What now passes for piercing logic and consistency in political discourse among right wingnuttia:

Today, in Warrensburg, Missouri – on a car with Kansas plates.

Rah. Sarah Palin 2012. Run, Sarah, run.

Advertising on a vehicle in Warrensburg, Missouri.

Evidently, the Faux News Channel is:

…One thing is certain: CBS anchor Katie Couric has nothing to fear.

Ouch. Also.

Chad Livengood via Twitter:

AP: Beach at Lake of the Ozarks closed due to high levels of E. coli […] about 13 hours ago from web

Sarah Palin to speak at College of the Ozarks on Dec. 2 […] about 13 hours ago from web

Why is this an outrage, and this is not? Just asking.

I’m waiting to hear about the second from the same people who were outraged by the first. [crickets]

Photo of Sarah Palin by Brian Adams/Runner’s World – via Balloon Juice  (The actual photo at Runner’s World is here).

Uh, you’re supposed to drape the flag over yourself, not drape it on your bar stool and then lean on it.

Dating from 1993:

UNITED STATES CODE

TITLE 36

CHAPTER 10

§176. Respect for flag

No disrespect should be shown to the flag of the United States of America; the flag should not be dipped to any person or thing. Regimental colors, State flags, and organization or institutional flags are to be dipped as a mark of honor…

…(d) The flag should never be used as wearing apparel, bedding, or drapery. It should never be festooned, drawn back, nor up, in folds, but always allowed to fall free. Bunting of blue, white, and red, always arranged with the blue above, the white in the middle, and the red below, should be used for covering a speaker’s desk, draping the front of the platform, and for decoration in general….

Okay, Chapter 10, as iterated on the non-governmental site above, is not enforceable.

Because:

Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397 (1989)

…Especially pertinent to this case are our decisions recognizing the communicative nature of conduct relating to flags. Attaching a peace sign to the flag, Spence, supra, at 418 U.S. 409″]409-410; refusing to salute the flag, Barnette, 319 U.S. at 632; and displaying a red flag, 409-410; refusing to salute the flag, Barnette, 319 U.S. at 632; and displaying a red flag, Stromberg v. California, 283 U.S. 359, [p405] 368-369 (1931), we have held, all may find shelter under the First Amendment. See also Smith v. Goguen, 415 U.S. 566, 588 (1974) (WHITE, J., concurring in judgment) (treating flag “contemptuously” by wearing pants with small flag sewn into their seat is expressive conduct)…

And:

United States v. Eichman, 496 U.S. 310 (1990)

…Although the Flag Protection Act contains no explicit content-based limitation on the scope of prohibited conduct, it is nevertheless clear that the Government’s asserted interest is “related ‘to the suppression of free expression,'” 491 U.S. at 410, and concerned with the content of such expression. The Government’s interest in protecting the “physical integrity” [p316] of a privately owned flag [n5] rests upon a perceived need to preserve the flag’s status as a symbol of our Nation and certain national ideals. But the mere destruction or disfigurement of a particular physical manifestation of the symbol, without more, does not diminish or otherwise affect the symbol itself in any way. For example, the secret destruction of a flag in one’s own basement would not threaten the flag’s recognized meaning. Rather, the Government’s desire to preserve the flag as a symbol for certain national ideals is implicated “only when a person’s treatment of the flag communicates [a] message” to others that is inconsistent with those ideals. [n6] Ibid. [p317]…

…Even assuming such a consensus exists, any suggestion that the Government’s interest in suppressing speech becomes more weighty as popular opposition to that speech grows is foreign to the First Amendment…

[emphasis added]

Yeah, those are flag burning cases, but the big picture is that government can’t dictate behavior or any orthodoxy about what is “correct” patriotic behavior or speech. This is not a new phenomenon in America, either:

WEST VIRGINIA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION v. BARNETTE, 319 U.S. 624 (1943)

…If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein. If there are any circumstances which permit an exception, they do not now occur to us…

In a time of war, no less.

Ask yourself, what would the political right be saying if it was Barack Obama standing in that same pose instead of Sarah Palin?

So, it all comes down to the political right’s view of what is patriotic orthodoxy. At this point they’re definitely not consistent about it, either. We’ll just have to go with *IOKIYAR.

*it’s okay if you’re a republican

The fictional orginal:

The greatest republican event advance since Bob Dole spilled through the fake handrail in 1996.

Oh, the humanity.

For the record, I rarely wear pajamas when I blog. Usually I just stick to a T-shirt and boxers ensemble.

From a Rasmussen poll of 1000 republican likely voters taken on November 5, 2008 – the margin of error was 3%:

…I know it’s a long way off, but if you had your choice for the next Republican nominee for President would you choose Sarah Palin, Mitt Romney, Mike Huckabee, Bobby Jindal, Tim Pawlenty or Charlie Crist?

64% Palin

11% Romney

12% Huckabee

4% Jindal

1% Pawlenty

2% Crist

6% Not sure

[emphasis added]

And under “what color is the sky in your world?”:

…Thinking back on the Presidential Campaign did Sarah Palin help or hurt John McCain’s chance of winning the election?

69% Help

20% Hurt

6% She had no impact

5% Not sure

[emphasis added]

The margin of delusion was close to 70%.

Exit Polls: Palin Hurt Ticket with Large Number of Voters [Jonathan Turley]

…Over sixty percent of voters said that she was manifestly unqualified – that obviously includes many Republicans. Other polls have shown Palin was the most cited reason for voting against McCain by voters. While she clearly did bring out the hardcore faithful, she also clearly scared off the independents and moderates are that were essential for a win…

Let this all be a lesson to you. Even with one of the worst vice presidential picks, the most poorly run campaign in the history of the republic, and an economy and government near collapse due to republican incompetence – over 57,000,000 people (about 46% of the electorate) voted for the republican ticket. One in five people you pass on the street (out of a total population of 305,000,000) voted for the ticket.

We should have won by thirty points.

You all better start preparing for the mid-term elections now. There’s a lot of work to be done.

Nice jersey.

…because we’ve already had a Dark Age and that didn’t work out so well.

Ah, the well-known danger of having a mediocre student as a political leader:

PZ Meyers at Pharyngula (post presented here almost in it’s entirety – because it’s a must read. Go. Read the comments.):

…I am appalled.

This idiot woman, this blind, shortsighted ignoramus, this pretentious clod, mocks basic research and the international research community. You damn well better believe that there is research going on in animal models – what does she expect, that scientists should mutagenize human mothers and chop up baby brains for this work? – and countries like France and Germany and England and Canada and China and India and others are all respected participants in these efforts.

Yes, scientists work on fruit flies. Some of the most powerful tools in genetics and molecular biology are available in fruit flies, and these are animals that are particularly amenable to experimentation. Molecular genetics has revealed that humans share key molecules, the basic developmental toolkit, with all other animals, thanks to our shared evolutionary heritage (something else the wackaloon from Wasilla denies), and that we can use these other organisms to probe the fundamental mechanisms that underlie core processes in the formation of the nervous system – precisely the phenomena Palin claims are so important.

This is where the Republican party has ended up: supporting an ignorant buffoon who believes in the End Times and speaking in tongues while deriding some of the best and most successful strategies for scientific research. In this next election, we’ve got to choose between the 21st century rationalism and Dark Age inanity. It ought to be an easy choice.

Nothing exceeds like excess:

October 22, 2008

Republicans spent $150,000 on Sarah Palin’s clothes

The Republican Party has spent $150,000 in upmarket designer stores on dressing Sarah Palin for the part of vice-president…

…The Republican Party has tried to play down the extraordinary sum it has spent on packaging Ms Palin.

“With all of the important issues facing the country right now, it’s remarkable that we’re spending time talking about pantsuits and blouses,” said Tracey Schmitt, a party spokeswoman…

[emphasis added]

They must not remember this:

No More Mr. Nice Guy

By Dana Milbank

Tuesday, December 11, 2007; Page A10

…Sounds like a bit of class warfare — coming from a man with a 28,000-square-foot house, $30 million in assets and a $400 haircut…

[emphasis added]

Yes, the republican party is seriously irony impaired.

They forgot. They created this world, but we all have to live in it.