Megyn Kelly's new show is already starting to bomb.

Why does everybody hate me?

Courtesy of Politico:  

Megyn Kelly’s new NBC hour following the “Today” show, in which the former Fox News star shuns political interviews for a softer, more lifestyle-driven focus, premiered on Monday to jeers from many critics. 

The Washington Post’s Hank Stuever was particularly cutting: “The debut was like watching a network try to assemble its own Bride of Frankenstein, using parts of Ellen DeGeneres, Kelly Ripa and whatever else it can find.”

CNN’s Brian Lowry allowed that, “It's absurdly early, of course, to draw any conclusions about the efficacy of the Kelly experiment.” Still, he continued, “After tepid marks for her prime time newsmagazine and now her addition to ‘Today,’ it's worth considering that NBC News brass leapt at the opportunity to snag a high-profile news star without having fully thought through how best to deploy her.” 

Jezebel also mocked the show, saying Kelly looked like “a HomeGoods catalog brought to life” and Newsweek was critical, as well.

This is how Time Magazine described Kelly's debut:

The host — a law school alum whose best-known skill has long been her prosecutorial zeal — served as her own defense attorney throughout the hour, pushing the case that she's not the person you remember from her years of political coverage. "The truth is, I'm kind of done with politics for now," Kelly said in a lengthy opening monologue that told her entire life story from childhood to TV stardom. "It's everywhere, everywhere, and I'm just like, it's over."

It's not just the sentiment that makes Kelly's case; it's the bearing. Kelly, a precise, crystalline wordsmith when in takedown mode, awkwardly sprinkled slang into her speech. She talked with her hands as though someone had said it was humanizing. When the cast of Today walked out with mimosas, Kelly declared, "O.M.G.!" A person who until as recently as last summer, during her Sunday-night newsmagazine show, sought to represent herself as deeply engaged in issues of the public interest now just thought it was over. Have a mimosa!

Can you say "disingenuous?"  Sure you can.

But done with politics or not, Kelly simply could not quite get that conservative stank off of her.

Courtesy of Yahoo News: 

The former FOX News correspondent welcomed the cast of "Will & Grace" onto her new morning show on Monday morning ahead of the hit NBC sitcom's revival, and a comment that she made while talking to a superfan of the show is garnering Kelly criticism on Twitter.

Kelly brought lawyer Russell Turner onto the stage to meet his idols saying, "Russell didn't know this was going to happen!" 

"Is it true that you became a lawyer -- and you became gay! -- because of Will?" she jokingly asked. 

After informing Turner that he would be getting tickets to a live "Will & Grace" taping and a behind-the-scenes tour of the set, Kelly turned to him and said her most head-turning statement of the morning. 

"I don't know about the lawyer thing, but I think the 'Will & Grace' thing and the gay thing is going to work out great," she said.

Well that "gay thing" may work out, but it very unlikely that this "new show thing" will.

How many attempts to repackage this Fox News turd does this make now?  

Donald Trump bitches about his critics during commencement speech at Liberty University.

Courtesy of ABC News: 

President Trump in a commencement address at Liberty University both went after his critics and emphasized the role faith plays in America. 

“The fact is, no one has achieved anything significant without a chorus of critics standing on the sidelines explaining why it can't be done,” Trump told the crowd in Lynchburg, Virginia, in what was his first commencement speech as president. “Nothing is easier or more pathetic than being a critic...The future belongs to the people who follow their heart no matter what the critics say because they truly believe in their vision.”

It should be noted that virtually NOTHING that Donald Trump promised during his campaign has actual been accomplished, and that it is very unlikely that any of it WILL be accomplished.

It should also be pointed out that Liberty University is probably one of the VERY few universities where Trump could speak without being drowned out by the boos, much like the ones that shut down his Secretary of Education when she tried to deliver a commencement speech to a group not handpicked to stay silent.

After Trump's October visit to Liberty University there was a protest letter issued by some of the students, however verbally protesting a speaker is simply not tolerated in that environment.

However Liberty would seem overall to be the perfect conservative bubble in which Trump can lie to his heart's content, because after all these students have just been lied to for the past four years anyhow. 

Of course Trump advises these students to ignore their critics, because he himself simply cannot handle protests or criticism, that is why he has protesters removed from his rallies, and almost daily attacks his critics on Twitter.

The Fake Media is working overtime today!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 12, 2017

And his advice to these students is of course terrible, because often your critics are simply pointing out that something you are doing is dangerous, foolish, or reckless.

Which I think sums up the Trump presidency in a nutshell.

The good news about Donald Trump's SNL appearance is that there is really no good news about Donald Trump's SNL appearance.

So as I stated yesterday, I did not see a single moment of last night's SNL.

I have also avoided any videos of the show on the internet, and have tuned the station when cable news has wanted to talk about it. So essentially I have done significantly better at boycotting this show than I have keeping my pledge to stop eating cheese.

God I love cheese!

Anyhow I did a quick search this morning, and found that many of the people who DID watch really wish they would have joined my boycott.

Courtesy of the AV Club: 

Look, no one was going to be happy here. The political discourse surrounding this election is so entrenched and without nuance that the response to this episode will undoubtedly be strident and abusive, no matter where it comes from. (Let me show you the folder of messages I’ve gotten in response to the article I wrote about the upcoming show sometime.) The chances of this doomed pairing of host and show was, well, doomed, from the moment it was announced. But neither Trump nor the people at SNL rose to the challenge of presenting something thoughtful, or entertaining, or even just plain funny. Given an opportunity to express themselves in what, I maintain, is still one of the most unique, excitingly risky live TV shows of all time, neither camp raised the level of public debate, made a single memorable joke, or did anything but confirm my worst fears about what this show would be. Tonight’s episode was bad satire, bad comedy, bad TV. SNL isn’t great political comedy—it swings and misses more often than not, mainly because it doesn’t commit to the swing. But when it connects, it still has some power. An episode like this isn’t just failing to suit up. It’s throwing the game.

Courtesy of The Wrap: 

Saturday’s broadcast was an extension of “SNL 40” and of the franchise’s laziest, worst impulses. It’s telling that the most clever line of the night came not from anyone on the show, but from Stop Racism PAC, the group that offered the bounty to anyone who would interrupt the broadcast and had, before the East Coast feed had ended, promised to pay it to David for his scripted “Trump’s a racist” line. 

“Joke or not, it’s true,” the group said in a statement.

Courtesy of The Hollywood Reporter: 

Appearing at either the very beginning or very end of at least three or four skits, plus a monologue that has to have been rushed through at a record pace, Trump hardly had any time to flail or succeed. Trump's funniest moment, and the only moment in which he attempted to move, came as he danced for 10 seconds in a parody of Drake's "Hotline Bling" video. It wasn't bad! Other non-political skits found Trump pretending to tweet mean things about the cast members participating in a not-funny skit, stumbling in as an opportunistic record producer in an already-dead family dinner dud and complaining that he didn't have enough time for his laser harp solos in a sketch in which he stumbled over his few lines, which wouldn't have worked anyway. 

Courtesy of the Chicago Tribune: 

For weeks, people had fretted about Donald Trump, Republican presidential candidate, despoiler of a Chicago skyscraper and former NBC reality star, being given a chance to host "Saturday Night Live." Free advertising, they said. Unfair! 

But the show that aired Saturday was one of the genuine duds in the recent history of the NBC late-night warhorse, and that's saying something. "SNL" didn't seem to know what to do with Trump beyond, mostly, a string of late appearances in sketches that sapped whatever meager power they had managed to muster.

Courtesy of Yahoo TV:  

The only entity that came off worse than Donald Trump was SNL. Turns out, this really was just a craven move for ratings. There was no attempt by Lorne Michaels and company to use Trump as a critique of himself, no moment that did not feel vetted by the candidate. But the way this campaign season is going, the insulting, often repulsive content of this SNL show won’t matter. All that’s important to Trump — constant, pervasive ubiquity in the pop culture — was achieved. 

I don't think I have ever been more happy to have boycotted a show in my life. 

You know the problem with Donald Trump on SNL is that HE is the punchline. You cannot make effect jokes when the punchline is standing right in front of you the entire time. 

Now the only question is when will the Republicans see that as well?

(H/T to Politicususa.)

Fans of American Sniper Chris Kyle threaten to rape and kill woman for criticizing him and the movie.

Photo courtesy of Death Squad Network.

Courtesy of Raw Story:

Fans of “American Sniper” Chris Kyle have threatened to rape and kill former RT anchor Abby Martin for criticizing the deceased Navy SEAL and creating a T-shirt they find offensive. 

“Some psychotic Chris Kyle fan just doxxed me & my family’s personal information on a bunch of sniper forums. If anything happens to me or them you know who to blame. These are the real f*cking terrorists,” she wrote on her Facebook page. 

Martin had criticized Kyle in the past for describing Iraqis as “savages” in his book. She also described the American Sniper movie as “dangerous propaganda that sanitizes a mass murdering psycho.” But it was her shirt that appears to have set off a campaign of harassment against her.

Courtesy of Abby Martin's Instagram account

That t-shirt seemed to have pushed some of the Chris Kyle supporters over the edge and they took to social media and made numerous threats. One suggested that they "put on our raping shoes and find this bitch."

Another was even more terrifying:

“F*cking c*nt. How dare you disgrace his name like that. He gave his life so you can have yours. F*cking b*tch. Don’t worry I know where you live thanks to your ip address. And don’t worry I’m a Marine,” said Jamie Lugo in a message shared by Martin. “So u won’t see me coming. I’m going to cause you pain beyond your imagination.” He later added: “Tic toc times running out.” 

So remember kids the message from certain folks on the Right is that the military fights for your right to say anything you want. However if you criticize one of their idols, well that's a raping.

And possibly even an execution.

Bill O'Reilly blames bad reviews of his film "Killing Jesus" on a liberal bias and because it's "open season on Christians in America."

Courtesy of Raw Story:  

Bill O’Reilly complained that he was a victim of religious discrimination because the “Killing Jesus” television movie, based on his book by the same name, received bad reviews from publications that he considers liberal. 

“The truth is, it is open season on Christians in America, and faith is not held in high esteem in the halls of Manhattan media operations,” O’Reilly said. 

The Fox News host suggested Monday night on his “O’Reilly Factor” program that critics should weigh his intentions in writing the book above its artistic merits, adherence to historical fact, and skillful use of dramatic elements. 

“A movie like ‘Killing Jesus’ is a noble endeavor, even if you didn’t like it – even though some conservative folks didn’t like it, either,” O’Reilly said, promising to read negative comments from conservatives. “But to see what actually happened to a good man, Jesus, who preached loving your neighbor and loving God above all, to see how he was abused and murdered historically, right before your eyes, is a powerful use of the motion picture concept.”

As you can see from the clip O'Reilly claims that he was divinely inspired to write his book, and that God was using him as a vessel, much like Christians believe the authors of the Bible were used by God to put HIS words down on paper.

This of course makes O'Reilly believe that his book is above criticism, despite his claims that critics had a right to their opinions. You can fairly see him bristle as he reads each negative review, and then attacks each of them as stupid, or elite, or pushing an agenda.

From my perspective the first problem with this is that it presents the story of Jesus as "historic" when in fact there is little outside of the Bible to support that label.

The second problem is that while there are plenty of theologians who are qualified to write a book about the life of Jesus, Bill O'Reilly is certainly not numbered among them.

However personally it really does not matter to me.

I have already sworn off ALL movies and television specials based on the Bible.

I made that decision after learning that there is no evidence to suggest that Moses led his people into the dessert, or that the Egyptians ever even had Jewish slaves in the first place.

I, of course, had already dismissed almost all of the Biblical stores as hogwash long ago, but after learning that even the most fundamental stories of the old testament were a steaming pile of BS I decided that I would no longer support the retelling of them with my hard earned money or attention.

I quite literally have no problem spending an afternoon in a darkened theater watching a superhero movie, or a silly horror film, or a movie with the most unbelievable premise of all, the romantic comedy. But those movies simply want to entertain me, and do not have the subtext of wanting to sell me a product for which I have absolutely no use.

Besides of all of the poorly written and unbelievable content I have ever suffered through, nothing challenges the content from the Bible. And I do mean NOTHING.

Just a suggestion, but if you are going to attack a scientist for being an Atheist, you might want to get your scientists straight first.

I leave you with the tweet of the year..."Dumb athiest. Why quote @richarddawkins? He just a retard in a wheelchair with a robot voice"

— Ricky Gervais (@rickygervais) May 18, 2013

Personally I am troubled that Richard Dawkins seems to have absconded with Stephen Hawking's wheelchair as well as his computer based communication system.

That seems unnecessarily rude to me.

P.S. By the way Ricky Gervais loves to rattle the cages of some of his more ignorant critics on Twitter and often retweets some of the most ridiculous things you have ever heard. This one was particularly funny.

Creationism pimp Ken Ham got his feelings hurt when people pointed out he was an idiot. Decides to post another video, because he is clearly a glutton for punishment.

The video below is in response to some blowback that Ham received after claiming that Bill Nye "The Science Guy" did not understand science. I guess he simply did NOT expect people to be offended by a man who perverts science to substantiate his superstitions, to accuse a man who lives and breathes science of "not understanding" it.

Go figure. Here is Ham playing the victim.

Courtesy of Raw Story:  

“When you see such an emotional response from these secularists, when you see the name calling, the the profanity, you realize what they’re doing is trying to suppress the truth,” he continued. “In a way, they are closing their ears, covering their eyes, and they’re saying, ‘we refuse to believe that there is a god who created us.’” 

Ham said the incident showed a clash of two religions, particularly “man’s word” and “god’s word.”

No, there is NO conflict between two different religions. There is the response to ONE religious group's attempts to invade the halls of academia out of abject fear that the veil of ignorance will be lifted from our children to reveal the lies that THEY have told them since infancy, by a group of intelligent individuals who recognize that the future of our species depends on that.

I would like to point out that it was the Fundamentalists coming into our public classrooms that started this conflict. It was THEY who demanded that their faith be given the same level of academic respect that science had earned through centuries of hard work, research, and discovery.

If they had simply kept their faith safely behind the doors of their church they would not have to suffer the humiliation of being confronted with their ignorance. But they wanted to play with the big brains, and this is the easily predictable result.

Ain't it great!

Tonight is the premiere of the completely unnecessary, and unwanted, reality show "LIfe's a Tripp." Gee, I wonder what the critics have to say about it? Update!

"Palin cakes are supposed to be lopsided. Now let me cut your finger for daring to criticize me."

Here are just a few snippets of what critics have to say about Bristol's most recent public flame out, courtesy of the Hollywood Reporter:  

Los Angeles Times' Robert Lloyd describes the show as being "about two sisters, temporarily billeted in a Beverly Hills mansion, mostly complaining about Los Angeles, each other and their lives." 

"Anyone expecting an unvarnished, unmeditated look at [Bristol's] life or any substantial take on the challenges it represents, or seems to -- her child-care issues stem from not wanting to hire 'some random baby-sitter,' not from a lack of wherewithal -- will be disappointed," he adds. 

Lori Rackl of the Chicago Sun-Times likewise is less than impressed, calling the show the "Alaskan Kardashians" in that it mostly features "Bristol and Willow shopping, squabbling and engaging in vapid conversations." 

Adds Rackl: "The series is supposed to illustrate Bristol’s journey into womanhood, but it feels like the show is a few years too early for that. It’s also supposed to portray how difficult it is to be a young, single mom. In that respect, the show’s too late. MTV has been there, done that — and done it much better with shows like Teen Mom, 16 and Pregnant and Caged.” 

Hank Stuever of the Washington Post says even the haters should stay away: "Even if you have a lasting grudge against all things Palin, there’s no payoff here. It’s a new low for anyone who makes the mistake of watching." 

He also writes that the show follows the cliched reality show formula too closely. 

“Life’s a Tripp stumbles blindly over the ghostly rubble and ruined format of what was once commonly known as a reality show," he writes. "There are sport utility vehicles in which to ride; boutiques in which to shop; Starbuckses in which to argue. There are microphone packs clipped to waistlines and bra straps. There are staged conversations during which one idly examines one’s split ends while the other person is talking. There is the furnished Beverly Hills mansion, redolent in its Bachelorette and Simpson-Lachey decor, smelling faintly of failed enterprises, pool chlorine and compromised souls." 

David Wiegand of the San Francisco Chronicle writes that the show is "not very interesting, and you probably wouldn't watch if [Bristol] wasn't [Sarah Palin's daughter.]"

And of course as I mentioned before there are a number of others as well that do not hold out much hope for this latest Palin attempt to regain relevance.

You might be able to fool the general public about the success of the Palin propaganda film "The Undefeated," but you CAN'T fool the movie critics!

Image courtesy of the amazing Love and Knishes.

From Box Office Mojo:

Normally, a movie with such poor box office would not receive story coverage on Box Office Mojo, but the furor over The Undefeated calls for an injection of truth.

Even before The Undefeated bottomed out in its second weekend, the movie was a bust in its first weekend, but its boosters latched onto two stats: per-theater average and ranking among political documentaries. The classic tactics of movie spin include bragging about per-theater average and declaring a high ranking in a niche category. The funny thing is that Undefeated's opening didn't rate highly on either front, making the spin extra-egregious.

Within the minor political documentary sub-genre, The Undefeated's $6,532 opening weekend per-theater average ranked 33rd out of the 91 limited openings tracked over the past 30 years, normalized for ticket price inflation. Among all documentaries, it was in the middle of the pack. Hardly worthy of hyperbole. Even if it had little to no advertising, Undefeated had far more media coverage than most other political documentaries and independent releases could ever dream of. The awareness was there.

Undefeated boosters ran with the notion that the movie's opening had the "second highest per-theater average of the weekend, behind only Harry Potter," but the movie was actually sixth in that metric. They also latched onto a press release about how The Undefeated averaged "above $11,000 in top markets." But averages are naturally higher in top markets (that's why they're "top markets") and, without context (how it compared to other movies' grosses in those markets), that was a meaningless statistic.

It's extremely myopic to believe that having one of the higher per-theater averages on a given weekend means a movie is a success, and The Undefeated's second weekend bore that out. Indeed, "per-theater average" is one of the most overrated stats. For limited releases, the most receptive locations are cherry-picked with the purpose to impress with a high per-theater average in order to book more markets. The fewer the theaters, the easier it is to have a higher average.

To put these numbers into further perspective: The Undefeated's ten theaters on opening weekend yielded 159 showings. Using the current average ticket price of $7.86, that means the movie played to an estimated 52 people per average showing or at about one-fifth to one-quarter capacity. In the movie's second weekend, which had 211 showings, the per-showing average attendance dropped to 15.

Damn, I like how this guy Brandon Gray left absolutely NO doubt that this movie was an unmitigated disaster. 


Not really much argument left is there?


Which makes THIS, seem just that much more pathetic.



The path to the White House runs through the theaters across America showing this film.

We need to sell those theaters out! No more excuses, no more complaints. Let’s show the world why we support her. Show them this film! We need your help to make this happen. We can’t sit silently anymore. Now we must act.

Special incentives:

Each Youth For Palin's Youth Brigade member will receive special rewards including $$ compensation and/or a donation to our group (your choice). special recognition, and other items.

Game On!

Personally I think that any parent who encourages their child to pimp this move for Snowdrift Snooki should be brought up on charges of child abuse.


It finally dawned on me who the Palin-bots who are refusing to see the writing on the walls about Palin's pathetic propaganda piece remind me of.  They remind me of those Japanese soldiers who stayed at their posts for decades because they did not realize the war was over.

Movie critic asks why did they release Sarah Palin propaganda film in theaters, if they were just going to put it on Pay-Per-View anyway? He must be new to the world of the Palin-bots.

Courtesy of Movieline:

In a move that probably should have happened two weeks ago, ARC Entertainment — the Santa Monica-based distributor of Stephen K. Bannon’s Palin documentary — announced that they would make the film available through on demand services starting on Sept. 1, backed by “a multi-million dollar marketing campaign.” Additionally, 250,000 Undefeated DVDs will hit stores around the country on Oct. 4, with a special edition version reserved for Walmart shelves. (How this will all dovetail with Palin’s will-she-won’t-she presidential run remains to be seen.)

“The Undefeated is a terrific case study for a digital cinema release,” said Jill Newhouse Calcaterra, the chief marketing officer at Cinedigm, which is the film’s digital distributor.

Indeed it may prove to be, Jill. However, if ARC and Cinedigm is correct in their respective assumptions — that The Undefeated will play well in the home entertainment market, since a majority of its potential audience probably isn’t able to get to one of the 14 theaters playing the film currently — the question must be raised: why release The Undefeated as a standalone theatrical property in the first place? So stories about how it played at an empty theater could disseminate across the blogosphere and make it look like a joke?

You know THAT is a pretty good question. (Before I go on I would just like to say to whoever decided to release the film theatrically so that we could make fun it, thank you, I really did enjoy that!)

However I think I might be able to answer this question.

You see Mr. Movie Critic, believe it or not the director of this film, Sarah Palin, and her supporters, all believed this turkey could actually fly. (They must have missed the WKRP Thanksgiving episode.)

They actually thought, now get this, that if people were exposed to their highly sanitized version of Palin governing Alaska, that they would be compelled to support her candidacy for President in 2012.

Yeah I know, sounds ridiculous right?

But keep in mind this is not unusual thinking for Palin and her reality challenged supporters.

Don't forget that this is the same woman who somehow imagined that she could force her family to stay with her on a, doomed from the start, bus tour, that she could quit said bus tour after only five days, could then claim that she really didn't quit but only took time off for jury duty, and then could attend a premiere of this film while still supposedly a potential juror, AND that nobody would notice that all of this smelled distinctly to moose poop.

She is also the same woman who believed that THIS clip would put to rest any claims that she was not really a hunter.



(Well I have to admit that answered all of MY questions about her hunting ability, how about you guys?)

Like I said, these people TRULY believed that putting Palin on celluloid and projecting her onto a giant screen, would absolutely convince people that she was an impressive figure worth supporting in 2012.

However in the face of embarrassing ticket sales and universally negative reviews from the critics, it is NO surprise that the producers of Palin's propaganda film have given up on its ability to find an audience in the theaters, and have decided to put it on Pay-Per-View right along with "Sticky Sweet Lesbians" and "MILFs in Heat 12."  (After all in this day and age who wants to be caught masturbating to their fantasy President in a dirty old theater?)

If her sycophants could get their heads out of the clouds, and their hands out of their pants long enough, they might be able to recognize that EVERYTHING Palin is connected with ends up failing (How is that gas line coming along Alaska?), and that EVERYTHING she starts, she ends up quitting.

But I guess that is asking a lot from people who still get their information from this site:

Here Are the Theaters That Will Show The Undefeated for Its Week 3 Comeback

It’s really important to pack these theaters, especially the ones in South Carolina and Ohio. She’s polling well in both states despite the fact that the mainstream and so-called conservative media have purposefully misled Republican and Republican-leaning independents into believing that she won’t run. Let’s force the media to report a Week 3 comeback for The Undefeated.

 I would like to thank the lunatics at the Sea O'Pee for helping me to make my point.

Palin propaganda might sell out in Texas, but in Orange County the movie opens to an empty theater.

Atlantic associate editor Conor Friedersdorf arrived in Orange County for the midnight showing of the Sarah Palin homage "The Undefeated."

Here is his report:

When the clock struck 12:01 am today, AMC theaters in select cities were permitted to start showing "The Undefeated," a feature length documentary about Sarah Palin. As it happens, I'm visiting my parents in Orange County, Calif., home to one of just 10 theaters where the film is being rolled out. Watching it didn't interest me so much as going to interview folks who decided to attend. I figured I'd meet some nice people, perhaps run into someone who knows my grandparents, press five or six Palin fans on why they like her, and convey their worldview. It's my experience that the grassroots doesn't fit the caricature of its champions or its detractors.

At first Friedersdorf believes he has arrived too late to get a good seat because he sees throngs of people lined up at the theaters.  But then he remembers that "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows-Part Two" is also playing.

As it turns out his concerns about not finding a good seat were completely unfounded.

It isn't strictly accurate to say that I sat through the whole movie alone. Just as the previews started, two young women walked in giggling together and took seats three rows behind me. Afraid that they'd ruined the only story I had at that point -- What If Sarah Palin Starred in a Movie and No One Showed Up? -- I hoped they'd at least oblige me with an interview, and so they did.

Jamie Watkins, 22, is a Missouri native, which qualifies her as a real American. She only recently moved to Southern California, and her little sister, Jessie, age 18, was visiting for the first time.
"So, um, what made you come out here tonight?"

"We're going to Disneyland tomorrow," Jamie said, "but she just got here, so we decided we should go out."

"We looked online for the latest movie playing," Jessie added. "But all the Harry Potters were sold out, and then we saw 'The Undeafeated.' We don't even actually know what we're seeing."

"Well welcome to California," I said. "You're about to see a documentary about Sarah Palin." 

"Oh, really?" they said, and started giggling again. I think they were expecting an action flick. When I returned to my seat, I thought maybe I'd talk to them after the movie, and get the perspective of two people who went in with no expectations. But they only lasted 20 minutes before walking out.

After that, it is strictly accurate to say that the theater was empty, except for me. On screen there were clips of a younger Sarah Palin helping to reform Alaskan governance. "In politics, you're either eating well or sleeping well," she said. I jotted this down: "And which of those are you doing now?" 

Shortly before the end of the film, a young couple entered, walked to the back row, started making out, then interrupted their session and left (spoiler alert) as Andrew Breitbart, who made one of several guest appearances, started talking about eunuchs. Then I was alone again, working. Instead of researching civil liberties violations, or the war in Libya, or the contest to elect the next president of the United States, I was both a journalist and the only member of the public willfully paying attention to Sarah Palin, as if standing in for the pathologies of my profession.

Afterward, I found a theater manager, told him I was a reporter, and asked if he could give me numbers about ticket sales. "Did anyone pay and not show up?" He said that they'd sold out all the Harry Potter movies until 2 a.m., and that all 5,000 seats looked full. "No," I said, "I saw the Sarah Palin movie. Do you know the figures for that one?" 

"Oh," he said, "I can't release sales figures."

Oh well, this probably doesn't mean anything right?  After all only very young people, with actual lives, go to a midnight showing of a new release.

I am sure that today the target audience for this movie will awaken early, take their Metamucil before heading off to Denny's for the "Early Bird Special," after which they will ride their scooter from the "Scooter Store" over to the local AMC, buy a ticket (making sure to get their senior discount), and after parking their scooter in the handicapped space five rows from the front and getting the valve on their oxygen tank adjusted perfectly, will sit back to enjoy watching the Nazi inspired Sarah Palin propaganda film, before nodding off halfway through the coming attractions and missing the entire thing.

"The Undefeated" movie trailer has been released!

Video courtesy of Business Insider.


The Undefeated Teaser Trailer from Dain Valverde on Vimeo.

Like a Marine she runs toward danger? Are they talking about the same woman who hides from all media except Fox News? She is not tough, she plays the victim and then waits to be rescued or protected by her supporters.  That is the way it has ALWAYS been with her.

And holy crap, what they showed about her first days as Governor was SO the opposite of what really happened! Sarah Palin took advantage of the fact that the Republican party was getting indicted right and left and swooped into the political opening left behind by labeling herself a "new kind of Republican"

But once she was there she really did not know what to do.

As Bailey points out in his book, after election night, she actually seemed upset that she had won and was now expected to do this very difficult job.

If she had not latched onto the ideas that were put forth by the Democrats she would undoubtedly have been an abject failure right out of the chute. All she did was support existing ideas, and then take all the credit for them.

However can I just say how MUCH I love the cigar smoking "good ole boy" silhouettes!"   Those are awesome!

By the way there will be at least ONE less critic at the next screening in Manhattan:

Uninvited to "Undefeated"! I've just received a foolhardy note from a public relations executive, Keith Appell of CRC Public Relations, who tells me that now I am "not invited" to the Sarah Palin documentary "The Uninvited," which is having a critics' screening tomorrow in Manhattan that is, and here I measure my words, going to be laughed off the screen by whatever hacks show up. Appell has banned me from the screening and not even bothered to pretend that this is for any other reason than payback for my painful-but-honest pan of a rough cut of the film in The Post . What's hilarious about this (apart from the fact that I have two emails from another publicist for the film confirming that I was on the list for tomorrow) is that Appell seems to think other critics are somehow going to be nicer to the film than I -- someone who actually likes the subject of the documentary and who is almost certainly the only Gotham film critic working for a mass-market outlet who has cast a vote for her. I can only assume that the massive flaws in the film I warned about have not in fact been corrected and that the distributors are content to release a hopeless raving sputtering jumble directed solely at an Amen chorus of supporters with zero chance of persuading any of Palin's many haters to change their minds. I said in my take, "Its tone is an excruciating combination of bombast and whining, it’s so outlandishly partisan that it makes Richard Nixon look like Abraham Lincoln and its febrile rush of images — not excluding earthquakes, car wrecks, volcanic eruption and attacking Rottweilers — reminded me of the brainwash movie Alex is forced to sit through in 'A Clockwork Orange.' Except no one came along to refresh my pupils with eyedrops." Publicists who think they can dictate favorable coverage by choosing who gets to see a movie are being very silly. You have to let all of us in and take your chances; that's the way the game is played.

The one hope the movie has (and it's a thin one given the level of Palin obsession in the media) is that, because it isn't opening in Washington, New York or anywhere nearby, that maybe some Northeastern outlets won't review it. Initial markets are Dallas, Denver, Oklahoma City, Orlando, Atlanta, Orange County, Phoenix, Houston, Indianapolis, and Kansas City. "National rollout to follow," they claim, but that's never going to happen to this amateurish rant.

God this just keeps getting better and better doesn't it?

Palin labels critics "Neanderthals" and attempts to blame sexism as the reason that she came under such scrutiny in 2008.

Feminist Republican Sarah Palin on "Neanderthals" who must "evolve" and mothers of small children working outside the home. from Vision Forum on Vimeo.

First off if any group deserves the label of "Neanderthal" it is those men who support Sarah Palin simply because she is "purty" and serves as inspiration for their masturbatory fantasies.  But somehow I don't believe she is talking about that portion of her minimally evolved fan base.

As far as her critics on the liberal side go, MANY of them are women themselves, so they could hardly be labeled "Neanderthals" (And yes I know that there were female Neanderthals. I understand biology.)  As for the liberal men I feel pretty confident in saying that her gender was way down the list of reasons they did not like, or support her campaign.

Palin's attempts to hide behind sexism, and recruit the shameful support of Geraldine Ferraro, is brilliant. If she is truly able to get women, and those with a liberal bent, to feel sympathy for her due to a perceived notion that her problems stem solely from the fact that she has a vagina, that might provide enough ambiguity for her to gain their support.

Of course for those of us who have been paying close attention that tactic is as transparent as Palin's attempts to portray her family as the Alaskan example of the Waltons.

We know that the reason she is judged concerning her looks is because that is what she uses to attract most of her positive attention from the voters. 

We know that the reason people discuss her parenting is because, more than any other candidate before her, SHE uses her kids as political props to garner support and sympathy.

We know that while she hides behind her gender, she also supports policies that are almost universally anti-woman.

And we know that virtually everything that we see about her is false.

In fact IF Palin were to become this nation's first female President it would damage the credibility of women to handle important leadership roles all over this country. (I can tell you right now it may be another twenty or thirty years before we elect our next female Governor in Alaska. And the fault for that rests solely on Palin's tiny shoulders.)

She may label her critics "Neanderthals" and attempt to smear us with charges of sexism, but we know better. And I believe that the majority of Americans will not be fooled by those obvious attempts to hide her multiple faults behind a veil of victimhood either.