Tag: that woman

Meghan McCain on THAT WOMAN.

What annoys me about this Meghan McCain article (via here) is not that I feel the urge to get a red pen (or perhaps an old priest and a young priest*).  Coherent writing on the Internet is not… precisely unknown; but neither is it particularly reliable.  You have to accept that there are a lot of people out there who cannot really write.  Some of them do so for an audience.  Insanely, some of them even get paid.

No, the annoying bit is that there’s an actual point in McCain’s essay, crying in the dark because it’s surrounded by slightly oozy fluff: Sarah Palin is manipulating the New Media paradigm in a fashion that not even Obama has, or possibly even can. Continue reading Meghan McCain on THAT WOMAN.

#rsrh QotD, Shoot-the-messenger edition.

While going through Ben Smith’s law blogger roundup of THAT WOMAN vs. Gawker (short version: Gawker is kind of hosed*) I came across this bit of misdirected exasperation on William McGeveran’s part:

…if you are sick of hearing Sarah Palin decry the arrogance of the media that covers her, then you’d rather deny her the satisfaction of being right.

I think that it’s just the tiniest bit uncouth to be blaming the victim for this, Mr. McGeveran?  Blame Gawker, blame the abusers of fair use, heck, blame the media/liberal/Democratic crusade if you like.   But I don’t see exactly what THAT WOMAN did wrong here.

Besides exist, of course.

Moe Lane

*They probably didn’t help matters much by taunting THAT WOMAN with links to… sites that proved her point, actually.

THAT WOMAN 1, Wall Street Journal 0.

The executive summary:

  • Former Alaskan governor Sarah Palin has an upcoming speech in which she criticizes a plan to institute ‘[quantitative] easing,’ which is in this case basically the practice of creating money via buying our own debt (this particular example of the practice is usually called ‘QE2’ by the papers, apparently because the term is more confusing to people than simply calling it ‘[quantitative] easing’).  Palin makes the fairly obvious point that this encourages inflation, and in the process mentions that food prices have significantly gone up recently.
  • “A-ha!” shouts Sudeep Reddy of the Wall Street Journal.  “The CPI says that they have not!  Silly Sarah Palin!” (I summarize.)
  • Sarah Palin raises an eyebrow, as her source for that claim was apparently… the Wall Street Journal, which reported last week that food prices had significantly gone up recently.  It also derives that conclusion from an examination of the CPI, which suggests that if Reddy has an issue with the methodology, then Reddy should probably take it up with his own newspaper.
  • As Palin put it: “Now I realize I’m just a former governor and current housewife from Alaska, but even humble folks like me can read the newspaper. I’m surprised a prestigious reporter for the Wall Street Journal doesn’t.”

Agreed, but I’d go one step further: it’s fascinating to see what an editor for the media will let pass through.  Statement that food prices are rising?  Smart! Sarah Palin agreeing with your statement that food prices are rising?  Dumb!

And they wonder why even their own reporters don’t read the papers anymore.

Moe Lane (crosspost)

The Heartbreak of Palin Derangement Syndrome.

It’s sad that this needs to be brought up, but it must: it would appear that the Netroots – as per their continuing habit of acting as if the American political system was identical to a pre-Giuliani Times Square peep show emporium – has gotten themselves in a bit of a scrape, again. Specifically, they spent several cheerful hours hooting and hollering over the way that THAT WOMAN suggested that the Tea Party not “party like it was 1773” before they noticed that… well, that the Boston Tea Party was in, well, 1773.

A couple of things: first, this storyboard; which is both cruel and accurate.

Second, while I understand and expect that your average online progressive blogger has about much awareness of American history as, say… Oh, this is awkward. An online progressive blogger would be the actual yardstick for ‘abysmally ignorant about American history.’ Nonetheless, while I understand that the Online Left is dumb… really, Gwen Ifill. You’re supposed to be one of the bright talking heads.

Tsk, tsk.

Moe Lane (crosspost)

PS: THAT WOMAN is LAUGHING at you, netrooters. And you DESERVE it.

#rsrh THAT WOMAN Derangement Syndrome Watch, 9/29/10.

Last time I – and Ace of Spades HQ (unlike the AP) – checked, Associated Press, naming something a ‘bar and grill’ kind of suggests that it’s a restaurant.  Which would suggest that yes, in point of fact, Bristol Palin would be allowed to be actually in it and have, say, dinner.  I mean, seriously: they have both a breakfast and a kid’s menu.

You know, when I first encountered this phenomenon, I was honestly just joking when I described this sort of thing done by various and sundry (and rather furtive) individuals and groups as being part of a rather bizarre sexual fetish.  I still describe it that way; only now I’m no longer joking.

Moe Lane

#rsrh I’m confused…

…is this supposed to be a bad shirt?

Tim Blair certainly doesn’t think so; as for me, well, while I freely admit that it’s a bit a bit since the last time I graced a church with my presence it’s not because I have any issues with Jesus.  As for the other two categories: I mean, come on.  Babies.  How can you be against babies?

Moe Lane

PS: Yes, I know that there are people out there who hate babies (as opposed to people who just don’t want kids).  They also have to carefully hide that attitude for the most part or risk social embarrassment, which is just fine by me…

The THAT WOMAN election tracker.

I saw this last week; the Washington Post has put up a Palin Endorsements Tracker to track, well, former Governor Sarah Palin’s endorsements. So far, of the 42 that they list: 20 primary wins, 10 primary losses, 6 still to be determined (this includes Miller up in AK, as the primary isn’t officially concluded up there yet), and 6 no-primary. That works out to two-to-one successful primary picks, which is apparently not too shabby.

Looking at the map itself: it’s pretty eclectic.  Categorizing the choices is surprisingly hard, and may be actually the result of a deliberate strategy by Palin.  Maybe she’s running, maybe she’s not; maybe she’s Tea Party, maybe she’s establishment; maybe she’ll throw her support behind female candidates, maybe that’s not really a concern for her, balanced against the need for conservative candidates. If I were a Democratic strategist, this would be worrying me.  Hard to plan against a strategy where the pattern isn’t obvious*.

Moe Lane

Continue reading The THAT WOMAN election tracker.

Union murder apologist upset at being called a thug.

‘if you strike a match and put your finger in, common sense tells you you’re going to burn your finger.’

AFL-CIO head thug Dick Trumka is worried about THAT WOMAN’s ‘poisonous‘ rhetoric.  The thug feels that a June speech in which she referred to ‘union thugs’ hit a little too close to home is an incitement to violence:

“And down in Tyler, Texas, she’s talking about — and I quote — ‘union thugs.’ What? Her husband’s a union man. Is she calling him a thug? Sarah Palin ought to know what union men and women are,” Trumka will say. “That’s poisonous. There’s history behind that rhetoric. That’s how bosses and politicians in decades past justified the terrorizing of workers, the murdering of organizers.”

Eddie York could not be reached for comment.

Moe Lane Continue reading Union murder apologist upset at being called a thug.

Palin and Reagan and bears, oh my.

Not to be mean-spirited about this, but it’s at times like this that Arianna Huffington demonstrates that she has a black-box approach to understanding Americans*.  In discussing the inexplicable (to her) attraction so many people have towards THAT WOMAN, Arianna wrote:

It’s not Palin’s positions people respond to — it’s her use of symbols. Mama grizzlies rearing up to protect their young? That’s straight out of Jung’s “collective unconscious” — the term Jung used to describe the part of the unconscious mind that, unlike the personal unconscious, is shared by all human beings, made up of archetypes, or, in Jung’s words, “universal images that have existed since the remotest times.” Unlike personal experiences, these archetypes are inherited, not acquired. They are “inborn forms… of perception and apprehension,” the “deposits of the constantly repeated experiences of humanity.”

…and then goes on to compare said mama grizzly video with this Reagan campaign video, which is apparently also ‘policy-free’ (that’s the latest progressive buzzword for ‘black magic’). And oh, yeah!  That has a bear, too!  That’s Jungian!  And it links Old Devil Figure to New Devil Figure, so that’s a plus!  Yes!  IT ALL COHERES!

Yes.  It makes Allahpundit’s head ache, too. Continue reading Palin and Reagan and bears, oh my.

The American Prospect: Trig Troofers?

For those who don’t know – lucky you – “Trig Troofers” are people who believe that former Governor Sarah Palin did not actually give birth to her son Trig Palin; they instead believe that the child is Bristol Palin’s, despite the fact that Ms. Palin herself had a child at about the same time*.  This has thus become a particularly bizarre conspiracy theory, on the level of the ‘we faked the Apollo moon landing:’ it will elevate (or descend) to the level of 9/11 conspiracy theorizing once the Online Left figures out how Sarah Palin’s uterus relates to the International Zionist Conspiracy.

I mention all of this because I wanted to make it clear that people who believe this nonsense are crazy.  And apparently some of them are riddled through the ranks of the leading liberal magazine The American Prospect.  Which means that there are people at TAP who are crazy. Continue reading The American Prospect: Trig Troofers?