Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Sarah Palin Plagiarizes Newt Gingrich? (attack of the RINO's)
Politics Daily ^ | Posted: 06/8/09

Posted on 06/08/2009 10:25:09 AM PDT by lewisglad

Last week, when introducing Ronald Reagan's son, Michael, to a crowd in Anchorage, Alaska, Gov. Sarah Palin delivered a speech that made news for its stinging criticism of President Obama's economic stimulus package. Further analysis of the speech, however, suggests that Palin lifted many of its central ideas, and the way they were worded, from fellow conservative (and presumptive competitor in the 2012 race for president) Newt Gingrich.

It appears that much of Palin's text was inspired by an article that Gingrich and Craig Shirley published in 2005 in the Manchester Union Leader, titled "Republicans Need to Relearn Lessons of the Reagan Revolution." As dissected by the Huffington Post's Geoffrey Dunn, the similarities between the Gingrich/Shirley piece and Palin's remarks indicate that she relied heavily on the article when preparing her own remarks. (She even acknowledged, "Recently, Newt Gingrich, he had written a good article about Reagan.") Here, then, is a list of before and after (or after and before, to be more accurate) comparisons:

Palin: We have to remember that Ronald Reagan never won any arguments in Washington. He won the arguments by resonating with the American people.

Gingrich/Shirley: Reagan never won an argument in Washington. Reagan won his arguments in the country with the American people.

More:

Palin: Remember this? His vision for the Cold War? We win, they lose.

Gingrich/Shirley: On the inevitability of the Soviet Union, Reagan responded with a then shocking vision for the Cold War -- "we win, they lose."

And more:

Palin: First, I think what we're going to learn tonight via Michael [Reagan] is that Ronald Reagan's ideas were the right ideas and all we have to do is look back at his record, his economic record and his national security record to know that his ideas were right.

Gingrich/Shirley: What should Americans learn from this remarkable man and his remarkable Presidency?... The "right" ideas really matter (the left was wrong and Reagan was right about virtually every major public policy issue and the historic record is clear for those willing to look at it).

And more:

Palin: And with detente, speaking of detente, he used two words: "Evil Empire."

Gingrich/Shirley: Reagan replaced the entire vision of detente with two vivid words: "Evil Empire."

Dunn goes on to cite six more strikingly similar passages from Palin's speech to show that a whole lot of cutting and pasting went into its preparation. Accused of plagiarizing the Gingrich and Shirley article, Palin's lawyer, Thomas Van Flein, responded: "It is abundantly clear in context, and even in subcontext, that the overview of President Reagan's legacy was attributed to Newt Gingrich."

True, Palin did mention Gingrich twice in the speech, but why was Palin so dependent on his (and Shirley's) analysis of "The Gipper" that she had to lift its wording so often? And why not highlight each and every passage in the speech that relied on Gingrich/Shirley with a clause like, "As Gingrich and Shirley wrote..."?

Plagiarism is a recurrent problem in politics. Joe Biden has done it. Barack Obama has been accused of the same (though on a much smaller scale). Perhaps this is a condition of our modern world, in which salient information is but a click away.

As yet, we have no comment form Gingrich on the borrowing of his old article. Should he be flattered, offended, or both?


TOPICS: News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: District of Columbia
KEYWORDS: davidknowles; gingrich; michaelreagan; newt; newtgingrich; palin; reagan; romney; waronsarah
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-54 next last

1 posted on 06/08/2009 10:25:09 AM PDT by lewisglad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: lewisglad

Who’s she supposed to quote? Barry Obama?


2 posted on 06/08/2009 10:26:57 AM PDT by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lewisglad

So I do not get it this is all in Public domain what is the big deal?


3 posted on 06/08/2009 10:27:14 AM PDT by Cheetahcat (Zero the Wright kind of Racist! We are in a state of War with Democrats)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lewisglad

Now please correct me if my 4th grade English lesson was not accurate..but doesn’t plagiarism mean when someone takes words from someone else and use them as their own without giving that person any credit...Sarah not only said Newt’s name FIVE different times, but actually said “I read Newt Gingrich said this about Ronald Reagan” she said that repeatedly..that isn’t plagiarism, that’s acknowledging the guy..WOW the left are so freakin retarded..when Ann Coulter said liberalism was a mental illness SHE WAS RIGHT..these people are SICK


4 posted on 06/08/2009 10:27:55 AM PDT by Sarah Barracuda
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DManA

It looks like the 2011/2012 primary is already underway...


5 posted on 06/08/2009 10:27:56 AM PDT by lewisglad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: lewisglad

Yo, you morons - Palin said twice in her speech that she was paraphrasing Newt’s article. It isn’t plagarism if the original source is attributed, but don’t let that stop the Palin-bashers.


6 posted on 06/08/2009 10:28:52 AM PDT by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lewisglad

When sniveling chronic losers attack!..


7 posted on 06/08/2009 10:29:00 AM PDT by DGHoodini (The New York Times, are lying 'Rats!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lewisglad
If she acknowledged that the speech was taken from an article written by Newt then she IN NO WAY plagiarized ANYBODY.

Plagiarism
1. the unauthorized use or close imitation of the language and thoughts of another author and the representation of them as one’s own original work.
2. something used and represented in this manner.

8 posted on 06/08/2009 10:29:42 AM PDT by allmendream ("Wealth is EARNED not distributed, so how could it be redistributed?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lewisglad
Sarah Palin Plagiarizes Newt Gingrich ... She even acknowledged, "Recently, Newt Gingrich, he had written a good article about Reagan".

Only our Sarah could attribute her words to Newt and still be guilty of plagiarizing from Newt. The left hates her! [I haven't firmly decided my vote, but that is another good reason to support Governor Palin.]

9 posted on 06/08/2009 10:30:01 AM PDT by TurtleUp (So this is how liberty dies - to thunderous applause!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lewisglad

Reagan, Palin, Gingrich: They all say the same things about bad democrat / communist ideas. What is the problem?


10 posted on 06/08/2009 10:30:15 AM PDT by Rapscallion (Empathy is the opposite of justice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lewisglad

Palin: Remember this? His vision for the Cold War? We win, they lose.

Gingrich/Shirley: On the inevitability of the Soviet Union, Reagan responded with a then shocking vision for the Cold War — “we win, they lose.”

Seems like both are quoting Reagan.


11 posted on 06/08/2009 10:33:41 AM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy
Yo, you morons - Palin said twice in her speech that she was paraphrasing Newt’s article. It isn’t plagarism if the original source is attributed, but don’t let that stop the Palin-bashers.

This piece didn't happen to be written by Carl Cameron, did it? SHEESH, I just got through reading the childish stuff about how Palin is planning to upstage Mr. Newt at the NRSC, some *insider* charge -- these people are so dang foolish, it's truly pathetic.

12 posted on 06/08/2009 10:34:01 AM PDT by MozarkDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: lewisglad

She cited Gingrich five times according to her lawyer, not two that the liberals state.


13 posted on 06/08/2009 10:35:13 AM PDT by aphid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: allmendream

And yet, 0bama can revise history, make all manner of false claims, yet he is touted as “sort of god.” Brudder!!


14 posted on 06/08/2009 10:36:01 AM PDT by MozarkDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: lewisglad

This was written by a David Knowles, sounds like Sarah Palin isn’t one of his favorites.


15 posted on 06/08/2009 10:36:58 AM PDT by jazusamo (But there really is no free lunch, except in the world of political rhetoric,.: Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cheetahcat
It is not good form to use another person's ideas and especially the expression of those ideas without acknowledgment.

Robert Hook published Newton's laws of motion, without attribution. Of course, Hook published them nine years before Newton, so attribution would have required prescience on Hook's part. Hook bore a life-long grudge against Newton for not acknowledging his contribution to “Newton's Laws”. In fact the whole apple falling from a tree story may have been an invention by Newton, since the episode occurred years before Hook's book.

16 posted on 06/08/2009 10:37:30 AM PDT by Lonesome in Massachussets (AGWT is very robust with respect to data. All observations confirm it at the 100% confidence level.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: lewisglad

Newt who?


17 posted on 06/08/2009 10:38:36 AM PDT by Seruzawa (Obamalama lied, the republic died.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lewisglad
Someday, somehow, at some point, the sea of imbeciles in this country of ours simply must wake up.

Right?

18 posted on 06/08/2009 10:40:27 AM PDT by workerbee (If you vote for Democrats, you are engaging in UnAmerican Activity.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lewisglad

“Ask not what your country can do for you...”

Visit the Kennedy website there’s some great stuff on this phrase. I thought it originated during WW1, but apparently the earliest reference they found was the mid-1800’s.


19 posted on 06/08/2009 10:42:10 AM PDT by Eagles2003
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lewisglad

Hi. I'm David Knowles and I'm a metrosexual.

20 posted on 06/08/2009 10:42:27 AM PDT by McGruff (Transparency and the rule of law will be the touchstones of this presidency - Obama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sarah Barracuda

“.these people are SICK”

They’ll contrive anything to hang this woman on it seems.


21 posted on 06/08/2009 10:42:46 AM PDT by AuntB (The right to vote in America: Blacks 1870; Women 1920; Native Americans 1925; Foreigners 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: lewisglad
Newt should be flattered, I'm offended...

Offended that media sh*t-wits like this are FALSIFYING this story so badly.

Isn't that LIBEL when it's in print like this and actionable in Court?

22 posted on 06/08/2009 10:44:11 AM PDT by Dead Corpse (III)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lewisglad
Palin: Remember this? His vision for the Cold War? We win, they lose.

Gingrich/Shirley: On the inevitability of the Soviet Union, Reagan responded with a then shocking vision for the Cold War -- "we win, they lose."

Does this analysis seem a bit overwrought? Two conservatives quoting the same man sound similar.

I'm shocked, I tell you, shocked!

23 posted on 06/08/2009 10:46:52 AM PDT by Aevery_Freeman (Our Last Best Hope: REPEAL THE 16th AMENDMENT!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lewisglad

Newt must not have been flattered. Does this explain why she’s out and he’s in at the big GOP event?


24 posted on 06/08/2009 10:47:54 AM PDT by crunk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lewisglad

Palin credited Newt. Twice. This is utter libtard nonsense.


25 posted on 06/08/2009 10:48:49 AM PDT by pissant (THE Conservative party: www.falconparty.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse
Isn't that LIBEL when it's in print like this and actionable in Court?

For public figures, the standard for Libel is much higher. You have to prove malice.

Interestingly, Palin's lawyer has written the ADN a 'cease & desist' letter, citing the 5 times that Newt was attributed in this speech. This could get interesting.

26 posted on 06/08/2009 10:49:27 AM PDT by Al B.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: lewisglad

Well then who did Newt plagurize, because I’ve heard those very words ever since Reagan left office.


27 posted on 06/08/2009 10:57:24 AM PDT by McGavin999 (How's that change old Hopey Dope promised you working out?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lewisglad

True, Palin did mention Gingrich twice in the speech,


Two, five or how many times Ma Palin mentioned Gingrich or Shirley should be easy to count. I suspect there is a word for word copy somewhere that has been posted online as very few things Palin haven’t been posted. A quick word search would end the speculation.


28 posted on 06/08/2009 10:58:46 AM PDT by deport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo
This was written by a David Knowles, sounds like Sarah Palin isn’t one of his favorites.

And what's really ironic about this is that, by his own admission, Knowles has cribbed his entire article from another article proffering this laughably contrived "gotcha" on Palin written by another man, Geoffrey Dunn of the Huffington Post.

As someone upthread said, it's kinda hard for Dunn & Knowles to make the charge of plagiarism stick when the alleged perpetrator credits her source no less than five times as Palin did.

Yet Knowles only credited Dunn once for fabricating this trumped up charge against Palin in the first place, which he's now promoting in his own article!

So, using his own criteria, exactly who is the true plagiarizer Knowles has just unwittingly exposed in this piece?

(Better watch out while hoisting those pesky petards, Mr. Knowles!)

29 posted on 06/08/2009 10:59:50 AM PDT by leilani
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: lewisglad

Personally, I’d like to see a ticket with two non-DC people in 2012. Romney/Palin would make sense. Newt can be an advisor on the campaign and chief of staff after the win...


30 posted on 06/08/2009 10:59:52 AM PDT by seamusnh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sarah Barracuda

The Left just wants the headline to continue the dogpile wherever & whenever Palin’s name comes up.


31 posted on 06/08/2009 11:04:05 AM PDT by Tallguy ("The sh- t's chess, it ain't checkers!" -- Alonzo (Denzel Washington) in "Training Day")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: lewisglad
"True, Palin did mention Gingrich twice in the speech, but why was Palin so dependent on his (and Shirley's) analysis of "The Gipper" that she had to lift its wording so often? And why not highlight each and every passage in the speech that relied on Gingrich/Shirley with a clause like, "As Gingrich and Shirley wrote..."?

There are only so many ways one can report on the words of another, in this case Reagan. Palin was NOT stealing anything from Gingrich she was repeating what Reagan said and gave him full attribution. This is a desperation move because Palin has at this time dispatched each and every "ethics" complaint brought against her by the lefty loonies. The only thing she needs to do now is file a harassment suit against those who made the complaints and drag them through the courts until the are dead broke and crying for mercy. Then she needs to tell them she will only back off if they admit publicly the complaints were frivolous and were at the behest of the DNC.

32 posted on 06/08/2009 11:05:54 AM PDT by 101voodoo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lewisglad

Is this the best shot you can take at Sarah? Try again.


33 posted on 06/08/2009 11:06:10 AM PDT by BlueStateBlues (Blue State business, Red State heart. . . . .Palin 2012----can't come soon enough!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lewisglad

Someone needs to point out to this alleged “reporter” that when first Newt quotes Ronald Reagan and then Sarah does the same, it doesn’t mean that Sarah is plagiarizing Newt!

“Plagiarize” refers to word-for-word copying of original ideas, not when two people idependently form similar thoughts!


34 posted on 06/08/2009 11:08:04 AM PDT by Redbob (W.W.J.B.D.: "What Would Jack Bauer Do?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: leilani

Wasn’t familiar with Knowles and took a few minutes to google, didn’t find much, His Politics Daily bio says he’s also a musician, might explain a little. :)


35 posted on 06/08/2009 11:09:12 AM PDT by jazusamo (But there really is no free lunch, except in the world of political rhetoric,.: Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: seamusnh

Romney, never in my book! Sorry.


36 posted on 06/08/2009 11:12:19 AM PDT by GOYAKLA (My Tee shirt for 2009-2012:" I voted FRED don't you wish you did")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: lewisglad

All that matters in a Palin vs. Gingrich matchup is that she hasn’t plagiarized his morals, or lack thereof. Ginrich is the Bill Clinton of our party when it comes to married sex affairs with interns. He is a repulsive lech.


37 posted on 06/08/2009 11:12:36 AM PDT by FreepShop1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: seamusnh
"Romney/Palin would make sense."

And Palin/Romney would make a lot more sense.

Finally:
Palin/AnyoneBut Romney would make the most sense of all.

Ever hear of "RomneyCare," or whatever that disastrous medical entitlement program is that he foisted off on the taxpayers of Massachusetts?

38 posted on 06/08/2009 11:14:47 AM PDT by Redbob (W.W.J.B.D.: "What Would Jack Bauer Do?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: deport
Two, five or how many times Ma Palin mentioned Gingrich or Shirley should be easy to count. I suspect there is a word for word copy somewhere that has been posted online as very few things Palin haven’t been posted. A quick word search would end the speculation.

Here is the text of Van Flein's (Palin lawyer) letter to the ADN. This is courtesy of C4P. Methinks Gov. Palin is through playing around with these people.

I am writing on behalf of Sarah Palin relative to the Anchorage Daily News’ (“ADN”) continued publication and re-publication of the story by Mr. Dunn that appears to be defamatory, malicious and just goes too far. We ask that the story, and the ADN link to this story, immediately cease.

Mr. Dunn has made the serious, and false, accusation that the Governor plagiarized text from Newt Gingrich. (Re-wording this in your story or Mr. Dunn’s story to the softer “lifted” is not a substantive difference, but it does reflect the fact that Mr. Dunn may now recognize that he was wrong in calling it “plagiarism”).

To evaluate this, we start with a definition of what “plagiarism” is and just as importantly, what it is not. Plagiarism is not reciting text originally authored by another. Rather, it is presenting somebody else’s expression of ideas without attribution or acknowledgement. See http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/plagiarized (“steal and pass off the ideas or words of another as one’s own: using (another’s production without crediting the source”).

I have a copy of the transcript of the speech given by Governor Palin. It is abundantly clear in context, and even in sub-context, that the overview of President Reagan’s legacy was attributed to Newt Gingrich. Before the text of paraphrased analysis was ever mentioned, the Governor clearly noted the source for her comments: “Recently, Newt Gingrich had written a good article about Reagan.” Thereafter, the Governor expressly referred to “Newt Gingrich” or the pronoun “he” or “he said” (all referring to Newt Gingrich). Thus, the commentary, paraphrase and analysis were acknowledged, attributed and sourced at the outset of the commentary—and at the end of the commentary. For example, the speech stated: “He said, regarding your dad Michael, he said we need to learn from his example that courage and persistence are keys to historic achievement.” Then, after the paraphrased comments, she again noted her source: “What Newt had written in this article....”

Far from “lifting” or plagiary, this is proper attribution in a political speech. The audience was made aware that Mr. Gingrich wrote about President Reagan’s legacy, and Governor Palin attributed her paraphrasing to Mr. Gingrich expressly and did so at the beginning and at the end of the paraphrasing. Labeling this type of commentary plagiarism is defamatory. It is also simply false. We ask that this article be withdrawn from your website and newspaper because of its errors.

Though there is considerable constitutional leeway for comment about public officials, statements made with malice are actionable. Actual malice is akin to deceit and misrepresentation. It is an intentional misrepresentation to assert, as fact, that Governor Palin failed to attribute her paraphrased commentary to Mr. Gingrich. It is also a statement made with reckless disregard for the truth. Either way, it is defamatory.

I am attaching a copy of the introduction. The paraphrased commentary was clearly attributed to Newt Gingrich, and no fair journalist should make the serious assertion that the Governor did not credit Mr. Gingrich with the comments he made about President Reagan. Please withdraw this article/commentary from your publication.


39 posted on 06/08/2009 11:18:51 AM PDT by Al B.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: lewisglad
[ Further analysis of the speech, however, suggests that Palin lifted many of its central ideas, and the way they were worded, from fellow conservative (and presumptive competitor in the 2012 race for president) Newt Gingrich. ]

-OR- shes on the same wavelength.. little difference..
Since Newt is usually correct on all issues..

With Sarah shes damned if she does and damned if she doesnt.

WHich means shes usually also correct on most issues..
About time for republicans to be tooting out of the same trumpet..

40 posted on 06/08/2009 11:25:10 AM PDT by hosepipe (This propaganda has been edited to include some fully orbed hyperbole....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lewisglad

I have a pet peeve about plagiarism. I love Sarah but she overdid it. She should have taken HALF of the Newt attributions, and gotten the rest from the source. Newt’s article should have sent her back to great Reagan speeches or editorials, and she should have borrowed more from Reagan than from Newt.

I do not think Sarah plagiarized, but she came too close for comfort.

With that said, her speech sounds great, and all three of them (Newt, Sarah, and President Reagan) are correct.


41 posted on 06/08/2009 11:29:12 AM PDT by Yaelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lonesome in Massachussets
“It is not good form to use another person's ideas and especially the expression of those ideas without acknowledgment.
Robert Hook published Newton's laws of motion, without attribution. Of course, Hook published them nine years before Newton, so attribution would have required prescience on Hook's part. Hook bore a life-long grudge against Newton for not acknowledging his contribution to “Newton's Laws”. In fact the whole apple falling from a tree story may have been an invention by Newton, since the episode occurred years before Hook's book”

But they are Reagan's Ideas and IMHO open to any real Conservative which she is BTW Newt went left with his warming Pandering.

42 posted on 06/08/2009 11:30:42 AM PDT by Cheetahcat (Zero the Wright kind of Racist! We are in a state of War with Democrats)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: lewisglad; All
...And Palin lifted, without attribution, whole sections of a 2005 Gingrich article in a speech she gave last Wednesday...

DEBUNKED.

Conservatives4Palin

...Apparently someone pointed out to Geoffrey that by citing Gingrich at least five times in her speech, Gov. Palin was attributing the words/ideas to him. She had no intention of pretending that it was hers. She was paraphrasing his words, but essentially using what he wrote. That’s why she cited his article five times....

43 posted on 06/08/2009 11:37:18 AM PDT by Virginia Ridgerunner (Sarah Palin is a smart missile aimed at the heart of the left!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Redbob; All

See Sarah on “Hannity” tonight!
“Palin/AnyoneBut Romney would make the most sense of all.” (Agree 100%)


44 posted on 06/08/2009 11:38:46 AM PDT by GOYAKLA (My Tee shirt for 2009-2012:" I voted FRED don't you wish you did")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: lewisglad
Either the author of this story is a LIAR or an IDOIT. If two people quote or summarize a primary source, they are both going to sound alike. This is not plagiarism. At least she credited the primary source unlike Joe Biden
45 posted on 06/08/2009 11:57:15 AM PDT by 11th Commandment (Proud Member of the DHS radical list since 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Al B.

My point is that something like this should be easy to refute or prove as I suspect the speech was posted online at least once. Then as the lawyer points out via the speech contex it is easy to show Ma Palin gave attributions. Dead horse.


46 posted on 06/08/2009 12:18:30 PM PDT by deport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo
His Politics Daily bio says he’s also a musician, might explain a little. :)

LOL. Well then there's still hope for him if he switches instruments. He's obviously pretty rotten at the petard, but maybe he could try his hand hoisting something with less potential for backfiring, like the alto sax, maybe. ;-)

47 posted on 06/08/2009 12:46:50 PM PDT by leilani
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: lewisglad

Is there now a copyright on political thought? Geesh.


48 posted on 06/08/2009 12:48:55 PM PDT by NormsRevenge (Semper Fi ... Godspeed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

Wait did Palin throw Rush under the bus too?


49 posted on 06/08/2009 3:55:17 PM PDT by Three if by government
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Three if by government

No idea on that. I haven’t been following newz too closely last few days. She’d need a big bus , No, make that a big amphib duckboat if she did. I saw a couple in Ketchikan on Saturday. ;-)


50 posted on 06/08/2009 3:59:07 PM PDT by NormsRevenge (Semper Fi ... Godspeed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-54 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson