Riffhard wrote on Jul 5
th, 2009 at 7:52pm:
If I were a Democrat I would be ashamed of my party for going after her like this. It is nothing more than a political witch hunt, and because of the vagrancies of Alaskan law the Democrats know full well that they can just continue to hound her over and over again ad nauseum. The article claims that all charges, save one, have been filed by Alaskans. Big deal! If you don't think that the DNC is behind this effort to destroy Sarah Palin then I have a bridge to sell you. It's pathetic! The hatred, and fear, of Sarah Palin is total, and nothing will stop the haters from seeking her political demise. I have a very funny feeling that Palin is going to have the last laugh. In fact I'd bet on it.
Riffy
Ah, Mr. Riffhard. We know we can always count on you for some laughs.
Why would the DNC want to "destroy" Sarah Palin? The DNC
would probably like nothing better than for Sarah Palin to remain
in the spotlight forever. As long as she's the Great White Hope
of the Republicans, sane Americans will have no choice but to
vote for Democrats. The "hatred and fear" of Ms. Palin which your
keen Chicken Little radar has picked up is actually the sound of
millions of eyes rolling.

Your speech about the "political witch hunt" was rousing. It must
have been inspiring to see you taking a stand against all the
Republicans who spent so much of the 90s trying to prove Bill
Clinton was guilty of murder, mayhem and marital infidelities.
You DID take a stand against that, right?
As far as the people of her own state filing ethics complaints
because Ms. Palin dared them to - she should've perhaps learned
from the mistakes of George W. Bush. Even he eventually
figured out that if you say "bring 'em on", they will come.
Oh, by the way, you probably mean "vagaries" rather than
"vagrancies". 'Vagaries" are unpredictable or erratic actions-
much like Ms. Palin's resignation speech. Although "vagrancies"
generally refers to wandering without visible means of support,
it can also mean "wandering in mind or thought", which could
also refer to Ms. Palin's remarkable speech.
Did you see that speech, Mr. Riffhard? What about it would
you say struck the most fear into the black hearts of democrats?
I think it was when she said "*((Gotta put First Things First!))*" . That and the
parts about how unfair the media has been to her.
Hey, remember when she said this, about a certain someone "whining" that the media was unfair to her:
Fair or unfair, I think she does herself a disservice to even mention it. You gotta to plow through that. You have to know what you're getting into -- which, I say this with all due respect to Hillary Clinton, and to her experience and to her passion for changing the status quo also -- but when I hear a statement like that coming from a woman candidate with any kind of perceived whine about that excess criticism or you know maybe a sharper microscope put on her, I think, 'man that doesn't do us any good' -- women in politics, women in general wanting to progress this country, I don't think it bodes well for her, a statement like that. Because, again, fair or unfair, it is there, I think that's reality, and I think it's a given. I think people can just accept that she is going to be under the sharper microscope. So be it. I mean, work harder, prove yourself to an even greater degree that you're capable, that you're going to be the best candidate, and that of course is what she wants us to believe at this point. So it bothers me a little bit hearing her bring that attention to herself on that level.