Michele Bachmann wrote a book. Yeah I know, surprised me too!

Well there is really no big story.  After all EVERYBODY who wants to be President seems to write book these days.

However I think the title needs some work.

How about, "Bored of Superstition?"

Or, "Whore of Perdition?"

Or, "Eyesore of Ambition?'

Or, "Boudoir of the Mortician?"

Just trying to help.

Sarah Palin trots out new serious political pundit image, as illustated by her new serious political pundit wig.

To watch the video just click the picture. Warning, it does take you to a Fox News site so take your Maalox first.

According to Klondike Kardashian now that CNN has hosted this "Tea Party" debate they have moved from "Lamestream" media to the Teabagger ass kissing media, which greatly pleases this insignificant political prick teaser. Good job CNN!

Palin has a favorite new term that she just learned, "Crony Capatalism," which she uses repeatedly during this interview to essentially smear the whole group of GOP candidates at one time or another.

However she really brings out the long knives when Greta mentions Rick Perry, the HPV vaccine, and the suggestion that the reason he went with the program was due to possible payoff from the manufacturer of the drug. Here Palin goes for the jugular and starts throwing charges of, her new favorite term that she just learned about, "Crony Capitalism" all over the place like a Ninja star.

She even compares Perry's decision to make the vaccination semi-mandatory to HER decision, around the same time, to NOT go with the program.  Essentially creating as much space between Rick Perry's policies and hers as possible, which is a complete turnaround to how she described "Governor Good Hair" only  few short months ago. You know BEFORE he threw his Texas sized hat into the ring and rustled all of her Teabagger support away from her.

At the end of this interview Greta asks the question that she is apparently contractually obligated to ask concerning whether or not Palin is still considering throwing her wig hat into the ring to run for President? I almost feel sorry for Greta who appears to be very tired of this dog and pony show, but Palin leaps on the question like a feral Wasillian and implies that she LOVES the fact that by staying out she can still influence the subjects that the OTHER candidates take on, including her favorite new term she just learned about, "Crony Capitalism."

This interview was just as bizarre and full of misinformation, attacks on our President, and barbs thrown at her own party as usual, the only REAL news seems to be that she is now blatantly, and aggressively, attacking Rick Perry, which seems to suggest that the sources who have said she is angry with him for very personal reasons are probably dead on.

Oh and of course the OTHER news from this interview is that whatever was on Palin's head from her LAST interview has clearly escaped and is undoubtedly still at large in the greater Wasilla area.

Residents should remain vigilant!

Beige meets Off White as Tim Pawlenty injects a little...a little...well whatever is the opposite of "excitement" into the Mitt Romney campaign.

"You're just kidding that I have to wear the magic underwear right Mitt?"

Courtesy of The New York Times:

Mr. Pawlenty, the former governor of Minnesota who ended his quest for the Republican nomination last month, chose Mr. Romney over Gov. Rick Perry of Texas, whom he was close to from their years serving on the Republican Governors Association. 

Many of Mr. Pawlenty’s contributors and supporters had been waiting for a signal from him in the escalating contest between Mr. Romney and Mr. Perry. And Mr. Pawlenty had been looking for help in retiring a campaign debt of at least $500,000. 

In a statement announcing Mr. Pawlenty as a national co-chairman of his campaign, Mr. Romney said: “Tim will be a trusted adviser as I move forward with my campaign. Tim has always been an advocate for lower taxes, reduced spending and an environment where jobs can be created. It is an honor to have him serve as co-chair to my campaign for the presidency.” 

Mr. Pawlenty, in an interview Monday morning on “Fox and Friends,” said of Mr. Romney, “I believe he’s going to be our party’s nominee.”

Oh yeah, THIS is what a campaign that has a mild mannered sofa cushion for a candidate does to reinvigorate their message.  Add the guy that restless sheep count jumping into a campaign at night to help them fall asleep.

The only way that Pawlenty could possibly make the Romney campaign more interesting is if Mitt lit him on fire and pushed him into a crowd of kerosene soaked Teabaggers. (I have to admit I would probably tune in for that.)

Of course now that Tim "Micheal Bay" Pawlenty is on board, he MIGHT be able to jazz up Romney's campaign commercials, and take them from this:

To this:

After all we know how much these advertisements helped Tim Pawlenty.

Wait that didn't come out right.

Stephen Colbert was very impressed with Rick PArry's debate performance. But like most of us thinks that Rick PErry is a douche.

The Colbert Report
Get More: Colbert Report Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,Video Archive

I have watched  a lot of pundits address Perry's ridiculous comparison of climate science to the imprisonment of Galilei Galileo, but I really think that only Colbert has put it in the proper perspective.

Plus he made it funny.

Lawrence O'Donnell responds to e-mail from Republican chairman in Iowa asking if he would apologize for repeatedly saying that Sarah Palin will not run for President after she announces. An announcement that he expected to take place on September 3rd.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

If only the Teabaggers watched Lawrence O'Donnell instead of Fox News, just imagine how much grief and disappointment they could have avoided.

I don't think Rick Perry and his Evangelical friends are praying hard enough.

Courtesy of Collective Vision:

The meanest drought in modern Texas history looks different out here, away from the cities.There are no emerald swaths of St. Augustine lawns, no blooming shrubs, no misters cooling bar patrons as the sun goes down on another cloudless, 105-degree day. 

The disconnect between what rural Texans are experiencing and sheltered urbanites are seeing has never seemed greater.Out here, the brutality of the drought is measured not in annoying water restrictions or water pipes bursting in the dessicated ground — all now commonplace in Texas cities and towns — but threatened livelihoods, and the waning of life itself.

 So tell me again Governor Perry what are your thoughts about global warming?

"There are a substantial number of scientists who have manipulated data so that they will have dollars rolling into their projects."

No serious candidate for President should have so little respect for science, and so little ability to see the evidence that surround him in his very own state.

Defining Dominionism.

Courtesy of AlterNet:

Dominionism is a broad political impulse within the Christian Right in the United States. It comes in a variety of forms that author Fred Clarkson and I call soft and hard. Fred and I probably coined the term “Dominionism” back in the 1990s, but in any case we certainly were the primary researchers who organized its use among journalists and scholars. 

Clarkson noted three characteristics that bridge both the hard and the soft kind of Dominionism. 

1. Dominionists celebrate Christian nationalism, in that they believe the United States once was, and should again be, a Christian nation. In this way, they deny the Enlightenment roots of American democracy. 
2. Dominionists promote religious supremacy, insofar as they generally do not respect the equality of other religions, or even other versions of Christianity. 
3. Dominionists endorse theocratic visions, believing that the Ten Commandments, or “biblical law,” should be the foundation of American law, and that the U.S. Constitution should be seen as a vehicle for implementing Biblical principles. 

At the apex of hard Dominionism is the religious dogma of Dominion Theology, with two major branches: Christian Reconstructionism and Kingdom Now theology. It is the latter’s influence on the theopolitical movement called the New Apostolic Reformation that has been linked in published reports to potential Republican presidential nominees Perry, Bachmann or Palin. All three of these right-wing political debutantes have flirted with Christian Right Dominionism, but how far they have danced toward the influence of hard-right Dominion Theology is in dispute. It would be nice if some “mainstream” journalists actually researched the question. 

“While differing from Reconstructionism in many ways, Kingdom Now shares the belief that Christians have a mandate to take dominion over every area of life,” explains religion scholar Bruce Barron. And it is just this tendency that has spread through evangelical Protestantism, resulting in the emergence of “various brands of ‘dominionist’ thinkers in contemporary American evangelicalism,” according to Barron. 

The most militant Dominion Theologists would silence dissenters and execute adulterers, homosexuals and recalcitrant children. No…seriously. OK, they would only be executed for repeated offenses, explain some defenders of Christian Reconstructionism. Even most Christian Right activists view the more militant Dominion Theologists as having really creepy ideas. 

Much of the controversy over the issue of Dominionism is caused by writers who use the term carelessly, often conflating the broad term Dominionism with the narrow term Dominion Theology. Some on the Left have implied that every conservative Christian evangelical is part of the Christian Right political movement; and that everyone in the Christian Right is an active Dominionist. This is false. Some critics even state that the Christian Right is neofascist. Few serious scholars of fascism agree with that assessment, although several admit that if triggered by a traumatic societal event, any contemporary right-wing populist movement could descend into neofascism.

There is more to this very informative article and I strongly urge you to read the entire thing.

And then when you are finished imagine what having a disciple of this particular militant brand of Christianity, such as Michele Bachmann, Sarah Palin, or Rick Perry, in the White House might mean for this country.

And you wonder why I never sleep.

Let's start the day with a hearty laugh at the Palin-bots expense shall we?

(With a very appreciative Hat Tip to the very clever and creative Love and Knishes.)

Who Doomed Sarah Palin's Presidential Dream?

So what, or who, is REALLY to blame for the demise of Sarah Palin's Presidential aspirations? Benjy Sarlin of Talking Points Memo thinks he has the answer.

Alaska 

The launching pad for Palin's political career may have proved its undoing as well. Her abrupt exit from the governor's office in 2009 freed her up to make million < s as a speaker, author, and general celebrity, but all but destroyed any hopes of building up a credible resume for a presidential run. 

The Establishment GOP 

Palin relishes her role as an outsider, going back to her days battling the "old boys' network" of entrenched Republican officials in Alaska. Her willingness to buck party leaders dovetailed nicely with the rise of the insurgent Tea Party, but earned her the enmity of establishment Republican figures like Karl Rove, who has questioned her electability at every turn. 

Rick Perry and Michele Bachmann 

One reason polls don't show a groundswell of support for a Palin run is that other candidates have already taken over her obvious territory. If you want a hardcore religious right leader running on her personal family values while horrifying establishment Republicans, Michele Bachmann is happy to accommodate your needs. If you're looking for a red-state governor with solid conservative credentials running on anti-elitist resentment, Rick Perry is ready and waiting. 

Women 

Palin's entrance on the national stage was heralded as an opportunity for the GOP to reach out to female voters, who traditionally lean Democrat in presidential elections. Instead, women have proven a weak spot for Palin. John McCain learned this the hard way in 2008 after his VP pick disproportionately turned off female voters despite a focused effort to pick up disaffected Hillary Clinton voters. 

Sarah Palin 

Ultimately, Palin has been her own worst enemy. Over and over she's made costly unforced errors that have solidified her critics' worst impressions of her while alienating potential supporters. The most disastrous -- and illustrative -- recent example was her response to the Gabrielle Giffords shooting in Arizona. Under intense scrutiny for her use of violent political imagery, Palin actually began to garner some public sympathy from unexpected corners as it became clear the alleged killer was motivated more by a deranged worldview than any coherent cause. But she instantly squandered it by releasing a tone-deaf video condemning a "blood libel" against her that only appeared more inappropriate after Obama delivered a moving speech focused on the individual shooting victims' biographies later the same day. Palin's popularity plummeted to new lows in the aftermath, but the episode did little more than confirm the already entrenched image of the ex-governor as a thin-skinned, rash, and divisive figure. 

I have to say I agree with much of waht Mr. Sarlin points out here. Especially that last part.

However I would also add that it is also very possible that Sarah Palin NEVER seriously considered a run for the Presidency, or at least changed her mind early on after considering the unavoidable embarrassments she would face, and that all of this has just been one long drawn out con game directed at her under educated supporters.

Whatever the reason I think we can rest assured that Palin has no REAL plan to launch a campaign, and if she absolutely believes she has to at least fake one, it will undoubtedly be the shortest campaign in American political history.

“Even if I am being conservative, I don’t see how Obama can lose.” Says Professor with never fail formula for predicting the winners of Presidential elections.

Picture courtesy of the Obama Diary.

Courtesy of US News:

Allan Lichtman, the American University professor whose election formula has correctly called every president since Ronald Reagan’s 1984 re-election, has a belated birthday present for Barack Obama: Rest easy, your re-election is in the bag. 

“Even if I am being conservative, I don’t see how Obama can lose,” says Lichtman. 

Working for the president are several of Lichtman’s keys, tops among them incumbency and the scandal-free nature of his administration.Undermining his re-election is a lack of charisma and leadership on key issues, says Lichtman, even including healthcare, Obama’s crowning achievement. 

Lichtman developed his 13 Keys in 1981. They test the performance of the party that holds the presidency. If six or more of the 13 keys go against the party in power, then the opposing party wins.“The keys have figured into popular politics a bit,” Lichtman says. “They’ve never missed. They’ve been right seven elections in a row. A number that goes way beyond statistical significance in a record no other system even comes close to.” 

Below are each of the keys and how it falls for Obama. 

1. Party mandate: After the midterm elections, the incumbent party holds more seats in the U.S. House of Representatives than it did after the previous midterm elections. Says Lichtman, “Even back in January 2010 when I first released my predictions, I was already counting on a significant loss.” Obama loses this key. 
2. Contest: There is no serious contest for the incumbent party nomination. Says Lichtman on Obama’s unchallenged status, “I never thought there would be any serious contest against Barack Obama in the Democratic primary.” Obama wins this key. 
3. Incumbency: The incumbent party candidate is the sitting president. Easy win here for Obama. 
4. Third Party: There is no significant third party challenge. Obama wins this point. 
5. Short term economy: The economy is not in recession during the election campaign. Here Lichtman declares an “undecided.” 
6. Long-term economy: Real per capita economic growth during the term equals or exceeds mean growth during the previous two terms. Says Lichtman, “I discounted long term economy against Obama. Clearly we are in a recession.” Obama loses this key.
7. Policy change: The incumbent administration effects major changes in national policy. “There have been major policy changes in this administration. We’ve seen the biggest stimulus in history and an complete overhaul of the healthcare system so I gave him policy change,” says the scholar. Another win for Obama. 
8. Social unrest: There is no sustained social unrest during the term. Says Lichtman, “There wasn’t any social unrest when I made my predictions for 2012 and there still isn’t.” Obama wins a fifth key here. 
9. Scandal: The incumbent administration is untainted by major scandal. “This administration has been squeaky clean. There’s nothing on scandal,” says Lichtman. Another Obama win. 
10. Foreign/military failure: The incumbent administration suffers no major failure in foreign or military affairs. Says Lichtman, “We haven’t seen any major failure that resembles something like the Bay of Pigs and don’t foresee anything.” Obama wins again. 
11. Foreign/military success: The incumbent administration achieves a major success in foreign or military affairs. “Since Osama bin Laden was found and killed, I think Obama has achieved military success.” Obama wins his eighth key. 
12. Incumbent charisma: The incumbent party candidate is charismatic or a national hero. Explains Lichtman, “I did not give President Obama the incumbent charisma key. I counted it against him. He’s really led from behind. He didn’t really take the lead in the healthcare debate, he didn’t use his speaking ability to move the American people during the recession. He’s lost his ability to connect since the 2008 election.” Obama loses this key. 
13. Challenger charisma: The challenging party candidate is not charismatic or a national hero. Says Lichtman, “We haven’t seen any candidate in the GOP who meets this criteria and probably won’t.” Obama wins, bringing his total to nine keys, three more than needed to win reelection. 

I might disagree with the professor on his assertion that Obama lacks charisma, but other than that I think the formula makes good sense.

Now while this is very good news for us in 2012, I by NO means believe we should rest on our laurels and just expect this to all play out in our favor.

In fact I believe that the Republican are well aware that they are in trouble in 2012 and are turning to dirty tricks in order to sabotage Obama's chances for reelection.

Case in point: 

The newest political strategy is to turn the African-American community against the first black president. The idea is to get black folks to scream at the President and to threaten to withhold our support come November 2012. Due to the very high unemployment rate in the black community, this could be an easy sell. The well-paid professional propagandists don’t ask African-Americans to lay the blame for the lack of employment at the feet of the business world (which is hoarding up a couple of trillions in their rainy-day fund), or to consider the fact that governors everywhere are cutting down on the public sector workforce (comprised of large numbers of black Americans per capita), or to holler at the Republican-dominated House, which has blocked most of the job-creating programs introduced by Democrats. Instead, they want us to aim our fire solely at our President and to blame him for 30 years of white men’s policies.

And the black community is not the ONLY voting block that the GOP is working to convince to stay home in 2012, we have also seen other groups like Environmentalists, Hispanics, LGBT members, and Union members targeted for disenfranchising by the Republicans.

The problem is that Obama is not a complainer.  He actually embraces the concept first put forward by President Truman that "The buck stops here." He simply accepts that he will receive the blame for problems left unsolved, the failure of policies aggressively blocked by the Republicans, and the fact that Americans are still dying on foreign soil.

If he were Sarah Palin he would go around blaming everybody else for every problem that came along, even those that WERE his fault.  But he is President Barack Obama, and he is somebody who buckles down and does the job to the best of his ability, hoping that the voters can peer through the fog of obfuscation and see the truth of what he has accomplished.

He has far more faith in the American people than I do. I think they are going to need somebody to grab them by the lapels and slap some sense into them before sending them off to the voting booth.

We are already seeing past supporters throwing up their hands in disgust "Hey, I thought he could walk on water. He can't? Fuck it I am not going vote then!"

To those people I would say that by staying home you are not just costing the President one more vote, you are handing your vote to the Republicans. That just means they need even fewer votes to grab hold of the nation's steering wheel and again start driving us off that cliff that the President worked so hard to steer us away from.

So yes the Professor's formula should give us all confidence that President Obama has a better than even chance of staying in the White House, but we still need to get active and do our part to get out the vote and educate our friends and family on the truth of what a Republican victory would mean for this country.

You know what I'm doing. What are you doing?

Update: I thought you all might like to see a few more pictures (Courtesy of the Obama Diary) of President Obama with his most loyal constituents.

New York Times editor compares religious belief to belief that space aliens live among us, and suggests that candidates for President should explain their faith.

Oh I LIKE this guy!

Courtesy of Bill Keller of the NYT:

If a candidate for president said he believed that space aliens dwell among us, would that affect your willingness to vote for him? Personally, I might not disqualify him out of hand; one out of three Americans believe we have had Visitors and, hey, who knows? But I would certainly want to ask a few questions. Like, where does he get his information? Does he talk to the aliens? Do they have an economic plan?This year’s Republican primary season offers us an important opportunity to confront our scruples about the privacy of faith in public life — and to get over them. We have an unusually large number of candidates, including putative front-runners, who belong to churches that are mysterious or suspect to many Americans. Mitt Romney and Jon Huntsman are Mormons, a faith that many conservative Christians have been taught is a “cult” and that many others think is just weird. (Huntsman says he is not “overly religious.”) Rick Perry and Michele Bachmann are both affiliated with fervid subsets of evangelical Christianity — and Rick Santorum comes out of the most conservative wing of Catholicism — which has raised concerns about their respect for the separation of church and state, not to mention the separation of fact and fiction. 

I honestly don’t care if Mitt Romney wears Mormon undergarments beneath his Gap skinny jeans, or if he believes that the stories of ancient American prophets were engraved on gold tablets and buried in upstate New York, or that Mormonism’s founding prophet practiced polygamy (which was disavowed by the church in 1890). Every faith has its baggage, and every faith holds beliefs that will seem bizarre to outsiders. I grew up believing that a priest could turn a bread wafer into the actual flesh of Christ. 

But I do want to know if a candidate places fealty to the Bible, the Book of Mormon (the text, not the Broadway musical) or some other authority higher than the Constitution and laws of this country. It matters to me whether a president respects serious science and verifiable history — in short, belongs to what an official in a previous administration once scornfully described as “the reality-based community.” I do care if religious doctrine becomes an excuse to exclude my fellow citizens from the rights and protections our country promises. 

I am sorry but there should not even be any debate about this.  Of COURSE we should know what kind of beliefs might inform the decision making of potentially the most powerful person in the world.

Look at Rick Perry for example.  The man has said numerous times that he would leave the more difficult problems facing his state, and our country, "in God's hands." Is that really the guy we want to have at the helm tasked with steering this great country through the troubles which lie just over the horizon?

Here are the questions that Keller sent to the candidates:

1. Is it fair to question presidential candidates about details of their faith? 
2. Is it fair to question candidates about controversial remarks made by their pastors, mentors, close associates or thinkers whose books they recommend? 
3. (a) Do you agree with those religious leaders who say that America is a “Christian nation” or “Judeo-Christian nation?” (b) What does that mean in practice? 
4. If you encounter a conflict between your faith and the Constitution and laws of the United States, how would you resolve it? Has that happened, in your experience? 
5. (a) Would you have any hesitation about appointing a Muslim to the federal bench? (b) What about an atheist? 
6. Are Mormons Christians, in your view? Should the fact that Mitt Romney and Jon Huntsman are Mormons influence how we think of them as candidates? 
7. What do you think of the evangelical Christian movement known as Dominionism and the idea that Christians, and only Christians, should hold dominion over the secular institutions of the earth? 
8. (a) What is your attitude toward the theory of evolution? (b) Do you believe it should be taught in public schools? 
9. Do you believe it is proper for teachers to lead students in prayer in public schools?

I don't know about all of you but I would LOVE to hear the answers to these questions, ESPECIALLY from Bachmann and Perry, and of course Palin if she were ignorant enough to throw her hat into the ring.

Already the recent journalistic focus on Dominionism has started to freak the Evangelicals out a little, as evidenced by this complete denial of its existence by disgraced "Right Hand of God" Ralph Reed.

Hey, in my opinion if they are really secure in their faith, and proud of their religious convictions, they should be proud to discuss them in the public forum.

I mean it's not like they have something to hide, right?

While discussing the top GOP candidates, Jack Cafferty wants to know "Why does America seem allergic to brains?"

Okay I am having some real difficulty buying into Cafferty's assertion that Ron Paul is "talking sense," but other than that his assessment of the frontrunners is dead on.

(H/T to Mediaite.)

Anti-immigration activist claims that President Obama is trying to end "White America" and suggests violence may be necessary to stop him.

Courtesy of Mother Jones:

Is President Obama allowing millions of Central Americans to live in the United States illegally as part of his secret plan to destroy "White America"? According to William Gheen of the group Americans For Legal Immigration, the answer is a resounding "yes." Gheen told a conservative talk radio show earlier this week that if things don't improve under "Dictator Obama," patriotic Americans may resort to possibly violent, "revolutionary means." (Gheen, as Media Matters pointed out, has been a frequent presence on Fox News and at tea party rallies). 

Here's what Gheen told talk show host Janet Mefferd: 

"What Janet Napolitano has spent most of her time doing in the last couple of months has been, one, preparing the new spy network that's available now, the new data-collecting, see everything you do online, beyond the normal terrorist list that they’re creating, they’re creating a much larger list now of people who might be troublesome here in the country. And putting out videos and propaganda telegraphing what I believe to be a conflict with White America they’re preparing for after they get another 10 or 15 million people in the country to back them up... "

"We're no longer referring to him as President Barack Obama, our national organization has made the decision and made the announcement we now refer to him as Dictator Barack Obama. That's what he is. And basically at this point, if you're looking for a peaceful, political recourse there really isn't one that we can think of, and I'm really not sure what to tell people out there than I guess they need to make decisions soon to just accept whatever comes next or some type of extra-political activities that I can't really talk about because they're all illegal and violent."

Gheen has since clarified (sort of) that he doesn't personally support violence as a political tool, but believes President Obama isn't leaving freedom-loving Americans with much a choice. 

As insane as this guy seems to be, we MUST pay attention to this kind of rhetoric. I really believe that once President Obama wins a second term that we are going to see a serious uptick in violence laden hyperbole, naked racism, and increased enlistment in militias and 2nd Amendment groups.

In other words, as bad as things are now, I really fear they could get much worse.

Salon writer absolutely nails the most likely reason that Sarah Palin will NEVER throw her hat in the ring.

"Oh hell no, I'm not jumping in! I'm just screwing with you people!"

Courtesy of Salon:

The safe bet remains that Sarah Palin is simply engaged in a long and tiresome tease. Every few weeks comes some new sign of her supposedly imminent entry into the GOP presidential race, but nothing ever seems to happen. 

For the latest flurry of speculation, we can thank Karl Rove, who used several television appearances last weekend to argue that "I think she gets in" and to suggest that Palin's scheduled appearance at a Sept. 3 Tea Party event in Iowa might double as a campaign launch. Like each one that's come before it, chances are that this eruption will soon die down without amounting to anything. Rove may just have been trying to spoil the campaign rollout of his old nemesis, Rick Perry, and Palin is now tamping down the speculation. 

Which is sort of a shame. Because if you're tired of all of this, and if you're tired of all of the media oxygen that the former half-term Alaska governor still manages to consume, then you really should be hoping that Palin actually does get into the race: It may be the best way of making her disappear for good. 

Why? Because a presidential campaign would almost certainly end in defeat for Palin. And not just any kind of defeat -- epic, humiliating defeat, the sort of disaster that might once and for all convince the political and media worlds that the empress has no clothes. 

If she jumped in, polls would initially show her in contention, but she'd be running a structure- and discipline-free campaign with no support from GOP opinion-shapers and on a message that really isn't unique. Republican voters who haven't yet figured it out would realize she's not a viable option and abandon her for a candidate who seems to have a better chance. If she were to then suffer humiliating defeats in Iowa and New Hampshire, Palin might suddenly find that the media isn't nearly as interested in her every tweet and Facebook post as it once was. 

In other words, those who just want her to go away should consider a Palin presidential campaign an investment: You'd have to deal with a few weeks (or maybe even months) of saturation coverage, but there'd be a good chance it would all end with Palin's presence in our lives severely and permanently diminished.

Brilliant!  This is EXACTLY what I have been thinking for quite some time now.

I do not give Ms. Palin too much credit for her intelligence, but I DO believe she has good instincts when it comes to keeping her brand alive and understanding the reality of her limitations.

Sister Sarah KNOWS she cannot stand on the stage and debate the other GOP hopefuls. And she knows that doing so will reveal her complete lack of knowledge about the things a President needs to know, and forever remove her ability to bullshit her followers into thinking she has what it takes to do that job.

And once the political fantasies of the Palin-bots have been crushed under the heavy heel of reality, why would they pay ANY attention to her ever again?


Essentially, just like this article states, Palin would be "permanently diminished," in a way that perhaps even Joe, or Levi, or Fred's books could never fully accomplish. Remember this would be MILLIONS of Americans watching her grasping for facts, failing to adequately understand the question, and sweating like a Sumo wrestler while her whole world crumbled around her.

It might make for some of the most compelling political theater we have seen in decades, but it is VERY unlikely to EVER happen.

New Hampshire Straw Poll puts things back into perspective.

Courtesy of Hampton-North Hampton Patch:

Ron Paul got a great birthday present Saturday, as the 76-year-old defeated 11 other Republicans in Saturday's New Hampshire Young Republicans Straw Poll. 

Paul, a congressman from Texas, won a commanding 45 percent of the vote and bested runner-up Mitt Romney by 35 percent despite not attending the event, which was held in New Castle and also included a lobster bake. 

There were 302 ballots cast Saturday, and the full vote results are as follows, in the order the candidates were listed on the ballot: 

Jon Huntsman - 3 percent ; 
Herman Cain - 5 percent; 
Rick Perry - 8 percent; 
Fred Karger - 0 percent ; 
Paul - 45 percent; 
Mitt Romney - 10 percent; 
Thaddeus McCotter - 8 percent; 
Rick Santorum - 3 percent; 
Michele Bachmann - 5 percent; 
Buddy Roemer - 3 percent; 
Gary Johnson - 6 percent; 
and Newt Gingrich - 1 percent.

It appears that as we go farther east, Dominionism does not have quite the same cachet as it did in Iowa.

As you can see Michele Bachmann, Rick Perry, and Rick Santorum barely caused a ripple.

Of course as we well know NONE of these straw polls really mean a damn thing. However I think it is worth noting whose name received too few votes to even deserve mention in BOTH contests.

It seems like the whole country is pretty much over Snowdrift Snooki, with the exception of those poor souls trapped on that rocky outcropping in the middle of the Sea O'Pee.

What is the definition of insanity again?

I believe it was Albert Einstein who said "Insanity: Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."

With that definition in mind, check out the frenzy of activity over at this Palin-bot site:

Texas Organize4Palin volunteers have arranged a charter bus trip to attend Tea Party of America’s “Restoring America” rally in Indianola, Iowa, on Saturday September 3rd. 

Governor Sarah Palin will be the keynote speaker at this event and many Palin supporters believe this will be the very day she will declare her candidacy for the 2012 election to defeat President Barack Obama.

Keep in mind that these same people were also CONVINCED Palin would throw her hat into the ring during her last book tour, and again when Glenn Beck came to Anchorage, and yet again during the premiere of "The Undefeated," and at various other times too numerous to mention.

Like miniature poodles running for the door every time they think they hear approaching footsteps, these idiots become excited every time Palin clears her throat, convinced that THIS time she will really do what they are breathlessly waiting on pins and needles for her to do.

What they still fail to realize, even though I have been selflessly attempting to educate them for almost three years now, is that Palin IS doing what MOST of us expect her to do.  Which is to continue faking a run for the office of President of the United States, while teasing these idiots into ponying up even more money for the opportunity to once again be disappointed that she did not declare.

Right now this whole thing seems like a crazy experiment in stubborn endurance, the goal of which is to see how long these people will dangle on the line with only a brief appearance here, or a pseudo political advertisement there to give them hope.

As much as I personally dislike what Palin is doing to these people, I have to admit that I find myself almost impressed that she has managed to successfully string along a portion of her once much larger group of supporters for all of this time. I don't know exactly what it says about her, or them, or celebrity-politics in general, but it has lasted far longer than I would have thought possible even a year ago.

And I once again have to say that I worry about the fragile emotional condition that will surely be the result once she finally cuts these people loose.

How in the world does the President even have TIME to read this many books?

Graphic courtesy of the Daily Beast.

That is TWENTY FOUR books!

And most of these are not exactly bathroom reading material.

I think in the same amount of time I have only managed to get through twelve books myself. And I am embarrassed to say that most of the books I have read are not quite up to the same literary standards as those that President Obama has read.

Amen

Rachel Maddow discusses how Republicans use a Presidential campaign, not to win the White House, but as a stepping stone to fame and fortune. Sound familiar?

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

(By the way in the lead up to this segment Rachel played the confrontation between Todd Palin and the Alaskan women in Iowa that we discussed here several days ago.  You can see that here.)

Top Ten Things that Rick Perry does NOT want you to know about him.

Courtesy of Think Progress:

(1) PERRY ALLOWED THE EXECUTION OF A LIKELY INNOCENT MAN, THEN IMPEDED AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE MATTER 

(2) PERRY WANTS TO REPEAL THE 16th AND 17th AMENDMENTS, ENDING DIRECT ELECTION OF U.S. SENATORS AND THE FEDERAL INCOME TAX 

(3) PERRY PROPOSED LETTING STATES DROP OUT OF SOCIAL SECURITY AND MEDICAID

(4) TEXAS IS THE COUNTRY’S BIGGEST POLLUTER, BUT PERRY SUED THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT FOR DISAPPROVING OF THE STATE’S AIR QUALITY STANDARDS 

(5) PERRY DESIGNATED AS “EMERGENCY LEGISLATION” A BILL REQUIRING ALL WOMEN SEEKING ABORTIONS TO HAVE SONOGRAMS FIRST 

(6) PERRY GUTTED CHILDCARE SERVICES EVEN AS TEXAS CHILDHOOD POVERTY HIT 25 PERCENT 

(7) PERRY WAS A STRONG SUPPORTER OF TEXAS’S ANTI-SODOMY LAWS 

(8) PERRY IS A STIMULUS HYPOCRITE WHO LOUDLY CRITICIZED FEDERAL RECOVERY MONEY BUT USED IT TO BALANCE HIS STATE’S BUDGET 

(9) PERRY SAID THAT TEXAS MIGHT HAVE TO SECEDE FROM THE UNITED STATES 

(10) DESPITE HAVING THE WORST UNINSURED RATE IN THE COUNTRY, PERRY CLAIMS THAT TEXAS HAS “THE BEST HEALTH CARE IN THE COUNTRY”

I think I would like to add an eleventh one to this list:

(11) PERRY STOLE MONEY SET ASIDE TO HELP THE POOR AND ELDERLY PAY THEIR UTILITY BILLS DURING THE CURRENT HEATWAVE, TO HELP BALANCE THE STATE BUDGET.

I said earlier that Rick Perry is the one GOP candidate that worries me the most, the more I learn the stronger that feeling has grown.