Wednesday, June 22, 2011

The Palin Future


This is my story and I'm sticking to it. I have said several things for years that have intertwined into a sizable knot for our beloved Republicans. First of all, the main reason Perry ran for and secured a third term as governor was that the country was on a very strong anti-Texan-as-President binge after the Shrub fiasco of two terms. That fervor against my state has subsided somewhat, now leaving Rick Perry in second place at Intrade behind the Mittenator, even before Perry has declared his intent. Just a moment ago, it took me about two seconds to locate this blog post and photo to enhance my prophecy. Here is the story to which I am stuck.

I do not believe there is a chance in hell that Sarah Palin will seriously challenge Rick Perry for the Presidency. I do think they could wind up together as our next nightmare, with her most likely at the bottom of the ticket. I do not think the Republican power brokers will allow her to be the top of the ticket paired with any candidate. Bachmann or Mittens could be the top, and I think either could possibly beat President Obama, but neither could do so as easily as Perry. The only wild card is Jon Huntsman, but I think his Mormonism will stop him in his tracks with the CINO's. If they decide they can tolerate a Mormon (which I seriously doubt), it will most likely be Mitt just because it is his turn, he has never worked with Obama, and he is more experienced, at least in the eyes of many. If I had to bet on the odds of whose chances for the Presidency today, I would pick Perry, Obama, Mittens, Bachmann, Huntsman, and Palin, in that order, with the chances of the first three running very close and the latter three dropping off rapidly.

With Trump chewing on his shoes and dumping his opportunity to drive the Camaro Pace Car, I have to put all my bananas in the Bachmann basket. She is the only one who can truly save us all at this point. How can she do that? Catfight! Catfight! Catfight! Bachmann can go to a debate and simply say, "But she's not here", and receive applause of approval. She can go on all the channels upon which Sarah is afraid to open her mouth. Sarah can act like a real politician. The difference is that Michele is not acting; she is a real politician.

One question I cannot answer at this point is whether or not Bachmann would be asked to be a VP candidate, and if so, by whom. There was a good article at Politicususa about Bachmann and Mittens. I am not sure that I agree with all of it, but this is certainly an article worth reading on the subject. My opinion is that this is a moot point until the dust settles over Palin and Perry, because I think they are a far more likely, and dangerous, and despicable, pair. If Mittens or Huntsman secures the Republican nomination, then the power brokers behind the CINO's are very likely to try to secure a rerun of 2008, as in Palin or Bachmann for VP. I have not mentioned Tim Pawlenty because I have never thought he has a prayer. He just does not have the looks or charisma. Yes, I know that is a terrible attitude, and I truly despise the fact that this concept even exists in our national politics, but it most certainly dominates our TV sets. This is one of the worst effects television has had on our culture, and there is not much we can do about it now. Ditto Santorum. He is nutty enough for any Tea Party crammed to the rafters with CINO's, but fortunately for us, he shares Pawlenty's political weakness, so that is one less nutcase for us to worry about.

Let me change channels here to discuss my old obsession. The two photos in Blind Allegiance have convinced me once and for all, as if I needed any further proof, that Gryphen has been correct from the beginning in his concept of the Two Babies. There is no question of whether there are or were more than one baby playing the part of Trig Palin. The questions are how many and why? Of course Tripp should not be left out of the inquiry, either, until the facts of the case have been finally proven. I am quite simply flabbergasted that no one outside the usual blogs has even mentioned the definitive photos printed in the book! There is one more question I would love to finally put to bed. How many of Ruffles ears are ruffled? I know the right ear is, but I am a bit unsure about the left, and how likely is either possibility, anyway?

I was thrilled last night to simply be able to channel surf a bit without seeing Bristol's despicable mug on my TV even once. I am not sure how long I intend to hold my breath on that issue, since her book is selling well at Amazon, as I would have expected. Just seeing that overpaid sleazebucket makes me want to barf just as much as it does you, but as always, I shall leave most of the Bristol blabbering to the other blogs. I am much more interested in the larger political and socioeconomic picture than I am in following how many plastic surgeries or houses Bristlebutt buys with her ill-gotten booty.

Circling back to the political race, one thing I agree with Joe McGinniss about is the September dating of the final potboiler for Palin. Although he may be somewhat just plugging his book release of the same month, September is a key player. The upcoming debate schedule includes: July 10 in Las Vegas, August 11 in Iowa, and three in September. Although some have predicted that Palin will enter the race on July 4, I don't think so. I think she will do so on the tenth anniversary of 9/11. A key element here is that the second upcoming debate is in Iowa, that hotbed of crazy conservatism that without Palin officially in the race, Bachmann will easily take by storm. Will Sarah stand idly by and let Michele do that? That is the question. Will Sarah step out of her chicken suit to debate Michele in Iowa? That is the second question. The first September debate is on 9/12/11 in Tampa and sponsored by CNN and the Tea Party Express. Do you see how that could be a real draw for Palin, yet she may want to avoid the CNN debate to compete in the Reagan, Reagan, all Reagan debate at his library two days later. (Note: the Reagan Library debate has since been moved up a week earlier to September 7, but the concept presented still applies.) Of course she may not be too thrilled with the fact that that one is televised from the enemy camp, NBC, instead of Fixed News. Ten days later on 9/22, the debaters return to Florida for the Fox debate in Orlando.

Can't you just feel the turmoil spinning throughout her cavernous little mind? If she decides to step up to the microphone and mix it up with Bachmann Turnip Overripe in August, yes, she could announce on July Fourth, or she could wait until the closing bell for the debate sign-up sheet. If Sarah wants to capitalize on the 9/11 Anniversary, she could skip the August debate and then catch the first one in September. However, by doing that, she would be letting Bachmann easily own Iowa. I do not expect her to enter all these debates, and she may continue to wear her chicken suit right to the very end. Nevertheless, I do expect her to officially run for President, even if only for a very brief period so she can add it to her resume. The big, tall Texas wildcard is her only nemesis other than Bachmann, and they are distinctly two different nemeses. Perry is her partner in leadership in cahoots with the same billionaire oilmen. They may run together, but they will not run against each other. Bachmann is the kind of political foe most feared by Palin. Perry and Palin are two of a kind in one way, but Bachmann and Palin are two of a kind in a much different way. Ladieeeees and gentlemen, let The Catfight of the Century begin!

8 comments:

Maddies_Mom said...

Sorry Floyd, it's delusional to think Perry can win.  And you're delusional about Bachmann also, too.

77TA66 said...

All I can say to that is I certainly hope the future proves me wrong, but I am not holding my breath!

Frank Jamese said...

BOYCOTT AMERICAN WOMEN
Why American men should boycott American women

http://boycottamericanwomen.blogspot.com/

I am an American man, and I have decided to boycott American women. In a nutshell, American women are the most likely to cheat on you, to divorce you, to get fat, to steal half of your money in the divorce courts, don’t know how to cook or clean, don’t want to have children, etc. Therefore, what intelligent man would want to get involved with American women?

American women are generally immature, selfish, extremely arrogant and self-centered, mentally unstable, irresponsible, and highly unchaste. The behavior of most American women is utterly disgusting, to say the least.

This blog is my attempt to explain why I feel American women are inferior to foreign women (non-American women), and why American men should boycott American women, and date/marry only foreign (non-American) women.

BOYCOTT AMERICAN WOMEN!

Sally said...

I just don't see any of the GOP mounting a serious challenge. For all Obama's missteps, the economy did NOT go over a cliff, the auto companies are actually solvent and hiring again, and gasoline has dropped 70 cents in the last month. If the Dems can get him to hasten the Afghan withdrawal, which may have to be done secretly, that only helps.
  Meanwhile, I only hear 'cut taxes' from the moronic GOP, and the GOP governors have antagonized every single voter in WI, MI, and OH, and Texas is getting there. They have nothing to offer, and the GOP contender in 2012 will lose. So it's just a matter of of who they decide to throw under the bus.

AKRNC said...

Perry might have a slim chance of beating Obama, but not if he moves as far right as Bachmann.  There is no way with her history that she can gather the Independents she needs or Democrats who are upset with Obama.  She really is batshit crazy and the videos are all to able to prove it.  The amount of evidence against her is overwhelming. 

If the Democrats don't let up on their messaging regarding the GOP doing everything they can to deter the economy from improving, not letting up on this until election day, we will have another four years with President Obama.  Those GOP'ers scare the hell out of sane people in this country.  We would not recognize the U.S. if any one of them were to get into the Oval Office.

Heidi3 said...

I agree that Bailey's book definitely shows pics of two different Trigs, and I also believe they were included for a reason.  The credible sounding "Anon 4:32" aka "shitfire" in IM's 6-2-11 comment section states that Bailey does, in fact, know the truth about the Trig hoax.

Floyd, sorry to say, but I think this is still the only (blurred) photo we have of Trig's ("Ruffles") left ear, found on Gryphen's seminal 2-22-10 blogpost "The Tale of Two Babies"
http://theimmoralminority.blogspot.com/2010/02/tale-of-two-babies-by-sarah-palin.html 
I think Gryph's photos do show a bilateral (both sides) malformation.

Of the old-school Republican voters remaining, no sane ones are going to let the Bachmann loon get the nomination, and of course no Independents would consider her.  Perry is already too far to the right (and has destroyed Texas), but if he pretends to move to the center, he could be a threat.  However, I'm still seeing Romney slide into the sacrificial lamb spot; historical statistics indicate that president Obama will be re-elected. 

77TA66 said...

I fear that you are being too optimistic. Clinton is the only Democratic President of our lifetime to get a second term. No President has ever been re-elected with the economic situation this dire. Obama will not have the enthusiasm behind him that he did in '08, and the electoral college map has gotten even redder since he was elected. Of course I shall vote for him, no matter what candidate the Repubs produce, but I think complacency could be the truest enemy the sane voters of America have right now. It is far more preferable to be pessimistically on guard against the raging tide than to get too cocky in overestimating the intelligence or underestimating the numbers of the CINO's who will never vote for any Democrat.

Heidi3 said...

I certainly see your points, Floyd, and am sure you're speaking to your readers in general.  For myself,  I'm neither too optimistic nor complacent.  I was generalizing as to the historical percentage of incumbent presidents who get re-elected, and not drawing a distinction as to what party they belonged to.

First of all, I think it's too early to even be having this discussion, at least as far as predicting the final election outcome is concerned.  From my reading, there are two pivotal factors involved in having an incumbent get re-elected:  (1) the unemployment rate, and (2) the president's current approval rating.  Neither of these are knowns at this early date.  President Obama's Afghanistan drawdown coupled with his, "It's time to concentrate on our own country now" statement is calculated timing, and could well have influenced both factors a year from now.

This go-around, we have to consider the "fruit-loop" ingredient, the greatest I've ever seen in my 40 years of voting:  the Republicans don't appear to have anyone who isn't a CINO, a Fundie, or a Mormon...everyone of them is a "fringe" in one way or another.  I've never once seen our country vote "fringe", and even if you say it's getting redder, I don't think we're to that point yet.  However, I DO worry very much about Diebold.

If I'm going to bay at the moon or go down rabbit holes any further, it's going to be in the effort to erase Sarah Palin from our nation's collective consciousness.  Once that's accomplished, I'll concentrate on 2012.  And I'm sorry, but that's the extent to which I've allowed her to infect my normally rational thought process for the past three years.  Unfortunately, it'll take decades to undo the damage she's caused.

We ARE pessimistically on guard, but for heaven's sake Floyd, there is no "raging tide"!  I know plenty of moderate old-school (Orange County!) Republicans here in Southern California who can't wait to re-elect Barack Obama - their party has no one they would even consider.