About the Firestorm I Touched Off …

The other day, on Bill O’Reilly’s  show, I tried to explain why elite liberals go nuts at the mere mention of the name – Sarah Palin.  And in the process, I touched off a firestorm I never envisioned, or intended.

Here’s what happened:  While I have never supported Sarah Palin, publicly or privately, I have long thought that too many of the attacks on her were mean, vicious and irrational.  I thought they went way beyond anything she had ever done in the political arena to deserve them.  And I figured, this can’t simply because she’s a conservative.

So on Bill’s show, I said I thought liberals (I should have said “many liberals” or “elite liberals”) dislike her so much because she didn’t go to Harvard, Yale or Princeton and instead bounced around a bunch of schools before landing at the University of Idaho – a crime against humanity to many of those elites. Then I said I don’t think they’re too happy with her either because she had five kids … and gave them names like Trig and Track and Bristol, Willow and Piper.  Then, I uttered the words that touched off the accusations that I was a “nasty” human being.  I said I thought that because she made a choice … to knowingly and willingly have a baby with Down Syndrome … that some liberals detested her for that too.

To put my observations into some kind of context, let’s take a brief trip down Memory Lane to when Sarah Palin was put on the GOP ticket in the summer of 2008.

A female professor at the University of Chicago, a first-rate school, wrote on the Washington Post Web site that Palin’s “greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman.”  You see, to many supposedly open-minded liberals, a conservative woman isn’t a woman at all.  She’s just a conservative; just as a conservative black person isn’t really black to a lot of liberals — only conservative.

Another woman wrote this in Salon, the liberal online magazine, about Sarah Palin’s sudden prominence: “I feel as horrified as a ghetto Jew watching the rise of National Socialism.”  In other words, the rise of Sarah Palin is akin to the rise of Adolf Hitler.

And a college professor in Canada wrote on the CBC’s Web site that Palin “added nothing to the ticket that the Republicans didn’t already have sewn up – the white trash vote.”

This hatred amounts to what I called Palin Derangement Syndrome.  It’s just plain nuts!  And to think female liberals wrote these vicious things about Sarah Palin just because she’s a conservative is also nuts.  There are lots of conservative women out there who don’t come in for this kind of trashing.  So I figured it must be something else.

It must be, I figured, that they hate her because she’s not like so many liberal feminists.  She appears to be happily married, for example.  And she’s not neurotic – like so many of them are.  And yes, I think her decision to have so many kids (with those names) makes liberals (not all, of course, but many) think she’s hopelessly Middle American.

As for Palin’s decision not to abort her baby with Down Syndrome: Women and their husbands should do whatever they think is best in those circumstances.  I have no say in those matters and I would never try to influence someone’s decision in that area.  It’s simply, and obviously, none of my business.   But I am asking this:  Who is more likely to have the baby with Down Sydrome, a pro-choice woman or a pro-life woman?  A woman who isn’t religious or one who is?  A woman who believes a life – even a life of a fetus – is sacred, or one who doesn’t?  I know there are many who will disagree, but I think it’s a safe bet that the pro-life, religious woman who believes in the sanctity of life is more likely to go continue her pregnancy (even as many who fit that description will abort a fetus with Down Syndrome).

That’s all I was trying to say.  I never thought I was “politicizing” anyone’s children or anyone’s pain.  If I did that, my sincere apologies to one and all.  But I still believe many elite liberals hate Sarah Palin for a whole bunch of reasons that have little to do with how she would vote on this issue or that — or even, as they often claim, because they don’t think she’s that smart, There are lots of lbierals who aren’t “that smart” — and they don’t seem to trouble their fellow libs all that much.

Bernie's Next Column.

Enter your email and find out first.

  • 154214274

    jerseys a cohesive and visually dynamic 

    freestanding display is an art that takes time and practice to master. Once you have some 

    experience under your belt, you’ll have a substantial advantage because this type of unit looks 

    like no other. Many companies and visitors consider it to be the pinnacle of modern trade show 

    displays. Your first attempt might not win any awards, but with additional experience you’ll be 

    able to create even more outstanding designs that will impress visitors at every angle.

  • http://kdjfjgugjfhdydshsj.com Nancey Veeser

    I really should mention the truth that I have to go together with you on your entry on the subject of %BLOGTITLE%. My wife and i learn progressively more that men and women tend to be simply not happy to hear reason in regards to this particular topic. Continue great work and My partner and i will keep on reading with the every other happy followers at this site.

  • http://www.dianevonfurstenbergonline.com Robin @ Diane Von Furstenberg Online

    Hello, just browsing for information for my Diane Von Furstenberg site. Truly more information than you can imagine on the web. Wasn’t what I was looking for, but cool site. Have a good day.

  • Caroline

    Palin is not qualified and Obama is…..come on were not idiots. He was elected for one reason and one only, he is half black. Tell me his qualifications …..if you can, what had he ever done before being elected president. After being elected all we have heard are lies and more lies, before that it was present, present, present.

    Sarah palin connects with the people and this scares both republicans and democrats. If Palin was a liberal man she would be idolized.

    Bernie you have lost my respect.

  • Craig Moore

    CBS 60 Minutes Sunday January 10, 2010 – Anderson Cooper segment on the new book “GAME CHANGE” written by Time Magazine’s Mark Halperin and NY Magazine’s John Heilemann:

    The headline for this book is Senator Harry Reid (D-NV) and Reid’s racial defamatory remarks about Obama made during the campaign. Reid admits he made a racial slur that Obama was a “light-skinned A/American with “no Negro dialect” basically stating Obama was a “good N….”.

    All the black leaders including Al Not-so-sharp-ton all forgave him and said to Harry, “That’s OK, just get health-care thru Congress.” The hypocrisy of the left!! No Republican or any sane American would ever make such a crude despicable comment and would be laid to waste by the Sharpton machine if they made such a comment as this! At least they would lose their job or censured of the Senate!!

    Last night on 60 Minutes, Anderson Cooper’s segment did not mention this part of the book at all. Guess what part of the book Anderson zeroed in on? Sarah Palin and her differences with the Republican campaign during the election along with Hilary initially turning down Obama for Sec/State. 2 non-issues. But a racial slur made by the highest ranking democrat in the Senate against the future President and all of black Americans went un-reported by 60 Minutes and Anderson Cooper!

    Our great biased media hard at work! This one was so obvious it would make a great discussion with you and Bill O’Reilly!

    A Fan from Phoenix.

  • Heather O’Connor

    Not one who normally comments ( actually never before) to anyone, but I do admire your commentary. There are many commentators who try to be even and fair minded while making strong analysis ( Dennis Miller comes to mind), but somehow it seems they try so hard to be fair, they overdramatize a point that differs from the conventional view(from the right)so vehemently to prove their objectiveness. Unfortunately, it comes across pretentious even if they are sincere.

    You seem to really hit the nail all the time. Your strength is making the alternative point of view reasonable enough for you to understand why one believes in it. Yes, there are times when you won’t give anyone a break for behaving or commenting in a way that is contemptible, but this is the exception that is credible if one recognizes your history. I agree with you about gay marriage but I believe you are the only one who understands and respects how someone might be against it ( as long as it was religious and not pure bigotry). Beautifully perfectly put. But that is the example.

    Don’t stop fighting the good fight! Btw, I am in the adult business ( Chicago – 3 adult clubs )but am as conservative as you can get. Pro-life included. Obviously, I wouldn’t be welcomed in any Republican or conservative gathering or be taken seriously despite having success in a market that isnt as easy as one would think. However, I am proof that conservatives can appeal to a vast group (even one as distasteful as mine).

  • Rex J. Ellis

    Beware of ignoring similarities!

  • http://fordjrp@comcast.net JrsCol

    A lightening rod draws energy from the surrounding country

    Obama is gounded in liberalism

    Palin is grounded in conservatism

    Ones dimming the other is getting brighter

  • Mark

    Here is Goldberg’s argument for his comment about why many liberals despise Palin:

    (A) Premise: Women who are religious and pro-life are more likely to give birth to a Down Syndrome baby than are women who are not religious and who are pro-choice; the latter group is more likey to have an abortion in that case. (B) THEREFORE, many (pro-choice) liberals “detest” Sarah Palin for her decision to give birth to a Down Syndrome baby.

    That is exactly how Goldberg explained his liberals-detest-Palin theory. A perfectly reasonable, if mundane, premise leads somehow to an entirely unrelated, unfounded, attack-in-the-form-of-an-assumption for a conclusion. With that profoundly creative piece of logical distortion, it’s no wonder he has found such a cozy home on “O’Reilley.”

  • Bounced Around

    I want to sincerely apologize for Sarah Palin’s and my own unforgiveable “choice”
    to “bounce around” to several colleges and take more than four years to get our
    degrees. Those like gOtsoh and the others who have found this an irrevocable failure
    probably got their own educational “commitment” by getting checks from home on
    a regular basis. Those of us who had no benefit of a living parent, or a financially secure home, or maybe (in her case) a school teacher father and three siblings, found it
    necessary to take breaks in school to earn tuition and living expenses. This often
    led to changing schools when the finances and work situation demanded it. I guess
    this is why the liberal “elites” can look down on us – for being financially shaky kids.
    I can’t help but wonder how much commitment and dedication gOtsoh and his
    “ilk” would show if they had been forced to take this route to get THEIR educations.

    The Obama “dirty Chicago” pols arranged to have their lunatic fringe file daily law
    suits on Palin which had no validity and were tossed out of court. However her
    legal costs for defense against this s— ran up to half a million $’s Maybe you, gOtsoh
    would write a book too, if you had mouths to feed. Doubt if they’s sell though.

    I’m in San Francisco. The insane politics in this city are ALL carpet bagged. No
    more than one or two politicians have lived here long since they imported themselves
    from the East Coast. Same goes for Seattle, I know personally. Nancy Pelosi is a carpet bagger from Baltimore, where her father was a mayor, and she was well steeped in
    Tamany Hall style politics.

    So tired of liberal hypocrites!

    • AlsoInSF

      I am totally with you! I have lived in this city for 15 years, coming to the last month as the job market and rent market are completely incompatible. I have read all of Bernard’s books precisely because the liberal nuts here have driven me to do so. They make me so crazy. I came here thinking I was a strong liberal myself, escaping from the stupid Republican midwest, only to find myself being discriminated against constantly for being from middle America and I found it almost impossible to get a job. If it were not for my lawyer brother supporting me as I went to school and bounced through a few jobs, I would have had to move away much sooner.
      My first boss here was gay and she hated me for being from Nebraska so she fired me without cause and locked me out of that company for 10+ years (I’m still locked out). It was when she did that I first started looking into conservative viewpoints that were independent of religion. My parents are conservative, but I had never heard any conservative opinions or politics voiced from anyone that were not completely based in Biblical beliefs, my parents were fundamentalist Christians who taught me to believe in a 6-day creation theory, if you’re wondering why I couldn’t seriously consider the idea of being a Republican. I was still young and I thought all Republicans were nuts because they couldn’t separate religion from politics it seemed.
      Anyway, I worked for many people, black, white, gay, AND straight, who had problems with me being from Nebraska and they kept giving me shit about it and forced the lowest rung jobs on me while less educated Californians with less experience climbed above me quickly (and this was back when I supported democrats very strongly, I supported gay marriage, and I even supported reparations for slavery (I am white so this would have me paying, not receiving). I was pro-choice but only on behalf of everyone else since I never planned to get pregnant but I figured if I ever accidentally did I’d likely NOT abort, even if the child had problems. I’m just not the type of person who could do something like that in good conscience. I am a woman, but I don’t hate Palin for her views on abortion. I was surprised she wouldn’t allow it even in cases of rape (that’s a little extreme for me, even now) but I still see it as a 9-month sentence for a mother to hold out before she could give the kid up for adoption, and I don’t believe anyone is a genetically programmed bad seed so again it really seems like too much fuss was kicked up over that controversy as well. It’s really not such a big deal for a woman to endure a 9-month term if she just wants to give the kid up, and if I was still religious and believed what I was raised to believe, I would be strongly against abortion in ALL cases because I was taught that our souls are already there at conception; God has a plan for every soul, and therefore destroying a soul is destroying God’s plan for someone’s life. I don’t believe that anymore, but I was completely against abortion when I was young and I believed that. I can see how anyone who considers themselves religious, if they honestly believe in God, then of course they would have issues with abortion being legal.
      I don’t particularly support Palin on all of her political views or goals either, but Bernard; good for you for standing up for her! So many people have jumped on the trash Palin train and I’ve heard a lot of stupid things out the mouths of liberals (I hear stupid things from them on a daily basis). Palin has yet to stick her foot in her mouth as often as our own state’s representatives. Despite their fancy Ivy League educations, I’ve heard a lot of dumb liberal politicians say a lot of dumb things, and especially propose a lot of dumb ideas that everyone follows like a herd of sheep just because of their fancy educations.
      I worked during my college years like a lot of middle class Americans in order to pay for my education, which was also nothing fancy (what can an 18-year-old afford for themselves?) It also took me longer to graduate and I could only go to a school that would not saddle me with a lifetime of debt. My brilliant brother went to law school on some scholarships and then he let me move in so I would only have to pay for school and not rent. I’ve worked for so many spoiled rich-kid Ivy League grads who went to expensive college prep pre-schools that their parents paid for (I kid not). Many of them were legacies who went to the same Ivy League as their parents did. Then they marched straight into management positions at the top of Fortune 500s and they never worked an entry level job in their life. What do they know how to do? They know how to proudly discriminate against working-class Americans from the midwest like me, and that’s all they know how to do, but it’s all they need to know because they do it so well, and it clearly works for them.

  • Driefromseattle

    Wow! Sorry I’m posting almost a month late on this piece. I must say reading the vitriol coming from the leftist posters here, I think you have hit a nail on the head. These posts o show that no amount of explaining ones position to a liberal will salve their wounded feelings. I believe Liberals are fully grown, unloved, somehow disenfranchised children who have major nervous breakdowns if someone has an opinion other than theirs. The liberals that I know cannot handle the unvarnished truth even if it is logically argued. They certainly can’t handle absolutes when it comes to ethics or morals. Sarah Palin speaks unvarnished truth and is woman who has a strict moral code by which she lives. She is not perfect. Her family is not perfect. Some of her political points of view may not be as finely honed as some of the more “professional” politicians might be. BUT then who IS perfect, and isn’t that why Presidents have advisors? Her appeal is that she speaks from who she is, from her heart if you will. I don’t get that from the vast majority of our politicians. It’s risky in politics to say what you really think. In a few sectors, you lose votes. For me, it has always been difficult to vote because I am never quite sure of who or what I’m getting. I think with Sarah Palin I know who I would be getting.

  • http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-november-18-2009/daily-show--the-rogue-warrior Fubu

    “The Special Olympics is to winners what Fox is to experts (‘Bernard Goldberg’), If you show up, you are one!!!”

    Jon Stewart!!!!

    • Driefromseattle

      Wow…sage sayings from a buffoon. Jon Stewart. Who died made him Plato?

      • http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-november-18-2009/daily-show--the-rogue-warrior Fubu

        Isn’t sad that a buffoon with an average intelligence has to point out the obvious?!! what is it say about the self appointed pseudo-experts-commentators-pundits? not armed with facts but faith, not intelligence but beliefs!! we have propagandists-for-profit
        (Goldberg-Coulter-Limbaugh-malkin-Rove-Cheney-Fox,et al etc, etc)
        the Reich had Joseph Goebbels!! . . . . but don’t point it out they may call you Plato!!!

        • notleft

          after oboma ruins everthing the right will have to fix everything again!!

  • Paul

    Mr. Goldberg,

    How dare you cast doubt on the sincere love someone you call a liberal can have for a child with mental challenges, and then try to turn around and “explain” your words…like it was misinterpreted. You sir are an a**hole, and if you think you know what the American people think you are sorely mistaken. Just like most others who make more money than they’re worth, any connection you ever had with a working class American experience has been diluted by the years you have spent in front of a camera in an endless vanity exercise.

    • speedball

      Paul, you truly are an idiot

  • http://theclosetconservative.com The Closet Conservative

    I think Ann Coulter made the point that you know who the real conservative is by how much the liberals despise him (her). I would go one step further. People unprompted by the lamestream media (Bernie’s phrase) will get an impression of her that she’s a nice intelligent lady who loves her family. It then becomes their mission to do whatever’s necessary to convince people to hate her. They fear this lady and that’s one more reason for us to embrace her.

  • nevadagem

    A couple of things. Tell O’Riley that Tiger has two kids not one. You are right people should be more interested with what is going on with Iran, Health Care, the global warming scam than some guy that plays golf.

  • Minerva

    This is for Dianne, the one who follows the teachings of Jesus Christ- “You have some ‘envy’ hanging off the side of your mouth, you may want to wipe it off…” Just saying…

    “What HAS she read, or thought or done for that matter?”
    “I hate Sarah Palin, yes hate, because she is an empty suit.”

    She has a whole lot of history that’s easy enough to check out, try Google…
    “Love one another as I have loved you.” In the words of Jesus, you know the one you claim to follow, yet spew such jealous, hatred, for a woman who ran as the Republican VP nominee… Better run out and get yourself some concealer, your insecurities are shining right through!! And you majored in, let me guess, psychiatry, right?!

  • Redball6

    Hey Bern! this here posting business is just going great!, you old dog, you knew this would happen if you mentioned Pailn. Now put “Rather”, Palin, Oprah and Obama in one story and you can light up the entire political spectrum for at least a week! wowsers! you ole dog you!

  • Redball6

    Geez Dianne, take a “Prozac” So Bernie:” But I still believe many elite liberals hate Sarah Palin for a whole bunch of reasons that have little to do with how she would vote on this issue or that” yup but Bern old buddy the real reason is they (liberals) know if she really really wants to play on the stage, she can! we will see, but she can play and the other GOP boys and gals know that.
    Oh Dems, well go figure, say does Pelosi’s Limo have a “Kamikaze Meat Ball” yet! check “6” Dems!

  • Tired

    Dear Irish:

    The term “middle america” in David’s post refers to the area of the country that the liberal elites call “fly over country” ie anywhere between the east and west coasts EXCEPT for large urban cities filled with brain dead liberal voters ie Chicago. It is a term that can be used for a geographic portion of the country but can also be used to describe the citizens located anywhere in the US which still believe in the exceptionalism of America, that hard work pays off if in nothing else self respect, the value of self sacrific for family and country, and that the promise of the US is to provide an equal opportunity not handouts for generations of drones (welfare recipients) paid for by money coerced from evil capitalilsts (read anyone who is willing to actually work).

    • Irish

      Give me a break. This is just as stupid as Palin’s “Real America” rhetoric. I’ve lived all over the country, and I can tell you that everywhere I’ve lived (including Seattle on the “left coast”) the vast majority of people I’ve met love their families, want what’s best for their kids, work hard at their jobs and grill hot dogs and watch fireworks on the 4th of July (yes, even in Chicago, where “brain dead” liberals live). Your kind of glorification of what you call “middle America” is exactly backwards…it is in cities such a Seattle, Portland, San Francisco, Chicago, New York, Boston, etc (in others words, outside of “real America” that most of the country’s culture, intellectual capital, and wealth is created.

  • Scott

    Wow! What a moron… Keep up the good work! Keep worshipping the Gov. that quit mid-term to cash in. Nice… It is all about the money.

    Personally, I am happy the Repubican party has been hijacked by dimwits!

    • RJ

      Scott…. The Republican party has been hijacked by dimwits? Reid, Pelosi, Franken, et al. I think ‘dim’ is too much an illuminatingly, descriptive word, to be placed in front of ‘wit’, to adequately describe and define, these unlit bulbs of the Democrat party.

  • Jeff

    Your simplistic views of liberals belie your aspirations to appear intelligent. In this sense, you have much in common with Sarah Palin.

  • Dianne

    Having read the above reply to your firestorm, Mr. Goldberg, I would like to add my two liberal cents. I am a middle class mother in New Jersey with two girls, one of whom is adopted. I am a very liberal person and believe that we as a nation and a civilization are responsible for our actions and that we need to help out those less fortunate. I believe in the teachings of Jesus Christ and am Roman Catholic. I have a bachelors degree from a mediocre University and am married to a Princeton graduate (plus NYU!!) I am appalled at your expanded explanation above…you have made the classic mistake of lumping everyone that disagrees with you into one faceless soulless group. I hate Sarah Palin, yes hate, because she is an empty suit…a person who has traded her telegenic good looks into celebrity and therefore thinks that she has something to say. She has nothing to say. All you have to do is listen to her and this becomes clear. She voices platitudes and the crowd goes wild…how will she create more jobs? Less taxes!!! Well golly gee, why didn’t anyone think of that before? An empty suit…and it is you and your fellow opinion makers and “journalists” who support her and cry foul when someone asks her what she has read lately. What HAS she read, or thought or done for that matter. All she has done is procreate and shoot things and pray….well I don’t shoot things but I do procreate and pray so maybe someone will come to New Jersey and interview me. How about it Bernie? Come on, I will make you dinner and show you around and then you can give me a platform for my views. And as to your rude and and obnoxious point that liberals will abort their children at the drop of a hat…well you are a complete moron and should be fired. I hope that karma will come around an bite you in the ass, and soon.

    • Irish

      Right on, Dianne! Rock on!

      • Troy

        Wow, once again Bernie makes a well thought out point and a liberal freaks out and proves him right with hatred, name calling and vitriol. Good job proving his point. I just wonder how all you libs know she is stupid? Is it because she doesn’t agree with you? Tell me, do you think Nancy Pelosi is stupid or an empty suit? Because just about everyone who talks to her thinks she is dumb as a brick. But she is a good liberal so you just love her. And being a Christian as you claim, should you really hate someone you have never met? I do not trust or believe in anything Obama is doing, but I do not hate him. For the party that is supposed to be all about compassion and civility you seem to typify that total lack of it that your party/movement exemplifies on a daily basis.
        God bless you and I hope you can overcome your hatred for all things and people not liberal.


      dianne: your hatred of Palin make me question your understanding of your Catholic faith…

    • stmichrick

      Your statement about Sarah Palin being an ’empty suit’ displays your own willful ignorance, or just plain malice towards people with whom you disagree. I can think of a couple of areas where Gov Palin is head and shoulders intellectually above Pres Obama. Energy and Good Government for starters. To say nothing of common sense about America’s role in the world would probably be something too foreign to you to mention.

    • Wayniebob

      Is hating somebody like Sarah a Catholic thing? I believe in Jesus and I’m not Catholic. I don’t hate Obama, Reid, Dodd, Shumer, Kerry, Pelosi, Frank (I could add a few more like my representatives (Mikulski, Cardin and Ruppersberger)). They all might be real nice people (like I think Sarah is). I just don’t agree with their political agenda. I don’t think Jesus believes in karma, either.

  • rich

    Bernie- watching your segment on O’Reilly the other night, got me thinking as well as to perhaps why liberals (or elite liberals) find her to be such a threat that they are compelled to continually keep her in the headlines albeit in a negative way.

    I am married to a woman who is a teacher and in the teachers union. Her immediate family are also big union people as are many cousins, uncles etc. Spending lots of time around her co-workers, family, and friends of my own who are liberals, I have been seeing a common thread emerge, that in some ways may parallel on a much smaller scale the whole Palin issue. It seems that (Elite) Liberals simply do not like, appreciate, or respect the “Self Made Person.” Liberals in general embrace the community approach, where a task cannot be completed without an approving body of some sort. An approving body represents a government of some degree thus is in line with thier method of thinking. The self made person rejects this approach on a whole sale level, opting to do things thier way, without intervention. Afterall, why would a self made person need unsolicited advice or conditions placed upon them?Elites also hold education to the highest priority. In thier minds ONLY the highly educated can hold any level of office ,or be a credible officer in many organizations or corporations. The self made person also holds education to a high degree of importance, but also feels that it is not neccesary to have a P.H.D. in order to make common sense choices or balance a checkbook, run a small business, manage people, or run for city council, or mayor or perhaps governor or beyond. The self made person with some education knows that hard work and perseverence will ultimately pay off, whereas educated liberals have a more entitlement approach, believing they are owed a lucrative position simply because of thier education. There is reason and truth to the saying: “The (A) students usually end up working for the (C) students”

    In my view, most liberals see Sarah Palin as a self made woman, which is worse especially to self named “Feminists” They see her thrive in a state that is harsh, and in many cases “frontier like” They see her strength, and they see her embrace the qualities that are specific to that state (fishing, hunting, ATV’s etc.) They see her educated but not from an elite school. In my view, Sarah Palin is the poster girl for what a feminist really is all about. Liberals (Generalizing) will always look down upon the self made person for these reasons.

    • Maryann Durkin

      What a jerk! Before you open your mouth and put your foot in it check your facts. The Kennedy’s are all LARGE LIBERAL families. They started The Special Olympics For Children like My daughter- the youngest of 4 who happens to have Down Syndrome.I know a lot of Large liberal families and a lot of liberal families with children who are Special Needs children. You should be ashamed of yourself!!!Ass a mother of a child with Down Syndrome I see Sarah Palin as a failure as a mother to her beautiful son who is a true gift from God!

      • Troy

        how do you see her as a failure as a mom? Because she is a conservative? And the Kennedys are self made as far as bootlegging is concerned. Good way to make a fortune.

      • Bill S

        You were right to say ass a mother ,although mother a ass would be more accurate in your case

        You are also latently jealous of Sarah Palin because you are not self sufficient beautiful and millions would not read your book or even care that you exist

  • Dan

    Liberals hate Sarah Palin because she is genuine compared to their pretentiousness, she is honest compared to their hypocrisy, and she is hard-working compared to their elite inherited positions of wealth and influence. Now, they are furious and green with envy over her popularity and the historic success of her book sales. The typical liberal loon sells a few hunderd (an occasional one thousand or so) books to their friends and are igorned by most Americans.

  • http://www.foxnews.com g0tsoh

    It must be nice, mister Goldberg, to live in your fantasy world where the opponents of your ideals dislike the politicians you rally behind solely for reasons that are easy for you to demonize. There’s no way that liberal America wouldn’t love Sarah Palin, unless their reasons for doing so were some kind of discriminatory looking down upon by the liberal elite, right? When they speak poorly of her schooling, it wouldn’t have anything to do with the fact that she “bounced around”, as you so eloquently put it, and that a bachelor’s degree was the highest level of education she completed. No, it’s not because those things demonstrate a lack of commitment, an inability to devote herself to her career. Hell, their criticism doesn’t even stem from the fact that her education has absolutely nothing to do with politics. She’s criticized strictly because she wasn’t able to to make it into an elite or Ivy League school. That’s it.

    Liberals weren’t afraid of Sarah Palin assuming a position of power in this country because she has no real relative experience that would make her qualified to run the most important and powerful country on Earth. It isn’t because she rode her physical attractiveness into the governorship of Alaska. It isn’t because she is terribly out of touch with real issues facing our country, and that she is proud of the fact that in place of experience and understanding, she has folk traditions and hockey mom experience. Nor did it have anything to do with her promises that she would have a dangerously reckless disregard for environmental issues. Nor that her husband was a member of an Alaskan secessionist group that considers Alaskan independence more important than the country as a whole, or that the extent of her foreign policy experience includes seeing Vladimir Putin from her front porch. No, that doesn’t have anything to do with it. At all.

    Liberals hate Sarah Palin because she didn’t abort her mentally handicapped child. Because, as you so eloquently put it, having a child with Down’s syndrome is something that a liberal “would never allow to happen”.

    You know, before you opened your mouth on this subject, I thought that the talking head that was farthest from reality was Mrs. Palin herself, but you Mr. Goldberg have shown me that it can get much, much worse than Sarah Palin. So, thanks for that. Long live Israeli expansionism and colonialism, right?

    • Donald

      Liberals hate Sarah Palin because she is so much like “middle americans” and that is what they truely hate. Because so many people can relate to her life story, they feel that she reprsents them, and the elite liberal media can’t stomach her.

      • Irish

        What a stupid comment (by the way, Donald, learn to spell). I’m from “middle America” (Chicago) and do not like Sarah Palin because she’s an egotistical attention grabber who uses her kids as props, quit her job as governor, and has no coherent political philosophy. I don’t hate her, I just think she’s completely unqualified for an serious political office. Even conservative columnist David Brooks called her a joke, and he’s right.

        • http://justanotherbagofhotair.blogspot.com Dan

          The definition of “politician” is “egotistical attention grabber.” And that is the problem. But I digress. I think Bernie’s absolutely right about the liberals’ hatred of Sarah Palin. They hate all of us who believe in the Bible, hard work, and personal responsibility. So she’s made some mistakes in her life. Who hasn’t? “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.” Fess up to your own shortcomings before you start blasting someone else for his or hers.

          God, why is everyone suddenly acting like first graders on a playground?

          • confused

            I don’t hate the Bible. If I don’t believe in God, but am happy that others do, does that mean I hate it? I don’t hate hard work — that just seems like a baseless insult. Personal responsibility? Is that in reference to welfare? I don’t know any liberals hate any of the things you’ve mentioned and I’ve met a lot of them. I agree everyone makes mistakes — and shouldn’t be condemned for it. I don’t blast Sarah Palin, she just puzzles me. I know I don’t have all the facts, so I would never make sweeping statements about her.

            I also try to stay open to all viewpoints. I mostly agree with liberal ideas, but appreciate thoughtful conservative thinking as well. Maybe we can move the discussion to at least a 3rd grade level?

  • Hawkeye

    She is hated because she is a more accomplished woman than the profesional feminists in the media and is a tougher hombre than the effete males in that populate the media and east coast establishments. She highlights their short comings.

  • Martin Peter McGurrin

    If Sarah Palin had aborted Trig instead of birthing him, the Dems would have wanted to run her. O.K., I’m exaggerating, but they call her dumb and it was Joe Biden who said in their debate that the CIA had driven Hezbola out of Lebanon – talk about dumb!

  • Irish

    Goldberg is being ridiculous that liberals don’t like Palin because she has 5 kids or carried a Downs syndrome baby to term. Actually, that’s what I like about her. What I don’t like about her is her paperthin views on political issues (“freedom good, taxes bad”) and her obvious love of the limelight. I also don’t like the fact that she’s a quitter. Nancy Pelosi has 5 kids for Gods sake–why don’t “family-hating” liberals hate her too?? My mom (God rest her soul) had 7 kids, and was a died-in-the-wool Democrat, as am I. Statements like Goldberg’s are totally ridiculous.

  • Wdyafo

    Bernie, I finally realized after listening to you tonight, what your problem with Sarah Palin is. Envy is such a powerful emotion. Even if people weren’t excited about everything Sarah stands for and at last someone comes forward that does represent Middle America. You would still be insignificant, and not inspiring to anyone. I’m sorry, but you just turn green at the mention of her name.


    • Mike

      You are SO correct!! Bernie used to be okay, until these new ‘stars’ took the limelight away from him. He is SO jealous of Glenn Beck that it’s hilarious. He hates his success, and so, slams him as a whacko conspiracy-theory proponent. Sad. Glenn is a wizard Bernie, and a super-star. Deal, loser. Can’t fricken stand ya anymore.

      • Mike

        As a matter of fact, it’s all I, I, I with BG. Hey! His initials are just the opposite of the new ‘great one’!! Why does BG like Bill O so much? They’re both narcissists, and so; why they give obama the benefit of the doubt-crap-hooey; you aren’t fooling anyone, you two! Moderation by design- in order to appear credible ain’t working. Tricky, but slimy move BG!

  • http://bingohouse.com/ bingohouse.com_loyal

    It’s a good thing you apologized.

  • Maureen

    I was rather offended by your comments that generalize what you think liberals are and what their values are. My parents and I are all Democrats that are mostly liberal. But my parent’s are very pro-life. And not just partial pro-life like some people. Now they had 6 children, which wasn’t a huge amount back then. My youngest brother was severely mentally retarded and physically handicapped. They were advised to put him into an institution, but they never did that or even thought of it. He was an equal member of our family. Wherever we went, he went. We were never ashamed of him in anyway. He was a very happy child and we all miss him. He died when he was 15 when he died. I have two children, and even though when I had my son I was 36, I didn’t even consider having an amniocentesis test done because I didn’t want to risk my son’s life and the results would not have mattered, because there was no question of not having him. The one thing I don’t understand about Sara Palin was why she had an amnio in the first place. She had to, to find out that her son had cerebral palsy. I gave Sara Palin a chance at first, but I found her to be dishonest. And I don’t like how she generalizes about certain groups of people as you seem to be doing. Some people tend to find it insulting for her to say that you’re un-American just because you don’t agree with her. Oh yea, and I happen to like wolves and didn’t agree with her wildlife management. See I am a liberal.

  • Tom

    Here’s another vote of confidence for you, Bernie. Anyone who has watched you regularly knows that you are well informed, and try to be honest, and fair. Perhaps if there is something to be gained from this firestorm, it is that we are having a dialog about these issues. Obviously, you have touched a nerve, however unintentionally.

    Should Bernie have looked under that particular rock in making his point about liberal elitism? Perhaps not, but as we say, s– happens.

    There are indeed those who look down on someone who has many children, or a Downs syndrome baby, but unfortunately, we can get ourselves into trouble when we try to generalize about something so personal. Drawing conclusions about what a certain type of person is likely to do is a very slippery slope. It is a very human thing, that when it gets down to reality, theories go out the window. There are no doubt those who might truly believe that they’d abort a child with a disability, but undergo a change of heart. Likewise, there are those who when faced with fear of the future, would abort, even though they never thought they would.

    But getting back to the original premise, which was whether Palin is being attacked based on cultural biases, there is simply no doubt. A perfect example was on Larry King the other night. Liberal radio host Stephanie Miller ridiculed Palin for winking during the VP debate. “Who does that?” she said sarcastically. Well, obviously Palin does.

    Now did I, as a grumpy New Yorker, find Palin’s wink unusual, and even a little embarrassing? Yes, I did. But unlike the elitist Miller, I didn’t conclude that my way is the right way, and Palin is a stupid hick. No doubt her accent and gestures wouldn’t be seen as unusual elsewhere in the country.

    It’s a little thing, seemingly not very important, but it gets to heart of this supposed educated elite. The blatant disdain that so many of them have toward middle America is distasteful, to say the least.

    By the way, Bernie, sorry that you haven’t been properly credited for coining the term, “Lamestream Media”. But some of us know it was you.

  • Bruce

    The worst fault of a highly-intelligent sovereign is to impose tasks on his subjects which are beyond their forces, for his aims go far beyond what they are capable of doing and, when he is in charge of an undertaking, he thinks he can foresee its consequences. His administration is therefore fatal to the people. The Prophet himself has said, ‘Pattern your step on that of the weakest among you. Too great an intellect is a burden for the people.’


  • Woman Voter

    Bernie, you are a great writer and perhaps your caring feeling for Sarah Palin would have best been expressed and understood in writing. You chose to speak up for her and even label criticism of her as an unusual Derangement Syndrome; unfair treatment that other conservative women do not suffer with.
    But Sarah Palin puts herself in the public eye and the limelight. You above anyone must realize that when you put yourself in the public eye you invite “bashing” that may not be deserved.
    It seems to me that FOX News and you, too, Bernie, are feeding the frenzy. Why react to the Crazy Lefties at all on the topic of Sarah Palin?
    Further, I think the Lefties delight in FOX’s and your reactions to what they say about Sarah Palin.
    Why would anyone put a voting poll on their web page asking if one would like Sarah Palin to run for office? When I saw the results of that poll I was taken aback and thinking that I don’t want to frequent a website if that’s the mentality of the people who are also visiting the website.
    Conservatives need to be looking for the real news, the real issues, not reacting to what the liberal media concocts as news. Conservatives need to rise to the occasion.
    Bernie, I think your time would be better spent and I would benefit most from your insight and commentary on matters that really count.
    I feel bad that this happened to you; you are too nice a man. But perhaps FOX and O’Reilly can learn from this–don’t sink to the Crazy Left’s level, rise to where YOU envision we should be. Discuss the topics that really matter. Give us all food for thought. (Not junk food!)
    Thank you for your effort and your good work.

    • Harrison Papil


      One final point on this topic (aside from looking at the basic statistical issues with your premise) — and I think this goes to the larger point, and in my opinion may have been what caused the strong reaction we’ve seen from Jon Stewart and others, was that you are suggesting, whether explicitly or not, is that the non-religious and/or liberal-leaning of this world somehow lack some amount of compassion for the unborn and that only the religious/conservative among us posses this compassion.

      At a base level, not only does such a suggestion have no backing from statistical position (as previously noted), but more to the point, (outliers aside) no one takes abortion lightly. No one — not even the repeat abortion patient — is “pro-abortion”. And it is continued assertions along this line of thought that furthers the deterioration of our political discourse… esp. when repeatedly made on the highest rated cable news-ish program in the country.

      That being said, I do enjoy your segments on Bill’s show.

      • http://Dudeman1962@twitter.com Michael Bowler

        Yes liberals (progressives, meaning American socialists) are more likely to advocate abortion of a Down’s syndrome baby. Yes many of this ilk do take abortion as a matter of course, who wants to be saddled with a baby when it’s not really a person and it might cramp one’s style? After all bad judgement shouldn’t hold one’s career back, right? Babies don’t have rights because they don’t vote.
        Sarah Palin despite your elitist view of her is very representative of good conservative values. She is not perfect, who amongst all humans is perfect? She seems on the face of it to have a healthy dislike of the party machine, that’s a major positive in the current political climate.
        What we need to clean up the mess is aloyal American with strong convictions and an outsider point of view. The Washington elites are tainted beyond usefulness to many of us.

        • Becca

          “Yes liberals (progressives, meaning American socialists) are more likely to advocate abortion of a Down’s syndrome baby. Yes many of this ilk do take abortion as a matter of course, who wants to be saddled with a baby when it’s not really a person and it might cramp one’s style?”

          Do you have any kind of facts or sources to support this claim? Because posts very similar to it have already been refuted elsewhere in the comments. With, you know, statistics from credible sources.

          • Ben

            Becky…excuse me, but you must be living under a rock. All one has to do is turn on the drive-by media and listen. For instance, to the libs abortion is all about convenience as far as they are concerned. Yes Becky you are in denial. The truth is a hard thing for a lib to face…

          • alan

            obama stated on camera during his campaign that he did not want HIS daughters burdened by a mistake they made meaning an unwanted child.. it is all VERY scary…

          • Becca

            What on earth makes you decide to change my name to Becky? Can I call you Benjy? Is that okay?

            But your failure to answer my question is answer enough. I’m going to hazard that I spend more time hanging out with liberals than you do, and trust my own experience (which runs so counter to your “information” that I’m pretty sure I’m not the one under a rock here) and go my merry way.

            Nice to meet you, Benjy.

  • http://n/a Kathie Ampela

    These are the tactics the liberal media uses on anyone with whom they disagree. They clearly have it out for Sarah Palin and anyone who supports her:


    Once upon a time, telling the truth was telling the truth, is wasn’t broken down according to partisan or ideological lines. Things like this Norah O’Donnell set up on a 17 year old girl demonstrates the left has no interest in telling the truth, only their side of it. If you disagree with them, you will be marginalized and destroyed.

  • Christene


    Another great column ,..after reading some of the replies I was reminded of a line in your book, “Crazies to the left of me, Wimps to the right”…-hopelessly out of touch-.
    Thank You for always giving the world the words that need to be said.

  • Brenda

    Bernie, your comments about “no minorities” being at Sarah Palin’s book tours were racist and full of bigotry!! For your information…I am a minority and I enjoy watching Chris Matthews!!

    • John

      Brenda, these conservatives talk about being too politically correct these days and as soon as you are not politically correct about them, they start crying and complaining. I am a minority too and I hate what these Neo Cons write about and talk about. I am telling you that people like Hannity, Rush, and Beck do make controversial statements just to increase their ratings and to make money. I am not sure about Bernie yet but I can tell you that I watched him on the O’Reilly’s show and I feel like he is bitter about his career and he thinks that it is the Liberal Media that has handed him a bad deal. I guess he use to work for CBS and no longer does. So don’t be offended with what he says. I wouldn’t want to go to Sarah’s book signing either but not because I am a minority but because I don’t think her book is even worth a cent. She is not going to be a President one day and that is that. If you think we lost the respect of the whole world with Cowboy Bush wait until Sarah is President and there will be WWIII.

      • Capn Eddie Ricketyback

        John sez: “I feel like he is bitter about his career”
        Your “feelings” are irrelevant, John. What an inane reply to a nonsensical post.

      • Christene

        LOL,..Acorn still have those computers up and running?
        By 2012 if we can get the dead, Disney & acorn pimps to stop voting for Donks, Sarah Palin will be a breath of fresh air,after the horrible embarrassment B.O is to America! For 8 years the world was not laughing at America,..pull your head out of the liberal box,..look beyond the bussed in crowds or the paid protesters from the past, ..this is what you voted for ” “To tell you the truth, it had to have been the worst US-Japan Summit Meeting in history,” a source of ours at the Foreign Ministry revealed to us.”…when he’s not giving money to those who hate America, he’s kissing the butt of those who hate people in general! ..Since Jan 09 America is ahead at NOTHING,..not one country is giving us anything, or working with us,..B.O is WEAK,..the world knows it,Americans know it, and the next terrorist who attacks us will know it too!

        • John

          Knowing your kind, you are praying on a daily basis that we get attacked so that you can go on and celebrate it and say it was Obama’s fault. Obama has done more in 10 months that Bush ever did in his life. If Sarah is all what you guys have to offer then more power to you. I like her as a person but she is so stupid. How did she even get to be a Governor? Just because some popele like her without knowing why that doesn’t mean we are going to make her President. All I can tell you is that I will celebrate when we have the Healthcare reform, peace between Israel and Palestinians and when Iran becomes mainstream with their Nuke efforts. If you think Sarah is a breath of fresh air you are welcomed to breath her as much as you can. BTW, I was shocked with some of the Acorn employees. Those tapes were fired and not very educated people in general so I am all for getting rid of those kind of employees.

          • Christene


            Come on buddy,..put down the crack pipe,..slowly back away! Didn’t anyone tell you that drugs are bad? I know Clinton didn’t inhale because he was trippin to hard on the acid, but come-on man, your better then that! Just say NO!!

          • Emma

            Wow, Christene. Does this mean that the people we see on the streets are elitist, liberal, crack addicts? Hmm…I would think that people considered “elitist” wouldn’t find themselves hanging out on the streets smoking crack. You on the other hand, seem to know exactly what is going on.

          • Greg


            I’m curious, can you give me a list of examples with detail for why you show the amount of negative emotion toward this woman? I’m not looking to bash you, I’m a conservative that doesn’t think she is really that great, but I think Mr. Goldberg has a very valid point, and you seem to be doing a very good job of making it for him.

          • John

            Hi Greg, I am only responding to you since others have been bashing me rather than responding to my point of view. Personally, I like Sarah. Read my posts. I disagree with how she has been treated and I object to how the Media and the Liberals have attacked her. However, I don’t approve of her to run for the office. Now one of the posters here would say: how gives a XXXX what you approve or don’t approve. There are two reasons: 1) I sincerely don’t think that she is qualified or ready to run our country. If she went and became a Senator or continued with her term as a Governor and engaged the domestic and world issues with diplomacy and respect then I would change my mind for her. I voted for Regan. I am a Democrat. 2) I need someone in the White house who at least can relate to my issues and policy perspectives. She has not displayed any intelligent conversations that addresses my issue. Finally, the poor women was not ready for primetime and people in general expect a lot more of their politicians than I see Russia from my backyard therefore I know how to deal with Russia.

          • Speedracer

            Come on John, the Russia comment was made on Saturday Night Live as part of a comedy skit, it was not said by Palin…get your facts straight.

          • John

            Here it is: watch it and then shut-up.


            BTW, You are welcomed to watch other interviews where she actually says what I wrote above.

          • Speedracer

            Just watched it John, and still didn’t hear her say she could see Russia from her back yard. What I did see was her trying to explain something the media took out of context and ran with.

            If this is the best you have on her, no sense in me wasting time watching the other videos you mention.

          • John

            Speedracer, I let you be the judge. Please Google the following phrase and then investigate for yourself: “Did Sarah Palin really say “I can see Russia from my house”? Unless you are like Glen Beck who believes that the communists, the socialists, and the aliens are taking over our country then you would agree that Sarah made such a statement. BTW, what is your view? At least I explained why I will not take Sarah seriously.

          • Speedracer

            I tried your google approach, and I’m still not convinced. I did come accross a Time piece that referred to her as saying ” one can see Russia from Alaskan territory.” Is that the comment you are talking about? If so I think you are just trying to find a reason to dislike her, since that’s a far cry from saying she can see Russia from her house.
            As far as my veiw on her, I haven’t said whether I like or dislike her. I’m am just very intrigued as to why there seems to be so much backlash toward her, from the media and liberals.

            Read more: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1848735,00.html#ixzz0XuF26iaT

          • John

            What Happened Greg, you disappeared on me?

      • KathyK

        Brenda & John,

        Your self-serving “minority status” a politically correct excuse for ignorance? For the record Brenda, most Americans don’t give a damn what the rest of the world think.

        • John

          Are you still around and do you want to have a decent debate about your comment above?

    • http://www.bernardgoldberg.com Bernie


      First, It was CHRIS MATHEWS who said there were no minorities at Sarah Palin’s book signing. I did not say it.

      Second, if this is your attempt at humor, it’s way too subtle. And not funny.

      Third, if you’re serious, you’re one of the dumbest people ever to post on this site.

      Fourth, do me a favor, don’t come back.



  • Barbara Taylor

    Bernie, you just keep up the good work. 99% of the time I agree with everything you say and respect your opinion. I don’t feel you have to explain or justify yourself at all about anything. We do still have the First Amendment in this country which gives us a right to an opinion whether others agree with it or not.

    • John

      Barbara, This is such a stupid and arrogant statement to make that because of our First Amendment that we can make statements that are offensive to others. If this is your contribution to a healthy debate then Bravo to you. What Bernie said was wrong and offensive and for you to encourage him to continue with statements like that because it is his First Amendment right says a lot about you.

      • Brian G.

        If people getting offended trumped the First Amendment, it would be meaningless. That you think people should be silenced just because someone else gets offended (which is entirely in their control, not the speakers), says a lot about you and your lack of understanding of the First Amendment.

        What’s especially disgusting is this belief that so many have that their interpretation of what someone says is more important than the meaning of the speaker. As if they get to take ownership over a statement just because it offends them. That is ridiculous.

        • Capn Eddie Ricketyback

          The myopia of “John” would be amazing if it were not so common on the left. “Stupid and arrogant” is a perfect description of his post. Brian is 100% correct… just because some dope claims to be “offended” by something someone says does NOT trump the First Amendment. Nobody’s holding a gun to anybody’s head making them read Bernie’s excellent and truthful columns. If John is offended by well-reasoned facts and opinions may I recommend Daily Kos? If memory serves, he won’t find much of it there.

          • John

            Capt wrote: “If John is offended by well-reasoned facts and opinions,” well that is the problem rigth there. In your small world facts and opinions come from conservative talk shows and web sites. All I was writing is that Barbara was encouraging Bernie to continue with offending Liberal mothers who have children with DS. OK, it is Bernie’s right to do so and your offer that I don’t read about it if I don’t like it. But the reality is that although you have the right to do so doesn’t mean you should. It is a choice we all make. What Barbara is saying is Bernie continue with being hurtful and what you are saying is if you don’t like it don’t read about it. I am sorry but it doesn’t work that way.

        • Becca

          I just want to point out that the first five words of the First Amendment are “CONGRESS shall make no law…” (emphasis mine).

          Bernie is free to speak his mind. He is free to hold his misguided, ill-informed, over-simplified opinions about special needs parents (and liberals who dislike Sarah Palin). If the Government were to shut him down, or close up his website, he would have a legitimate grievance. But that’s not what’s happening here.

          Neither I, nor any other dissenting person who has commented on this website this week is, to my knowledge, a government agent. We are legally incapable of interfering with Mr. Goldberg’s First Amendment rights. (And as this is his website and he employs the moderators, he has considerably more power of freedom of speech than I do in this particular setting.)

          He can speak his mind (and has every right to make an idiot of himself when he says things that have no basis in fact). I can show up on his blog and disagree with him and start discussions. He can fail to approve my comments if he likes, and I can’t file any sort of constitutionally based legal complaint because he’s not an agent of the government either. We all have the right to offend each other equally here. All the First Amendment guarantees is that the government will stay out of it.

      • Christene

        Yeah John,..it’s liberals like you, who think you can tell the rest of us what to do! Yes, the first Amendment does not only allow bleeding heart liberals to speak the ignorant rants they do, (.global warming, stay out of my womb, terrorist are parents too,..and so on, and so on),…but it gives the normal people the right to speak up, …if you don’t like what Bernie has to say, then DON’T READ HIS COLUMN OR WATCH FOX NEWS!!
        Why would anyone even attempt to understand the mind of a liberal, a mind set compares to asking someone in a round room to pee in a corner.

        • John

          You and the Capt who wrote before would like very much to have your own State and want the government to work for your way of life and so on. The truth is that will not happen. I watch Fixed news sometimes to see what is going on. I have the right to do so and I will continue to put pressure on people to behave. I participated in the campaign that removed Dobbs. Let’s make a bet that Beck will be next. Let’s discuss real issues not who is going to pee where.

          • james

            First thing John, Is your life son incomplete that you have to try and take credit for Lou Dobbs . What a joke ,First of all you had zero to do with that , What a joke . You would be better off reporting to obama to see what he wants you to think or if he as any luggage you can carry .

          • Mike

            I’ll bet you 5k that Glenn won’t be next, you ignoramus! You started the name-calling, so don’t even go there. I was just reading comments here after the article- for entertainment. I noticed that the only troll was John. Nothing to do with his life. I’m so sorry for you. A frothy-mouthed liberal is the very worst kind of whack-job. Liberalism certainly is a terrible brain disorder.

  • http://www.nucciconsultinggroup.com Ev Nucci

    Hi Bernie,
    Frequently people are born into their religion and into their politics.

    Fanatics on either side are irrational. Both are visceral, uncompromising, zealous and excessive. America is in the middle. Those that are independent in their thought processes, do so because they are true intellectuals. They think about the issues, the candidate, can see past charisma and vote based on the candidate’s history–not campaign promises. They are accustomed to reading people, have foresight and vote either party. As fiduciaries, they are committed to government restraint. They don’t see the role of government as involved in social mores and expect fiscal restraint.

    Sarah Palin worked with Democrats to clean up the Republicans Who would you fear more?

    A sexy mom with five kids who actually does what she says she’s going to do, has the skill and ability to clean up her own house? You have to love this woman’s integrity!

  • Harrison Papil

    Andrew responded to a comment of mine and the forum apparently isn’t setup for responses once a thread reaches a handful of back/forth comments, so I’ll respond here:

    Andrew said: (November 21, 2009 at 1:56 pm) “And who do you think are more apt to abort in the strongly religious U.S., the religious conservative or the less or non-religious liberal? Just because we are a strongly religious country doesn’t mean that every person who ends up having an abortion is strongly religious. This chart that keeps coming up is irrelevant.”

    This is the chart he is referring to:
    Abortions per 1000 people:
    Latin America (very religious): 31
    USA (strongly religious): 21
    Southern Europe (strong religious remnants, ie., the Pope): 18
    Western Europe (not very religious): 12

    If the religious are less likely to have an abortion, why are the abortion numbers of very/strongly religious nations higher than those of less religious nations?

    • Andrew

      We are a nation of 300+ million people you will inherently have a large actual number of people (millions upon millions) that end up making a smaller percentage. It is entirely plausible and in fact likely that people for whom religion is not an important issue would be less weary about having an abortion and the other percentage of people for whom religion is at the forefront of their minds when they make important decisions would be less likely to have an abortion.

      That is why I feel the chart is meaningless, guess how many people self identify as liberal in the U.S., roughly 20%, what is 20% of 1000, 200, that means out of the 1000 people at least 200 are liberal.

      I’m not saying no conservative has never had an abortion but it is simply factual to state that liberals are more likely to abort than conservatives, and ultimately that is what Bernie said, the fact that it touched of a firestorm is pretty funny when you break down the comments.

      I’ve posted this before but wouldn’t a liberal person be likely to “choose” their child and want it to have a healthy and full life, that is the whole reason they have over and over again pounded home their mantra of “choice”.

      • Harrison Papil

        You mention religion in the 1st paragraph of your response but do not in the rest; Bernie’s assertion was both a combination of politics and religion, so I will try to respond with that in mind.

        So in these other very religious countries (like those in Central/Latin America), what you are saying is that despite having HUGE religious populations… that it is the very small minority of non-believers/liberally-bent that are having an unprecedented number of abortions??

        Take Mexico: With a population that displays similar percentages of conservatives and liberals when compared to the USA, it also has a population that self-identifies as 95%+ Christian (with the vast majority of those being Roman Catholic). Mexico has an abortion rate of 33 per 1000 people. 33.

        How does a very religious nation have these abortion numbers? By your assertion, one must assume that the non-religious/liberally-bent must be having TONS of abortions. Literal constant and unrelenting abortions in order to produce a 33 in 1000 number. This seems implausible. Or… are the religious having abortions? Are the religious — who don’t have access to contraception and proper sex education (because their religion doesn’t allow it nor provide for it) — are they having a ton of abortions?

        • Andrew

          Now you are talking about Mexico?
          I’ve never discussed Mexico, Bernie has never discussed Mexico, It would seem as though you are searching.

          As for libs having to abort at a much higher rate than cons. which may not pertain to your argument in America…
          If and I’m not saying this is the case if every single one of the 21 abortions your chart says were carried out by liberals it would only be 10% of the liberal population, which is not a drastic number at all. Now I don’t believe every single abortion is carried out by extremely liberal people but that is what the numbers would be in the U.S. if they did.

          The percentage of cons. identification is roughly 40% so that would leave another 40% who are not conservative that could also potentially be aborting. Please stick to our assertions here in the U.S. and don’t ask me to talk about Mexico’s political and cultural climate.

          • Harrison Papil

            Statistical relationships of these kinds are repeatedly demonstrated to carry-over from one western culture to another. This is a basic tenet of statistical modeling. Comparing the USA to other Western nations is not only apt — it is required — for looking at what others are doing, how they are doing it and documenting their successes and failures is a basic way to… learn.

            This is what I was saying when I pointed out O’Reilly’s penchant for dismissing statistics in an earlier comment — his dismissal of statistics that invalidate his position because… he really likes his position (who doesn’t) — and this is what you and Bernie are attempting to do here.

            A snip from my earlier comment: “For example, when someone recently pointed out to him the fact that instances of violent crimes declines when marijuana is decriminalized, he invariably will dismiss that stat because (paraphrasing his reasoning) “the population that produced that stat (invariably a Western European country) doesn’t have a population the size of ours — which negates the stat’s validity”.”

            O’Reilly thinks it invalidates the stat’s validity; it does not. The comparison is apt and proper and O’Reilly would serve himself and his audience better were he to learn this.

            There is nothing special in the water, no pun intended, that is causing that higher abortion number in Mexico. There is nothing special in the water that is causing the much lower abortion numbers in Western European countries. AND there is nothing special in my water either — here in the USA — that is causing our higher abortion numbers. So when you remove water from the equation, what else is causing these numbers? Unavoidably, one sees that access to useful sex education, access to contraception and the religiosity of the populaces (and the influence their religion(s) have over access to sex education and contraception) are the answer.

          • Andrew

            You’re still not answering who is electing, “choosing”, if you will, to have the abortions in the U.S.A.

            You’ve completely ignored my argument, case, for the reasoning behind my approach.

          • Harrison Papil

            I was attempting to show a larger point via a forest-for-the-trees comparison by showing that the religiosity and political leanings of a populace does impact its abortion numbers — and that despite how you or Bernie feel on the subject or how “logical” you may find your position — that, in fact, the more religious do have higher abortion numbers regardless of location and the USA does not exist on a statistical island. Correlation has been shown, but as I’ve stated, causation has not. Further, one need also recognize the impact that is had when access to sex eduction and contraception are constricted as is seen in religious populations.

          • Andrew

            fair enough

          • Becca

            I addressed your question earlier, forgive me for linking to myself but I’d rather not get repetitive:


  • http://votethemout2010-2012.ning.com/ Charles Blakemore

    Hi Bernie,
    As long as you’re reporting the truth about those damned Liberal loons, you keep plugging away. The time has come for them to take what they dish out. All the vicious attacks have to be answered. You’re doing a great job on O’Reilly’s show. Don’t stop now. I think everything is about to come to a head and a lot of political heads will be rolling. Even the truth can’t be stopped. Nor, can the tides of change we can believe in. Sarah is the voice of reason in the clutter of political rhetoric. I think she actually made a campaign introduction during part 2 of her interview with O’Reilly. Go Sarah!


  • Mike

    words words words
    Nice try at an explanation, Bernie, but you’re missing the point. What you said, clearly, was that, given the “choice”, liberals would abort a down syndrome fetus. Yes, you did. And whether we’re liberal or conservative or progressive or whatever we might be, we all know liberals who decided, as Sarah did, to give birth and raise a down syndrome child. We’ll let the generalizations about the midwest and colleges go. We won’t let your stinking generalization re: choice and parenting go. We know who you are and how your mind works, and all you words can’t change who you are and how you think. In the morning, you wake up, and you’re still a slime. I pity you and those of your ilk.

    Gamers play by the rules but are too naive to ever rule.

  • Tim

    Oh here we go. Now the gamers are online. You can always tell as the sentences have two words and they have no courage to say their real name. Great courage from the couch boys! Do you wonder why you don’t have dates?

  • Andrew

    Suppose, this as good a place as any to tell you Bernie to “keep on keeping on”.

    It is supremely admirable that you have posted a column on your “firestorm” and allowed debate over the issue.

    You don’t have to put up with any of this but you do, it says a lot about your character, in a good way.

    • http://www.bernardgoldberg.com Bernie

      Thank you, Andrew. Man, that really means a lot to me.

      • Andrew

        Glad to say it, I’ve always admired watching you on t.v. and reading your books. It might surprise you to find out I’m only 22. There is hope for the youth of America.

        • John

          Actually it is sad that a 22 years old considers Bernie as his hero and that Bernie thinks what you said means a lot to him. Do you conservatives like to compliment each other and give comfort to each other and make feel good? “You don’t have to put up with any of this but you do.” How arrogant that is how arrogant? Well, what do you suppose your majesty Sir Bernie can do if he doesn’t want to put up with this. What that people can’t go to his web site and tell him how wrong he is when he says on National TV that Liberals would abort a Down Syndrome.

          • Andrew

            I’ve made absolutely no pretense about my political ideologies, glad to see that you have nailed down to a “T” though.

            I’ve never said is a “hero” either, just the fact that he says what he believes and doesn’t hide behind criticism, if our elected officials could behave this way we wouldn’t be in the mess we are in.

            Yes I do admire the man though, someone who is supremely successful and continues to put himself out there and open to ridicule is someone to be admired.

  • Greg

    This is my first time posting something here, so I think in my first attempt posting this it ended up in the middle of some other thread. Here it is on it’s own, sorry if it’s redundant:

    Jon Stewart hit it on the mark with the rest of his piece – how this pathetic practice of pinning “liberals” with all the wretched things they believe and practice and do has nothing to do with reality, but is based on your own shallow thinking and ridiculous typecasting. It’s such a load of crap. I mean really, I love how Bernie is basing his argument on comments he read on certain websites as “proof” of what liberals as a whole think or believe. Is that really anything close to a reliable source Bernie? I thought you were a journalist. Someone could be pretending to be someone or say anything they want in these comments, but this is what you’re using as “proof” of liberal’s horrible beliefs? This cartoon straw dog of “liberals” that conservatives love to create then tear down is the real media-driven travesty here.

    And what kind of argument is saying “a pro life person would be less likely to have an abortion than a pro-choice person.” Um, duh, yeah I think so. Isn’t that the definition of these beliefs? But you ARE in fact politicizing it and trivializing a serious matter by pointedly suggesting that these “liberal” people really don’t care about mentally handicapped children, and that’s the REAL reason they might choose to have an abortion in this situation. This is really foggy logic, and it is trivializing something very real and difficult and heartbreaking people of ALL stripes cope with, and that’s raising a handicapped child of any kind, be it Downs, or Autism, or a physical handicap. I think that whatever your political proclivities, I’d like to believe that any human being would do an equally admirable, wonderful job if dealt this circumstance. How about that possibility Bernie? But unfortunately you turned yet another irrelevant issue into crass political fodder. That is definitely something the right specializes in unfortunately these days.

    So no, people don’t dislike Sarah Palin for any of the issues you’ve pointed out. They dislike her because they’ve heard her ideas, heard her (try to) express them and just don’t take her seriously or like her ideas. And that’s including many conservatives and independents who feel that way. And is it really only conservative women who are criticized and dissected this way? Let me throw one name at you: Hillary Clinton. Care to take a stroll down that memory lane and remember all the vitriol and hatred spewed her way for years and years?

    • Andrew

      How is he politicizing this topic? I don’t see your analysis coming to fruition here.

      You make his argument for him when you say that libs are more likely to abort than conservatives.

      Because liberals are more likely to abort, why the heck would they not try to create the perfect situation for the child they want to raise. It would be more likely that they would “choose” their child.

      • Andrew

        Wish I could edit my prev. post

        Why are liberals upset that Bernie has suggested they would abort a child, that is what they stand for?

        • Harrison Papil

          They are upset because Bernie is factually wrong in his assertion. The numbers are clear — the more religious/conservative the population, the higher the abortion rate. I’ve shown these numbers in another post:

          Abortions per 1000 people:
          Latin America (very religious): 31
          USA (strongly religious): 21
          Southern Europe (strong religious remnants, ie., the Pope): 18
          Western Europe (not very religious): 12

          • Andrew

            And who do you think are more apt to abort in the strongly religious U.S., the religious conservative or the less or non-religious liberal?

            Just because we are a strongly religious country doesn’t mean that every person who ends up having an abortion is strongly religious.
            This chart that keeps coming up is irrelevant.

        • Greg

          No, that’s not all he was saying – he was cleverly trying to pivot from this point, which is (of course) pro-choice people have more abortions than pro-life ones, duh, but then to imagine some hatred they have for Palin because she chose *not* to have one for her handicapped child, and that none of these “liberals” would ever conceive making that choice because of course they’re lacking in moral character. That is crassly political and is completely presumptuous of the decision these “liberals” would make based on ABSOLUTELY NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER, only based on his own biased conjecture. What’s the point really? Like I said before, a topic like this should be above scoring political points over – I sincerely believe this is a very personal matter, and whether a pro-life person might choose to terminate this pregnancy, or a pro-choice person might choose to follow thru with the pregnancy, both are completely personal decisions to be decided by that person alone, and I would respect either one. That is what this country is about – freedom to make these decisions. I’ve never been there so I can’t begin to assign a moral value to one decision over the other. Is that what you or Bernie is trying to assert? Have you ever had to make that decision? I think until you’re faced with it, don’t judge what is the more “moral” one. And if you have don’t condemn a choice that’s different from yours.

          Bernie’s trying to soft-pedal it now, saying “I was only trying to say who would be more likely…” but the way he put it on the O’Reilly show was that liberals are immoral and wouldn’t make the decision Palin made, and disrespect her because she did. And that’s what rightfully elicited the “Go F-yourself” comment from Stewart. I have never knows a pro-choice person to condemn someone for ever deciding to follow thru with a pregnancy. That’s a really weak point, and was only made to find yet another way to caricature and shoot down liberals.

    • http://www.bernardgoldberg.com Bernie


      Help me out. What does this mean:

      “I love how Bernie is basing his argument on comments he read on certain websites as “proof” of what liberals as a whole think or believe. Is that really anything close to a reliable source Bernie?”

      HUH? I literally have no idea what you’re talking about.


      • Greg

        In your article above, you take three quotes drawn from Salon, The Washington Post, and the CBC, and use those to set up your argument that “this is how liberals feel, and this is why they hate Palin.” Were these quotes from actual articles, or just from the comments section from these websites, sections just like this one? It wasn’t entirely clear but based on who you attributed them to (a “college professor”, “another woman”), it seemed like they were merely comments from random people in the comments section. This to me is hardly a reliable source, it’s antidotal at best, and also like I said, these are people who might not even be who they say they are.

        • Andrew

          Are you trying to say that liberals actually don’t mind Sarah Palin, if so you are delusional.

          • Kibba

            Priceless seeing Bernie owned on his own site.

  • Harrison Papil

    Just an observation…

    Re: The Left’s dislike of Sarah Palin is something I find quite simple and obvious to finger: They fear she could be elected President in 2012.

    On its face, this dislike is misplaced as the poll numbers strongly show that she could never win a national election as the ~20% conservative base that adores her does not equate to winning national elections. One needs to be able to pull strong numbers of moderates — in addition to one’s own party — in order to win the Presidency. And Palin can’t generate strong support from even moderate conservatives, let alone getting people to cross the isle. It won’t happen, but this won’t stop those on the Left from fearing her.

    That said: I would share their fear if I thought there were some way she could win a national election as I’ve never seen her give a nuanced answer to any question of substance. As it is quite apparent that she has no knowledge of international affairs… and watching her try to address these topics in friendly venues (like Hannity and O’Reilly tonight) is almost painful to watch. The fact that she has been on the national stage for over a year and has yet to participate in a press conference — taking any/all questions from reporters across the spectrum — is very telling.

    Yes, the media is/has-been hard on her. But so what. Will Russia and Iraq and Iran and Afghanistan and Israel and Palestine and China — just to name a few — go easy on her? Of course not. So until she can give substantive responses to probing questions regarding the problems of our time… she will do well to make as much as she can with her book.

    • Jake

      It may be telling that she has not exposed herself to an open press conference, but for you to say that she cannot win because of it is interesting. Obama knows nothing about international affairs even with a taxpayer funded cast of advisors. He controlled his entire campaign and avoided any and all directe questioning by all sides. The few times that a question slippped through, he either avoided answering it or vilified the questioner. So the real truth is that a conservative woman who does not put herself out there cannot be elected, but a protected class liberal can. This says alot more about the state of the media and the so called activist groups than it does about Palin.

      The important question is will Obama get tough with Iraq, Iran, Russia, etc. ? His great wealth of knowledge seems to be rather ineffective. Perhaps someone with a wealth of principles and a love of country is better suited to handle our problems than a hairsplitter and a an apologizer

      • Harrison Papil

        Like Obama or not, one can’t seriously suggest that he doesn’t understand our major foreign policy issues nor that he can’t give nuanced answers — as many will suggest (O’Reilly, for example) that his answers are too nuanced and that he needs to do better job of cutting through the bs. You may not like him or his polices or how he intends to enact them, but knowledge certainly isn’t a department he is lacking in.

        And I wasn’t suggesting that she couldn’t be elected only because she hasn’t participated in a presser. Her lack of knowledge on these issues is obvious and transparent and shows itself with every interview. There is no avoiding it. But my point was more towards Palin’s electability in general (regardless of her lack of knowledge on the various issues) — and the simple fact is that she a very polarizing figure and the numbers do not lie: She is unelectable in a national election.

  • http://n/a Kathie Ampela

    The way Sarah Palin was destroyed by the liberal media is part of the reason why I’m on websites like Bernie Goldberg’s posting my comments. Granted, Sarah’s interview with Katie Couric was not her finest hour. But the fact remains, the blatant favoritism that was shown Obama/Biden during the 2008 campaign is unprecedented in American history or at least in my lifetime. Much was made over Sarah Palin’s inexperience, but can you name one accomplishment that Barack Obama made in the Senate? This was blown off by the media. The guy can’t give a speech without a telepromter! Hello? Anybody home? And how about Joe Biden? Now granted, he had the experience, but did he ever give you the feeling that he should step down? Like the lights were on, but nobody was home? He certainly seemed rambling and confused to me. Did anyone in the media ask the obvious question, do you want Joe Biden a heartbeat away from the presidency? Of course, they didn’t! But they certainly posed that question of Sarah Palin! If that’s not blatant bias, I don’t know what is!

    I think Sarah Palin has raw, undefined talent. Is she presidential material? I have good feelings, but I don’t know. I’m not making a commitment until I’m sure. I’m keeping an eye on her. If you dislike her, that’s fine, it’s your choice. But lay off the vicious attacks. No human being deserves that, whatever their politics.

    Bernie, great column and sorry it’s been a rough week for you.

  • Paul Jahn

    As a conservative parent of a 16 year old girl with Down Syndrome what offended me about your comment on O’reilly was that you seemed to be drawing the same sort of ill informed general conclusions that you correctly criticize in the main stream media. While you did not explicitly say that the choice to have a child with Down Syndrome is not morally superior to the choice to abort, one could certainly draw an inference that liberals are less likely to be willing to meet the challenges of raising such a child. Many would argue that accepting sacrifice for a child is sign of good character.

    The fact is fewer parents are choosing to bear children with Down Syndrome. The fact is that parents of children with Down Syndrome cover the full gamut of political, ideological and religious points of view. The fact is that I have liberals friends who treat my daughter with the respect she is due as a fellow human and have known conservatives who are uncomfortable with her and extremely condescending.

    One of the reasons I admire Governor Palin is the empathy I have for her and the respect I have for the way in which she treats and refers to Trig. For me it is a sign of strong character.

    However, I always find it appalling when ideologues on either side of the aisle confuse ideological differences with character defects. This tendency runs stronger on the left than on the right and is wrong when used by either side.

    Your comments on Palin and the shabby treatment she receives were otherwise on target and accurate. Alas, your ill considered generalization on families with Down Syndrome had just a whiff of hypocrisy. I still have a great deal of respect for your opinion but less than I did a few days ago.

    • John Dendy

      Paul, I’m sorry but I think Bernie was right on target, generally speaking. The fact that you have liberal friends who treat your daughter with respect is irrelevant. I’m sure that makes them feel god about themselves. How many of them would chose abortion over giving birth to a Downssyndrome child? Most I would bet. .

      And you cannot seperate Ideology from Character. The liberals that trash Sarah Palin have zero character and zero integrity. I have heard very few Conservitives trash liberals publicly.

      • http://www.rummelhudson.com Robert Rummel-Hudson

        According to numbers from King’s College in London, roughly 90% of pregnancies resulting in Down Syndrome are terminated by the parents. As Down Syndrome is a genetic disorder that does not favor any specific ethnic or demographic group, it follows that the vast majority of parents faced with the reality of raising a child with Down Syndrome choose not to, and they do so regardless of political or religious belief. NINETY PERCENT.

        Of the remaining ten percent, subtract whatever percentage did not have access to medical care sufficient to inform them that their child would be born with Down Syndrome. The number that is left? THAT’S the single digit group that is making the choice to have a child who they know will have Down Syndrome. Even if you pretend that every one of them is a good God-fearing conservative, you are still talking about a statistically negligible percentage. (Bernie, more than one person has made this point to you, and yet you remain conspicuously silent on this fact.)

        In other words, the people who are making this very difficult decision are doing it without politicization and without ideological talking points to guide them. They are making a heartbreaking decision without regard to their political stripes.

        The reason that Mister Goldberg’s remarks were so offensive to those of us with children with disabilities isn’t because he’s insulting liberals. That’s what he does, and to do otherwise (including making an actual sincere apology, without the self-justifications and the cheap shots) would damage his “brand”. That would take real humility, and he can’t be faulted for being unable to do so.

        No, his remarks were (and remain) offensive because he’s playing politics with children and families that he simply has no place doing so. In that respect, even the most liberal of us feel more kinship with Sarah Palin than we do with Mister Goldberg. She’s part of our club, the one that none of us asked to join and whose membership never expires. You, Mister Goldberg, are not. We’d prefer that you play politics with your own families and leave ours (liberal and conservative alike) out of your polemics.

  • Valeri

    Oh, Bernie. Most kids learn in grade school that “I’m sorry you took it that way” and “I’m sorry I said that” are not the same thing.

    Would you like to try a real apology? One that perhaps the least bit sincere? And why no reponses to the articulate and well-formulated comments? You know you’re wrong and it’s embarrassing to see you flounder.

    • John Dendy

      Hey Valeri, Bernie doesn’t owe you an apology. get over yourself.

      • http://www.bernardgoldberg.com Bernie

        An apology exactly for what? If there’s no room for disagreement on that issue, then that’s the way it will have to be. But I have no plans to conform to anybody’s orthodoxy — not even on this sensitive issue.

        • http://www.rummelhudson.com Robert Rummel-Hudson

          If there is one thing that has become almost painfully clear in all of this, Mister Goldberg, it is that when you made your original remarks, you had no idea, absolutely none whatsoever, that this issue was even remotely sensitive. It was an easy cheap shot in the service of a talking point, and I get the impression that you have been genuinely surprised by our reaction.

          If there’s anything in this whole hubbub that’s telling, it’s not your politics. It’s your insensitivity and your disconnect from the actual human beings and actual families with diverse political and religious backgrounds who exist in the real world beyond your casual, careless remark.

          For the record, John Dendy is correct. You don’t owe anyone an apology. But you just might find your own soul could benefit from it. Not by way of explanation, but simply “I was insensitive, your families and your children face enough hardship without being turned into political hay, and I’m sorry I did it.”

          Whether or not you choose to grow as a person and perhaps show some integrity is beside the point for those of us raising kids with disabilities. We’ll keep doing what we do, liberal and conservative, because that’s the world we live in. It can be a hard place, but there are indescribable rewards for us, rewards that I am increasingly convinced you’ll never be capable of understanding. In that respect, you’ve got my pity, and that’s the truth.

  • Jobu

    Mr. Goldberg:

    Moderate and liberal women do not hate Sarah Palin. Rather, they strongly oppose many of her far-right positions on important issues. For example, they oppose her because she would deny them the EXACT SAME CHOICE she had with a Down Syndrome fetus: whether or not to carry it to term. The right-wing slander — which has been expressed by the usual vulgarians on the right as well as conservatives who should know better (e.g., Krauthammer, Barone) — that liberals “hate Palin because she didn’t abort Trig” is among the more despicable smears promulgated by an increasingly shrill, offensive, and intellectually dishonest “commentariat.”

    While you are at it, why not raise the issue of Palin’s opposition to the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. This “new feminist” seems to have a problem with women having the right to be paid the same as men for the same work. That should play well in the country when she tries to rally women to her side in 2012.

    • http://www.benevolentgrammarian.blogspot.com bmmg39

      John: “For example, they oppose her because she would deny them the EXACT SAME CHOICE she had with a Down Syndrome fetus: whether or not to carry it to term.”

      Here is it again: the “Palin’s-a-hypocrite” charge. If she’s pro-life, and then doesn’t have an abortion, that doesn’t make her a hypocrite. It’s like someone speaking out against embezzlement, and not embezzling, herself, and you referring to her as a hypocrite for denying others the “choice to embezzle” that she had.

  • Erin

    You insulted all women, whether liberal or conservative with your comments. I was hoping they were taken out of context, which is why I read your column. But, the weren’t. You continue to spout off about something you have no direct knowledge of, or proof of. This isn’t about Mrs. Palin. You don’t know the private agony a women goes through when faced with a decision like this. How dare you say a liberal woman would kill their child and a conservative woman would not. What a bigot you are. When you grow a uterus, you can join the debate.

    • http://www.bernardgoldberg.com Bernie

      And when you acquire a little civility, you too can join the debate.

      When did I say “liberal women would kill their child and a conservative woman would not”? Please read my column again. Thanks.

  • John

    Bernie, Today I posted my comments on your web site and I wanted to thank you for providing such a forum for different point of views to be posted. After all you did apologize for the comments you made about the Down syndrome. Please continue to be accountable for what you say and stop reading too much into what Liberals do and don’t do. Why don’t you reach out to a liberal you respect and perform some work that is good for our community, society, and country.

    Finally, I am not a liberal and I like Sarah as a person and agree that the media and some liberals have been unfair to her. However, my suggestion as to why they potentially hate her or don’t like her is that they have had terrible experience with another Maverick named Bush. There is no way that mass population would vote for Sarah. Instead of a Book signing campaign, why didn’t she for example go and become a Senator or finish her term as a Governor? Gain more respect and experience before wanting to run for the Presidency.

    Thank You and Good Luck

    • Bill

      As long as your asking why Palin didn’t do this or that, why don’t you ask about something more important: the lack of experience in private business or government of your beloved leader, Barack Obama? The liberals’ fixation on Palin is why people identify with her and are so upset with her detractors. Not a night goes by where some leftist comedian takes a a cheap shot at Palin or her family. Joe Biden, a man who’s entire political career has been spent on the wrong side of history and sticks his foot in his mouth more often than not, gets a pass. It is this rank hypocracy that gets people worked-up.

      • John

        Bill, I watch both MSNBC and Fixed News and trust me Fixed News starts at early morning hours until that guy at red eye nothing but bashing Obama. I mean this is a 24/7 nonstop machine that never slows down. Try it one day. It goes both ways and that is what I am sick of. It never ends and as a result we will not be a better country that we can we.

        • Bill

          John, I guess that CNN, CBS, ABC, NBC, PBS, the Boston Globe, the New York Times, the L.A. Times, the Chicago Sun-Times, the San Jose Mercury News and the AP, as just a few quick examples, are fair and balanced? Yes, some of the guys at Fox (specifically Hannity, Beck, O’Reilly, Red Eye, etc.) are firebrand partisans who definitely dislike how Obama and the Dems are trying turning the country into something we used to read about in National Geographic Magazine. However, they are openly partisan, unlike the MSM outlets cited above. No, those “journalists” get on television or write stories that are slanted to a liberal viewpoint and everyone who watches them or reads them knows it – except felow liberals who share their viewpoints. Those people just won’t come out and publicly acknowledge it. Think of Dan Rather and Bill Moyers for instance. Can’t you admit, at least, that those two are partisan hacks masquerading as straight journalists when talking about policy issues?

        • John Dendy

          Obama is bashed because he is worthless and is destroying our country. What part of that do you not get? Moron.

        • Jeff

          John, your statement about FNC’s so-called non-stop bashing is either exaggeration or simple ignorance.
          During the campaign, BO and his team did everything they could to avoid challenging questions and environments. Mrs. Clinton, to her credit, went on Bill’s show knowing she wouldn’t get coddled. Her fellow democrat opponent avoided it as long as he could, and there is reason to believe that he would’ve stayed away altogether if HC’s campaign didn’t benefit from her appearance. When he finally did go on the Factor, the questions he got were mixed: some he no doubt didn’t want to face, and some he had no problem answering. There certainly wasn’t any of that “gotcha” crap that Charles Gibson tried with Governor Palin.
          Liberals in general seem to think that because FNC’s newscasts provide the whole story, and don’t omit the stuff not favorable to BO, that it’s bashing him. It’s the same delusion that is blind to the unprecedented support and protection the guy has gotten from the majority media.
          And you clearly have no idea what you’re talking about if you think Bill’s approach isn’t consistently on the level.

  • Henry

    Hi Bernie. First off, I want to say that I enjoy watching you on The O’Reilly Factor. I’ve also read two of your books (Liberal Bias; Crazies To The Left Of Me, Wimps To The Right). Not only do I enjoy your candor but also your dry and witty sense of humor (at least to me!). Thank you for telling it like it is! And thank you for speaking out for Sarah, whether you support her or not. After watching her on The Factor and Hannity, I have so much more respect for her! Many of the liberals (elite and otherwise) can’t stand her because she isn’t like them. To that, I say more power to her! In any case, Bernie, please keep up the good work, and don’t let the liberals get to you!

    • http://www.bernardgoldberg.com Bernie

      Thanks Henry.

  • Patty

    I am a liberal, pro-choice, religious, mother of a precious, loving son with Down syndrome. I thank the creator every day that he is my son. I know many other women like me. You’re off base here. And by the way, religious people can be liberal.

    • Bill

      If you are a devout Christian or Jew, the anti-religious attitude of your fellow liberals should make you wince. Have you ever seen a religious service in liberal San Francisco or Berkeley interrupted by gay activists? If you have, you would not soon forget how the Left acts toward Christianity and the devoted who try to pray in peace.

      I am certainly glad, however, that your son has a loving and caring mother.

  • Dave S.

    If Sarah Palin had a Boston accent, the lib media would give her MUCH more respect and leeway.

    I truly believe it is Palin’s twang and mannor of speaking that irritates many on both the left AND right.

    • Bill

      Reaaallly? While on my way through Beverly Hills the other day, I almost drove my hybrid Bentley into one of those, you know, one of those pick-up truck thingees. The chap driving it looked like he was from, dare I say it? The “Valley”!! Well, as I was on my way to Paris Hilton’s house I had this dire experience. Thank GOD I had my driver avoid Santa Monica Boulevard and the common public. He know a secret way to Bel Aire, through the back door don’t you know, but, gee willikers, he forgot the gate code. Anyway, by the time I arrived at the party, everyone who was anyone was gone!! I was soooooo pissed. What was I to do?

      I do listen to politics and Rachael Maddow is my fave. She’s always right!!

      • http://www.bernardgoldberg.com Bernie


        I TOTALLY agree with you re the Boston accent. I have often thought that if Stephen Hawking sounded like Goober on the old Andy Griffith show, people (certainly left-leaning people) would think he’s a moron. But if you have the “correct” accent you can tell some people that two and two are nine and they’ll not only agree, but be thrilled just to be in your company. Thanks for the post.


  • linda comstock

    As a former teacher who has worked closely with many families and children with down syndrome I was outraged to hear your comment that “liberals who are prochoice would not allow a child with down syndrome to be born. I have known many families who are proud of their children with down syndrome and never considered an abortion and many of them are very liberal. In fact, most of the people I work with that spent countless hours helping,supporting and loving these children and their families are also liberal. I wonder what your personal experience can be and if you know that these children are wonderful, loving human beings that deserve more that a hurtful, glib uninformed statement like yours. why don’t know find out what you are talking about before you make hurtful outlandish statements!

    • Stanley Mumford Myrtle

      Linda, I may be getting tired but I can’t find the quote you mention. “liberals who are prochoice would not allow a child with down syndrome to be born. You never put the end quotation in so I’mnot sure where you are ending the quote but the idea seems to be that you think BG said that Liberals would not allow a downs syndrome baby to be born. I don’t find that anywhere. I could be wrong and if I am please accept my apologies and point me in the direction of the quote. Thanks.

  • Don Sampietro

    Excellent article Bernie. You say things that others just feel and are afraid to say. Political correctness will soon go the way of the prehistoric beasts that once inhabited the earth. As far as I’m concerned it can’t leave fast enough. You possess something that too many liberals lack and that’s honesty, intelligence and common sense. One of the reasons Bill Oreilly’s show is rated so high is that he surrounds himself with excellect and informed guests like you.

  • Andrew

    I’ve read all of the posts up to this point, and am surprisingly miffed at why after reading this article by Bernie, people still call him a bigot and know nothing moron.

    As for the person who said that Bernie is a moron with no talent…
    I realize Bernie, like most average people, probably don’t want to toot their horn too much.

    Fact is Bernie is an Emmy winner, Best-selling author, he does have his own sports show on HBO and has contributed to the dialogue in America for years now and does so in a very intelligent and honest way.

    Why go to the guys website if you hate him and just want to tell him off, disagree, but do it in a coherent manner.

    • John

      The problem with you so called conservatives are that you are arrogant and think that you are of a better human species than for example the Liberals. None of you man up for the miserable failures of Bush and will never admit that he was a poor President and not a good leader at all. The damage that this man has done to this country with his Cowboy diplomacy are going to be around for years and trust me his legacy as already shown is that he was an ineffective President. People like Glen Beck, Hannity, Rush, and others like Ann Coulter are poison to this country and there is only one reason they are in this business so that they can make money. And of course they have followers who cowardly hide behind what they say. I don’t hate Bernie but I don’t agree with a lot of things he says. There is actually one that I despise and that’s that so called comedian Miller who is also a regular guest at the O’Reilly show.

      • Bill

        John, take off the blinders and see reality!

        • Bill

          Also, Dennis Miller is brilliant. More brilliant than Bill Maher. However, Miller is not a moron who loves to dump on people’s religious beliefs. Maher will make fun of anything religious — except of course, Islam, the “religion of peace and tolerance” (for obvious reasons, duh!).

          I do agree with you that Ann Coulter and Glen Beck are obnoxious.

        • Stanley Mumford Myrtle

          John how about you give us an account of all the ways BO has changed policies from Bush when it comes to national security issues that the liberals railed against Bush over? This will be your chance to be fair about a presidents record. Be sure to include all the positions he’s taken with allowing enemy combatants to be handed over to foreigh governments, that was abig one the liberals hit Bush on. Include all the court cases BO has agreed with the Bush positions, despite his changing the verbs and nouns in the press releases. And then go to your private area and have a good scream over how bad Bush was and MOVE ON!!! He’s not president and as long as you and other BO supporters keep trying to answer questions about the sitting president by saying but what about Bush, we will not have an effective discourse.

      • Andrew

        How does your reply have ANYTHING to do with what I said?

      • http://www.benevolentgrammarian.blogspot.com bmmg39

        John: “The problem with you so called conservatives are that you are arrogant and think that you are of a better human species than for example the Liberals. None of you man up for the miserable failures of Bush and will never admit that he was a poor President and not a good leader at all.”

        There’s nothing to “admit,” John. Bush wasn’t a poor president and he was a good leader. Now, if you disagree, that’s one thing. But you seem rather eager to throw around the charge that conservatives think they’re better than everyone else, when you yourself are the one guilty of that.

  • Charlie

    Do you remember reading anywhere in the lamestream media about 550 metric tons
    of yellowcake being secretely removed from Iraq without being detected and transferred to Canada? Do you know what yellowcake is? You have an MBA (you say) you should know!
    If not I will tell you — it is what uranium reactor fuel and bomb material is made from.
    Bush lied? Don’t sound like it to me. If you doubt me, google the words yellowcake and
    Iraq at the Chicago Tribune. It was in the Tribune and a few other print outlets.

    • John

      Charlie, there is some yellow and blue cakes next to where you live. Let’s go kill all the Arabs before it is too late. They might come after you next. Why are you conservatives so afraid and fearful and paranoid? What yellowcake? Even if they had Yellowcake where was the infrastructure to build the so called WMD’s. Bush not only lied as evident by many of his staff who said so later, he used the fears in average people like you to make you believe that this was a justifiable war.

      • Bill

        John, if you cared about your country under Bush, why is it that you cannot say a word about how the U.S. is being led by a Leftist who surrounds himself with SEIU union thugs, ACORN crooks, Rev Wright-types, Mao TseTung lovers, and assorted morons like Eric Holder and Anita Dunn? Oh yeah, you will ask, what about Halliburton? Well, what about it?

        • John

          Trust me Bill that as a leader I rather surround myself with various political points of views than what Cheney has to offer.

          • Bill

            “Various” political points of view? I’ve never heard Marxism, Leninism or Stalinism so described. By the way, how many moderate or conservative voices are part of the Obama inner circle? Maybe we should ask his “closest” advisors, such as Andy Stern, Bertha Lewis, Valarie Jarrett or Van Jones for instance? Wow, what a group of open-minded advisers. Almost as good as his “mentor” of 20-plus years, Rev. Wright. Nice call.

        • Harrison Papil

          What an odd and disjointed comment.

          This guilt-by-association stuff is surreal… as we all have the weird/crazy uncle.

          That being said: The last time I checked, we live in America, where someone can believe what they want without fear of reprisal (as long as their actions don’t harm others). As such, ANYONE can hold office, advise the President, swim in my pool — be he a Muslim, a Communist, a Marxist, a Jew, a Christian, an atheist, etc — if you do me mp harm and if you can hold a decent conversation, feel free to come on in… the water is fine.

          • Robert

            True, we all may have a crazy Uncle, but when our President surrounds himself with MANY crazy Uncle’s & Aunts, one has to question his/her beliefs.

            So the only thing wrong with Bill’s post was there were many other names he left out.

            And to JOHN….I think it’s way past your bedtime. Your logic sucks & you are getting personal towards others.

            A big shout-out to Bernie, a true voice of reason. Those who see Bernie on a regular basis on O’Reilly know he is a fair & level-headed Gentleman.

          • Harrison Papil

            So there is a crazy-uncle limit now? I must have missed that email.

            Obviously my hitch with this kind of criticism is that instead of focusing on what is truly important — political policy objectives and how they are going to be enacted — it focuses on the truly unimportant, the color of the drapes, the positioning of furniture, etc. instead of what true/good criticism does, which is to put forth a competing thought or alternative points-of-view in an eloquent and pointed manner.

            Further, it strikes me as an attempt dehumanize our neighbors. Like Obama or not, he is an American and he is the President and we all deserve a better public discourse.

            (And just because others may also behave in the manner doesn’t make it ok for us to do it too.)

  • Ron Kean


    You were the first to go after liberal bias. Or to at least point it out.

    It’s a shame that for simply commenting on the reasoning process of Palin haters you found yourself in the crosshairs of so many.

    You and people like you carry the flag for us who individually have a small voice. And like flag bearers in a battle charge, you have a greater risk of being hit in a figurative sense. Conservative or even not-liberal speakers have been hit with pies and almost hit with shoes.

    To speak on O’Reilly is brave and we appreciate it. If you can continue to contend with the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune (I stole that) I’d like to commend you and encourage you to speak out more.

  • Andrew D

    You’re right on the mark, Bernie. I have argued with liberal friends over the very same points. You can dislike a politician of the opposite ideology, but the hatred they have for Palin goes much deeper. The factors you hit on are right on the money – especially her choice to keep the baby when so many others would have aborted it.

    She is the worst nightmare of the left – conservative, religious, pro-life, charming (well, certainly in comparison to Hillary) and female. She doesn’t conform the molds of their identity politics, so they chalk her up to “inexperienced ignorant redneck,” and then go on to elect the most inexperienced president of the modern era – a man who has proven that being “smart” doesn’t make you a one a good leader.

    The other point you make is important too. A liberal friend hopes she is the GOP nominee in 2012. I keep telling him to be careful what he wishes for, because I don’t think she’s going to be as easy a target nor as unprepared the next time around. She has some ground to cover, and the media will do everything they can to hurt her, but she could be a formidable opponent in 3 years – a lot can change between now and then.

  • Bill

    Bernie, great column. The bottom line in this discussion, in my opinion, is the Leftist elites on the coasts cannot stomach a woman who is the personification of so-called “Middle America.” I have attended functions in California and New York where the elites gather and walk around with their glasses of wine and discuss, oh so seriously, what a threat Sarah Palin is to the country. Do you know what they say? Well, they clearly disdain anyone who claims to be a practicing Christian. Mormons? Forget the Mormons. They’re anti-gay bigots who just have kids and believe in a fairy tale story about Joseph Smith. Jews are okay, as long as they are secular and liberal. Their status is purely social in nature, and not religious. Southern Christians? No fricken way! “Those people” like NASCAR and Walmart – waaay too stupid to make any sense at all. How about just average people to go to work every day, pay their bills on time, send their kids to school and teach them American history – real American history? Those folks are also Walmart shoppers andalso “bitter clingers” who cannot be trusted with America’s future. They are just too ignorant and unsophisticated.

    On the other hand, the elites just love celebrities and leftists. They adore the Sean Penns and Susan Sarandons of the world. Hugo Chavez and Che Guevara are cool, don’t you know. Toting “Mao Bags” and wearing “Castro Shirts” are fashionable. Most people in Hollywood, San Francisco, Berkeley and the Upper West Side of Manhatten are sophisticated, worldly and “smart.” They are all geniuses. They are “creative” to the point that middle America cannot possibly imagine. “Piss Christ” and “Dung Madonna and Child” are expressions of such nuance that dumb-ass average Americans cannot fathom the message. Works of “art” “do not speak to us.” Just watch the Hollywood award shows that take place dozens of times a year. Watch New York and Paris fashion shows. Hear the actors and directors be hailed as geniuses and “giants” of creativity and intellect far above our ability to understand. Their heros are huge “achievers” like Barack Obama and John Kerry, who, as we all know, are smart and nuanced. Brash and unsophisticated people like Sarah Palin and Ronald Reagan are scorned as “dumb, stupid and low class.” They are “dunces” who got by because other stupid dunces, who are not nuanced and sophisticated supported them – poor souls – if they only attended Harvard or Yale, they would know better and have supported towering intellects such as John Edwards, Joe Biden and Dennis Kucinich.

    Sarah Palin is not a hit with David Letterman or John Stewart. Such a pity! Katie Couric and Chris Matthews cannot stand her. How rude! Joy Behar and Barbra Walters think she is unqualified to run anything more than a backwater state such as Alaska. She did not attend UCLA, U.C. Berkeley or another elite school, so she is obviously unintelligent, dense and dangerous.

    Oh how I wish that Sarah was a Hollywood liberal. She would be super-qualified to run the United States Government and the military. Had she been a liberal from New York, she would be nuanced enough to know that the New York Times is always unbiased. She would take sage advice from Gloria Steinem and Diane Von Furstenberg and wear better clothes and name her kids Ozone, Sunshine and Pencil, instead of Trig, Track and Bristol. She could attand $50k per plate fundraisers where the common folk like Tom Hanks, Steven Speilberg and David Geffen could support her as well as Barbara Boxer and Nancy Pelosi. All would be right with the world if Sarah could only get the endorsements of the Teachers Union, the SEIU, ACORN, Al Sharpton, Hugh Heffner, Larry Flint, Megan Fox and Jane Fonda.

    Some of the above is serious and some sardonic. Can you tell the difference?

    • Henry

      Well said, Bill, well said. :)

  • ddmeyers

    You figured right. You explained the insanity of elitists (whatever their political affiliation) towards the “Sarah Palin” style American, perfectly. Your comments during the O’Reilly Factor were insightful, succinct and accurate. Sarah Palin is the “magic mirror on the wall.” In her reflection elitists see they are not the fairest of them all. It is the truth about themselves they hate and cannot escape, whenever she’s around. She is merely the messenger, as were you when describing their motivation.

    You are one of the main reasons I watch Bill O’Reilly’s show. I always enjoy reading and hearing your thoughts! Please, keep them coming.

  • TonyM

    Your comments were incredibly ignorant–“liberals don’t have 5 children, liberals are less likely ‘welcome’ a DS baby into a family”. The civil discourse in this country can’t get much lower. And, no matter what rationale you apply, your comments can’t bet justified

    You go on to suggest conservatives are more religious than liberals; and therefore, I assume, better Christians or Jews. Good Christians like the ones behind the Obama Psalm 109:8 campaign. These are the types of good conservative, religious Christians making decisions you’ proud of.

    • http://www.bernardgoldberg.com Bernie

      I never said anything about who’s better than whom? So I don’t know what you’re ranting about. Sorry.

      • sara

        Oh please, all you have to do is listen to your original statements and response to Stewart on O’Reilly to know just what you mean.

        “Who do you think is more likely to willingly and knowingly have a baby with Down Syndrome, a pro-choice woman or a pro-life woman; a woman for whom religion isn’t terribly important or a woman for whom religion is important; a liberal woman or a conservative woman? The odds are that it’s the pro-life, religious conservative woman that would make such a compassionate decision and the reason, the reason he’s so upset is because he like most liberals think they have a monopoly on compassion and she shows that they don’t.”

        If you were not implying “who’s better than whom” than you don’t know what your ranting about.

    • John Dendy

      TonyM, do you mean liberal Christians like Obama? The man you listened to Rev Wrights anti-American, anti-white bull crap for 20 years?

      You are a hypocrite and a dispicable persdon.

      • TonyM

        John D, based on a 15 sec sound-bite, you think you’ve captured the life and essence of Jeremiah Wright. Based on that sound-bite, you believe you can sum up his 35 years as a minister. And I’m the hypocrit?

        Goldberg knows exactly what I’m saying. Without question he implies a conservative women is more compassionate and therefore the ‘better’ person. “Sorry” is an excellent summary of your statement..you got that one right!

  • Harrison Papil


    These are your words:

    “Let me try to respond to the brilliant analysis with a serious point. Look, who do you think is more likely to willingly and knowingly have a baby with Down Syndrome, a pro-choice woman or a pro-Life woman?… A woman for whom religion isn’t terribly important or a woman for whom religion is important?… A liberal woman or a conservative woman? Look the odds are that it’s the pro-Life religious conservative woman that would make such a compassionate decision.”

    At 1st glance, one may be inclined to see some logic in that assertion, but statistics for the western world show that you are wrong as abortion is more prevalent in more-religious/conservative countries than in less-religious/liberal countries.

    Abortions per 1000 people:
    Latin America (very religious): 31
    USA (strongly religious): 21
    Southern Europe (strong religious remnants, ie., the Pope): 18
    Western Europe (not very religious): 12

    As mentioned in a previous comment to your last post, education and access to contraception are certainly contributing factors to these statistics — as is the religiosity of the populace (and it isn’t without note that the religiosity of a population also directly impacts both the education of said populace and their access to contraception).

    So, when it comes to the abortion question: Women in the less-religious/liberal countries are LESS LIKELY to abort an unwanted pregnancy than women in the more-religious/conservative countries of the western world.

    Those here defending your point are defending a canard (sorry, “The Natural” was on last night and the word “canard” is used and caught my ear… and its use here is appropriate).

    My Biases: I am no liberal. I abhor abortion. I respect the patient/client privilege and the basic rights a woman has over her body.

    • http://www.bernardgoldberg.com Bernie

      Let’s assume the numbers are correct. Isn’t it more than possible — isn’t it likely — that within those countries — religious or not, conservative or liberal — women who are pro life are more likely not to have an abortion than women who are pro choice. I will accept, at least for arguments sake, that (as you say) “Women in less religious/liberal countries are LESS LIKELY to abort an unwanted pregnancy than women in the more religious/conservative countries of the western world.” But again, WITHIN those countries, who is more likely to have an abortion: a woman who favors abortion or one who doesn’t. I appreciate your post and your research, seriously, but please … keep an open mind on this.

      • Harrison Papil

        Those numbers are correct.

        You: “But again, WITHIN those countries, who is more likely to have an abortion: a woman who favors abortion or one who doesn’t.”

        There is no specific study that addresses this exact question, but the inference to be made from various studies is quite clear — and quite appropriate: The more religious the populace, the greater the number of abortions. Obviously you may not agree with that conclusion, but that data is solid and repeatable. Fact, as they say, is fact. And I want to be clear: I’m not suggesting causation here — correlation, yes — but causation is a bridge too far (at least until data is produced that suggests otherwise).

        Further, my mentioning the lack of access to education and contraception (and their unmistakable ties to the religiosity of a population — i.e., the more religious the nation, the more restrictive their access is to sex education and contraception) is certainly a factor as well.

        Speaking of Bill O’Reilly (I know we weren’t, but this ties in quite nicely), I’ve noted that he has a penchant for dismissing out-of-hand statistically factual/appropriate data that invalidates his position (which I find quite odd given how engrossed he becomes with poll numbers). For example, when someone recently pointed out to him the fact that instances of violent crimes declines when marijuana is decriminalized, he invariably will dismiss that stat because (paraphrasing his reasoning) “the population that produced that stat (invariably a Western European country) doesn’t have a population the size of ours — which negates the stat’s validity”. Anyone with a passing knowledge of the appropriateness of applying statistical similarities to population sizes of Western-oriented nations will know that Bill is simply wrong. Such a statistical comparison is apt.

      • Becca

        Mr. Goldberg,

        I ask you the same question. Isn’t it also possible and likely that a liberal woman, who thought she had her opinions and convictions straight about what she wanted her family to look like and what kind of child she wanted to bring into the world (even if the scope of her vision was simply one that was not retarded), might reconsider her position when the issue comes straight into HER life, into HER uterus? If a politically conservative, religious woman can (and does) make the decision to NOT bring a child with Down Syndrome into the world…mightn’t a liberal atheist make the choice to keep one? Don’t religious conservatives also make assumptions about the child the creator gifts them with, and mightn’t those assumptions also crash to the ground–along with everything they thought was true about the world?

        The statistics are so drastic that there is no such woman as one who is “more likely” or “less likely” to have an abortion. You can’t make those guesses based on somebody’s politics or religious beliefs–as I think you’ve discovered this week. If your assumptions about the identities of parents with special needs were correct, I don’t think you would have “touched off a firestorm [you] never envisioned, or intended.” I have been reading all the comments over the past couple days and I haven’t seen a whole lot of religious, conservative parents of special needs kids coming to your defense. (If they’re congregating somewhere else, let me know, and I will stand corrected.)

        I do believe you did not mean to offend, and I don’t think you meant any harm. And I don’t intend to harrass you, and I’m cognizant of the fact that you were only tangentially speaking about special needs kids to begin with. And I appreciate your words about not trying to influence a couple’s decision. But you have an enormous megaphone with which to speak, and people listen to what you say and take you seriously and assume you have some experience in what you say. I have a comparitively small voice, but I get tired, oh so tired, of feeling like my sister, and others like her, and my family’s experience with her, is invisible. Implying that all parents of special needs children look or think like Sarah Palin, or that the decision making process of all parents would look like Mrs. Palin’s reasons for keeping her child, makes us more invisible. That’s all.

        Thank you, again, for your time.

    • Jeff

      Harrison, I’ve read the numbers you cited, and it bears the question: what % of those populations is in fact liberal, and what % conservative? It’s difficult to answer.
      For one thing, Nancy Pelosi is a Catholic, and she is also the most pro-abortion congressperson in America, possibly in history.
      Another: all too many liberals don’t consider themselves liberal.
      In any event, a woman who has an abortion IS more likely liberal. It’s simple logic. I would be kidding myself if I called myself a conservative and supported higher taxes, unrestricted access to abortion, redefining marriage, and the “Fairness” Doctrine.

      • Harrison Papil

        Bernie’s assertion was both a combination of politics and religion (many commenters seem to be focusing on one or the other and not both) and as I’ve stated prior, there are no studies that directly address such a combination. But given Bernie’s premise, my comments are directed towards that political/religious combination. That being said, throwing out numbers because you think “all too many liberals don’t consider themselves liberal” pretty much ends the conversation — for if you will dismiss valid statistical analysis out-of-hand, any chance of a legitimate conversation has left the room.

  • http://www.mcjusa.com Annie Fields

    Good grief. I guess we’re just not NUANCED enough… Keep up the good fight, Bernie. I think those who underestimate Sarah Palin do so at their own peril. Ivy league tuition can’t buy common sense. As a local radio host here in Boston says, “Too big to be an insane asylum. Too small to be a republic. We’re not wrong. We’re just outnumbered.”

    • Becca

      Do I think that Mr. Goldberg’s comments (either about liberals or about the parents of special needs kids) were nuanced? No. I don’t think Mr. Goldberg would contend they were terribly nuanced either. (He actually admitted as much in his most recent comment, saying he should have clarified his comment with a phrase like “most liberals” or “elite liberals”.)

      But if a loved one of Mr. Goldberg’s came home from the OB-GYN one day with a phrase like or “spina bifida” or “osteogenesis imperfecta” or “xeroderma pigmentosum” filling her throat, do I think that he would respond to that situation with kindness, compassion, courage, and yes, nuance? I think he would. As I think you would. Nuance (at least in the way that I am thinking of it) isn’t something that’s specific to one class or political belief or education level.

      I’m venturing farther and farther off topic the more I comment here, but I just wanted to throw that out there. Nobody’s got the market cornered on nuance and compassion–not liberals, not conservatives. I’m sorry if I sounded like I was getting up on a high horse in my previous comments. And if your comment wasn’t directed at me at all, well then, I apologize for being arrogant and self-centered and thinking it’s all about me. :)

  • John

    Bernie, why is it when you guys screw-up on national TV, you then come-up with a fancy way to cover for it. I don’t agree with what you said about the liberals. What sort of talent doo you have other than going on O’Reilly’s and bash liberals. I agree that the media has been tough with Sara but she is not qualified to run this country. W left our country with the mess we are in right now and now you want Sara to come in and do what? She is not qualified to be President. Like you are not qualified to have your own TV show.

    • John

      Sorry for the typos. Let me try again:

      Bernie, why is it when you guys screw-up on national TV, you then come-up with a fancy way to cover for it. I don’t agree with what you said about the liberals. What sort of talent do you have other than going on O’Reilly’s and bashing liberals. I agree that the media has been tough with Sarah but she is not qualified to run this country. W left our country with the mess we are in right now and now you want Sarah to come in and do what? She is not qualified to be President. Like you are not qualified to have your own TV show.

      • Greg

        Jon Stewart hit it on the mark with the rest of his piece – how this pathetic practice of pinning “liberals” with all the wretched things they believe and practice and do has nothing to do with reality, but is based on your own shallow thinking and ridiculous typecasting. It’s such a load of crap. I mean really, I love how Bernie is basing his argument on comments he read on certain websites as “proof” of what liberals as a whole think or believe. Is that really anything close to a reliable source Bernie? I thought you were a journalist. Someone could be pretending to be someone or say anything they want in these comments, but this is what you’re using as “proof” of liberal’s horrible beliefs? This cartoon straw dog of “liberals” that conservatives love to create then tear down is the real media-driven travesty here.

        And what kind of argument is saying “a pro life person would be less likely to have an abortion than a pro-choice person.” Um, duh, yeah I think so. Isn’t that the definition of these beliefs? But you ARE in fact politicizing it and trivializing a serious matter by pointedly suggesting that these “liberal” people really don’t care about mentally handicapped children, and that’s the REAL reason they might choose to have an abortion in this situation. This is really foggy logic, and it is trivializing something very real and difficult and heartbreaking people of ALL stripes cope with, and that’s raising a handicapped child of any kind, be it Downs, or Autism, or a physical handicap. I think that whatever your political proclivities, I’d like to believe that any human being would do an equally admirable, wonderful job if dealt this circumstance. How about that possibility Bernie? But unfortunately you turned yet another irrelevant issue into crass political fodder. That is definitely something the right specializes in unfortunately these days.

        So no, people don’t dislike Sarah Palin for any of the issues you’ve pointed out. They dislike her because they’ve heard her ideas, heard her (try to) express them and just don’t take her seriously or like her ideas. And that’s including many conservatives and independents who feel that way. And is it really only conservative women who are criticized and dissected this way? Let me throw one name at you: Hillary Clinton. Care to take a stroll down that memory lane and remember all the vitriol and hatred spewed her way for years and years?

    • Tim

      John you just elected a President with not one day experience running anything in his life. So don’t hide behind the experience issue with Plain. If you don’t like her tell us why. Educate us. The fact is Bernies comments struck home didn’t they!

      • Tim

        Oops, typo myself. Didn’t think us conservatives did that type of thing. Should be Palin not Plain.

      • John

        But she is not smart either. I like her as a person and I am a democrat. I feel bad for how she has been treated in the media and by others. It was her inexperience that allowed her to create a liability about her wish to become a President one day. Have you watched the scene where a Turkey was being slaughtered in her background? This image of stupidity will never be erased from the minds of voters. Obama is intelligent. Give the man his term and see what happens. What did Bush do for eight years: lied about the war, never did anything about the Israeli and Palestinian issue and performed poorly in about every domestic policy. Now Obama has been in the office for 10 months after picking-up a big mess and you have Fixed News 24/7 bashing all of his policies. It doesn’t make sense.

        • Tim

          You have evidence that Bush lied? Please share it as I’m sure you wouldn’t make such statements without evidence. Enjoyed the Turkey interview. Who couldn’t. But I guess to you a turkey relationship is much more relative than a relationship with Ayers who is an admited terriorist.

          • John

            There is no need for evidence. There was no WMD’s. At a minimum, 87,000 innocent Iraqis have been killed and more than 4000 of our son and daughters and there was no WMD. We have also paid trillions for this War and corrupted contracts to Cheney’s company. As for the Ayers relationship if you put it within the context of why Obama worked with him then you realize that it was pure “working relationship” and nothing else.

          • Tim

            So there is no need for evidence other than you say he lied. At least I know where you stand.

            Let’s do what you say and put the Obama Ayers relationship in context since I have served on board of directors. If you believe that Chairmans, CEO’s and most certainly in charities pick board members that do not share their vision, principles, and beliefs you are very mistaken. Any person invited to serve on a board will evaluate this point. This may not be necessarily true for public companies but for private and charities it is fact.

            Again, I find the turkey interview extremely humours and the Ayers relationship relative.

        • Jack Davis

          John, all this Bush-bashing is getting rather tiresome. As to how Obama has performed in his 10 months, some of the “minor quibbles” I have are listed below.

          ECONOMY–Obama said that if the stimulus were passed, unemployment wouldn’t rise above 8 percent.

          RUSSIA–Obama gave up a valuable bargaining chip (the missile shield) without getting anything concrete in return.

          MUSLIMS–Despite his much-vaunted outreach to the Muslim world, Obama has nothing to show for it.

          IRAN–Likewise, Obama has nothing to show for his much-vaunted outreach to Iran.

          AFGHANISTAN–Obama went from necessary war to “Let me think about it.”

          HEALTH CARE—Can’t your buddies in Congress write laws that say what needs to be said/do what needs to be done in fewer than 1,990 pages?

          BRINGING KHALID SHEIKH MOHAMMED TO FEDERAL COURT–a VERY bad idea. You need to read Scalia’s dissent in Boumediene v. Bush and the dangers inherent in extending carte blanche constitutional rights (not just habeas corpus) to enemy combatants/detainees.

          Clearly, Obama has failed enough in the past 10 months to stand on his own two feet. You don’t need to prop him up with “what Bush done.”

          • Jack Davis

            And regarding the “working relationship” Obama had with Ayers, you need to read: “Obama and Ayers Pushed Radicalism on Schools,” by Stanley Kurtz (and his follow-up articles).

          • John

            Jack, it is called planning and setting the stage for success. These are very complex issues and you expect the poor guy to resolve them in 10 months. You have to put in some work before you see results. I agree that he is not 100% perfect but he is laying the foundation. How do you know he hasn’t gotten anything back from Russia. I see Russia has changed their policy towards Iran in support of Obama. Healthcare, I have a family of 4 with and I have an MBA and self-employed and pay $1200 a month for high deductible coverage. I recently cancelled it. I can’t afford it. Muslims, I hate the radical Muslims. I am a Muslim and I hate radical Muslims. Economy, wow, how do you expect the employment to get better after what we have been through in just 10 months. And why can’t we discuss Bush’s failures? Isn’t that part of the history and lessons learned?

    • http://www.bernardgoldberg.com Bernie

      I don’t want Sarah to come in and do anything. If you listened to me on O’Reilly you heard me say I have never endorsed her politics or anything else about her, publicly or privately. As for what talent I have besides going on television and bash liberals … well, I write books, I report news, I play basketball, I do a lot of things. You?

      • John

        Ok, I apologize for asking you about your talents.

        • Stanley Mumford Myrtle

          John, please tell me you weren’t suggesting that Bush in some way didn’t do enough for Isreal?? The Bush/Obama comparison on that issue is not debatable. BO has all but given the finger to Isreal. And this concept that he’s laying the ground work with his placating of the extreme muslims, is one I am hoping with all my soul is true. It doesn’t feel like thats what’s going on but I hope you are right. To set the record straight, BO gave Russia the win on the defense shield and got nothing back. Yet. But NOTHING. Medvedev said that they may in the right circumstance consider possibly thinking about considering the chance of a discussion about some sanctions at some point in the future, maybe. It’s beginning to feel like our president is struggling with the decision making part of the job. As a state legislator and as a US Senator he never had to make a decision that had to stand on its own. He appears to be uncomfortable doing so. The notion of judge me by the enemies I make is one a US President eventually has to become comfortable with or he will fail. Skipping around to your comment about Cheney and Haliburton, is there a difference between BO’s aggressive support for the unions and any other politician supporting anyone/company that raises them money? Your answer to that question will either show this forum you are able to be open and honest or you are not.

    • John Dendy

      According to their respective resumes, Palin is much more qualifed than Obama.

      You talk about the mess that Bush left, well, OBAM has made it much worse. or do you not read the news?

  • T Teller

    Bernie, as a liberal with two Downs syndrome family members, let me just say you are a bigoted idiot.

    • Stanley Mumford Myrtle

      Now wait a minute!! Why the name calling?? BG attempts to have a real discussion about the issue of the hatred for SP and in so doing he points out something that he acknowledges is his opinion, albeit a very strong one, and gives a further opinion that he thinks data would prove his opinion to be also a truth and you call him names?? As a human being with two downs Syndrome family members why would you do that? As a liberal or a human being (I’m not sure you one can be both, I think to myself..oops) I would think you wold applaud the open honest discussion. My suspicion is that you may just not like him and his opinion. But please, you have the floor. Explain to me why you think BG’s comments make him a bigoted idiot. I would encourage you to be more eloquent and explanatory than your first comment.

    • http://www.benevolentgrammarian.blogspot.com bmmg39

      Didn’t take the time to read Bernie’s response column at all, didja, T.?

  • Jack Davis

    Masterfully written, Bernie, and a helluva good read!

    • http://www.bernardgoldberg.com Bernie

      Thanks, Jack. Don’t think the post above yours from Teller would agree. I’m glad guys like you are around.

  • Harry G.

    Mr. Goldberg,

    I greatly appreciated you standing up to your words and elaborating on what you said on the O’Reilly Factor. I believe what you said is true, sometimes the truth hurts; and that is why it has gotten the reaction it has. It is a fact that conservatives give more to charity than liberals (see Arthur C. Brooks’ book “Who Really Cares”). In general, conservatives give to private charities while liberals prefer to have the government take care and solve all the ills of society. Guess which is more effective?

    There probably hasn’t been any research done, but it is probably a fact that a religious, conservative woman carrying a fetus with Down Syndrome is more likely to give birth to it/he/she (choose your pronoun)–heck, it’s probably a fact that a conservative, religious woman is more likely to give birth to ANY fetus with or without abnormalities than a liberal, nonreligious woman. We have a problem in this country if people are persecuted for speaking the truth or for speaking their opinions. Both are protected and invaluable in a free society.

    Keep up the good work.

  • Stephen Shields Springfield, IL

    Almost verbatim from your most recent book Bernie! As the old saying goes, history repeats itself and unfortunately your argument rings truer than ever right now. Great column as usual, and even though I don’t think you did anything wrong, you are man enough to admit you might have stepped on some toes. This is something most columnists wouldnt do. You’re one of the good ones.

    • http://www.bernardgoldberg.com Bernie

      Thanks … but I’m making no headway with the folks who thought I was an idiot before I wrote the column. That’s the way it goes, I guess.

      • Stephen Shields Springfield, IL

        Keep up the good fight Bernie… You have support!

  • Speedracer

    Well said Bernie. You often say how many of us are feeling.

    I think it’s time we start standing up for our views.(Instead of apoligizing for them, as some liberals would have us do.)

  • Amy

    Hate her because she didn’t go to an Ivy League, or because she didn’t abort her child, or because she’s married? You are *so* misguided, so off the mark, but I guess that’s the best you can come up with.

    • tim


      Why than do you believe she and her famility has been so viciously attacked? Is it because she is inexperienced? Can’t be we just elected a president with no record running anything! Is it because she exposed corruption in her own state?

      Please enlighten me.

      • John

        People have high expectations of their politicians and when Sarah goes on TV interviews unprepared and not smart enough to answer basic questions the right way then people get upset and react. I agree that the media and some people have been more than tough with her but I told a friend a long time ago and it was mentioned recently that Sarah is the Jessie Jackson of the Republican party. She has some followers but she will not be able to be the President. I see Russia from where I live therefore I know foreign policy is not very comforting to me.

        • Tim

          John, did you catch Obama on the Rick Warren debate. Don’t tell me about unprepared or not smart enough. One other note; I woudn’t tell to many friends your comparison to Jessie Jackson. It says a lot more about you!

          • John

            Jessie Jackson was inexperienced and he was not qualified to be President.

          • Tim

            John do you really believe that Jessie Jackson lost because he lacked experience. You don’t think that maybe many people didn’t buy into his politics.

            If experience was everything we would never have walked on the moon.

        • http://www.benevolentgrammarian.blogspot.com bmmg39

          John: “I see Russia from where I live therefore I know foreign policy is not very comforting to me.”

          How is it possible that this many people confuse Sarah Palin with Tina Fey and/or grossly overstate the importance of what was (when Palin said it) a segue comment?

    • http://www.bernardgoldberg.com Bernie

      Ok, Amy, then why do you hate her? And if you personally don’t, why do so many liberal women detest her?

      • TonyM

        Bernie, for one because she’s a hypocrit. Early on, she chastised Hilary Clinton for “whining” about sexisim in the campaign and the double standard to which she was being held. Then and now, it’s become Pailn’s rallying cry…the ultimate victim of the media and sexism.

        The inaccuracies in her book are well documented…there’s no liberal agenda there. A good deal of the falsehoods are pointed out by Repubs/McCain campaign staffers.

        The biggest difficulty..she’s clueless. On the economy, foreign policy–she can’t put together two coherent sentences expressing an opinion or a way forward. The best description of her effort to do so is gibberish. A stream of words saying nothing. Yet she dominates debate. It’s a sad commentary on political affairs in this counrty which can be described as a Reality TV–the dumbing down of the US.

  • Stanley Mumford Myrtle

    Bernie, well said. Shockingly open. Talk about having an honest discussion about an issue!! (Eric Holder may want you to lead the honest discussion about race)

  • Capn Eddie Ricketyback

    Another great column, Bernie! I don’t see how any sentient person could argue with your conclusions, but I’m sure some others will. My only quibble is with the apology, but you’re the columnist, and it’s your call.

    • http://www.bernardgoldberg.com Bernie

      just trying to be a nice guy, capn eddie … thanks for being there. b

  • Tim

    Yes, recognize their great courage in their words. Great bravery from the couch gamers. And they wonder why the can’t get dates.

  • Tim

    You can’t get a date

  • Tim

    No, you’re missing it. These guys are scumbags.

  • Andrew

    real eloquent buddy

  • John

    Mike, can’t debate these guys. They’ll start using your name when they post. Remember that gaming keep the Pedophilia off the streets.