« How Well Will The Iraqi Army Stand On Their Own? | Main | With Ricci Decision SCOTUS Majority "Legislated from the Bench" »

Republican "Little Shop of Horrors"? Sarah Palin!

Just as I've been saying all along...

alg_palin-address.jpg
Alaska's lipstick-wearing pit-bull is a "Little Shop of Horrors."

That's how one longtime friend and campaign trail companion of John McCain, the vanquished 2008 GOP presidential nominee, described veep nominee Sarah Palin.

McCain campaign staffers admit that she was not ready for the job...

In an expansive story in the August edition of Vanity Fair, a slew of senior members of McCain's campaign team told reporter Todd S. Purdum that they suffer a kind of survivor's guilt following the 2008 presidential election.

"They can't quite believe that for two frantic months last fall, caught in a Bermuda Triangle of a campaign, they worked their tails off to try to elect as vice president of the United States someone who, by mid-October, they believed for certain was nowhere near ready for the job, and might never be," Vanity Fair reports.

Caribou Barbie was wholly unqualified for the job, and her ego got in the way of her decision-making:

During the campaign, there were reports of anonymous McCain aides describing Palin, the governor of Alaska, as a "diva" and a "whack job."

The Vanity Fair article recounts how strained Palin's relationship was with the McCain advisers. She maintained "only the barest level of civil discourse" with Tucker Eskew, the operative assigned to be her chief minder, the magazine reports.

She believed Steve Schmidt, McCain's top strategist, had lied to her about conducting polling in Alaska - that was a "belief she conveyed to anyone who would listen," the magazine reported.

If the hoax that was attempted with Sarah Palin's candidacy wasn't so damned funny, it would be downright sad:

As previously reported, Palin was so intent on delivering her own concession speech on Election Night that she wouldn't accept advisers telling her that McCain had decided he would be the only one to speak. She took the issue up with McCain himself, discussing it on the walk from his hotel suite to the farewell rally.

Palin did not speak on Election Night. Only McCain addressed the crowd and the nation.

One McCain aide, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said he "always wanted to tell myself the best-case story about her."

"I think, as I've evaluated it, I think some of my worst fears...the after-election events have confirmed that her more negative aspects my have been there...."

As his voice trailed off, he said, "I saw her as a raw talent. Raw, but a talent. I hoped she could become better."

Palin refused to comment for Vanity Fair.

Sarah Palin was a train wreck, and the good news is - the more progressives label her as such the harder her supporters fight to make her ready for the 2012 ticket.

I can't ask for a more "perfect storm"....


Note: Wizbang Blue is now closed and our authors have moved on. Paul Hooson can now be found at Wizbang Pop!. Please come see him there!

  • Currently 2.3/5
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Rating: 2.3/5 (6 votes cast)


Comments (52)

Jay Tea:

How many named sources are there in the article? I stopped looking after the first page and a half.

And as others have noted, if you took the same article, replaced the feminine pronouns with masculine ones, changed a few other specific details (names, numbers and sexes of children, and the like), the article could be describing Obama.

As far as new "revelations..."

Yawn.

J.

JLawson:

Lee -

Admit it. You'd be stalking her in a heartbeat if she wasn't good with a rifle.

Lee Ward:

How many McCain campaign staffers have stepped forward to refute the numerous and voluminous insider accounts of Palin's ineptitude?

And as to the revelations being nothing new? Well, yeah -- it's been known for some time now that Palin was inept and her handlers knew it. That doesn't mean more evidence is a bad thing...

Lee Ward:

JLawson -- I have a girlfriend whose hotness makes Caribou Barbie look like that guy "Fish" on the old Barney Miller Show -- Abe Vigoda.

And even more importantly my girlfriend is super smart. Palin is literally an airhead, and Barbie doll women with low IQs don't float my boat at all.

JLawson:

Yep, you're obsessed with her.

(Shrug.)

That's okay. We won't tell your girlfriend.

gdb in central Texas:

Hey, JL, Lee's girlfriend can't be all that smart - she hangs around Lee.

(Poor Lee, all he does is gossip. At least Paul H can discuss an issue.)

J.R.:

JLawson -- I have a girlfriend whose hotness makes Caribou Barbie look like that guy "Fish" on the old Barney Miller Show

Of course she lives in Canada and you met last year at camp, right? you crack me up lee.

ke_future:

the way i read this:

staffers for mccain, who lost the election are trashing palin in order to deflect critism from their boss and themselves. this is not all unexpected and this type of stuff happens all the time in politics. i would have been surprised if it hadn't happened. how many kerry staffers complained about edwards? or bush staffers complained about quayle? or gore staffers about lieberman.

in this case it is especially exasberated because palin is an outsider to washington politics. this makes her the natural target of the political elites that made up mccain's campaign

the only reason that lee is ranting about all of this is because it fits his prejudices. in reality these kinds of things need to be taken with a large grain of salt.

GianiD:

Hilarious part is, however much you want to put her down, she has way more experience than either the teleprompter in chief, or the idiot 2nd in command from DE. Furthermore, she can actually articulate her own thoughts 95% of the time. Neither Fauxbama or Lyin Biden can.

Continue your obsession.

Tim:

This reminds me - where is that massive media investigation of Palin's corruption that you promised us? I guess your "inside information" is as plausible as your accounts of your "super smart" girlfriend. Reality based. Count on it.

SCSIwuzzy:
That's okay. We won't tell your girlfriend.

No need. Paul already knows.

Seriously, however, I'll second others... anonymous staffers talking to Vanity Fair, via a post that doesn't even include a courtesy link to the source... not much to get worked up over.
What next, rumors that Nixon and Johnson used rough language? Regan liked to go to bed early and kept jelly beans on his desk (at least he quit smoking)? At least people have gone on record in these cases.

Alison:

Sarah in a speech on June 3, 2009 -
yep - she sure can articulate her thoughts.

"Today the things that some in Washington would do to take away our freedoms, it's absolutely astounding, and we would do so well to look back on those Reagan years as he championed the cause for freedom and then he lived it out as our president - cheerfully, persistently and unapologetically. Reagan knew that real change and real change requiring shaking things up and maybe takin' off the entrenched interest thwarting the will of the people with their ignoring of our concerns about future peril caused by selfish short-sighted advocacy for growing government and digging more debt, and taking away individual and state's rights and hampering opportunity to responsibly develop our resources, and coddling those who would seek to harm America and her allies."

Uh - now what exactly did she say here?

Lee Ward:

"This reminds me - where is that massive media investigation of Palin's corruption that you promised us? "

Watching for startling revelations a week before the 2012 elections... lol.

Worth repeating (thanks Alison)

Sarah Palin: "Reagan knew that real change and real change requiring shaking things up and maybe takin' off the entrenched interest thwarting the will of the people with their ignoring of our concerns about future peril caused by selfish short-sighted advocacy for growing government and digging more debt, and taking away individual and state's rights and hampering opportunity to responsibly develop our resources, and coddling those who would seek to harm America and her allies"

Yep - ready and able... to drool.

SCSIwuzzy:

Nothing worse than a politician speaking inarticulately.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=omHUsRTYFAU

Jay Tea:

...and yet, somehow, we're SO much better with Joe Biden as vice-president. Joe Biden, who makes Dan Quayle sound like Winston Churchill. Joe Biden, who actually believes his own bullshit. Joe Biden, who has permanent hoof-in-mouth disease. Joe Biden, who's already pissed off Obama several times and insulted the Chief Justice in a scant six months. Joe Biden, who voted AGAINST the first Gulf War and FOR the second.

Yup, we sure dodged a bullet there...

J.

Lee Ward:

Yes we did. The idea of Sarah Palin in the Oval Office should McCain have passed away is absolutely horrific.... as McCain campaign staffers now admit.

DaveD:

Seriously Lee, you have to be a radically insecure individual. You spare no effort in trashing Palin at least once every hour. She lost in an election. You consider her a fringe occupying loony and you seem to feel she is blindly supported by only a small minority of misguided cretins............and yet you still feel the need to use her to compare to your girlfriend. Undeniably weird.

GianiD:

SCS,

Funny isnt it, the main stream media ignores that torturous video. He might be one of the dumbest mofo's Ive ever seen in politics.

Then again, we know he has basically ZERO personal accomplishments, and virtually everything he has touch professionally has turned to crap, or debt.

This once great nation is next.

Jay Tea:

Oh, please. Those gutless wonders of McCain staffers (who won't even go on the record) are flailing around for any excuse for the incompetence of themselves and their candidate, and people like Mr. Ward are ready and eager to carry their water for them.

Palin had a better resume' of successful administration and executive experience than Obama and Biden (Smug and Plugs, Empty Suit and Stuffed Shirt, insert your own term here) combined. And GianiD is right -- Obama's record outside elected office is a string of failures, corruption, and ineffectiveness.

That's not even mentioning his utter worthlessness as a legislator.

As far as his campaign... there are volumes of criticisms one can reprint from this very site that say all that need be said.

Palin might not have been the best choice, but she was probably the best of the four candidates on the national ticket.

J.

Knightbrigade:

A strong Conservative really gets the Progresseeeeeves panties in a bunch..

Lee has to drag out his Girlfriend to compare her to Sarah..lol
Something about that has blowup doll written all over it.

Jay Tea:

Just who is the author of this Palin piece, anyway?

MILBANK, S.D. -- Former President Bill Clinton today unleashed a salty stream of epithets to describe former New York Times reporter and current Vanity Fair writer Todd Purdum, calling him "sleazy," "dishonest," "slimy" and a "scumbag."

The former president made the comment at a local campaign event after I asked him if Purdum's much-commented upon Vanity Fair story was weighing on his mind.

Tightly gripping this reporter's hand and refusing to let go, Clinton heatedly denounced the writer, who is currently married to former Clinton White House Press Secretary, Dee Dee Myers.

"[He's] sleazy," he said referring to Purdum. "He's a really dishonest reporter. And one of our guys talked to him . . . And I haven't read [the article]. But he told me there's five or six just blatant lies in there. But he's a real slimy guy," the former president said.

When I reminded him that Purdum was married to his former press spokesperson Myers, Clinton was undeterred.

"That's all right-- he's still a scumbag," Clinton said. " Let me tell ya-- he's one of the guys -- he's one of the guys that propagated all those lies about Whitewater to Kenneth Starr. He's just a dishonest guy-- can't help it."

Purdum's piece, featured in this month's edition of Vanity Fair, included former advisers criticizing former President Clinton for bringing negative attention to Hillary Clinton's candidacy and for surrounding himself with friends who might discredit her campaign.

The former president's tirade continued:

"The editor of Esquire-- he sent us an email yesterday and said it was the single sleaziest piece of journalism he'd seen in decades. He said it made him want to go take a shower and he was embarrassed to be a journalist when he read it."

"You know he didn't use a single name, cite a single source in all those things he said. It's just slimy. It's part of the national media's attempt to nail Hillary for Obama. It's just the most biased press coverage in history. It's another way of helping Obama. They had all these people standing up in this church cheering, calling Hillary a white racist, and he didn't do anything about it. The first day he said 'Ah, ah, ah well.' Because that's what they do-- he gets other people to slime her. So then they saw the movie they thought this is a great ad for John McCain-- maybe I better quit the church. It's all politics. It's all about the bias of the media for Obama. Don't think anything about it."

"But I'm telling ya, all it's doing is driving her supporters further and further away-- because they know exactly what it is-- this has been the most rigged press coverage in modern history-- and the guy ought to be ashamed of himself. But he has no shame. It isn't the first dishonest piece he's written about me or her."

"Anytime you read a story that slimes a public figure with anonymous quotes, it oughta make the bells go off in your head. Because anytime somebody uses those things-- he wrote the story in his head in advance, and he just goes around and tries to find some coward to say whatever they want to say, hoping to get some benefit out of it. It didn't bother me. It shouldn't bother you."

William Jefferson Clinton, June 2, 2008.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mayhill-fowler/bill-clinton-purdhum-a-sl_b_104771.html

Seems like Mr. Purdum has found his niche in life... seeking out political rivals of Obama and shredding them with anonymous sources and heavily slanted innuendo.

At least it seems to pay well...

J.

Rich Fader:

I look forward to seeing the Governor run in 2012. And I really look forward to seeing the party of Joe Biden, Al Franken and Barbara Boxer trying to explain why she's too stupid to be president. And as a bonus, I particularly look forward to seeing "Don't Call Me Ma'am, Call Me Senator" Babs explaining why the gov is a wacko idiot diva...and she isn't.

Lee Ward:

All it'll take is Palin doing a couple of interviews.

She'll have had 4 years to study up.

She'll still fail.

Jay Tea:

So true. The interviewers won't cut her any of the slack they give Obama, Biden, Kennedy, Pelosi, Reid, or the rest of the Democrats...

J.

Lee Ward:

Awww, when will the whining stop?

Questions like "What newspapers and magazines do you read?" totally stumped the Palinator.

Jay Tea:

"Stand up, Chuck!"

"I broke the president's TelePrompter."

"Wouldn't want to blow it like Chief Justice Roberts."

And my personal favorite, a blast from the past (1988), four and a half lies in one:

"I went to law school on a full academic scholarship, the only one in my class, I ended up in the top half of my class, I won the international moot court competition, I was the Outstanding Student in the Political Science department, I graduated with three degrees..."

Joltin' Joe got a needs-based scholarship, graduated 76th out of 85, was CONSIDERED for "Outstanding Student," and graduated with two degrees. He gets half credit for being on the winning team for moot court.

This is a chronic liar and egomaniac who everyone thinks is SO MUCH BETTER than Palin.

Even scarier, Joe seems to believe his own bullshit. He just makes stuff up that sounds good, convinced that no one will question him.

And he's almost never called on it.

Tell us again about how great Obama's "judgment" is. And how fortunate this moron is our veep.

J.

Rich Fader:

Yes, it's long been known that Sarah Palin is the Idiot Wacko Diva. You know, sort of like Barack Obama has long been known as the Omnipotent, Omniscient, Omnipresent, Omnibenevolent King of Kings and Lord of Lords who is merely slumming as our head of state. There are a lot of things that have "long been known" that just aren't so.

The problem is, if Governor Palin really were the Idiot Wacko Diva, it's hard to imagine the press wouldn't have figured it out in the first week, rather than when the Unknown Comics from the McCain campaign actually told them, six to eight weeks into the campaign. And it's hard to imagine that, given the zero-to-WTF-in-Bonneville-Salt-Flat-time press hostility toward the gov, that wouldn't quickly have been the story, rather than who Bristol Palin was banging, and when, and whether Bristol was actually Trig's mommy. I remember the campaign quite well, and that didn't happen. What I'm trying ever so diplomatically to tell you, my friends, is that the Unknown Comics are lying liars.

GarandFan:

Hey Lee! If Palin is not a political threat, why are you leftest so obsessed with her?

GianiD:

Do Dims really believe this is eloquence?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=omHUsRTYFAU


Show us a clip of Palin being anywhere near as STOOOPID as this POS in the WH.

SCSIwuzzy:

Giani,
Link already posted, point already made.

Lee Ward:

"Hey Lee! If Palin is not a political threat, why are you leftest so obsessed with her?"

Because her nomination ranks as among the stupidest moves ever made in US politics...

and, speaking for myself, I believe that the more that the left disses Palin, the more determined the right wing Palinbots are to put her on the GOP ticket in 2012...

and I know that if she's on the 2012 ticket the Democrats will prevail in the 2012 election.

As scary as Palin is... there is nothing - I repeat NOTHING - that the GOP could do to ruin their chances at the WH in 2012 than to put Palin on the ticket.

I don't think there's a good chance Palin will end up on the ticket, because the smarter people in the GOP will probably prevent that from happening, but I can always hope...

Jay Tea:

Because her nomination ranks as among the stupidest moves ever made in US politics...

Oh, how wrong is this? Let me count the ways...

Joe Biden.

John Kerry.

Dan Quayle.

Jimmy Carter.

"Malaise."

Whip Inflation Now.

Dukakis.

Obama's "stimulus" package and the consequent surge in unemployment.

Joe Biden.

"Cap And Trade."

"Let's put Alcee Hastings in charge of the Intelligence Committee!"

The Vietnam War.

Watergate.

And that's just off the top of my head...

J.

Lee Ward:

You're not disputing that it was a stupid move - just that it was 'the stupidest move' move.

At least you got that much right.

But it's only a 'stupid move' if it hurt rather than helped McCain's chances...

No arguments there either...

The stupidity with Palin is, in part, the fact that she would have been an unmitigated disaster in office - and the selection of a poorly vetted, unqualified candidate didn't reach its full "stupidity potential because, in just a few short interviews, Palin's poor qualifications were glaringly obvious and America's electorate knew it at that point.'

It lost McCain and the GOP the election.

Jay Tea:

It lost McCain and the GOP the election.

That would mean that sans Palin, McCain would have won. Not bloody likely.

Palin has credentials that were sorely lacking on the rest of the ballot. Executive experience, for one. Standing up to corruption within her own party, for another.

What I find most entertaining, though, is that you're subjecting her to the very same sexist attacks that you were denouncing a year ago when the target was Hillary Clinton.

Or is there something that's not sexist about "Caribou Barbie?"

Instead, we got two leading Senators who've never held any kind of executive positions in their lives running things. And leading, as in "the biggest do-nothing legislator" and "the biggest idiot legislator."

For example, on foreign policy, it seems to boil down to "treat our friends like enemies, and our enemies like friends." I doubt even "Caribou Barbie" would try that.

I will give Obama credit, though, in one area -- he seems to be actually almost kinda getting somewhere with North Korea. The Minuteman III test firing and the stalking of his weapons freighter (by, of all ships, the USS John S. McCain, named for the Senator's father and grandfather) seems to have persuaded 'Lil Kim to rein it in a bit.

Everywhere else, though... what a Charlie Foxtrot. Lean on Israel, mollycoddle Iran, side with Hugo Lite in Costa Rica...

Oh, well. America's survived worse. Hell, we got through Carter and Johnson.

J.

Doubting Thomas:

Re the Minuteman launch - I was thinking the range wouldn't be sufficient to hit NK, but according to Google Earth (and various other great circle calculators) there'd be about 2500 miles to spare.

Nice message, even if it wasn't intended as one.

Jay Tea:

You're not disputing that it was a stupid move - just that it was 'the stupidest move' move.

At least you got that much right.

But it's only a 'stupid move' if it hurt rather than helped McCain's chances...

No arguments there either...

I argued "stupidest" because that's what you said. If you're walking it back to "stupid" now, then I'll argue that, too.

The problem of McCain/Palin (which still won almost 46% of the vote) was a fundamental incompatibility. McCain got the nomination largely by being the media's darling. (The quickest way for a Republican to do that is to take stands against Republicans; witness your own calling one of those idiots who voted for "Cap And Trade" a "great American.") The New York Times even endorsed him a few scant weeks before turning on him as savagely as the Old Gray Lady can still muster. (Witness the "McCain's sleeping with a lobbyist" and the Cindy McCain hit pieces.)

Palin was many of the things McCain wasn't. Some times that kind of balancing works -- Reagan/Bush, Bush/Cheney. Other times, a partnership of similars can work -- Clinton/Gore.

In the long run, a vice-president can seldom hurt a ticket and sometimes help. This time around, Palin brought a bit of "star power" to the ticket to counterbalance Obama.

It wasn't enough to overcome the too-many contradictions between the two, though. And the biggest being that if you go for "star power," it ought to be at the top of the ticket.

And the biggest problem Palin would have had in office would have been the endless stream of sexist attacks, from the "post-partum depression" being floated by the losers from McCain's staff eager to slough off their own failures to your own "Caribou Barbie" fixation.

J.

Lee Ward:

And that's the beauty of Barbie.

Social conservatives see her as the nation's salvation.

Moderate conservatives see her as the unqualified middling little twit that she is, wholly unqualified for the job.

And the people who defend her the most ignore the stark realities that she is unelectable, and try to defend the Palin Crusade as a noble and just cause.

And nobody on the right --- well, hardly anybody -- is speaking of Palin realistically and honestly.

All of which fits into the Republican "Lie through your teeth to the American people" meme that has worked so well over the 2006 and 2008 elections. Extending Democratic gains into 2010 and 2012 is a sure thing as long as Palin is front and center.

Lee Ward:

"That would mean that sans Palin, McCain would have won. Not bloody likely."

No, it means with a strong candidate McCain would have won. And that's a significant possibility. As you're seeing now, Obama's inexperience was a downside. A strong GOP VP would have strengthened the GOP' ticket's chances significantly, but instead McCain and Co. went with someone who's qualifications were actually less than Obama's.

THAT was the big mistake -- it threw away the strongest argument against Obama -- that he was inexperienced.

There weren't many possible candidates who were more inexperienced than Obama, but McCain found one and put her on the ticket!

It lost the election -- but you're right. McCain and Co. 'might' have made an equally stupid choice in another candidate and still lost. A distinct possibility.

Jay Tea:

Social conservatives see her as the nation's salvation.

Moderate conservatives see her as the unqualified middling little twit that she is, wholly unqualified for the job.

And the people who defend her the most ignore the stark realities that she is unelectable, and try to defend the Palin Crusade as a noble and just cause.

You overlooked one element. Frothing nutjobs on the left fixate on her sex and focus on elements of that for most of their criticism.

For example, Andrew Sullivan's unhealthy fixation with her uterus, and whether or not it ever hosted Trig Palin.

Or others, who rejoice in her single-mother daughter and regale us all with every single sordid detail about the private life of an 18-year-old who never sought public office.

There are probably other breakdowns, but that omission really needed to be addressed.

J.

Lee Ward:

"There are probably other breakdowns, but that omission really needed to be addressed."

Only by the frothers.

And thanks for agreeing again. Those who criticize Palin and point out her many flaws raise the ire of the righteous right nutjobs -- the ones who hate at the drop of a hat, and will attack in a right wing red-eyesd frenzy once Palin the Diva is criticized.

It's kept the GOP infighting going - good example!

Jay Tea:

By the way, I responded to your invitation to e-mail you some questions. I first sent it to your e-mail address (which may have been outdated), then to the tips box. Did it get through?

I do find it rather remarkable, though, that you give anonymous alleged "Former McCain campaign staffers" so much credibility, especially since their statements are mostly speculation and scurrilous rumor. The story being peddled by Vanity Fair is utterly and completely vaporware, without a single solid anchor.

But since it says what you want to believe, and attributes the remarks to those who would lend a shred of credibility to those charges, it MUST be gospel.

J.

Jay Tea:

Damn... sorry for the double-posting. Connection issues. Please delete one of them.

J.

Lee Ward:

Names are named in the vanity fair article.

Not gospel - just more testimony - testimony that corroborates previous testimony from others, is supported by public evidence such as Palin's abysmal interviews, and is evidence that hasn't been proven incorrect or flawed.

but froth away -- your anonymous complaints are certainly part of this great orchestra of denial that the vanity fair article is bringing to crescendo.

btw - the right wing hypocrisy of denying the nose on your face only detracts further from GOP credibility. Admitting a few obvious facts, such as Palin's ineptitude and the extent to which she contributed to McCain's downfall, might lend credibility to the few times you actually make cogent points.

And this thing with the email and "your questions" - knock it off. You've posted the same message numerous times in thread after thread. Drop the harassment - figure it out - you're being ignored as a troll. Quit acting like one and you might get some mileage.

Your email concerns have been duly noted and filed, Mr. Tea.

Lee

Jay Tea:

No names are attached to the stuff you quoted here.

No names are attached to the most scurrilous attacks.

Those are done behind the veil of anonymity, by people with a clearly-defined agenda -- to shift the blame for the loss off of themselves and on to Palin.

J.

Lee Ward:

btw, Jay - regarding the double posting you did above --

I just noticed that the IP address you commented from in comment #41` -- the comment that you requested I delete -- (I deleted the other duplicate instead) is the same IP address used by a commenter using the name "Frank Pierce" back on January 1, 2009 - linked here - which was also a post critical of Sarah Palin.

Did you post that comment on January 1, 2009, posting as Frank Pierce?

And why are you using two different IP addresses today?

Jay Tea:

Mr. Ward, I use a couple of different IPs, depending on signal strength. One of them crapped out halfway through trying to post the comment, so I switched -- but didn't notice the comment had gone through, and tried it again.

Thanks for deleting one of them. Which one really didn't matter.

Did you get my e-mails in response to your invitation to contact you that way?

J.

Lee Ward:

Yes, Jay I got your emails, and as I said above your concerns have been duly noted and filed, and are no longer a topic for discussion.

But Jay - you accidentally forgot to answer the question regarding Frank Pierce's comment on January 1, 2009.

Did you post that comment or not?

It has the same IP address as one of your comments today.

It's also a comment on a Palin post, just like today.

Since you're not denying it, I'll assume it's yours unless you tell me otherwise.

The comment on the older Palin post where you used the name "Frank Pierce" is linked here.

Lee Ward:

Jay Tea (1) has a past history of posting in violation of the site TOS and (2) posted today from 2 different IP addresses within a 4 minute period. One of the IP addresses he used today shows up on a comment made back in December on another Palin post where a different Name was used.

Jay Tea, who used to enforce the TOS on the comment threads at Wizbang, knows the rules.

I've asked him to clarify - asked him to tell me if he made the post January 1 as "Frank Pierce," and for some odd reason, he's avoiding the question...

Jay Tea:

Sorry, Mr. Ward, I didn't realize that your answers that you posted before my e-mail applied to the following questions. I'll go back and re-read them with those questions in mind.

I don't recall specifically commenting on New Year's Day about Palin, but if you wanna say I did, meh. Whatever. Frank(lin) Pierce, it should be noted, is the only New Hampshirite to ever serve as president -- he's almost as significant a person in New Hampshire's history as General John Stark.

But back to the subject at hand, which was the Vanity Fair hit piece on Palin, did you ever find a listed source for the most salacious of the allegations, like the one you cited? Or do you want to keep dredging up old grievances?

Like I said before... feel free to start a thread called "Jay Tea's moral failings," and if the spirit moves me, I'll comment there. I'd rather stay on the topic at hand.

J.

Lee Ward:

So you don't deny that you posted on January 1, 2009 in violation of this site's TOS -- the same TOS that you know so well because you yourself enforced this same TOS relating to commenting at Wizbang for years?

I'll give you another chance to deny it if you have any doubt that you were the person posting January 1 as "Frank Pierce" on the link I've provided.

This is your last chance to deny it, Jay.

Are we gonna go through this rigamarole every time I start winning arguments? You go back and dig up old grievances?

I don't recall the particulars, and I didn't go back and read the comment, but it very well could have been me. The "Frank Pierce" reference sounds like a wink and a nod I'd use.

So fine, I'll plead no contest. You wanna say it was me, sure. Fine. Whatever. It obviously means a hell of a lot to you now, that I'm winning a discussion, so I yield on that point.

I don't see what this has to do with the current topic, which makes me concerned that I might be baited into going off-topic, but -- again -- whatever.

To the topic Do you have a single name to link to the allegations against Palin in the article? Or are you willing to acknowledge that this is Purdum's modus operandi -- go after an Obama rival with a bunch of anonymous sources who won't stand behind their accusations?

I was particularly entertained by what others noted -- Purdum managed to find several people acquainted with Palin who all, anonymously of course, looked at her conduct and immediately ran to the standard psychological texts to diagnose her. What an astonishing coincidence...

J.

Lee Ward:

Commenting on this post have been temporarily closed by the author.


Advertisments

Categories

Archives

Technorati



Add to Technorati Favorites

Credits

Publisher: Kevin Aylward

Editors: Lee Ward, Larkin, Paul S Hooson, and Steve Crickmore

All original content copyright © 2007 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark. Wizbang Blue™ is a trademark of Wizbang®, LLC.

Powered by Movable Type 3.35

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.