Sarah, She Wolf of the GOP

William A. Jacobson over at the Legal Insurrection blog speculated earlier this week about “The Obsession With Liberals’ Obsession With Sarah Palin”:

Charles Krauthammer has lambasted the mainstream (i.e. liberal) media for its obsession with Sarah Palin.

That goes double for liberal entertainers and academics, and triple for the left-blogosphere, which is nuts-in-the-head (that’s a precise medical term in Austrian) when it comes to Palin.

But this obsession is not a one-way street.

Admit it, many of us in the right-blogosphere are obsessed with liberals’ obsession with Palin.

It didn’t start out this way. But it has developed not because of who Palin is, but who the Palin haters are.

And yes, it is liberals, much more than even conservatives, who can’t stop thinking about her; consider the numerous polls over the last year which show Palin unable to muster a majority even among Republican voters, much less the general electorate, and yet the liberal-leaning media gives Palin more ink than any other figure in America except possibly the president himself.

All sorts of theories are proffered to explain this preoccupation. Just this morning the Washington Post‘s Jennifer Rubin spelled out the standard theory — that the “obsession” must be a ruse to elevate an unelectable candidate:

Much of the punditocracy is obsessed with Sarah Palin. It’s understandable on several levels. First, she makes for good copy and has a knack for coining catchy phrases (“death panels”) and new words (“refudiate” — it’s now in the dictionary). She is controversial and opinionated, so given the choice between, say, a story on John Thune and one on Palin, it’s a no-brainer to choose the best-selling author, TV reality show star and Tea Party darling. But conservatives suspect there’s also some mischief-making afoot — the desire by liberal-leaning members of the media and the White House to make Palin the symbol of the Republican Party, which they are convinced will translate into her presidential run, her nomination and a shellacking for the GOP at the polls in 2012.

While that theory might describe the goal of a few elite members of the Sarcastic Class, it’s fairly evident that most leftists truly do fear a Palin nomination, since they feel that none of the other current GOP hopefuls has much of a chance in 2012.

But what else could explain the liberal obsession with Palin? Everybody’s got their own ideas: Palin’s a Jungian archetype; she’s a Riot Grrrl; she evokes “status-anxiety”; every day produces another theory. How long before “Palin Studies” becomes a college major?

Sarah Palin at the Belmont Stakes in June

But really, everyone knows the real answer: it’s all about sex. I had once planned to make a post about this too-obvious thesis, but then I saw that Harper’s Magazine had a cover story called “Is Sarah Palin porn?” back in June, and so I shelved my idea, since someone had beaten me to it.

But then yesterday I finally got around to actually reading the Harper’s story and discovered to my shock that it’s not about porn or sex at all — that was just a catchy headline for an otherwise standard-issue leftist essay about how awful Sarah Palin is.

I guess it’s up to me, then, since no one else is willing to come out and say it.

Why are liberals obsessed with Sarah Palin?

Because she is their dominatrix.

I posit that American liberal men are, as a group, masochists in search of a sadist. Sarah Palin at first walked into the dominant role completely unwittingly, but once she grasped the erotic control she wielded over her opponents, she became not quite as unwitting about it as some may think.

Sexual kinks are a peculiar thing: they often make no logical sense to an outsider who does not share the fetish. How can liberals denounce Sarah Palin as a Nazi and a bitch and an idiot yet simultaneously harbor a masturbatory fascination with her?

There is a one-word answer: Ilsa. Actually, make that six words: Ilsa, She Wolf of the SS. If that doesn’t ring a bell, it’s the title of a pornographic exploitation film from the mid-’70s about a sadistic female Nazi officer who tortures and rapes concentration camp victims. If you’re familiar with the sexual subculture, you already know that this cult film is a favorite with masochists who require a cruel dominatrix (or at least the fantasy of a cruel dominatrix) for them to achieve sexual release. If you’re not familiar with the subculture of fetishes and sadomasochistic sex games, then you likely will find the whole Ilsa/Nazi/dominatrix thing completely mystifying and more than a little “sick.”

But it doesn’t matter that “normal” people don’t understand: this psycho-sexual pathology plays out right before their eyes every day, whether they’re aware of it or not.

To make it all clear for everybody, I have taken the original lobby poster for Ilsa and updated it to explain contemporary American politics:

(Click on the image or here to view it full-size.)

Do the liberals fear Sarah Palin? Yes. And that fear is the basis of their sexual attraction to her. They want — nay, need — to be dominated, not only because they are masochists, but also because it helps them adopt the morally superior underdog role in the battle of ideas.

Sarah Palin was dragged from obscurity into someone else’s sexual fantasy. She didn’t intend to become the liberals’ dominatrix: she was elevated to that position by submissives who finally found their perfect mistress. She was caught off-guard at first, angry and offended, but by now I think she understands, maybe even subconsciously, that she can use this role to her advantage. Liberals need someone to crack that whip? Crack! Do as Sarah says!

54 Responses to “Sarah, She Wolf of the GOP”

  1. 1eots on Dec 2, 2010 at 1:37 pm:

    LOL! It also explain why liberal women fear her and obsess with her — she got into the heads of their men.

  2. 2gDavid on Dec 2, 2010 at 2:52 pm:

    Sarah is so smoking hot, most conserative women are hot, liberals; not so hot, i.e.; San Fran Nan and, UGH!!!,

  3. 3curious_fritz on Dec 2, 2010 at 4:06 pm:

    Your hypothesis is interesting. Yet I do not understand, on which fact(s) your assumption, that liberal men are masochists, is based. Are there any studies or empirical data that back said theory? Or is it more of a general assumption based on liberals behaviour or personal experience? Regarding the left in germany, one could also assume, that leftwingers are masochists, yet I never knew why precisely it seemed to me that way. So if you could offer an explaination on this, I would be grateful. BTW: germans left to right also seem to fear Sarah Palin and are especially worried because of her anti-intellectualism (so the newspapers say).

    Greetings from Germany,


  4. 4eots on Dec 2, 2010 at 4:49 pm:

    Curious Fritz
    “And I went down to a demonstration to get my fair share of abuse.”
    That’s from Mick Jagger.
    It’s a separate topic, but I think many people will agree with the observation.

  5. 5Scott on Dec 2, 2010 at 7:41 pm:

    Curious Fritz:

    Who would self-identify as a liberal masochist to prove themselves stereotypical? But, if you check out Zombie’s blog, there are several very clear examples of masochistic liberal activity: July 28, 2008 Up Your Alley Street Fair, with a submissive gay man being urinated upon, the words “toilet pig” on his back; examples of scrotal inflation; plenty of unconventional body piercings; a fetish uniformed cop with split genetalia (his uretha cut underneath).

    There are more examples of masochistic behavior at the September 30, 2007 posting at the Folsom Street Fair, including more than one man being whipped in public by (not a surprise) women.

    Still another example of scrotal inflation in Zombie’s 11/14/10 post of “Nancy Pelosi’s San Franscisco”; page down on this same post to see a man holding a sign that says “I’m ashamed to be an American”. This requires some interpretation, but consider that he probably IS an American, living in a wealthy city, and he is ashamed, seemingly begging for someone to spit at him. Or at least his fellow countryman.

    Next, check Zombie’s 12/2/07 post with the Berkely tree sitters, with the first photo in that essay being a man with a lightbulb hat and a sign saying “I demand my fair share of abuse”. Consider also that the tree “sitters” had to endure cold, wet, and generally uncomfortable conditions while squatting in trees; something for which modern man is generally not built.

    Of course, San Franscisco is a liberal bastion, but multiply this activity at least by a few million people all over our country, and you can get a sense of the irrational, unhinged nature of the liberal people.

    The same affliction seems to have overtaken Germany (and much of Western Europe) leading the socialist believers there to think that Sarah Palin, simply because she dares be a conservative, is stupid. It is pretty obvious, no?

  6. 6Doragoon on Dec 3, 2010 at 9:18 am:

    So liberals are obsessed with Sara Palin because they are sexually attracted to feeling bad about themselves. So when an attractive woman criticizes liberals, they can’t help but be obsessed.

    The lesson to learn from this is that liberals will like you more if you insult them. Maybe like you a little more than you’re comfortable with.

  7. 7curious_fritz on Dec 3, 2010 at 12:14 pm:

    dear eots, dear scott,

    thank you for your responses! Especially to you, scott, as it really takes some effort to give such an accurate response with all the examples! Nonetheless they are both kind of missing the point. maybe I didn’t make it clear enough, what I meant: I meant, whether there is some masochist content in the liberal ideology (I hope; you understand what I mean). Some of the examples scott gave show (potential liberal) masochists. But the question remains: does their liberalism and their masochism merely corelate, or are they bound together in some way. The example with the “I’m ashamed to be an american” women comes closest to my question. As clearly the women at the same time makes a political statement, and is enjoying the process of committing how ashamed she is. I think, one term kind of sums up that kind of behaviour, it is “liberal guilt” (is that the right term?). It seems to be like some liberals derive joy from feeling guilty or ashamed. Yet I cannot see if or how this guilt is part of the american liberal mindset (as I do not know so much about the american liberal mindset). That is, what my question was pointing at.

    As for Europes opposition towards Sarah Palin: I think, the roots of Europeans disliking Palin are to be found in the widespread anti-americanism in europe. That is also, why Europeans, especially Germans, love(d) Obama so much, because he seems more than a European than an American in their eyes. Sarah Palin on the other hand is regarded as stupid and anti-intellectual by Europeans, liberal and (euro-) conservative alike.

  8. 8eots on Dec 3, 2010 at 12:59 pm:

    Curious Fritz,
    I understand, you weren’t looking for examples. Yes, there is a masochist content. At the heart of liberal ideology is the idea that white men are the root of all evil around the world (colonialism, capitalism, wars, misogyny, homophobia), and therefore must atone.

  9. 9Scott on Dec 4, 2010 at 7:24 am:

    Curious Fritz:

    Here is a piece from the Daily Caller that might shed some light:

    “While the New York Post reported Wednesday that more than 80 percent of Americans believe that keeping the Bush tax cuts is “a priority,” more than 80 millionaires are asking President Barack Obama to “please let the Bush tax cuts expire and raise our taxes.”

    In a letter addressed to the President, the millionaires make their case, saying that as successful Americans they are ready and willing to do their “fair share.”

    “For the fiscal health of our nation and the well-being of our fellow citizens, we ask that you allow tax cuts on incomes over $1,000,000 to expire at the end of this year as scheduled,” they write. “We make this request as loyal citizens who now or in the past earned an income of $1,000,000 per year or more.”

    The Patriotic Millionaires for Fiscal Strength, include musician Moby, Men’s Warehouse CEO George Zimmer, Princeton Review founder John Katzman, and Ben Cohen of Ben & Jerry’s ice cream.”

    Are these millionaires not capable of writing checks to the US Treasury voluntarily? Instead, they opted to beg the President to raise their taxes. This is a masochistic act, but there is a strong element of sadism here too. Of course they can write their own check…so the underlying question is, why won’t they? The simple answer is that they like the power of dictating other people’s activities, enabled through a socialist/totalitarian government like the one we have today.

  10. 10Bakunin on Dec 4, 2010 at 1:48 pm:

    I really like when Zombie creates unprovable theories on why people do things.

    Also find it somewhat ironic to cry about the “liberal medias obession with Sarah Palin” in an article about Sarah Palin.

    Another irony: pointing out that “the liberal media” want’s to “elevate an unelectable candidate” in Sarah Palin when the post before was about how “President Palin” is going to save capitalism.

  11. 11Scott on Dec 4, 2010 at 3:34 pm:

    [I really like when Zombie creates unprovable theories on why people do things.] Yet the evidence is everywhere, in this particular case. You are choosing not to acknowledge it. Of course Zombie’s post is tongue in cheek, but there is a magical effect Sarah Palin has on liberals, Bakunin. You wouldn’t be sniffing about how Zombie’s theories are unprovable if you didn’t have some sort of irrational fear of President Palin, potential 2012 nominee and winner.

  12. 12Bakunin on Dec 4, 2010 at 6:21 pm:

    Evidence, especially evidence interpreted by such a bias source, is not proof.

    Take Zombies assertion: liberals are afraid of Sarah palin because they are machonists who have the desire to be dominated by a strong women.

    Now, take this assertion: Conservatives advance anti-gay legislation because they are actually hiding there own homosexuality and are trying to overcompensate.

    I’m sure partisan hacks can dig up the “evidence” to back either of these claims. But such vast generalizations, while suggesting truth, does not make it real.

    This piece uses the propaganda technique of the Fallacy of the single cause as well as labeling and ad hominem fallacies.

    There is probably many reasons that that the media focuses on Sarah Palin, from the fact that she makes for good copy and has a knack for coining catchy phrases and new words, is controversial and opinionated, entertaining and physically attractive, and least of all is the fact that she is probably one of Americas biggest fame whores (def: Someone who craves the spotlight. Usually this person has no talent to begin with.) And true, there maybe some sort of weird psycho-sexual thing going on, But all these things, or none of these things, can contribute to why the media realise on her as the public face of the conservative movement.

    More over, the entire media, not just the ‘liberal’ media, is obsessed with Palin. I mean, the woman is an “analyst” for Fox News, and is heavily promoted by that channel! Unless zombie and yourself are suggesting that Fox News is a liberal media outlet.

    The argument that something is “tongue and cheek” is another fallacy that is particularly popular with conservative pundits. It allows people like Rush or Beck to go on race-baiting, and when they are called on it, they simply say “I’m just an entertainer” and pretend that the political content of there screeds shouldn’t mean anything. But they do, and it resonate with there audience. We shouldn’t let people make political arguments and then pretend that they didn’t mean it.

    Here’s the problem, Scott, you are too consumed by partisanship to think critically of the media you are consuming. Rather then blindly accept a steaming pile of propagandistic fallacies as presented by zombie, why don’t you challenge some of his/her assertions. You live in an echo chamber.

  13. 13Rod on Dec 5, 2010 at 12:22 am:

    Hey Bakunin – FOXNEWS!!! FOXNEWS!!! FOXNEWS!!! Rush!!! Beck!!! Hannity!!! O’Reilly!!!! Now bark your response in your own echo chamber, bitch. In the spirit of bipartisanship I mean…you’re not partisan are you?


  14. 14Gork on Dec 5, 2010 at 7:46 am:

    There is something very strange and horribly non-linear about the way that Left leaning Liberals react to Sarah Palin. She annoys and scares the crap out of them. They go out of their way to discredit her in any way they can. Ms. Palin’s recent example of all the verbal mis-steps that President Obama made, assembled in to one paragraph, demonstrates precisely that problem. People are paying so much attention to every verbal mis-step she makes that she can’t help but think that something really weird is going on here.

    Bakunin, you’re correct, Zombie’s assertions are not provable. However, you would be a fool to deny the disproportionate attention is given to Ms. Palin. Something is attracting their attention much like a gory accident on the side of a road causes rubbernecking. They give her more attention than even the likes of Glen Beck and Rush Limbaugh.

    It is a real phenomenon. We’ve seen it before with Dan Quayle. Some people attract disproportionate attention of the Left. You can’t deny that it is an interesting phenomenon, worthy of at least a theory. And that’s all Zombie is doing. Theorizing.

    So, what’s your answer for this? Aren’t liberals supposed to be the fountain of ideas?

  15. 15Scott on Dec 5, 2010 at 8:19 am:

    [Here’s the problem, Scott, you are too consumed by partisanship to think critically of the media you are consuming.] Actually, Bakunin, I am confident that I am MOST qualified to critically analyze the media because I have a degree from one of the top media schools in America. Their liberal indoctrination prompted me to question, dissect and examine media stories to see which viewpoint the report represents. It wasn’t until the early 1990s when I began to really understand what it was that CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, etc…were doing with their so-called “reporting”. Prior to that, my indoctrination kept me fearful of Rush Limbaugh, for example. “Oh THAT idiot” I would echo, as so many on the left continue to do today.

    Fox News could be better, for sure, but at least they make an attempt at reporting news, instead of giving a couple of liberal quick hits at the top of the hour focused on the savior, then moving to “human interest” stories for the remainder of the broadcast.

    [Rather then blindly accept a steaming pile of propagandistic fallacies as presented by zombie, why don’t you challenge some of his/her assertions. You live in an echo chamber.] I told you, Zombie’s piece is tongue in cheek. I accept it as humor, you don’t. Like most of Limbaugh’s broadcast (if you ever bothered to listen for a while…not just a half hour, but listen to him for a week) you’d understand how much humor (pointed, absolutely) there is in Limbaugh, Beck, Coulter, and even Zombie’s forms of “news”. I enjoy listening to/reading these folks work because it entertains me. By the way, his premise is backed with well documented fact (from his own blog), which you have conveniently ignored.

    You might ask how it is I can obtain news from such sources since these people are my “echo chamber”. Quite simple, really. I do what most people don’t: I watch/read liberal media, dissect it, seek other information that corroborates or repudiates it, and form my opinion based on that. Most people swallow the NYTs, WaPo, Newsweek, Time, PBS, even Fox News etc…whole and feel “informed”. I’ve simply learned that you gotta look at the man behind the curtain.

  16. 16eots on Dec 5, 2010 at 9:29 am:

    Bakunin, what Zombie is doing here falls into lit crit/cultural studies category. And no, there is no “proof” for any of her assertions, only significant amount of evidence. There is no “proof” for anything lit crit. Does it mean that we need to stop thinking about what’s going on with our society? No. If you don’t find Zombie convincing — don’t be convinced. Point to the evidence to the contrary. To me the fact that liberals (and conservatives) are so obsessed with Palin does point to some sort of psycho-sexual quirk. I suppose it’s not hard to dig up more evidence to further support Zombie’s claim. I suppose there are several dissertations there on liberal obsession with Sarah (right, like those will ever get written). But there is only so much one can do in a short blog post.

  17. 17fact check on Dec 5, 2010 at 11:03 am:

    Libs aren’t really all that obsessed with her. If you read liberal blogs you’ll find they generally ignore her. A Palin tweet or blog entry has a much better chance of being quoted and discussed by conservatives than libs. Libs don’t friend her on Facebook, sign up for her twitter feed, pre-order her books on Amazon, watch her reality shows etc. That’s generally conservatives.

    There is a conservative meme that “liberals are obsessed with Sarah Palin” but it’s just not so. Libs ignore most of what she says and when they occasionally mention her they’re accused of being obsessed by conservatives who monitor every Palin entry in the blogosphere.

  18. 18Scott on Dec 5, 2010 at 12:37 pm:

    Mr. Fact Check, you should check your facts. Keith Olbermann recently called Bristol Palin “the worst person in the world”. BRISTOL Palin. Now, that is an unnatural obsession that stems from his coverage back as far as September, 2008, when he was already proclaiming Sarah the dumbest broad ever to walk the Earth. has a recent blog post about the whole deal, by the way, if you want to “check” it out, complete with Sarah portrayed as the naughty school teacher in a tight sweater and unnaturally large breasts. This goes, by the way, to Zombie’s psycho-sexual fantasy theory about libs who lust Sarah, but fear her as their dominatrix.

    The Katie Couric “gotcha” interview on what media Sarah consumed two years ago generated abother flurry of “Oh no, Sarah is stupid!!!!” and the echo chamber was quickly flooded with still more silly caterwauling about Sarah’s low IQ (HuffPo and Daily KOS for example).

    Saturday Night Dead was practically revived because Tina Fey dressed like her and said in a sketch “I can see Russia from my house!!!” Some libs actually believe that Sarah Palin said that.

    Andrew Sullivan has 8 PAGES of Sarah Palin-related material in the Atlantic alone. Many of these posts have to do with dear Andy’s obsession with Sarah’s down syndrome boy. It is truly sick stuff, if you care to read it at the

    Another example is Maureen Dowd of the NYTs, who has 70 different articles with some reference to Sarah Palin in them. MoDo calls SP a “mean girl” while putting her down for stupidity, etc…

    Finally, check and for still more examples of unhinged liberal blog/media activity about Sarah Palin. There are dozens more examples, but I suspect you are like Bakunin; you would prefer to stick your fingers in your ears and scream, rather than hear the truth.

  19. 19fact check on Dec 5, 2010 at 1:04 pm:

    Not really, Scott. Liberals are more concerned with governing than worrying about a woman who ran for VP and lost a couple of years ago. She probably won’t be nominated and if she does, she probably won’t win. The only thing keeping her in the news right now is the chance that she might run, and the Tea Party base of the GOP that will support her if she does.

    This blog post is a good example of the conservative obsession with Ms. Palin. Zombietime blogs about Palin and links to the conservative William A. Jacobson who blogs about Palin and links to the conservative website Newsbuster which blogs about Palin and links to a clip of conservative Charles Krauthammer talking about Palin on some PBS show nobody watches. What is Krauthammer talking about? He’s lamenting the supposed “liberal obsession” with Palin. And that was back on November 26th, so we’re now in our ninth day of conservative blogs, pundits and commenters analyzing Sarah Palin and why those darned libs just can’t stop talking about her. Liberals, for their part, are largely unaware of this because they don’t really care in the first place.

    Oh, the irony!

    By the way, since I wrote this I scrolled down and noticed two more conservative blogs have picked up this post and will continue to discuss the “liberal obsession” of Sarah Palin well into next week.

  20. 20Scott on Dec 5, 2010 at 2:00 pm:

    [Liberals are more concerned with governing than worrying about a woman who ran for VP and lost a couple of years ago.] Yeah, well apparently liberals are far more concerned about power than “governing” for the welfare of the people. 10% unemployment and Obama’s need to oversee the demise of America is evidence of that. But I gave you examples, Fact Check, which means I deal in facts, where you deal in assumptions and a biased world view.

    I might agree with you that some Conservatives are also preoccupied with Sarah Palin, but I believe if you did more probing, you’d see that there is far more chatter about taking back our country than making President Palin a reality in 2012. Conservatives want to drive out the Soros-financed, irrational, fruitcake liberals who are ruining a place that used to be a haven for anyone with ambition and a willingness to abide by the rule of law. That Sarah Palin agrees with conservatives on that makes her a bit of a hero and of course, the subject of plenty of cyber ink.

    You may not be preoccupied with Sarah Palin, but your like-minded media friends like Keith Olbermann and Andrew Sullivan do not share your view. They are stuck on making Sarah Palin stupid, and sadly, look so foolish themselves.

  21. 21fact check on Dec 5, 2010 at 2:32 pm:

    - I gave you examples, Fact Check, which means I deal in facts

    Tina Fey, Andrew Sullivan and Katie Couric? Sorry Scott, but you seem to be re-fighting the 2008 election. I agree that the media pays an inordinate amount of attention to her, but it’s not a liberal thing. The fact is she doesn’t have any real responsibilities since she quit her job as Governor, and spends much of her time trying to get attention on her Twitter and Facebook page. Sometimes it works, usually it doesn’t, but without holding elected office it’s really all she’s got.

    And the news coverage isn’t totally unwarranted. She will be newsworthy as long as she’s a plausible presidential candidate (and only to the extent that she’s a plausible candidate). I suspect that the recent conservative uproar about “obsessed liberals” has more to do with conservative opposition than anything Keith Olbermann says on MSNBC. There is a growing Tea Party/Establishment split in the GOP and Palin is firmly in the TP camp. She has mocked the Bush family, dismissed Ronald Reagan as just a “Bedtime for Bonzo actor” and tangled with a number of lifelong conservative Republicans who have worked on every successful Republican presidential campaign in her lifetime. It’s not a great way to recruit talented, experienced campaign professionals, so I guess she’ll just wing it with her inner circle of trusted Alaskans.

    In the meantime, Palin’s supporters might encourage her to tone it down a bit and try to find common ground her conservative detractors. There is a narrow path for her to the Republican nomination (TP crushes Romney in NH + early withdrawal by Huckabee = Palin 2012) but it will be a disaster if she wins by burning down the house. Obama could peel off more than enough Romney fence-sitters to be re-elected.

  22. 22Scott on Dec 5, 2010 at 3:18 pm:

    [I agree that the media pays an inordinate amount of attention to her, but it’s not a liberal thing.] Lemme guess, you don’t think that the mainstream media is liberal. Chris Matthews, Brian Williams, Matt Lauer, etc…aren’t liberals in your eyes, I suppose. Well, given that there is a mountain of evidence two years long that shows a media obsessed with Palin and you’d rather not acknowledge that is not my problem. The Palin obsession is real, it is documentable, and I’ve given you tangibles that you continue to ignore. I think we are staying in our camps, so let’s leave this one alone.

    She really hasn’t mocked the Bush family…she called them part of the “elite”, which from a Tea Party view is absolutely true. I personally like GW Bush, but he is no Tea Party conservative. We wouldn’t have Henry Paulson bailouts had he been. I’ve never heard her mock Ronald Reagan but, as we all know, the federal government grew under RR. I’d like to see a Terminator conservative come into DC and destroy the liberal bastions that have been set up everywhere. Really, that’s what I’d like to see.

    But, I digress. I am not really wanting to defend Sarah Palin from liberal hatred…just care to document it. And I prefer to think of Sarah Palin as a foil to draw the ire of the liberal establishment, hopefully distracting them enough to allow a better conservative candidate in for a serious presidential run in 2012. Huckabee is no conservative, and Romneycare is too much like the capitulation of Republicans over the past twenty years for me to like. If Sarah Palin winds up the Republican candidate, I’ll vote for her (you betcha) but I’d prefer someone else. She’s so hated by the liberal fruits & nuts that I don’t think I could endure 48 months of that torture.

  23. 23eots on Dec 5, 2010 at 4:26 pm:

    Fact Check, it’s not just the news media. Take the Palin boob job hysteria; it started on the internet.

  24. 24zombie on Dec 5, 2010 at 4:30 pm:

  25. 25Scott on Dec 5, 2010 at 6:46 pm:

    Excellent post, Zombie. Mr. Blow, a racist partisan, puts it into perspective quite well for Fact Check.

    Just when I thought it was safe to watch TV, I flip past VH1 tonight to see Kathy Griffith, the pseudo comedian, and a huge picture of Bristol Palin behind her. What does she do? Invites everyone in the audience (and they happen to be armed forces troops, alegedly being “saluted”) to boo. BRISTOL Palin, who is just a kid who got pregnant before she was married. Someone who would not even make a dent in the world, but for her hated mother, Sarah.

    Obsessed with the Palins? Liberals? Nawwww…

  26. 26Ming the Merciless on Dec 5, 2010 at 10:35 pm:

  27. 27CattusMagnus on Dec 6, 2010 at 9:14 am:

    Yes liberals are fixated on Sarah Palin. Anyone who is friends with liberals on Facebook knows this. Not a week goes by without one bitching about her or Glenn Beck. Since W’s gone, the derangement syndrome has been redirected.

  28. 28merc on Dec 6, 2010 at 10:59 am:

    Was trying to read the comments, pay attention to the discussion…but I keep going back to look at that picture of Sarah.

    No! Not THAT one!


    I mean the one of her in the white top -


  29. 29Bakunin on Dec 6, 2010 at 12:43 pm:

    CattusMagnus: Yes liberals are fixated on Sarah Palin.Anyone who is friends with liberals on Facebook knows this.Not a week goes by without one bitching about her or Glenn Beck.Since W’s gone, the derangement syndrome has been redirected.

    Yeah… To Barrack Obama….

  30. 30Bakunin on Dec 6, 2010 at 1:06 pm:

    Scott: Excellent post, Zombie.Mr. Blow, a racist partisan, puts it into perspective quite well for Fact Check.Just when I thought it was safe to watch TV, I flip past VH1 tonight to see Kathy Griffith, the pseudo comedian, and a huge picture of Bristol Palin behind her.What does she do?Invites everyone in the audience (and they happen to be armed forces troops, alegedly being “saluted”) to boo.BRISTOL Palin, who is just a kid who got pregnant before she was married.Someone who would not even make a dent in the world, but for her hated mother, Sarah.Obsessed with the Palins?Liberals?Nawwww…

    Actually, that’s not what happened. Here’s the Link:
    When making pretty lame jokes about Bristol’s weight, the crowd booed, to which Kathy Griffith replied “You can boo louder then that, common, boo me, I love it.”

    The fact that Britsol is a key factor in Palin’s never ending 2012 campaign is important to point out. it’s that the Palins are in constant campaign mode for 2012 and, thankfully, haven’t learn that every time they refuse to let a story whiz by, they look like assholes. Bristol Palin fired back at Margaret Cho’s claim that Sarah Palin forced her daughter to appear on Dancing With The Stars to make up for getting pregnant during the 2008 election. And by Bristol Palin I mean her mom’s ghostwriter who wrote the following 8,000 word essay on Facebook.

    it was practically a campaign speech. Jabs at Obama, folksy jokes, use of the word “canard” to make it look like her earlier note about Keith Olbermann wasn’t written by a ghostwriter, and probably most glaring, Bristol’s first and primary concern was worrying about being exposed to the “haters” trying to stop her mom from saving America with a bowl full of buckshot and moose chili, not, you know, taking care of her child.

    Unlike past presidential candidates, like Bush, Clinton and Obama, who have worked hard to keep there children out of the spotlight, the entire Palin family is a prop for Sarahs political campaign. Why is Bristol on a show called “dancing with the STARS” anyways? What the fuck has she ever done?

  31. 31Scott on Dec 6, 2010 at 3:26 pm:

    Bakunin, you might be catching on. Bristol Palin should not be the subject of such unwarranted hatred, but she IS, don’t you know. And she hasn’t done anything to deserve this treatment. My apologies about the VH1 thing; I caught a glimpse and was immediately repulsed by Kathy G, self-described “D” lister and liberal toady. She should stay on the D list and stay off of TV.

    Now, you claim that the Palins trott her out for campaign purposes, but I don’t think we have sufficient proof that this is true. Some producer at DWTS had to come up with a list of folks who would draw ratings…I’ll guess they wanted Sarah, couldn’t get her, so settled for Bristol, and BP went for it because, let’s face it, she’s a single mom in Alaska, and where else is she going to make that kind of cash?

    There is also a rumor that DWTS wants Todd now. Apparently, the Palins attract audiences. They do have their own television show. You interpret that as constant campaign mode, I interpret it as Sarah cashing in on her 15 minutes of fame (that has been extended to years of fame). Again, who can blame her? Barack Obama is a millionaire. Joe Biden is a millionaire. John McCain is a millionaire. Sarah Palin 2008, not so much. She also had quite a financial liability from constant lawsuits two years ago. Who can blame her for wanting to make that back? I’d be writing books and doing reality TV too if I were in that same position.

  32. 32Bakunin on Dec 6, 2010 at 6:29 pm:

    I mean, one of the attraction in the media is the “will she or won’t she” suspense. I believe a large part of her media strategy is to saturate herself as much as she can, to present the image that she want to present all the time. And the useless and uncritical media gobbles up her.

    Essentially, I think she is a fame whore, An individual who is willing to do anything, regardless of how humiliating or demeaning, to achieve notoriety. I think that she intentionally presents an folksy, anti-intellectual face, post 2007 gaffe as a way to explain away her short comings as a candidate (the fact that she was unvetted and just didn’t care about facts). Same strategy as G.W. Bush (the old adage is true: it’s better to be likable then talented/smart).

    And I’m glad I agree, here’s the thing though, especially about Bristol: now she has become apart of political activity. Like I said, her post on Margret Cho was essentially a stump speech for her mom’s campaign. So, if she want’s to engage in political debate, she should be treated like any other person over 18 engaging in debate.

    But at least we can agree on two things: 1) Children of public office shouldn’t be involved and 2) Kathy Griffith is fucking terrible.

  33. 33Scott on Dec 6, 2010 at 7:27 pm:

    Well, yes, we can agree on the last two points. Of course, it doesn’t stop, say, RFK Jr, for example. But, there he is. And of course, GHW Bush’s kids are there, one a former president, one a former governor. And so on.

    Palin is possibly a brilliant strategist, for she has commanded a huge share of media for herself…whether books, television (interviews and analysis, reality TV, comedy sketches, and DWTS variety), radio, or live speeches. Bless her for spinning her folksy charm into something that draws the liberals’s hatred almost as intense as Dick Cheney at a Ducks Unlimited meeting. I think she has the potential to blow it completely, though, if she actually runs. I want everyone to speculate, as you say “will she or won’t she?” until the last possible moment. Then I hope Sarah will throw her weight behind someone else. Hopefully, that is what she intends to do, and if so, I will believe that she is a brilliant politician.

    Otherwise, perhaps you will be right. She’s a media whore. Time will tell, but I will say this: her plan has worked to unseat Democrat control of Congress when things were very dark for the Republican Party. Nobody, not even the Republicans (and certainly not Mike Steele) dreamed that this “shellacking” could have happened just 24 months after “the One” was elected.

    Perhaps most telling was something I observed tonight when shopping–in a discount rack was a pile of DVDs for sale, and on top was “Barack Obama: A Story of Hope”. How the mighty have fallen.

  34. 34Bakunin on Dec 7, 2010 at 7:15 am:

    as much as she can potentially be blamed for unseating Democrats in the congress, we also have to point out that she can be blamed for losing the Senate by bolstering essentially unelectable extremist candidates (O’Donnell, Angle, Miller, Tancredo, etc).

  35. 35eots on Dec 8, 2010 at 1:30 pm:

  36. 36streetsweeper on Dec 8, 2010 at 7:22 pm:

    Hey Zombie, it’s street! LTNS! I’m gonna be linking to, copying and using your pic’s in an edumacational effort over at my blog: Next brew is on me when we get back to DC. Uh wait a cornpicking minute! Isn’t Lilyea’s turn to buy the beer? Make that over in Virginia, The Balston that way we’ll have better security. Take care you, Merry Christmas!

  37. 37Daniel Noe on Dec 14, 2010 at 12:22 pm:

    This clears up nothing. This only makes liberals even more mysterious than before.

  38. 38Jamie Rees on Mar 17, 2011 at 11:51 pm:

    I find this article quite interesting, the dominatrix vibe of Sarah Palin is there, not sure that it’s an entirely liberal thing though, i have a feeling zombie was just aching to write a tongue in cheek piece about how perverted liberals are and the men all secretly want to be spanked and flogged by mistress Palin. There’s no doubting the physical attractiveness of Palin, many men find her sexy but apparently the conservative blokes just want to take her dinner and possibly do the business with her. But it’s the limp wristed libs who find her folksy, look how silly the lamestream media is, soccer mom, gun totting beauty queen schtick strangely arousing.

    They fantisize about being lashed up in her dungeon in Wasilla, being made to watch her reality show and forced to say under penalty of cigarette burns, we need to give more tax cuts to the rich. Also it quite humorous that the BDSM community and liberals are thrown together where their Ilsa movie marathons are essentially a big wankfest where they’re replacing Dyanne Thorne with Governor Palin.

    Congrats on making a conservative opinion piece actually funny, thought the idea of Palin haterade simply being used by lefty elites, the perverts in their east coast coffee shops going to work on pictures of sarah gussied up as a dom or hiring mistresses to wear glasses and speak in an alaskan accent and RINO saboteurs.

    Despite the fact that Palin has been savaged by prominent right wingers and how her victimization, they don’t like me because i’m a woman complex is making her “Al Sharpton, Alaska edition” make me think that there’s more to Palin Critiques than PDS and S&M fantasies. Anyway that’s what i think, oh and don’t forget the dom angle also work for Ann Coutler, Christine O’Donnell though sexy witch works as well, S.E Cupp and yes Michelle Malkin, think Lucy Liu in payback but less less attractive.

  39. 39autobloging on Mar 24, 2012 at 4:36 pm:

    Automotive news program addart

  40. 40rent a car in buffalo on May 27, 2013 at 4:31 am:

    Hello, Neat post. There’s an issue with your web site in internet explorer, may check this? IE nonetheless is the market chief and a good section of other people will pass over your fantastic writing because of this problem.

  41. 41Ken Antu on Nov 23, 2013 at 10:17 pm:

    Regards on behalf of all your efforts that you have situate in this. Very motivating in a row. “It is in our lives and not our words that our religion must live read.” by Thomas Jefferson.

  42. 42Ed Varughese on Nov 26, 2013 at 12:24 pm:

    How act I vary firefox from remembering my facebook info?

  43. 43żwir lębork on Nov 29, 2013 at 1:45 pm:

    I hope you never stop! This is one of the finest blogs Ive endlessly glance at. Youve got some illogical skill here, gentleman. I merely chance that you dont fail your style for the reason that youre certainly one of the coolest bloggers outdated here. Entertain file it awake as the internet needs a name comparable you spreading the word.

  44. 44ogłoszenia on Nov 29, 2013 at 3:09 pm:

    We went to university collected Dark Lolita Bbs PinkAngelSam you dumb fuck that isn’t equal a valid website. Probably a nest of viruses. Find the fuck not on of here.

  45. 45Dina Wharton on Nov 29, 2013 at 3:19 pm:

    Good blog post. A few things i would like to bring about is that computer system memory has to be purchased in case your computer cannot cope with what you do along with it. One can install two random access memory boards of 1GB each, for example, but not one of 1GB and one with 2GB. One should always check the maker’s documentation for the PC to be certain what type of memory space is required.

  46. 46ogłoszenia samochodowe on Dec 4, 2013 at 2:19 am:

    Is here a website that makes it straightforward to follow blogs and podcasts? I don’t have an iPod, does that matter?.

  47. 47ogłoszenia sierpc on Dec 4, 2013 at 5:43 am:

    Excellent place of duty. I was checking constantly this weblog and I am impressed! Enormously useful in sequence exclusively the last partly I expression behind such in order much. I used to ensue sharp on behalf of this positive data for a same long time. Express gratitude you and clear luck.

  48. 48ogłoszenia lublin on Dec 5, 2013 at 2:14 am:

    I call for absolute and full necessities, policies and procedures, anybody help me please? = ).

  49. 49ostrołęka ogłoszenia on Dec 5, 2013 at 2:31 am:

    Hello, i would like to know how to share cinema from added blogs on blogspot to tumblr otherwise facebook otherwise some extra common website. thanx!.

  50. 50Julianne Gaekle on May 19, 2014 at 10:18 pm:

    I mentioned in my Rebbeca Van Dyck post, I headed over to your new Facebook campus to photograph CSO (Chief Security Officer) Joe

  51. 51Does Vision Without Glasses Work on May 27, 2014 at 12:15 am:

    I drop a comment when I appreciate a article on a blog or if I have something to add to the conversation. Usually
    it is triggered by the passion displayed in the article I browsed.
    And on this post Sarah, She Wolf of the GOP · zomblog.
    I was actually excited enough to create a leave a responsea response :-) I actually do have some questions for you if you don’t mind.

    Is it just me or do some of the comments look like they are written by brain dead people?
    :-P And, if you are writing at other places, I would like to follow anything new you have to post.
    Could you make a list every one of all your communal pages like your linkedin profile, Facebook page or twitter feed?

Trackbacks / Pingbacks:

  1. The Man Trap - Big Tent Revue

    Pingback on Dec 3, 2010 at 11:43 am
  2. Intellectuals and Schmoozers « sitting on the edge of a sandbox, biting my tongue

    Pingback on Dec 3, 2010 at 4:58 pm
  3. Marginalized Action Dinosaur » Sarah Palin, She Wolf of the GOP

    Pingback on Dec 7, 2010 at 1:18 pm