Conservatives lament the fall of Sarah Palin.

Palin with her former political prop, courtesy of Facebook.

Courtesy of the Washington Times:

Sarah Palin’s latest effort to unseat a Republican leader fell short when House Speaker Paul D. Ryan cruised to a victory in his primary, easily dispatching the insurgent Mrs. Palin had backed. 

It’s the latest episode in which the 2008 Republican vice presidential nominee has seen her star fall as the tea party movement she championed has splintered and the former Alaska governor’s populist appeal has been overshadowed by GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump’s far more outspoken campaign. 

“She speaks to a part of the GOP primary base, but when it comes to general election messaging, she can really complicate things,” said Craig Robinson, a former GOP consultant who runs “The Iowa Republican” website. “So I think a lot of people stay away.” 

That hasn’t quelled her own support for Mr. Trump, and she continues to defend him — and fire at liberals, the media and her other critics from atop her Twitter perch, with its 1.28 million followers, and elsewhere online.

Of course most of those Twitter followers are fake, but why quibble?

After her vice presidential run, some analysts predicted Mrs. Palin would be in the running for the top of the ticket in 2012 or 2016. But she took a pass. Instead, she has fired shots from the sidelines, albeit with less of an audience. 

“Five years ago, she would have drawn 25,000 people to an event, and today she would do well drawing 2,500,” said Ken Crow, a tea party activist in Iowa. 

Mr. Crow said Mrs. Palin remains a beloved figure — though some were turned off by her decision to back Mr. Trump over Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas, whom many see as the ideological chief of the grass-roots movement. 

“Although we realize her political stock is not what it used to be, her devotion to country and conservatism is stronger than ever,” Mr. Crow said. “We do love her, but realize that she will never be president. We realize that she will never be vice president, but she is one of the moral and emotional leaders of the tea party movement and she always will be because she preaches conservative values.” 

 I really think that when conservatives claim that they "love" Palin they are really in love with their idea of who she is and not with the reality of who she is, which as of now is of being a Facebook troll, a failed parent, and an albatross around the neck of the Republican party.

This Craig Robertson guy essentially drives that point home: 

Mr. Robinson said it appears that as far as elected politics go, Mrs. Palin’s “role has been diminished to the point where she is a role player in primaries.” 

“In [2008], I think people were looking at her as the future of the party, and I don’t think anyone is looking at her like that today,” he said. 

Boy there's an understatement for you. 

I am still amazed that there are people out there who are still willing to speak about Sarah Palin as if she was EVER anything more than a pretty face, with limited abilities, desperately in search of adulation.

In truth she was never an effective politician, never a faithful member of the Republican party, and certainly NEVER the future of anything.

And people really do not need to imagine what it would have been like if Sarah Palin HAD run for the presidency, and HAD been the future of the Republican party.

Because that reality is staring back at us from our TV sets every damn day!

Sarah Palin lets Greta Van Susteren do her talking for her on Obama's Cuba decision, and the second season of Amazing America attracts a smattering of coverage. Not all of it good.

I don't think that Palin really has any idea what the President's decision to normalize relations with Cuba ultimately means for conservative politics. So until her handlers tell her what to say she is staying relatively quiet on the issue.

However that does not mean she cannot link to her pal Greta Van Susteren who seems perturbed that the President worked to release Alan Gross, who has been imprisoned in Cuba since 2009, and not Andrew Tahmooressi who had been in a Mexico jail for about seven months.

This is from Van Susteren's Facebook page:

I'm very happy ‪#‎AlanGross‬ is home, but still absolutely mystified as to why President Barack Obama wouldn't help our ‪#‎MarineHeldInMexico‬. Watch my "Off the Record" commentary and tell me if you are likewise stumped about the president's lack of involvement in freeing Sgt. Andrew ‪#‎Tahmooressi‬.

Here let me help.

The reason that the President was more hands on with getting Alan Gross out of prison than the conservative's pet border jumping Marine might be because Gross was arrested for smuggling satellite phones and computer components to a Cuban Jewish organization, and Tahmooressi was caught crossing the border with illegal firearms and then repeatedly lied to the Mexican police.

Just a hunch.

As for Palin's second season working the green screen, there is really not a whole lot of buzz thus far.

The Washington Times covered it, barely.

As did Mediaite.

Alaska Dispatch did a little better. (Also revealing Miss USA 2006 Tara Conner's struggle with alcohol and drugs.)

And even Breitbart could only bring themselves to contribute about six paragraphs to the show.

They also used this picture.

Which I think indicates where THEIR interest lies.

What I found more informative were the comments found on some of these media outlets.

For instance: 

They'll do okay until they get in their first fight about what to shoot from the helicopter wolves or pigs, and the whole Palin klan blindsides and jumps Nugent in a drunken orgy of violence. 

You know, a typical Palin family outing. 

And: 

Wow, Nugent and Palin on the same show - between them they might get to double digits in the IQ department. 

As well as: 

...and the caricature of a human is now complete. It seems appropriate that she's standing on the side of a road looking for the best offer to come along, much like she spent her time in the Governor's office. What a waste of skin.

Not that is a hell of a lot more entertaining than anything to be found in this crappy show of hers.

Speaking of entertainment I thought you guys would like to know that my source was beyond thrilled with the response to my post on Monday and is excited to share more.

I will be trying to get together with her this weekend, or early next week.

Before then I thought it might be fun to ask all of you if there are any questions that you would like her to clear up, that perhaps I have not already thought of myself. And before you say it I have already discussed with her the babygate thing and we are working on that.

The Washington Times gushes over Palin's new show on the Sportsman Channel, seems impressed that she could get a reality show while somebody like Harry Reid could not.

The picture that has the Sea O'Pee wetting their panties.

Courtesy of The Washington Times: 

Sarah Palin is hitting the road with her guns, fishing rods and “Mama Grizzly” persona. 

The former Alaska governor is returning to reality TV as host of “Amazing America,” a weekly series on the Sportsman Channel set to begin in April. 

According to its billing, Mrs. Palin “takes viewers coast-to-coast where the American spirit and the great outdoors are celebrated in equal measure.” 

“It takes a certain kind of pizzazz for a politician to make the move into reality television,” said Jeffrey McCall, professor of communication at DePauw University. “Harry Reid, for example, could never find a reality television platform that would catch on. The Sportsman Channel, however, has found a great fit with Sarah Palin. Palin has a special attraction for her fans, many of whom are likely viewers for Sportsman Channel.” 

Okay let's stop right there.

These people DO realize that the goal of most politicians is not to move from public service into a realm of entertainment dominated by the likes of Honey Boo Boo and the Real Housewives of Beverly Hills right?

Since when does anybody believe that successful politicians are actually jealous of a half term governor, who has lost all political credibility, and is now appearing at the opening of carpet stores and calling into low rated radio talks shows in a desperate attempt to stay relevant?

Answer: Never.

At least the Washington Times got this part right:  

The show is Mrs. Palin’s second direct attempt at reality television. In 2010, she and her family were the focus of TLC’s “Sarah Palin’s Alaska.” The series premiere was the network’s most-watched with nearly 5 million viewers, though the show lost roughly half of that audience after four episodes.

Yep, much like everything Plain does the curious showed up to check the show out and then were driven away by the inherent stupidity and lack of entertainment value. 

Source

And I will be willing to bet my house that THIS time out will be even LESS successful.

Amid charges of plagiarism the the Washington Times essentially fires Rand Paul as a columnist.

Courtesy of the Washington Times:  

The Washington Times said Tuesday that it had independently reviewed Mr. Paul’s columns and op-eds and published a correction to his Sept. 20 column in which the senator had failed to attribute a passage that first appeared in The Week. 

The newspaper and the senator mutually agreed to end his weekly column, which has appeared each Friday since the summer. 

“We expect our columnists to submit original work and to properly attribute material, and we appreciate that the senator and his staff have taken responsibility for an oversight in one column,” Times Editor John Solomon said. 

“We also appreciate the original insights he has shared with our readers over the last few months and look forward to future contributions from Sen. Paul and any other members of Congress who take the time to help educate our readers,” Mr. Solomon said. 

This article also claims that Paul took "personal responsibility" for the plagiarism however THIS is how he supposedly did it: 

Mr. Paul took personal responsibility for the oversights, which he and aides said were caused by staff providing him background materials that were not properly footnoted. 

So the staff did it?

It seems to me that either the Washington Post or Rand Paul do not really understand the consept of personal responsibility.

Bottom line the guy is a habitual plagiarist and there is NO reason to trust him on any of this, or excuse his behaviors and being the fault of overzealous staff members.