Cross-posted at Conservatives4Congress:

By now you’ve seen the premier of the new commentary program, Parker-Spitzer, on CNN. (Or you intentionally avoided it because you have a weak stomach or are prone to throwing things at your TV).

I only watched the “Opening Arguments” on Hot Air … so I can’t judge the whole program, but let me say based on the first eight minutes: Keep the breakables out of arms reach, and a barf bag handy because it’s Kathleen Parker in her full obtuse glory.

I will give you my thoughts on the segment in real time as I watched the replay, but first, is it just me or is anyone else surprised that the show only premiered tonight. I had heard about this show so long ago I figured it must have already aired and was a complete flop. Alas, most of us here on C4P move at “blog speed” vs. the networks that crawl at something much slower, to our utter frustration.

Furthermore, my first thought on hearing the name of the show was: Did CNN intentionally attempt to find two people with last names ending in er — like a herd of flying reindeer? Moreover, could they not have made it a trio with Parker-Spitzer-Blitzer?

Ah, but on to the show.

Spitzer (the adulterous sex purchaser) opened up with a rough assessment of Obama’s cozy relationship with Wall Street, thanks, he believes, to Tim Geithner, who has a lot of his old buddies still on Wall Street and has let them get away with prostitution murder. Spitzer says Geithner must go.

Say, if Geithner does get fired, perhaps CNN could hire him as a fourth member of the team. I don’t know about you, but Parker-Spitzer-Blitzer-Geithner has a certain ring to it.

I admire that Spitzer went after Obama, if only to suggest firing Geithner would solve the problem. Um, not even. That’s like suggesting that getting rid of the mustard on the burger you eat everyday will help you slim down! (That’s assuming Michelle Obama will let you have your daily burger in the first place).

My biggest complaint with Spitzer was his use of the tired cliché “Wall Street vs. Main Street” which is so 2008. Today, in 2010, it’s the People vs. the Elites … Or the People vs. Kathleen Parker, whichever you prefer.

Thankfully, Spitzer is done, and turns it over to Pulitzer Parker with “What’s on your mind?”

(Why do I feel like I’m about to watch a rerun of Crossfire — only without the fire)?

Parker(#1 on the Palin gravy train) is up next. She starts right off saying:

“I wanna talk about my favorite politician … Sarah Palin.” (i.e. the woman who pays my condo payment, the woman without which I wouldn’t have a show on CNN much less a Pulitzer prize.)

Note: Yes, I can read Kathleen’s thoughts. I’m empathic.

Kathleen then informs us:

“Sarah Palin has a new commercial out.”

No way! Um, Kathleen, they call them “ads” nowadays in the Internet era, and frankly that Tea Party ad is not new, it’s a few weeks old. Where ya been? The North Pole? No wonder CNN is mired in third place in the cable news race. Where’s Bernard Shaw when you need him? Uggh …

We then watch a tiny snip of the Palin “commercial” we’ve seen hundreds of times already and Kathleen asks:

“So, Sarah, are ya runnin’ or aren’t ya? (Pregnant pause). Of course, Palin won’t say because the suspense benefits her (kinda like bashing Palin benefits me). As long as her fans think she might run, they’ll keep sending money to SarahPAC, and they’ll keep showing up to her rallies, and (and liberals will still have a need for my snotty critiques).”

Then Kathleen confesses that she never thought Sarah would take off like she has.

“She has something that obviously appeals to a lot of people (and which drives me insanely jealous). She has it – big time. But she’s also maddening to many others – especially women.”

Incidentally, Kathleen learned that impressive straw woman technique from watching Katie Couric every day. Couric has mastered the “Some people say …” routine from mimicking President Obama. Now, because Gov. Palin has such a problem — “especially with women” — we deduce that Kathleen obviously doesn’t count Tea Party women as actual WOMEN, nor does she consider Carly Fiorina, Christine O’Donnell, Kelly Ayotte, Nikki Haley or Susana Martinez to be actual women either. Good to know!

And here we get to the crux of why Sarah Palin is so “maddening to many others – especially women,” according to Parker:

“She flirts – she’s a tease. Of course, all politicians do that – men do that, Republicans do that, Democrats do that, that’s how they raise money. (But they don’t help out my career like Palin so I won’t mention them.) But Palin is coy, and after awhile it begins to feel dishonest. Most important, other serious candidates may be locked in limbo as they wait to see what the Palin Machine intends. I know of at least one person who won’t run if it looks like Sarah has the wind at her back – and he should run.”

At this point Spitzer interrupts: “Who?”

Parker says: “You really think I’m going to tell?(I won’t tell because I, like Sarah, am a tease).”

Then she concludes this sad, illogical segment with this nonsense:

“He should run because he can win a national election and Sarah Palin for all her good qualities cannot. It may be that Palin is waiting for a thunderbolt or a voice from beyond to instruct her next move. In the meantime, she’s teaming with RNC chairman Michael Steele to raise money. C’mon Sarah, drop the tease, and just tell the American people you’re not running. As consolation, maybe you and Michael Steele can turn your road show into a money-making gig for real. A TV show perhaps. You could call it Steele Magnolia.

And then she winks. And Spitzer says, “Clever name.”

So, the woman on a TV show called Parker-Spitzer, with a man who slept with prostitutes, is giving advice on a name for Palin’s future TV show? Nice.

I’m no Rhodes Scholar, but I saw a few logical gaps in Parker’s reasoning … May I just take a stab?

1. Everybody is coy about their presidential intentions, but it’s worse when Palin does it because she has such a big following. Hmmm …

2. Palin’s big following is not only a bad thing in terms of being able to “actually win” a national election, it’s hindering better candidates from getting into the race. Ok …

3. These better candidates (one of which Parker knows quite well apparently) are frightened by Sarah Palin’s following because they don’t think they could beat her, but they, according to Parker, could easily win a national election. Because we all know those unpopular candidates who always win national elections. Moreover, women — especially women — are attracted to men who are afraid of Sarah Palin.

4. Sarah Palin, who has nearly single-handedly led the charge to reclaim Congress, should just be the GOP sugar mama, then team up with Michael Steele, to make some serious cash with their own cable TV program, despite the fact that Sarah Palin probably makes more in a month than Kathleen Parker makes in a year.

So, is jealousy good for ratings? We shall see.