Today on Tommy T’s Obsession With The Freeperati – Palin and Pals edition

Good morning everybody – let’s suit up and get down to it, shall we?

This go-round of “Obsession” starts with some dissension in the Freeper ranks over theirobject de baver, but first, the Levi Johnson article you knew was coming after his reappearance on the talk show circuit.

Check out the media “blipz” and then come back!

Ok – from the sublime to the ridiculous – I present –Enough of the Palin-bashing!

Enough of the Palin-bashing!
March 29, 2008 | Me

Posted onSunday, March 29, 2009 3:54:33 PM byBig Steve
I have seen a lot threads in here on our friend and heroine, Sarah
Palin. While most in here are good, there have been some posts or
comments in these posts that have led me to speak out. For all of you
so-called conservatives who have nothing to do than bash Sarah Palin, I
have only one word to say to you. ENOUGH! I have had it with finding
fault with everything she does.
I’ll admit, she needs more work, but to sit here and bash her like a
member of the Democratic Party or liberal media is reprehensible. To
say she is damaged goods because of her being McCain’s running mate is
reprehensible. She has brought more excitement and energy than any one
I can remember except Reagan. She is young, vibrant, conservative,
charismatic, and honest. She is beautiful as well, but that’s besides
the point. Even though we lost, I think bringing Sarah Palin on the
national scene was probably one of the few things McCain did right in
this campaign. Sarah was the one who brought out crowds to rallies as
big as Obama did. That’s saying something. The Dems, the media, and
yes, even some Republicans, know that she’s probably the one person who
can unseat Obama in 2012. They know it, which is why they are
continually attacking her even though the election is long gone.
I am a strong Sarah supporter, but I will not follow her blindly. If
she does something that I don’t agree with, I will say it. But she
seems to know what she’s doing, and I am just a regular person, which
she is as well other than governor. I hope she runs for re-election in
2010 and wins, and if God is willing, she decides to run for the
Presidency in 2012, I will enthusiastically support her. First, if she
is re-elected, she just needs to work for the people of Alaska, which
I’ll know she’ll do. After that, she should run in ’12 if she decides
to do so. She will have a strong base of support. All of the other
candidates who ran in 08 should just step aside and let some new blood
run. I do hope to volunteer for her campaign if she decides to run.
That has been my dream, to work on a campaign. Hopefully it will be
Again, for those so-called conservatives who bash her, either admit you
just don’t like Sarah, or get on board. It’s not like, “It’s her turn.”
It’s our turn, and she can be our leader. She’s not perfect, but who
is? All I can say is, she will be the right person at the right time.
Keep her and her great family in prayer as she makes the tough
decisions down the road. God bless her and her family.

To: Big Steve
Sorry, there are no sacred cows.

3 posted onSunday, March 29, 2009 3:58:28 PM bypissant (THE Conservative party:

Except for Ronald Reagan.

To: Big Steve
Free Republic is all about thefree exchange of ideas, opinions and viewpoints.

Which is why anyone not toeing the Party Line gets their account suspended…
As for ‘Enough of the Palin-bashing’, there are some Freepers who don’t like her, never liked her, and will NEVER like her.

ok in my book, not my first choice but a damn sight better than John
McInsane or any other RINO in what used to be the Party of Reagan.

I’m working on reanimating his corpse even as we speak.
In an ironic twist, I’m using embryonic stem cells for the initial experiments.
suggest FRiend, that imploring Freepers to cease and desist with
bashing Sarah Palin is not unlike waving the sandwiches and snacks at a
picnic out in the country and saying “you ants stay away now!”

Sarah Palin is unfortunately the right of any Freeper who dislikes her
as intensely as many of us despise and did everything in our power to
stop the likes of Rudy-Tooty and his ilk.

But kudos to you for standing up for her.

4 posted onSunday, March 29, 2009 3:58:31 PM bymkjessup (You’re either with our Constitution, or you are with TKU (“The Kenyan Usurper”). CHOOSE!!!)
To: Big Steve
I doubt I’d like her half so much if she didn’t drive the Leftists mad.
Honestly, I suspect that as president she would bean accomodater like

Insert your own Dubya joke here.
But after the scars she’s picked up over the last 9 months, maybe

5 posted onSunday, March 29, 2009 3:59:08 PM byCrush T Velour

To: pissant

“Sorry, there are no sacred cows.”

Our more childish ones on FR can’t handle that reality.

11 posted onSunday, March 29, 2009 4:05:55 PM bynmh (Intelligent people recognize Intelligent Design (God).)
To: pissant
Sorry, there are no sacred cows.
Needs to said again. Enough of this “you’re not a conservative if you don’t worship Sarah” BS.

12 posted onSunday, March 29, 2009 4:06:05 PM byGATOR NAVY

What’s this? Is the bloom off the rose??

To: Big Steve
This is why the Liberals are in control. The Right/ Conservatives/ Republicans love to eat their own.

18 posted onSunday, March 29, 2009 4:10:00 PM byPaige (“All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing,” Edmund Burke)

Pass the catsup, please.

To: Big Steve
Your anger is justified, however it is the trolls that cruise this site that attack her.
Some of these trolls are Mitt, McCain, Huckster supporters or just democrat fascists.

19 posted onSunday, March 29, 2009 4:10:21 PM bystockpirate (We the People should not look for the GOP to save us, they are part of the problem)

That’s a pretty wide net, stockpirate. Oh, and a bit of FRiendly advice – change your handle.

To: Big Steve
“Hey Sarah! Hold your head high, and you go, girl!And God be with
you.” is all I’ve got to say. There are a few on FR who are in league
with the RINOs.

25 posted onSunday, March 29, 2009 4:13:28 PM byPaperdoll( On the cutting edge)

Um – using Urban Dictionary catch phrases with Special-K commercial roots is not on the cutting edge of anything.


To: Big Steve
You’d be surprised.We had a coronation here last time for Fred.

33 posted onSunday, March 29, 2009 4:18:25 PM bypissant (THE Conservative party:

Ah yes, you did, didn’t you?
Exactly how did that work out for you guys?

Ok – now that I’ve thrown the “eating their own” bunch a knife and a fork, there’s so much more after the jump, so let’s juuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu


What’s next?
Ok – since I’ve run out of ways to rhyme dirty words with “Horowitz”, I give you –Obama Derangement Syndrome!

Obama Derangement Syndrome–Some conservatives are headed for the deep end. ^

| March 30, 2009
| David Horowitz

Posted onMonday, March 30, 2009 7:42:17 AM bySJackson
I have been watching an interesting phenomenon on the Right, which
is beginning to cause me concern. I am referring to the over-the-top
hysteria in response to the first months in office of our new
president, which distinctly reminds me of the “Bush Is Hitler” crowd on
the Left.
Speaking of this crowd, have you seen any “I am so
sorry” postings from that quarter as Obama continues and even escalates
the former president’s war policy in Afghanistan and attempts to
consolidate his military occupation of Iraq?
please. Let’s not duplicate the manias of the Left as we figure out how
to deal with Mr. Obama. He is not exactly the anti-Christ, although a
disturbing number of people on the Right are convinced he is.

I have no idea where you got that impression, David.

have recently received commentaries that claim that “Obama’s speeches
are unlike any political speech we have heard in American history” and
“never has a politician in this land had such a quasi-religious impact
on so many people” and “Obama is a narcissist,” which leads the author
to then compare Obama to David Koresh, Charles Manson, Stalin and
Saddam Hussein. Excuse me while I blow my nose.

That’s redundant. Just reprint one of your old columns – same effect.

This fellow has
failed to notice that all politicians are narcissists – and that a
recent American president was a world-class exponent of the imperial
me. So what? Political egos are one of the reasons the Founders put
checks and balances on executive power. As for serial lying, is there a
politician that cannot be accused of that? And once, the same recent
president set a pretty a high bar in this category, and we survived it.
As for Obama’s speeches, they are hardly in the Huey Long, Louie
Farrakhan, Fidel Castro vein. They are in fact eloquently and cleverly
centrist and sober.

Even if he does read them FROM A TELEPROMPTER!! ZOMG!!!1! AIEEEEEE!!!!

So what’s the panic? It is true that Obama
has shown surprising ineptitude in his first months in office, but he’s
not a zero with no accomplishments as many conservatives seem to think
– unless you regard beating the Clinton machine and winning the
presidency as nothing. But in doing this you fall into the
“Bush-is-an-idiot” bag of liberal miasmas.
It is also true
Obama has ceded his domestic economic agenda to the House Democrats and
spent a lot of money in the process. But what’s the surprise in this?
After all, Bush and McCain both proposed (and in Bush’s case pushed
through) massive government giveaways (which amount to government
takeovers as well). This is bad, but it doesn’t make Obama a closet
Mussolini, however deplorable the conservatives among us may regard it.
Moreover, he’s already run into political resistance even within his
own party. Charlie Rangel has made it clear that the itemized deduction
tax hike is not going through his committee – and that should tell you
that the American system, the one the Founders created, is still in

(offer not valid in some states, some sexual orientations, and for some ethnicities)

Even as astute a conservative thinker as Mark Steyn has
been swept up in the tide that thinks Obama is a “transformative”
radical. But look again at his approach to the wars in Afghanistan and
Iraq. In both cases, as noted, he is carrying out the Bush policies –
the same that he once joined his fellow Democrats in condemning. And
that should be reassuring to anyone concerned about where he is heading
as commander-in-chief.
In other words, while it’s reasonable to
be unhappy with a Democratic administration and even concerned because
the Democrats are now a socialist party in the European sense, we are
not witnessing the coming of the anti-Christ. A good strategy for
political conflicts is to understand your opponent first – not to
underestimate him, but not to overestimate him either.
conservatives do that, they will find some silver linings in the first
moves of the Obama administration. Through a combination of ineptitude
and zeal, Obama has in two short months locked down the conservative
and Republican base.

…to it’s core 27% of crazies…

On fetal stem-cell research, on borders
(e-verification), on spending, on unions, on shutting down talk radio,
Obama has flexed the leftist muscle so nakedly and unmistakably that
there isn’t a conservative left who will vote Democratic in the next
election (and there were many who did so in the last).
As we
move forward, Obama faces increasingly tough choices in the wars
against Islamic fascism in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Gaza and Iran.
Hopefully, he will make the right choices, and should he do so
conservatives will need to be there to support him. If he makes the
wrong choices, conservatives will need to be there to oppose him. But
neither our support nor our opposition should be based on hysterical
responses to policies that we just don’t like. Let’s leave that kind of
behavior to the liberals who invented it

Well ! I’m sure the Freeperati will give this cautionary tale the credence and careful consideration they believe it deserves.

To: SJackson
Hopefully, he will make the right choices…
Oh my, you’ve sipped some of the kool-aid.

posted onMonday, March 30, 2009 7:45:21 AM
(Tagline comment removed by moderator)

To: SJackson
Look David…Obama is the MOST DANGEROUS and ANTI-AMERICAN President we have EVER had.

posted onMonday, March 30, 2009 7:45:41 AM
byAnn Archy
(Abortion…the Human Sacrifice to the god of Convenience.

To: SJackson
I’m abirther so there’s no hope for me.

posted onMonday, March 30, 2009 7:49:36 AM
(The poor bastards have us surrounded.)

Now, that’s funny! It’s kind of like a 9/11 gubmint conspiracy theorist callinghimself a “truther”.

To: SJackson
SLAP! Snap out of it Horowitz! Look around man! SLAP!

posted onMonday, March 30, 2009 7:49:45 AM
(The Roar Of The Masses Could Be Farts)

To: SJackson
That’ll teach you not to sleep while there’s a large pod lying on your pool table…

posted onMonday, March 30, 2009 7:50:01 AM
by668 – Neighbor of the Beast
(American Revolution II — overdue.)

To: SJackson

posted onMonday, March 30, 2009 7:50:53 AM
(Obama is everything Oklahoma is not.)

To: SJackson
What a steaming load of cah-cah.
Horowitz’ cheese has slid right off his cracker.

posted onMonday, March 30, 2009 7:56:44 AM

You know, I was just in the kitchen talking to Barbara about this post, and my (a lot of peoples’ , actually) fascination with watching the GOP eat its own.

I told her “Sure, it’s entertainment on a pretty vulgar scale,similar to watching Ultimate Steel-cage fighting-kicking-ear biting championships, with a bit of the old WWF thrown in for flavour. But do you know what’s even better than that? Watching the two people you despise most in the world – say, the guy who ran over your pet on purpose and the guy who raped your 13-year-old niece –get into that steel cage together!

A popcorn movie, with extraschadenfreude on the popcorn.

And now – presented with a perfectly straight face:

Women’s Right to Vote, the Beginning of the End for America?
Chico Enterprise Record Post Scripts ^| 3/29/09 | OneVike

Posted onMonday, March 30, 2009 8:51:43 AM byOneVike
From the day the founding Fathers risked their liberty and life by
signing the Declaration of Independence, there has been those who have
wanted to sink this great ship called the United States of America.
Well 143 years later the good ship America took a torpedo hit that at
the time seemed like just another glancing blow. What many still
consider the greatest step forward in equality for the sexes, was more
then just a glancing blow however. It was in fact a deadly strike that
entered the very heart of the ship and has been smoldering since. The
damage caused by the 19th amendment was slow in its destruction, but
after almost 100 years we can now see how complete the destruction
really was.


This is topic of interest I have been bantering
about in my noggin for a very long time. Then I was asked to present an
article for a friends blog. So I put this together. It had originally
been almost 2000 words until I edited it down to 1200. I could just not
get it any briefer without butchering my thoughts.

Heaven forbid.

I know I posted this yesterday, but a lot of Freepers would
have missed if they were not around, so I am re-posting it this time
for consideration of those who are now checking out all the Monday
morning stories.

1 posted onMonday, March 30, 2009 8:51:44 AM byOneVike

You know – there are some things too reactionary and regressive for even Freepers to swallow.

To: OneVike
You’re off by about 60 years.

2 posted onMonday, March 30, 2009 8:54:50 AM byml/nj

To: OneVike
So God-given rights are only for white men?

4 posted onMonday, March 30, 2009 8:57:35 AM byShandaLear (I LOVE RUSH!)

To: OneVike
You can’t be serious.

5 posted onMonday, March 30, 2009 8:59:58 AM byearlJam

See? I told you! Not even the Freeperati would consider such a thing seriousl…wait a minute.

What’s that sound?

Oh no. Oh MY GOD!!

To: ShandaLear
No, the majority of women show that they vote with emotion and not thought. The founding fathers knew this and they were right.

17 posted onMonday, March 30, 2009 9:09:34 AM bybmwcyle (American voters can fix this world if they would just wake up.)

To: MEGoody
The figures show that one of the biggest voting group for Obama is women. I’m sorry you deny the truth.

22 posted onMonday, March 30, 2009 9:11:42 AM bybmwcyle (American voters can fix this world if they would just wake up.)

To: ShandaLear
Ann Coulter said the same thing on a show one time, that she would give up her vote also to keep other women from voting.

29 posted onMonday, March 30, 2009 9:15:02 AM byOneVike (Just a Christian waiting to go home)

And she’s a woman, probably, and would know.

Just when I think the tsunami of stupid couldn’t get any stranger, they go all Heinlein and start advocating voting rights for plantatio…I mean, land-owners only.

Then, they start fighting about how rich you should be to qualify for the vote!

To: OneVike
Allowing people with no ‘skin in the game’ has the same bad ending
wherever it’s tried. Eventually you end up with a huge under class who
votes for their freebies.
Even the founders recognized the problem associated with everyone voting.
I say you need show a paycheck with at least $1000 in taxes paid before you get to vote.

3 posted onMonday, March 30, 2009 8:55:02 AM byTarpon (It’s a common fact, one can’t be liberal and rational at the same time.)

To: OneVike
Go back on or increase your meds. YOu must not be a conservative if you think such nonsense.
That said only landowners or real taxpayers should vote.

13 posted onMonday, March 30, 2009 9:06:47 AM bystockpirate (We the People should not look for the GOP to save us, they are part of the problem)
To: Tarpon
> I say you need show a paycheck with at least $1000 in taxes paid before you get to vote.
I say you should get 1 vote for every dollar paid in tax.
14 posted onMonday, March 30, 2009 9:07:05 AM byDieHard the Hunter (Is mise an ceann-cinnidh. Cha ghéill mi do dhuine. Fà g am bealach.)

To: Tarpon
“..I say you need show a paycheck with at least $1000 in taxes paid before you get to vote…”
I would simply add to that – one should be a “property owner” (definitions?)and be over the age of 25 years old.

21 posted onMonday, March 30, 2009 9:11:13 AM byPGR88

AndI think that you shouldn’t be allowed to vote unless:

You own at least two vacation homes. Pre-fabs do not count.

You are able to evade at least $100,000.00 in taxes by the judicious use of offshore accounts
You can trace your own lineage back to at least 1845 – before the Irish started moving in – and no darkies in the woodpile!

You can prove that you own accounts on Free Republic, LGF, Stormfront, and Ace Of Spades, and can post the same cut-and-paste on all of them while juggling, hopping on one foot, and singing the Catalina Magdelena Luptenschteiner Volunbeiner song!

That ought to keep out the riff-raff!

Ok – looks like Scout got the scrubbers going again, so we have time for one more incursion into insanity, entitled simply –“for shizzle”‏:

Obama is Ghetto Fabulous

contraeverything’s blog ^

| 4/2/2009
| contraeverything

Posted onThursday, April 02, 2009 1:09:12 PM bypiracy
There is a type of populism that is admirable. Think of Thomas
Jefferson answering the door of the White House himself. And in his
But then there is a type of cluelessness born of
being firmly rooted in the lower classes, no matter how much wealth and
power one may amass.
And Barack Obama is one of the most classless individuals on the planet, for shizzle.


What the hell did you just say???

the leaders of two countries meet for the first time, it is customary
for them to exchange gifts with one another. Generally, the gifts are
simple, classy, and unique expressions of some aspect of the home
country’s culture or history. Think of a bottle of wine from France, or
something containing a small diamond from South Africa.
Barack Obama met English Prime Minister Gordon Brown for the first time
in the White House, Brown brought him an exquisite carved ornamental
pen holder from the planks of the English anti-slavery ship, HMS
Gannet. Simple. Exquisite. Unique. Meaningful. Reservedly English.
return, Barack Obama offered to Prime Minister Brown a sack of 25 DVDs.
Now wait – these are good DVDs. Psycho was one of them. As was Star
As of today, more than 2,000 letters of apology from U.S. citizens have been received by the English government.

To: piracy
Slumdog president.

posted onThursday, April 02, 2009 1:14:15 PM

To: WhistlingPastTheGraveyard
Wow. Ghetto fabulous? Great term. Then again
he did hangout with Ludacris. Fun. What a great guy. He also has
referred to his wife as his baby momma and prefers a fist bump to a
good old hand shake.

posted onThursday, April 02, 2009 1:23:55 PM
(All we ask is to be let alone—-Jefferson Davis)

To: piracy
You can take the boy-king out tof the ghetto, but you can’t take the ghetto out of the boy-king

posted onThursday, April 02, 2009 1:39:03 PM

And, as always on Free Republic, the only thing worse than being a stereotypical ghetto-dweller is, um, NOT being a stereotypical ghetto-dweller.

To: piracy
Like I told the wife yesterday, the man’s as ghetto as a cheeseburger on Wonder bread.

posted onThursday, April 02, 2009 1:18:48 PM

And now…the punch line:

To: piracy
As my mother has always said…”You can’t buy class.”

posted onThursday, April 02, 2009 1:14:10 PM
(“The smallest minority on earth is the ‘individual’.” ~ Rush Limbaugh)

And she would know, would she not?

Well, we’re done here.
I’m going to go out and enjoy the day (this post was pre-recorded for later broadcast).

Here’s some bonus Bailey boy Bulldog blogging of someone else enjoying the day:

BaileyStudio 005

4 thoughts on “Today on Tommy T’s Obsession With The Freeperati – Palin and Pals edition

  1. But I thought Palin was the presidential hopeful for 2012. As long as she is touting that, she’s gonna be on the radar.
    Oddly enough, I can’t see the ersatz son-in-law being a big deal in 2012. Plus I’m starting to wonder about some possible inconsistencies in his story. But I still wonder how this doesn’t reflect on Sarah Palin’s ability to govern.
    The link you gave had him talking about being on security camera in every room. Sounds rather high-strung to me. But then he is talking about rolling joints on camera (so the Palin household had knowledge of a crime in their home and didn’t do anything).
    And Palin preaches abstinence education. But she let a couple of kids shack up in her home with only some definition hair-splitting over stay vs. reside?
    But I can’t believe that someone is voicing that the world went downhill because of women gettin to vote. Not even Archie Bunker went there !

  2. Maple Street – that link is to the Something Awful satire site. They have been running a parody “letters from Levi” feature on and off.
    Any resemblance to the real Levi “Hockey” Johnson is coincidental.

  3. Thanks Tommy. Wasn’t familiar with that site and missed the satire. So I have to pull back from the video cameras while rolling a joint (but if it isn’t believable, it wouldn’t be funny – right? Although one of the inconsistencies in the story I was thinking were the video cameras vs. him staying at the Palin home and having sex).
    I do know that I’ve seen videos of the temporary son in law in interviews where he says he stayed at the Palin residence.
    What can I say but I’ve been punked.

  4. That Freeper thread about who should be allowed to vote reminds me of the shenanigans that Lawrence Auster and his buddies get up to at View From the Right. I don’t know if you know this site. The VFTR gang are more erudite than the Freepers and better spellers, but just as nuts if not more so (and they could certainly never master the Freeper art of saying what you want to say in 25 words or less). They love to construct alternate universes, fantasizing, for example, about deporting everyone of color back to whence they came. If someone happens to point out that other Americans would never stand for that, they come out of their dreamy daze long enough to snap “Well, in aperfect world all Americans would understand why this is necessary”, then they drift back into their imaginary universe.
    Anyway. One of their favorite topics is who should be allowed to vote. Every once in while they start spinning this one and it’s all fun and games until someone’s feelings are hurt. The last time I looked, the franchise would be limited to men who were net taxpayers. Then someone decided the franchise should be limited to married men with children since they had the most stake in society. Then of course someone else realizes “Hey, I’m divorced – does this mean I couldn’t vote?” So then divorced men are accepted but only those who have only been divorced once, since being divorced more than once shows a certain instability. (So I guess that leaves out Newt Gingrich.)
    But the oddest thing is the women commenters who happily concede that they should be disenfranchised. I don’t for a moment think that Coulter ever meant what she said, she was just stirring the pot. But these commenters on VFTR seem to mean it when they say they’ll give up their right to vote if it means other women can’t. It’s quite a loony bin.

Comments are closed.