator who on Friday said some horribly offensive things about former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin.

Today he apologized for his remarks.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2013/11/18/msnbcs_bashir_apologizes_for_saying_someone_should_defecate_on_sarah_palin.html

I didn’t hear the remarks as he said them on TV. I caught up with the remarks over the weekend from online publications. I heard them and was appalled. The link attached here carries additional links to what he said at the time. Take a look and have a listen. I think you’ll agree with his apology.

Two points need to be made about Bashir’s apology.

First is that he didn’t qualify it with one of those “If anyone was offended … ” non-apologies. He said he is sorry, period. He knew he crossed a line of decency and civility and was man enough to offer the unqualified expression of regret to Palin, her family, friends and political supporters.

Second is that Bashir and others have been correctly critical over many years of some of the discourse that has emanated from those on the other side of the political divide. They have taken others to task for untruthful statements and outright lies about public policies.

The deeply divided nation can debate policy differences without resorting to the kind of ugliness that presents itself from time to time. From the left and the right it has revealed its ugly side.

To that end, Bashir promised to be more thoughtful and circumspect “in the days ahead.”

I hope the folks on the other side, those on the right and the far right, follow Bashir’s lead.

Uncategorized

House speaker is held hostage

I can’t believe what I’m about to say … but I’m actually beginning to feel a little sorry for U.S. House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio.

He’s being held hostage by a cabal of his Republican caucus, the tea party wing of his party. He seems powerless to do anything about it.

At issue is this partial government shutdown. House of Representatives Republicans — or shall I say a minority of their members — dislike the Affordable Care Act so much they want to attach defunding mechanisms to any spending bills, which is a non-negotiable item to House and Senate Democrats, not to mention the Big Democrat in the White House, the president of the United States.

The tea party wing has Boehner scared. He doesn’t want to rile them. He doesn’t want to lose his speakership over this issue. So he’s being forced to go along with what they want.

Boehner is the Man of the House, if you will. He is one of 233 Republicans who comprise a majority of the 435 members who serve there. Each of them represents roughly 700,000 Americans, given that the Constitution requires each member’s district to be apportioned equally.

So, a country of some 310 million or so citizens is being “governed,” more or less, by a group of lawmakers whose combined constituency accounts for about 21 million Americans. Let’s see, that amounts to a good bit less than 10 percent of the country, correct?

Let’s play this out a little further. Republicans control one legislative chamber. Democrats control the other one. The White House is being occupied by a Democrat, who appoints a staff and a Cabinet of like-minded individuals, which the Constitution allows him to do. The third branch of government, the judiciary, is ostensibly non-political, although partisans on both sides accuse the court system of comprising “judicial activists,” meaning they’re actually politicians in judges’ clothing.

President Obama tried the other day to make this point as the Affordable Care Act took effect. He said essentially that a “minority of a minority” is calling the shots.

If the House speaker could have his way, he’d bring this whole matter to a vote of the entire House — and the government shutdown could come to a halt. The park system and other “non-essential” offices could reopen, veterans could get their disability checks on time, Americans could get their passports. The government would become fully functional, serving the people whose money pays for it.

John Boehner can’t have his way. He’s being held captive by members of his own congressional caucus who — if you’ll pardon my borrowing this phrase from another tea party sweetheart, Sarah “Barracuda” Palin — have “gone rogue.”

This is no way to govern.

Uncategorized

Battle of the Barbies heats up

A couple of Dallas Morning News writers — Mike Hashimoto and Nicole Stockdale — are tussling over the reaction to the “Barbie” moniker hung on state Sen. Wendy Davis, D-Fort Worth.

Hashimoto apparently sees media reaction as being a bit hypocritical, given that former half-term Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin was called “Caribou Barbie” when she was all the rage. Stockdale doesn’t see it that way.

I agree with Stockdale.

http://dallasmorningviewsblog.dallasnews.com/2013/08/abortion-barbie-vs-caribou-barbie.html/

Davis was called “retard Barbie” by someone supporting Republican Texas Attorney General Greg Abbot’s campaign for Texas governor. Davis is dropping hints all over Texas that she’s thinking about running for the Democratic Party nomination for governor. We’ll all know soon whether she’s in or out.

My sense is that the reaction to the “retard Barbie” slur has been based mostly on Abbott’s rather timid reaction to it. Instead of condemning such language with indignation and disgust, he has offered some timid disclaimers about being unable to control what people say on social media.

“Caribou Barbie” was meant, as I understand it, to call attention to (1) Palin’s attractiveness and (2) her devotion to the Alaska lifestyle.

Nicole Stockdale asks: What’s wrong with that?

I see nothing wrong with such a reference in that context.

The Davis reference — which was posted with hatred — is quite another matter.