Thread: Sarah Palin

Originally Posted by Humbert

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Heh..obvious answer, dude. They got their shit together and have the balls to reject the Liberal line

They have a name for it. It's called ignorance.

Read my Sig Line lately have you, Bert?

Originally Posted by wjblaney

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Why do these whacked-out Libs vehemently hate smart Conservative chicks, eh?

Why are such beautiful and smart women so conservative?

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Read my Sig Line lately have you, Bert?

Nobody's stopping you from clinging to your ignorant beliefs were just laughing at you for having them.

Sarah Palin wants everyone to 'speak American' | Sun Times National

I seriously dislike this woman. It's people like her that make me confident there will come a day when I'm sitting with my wife and daughter enjoying a meal in some Amish restaurant and some dumb ass is going to approach our table and berate them for not speaking "American".

We have a woman in oz just as ignorant & racist.
And she appeals to the same people as the Palin supporters ignorant racists.

Originally Posted by Humbert

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Read my Sig Line lately have you, Bert?

Nobody's stopping you from clinging to your ignorant beliefs were just laughing at you for having them.

Are you trying to take away his 'rights', Humbert? They are inalienable and - irrespective of how badly they are left open to interpretation - they are RIGHTS!!!

Fucking hell, that woman is as dumb as a brick.

Sarah Palin wants to be Donald Trump's energy secretary, has no idea what the job entails
Updated by Brad Plumer on September 7, 2015, 12:20 p.m. ET

Sarah Palin is already picking out a job for herself in the forthcoming Donald Trump administration. She'd like to run the Department of Energy for a brief period, before abolishing it.

Sounds promising! Except for one tiny little catch — it's not clear she even knows what the department does. Here's what she told CNN:

"I think a lot about the Department of Energy, because energy is my baby: oil and gas and minerals, those things that God has dumped on this part of the Earth for mankind’s use instead of us relying on unfriendly foreign nations."

"I'd get rid of it. And I'd let the states start having more control over the lands that are within their boundaries and the people who are affected by the developments within their states. If I were in charge of that, it would be a short-term job, but it would be really great to have someone who knows energy and is pro-responsible development to be in charge."

Palin is talking about the fact that the federal government owns billions of acres of land and coastal waters, containing quite a bit of oil, gas, and coal. Industry groups have long complained that President Obama hasn't opened up nearly as much of this land to drilling as they'd like. And a few (fringe) groups out West have even demanded that this land be transferred to the states.

Except this really has nothing to do with the Department of Energy, which mainly oversees the nation's nuclear weapons program — a task consuming nearly half its budget — runs the national labs, and conducts energy R&D.

What Palin wants is the Department of Interior, which oversees the vast majority of federal lands. They're the ones handling leases for coal mining or fracking on public lands, through the Bureau of Land Management, or supervising offshore oil and gas drilling, through the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management. If you wanted to devolve federal lands back to the states, you'd focus on Interior, not Energy.

New York Times found not liable in Palin defamation case

A jury found The New York Times not liable after the news organization was sued by former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin (R) over an editorial it published linking her to a mass shooting in 2011.

The jury's decision Tuesday, which was unanimous, came a day after the judge in the case indicated he would dismiss the lawsuit against the newspaper, saying Palin's attorneys produced a lack of evidence to suggest the news organization acted recklessly or knowingly published false material about her.

"I think this [was] an example of very unfortunate editorializing on the part of The Times," U.S. District Court Judge Jed Rakoff said in court on Monday. "The law here sets a very high standard [for actual malice]. The court finds that that standard has not been met."

Palin's lawyers argued during the trial that The Times and James Bennet, then the editorial page editor at the newspaper, acted with "actual malice" against the former governor when they published an editorial linking her to the deadly 2011 shooting in an Arizona parking lot of then-Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.).

The jury's verdict in the civil case ruled against Palin's claims of libel.

"The New York Times welcomes today’s decision," a spokesperson for the newspaper said after Rakoff indicated he would move to dismiss the case as the jury was still deliberating. "It is a reaffirmation of a fundamental tenet of American law: public figures should not be permitted to use libel suits to punish or intimidate news organizations that make, acknowledge and swiftly correct unintentional errors."

After publication, The Times later corrected the inaccuracies in the initial editorial, noting a previous version had “incorrectly stated that a link existed between political rhetoric and the 2011 shooting."

On the witness stand last week, Palin described a feeling of being “powerless” after the editorial's publication.

"It was devastating to read, again, an accusation, a false accusation that I had anything to do with murder, murdering innocent people," Palin said.

The case was widely seen by observers as a major test of press freedoms and the high standard for defamation cases against public figures.

Palin's lawyers are expected to file an appeal, a likelihood Rakoff cited as he explained his decision to dismiss the case as the jury continued to deliberate, saying that "the court of appeals will greatly benefit from knowing how the jury decided."

The Times has not lost not lost a libel case in an American courtroom in at least 50 years, the newspaper noted.

The failed governor of Alaska (quitter) responds to the verdict………

SarahPalinUSA - katiecouric now you get it? why I don’t read the newspapers you think I should read? https://twitter.com/SarahPalinUSA/st...75691860717568

What to Know About Sarah Palin v. New York Times | KCM - https://twitter.com/katiecouric/stat...51508762300425

Originally Posted by S Landreth

The failed governor of Alaska (quitter) responds to the verdict………

SarahPalinUSA - katiecouric now you get it? why I don’t read the newspapers you think I should read? https://twitter.com/SarahPalinUSA/st...75691860717568

What to Know About Sarah Palin v. New York Times | KCM - https://twitter.com/katiecouric/stat...51508762300425

He is a witty broad, I betcha. LOL

Why is this cnut news......still?

^Fvck off Jeff

Sarah Palin loses jury trial in closely watched New York Times libel case

Originally Posted by S Landreth

It really is lies replacing the truth.

Katie Couric embarrassed her by asking her what she *does* read and she didn't have an answer because she struggles if it isn't pop-up or join the dots.

Fuck, this thread brings up a lot of memories. I really miss smashing boontard.

He was a massive idiot along the lines of skiddy, but actually worse.

Yes, shudder, he was worse than skiddy. He posted utter shit and never read most of what he posted because he falsely thought reading the headline that it was backing his point only to find out after most of us smarter people who actually read the article found out that it was counter to his position.

He clowned himself over and over.

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Palin is gonna OWN the NYT - bet on it!

She had to settle for Fox.

The Moment Sarah Palin’s Testimony Fell Apart

Then the lawyer brought up The Masked Singer. Palin appeared on this prime-time show in 2020, well after the story she’s suing over ran in the Times. In the run-up to this trial, her attorneys filed a motion to bar any showing of the video in the courtroom. Now, Palin tried to bar any mention of the incident. “Objection,” she said, in an earnest way that made it sound like she actually thought she had the ability, as a witness, to object. The courtroom burst into chuckles.

Anyway, I haven't really been "Keeping up with the Palins". Any more teenage pregnancies, domestic assault incidents, drink or drug driving arrests?

Only political hacks of the lowest order ( Reach-around and Sewer Landreth) keep up with the Palins.

Michael is definitely my preferred Palin.

Love Palin. Comedy gold.

Originally Posted by Davis Knowlton

Love Palin. Comedy gold.

Yet strangely I reckon she'd be a dynamite shag. I would.