Search This Blog

Sunday, August 31, 2014

Why Curt Clawson needs to be voted out of office in November

Sarah and Bristol Palin are the ultimate death panels

Trig Palin is an adorable little boy.

Yes he is.

Bristol recently posted above picture on her blog to show the world that she loves her "little brother" so much it hurts.

Really Bristol?

Did you cry when your mother took him away from you when you were born?

Do you cry when you see your mother neglecting him:

Carrying him around like a loaf of bread

Eyes are to close to the screen

Using him as a prop
No proper clothes

Bristol and Sarah I am convinced you are a two person death panel in denying Tripp the love, care, and therapy he needs.  I hate to say this but I do not think he will make it to adult hood.

Saturday, August 30, 2014

My apologies to the newest member of the Palin family

From Sarah's Fecebook page:

Happy household this weekend as we welcomed a new addition to our family! Our new four-legged love, Jill Hadassah, comes to us with great training under her collar by our friend in Iowa Becky Beach and her Puppy Jake Foundation, along with Canine Craze in Des Moines. The Puppy Jake charity trains dogs for adoption by our service men and women, including those recovering from PTSD, as well as families with special needs. Jill Hadassah has been trained to be Trig’s buddy, and we’re over the moon to finally have her home! Thrilled, too, because all the rescue dogs and cats our kids have adopted over the years will hopefully learn something from our first dog trained to do anything! She’s brilliant and beautiful, and we feel very blessed to have her.

Thank you so much, Becky and Puppy Jake Foundation, for working with this tail-wagging bundle of love. We’ll treasure her, as she joins the rest of the current furry members of our family: Lucy, Lola, and Wilson.

Please visit the Puppy Jake Foundation to learn more about the great work they do, and join us in supporting them if you feel led to do so!

Sarah if you had gotten Trig therapy earlier he may not need a dog now.   You suck.

Jill I'm so sorry you were adopted by the Palins.  I hope you can run away and take Trig with you.  Even a dog can take better care of Trig than his "parents".

Friday, August 29, 2014

On the anniversary of John McCain inflicting the bitch onto the world, I thought this article was appropriate

Photo courtesy of the Sarah Palin Channel

From Forbes

When Sarah Palin stormed onto the scene in 2008, there was no denying the power of her brand. Whether you loved her or hated her, whether you thought she was the future or rolled your eyes at her big-game hunting and comments like being able to see Russia from Alaska (or “see Russia from my house,” said Tina Fey when she was impersonating Palin on “Saturday Night Live”), you knew what she stood for, and you had some begrudging respect for her positioning as a hockey mom who didn’t believe in wasting a civic nickel. (You gotta remember the stuff on pigs and pork?)

The previously unknown Alaska governor quickly became a new breed of working mother. A strong conservative woman. An unlikely but believable candidate to shatter the glass ceiling. A rallying force for the Tea Party and other right-wingers. A maverick, a rebel, a politician unafraid of speaking her mind—and who cared if it was uninformed or inappropriate?

 With John McCain (who is so not a kook that I can’t understand how his brand ever got commingled with Her Kookiness, because brands are judged by the company they keep), she tried her best to give Obama a run for his money and earn that erstwhile place a heartbeat away from the famous 3 a.m. phone call. When that didn’t work out, she traded politics for much-more-lucrative punditry and remained a force that shaped the American conversation, for better or worse.

Last week she launched the online Sarah Palin Channel. “Join us as we discuss the great issues of the day and work toward solutions,” it says on the site, which includes posts ranging from her mother’s Word of the Day to a video called “The Truth About the War in Israel.” Even with this new development, Palin is in danger of becoming irrelevant, a punch line, a blooper in the historical record.

That’s the danger of choosing kook as part of your personal brand. It gets attention, but it has an inherently limited shelf life. Eventually the novelty, controversy and “maverickness” of it wear off, then you have to amp it up and do something even kookier in order to remain in the public consciousness.

She has been especially tone-deaf on an important issue. As reported by New York’s Daily Intelligencer blog, she told “Extra” that Hillary Clinton’s impending grandmother-hood will “broaden her worldview” and that “of all places, it should be in the womb that these babies are protected. So maybe even on a social issue like that, she’ll open her eyes.”

(Clinton’s becoming a grandmother has plenty of real implications for her own personal brand. I’m curious to see how that plays out, whether the grandmother brand will increase her likability and relatability, or play into the hands of the opponents who have cast her as infirm and growing longer in her teeth, to paraphrase a bad description.)

Earlier this year, the former Alaska governor “out-Palined herself,” in the words of numerous headlines, when she gave a speech at the National Rifle Association’s annual meeting and said, “[I]f I were in charge, [U.S. enemies] would know that waterboarding is how we baptize terrorists.”

But being flabbergasted by Sarah Palin isn’t about red states or blue states, or right or left. It’s about having all your knives in the drawer, and if Palin ever seemed to, she certainly doesn’t seem so now. What’s not clear is whether she’s doing this in a desperate plea for attention or to peddle her new online channel. (It doesn’t appear that it’s for another run at a high political office; in the same “Extra” interview, she fairly brushed aside talk of running for president in 2016.)

Unless she completes a major branding makeover (and perhaps several years of intense education), she doesn’t stand a chance.

Thirty years ago, Geraldine Ferraro cracked the glass ceiling with dignity and grace, and she remains positively regarded by many Americans, whether or not they shared her politics. Her respectable brand endured, and she didn’t become a historical punch line. For 20 years, Hillary Clinton has been chipping away at it, making more cracks even as she endured scandals and cruel judgments.

But the latest woman who was poised to reinvent American politics is now just coming off as cracked. Forget the ceiling. She needs a quick brand reinvention just to pick herself off the floor.

There you have it folks, six years after becoming a shining star, she is now a sack of shit trying to capture that lost shine.

Thursday, August 28, 2014

Sarah Palin should appreciate Native Americans more

From Fecebook

Rush Limbaugh’s always on top of the pile. He’s ahead of issues, including this one where he gives a heads up that Coach Ditka may actually get fired for exercising America’s First Amendment:

Nothing should surprise us lately; but when the Politically Correct Police bust Ditka, they hope the silent majority will cower under leftist control. My goodness, Ditka merely spoke his mind. This accomplished and esteemed coach knows there are big issues to be addressed in America today; there’s no intent to offend by referring to a team by the name they’ve proudly worn since day one and chose with pride in our native ancestry and obviously had absolutely no intent to insult; and the liberal media’s made-up controversies divide our country. The government’s intent to force any owner of anything, in this case an NFL entity, to change a name is the antithesis of the American way of working through differences. Ditka said he actually likes the Washington Redskins, and he’s a man full of commonsense and admired patriotism. Still, I must disagree with Coach Ditka after reading his full statement:

“What’s all the stink over the Redskin name?” Ditka said. “It’s so much [expletive], it’s incredible. We’re going to let the liberals of the world run this world. It was said out of reverence, out of pride to the American Indian. Even though it was called a Redskin, what are you going to call them, a Proudskin? This is so stupid it’s appalling, and I hope that owner keeps fighting for it and never changes it, because the Redskins are part of an American football history, and it should never be anything but the Washington Redskins. That’s the way it is. It’s been the name of the team since the beginning of football. It has nothing to do with something that happened lately, or something that somebody dreamed up. This was the name, period. Leave it alone. These people are silly — asinine, actually, in my opinion.”

He thinks the name should always be Washington Redskins, as a source of pride? Take the word “Washington” out and I’ll agree the team name is a great source of pride.

- Sarah Palin

Several things here Skanky:

Washington DC was named after George Washington, father of our country, so was the state of Washington where your mother is from.  So yes Washington is a source of pride.  Then there was George Washington Carver, Booker T Washington.

Even though Ditka was an NFL player and coach, he doesn't know shit about the NFL history:

 The city of Boston, Massachusetts, was awarded an NFL franchise on July 9, 1932,[6] under the ownership of George Preston Marshall, Vincent Bendix, Jay O'Brien, and Dorland Doyle.[6] They were given the nucleus of the defunct Newark Tornadoes[7] which folded after the 1930 season and was sold back to the NFL; although none of the members of the 1930 Newark Tornadoes roster[8] remained by the 1932 Boston Braves roster.[9]

Initially, the new team took the same name as their landlords, the Boston Braves, one of the two local baseball teams at the time. The Braves played their first game on October 2, 1932, under the leadership of coach Lud Wray, against the Brooklyn Dodgers, to whom they lost 14–0.[10] The next week, the Braves recorded their first win, beating the New York Giants, 14–6.[11] Despite the presence of two rookies; halfback Cliff Battles and tackle Glen "Turk" Edwards — the new franchise's losses during the first season reached $46,000 and Bendix, O'Brien, and Doyle dropped out of the investment, leaving Marshall the sole owner of the Braves.[12][13] The team moved to Fenway Park[14] (home of the Boston Red Sox) the next year, and Marshall changed the name to the "Redskins" apparently in honor of then-coach Lone Star Dietz,[15] a Native American (he claimed to be part Sioux, but his actual ancestry has been challenged).[16] A 1933 news article quotes Marshall as saying that he did not name the team in honor of Dietz.[17]
Dietz's first year as coach in 1933 was unremarkable, and the Redskins finished the season with a 5–5–2 record.[18] However, one impressive feat during the season was Cliff Battle's performance against the Giants on October 8, 1933, where he rushed 16 times for 215 yards (197 m), and scored one touchdown and became the first player ever to rush for more than 200 yards (180 m) in a game.[19]

What can you expect from Ditka, he is a Republican.

The only reason Limbaugh is bringing this up is because he is still butthurt over ESPN firing him 11 years ago.  When they first hired him for NFL Countdown I boycotted ESPN until he left.  That boycott lasted four weeks.

Skanky you should be more sensitive to Native Americans.  Your husband is one, your three daughters are, and so are your grandkids.  BTW did Track get his health care from the Native Health Service even though he was not fathered by Todd?


Wednesday, August 27, 2014

The Wizard of Oz comes to life, Sarah Palin melted!

Sarah is so immature, she thinks Hillary Clinton is going to pay attention to her?  And John McCain?  She has never left Middle School.  Pretty sad for a 50 year old woman.

Bad news

Doggone it Sarah Palin removed her videos from YouTube.  It's a shame cuz I had some more of them on autopost for the future for us to view and make fun of.  Oh well.

I guess it's safe to say The Sarah Palin Channel is a colossal failure.  She hasn't been on FOX lately so maybe they fired her too.  All she has left is Facebook.  Maybe she should start a payblog like Newsmax.  Oh wait she tried that.

Tuesday, August 26, 2014

Would someone please arrest Joe the Plumber?

From Politicusua

Joe the Plumber (Samuel Wurzelbacher) channeled his inner Jared Loughner this week by declaring on his web site that the most important reason for having guns is to hunt down politicians. On his Joe for America web page, he gave a list of reasons for why guns are needed, ending with this commentary:
And – this is the most important one:
Guns are mostly for hunting down politicians who would actively seek to take your freedoms and liberty away from you.
Now Joe the Plumber does not specify by name which politicians should be hunted down, although he does say to Google “Hitler, Mao, Kim Jung Il, Castro [and] Stalin” just for starters.  His defenders may argue that his comments would only apply to tyrannical dictators, but the fact is Joe the Plumber is talking about guns in America, so it stands to reason that the politicians he thinks need to be hunted down are American politicians.

This sort of insurrectionist rhetoric has become all too familiar in the modern pro-gun movement in the United States. This is the very rhetoric that is used to justify political assassination attempts like Jared Loughner’s deranged attempt to murder Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords in 2011.

Now, again, some defenders of Joe the Plumber may dismiss his comments as innocuous, saying that in context he is referring to shooting dictators not elected leaders. However, that would be overlooking Joe the Plumber’s view that Obama is acting as a lawless tyrant and a dictator. In that context, it is not much of a stretch to argue that Samuel Wurzelbacher is implicitly condoning hunting down the President of the United States. While Joe the Plumber probably has no intention of actually shooting a public official, his irresponsible rhetoric could embolden a mentally unstable right-winger to feel justified in shooting the President or another elected politician.

Right-wing defenders of unrestricted gun rights have long entertained delusions of fighting off government forces in an epic struggle for liberty. In their absurd guerrilla fantasies, they draw analogies between modern America and Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia to validate their insurrectionist paranoia and to paint themselves as defenders of freedom. However, when people like 

Joe the Plumber argue that the purpose for having guns is to hunt down democratically elected politicians, it is he and his followers that are the greatest threat to our freedom, rather than the politicians he believes should be targeted for assassination.

Thanks John and Skanky.  This is what you have created.

I already knew this, but it's time the media reported on it

From The Daily Beast

Do you know where your donations go? Not to candidates, if you give to these five Tea Party organizations.
It’s a scenario that has become all too familiar. You’re frustrated with the gridlock in D.C. You’re sickened by the burgeoning national debt. You think the country has gone to “hell in a handbasket” under the current administration and party leadership.
And then you get a direct mail piece, or an email, or see an ad on the web that promises change by supporting candidates who embrace your ideals.
Hopeful and excited to learn that there are organizations willing to fight for what you think will “fix this country,” you grab your credit card and fire off a donation, confident you have contributed to a worthwhile cause. If only it were so!
The reality may well be far from what you believe, and have a right to expect; in fact, you may be sickened to learn the truth about how little of your money actually goes to directly or indirectly supporting candidates and their campaigns.
This article is not a piece of commentary about beliefs or ideologies. Airing concerns openly can be constructive, civil debate can be productive, and incumbency shouldn’t equate to job security.
This article is about the hijacking of a movement that started in 2009 by the modern equivalent of the “Old West Snake Oil Salesman.” Slick, fast-talking, and capable of whipping a crowd into a frenzy, they travel from town to town peddling their promises of “change.’
The problem is evidence indicates some Tea Party groups care far less about your ideals and far more about your money—taking it and making it their own. They’re an ideological Ponzi scheme; they use donations to generate more donations, by creating sensationalistic ad campaigns to persuade donors they’re getting value, and to scare or guilt them, and new donors, into sending more donations.
Here are five very recognizable organizations that spend vastly more on fundraising efforts than on support for any candidate.
The charts, above and below, were created using actual values from the FEC financial reports filed by the Tea Party Leadership Fund, Tea Party Patriots, Madison Project, Sarah Palin’s PAC, and the Tea Party Express; from January 1, 2013 through June 30, 2014. To be clear, these numbers are exactly what each organization reported without manipulation or modification.
Tom Dougherty
From the “best of the worst” to the “worst of the worst”—here are the amounts received and then spent on operations (like administrative costs, consultants, fundraising, online expenses, professional fees and travel). Here too are the amounts contributed either directly (contributions) or indirectly (independent expenditures) to candidates, for the five organizations.
Also shown are the (paltry) sums spent by each organization on candidates and campaigns. Bear in mind the (alleged) focus for these groups in the 2014 cycle is on regaining a GOP Senate majority.
Tea Party Leadership Fund
Total receipts were $4,862,790, with expenses of $4,054,288 and $650,260 benefiting candidates; that’s 87 percent on expenses and 13 percent to candidates. Senate spending has been slight, while markedly almost $300,000 has been spent specifically in opposition to Speaker John Boehner.
Tea Party Patriots
Total receipts were $10,659,371, with expenses of $9,263,753 and $1,027,354 benefiting candidates. That’s 90 percent on expenses and 10 percent to candidates. The Mississippi race was conspicuously the largest investment the Tea Party Patriots made, with almost $600,000 spent in opposition to Thad Cochran, and more than $200,000 in support of Chris McDaniel. When pushing out just 10 percent to candidates, the rationale for dropping more than three-fourths of that trifling amount on a single race calls into question their political savvy, as well as it highlights their poor fiscal management.
Madison Project
Total receipts were $3,801,897, with expenses of $3,675,432 and $326,810 benefiting candidates. That’s 91 percent on expenses and 9 percent to candidates. Mitch McConnell drew the financial ire of the Madison Project with more than $50,000 spent in opposition to the Senate minority leader. McDaniel received the greatest financial support with more than $25,000 in total value, while five other senatorial candidates each got the maximum of $5,000 in cash contributions.
Sarah PAC
Total receipts were $2,068,666, with expenses of $2,120,019 and $106,000 benefiting candidates. That’s 95 percent on expenses and 5 percent to candidates. With just a measly one-hundred grand in candidate support, Sarah Palin’s PAC basically has taken a shotgun approach by doling out $5,000 cashcontributions to eight senatorial candidates, and a half-dozen House candidates, most of which are notable for their primary losses.
Tea Party Express
Total receipts were $9,501,795, with expenses of $9,447,467 and $381,098 benefiting candidates. That’s 96 percent on expenses and 4 percent to candidates. As worthless as the Tea Party Express is in rationing out just a mere 4 percent to candidates, they too must have their politicking prowess questioned when more than $200,000 of their total went to Owen Hill, who withdrew in March when Cory Gardner stepped into the race.
Two noteworthy points are as follows: In addition to sharing abysmal records of candidate giving, four of the five organizations also spent MORE than they took in over the 18-month period cited. And in their battles against incumbent or “establishment” supported primary candidates they averaged a win a piece out of six tries. It is significant that the few wins they did have were from candidates (Daines, Ernst and Sasse) who enjoyed far more support from leadership and national party organizations.
Hardly an impressive record for this group of five, but one that highlights their lack of campaigning competency in addition to their pathetic and opaque financial practices.
Last Monday I asked, “Is the Tea Party Express Just a Fundraising Scam?” and wrote:
Move America Forward is by no means the only dubious charity out there; and Tea Party Express and their Our Country Deserves Better PAC is not the only political organization that has morphed from being a grassroots advocacy organization in 2009 to a fundraising machine today; others have also lost sight of their real mission, with little or no true regard for their donors. However the fact that they are not alone should make their behavior that much more appalling to donors.
While the Tea Party Express is the “worst of the worst,” they are not alone, and these five are still far from the entirety of the “Cannibal Conservative,” “Grifting Wing,” “Scamster,” or “Purity for Profit” organizations. Every donor should know where their money goes (or rather doesn’t go) with these groups, i.e. not toward supporting campaigns or candidates. On the contrary, most donor money is spent on raising more donor money, period.
Yes, it can be argued the country has gone to “hell in a handbasket.” Yes, gridlock frustration and national debt nausea are understandable. But if you truly want to change the direction of the country, then you have to do it legislatively; and before you can legislate, you have to win, and flushing money down the toilet is never a winning move.
I would like to see the books for the Koch based pacs Americans for Prosperity and FreedomWorks.  I bet 99.9% of it goes into Chuck and Dave's pockets.

Monday, August 25, 2014

Sarah Palin is still bitter

From Market Watch

Sarah Palin still seems a bit resentful toward Saturday Night Live when it comes to its backwater beauty queen depiction of her during the lead-up to the 2008 election.
In an excerpt from the new edition of SNL tell-all “Live From New York,”printed in the Hollywood Reporter, Palin had this to say about her decision to be a guest on the show: “I know that they portrayed me as an idiot, and I hated that, and I wanted to come on the show and counter some of that.”
This isn’t the first time she’s voiced displeasure with Tina Fey and her epic impression. Back in 2009, Sarah Palin said it was “perplexing” that the comedian was named entertainer of the year, and that “it also says a great deal about our society.”
Of course, she was a bit on the defensive, considering the lampooning she had endured. Five years later, Palin hasn’t forgotten.
If given the chance, she’d tell Fey: “You need to at least pay for my kids’ braces or something from all the money that you made off of pretending that you’re me! My goodness, you capitalized on that! Can’t you contribute a little bit? Jeez!”
Palin also blew off what the show did to her career trajectory.
“SNL is egotistical if they believe that it was truly an effect on maybe the public debate about who should lead the country in the next four years,” she said.
On the other hand, Horatio Sanz, a cast member at the time, had no doubt of its impact, or the impact of Will Ferrell’s George W. Bush.
“As funny as Will’s impression was, the audience, the whole country, would probably see that as, ‘Oh, I like Bush. Because he’s Will,’ he said. “You know, if Will hadn’t done that impression, or at least made him likable, it may have tipped it the other way. I honestly think so. We made up for it. I think Tina’s impression basically killed Sarah Palin.” A stretch? Well, at least one study at the time supported Sanz.
Just how much Palin’s doppleganger hurt the candidate’s chances in the political arena is debatable, especially considering the missteps she had of her own doing. What isn’t up for debate is that Fey absolutely nailed it with “And I can see Russia from my house” and global warming is “just God hugging us a little bit closer.”
Sarah sweetheart Tina Fey didn't ruin you.
Take a look at this video, Tina and Amy Poehler was able to reconstruct your Couric interview verbatim:

It is not Tina Fey's fault you are a fucking retard.

Sunday, August 24, 2014

Ex-Kingmaker Sarah Palin

From McClatchy DC

 — Sarah Palin has lost the magic. The defeat of her choice Tuesday in a Republican Senate primary in her home state of Alaska capped a primary season in which her favored candidates have stumbled across the nation.
A referendum to restore Palin’s signature achievement from her time as Alaska governor, a state tax on oil companies, was also headed toward defeat following Tuesday’s voting, dealing a double whammy loss to Palin in her home state and highlighting her declining influence.
Only four of the 15 congressional candidates endorsed by Palin nationwide this year have won their primaries, a far worse record than the previous two elections, when Palin played a role as kingmaker and her approval was eagerly sought by candidates looking for an edge with Republican voters.
Palin remains talented at raising money. “But her influence on the actual political process is diminishing rapidly,” said John Feehery, a Republican political consultant and former aide to GOP leadership in the House of Representatives.
Palin had urged her fellow Alaskans to vote for tea party candidate Joe Miller on Tuesday in the state’s Republican primary, saying he’s needed to “restore liberty, to defend our Constitution, to build American exceptionalism.” Alaskans received automated phone messages, known as robocalls, with Palin’s voice urging them to get out and vote for Miller for the Senate.
It didn’t work. Miller was easily defeated by Republican establishment candidate Dan Sullivan, who will now face incumbent Democratic Sen. Mark Begich in the general election.
Palin also lost the effort to defend her signature tax on the oil companies that operate in Alaska.
Her successor as governor, Sean Parnell, worked with the state Legislature to reverse Palin’s tax system last year, saying it was hurting oil production. Palin called the move “crony capitalism” and supported a referendum to restore the tax. But it was losing by nearly 7,000 votes with most ballots having been counted.
A poll of Alaska voters this month by Public Policy Polling found just 36 percent have a favorable view of Palin, a huge fall from the 87 percent approval she enjoyed before being tapped by John McCain as the Republican vice presidential candidate in 2008.
Key to her demise at home: her 2009 resignation as governor a little more than halfway through her first term was devastating to her image in Alaska, according to Anchorage pollster Marc Hellenthal.
“She didn’t honor her contract, in a certain sense, with Alaska. They voted for her and she quit,” he said.
While Palin has since become more of a reality television star than a politician, her endorsement still carried weight in recent elections. The majority of candidates she supported in 2010 won. And Palin’s picks won an impressive string of victories two years later, including Ted Cruz in his upset Senate victory in Texas.
At times Palin got involved in races when her favored candidate already had picked up momentum _ such as the case with Cruz. But Palin was credited with helping give a push to several underdogs.
That included Miller, who won Alaska’s 2010 Republican Senate primary with tea party campaign cash raised as a result of Palin’s endorsement. However, Miller went on to lose the general election to a comeback write-in effort by incumbent Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski.
Miller didn’t come close to winning the primary this year, and most of the other House and Senate candidates listed as “Palin’s 2014 picks” by her political action committee, SarahPAC, also have not fared well.
Palin backed failed attempts to unseat incumbent Sens. Thad Cochran in Mississippi and Lamar Alexander in Tennessee. Her Senate picks in Oklahoma, Minnesota and Georgia all failed to advance beyond the Republican primary as well.
Palin had more success with her Nebraska pick, following Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., in endorsing Ben Sasse’s successful campaign for the GOP Senate nomination.
Palin also joined Mitt Romney and Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida in stumping for Joni Ernst, who won the Republican Senate primary in Iowa, and she endorsed heavily favored Sen. Tim Scott in South Carolina.
Just one of Palin’s choices for the U.S. House, Barry Loudermilk in Georgia, won the Republican primary election. Palin‘s picks for the House lost in Texas, North Carolina, New Jersey, Florida and Georgia.
A message left with SarahPAC asking about the endorsed candidates’ struggles was not returned. (Big surprise)

Read more here:

Thursday, August 21, 2014

Oh fuck she is pregnant!!!!!!!!!

 OK it's not Butthole Palin but just as bad:


After a whirlwind courtship, engagement and wedding, Jill Duggar (now Jill Dillard) has even more new happy news to deliver.

"We're having a baby!" Jill tells PEOPLE exclusively. "We are so excited."

Jill, 23, and husband Derick, 25, who tied the knot on June 21 in Springdale, Arkansas, shared their first kiss in front of more than 1,000 family and friends and then celebrated with them at a reception.

The couple's wedding will be featured on TLC's hit reality show 19 Kids and Counting, during its new season that begins Sept. 2 (9 p.m. ET).

After taking several pregnancy tests that came back negative, Jill was persuaded by her sisters to take one of her mom Michelle's tests while she and Derick were visiting her parents' home. This test gave her a very different result – it was positive!

"It was surreal," says Derick. "We were shocked. Both of us are so excited."

The happy couple, who are due in March, have been having fun sharing their news with their family.

"About 30 days after Jill and Derick got married they gathered everyone in the living room and shared the news," Jim Bob, 49, tells PEOPLE. "Everyone was clapping and cheering, and we were in shock, too."

Would someone spay and neuter these people please!

As a Christian I follow the Duggars a little bit.  But for different reasons.  I find fundies kind of fascinating.  And stupid.

People like the Duggars and Maxwells are the reason people get turned off by Christians.  Ghandi said it best, I like Jesus Christ but I don't like his followers.

I was hoping Jill and Derick would wait but it didn't happen.  Didn't take them long.  I think the reason they announced the pregnancy so early was because of Michelle Duggar's robo calling:

Hello, this is Michelle Duggar. I’m calling to inform you of some shocking news that would affect the safety of Northwest Arkansas women and children. The Fayetteville City Council is voting on an ordinance this Tuesday night that would allow men – yes I said men – to use womens and girls restrooms, locker rooms, showers, sleeping areas and other areas that are designated for females only. I don’t believe the citizens of Fayetteville would want males with past child predator convictions that claim they are female to have a legal right to enter private areas that are reserved for women and girls. I doubt that Fayetteville parents would stand for a law that would endanger their daughters or allow them to be traumatized by a man joining them in their private space. We should never place the preference of an adult over the safety and innocence of a child. Parents, who do you want undressing next to your daughter at the public swimming pool’s private changing area? I still believe that we are a society that puts women and children first. Women, young ladies and little girls deserve to use the restroom or any other facility in peace and safety. Will you speak up for protecting women and children? Call 575-8330 and tell the Fayetteville City Council members and Mayor Jordan to vote ‘no’ on ordinance 119. The number again is 575-8330. For more information please go to Paid for by

Even though the Dillards are now pregnant, I can take solace in knowing they got pregnant faster than Jill's older brother Josh (aka Smuggar on FreeJinger) and his wife Anna (Smuganna).  And now Michelle (Mullet) pregnancy days over probably over she will no longer get much attention.

If the Dillards decide to be like Smuggar/Smuganna and Mullet/Boob and go with the same first letter theme, I hope they pick D.  DD would be cool initials, and D would be after Derick. 

Deborah ( would love this one, she was a judge in the Bible)
Deanna (after Boob's sister)
Dericka (after her daddy, wouldn't that piss Boob off)

David (would love this one too)
Derick (after his daddy)
Devlin (ooh!)

Wednesday, August 20, 2014

So is Trig Palin and Tripp Johnston going to enroll in kindergarten this fall?

Today the first day of kindergarten in the Mat-Su School District.  Anyone know if Trig and Tripp are enrolled?  Or is he enrolled in Arizona?

Personally I can't see Trig being ready for Kindergarten because of this:

 We have always been inspired by the work of those very special therapists and educators who dedicate their lives to helping children and adults with special needs. Ever since Trig came into our lives, that respect has grown immensely. 

 You know, I come from a family full of teachers so I have a great appreciation for uh that vocation. But, especially since Trig came into our lives, I have an even greater appreciation, especially for those teachers who have the heart for the special needs kids. Uh, Trig, for instance, today, we took him to a speech therapist because he’s headin’ into [begin sing-song voice] real kindergarten in the fall and uh, you know, of course, he needs to be a little bit more ready than he is now. Doesn’t quite talk. Still does his sign language. Puts two words together, though, which is awesome and, you know, at six years old there-there’s expectations whether [mumble] you know, whatever degree of-a…of-a special needs the kids have. 

There’s expectations, of course, that-that the families will do all that they can uhm before kinda handin’ em over in a sense for at least a few hours every day in the school system. So…great appreciation for the teachers who have the patience and the uh therapists who does-they do miraculous work with these kids. Today. Trig. At speech therapy, he…uhm…he-he did what the therapist needed him to do and they’re-the therapists are so observant, of course, they catch things that we miss all the time. They know how to help the kids, even better in some areas, than we know how to…help..Trig. He also attended uhm eating therapy because uh still doesn’t eat a lot of solid food. In fact, I think he’s th-the only kid in the world who hasn’t had a Cheerio yet. So, he-he’s still working on uhm food sensory things, the mouth, and he’ll be eating solid foods I’m sure uh at some point here, in the near future. 

So, great appreciation for those who have the heart to help the kids with special needs because they’re so full of potential and purpose and they’re-they’re God’s GIFT to-to this world, we know, personally, to our family, the gift Trig is kinda makes us keep everything in perspective and we can understand what true innocent joy is by being around Trig because he-he’s joyful and-uh so he, you know, kinda spreads to the rest of us, makes up [sic] happy. 

So, just wanta [begin exaggerated baby talk] thank all those folks out there, whether they’re professional therapists or teachers or just uh good yaa [audible sigh] good mom and pops who want to reach out and help these groups that help kids with special needs, and adults with special needs, and they support ‘em financially, they support ‘em uhm with their time, volunteering to uh to help these good, good people who are here for a good reason. I-I thank you for havin’ that heart for these kids."

Shame on you Sarah and Todd for not getting Trig therapy earlier!  FUCK YOU AND THE HORSE YOU RODE IN ON!

Now to Tripp.  Since the court hearing is coming up,  I'm sure he is enrolled in school since Butthole has to prove to be a stable mother.  And since Sunny is a former preschool teacher I am sure she will see to it.

Tuesday, August 19, 2014

Today is the Alaska Senate Primary and Joe Miller is going down thanks to Sarah Palin

Today is Primary Day in Alaska.  And Skanky has endorsed 2010 loser Joe Miller again!

Let’s send in the reinforcements!

To restore liberty, to defend our Constitution, to build American exceptionalism, we must send fighters to the U.S. Senate who will stop Barack Obama’s fundamental transformation of the nation we love. The status quo has got to go, and in Alaska the man who understands this key to our state and country’s future also has the guts, wisdom, experience, and optimism to fight for what is right – and win. We said we'd send the good guys in Washington their reinforcements; so, Alaska, here we go! Vote for Joe Miller on Tuesday and shake off the liberal stranglehold so we can get on the right track.

Thank you, Alaska!

- Sarah Palin

Of course Joe was going to lose anyway because of stupid shit he said earlier in the year.

Why run again?
The country’s facing problems that are similar to what we saw in 2010, but worse… A debt, of course, which is now over $17 trillion. Huge unfunded liabilities…

We now have documentation that our government was involved in the surveillance of our phone calls.

Clandestine agencies have admitted to metadata gathering. You know, there are NSA whistleblowers who have suggested that in fact most digital cell phone calls are recorded. You’ve got all sorts of aggressive action taking place at the federal level which is really, I think, a violation of what the founders intended with the Fourth Amendment – unreasonable search and seizure. And I agree with what some have said, that this is essentially turnkey tyranny. That you’ve got a government with now so much information that’s gathered unconstitutionally, that it does pose a threat to freedom…

The expanse of the federal government in ways that the founders didn’t intend… intruding on states’ rights — another area that gives me great cause for concern.

And when I look at Alaska and how that race is shaping up, and we see two other candidates in the Republican primary that really represent more of the same – we call them establishment candidates, some call them RINOs – we had no choice but to run.

In the struggle over the future of the Republican party, what are the centers of power now?
 The nation to a certain degree faces a duopoly where both parties are effectively doing the same thing, and that’s growing the expanse of power in Washington, D.C.…

There’s an enormous degree of power that’s exerted against both parties by multinational corporations.

You see that with the [Trans-Pacific Partnership]. You see that with respect to, you know, crony regulations and statutes that are embedded in the laws at the behest of lobbyists. You see that even down to the impact that we’re seeing today economically in the country, with middle class having immediate net worth that is lowest in decades…

The people aren’t being properly represented.

The Employment Non-Discrimination Act that passed the Senate – would you have voted for it?
No. I would not have. No, I think that private employers should be able to make decisions as to what they do in their private businesses, and I think the people then are entitled to make decisions as to whether or not they use their services.
They can boycott. I think the market can have a proper impact in determining whether or not a business succeeds, based on those decisions that are made. But I mean, right now, what we see is we see this conflict between, you know, the First Amendment and other concerns, where [groups] believe that they have a Free Exercise right – and I think justly so – to decide what they’re going to do in their private business. And I don’t think, for example, somebody that is a traditionalist, that believes in traditional marriage, that runs a bakery for weddings, should necessarily be compelled to do something that’s against their conscience. And I think that’s effectively what the First Amendment was designed against, is someone being forced to violate conscience. So I would’ve voted against it for that reason.

Should a hotel be able to turn away a couple because they’re gay?
I believe that if you’re a private employer, you have the right to do what you want with respect to your business, and that the people of the country then have the right to do as they will, with respect to whether or not they boycott or take other action to financially penalize. I don’t think the government has a role in that.
And you know, what we’re in today, with free enterprise, this is effectively no longer a pure free enterprise system. What we have is a government that’s picking winners and losers. And any time that the government is engaged — whether it be with respect to enforcing the type of protections that you’re talking about, or whether it’s creating regulations to freeze others out of the market, or creating subsidies, or some sort of tax shelter for the big business so that others can’t succeed, where others don’t have those type of benefits — I think it’s an improper role of government. I take more of what you might call a federal libertarian perspective with respect to that.
States, on the other hand, have a wider breadth of action, you know, within the parameters of the Constitution. And if somebody wants something like that — if they want an environment where those types of laws are enforced, then they should be encouraged to move to a state that provides for that. But we’re becoming an increasingly diverse country, and I don’t think anybody – even in your readership – would disagree with that. That the country – I’m not going to call it necessarily “polarized,” but there are different expectations of government, there are different worldviews, there are different values. And the more heterogeneous we become, the more difficult it is to impose a one-size-fits-all solution.
So instead, why don’t we take kind of the direction that our founders intended? And that was, you know, the laboratories of democracy. Different states offering different approaches. And the states that prevail and succeed, obviously that’s a model that can be adopted by other states. But I really do think fundamentally that’s where we’re at. And I think that, at the federal level, the better thing is not to impose the one-size-solution-fits-all, but to reduce the involvement of the federal government, in favor of the people in the states.

So at the federal level, then, should it be legal for that hotel to turn someone away because they’re African-American?
Again, that’s all I’m going to say about it. The state has the right to act. The federal government should be more of a libertarian stance. And that’s all I’m going to talk about on that issue. I’m a state’s right advocate in those areas.

So should a restaurant then be able to turn someone away because they’re African-American?
Again, I’ve said my piece on that.

And so would you repeal the Civil Rights Act?
Again, I’ve said my piece on the issue.

And –
And of course not. I would not. I’ve said my piece on the issue of ENDA. That was your specific question, that’s my response to it. If the states want to act in that area, they certainly have the ability to do it.

Specifically the public accommodation portion of the Civil Rights Act — should that be repealed?
I’ve already made it clear what my position is.

Last year, reportedly you said that “The President of the U.S. and his allies are engaged in a form of systematic spiritual and religious apartheid.” How so?
I think that we’ve seen a president that is more antagonistic and antithetical to free enterprise than any president in the history of the country…
You see that with a complete disrespect, for example, [for] religious institutions to decide whether or not they want to provide certain things under their health plan that they pay for. It’s – if you have a religious organization that’s founded on religious principle, funded by donations, they certainly have the right not do things that they believe violate their doctrine and their conscience. It to me can’t be any clearer.
If the president wants to enforce upon religious groups his version of what should be done, I think that he needs to take into account the fact that he’s got limitations of the Constitution which are designed in the Free Exercise clause to allow those particular religious groups to pursue what they see as appropriate within their particular religious views. When you look at, for example, even internationally what our country is doing in Syria, in the disrespect for what we see going on with the religious minorities there – even Iraq to a certain extent, Afghanistan even. I mean, I think there is almost a degree of, perhaps — internationally — apathy toward those issues [from the administration]. In the United States, almost a degree of hostility in domestic policy.
And so I think that’s a correct assessment of the president. Whether he intends it or not, I mean, I don’t know his heart. But I can certainly see his actions.

What is the apartheid comparison there? Is there one group that you think is being privileged over another group?
Well, we’re talking about different groups, aren’t we?

So who is in what position there?
 I thought we were talking about religious groups and irreligious groups.

So are you suggesting that irreligious groups have more rights than religious groups?
Well, a religious group has a free exercise right to practice their religion. If you’ve got a secular group, there is not a free exercise protection there. But a religious group absolutely has free exercise rights. The people are there, they bind together in community, for the purpose of their worship and their religion. And they have a right to be free of government interference and government mandates that require them to act in a way that violates their very beliefs and, you know, their fundamental worldview.
That’s – I mean, I – I guess maybe I need to take you on a history lesson. I mean, this country was founded on the idea of free exercise. Many of the people that came to this country at its origin – not all, but many of them came here because of the persecution that they were experiencing…
They said…”We want the ability to practice our beliefs as we believe God has directed us, and that’s an area that’s sacrosanct.” And yet this president doesn’t seem to have any respect for it. And that’s what led to that comment…
I think that any time that you show a degree of disrespect for the Constitution, that it should cause all of us to be concerned. Especially – I mean, your magazine… I assume that you’re a civil libertarian, one that embraces the rights that are described in the Bill of Rights. So, what, you’re going to trample the First Amendment free exercise clause… and you don’t think that your other rights are going to be at risk? Any time that you empower the central government and you give way on one of those rights, you’re going to give way on the rest of them…
It really frankly humors me to some extent when I hear those on the left that are out there saying, “Oh you know we ought to mandate the religious groups, go out there and provide for abortions and provide for contraception, even though we know it’s a First Amendment free exercise violation,” but then you scream bloody murder over the fact that the government’s involved in this massive surveillance state, which is clearly a Fourth Amendment violation.
I mean, we have to bind together to protect all those rights. Even though it may feel uncomfortable. You know, I’m a traditionalist; I believe in the traditional family. But I’m also willing to say that the federal government does not have a role in that area – that that’s a state issue…
I think that the unifying concept is the Bill of Rights.
And if someone has a religious objection to serving an African-American at their business, then –
I’m — again, I’m not going there. I already talked to you about the Civil Rights Act.
Are religious objections to interactions with African-Americans equivalent to religious objections to interactions with gay people?
They’re – look – I’m not even going there. I mean, we’ve already talked. We’ve talked about ENDA that was the discussion that you had. The Civil Rights Act is not up to debate. It’s not something that anybody, with any reasonable approach, would ever even consider repealing. So that’s not even – it’s not even a dialogue. I mean, what you’re doing is playing “gotcha” journalism. I’m not gonna play that game with you.
And if someone has a religious objection to paying taxes for foreign wars, that they don’t support, then –
Obviously the courts – no, obviously the courts have established a balancing act. And I assume that you’re knowledgeable enough in the legal area to understand that. I mean, just because somebody claims free exercise doesn’t mean that any moron that claims some sort of free exercise right can do whatever they want. You know that, I know that. And this interview is done.
Well, I appreciate you taking the time…
You know, I’m willing to engage in a dialogue, but we aren’t going to go into the moronic on this, OK?
What was moronic?
What is absolutely moronic is you suggesting that you don’t understand that there are limits to the free exercise clause. And you know there are, and you know that there are balancing tests that are imposed.

What the fuck is a duopoly?  Is that a Sarah Palin term?

I would like Joe to win the primary just so Mark Begich can kick his ass!