The Holy Spirit is very concerned about Freemasons and waited 226 years to tell Dianne Reidy

Mediate – Dianne Reidy, the stenographer who went on a strange rant on the House floor Wednesday night, has now made a public comment, in an e-mail sent to Fox News… Greta Van Susteren posted the e-mail on her Gretawire blog:

“For the past 2 and 1/2 weeks, the Holy Spirit has been waking me up in the middle of the night and preparing me (through my reluctance and doubt) to deliver a message in the House Chamber. That is what I did last night”

Once again, here’s the message the “Holy Spirit” spent 2.5 weeks preparing Dianne Reidy (via insomnia) to deliver personally to the House floor:

“He will not be mocked. He will not be mocked. Don’t touch me. He will not be mocked. The greatest deception here is this is not one nation under God. It never was. Had it been, it would not have been… no! It would not have been …the Constitution would not have been written by Freemasons and go against God. You cannot serve two masters! You cannot serve two masters. Praise be to God, Lord Jesus Christ!(Listen)

Now we know: the Holy Spirit is very concerned about Freemasons and the U.S. Constitution and determined, 226 years later, that Reidy and Fox News would be the best way to get the word out.

Jon Stewart: Government Shutstorm from Bullshit Mountain

Stewart points out: “Outraged, [Fox News' false-outrage-exploitation-engine] will storm the barricades to make sure these, maybe, 100 veterans get into the [WWII] Memorial while forgetting that it’s their allies asinine budget shenanigans that not only shut it in the first place, but also put Meals on Wheels at risk–a program that serves meals to over 500,000 veterans a year.”

After playing a montage of Republicans describing their love for “small government,” Stewart summarizes: “You hate the government. Yet you rail like banshees if any of the services and benefits YOU like are taken away.” Echoing a famous scene from Steve Martin’s The Jerk, he says, “I don’t need any government… except these memorials… and Social Security… and the paddle game.”

He continues, “And THEN, in the middle of your outrage and sadness over the government shutdown, well… you always wind up giving away the bullshit game.” Stewart cuts to a video of Michele Bachmann saying, “We’re really very energized today, we’re very strong. This is about the happiest I’ve seen members in a long time.”

WashingtonPost — One of the last remaining veterans of World War II in Congress called Thursday afternoon for his colleagues to end the government shutdown, suggesting that members of the legislative body who have appeared at the World War II memorial this week are not doing enough to support those who served in the conflict. “If this Congress truly wishes to recognize the sacrifice and bravery of our World War II veterans and all who’ve come after, it will end this shutdown and reopen our government now,” John Dingell (D-Mich.) said in a joint statement issued with former Republican senator Bob Dole of Kansas, a combat-injured veteran of World War II.

What? Photo ops with WWII veterans in wheelchairs isn’t doing enough for veterans during the shutdown? That must be a mistake.

Related: 

Video: Rep. Randy Neugebauer (R-TX) bullies a National Park Service Ranger

Fox host: “I want to punish these people. Sorry to say that, but that’s what I want to do.”

“…I’m sick and tired of a massive, bloated federal bureaucracy living on our backs, and taking money out of us, a lot more money than most of us earn in the private sector, then getting a furlough, and then getting their money back at the end of it. Sorry, I’m not for that. I want to punish these people. Sorry to say that, but that’s what I want to do.”
— Stuart Varney, Fox Business host on furloughed federal workers.

When Varney says “us,” he doesn’t actually, literally mean usVarney’s net worth is $10 million. So this is exactly like when Willard Romney complained that government workers earn more than he does.

In reality, the super wealthy want the conservative base to believe and agree with the notion that a middle-class wage is an unfathomable luxury that shouldn’t be paid in the public sector AND shouldn’t be something that ordinary people even aspire to in the private sector. Stuart Varney must resent that he’s not getting a new tax cut this year for his income bracket.

Unfortunately for everyone, the Fox viewing audience gobbles up this delicious bullshit and always holds out their plates for seconds. Be happy with your Walmart wages, baggers. Keep your standards low and keep voting for the one percent. Praise Jesus! 

Sarah shat a new zinger-turd!

“Where is our commander in chief? We’re talking now more new interventions. I say until we know what we’re doing, until we have a commander in chief who knows what he’s doing, well, let these radical Islamic countries who aren’t even respecting basic human rights, where both sides are slaughtering each other as they scream over an arbitrary red line, ‘Allah Akbar,’ I say until we have someone who knows what they’re doing, I say let Allah sort it out.

Sarah Palin speaking on Syria and American foreign policy Saturday at the Faith and Freedom Coalition conference. (video)

And, really, what’s going on with this Bumpit-combover-dead-animal situation on top of Palin’s head?

No wonder Fox “News” hired her back.

In case you wondered: “The statement shows how far Palin has drifted from former running mate Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who is the chief Senate proponent of U.S. military action to help the Syrian rebels.” — John McCain, Real Man Of Genius

McCain’s entire historical legacy should be this woman.

CNN blew it. MSNBC got it right.

POLITICO: And when the dust from Boston Marathon bombing clears, viewers will remember two things about the cable news coverage of this historic event: that John King blew it, and that Pete Williams got it right.

On Wednesday, while CNN was self-destructing after falsely reporting that a suspect has been taken into custody, Williams rightly reported otherwise. Through Thursday, he reported what was known, while resisting the temptation to speculate on what he did not. Then, in the early hours of Friday morning, Williams was among the first to report on the ongoing developments of the search for the suspects — including that one of the suspects was dead and that both suspects were legal residents with foreign military training. [...]

“MSNBC isn’t a news network — they don’t do news,” is something I’ve often heard folks at CNN say.

This week’s coverage of the Boston Marathon bombings demonstrated that that is a false argument. MSNBC doesn’t need to “do news,” because they have the resources of NBC — they have Williams, Michael Isikoff, Richard Espositio and Jonathan Dienst, just to name a few. CNN may have more boots on the ground, but in the chaotic 21st century media environment, viewers want quality not quantity.

Morons among us

The usual suspects:

We can do better, America.

LOL Sean Hannity

  
  
via sandandglass

Sen. Lindsey Graham’s “Final Solution”

I hope people actually pay attention to what Lindsey Graham is proposing here, especially with all the effort that’s been going into the rebranding and remarketing of the Republican Party and their “message.”  Graham is saying that because of the sequester’s automatic cuts to the military (about 7.5% out of an astronomically huge defense budget), he thinks we should cut the health coverage of about 30 million people to pay for that shortfall and protect the DoD’s budget.

JOSH ISRAEL | THINK PROGRESS: Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) said Sunday the government should protect the Defense Department from automatic spending cuts by slashing $1.2 trillion from the Affordable Care Act. During an appearance on Fox News Sunday, Graham suggested that the sequester’s across-the-board cuts to federal spending, including about a roughly 7.5 percent reduction in military spending, would be “destroying the military.” But rather than agree to President Obama’s proposed alternatives to the sequester, the South Carolina Republican said we should save money by eliminating health care for the 30 million people covered by the Affordable Care Act:

GRAHAM: Well, all I can say is the commander-in-chief thought — came up with the idea of sequestration, destroying the military and putting a lot of good programs at risk. It is my belief — take Obamacare and put it on the table. You can make $86,000 a year in income and still get a government subsidy under Obamacare. Obamacare is destroying health care in this country and people are leaving the private sector, because their companies cannot afford to offer Obamacare and if you want to look at ways to find $1.2 trillion in savings over the next decade, look at Obamacare, don’t destroy the military and cut blindly across the board…

JOSH ISRAEL: But Graham’s “solution” also misses a key reality: Obamacare actually reduced the deficit. His proposal to put its elimination on the table would mean increasing the budget deficit by an estimated $109 billion over the same 10-year period, according to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office.

JOHN COLE: The notion that miniscule cuts to the most bloated military in the world [will destroy it] is, in and of itself, offensive to common sense. That this douchebag wants millions of Americans to die without health coverage to keep shuffling three quarters of a trillion to said military really says it all.

CHARLES JOHNSON: And if you’re tempted to believe Lindsey Graham’s risible statement that a 7.5% cut would “destroy the military,” just take a quick look at this simple chart showing the world’s top 5 military spenders in 2012.

Another thing, they can all freely blame Obama for the sequester on Fox ‘news,’ naturally, but they don’t get away with it so easily on other networks:

IGOR VOLSKY reports that “ABC News’ Jonathan Karl confronted Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) over his past support for the sequester, just as the one-time GOP vice presidential candidate sought to blame President Obama for the automatic across-the-board cuts scheduled to go into effect on March 1.”

“Ryan’s argument is fundamentally dishonest, as he is one of the Republicans responsible for creating the sequester in the first place. In the summer of 2011, Republicans demanded spending cuts to offset a debt ceiling increase and refused to consider new revenues in those negotiations. That standoff produced the Budget Control Act, which Ryan voted for and promoted. The law included spending caps and a devastating sequester as a way to motivate a bipartisan Super Committee to find $1.2 trillion in spending cuts.

After the Super Committee failed to agree on a spending reduction package, Ryan — then the GOP’s vice presidential candidate — consistently railed against the sequester mechanism he previously supported, calling it “reckless” and “devastating.” Two months later, he wants the sequester to go into effect and may incorporate its savings in his upcoming budget.”

It’s as if Graham and Ryan would have us believe the sequester was never voted on and passed as law through Congress by Republicans.

Not only is Ryan’s argument “fundamentally dishonest,” but Paul Ryan, the man, is fundamentally dishonest. And I think most of us can agree that’s a standardized requirement for the chosen ‘rock stars‘ of the GOP.

Here’s why mainstream America has given up on the Republican Party

“The Republican Party should be less worried about its image and more worried about its substance. No party that dismantles the American Jobs Act, blocks the Violence Against Women Act and defeats the DREAM Act can expect to win the hearts and minds of mainstream America, let alone a governing majority.

For crying out loud, Republicans in the chamber couldn’t even manage to stand up and applaud for protecting voting rights and helping kids go to pre-school. Instead of continuing to oppose everything Democrats stand for, Republicans should explain to the American people why the only thing Republicans seem to consistently stand for —- more tax cuts for the rich —- didn’t create jobs and ward off our financial crisis when those cuts were in place.”

— “Republicans need to quit complaining and start cooperating with Obama” by Sally Kohn at FOX News [thechosenjuan]

Fox news’ credibility at all-time low

“We continue to find that Democrats trust most TV news sources other than Fox, while Republicans don’t trust anything except Fox. News preferences are very polarizing along party lines.” — Dean Debnam, President of Public Policy Polling, in a press release on a new poll released on American trust in its broadcast news stations. Fox News’ Credibility Declines (PDF).

The Huffington Post reports that Fox news’ credibility has fallen to an all-time low:

Fox News’ credibility has fallen 9 percent since three years ago, according to new Public Policy Polling (PPP) results released on Wednesday.

The annual poll asks participants to rate their trust in multiple networks including Fox News, MSNBC, CNN, PBS, Comedy Central, ABC News, CBS News and NBC News. According to PPP’s press release:

Just like its actual ratings, Fox News has hit a record low in the four years that we’ve been doing this poll. 41% of voters trust it to 46% who do not. To put those numbers into some perspective the first time we did this poll, in 2010, 49% of voters trusted it to 37% who did not.

Just like last year, researchers also found that Fox News is both the least trusted and most trusted network when compared to the other networks in the survey. Thirty-four percent said they trust Fox News the most, while 39 percent said they trust it the least.

We’ll give you five reasons why fewer people trust Fox News than ever before

  • They misrepresented the unemployment rate
  • They misinformed viewers about Benghazi.
  • They blamed non-existent ‘massive layoffs’ on Obama.
  • They got almost all of their climate coverage wrong.
  • They don’t cover big stories.

Maybe some of Fox’s viewers are tired of being the most misinformed?

Forbes: Fox audience members are far less informed than most TV news watchers. A poll by Farleigh Dickinson University in New Jersey showed that of all the news channels out there, Fox News viewers are the least informed.


Graph: Section 4: Demographics and Political Views of News Audiences | Pew Research Center

Orwell 101: the GOP tries out some new words to adjust for ‘language errors’

#1: Ix-nay on ape-ray abies-bay comments

Think Progress: “On Tuesday afternoon, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) delivered a speech that sought to “rebrand” the GOP as a party that can advance legislation that would improve the lives of the “most vulnerable” Americans…. But a closer look behind Cantor’s policy proposals reveals that House Republicans are still more interested in sounding compassionate than ensuring economic advancement for middle and lower income voters.”

Here are 8 reasons why the new rebranded GOP is just the old GOP (but with new words!):

1. SCHOOL FUNDING
2. HIGHER EDUCATION
3. WORKING MOTHERS
4. TAX REFORM
5. IMMIGRATION
6. OBAMACARE
7. MEDICARE
8. MEDICAID 

Read Cantor’s spiffy, new ‘rebranded’ version of GOP policy on the issues above, vs. the same, old, unchanging reality of their policy here.

-

Charlie Pierce hilariously takes apart Cantor’s psyops, comparing it to “Let me tell you about the benefits to your family of fine vinyl siding.” or “Has anyone spoken to you recently about a reverse mortgage?”

-

Frank Rich“The party is what it is. This idea that it’s something else is a fantasy and they’re going to have to get real about it and face the party they have and change it from within, not with stunts involving spending money on advertising.”

-

WATCH JON STEWART discuss the rebranding effort currently underway on Fox ‘news.’

Raw Story:  Conservative strategist Frank Luntz, for instance, has called on Republican candidates to “adjust” their “language errors.” [...]  

Luntz said Republicans should stop using the phrase “smaller government” and instead advocate “more effective and efficient government” because voters don’t care about the size of government.

“If you say you want smaller government, the electorate rejects it,” Stewart elaborated. “But if you say you want the government to function more efficiently, the electorate likes it, even though that’s clearly not what you believe.”

Luntz even suggested that instead of talking about controlling or cutting Social Security and Medicare, Republican should talk about saving and strengthening the popular government programs. Though Stewart, amazed at Luntz’s audacity, noted that strengthening Social Security and Medicare was the opposite of what Republicans were proposing.

“Save and strengthen does sound better than the Republican’s actual plan for entitlements, which would cut them, which sounds shitty,” he remarked.

-

Click for larger:

via huffpostpolitics

Republican in-fighting (or Dr. Frankenstein vs. his Monster)

What could be better than watching Republicans “Fox News” each other?

MMFA: Fox News political analyst Karl Rove and Erick Erickson, the network’s newest contributor, are at war over the political direction of the Republican Party.  [...] The Times went on to report that the creation of [the Conservative Victory Project] demonstrates “the establishment is taking steps to fight back against Tea Party groups and other conservative organizations that have wielded significant influence in backing candidates who ultimately lost seats to Democrats in the general election.” But Tea Party-affiliated conservative media figures aren’t going quietly, and some of the fire at Rove is coming from inside the Fox News tent. Erickson, who has regularly supported right-wing primary candidates over less ideologically rigid Republican ones, writes today on his RedState blog that GOP candidates supported by Conservative Victory Project should be targeted for defeat. He also mocks the effectiveness of American Crossroads, writing, “Thank God they are behind this. In 2012, they spent hundreds of millions of rich donors’ money and had jack to show for it.”

-

Steve Benen discusses the GOP’s increasingly deep schisms and infighting:

In public, Republicans insist their biggest problem is rhetorical — they need to identify a better way to sell their ideas to voters. In private, Republicans focus more on their primary problem — GOP leaders are convinced that the party would be in far better shape right now were it not for rank-and-file Republican voters nominating unelectable loons in so many key races. [...] Enter Karl Rove’s operation to the rescue.

The biggest donors in the Republican Party are financing a new group to recruit seasoned candidates and protect Senate incumbents from challenges by far-right conservatives and Tea Party enthusiasts who Republican leaders worry could complicate the party’s efforts to win control of the Senate.

The group, the Conservative Victory Project, is intended to counter other organizations that have helped defeat establishment Republican candidates over the last two election cycles. It is the most robust attempt yet by Republicans to impose a new sense of discipline on the party, particularly in primary races.

[...] Rove and his allies argue, “Listen to us or we’ll be stuck with another bunch of candidates like Akin, Mourdock, O’Donnell, and Angle.” Simultaneously, the Club for Growth and its allies argue, “Listen to us or we’ll be stuck with Karl Rove’s 99% failure rate.”

The opportunity for a round of bitter proxy fights will materialize very soon: Steve King in Iowa, Paul Broun in Georgia, and Joe Miller in Alaska are each poised to launch right-wing Senate bids, and by most measures, these candidates are so far from the mainstream they’re very likely to fail — after winning their respective primaries.

-

Andy Kroll: With Rove’s new super-PAC in the mix, the GOP’s slate of 2014 primaries will be even nastier than expected in states such as Iowa, Georgia, and Kentucky, among others. The GOP needs to win six seats in 2014 to take back control of the Senate, and if that requires some intraparty combat, the Conservative Victory Fund looks ready to go to war. By the end of 2014’s primary season, don’t be surprised, to borrow a phrase from Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, to see quite a lot of blood and teeth left on the floor.

-

Politico: Both the Club for Growth and the Senate Conservatives Fund – two of the most prominent groups that have boosted candidates on the right – mocked the new initiative as yet another hapless establishment-side attempt to muzzle the GOP base. Matt Hoskins, executive director of the Senate Conservatives Fund, branded it the “Conservative Defeat Project.” “The Conservative Defeat Project is yet another example of the Republican establishment’s hostility toward its conservative base. Rather than listening to the grassroots and working to advance their principles, the establishment has chosen to declare war on the party’s most loyal supporters,” Hoskins said. “If they keep this up, the party will remain in the wilderness for decades to come.”

-

In other words, it must be Obama’s fault.

Also too, let’s not ignore the fact that this is yet another fantastic money-making opportunity for Karl Rove and the Club for Growth. It’s the new grift! Start sending your pennies now, rubes.

Bill Maher explains why Sarah Palin is about to make a lot of money

“Survival seeds. Also known as… seeds.”

Bill Maher explains why Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh do so well financially – and why it’s that conservative business model which Palin will undoubtedly cash in on as well:

“They don’t care about winning elections; they care about separating rubes from their money. They discovered that there’s a fortune to be made by keeping a small portion of America under the illusion that they are always under attack, from Mexicans or ACORN or Planned Parenthood or gays or takers, global warming hoaxers — it doesn’t matter. They don’t want a majority; they want a mailing list, a list of the kind of gullible ‘Honey Boo Boos’ out there who think that there’s a ‘War on Christmas’ and the Socialist policies of our Kenyan President have been so disastrous that the end of the world is coming.

[...] Glenn Beck has only 300,000 subscribers, so they’ll never be a majority. But it doesn’t matter. Maybe they can only vote once every two years, but they can buy the same book every three weeks… the exact same book, over and over and over again.

I don’t know why being a Republican means needing to have your faith recharged five times a day like Dick Cheney’s heart. Because there’s no comparable industry on the left devoted to separating liberals from their cash. I mean, unless you count Whole Foods.”

Fox’s Chris Wallace to NRA’s Wayne LaPierre: “That’s ridiculous and you know it, Sir!”

“The most basic right is to protect yourself. If you limit the American public’s access to [assault weapons] semi-automatic technology, you limit their ability to survive.”Wayne LaPierre, on Fox News Sunday, arguing that banning assault weapons limited the ‘ability to survive’ and that high-capacity magazines should not be outlawed because women need more bullets.

Paul Krugman on ABC’s This Week“The NRA is now revealed as an insane organization, What strikes me is we’ve actually gotten a glimpse into the mindset, though, of the pro-gun people and we’ve seen certainly Wayne LaPierre and some of these others… It’s bizarre. They have this vision that we’re living in a ‘Mad Max’ movie and that nothing can be done about it, that America cannot manage unless everybody’s prepared to shoot intruders, that — the idea that we have a police forces that provides public safety is somehow totally impractical, despite the fact that, you know, that is, in fact, the way we live.”

Think Progress: During a heated exchange with NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre on Sunday, [Fox host Chris Wallace] played a clip of a now infamous NRA ad criticizing Obama for relying on Secret Service to guard his children and asked if the organization believed that every child in America faces a threat similar to that of the Obama kids. LaPierre said that they do, leading Wallace to forcefully push back against the gun chief, saying, “that’s ridiculous and you know it, Sir!

Daily Intelligencer: Wallace then asked LaPierre, who showed up to the Fox News studio with armed guards, whether he counted as “an out-of-touch elite, because you have security.” LaPierre skirted the issue, explaining that, “We’ve had all kinds of threats coming to us. I don’t deny anybody the right to security when they need it. What I am saying is, it’s ridiculous, Chris, for all the elites and all the powerful and privileged, the titans of industry to send their kids to schools where there is armed security, to have access to semi-automatic technology.”

TPM: LaPierre argued that background checks were ineffective, possibly part of a government plot against gun owners, and not a real legislative option because of a powerful “mental health lobby.” He noted that the NRA used to support universal checks but said special interests surrounding mental health and privacy had derailed the effort and led to NRA leaders throwing in the towel. “The instant check was actually the NRA’s proposal. We offered it as an amendment to the Brady Bill. And I’ve been in this fight for 20 years. We supported it. We put it on the books. But I have finally become convinced after fighting to get the mental records computerized for 20 years and watching the mental health lobby, the HIPAA laws, the AMA oppose it, I don’t think it’s going to happen,” he said.

Bob Cesca: The gun control advocacy group, Mayors Against Illegal Guns, paid for a 30 second ad to run during the Super Bowl, using Wayne LaPierre’s unearthed statements on universal background checks:  

“We think it’s reasonable to provide mandatory, instant criminal background checks for every sale at every gun show. No loopholes anywhere, for anyone.” Wayne LaPierre, public testimony from 1999.

Why the change? What does the NRA stand to lose with instant background checks and closing loopholes, like unchecked gunshow sales? As with most things in America, follow the money:

Tim Dickerson | Rolling Stone: “The shift in LaPierre’s rhetoric underscores a radical transformation within the NRA. Billing itself as the nation’s “oldest civil rights organization,” the NRA still claims to represent the interests of marksmen, hunters and responsible gun owners. But over the past decade and a half, the NRA has morphed into a front group for the firearms industry, whose profits are increasingly dependent on the sale of military-bred weapons like the assault rifles used in the massacres at Newtown and Aurora, Colorado. “When I was at the NRA, we said very specifically, ‘We do not represent the fi rearm industry,'” says Richard Feldman, a longtime gun lobbyist who left the NRA in 1991. “We represent gun owners. End of story.” But in the association’s more recent history, he says, “They have really gone after the gun industry.”

“Today’s NRA stands astride some of the ugliest currents of our politics, combining the “astroturf” activism of the Tea Party, the unlimited and undisclosed “dark money” of groups like Karl Rove’s Crossroads GPS, and the sham legislating conducted on behalf of the industry through groups like the American Legislative Exchange Council. “This is not your father’s NRA,” says Josh Sugarmann, executive director of the Violence Policy Center, a top gun-industry watchdog. Feldman is more succinct, calling his former employer a “cynical, mercenary political cult.”

The NRA’s alignment with an $11.7 billion industry has fed tens of millions of dollars into the association’s coffers, helping it string together victories that would have seemed fantastic just 15 years ago. The NRA has hogtied federal regulators, censored government data about gun crime and blocked renewal of the ban on assault weaponry and high-capacity magazines, which expired in 2004. The NRA secured its “number-one legislative priority” in 2005, a law blocking liability lawsuits that once threatened to bankrupt gunmakers and expose the industry’s darkest business practices. Across the country, the NRA has opened new markets for firearms dealers by pushing for state laws granting citizens the right to carry hidden weapons in public and to allow those who kill in the name of self-defense to get off scot-free.”

NRA’S Newtown ad campaign: BUY MORE GUNS! 

Hey, Fox “news” viewers: you’ve been grifted!

Don’t cry for me, Wasilla.

Think Progress: According to a news analysis by the Smart Politics project of the the University of Minnesota’s Humphrey School of Public Affairs, during former Gov. Sarah Palin’s tenure as a contributor to Fox News—which ended last week with the decision not to renew her contractPalin was paid $15.85 per word she spoke on the network.

Here’s some of the “Palin by the numbers” breakdown:

-$1 million: Sarah Palin’s annual salary as a Fox News analyst.

-189,221: Words Palin spoke on Fox during her three-year contract.

-$1.25 million: Palin’s advance for her memoir Going Rogue.

-469,000: copies of Going Rogue sold in its first week on the market. The memoir would go on to sell 2,670,000 copies in 2009.

-797,955: Copies of America By Heart, Palin’s second book, sold in 2010.

-$100,000: Palin’s speakers’ fee, as negotiated by the Washington Speakers Bureau, as of 2010.

-$200,000: The reported low estimate for Palin’s per-episode fee for Sarah Palin’s Alaska, her TLC show, which ran for a single season. One of the reasons the show ultimately wasn’t renewed? Palin’s salary demands for a second year.

-$15,000-$30,000: Bristol Palin’s range of speaker’s fees, as of 2010.

What does it say about the state of the modern conservative movement that BRISTOL PALIN is paid $15,000 – $30,000 in speaking fees on issues like teen pregnancy and ABSTINENCE! Seriously, if Bristol hadn’t gotten pregnant at 17, where would she be now?

$15.85 per word, Rubes. What’d you learn?