Who is this whiney Palin-bashing weenie on Hannity's show?

(vanity)

[Cringing Negativism Network]

For crying out loud.

Hannity has some maroon on now, promoting his Palin-bashing book.

For why?

[Arrowhead1952]

I was wondering how long you'd last.

[TheOldLady]

Retread disruptor troll finds a boot up his butt and rides the lightning


Image by JoeProBono


When that all heals up, come on back. We'd love to do it again.

[Darksheare]

http://www.freerepublic.com/tag/by:cainmutiny/index?tab=comments

Looks like he mouthed off on another thread.

[BillM]

Watch Fox Business News. They are all great!
Judge Napolitano is THE MAN!

[Arrowhead1952]

Yes, I looked at the posting history as well and the troll was on an anti Palin streak for a while.

[Chandalier]

The guy was a deer caught in headlights with the same response for every question. Total loser.

[kevkrom]

I noticed a higher than statistically likely number of males who go bonkers about Palin, seem that way.

The most vicious and personal attacks on Palin seem to come from gay men and women who've had abortions.

[Darksheare]

Made a lame claim to support her too.
What a jerk.

[Texas Eagle]

I’ve long ago giving up any effort to try to understand why Hannity does what he does. The best answer I can come up with is he’s a goofball.

[paulycy]

[Arrowhead1952]

Well, if he / she / it supported Palin, it was NOT pissant.

[TheOldLady]

Hi Pauly!

Me too, and cute kitteh. Looks like a senior citizen, but cute.

[Sloth]

Chemical engineer.

I guess by your criteria Dan Rather is a freaking genius.

[Windflier]

He wants Newt for POTUS? NOOOOOOOOOO!

He has Newt on his show at least a couple of times a week, and has been badgering him about a run for president for the last two years.

[Darksheare]

I suspect it lied.
Repeatedly.

[Arrowhead1952]

I’ve been watching several other n00bies. Here is a four post n00b who was hanging around on a birther thread.

http://www.freerepublic.com/tag/by:owebamalies/index?brevity=full;tab=comments

Another n00b here with last post on May 12.

http://www.freerepublic.com/tag/by:willescott/index?brevity=full;tab=comments

[jaydubya2]

I noticed a reviewer on Amazon, T. Frank, gave a review:

"Performed the "Washington read" of looking up my name in the index, and read the section where I was actually involved, and Dunn gets all the facts wrong (except a handful he cribs from other journalists). They say all publicity is good publicity so long as they spell your name right, but he didn't even spell my name right.

Of course, the book isn't so much journalism as cheerleading for a particular point of view. If you hold that point of view, you'll love the book. If you don't, you won't. Don't expect nuanced analysis.

Edited to add in response to comments: I said I read the "section" involving facts where I was involved and had first-hand knowledge of what happened. That's not "a few paragraphs." That's a "section." Yes, Dunn accurately quotes "Game Change." If that's all you want, why not just read "Game Change"? Asking around, Dunn doesn't appear to have actually talked to anyone involved in the vetting (or even attempted to talk to anyone involved in the vetting), which is perhaps why we get fictional inventions like "Culvahouse was given less than a day to complete the final vetting," which is contradicted just a few pages later. It's a simple standard: if I test the author on questions where I was actually there and know what happened, and the author gets that description wrong and gets basic details wrong, why should I trust the author on anything else? The problem is doubly worse when all of the author's errors are shaded in support of a particular point of view; if the author was making random errors, some would unfairly favor Palin, and some would unfairly criticize Palin. That wasn't what happened here."

I wonder who T.Frank is?

[terycarl]

I guess by your criteria Dan Rather is a freaking genius.

I'm thinking............nope, I can't imagine what you're talking about!!

[SunkenCiv]

He's lost the Battle of Zotsylvania.

[TheOldLady]

Indeed.