Nixon was the last liberal in the White House. Clinton undid much of his good work.

Nixon would be anathema to both parties now and would probably only be acceptable to Greens. He didn't start the war, he ended it. That is why he had to go, not Watergate.

The lions are sure a hungry bunch, it seems. I don't think that the selection of her "endangered the country." I think she had a lot more conscientiousness than Dan Quayle, the Veep that pretended to serve from 1988-1992.

His pappy had to pay a huge donation to Indiana University to take the guy and he flunked the bar about 15 times.

At least Sarah Palin worked.

I just can't help but wonder if a man would receive such a smack down. Honestly. Leave her alone, for fuck's sake.

"Salon posts have gotten quite adolescent recently. Can't we have some editing please? Get rid of all the name calling ones? I'd like to see higher standards from Salon than we see in other blogs. It's why I read Salon.

My appreciation to Susan Woods for her posts, among the few rational ones here. I've been a mental health professional for 30 years though, and I do think there's an argument to be made that Sarah Palin's narcissism is exceptional, even for politicians."

No kidding. It's like a bunch of stupid trollish preteens have taken over.

BUT - name calling? Then you go and "diagnose" Palin with narcissism?

Hypocrite.

Now you got me doing it.

Mental illness is spreading and you can catch it from others. That is why I avoid schizophrenics, depressives, maniacs and MENTAL HEATH CARE PROFESSIONALS.

After 30 year of that kind of work, how could you NOT be a certifiable loon?

BTW - Phenothiazine is an insecticide.

BTW - SSRIs are based on fluoride insecticides.

After 30 years in that business are you on any of those drugs?

You know how most people get over mental illness?

They stop seeing the Doctors and MENTAL HEALTH CARE PROFESSIONALS.

Why do you think they call your profession MENTAL?

Because it is.

Why in the world would you think that Palin would be any less pro-corporate than any other GOP candidate? You really think she wouldn't help Wall Street?

The GOP platform is extremely business friendly and anti-worker. It's extremely helpful to corporate America, runs interference for them on issues like pollution, protects them from regulation, protects them from workers' rights, civil rights, unions, and environmental legislation in general.

It's far more pro-corporate than the Democratic party, and the Democratic party is very much pro-Corporate these days. Since roughly 1973, they have embrace Corporate America, but they're not nearly as aggressive as the GOP in that field.

Palin would be no different.

As for your "progressive elites". Beyond the fact that that's an Orwellian configuration, similar to "liberal fascism", progressives don't exist in the GOP party. We progressives are to the left of the Dems on pretty much every issue. They are too centrist for us . . . with some leadership folks who actually exhibit center-right tendencies. If we had a truly progressive government, workers, the environment, Single Payer healthcare, better education, a bigger public square . . . would be the focus, not the financial elite. Our philosophy is anti-elitism, especially anti-financial elite.

That's not Palin. Palin would work hard to protect and defend the financial elite and make things better for them. She would deregulate, cut taxes for corporations and wealthy Americans, roll back environmental regulations (which are already too weak), make life hell for unions and workers in general, and return to Bush-style "civil rights", which means a refocus on the supposed persecution of Christians.

She would be horrifically bad for 95% of America. But the financial elite and the religious right would love her.

Under a democratic ideology, any and every one with access to public media is entitled to employ whatever rhetoric they wish to effect whatever political ends they desire. It is exactly like mixing volatile chemicals, willy-nilly, in a high school test-tube with results as predictably unpredictable and destructive.

In operation and effect, democracy is akin to an enormous choir or symphony orchestra playing both without scores and under an array of mutually antagonistic conductors. Anyone powerful enough to climb up to a podium in the public media is entitled thereby to attempt to conduct the orchestra. Americans take bullet-proof pride in their "democracy." They are, apparently, politically tone-deaf, as the result is the definition of ideological cacophony and schizophrenic behavior. Under such an approach to social organization, there can be no symphony, no harmony, no concord. Discord is a structural imperative of such a "system" as "democracy."

Mr. Conason would have us believe that those conductors who attempted to guide the "music" into discord with the music that he imagined should prevail should be pulled down from their podiums. But this is democracy! Each and every man and woman is a franchised voice in the choir, and each "conductor" entitled by virtue of owning a podium. What normative force among them has the right to ordain which voices in that vast mad choir are concordant and which discordant?

In American history, what is "right" and what is "wrong" are matters determined only after the fact, not before. Americans love to say, after all, that their winners write their history books.

Palin is far too simple, naive and jejune for the organized crime machinations required by Obamas owners.

Obama is corrupt enough to play by their rules.

Sarah just wouldn't get it.

Because she isn't "SMART" enough to be evil.

Come 2012, she will be.

Let's assume liberals are generally more intelligent then everyone else. (except maybe for Tibetan monks or green spotted turtles)

Let's assume Palin is an idiot.

The question really has to be asked why does dumb ol' Palin cause such attention from and consternation to the super intelligent left?

Is it because they like to remind themselves how super intelligent they are by calling Palin stupid?

Obama sounds intelligent but isn't. Bush did not sound intelligent and wasn't. Biden sounds like a fool but that is interpreted as intelligence. Politicians are the last place to look for intelligence.