Some prominent bloggers on the right.. conclud[ed] that Palin’s inelegantly expressed remark was further evidence of her “chronic problem” — an alleged inability to speak clearly even when making valid points. Some expressed the hope that this trait, allegedly evidenced by the latest kerfuffle, would end her presidential prospects.

The tri-part reaction to Palin’s remark— (1) she’s stupid; (2) she was only unknowingly right; (3) she was right, but she can’t speak good English — was an elite response. It was the reaction of a class that prizes, above all else, educational credentials and the ability to speak well.

Ironically, that is part of our current predicament. The sitting president is someone elected without experience or accomplishments, largely because he was well-educated, spoke well, and wrote a book. Some Republicans and conservatives thought Obama was potentially a great president while lacking even the qualifications of the vice-presidential candidate on the opposing ticket — a sitting governor with an impressive record of achievement.

Carol SEIU Porter Supporter Sargent (Debbie Wasserman) Schultz is becoming a daily project.  I can’t open a news aggregator without finding something new and somehow more ridiculous than anything uttered previously by the Mouth of the South.. Today’s installment comes courtesy of Greg Hengler at Townhall.  Apparently the DNC chairman is working up a segregationist frenzy without regard to her own parties long and storied problems with the subject.

“”…if there is any attempt to segregate, it is being championed and exercised on a daily basis by those on the Left, by blacks, and by Hispanics themselves. I’ve written before about the segregated black and brown graduation ceremonies around our country. What about segregated black television (BET)? How about the segregation done within the Congressional Black Caucus? What about the segregation within the Congressional Hispanic Caucus? These two caucuses do not allow anyone with white skin pigment to join regardless of whether they serve a black or brown majority district. Note too how both of the racially-segregated caucuses are leftist-only/Democrat organizations.

The list of instances where blacks and Hispanics self-segregate has no end; and those who practice self-segregation have no shame, and there is no pressure for them to ever apologize, and there is nothing under the sun that can justify their Jim Crow-like behavior. Name one program, television channel, caucus, graduation ceremony, church, etc. in the country where whites have segregated themselves and apply the “white” label to their organization? Where’s WET (White Entertainment Television)? The White church? The White graduation? The Congressional White Caucus? They don’t exist because it would rightfully be deemed racist and unworthy of our progressive/inclusive society!””

I realize Obama picked Sargent (Debbie Wasserman) Schultz to head the DNC to distract us with her inane and insane nonsense so that we would spend less time looking at his own.  But if you are going for distraction, a congressman named Weiner is hard to beat.

“I believe in art, I believe in public art…But that doesn‘t mean that we don’t have a right to say, forcefully, some art is simply offensive to us and we think it should go.”

Mark Levin has had it with the institutional Republicans in the punditry class, Charles Krauthammer in particular, in regard to their endless nitpicking and attacks on Sarah Palin.  Levin is asking some important questions, questions I would ask the Union Leader to which I remarked earlier on facebook today, seems to hate the woman.   Every opportunity to manufacture negative press is an opportunity to fill column inches whose sole purpose is to convince people as Krauthammer seems intent on doing, that she is a dolt and unelectable, neither of which is true, but both of which put the UL in the same neighborhood as the liberal left just at a different address.

Which brings us to Mark Levin’s remarks about Krauthammer (which I’d hijack and apply to the UL and all those (r)epublican folks who have it out for her as well.)

“So what is it? What’s the problem?” he said. “She’s solid on social issues. She’s solid on fiscal issues. She’s solid against these subsidies against big companies – in other words, she is not a corporatist. She’s not a crony or a believer in that. She’s solid on taxes and spending. I’m just confused. She’s solid on Israel. She’s solid on the military. She’s solid with respect to our allies. Is there some big issue that’s disqualifying? What – because the liberals don’t like her? …

She’s solid on energy, all of it–suggesting we end all subsidies to all forms of energy and let the market do its magic, saving taxpayers billions and removing a rhetorical hammer from the hands of democrats.  No one else has the balls to say stuff like that.  

So is that the problem?  

No.  Liberals hate her because they can’t control her.  No matter how much they smear her she wont do their bidding.  Their media can’t control her.  The mainstream progressive power brokers in both parties can’t control her.  And by “can’t control” I mean, make her do what they want.   They can’t seem to make her conform. And no one gave away the “attitude” any better than former NH GOP Chairman Fergus Cullen.

“Former New Hampshire Republican Party Chairman Fergus Cullen, who noted that the normal laws of political gravity don’t seem to apply to Sarah Palin,” said the catch-me-if-you-can act has to end sooner or later.

“At some point, the establishment has to be paid its due,” he said. “She gets sort of an initial pass, but at some point the goodwill gets used up.

“So what is it? What’s the problem?” he said. “She’s solid on social issues. She’s solid on fiscal issues. She’s solid against these subsidies against big companies – in other words, she is not a corporatist. She’s not a crony or a believer in that. She’s solid on taxes and spending. I’m just confused. She’s solid on Israel. She’s solid on the military. She’s solid with respect to our allies. Is there some big issue that’s disqualifying? What – because the liberals don’t like her?

On the matter of parental notification legislation, the Nashua Telegraph, in reprinting (as a guest editorial) the left wing blathering of the Concord Monitor, has just reassured sexual predators who want to abuse young girls in the state of New Hampshire that their secret is probably safe.

“But consider the rights of vulnerable teenage girls whose fear of confiding in a parent or a judge – perhaps misguided, perhaps chillingly justified – would keep them from seeking help at all.”

..according to the CDC, from 2000 to 2007, (2007 is the last year data was available) among the top ten causes of death for girls age 13-17 in New Hampshire–those ages that would be affected by that horrible parental notification requirement–there are no recorded deaths due to pregnancy or complications from it.