Don’t Hurt Yourself Stretching

werewold journalist

This was supposed to be today’s morning post. By Forrest A. Gump Nabors at Politico:

She Can See This Disaster From Her House

If Republicans lose the Alaska Senate race, they’ll have Sarah Palin to thank.

Deemocrats might long remember 2014 as the year when Sarah Palin won a place in their hearts. Four years ago, an endorsement by the former governor and vice-presidential contender vaulted Joe Miller from obscurity to Republican primary winner in the U.S. Senate race in Alaska, defeating incumbent Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski. In the general election, Murkowski ran again as a write-in Republican, and won. Miller sank between the primary and the general election, helped along to his demise by eagerly reported news accounts of improprieties, including his security detail’s handcuffing of a journalist.

Although Miller narrowly lost his bid for the Senate, he parlayed Palin’s endorsement into national name recognition, what he calls a “top-ranked” Internet news site (“Restoring Liberty” at and a small but intensely loyal local following—the kinds of people who are “looking for the Ted Cruzes, the Mike Lees, the Rand Pauls.” Miller is running again this year in the Republican primary for the right to oppose incumbent Sen. Mark Begich—one of the most endangered Democrats of the 2014 midterms and a key takedown target for Republicans.
Yet by an unusual arrangement of events, Miller is actually poised to seal Begich’s re-election, protect the Democrats’ Senate majority and prevent the repeal of Obamacare. And it’s all thanks to Sarah Palin.


Until this past year, when new chairman Peter Goldberg established calm, fratricidal bickering between Tea Party-style libertarians and everyone else has bedeviled the Alaskan Republican Party. Several chairmen have been ousted since 2010, and at one point the party leadership resembled the medieval papacy, with multiple claimants and no clear pope. The wounds from those intra-party fights are still fresh, and it’s not hard to imagine Miller launching an independent bid should he lose the primary, taking many of his Tea Party supporters with him. After all, “there’s a reason why the party bosses hate him and Washington fears him,” says the voiceover in one campaign ad. In the same clip, Miller says he is sending a message to “big-taxing, big-spending elites that the party is over.”

For the GOP, Miller’s run as an independent would likely be a disaster. In February, a Hays poll hypothetically pitted Begich, Sullivan and an independent Miller against each other (omitting Treadwell—a decision his campaign protested for “ignor[ing] the space-time continuum”), and found 45 percent for Begich, 33 percent for Sullivan and 10 percent for Miller—just enough to prevent a Republican victory.

Miller has been cagey about his plans. When prompted at a University of Alaska speaking event on April 10, he was careful neither to confirm nor deny a possible independent run in November, if he does not win the primary. But he did say that a vote for Treadwell or Sullivan would amount to a vote for Begich, and he did refer to good and “evil” Republicans.


Alaskans have not yet heard from Sarah Palin about Joe Miller’s candidacy this year, which is viable only because she endorsed him in 2010. But Miller, once left for dead on the political battlefield, is back in a big way. Incredible as it may seem, that endorsement is likely to haunt Republicans for years to come.

The original Politico title for this piece was “How Sarah Palin Ruined The Alaska Senate Race.” What I want to know is whether the author hurt himself stretching so ridiculously far to tie Sarah Palin into a hypothetical situation.

Lisa Murkowski (aka “Princess Lisa”) got her Senate seat the old fashioned way – her daddy gave it to her. He was the Senator and when he got elected as governor he appointed Princess Lisa to take his place. This was all before Sarah Palin defeated her daddy in the 2006 gubernatorial primary.

In 2010 Princess Lisa had to run for re-election, and she was defeated in the primary by Tea Party candidate Joe Miller. Backed by a informal coalition of Establishment Republicans and Democrats and funded with lots of out-of-state money, Princess Lisa ran in the general election as a “write-in Republican.” It was an ugly campaign, relying heavily on negative ads targeting Miller. He was thoroughly Palinized.

Princess Lisa won a plurality decision with 39% of the vote. Joe Miller got 35% and the Democrat candidate got 23%. Vox populi, vox Dei.

So now Miller is running again, hoping to win the GOP primary so he can face Mark Begich in November. He hasn’t said or done anything to indicate he would copy Princess Lisa and run as a write-in candidate if he loses the primary.

But the author (an assistant professor of political science at the University of Alaska in Anchorage) bases this whole two-page article on speculation that Miller will run as a write-in candidate and cost the GOP a possible victory and then he blames it all on Sarah Palin!

Palin Derangement Syndrome never dies. They just can’t quit her. She’ll live rent-free inside their heads forever.

Republican Fight

Princess Lisa

About Myiq2xu - BA, JD, FJB

I was born and raised in a different country - America. I don't know what this place is.
This entry was posted in Palinpalooza, Sarah Palin and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

41 Responses to Don’t Hurt Yourself Stretching

  1. The Klown says:

    This is some cray shit. I hope that Politico was just cynically trolling for hits and wasn’t serious when they published this crap.

    • 49erDweet says:

      Who are you and what have you done with our Klown?
      The Real Klown would not engage in wistful dreaming as far as Politico’s seriousness quotient. They are stark raving bonkers now, and beyond the pale. Or pail, too.
      Let him go, you monster.

  2. swanspirit says:

    Naaah , logic was last seen in their rear view mirror a long time ago. Their “truth” is so convoluted now they run into each other coming and going. And anytime they can work Sarah’s name in , yes they are guaranteed extra attention.

  3. DeniseVB says:

    Well this was supposed to go on the last thread….Jake Tapper. Does he know if this was under BUUUSH, Bundy would be a hero on the left? Let’s think about this….most of us with compassion in our hearts haven’t given that up. Bundy’s a private citizen, yeah, maybe crazy too, but I’d like to think it’s more about our freedoms. Rights? I’m not defending the right here either, GOP fleeing? If they keep this up, we’ll certainly have Obama’s third term. Oy.

  4. DeniseVB says:

    One more, Dana was right, tired old media taking advantage of a tired old rancher, somewhere in Nevada……

    • 1539days says:

      I wrote below that it is in fact, not illegal to be racist. The feds did not take Bundy’s cattle because he was racist. Racism does not lead to the forfeiture of land in this country. Yet.

      • 49erDweet says:

        Yep. Failure of Character does not equal Forfeiture of Rights……..unless one votes rightish, of course.

        • The Klown says:

          It’s not illegal to be racist, but it is socially unacceptable. The problem is that some people were too quick to put Bundy on a pedestal and now they have egg on their faces.

          • 49erDweet says:

            Yep, some did. But most of what I read supported his position, not his politics or character. It’s disingenuous to claim otherwise……not that THAT would slow down the progs.

          • 1539days says:

            If only that egg spread to Democrats who supported racists.

          • Somebody says:

            I don’t know if a lot of people put Bundy on a pedestal necessarily. I saw people that stated over and over again he didn’t have a legal leg to stand on. My impression of many that supported Bundy was that they thought it was overkill by the government. They didn’t need to come in there with snipers and helicopters. Many governmental agencies have been weaponized and have SWAT teams basically. I thought that is what people were there protesting more than anything else. Maybe I’m wrong I didn’t follow the whole story that closely, mostly because from what I could gather he owes the money, he had his day in court and lost.
            In my mind though when I saw all those BLM goons it made me think about the raid on Gibson and that bottled water company in Arkansas. There is no need for that kind of force over a debt. I can’t remember ever seeing that kind of force over a debt or in the case of the other companies over some supposed violation, but we’ve sure had more and more of that kind stuff under this administration.

      • votermom says:

        Even his cows are racist! So of course the BLM had to shoot em.

  5. DeniseVB says:

    As myiq mentioned earlier, Bundy’s a squirrel for the media right now. Isn’t it easier for the left to bash him than defend the Obama, Reid or Pelosi spew against their loyal oppo?

  6. driguana says:

    I’m growing weary…

  7. The Klown says:

    Apparently nobody bothered to tell me it’s WTF Week:

    One Teen’s Victory Over McDonald’s Boy-Girl Happy Meal Toys

    Connecticut teen Antonia Ayres-Brown is on her way to becoming a feminist hero this week for standing up to a billion dollar corporation — McDonald’s — over its alleged tendency to box kids in by gender when doling out Happy Meal toys.

    “In the fall of 2008, when I was 11 years old, I wrote to the CEO of McDonald’s and asked him to change the way his stores sold Happy Meals,” Ayres-Brown, now a high-school junior and talented musician, wrote in a Slate essay that’s gone viral since being published on Monday. “I expressed my frustration that McDonald’s always asked if my family preferred a ‘girl toy’ or a ‘boy toy’ when we ordered a Happy Meal at the drive-through. My letter asked if it would be legal for McDonald’s ‘to ask at a job interview whether someone wanted a man’s job or a woman’s job?’”

    The precocious inquiry yielded a series of communications between Ayres-Brown and the fast-food chain. It also led to some serious data collecting by the girl and her dad Ian Ayres — who is, unsurprisingly, a heavy-hitting Yale law professor and economist who has previously collaborated with his daughter on research — about McDonald’s employees and the Happy Meal gender bias. The findings had them filing a complaint with the Connecticut Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities in no time. And while McDonald’s was initially dismissive, Ayres-Brown writes, the daughter-father team finally achieved a sort of victory in the form of a letter from McDonald’s chief diversity officer Patricia Harris in December of 2013.

    “We take your concern seriously,” she wrote, according to the letter, which is attached to the Slate essay. “It is McDonald’s intention and goal that each customer who desires a Happy Meal toy be provided the toy of his or her choice, without any classification of the toy as a ‘boy’ or ‘girl’ toy and without any reference to the customer’s gender.” Additionally, Harris noted, the company had said it recently “re-examined our internal guidelines, communications and practices” with regard to how toys are to be given out.

    Ayres-Brown noted that the response was “a start” and that a recent photo on’s Facebook page of a local manager’s reiteration of the gender-blind policy was “heartening.” Her dad, meanwhile, in a blog about their efforts for the World Consulting Group, notes, “To my mind, this is evidence that McDonald’s is really trying.”

    Indeed, a McDonald’s spokesperson tells Yahoo Shine in an email, “It’s true we occasionally re-share procedures with the restaurants, and in this case have done so from time to time related to the recommended practice around Happy Meals, which is to name the toy properties by name.”

    Virtual high-fives for Ayres-Brown have been numerous, with SheKnows calling her “inspirational and forward-thinking” and Jezebel praising her efforts as “not too shabby.” Tweets have called the teen “smart,” “persistent,” and “awesome.”

    But, as Ayres-Brown notes in her piece, “The problem with Happy Meal toys may seem trivial to some, but consider this: McDonald’s is estimated to sell more than 1 billion Happy Meals each year. When it poses this question — ‘Do you want a boy’s toy or a girl’s toy?’ — McDonald’s pressures innumerable children to conform to gender stereotypes.”

    And that’s not just teenage conjecture, according to Christia Spears Brown, author of the new “Parenting Beyond Pink and Blue: How to Raise Your Child Free of Gender Stereotypes” and a University of Kentucky associate professor of psychology.

    “It is important for two reasons,” Spears Brown tells Yahoo Shine in an email regarding Ayres-Brown’s efforts. “First, research has clearly shown that simply labeling a toy as a boy toy or a girl toy will determine what children are interested in. … So instead of asking children which toy they would like and letting it be based on actual preferences for play, by labeling it for one gender or the other, we are shaping what children will play with. Second, and more importantly,” she adds, labeling toys with “boy” or “girl” actually teaches kids “that gender is such an important part of who they are that it should determine their type of play. It becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.”

    Some food for thought next time your kid is asked to choose between a My Little Pony and Skylanders toy to go with her burger.

    This falls under the category of “First World Problems”.

    • 1539days says:

      The last name of “Ayres-Brown” told me everything I needed to know about the parents.

      I feel bad for parents who aren’t rich academic assholes. Now they have to figure out which cartoon series of figures is the “boy” show or the “girl” show. Let’s not forget, there are two kind of toys because girls were being shut out of their own kind of cool toys at one time.

    • WMCB says:

      You know what I did when I was a kid and I wanted the “boy” toy in a store? I asked for the boy toy. And got it. No one is FORCING the parents to buy strictly gender-appropriate toys.

      There is absolutely nothing wrong with marketing toys to the (EFFING OBVIOUS) differences in gender traits that boys and girls display. The only problem comes when you force a kid to exhibit ONLY those traits, and don’t allow for a spectrum. When you take the “general” and rigidly enforce it in specifics.

      Good grief, people need to grow the hell up. These morons think that the fact that something EXISTS – in the world, in marketing, in a happy meal, whatever – means that it’s somehow compulsory and they are inexorably forced to choose it.

      They really do have the mindset that “Everything not forbidden is compulsory.” It’s how they view the whole damn world. It’s why they need govt or a judge to make a rule about anything they find “wrong.” And it’s sick. I’ve never seen such a controlling, dictatorial pack of hyenas in my life. And that includes some very weird religious cults – but even THEY only applied their restrictive rules to their own believers, not every Tom Dick and Harry who draws breath.

      • votermom says:

        Used to do this alll the time for my kids at McDs – which toy do you want, tbe dinosaur or the pony?
        And if they got a toy they already had from the last time, we let them walk up to the counter and exchange the still-wrapped toy for a different one.

        • WMCB says:

          Some days you feel like a transformer, some days you feel like a sparkly pony. What’s the big deal?

      • 49erDweet says:

        Side issue time: Isn’t a developing child with gender identity issues an easier prey for a chickenhawk type sexual predator? So does backing off on gender specific toys possibly extend a youth’s potential for victimization? Who else stands to gain when adolescents are gender-confused? Who stands to gain? What do they gain? Curious minds, and all.

        • WMCB says:

          Trying to force a kid who is naturally “masculine” or “feminine” to be all neutral and stuff is abusive and unhealthy IMO. I was a tomboy, but my granddaughter has eaten breathed and slept pink and sparkly and princesses and prissy since the day she was born. And that’s okay. Should I make her feel bad about that? NO! Why? I was an outlier, and that’s fine. Guess what? Most little girls are not. They are fine as well.

    • sleepyhead says:

      I guess I am the only cynic here. I read this as an attention-getting device – possibly instigated by dad – as a way for the girl to pad her resume so as to give her a leg up when she applies to whatever fancy college she wants to attend. Such a coincidence that she originally did this 6 years ago but her letter just happens to go viral at just the exact time when she is going to begin the college application process. (What possible “research” could an 11-year-old girl be doing that would require the collaboration of a “heavy-hitting Yale law professor and economist”? Sorry, but I live in Brooklyn, the land of aggressive, pushy academic parents who would stop at nothing to get their kids into the elite school of their choice – and this whole thing reeks of that type of behavior.)

  8. The Klown says:

    Krauthammer’s Take on Cliven Bundy:

  9. WMCB says:

    I don’t give a shit if Bundy is racist as hell. I thought David Koresh in Waco was a damn nut job. That still didn’t give the govt the right to burn all those people alive.

    Rights aren’t dependent on whether I approve of you or not.

  10. The Klown says:
  11. mothy67 says:

    Feel sorry for the little girl. It is just silly. Parents knew what kind of toys were given out they did this with intent. Boring. Still not as bad as all the little boys loaded up on ADHD meds. Boys are brats. Medicating them into a stupor won’t fix that. Set of identicle twin boys went to the same school as shortstop. The kids have this boundless energy. Get into everything. Never turn your back on them. Shrink wanted them on meds. The school begged the parents to wait and they did. Three years later and they almost behave.

  12. insanelysane says:

    After having visited Monticello in Charlottsville, VA and taking the slavery tour and with further research, I realized that if I was a black teen in a 3rd world poverty stricken region of Africa and I was given the chance to become a slave on Monticello I would jump at it. Families lived in small but decent houses on Slavery row right next to the gigantic vegetable garden in a beautiful part of VA. 3 squares a day and I would be taught a skill. I would actually feel privileged.
    Now, I do realize all slave owners were not as benevolent as T Jefferson, but surely there were other slave owners who provided the same.

    I know, that makes me a racist. There, I said it… save your breath.

    • The Klown says:

      There is a lot of evidence that the average standard of living of freed slaves went down after the Civil War.

      Yes, slaves were treated like livestock, but a smart farmer/rancher takes good care of his livestock.

      BTW – Even though immigrants continued to pour into the country after the war, there was little or no effort to relocate freed slaves into the north or west. They were basically left to twist in the wind.

Comments are closed.