Sarah Palin’s Bus Tour To Hit Iowa

Sarah Palin's latest media spectacle will be heading west next month.

What was originally announced as a tour of East Coast historical sites appears to be taking a significant detour west:

WASHINGTON — Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin will travel to Iowa next month as part of her nationwide bus tour, two sources with direct knowledge of the plan told RealClearPolitics.

Palin’s trip to the nation’s first voting state — where she has not yet set foot this year –will further escalate the already feverish speculation that she is leaning toward a White House run.

Though Palin has insisted that her “One Nation” bus tour — being kicked off from Washington over the holiday weekend — is intended merely to “highlight America’s foundation,” RCP has learned that the road trip was designed as a test run to find out whether she can execute a decidedly unconventional campaign game plan.

Palin — and especially her husband, Todd — is said to be leaning toward running. But multiple sources said that their foremost remaining concern was whether it would be logistically feasible for their large family to hit the road together for the next several months in a prospective campaign that would rely heavily on bus travel.

The answer to that question will play a critical role in how the 2012 race develops.

For months, the prospective candidates for the Republican nomination for president have methodically lined up donors, hired operatives, and laid the groundwork in early-voting states to set the gears in motion for their painstakingly planned campaigns.

Eager to avoid burning through resources and peaking too early, the GOP White House hopefuls have, for the most part, eased incrementally into a slowly developing race, while eyeing one another warily.

Enter Sarah Palin in a black leather jacket, cruising through the nation’s capital on a Harley-Davidson. “I love that smell of the emissions!” she told the crowd as she kicked off her tour at the annual Rolling Thunder motorcycle rally on Sunday.

And with that, the question arises: Could Palin leave some of the less charismatic candidates in the dust?

Indeed. If I were Tim Pawlenty, Herman Cain, or any of the other number of GOP candidates trying desperately to break through in the race, this is bad news. Even if Palin doesn’t enter the race, her presence touring the country for the next 4-6 weeks is going to be all over the political press, meaning there will be less time for coverage of the latest stump speech from Cain, Pawlenty, or any of the other candidates. If she does enter the race, then I think it’s fairly accurate to state that those candidates would be hurt significantly in the race for the GOP base.

The person a Palin candidacy would help the most? Mitt Romney:

“It’s possible someone may get in later on,” Gillespie said, “but Republican activists, officials and donors are going to begin picking a horse from the current field. We have a field that will produce a nominee capable of beating Obama next November.”…

Republicans officials have no idea what [Palin is] planning, although they agree she would have tons to lose by entering a race that would cost her the mystique she has built up. And Romney advisers said her entry would help the former Massachusetts governor dramatically.

“The shock value would cause elected officials and party officials to rally around Mitt, because she’d scare the daylights out of them,” one official said. “And it would allow him to position himself very much in the middle of Republican, conservative thinking and avoid the fringe, and look more moderate for the general election.”

Bachmann would have the same effect, the advisers said. Either of them “gives Romney a bogeyman: ‘Stop this crazy woman.'”

Slate’s John Dickerson mostly agrees:

The view among Republican strategists involved with various current and past campaigns is that Romney benefits from Palin’s entry. Romney’s supporters are unlikely to leave him for Palin. Palin not only steals a portion of the anti-Romney vote from candidates like Tim Pawlenty and Jon Huntsman; she also steals available television air time. She makes it harder for second-tier candidates to get noticed.

A Palin candidacy also potentially changes the shape of the Iowa caucus, which helps Romney, who is not in a position to do well there. She appeals to the state’s large number of evangelical caucus voters. If she wins or does well, Romney can argue that Iowa is following its pattern of selecting quirky, unlikely-to-win-the-nomination candidates like Mike Huckabee and Pat Robertson.

There is one scenario, however, in which Palin’s entry could cause Romney’s numbers to fall. Right now, the dynamic of the race is that there is Romney and an anti-Romney candidate. If it becomes instead Palin and an anti-Palin candidate, Huntsman or Pawlenty might have a moment in the sun.

Perhaps, but Pawlenty has yet to show that he can break out of the pack. In fact, the most recent poll shows him trailing not just Romney and Palin, but also Rudy Giuliani (who probably isn’t even running) Herman Cain, Ron Paul, and Michele Bachmann. Moreover, Pawlenty’s blandness on the stump does not contrasts well with Palin who, whatever one might say about her, does know how to fire up a crowd. Huntsman, on the other hand, is a cypher who seems unlikely to break out this time around despite the fact that pundits seem to think he’s the next big Republican star. At this point, then, Romney would be best situated as the anti-Palin and, for Republicans who actually want to win in November 2012, the best hope against a Palin campaign that is, in the end, nothing but a suicide mission.

 

FILED UNDER: Campaign 2012, Politicians, Sarah Palin, US Politics
Doug Mataconis
About Doug Mataconis
Doug holds a B.A. in Political Science from Rutgers University and J.D. from George Mason University School of Law. He joined the staff of OTB in May 2010 and contributed a staggering 16,483 posts before his retirement in January 2020.

Comments

  1. ponce says:

    If you want to look like a leader you should avoid riding in the kiddie seat.

  2. michael reynolds says:

    Does she not know she looks like a lipstick lesbian riding behind her butch girlfriend?

  3. Josh Painter says:

    Actually, Palin is positioning herself as the anti-Romney, Considering Mitt’s RomneyCare, ethanol pandering and reputation as an opportunistic flip-flopper with no core issue positions of his own, that’s not a bad strategy.

    Even the establishment GOPers are beginning to sour on Romney and looking at Huntsman as the possible new Great RINO Hope.

  4. Josh Painter says:

    Alinsky much, Michael?

  5. Wiley Stoner says:

    Josh, you will have to explain to Mikey who Alinsky was. Seems our font of knowledge is lacking in that area. Yet he follows Alinsky’s rules to the letter.

  6. ponce says:

    Isn’t it odd that only the fringe right have read Alinsky’s stuff?

    In fact, the fringe right has an entire pantheon of heroes and villains that normal Americans have never heard of.

    Actually, I think Palin is putting the lesbian vibe out purposefully to give her panty sniffers a tingle.

    Her flapping jowls were kind of a buzz kill, though…but…it’s the one thing she truly shares with Reagan.

  7. michael reynolds says:

    ponce:

    They haven’t read Alinsky. Glen Beck told them they should be afraid. Now they’re all experts.

    Garbage in, garbage out.

  8. jukeboxgrad says:

    At this point, then, Romney would be best situated as the anti-Palin and, for Republicans who actually want to win in November 2012, the best hope against a Palin campaign that is, in the end, nothing but a suicide mission.

    This is true. And so is this:

    Bachmann would have the same effect, the advisers said. Either of them “gives Romney a bogeyman: ‘Stop this crazy woman.’”

    And what Dickerson said (in a part of his article that you didn’t quote) is also true:

    We know what President Obama’s strategists would like: a civil war between the Romney’s establishment Republicans and Palin’s Tea Party populists.

    And that “civil war” is exactly what’s going to happen. The party ‘elite’ is going to rally around Romney, and this is just going to fuel Palin’s narrative, that it’s all about the people vs. the elite. Palin is about to rip the party apart. Good.

    The current state of that civil war can already be seen in various places, like the comment thread on the hotair article you cited. Pro-Palin Rs and anti-Palin Rs are communicating with each other using statements like this: “you are an effing idiot.”

    I’ll be needing plenty of popcorn.

  9. jukeboxgrad says:

    And in the end, the nominee will be Palin (as I have been predicting since at least last November). Because there are lots of Palinists, and they are not going to listen to reason. If they were susceptible to facts and logic, they never would have become Palinists, to begin with.

  10. Terrye says:

    It is getting kind of tedious..will she won’t she…I am going to start avoiding Palin stories. On the news and everywhere else too.

    I think Sarah Palin is a very gifted politician, but I am just kind of leary of all the hoopla and the reality TV and the facebook and the book tours and the bus tours. It feels too much like Entertainment Tonight.

  11. Terrye says:

    jukeboxgrad:

    I can remember those pro Obama people and pro Clinton people going at it pretty good too, but when push came to shove..Obama won.

    The thing you have to remember is that all those Rs..pro Palin, anti Palin, indifferent Palin..have one thing in common: They want to send Barack Obama back to Chicago.

  12. Rock says:

    Anti-gay, sexism, chauvinist pig, Alerts:

    Does she not know she looks like a lipstick lesbian riding behind her butch girlfriend?

    Actually, I think Palin is putting the lesbian vibe out purposefully to give her panty sniffers a tingle.

  13. TG Chicago says:

    Dickerson said:

    A Palin candidacy also potentially changes the shape of the Iowa caucus, which helps Romney, who is not in a position to do well there.

    I’m not sure about this. Romney came in a very solid second place last time, and this time Huckabee isn’t running. Given that Romney now has a network on the ground, doesn’t it seem likely that he’d get at least second place this time? (if he puts time, effort and resources into it) Unless Dickerson believes that Romney only does “well” in Iowa if he wins, I can’t agree with what he said.

    I guess it’s all the expectations game in the press. If Romney tries to win Iowa and fails, then he looks weak. If he doesn’t try, then no big deal. But to me, if he actually wins Iowa, it gives him the air of inevitability, which always helps with donors and volunteers and such.

    Ah, one thing I just considered. Romney got 25% of the vote last time. If he runs seriously for Iowa this time and does worse than 25% — even just a little bit — that hands a story peg to the press that he’d rather avoid.

  14. ponce says:

    The thing you have to remember is that all those Rs..pro Palin, anti Palin, indifferent Palin..have one thing in common: They want to send Barack Obama back to Chicago.

    With 70% of Americans saying they would definitely not vote for Palin I imagine there are a considerable number of Republican who would prefer Obama wins.

    As George Will just said: “The threshold question, not usually asked, but it’s in everyone’s mind in a presidential election. ‘Should we give this person nuclear weapons?’ “

  15. michael reynolds says:

    Rock:

    Ah, I was waiting for this, the predictable response.

    So, ‘splain to me what’s anti-gay, sexist or chauvinist about saying that she looks like a lipstick lesbian sharing a hog with her butch girlfriend?

    Take them one at a time, and explain.

  16. TG Chicago says:

    Enter Sarah Palin in a black leather jacket, cruising through the nation’s capital on a Harley-Davidson. “I love that smell of the emissions!” she told the crowd as she kicked off her tour at the annual Rolling Thunder motorcycle rally on Sunday.

    Yeah, it’s not enough to ignore all available science regarding climate change. If liberals are against it, wingnuts have to actively and wholeheartedly embrace it. Next she’ll be talking about the natural beauty of oil spills.

    (Of course, Palin has often spoken of loving the clean air in Alaska. I guess she gets to have multiple positions on this issue.)

  17. Rock says:

    Michael,

    You are a writer and a scholar. You know dam well what those terms mean without explanation. If you don’t know, then no explanation by me or anyone else will enlighten you.

  18. Murray says:

    Anybody wit half a brain knows she’s mainly a media troll, but she sure is good at it!

  19. michael reynolds says:

    Rock:

    So, first you call me names. And then — shock and amazement — you have nothing to back it up.

    I am a writer, but definitely not a scholar. Nevertheless, I’ll point out that the word “lesbian” is not a pejorative. Neither is “lipstick lesbian,” or, “butch.” You’re assuming that lesbian is an insult and from there you go on to assume that I must share your perspective.

    If, let’s say, Barack Obama were on the back of a motorcycle being driven by some big hairy tough guy (can’t think of an example, sorry,) I could say, “He looks like a twink out riding with a bear.” Same way I might, if I saw Rick Santorum on the back of a motorcycle with Herman Cain, I might say, “Oh, look, it’s both flavors of stupid: chocolate and vanilla.”

    It’s insulting, it’s mean, but it’s not anti-gay or sexist or chauvinist.

    The humor comes from the gap between the image Palin thinks she’s projecting and the image I (and probably most people) perceive.

    It has nothing to do with gays per se, or women per se. We’re allowed to say, “gay,” and “lesbian,” and “black,” and “Hispanic,” and all kinds of words without them automatically signaling homophobia, racism or nativism. These are not in and of themselves pejoratives. The import of the word comes from the intentions of the user, not just from the word itself.

    And humor requires leeway with language and indeed with sensibilities. Which is why I was fighting back against political correctness years before Bill O’Reilly explained to you what it meant. And why I speak out against online censorship and lists of so-called dirty words, and the rest of that nonsense.

  20. jukeboxgrad says:

    Terrye:

    I am going to start avoiding Palin stories.

    That’s going to get harder and harder to do.

    Even though Palin makes a big deal about how they are supposedly at war with her, Palin and the press have a highly symbiotic relationship. She’s great for ratings because even people who don’t support her find her entertaining, albeit for reasons she wouldn’t like (I’m in that category).

    This is one of the reasons she’ll win the nomination: she’s going to get an extraordinary amount of free press. Romney will have plenty of money, but it won’t be enough to compete with all the free coverage she’ll be getting.

    I can remember those pro Obama people and pro Clinton people going at it pretty good too

    Good point. But I think the civil war we are about to see inside the GOP is going to be much more polarized, intense, bitter and personal. Palin has a special talent for making things that way. And the battle over her is going to highlight deep fault lines in the GOP that have been lurking there for a long time.

    The thing you have to remember is that all those Rs..pro Palin, anti Palin, indifferent Palin..have one thing in common: They want to send Barack Obama back to Chicago.

    Good point, but ponce also has a good point, that plenty of Rs will vote for Obama over Palin. Also, looking at the situation the way you describe requires thinking rationally. Palinists, virtually by definition, are people who are inclined to not do that. So they are supporting Palin, and will continue to support Palin, even though Romney, not Palin, is the best shot “to send Barack Obama back to Chicago.”

    By the way, I’m not just predicting that Palin will be nominated. I’m also making this prediction: in the unlikely event that she is not nominated, she will run anyway.

    ==================
    TG:

    Of course, Palin has often spoken of loving the clean air in Alaska. I guess she gets to have multiple positions on this issue.

    She was for clean air before she was against it.

    ==================
    Michael:

    It’s insulting, it’s mean, but it’s not anti-gay or sexist or chauvinist. The humor comes from the gap between the image Palin thinks she’s projecting and the image I (and probably most people) perceive.

    Nicely done, as usual. Intelligent, clear and true. You are a “dam” good writer.

  21. MarkedMan says:

    This Palin mania is not good for the Republican party and its not good for the country. And this comes from me, someone who realizes that Obama would crush her in a landslide and I think our current president is doing an exceptional job. But I’m not a partisian, rather I am someone who would rather both parties are serious about doing what is right for the country. Palin in is not serious and she only cares about Sarah.

  22. Wiley Stoner says:

    Mike, Mike, the only thing needed to prove you are all the things someone claims your are, and I noticed none of those claims were that you are intelligent, reasonable or good looking, is a quick review of what you post here. I would like to know which of Palin’s policies do you disagree with. Sorry Mike, but women who look as good as she looks never look at dudes like you. Sad but true. All your life. No wonder you are a hater. Maybe you have a change with that brilliant Debbie Wasserman.

  23. michael reynolds says:

    Wiley:

    Sorry Mike, but women who look as good as she looks never look at dudes like you.

    My wife at about age 50, several years older than Palin: http://www.poemas-del-alma.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/Applegate.JPG

    Now, why don’t you show us your pretty face?

  24. marperl says:

    On the Road to . . .

    Sarah Palin’s national bus tour is underway. But things got off to a shaky start Sunday when the Ms America Express became lost in the District of Columbia and ended up in the not-so-touristy but historic southeast Anacostia neighborhood.

    According to a very, very recently “retired” Palin aide, “Tod, was driving and refused Palin’s request to stop and ask for directions.” The former aide said the bus finally turned onto a sidestreet and tried to back out only to bump into the curb. As Team Palin came out to assess any damage, curious onlookers gathered and soon realized who was “visiting” them. . .

    Palin’s predicament continues at the whimsical Thinking out Loud:
    http://marperl.blogspot.com/2011/05/more-breaking-news.html

  25. anjin-san says:

    Wiley.. Perhaps you could show us a photo of Mrs. Wiley, since you elected to go down that road.

  26. Patrick T. McGuire says:

    If they were susceptible to facts and logic, they never would have become Palinists, to begin with.

    Ah hell, why bring facts and logic into it? If we had done that in 2008, O’Bama would never have been elected in the first place.

  27. anjin-san says:

    O’Bama

    Hey, Patrick remember to wear his “I am an idiot” badge.

  28. TG Chicago says:

    Ah hell, why bring facts and logic into it? If we had done that in 2008, O’Bama would never have been elected in the first place.

    It’s perfectly logical that, after the Republican party had made the country much worse for 8 years straight, the American people would choose a different option.

  29. Rock says:

    Michael,

    Yes I know it’s mean and insulting to call other people names. It seams to me that you and others have extraordinary antipathy toward people not like yourselves and are quick to insult them if you have some level of discomfort with what they say or do. The name calling gets really old and . . . as far as I’m concerned, diminishes the character of the writer and creditability of the message.

    Would you actually tell Todd Palin to his face that his wife looks like a lipstick lesbian riding behind her butch girlfriend?

  30. michael reynolds says:

    Rock:

    Where do you get ‘antipathy toward people not like myself?’ That’s nonsense.

    If Palin were just a person not like myself I’d have no interest in her. She thrust herself into politics. I didn’t invite her. She ran for Vice President. She works as a commentator for Fox “News.” She has a reality show. She does everything she possibly can to draw attention to herself, and she does it in pursuit of a political agenda. And she relentlessly attacks anyone “not like her.”

    Is she off limits? Is that your point? Why?

    She’s a pol. We’re allowed to criticize pols. I seem to recall you doing it yourself. We’re even allowed to satirize pols. We’re allowed to dislike what they stand for, and we’re allowed to poke fun at them when they make lame attempts to manipulate us, as she is now doing.

    This goes to the very heart of the Palinista mentality. To you she’s some kind of symbol of you, an avatar of you and what you think of as people like you.

    She’s a politician, Rock. A politician. If she wants to avoid being criticized she should think about another line of work, because politics ain’t beanbag. And if she’s so fragile that she has to quit her job as governor because people were saying mean things to her, and if you and the rest of her fans don’t think she’s up for some ribbing, maybe you should ask yourself why in God’s name she should be running the world’s sole superpower.

    Seriously? I should be careful because her husband might beat me up? Gosh, let’s hope no one says anything mean to her if she’s elected, God forbid, or I guess Todd will have to go nuclear.

  31. mpw280 says:

    reynolds brings the hate and slurs once again, weakly tries to justify his way out of it, but shows once again that he is just a shallow hater. mpw

  32. anjin-san says:

    mpw… generally, the expression “hater” is a go to for 13 year old girls use when they are talking about people who do not like them. If you are going to call people shallow… just sayin’

  33. Pete says:

    And this comes from me, someone who realizes that Obama would crush her in a landslide and I think our current president is doing an exceptional job. But I’m not a partisian, rather I am someone who would rather both parties are serious about doing what is right for the country. Palin in is not serious and she only cares about Sarah.

    Those of you who count Andrew Sullivan a sage, (I don’t), might be surprised that he thinks Palin can beat Obama; http://video.thechrismatthewsshow.com/player/?fid=31183

  34. Rock says:

    Michael,

    Would you actually tell Todd Palin to his face that his wife looks like a lipstick lesbian riding behind her butch girlfriend?

    Seriously? I should be careful because her husband might beat me up? Gosh, let’s hope no one says anything mean to her if she’s elected, God forbid, or I guess Todd will have to go nuclear.

    That was a creditability test, Mike.You didn’t handle it well. I guess in your world it’s okay to insult a man’s wife if you face no consequences. Sarah is never going to be president. You know it and so does everyone else.

    What if Michelle Obama rode up on a Harley sitting behind a woman, would you tell the President that his wife looks like a lipstick lesbian riding behind her butch girlfriend?

  35. An Interested Party says:

    Yes I know it’s mean and insulting to call other people names. It seams to me that you and others have extraordinary antipathy toward people not like yourselves and are quick to insult them if you have some level of discomfort with what they say or do. The name calling gets really old and . . . as far as I’m concerned, diminishes the character of the writer and creditability of the message.

    Tell us, how do you refer to the president? Do you always use his proper name? Do you always show him the respect you seem to want for Palin? This silly notion that just because some people are mean to poor Sarah makes them misogynists and male chauvinist pigs is just as ridiculous as the idea that any criticism of the president is based on racism…you’re a big one to scream “RACE CARD!!!!” and yet you don’t seem to mind using the gender card when it suits your purposes…

    reynolds brings the hate and slurs once again, weakly tries to justify his way out of it, but shows once again that he is just a shallow hater.

    This from someone who has told others in the past who have supported the president that they were “sucking his knob” or words to that effect…please, check out a mirror before you are tempted to call anyone else a shallow hater…

  36. Rock says:

    An Interested Party:

    Tell us, how do you refer to the president? Do you always use his proper name?

    Not every time. Sometimes I use his middle name. Nevertheless, Michael just told me that its okay to insult politicians.

  37. michael reynolds says:

    What if Michelle Obama rode up on a Harley sitting behind a woman, would you tell the President that his wife looks like a lipstick lesbian riding behind her butch girlfriend?

    Is MIchele Obama a politician?

    The bottom line here is that you’re the sexist. Equality means equality. It means a woman can run for office, and she can take the same crap as a man. I’ve been a feminist since I baked bread for my wife when she was running the women’s center at University of Texas. And I’ve never wavered in the simple idea that equal means equal. (I also maintained that position when Pat Schroeder was treating the army like an equal results mechanism.)

    Sarah Palin is a politician, not “Todd’s wife.” She’s a big girl looking for a big job.

  38. mpw280 says:

    Oh please anjin, like it isn’t soooo liberal to call anyone who isn’t a liberal a hater.

    ip police your own, but no, you can’t. If you don’t like me calling someone a ballwasher, knob sucker, and what not, defend reynolds’ language less and call him on it more, or put down the alinsky book and live up to the standards you think I should live up to and try and get reynolds to do the same. Since no one on the liberal side here really has a problem with reynolds slurs then why should I tame it down? You all like your slurs when you are throwing them, like them when I do as well. If you can’t take it don’t dish it, would be the appropriate theme there, and we all see that your side doesn’t take it so maybe they shouldn’t dish it. mpw

  39. A voice from another precinct says:

    I have to say that it is fun to watch these threads spin wildly out of control and off topic. But on the other hand, it is hard to stay focused on content so insignificant.

  40. mpw280 says:

    reynolds, Mrs Obama campaigns, therefore she is a target according to your twisted logic. So you have made it ok to make Mrs Obama fair game, thanks for the open season sign, want to try for the kids too? Keep digging. mpw

  41. A voice from another precinct says:

    An open question to Michael: is it just my imagination, or are you pigmy baiting in your posts? (and I look forward to seeing what names about me THAT comment provokes.)

  42. michael reynolds says:

    mpw:

    And here we have Alinsky again. Glenn Beck must have been talking about him again. Up pop the robots regurgitating nonsense.

  43. michael reynolds says:

    An open question to Michael: is it just my imagination, or are you pigmy baiting in your posts?

    Okay, that made me laugh.

    The truth? Of course I am. I’m in the middle of a rewrite. I hate rewrites. First drafts are fun, but rewrites annoy me and I can only handle so many pages at a time before I get bored and frustrated and go looking for trouble.

    I suppose I could drink, but that really would get in the way of work, and, after years of research I’ve discovered a connection between drinking and hangovers.

    I could cheat on my wife, but I’m pretty sure I’d wake up with Osama Eyeball, if you know what I mean.

    I could beat the kids, but my son is 14 now and getting frighteningly big, and my daughter is up for her junior black belt, so I’m not sure that would work out, either.

    Can’t really handle drugs anymore, too old.

    So, yes, I occasionally engage in the sport of pygmy baiting. I know it’s wrong. But it’s kind of fun sometimes.

  44. Scott O. says:

    What is the big deal with conservatives and Alinsky? Is there one of his tactics that they would hesitate to employ? MPW, maybe you could explain it to me.

  45. ponce says:

    Sarah Palin always brings out the best in Americans.

    So, she has that going for her.

  46. mpw280 says:

    I shouldn’t slur anyone while reynolds can slur anyone he likes, which would be right out of alinsky’s rules for radicals. Which, paraphrased, is make the other side live up to standards you set. Since ip said I shouldn’t use the same language as reynolds while not calling reynolds on his use of slurs, it fits. Want a level playing field, make it. Don’t expect not to have the same language thrown back in your face when you use it, like reynolds does and ip defends.
    reynolds, don’t watch Beck, don’t need to. Have read the book and have seen it in action, with your weak semantics and bs defense or your using slurs. As to pygmys, they would kick your ass handily, them maybe roast it. You baiting pygmy’s would be dangerous, they are armed and you would be easy meat. mpw

  47. michael reynolds says:

    mpw:

    I think there is 0% chance that you have read Alinsky’s book. And 100% chance that you heard about him on talk radio or Fox.

    Numbers approximate.

  48. Wiley Stoner says:

    Well, Mikey one surely does not hear about the radical left on NBC, CBS, or ABC. Not to mention CNN or MSNBC. For that matter any major news paper. If you do not watch Fox news chances are youi are misinformed. Reynolds being a near perfect example. Anjin, I am not married, but like always, you change the subject to something other than what I wrote about. For all you know, I share the same problems Reynolds does. I just do not publish my picture to frighten little children. I am of the opinion most of the posters here have had any sign of intelligence educated out of them. Any of you a member of mensa? Mantis, Anjin anyone. I didn’t see any of you at any convention.

  49. michael reynolds says:

    I kind of love Wiley right now.

  50. mpw280 says:

    You think, wow, that is rich reynolds. Only a liberal can read alinsky? Don’t listen to talk radio, don’t have the time or inclination for talk radio. Only watch a little Fox, more inclined to History, Military, Discover, G4, Foodtv, Outdoor. I would hazard a bet you listen to more Fox than I do, in either format. So you fail again. Good luck, keep digging. mpw

  51. michael reynolds says:

    mpw:

    Actually i don’t think any significant number of liberals have read Alinsky. No one gives a damn about him except Beck and his acolytes. Suddenly, out of nowhere, there’s a huge interest in this old fart. It all came from Beck. That’s where you got it. And no, you didn’t read the book.

  52. Jay Tea says:

    Does she not know she looks like a lipstick lesbian riding behind her butch girlfriend?

    I’m a little late here, but once again michael opens up his criticisms of Palin by sexualizing her. (Prior, he said she had been promoted from MILF — Mother I’d Like To F*CK — to GMILF — Grand-Mother I’d Like To F*CK). Now, he’s calling her a lesbian.

    OK, michael, you’re right, technically, neither are insults. But kindly explain to us how you, a self-proclaimed successful writer, could insist on making Palin’s sexuality the first thing you tend to bring up, especially in context of the historic trend of men sexualizing women in an attempt to make them be taken less seriously and denigrate them for venturing outside the “traditional” female roles of wife, mother, housekeeper, and whatnot and venturing into “man’s work.”

    Conversely, would you mind terribly if I were to comment on that presumed photo of Mrs. reynolds, which you posted purely in the context of her physical appearance, and say that she is exceptionally appealing, and I especially appreciate the slightly downturned angle of her head, which facilitates fantasizing about her performing fellatio on me, preferably while unclad?

    Please, consider it a compliment and expression of envy and respect, and not as any kind of insult to her or you.

    J.

  53. Yet another disillusioned pawn says:

    Jay,

    That was crass! In fact, that was so crass that as a fellow classmate used to say while we were in college together, that was so low that you’d have to put up an umbrella if you were standing under an ant.

  54. anjin-san says:

    I didn’t see any of you at any convention.

    Since you don’t know what I look like, it would be difficult to know if you had seen me or not, no?

    Did you say MENSA, or DENSA?

  55. jwest says:

    First off, I would like to congratulate Michael for marrying far above his station. She’s a lovely woman who appears to have a look of infinite patients, which must come in handy being wed to a liberal.

    Secondly, I would agree with Disillusioned Pawn that Jay Tea’s comment was crass. I say that only because Jay Tea is conservative and as such that type of comment isn’t what we do, however, I do recognize why it was made. Jay Tea was trying to use the same tactic as liberals to shock Michael into realizing how inappropriate his comment was. It won’t work. It never does.

    Liberals have always been socially awkward and most times don’t know when they are being insulting. Whether due to some chemical imbalance or how they were genetically deprived of the ability to connect empathically with others, what most people would know instinctively not to say they blurt out without a second thought. They can’t help themselves.

    Without the ability to look past the deficiencies liberals have with conversation in polite society, no dialog is possible.

  56. Jay Tea says:

    pawn, I was trying to be courteous by speaking to michael on the level he seems most comfortable. I thought I was rather polite and considerate.

    I would never speak that way to most others, though — because, like you, I find it very crass and tasteless and likely to get me (rightfully) punched in the nose or slapped. But with michael, that’s his chosen milieu.

    J.

  57. jwest says:

    By way of example, Larry David plays the quintessential liberal on “Curb Your Enthusiasm”.

  58. sam says:

    Lessee, Jay Tea posts a really execrable piece of trash about Michael’s wife — a posting that ought to shame any decent person — and immediately thereafter MiniTea posts saying, “Golly, that was crappy, but Jay’s lapse from conservative good manners was in furtherance of the Great Patriotic War Against Libruls, so it’s really OK if he shows his ass in public because it’s all in a good cause and you never can win with libruls anyway, but, gosh, God has called us to this task so we must go on even though it’s a lost cause because, well you know, they are libruls, but per aspera ad astra or sumthin.”

  59. anjin-san says:

    Sam… as has been noted previousy, jay is a brave man when he is hiding behind a computer.

  60. Jay Tea says:

    So, then, anjin and sam, there is a line between michael’s calling Sarah Palin a MILF/GILF and “libstick lesbian” and my comments based on his wife’s picture? Please, enlighten me — just where is the line? What makes michael’s comments acceptable to you, and mine unacceptable?

    I am eager to learn, as if I have indeed erred. Show me the error of my ways. Elaborate, please, where my remarks were substantially worse than his.

    J.

  61. hey norm says:

    i suppose pretending to be a biker is not nearly as bad as pretending to be a hunter. funny… she has her daddy load her rifle for her, and she has someone else ride her around on the back of a harley. the one thing she had to do herself – be govenor – she quit. is this lady capable of actually doing anything? seriously?

    let’s see – faux news cancelled newt and santorum, but not huckabee and palin. newt and santorum are running for president. huckabee is not running for president. the calculus regarding palin is pretty simple. she is so self-absorbed that she will risk hurting the party to sell books and make large speaking fees. such a nice down-to-earth lady.

  62. sam says:

    Shorter Jay:

    Sputter, sputter.

  63. Jay Tea says:

    Longer sam:

    “I don’t like Palin, and she’s famous, so it’s OK to talk trash about her. But I do like michael, so I’ll pretend to be outraged over Jay’s comment.”

    J.

  64. jukeboxgrad says:

    “I don’t like Palin, and she’s famous”

    I guess you’re too dim-witted to comprehend the extreme relevance of the “famous” part, even though it’s already been carefully explained. Indeed, when someone decides to become a public figure, and especially when they go into politics, something that goes with the territory is being exposed to mockery and meanness. People who don’t like that should stay out of politics.

    So yes, there is no comparison between insulting a politician and insulting a private party.

  65. Jay Tea says:

    junk, michael objectified his wife when he posted her photo and discussed her appearance. If he didn’t want to make her part of the discussion, he could have kept that photo out of this thread. But he did, and I responded.

    I responded in the same manner he treats Mrs. Palin. Crude, crass, objectifying, and insulting.

    Whiny hypocrites.

    J.

  66. jwest says:

    Jay Tea’s lack of sensitivity in one comment is a matter that should strictly be handled between compassionate conservatives and is not for discussion by liberals.

    He violated our rules of conduct by straying from the land of sweetness and light to dark underworld of liberalism, holding a mirror to face of leftists to reveal how truly grotesque they are. Although pure in his intentions, only wanting to expose the ugliness that is the face of the left, he wandered from path that makes conservatives so much better than liberals. If the left had the capacity to see the hypocrisy of their actions, it would be an effective and accepted tactic, but sadly they don’t.

    If this were a discussion where all parties used reason and logic, Jay Tea’s comment would be viewed as fair and on point, but in interactions between the right and left, it is not acceptable for the conservative to lower himself to the level he so rightfully wants to raise.

  67. Patrick T. McGuire says:

    So yes, there is no comparison between insulting a politician and insulting a private party.

    Does that apply to Sheikh O’Bama too?

  68. sam says:

    @Jay

    Longer sam:

    “I don’t like Palin, and she’s famous, so it’s OK to talk trash about her. But I do like michael, so I’ll pretend to be outraged over Jay’s comment.”

    Don’t be a moron. What I think or don’t think about Palin and what’s said or not said about her has not one scintilla of bearing on the question of your lack of understanding of the limits. It’s what you said that is at issue. You think that because, according to you, you’re replying in kind to Micheal, this somehow makes it OK. On your own grounds, you’re a moral idiot.

  69. sam says:

    @MiniTea

    Jay Tea’s lack of sensitivity in one comment is a matter that should strictly be handled between compassionate conservatives and is not for discussion by liberals.

    He typed that in with a straight face. Jesus Christ, these guys are well and truly down the rabbit hole. (Oh, and Jay, he thinks you were an asshat upthread, too, in case you missed it.)

  70. jukeboxgrad says:

    Jay Tea:

    michael objectified his wife when he posted her photo

    Posting that photo is not even remotely comparable to having a career as a celebrity politician. Michael’s wife is not a public figure. Palin is.

    Also, saying that someone looks like a lesbian (not an insult unless you’re a homophobe) is not even remotely comparable to posting a graphic description of your imagined sex act with the wife of the person you’re addressing.

    Keep digging.

    ============
    jwest:

    He violated our rules of conduct by straying from the land of sweetness and light to dark underworld of liberalism, holding a mirror to face of leftists to reveal how truly grotesque they are.

    English translation: ‘conservatives are superior to liberals, except when they’re not.’

    And a grotesque statement by a conservative is proof that liberals are grotesque. In other news, war is peace, freedom is slavery, and ignorance is strength.

    ============
    Patrick T. McGuire:

    Does that apply to Sheikh O’Bama too?

    Saying “Sheikh O’Bama” is roughly on the level of saying “Bushitler.” Neither is comparable to what Jay Tea did. Starting to catch on? It’s not that complicated.

  71. michael reynolds says:

    Jay:

    Your usual style and cluelessness is on display. But, that said:

    Conversely, would you mind terribly if I were to comment on that presumed photo of Mrs. reynolds, which you posted purely in the context of her physical appearance, and say that she is exceptionally appealing, and I especially appreciate the slightly downturned angle of her head, which facilitates fantasizing about her performing fellatio on me, preferably while unclad?

    I’m sure she’ll be very flattered. Women over 50 have a tendency to believe men only look at younger women.

  72. anjin-san says:

    Sam… doubtful that jay has ever been married, or that he gets out much, so he may not be aware that talking shit about someone’s wife is very bad form indeed.

    It’s also telling that these guys think referring to someone as a lesbian is an insult.

  73. jwest says:

    Anjin-san,

    Presuming you have a wife or girlfriend, why not tell her that she looks very “lesbianish” today?

    See if she takes it as a compliment.

  74. Barry says:

    jukeboxgrad says:

    “And in the end, the nominee will be Palin (as I have been predicting since at least last November). Because there are lots of Palinists, and they are not going to listen to reason. If they were susceptible to facts and logic, they never would have become Palinists, to begin with.”

    That doesn’t follow. If Palin has 30% of the delegates at the convention, she isn’t getting the nomination, no matter how much fuss they stir up (and if they decide to shut the convention down,
    the people running it will simply have the police arrest them).

  75. Jay Tea says:

    anjin, I know it was very bad form. That was the point. I’d tried to take the high ground with michael’s misogyny, and that went nowhere, so I figured another approach might work.

    And for all those who leaped to michael’s defense, note that he doesn’t seem anywhere near as offended as you all thought he would or should be. Perhaps you should let him decide what is beyond the pale and what is not in regards to his wife — whom he chose to insert into this discussion.

    J.

  76. jwest says:

    Barry,

    The one thing Jukeboxgrad has said that makes any sense is that Sarah Palin will be the nominee (if she wants it).

    The only twist that could be in the wind is her teaming up with one of the other potential candidates to lock the nomination and avoid a lengthy primary.

  77. Patrick T. McGuire says:

    @Jay:

    anjin, I know it was very bad form. That was the point. I’d tried to take the high ground with michael’s misogyny, and that went nowhere, so I figured another approach might work.

    I have been told that it’s pointless to argue with idiots because, before long, it’s hard to distinguish the difference.

  78. anjin-san says:

    Sure jay. Your are respector of women. Just a stand up guy trying to point out where someone else fell short of the mark. A high ground kind of guy.

    Why don’t you walk up to the next black guy you see and repeat your clever “brown sugar” remark about Michelle Obama from the caption contest and see how that works out for you?

    Already knew you were a liar and a coward. Now we can add fake to your bio.

  79. Jay Tea says:

    Oh, dear, anjin. In a caption contest, I put bad words in the mouth of a bad man. Shame on me.

    To repeat msyelf: lighten up, Francis.

    J.

  80. michael reynolds says:

    The fun thing about this thread (my pygmy baiting as was said up-thread) is that it ended up catching Jay T. Jay’s not very bright but I’d have thought he was a step up the evolutionary ladder from Wiley.

    But no, Wiley disappeared (or passed out) and along comes Jay, tra la, tra la, on a bright morning, ready for the day, and steps into it with both feet.

    The one thing all of Palin’s “defenders” have in common? They see her as a woman first. No one compared her to Ronald Reagan in any of their examples. They compared her to my wife or to Michelle Obama. I forget which nitwit decided Todd was going to kick my ass, but it was a perfect display of the real feelings the Palinites have for Palin.

    Just so you understand what I thought was awfully clear, Jay: Michelle Obama and my wife are not analogous to Sarah Palin. Neither of them is angling for the biggest job on earth. But of course all you see is gender. Because in the end it’s all about fantasy for you and the rest of the Palinites.

    None of this is surprise to the brighter people here. We’ve always known. But it was wonderful of you, Jay, to demonstrate beyond any reasonable doubt, that your attraction to Palin is almost entirely about her gender. And that you yourself analogize your feelings toward her as protective, chivalrous, husbandly.

    Did you feel the same way about Reagan? Protective, like he couldn’t take care of himself? How about husbandly?

  81. Jay Tea says:

    michael, you better contact the admins of this site. Someone impersonated you on the very second comment:

    Does she not know she looks like a lipstick lesbian riding behind her butch girlfriend?

    Which kinda puts your current “But of course all you see is gender” point in stark contrast.

    Not to mention your earlier “Palin is a MILF/GMILF” remarks.

    I don’t force you to make your first reaction to Palin based on her sex. You do that all on your own. I just point it out. Which, apparently, makes me a terrible person.

    J.

  82. michael reynolds says:

    Jay:

    Jesus you’re dense.

    Let me see if I can walk you through this:

    1) I don’t like Palin.

    2) You do.

    3) I took a shot at her.

    4) You decided the appropriate response was to take a shot at my wife.

    See the problem there? If you took a shot at Obama would it make sense for me to respond by taking a shot at your wife?

    Just to make it crystal clear: Obama is the appropriate counterpart to Palin. Because they’re both politicians. See?

    Whereas my wife writes kids books. See how she’s not a politician?

    The fact that my wife and Sarah Palin are both women is irrelevant. The connection is pol-to-pol, not woman-to-woman.

    Palin is not your wife. She’s your potential candidate.

    If you’re still having trouble understanding . . . well, then there’s not much I can do for you.

  83. anjin-san says:

    It’s telling that Palin inspires chivalry in jay, and Mrs. Obama inspires a line from a song about a slavemaster having his way with a black woman who has no choice but to submit.

    At any rate, jay appears determined to keep digging. Should we get him one of those little pail and shovel sets the kids take to the beach?

  84. andrew says:

    “If the left had the capacity to see the hypocrisy of their actions, it would be an effective and accepted tactic, but sadly they don’t.”

    Leftists aren’t hypocrites. A person has to have principles to qualify as a hypocrite.

  85. Rock says:

    What if Michelle Obama rode up on a Harley sitting behind a woman, would you tell the President that his wife looks like a lipstick lesbian riding behind her butch girlfriend?

    Is MIchele Obama a politician?

    Perfect! You didn’t handle that double standard litmus test well either.

    Are Palin’s kids politicians? That must be why they were attacked by the MSM and lefties so violently. That’s it! They were little budding politicians who had to be stopped. Is that why the left has double standard that only they can use?

  86. michael reynolds says:

    Rock:

    If you can find any place where I have attacked Palin’s children you let me know. In fact I’ve criticized the people who did.

    In order for you to apply a litmus test you’d have to be able to understand the issue under discussion. You don’t.

  87. michael reynolds says:

    anjin:

    I actually try most of the time to follow my small-d democratic impulses and treat people as equals. But the fact is these guys just can’t think. They cannot reason in the abstract. It’s all emotion and impulse, and when challenged to walk something through in a logical fashion they end up blustering because they flat can’t do it.

    It’s honest to God like watching myself try to do algebra. There’s just a circuit missing or something.

  88. michael reynolds says:

    anjin:

    But I would add to my comment above that at least I have the good sense not to go on mathematics fora and argue with mathematicians.

  89. anjin-san says:

    My guess is Michelle Obama would pilot her own bike, she does not seem like a ride on back kind of person to me. It’s actually a little interesting that Palin was willing to do the ride on back thing. When I heard she was glomming on to rolling thunder, I assumed she had her own bike. As someone pointed out, riding on back is not very Presidential. it might just boil down to. her wanting a little biker cred but being too lazy to do the work.

    Mrs. Obama strikes me as someone who would be at home driving a convertible Benz.

  90. anjin-san says:

    Algebra is a painful memory for me, my older brother is a math prodigy, and it just gave me a headache. I did not meet my families academic expectations, to say th

  91. michael reynolds says:

    Even Mitch Daniels rides his own hog and he’s not exactly a big burly dude.

  92. jukeboxgrad says:

    Are Palin’s kids politicians? That must be why they were attacked by the MSM and lefties so violently.

    This is one of those things that gets said a lot, but I’ve never seen any proof. Would anyone care to post a few major examples of “the MSM” attacking Palin’s kids? Violently? Or even non-violently?

    Is this about mocking Bristol’s career as an abstinence advocate? I don’t see that as “attack.” I see that as legitimate criticism of an adult. Anything else?

  93. Davebo says:

    Are Palin’s kids politicians? That must be why they were attacked by the MSM and lefties so violently.

    Bristol happily takes 30k per speech to talk about abstinence, among other things, that she’s failed at in life. I don’t see her complaining about her own celebrity which is more than we can say for her Mother.

  94. jukeboxgrad says:

    Barry:

    If Palin has 30% of the delegates at the convention, she isn’t getting the nomination, no matter how much fuss they stir up

    A fair point, and I can’t come up with a detailed answer, because it’s still early, and because I don’t understand the rules of the convention very well.

    But my hunch nevertheless is that she’s going to end up on top, one way or another. Her base is highly motivated, and I don’t see any force in the GOP strong enough to counter that.

  95. Jay Tea says:

    anjin, this may KILL my chances to win that caption contest, and for that I may never forgive you.

    The photo in question shows now-former IMF head and accused rapist Dominique Strauss-Kahn leaning towards Michelle Obama, with President Obama placing a restraining hand on DSK’s arm. My caption was “At that moment, Barack Obama realized that Monsieur Strauss-Kahn’s comments about “brown sugar” had absolutely nothing to do with France’s trade balance…”

    The inference is that DS-K was making the “brown sugar” remarks, and President Obama — realizing the implications of what the serial womanizer and accused rapist was saying to his wife — was acting to defend her from his attentions. So yeah, I put bad words in the mouth of a bad man. Gosh, I’m so horrible.

    michael, I have a challenge for you. The next time you want to criticize Palin, either do NOT sexualize her or just drop all the pretense and call her the C-word. I’ve tried shaming you into showing a smidgen of decency, and it failed. Here I tried shocking you into a smidgen of decency, and I see that’s failing too. Now I’m just going to call you out on it directly, and see if that approach does any good, either.

    It’s really disappointing. For someone who sees racism everywhere, you don’t see your own sexism in insisting on sexualizing a woman you have expressed repeated contempt for. It says something about you that your first instinct towards a woman you dislike is to categorize her in some kind of sexual form — a mother or grandmother you’d like to fornicate with, to a “lipstick lesbian.” Kinda reminds me of the old clod’s reasoning; “the b*tch turned me down, she must be a d*ke.”

    Alternately, you could just admit and embrace your inner sexist. I mean, it’s pretty much a known fact now; what’s the point of continuing the pretense?

    J.

  96. Rock says:

    Jay Tea:

    Ain’t gonna work. The lefties are hypocrites and they know it. And it does not bother them one bit.

  97. michael reynolds says:

    Jay:

    You’re just too f*cking dumb to talk to anymore.

  98. anjin-san says:

    Gosh, I’m so horrible.

    You are just an inconsequential idiot. I am sure you are used to it by now.

  99. Jay Tea says:

    So, michael, I take it you’re going to continue denying your misogyny, while continuing to demonstrate it at every opportunity?

    Gotcha.

    Just like to confirm things.

    J.

  100. michael reynolds says:

    Jay:

    I left you a simple guide to how to make sense of things. It’s about a dozen comments up. Walk through it. Try to get it. I don’t know if you simply lack the basic intellect for abstract thought — that’s certainly Wiley’s problem.

    But seriously, a man who wrote a long comment about how he pictures my wife sucking his d!ck really just needs to shut up and not lecture anyone about anything.

  101. An Interested Party says:

    @mpw280: Michael is more than capable of defending himself…the point is that you have no right getting upset because someone else brings out the hate and slurs, because you do the exact same thing…once again, before calling anyone else a “shallow hater”, check out a mirror…

    @Rock: Michael is only showing Palin the same respect you show the president…

    Palin is not your wife. She’s your potential candidate.

    You noticed that too? It is rather…interesting that Jay would take Michael’s attack on Palin as a reason to attack Michael’s wife…

  102. anjin-san says:

    Guess jay is just missing what his comment about Michelle Obama tells us about him.

    It says something about him that his first instinct towards a woman he dislikes is to categorize her in some kind or racial form. “Brown Sugar”. Not surprising, considering his recent attempt to create an ebonics version of the particularly lame right wing Obama meme “The One”. What did he come up with? “Teh won”, I believe it was. This sort of thing closes out of town with most folks, but it probably plays well on bit’s blog and wizbang. Water seeks it’s own level.

    Jay and the other right wing bottom feeders in here seem to endlessly mix racist comments with vehement denials that they are racists.

    Fellas, there is a simple test. When you feel a clever quip coming on that refers to a black person being black, various aspects of the black cultural experience in American & so on, go work with an ah hoc focus group. Walk up to some black guys, and try our your material. If you don’t get your ass kicked, you are OK. If you do get your ass kicked, well, it is probably not the first time. Of course this approach requires some real life courage, so none of your will be trying it out anytime soon.

    Back to jay, he is guilty of the very same offense he thinks someone else committed, and is trying so desperately to call another party to account for. And he is too fricking stupid to see it.

  103. Rock says:

    @Rock: Michael is only showing Palin the same respect you show the president…

    An Interested Party:

    I would never imply that President Barack Hussein Obama II looks like a goober gobbler on a Schwinn even if he was riding on the handlebars.

  104. Joel says:

    “Teh won” sounds more like internet-geek-speak than ebonics to me.

  105. Rock says:

    @anjin-san

    Sometimes “Brown Sugar” is just a song by the greatest Rock and Roll band ever. Listen to the lyrics, anjin-san, If you don’t understand the lyrics I can post them here and I almost guarantee that the words will set your hair of fire as you read them.

    Ditto what Joel said about “Teh won.”

  106. Jay Tea says:

    Ebonics, anjin? Please. It was a combination of internet lingo, where ‘teh” is the most common misspelling of “the,” and “won,” as in Obama’s rebuttal to an argument with “I won.”

    And thank you for calling my “Brown Sugar” reference clever. I hope it was clever enough to win the caption contest, and I’m rather proud to have not said that myself, but put it in the mouth of a guy who appears to be a serial philanderer, womanizer, and alleged rapist. And in that photo, Obama seems to be acting quite appropriately — protecting his wife from the scumbag.

    michael, you could take some lessons from Obama…

    J.

  107. anjin-san says:

    Rock… sometimes it is just a good song. When it is used to specifically reference a black woman in a conversation that has sexual connotations, well that is not one of them. Hope this concept is not too complicated for you.

    Any time you think you are ready to school me about rock and roll, just let me know. Perhaps you could write your review of sticky fingers, I could write mine and we could both post them and see what people think. I am game if you are.

  108. Rock says:

    anjin-san:

    You’re hair is on fire isn’t it? I’m not going to play your silly R&R games. I’ve been a fan of The Stones since the 60s. Compared to them all others are just wannabes.

  109. anjin-san says:

    Wow rock, you have listened to the stones since the 60s… how unique.

    At any rare, it seems you are not willing to back up talk with action. Probably wise.

    How about something easier? Tell me what was the creative process Sunny Rollins used for his sax solo on “waiting for a friend”? Don’t Google it, just give it your best shot.

    For a bonus question, you can tell the class what the significance of the Williamsburg Bridge is to Rollins’ career. Remember… no Google.

    Or, you can just say “duh”. Pretty sure you know that one.

  110. Jay Tea says:

    No Googling, but isn’t that where Rollins allegedly made a certain agreement that was exceptionally beneficial for his career?

    And I think I see the problem now with my caption submission. Why would a French socialist rapist try to use a pick-up line from the Rolling Stones?

    DAMN YOU, anjin, for making me over-think this!!! You have forced me to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory!

    J.

  111. Rock says:

    anjin-san, I told you I didn’t want to play the game. I bet you actually pulled down the zipper to take a look at what was inside. Did you not?

    Rollins? That’s difficult but I think I got it. Isn’t the the fellow who wrote “May the Bird of Paradise Fly Up Your Nose,” sung by Little Jimmy Dickens?

    That’s my best guess.

  112. anjin-san says:

    So rock your response is you don’t want to play AND you did not understand the question. Got it.

    Too bad, I would have enjoyed writing the review, may do it anyway as an exercise.

    BTW, if you are going to throw down, its not a bad idea to have something besides “I don’t want to play” to pull out of the hat when the other guy responds. pretty lame.

  113. Rock says:

    anjin-san,

    What has any of this to do with Sarah Palin’s Magical Mystery Tour?

  114. anjin-san says:

    Not a thing Rock. Just exploring your offer to educate me about the Stones.

    Sometimes it is a god idea to know your audience before you snark…

  115. Rock says:

    Not a thing Rock. Just exploring your offer to educate me about the Stones.

    OMGWTFBBQ! I Made no such offer.

    OMGWTFBBQ!

    Sometimes it is a god idea to know your audience before you snark…

    Take your own advise. Educate thyself! But I like your God idea. Get some!

  116. anjin-san says:

    OMGWTFBBQ! I Made no such offer.

    Listen to the lyrics, anjin-san, If you don’t understand the lyrics I can post them here

    Take your own advise. Educate thyself!

  117. anjin-san says:

    Sorry, hit post by accident, was not quite finished.

    Take your own advise. Educate thyself!

    About rock and roll? I have had people with platinum records on the wall ask me my opinions about rock and roll on more than one occasion. I’ve sat up drinking till sunrise with guys who played at Woodstock. There is always more to know, but by any reasonable standard, my opinions carry some weight, and I am not impressed by snarks from someone offering to help me understand what a song I have been listening to for 40 years means.

    You were the guy who had to be a wise ass, don’t start bitching because it did not work out all that well for you. After all, it’s just another mad mad day on the road.