Mad Magazine on Sarah Palin


220 Responses to “Mad Magazine on Sarah Palin”

  1. buddy66 says:

    Contact: Deirdre A. Cronin
    Executive Director:

    Covenant House is … helping some of the most hopeless teens grow into independent, successful and productive adults.”

    Fire this woman. She has broken the Prime Directive of the helping professions, calling helpless people “hopeless.” If that’s not enough reason, and she is right in her assessment, then fire her for wasting time and money futilely trying to help the hopeless.

  2. rrsafety says:

    The thought of Obama being a heartbeat away from the nuclear button scares the hell out of me.

  3. Cupcake Faerie says:

    Boing Boing’s bloggers, its constituency (aka readers,commenters) are , by and large (if not 100%),
    Go ahead, say it with me just once, liberal.
    See, that really wasn’t so hard to do.
    liberal liberla liberal liberal
    Yae ! There is no stigma in word liberal – at least not this year.
    This is a political year.The people who come to this blog, and write for it, are political beings. You can bet your sweet bippy that politics is going to make it into the conversation! If you don’t like it, well you can go hang out at Sams Club or go to a hockey game.

  4. minTphresh says:

    pdoogie, i must say, you earn that pay!

  5. sojourner strange says:

    Canuck: I was not addressing you; at the time I posted your comment was not yet visible. But in reply to what you actually said – it may be arbitrary, but it’s the law.

  6. minTphresh says:

    tenacious and growly, like a pitbull with lipstik!

  7. Ugly Canuck says:

    Bush’s policy kills hundreds of thousands and Obama scares you?

  8. VagabondAstronomer says:

    @199 (Powerpants)
    I don’t think this was a blanket comment on all supporters of the GOP ticket, just, sadly, a number of them. I personally know a number of lifelong Democrats who are either simply not going to vote or vote GOP simply because Obama is black (and they come up with such ludicrous reasons to hide their racism; they have shown a history of it but don’t like to show it). Unfortunately, here in the South, I’d have to say that too many Republicans I know are racists and don’t bother to hide it. For them, at any rate, it is a no brainer.
    Don’t get me wrong, I have many very conservative friends who are not and are some of the most honorable people I know. Like all things, there are a few bad apples…

  9. imipak says:

    @Gobo, #8: Me, too, but after Bush managed to get himself re-elected four years ago I lost any illusions that USA was any different.

  10. Ugly Canuck says:

    Because he’s not white enough?

  11. Ugly Canuck says:

    Are parents then held also held responsible for their children’s lawful actions? For this is what is under discussion…family’s off limits, but some voters will be influenced by it ( to the detriment of the public as a whole).
    And yes sojourner I know I was stealing that compliment…

  12. eti says:

    “Defiant1, why don’t you put your money where your mouth is and send Barak’s half-brother some?”

    Come on, think about this for a second. Wouldn’t that really embarrass Barack Obama if the right organized some kind of fund for his half-brother? I could see someone like Rush Limbaugh really getting behind this idea.

  13. barfy says:

    Wow I just noticed that you even de-voweled the links of #118, never seen that done on this site before. anybody ever tried to use them as the are now? Might take you to the place where all the bad vowels go…

  14. p3n3nc3 says:

    Ugly Canuck @13 – Take a look at the numbers though…more people died in Chicago violent crime than American soldiers did in Iraq. Safer to be in Iraq as a soldier than a citizen of Chicago?

  15. buddy66 says:


    Why not leave the cheap shots at physical unattractiveness in the high school locker room where they originate? BB doesn’t need such trash talk, you think?

  16. Ugly Canuck says:

    liberals love liberty. What’s not to like?
    Ms Palin Jr. has the liberty to become pregnant before marriage.
    hoo-rah! we win again!

  17. eti says:

    “… Ummm, I send money to to OXFAM and UNICEF every year. I don’t make a lot, but I try. DO YOU?”

    Don’t you think Barack does too?

  18. sojourner strange says:

    I don’t suppose parental responsibility for children’s lawful actions is covered under the law, but as I’ve said (and as others have said), the children’s actions can be a tell – not just the policies thing, but also vertically transmitted attitudes and so forth. Of course, I haven’t seen anything about that latter aspect of it.

  19. Ugly Canuck says:

    Sojourner, its a bad political tactic…too many good parents have come to grief with their own late-teenage kids not to be somewhat sympathetic should Ms. Palin Sr. be attacked publicly for her daughters’ “sins”. This a problem between the repubs and their base. I hope it festers, too.

  20. Gilbert Wham says:

    So, what about all those otherdead people in Iraq? Should they have gone to Chicago, or what?

  21. John Coulthart says:

    BRUNOTHEPUG: I refuted the booklist story in Cory’s early posting about Palin’s banning request. Cory never said the list was Palin’s, a commenter did.

    No one here is pursuing that but you signed on to BB solely to detract from the issue that Palin did make a banning request, as indicated in the links I posted above. If Michelle Malkin can refute those stories (and their documented quotes), show us.

  22. Ugly Canuck says:

    Stll wtng fr smn t xpln t m …f ws wrtng Cnstttn tdy fr ny cntry s thr ny rgmnt t ll fr gvng ndvdls Cnstttnl rght t br hndgns?
    By nt rplng th 2nd mndmnt m scty gs bckwrds …thr s n rtnl rgmnt fr gvng rbn pps rghts t gns…ts n hstrcl nmly xpltd by pwr-grbbrs s wdg ss nd s wy t kp scty vlnt frgmntd trrfd nd hrt – t jstfy thrws ncnscnbl plc vlnc nd t kp wpns mkrs rch, drnkng th bld f thr fllw-ctzns.

  23. Ugly Canuck says:

    What about the Iraqis you were purporting to help when you decided to invade? Oh yeah, they are not white or American enough to count.

  24. mdh says:

    … You’re knocking Sara Palin for the choices her daughter made, aren’t you?

    No Defiant1, we’re knocking Sarah Palin for proposing to take away the ‘choice’ her daughter had the freedom to make.

    To be very clear

    If their belief system does not allow for abortion, how does it allow for unwed pregnany?

    Do you see the BS implicit either in your argument, or in their position, now?

  25. sojourner strange says:

    Meaning that many late-teenage kids are uncontrollable by parnets no matter what? That’s a point to make as well.

  26. mdh says:

    I should be a little clearer.

    Sarah Palin would deny government help to others who make the same mistake her own blood did.

    Lets say some other 17 year old gets pregnant by a hockey star but her mom IS NOT the governor, but rather is just some random woman in a town of 9’000 who is married to an Inuit steelworker.

    Gov. Sarah Palin would not be happy with that family – I think she might even hold them up for ridicule, but I am certain she would not be interested in the gov’t helping that irresponsible brat out at all – no matter the circumstance.

    Life isn’t so grand for all of us, brother. We can’t all be the daughter of the governor.

  27. Ugly Canuck says:

    Back OT, it should be noted in this context that the FBI went after MAD magazine for twenty years…as a potential threat to the Nation and its Laws of some kind, presumably (that’s why the FBI gets your tax dollars, right?).

  28. gnugeek says:

    You REALLY want an “elitist” at the controls. You don’t want an everyday man. You want someone better than an everyday man. The president should be super human. So, cut it with the “elitist” crap. We need and should WANT an elitist.

    There is no such thing as a “superhuman”. Promoting the idea that there is a class of people so far above the “everyday” person as to qualify as “superhuman”, and is more qualified to lead because of this, is fascist ideology.

    Do I want a smart, thoughtful, capable person in the office of the presidency, who shares my values and my goals? Of course. Do I want someone who considers himself or herself to be a “superhuman”, ready to hand down that’s “right” to the “ignorant masses”? It didn’t work out so well for Germany.

  29. minTphresh says:

    buddy, c’mon…joking! geez. someone needs a hug..

  30. buddy66 says:

    This is nonsensical! Nobody has ever been legally charged for committing a lawful action. What am I missing? You guys are lawyers, aren’t you? That’s gotta be it. That’s why I can’t understand a fucking thing you’re saying.

    Now I get it: you’re putting us on.

  31. pduggie says:

    “As for that VP talk all the time, I’ll tell you, I still can’t answer that question until somebody answers for me what is it exactly that the VP does every day? I’m used to being very productive and working real hard in an administration. We want to make sure that that VP slot would be a fruitful type of position, especially for Alaskans and for the things that we’re trying to accomplish up here for the rest of the U.S., before I can even start addressing that question.”

    Mad is good at out-of context propaganda

  32. Ugly Canuck says:

    Absolutely sojourner. I feel that not only are late teenagers ‘uncontrollable’ by their parents they are simply ‘uncontrollable’. Lets hope they do the right things. Most do make the right choices…eventually.
    Remember that errors are successes in learning if you are operating by trial and error…surprising how many kids do just that.
    In any event best not to build a Democratic siege wagon on this particular peccadillo…Dems should keep their eyes on the prize, and all that. Attack on matters reasonably viewed as private personal and familial will backfire. No doubt about it.

  33. sojourner strange says:

    I may be wrong, but I think Mr. Canuck meant to emphasize that since getting pregnant isn’t illegal, there should be even less attention being paid to it. Or something. Er, that is, if you were addressing us.

  34. pduggie says:

    Palin actually raised by 300% the allocation for Covenant House, a home for wayward teens (which dem propagandists tried to sell as cutting fund, but that was only a cut of a 500% increase)

    So “Gov. Sarah Palin would not be happy with that family” is juts your wild speculation. You’re prejudicial.

  35. Troy says:

    It’s amusing, but it doesn’t really have much to say. All those jokes are a tad obvious and have been making the rounds for over a week now. Cracked is better.

  36. sojourner strange says:


    Your point (about politics, that is) is taken. But I don’t think any of the actual politicians have said anything derogatory about Miss Palin’s pregnancy, have they?

  37. Ugly Canuck says:

    VP sits as President of Senate casts vote if tied and replaces Pres. when sick. (That’s a “period’.)
    I’m not Am but even I know that.

  38. anthony says:

    There’s a pretty long list of successful attacks on certain politician’s private, personal issues in the US, Ugly.
    Bill Clinton?

  39. minTphresh says:

    PDOGGIE, how long have you been on the Palin payroll?

  40. Ugly Canuck says:

    PS Propaganda comes from governments not periodicals…

  41. sojourner strange says:


    Perhaps it would be clearer to talk about an elitist voting process, as opposed to an elitist candidate? There’s no question of implicated snobbery that way.

  42. Ugly Canuck says:

    Bah. Wrong on that one.

  43. Cupcake Faerie says:

    @12 & @16
    Whether it’s Baghdad or Chicago, there are parts of a large city you don’t want to stroll though at night.

    Making the statement that more people have died violently in Chicago than Baghdad(or Iraq as a whole) is the kind of ludicrous argument republicans love to try to confuse the general populace with.

    Yet again some posters I’ve never seen before, coming in support of trollishly contrary view. So,has Karl Rove recently discovered Boing Boing?

  44. Roy Trumbull says:

    I decided to take it a step further and do a satire for those of you familiar with Greek Tragedies. Check out Vetting Medea:

  45. Ugly Canuck says:

    How can people even think about voting Republican (or for any of your killer politicians) after the horrors they have brought into our lives using US Tax dollars.
    Note also in the 8th para. that ex-Col. Oliver North has found a job. I also note that this is not getting a whole lot of play in the News.

  46. Ugly Canuck says:

    Off-topic, I note that “propaganda” historically was an innovation brought about by religious types…”College of Cardinals”…and then quite openly adopted by “ideological” movements of the 20th C., Nazis/Commies…..others…and that all propaganda is a group activity/product by definition…antithetical to trad Am individualism and truth-seeking.

  47. monkeygirl says:

    #16 Obama is a senator. He is not the mayor of Chicago–or even the governor of Illinois. Fighting crime in Chicago isn’t really Obama’s responsibility, is it? And he did oppose the war in Iraq, so you can’t lay that one at his doorstep either.

  48. rolandthick says:

    What happened to America? Have we forgotten about high gas prices, food costs, unemployment? Aside from the fact that McCain-Palin dont have a plan that reaches my neighborhoods problems, theyre family issues are tacky! Why doesnt the majority just come out and say they would rather have a white woman with a trailer trash mentality than a black man with no experience. We African-Americans know we have to work 10 times harder and have 10 times more qualifications to even be considered for power positions. The Republicans screwing up made it easier for a black man to have a chance. Just say it and get it out of the way. The people who support Palin do not want a black man with power. They never had to deal with that. Usually they could quit a job, or move away from a neighborhood that has increasing black residents. If he is President, they cant get away from it. Try to avoid this issue if you want but, I think people are afraid for a black man to run the country! Dont worry, he isnt gonna pay you back for all the years of pain. He just wants to help American families, black and white. I thought Obama was too MLK like, celebrity like. That turned me off, but Palin is more of a celebrity than he is now. All of the issues she stands for does not affect MY people and most of my white friends either. My white friends are embarrased of her. The only people who identify with Palin are people who refuse to ever identify with a black man, regardless of what he says or does. People are making excuses I have never heard before! Where were these people when Bill Clinton was impeached for a private family matter! Where were they when Obamas church was being bashed? We may need to look back at how far we REALLY have come. Now that it is a REAL possibility a black man can become president, people are freaking out!!! That is the underlying message in Sarah Palins significance. The option.

  49. Ugly Canuck says:

    Gnugeek I agree with most of your comment but the opening confuses me. An elitist is like well Plato with his philosopher-kings or anybody who feels the vast majority of people exist only for the benefit of a tiny minority….perhaps kinda like some of the small number of people who own most of the US economy. There are enough elitists of all kinds around already you do not need one as President too. That the President will gain entree if not belong to the American elite, however, goes without saying.
    We are all equal before the Law. But in my opinion, some people are in fact better than others – usually only in the sense of ability, at doing something or other. Never in just an abstract sense. At a more general level, adherence to and capable execution of the duties and obligations of life in general can also serve to differentiate us as to our respective merit. Equality of course and always between people but not a blind equality.
    You want the best for the job, if you can find her. And in a democratic republic one would hope that one could vote for one whose views accord with one’s own, doesn’t one?
    There are no supermen. But there is an order of rank…some are better than others at some things. That is the way it is. You want to put in office somebody who would be good at the job.
    Good luck, sincerely. It’s tough but it has been done, I think.

  50. Frank_in_Virginia says:

    @181 I like your post. If it is afraid of a black man or if it is racism, I guess it doesn’t matter. I can only hope people can see past these things and bring someone into office that is thinking of the future, and not throwing-up the past. My wife and I have been behind and for Sen. Obama from the start. McCain’s choice of the right-wing Palin just makes the choice sounder.

  51. Troy says:

    Ugly Canuck… propaganda…. religious beginnings… good point, but it’s a political tradition too. And the Commies, Nazis are just secular religions of course. Thomas Paine, The Federalist, The Anti-Federalist, the broadsheets that inundated this country through the early 20th century — most openly allied with political parties. Propaganda is an American sport. It’s not in and of itself a bad thing if the reader knows the bias and can take the appropriate grain of salt.

    MAD magazine is definitely not propaganda to whomever ever said that. Good or bad satire, but I doubt Pelosi is sending them anything — she’s not intentionally funny.

  52. Deviant says:

    #29 It’s very hard to compare Obama’s opposition to the war in Iraq with Biden’s (or Hillary’s et al.) since Obama wasn’t in Congress yet. He lacked information they had (misleading as it might have been), he lacked the pressure from within his own party to support their votes, and he was trying to make a name for himself, so taking an idealogical position was far easier for him. This is not to discredit him, but just to add a little context.

    Ugly Canuck: Y cldn’t b mr cnfsd bt why th 2nd mndmnt xsts. Th fndmntl spct f mrcn scty s tht th gvrnmnt shld srv th ppl, nt th thr wy rnd. Th Frmrs f th Cnstttn wntd ftr mrcn pltcns t knw tht n ttmpt t crt mnrchy wld b mt wth rmd ppstn. Hndgns wnd by trnd, lcnsd ctzns r nt dngrs nd prvd mjr dsncntv t crm. Srch th nws t try t fnd xmpls f crms cmmttd by ctzns wth lcnss t crry cncld hndgns. Y’ll fnd lmst nn, bt tht dsn’t stp ppl frm mkng fctlly nccrt ssmptns.

  53. Ugly Canuck says:

    Hey yeah were the Corps that laid off the workers (that Obama helped counsel as a community organizer) helping thereby to fight crime? Or did those Corp actions contribute to increase the local crime rate?

  54. Ugly Canuck says:

    Well this ain’t about gun control but maybe the liensees were too smart to get caught…yer clearance rates are nothing to brag about IMO.

  55. buddy66 says:

    All right . . . If my suspicions about Alaska are correct, somebody’s gonna cite some goddamned blue law that was broken by this unfortunate girl and her boyfriend. What is the legal age of consent? How old is the father? Who will be the first Dem to want him prosecuted for statutory rape? Some shit WILL be stirred. It will be a shame, but it will happen. For the GOP, however, it will be chickenshit coming home to roost. Whether it blows back or not, or how much, or how much will get on the Guv, will depend on how Rovian-like it is in its cunning. Even as we type and quibble there are frantic meetings on both sides trying to figure out what to do with this smoking pile that McBush shoved them into.

    My bet is that she’ll be off the ticket in ten days.

    To spend more time with her family.

  56. mdh says:


    The legislature gave them an increased budget to build a building.

    She reduced the appropriation.

    Thus, she cut benefits to those who benefit from their services, people much like her daughter.

    please, done now, you’re just being a caricature of a conservatice at this point.

  57. anthony says:

    Buddy, everyone’s interested in this person. She’ll stay on the ticket but there will be issue wrangling

  58. Ugly Canuck says:

    Stll fftpc: hy dvnt
    s tht sm f yr gd gys r dng bttr:
    Lk th Smmr f Lv. Bt nt rlly:
    Hndgns mk kllng s mch sr.

  59. Mackenzie says:

    Wht th fck s McCn dng?

  60. Secret_Life_of_Plants says:

    Have 30,568 Chicago residents been seriously wounded?

    Are they walking around with Depleted Uranium in their lungs?

    Are they shell-shocked and suffering post-traumatic stress syndrome/disesase?

    Are 20% of the above listed wounded Chicago residents suffering serious brain and or spinal injuries (a total that excludes psychological injuries)?

    Is Chicago now “Home of the folks with tumors, daily blood in urine and stool, sexual dysfunction, migraines, and frequent muscle spasms!”?

    As of Jan 2007, 500+ major amputations?
    As of Feb 2007 7500+ traumatic brain injuries?
    As of Mar 2008 30% mental illness and suicide?

    (That’s just American and coalition soldiers…
    then there are the 946,000 to 1,120,000 total casualties (human beings killed) in the region…I mean, Chicago…)

  61. Deviant says:

    Do people really think the Palin pick was bad for McCain? Seriously? His candidacy couldn’t have been more flat and uninteresting, and suddenly his VP pick gets viewership during her speech that rivals Obama’s. Everyone is talking about her, and the Repub base is once again energized.

    If McCain wins, she may well go down in history as the best VP choice ever.

    Please note that by “best” I mean competitively, not best qualified or best for the job. Best to improve McCain’s chances.

  62. Rindan says:

    Normally, the VP pick really doesn’t mean much. No one wins on a VP pick. With McCain, it is different. McCain and his surrogates have already floated the idea that he is a 1 term president. What does that mean? It means that 4 years from now Palin is going to be the Republican pick (assuming McCain wins). They are trying to bundle the two as a package of presidents… and it is probably a good idea if she can survive the first round of fire by the media.

    The idea is simple. Take a fiery woman with just enough of a record such that she can point to good things (anti-corruption mostly) that she has done as qualifications, and yet has not been around long enough to build up a massive record compromises (aka “flip flops”) like what Biden and McCain have. On the face of it, she really can’t make much of an experience argument, but she CAN make that argument after serving as VP for a 4 years. She is being lined up for the presidency in 4 years.

    What makes this so insidious is two fold.

    1) She is going to steal a swath of the “angry Hillary” crowd. She won’t take a huge hunk of them, but when elections are decided by a few percent, she doesn’t need many. Some pissed off women are going to completely ignore the fact she shares absolutely no values in common with Hillary, and vote for a woman for the sake of voting for a woman. It might be enough to nudge McCain over the top.

    2) The real horror here is that if McCain wins, she is lined up to be the president. McCain is a fairly moderate guy. A McCain presidency doesn’t sound like a fun time, but I don’t sit there cowering in terror at it. Palin on the other hand is a frigging nut. Slipping her under the rug scares me. While McCain is fairly moderate, Palin is a bible wielding full on religious nut. We have not seen a fully right wing fully religiously nutty president. Regan was practically an atheist who just pandered to the right (he never mentions abortion once in his autobiography). Even Bush, while certainly religious, wasn’t a full on religious nut job (he is just an idiot). Palin on the other hand is the real deal. She is a bible swinging, book banning, creationist, who isn’t just against abortion, but frigging contraceptive (exhibit 1: her 17 year old pregnant daughter).

  63. buddy66 says:


    Yeah, I am pretty touchy about mocking conditions that are no fault of the unfortunate people suffering them. I’m sorry, however, if I jumped too hard; I’ve read enough of your comments to know you for a decent person.

    Oh, my nickname for a couple of years was … “Alligator.” I’m sure you can imagine why.

  64. Takuan says:

    we talking hundreds of dollars here? Or tens?

  65. Ugly Canuck says:

    Best VP choice ever?
    Tough to even remember any to compare her to…Eagleton?
    Along with the 2nd Amend. you guys ought to re-think the need for a VP IMO. That is if the Sacred Constitution is in fact open to human Amendment anymore…haven’t seen any in my lifetime.

  66. quantumage says:

    How dare “they” treat Palin in such a sexist manner! “They” would never do this with a male candidate for VP!

  67. Ugly Canuck says:

    Yeah …the “blank slate” who becomes very right-wing AFTER getting into power…like John Roberts?

  68. gnugeek says:

    Sorry Canuck, the opening was a quote from some one else’s post, and I didn’t know how to do the quote tags right. The opening paragraph is not my words, I was responding to another post :)

  69. jjasper says:

    People who think that the Palin nomination is the deciding point that will win the election for McCain are also the ones who told us that the Iraq occupation would be an easy job.

  70. pduggie says:

    “If my suspicions about Alaska are correct, somebody’s gonna cite some goddamned blue law that was broken by this unfortunate girl and her boyfriend. What is the legal age of consent? How old is the father?”

    Don’t you think that would have happened?

    Don’t be suspicious.

    Here’s the age of consent laws for alaska. None were broken. None were broken.

  71. Avram says:

    MDH @177, I’m not a conservative myself, but I’ve spoken with and read enough conservatives to know that your question about belief systems doesn’t make any sense.

  72. anthony says:

    PDUG, according to your link it depends on who the father is.

  73. Rindan says:

    That is if the Sacred Constitution is in fact open to human Amendment anymore…haven’t seen any in my lifetime.

    So I take it you are under the age of 16?

  74. Jeff says:

    You know what I wish? I wish she had a few different mindsets, and that she was with Obama. If only she wasn’t some kind of throw-back. Things do get along slower in Alaska.

  75. anthony says:

    #5 Quayle was a trailblazer. Without him, the concept of a genuinely clueless leader existed only in satire form. Now, it’s becoming a solid real life tradition. Somehow it has become accepted, maybe even expected by now. Which leads me to:

    Ugly Canuck @ 18-We’re a culture seduced by violent play. Our love of it is mingled and grown over and around what we consider our fundamental rights and truths. How to pull out the weeds without disturbing the garden?

    And thanks for posting the above info, Secret Life.

  76. Ugly Canuck says:

    When did you guys last Amend your Constitution? Americans, that is?

  77. Ugly Canuck says:

    Gnugeek: Good to hear , I thought you were a little schizoid, for a while.

  78. Bender says:

    I’m now waiting for the Republicans to call Mad Magazine a member of the “Elite Media”.

    I find it puzzling when people say that they don’t want Obama near the nuclear “button”, when he believes that war should be the last possible option. While a lot of the right wingers can’t hear much over the din of their own saber rattling. I can imagine a President Palin, after nuking the middle east, saying “It was Gods’ will. My preacher told me so.”

  79. mdh says:

    Unless you can prove she was behind the larger appropriation in the first place, before she was against it.

  80. Ugly Canuck says:

    To be honest, I think that the appointment of the Honorable Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United states of America John Roberts may over time prove to be the best thing Bush did during his 8 years. At least, here’s hoping. But prior to getting the top job, he really was a blank slate as to his views on many issues. And…he’s very young.

  81. minTphresh says:

    buddy, all is forgiven! trust me homes, i was one of those pizza-faced boys way back when i was 17.

  82. Ugly Canuck says:

    Anthony: it is never to early to start your kids on a course of “Media Study”, to disempower the Media, at least as far as Jr.s thinking goes.

  83. John Coulthart says:

    Since Palin refuses to discuss her policies or her past record with journalists (where else does this happen outside banana republics?), readers may be interested in a 63-page vetting document prepared by Democrats in 2006 which can be found here:

    Includes gems of fiscal conservatism such as:

    Palin Left Behind Almost $19 Million In Long-Term Debt, Compared to None Before She Was Mayor.

  84. anthony says:

    Our extremism is sanctioned by God, but theirs is driven by fanatics who worship a false God. Do both sides of the conflict say the same thing?

    The old Cold fears return.

  85. Deviant says:

    @141: My bet is that she’ll be off the ticket in ten days.

    I would take this bet or anything remotely like it in a heartbeat. Anyone who thinks this has spent way too much time in the echo chamber.

    AVRAM: The exchange between me and Canuck was not only relevant (considering Palin’s position on gun laws) but also exactly the type of exchange that forums like this exclusively can provide. BB needs to pull back the thought police moderators here who have gone insanely overboard. This is the last place I would expect this problem.

  86. imipak says:

    @Deviant, #31:

    > The fundamental aspect of American society is
    > that the government should serve the people,
    > not the other way around.”

    “The country was founded on the principle that the primary role of government is to protect property from the majority, and so it remains.” -Chomsky

    Step back and take a squint at the country. Which of those two quotes is most consistent with how things actually are, today, in the real world? Personally I find it depressing that Chomsky’s description fits the apparent facts so well. (Or am I just getting more left-wing as I age?)

    Agree with your #36 though, Palin’s a brilliant move and (unless something really bad turns up at the back of her closet, or she makes a terrible gaffe on camera) has a good chance of making Cain electable.

    Incidentally I just came across this piece by Michael Moore in Guardian, dated August 9th, on how the Democrats could still manage to lose this year.

  87. anthony says:

    Media Study, Arabic, and Spin 101.

  88. Digital Artz says:

    I did abstain till 1956.

  89. alainsane says:

    Hmmm. Why is the thought bubble coming out of McCain’s mouth? Everyone who’s seen McCain fielding questions knows he can’t easily get thoughts generated via his mouth.

  90. Ugly Canuck says:

    Further to the (off-topic) “Chicago ain’t Iraq” discussion above:
    Death ought not be the business of politicians, especially by self-appointment.

  91. anthony says:

    Deviant, I just clicked on related links pertaining to this thread until I got to USMagazine, where I read some comment threads there. We need the moderators we have over here, believe me.

  92. anthony says:

    Bluetooth device?

  93. lberceli says:

    In case some of you have forgotten, this woman was involved with a political party that supported Alaska’s SECESSION FROM THE U.S.

  94. Ugly Canuck says:

    Anthony: I doubt that there is anything as cohesive as “the other side” here, there is an awful lot of projection (in the psych sense) in Am politics esp. foreign relations.

  95. anthony says:

    @54 What about “Us against Terror” in all its permutations?

  96. Ugly Canuck says:

    It seems to me that outside of the context of invaded nations (Iraq, Afghanistan) the people physically attacking Americans all have “personal” reasons…not “reasons of State”.
    That is, there’s nothing over-arching here like a unified nation state or even church, nothing but an association of individuals arrayed against you. It is thus more properly a criminal matter and not an affair of State (like eg a war between states or even eg picking sides in a civil war like israel/palestine or 1918 Russia) except insofar as international co-operation is needed to bring these criminals to justice.

  97. p3n3nc3 says:

    Ahh…sorry… I thought Obama had helped to organize the Chicago communities :/

  98. Ugly Canuck says:

    Still waiting Rindan…what was changed in 1992, in the US Constitution?

  99. anthony says:

    Canuck @56 I would say at the very least it is implicitly a war of ideologies tied to religion, or justified by religion. Don’t you think so?

    I don’t follow your reason for the Constitution question-sending Rindan on an errand? I looked it up when the question was first raised on the thread.

  100. EH says:

    Canuck @56 I would say at the very least it is implicitly a war of ideologies tied to religion, or justified by religion. Don’t you think so?

    Not implicitly, explicitly. War is a byproduct of religion.

  101. pduggie says:

    180: That’s an odd assumption

    183: We’re talking millions

    185: Interesting document. I’m wary of just uncritically accepting a full list of what her prtsn opponents consider her faults. I’m sure she has faults.

    Can we give her some time before we say “she refuses to discuss her record with journalists” though?

  102. Irene Delse says:

    Cute but weird. Palin makes the Republican look nearly French:

  103. minTphresh says:

    so…not gonna answer my question, eh pdugout? i guess i should have worded it :”how long have you been on the RNC payroll?”

  104. Avram says:

    OhSayCanYouSee @70 really, you shouldn’t have used your first ever comment on BoingBoing just to post three paragraphs of blatantly false right-wing propaganda. It makes you look like one of McCain’s paid astroturfers.

    Deviant @151, sorry, but no. Gun rights is one of the topics that attracts bad commenting behavior like a bright light attracts bugs. If one of the Boingers decides to start up an explicit firearms-rights argument thread, then fine.

    If you want to argue about gun rights, go get your own webhost, start up your own forum, and argue all you want.

  105. pduggie says:

    zero years

  106. anthony says:

    #60 I say it’s implicit because the intent is concealed. Calling the Other “evil” is as close as we get to announcing our religious superiority outright. The belief is implied, not fully articulated.
    This war stems from land and resource coveting, although religious issues seem to be rooted in such conflicts as well. Do the religious aspects predate the actual physical boundaries?

  107. Takuan says:

    decades then? -aw, just funnin ya!

  108. LightningCrash says:

    Median comment for this discussion: wld rthr fm t th mth nd ttck Srh Pln thn dmt tht rlly dn’t knw nythng bt hr.

    Sounds like a plan!

  109. Avram says:

    Ugly Canuck and Deviant, please refrain from having off-topic arguments here about hot-button issues like firearms rights.

    Also, Canuck, the last amendment to the US Constitution was the 27th, having to do with congressional pay raises, ratified in 1992, though it was submitted way back in 1789. Kind of a funny story — it was one of the original dozen amendments first submitted for the Bill of Rights in 1791, but it didn’t get enough support to pass. Everyone just sort of forgot about it, but since it didn’t have an expiration clause, it was still technically available for state legislature to ratify. In 1982, a university student discovered it, and drew attention to it, whereupon states started ratifying it.

    The 26th Amendment, setting the voting age at 18, was introduced and passed in 1971, and there were three amendments passed in the ’60s.

  110. Ugly Canuck says:

    No lightning that is only what you think you heard.
    I think that in your case what you believe is what you see .
    Have you got anything to add or shall you grace us with another statement of what we have said?

  111. JB NicholsonOwens says:

    Mnkygrl: bm’s ppstn t th wr n rq s lk mst Dmcrts’ ppstn t th wr n rq: thy fnd mr ccptn. t’s bn th Dmcrts’ wr snc thy tk cntrl f Cngrss n th md-trm lctns.

    bm’s spprt fr wr gs n: h hs lng spprtd snctns gnst rn, lnchng mssls nt rn (s hs ntrvw n th 4 Sptmbr 2004 Chcg Trbn ntrvw fr bth), ncrsng wr n fghnstn (whr h sys th rl wr ls), nd rdcng ccntblty by ppsng mpchmnt (whch < hrf="">h sys s “dysfnctnl” dstrctn bst rsrvd fr “grv, grv brchs, nd ntntnl brchs f th prsdnt’s thrty”). Thn h ws dstrbd by th “ncmptnc” wth whch th wr n rq ws prsctd, nt tht th nvsn nd ccptn ws bsd n ls nd shldn’t hv bn strtd t ll.

    S th crprt prts ffr vtrs tw chcs whr bth wnt t fght mr wr nd thrtn rn wth mr wr. thnk f bth prts skng th ntn hw pr y’ll lt thm mk th cntry (< hrf="http://www.dmcrcynw.rg/2008/2/29/xclsv_th_thr_trlln_dllr_wr">$3 trlln s fr ccrdng t Stgltz nd Blms) nd whr y wnt yr chldrn t d.

  112. minTphresh says:

    oh, just starting out then, eh? make sure you get the health plan IN WRITING!

  113. anthony says:

    EH, my wife reminds me that Palin considers the war “God’s war”, so that’s pretty explicit after all. My bad.

  114. mdh says:

    Jeff, then you missed your candidate. Mike Gravel.

    That’s an actual primary ad of his. Brilliant.

  115. sojourner strange says:

    Most of the time, wars are fought over the control of useful things like land and trade and so forth. There may have been some wars that were truly fought over the superiority of one belief over another, but more often than not, religion is the excuse.

  116. Ugly Canuck says:

    Roger Wilco Avram.

  117. buddy66 says:

    Looks like it’s ABC and Gibson later in the week. Any betting on the questions he’ll ask?

  118. Jeff says:

    Mike Gravel isn’t a woman. Don’t you think it would have been great if Obama had found someone like Palin? That would have been a ticket for change in this NUT house country of ours.

  119. Ugly Canuck says:

    PS Thank you for enlightenment re:US Constitutional Amendments, I was around in 60s. Was not paying attention though.
    Thanks also to enlightenment for US Constitution.

  120. prodigous says:

    ah sorry for the mistake then.

  121. Noelegy says:

    First of all: This is NOT a political rant. It’s a rant about MAD. MAD Magazine used to be so much smarter and better. I have the CD-ROM collection, and I also have print collections going back to the Sixties. Nowadays, MAD doesn’t bother being smart anymore; it goes for the gross-out kind of humor that adolescent boys find funny.

    I haven’t bought a MAD in ages. The last time I flipped through one, it had ads. ADS.

  122. prodigous says:

    lwys ht t whn Cry dps nt crss pltcs. Pltclly n sdd cvrg whl fn hbby, s ncrdbl lntng t crtn sgmnts f yr dnc. t jst dsn’t blng n drctry f wndrfl thngs.

    Whl pprct mny f Cry’s dvccy cmpgn’s ths knd f dmcrtc bstrsm jst trns m rght ff. Prpgnd s prpgnd.

  123. Maddy says:

    way up at #36 — don’t be so sure of McCain’s moderate stance. from what I’ve been seeing lately — he USED to be moderate. His voting record for the last two years have placed him in the upper echelon of ultra-conservative land re

  124. OhSayCanUSee says:

    Fr nyn wrryng bt bm’s fngr bng n th “nk bttn,” nt t wrry. r y frgttng tht h hs sd h wll dsrm mrc nd pprv n bdgts fr nw rms dvlpmnt? Thr wn’t b “nk bttn” fr hm, r nyn ls, t psh.

    Dn’t y knw tht w’r gng t hv lttl t prty nd lv n pc wth ths dtrmnd t dstry mrc nd ll mrcn “nfdls?”

    bm thnks hs lqnt spchs cn wn th hrts f th wrld’s trrrsts th sm wy h hs msmrzd nn-thnkng, lbrl mrcn vtrs nd w wll ll lv hpply vr ftr.

    sn’t h jst wndrfl?

  125. Takuan says:

    sad, but true.

  126. Ugly Canuck says:

    Gee Prodigious it kind of turns me on…and that’s a wonderful thing.

  127. Ugly Canuck says:

    Hey another right-wing first time poster!

  128. OhSayCanUSee says:

    Quote:“OhSayCanYouSee really, you shouldn’t have used your first ever comment on BoingBoing just to post three paragraphs of blatantly false right-wing propaganda. It makes you look like one of McCain’s paid astroturfers.”

    There is nothing false about what I said. Obama hs sttd th fct tht h wll dsrm mrc’s nclr wpns nd spnd n mny fr dvlpng ny nw wpn tchnlgy. It’s on YouTube, for crying out loud. G nd wtch hs spchs fr yrslf.

    r y ppl s frd f rdng th trth bt yr cnddt tht y scrmbl th psts s n n cn rd thm? ‘m srry bt ths smcks f th wrst knd f left wing, socialistic censorship.

    thnk my prblm ws nt rlzng jst hw lft-twstd y ppl r.

    By the way. I was asked for an email address when I joined, not a website. How screwed up is this place anyway? Any fool can see that I gave my email addy, as I was asked when I joined. Nothing about a website was mentioned on the join page.

    hp sm f y cn rd ths bfr th KGB censor police scrmbl ths mssg, t.

  129. Ugly Canuck says:

    With a website that my computer tells me may be trying to trick me!

  130. Jake0748 says:

    Take a few deep breaths, get a grip my man.

  131. Jake0748 says:

    “Hey another right-wing first time poster!”


    You can’t swing a dead cat in here lately without swatting a few of those.

    Somebody should invent a little counter applet to keep track of them all. :)

  132. eti says:

    The reason she wasn’t vetted is because John McCain insisted “I’m a vet; isn’t that enough?”

    And if it’s truly safer in Iraq than in Chicago or Detroit (which I doubt), then that’s all the more reason to pay more attention to the people at home instead of spending billions every month in Iraq.

  133. minTphresh says:

    #70, OHSAYCANYOUSEE an astroturfing troll? puh-leeze, beeotch!

  134. jamesgyre says:

    john mccain either lies, or is out of touch with reality. these recent allegations that barrack obama hasn’t created any legislation is bogus.

    820 is the number of laws Obama sponsored in the Illinois State Senate.

    427 is the current count of the number of bills Obama has co-sponsored in the U.S. Senate.

    152 is the most recent tally of the number of bills that Senator Obama has authored. You can see his current legislative record here. Three of them, including S. 3558 (“A bill to provide for enhanced food-borne illness surveillance and food safety capacity”) were moved upon just last week.

    anyway i’ve been slowly building a comprehensive archive to all the b.s., lies, panders, flip-flops and insanities of mccain. THE DIRT IS HERE. it’s hardly full, because there is a lot.

    and i know obama isn’t perfect, he’s just a lot more stable and honest. compare factcheck events to mccains… mccains are a lot more fucked up.

  135. mdh says:

    pduggie, ur doing it wrong

    That story from the Washington Post would appear to entirely contradict your point. Let me further emphasize that word

    - entirely -

  136. Defiant1 says:

    spps, thn, tht’s t’s K t rp bm fr nt knwng hw mny hlf-brthrs/sstrs h hs, fr nt knwng hw mny “wvs” hs dn dnr hd?

    r tht bm’s hlf-brthr lvng n ht n Kny gts by n $12/yr, nd bm nvr bthrd t snd hm s mch s $20 bll?

  137. Ugly Canuck says:

    Sure sounds like one…and no recent posts…

  138. eti says:

    Defiant1, why don’t you put your money where your mouth is and send Barak’s half-brother some?

  139. mdh says:

    @Avram – yeah, that was clumsy wording. ‘belief system’ was less about her having any specific faith, but and more about her specific faith being a good and sole moral compass by which society should live. She doesn’t seem to shy away from imposing rules derived from her faith on the government under her stewardship.

    I was trying to get at the notion that Governor Palin is a moralist, and by her standards her daughter has made what she must call a mistake, as her daugher was neither married nor independent at the time of conception, which is the Gov’s self-stated ideal.

    What goes around is coming back around.

  140. Stefan Jones says:

    #161: You’re knocking Barack Obama for the actions of his estranged father?

  141. Talia says:

    I saw some interview where Obama’s half brother stated he was living comfortably and proud to be making it on his own, he didn’t want his brother’s money.

    #157 cause what we really need are more weapons! MORE! Bigger and badder! So that when armageddon comes we can blow up everyone!11!11

  142. VagabondAstronomer says:

    @195 (MDH)
    Me thinks that these cuts must be some sort of “tough love” initiative, a fair warning to all those young Alaskan women; you get yer butts pregnant, and you’re on your own. Unless you have wealthy families.

  143. Kieran O'Neill says:

    #74 Indeed. Though “Oh Say Can U See”. I loled.

  144. gnugeek says:

    I’m so tired, already, of the attacks on Sarah Palin’s daughter, and the many comments designed to portray Sarah Palin herself as some sort of back woods ignorant white trash. Is there no room anymore in American politics for mature discussion of actual matters of policy?

    I have grave misgivings concerning Sarah Palin. I find her views that we are fighting “God’s War” in the Middle East to be dangerous; I find her lack of regard for the Constitution to be extremely disturbing; and I do not feel she is has the experience necessary to step into the role of President of the United States of America.

    How about actually discussing those things, instead of making snide hints that she is ignorant white trash? I find this attitude to be digustingly elitest and counterproductive.

    Watching people pat each other on the back and yuck it up while they attack her daughter for making a mistake in life nauseates me.

  145. Rindan says:

    Be that as it may, to attack Ms. Palin on the grounds of her daughter’s behavior will cause sympathy to arise from any parent who’s seen a teenaged child go wayward, despite their own best efforts.
    Such attacks will backfire.

    That isn’t what the attack is. No one gives two shits that her daughter is pregnant. No one thinks it reflects upon Palin’s character (or if they do, they are smart enough to keep their mouth shut), and no one really thinks it will set a “bad example” for other Americans. No democrat of rank is dumb enough to make these bad arguments. The reason why people are jumping on it is because it is a blatant example of an utterly failed policy. Abstention only education has been proven to be completely and utterly worthless. Now, you have the daughter of someone running who advocates abstinence only education and her own daughter is a prime example of the failure of that policy. It has nothing to do with Palin or her daughter. It isn’t a moral judgment on either one of them. It is purely a policy judgment backed up by a pretty damn convincing case study. When a backer of a policy has juveniles serving as prime examples of failure, any rational person is going to question the wisdom of the policy.

    That said, I completely agree that this is a land mine waiting for a democrat’s foot. The argument is just sitting out there waiting for a democrat sucker to step on it. If democrats were wise, they would resist the horrible temptation that this arises and stick to speaking in innuendo.

    McCain has perfected the innuendo attack. McCain’s chest beating about being a REAL America with REAL American values is an innuendo attack implying that Obama isn’t a real American and is really a black power Muslim in disguise. Democrats, if they are wise, will adopt the same strategy when dealing with Palin. You DON’T declare that Palin’s daughter is an example of Republican “abstinence only” education gone horrible wrong. What you do instead is declare that teen pregnancy is a “real problem” in America and state that abstinence only education has resulted in failures to stem this horrible problem (this is an “OMFG THE CHILDREN” defense, Americans love this crap). You never mention Palin or her knocked up daughter once. You just babble on about teen pregnancy with a wink a nod. In the same way McCain can imply that Obama is a crypto-Muslim-black-power guy, Democrats can imply that Palin is a off her fucking rocker religious nut job who wants to apply her worthless policy on teen pregnancy to everyone’s children children as badly as she applied it to her own.

    It will be great fun to watch the campaigns battle each other with their innuendo messages. Vote for Obama and get a crypto black power separatist Muslim candidate, or vote for McCain/Palin and your daughter will knocked up by white trash. Mmm… American politics. Gotta love it.

    Of course, I pretty much expect democrats to fail in this battle. Some high level surrogate is going to step on this landmine and the Republicans will eat them alive for it.

  146. p3n3nc3 says:

    Eh @ 60 -

    War is a by-product of humanity.

  147. Jake0748 says:

    I agree with you Gnugeek, up to a point. But rudeness, cheap shots and snide hints are (fortunately or not) an integal part of the the American political process. No politician is immune from, or gets a free pass from the ugliness. If Palin or her supporters can’t take it, she should get out. It isn’t going to stop.

    On the other hand I haven’t seen a single scrap of anything that shows me she’s remotely qualified to be (potentially) president. Being a “pit bull” or a “hockey mom” don’t cut it. I look forward to her putting forward some serious policy ideas and answering some tough questions. I’m sick of the media show.

  148. anthony says:

    GNU, I’m missing the white trash innuendo on this thread. With only a few exceptions of rudeness-over-polite discourse, this one has been rolling along fairly smoothly.

  149. Teresa Nielsen Hayden / Moderator says:

    Defiant, do I need to suspend your account while I get some sleep and then turn it back on in the morning, or can you behave yourself while I’m gone?

    Bruno the Pug, Michelle Malkin is not a reputable source of information.

    Cupcake Faerie, there are readers and commenters of all political stripes. Of course, the proper label depends on who’s talking. By the standards of the modern far right, all of Boing Boing’s Bakuninists, Social Democrats, anarcho-capitalists, neo-Trotskyists, googoo dems, and progressive technocrats qualify as liberals — which is to say, they don’t adhere to the far right.

    Secret Life of Plants @34, bravo! Good on you! There’s nothing quite so effective as digging up the real data. I noteice, by the way, that p3n3nc3 has yet to really acknowledge your point.

    Gnugeek @77, I’m not seeing a lot of what you describe. As for the matter of Sarah Palin and her daughter, see my comments to Muirne @66 in the Douglas Rushkoff thread.

    John Coulthart @89, next time just give us the link and quote a short paragraph, or give us a link and summarize the article.

    Rindan @92, well said. We didn’t make Bristol Palin a political counter. Sarah Palin and John McCain did that.

    MDH @96: Spot on. The Dems are not afraid of her.

  150. prodigous says:

    While i don’t have your frequency of posts Canuck, indeed i do have recent posts. I just usually have better things to do than argue with someone on the internet. You caught me on an off day.

    Oh well, I’m sure I’ll just get lumped in with the conservatives and dismissed. Libertarian leaning Anarcho-Capitalists never get any of the love.

  151. minTphresh says:

    anthony, with out the strawman arguements, people like GNU got nothin’. please don’t take that away from him.

  152. Jake0748 says:

    I for one, welcome our crypto black power separatist, Muslim, your daughter will be knocked up by white trash, political overlords.

    Gaaachhkkk… :P

  153. sojourner strange says:

    Also, in response to earlier comments-

    Wikipedia: “Creationism is the religious belief that humanity, life, the Earth, and the universe were created in their original form by a deity (often the Abrahamic God of Judaism, Christianity and Islam) or deities, whose existence is presupposed.”

    I don’t care if she’s a creationist or not as long as she doesn’t try to require its teaching in science classes or something. Personally I find it ironic that she has absolutely no respect for the world that she thinks her God created.

  154. Ugly Canuck says:

    Prodigious, my apologies. I was not aiming at you with my second comment but at Ohsaycanyousee. My 2 comments’ posting one after the other and my not naming the target of the barb made it confusing. Once again, sorry. Still disagree with the point you made though.
    I like Libertarians, and do not consider them right wing. “My” right wing is Authoritarian.

  155. eclectro says:

    I have no plans to vote for Palin. I do have an issue over saying she favored book banning. There is very little concrete evidence in this area and we have yet to hear from the librarian involved.

    I think I’d rather highlight her dubious previous political affiliations, that she has more experience being a beauty queen than public official, and her rather smarmy speech that failed to address some of the cold issues that are facing us.

    I worry that that a vast swath of women will turn a blind eye to this and want to vote for her anyway. We really can’t afford another eight years of what we have had.

  156. buddy66 says:

    You Yankees gonna have to learn the difference between white trash and rednecks. My Tennessee family are admittedly rednecks and would be highly indignant to be called out of their class. As my aged grandmother, rest her soul, said back when George Wallace was making a run for the presidency and she was asked if she was going to vote for him, “No, honey, I know white trash when I see it.”

  157. buddy66 says:

    Palin & Co. are REDNECKS.

  158. Ugly Canuck says:

    Rolandthick: Bravo for mentioning the 800-lb gorilla in the room, as a Canuck I do not feel entitled to discuss that, which is such a difficult issue amongst Americans, their race relations.
    Rindan: Ah, that’s a bit of context I was missing…I assumed that Am sex ed like its tech ed would be close to the best in the world….not being a local I had not really noticed that “abstention-only” political crust that’s formed on it…don’t your politicians believe in Public Health science/research/statistics?
    Nevertheless I think Palin is kinda like flypaper for the Dems…there are better issues, less amenable to Repub “turnabout”, than this lady and her issues. A question of tactics, of resource allocation.
    Noelegy: yes Mad stinks now compared to the sixties-early seventies when i was reading it…the old gang’s gone, and it’s now a Time-Warner thing, IIRC (see link I posted above re: Mad vs FBI). Sad to say that it too now is part of big corporate media, though such is usually not “Liberal” IMHO (contrary to what those right-wingers…where? Oh Yeah!… all over the Media tell us).

  159. John Coulthart says:

    Re: the book banning issue (again):

    Palin Asked City Librarian About Censoring Books, Insisted It Was ‘Rhetorical.’

    In 1996, according to the Frontiersman, Wasilla’s library director Mary Ellen Emmons said Palin asked her outright if she could live with censorship of library books. Emmons said, “This is different than a normal book-selection procedure or a book-challenge policy…She was asking me how I would deal with her saying a book can’t be in the library.” Palin said in response, “Many issues were discussed, both rhetorical and realistic in nature.” [Frontiersman, 12/18/96]

    Then, in an incident that is fast turning into the stuff of political legend, Palin was revealed earlier this week to have attempted to censor Wasilla’s library. The idea is almost laughable when you see the library itself. Its small collection of books includes a prominent section on hunting and fishing, and no visible copies of Lady Chatterley’s Lover. Yet in 1996, after parents complained about a book their child had taken home, Palin took umbrage. Frustratingly, no one can remember the volume concerned. What we do know is that Palin turned on the then librarian, Mary Ellen Emmons, asking her in a council meeting what she would do if she were told by the mayor to remove certain books from the collection.

    Local resident Anne Kilkenny was in the public gallery and heard the librarian’s reaction: “She sucked in her breath, and replied that the books in the library were all acquired in accordance with professional criteria and she would resist completely.”

    Palin has since claimed her question was purely rhetorical. That is not how Naegele and Kilkenny perceived it at the time. A few weeks later, Palin sent Emmons a letter terminating her employment. “People in the town rose up in anger,” Kilkenny recalls. “The library is an important institution in our city, as there’s not a lot else to do here in the winter but sit by the fire with a good book. There was real public pressure, and Sarah was forced to rescind the letter.”

  160. Ugly Canuck says:

    I would like to second Buddy66 on his point. Some of the most capable people I’ve ever met were and are rednecks. White trash is something else. I suppose they could overlap, a small set of shared members.
    Would not vote for a redneck Pres or PM though. America and Canada too are now urban nations, and I’m a city boy.
    To represent a redneck district, though…well maybe.
    If they can win election, why not?

  161. buddy66 says:

    If that’s it, then that’s it. Document it, affidavits and all, and hang her out to dry. “SARAH PALIN, BOOK-BURNING (‘rhymes with “witch””– Mrs. G.H.W. Bush)

  162. Rindan says:

    I’m so tired, already, of the attacks on Sarah Palin’s daughter, and the many comments designed to portray Sarah Palin herself as some sort of back woods ignorant white trash. Is there no room anymore in American politics for mature discussion of actual matters of policy?

    Two things:
    1) The pregnant 17 year old is relevant due to Palin’s stance on policy issues. She is against teaching about and distributing contraceptives. She is all for “abstinence only” education. The fact that in her own home where one can assume she has a direct hand in her daughters education abstinence only education failed is a pretty powerful point. No one cares that her daughter is pregnant. It is just seen as proof that her “ideas” on teen pregnancy are out of whack of reality. If it doesn’t work in your own home, why on earth would you want to try this insanity on a national scale?

    2) The pregnant 17 year old is a land mine waiting for a democrat’s foot. The above point is extraordinarily compelling. Anyone who finds the idea of abstinence only education to be absurd is going to reflexively make the above (and perfectly valid, IMO) point. At which point, they and anyone they are associated with are going to be lynched for picking on a poor pregnant teenager and launching character attacks on the candidate’s daughter. A high ranking democrat is going to fall for it. I bet my left nut on this point. Republicans should be overjoyed and waiting in eager anticipation.

    I find this attitude to be digustingly elitest and counterproductive.

    I know “elitist” is a curse word these days, but I really don’t get it. I WANT my president to be an elitist. I want the guy who has a huge hunk of power over 5% of the worlds population, the worlds largest economy, and the worlds largest and most powerful military to be an elitist. I want him to be better than everyone else. I don’t want an average every day Joe. I want someone who smarter than me, more eloquent than me, and in general someone who is better and far more elite than me. I want him (or her) to have a better education and a better grasp on the world. People, this is guy (or gal) who gets tossed in front of the controls of a nation with more than enough power to kill every other human on earth. The president can destroy any nation he points to, ruin your standard of living, and sink the world economy without batting an eyelash.

    You REALLY want an “elitist” at the controls. You don’t want an everyday man. You want someone better than an everyday man. The president should be super human. So, cut it with the “elitist” crap. We need and should WANT an elitist.

  163. Roschelle says:

    The “maverick” is looking more and more like a sidekick…merely going along with the powers that be…he says and does whatever he thinks his champions want to hear. Just like calling lobbyists ‘birds of prey’ which is a total contradiction to what his true ties with these unnecessary evils in Washinton are.

  164. powerpants says:

    @181 – I did not like your post. As a white person who supports Palin, I am very offended by your calling me a racist simply because I don’t support Obama. I am NOT a racist, I just don’t think his proposed policies would be good for ANYONE in the nation, rich or poor.

  165. Ugly Canuck says:

    You know, I agree that some books should be consigned to the flames. It’s just that this is a choice that must be left to each individual, to use her best judgment in any particular case.
    I don’t want the goovernments to tell me which volume to burn to heat my pottage or my cottage, no thank you Ma’am.

  166. sojourner strange says:

    Er, Rindan, I think that at this point it is important to make a distinction between an ELITE person and an ELITIST person. Yes?

  167. Takuan says:

    and Palin would?

  168. buddy66 says:

    sojourner strange,

    Then what is it?

  169. mdh says:


    The Democrats are not scared of her. As candidate Obama said, he’s been called worse on the basketball court.

    We’re scared of you all who constantly fall for her brand of all talk B.S. We’re scared you’ll fall for ANYTHING.

    In the meantime though, we’re making popcorn so we can watch Joe “Chair of Senate Foriegn Relations Committee”/”bulldog without lipstick” Biden rip her to shreds.

    If she’s not too chicken to debate him, that is.

  170. Falcon_Seven says:

    It’s just a matter of time before someone digs up Joe Biden’s lurvechild. Why not join the fun. Don’t forget your shovel.

  171. Ugly Canuck says:

    Rindan, it seems you wish to have a person of superior merit to be president. Not an “elitist” …whether that elite is defined by money, religion or inherited name.
    Think George Washington whose merit as a person was universally acknowledged even in his lifetime.
    Meritocracy is a pretty good way to go if you’re hiring, and what is an election if not a way of hiring executives and representatives?

  172. mdh says:

    Did she really just get her first passport last year?

    And she has to debate Joe “No Lipstick” Biden?

    This should be fun to watch.

  173. mightymouse1584 says:

    #82 “Libertarian leaning Anarcho-Capitalists never get any of the love.”

    w00t! lets here it for the Libertarian leaning Anarcho-Capitalists! we can be tough to find on boingboing but its always fun to see another one lurking in the depths of the discussion board.

  174. Ugly Canuck says:

    Hay falcon seven why not share what you’ve got? Besides innuendo?

  175. LightningCrash says:

    Ugly canuck:
    You haven’t said much. Nobody really knows anything about Sarah Palin, she’s such an unknown. t’s hmrs t s ths mth-fmng ppl n bth sds f th fnc, vrcsly ttckng r dfndng Srh Pln, whn thy rlly knw s lttl bt Srh Pln. ‘v rvwd th nfrmtn vlbl bt Srh Pln t ths tm, nd thr’s nt ngh t drw rlbl cnclsn n th wmn.

    Bt hy, dn’t lt lck f vdnc gt n th wy f gd rgmnt!

    And because I don’t believe in censorship:
    Mdn Cmmnt fr ths thrd: wld rthr fm t th mth bt Srh Pln thn dmt tht dn’t knw nythng bt hr.

  176. minTphresh says:

    falconsebbin@#98, what the hell is a “lurvechild” ? similar to a truffle? joe biden is so selfish!

  177. Crawford Tillinghast says:

    Like the usual gang of idiots used to say back when they still kicked real ass…you could do worse – and you always have!

  178. Ugly Canuck says:

    just a point. Palin’s daughter is off-limits… nor I do not believe in collective punishment, nor in punishing family members for an member’s offenses.
    It is irrelevant and immaterial to her abilities and merit for the job.
    The election is not about who has the more morally pure family members its about how well these people will do managing the tax receipts. That is all. How those receipts are spent is what the Gov is about and forms the difference between governments. This moral stuff about the candidates’ families from either side is all hogwash.
    There’s a reason military spending is as high as it is and it has naught to do with threats…

  179. pduggie says:

    MDH 195: N, th rtcl y ct s ncrrct nd msldng. Th ffth cmmnt dwn n th lnk xplns why.

  180. buddy66 says:

    How about hearing it for us Free Market Socialists?

  181. Ugly Canuck says:

    Mintphresh: Perhaps he meant ‘larvachild”, some kind of sci-fi/horror thingy. Something to dig up.

  182. minTphresh says:

    canuck, maybe he left off the ‘e’ at the end and it is really spelled ‘Lurvechilde” like “Rothschilde”…and we need the ‘shovels’ to dig up the CONSPIRACY! whoa! but, ‘larvachild’ does sound cooler. you damn canadians…

  183. Defiant1 says:

    “Defiant1, why don’t you put your money where your mouth is and send Barak’s half-brother some?”

    … Ummm, I send money to to OXFAM and UNICEF every year. I don’t make a lot, but I try. DO YOU?

    “You’re knocking Barack Obama for the actions of his estranged father?”

    … You’re knocking Sara Palin for the choices her daughter made, aren’t you?

  184. Biscuit4 says:

    I’m up late because I think I dragged home a bug from the hospital which I work but I might stop at the news stand tomorrow and buy this if it’s real. It’s funny, real or not . Even though I havn’t bought a “Mad magazine” in years it’s a great mag. I look forward to folding together the back page.

  185. sojourner strange says:


    In everyday conversation, as far as I can tell, an elite person is someone who is very good at what s/he does; an elitist person is someone who looks down on anyone who s/he perceives to be inferior.

  186. Teresa Nielsen Hayden / Moderator says:

    Defiant, you’re deliberately missing the point. I think.

  187. imipak says:

    I seem to remember Quayle, who we all found just as scary/hilarious back in ’88, was elected.I cleave to the opinion that Palin’s a stroke of genius and might well be the decisive stroke that defeats Obama/Biden.

  188. minTphresh says:

    #199, plus, he’s so damn ‘uppity!

  189. mdh says:

    Ugly Canuck – Her daughter is not entirely off limits. As an individual, yes, but as a prime example of the kind of people she has worked against (her record of cutting benefits for single teen mothers), her daughter exists in the discussion as a single brilliant data point.

    Her daughters “choice” to keep the baby is a second dazzling data point.

    Kids will be kids, but how you manage your own offspring says a lot about how you will run the country – and it seems Gov. Palin is perfectly okay with setting rules that, in reality, cannot go unbroken (like honestly expecting 17 year olds not to have sex).

    Also, she believes the earth is 6,000 years old – so really, nothing is off limits.

  190. Defiant1 says:

    And you’re missing mine.

  191. pduggie says:

    “it seems Gov. Palin is perfectly okay with setting rules that, in reality, cannot go unbroken (like honestly expecting 17 year olds not to have sex).”

    It seems not:,0,3119305.story

    “In a widely quoted 2006 survey she answered during her gubernatorial campaign, Palin said she supported abstinence-until-marriage programs. But weeks later, she proclaimed herself “pro-contraception” and said condoms ought to be discussed in schools alongside abstinence.

    “I’m pro-contraception, and I think kids who may not hear about it at home should hear about it in other avenues,” she said during a debate in Juneau.”

  192. mdh says:

    Pduggie @ 201

    The link you provided…. oh, yeah, your assertion currently remains baseless.

    that 5th comment down you mention. i believe this handles it tidily.

    If you’re claiming Gov. Palin is responsible for providing the 5 million dollar increase in funding, you’re nutz. She’s the executive, she spends the money where the legislature damn well tells her to. The legislature did so, and she used her veto power subsequently to reduce the appropriation.

    Yes, their budget increased, (although the large increase in state aid was apparently due to a large capital improvement project) and I suppose we should really just shut up and be grateful the group that supports hundreds of girls not unlike her own daughter got any money at all.

    I believe the assertion that she cut their budget stands, despite the legislatures best intentions.

  193. Ugly Canuck says:

    How they manage a seventeen year old?
    Why is a seventeen year old not free?
    Seventeen is independent of parents. On their own. What seventeen year olds do, does not for me reflect at all on the parents’ abilities, except perhaps as parents, very arguably.
    Certainly not as to skills and abilities outside of parenting. Not on their skill as public servants. They may indeed have neglected their kids, to do a better job for the public.
    I understand that its bogus republican hogwash ‘family values” BS biting her in the a**. But don’t be crowing about it, and it is Repub. BS. Don’t make it Dem. BS too.
    Merit and ability of the Candidate to perform the job and fill the Office to which they aspire.
    That’s what counts. How they will do the job.
    Not how they control their adult children.

  194. pduggie says:

    I’m counting all kinds of “spin” as propaganda. (which should be a neutral term anyway: there’s good and bad, and seminal SF author Cordwainer Smith (Paul Linebarger) wrote the book on it.

    Mad’s quote of her saying “what does a VP do anyway” makes her sound like a ditz. In context, it clearly isn’t. Its saying “I’ll take the job if you give me some responsibilities on the side”

    Clear as anything. Mad went for a cheap shot. Which is OK. They’re cheap :)

  195. GonzoMultiverse says:

    I think that Johnny just has a crush on her. Infatuation is blind. And do I really want to watch this unrequited love drag on for 4-8 years? Nah.

  196. Ugly Canuck says:

    The VP…it’s not really a office, it’s more like a waiting room.

  197. Torley says:

    The Juneau parody is also an amusing movie riff:

    Nice to see MAD get some love too, after Cracked has been dominated Digg lists and such, I hadn’t heard from MAD in awhile!

  198. buddy66 says:


    Then when some poor schmuck like me is accused of being a member of the liberal elite, I am actually being accused of being very good at what I do?

    No, I think maybe I’m being called a latte-sipping, Birkenstock-wearing, bicycling, wine-drinking, faggoty Democrat.

    Happily, those who use the term “liberal elite” can easily kiss my ass—because I’m so far above them, looking down.

  199. sojourner strange says:

    Technically, we’re not free until we’re eighteen. We’re minors and our parents/guardians have control over us, legally speaking.

    But that aside, there are loads of non-sexually-active seventeen-year-olds out there, and it isn’t always religious… just saying.

  200. pduggie says:

    The next article you cite is not incorrect or misleading the first you did was.

    My assertion is not and never was “baseless”.

  201. minTphresh says:

    yes, #114, some of those pizza-faces couldn’t get laid with a gold card!

  202. Ugly Canuck says:

    sojourner, that’s legal technicality, determined by custom. The ancient Franks, and others, considered males as fully-qualified adults with its attendant freedoms, at 14, and i do not think much has changed. That was the age of “responsibility”, when one became responsible for one’s acts.
    That is at 14, people know generally what they are doing (but not necessarily what it means). But it is wrong to impute any taint to the parent from the crimes or other bad behavior of the youth. These are the ages when the youth pulls away from the parent. In that process many cars have been wrecked, etc. etc. during what is best IMO seen as a period of groping self-definition. But it’s not the parents at fault.
    Be that as it may, to attack Ms. Palin on the grounds of her daughter’s behavior will cause sympathy to arise from any parent who’s seen a teenaged child go wayward, despite their own best efforts.
    Such attacks will backfire.

  203. pduggie says:

    “September 4, 2008
    Contact: Deirdre A. Cronin
    Executive Director

    “Covenant House Alaska is a multi-service agency serving homeless and runaway youth, including teen mothers. The majority of the agency’s annual operating budget is privately raised, with no more than 10 to 15 percent of funds coming from state grants in any given year. We are grateful for the support we have received from Governor Sarah Palin, the Alaska legislature and our Congressional delegation over the years.

    Despite some press reports to the contrary, our operating budget was not reduced. Our $3.9 million appropriation is directed toward a multi-year capital project and it is our understanding that the state simply opted to phase in its support for this project over several years, rather than all at once in the current budget year.”

    Covenant House Alaska is Alaska’s largest private non-profit adolescent care agency serving homeless, runaway and at–risk youth between the ages of 13 and 21. With particular expertise in helping some of the most hopeless teens grow into independent, successful and productive adults.”

  204. gobo says:

    #5, if the choice of a creationist, book-banning hard-right-wing gun nut proves to be what America’s been looking for, that makes me very sad for the future of our country.

  205. sojourner strange says:

    Your wit astounds me.

  206. travelina says:

    This parody, although it has a funny title, only reminds me of the sad fact that the Obama campaign refused to vet Hilary for veep, even though she got 18 million votes. Now the other party has a live-wire, kickass woman candidate, and a lot a people who don’t read Mad or HuffPo can identify with her. I think it was a brilliant choice.

  207. Jake0748 says:

    Whether she was politically a “brilliant choice” or not, the thought of this woman being a heartbeat away from the nuclear button scares the hell out of me.

  208. Ugly Canuck says:

    Why thank you Sojourner. I point out that her daughter is not running for Office.

  209. BrunoThePug says:

    rlly lk BB n gnrl, bt wsh y’d stp pstng ll f ths mpssbly lm nt-pln jnk. spclly snc ll f ths rmrs kp gttng dbnkd. S hr ( nd nthr n hr (

  210. Defiant1 says:

    Dms mst b vry scrd t b ths rlld p. Bwr f th Brdly ffct.

  211. Takuan says:

    “Y’all talk right – or there ain’t gonna be no money next year – ya hear?”

  212. Talia says:


    No, its been pretty clear no one is knocking Sarah Palin for her daughter’s choices.

    The right wing would LOVE you believe that. They’re counting on hypersensitivy about the matter to launch their own attacks. Use some circumspection and don’t fall into that trap. Prove you can think for yourself, not just what the drones feed you and encourage you to believe.

  213. buddy66 says:


    Must have different laws up there in the land of Nice. (actually I’m further north than you are if you’re a Torontonian). USA parents are liable for their minor children (under eighteen) even in Alaska, the prime redneck outpost of our empire. Many parents suffer dire consequences because of this binding responsibility. Hmm. If the girl broke any law … the Guv and her icebilly husband could be legally … Aw, forget it.

  214. barfy says:

    I stoped reading mad as well Due to the Adverts. but I just gotta love a good political satire(ing?). But my real concern is over this new subspeices call “AdultChildren”. I have been seeing more and more of them hanging out in parkinglots and around the dumpsters near my home, Also have noted a few “ChildAdultChildren” running around in the local park and infesting those lovely playgrounds in residental neighborhoods around our state. Something must be done to preserve the “Adult” species befor we become Extinct or worse yet only found in Zoo’s covered in green alge……..

  215. mdh says:

    “Not how they control their adult children.”

    But rather how they control other adult children.

    Thanks for making my point.

  216. ray ray says:

    It’s going to get interesting if her handlers ever let her talk to the press. I guess I’ll have to wait until the debates.

    I hear she is a very skilled debater who will tear Biden to pieces and show everyone that she is more fit to be President of the United States than McCain even.

    Bless her little heart she does have a lot on her plate with the scandals, babies, baby scandals, and getting up to speed on foreign policy.

Leave a Reply