|
|
| Palmgate? (559301) | |
 |
|
| Home > OTChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
[1 2] |
||
|
|
Page 1 of 2 |
|
|
| (559301) | |
Palmgate? |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Mon Feb 8 09:18:58 2010 This is the funniest thing I've seen since the Letterman/Leno/Oprah ad.Via WSJ, links there. * February 7, 2010, 12:41 PM ET Did Palin Scribble Notes on Her Palm? Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin offered the keynote address Saturday night at a Nashville, Tenn., Tea Party convention, but the lingering question today is: Did she really have notes written on the palm of her hand? Photographers and television cameras captured shots of scribbled notes on Palin’s hand during her hour-long appearance before 1,100 grassroots activists in which she answered a handful of questions from convention organizer Judson Phillips. An enlarged photograph seen here appears to show the words “energy,” “tax,” and “Lift American spirits” written on Palin’s left hand. TV snapshots also appear to show Palin consulting her palm during the question-and-answer session. The notes are in line with a response to a question about what she believed the top three priorities should be for the party. Her answers were: cutting government spending, jumpstarting energy projects, and “allowing America’s spirit to rise again.” Liberal bloggers, naturally, have seized on Palmgate to criticize the former governor, who in her remarks chided President Barack Obama for using a teleprompter when he gives speeches. “Oh don’t fault her for using good ol fashioned American know-how instead of some new-fangled furrin-made device,” snarked liberal blog FireDogLake. |
|
|
| (559302) | |
Re: Palmgate? |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Mon Feb 8 09:31:03 2010, in response to Palmgate?, posted by trainsarefun on Mon Feb 8 09:18:58 2010. She's a joke now. She knew about this appearance months ago, and did little to prepare for it. The Tea Party is being taken over by the GOP, and that's sad.Palin said nothing new. What a waste of money and time. No doubt, Letterman will read his jokes of the palm of his hand tonight. |
|
|
| (559303) | |
Re: Palmgate? |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Mon Feb 8 09:33:06 2010, in response to Re: Palmgate?, posted by LuchAAA on Mon Feb 8 09:31:03 2010. ............off the palm of his hand tonight. |
|
|
| (559304) | |
Re: Palmgate? |
|
|
Posted by Easy on Mon Feb 8 09:40:47 2010, in response to Palmgate?, posted by trainsarefun on Mon Feb 8 09:18:58 2010. I feel sorry for her. She's in way over her head trying to be the de facto conservative leader. But I don't think that these types of occurrences are a problem for her supporters. It makes her more like them. |
|
|
| (559305) | |
Re: Palmgate? |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Mon Feb 8 09:41:21 2010, in response to Re: Palmgate?, posted by LuchAAA on Mon Feb 8 09:31:03 2010. I certainly hope that she's not the GOP nominee in 2012. She has me longing for Mitt Romney's nomination. That's really saying something, considering what a flop he was after leaving the Massachusetts' Governor's office. |
|
|
| (559307) | |
Re: Palmgate? |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Mon Feb 8 09:45:13 2010, in response to Re: Palmgate?, posted by Easy on Mon Feb 8 09:40:47 2010. I don't feel sorry for her. She's a multi-millionaire and makes big money doing these appearances. She quit her job as Governor and took a book deal, booked herself for appearances making more in one night than most people make in a year, and signed with Fox News.The only time I felt sorry for her was when Letterman attacked her family. That was wrong. |
|
|
| (559308) | |
Re: Palmgate? |
|
|
Posted by Easy on Mon Feb 8 09:47:29 2010, in response to Re: Palmgate?, posted by LuchAAA on Mon Feb 8 09:45:13 2010. I didn't feel sorry for her with Letterman because while he shouldn't have brought her any of her daughters into crass jokes, she came out on top in that exchange. |
|
|
| (559309) | |
Re: Palmgate? |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Mon Feb 8 09:48:19 2010, in response to Re: Palmgate?, posted by LuchAAA on Mon Feb 8 09:45:13 2010. Also, she let a lot of people down. She's a broken record. After the momentum gained in Massachusetts, Obama's terrible SOTU, and the embarrassing "corpseman" comment, Palin really hurt the GOP. |
|
|
| (559313) | |
Re: Palmgate? |
|
|
Posted by Easy on Mon Feb 8 10:47:01 2010, in response to Re: Palmgate?, posted by LuchAAA on Mon Feb 8 09:48:19 2010. lol. You really don't care much for Palin do you? I missed any information about the tea party stuff other than this thread so I don't know what happened other than that she spoke somewhere. I do want to make it to a tea party to check it out. Hopefully they'll have more. |
|
|
| (559314) | |
Re: Palmgate? |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Mon Feb 8 11:08:16 2010, in response to Re: Palmgate?, posted by Easy on Mon Feb 8 10:47:01 2010. They are going to have more. I think there's one in Detroit coming up. Haven't heard of one in your area.And there will be splinter groups, unhappy with the direction the movement is taking. |
|
|
| (559319) | |
Re: Palmgate? |
|
|
Posted by bingbong on Mon Feb 8 11:49:57 2010, in response to Palmgate?, posted by trainsarefun on Mon Feb 8 09:18:58 2010. Yes she did. Those notes didn't even pertain to detail or nuance, those are supposedly the foundation of her supposed policy positions. Talk to the hand: 
|
|
|
| (559325) | |
Re: Palmgate? |
|
|
Posted by ClearAspect on Mon Feb 8 13:41:12 2010, in response to Palmgate?, posted by trainsarefun on Mon Feb 8 09:18:58 2010. I don't see the usual batch of people saying anything... they were all over Obama over the corpseman but nothing about this... |
|
|
| (559326) | |
Re: Palmgate? |
|
|
Posted by bingbong on Mon Feb 8 13:57:27 2010, in response to Re: Palmgate?, posted by ClearAspect on Mon Feb 8 13:41:12 2010. They think the rules only apply to Democrats. |
|
|
| (559327) | |
Re: Palmgate? |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Mon Feb 8 13:58:54 2010, in response to Re: Palmgate?, posted by ClearAspect on Mon Feb 8 13:41:12 2010. What's a "corpseman"? |
|
|
| (559331) | |
Re: Palmgate? |
|
|
Posted by TheCiskoKid on Mon Feb 8 14:23:40 2010, in response to Re: Palmgate?, posted by ClearAspect on Mon Feb 8 13:41:12 2010. I am guessing that this is just some left wing partisan garbage designed to keep the democrat twits happy. |
|
|
| (559353) | |
Re: Palmgate? |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Feb 8 16:27:09 2010, in response to Re: Palmgate?, posted by Easy on Mon Feb 8 09:40:47 2010. Heh. :) |
|
|
| (559354) | |
Re: Palmgate? |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Feb 8 16:28:12 2010, in response to Re: Palmgate?, posted by trainsarefun on Mon Feb 8 09:41:21 2010. He isn't so fondly remembered *in* the Massachussetts Governor's office either. :) |
|
|
| (559355) | |
Re: Palmgate? |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Feb 8 16:30:38 2010, in response to Palmgate?, posted by trainsarefun on Mon Feb 8 09:18:58 2010. 
|
|
|
| (559362) | |
Re: Palmgate? |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Mon Feb 8 17:02:59 2010, in response to Re: Palmgate?, posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Feb 8 16:28:12 2010. He isn't so fondly remembered *in* the Massachussetts Governor's office either. :)I don't know about that. He was a major backer of Scott Brown's candidacy, and was acknowledged as such. In MA, he didn't even pretend to go off the deep end. I realize that he thought that he had to be just to the right of the Taliban to make it through certain GOP primaries, but it's ultimately better to be yourself, to say that you can win, and do things that way. Remember, MA doesn't have a history of right wing Republicans, e.g, Mr. Romney, William Weld, Scott Brown, etc. It'd be nice to have someone who could replicate the last sane quest for the GOP presidential nomination (this one) who might have a chance of actually winning. |
|
|
| (559364) | |
Re: Palmgate? |
|
|
Posted by Orange Blossom Special on Mon Feb 8 17:04:58 2010, in response to Palmgate?, posted by trainsarefun on Mon Feb 8 09:18:58 2010. huh? |
|
|
| (559369) | |
Re: Palmgate? |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Mon Feb 8 17:07:58 2010, in response to Re: Palmgate?, posted by Orange Blossom Special on Mon Feb 8 17:04:58 2010. Problem? |
|
|
| (559381) | |
Re: Palmgate? |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Feb 8 17:20:24 2010, in response to Re: Palmgate?, posted by trainsarefun on Mon Feb 8 17:02:59 2010. The pundits love to wrap themselves around Brown's win being some sort of republican message, but it isn't. Coakley lost because she did a Princess Caroline and it went over as well there as Caroline did in New York. To ascribe some sort of newfound respect for either Romney or the republicans is to totally miss what the voters were saying ... |
|
|
| (559384) | |
Re: Palmgate? |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Feb 8 17:21:51 2010, in response to Re: Palmgate?, posted by Orange Blossom Special on Mon Feb 8 17:04:58 2010. Gotta love it ... kids learn not to put their crib notes on their palm before they hit high school ... that's what long sleeve shirts are for. : ) |
|
|
| (559386) | |
Re: Palmgate? |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Mon Feb 8 17:25:09 2010, in response to Re: Palmgate?, posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Feb 8 17:20:24 2010. To ascribe some sort of newfound respect for either Romney or the republicans is to totally miss what the voters were saying ...Obviously, it wasn't univocal: there wasn't toleration of what Princess Martha was all about. But I think that MA voters did endorse a Republican who wasn't far right, anti-abortion, prudish, totally laissez faire, etc. p.s., I hear that on behalf of Princess Caroline, Mayor Moneybags is really pumping up Harold Ford's candidacy, and Democratic leaders are putting the screws to David Paterson not to seek a full term. |
|
|
| (559388) | |
Re: Palmgate? |
|
|
Posted by Orange Blossom Special on Mon Feb 8 17:42:57 2010, in response to Re: Palmgate?, posted by trainsarefun on Mon Feb 8 17:07:58 2010. Yea, I'm looking for the point.I don't go on emotional assumptions. |
|
|
| (559394) | |
Re: Palmgate? |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Feb 8 17:47:41 2010, in response to Re: Palmgate?, posted by trainsarefun on Mon Feb 8 17:25:09 2010. Mass voters tend to be overwhelmingly independent. They learned (like we did up here) long ago that there really isn't much difference in the end result between the two parties. While they may *lean* democrat there, they sure can spot an asshole when they see one. :) |
|
|
| (559410) | |
Re: Palmgate? |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Feb 8 18:31:46 2010, in response to Palmgate?, posted by trainsarefun on Mon Feb 8 09:18:58 2010. What do you find funny, Palin's palm writing, or the ridiculous, predictable response by the left?Palin did this deliberately. She set the trap and they walked right into it: 
|
|
|
| (559417) | |
Re: Palmgate? |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Mon Feb 8 19:09:25 2010, in response to Re: Palmgate?, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Feb 8 18:31:46 2010. What do you find funny, Palin's palm writing, or the ridiculous, predictable response by the left?Palin did this deliberately. Then she's even more stupid than even leftist bloggers think. |
|
|
| (559419) | |
Re: Palmgate? |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Feb 8 19:15:14 2010, in response to Re: Palmgate?, posted by trainsarefun on Mon Feb 8 19:09:25 2010. How so? She's managed to make all her detractors look like petty assholes! |
|
|
| (559427) | |
Re: Palmgate? |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Mon Feb 8 19:40:06 2010, in response to Re: Palmgate?, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Feb 8 19:15:14 2010. How so? She's managed to make all her detractors look like petty assholes!After criticizing President Obama for being a genius as long as he's in front of a teleprompter, she puts “energy,” “tax,” and “Lift American spirits” on her palm, and consults it during a Q & A session, giving that as a response almost verbatim. It merely tends to confirm conventional wisdom regarding Ms. Palin being a ditz. It's a bit telling that President Obama is a fool for telling us about "corpsemen", but Ms. Palin in the version of the gospel that you're selling for either what is great on account of either the most counterproductive stunt in national politics in some time or for being too stupid to commit to memory what she thinks our nation's priorities are. As someone who was unwise enough to offer a partial defense of Ms. Palin after her campaign with Senator McCain, I have been sickened by her exiting her job to become a relentless self-promoter who is short on substance and nothing but glitz. If the GOP doesn't want to publicly slit their wrists and ensure Barack Obama a second term, they will nominate someone competent. A necessary condition for competence is not being Sarah Palin. |
|
|
| (559428) | |
Re: Palmgate? |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Feb 8 19:57:38 2010, in response to Re: Palmgate?, posted by trainsarefun on Mon Feb 8 19:40:06 2010. After criticizing President Obama for being a genius as long as he's in front of a teleprompter, she puts “energy,” “tax,” and “Lift American spirits” on her palm, and consults it during a Q & A session, giving that as a response almost verbatim. It merely tends to confirm conventional wisdom regarding Ms. Palin being a ditz.On what planet? She's no ditz to begin with and what she did does not compare to the teleprompter-in-chief. It's a bit telling that President Obama is a fool for telling us about "corpsemen", but Ms. Palin in the version of the gospel that you're selling for either what is great on account of either the most counterproductive stunt in national politics in some time or for being too stupid to commit to memory what she thinks our nation's priorities are. Oh, brother. You're one of them now, aren't you? As someone who was unwise enough to offer a partial defense of Ms. Palin after her campaign with Senator McCain, I have been sickened by her exiting her job to become a relentless self-promoter who is short on substance and nothing but glitz. If the GOP doesn't want to publicly slit their wrists and ensure Barack Obama a second term, they will nominate someone competent. A necessary condition for competence is not being Sarah Palin. I'm not furthering the cause of Palin '12. If she runs and loses (which, given the current political climate is less likely than ever) it won't be because people think she's an idiot. If people thought she was an idiot, she'd be a housewife in Wasilla, AK and a footnote in history. |
|
|
| (559444) | |
Re: Palmgate? |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Mon Feb 8 21:05:29 2010, in response to Re: Palmgate?, posted by trainsarefun on Mon Feb 8 19:40:06 2010. It merely tends to confirm conventional wisdom regarding Ms. Palin being a ditzDrifting further left? That's name-calling. |
|
|
| (559445) | |
Re: Palmgate? |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Mon Feb 8 21:05:55 2010, in response to Re: Palmgate?, posted by trainsarefun on Mon Feb 8 19:40:06 2010. It merely tends to confirm conventional wisdom regarding Ms. Palin being a ditzDrifting further left? That's name-calling. (And UIM, it's Mrs. Palin.) |
|
|
| (559447) | |
Re: Palmgate? |
|
|
Posted by Easy on Mon Feb 8 21:07:58 2010, in response to Re: Palmgate?, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Feb 8 18:31:46 2010. ROTFLMAO!!So Palin's strategy was to first make herself look like an idiot in order to generate ridicule from the left, and then gain sympathy support over the criticism? Brilliant!! |
|
|
| (559449) | |
Re: Palmgate? |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Feb 8 21:10:32 2010, in response to Re: Palmgate?, posted by Easy on Mon Feb 8 21:07:58 2010. Olog is probably doing a Montgomery Burns over the implications of this against Europe. :) |
|
|
| (559450) | |
Re: Palmgate? |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Feb 8 21:11:12 2010, in response to Re: Palmgate?, posted by Olog-hai on Mon Feb 8 21:05:29 2010. No, that's a fact ... |
|
|
| (559452) | |
Re: Palmgate? |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Mon Feb 8 21:17:45 2010, in response to Re: Palmgate?, posted by Olog-hai on Mon Feb 8 21:05:29 2010. That's name-calling.I did not assert that Sarah Palin is a ditz. I said: It merely tends to confirm conventional wisdom regarding Ms. Palin being a ditz Regarding the conventional wisdom, no doubt you've seen enough illustrations of it in popular press and daily encounters to agree or disagree. I leave that to the reader. |
|
|
| (559460) | |
Re: Palmgate? |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Mon Feb 8 21:34:10 2010, in response to Re: Palmgate?, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Feb 8 19:57:38 2010. She's no ditz to begin withI used to think not, but I am reconsidering. But let's pause to consider your version of this. Sarah Palin, who is thought by many not to be the sharpest tack in the box, doodles on her hand things that she shouldn't have to doodle, she consults said doodling several times during a Q&A, and uses said doodling almost verbatim. You allege that by acting like a ditz, she knew that she would be criticized for being a ditz, and she hopes to turn the tables by somehow convincing those who thought that she was/is a ditz that she wasn't/isn't a ditz. Seriously, isn't the better way to convince the world that you're not a ditz not to act like a ditz? I assume that this won't register since you've apparently been drinking the kool aid, but if it was a stunt, it reflected quite badly on Ms. Palin, and if it wasn't a stunt....it reflected quite badly on Ms. Palin. If people thought she was an idiot, she'd be a housewife in Wasilla, AK and a footnote in history. We are blessed in American politics to have no shortage of idiots. It's left as an exercise for the reader whether Sarah Palin is a member of that population. |
|
|
| (559472) | |
Re: Palmgate? |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Mon Feb 8 22:01:39 2010, in response to Re: Palmgate?, posted by trainsarefun on Mon Feb 8 19:09:25 2010. I think not! Even if she needed the "crib notes" she can still speak extemporaneously - something obabba seems unable to do. |
|
|
| (559542) | |
Re: Palmgate? |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Tue Feb 9 08:25:25 2010, in response to Re: Palmgate?, posted by Train Dude on Mon Feb 8 22:01:39 2010. I think that Barack Obama is quite overrated as an orator. His strength lies in motivating his base, in motivational speaking. That said, I think that he can deliver, suitably cued, a good performance, e.g., his state of the union address. Personally, while I think that he's more sure footed speaking than either President Bush, Presidents Clinton and Reagan were better at delivering speeches.As for the one who spoke best extemporaneously, I think that's President Kennedy after his speech to the Southern Baptist Convention that didn't want a Catholic heading up the Democratic Party ticket in 1960. True grace under pressure actually engaging his adversaries in their home court fielding really pointed questions from the audience. |
|
|
| (559548) | |
Re: Palmgate? |
|
|
Posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Tue Feb 9 09:52:14 2010, in response to Re: Palmgate?, posted by trainsarefun on Mon Feb 8 21:34:10 2010. But let's pause to consider your version of this. Sarah Palin, who is thought by many not to be the sharpest tack in the box, doodles on her hand things that she shouldn't have to doodle, she consults said doodling several times during a Q&A, and uses said doodling almost verbatim. You allege that by acting like a ditz, she knew that she would be criticized for being a ditz, and she hopes to turn the tables by somehow convincing those who thought that she was/is a ditz that she wasn't/isn't a ditz.Given that her speech included a teleprompter joke, it's possible that the palm-reading was a poor attempt at satirizing the President, especially since it was so deliberate. |
|
|
| (559550) | |
Re: Palmgate? |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Tue Feb 9 09:54:33 2010, in response to Re: Palmgate?, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Tue Feb 9 09:52:14 2010. it's possible that the palm-reading was a poor attempt at satirizing the President, especially since it was so deliberate.As I said, that's one alternative. Obviously, the joke, if any, didn't go over too well. |
|
|
| (559553) | |
Re: Palmgate? |
|
|
Posted by bingbong on Tue Feb 9 10:34:12 2010, in response to Re: Palmgate?, posted by trainsarefun on Mon Feb 8 17:02:59 2010. Being and/or running as a centrist is very different than going to Washington and being expected and/or demanded to vote in a lockstep bloc that's just to the right of the Taliban. Scott Brown has no power. He cannot do much more than talk his mind to the camera, but must vote according to the will of his caucus' keepers. Those guys are NOT moderates. |
|
|
| (559621) | |
Re: Palmgate? |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Tue Feb 9 14:01:48 2010, in response to Re: Palmgate?, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Tue Feb 9 09:52:14 2010. I think that certainly worthy of consideration although the ironic humor may really be too subtle these days. She certainly seemed to go out of her way to show it to the camera and the "cross-out" seemed a little hokey. Shows she's not just another cute face. |
|
|
| (559745) | |
Re: Palmgate? |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Tue Feb 9 22:16:29 2010, in response to Re: Palmgate?, posted by bingbong on Tue Feb 9 10:34:12 2010. Those guys are NOT moderates.I'll wait to see how Senator Scott Brown votes. For the record, the Democrats have been anything but moderate in power. |
|
|
| (560770) | |
Re: Palmgate? |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sat Feb 13 12:19:26 2010, in response to Re: Palmgate?, posted by trainsarefun on Tue Feb 9 08:25:25 2010. The SOTU address was god-awful! |
|
|
| (560772) | |
Re: Palmgate? |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Sat Feb 13 12:21:25 2010, in response to Re: Palmgate?, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sat Feb 13 12:19:26 2010. The SOTU address was god-awful!Substantively, yes. But it was fair to good performance. |
|
|
| (560773) | |
Re: Palmgate? |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sat Feb 13 12:23:14 2010, in response to Re: Palmgate?, posted by trainsarefun on Tue Feb 9 09:54:33 2010. Yeah, it did. The MSM walked right into it. Andrea Mitchell and Robert Gibbs humiliated themselves in response. And Dianne Feinstein? |
|
|
| (560780) | |
Re: Palmgate? |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Sat Feb 13 12:32:56 2010, in response to Re: Palmgate?, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sat Feb 13 12:23:14 2010. Yeah, it did.If it did, then it wouldn't have been news the way that it was. |
|
|
| (560781) | |
Re: Palmgate? |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sat Feb 13 12:34:01 2010, in response to Re: Palmgate?, posted by trainsarefun on Sat Feb 13 12:21:25 2010. No, it wasn't. Most polls showed no substantive pro-Obama movement in response, and the only poll that did (Rasmussen) is supposedly not a legit pollster. The Rasmussen bump has since disappeared and it's registering record low approvals. |
|
|
[1 2] |
||
|
|
Page 1 of 2 |
|