The funny thing is that instead of testifying she submitted written testimony.

This tactic allows her to avoid contradicting herself in the cross-examination and allows her to issue claims without having to support them. This way she can lie while minimizing any opportunities for others to debunk her. Truth does not serve Palin's position; lies do.

She knows she'd lose any honest debate and therefore resorts to a dishonest one. As usual, all who do evil hateth the light.

Don't look now, but you've refuted yourself.

You also go through a lot of effort to misrepresent who said what and to bury the facts in piles of obfuscation. Honest reviews like Factcheck quote the sources, cite them properly, and compare the actual sources with the claims. You don't. You attempt to "prove" claims with still more claims, and those claims are contradicted by the sources. You're just weaseling around the facts. In other words, you're a liar, and not a very good one.

And you wonder why people don't like you.

You're not actually capable of posting anything that's true, are you, neocon?

By the way.

Go wash your hands. You have blood on them.

That Sarah is so silly ...

If only it could be dismissed as merely silly so easily.

Sarah Palin is symptomatic of a delusion and corruption in US government, its business leaders, and many if not most of its people that is so entrenched that it is likely to be the downfall of the country. That corruption feeds America's problems and those are getting worse, not better, and given the state of its culture of delusion and corruption the negative trends appear to be quite intractable and impossible to reverse.

I give the US twenty years, tops. It's not just going to be ugly. It's going to be weird ugly.

The truth of the matter is that no one has ever received a job from a poor person.

A lame deception.

Even the poor pay what they can for what they need, thereby enabling the employment of those to whom they pay.

And even the poorest shopkeeper in Asia has at least one employee, even if it is only himself. Not all capitalists are rich.

Government, and especially Dear Leader's administration, are the true wealth destroyers.

Baloney.

Civil government, so far as it is instituted for the security of property, is in reality instituted for the defence of the rich against the poor, or of those who have some property against those who have none at all.

- Adam Smith

A lot of commenters gave the example of Bill Gates. I think that software, like books or music, is a bit of an exception.

Such examples are designed to mislead and to distract from other elements in the equation of wealth and its creation.

Bill Gates could not have become rich all by himself and his "contribution" to the wealth of society is intentionally overstated. He could not have become rich without the work of those who developed computing technologies before him, and not without access to labor markets, and not without access to markets for his products: he could not have become rich without customers who could use and could pay for his products.

The rich would have you believe that society exists for the purpose of making them richer, a preposterous notion. Nothing they could contribute to the benefit of society makes the society the property of the rich, just as a paycheck doesn't reduce the employee to the status of livestock, or entitle the employer to the employee's home and family.

To the contrary, society is owed a great deal for having made the rich wealthy, for having provided the economic infrastructure which made their wealth possible. The rich are to be required to pay for their use of that infrastructure, equal to the full cost of their use of it. Taxes are one price they are to pay for their participation in the economic system which made them rich. Naturally, greed will invent excuses to avoid paying any price, and having given a little, greed wants to take all in return.

The failure to pay for that economic infrastructure degrades it and necessarily results in the social problems we see today, which amount to costs borne by society which should be borne by rich. The present situation, where the rich profit inordinately and do not bear their share of the costs of society, amounts to unearned profit for the rich at the expense of those who are not rich. And that is entirely unjust.

As soon as the land of any country has all become private property, the landlords, like all other men, love to reap where they never sowed, and demand a rent even for its natural produce.

Labour was the first price, the original purchase - money that was paid for all things. It was not by gold or by silver, but by labour, that all wealth of the world was originally purchased.

People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices.

- Adam Smith

And one more:

All for ourselves, and nothing for other people, seems, in every age of the world, to have been the vile maxim of the masters of mankind.

Adam Smith, Wealth of Nations, III.iv.10