World News Korner

Sarah Palin appears on Fox News to play the victim over comments by MSNBC's Martin Bashir, to attack Obamacare, and to convince somebody to buy her damn book!

Click one of the protruding knobs to see video.

Chris Wallace starts off asking Palin about Obamacare. (Spoiler alert: She hates it!)

"Well certainly the roll out itself, and a malfunctioning website isn't the problem. The problem is Obamacare itself is the problem, you know a road toward socialized medicine that is unaffordable, and unasked for, and unpopular, is not workable, that's the problem. People want Obamacare scrapped, I think at this point Chris we don't even care if the website gets up and running, it's just going to prove to be an invitation find out..uh..more problems as to Obamacare as a whole....

At this point the tape kind of skips and you see Wallace posing the next question, as if somebody decided Palin had rambled enough and were trying to keep the craziness to a minimum.

Wallace then asked Wonder Boobies if she thought Obamcare was the tipping point that undermined the President's entire approach to government

"I do, Thank goodness people are awakened from their slumber, thinking that it's okay for government to deceive us in thinking that they can, they can give us free stuff. Their ain't no such thing as a free lunch, and people have opened their eyes now, understanding that 'oh Tea Party patriots they were right' when they said that this big government policy crammed down our throat called Obama-pare (I swear that is what she said.) its not good for America. And people have awakened and realized that the Tea Party was right, and hmm they may be right on a couple of other issues too. So yeah that's a tipping point, people are awake now."

Wallace then suggests that it is a problem for Republicans that Obamacare will eventually cover 30 million uninsured Americans whereas the most recent GOP plan would only cover 3 million. And asks Palin if she does not agree that the Republicans need to do better.

"Oh, I am one to question, I am one to question those numbers. 30 million more people will receive health care coverage under Obamacare? I question it, one I don't believe a doggone thing coming out of Washington D.C. anymore and isn't that a sad state of affairs when a normal American has to be so cynical of what government (Normal American?), and government reports, are telling us. Even if it is a nonpartisan report. Chris no, once that employer mandate kicks in, after the new year begins, next year..employer mandate..that's going to kick more and more people off private sector health care coverage that they had, at least up til now, been able to enjoy, and been able to afford. There will be fewer people being covered under a sensible, doctor-patient relationship centered health care program under Obamacare than what we see today I guarantee you that." (So in a nutshell, Palin is saying, "Facts, I don't need no stinking facts! I know what I know when I know it.")


Wallace simply lets that huge truckload of BS sit there as he moves onto another topic, essentially destroying any credibility he has a journalist, and asks her about the new Senate rule change. (The "Nuclear Option.") Essentially asking her if she thinks that any President should have the right to name their team, unless a candidate is "wildly outside the mainstream?"

"Well there are a lot of wildly outside the mainstream nominees and pals of Barack Obama that he wants to see help him usher in an agenda to transform America, so that's one thing that Congress has done right. And that is to oppose some of these nominees.

(Really? So this is okay?)

Replaced previous graphic identifying nominees to this one. More accurate.

(I bet she wouldn't say that if this were a Republican. Or a white guy.)

As for this rule, change that some people are calling the nuclear option, I guarantee this week, Thanksgiving dinner, people sitting around their tables, we're not going to be talking about the president's blessing, the thwarting of a balance of power in Congress with new Senate rules called the nuclear option.People are going to be talking about our failed big government policies that will bankrupt this country. So this distraction, this new talking point in the media and with Congress, with senators and with the president blessing this action, it's a distraction and it's a lot of, you know, double standard and Democrat hypocrisy because just a few years ago, they were so anti, anti-nuclear option. They were against any thought of Republicans ever considering changing these rules. And yet now, you know, it's the greatest thing since sliced bread. So American people, they don't care about distractions like that. They're not in that inside baseball Senate rule stuff. They want government to be back on our side. They want it to get out of our lives and in order to do that we need those who will not fundamentally transform America but will fundamentally restore what's right about America. We do that by having good judicial nominees and nominees in these regulatory agencies and elsewhere. So, this new rule change, it stinks." (I'm sorry, what?)


This is when Wallace finally broaches the subject of Bahir's comments on MSNBC.

"That's funny, because Bashir has invoked the analogy of slavery also. The definition of slavery is to be beholden to a master. And we will be beholden when that note is due, when we have taken from our children and our grandchildren and borrowed from China and other foreign countries in order to pay for our wants today. So we will be beholden to another master at some point here when that note's due. As for the -- you know ,the networks condoning those types of statements, because there's been no punishment of the fella who said these words, that's hypocrisy. That's a given, though, when a conservative woman says something that they're -- they take offense, they usually just kind of pooh-pooh it, laugh it off; it's no big deal. But as for personally taking shots like that, Chris, everybody in life takes shots. You have a decision to make when you take a shot. Are you going to become bitter or better? In a case like this, you know, I don't have to accept his words, his vile, evil comments, so they don't have to affect me. I move on. And I charge forth. (Oh yeah, she is known for that.) However, if Mr. Bashir or anybody else in this media elite bubble that they put themselves in were to attack someone who is defenseless, like a vulnerable child, who does not have that podium, that microphone that God has blessed me to be able to express my opinion, if they don't have that type of platform to defend themselves -- well, if you want to see a mama grizzly get riled up and slap that person down, then you come after a vulnerable child. In this case, he didn't come after a vulnerable child. I can defend myself and, you know, I can take it" ( I assume she is daring somebody to attack Trig so that she can defend him and garner more sympathy. What an odd thing to interject into this statement.)

Wallace then plays Bashir's apology and asks the Wonder Twins if she accepts it.

"Well, that's the executive hypocrisy that is so prevalent in that media elite bubble, where it depends on the target of the vile rants that it doesn't depend on what their rant itself actually is. And conservative women are a target of them. As for the apologies, well, obviously, you know, who am I to not accept an apology? Everyone must humble themselves and accept that offer to, you know, of apology. (This part really makes me wish that Bashir had not caved in and apologized to the skank.) But as for the apologies, too, next time that they want to say such a thing and then get the attention that they were seeking after they've said it, and then they want to call and apologize to me in private, I'd like them to go through, say, Todd first or one of my children first. Leave the message with them. Hear what they have to say about it and then they can come to me." (So she wants to have her apologies screened before accepting them? What is she afraid of?)


This is the point where apparently Wallace is contractually obligated to let the "Ghost of Christmas suck ass" to pimp her book.

Wallace: " Governor, you say there is a link between faith and freedom. Explain what you mean." (Why do these idiots continue to call this quitter "Governor?")

"It's an inherent link, and our Founders knew that. They said that our government is -- our Constitution for our government is written for a religious and world people, meaning you have to have a strong foundation of faith, believing in something greater than self and not be so selfish. Otherwise, our Constitution isn't going to do any good. There's no need to follow a Constitution or a rule of law if you don't have that foundation. (Actually you do, it's called avoiding prison and it is a MUCH bigger deterrent to criminal behavior than the idea of hell or heaven.) So, it's very, very important that we protect the heart of Christmas, which then will protect the heart of America. And it's been a wonderful book tour; 21 cities thus far. (And each one resulting in the book falling further and further down the Amazon list of best sellers. As of this post it is now down to 358. If this keeps up it will be in the dollar bin before the last stop of her book tour.) And it is all about good tidings and great joy and amazing, amazing, inspiring, energetic people we've met along the trail, love them. And it's a good book."

Wallace then asks what is wrong with businesses wishing people "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas?"

"Well, there's not a doggone thing that's wrong with saying "Happy Holidays." It's like I say before Christmas, "Happy Hanukkah." After Christmas, you can say "Happy Kwanzaa." But as for Christmas itself, Jesus is the reason for the season. And Christ is the foundation of Christmas. So, to have a double standard, try to be applied to say, well, you just can't say "Merry Christmas" or invoke God or Bethlehem or an angel when anything spiritual when it comes to actually that day, December 25th, Christmas, otherwise somebody may take offense, it's a double standard, more hypocrisy, more nonsense, and I'm just saying no, we're going to protect the heart of Christmas because Christ is what it's all about."

"Well, there's not a doggone thing that's wrong with saying "Happy Holidays." I'm sorry, I'm confused. Is she saying that there is NOTHING wrong with saying "Happy Holidays" or is she insisting that the only appropriate greeting is "Merry Christmas?"

Or is she saying that there should be no rule prohibiting shopkeepers from saying "Merry Christmas" instead of "Happy Holidays" which of course has never been anything of the sort? Does anybody else's head hurt?

You know if you are going to have an entire book ghostwritten for you on the subject, perhaps you should actually know just what in the hell you are talking about.

Oh right, this is a Sarah Palin book.

My bad.

Source