Sean has missed the opportunity to ask Juan the one burning question that MUST be asked, to wit: "This is a simple yes or no question, did the President of the United States authorize the use of military intervention to help the people under attack in Behghazi?" If the answer is yes, then to whom? And did he follow thru to see if it was carried out? If no, then why not? Yet, no one seems able to ask that question...

Maybe you don't understand Palin cause you're a liberal on the outside looking in trying to explain what a conservative believes in. I would assume you have never really listened to Palin and what she believes in, have you? As for taking a loss in the elections, conservatives never really thought McCain was a conservative, that he was and still is, a RINO.

Easy talk, no sustance, no facts, no truths to back up an obviously liberal opinion. Is it so hard for you to cite fact and back up your opinions? Or is it the liberal way to easily talk in generalities like "totally empty suit" and "sleazy politcal operative?" I have no idea what that means anyway. Talk about the issues. Or is that too hard to do? and back up your statements.

This is the ONLY place you'll see the internal bickering match as you put it. You will NEVER see the internal bickering in the democratic hacks. Democrats NEVER criticize other democrats no matter what they say. When people like Dean can say that a Republican never lived who had an honest job, where are the democrats to condem his comments? There isn't enough time and space to print all the stupid, idiotic statements democrats make, and the democratic hacks to refuse to say anything about those stupid, idiotic statements. So ya, I can see where you like to see the internal bickering of the GOP cause you sure won't see it among the democratic elite.

I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about, BrickerSnicker. What has this to do with my comments and the price of eggs in China?

What I want to hear is Karl Rove criticize Sarah Palin on her 2nd amendment beliefs, on her love and support of the military, of her principles of women's rights, on her stance on a strong military, on her unashamed statement of being a capitalist and strongly believing in the free market. Karl Rove has yet to say what principles he opposes that she believes strongly in. I wonder why that is? From the get-go, Rove has only attacked the minor things she says, he can't seem to find it in him to attack her on the issues.

It's really pretty shallow for Karl Rove to criticize for not staying in her term of office. She has fully explained that she could not do her job with all the law suits being brought against her frivolously. Karl Rove appears not to accept that reason. It is interesting to note that Karl Rove never seems to criticize Sarah Palin on her political beliefs or challenges her on her principles. After all, when Sarah Palan says she is for the 2nd amendment, how can he respond to that, being a conservative himself? Instead, he seems to be quick to criticize her for everything EXCEPT her conservative values.

Why should ANYONE believe ANYTHING this man says? After all, here is the guy who said: "A republican never lived who made an honest living. " That, to me, gives him ZERO credibility. There is an old saying: If it looks like a duck, if it quacks like a duck, if it walks like a duck, then it must be a liberal....

I fail to understand. On the one hand you say: "An $80 million cash-on-hand lead at the end of April was down to $45 million at the end of May, according to new Federal Election Commission filings." Yet on the other hand you say: "Fighting to keep his job, President Obama spent more money than he raised in May, and ended the month with $109.7 million in cash reserves — a more than 6-to-1 advantage over his Republican rival Mitt Romney, federal reports filed Wednesday show." Well, which is it? $45 million or $109.7 million?

Ignore him. Don't watch the video, which I won't. When liberals are not given a venue to talk, no one listens. ANYTHING this liberal has to say is not worth listening to. His words fall on deaf ears. Nobody in America cares what he says. He is, therefore, an effectively marginalized liberal.