Yep, Sarah Palin is now a contributor to Fox News. It will be interesting to see if her skills as an interviewee manage to come through as a presenter.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8453223.stm

Good. It means she will never run for office again.

If she became the presidential candidate it would essentially doom the republicans to another four years of a Democrat president.

just saw this on yahoo. Yup FNC is THAT kind of caliber news station.

Yea, I mean, when you want a political pundet, why on earth would you think an attractive woman who was a former Governor with the highest approval rating in all 50 states, and someone who just over a year ago was the VP candidate?

Man they sure are scraping the bottom of the barrel with that one.

This is good for Fox, bad for Sarah. It means her political career is over, but that does not mean she has nothing worth contributing to a new organization.

No, they're not scraping the bottom of the barrel.

They're trolling the shit out of this country. Playing politics for ratings. That's the kind of caliber they are.

And don't stand up for her. She is one of the worst out there: "Creationism taught in all schools, abstinence only sex ed, Iraq War as a task from God, and she thinks the founding fathers wrote the Pledge of Allegiance." Additionally, while it's arguable whether global warming exists or not, she thinks the ice caps are in fact, not melting, so polar bears should be taken off the endangered species list.

She abused her power as a governer and has multiple ethics suits against her. She says that representatives should be diplomatic and visit other countries, so she did; ONCE per year. She criticizes tina fey, and then goes on the show to pretend like it's no big deal and tells everyone how much she loves tina fey.

Not only that, but I'm pretty sure this move will split the republican party even further, so, it's bad news for you too.

That, would be the best posable news. 

Democrats are screwing up so bad, they are fracturing there party. If only the Republicans would do the same, so the middle of both could make the party I would be a part of.

I am not Republican, because half of them are pieces of shit.

I am not a Democrat, because half of them are pieces of shit.

If the good parts of each would break off and for up, that would be great. The ones that think our liberties belong to us... all them. Not just the few that each party wants to give us, but all of them, then we would have something.

Right now, thanks to the Republicans being in power, and now the Democrats being in power, we have nothing.

And if you think Fox News is any worse then any other cable news network, your fooling yourself. All of them suck, you just hate Fox more because you don't like there message. Scum sucking bottom feeders are easier to take, when they are on your side.

haha, hey, I like you now

You forgot she's crazy......

So much of this is complete BS that its hard to know where to start.

First: Her political views you take issue with are legitimate points that can be debated. So listing them as reason to dismiss her is ridiculous.

Second: The Pledge quote you're talking about hardly is a reason to damn her, unless you also think we should toss Obama out on his ass for saying there are 56 states?  He repeated that blunder several times...does it make him incompetent or human?  Furthermore if you look at what she said on the Pledge:

Q: Are you offended by the phrase “Under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance? Why or why not?

A: Not on your life. If it was good enough for the founding fathers, its good enough for me and I’ll fight in defense of our Pledge of Allegiance

It is pretty clear her point was that the founding fathers had no problem with God being mentioned within the context of government (which is undeniably true).  Her misconception is the time when the Pledge was written and while silly on her part falls well short of being worthy of condemning her, unless of course you're ready to condemn anyone who does similar...and believe me that is a very very long list. 

Third: The ice caps and whether they are melting is not what she cites as the reason to take polar bears off the endangered species list.  She cites their rapidly rising population and the fact that there are scientists who study the bears that say they are not endangered.  I do however realise this is an entirely reasonable position and thus repeating the entire set of facts would thus defeat the purpose of bringing it up.

Fourth: If you honestly believe she abused her power as governor you would probably cite the specific cases...can you do that without having to go do research before posting?  I have actually gone through and read the legal briefs for all of the major ethic complaints she was investigated for in Alaska and I posted extensively on them during and even after the campaign on this website (in fact it might have been you that I debunked at the time, hard to remember now). The simple truth of the matter is that every last one of those charges were an excercise of throwing shit at the wall, not just to see what sticks, but so folks like yourself who had never read anything, except what the Dailykos posted about it of course, could spew the kind of ignorant information you are spewing right here, right now. 

Fifth: There are intelligent and thoroughly legitimate reasons to dislike Palin and many of them you touched on the first point I addressed, but none of those are reasons to dismiss her like you try to do.  Hell I don't agree with her on abortion, the abstinence only policies, creationism, and a whole lot of other issues.  But what I don't do is buy into a bunch of crap I read from a person who has a blatant bias against her without checking out some of the facts myself, something you might try.