So how did you love Sarah's speech? And did anyone catch Olberfool and Matthews to learn why the speech was a non-tingly miserable failure?
MORE: Not as cool as shooting hoops with the troops, of course, but still pretty cool. For a Republican.
« Sarah's Night - Open Thread | Main | Boys Will Be Boys? »
The comments to this entry are closed.
Elliott, I heard that too. Compare that with this:
Joe Biden on Meet the Press, September 9, 2007: “I mean, the truth of the matter is that, that the — America’s — this administration’s policy and the surge are a failure, and that the surge, which was supposed to stop sectarian violence and — long enough to give political reconciliation, there’s been no political reconciliation... The reality is that, although there has been some mild progress on the security front, there is, in fact, no, no real security in Baghdad and/or in Anbar province, where I was, dealing with the most serious problem, sectarian violence. Sectarian violence is as strong and as solid and as serious a problem as it was before the surge started.” (h/t Geraghty)
Joe Biden should just debate himself; he might win that one.
Posted by: michaelt | September 04, 2008 at 09:23 AM
The Hillary machine must be about to go into overdrive,Gov.Palin represents a real threat for Hillarys' 2012 plans.
Posted by: jean | September 04, 2008 at 09:24 AM
If Governor Palin and John McCain want to define 'change' as voting with George Bush 90% of the time, that's their choice, but we don't think the American people are ready to take a 10% chance on change.
"Change" is Obamas vague, undefined nonsense - most Americans are baffled as to all this need for "change".
Posted by: Bill in AZ | September 04, 2008 at 09:28 AM
And we fear the kind of "change" Obama would probably bring, based on the caliber of people he's associated with most of his adult life.
Posted by: fdcol63 | September 04, 2008 at 09:31 AM
The Hillary machine must be about to go into overdrive,Gov.Palin represents a real threat for Hillarys' 2012 plans.
This has to have Scary Larry hopelessly conflicted (as if he is ever in any other state). He was hailing Palin last week, probably only because it got rid of Obama to clear the way for Hillary in '12. Well, he has 4 years to forge and invent a bunch of nonsense - like the phantom whitey tapes.
Posted by: Bill in AZ | September 04, 2008 at 09:32 AM
Jane, this is getting frightening. I pulled that very same Steyn bit to post here.
Posted by: clarice | September 04, 2008 at 09:39 AM
Leo, honey, we've been making fun of that "response" for hours. Catch up.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | September 04, 2008 at 09:40 AM
Joe Biden should just debate himself; he might win that one.
But I bet he'd lose, too.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | September 04, 2008 at 09:41 AM
Clarice - Steyn is exhibit A for why there should be no term limits for commentators.
Posted by: bgates | September 04, 2008 at 09:43 AM
jane,
I just mailed your joke to Instapundit as a recurrent rumor I have been hearing.
I wonder if anything will come of it.
I dare Obama to deny it. Har.
Posted by: M. Simon | September 04, 2008 at 09:43 AM
I can't wait for the first Palin-Biden debate.
Biden will drone on and on and on, pleased at the sound of his own voice and his attempts at humor, while bloviating and trying to impress everyone with his experience and his IQ - which of course is much higher than everyone else's (he thinks), meandering aimlessly until he arrives at the central point of his statement, which was ..... what?
In contrast to Palin, who'll be disarmingly self-deprecating and sweet, concise and to the point, carefully taking aim and dropping the moose - or jackass, in this case - with one quick shot.
Posted by: fdcol63 | September 04, 2008 at 09:45 AM
Rasmussen:
"Last night’s polling shows that, by a ten-to-one margin, voters believe reporters are trying to hurt Palin’s campaign rather than help. Republicans and unaffiliated voters strongly believe that a double standard is being applied to Palin because she is a woman. Democrats disagree. Perhaps most stunning is that, among unaffiliated voters, just 42% believe Obama has better experience than Palin to be President. Thirty-seven percent (37%) say Palin has the edge on experience. Again, most of the interviews for this survey were completed before Palin’s well-received speech last night."
Posted by: Danube of Thought | September 04, 2008 at 09:47 AM
Poor MSNBC... Palin was so "sarcastic" and "insulting" to their guy Obama.
Doesn't she know her place?
Insulting a [Republican] presidential ticket during a party convention is Keith Olbermann's job...
Posted by: Cecelia | September 04, 2008 at 09:47 AM
Did anyone else see Gloria Borger's reaction to the news that Harry Reid's spokesman had called Palin's speech "shrill?" She knew right away how big a mistake it was.
Another accolade from Harry Reid?
Outstanding. I hope she hurts his ears again.
BTW the PUMAS got that news and the reaction was "They said the same thing about Hillary".
Posted by: M. Simon | September 04, 2008 at 09:48 AM
Well, the media set themselves up for that one. They thought they were dealing with some "little girl" they could destory with nasty rumors. I think part of the reason McCain picked her is that she has the same love of the fight that he does. The harder you make it, the better they perform.
Also noticed that further foundation was established to tie Obama to the "do nothing congress" and Harry (the war is lost) Reed. The ad McCain put up yesterday to run in Ohio does the same thing. Also a nice reference to Truman last night. Coincidence? I think not.
The one thing I would love to see McCain do tonight is read his letter to Obama from his first year in the Senate, where Obama promised to help McCain on ethics reform, then pulled back because of Dem party pressure. As I recall, the letter ends something like 'I took you for a man of integrity, who put principles before your party. Clearly I was wrong. I shall not make that mistake again.'
Posted by: Ranger | September 04, 2008 at 09:49 AM
From now on, when a Democrat says "But what if McCain drops dead on his first day in office?!?!?!" I'm going to say "dude -- don't tease me like that."
From RevnantD at Althouse also on Instapundit.
Posted by: M. Simon | September 04, 2008 at 09:50 AM
Poor John McCain. His speech will seem so anticlimactic. And he isn't a good speech giver to start with. I just love Sarah Palin.
Posted by: bio mom | September 04, 2008 at 09:53 AM
DoT,
That is good news indeed.
Posted by: Sue | September 04, 2008 at 09:53 AM
sbw,
Spengler thinks it was intentional.
LUN scroll down.
Posted by: M. Simon | September 04, 2008 at 09:53 AM
They’re the ones whose names appear on laws and landmark reforms, not just on buttons and banners, or on self-designed presidential seals.
Ouch.
Posted by: Sue | September 04, 2008 at 09:54 AM
Leo,
When are you going to be a man and apologize.
Posted by: M. Simon | September 04, 2008 at 09:56 AM
You know, I like the moose shooting metaphors. I do. But in the interests of accuracy, wouldn't it be more appropriate to say she harpooned Obama and Hillary last night?
Posted by: Extraneus | September 04, 2008 at 09:57 AM
Cleo,
Did Obama say which Bush Speechwriter left the WH to bail out the incompetent Palin?
I guess it worked since Obama is rumored to be quitting the race in a matter of hours.
Posted by: Jane | September 04, 2008 at 09:58 AM
I hope that Biden gets those clips in his brain checked before the VP debate.
Posted by: Neo | September 04, 2008 at 09:59 AM
Did anyone else see Gloria Borger's reaction to the news that Harry Reid's spokesman had called Palin's speech "shrill?"
Being a spokesman for that pathetic worm must be the most disgusting job in the world. I would think a pre-requisite would be having facial paralysis.
Posted by: Captain Hate | September 04, 2008 at 10:00 AM
I have hear rumors at No Quarter that several of Hillary's family members will be in attendance tonight.
Her brother which was already reported in the Shrinking Media and her mother. Is her mother still alive?
Also a rumor that the McCain Campaign is looking for lawyers to prevent vote fraud. Lots of PUMAS are up for that one as poll watchers.
Posted by: M. Simon | September 04, 2008 at 10:01 AM
Is this a smear? Palin's Faith Is Seen In Church Upbringing.
Now, I'm willing to write some of this stuff off to the loose expression of nutcake ideas, which may not be systematically held. However, Guv Sarah listened to this stuff for more than two decades in Wasilla, and it appears that she still listens to it while in Juneau, the state capitol. I will also grant that she handles the English "tongue" just fine, thank you, and I presume that's the "tongue" she'll use as president of the Senate and with foreign leaders. Still, the last fruitcake of this sort we entrusted with high public office was John Ashcroft--not an inspiration. Being a good speaker is one thing, having some sound ideas is another, but accomplishing them is yet another thing. Is it a smear to suggest that this baggage may get in the way?
Posted by: anduril | September 04, 2008 at 10:01 AM
M.Simon,
It's not my joke, I read it here last night.
Jane, this is getting frightening. I pulled that very same Steyn bit to post here.
Clarice,
I can't tell you how flattering it is to be in group think with you.
Posted by: Jane | September 04, 2008 at 10:01 AM
Hmm, begates, I don't think Steyn's been writing political commentary as long as some dinosaurs have, but--ok--why not give me the power to issue waivers from the term limit rule.
Posted by: clarice | September 04, 2008 at 10:02 AM
GMax - still want to bet we won't take at least one house?
Sure if you have money to lose I will be your Huckleberry.
Dont get me wrong, I would dearly love to retake the House this election and give a Republican administration a fighting chance to govern, but that is a pretty tall over if the party ID remains +5.7 for the Democrats.
As I pointed out though, 50+ Blue Dog Democrats will be the swing votes if the Rs can recover around 10 seats. Nancy would then have a very tough task, as the number of votes she could safely lose on any roll call would be razor thin.
The Senate is going to have more Democrats simply because there are like 23 R seats up, and only 10 D seats. And a lot more open seats and a couple poorly positioned incumbents.
Plus there is a money problem and the Democrats in the Senate have a lot of funds to throw at races.
If you have money to lose, its tax deductible to make a donation. I would suggest the RNCC, which is the House fundraising arm as being the highest probability of success.
2010 may be more fruitful for take backs, assuming we can get a unified message for the Party and nationalize the election.
Posted by: GMax | September 04, 2008 at 10:03 AM
BTW a fair number of PUMA fence sitters were moved by Palin's speech.
Posted by: M. Simon | September 04, 2008 at 10:07 AM
anduril, let us assume the Pentacostal report is correct--how would you compare it to Rev. Wright?
Jane, if you don't email me about the rumor, I'll bow out of the mud wrestle for Hit and you'll be stuck with him.
Posted by: clarice | September 04, 2008 at 10:07 AM
william: It was a total failure.
Shhhh !!
I want to see just how long Obama will continue this charade and allow himself to be said to have no executive experience.
Posted by: Neo | September 04, 2008 at 10:08 AM
Glen Beck - "she says what you scream at your television."
Posted by: SunnyDay | September 04, 2008 at 10:09 AM
Different flavors of fruitcake.
Posted by: anduril | September 04, 2008 at 10:12 AM
anduril,
Palin is a Constitutionalist. She governs according to the law not her beliefs.
I mean people have all kinds of nutty beliefs. Some people believe Jesus rose from the dead. Ask any Jewish scholar. They will tell you that is nuts.
However, if they want to attack her on that stuff fine. I guess she will have to give another speech. Is that what you really want?
Posted by: M. Simon | September 04, 2008 at 10:13 AM
"Leo, honey, we've been making fun of that "response" for hours."
Yeah, I remember my first beer.
Posted by: Semanticleo | September 04, 2008 at 10:14 AM
clarice,
Instapundit has a bit up from Kaus. You know about the swirling Edwards rumors. IP says the sooner the rumor is out there the sooner it gets debunked. Maybe if enough of us tell IP what we have been hearing he can put it up and see if anyone can debunk it.
Get busy folks.
Posted by: M. Simon | September 04, 2008 at 10:17 AM
leo,
Still not man enough to apologize?
Posted by: M. Simon | September 04, 2008 at 10:18 AM
anduril, the quotes above (which I don't necessarily think are problematic in all cases) are only from the Wasilla Assembly of God pastor, Kalnins. You have not established that "she still listens to it while in Juneau." To do that you will need similar quotes from the Juneau pastor if you can find them.
The Kalnins quotes are somewhat relevant, although as pointed out in the article, she has not attended his church in seven years.
I agree that this kind of thing probably doesn't help with certain groups of voters, most of whom are solidly Obama anyway.
Posted by: Porchlight | September 04, 2008 at 10:19 AM
"BTW a fair number of PUMA fence sitters were moved by Palin's speech."
Simon
Yeah, I saw your comment @ Goldbrick's.
You would never vote for McCain, but you would vote for Palin.
Quite a few here (just some short months back) were virulently Anti-McCain. But now you're fully committed to his 'reforms'.
I think the GOP Illuminati want to lose 2008. Why don't you get on board?
Posted by: Semanticleo | September 04, 2008 at 10:20 AM
Now, I'm willing to write some of this stuff off to the loose expression of nutcake ideas,
Gee, there are millions of people who believe that under God and not just coincidental fate, a group of men gathered in Philadelphia, issued a Declaration, took on the most formidable military of the day, and then wrote a rather short document called the Constitution. They believed that it was through God that this was possible. "We are endowed by our creator..."
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | September 04, 2008 at 10:21 AM
"Still not man enough to apologize?"
GOP Strategery; "A lie repeated sufficiently, becomes the truth".
Posted by: Semanticleo | September 04, 2008 at 10:22 AM
GMax,
D party ID is dropping. Before the Palinator.
I have seen some movement since her speech. Anecdotally of course. She also seems to be drawing a bit from the unlikely voter pool.
Posted by: M. Simon | September 04, 2008 at 10:22 AM
Leo, oh please, let's continue to compare 20 years of Wright with 20 years of fundamentalism. This is the problem with the echo-chambered media and you poor left wing zealots. You've imagined yourself into a world that does not exist. It is from this fantasy world that all these loser memes come from.
This sort of denouement was eventually inevitable; the dissonance can only be ignored for so long.
==========================================
Posted by: kim | September 04, 2008 at 10:22 AM
Harry Reid's spokesman had called Palin's speech "shrill?"
Nice. That'll bring the women back, because "shrill" is totally not code.
Idiots. Go SARAH!!
Posted by: Lea | September 04, 2008 at 10:22 AM
"To me, it is highly relevant to someone who potentially has her hand on the nuclear button," he says. "If that is her worldview, I would want to know about that."
LOL. If he had studied the AofG church, he would find out they have been preaching the end times since their formation. And I've never heard an Assembly of God preacher advocate hastening that end time.
Posted by: Sue | September 04, 2008 at 10:23 AM
Several months ago, I went out on a limb and said that despite the media, despite what the polls were showing, I believed that in these perilous times, when all was said and done and the voters went into the booth, that McCain would win and win in a landslide.
This morning, I'm even more convinced I'm right.
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | September 04, 2008 at 10:25 AM
"You've imagined yourself into a world that does not exist. It is from this fantasy world that all these loser memes come from."
So you imagine................
Posted by: Semanticleo | September 04, 2008 at 10:25 AM
M. Simon, Maybe I would if I knew what the rumor was. I know a couple of you keep alluding to it but you aren't giving up any details. Can we say annoying?
Posted by: clarice | September 04, 2008 at 10:25 AM
Just think: If McCain can make such a great personnel decision with such little "vetting" - as the MSM and Dems weakly claimed before Palin's speech - think what he'll do when he uses more due diligence!
Posted by: fdcol63 | September 04, 2008 at 10:25 AM
McCain is a constitutionalist, too, and even got the Supremes to ratify McCain - Feingold as constitutional.
Posted by: anduril | September 04, 2008 at 10:26 AM
"I can't wait until Palin finally gets 'vetted'"
I can't wiat until you get "vetted" Septic.They say it only hurts if the vet gets his fingers caught between the bricks.
Posted by: PeterUK | September 04, 2008 at 10:26 AM
"think what he'll do when he uses more due diligence!"
No, 'imagine' what he'll do.....
Posted by: Semanticleo | September 04, 2008 at 10:27 AM
"When they attack one personally it means they haven't a single political argument left." -- Margaret Thatcher
Posted by: M. Simon | September 04, 2008 at 10:27 AM
Different flavors of fruitcake.
"I don't think it's God's will to have a war," he says.
Ooooh, listen to the crazy religious man!
Posted by: bgates | September 04, 2008 at 10:28 AM
"When they attack one personally it means they haven't a single political argument left." -- Margaret Thatcher
Posted by: M. Simon | September 04, 2008 at 10:27 AM
OMG. Don't they have any mirrors in EngineerWorld?
Posted by: Semanticleo | September 04, 2008 at 10:29 AM
the easist way to really rile up the Evanglicals would be to start going after her Church.I can't believe the DEMS would be that dumb.
Posted by: jean | September 04, 2008 at 10:29 AM
McCain is a constitutionalist, too, and even got the Supremes to ratify McCain - Feingold as constitutional.
What scary religious groups do the Justices belong to?
Posted by: bgates | September 04, 2008 at 10:30 AM
BREAKING NEWS: Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick resigns as part of plea deal
Posted by: Neo | September 04, 2008 at 10:30 AM
I told you guys they would attack her religion. Just wait. It will definitely get worse.
Posted by: Sue | September 04, 2008 at 10:31 AM
"the easist way to really rile up the Evanglicals would be to start going after her Church"
It's amazing how much she LOOKS like Margene.
http://www.hbo.com/biglove/
Posted by: Semanticleo | September 04, 2008 at 10:31 AM
I can't believe the DEMS would be that dumb.
I can, jean. What earthly evidence do we have otherwise?
Posted by: Porchlight | September 04, 2008 at 10:31 AM
It will definitely get worse.
Worse than anduril? More heavily bolded, too?
Posted by: bgates | September 04, 2008 at 10:35 AM
I guess anduril has never watched Hal Lindsey teach or read any of his books or watched the Trinity Broadcasting Network. If you had, you would know that they believe in God's protection and guidance, you would understand what their meaning of the "end times" is all about.
These aren't backwoods snake handlers and Bible thumpers. They have massive worldwide high tech communications organizations, have massive outreach programmers for the relief of poverty and disease, have an "army of missionaries," and who believe in the restoration of Israel and the rebuilding of the Temple, and that God is the guiding hand of life.
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | September 04, 2008 at 10:36 AM
fresh, fearless, formitable and fine
Posted by: LJM | September 04, 2008 at 10:37 AM
Are we really going to have an examination of religious beliefs again? Are the Dems this stupid?
Lets put Rev Wright and his racist ranting beliefs in the spotlight again, only this time when voters are truly paying attention.
Lets allow another round of examination of the condenscension embedded in the bitter folks clinging to their religion comment. That plays so well in several battleground states.
And then on top of it all, maybe the Dems will go all in and call her church anti semitic, which I have seen at least one try. Of course this comes from a staggering ignorance that fails to understand that evangelicals are perhaps the strongest supporter of Israel in this country and anti semitism is deeply rooted not there but in huge swaths of the black community and also the muslim communities.
Bring. It. ON.
Posted by: GMax | September 04, 2008 at 10:37 AM
Worse than anduril? More heavily bolded, too?
Yes.
These aren't backwoods snake handlers and Bible thumpers.
What do you mean by Bible thumper? Because if you mean what I think you mean, then yes they are. They just don't handle snakes.
Posted by: Sue | September 04, 2008 at 10:38 AM
Like drowning rats fleeing from a sinking rust bucket, the Dems will flail about and desperately reach for any flimsy flotsam and stinking debris they can hope to grasp.
As their situation becomes more dire, the more frantic and shrill they will become.
Posted by: fdcol63 | September 04, 2008 at 10:38 AM
"It will definitely get worse."
Speaking several languages will 'help' Palin debunk the 'inexperience' burden..........
unless she speaks them in 'tongues', that is.
Posted by: Semanticleo | September 04, 2008 at 10:38 AM
GMax,
The opposite is true. They teach and preach that no Christian should ever take up arms against Israel and should protect it at all costs.
Posted by: Sue | September 04, 2008 at 10:39 AM
Leo,
I don't know if she speaks in tongues or not. Not everyone who attends does. It isn't a requirement to be a member. ::grin::
Posted by: Sue | September 04, 2008 at 10:40 AM
Keith O has has virtually no self awareness at all.
Trak will be attending the deployment ceremony on Sept 11th. This is public knowledge and will likely be broadcast on the local news and the day he will be separated from his loved ones.
Obviously K O has never has never sent a loved one off to war.
What a tool
Posted by: LJM | September 04, 2008 at 10:40 AM
All I know is I've heard that Obama would be "stepping down" tonight, and the suspicion is that he would be announcing this on O'Reilly. It seems otherwise strange that he would go on O'Reilly on McCain's night, but it doesn't necessarily make sense that he would just resign from the ticket entirely (as Jane says, it would seem illogical after all the styrofoam he used just last week), so I was wondering if he might be planning to swap places with Biden instead.
Personally, I'm not sure it's worth repeating outside of here if the result is that O'Reilly gets more viewers, since I can hardly stand the guy. But anyway, that's my understanding of the rumor.
Posted by: Extraneus | September 04, 2008 at 10:41 AM
Boycott O'Reilly!
Posted by: Sue | September 04, 2008 at 10:42 AM
I'm not surprised, we are talking about people so devoid of faith in anything, they actually think a Marxist is the Messiah.
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | September 04, 2008 at 10:42 AM
Books by MR Hal Lindsey
The Late Great Planet Earth - 1970 - 196 pages
Satan Is Alive and Well on Planet Earth - 1972 - 268 pages
There's a New World Coming - 1984
A Christian Zionist will be excellent at Foreign Relations.
Posted by: Semanticleo | September 04, 2008 at 10:42 AM
We need to send Sarah on a week's tour of Europe to give her those "hefty foreign policy creds" ala Obama. Imagine Sarkozy with Palin.
Posted by: bad | September 04, 2008 at 10:42 AM
D party ID is dropping. Before the Palinator.
I have seen some movement since her speech. Anecdotally of course. She also seems to be drawing a bit from the unlikely voter pool.
Well if you thought that was news to me then I can see why you posted it. You do realize that we are only a hair under where we were in 2006. How did that turn out?
I further do expect a continued drop in the margin, but I do not expect it to go away. The margin was 1.6 % in 2004 and we did just fine. We have some work to do to get there and may not.
Plus I expect some major ticket splitters from Hill Dems and indys this year. Coattails remain to be seen. If McCain would get more behind drill, drill drill it would help nationalize but if he sticks to ANWR being pristine, you can probably forget that one.
Posted by: GMax | September 04, 2008 at 10:44 AM
My guess is the lib med will now be going after her religion and "goofy" evangelical faith.
That worked so well in 2000 against Bush.
Posted by: LJM | September 04, 2008 at 10:44 AM
Halfway through Sarah Palin's speech tonight at the RNC, people following the speech noticed she was deviating from the prepared text. — According to sources close to the McCain campaign, the teleprompter continued scrolling during applause breaks.
Posted by: Neo | September 04, 2008 at 10:44 AM
I guess anduril has never watched Hal Lindsey teach or read any of his books or watched the Trinity Broadcasting Network.
Good guess. My guess is I'm not unique in that, including on this forum. I've met some of those people, however: some are pathetic, others simply very ignorant.
Lieberman, SecState? Lindsey Graham, kitchen cabinet?
Posted by: anduril | September 04, 2008 at 10:46 AM
I bet if the guy who wrote last nights speech is really a Bush writer,he was excited to finally have is words delivered so well
Posted by: jean | September 04, 2008 at 10:46 AM
"Not everyone who attends does. It isn't a requirement to be a member. ::grin::"
Do YOU attend?
It may not be required for attendance, but do you get to sit closer to the altar?
Posted by: Semanticleo | September 04, 2008 at 10:47 AM
Obviously K O has never has never sent a loved one off to war.
Couldn't if he wanted. Army's got plenty of mirrors.
Posted by: bgates | September 04, 2008 at 10:48 AM
That worked so well in 2000 against Bush.
That's what I've never gotten. Bush is a Methodist. One of the most liberal of the Protestant faiths. However, I will note that the Assembly of God is an offshoot of the Methodist Church. ::grin::
Posted by: Sue | September 04, 2008 at 10:48 AM
Does this hot rumor indicate why O would step down when he remains ahead in all the polls, has a giant cash pot to run on and the election is but months away?
Posted by: clarice | September 04, 2008 at 10:48 AM
Sue
The opposite is true. They teach and preach that no Christian should ever take up arms against Israel and should protect it at all costs.
We agree and that is what I was trying to explain. Perhaps you made the point better. I can tell you I went to a wedding in San Antonio held in John Hagee's church ( you remember him the left was all over his endorsement of McCain ). The largest Israeli flag I personally have even seen, hangs on the wall of that church. In the sanctuary, in full display every Sunday.
Posted by: GMax | September 04, 2008 at 10:49 AM
What do you mean by Bible thumper? Because if you mean what I think you mean, then yes they are. They just don't handle snakes.
Oh calm down Sue and read in context. If it helps take out the "and" and understand what my point was. They aren't a bunch of crazies, in case you missed it.
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | September 04, 2008 at 10:49 AM
How many here are thrilled to have her associated with a church which encourages trance-like encounters with the 'HOLY SPIRIT'?
Posted by: Semanticleo | September 04, 2008 at 10:49 AM
Palin the Puppet [Byron York]
Kansas Democratic Gov. Kathleen Sebelius, moments ago in a conference call with reporters:
[Palin] mastered the words written by the Bush speechwriters and delivered them well.
09/04 10:44 AM
Somebody is jealous.
Posted by: bad | September 04, 2008 at 10:49 AM
Do YOU attend?
It may not be required for attendance, but do you get to sit closer to the altar?
Not anymore and no, you can sit as close to the altar as you want. And by you, I mean even you Leo. ::grin::
Posted by: Sue | September 04, 2008 at 10:49 AM
I've met some of those people, however: some are pathetic, others simply very ignorant.
Dang, and I already did a mirror joke.
Posted by: bgates | September 04, 2008 at 10:49 AM
"They aren't a bunch of crazies, in case you missed it."
In defense of Sue, she said 'speaking in tongues' was not a REQUIREMENT to attend.
Posted by: Semanticleo | September 04, 2008 at 10:50 AM
I've met some of those people, however: some are pathetic, others simply very ignorant.
Does kettle and pot come to anyone else's mind?
Posted by: GMax | September 04, 2008 at 10:52 AM
Oh calm down Sue and read in context.
Calm down? I'm not excited Sara. I'm pointing out facts.
Posted by: Sue | September 04, 2008 at 10:52 AM
Leo,
Okay, let's be more specific, okay? It is not a requirement to be a member of the Church. Baptism, by water, is all that is required.
Posted by: Sue | September 04, 2008 at 10:53 AM
Leo
Palin's church is much less frightening than Obama's.
Posted by: bad | September 04, 2008 at 10:53 AM
I imagine it has something to do with his internal polling, or possibly something personal about to come out.
Posted by: Extraneus | September 04, 2008 at 10:53 AM
"some are pathetic, others simply very ignorant."
Would you say they are as ignorant as the pilgrims who go to Medjugorje to see an apparition and have a few locals interpret her sayings? Or the ones who flock to Lourdes? Or the ones who head to Loreto in Italy?
Posted by: Rick Ballard | September 04, 2008 at 10:54 AM