That’s when Palin should take off the gloves and deflate the puffy souffle that is really Oprah.

Would Oprah dare to do a one-on-one?

If Hillary couldn’t break through, there are few who could best her!

Who knows? No one would have dreamt that Carter would become POTUS. Maybe Sarah will herself be a long-shot winner, and I think she could hold her own against anyone.

Take your foot out of your mouth. I supported Hillary Clinton during the primaries, well before the election, and well documented on these boards. I had the feeling that the goody-goody McCain, would not make it, and that I could live with HRC as POTUS…and then she stumped for the POS we have now. That was unforgivable. That was the most supreme example of party before country, and that ain’t no hyperbole. The Clinton themselves knew enough shit on BO to sink him, and you can be sure, that today, it is eating Bill from the inside out. There is enough cause to investigate Obama as a murderer, and we all know he is not eligible to be POTUS. What is frightening is that the entire upper echelon of the Democratic Party knows and knew all of it. HOW ANY OF YOU CAN CALL YOURSELVES DEMOCRATS TODAY IS ASTONISHING. HYPERBOLE? NO SIREE, IT REALLY DOES ASTONISH ME.

How easy it is for some of you to discredit me as a rank and file Republican. I was a one-time Democrat, then Republican and now a very gay Independant, and served for my country, which is more than Clinton can say. I did support McGovern and Carter. Astonishing? Indeed.

Oprah won’t ask any good questions about actually running a state, negotiating contracts with oil companies, or creating jobs. She doesn’t know how to do any of that.

Oprah’s questions will be about FEEEELINGS, with a few fake questions expressing concern about Sarah’s daughter being a single mother, but hoping that fake concern will get great scoop for the Axelrodians.

It’s how Oprah rolls. She LIKES celebrity gossip, feel-good new age religions, recipes, expensive gifts. She can’t discuss economics, because she doesn’t understand it. It’s not her “niche.”

It’s why many in her audience abandoned her show completely.

Watch your back, Sarah. Oprah has different motives than you do.

Remember it was Dee Dee’s husband who wrote the scathing piece on Bill Clinton in Vanity Fair just weeks before the primaries ended – a real dirty trick. DD swore she had nothing to do with that – that she and her husband had independent views.

After the elections I read somewhere that Dee Dee Myers sister was a big wig for the 0bama campaign. Dee Dee was surely not a Hillary supporter, yet she was asked to be a pundit with people assuming she was for Hillary for obvious reasons. They would have republican strategists that spoke for the “other” side (Hillary) – the closest thing to “fair and balanced” on MSNBC0. Often the pundits would all be for 0bama. He had no critics.

In early 2008 when FL and MI finally realized the DNC was indeed not going to seat their delegates due to the arbitrary changing of their primary dates, FL Senator Nelson was on a panel with the dispicable Donna Brazile. Senator Nelson said FL would be taking the case to court. Brazile confidently reminded the Senator that going to court did not work for them in 2000 (the case was thrown out) and it would not work for them in 2008.

Brazile and the rest of the DNC and dem leadership were well aware this was the case and the reason they decided the dems would succeed in 2008 because they would use even more illegal, unethical tactics than the republicans used in 2000 because they knew they could.

This is better understood for me if I imagine the republicans having an internal party dispute, even with illegal tactics. Unless you are a member of that party, you are not particularly moved by it. This is the only rationalization I can come up with.