Sarah Palin visited Fox News’ Cashin’ In show this morning. It’s supposed to be a business show. But instead of talking business, host Eric Bolling described Palin as a “freedom fighter” and asked her which constitutional amendment is “most at risk” thanks to President Obama.
Well, at least she didn’t say, “all of them.” But I’m not at all convinced she had any real grasp of the one she chose, the First Amendment. Because her following lecture to President Obama about the Constitution didn’t mention a single example of how he has violated that First Amendment:
The problems that we see today start at the top. We have a president who doesn’t understand or just chooses to disrespect our Constitution, those rights, the rule of law, the separation of powers, all those things that we learned in elementary school about how our nation was formed and why it is the most exceptional nation on the earth – because of that Constitution.
Of course, Bolling didn’t ask for any examples, either.
Anyone want to bet that if someone asked “Constitutional expert” and “freedom fighter” Palin what the Third or Sixth Amendment is about, she couldn’t answer? Heck, I’m not sure she could come up with a coherent explanation of the Fourth or Fifth either.
photo credit: scriptingnews via photopin cc
Sarah has a tenuous grasp of reality in the first place. Why she would be tapped for questions like this serves one purpose – Roger Aisles is sucking up to the over 60 white male audience that still think Sister Sarah is the sexiest thing on the planet and they have another excuse to hate the darky in the White House.
Characteristics of a Palin-bot:
“MJ .. another Obama pecker-slurper.”
First, open with an insult; bonus points for use of sexual innuendo.
“What makes you think Zero’s federal crap is the ‘rule of law’?”
Second, de-legitimize the duly elected President at every opportunity.
“Nevada is a sovereign state ..”
Third, display your ignorance of basic tenets of the US gov’t: the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA collectively is a “sovereign” (independent) state; the individual states (like Nevada) are not . . .
“The American people have had their fill of the tyranny of your ilk.”
Fourth, use the false equivalence of equating actual, routine, and constitutionally-mandated enforcement of federal law to “tyranny” — when the ACTUAL tyranny of outing a covert CIA agent, warrantless wiretapping of US citizens, and promotion of the “Unitary Executive” was tolerated and even celebrated just a short while ago.
(Fifth, expect the Palin-bot to return during late-night or some other time after regular posters have moved onto other threads, in an attempt to get in the “last word” — most likely under another sockpuppet)
@joseph West: I think I read somewhere that the U.S. Gov’t owns about 86% of all the land in Nevada. It goes back as a requirement for them obtaining statehood. All Bundy had to do way pay some grazing fees, which many other ranchers do in Nevada. Instead he suckled off the gov’t teat.
Furthermore, anyone with a knowledge of US history knows that the State of Nevada only came into being to ensure that it would remain Union territory during the Civil War (the territory, at the time, did NOT have the legally-required population level for statehood). And, at the end of the Civil War, Nevada gained that little chunk of land in the south that is now home to the little village of Las Vegas and its access to the Colorado River.
Also, the majority of Nevada is actually owned BY the US Government, including the lands that this LAWBREAKER is using without paying the proper fees.
Earth to Simple Sarah: kindly explain how rancher Cliven Bundy’s refusal to comply with federal court orders to stop grazing on BLM-controlled land constitutes following the “rule of law” . . .