I read the last sentence as a sarcastic comment on how her haters see her.
“I read the last sentence as a sarcastic comment on how her haters see her.”
I can see it both ways. One of the things about sarcasm, though, and you know this if you tend to make sarcastic remarks, is that you have to make some kind of determination as to whether your audience will or is capable of “getting it.” You have to know them some, and they have to know you some. It’s really not much different than having the discretion to know that if you can’t resist telling Polish jokes that maybe you should find out if the people you just met are Polish before you launch.
A lot lot lot of people don’t or can’t deal with sarcasm without knowing you. That doesn’t make them dumb or you smart, in my book. If your initial approach to people is one of hard sarcasm, you’ll offend many of them. I’d even say *most* of them.
So, I’ll concede your point from the theoretical standpoint (eg; it’s possible) But I am not so facile in accepting as genuine a single concession, the first and only, from an entity that has attacked “me” or “my ideas” or “my opinions” or “our views” three hundred times. Viciously, with absolute abandon of anything I’ve ever considered any kind of couth. It’s kind of a question of balance. As I’ve said, the attacks against Palin went miles beyond anything I can recall, and were especially puerile, loathsome in their reach, and plenty of them were published in HuffPo. They start from a very deep hole is what I’m saying.
Let’s see the next article. HuffPo has to earn my trust, and I don’t trust former mortal enemies easily.