Does Sarah Palin Make Dems Happy?

PalinAndFlagby Anniel  1/28/15
“A man can’t ride you unless your back is bent.” – Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr.  •  “. . . the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately, by the grace of God. These are grounds of hope for others. . .” – Thomas Jefferson, written from Monticello on June 24, 1826 to Roger Weightman

* * * * *

So, my friend and fellow Alaskan, Sarah Palin, gives a talk and ruffles a few feathers, again. Such a shock though, she’s never made Democrats “happy” before, nor have her detractors wound up with egg on their faces either. They always think they’ve got her this time.

What else is new in the liberal War On Conservative Women? Or have feminists opened their minds and hearts to acknowledge the downtrodden, brutalized and raped women and children in both Islamic countries and supposedly civilized places in Great Britain and Europe? Is the woman who was head of Child Protection in Rotherham still not in jail and earning her keep in Queensland? Do any of the Feminists in this country have any idea how foolish their agenda seems when such agony exists for females in the wider world?

Back to Sarah. Which of the quotes above was she using, and why do Democrats and others find what she said so funny? I got the impression that there was some salacious reference that I just didn’t get. Maybe only Democrats have dirty minds? No one in my family could say why the words led to so much parody and snickering either.

There has been speculation and rumor for some time that Sarah will run for President in 2016. Many Republicans are asking that question more seriously every day. Some admire Sarah a lot and love her ability to think on her feet. But should she run for President, or even Vice President? A lot of people all over the nation have weighed in on the question after she has hinted that she might. Some scuttlebutt is very critical of her, but most of what I hear is favorable. The libs are certainly showing their fears about what she will do. I keep thinking that she might be more effective as a free-floating ambassador in fly-over country, voicing the concerns of real people like you and me and strengthening our resolve. She does seem, mostly, to have the common touch, and conservatives love her.

Sarah’s standing in her home state is more shaky than outsiders might expect. There are folks in Alaska who would like to see Sarah take on our very own RINO Senator, Lisa Murkowski. But I’m not sure Sarah didn’t politically hurt herself, maybe too badly, when she turned against Sean Parnell, who had been her Lt. Governor, and succeeded her when she resigned as Governor. She endorsed Bill Walker, running on a split ticket as an Independent for Governor, with Byron Mallott (D), as Lt. Governor. Lots of Republicans were shocked at her endorsement and felt like Sarah was disloyal to the party. They were especially enraged when Walker and Mallott (or outside parties supposedly acting on their behalf) engaged in some really nasty political ads, with personal slurs against Parnell about things he had little to do with. Could Sarah even survive a primary run against Murkowski? That’s a hard question to answer at the moment, and Murkowski takes no prisoners.

Alaska Republicans are watching Gov. Walker very closely. If he messes up much, especially over oil and gas or budget matters, they just might lay the blame completely on Palin’s perceived disloyalty. Whether that’s fair or not will depend on the politics of the moment.

I am also personally becoming concerned about Sarah’s seemingly new penchant for using so much foul language. Michael Moore may be a real idiot, but there are more (may I use the term?) ladylike and Christian ways of saying so than holding up a revolting sign. There are still people who don’t respond well to crudity of expression. Some of them are not even Christian, they just prefer some degree of class.

I hope the quote by Thomas Jefferson was the one Sarah was referencing when she “made the Dems happy,” because there is no ambiguity as to who the “booted and spurred” riders are and the freedom Jefferson was advocating in his letter to Mr. Weightman.

The quote from Reverend King is much more subtle and ambiguous. He was talking about being free and standing straight, true, but, as a churchman, he was also reminding people that they cannot lift or raise another unless they have the love and humility to bend their own backs first.

What will Sarah do? She’s the only one who can say, and she certainly has proven she is her own woman. • (4340 views)

This entry was posted in Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

25 Responses to Does Sarah Palin Make Dems Happy?

  1. Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

    This must be the sign you’re talking about. I hadn’t heard about that.

    I like Palin. But she’s also a good reminder that politics and the entertainment culture are now thoroughly mixed together. Imagine Lincoln holding up a sign that said “Fuc_ You, Jefferson Davis.”

    It’s not the word that bothers me as much as this is clearly giving into the soundbyte-ization of politics. May the hashtag mentality die a quick and agonizing death, whoever is doing it.

    • Anniel says:

      That’s the sign. The daughter-in-law of a US Supreme Court Justice I am somewhat connected to has been absolutely horrified by that sign and is letting everyone know about her feelings. It’s an embarrassment to everyone who admires Sarah. Thinking she wasn’t.

      Hashtags are so inane, and insane, and I hope they disappear soon.

    • Timothy Lane says:

      For liberal hate-mongers (if you’ll pardon the redundancy) this was obviously a 2-fer. They get to mock Palin and her fans. Well, she shouldn’t have been so vulgar in public, but the only thing wrong with her sentiment is that it was much too limited in its target.

  2. Timothy Lane says:

    Palin is a charismatic speaker with a built-in audience. But her resignation from the governorship, however understandable given the vile Democrap campaign of false ethics charges against her, is probably a disqualification until she proves otherwise through public service in some other position. (I thought she would make a good choice for Energy or Interior Secretary if Romney won, though he probably never had her in mind, but this proved irrelevant.) She would certainly be a far better choice for president than the current incumbent. But then, so would a garden slug.

  3. GHG says:

    Sarah Palin represents my views more closely than anyone else on the national stage. If I were king-maker, she would be our next president.

    However, there are too many hurdles for her jump to make her electable, starting with her assassinated character. She is the poster child of character assassination. The LoFo’s know her as the Tina Fey parody. Would they turn out in sufficient numbers to vote for a person they consider a dingbat? Couple that with the dearth of support she would be getting from the GOP coffers and those LoFo’s would remain LoFo’s regarding the real Sarah Palin. I will go so far as to say the GOP would act to ensure her defeat, and I don’t mean just the primaries – I mean the general election. Big-Business / Chamber of Commerce / Establishment-GOP, basically all the same thing these days, have more in common with the economic policies of the Democrats than with the Tea Party. And finally, the obvious, Palin is antithetical to everything the left holds dear so they will re-double their effort to smear and misrepresent anything and everything about Sarah.

    Just simply too much baggage to have more than a snowball’s chance. Having said that, I hope she runs because I would be proud to pull the lever for Sarah. And if by some miracle she wins the GOP nomination, I would be proud to pull the lever for Sarah a second time. Who knows … maybe she is “the one”.

    • Anniel says:

      Interesting take Mr. Lesser. If she ran against Murkowski for Senate and lost I don’t know if she could recover. I’d like a chance to see her try, but she has enemies beyond Democrats, and the sign against Michael More cuts deep with a lot of people, even ones who gag when they hear anything about him.

      • Rosalys says:

        I kind of think her time to run for president is past. I don’t think her time is past, though. Like you I believe she has been a great help in getting some conservatives elected. I don’t like the sign either, although deep down inside I have to agree with the sentiment. And as one who uses the crude word “crap” on a fairly regular basis, I’m not sure I’m qualified to judge Sarah. Despite her occasional human failings (real failings, not the nonsensical garbage which is continually flung at her) I remain a big Sarah fan; and if she were to secure a nomination for the presidency I would have no reservations about proudly voting for her.

        Ever consider that the lack of good leadership my be part of the (self inflicted but divinely endorsed) judgement upon our nation?

        • Anniel says:

          I say “crap,” too. Sometimes even worse if the truth be known, but not in a public setting.

          I like to think that when the right leader comes along God will let us know, that we’ll actually have our minds ready. I love Ben Carson, and I read someone who says Carson didn’t really “retire,” from medicine but was forced to resign because he is now senile and crazy. Oh boy, do the haters let us know who they fear.

  4. Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

    To see the state of conservatism, look at this trashy article that NRO published: Any Other Women Feel Like Swearing at Huckabee?

    Does anyone know who this Katherine Timpf is? Is she a libertarian kook or just a liberal pretending to be a conservative? But, good god, what a hyperventilating little feminist nightmare of a writer…and for a supposed conservative magazine.

    I’m disgusted with this manner of air-headed reporting and opinionating. Damn Huckabee for many things, but not for him stating his opinion that people need to clean up their language. Huckabee is right.

    And rather than this being a small issue, how does one expect to clean up society if we don’t start with ourselves? Our attitude is everything. And if life is merely a stage for throwing f-bombs, then what a pathetic species we are.

    Timpf is a moron. Sorry…I’ll clean up my language tomorrow. Not all that many things get me angry. But when I saw this kind of Leftist-like bashing of a conservative at National Review, of all places, that gets my hackles up.

    • Timothy Lane says:

      I just saw it, and if you go back in you’ll see that I share your view of it. (In fact, I was thinking of commenting on it here anyway.) Note that Cooke’s article on Huckabee has some problems as well. It’s a good reminder that National Review is produced by northeastern conservative elites, and they share the prejudices of their particular group. And I’m no fan of Huckabee as a candidate.

      • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

        Okay. I found your comment here, Timothy. A pretty good one.

        Ladies and gentlemen, I don’t have the time or inclination to parse just how pathetically wrong Timpf is. But that’s beside the point. I don’t travel to liberal sites and do battle just for the fun of it. Let these goofballs believe what they will.

        But for this kind of garbage to show up at National Review is astounding. This writer is thoroughly of the Left, for her emphasis is “equality” of the “genders.” That is why she takes such issue with Huckabee. How dare someone suggest (even though he was lamenting this trait in all sexes) that women not be just as vulgar as a man?

        I mean, good god, who passes this stuff through? I guess I have to thank the non-editor at National Review for that because it was this sheer lack of leadership and vision that was a main impetus to do this site. By all means, have a difference of opinion. But anyone in conservative circles foolish enough to lead with this weak, equality-based, grievance-based feminist schtick will get laughed out of here as well (and I’m glad to see that many, but by no means all, of the NR commenters are exactly right on this issue).

        Fortunately our writers (and ladies) here at ST are heads and tales above this sort of crap. I guess you should all take this as a moment not only to take a bow but to continue raising your game. And you should all note the dangers of developing a sad, vapid soul desiccated by political-speak, through parsing everything through a political lens. This is why I sometimes take pains to caution people here not to get too wrapped up in the politics. Once in a while take time to stop and smell the roses or else you, too, could end up as this kind of desiccated persona who has politics as a soul, if you can call it a soul.

        We never want to become like that. It may be inevitable that we humans are a political animal to some extent. But let us set our sites much higher. Timpf has not. And, no, I’m not jealous that a hack is having her articles published as National Review. I’m happy doing just what I’m doing, as I hope you are. Quality will tell in the end.

    • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

      Does anyone know who this Katherine Timpf is?

      Just another of these young supercilious NRO scribblers who have little experience and are more than happy to embarrass themselves by displaying it for all the world to see. They seem to believe simply because they write passably well, that they have something important to say. Timpf’s picture on NRO says it all. A smirking little trollop who thinks she is superior to the Rubes.

      One of the main reasons our society has become extremely coarse is that women, who in the past demanded decent manners of men, have now lowered themselves to where they are proud to speak like uneducated stevedores.

      Worse still is the fact that they so often try to act as vulgarly as the lowest sort of male.

      Timpf and her ilk, will probably not be satisfied until they can step up to the urinal and pee like a man. Better watch out for those shoes.

    • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

      Does Timpf believe men are attracted to women with foul mouths? Or do men associate foul mouthed women with loose women? Of course, men will be attracted to loose women, but for how long? Do men wish to have such women as the mothers of their children?

      I am, perhaps, past my “sell” date on such things.

      • GHG says:

        “I am, perhaps, past my “sell” date on such things.”

        That only matters if you’re for sale, which I’m quite certain you’re not. 🙂

        • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

          My story is that I’m holding out for a higher reward, and I’m sticking to it.

          As to this Timpf creature’s standards, I was thinking back and I cannot recall ever hearing my mother curse. Of course, during that time and place (the South) women didn’t often curse much less brag about it.

          And what probably bothers me more than the question of morals is the vulgarity and bad taste it displays. Of course, we no longer pursue excellence or try to better ourselves very much. And that is why I think Palin was absolutely wrong to do this. Leaders should always try to lift our standards, not concede to mediocrity or vulgarity. That takes self control and a higher code of behavior.

          How far the culture has fallen.

      • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

        I’m still trying to figure out is she’s a libertarian kook or an Establishment Republican Hack. I’m now leaning slightly toward Establishment Republican Hack because to the ERH there is never a reason to take on any issue today that is even vaguely controversial (to the New York Times and the Left, although conservative ideas can be crushed at will). They will forever tell you about the “more important” issues that must be tackled first (and never are unless it’s tackling conservatives).

        The ERH believes that “values voters” need to go the way of the Dodo. They are clearly an embarrassment to the People Whose Own Excrement Doesn’t Stink (another name for the ERH).

        But there’s also a libertarian slant to what she wrote. Libertarians also have an extreme distaste for moral issues. This is why both libertarians and ERH’s are useless in terms of fixing anything. They don’t recognize that the moral rot led to many of the problems we have today. Both types have no soul, no sense of life being more complex than mere dime-store political or material elements. There’s something missing from these types. They have very little wisdom.

        • Timothy Lane says:

          If you want to see libertarian moral rot, you can check out an article on questioning whether Chris Kyle is a hero (but notice the many very negative responses). Given NRO’s proclivities, I suspect she’s the NYC equivalent of a Beltway Bandit.

    • Rosalys says:

      I don’t know if I can give up “crap.” It’s so descriptive and with the state of things being what they are, I don’t know if, “Mercy, teacups!” quite fits the bill.

      • Jerry Richardson says:


        I don’t know if I can give up “crap.” It’s so descriptive and with the state of things being what they are, I don’t know if, “Mercy, teacups!” quite fits the bill.

        Watch your mouth! Heavens, Mercy, teacups!


  5. GHG says:

    Would the author approve of such language by a 10 year old? How about a 7 year old or a 3 year old? Presuming she would think it inappropriate for a child to use such language, at least in the case of the 3 year old, when does it become acceptable? Or maybe more to the point, are there cicumstances that make it inappropriate for foul language to be used regardless of age or gender, or has our society completely abandoned social etiquette? If foul language has become acceptable in public and even professional settings, then Huckabee is behind the times and Ms Timpf is guilty of merely having bad form by publicly laughing at him. But if our society hasn’t fallen so low as to accept foul language in any and all settings, then Ms Timpf is an elitist snob who uses her bully pulpit to denigrate those who don’t agree with her views.

    What a silly article. What a silly woman. Am I allowed to say that?

    • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

      What a silly article. What a silly woman. Am I allowed to say that?

      Yes, and I’m glad you did. You caught the essence of it, Mr. Lesser.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *