"Palin supporters who made money on the controversial sports-complex deal helped the Palins build their home on Lake Lucille."

If you are going to support an accusation like that, I would hope you'd present your evidence in this matter. Isn't that what journalists are supposed to do? Or are you just following an agenda committed to spreading discredited rumors about your political adversaries?

Why do Palin adorers (or the entire rethug base, for that matter) have such poor reading comprehension skills? See kookamonga and hucklebuck for examples.

I notice you didn't provide all of Joan's claim. Here, let me help you out.

Village Voice reporter Wayne Barrett broke the story back in September, examining whether Palin supporters who made money on the controversial sports-complex deal helped the Palins build their home on Lake Lucille.

So, now that we see the whole sentence, precisely what do you think Joan needs to support? Do you not believe the Village Voice broke the story? Do you not believe the VV examined the controversy?

Also, would you care to explain why you needed to truncate Joan's sentence to make your pseudo-point?

Buh bye.

When you finally get those ATT idiots on the phone, be sure and tell them to have their friends upstate yank those "Whole Paycheck" eyesores from your state! California was doing just fine, thank you, for decades with industrial food from Safeway and Kroger and the benefits of which are waddling, er, walking, around the streets of San Francisco for all to see, regardless of race, color, or creed! That rabbit food may be OK for skinny, knowledge-worker types but California is a nineteenth-century man's state where real work is required, not that brain-based nonsense for effete girly men! BTW, I was here for the dotcom party: What a blast! My apartment building was 100 percent dotcom occupied and we'd hang out in the hallls to swap war stories about our employers and wonder if the next check would bounce because the only thing the people we were working all had in common was that they weren't making money just burning through the VC cash! (But you landed on your feet, I bet!) Then, one day in September 2001 I walked up to the building and found about thirty eviction notices plastered on the front door! Don't worry, I had a fallback job in software that I never left. The others weren't so lucky: it was back home to mom or dad (depending on who got the ranch after the divorce) and the spare bedroom. Now my building is full of suburban crackheads taking advantage of the city's many opportunities. Well, I guess that's progress! Ciao for now!

“Van Flein's actions remind us of one of the late I.F. Stone's favorite stories. He used to put out an annual list of the dumbest legislators in Congress. So he bestowed the honor one year on the perfect candidate.

So what does the congressman do? He holds a press conference to deny that he is indeed the dumbest. Stone pointed out that his Weekly had a circulation of about 4,000, if I recall, and the congressman went to the national print and television media to deny that it was true.”

LOL, Thanks! Never heard that one.

Images of Peter Sellers holding the press conference surfaced.

You may be right -- am I the only person in the blogosphere who thinks this is a genuinely great move?

Let me offer an objective insight you won't find elsewhere, and see if you follow my thinking.

1. Sometimes, I get concerned for Sarah, and one of those times was a month ago when I read Huckabee planned to decamp to Iowa this fall to raise money for, and otherwise endorse, social conservative candidates in every town and county in the state. Why concerned? Because it could take away, and/or neutralize, social conservative support for Palin.

2. Palin is obviously not the beltway favorite, but she knows how to fight. You might imagine her watching this unfold on C-SPAN and saying, "Doggone it, also, I'm not going to sit here and watch Mike Huckabee eat my dinner and take my support."

3. To that end, the Washington Post (in its column called the "Fix") ran down winners and losers on Palin's announcement this morning, and footnoted a loser being Huckabee, for obvious reasons. Furthermore, it said Hucakbee is getting pressure to bow out and run for the Senate in Arkansas instead. On Fox News, Huckabee made some very gracious comments about Palin, saying he couldn't objectively analyze her decision because he such a big fan and likes her so much. P.S. Sarah, would you mind raising money for me in Arkansas? Huckabee is even more machiavellian than Sarah; he wouldn't be taking this tact unless he was concerned.

4. Yes, but who cares about Iowa? Well, win Iowa and you have a 50% shot at the nomination, historically speaking. Yes, but who cares about Huckabee? Well, if you average early polling, it's (1) Palin, (2) Huckabee, and (3) Romney. And, Huckabee won Iowa before. Sideline Huckabee, and you might just be the nominee.

5. Furthermore, while Gingrinch and Romney may the beaux ideal Republican in George Will's mind, out in the church basements of Iowa, there is a different perspective. Recall how badly the establishment misperceived Iowa in 2008. Even conservative leaders got it wrong. Pat Robertson endorsed pro-choice Rudy, arguing his win was inevitable and it was best to make him a friend. The National Right to Life endorsed Fred Thompson over Huckabee even though he was less anti-abortion, citing realpolitik and electability as the reasons. Point being: conservatives will do whatever they please. Including nominating Palin.

Also, I'm not a beltway pundit, but I do have good conservative instincts. The commentariat broadly praised Romney's "Ich bin ein Mormon" address in Texas last year; I read it and thought he was finished. My gut tells me Palin is going to be in very good shape with conservative primary voters.

6. Yes, but what about the states beyond Iowa? Palin will have more stamina in New Hampshire than Huckabee -- she scored smashing crowds there late in the campaign. She also was a smash in Michigan, garnered a crowd of 60,000 -- yes, 60,000 -- in Florida, and can be expected to do very well in South Carolina. Win Iowa and South Carolina, and generally speaking, you're the nominee.

7. And what about the issues? Oddly enough, she may do more for Alaska outside the state than inside. ANWR is her favorite issue, and she can be expected to trade PAC support for ANWR endorsements from Republican hopefuls. That's a big part of her energy independence platform (drill, baby, drill), as well as creating good paying union jobs for people like her husband and prosperity through lower energy costs. It also gives her an economic argument that Huckabee lacks.

So, to sum it all up for you, my favorite anti-Palin correspondent, I think she did very well. If I were her, I would have done the same thing -- assuming I had the guts and vision for it.