Keith Olbermann Highlights Sarah Palin’s Lies in Email Hacking Case

Even the mainstream media is starting to catch on to Palin's lies

On his MSNBC program Countdown, Keith Olbermann finally brought into the mainstream media what many in the blogosphere have been wondering for days, did Sarah Palin perjure herself with her testimony in the email hacking case? The fact is that the emails released from Palin’s personal email accounts contradict her testimony, and Sarah Palin is caught in yet another lie.

Here is the video from MSNBC:

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

Olbermann said, “The testimony from Palin herself centered on whether or not the release of those emails caused her actual damage. The trial was not about whether or not Palin ever used personal email for state business while she was governor, but in testifying that she did not conduct gubernatorial business that way, she may have committed perjury.”

Palin denied conducting government business on the personal email accounts, but Olberman pointed out that, “3,000 pages of Palin’s emails released through a Freedom of Information request from MSNBC.com contradict that. Palin’s personal email account, she actually had three of them, were replete with examples of government business like the state budget, or legislation awaiting action, or a discussion of government positions.” However, the Washington Post’s David Weigel hasn’t seen the transcript, but it looked like she did not perjure herself. The emails that Olbermann discussed were off limits for her testimony.

The point is that Palin may not have perjured herself this time, but she obviously lied about what she was using the personal email accounts for. A quick look through the released emails contradicts her claim that she was not using them for state business. The bigger problem for Palin is that this is another lie that will continue to dog her political future, but Palin’s entire career is based on lies, so what harm could adding one more do to her house of cards?

The answer is that this lie could do a lot of harm, especially if the transcript of her testimony is released, and she decides to go after the Republican nomination in 2012. You can bet that the Romney people have already scrutinized her emails and would love nothing more that to have her testimony on paper for the sake of comparison. Can you see her inability to keep an email account secure becoming an issue in the security happy Republican primaries? Picture an ad which will ask, “If Sarah Palin can’t be trusted to keep information safe, can she be trusted to keep America safe?”

With each of these lies, Palin keeps adding another shovel full of dirt on top of her political grave. None of this matters though to her Kool-Aid drinking followers who repeat and babble Palin’s claims about the lame stream, without giving a moment’s thought to the walking ball of hypocrisy, lies, and contradictions that they support. Their job is not to think independently, but to blindly worship and regurgitate the nonsensical ramblings of their queen. Someday these poor fools will realize that their savior was really nothing more a confidence woman who broke their hearts and picked their pockets, but as the old saying goes a fool and his money are soon parted.

(Congrats to our good friends, and yes they are our friends, at Palingates for the mention tonight on Olbermann. They do great work tirelessly chasing down the hypocrisy of Sarah Palin. They and their readers have been absolutely great to us here at Politicus especially during and after the DDoS attack, so this seems like a good time to say thanks).

35 Replies to “Keith Olbermann Highlights Sarah Palin’s Lies in Email Hacking Case”

  1. Awesome!!!!
    “each of these lies, Palin keeps adding another shovel full of dirt on top of her political grave. None of this matters though to her Kool-Aid drinking followers who repeat and babble Palin’s claims about the lame stream, without giving a moment’s thought to the walking ball of hypocrisy, lies, and contradictions that they support. Their job is not to think independently, but to blindly worship and regurgitate the nonsensical ramblings of their queen.”

    Everyone must expose HER LIES!!! Every time she opens her mouth a lie pops out.
    Oh Jason you made the bots, the creeprers(c4p) on fri mad….TeeHee,
    the creepy crawler has a post about you…LMAO!!!

    She will go down and it will be worse than the Hindenburg!!!!

  2. While it not technically have been perjury, the Palin lies in Tennessee will continue to percolate as they damn well should

  3. Jason, thank you so much for your article. I am a big fan of you and Sarah Jones. I commented on Palingates but would like to re-post my comment here, in the hopes that David Weigel sees it:

    David Weigel said: “I would be surprised if this doesn’t show up on her FaceBook feed at some point, if she doesn’t accuse people of attacking her based on a blogpost on a site that attacks her. It was a popular blogpost and it got people like me checking into it.”

    Weigel, so glad you came to visit “on a site that attacks her”, but you seem to miss the point that Palingates exists to expose Sarah Palin’s LIES. And we will continue to expose her lies, cheating, faking her “pregnancy” with Trig, fake “family values”, grifting and her whacko religious ties, until people like YOU finally report the truth about Sarah Palin. But I won’t hold my breath to hear the truth coming from your mouth or articles. You seem to be enthralled with licking her toes or something.

    Weigel hadn’t seen a transcript, relied upon other people who were in the courtroom (who perhaps are slanted rightwingers like himself?) but still Weigel dismissed that Palin perjured herself but “people I talked to inside the courtroom say that, eh, maybe she could have fudged the words a little bit less”. “Fudged” in testimony under oath in a federal trial where a young man is in jeopardy of facing 50 years in jail????

  4. Jason, I’d like to thank you personally for putting up this post. Keith’s comments are always spot on, and in this case, I feel it’s important to get the news out to as many media outlets we can about Sarah Palin’s twisted lies.

    This young man could face fifty years, he’s up against the Palin machine in a pro Palin state, who knows the views of this judge and jury?
    Had he been a republican and the son of a republican, I doubt she’d be so quick to judge, she’d excuse it as a prank, an indiscretion, etc.

    As an avid reader of liberal blogs, and a palingates regular, I thank you again for doing your part. We;’re all in this together.

  5. @ProChoiceGrandma, “Weigel, so glad you came to visit “on a site that attacks her”, but you seem to miss the point that Palingates exists to expose Sarah Palin’s LIES. And we will continue to expose her lies, cheating, faking her “pregnancy” with Trig, fake “family values”, grifting and her whacko religious ties, until people like YOU finally report the truth about Sarah Palin. But I won’t hold my breath to hear the truth coming from your mouth or articles. You seem to be enthralled with licking her toes or something.”

    PCGM…STINIGING!!!! You totally hit the nail on the head…I think KO maybe knew about him but is wanting to bait mama griz or van flea?

  6. Perjury: The deliberate, willful giving of false, misleading, or incomplete testimony under oath.

    Uh, how did she lie, but not “perjure” herself?

    Yep, that’s perjury. Whether or not her lie(s) were negligible is a different matter. But still lies – able to be proven and not based soley on one witness’ word against another’s.

  7. Jason, thanks for putting this up. I’ve never had a favourable opinion about Sarah Palin and this just reinforces my opinion further.

  8. Just more fodder for when if/she does decide to run. her hanging with the tea party is the wrong place to be if you want to run for pres in mainstream America

    Her constant lying will be noted on the D E A T H P A N E L S Im sure. She would be buried in debates almost instantly

  9. I’m really hoping to see more of this in the mainstream media – Palin continues to lie, perjure, and walk a fine line (or jump right over) of hypocrisy on a daily basis. Why her followers can’t see through the charade is beyond me. Just keep putting the truth out there; eventually it will have to take or she will be held accountable for all of her lies and games.

  10. Jason & Sarah,

    thank you for reporting this story from a very objective point if view. This is what the MSM should be doing. We highly appreciate your special shout-out to Palingates. Only when they are united, bloggers can be strong!

  11. @Alaskan, I think the legal definition of perjury is different to the literal one. I was told by a lawyer here in Australia that it only amounts to a case of perjury if the perjurer had something to gain in the case by falsifying the testimony. Palin’s lies may technically not have helped her case, as it wasn’t the crux of the damages argument.

  12. @Patrick – Palingates, Since perjury is so difficult, I thought that the bigger political story wasn’t the legal definition of perjury, but the fact that she told a huge, gigantic lie, whether or not it was germane to the case is not relevant necessary when talking about a public individual’s pattern of behavior.

    You folks do some fantastic work over there and I know that there has been some jealously over your recent attention from certain other folks on the left who are self styled Palin experts, but that is not how we do things here. We don’t get jealous of another’s success. My goal is to just simply to interest, inform, and entertain a little too. Thanks for calling us mainstream, but I still have trouble getting my mind around the idea that this little blog is mainstream.

  13. @ProChoiceGrandma, Thank you for your kind comments. It is interesting that when Bill Clinton perjured himself, the right was ready to string him up, Sarah Palin lies it is referred to as fudging. One question that I have for Mr. Weigel is who were these experts that he talked to who expressed the opinion that Palin did not perjure herself? They would not have happen to have been Republican attorneys, by any chance?

  14. @Jason Easley,

    thank you so much for your support! That’s the spirit! I wish everyone would think that way.

    There is still a long fight ahead, but we are making progress! :-)

  15. I look forward to the day that the so-called main stream media outlets stop making Sarah Palin and the Tea Party main stream news.

  16. @Patrick – Palingates,

    Thanks Patrick!

    Jason did a great job with this. It’ll be very interesting to see the transcripts.

    Thanks for all of the great support during the DDoS attack. Keep up the great work!

  17. *The point is that Palin may not have perjured herself this time, but she obviously lied about what she was using the personal email accounts for..*

    So… Palin didn’t perjure herself – no crime committed.

    As for `more dirt on her political grave’ – go ahead and continue living in your dream-world, the one where one poster and seventeen commenters give a rat’s ask about whether or not someone used her private email to conduct government business…

    I mean, what a scandal you’ve uncovered here!

  18. @RB Glennie,

    Clearly you are not interested in the truth. We won’t know if she perjured herself until the transcripts come out, capiche?

    However, we do know that using private email accounts to conduct state business IS illegal.

    I notice you skipped over that part, in a nod to the right’s Machiavellian lust for power. Who cares how you get there, eh? Just so long as you get there.

    Cue Dick Cheney.

  19. @srjones,

    Sorry, just how does someone using their private email account for govt business equal a `Machiavellian lust for power’?

    You really need to bone up, sr, on logic, common sense, the real world, and all that jazz…

    People using personal emails for business? Banish the thought! How outrageous! I mean, who’d have thunk it?!?!?!?! I’m sure that SR Jones and 17 people who have commented here have never done anything like that!

    That was my point that you missed: no one (except the 17 people here and Keith Olderman apparently) gives a rat’s arse.

  20. @RB Glennie,

    Um, apparently you are unaware that it is illegal for her to have used a private account to conduct state business (avoiding FOIA requests).

    Yeah.

    I guess that’s the kinda common sense thingy you were referring to?

    And actually, many people do care. See, our government is set up for the leaders to be accountable to the people. Transparency is part of that. Hiding your state business in a private email account (or 3 as Palin did) so that you can avoid transparency is illegal because it violates the very tenets of this country’s government.

    See, hiding one’s agenda from the public and conducting business under the cloak of darkness is what someone like Dick Cheney does. Or Sarah Palin. And it’s NOT OK with most Americans.

    Apparently you are comfy with the whole dictatorship thingy and so it’s OK with you if Palin conducts herself like a dictator who does not need to follow the law. However, many of us like America the way she is and don’t want to change the rules for Palin.

    If we wanted Kings and Queens, we would not have fought that pesky revolutionary war.

  21. @RB Glennie,

    My reply to you got lost. It is illegal to use personal accounts to conduct state business.

    It violates the tenets of our government: transparency and accountability.

    She did it on purpose, or have you not read the MSNBC emails of hers?

    She directs people to use the private account for state business so they can avoid FOIA requests and prying eyes.

    I get that you think this is OK, but that doesn’t make it so. Palin had 3 private accounts she used for state business. This is illegal. Palin is clearly Machiavellian in her approach– this has been obvious from the beginning. The ends justify the means for her, because she thinks she has been mantled for the Presidency.

  22. RB Glennie,

    Apparently the Freedom of Informatin Act means nothing to you. And apparently, you slept through the 8th grade civics class where most of us were taught that elected officials are PUBLIC figures, and as such, they must conduct their business, which…gasp…is actually the public’s business (not corporate business, as you conveniently try to slip an orange into an apple debate), out in the open.

    By the way, since you seem so high on “logic,” I’m sure you intended to misdirect with your “apples and oranges” insertion…nice try at a red herring, but too bad for you, some of us took logic classes in college and actually managed to stay awake.

    And I always love people who come here to comment and their stock response is “only you and 17 losers care.” Apparently, you care also.

    I guess that makes you loser # 18, eh?

    And you hold another distinguished honor as part of the “loser” family. Outside of SRJones and Jason Easley responding to other posters, you’re the only one who has posted two replies.

    I guess that doesn’t just make you loser # 18, it makes you the biggest of 18 losers…

  23. *Um, apparently you are unaware that it is illegal for her to have used a private account to conduct state business (avoiding FOIA requests).*

    and my answer is: I don’t give a shit. No one else does either.

    *I guess that’s the kinda common sense thingy you were referring to?*

    what does it have to do with common sense?

    *And actually, many people do care. See, our government is set up for the leaders to be accountable to the people. Transparency is part of that.*

    yes, we know about `transparency’ these days… like Pres Urkel promising to conduct his health care `reform’ talks on CSPAN, and then just sodding that promise… or that he was going to accept public funding during the pres. campaign, and just turn around and broke that promise to be transparent.

    so, no, unless you are denouncing all the transparency-breaking that has been done under this one-party govt, your protestations about someone using private email for govt business have little weight…

    *See, hiding one’s agenda from the public and conducting business under the cloak of darkness is what someone like Dick Cheney does. Or Sarah Palin. And it’s NOT OK with most Americans.*

    Ok, Sr, you’ve made that point three different times. You commitment to redundancy doesn’t make your point any less false.

    *Apparently you are comfy with the whole dictatorship thingy and so it’s OK with you if Palin conducts herself like a dictator who does not need to follow the law.*

    ummmm… yes, I’m `comfortable with dictatorship’, yes, that must it.

    Palin, who no longer holds public office, `conducts herself like a dictator’… because she (in your view) conducted govt business on private email…

    *However, many of us like America the way she is and don’t want to change the rules for Palin.*

    America has to change its rules for palin… because (in your view) she conducts govt business on private email…

    Wow. Is there any level of grandoisity that you won’t aim for, SR?

    *My reply to you got lost. It is illegal to use personal accounts to conduct state business.
    It violates the tenets of our government: transparency and accountability.
    She did it on purpose, or have you not read the MSNBC emails of hers?*

    Yes, well there’s a reliable source, MSNBC…

    *She directs people to use the private account for state business so they can avoid FOIA requests and prying eyes.
    I get that you think this is OK, but that doesn’t make it so.*

    I don’t think it’s ok. But are you that stupid? Do you think every politician does everything she or he can to keep prying eyes from their business…?

    *Palin had 3 private accounts she used for state business. This is illegal. Palin is clearly Machiavellian in her approach– this has been obvious from the beginning. The ends justify the means for her, because she thinks she has been mantled for the Presidency.*

    Wow. A politician acting in a Machiavellian manner. You’d almost think she’d attended a church wherein the preacher spewed out racist garbage for twenty years without the politician in question, having heard a thing…

    Go on, Dummycrat, go on believing your own garbage:

    The entire country believes that Sarah Palin is the next Richard Nixon bec. (in your view) she did state business on private email…

    That Palin’s use of email in such a manner is going to lead to dictatorship

    That anyone but yourself gives a tooth about this…

    It’s right up there with

    “Americans don’t like health care reform bec. it didn’t totally socialize medicine…”

    “Massachussetts voted for a rightist Republican bec. people in that state believe Urkel is too moderate…”

    Go on believing until your bus leaves the cliff edge…

  24. RB Glennie,

    *Apparently the Freedom of Informatin Act means nothing to you. And apparently, you slept through the 8th grade civics class where most of us were taught that elected officials are PUBLIC figures, and as such, they must conduct their business, which…gasp…is actually the public’s business (not corporate business, as you conveniently try to slip an orange into an apple debate), out in the open.*

    I may have been asleep, but I was wide awake for the rest of my life and I see that public officials try all the time to prevent people knowing what they are doing…

    Should they? No. Do they? Yes.

    Do I think your sudden concern with `transparency’ is a bunch of bulshit so you can go after Palin and thereby occlude the actual crime being committed (i.e. hacking into someone’s email account).

    Yes!

    *By the way, since you seem so high on “logic,” I’m sure you intended to misdirect with your “apples and oranges” insertion…nice try at a red herring, but too bad for you, some of us took logic classes in college and actually managed to stay awake.*

    That’s good you stayed awake in uni bec. I guess you slept for the rest of your life.

    It’s not `apples and oranges’; we’re talking about official business on personal email accounts. I’ve done it, you’ve done it, SR has done it, the author of this piece has done it… so go take your hypocrisy and bad faith and return to sleep.

    *And I always love people who come here to comment and their stock response is “only you and 17 losers care.” Apparently, you care also.
    I guess that makes you loser # 18, eh?*

    Who said anything about `losers’? I said you’re the only seventeen who care. This is true.

    *And you hold another distinguished honor as part of the “loser” family. Outside of SRJones and Jason Easley responding to other posters, you’re the only one who has posted two replies.

    I guess that doesn’t just make you loser # 18, it makes you the biggest of 18 losers…*

    So what? I’ve posted a comment, someone’s replied, and I’ve posted a reply to that comment.

    I don’t see how that adds up to me being a `loser.’

    But to bigots like you, things like common sense and decency have no purchase…

    Anything else?

  25. RR Glennie,

    >>Do I think your sudden concern with `transparency’ is a bunch of bulshit so you can go after Palin and thereby occlude the actual crime being committed (i.e. hacking into someone’s email account).

    Wow…we must know each other. Yo might as well tell me who you are b/c you talk like you know me and that you kno wwhat my intentions are. I’ve always been concerned with transparency; for eight years I bemoaned the Bush Admin and their complete lack of transparency.

    But since you know me so well, you must already have known that, and just conveninetly decided to ignore that.

    And why do you bring Palin into this? I said nothing directly about Palin, only that publicly elected officials are in fact held to a higher standard b/c they conduct the public’s business, they need to embrace FOIA.

    So nice try trying to impose your guilty conscience on to me, but it’s just not gonna take. So sorry.

    Insofar as “occlusion of original crime” goes…tsk, tsk… nice way of trying to absolve your Messiah Sarah, but it’s just not gonna work. See, if you’re break into someone’s house, and I break into it also, and we get caught, you pointing out that I broke into the house does not absolve you of your crime.

    What you’re suggesting is ridiculous. If they want to go after the hacker, by all means do so. A crime was committed. But that does not cleanse your pretty, pretty Sarah, no matter how much you wish it would.

    >>It’s not `apples and oranges’; we’re talking about official business on personal email accounts. I’ve done it, you’ve done it, SR has done it, the author of this piece has done it… so go take your hypocrisy and bad faith and return to sleep.

    Again, you talk like you know me. If you’ve done it, then speak for yourself only. I don’t conduct “official” business on personal email. That’s why I have separate email accounts…precisely so I can keep the two worlds separate. My friends don’t have my business email, and my clients don’t have my personal email.

    And let’s not try to “occlude” (b/c you seem to like that word), “elected, public business” with any other “official” business. They’re not the same.

    Electeds’ primary duty is to uphold the public’s trust. Taking the public business offline is deceit. As a business person, I have “official” communications. But if I’m selling iPhones and I decide to email a friend about a good deal from a personal account, I’m not liable or responsible for any public trust.

    Try not to conflate these two again, Glennie boy. Really, the difference is plainly obvious to anyone who cares to see.

    >>So what? I’ve posted a comment, someone’s replied, and I’ve posted a reply to that comment. I don’t see how that adds up to me being a `loser.’

    Yes, but just be honest with us. You can lie to yourself, but don’t lie to us. If not a “loser,” you surely do seem to care a lot about this issue, which is exactly what you demean the other 17 for… we call that being intellectually dishonest and disingenuous.

    It’s okay if you care. You’re not 13 anymore…you don’t have to pretend to be too cool to care. Besides, you costant, frequent and rapid responses betray you.

    >>But to bigots like you, things like common sense and decency have no purchase…

    There you go talking like you’ve known me forever… please, just reveal to me which of my friends or acquaintences you are b/c you sure shit smack like you know me.

  26. RB Glennie! My brother in arms! You are awesome! Keep wiping the floor with that dumb libtard Arias Rowe!

    Palin hid the public’s work on personal email…so what?! I agree with you that there’s nothing wrong with that so long as other people do it too. The logic here is sound, my friend.

    You do it, others do it, so why single Palin out?

    Dumb libtards. They just dont’ get that bending rules is American when real americans do it. Start a war? Who cares? Bush did it, Cheney did it, you do it, I do it…none of it matters.

    Predatory lending and shell games on wall street? What’s wrong with any of this? Goldman Sachs do it, Arthur Andersen did it, you do it, I do it…fuck libtards! Nothing wrong here!

    We all have stolen, lied, cheated…so long as others do it, it isn’t the least bit wrong when we do it.

    Keep up your real American awesomeness! I got your back if any of these libtards try to attack you again!

  27. @RB Glennie,

    You have made it clear that transparency and accountability are not values of yours. This is why you vote Republican.

    That’s fine — but where you are wrong is when you assume that because you don’t care, the rest of us don’t care.

    The majority of the country does care- hence the Nov 4, 2008 election results.

  28. @srjones,

    I don’t vote Republican.

    You don’t care about transparency, or you be flailing the Urkel govt for its multiple instances of betraying the same value… instead, you harp on some issue that has no relevance to anything and no one cares about.

    Or rather: perhaps you have gone after Nobama in such a fashion; if so, I apologize for being as presumptuous as you were in regard to whom I vote for.

  29. @Arias Rowe,

    *Wow…we must know each other. Yo might as well tell me who you are b/c you talk like you know me and that you kno*

    I don’t know you but I do know you don’t know how to type…

    And I also know you mentioned nothing about the actual crime in this matter, the hacking of Palin’s account – you’re screaming about the `crime’ of P using private email for govt bus (so you allege).

    *And why do you bring Palin into this? I said nothing directly about Palin, only that publicly elected officials are in fact held to a higher standard b/c they conduct the public’s business, they need to embrace FOIA.*

    ummm… because that’s the subject of the post here, remember: Sarah Palin’s alleged `crime.’

    *So nice try trying to impose your guilty conscience on to me, but it’s just not gonna take. So sorry.*

    Huh? My `guilty conscience’? Are you saying you know me someone, or do you fancy yourself a clairvoyant?

    *Insofar as “occlusion of original crime” goes…tsk, tsk… nice way of trying to absolve your Messiah Sarah, but it’s just not gonna work. See, if you’re break into someone’s house, and I break into it also, and we get caught, you pointing out that I broke into the house does not absolve you of your crime.*

    Huh, huh huh? palin broke into someone else’s email account? Do you need your meds?

    btw – She’s no Messia of mine… unlike your treatment of Obambi, I would guess.

    *What you’re suggesting is ridiculous. If they want to go after the hacker, by all means do so. A crime was committed. But that does not cleanse your pretty, pretty Sarah, no matter how much you wish it would.*

    that’s what they did. That’s why you’re screaming about Palin’s `crime’ that was never committed.

    *Again, you talk like you know me. If you’ve done it, then speak for yourself only. I don’t conduct “official” business on personal email. That’s why I have separate email accounts…*

    yeah, sure ya don’t. You’re just as clean as newly fallen snow.

    *And let’s not try to “occlude” (b/c you seem to like that word), “elected, public business” with any other “official” business. They’re not the same.*

    I know its some effort to go and look up words you don’t know in a… what’s it called again? Oh yeah, a dictionary. remember, the words are in alphabetical order (that begins like: a, b, c…)

    *Electeds’ primary duty is to uphold the public’s trust. Taking the public business offline is deceit. As a business person, I have “official” communications. But if I’m selling iPhones and I decide to email a friend about a good deal from a personal account, I’m not liable or responsible for any public trust.*

    I guess you’re just a lot more moral than the rest of us. It must be a shame living in a world where everyone isn’t as ethical as you Arias.

    Congratulations.

    *Yes, but just be honest with us. You can lie to yourself, but don’t lie to us. If not a “loser,” you surely do seem to care a lot about this issue, which is exactly what you demean the other 17 for… we call that being intellectually dishonest and disingenuous.*

    Was I dishonest? Can you explain where? I am demeaning you and the others for caring about something no one else does… in bad faith, yet, bec. you want to occlude (there’s that word again!) the actual crime being committed: hacking someone’s email account.

    *It’s okay if you care. You’re not 13 anymore…you don’t have to pretend to be too cool to care. Besides, you costant, frequent and rapid responses betray you.*

    I’m not, apparently, you and the others are: after all, stupid and irrelevant things is what 13 year olds become obsessed about.

    *There you go talking like you’ve known me forever… please, just reveal to me which of my friends or acquaintences you are b/c you sure shit smack like you know me.*

    `sure shit smack’? – please learn to write English.

  30. @Conservative Heart,

    *RB Glennie! My brother in arms! You are awesome! Keep wiping the floor with that dumb libtard Arias Rowe!*

    I ain’t your brother pal.

    *Palin hid the public’s work on personal email…so what?! I agree with you that there’s nothing wrong with that so long as other people do it too. The logic here is sound, my friend.*

    Who said there’s nothing wrong with it? I said its irrelevant, no one cares and if you really did care about `transparency’ you’d be going after the Obama govt and not some governor of a small state who resigned from office months ago.

    Perhaps you do.

    *You do it, others do it, so why single Palin out?*

    You are singling her out for the same reason you did during the campaign: because she was a threat to the coronation of your idol, Pres Urkel, and so you treated her in the same sexist, classist manner you condemn when it is done to others on the left side – or as you put it, `the libtard’ side.

    *Dumb libtards. They just dont’ get that bending rules is American when real americans do it. Start a war? Who cares? Bush did it, Cheney did it, you do it, I do it…none of it matters.*

    that’s right, intimidate voters outside ballot stations, give advice as to run an underage prostitution ring, lie about being called racist names – that’s what we Conservatives love!

    *Predatory lending and shell games on wall street? What’s wrong with any of this? Goldman Sachs do it, Arthur Andersen did it, you do it, I do it…fuck libtards! Nothing wrong here!*

    Yes, that’s right, using Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as your private bank accounts; committing voter fraud by `community activists’; attempt to ostracize a major news service. That’s the way we love it, this is America after all my hero Malcolm X put it well: violence is as American as apple pie! Fight the power man!

    *We all have stolen, lied, cheated…so long as others do it, it isn’t the least bit wrong when we do it.*

    That’s right, like Acorn steals, lies and cheats elections and much else! that’s the way!

    *Keep up your real American awesomeness! I got your back if any of these libtards try to attack you again!*

    that’s right, I will! I will go to my stars and stripes everyday and kneel before it kneel I say and cry fulsome tears!!!!!!

    Yeah!

  31. @Arias Rowe,

    Arias, you’re great – your arguments are running circles around this sad clown and he’s breathless trying to keep up with his failed logic of “everybody else does it, so who cares” and his 6th grade name calling.

    RB Glennie, you need to go back to school…..or sleep…

  32. @RB Glennie,

    You said:

    “You don’t care about transparency, or you be flailing the Urkel govt for its multiple instances of betraying the same value… instead, you harp on some issue that has no relevance to anything and no one cares about.”

    Are you calling Obama Urkel?

    Is that your only defense — an offensive name? Do you have any facts or are you just tossing out accusations in the inscrutable verbosity you call a reply and hoping they stick?

    Your implied generalizations do nothing for your cause, nor does your argument that because you claim Obama is not transparent, we can’t talk about Palin’s violation of the law.

    You haven’t proven your point and even if you had, this post is about Palin, not Oabma. It is irrelevant what Obama did or did not do. As far as consistency goes, the left is very consistent in demanding accountability and transparency from their leaders. The right can’t make this claim, given the authoritarian structure of their platform.

    On the other hand, specifically, I can make the argument that Palin has been found guilty of abusing her power and her Fund was found to be in violation of the AK ethics act as well. Those are facts.

    You say you don’t vote Republican but you are defending Palin. I think your party affiliation is pertinent here as it goes to your motives for desperately trying to spin reality. My position is clear. Are you ashamed to admit who you voted for?

    Your attempt to gain implied authority by claiming you speak for everyone, when clearly you don’t, has failed.

    What’s next on your list? Got any real arguments to make here or are you just going to run down the list of how to lose an argument?

  33. @RB Glennie,

    >>Huh, huh huh? palin broke into someone else’s email account? Do you need your meds?

    Wow…you are seriously going to spin my example into this? You know, I thought about spanking you again, but I won’t. I just pity you now. You’re sad and pathetic. Clearly, you have nothing substantive to offer.

    Here, let me turn your own tactic on you:

    >>`sure shit smack’? – please learn to write English.

    OMG, what the hell? Huh, huh, huh?! Why are you so racist?

    Shit, that was easy… I feel so POWERFUL! Now I know why you keep coming back here and doing what you do.

    >>I don’t know you but I do know you don’t know how to type…

    Yes…I need to learn how to type like you know how to type. Here, let me learn from your awesome typing example below:

    Huh? My `guilty conscience’? Are you saying you know me someone, or do you fancy yourself a clairvoyant?

    Um, my mistakes are typos because I struck the wrong key in typing. Let’s look at yours, shall we? First, when you try to quote “guilty conscience,” it’s a double quotation mark, not the singular ones you use. And proper English grammar dictates that your question mark needs to go inside the end quotation mark, not outside of it.

    Do we even need to discuss your “are you saying you know me someone?” Yeah, I didn’t think so.

    So, come again, what was it you were just saying about me having to learn English?

    Like I said, you’re sad and totally pathetic.

    I’m done with you. Waste of time.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.