...quit an elected office. Fine. Except all this self-satisfied clucking and crowing and braying seems only a continuation of the dubious and very partisan, holier than thou superficial witchhunt that broiled around every word she said when she first arrived on the national scene.

We now know that your god can't so much as cough without the aid of a teleprompter. (She had more statewide, let alone total, elected office experience than the one.) So what's the issue?

And you do this oblivious to a police state fast arising around you that would have made Markus Wolf proud, an expertly expanded war and a wedding of industry with the commonweal unrivaled in the annals of fascism.

"Wolf! Wolf!"

Looked to me like she had a snootful of Wasilla crystal meth.

Well, I certainly don't like having my post called "childish," and I would love to reply, "I know you are, but what am I?--Infinity!" But that seems counter-productive.

In fact, you've actually brought up a pretty compelling issue: Since everybody does it, how do we determine which lies are worthy of censure? Kennedy's certainly were, because they were designed to thwart findings of fault, and were utterly craven. But you also mention Watergate lies, and I believe Sarah Palin's fall into that category. Most of her lies seem to have arisen from an attempt to gain office (she, like Nixon, seems to believe that the end can justify the means), or forestall inquiries into her conduct in office. Isn't that pretty much the definition of "Watergate-level lies?"

Other than my (admittedly) childish over-repetition of facts clearly in evidence, I don't think my comments have been vitriolic. But others' clearly have been. Why do you think the vitriol is here?

did Keith Olbermann, Rachel Maddow AND Chris Matthews have to take THIS week off? And why does MSNBC have to turn into Lockdown tv every weekend and holiday?

I actually watched CNN tonight for the 1st time in months.

Just watched the whole thing. The snotty narcissism of the delivery is only exceeded by the total lack of organized thought.

Yeah, I really believe she asked her kids "do you want mommy to go make a difference in the lives of American kids all over the world?" As Sullivan has noted, the breathtaking thing with her lies is the bravado involved; she states the improbable as factual even when any normal liar would KNOW that the thing was easily disproved - and she just doesn't care!

I question now whether she's actually ANYone's mother, since people with balls don't usually also have vaginas.

I think I'm in love with you. Are you married? If so, do you have a brother? If not, do you have a sister? I can change.

It rhymes with "Punt."

And it's starts with "C."

And it's pronounced "Cunt."

Pitbulls don't quit.

Stay tuned for the ridiculous explanations for Palin's resignation (QUIT, QUIT, QUIT) that will be given by conservatives like Hannity and Rush! They are going to be outrageous!

I look forward to listening to right wing nuts try to explain her statements. It was more confusing than anything I think I have ever heard in the political arena.

What infamous or depending on your view, famous and frequent poster to Salon wrote the following yesterday?

"That's enough. So long. I absolutely promise you, no more posts, no more reading this web site, no comebacks in another name. What happened tonight is just not right."

All correct answers get a hearty laugh at the poster's inability to follow his own words, and a copy of the upcoming book: I Lie Because I love You. Now watch me shoot this wolf: The Sarah Palin Story.

88794

That is the number.

The Vanity Fair article noted that she raised $400,000 the week the PAC was created but before it made its first overt solicitation.

The Republicans aren't lacking money...what they really need is some viable national leadership, or maybe just some people who aren't mentally ill.

And what's more, doing #5 and #6 of your list WHILE doing #7 and #8.

Just incomprehensibly vile.

With politicians getting weirder and weirder before our very eyes and no matter how screwed up they are they won't leave. Palin is on her way out. (Kristol still has the hots for her but he is dead wrong again.) Al Francken is finally declared the winner. So things are looking up. Now if President Obama would stop being so nice and give the heave to Lieberman and Blago's man from Chicago, that would be a trifecta.

Made Dan Quayle look good.

Wow, a marriage proposal on Salon...that's what I call a good day. ; )

I am not married, but my heart is taken, unfortunately.

I do have a brother AND a sister...but if you like me, you wouldn't want to marry either of them. I'm sort of the black sheep....

Like FaulknerJr, I find your posts interesting, and I continue to be impressed by your fearless analysis in these letter sections. How you can explain "Sarah" as Nixonian in the same paragraph that you exclaim (again) your love for her is quite an enigma to me, but your honesty, consistency and respectfulness are all, in some way, admirable, I think.

I wonder who you are in real life... Are you a Sarah impersonator? Are you a leader of her PAC? Are you a writer for the Washington Post? Are you David Brooks?

Anyway, personally, it makes sense to me that Sarah Palin's new endeavor will be about raising millions and millions of dollars for Rudy and Mitt. I don't want to sound too catty or anything, but isn't that politics as usual? There's really nothing unusual about her fake maverick identity--it's just another kind of hypocrisy, in the end.

who's not merely a "you just hate/fear/are jealous of Palin because that's what you are" brand of Palin defender. No, with him/her, it's about deigning to regale other posters with his/her superior strategizing skills, in which - what do you know - Palin emerges as, well, just as brilliant as Rader him/herself. Intriguing approach, or would be, if s/he could restrain him/herself from occasional decensions into "nah-hahing" language ("Let the liberal teeth-grinding begin...") when the facade slips, revealing - what do you know again - just another "you just hate her 'cause you don't get her" Palin supporter. So I guess my original assumption about Reader2 was half correct, and as for the incorrect half, we libs are too stupid to be dazzled by Reader2's explanations why we should be as impressed by Palin as s/he is.