BY KAREN WEBB
I have not watched or read Sarah Palin’s entire speech at the Tea Bag convention, nor have I watched all of the entire interviews, but from what I have seen, Tina Fey already has all she needs and more for the next three years. All of this after just one year with President Obama in office. Thank you, Sarah, and keep it going, please, please, please.
She said that Obama is still trying to make this all about George W. Bush. Maybe she has forgotten that Bush and the Republicans to this day are still blaming Bill Clinton and it has been nine years now.
“This was all part of that hope and change and transparency. Now a year later, I gotta ask the supporters of all that, ‘how’s that hopey, changey stuff working out for you.’”
Not as well as I had hoped, but I don’t know Sarah, “how is that quitty, tax evading, losey stuff working out for you?”
Obama only has to stick it out another year and he will have lasted longer than you did in office. How is it that inciting gun owners to wear guns to Presidential speeches was OK, but wearing a W with a slash through it or having it on your car bumper could get you arrested or kicked out of a Bush speech?
“Treating this like a mere law enforcement matter places our country at grave risk. Because that is not how radical Islamic extremists are looking at this. They know we are at war and to win that war we need a commander and chief, and not a professor at law standing at the lectern.”
Maybe we could use another C student, draft-evading, egotistic, dry-drunk, rich, frat boy, egging on suicide bombers by daring them to “bring it on” and then declaring victory nine years, and still counting, too soon.
Maybe we need a guy with his fifth draft deferment still spouting off on TV.
Maybe we need a small town mayor, who had to go to several schools in order to find one willing to give her a degree, who couldn’t stomach a full term as governor, who thinks war is some sort of political, darers-go-first party game standing at the lectern reading her own palm in front of all those bagged tea leaves out there.
“I caution against allowing this movement to be defined by any one leader. This is about the people and it is bigger than any king or queen of a tea party and is a lot bigger than any charismatic guy with a teleprompter.”
Who needs a leader when anarchy is such fun? Yelling over anyone who disagrees with you and calling it “your constitutional right to free speech.” How can a woman who had to write her three primary talking points on her hand for an interview make fun of a guy who just sat down with over 100 people, who are against everything he stands for, with NO teleprompter and NO pre-approved questions?
She had “energy, budget crossed out with cuts next to it, tax beneath that and, Lift American spirits” written on her hand. A cheat sheet with corrections! What’s up with that?
She had to remind herself to lift our spirits? Well she couldn’t lift mine with a crane, but those tea bags that have to be in hot water to release anything need a lot of lifting and dunking.
Then with Fox News’ Chris Wallace instructing her in a way similar to a teacher speaking to an unruly student on how to take off her political hat and put on her analyst hat to analyze Obama’s chances in 2012 she really cranked up. After being influenced by one of Pat Buchanan’s columns she said, “SAY, he played the war card. SAY, he decided to declare war on Iran or really came out and SAY do whatever he could to support Israel, which I would like him to do. That changes the dynamics. What we can assume is going to happen between now and three years. Because if the election were today I do not think Obama would be re-elected. But three years from now things could change on the national security issue.”
SAY, Sarah thinks the more dead Americans we have in the next three years the better, if Obama wants to win in 2012. SAY, declare war on Iran, that would do it, and SAY, make sure to support Israel. SAY, those panty-waists who allow gays in combat need all the support they can get. SAY, that would change the dynamics. Please, Obama, Sarah wants you to play that death and destruction for votes card, but it didn’t work for Sarah in 2008 so be careful. Did she really mean it when she said, “Say, if he really came out” and then suggested he support Israel? Came out?
Chris asked, “You are not suggesting that he would cynically play the war card.”
“I am not suggesting that,” she said, “but if he did, things would dramatically change if he decided to toughen up and do all that he can to secure our nation and our allies.”
Our allies? SAY, does she mean those 25 who allow gays in combat? Obama, we need dramatic effects and from the speaker just before Sarah, Jim Crow Tancredo, we need a whole lot more “Birth of a Nation” kind of stuff. He wants a civics test to vote and is suggesting a lot of Obama supporters are still illiterate.
From all I have heard or seen from Tea Bag Queen Sarah, and all her drones, they couldn’t pass a civics test if they had the Constitution, Bill of Rights and the Ten Commandments written on their hands and were allowed to use a civics book.
And then, Sarah said that when Rush Limbaugh used the term “retarded” he was using it correctly, as satire. She is against name calling, except in the satirical sense. Does she think all of that crap coming out of her mouth during the election was satire? She thinks we need to stick to the issues, or at least what she can write on her palm. Name calling is unnecessary and wastes time, she says. She can say “law professor” or “community organizer” and it make it sound like she is saying something dirty and degrading.
Then Chris almost sounded like a real journalist when he said, “You know what some people are going to say and have said. They say, look, when it is her political adversary, Rahm Emanuel, she is gonna call him out, he is indecent and demand he apologize, but when it is a political ally friend, like Rush Limbaugh, oh, it is just satire.”
“I didn’t hear Rush Limbaugh calling a group of people whom he did not agree with “f—ing retards” and we did know that Rahm Emanuel did as has been reported say that. There is a big difference there,” she said.
I’m sorry, and the difference is? Is she saying Rush didn’t call people he disagrees with “f—ing retards” when he said it is OK to call people “retards” if they actually are “retards.” Is she insinuating that Rush agrees with the Senate Democrats or that they actually are “retarded?” I think she and Rush are saying exactly the same thing, which by her definition depends and hangs solely on whether or not Rahm Emanuel really believes the Senate Democrats are “f—ing retards” or was just being sarcastic.
I have to agree that it is insulting to compare the mentally challenged to some of the Senate Democrats, who are politically challenged and closer to criminal selfishness, from what I have seen and heard.
– Karen Webb lives in Moore, OK and is a regular contributor to The Oklahoma Observer