PlacitasRoy

Gee thanks for pointing out those typos. I'll get them cleaned up right NOW! I know how your little brain gets so confused and uncomfortable making those unconscious adjustments to them. Gee thanks for pointing out those typos. I'll get them cleaned up right NOW! I know who your little brain gets so confused and uncomfortable making those unconscious adjustments to them. You made several illogical assumptions. "A helluva lot more than your buddies Obama or Hillary!" Nothing salacious about them and the corporate hype was no where as intense. Additionally people were expecting serious work not ghostwritten gossip. Regardless escapism usually sells better than policy. At no time and no where did I say the only people who where buying her book were just hillbillies.....bu t a bunch of them are. The comment was about the TOPIC: The magazine cover. Only a dittohead, foxhole, or teabagger would think the person on the cover picks the cover. The publishers pick the photo for one reason and one reason on,y: To sell magazines. Newsweek selected that photo to sell magazines to the horny redneck hillbillies who are her base. And they probably got a boost in sales. Regular readers and subscribers wouldn't care. (Wednesday | post #55)

Gee thanks for pointing out those typos. I'll get them cleaned up right NOW! I know who your little brain gets so confused and uncomfortable making those unconscious adjustments to them. You made several illogical assumptions. "A helluva lot more than your buddies Obama or Hillary!" Nothing salacious about them and the corporate hype was no where as intense. Additionally people were expecting serious work not ghostwritten gossip. Regardless escapism usually sells better than policy. At no time and no where did I say the only people who where buying her book were just hillbillies.....bu t a bunch of them are. The comment was about the TOPIC: The magazine cover. Only a dittohead, foxhole, or teabagger would think the person on the cover picks the cover. The publishers pick the photo for one reason and one reason on,y: To sell magazines. Newsweek selected that photo to sell magazines to the horny redneck hillbillies who are her base. And they probably got a boost in sales. Regular readers and subscribers wouldn't care. (Wednesday | post #48)

You made several illogical assumptions. "A helluva lot more than your buddies Obama or Hillary!" Nothing salacious about them and the corporate hype was no where as intense. Additionally people were expecting serious wok not ghostwritten gossip. Regardless escapism usually sells better than policy. At no time and no where did I say the only people who where buying here book were just hillbillies.....bu t a bunch of them are. The comment was about the TOPIC: The magazine cover. Only a dittohead, foxhole, or teabagger would think the person on the cover picks the cover. The publishers pick the photo for one reason and one reason on,y: To sell magazines. Newsweek selected that photo to sell magazines to the horny redneck hillbillies who are her base. And they probably got a boost in sales. Regular readers and subscribers wouldn't care. (Wednesday | post #43)

Except for lies, distortions, and misrepresentations, what the hell does a bunch of unidentified dissidents and fired members of ACORN soliciting money, a Reich-wing propaganda site, and a couple of film makers who are being sued by ACORN, have to do with Palin's ghostwritten book? (Tuesday | post #1346)

Let's see Palin involved with acorn voter fraud NO!" Neither was anyone else associated with any campaign. EVERY ONE of your LIEs have be debunked by Politifact Snopes, and FactCheck.org. Only an ignoramus or a BALD FACED LIAR would spew that cr@p. I assume you are the later. No one else could post all that cr@p (Tuesday | post #1323)

Because Fox Falsifiers, Gruggie & hte rest of hate radio are really really good. This morning Editor & Publisher (America's Oldest Journal Covering the Newspaper Industry) just published an excellent overview by the co-authors of “Manipulating the Public Agenda: Why ACORN was in the News and What the News Got Wrong." published by Urban and Environmental Policy Institute at Occidental College. HAVE THE MEDIA 'FALSELY FRAMED' ACORN? http://tinyurl.com /Ed-Pub-ACORN ACORN is now well known across America, but what most Americans know about it is wrong. ..."Our goal in this study is not to get bogged down in charging various news media with left‐win g or right‐wi ng bias, but to instead demonstrate that there are indeed intensive political efforts to influence the national news agenda and to frame news stories by special interest groups, or OPINION ENTREPRENEURS. [Emphasis in the original] Moreover, when journalism organizations take a disinterested stance of “objectivity,” passing along the day’s political talking points, and failing to verify allegations before they report (or, just passing along the political talking points because they have 24 hours of programming or news holes in their op‐ed pages to fill), they do a great disservice to citizens, the electorate, and their own profession." (Tuesday | post #1313)

Corsi's book was branded as nothing but a collection of LIEs before it ever came out. Anyone with an ounce of common sense and any knowledge of World Nut Daily & Corsi would have know that POS wasn't credible. Just like Palin's ghost written POS, Corsi's was given away with right-wing subscriptions, bought in bulk by think tanks and deeply deeply deeply discounted. At least her's had a MILF on the cover. (Tuesday Nov 24 | post #1307)

Wonder if Palin will ever read it. Popular doesn't make it accurate. (Tuesday Nov 24 | post #38)

Not really, You simply made a lot of unsubstantiated claims. I stated they are extremely accurate and no one has offered up a single example that they are not. Best media site on the internet. So what's your point? You disputing the poll results? If so, in what regard? I stand by the statement, America is center- left even though they self-identify as center-right. The data back it up. (Tuesday Nov 24 | post #1281)

Sound Off! (Nov. 21)

One of the biggest fallacies with your illogical and talking points argument is that President Obama, hired the advisers, several of which required Congressional confirmation. From Politifact: "So who exactly qualifies as a czar? As best we can tell, it's whenever someone in the media says so. You can identify a guy as "Assistant to the President for Science and Technology, Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, and Co-Chair of the President’s Council of Advisers on Science and Technology," but it's a lot easier on everyone to just say "Science Czar." And "Special Master" sounds like Richie Rich's best friend. So the title of czar is largely arbitrary media shorthand for "It's this person's job to make sure (blank) goes right." And we think everyone can agree that "Terrorism Czar" sounds way cooler than "Deputy National Security Adviser for Homeland Security." http://www.politif act.com/truth-o-me ter/statements/200 9/jun/12/john-mcca in/McCain-says-Oba ma-has-more-czars- than-Romanovs And from FactCheck: Q: Does Obama have an unprecedented number of "czars"? A: "Czar" is media lingo, not an official title. But our research shows that George Bush’s administration had more "czars" than the Obama administration. " http://www.factche ck.org/2009/09/cza r-search I'm sure you'll continue to spew the Reich-wing propaganda and talking points. But facts don't matter to the brainwashed dittoheads, foxholes, or teabaggers. The Big Lie worked for Gobbels and it still works today. (Tuesday Nov 24 | post #82)

If you don't think that is about sex, you ain't hit puberty yet. (Which fits with your posting) How does it hurt? Magazines use sex on covers to sell all the time. And Newsweek probably got a sales spike from all the horny rednecks, teabaggers, dittoheads, and foxholes. How many did you buy? Can you still see the cover? What's the matter? The cover stick together? (Tuesday Nov 24 | post #1263)

I am correct. Most people will self- identify as center right, but when questions are individually asked, the majority respond to the left. Here's one from just a little over a year old. Here are 3 sources: PATHWAYS TO IDEOLOGY IN AMERICAN POLITICS: THE OPERATIONAL-SYMBOL IC “PARADOX” REVISITED Only about one in five self-identified conservatives holds consistently conservative issue positions: right of center positions on both dimensions. Put another way, ALMOST 80% OF PROFESSED CONSERVATIVES ARE NOT CONSERVATIVE ON AT LEAST ONE OF THESE DIMENSIONS. A larger group (30%) of conservatives is operationally conservative only on the narrow set of issues related to traditional morality, not the broader social welfare dimension. The "economic conservatives, " conservative on social welfare issues alone, are not very numerous (15%). But the largest group (34%) of self-identified conservatives rejects operationally conservative beliefs on BOTH THE SOCIAL WELFARE AND THE MORAL ISSUE DOMAINS. This stands in contrast to the less than 4% of self-identified liberals who hold no liberal issue views. [emphasis in original] http://www.unc.edu /~jstimson/Pathway s.pdf#page=8 AMERICA: A CENTER-LEFT NATION In a study produced by Media Matters and Campaign for America's Future found that, based on several polls: "Polling data regarding a wide range of issues, including the role of big business, health care reform, gay marriage, stimulus spending, international trade, and Social Security, indicate that Americans are increasingly receptive to and comfortable with a progressive agenda." Polling has found that public option has widespread support. Media Matters has also documented that polling consistently shows broad support for inclusion of a public option in health care reform legislation..... http://cloudfront. mediamatters.org/s tatic/pdf/caf_mm-2 0090526-6.pdf THE ZOGBY/LEAR CENTER SURVEY FINDS THIS IS A "CENTER-LEFT " COUNTRY Where does the country stand? The graphs below portray the 21 statements that had majority support from the entire sample (whether the respondents were Reds, Purples or Blues). We then calculated the average number of respondents who supported the Blue or liberal position and those who supported the Red or conservative position..... http://www.learcen ter.org/html/proje cts/?cm=zogby/cent erleft (Tuesday Nov 24 | post #1257)

I think Palen POSED for that Running World photo. She is the beauty queen contestant who winks at the guys. She is a good looking who looks like a "sexy flight attendant" and "Trailer Park Barbie" and regularly flaunts it. We had a term for it 45 years ago when I was in high school. You want to see disgusting. Not only insulting to women, but to the democratic progress on the floor of the House of Representatives. GOP Gone Wild: Unruly Republicans Silence Women Lawmakers With Screams, Shouts, And Delay Tactics Watch the video: http://thinkprogre ss.org/2009/11/07/ gop-gone-wild (Tuesday Nov 24 | post #1174)

Overall I agree with you, with a couple of additional observatios. The uninformed Obama supporters were much more 'uninformed' than misinformed. Their comments were not nearly as clone like, based on focused tested talking points and spewed by 800+ hate radio station & a national TV cable channel. The Obama supporters were not questioning Old Keating 5 McCain's patriotism, nationality, or religion and spewing LIEs about the same. 10 years from now she'll be a footnote just like Dan Quayle. And at least Admiral Stockdale has serious competition for the most clueless VP candidate. (Tuesday Nov 24 | post #1171)