I am still trying understand what the value of Sister Sarah’s endorsement was, other than to provide Saturday Night Live with another winning political season. SNL once again capitalized on the questionable phenomenon that is Sarah Palin by lampooning her bizarre and rambling endorsement. as seen in the video posted below. (I would advise you to skip the actual endorsement in the first video and enjoy the pure comedic gold of the second video):
Palin endorsed Trump, prior to the Iowa Caucus, without hesitation, she claims in an interview with NBC’s Matt Lauer and Savannah Guthrie. Despite her long held ties to Ted Cruz (Iowa 2016), despite the support she gave Cruz in his bid for national office during his Senate run, and her belief that he is a “true conservative”, Palin tells the Today Show hosts the following about Cruz: “I want to keep him in the Senate, and I want Donald Trump to be our president.” Why not? Cruz has routinely distracted the Senate from the work that needed to be done in favor of throwing rotted red meat at those for whom his circus act plays well.
His ideological, highly unrealistic, approach to governing has not served the nation, nor his party, well in my opinion. His legislative record is paltry, at best. His most significant accomplishments in congress may be his ability to help shut down the government and to keep media attention on himself as he makes promises to his base that he is improbably going to be able to deliver.
Given the serious miscalculation of the value of Palin’s endorsement, and her inability to swing conservative voters into Trump’s camp in meaningful numbers, this will hopefully be the end of the courtship of Palin by Republican pols. Trump, himself, now looks more like “Palin the Failed Promise” than “Donald the Future Leader”. It now feels as if they share the same penchant for saying anything, showing zero competence in discussing ANY issue, ability to gloss over the reality of voter mood, and an ability to spew meaningless rhetoric. We’eve been down that road, and ONE the individual who helped take us there in 2008 just endorsed Trump and probably cost him Iowa and the party’s nomination.
Ultimately, the greatest irony is that post Iowa, both Cruz and Trump are beginning to be viewed as placeholders for Marco Rubio. No matter the outcome on the Republican side, this should be an interesting election season and one that should make Hillary Clinton feel optimistic about the election this coming fall. Months, money, and motivation… down the drain, because in the end both Trump and Cruz will be stumping for a weak Rubio.
In any case, this all feels like a WIN for Hillary Clinton:
Trump is too much of a reminder of the obnoxious boss many people can’t wait to get away from. He reminds you of the boss who sorely underpays you and then shows you the pictures of the expensive remodel on his grand new home. Despite his recent run away from his comments that “wages are too high”, that comment will live with him. Note that American hourly wages are too high. I don’t recall any statement where Trump questioned the wages of the workers at the top.
Cruz is too much like that odd neighbor whose odd behavior leaves you feeling uncomfortable for reasons you can’t explain. You know enough to not to do business with him or leave him alone with your valuables.
Rubio? Sigh. Poor Rubio.
As The World Turns
Why does Paul hate Dusty so much? I know the writers want conflict between ATWT’s titan younger male leads, but it doesn’t make sense – especially in light of Dusty’s relationship with the deceased Jennifer Munson. Dusty has loved Jen and maintained the integrity of her memory FAR more than her own brother has. For Paul to hire a someone to cause Dusty to question whether she’s Jennifer, or some reincarnated form, was just classic soap evil! Tasty little plot, isn’t it? Even still, Dusty fought Craig Montgomery to protect Jennifer and to protect her son from falling into Craig’s hands. So what is the foundation of Paul’s extreme hack-him-to-death hatred for Dusty?
I’m curious about whether anyone on the ATWT writing or production staff has every watched Roger Howath’s work on One Life To Live. Todd was one of the most vile and despicable characters in the history of daytime (read my blog below about why I think the OLTL writers owe the fans an apology for the Todd/Marty storyline. Many of the clips of the early Marty/Todd interactions were filmed while Howarth was still in the role). Todd was malicious, and frightening to be quite honest. His continued tormenting of Marty Saybrooke even after he raped her gave viewers the impression that given the chance, he’d assault her again.
What does that have to do with Howarth’s work as Paul? If the writers then followed the storyline, and watched as Howarth transformed Todd from a hateful bastard to a repentant and self-loathing soul, they would have been amazed. They would better understand the range of Howarth’s ability (and it is an amazing range). The WTs writers would pen storylines that allow Howarth to best use the extensive arsenal of skills he brings with him to the role of Paul Ryan. I’ve never warmed up to Mr. Howarth in this role and it has nothing to do with the actor. it has everything to do with the writing.
Paul, as he’s currently written, has very few redeeming qualities. He’s insecure, whiny, and perpetually angry. That’s the short list. There is little room for the character to be remorseful because he spends so much of his time moving from one failed idiotic plot to the next. The writers have given viewers, in my opinion, very little reason to root for NuPaul, or the Paul/Meg relationship. “Peg” yet to establish themselves as a couple, outside of the fact that they are two people whose lives are constantly marred by tragedy, much of it self-inflicted. Trauma and drama are daytime staples, but almost all successful couples have been granted some period of time to experience a little happiness. I want to see Howarth make this role his own and bring to it the uniqueness it deserves. He has talent to spare, and given the right material he could create a character, and become part of a couple, with few equals in daytime. Here’s hoping!
Just as an aside
BTW, doesn’t this picture just scream, “Even I’m not buying into the ‘sainted Janet’ role I’m now playing”. Janet was more believable as a woman who worked to break up the marriage of a man she hadn’t seen since she was a teenager.
Don’t worry ‘Janet’, you’re not alone. I’m not buying it either. I’m over the ‘CarJack’ phenomenon and would love to see Carly happy with a confident and loving man. I say that to say this, I don’t dislike Janet because of her relationship with Jack – she’s not keeping Jack from Carly in my book. Jack clinging to stupidity has always done that.
What I want so see is a Janet with a little more grit. She doesn’t have to be the sleaze she was when she hit town, but the writers have to do better than propping her up as the cardboard charcter she’s become. If the only way to sell Janet and Jack is to make Carly look like the bad seed keeping them from their happiness, Janet is nothing more than a plot device and hardly a useful character worth watching. To continue to promote her in front burner storylines when her only purpose is to try to make Carly look worse is a waste of viewer’s time. Give her her edge back. Let her take on someone other than Carly, and figure out who and what she is – other than Jack’s ego defense shield. Pinson has the goods and can turn in a hell of a performance given the chance, much like her costar, Howarth. The writers just have to give her the chance!