Could someone please explain the Sarah Palin phenomena.

1. 60

   logic,commonsenseposted 14 years ago

   Not sure if this is still about Palin, but here is my take.
   She is hot and she has the guts to say what is on her mind!  What else could you want in a woman?

   replyreport
   1. 68

      kartika damonposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      How about brains and integrity?

      replyreport
      1. 79

         jiberishposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         I think you said it in your hub is Palin 'retarded'. Even though i disagree, I have read your Hubs, and I had some respect for you until you used those words knowing she has a disabled child.

         replyreport
         1. 60

            tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            You make a valid point.

            replyreport
      2. 62

         Mishaposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         Really, bashing people behind their back requires a lot of brain and integrity.

         replyreport
         1. 62

            nicompposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            That makes Jon Stewart a genius.

            replyreport
            1. 61

               Sara Tonynposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               Who has he bashed behind his/her back?
               
               Anything said on his award-winning coast-to-coast cable show is hardly behind-the-back bashing.

               replyreport
         2. 87

            livelongerposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            I wasn't aware that Kartika had the opportunity to express her feelings about Sarah Palin to her face-to-face.

            replyreport
            1. 0

               Leta Sposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               I believe Misha has decided to defend Sarah Palin on the basis that she's 'cute.'  That takes a lot of both those qualities mentioned, of course.

               replyreport
               1. 60

                  tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  He can probably speak for himself, huh?

                  replyreport
            2. 62

               Mishaposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               I agree, probably she didn't. Don't see how this relates to my post though?

               replyreport
               1. 87

                  livelongerposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  Criticizing a politician is not "bashing them behind their back," unless you have an opportunity to express your discontent with them, right?

                  replyreport
                  1. 62

                     Mishaposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                     Since when implying that somebody doesn't have brains is fair criticizing?

                     replyreport
      3. 0

         A Texanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         Yeah, how about that?

         replyreport
      4. 61

         Sara Tonynposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         Ding, ding, ding! We have a winner!

         replyreport
2. 68

   BJCposted 14 years ago

   Check out the following.  One was even on MSNBC
   
   This is a quote from the article following written by Michelle Malkin
   
   
   "The same ACORN tied to massive voter fraud in Missouri. And Ohio. And 12 other states. Here’s the Washington state scoop via Seattle’s KOMO TV: “King County prosecutors filed felony charges Thursday against seven people in what a top official described as the worst case of voter-registration fraud in state history, while the organization they worked for agreed to keep a better eye on its employees and pay $25,000 to defray costs of the investigation. The seven submitted about 1,800 registration cards last fall on behalf of the liberal Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, or ACORN, which had hired them at $8 an hour to sign people up to vote, according to charging documents filed in Superior Court.”
   
   
   
   
   
   http://michellemalkin.com/2007/07/26/ac … e-history/
   
   
   http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30567548/
   
   
   
   http://www.rottenacorn.com/activityMap.html
   
   They have admitted falsely registering people!
   
   If you truly believe that they just made up names without the intention utilzing them, then I'll sell you swamp land in South Florida.

   replyreport
   1. 61

      Sara Tonynposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Or simply to make more money as I already mentioned.
      
      Either way, there's still no evidence a phony vote was cast and counted, regardless of intent.
      
      Should I drag up all the Republican tinkering and interference in the past 4 or 5 elections? Can I assume they intended to tamper with the votes? Can I assume they actually succeeded even if I don't have proof?

      replyreport
      1. 79

         jiberishposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         I assume you will have a harder time finding interference from past elections than with this one.  But go at it, unless you want to bring up the Clintons, then I can help with that.

         replyreport
         1. 61

            Sara Tonynposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            Did you not understand my point?

            replyreport
3. 80

   Tom Cornettposted 14 years ago

   Anyone got any stats on how many dead people voted in Ohio?

   replyreport
   1. 62

      nicompposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Not dead people as much as people who were shuttled from precinct to precinct by Acorn operatives. Acorn submitted so many registrations that one election board threw up its' collective hands and gave up. They couldn't possibly validate all of them before the election.

      replyreport
      1. 61

         Sara Tonynposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         So if those ACORN registrations were never validated (due to lack of time), they were never cast and never counted. Therefore, no phony votes made it into the election.
         
         Thanks.

         replyreport
         1. 62

            nicompposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            oops. wrong. They were accepted, just not vetted properly. You don't really think the Boards of Elections would refuse to let people vote after the way Ken Blackwell was assaulted, do you?

            replyreport
            1. 61

               Sara Tonynposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               If the registrations were accepted anyway, it still doesn't prove any bogus votes were actually cast or counted.

               replyreport
         2. 0

            girly_girl09posted 14 years agoin reply to this

            Sorry - had to jump in. ACORN boils my blood.
            
            Here goes:
            
            Fraudulent votes make it into every single election. Voter fraud is rampant. Our system is flawed. Greatly. Voter fraud is rarely prosecuted, however it is starting to become more common. We need to make examples of the criminals who break the law just "because they can". Vote fraud (illegally casting a ballot) and fraudulent voter registrations are both VERY serious crimes.
            
            That being said, Obama did win the election fair and square, I'm not sure if anyone is implying otherwise (I hope not). Campaigns spend lots of money and manpower observing the election process. While there were many disconcerting events in the last election (namely fraudulent ACORN registrations), that was the only *widespread* fraud witnessed. Of course there were many little incidents all over the country, but nothing unusual or nefarious - other than ACORN's fraudulent activity.
            
            While collecting false voter registrations is a crime (which some ACORN employees did), a fraudulent voter registration does not necessarily mean that an illegal vote will be cast on Election Day or prior to ED via an early vote or absentee ballot.

            replyreport
            1. 71

               rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               Corrupting the vote is the last bastion of defense we have to foil the lobbyist held congress.  With recent election scullduggery from 2000 and further on back and to date there is lots of manipulation of the vote being attempted.  What is funny is that while there is much evidence and witnessing of this going on you hardly see any convictions.  Why is that?

               replyreport
               1. 0

                  Madame Xposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  Are you making a joke?

                  replyreport
                  1. 71

                     rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                     Maybe? Is it on you?

                     replyreport
                     1. 0

                        Madame Xposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                        ???

                        replyreport
                        1. 71

                           rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                           ??????

                           replyreport
               2. 0

                  girly_girl09posted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  The answer to your question is the same for any other crime...it is up to each individual state and their AG's office whether or not someone will be prosecuted. These investigations take time and money and unfortunately, some officials simply turn their heads.

                  replyreport
               3. 0

                  A Texanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  Lets go further back, say 1960, Kennedy carried Texas an interesting development considering the hatred rampant for him here. In Fannin and Angelina County it was discovered that more votes were cast than they had registered voters, 2/3 going to Kennedy. There was rampant fraud in Illinois also, 56 people from one house voted for Kennedy, must of been a big house.
                  
                  Its not debatable that the 1960 election was stolen from Nixon and it was done by Democrats, probably time to get over the 2000 election since the Democrat attempt at changing the will of Florida voters was unsuccessful!

                  replyreport
                  1. 71

                     rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                     But Texan you don't vote.

                     replyreport
                     1. 0

                        A Texanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                        Sure I do, just because I didn't vote in the last presidential election does not mean I don't vote.

                        replyreport
                        1. 61

                           Sara Tonynposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                           It's not debatable? LOL
                           
                           Don't your legs hurt from making those quantum leaps?

                           replyreport
               4. 65

                  Ralph Deedsposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  While you are criticizing ACORN, you should also recognize widespread GOP efforts to suppress the minority vote, as in Florida where the election was stolen from Al Gore in 2000.

                  replyreport
4. 0

   Madame Xposted 14 years ago

   Why did you ask if it was on me? Obviously the guy who gets in as a result of voter fraud isn't going to prosecute those who committed the fraud to get him in.

   replyreport
   1. 71

      rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      I did not get your sarcasm and therefore did not know how to relate your comment.
      
      The fact of the matter is that if indeed there is voter fraud going on and we don't prosecute it we are doomed.
      
      The Nazis took the peoples weapons and their tongues and ultimately the vote.  Are we headed the same way?

      replyreport
      1. 0

         girly_girl09posted 14 years agoin reply to this

         I agree 110%.

         replyreport
      2. 0

         Madame Xposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         Your original question was "What is funny is that while there is much evidence and witnessing of this going on you hardly see any convictions.  Why is that?"
         
         So why would the person with the power to prosecute, prosecute? I don't know how to reverse the trend except by protest - kind of like those "angry mobs" in DC.
         
         Yeah it stinks - but there it is.

         replyreport
         1. 71

            rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            Maybe this topic is better expressed in the forum I started about the two party system is killing democracy.

            replyreport
            1. 60

               tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               LOL Well, it's sure taking its time about it!

               replyreport
5. 68

   BJCposted 14 years ago

   www.GOOOH.com is the route.  Evict the house of representatives and have your local representative in office.  Non-partisan and all are welcome.

   replyreport
6. 52

   xenophon 909posted 14 years ago

   Shouldn't be all that difficult to figure out- I realize it has been a long,long time since we have had a political figure who speaks with a straight tongue- Sarah has convictions, integrity and she is one of us-she LOVES her country and she wants to preserve it for her children as well as ours- her record as the Governor of Alaska speaks volumes-she gave me hope- I believe that she knows what our country needs and I believe she know how to make it happen-- ~~SARAH PALIN 2012

   replyreport
   1. 61

      Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      I didn't realize she'd been convicted.

      replyreport
      1. 0

         A Texanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         Ron, you couldn;t come up with anything lamer?

         replyreport
         1. 61

            Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            Sorry to dissapoint.

            replyreport
            1. 0

               A Texanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               A picture? Breast comment? Nothing?

               replyreport
               1. 61

                  Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  Her very existence is such a joke it seems my efforts are superfluous.

                  replyreport
7. 77

   Mighty Momposted 14 years ago

   Dear Mrs. Palin,
   Everything you say is true. You are beautiful and talented and down to earth. But speaking for myself alone, the real attraction to you is your -- oops, I'm feeling a moment of social awkwardness here, as I don't know the proper term -- would-be son-in-law? Daughter's boyfriend? Father of your grandchild?
   Well, you know who I mean. That hunky hunk Levi Johnston! Yeah, baby!
   
   

   replyreport
   1. 0

      Star Witnessposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Eh, OK...  I prefer objects of attraction a little more, um, closer to heaven in aspects of mind than that of earth, so to speak.

      replyreport
   2. 0

      SarahPalinposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      NO!!!. They love me because I am me DONTCHA KNOW!!!!

      replyreport
8. 66

   Kimberluposted 14 years ago

   I am still trying to figure it out when someone figures out why Sarah is so news wothy please tell me.
   In my opion the woman reminds me of a ditzy blonde, I can not find one thing I like about her not to mention she is very annoying.
   Sorry had to get that off my chest.
   
   So if you find the answer pleaase let me know.
   
   
   Have a Great Weekend Hubbers !!!!

   replyreport
9. 85

   rebekahELLEposted 14 years ago

   I'm sorry, I don't see how any thinking person could explain her.

   replyreport
   1. 62

      Mishaposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      You can't explain love at a first sight, can you?

      replyreport
10. 68

    drej2522posted 14 years ago

    haha, Misha

    replyreport
11. 77

    Mighty Momposted 14 years ago

    She's definitely charismatic, I'll give her that.
    But so was Marilyn Monroe and I don't think anyone would have considered her for POTUS, even though she did sing a lovely rendition of "Happy Birthday, Mr. President..."

    replyreport
12. 62

    Mishaposted 14 years ago

    LOL MM, I would say Mr O does not have more qualifications than her, yet he got elected

    replyreport
13. 68

    drej2522posted 14 years ago

    a bit below the belt...though true nonetheless

    replyreport
14. 68

    drej2522posted 14 years ago

    and stand by my original answer here...she's hot...that's it!

    replyreport
15. 81

    earnestshubposted 14 years ago

    The thing that could have been amazing would be America trying to explain to the sane world why the Vice President speaks in tongues!

    replyreport
    1. 60

       tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       What part is the "sane world"?
       
       
       

       replyreport
16. 60

    garynewposted 14 years ago

    SOME people find her "MILF"-y.  Please don't ask me what that acronym means, as I certainly wouldn't know.

    replyreport
17. 65

    Ralph Deedsposted 14 years ago

    Here's one of the best explanations of the Palin phenomenon that I've seen. It's by one of the NYTimes two GOP op-ed writers, Ross Douthat--He says the GOP needs a leader with an "intellectually vigorous conservatism." Palin is certainly vigorous enough but I haven't heard anyone accuse her of being intellectually vigorous!!
    
    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/23/opini … ef=opinion
    Op-Ed Columnist
    They Chose Celebrity
    
       
    By ROSS DOUTHAT
    Published: November 22, 2009
    
    Before the 2008 election, almost nobody outside Alaska and Arkansas had heard of Sarah Palin or Mike Huckabee. But in a long and crowded campaign season, they were the only Republican politicians who inspired any genuine enthusiasm.
    Skip to next paragraph
    Susan Etheridge for The New York Times
    
    Go to Columnist Page »
    Ross Douthat's Evaluations
    
    Ross Douthat welcomes readers to his new blog.
    More From Evaluations »
    Related
    Times Topics: Sarah Palin | Mike Huckabee
    Readers' Comments
    
        Readers shared their thoughts on this article.
    
        * Read All Comments (134) »
    
    They had other things in common as well. Both came from lower-middle-class backgrounds, and joined a soft-edged social conservatism to a strong populist streak. Both had been considered pragmatists, rather than ideologues, as governors of their home states. Both were untainted by the failures of the Bush-era Republican Party.
    
    And both had the same Achilles’ heel: They seemed unready for high office, and owed their appeal more to personality than to substance.
    
    This meant that both faced the same post-election choice. Did they want to take their newfound eminence seriously? Or did they want to cash in on their celebrity?
    
    For Palin, the serious path required at least serving out her term as governor before returning to the national stage. For Huckabee, it could have involved anything from starting a think tank to running for the Senate in 2010. For both, it would have meant wedding their political identity to ideas as well as attitudes.
    
    So far, they’ve chosen celebrity instead. Huckabee spent the last year hamming it up on a weekly talk show, and the last month hawking a book of inspirational Christmas stories. As for Palin — well, you probably know what she’s been up to lately.
    
    Nobody should begrudge them their choices. Think tanks are a snooze; Senate races are a grind. Signing autographs for your adoring fans is more fun than rounding up budget votes in Juneau.
    
    But they were the wrong moves if either wanted to become president someday. Huckabee’s gabfest is a weekly reaffirmation of the rap that he’s too lightweight for the Oval Office. Palin has sealed her identity as a culture-war lightning rod: she can inspire hysteria from liberals (ably catalogued in Matthew Continetti’s “Persecution of Sarah Palin”) and adulation from conservatives (visible at every stop along her book tour), but she’s unlikely to persuade anyone in the middle to trust her with the reins of government.
    
    It’s possible to be a celebrity and a serious politician at the same time: Barack Obama’s career proves as much. But Obama’s celebrity status is frequently a political liability, and he’s (usually) wise enough to know it. That’s why he plays the wonk as often as he plays the global icon.
    
    For now, no Republican leader projects a similar level of seriousness. Late in the Bush years, it was easy to dismiss conservatism as brain-dead. Among policy thinkers, that isn’t true anymore: the advent of Obama seems to have provided just the jolt that right-of-center wonks needed. But innovative proposals are useless without politicians willing to champion them.
    
    When the Republican minority needed an alternative to the Obama administration’s sweeping stimulus proposal, for instance, a number of free-market economists were ready with an answer: a payroll tax cut. It was plausible, elegant and easy to explain — but there was no Republican leader with the wit to seize on it and sell it.
    
    You could tell the same story about regulatory reform. A slew of conservative economists and think tankers, led by the University of Chicago’s Luigi Zingales and the Manhattan Institute’s Nicole Gelinas, have been working on ways to protect free markets from a re-run of last fall’s “too big to fail” fiasco. But most Republican politicians would rather rail against bailouts that have already happened than talk about how to prevent them from happening again.
    
    In the health care debate, too, conservative and libertarian policy thinkers have floated a number of plans to expand insurance coverage. Some are incremental and some are sweeping; some build on the existing system and some would essentially replace it. But any of them would be better than that threadbare plan House Republicans actually put forward, which would hardly expand coverage at all.
    
    True, these ideas won’t sell millions of books, or excite the crowd on Huckabee’s talk show. But they’re what the Republican Party needs if it’s going to be more than just a brake on liberalism’s ambitions. And they’re what voters are going to be looking for, in 2012 and beyond, as proof that conservatives can be trusted once again.
    
    This means that there are substantial political rewards awaiting the politician who becomes the voice of an intellectually vigorous conservatism. It probably won’t be Mike Huckabee or Sarah Palin. If Republicans are lucky, though, it will be somebody who shares their charisma — but who prefers the responsibilities of leadership to the pleasures of celebrity.

    replyreport
18. 87

    livelongerposted 14 years ago

    There is that incredible irony that in her GOP convention speech, Palin said that she actually had an executive job and Obama was just a community organizer...

    replyreport