The Closer: Palin will stump with Saxby Chambliss next week

Georgia is going through a hotly contested runoff for their Senator seat - a seat that could decide whether or not Democrats have a filibuster-proof Senate. Currently, they're only two votes shy of the 60 needed to do so.

Incumbent Chambliss is running off against Democrat Jim Martin, and Chambliss called "The Closer" to help him in the home stretch, as the vote is December 2.

Palin is speaking at four rallies on December 1:

Augusta, GA
8:30 a.m.
James Brown Arena
601 Seventh Street
Augusta, GA 30901

Savannah, GA
11:00 a.m.
Savannah Civic Center
MLK, Jr. Arena
301 West Oglethorpe Avenue
Savannah, GA 31401

Perry, GA
1:30 p.m.
Georgia National Fairgrounds & Agricenter
Miller-Murphy-Howard Building
401 Larry Walker Parkway
Perry, GA 31069

Atlanta Metro
4:00 p.m.
Gwinnett Arena
6400 Sugarloaf Parkway
Duluth, GA 30097

You can RSVP to attend the events here:
http://www.procatalog.com/saxby/

Palin was wildly popular in Georgia, so I'm positive that she'll be a huge help to the Senator. I wish them all luck!

Minnesota's seat is also contested - between Republican Senator Norm Coleman and Democrat Al Franken. That vote is still going through a recount, with Franken trying desperately to win at any cost.

With this being such an important seat, Palin will hopefully be the best "Closer" and seal the deal for Chambliss.

Happy Thanksgiving

Happy Thanksgiving- I hope you have a wonderful day, no matter how you celebrate it. I'll be back in a few days. Be safe!

Sarah knows where Thanksgiving turkey comes from...

. . .unlike the media, apparently. Or maybe their turkeys die peacefully of old age surrounded by family and a priest. Once passed, they're respectfully cleaned, dressed and prepared for a dinner befitting of their legacy.

How people are calling this a "gaffe" is beyond me. It only shows that they consider themselves too sophisticated to ever set foot on a working farm, and that they're "above" the farmers who work hard to put food on their tables. So, this only makes her look better in my eyes.

Byron York from NRO had the best quote on this story:

She should tell the media that she apologizes and she'll do her next interview inside an abortion clinic.

Mike Huckabee, please go away now

I was never a fan of Mike Huckabee. I'm less than enthused that he seems wildly popular among Republicans. He always seemed like a stereotypical politician to me, never directly answering anything, not really expressing his beliefs fully and used car salesman-like. But I tried to like him throughout his run and embrace him the way others have - until today.

Now I can totally own my dislike of him without guilt. Here are some of his comments about Palin during a press breakfast he held to promote his book:

Huckabee had some interesting observations about Sarah Palin, a potential 2012 opponent, suggesting that she didn't earn her spurs and was more appealing to the base of the party because she hadn't been scrutinized in the primary.

"What John McCain did for her was to give her the capacity to sort of leapfrog over the process and get right to the center stage," he said of the GOP's vice presidential nominee.

Unlike those, he added, who had competed in the Republican primary.

"She didn't have to get bloodied like us. Few people on that stage didn't get bloodied."He did allow, though, that she did get bloodied -- "but not by the people Republicans care about, you guys."

And from WSJ:

Huckabee’s comments on Palin, a possible rival for the 2012 Republican nomination, suggest some jealously. “She didn’t have to go through any the debates, she didn’t have to go through the primaries, she didn’t have to have people pick her or pick someone else against her. State parties did not have to divide from one to 12 ways over her. So it was a remarkable ability for her to come in at a level that is an extraordinary benefit to her.”

Riiiiiiight (best Dr. Evil impression). Palin didn't earn her right to be there because she didn't compete in the primaries - okay. Well, maybe she was busy running her state as Governor. And I assume Huckabee didn't notice how she very much got bloodied by everyone (including her party) as soon as she was announced as running mate - right down to people scrutinizing how she gave birth. In fact, she's still not done getting bloodied by her own party.

Mike Huckabee is still bitter he didn't win the nomination and this statement reeks of sour grapes. His battle in the primaries was nothing compared to what Palin went through. He's bitter he doesn't have the staying power and popularity she does and is apparently now willing to split the party over it. He also apparently didn't notice how well she performed during the Vice Presidential debate.

What an indicator that he's completely self-absorbed and consumed with his own career - and not putting the best interests of Party first. He of all people should know the Republican Party is in danger right now and we need someone strong like Palin to compete in 2012. He should be cheering her success instead of denying it. Who does he think we should follow? Him? He wasn't strong enough to beat John McCain in the primaries in 2008; I don't think he'll be strong enough to lead the way in 2012. And wow, how could he deny her fabulous performance during her time as VP candidate? How could he deny how she was knocked down only to get back up stronger again and again? He marginalized her by saying she didn't compete in the primaries, which is a straw man argument that undermines how exceedingly well she did as VP candidate.

So please, Mike Huckabee, go away now. You're bad for the Party.

Simply stunning

Sarah Palin attended a celebration of Alaska's 50th Anniversary of Statehood last Friday. Here she is, surrounded by past Governors of the state, looking fantastic in a gorgeous gown.

What an accomplishment, to be able to attend such a wonderful event celebrating that great state as the first female Governor and with the highest approval rating ever.

Of course, HuffPo wanted to trash something about her so they decided that her decision to wear a corsage was outdated and stupid. I probably wouldn't have even noticed it but now that I do, I think it's lovely.

No Room for RINOs

An excellent article ran today in the WSJ Opinion Journal. Brendan Miniter discusses how the RINOs contributed to this election's losses, refuting those who claim Republicans need to abandon conservative ideals in order to win. If you read any of it, read the 2nd to last paragraph where he gives the startling statistics for Ohio.

POLITICAL DIARY
NOVEMBER 20, 2008
No Room for RINOs
Who will resurrect the GOP?
By BRENDAN MINITER

South Carolina's Mark Sanford is one of three GOP governors now being widely mentioned as potential saviors of the Republican Party between now and 2012. All are conspicuous for calling on their own party to live up to its principles. Most notably, none have advocated the GOP move to the left.

Mr. Sanford is a two-term governor known for vetoing spending bills, pushing market-oriented policy reforms (such as moving his state's Medicaid system to a private account-based model) and criticizing the lapses of the national GOP. "Some on the left will say our electoral losses are a repudiation of our principles of lower taxes, smaller government and individual liberty," he wrote on CNN.com after this month's elections. "But Tuesday was not in fact a rejection of those principles -- it was a rejection of Republicans' failure to live up to those principles."

In the same op-ed he took a swing at Alaska Republican Sen. Ted Stevens, identifying him as someone who "personifies what went wrong in the election. . . He was a proud champion of pork barrel spending and bridges to nowhere and stayed so long that he developed a blind eye to ethical lapses that would be readily seen by scout leaders and soccer moms alike."

Two other leading lights for a troubled GOP are Govs. Sarah Palin of Alaska and Bobby Jindal of Louisiana. Before she became John McCain's running mate, Mrs. Palin was best known for challenging her own state GOP to cure its spendthrift, corrupt ways. She unseated a sitting mayor in her first bid for office and became a giant killer by knocking off the high-handed, free-spending Gov. Frank Murkowski in a Republican primary.

Mr. Jindal is a boy wonder of the party. At 25, he was appointed to fix Louisiana's failing Medicaid program, and succeeded. At 32, he lost a hard-fought campaign for governor but later landed a Congressional seat from which he criticized bureaucratic bungling in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. Last year, after Katrina had destroyed Democratic Gov. Kathleen Blanco's reputation, he won his second bid for the office by promising sweeping reform of Louisiana's corrupt and inefficient government culture.

That Republicans are coalescing around these three governors is also revealing for who is not included. Several years ago Christie Todd Whitman, former governor of New Jersey and EPA administrator, wrote a book called "It's My Party Too." She used that treatise to argue for the party to abandon its conservative roots. Even after two serious GOP drubbings at the polls, she has found no takers. Likewise, Lincoln Chaffee, the former Rhode Island Senator once labeled a "Republican in Name Only," was still complaining last week to the Washington Post that "right-wing talk show hosts and the Ann Coulters and that ilk" never understood that the GOP needs people like him.

Maybe that's because Republicans have looked closely at the election results. The country hasn't so much moved left as it has abandoned a GOP that abandoned its own principles. In Ohio, Barack Obama actually won about 40,000 fewer votes than John Kerry did four years ago. Mr. Obama took Ohio only because John McCain pulled 350,000 fewer votes than George W. Bush did in 2004. Republicans and Republican-leaning voters stayed home.

That's not an endorsement of the ideas of the left. It's a lack enthusiasm for a party that failed to deliver the smaller government it promised in Washington. At least the GOP, in settling on future leaders like Governors Jindal, Sanford and Palin, seems to understand that.

Time Magazine Person of the Year voting

I know Time Magazine isn't the paragon of good journalism but Sarah Palin is nominated to be their Person of the Year 2008. The award is publically voted on and currently she's in second place behind. . . guess who?

Okay, okay, I know there's a snowball's chance in heck of her winning but it's still fun to vote. You can do it here.

Hillary taking Secretary of State – what it would mean for the 2012 election

Hitching herself directly to the Obama Administration almost guarantees she will not run for President in 2012. This could be really good for Palin in 2012. She’ll most likely face an Obama/Clinton ticket in 2012. Palin has already run against Obama, she knows what to expect and will be prepared. Plus, she'll be the breath of fresh air against the extreme left of an Obama/Clinton ticket.

This news was initially surprising to me. I was thinking that Hillary wanted to distance herself from Obama, sharpen her voting record even more as Senator, take a few opportunities to reach across the aisle (attracting moderates), occasionally disagree publicly with Obama and raise more money to run for President again in 2012. I thought she would never want to be "chosen" to do anything.

Being Secretary of State she won’t be involved in domestic issues or representing her constituents in New York. She’ll be firmly with Obama. That’s an extremely risky choice given that Obama has zero foreign policy experience. There would be no way to distance herself from any negative outcomes as SoS. On the other hand, anything good that happens will be attributed to Obama. SoS tenures are typically short and easily terminated. If there's friction between her and Obama she could lose that job quickly.

In my opinion, if she takes the job she'll appear to be even more power-hungry than she already does. It looks like she would settle for any position of power now. I don't think it would be a good political move for her to abandon the people of New York at this point - but that's good news for us.

My prediction is the natural one if this comes to pass – I predict she will abandon her Presidential run and Obama will select her as his running mate in 2012. Look for an Obama/Clinton ticket to face Palin and whomever she chooses in 2012.

Palin doesn't believe in Party reform

During the Republican Governors Association in Miami last week, the Governors were having the same conversation many of us had and what I posted about on Friday - how the Republican Party should be reformed in order to gain future success.

As usual, Palin took the hard line approach: "Now it is time for us to go our own way ... confident in the knowledge that there will be another day. We'll rise to fight again," Palin said.

Florida Governor Charlie Crist disagreed and proposes the Party embrace his brand of Republicanism - agreeing with Democrats on several, if not most, issues. Crist has also appointed several Democrats into his Administration.

Sounds like a great idea, right? Lets make ourselves look like the Democratic Party so we'll get elected next time! I'm sorry, but I really don't see the point in electing Republicans who are like Democrats. That would be completely counter-productive. We end up with people like John McCain and Christine Todd Whitman - see where that got us?

In politics we need to work together in order to serve the citizens. Having two Parties that are nearly identical in ideology would not be representative of the public and its needs. I still can't fathom this phenomenon. I hesitate to use the term RINO (Republican In Name Only), but that's what Crist is proposing.

Funny how this option seems to only exist for the Republican Party. I don't hear Democrats saying they should reform their Party to agree more with Republicans in an effort for inclusion and working across the aisle.

MSNBC: Palin could rake in $7 million from book deal

MSNBC is reporting that Palin might be in negotiations for a book deal.

By Courtney Hazlett
The
Scoop
msnbc.com
updated 7:29 p.m. CT, Sun., Nov. 16, 2008

After she spent the last few weeks talking to just about any camera put in front of her, it should come as no surprise that former vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin is moving closer to inking a book deal.

Just how much could the Alaska governor make from putting pen to paper? About $7 million, according to some estimates.

Sound like a lot? Not necessarily, says one literary
insider.

"Bill Clinton made more than $10 million when he signed his deal in 2001 and that was the most for a former president," says the source. "Sarah brings something different to the table -- there is so much curiosity surrounding her and her life. If they move fast and get this thing on shelves, then a $7 million advance could be worth it."

I've been hoping she would do this. Its benefits are twofold: it would answer a lot of questions the general public has about her, and it also would be ripped to shreds before the 2012 campaign. Any perceived damaging statements in the book would be over and done with before campaigning even starts. I believe it's absolutely crucial for her to publish a book in the next few years so I'm really happy about this report.

I'll add my $.02

Since the election, the topic of where we went wrong has been beaten dead. I like to learn from our mistakes and use history as an example for the future as much as anyone, but we have got to move on. Obama is our President. We must focus on 2012, now. There's been a fever pitch of "reformer vs. traditionalist" talk throughout conservative news outlets recently. I'll add my two cents to the discussion.

The idea of changing one's beliefs to fit current trends, or to win an election, is wrong. I might even say there is never a good time to do this.

The ideas of society and government's reach over it are everlasting. We're not a super society that has transcended the concepts, ideas and thoughts of the great political philosophers in history.

Currently we're in an economic crisis. We can trace its origin to an over-reaching government getting involved in social and economic issues it should never have gotten involved in. The current solution of using billions (and possibly trillions) of taxpayer money is another example of over-reaching government. I believe if we weren't in this crisis Obama wouldn't be president right now. McCain allowed the Republican party to be incorrectly blamed for it and we suffered in this election because of it. But is it a reason to reform the party? Absolutely not. It merely means we had a bad candidate who didn't run a good campaign this time around.

We need to remember that Obama only got elected to a 4-year term. Should we let the results of this election, and the next four years of an Obama presidency give us haste to reform the Republican Party? Absolutely not.

What if there were no economic crisis - would McCain have won? It's highly possible. There will always be something we as a society must deal with - whether its an economic crisis, natural disaster, war, peace-keeping endeavors, science and technological pursuits, etc. This is the normal ebb and flow of society.

That's why we should never adapt our beliefs to current trends. Our job is to deal with the situation in accordance with how we believe government should function in society. The situation changes, but our beliefs don't change.

Obviously, the majority wanted someone like Obama at this moment. In a few years they might want a change. That's the beauty of our democracy. We can vote for change when we want and need it. When the time comes that the majority does want change, are we going to present to them a newly-reformed Republican Party that changed itself to cater to the wants of the majority in 2008? Or are we going to show them the Republican Party that has stood its ground even when not in control - the party that always held its views of minimal government and individual liberty no matter how much they weren't en vogue?

This is the time to hold fast to those values of individual liberty, choice and minimal government - now, more than ever. Because when the Obama Administration fails to deliver on its exorbitant promises, and it will, people are going to want a change. We need to be ready when that happens.

A long way to go - Part II

One of the most preposterous arguments against Palin during the race was the idea that she was neglecting her children by being in the race, and if she and McCain won her childrens' lives would suffer because she would be failing at her duties as a mother- especially to a special needs baby. I was stunned. So because she has children living at home and her husband makes plenty of money, she should be required to stay at home for the duration of their childhood. Once they leave the nest then she can have pursuits outside the home such as: knitting, the book club, decorating, planning family vacations and bird watching. What year is this, 1950? Those are all great pursuits if that’s what you want to do, the operative word being want. If that’s not what she wants to do she shouldn’t be pigeonholed into doing it because people are stuck with antiquated standards for women.

It’s an old-fashioned theory that women are biologically better nurturers to children than men. Women were not predestined to be only carriers and caretakers of children. Maybe it’s because I was raised by a single dad that I can’t even fathom this argument. To say that is actually very insulting to men. There’s nothing wrong with a man who decides to stay home with the kids while his wife has a career. This is 2008 and there are no more rules. When Todd Palin stood on the stage at the RNC carrying baby Trig, it took my breath away. When have we ever seen that in American politics? Here’s a real man who’s not afraid to stand by and support his wife while she does a very time consuming, potentially powerful and enormous job. Did we hear anything positive about that? No. People couldn’t get over the fact that she wasn’t at home nursing her baby – or in the background like wives Michelle and Cindy.

But if people want to make the argument that she should not have been VP due to her filial duties then so be it, but do the same thing to the male candidates. No one questioned how Obama’s daughters would function with him being gone 90% of the time as President. No one questioned where they would go to school. No one questioned the circumstances of their births (as was done to Palin). No one mentioned that uprooting these young girls’ lives would be too traumatizing and therefore he should quit the race. No one questioned what Michelle would have to do regarding her career if her husband won. No, when a man is running for President, the noble thing for his family to do is follow, and make any and all sacrifices for him. When a woman runs, her judgment is questioned.

No one brought up the good things she’s done as Governor, or the difficult road it was to get there. All they could say was that she was being a bad mother for having a time consuming job outside the home. No one thought that maybe the state of Alaska was better off with her as Governor than not, and it was a good thing she made the sacrifices to do it.

Clearly, a long way to go.

We have a long way to go. . .

. . .before we’re ready for a female President. Part I.

I’ve heard a lot of praise for Obama being elected as the first black President. I see a bit of irony, or maybe it’s injustice, at the fact that people are happy and relieved that Sarah Palin did not become the Vice President. If Obama had lost, it would not have been acceptable for anyone to be happy or relieved. I imagine the majority would be saddened that a black man came so close, almost got there and would be proud he got so far.

Conversely, if McCain/Palin won, would there be women celebrating in the streets? Would there be women crying that we finally have made it, at least as the Vice President? Would party walls be dropped temporarily so everyone could celebrate the historic milestone? Would articles be written about how little girls could finally aspire to be in the White House and therefore, women really can do everything men can? I don’t think any of that would have happened.

I haven’t heard anyone lamenting that the female candidate lost. No one is praising that she got so far or saying we should be proud and persevere to get to the top next time.

When Palin was picked there was a public outcry that McCain was merely pandering to women. I heard many women proclaim with righteous indignation that they would NOT be fooled by this obvious attempt to get the female vote. “Women don’t vote for women just because they’re women.” But somehow it is acceptable that a higher black turnout was expected for Obama. Those women did not stop to think that maybe she was picked because of her qualifications. There are a large number of people who continue to deny her qualifications with their index fingers stuck in their ears screaming “la, la, la, la, I’m not listening, Palin is dumb, la, la, la.” They would have been more comfortable with a man.

When Hillary had the chance to win the Democratic nomination, I was breathless with excitement. Even though I disagree with her completely, I was amazed at her strength, determination and guts to run for President. If she had won, it would have been amazing. A woman with a very long political career fighting her way to the top through many obstacles, earning the respect of her colleagues and the American public to win the nomination for President of the United States. She could have picked her running mate. If she won, she would have picked her Cabinet. It gives me chills, really, to think about what might have been. I’m not ashamed to admit that I really would have been truly happy for her and loved to see it happen.

I think Hillary was cheated by her own party. A party that would rather nominate a freshman Senator, with a very short career and shady history was more preferable because why? Was it because he was a man? And despite her very long career, leadership and dedication they weren’t comfortable nominating her; they would rather have. . .who exactly? Just someone who is not Hillary, no matter what his credentials are. After everything the Clintons have done for their party to see them be turned on like that was shocking to say the least.

I'm not saying people should vote for them just because they're women, quite the contrary. I see two highly qualified candidates who got passed over because they were women. Two candidates who would have succeeded if they were men. It says a lot about our society when we pass over these two individuals and instead opt for a man with significantly less experience and accomplishments.

What happened to the two significant female candidates in this election leaves me greatly disappointed. The way the public is ignoring how far these women came, and how close they were to the President/VP is disheartening, but par for the course on society's treatment of women today.

A Conflicted Ticket

Now that the dust has settled since the election, it’s easier to reflect on the past and plan for the future.

Palin being chosen as John McCain’s running mate was a double-edged sword. On one hand she received the national exposure she wouldn’t have ever received otherwise. Sure, she might have gained some as the 1st female Governor of Alaska and her excellent record there, but in all honesty it would have taken many, many years to get noticed. On the other hand, the person who picked her was John McCain.

McCain has a tumultuous history with the Republican Party. For years he’s defined himself as the Maverick or anti-Republican in the party, to our chagrin. His views differ with many of Palin’s. When he won the nomination many conservative Republicans were understandably upset. There were some circumstances during this election where it might have been good to have a more center-right nominee, but not many. It was an uphill battle from the start. Being the Republican nominee after one of the most heavily disliked Republican Presidents of all time would have been difficult for anyone. McCain’s campaign was practically over before it started.

Picking Palin was exactly what he needed. He, being the thorn in Republicans' side for so many years. Palin is far Right and made up for what he lacked. Perfect for the ticket, so it seemed.

Although it was gutsy to pick her, and he stood by her despite mainstream media’s many requests to kick her off the ticket – in the beginning he both stifled her and threw her in the lion’s den with little notice. The first few weeks were tough. Despite her resilience and ability to overcome all the negative press, the first few weeks were pretty damaging to her reputation. Some of it was mainstream media’s substantiated fear that Americans liked her and could relate to her – endangering their chosen candidate’s chances. Some of it was McCain’s campaign not doing enough, or doing too much, to repair it.

Later the campaign restricted her so much that she had to go into “rogue” status just to get her point across. As we know, Palin does well when she’s just being herself. She has a fighting spirit and many people liked her a lot more when she was in rogue, which probably disappointed McCain who seems never to fully commit to the Republican Party. He might have seen her as a threat to the party he was hoping to shape into his vision.

Now, as rumors are spread from his own people, McCain stands by and says nothing to defend his former running mate. This is a man who freaked out when his aides dared mention Obama’s middle name, and, to some, didn’t pursue Obama’s lack of qualifications aggressively enough. His silence now is deafening. He’s gone back to being the old thorn in our side and we end up going farther Right because of it.

There is still McCain, the Senator. During his service I’m sure he’ll once again be the champion of bipartisanship during this Administration, further distancing himself from the party and the probable future Republican nominee.

McCain clearly thinks Palin has the intelligence and skill to run the country. I’m sure he believes that, but I have to think Palin would have faired a lot better in the public with a different running mate. I’m sure at times it pained him to support her, and vice versa. It was a difficult journey to say the least. I’m sure they both believed in each other and believed they were the best choice as President and VP at this time. But it’s hard for two people who have such different views to share the same platform.

On her own, Palin will be able to be in full “rogue” as just herself. She’ll hopefully run for President and get to pick a running mate more suited to her ideology. I’m sure in that scenario she’ll flourish even more than she did under the circumstances of this election.

The un-fairness of the Fairness Doctrine

It's not uncommon for an Administration to silently introduce and pass controversial policies during a crisis. The public is so consumed with the crisis that they think any bill or Act is much less meaningful than the emergency at hand. So they don’t research what’s on the table, they don’t pay attention to what Congress is doing and they don’t take the time to write to their Senator or Congressman. They’re focused on their families and the how the crisis affects them. That’s exactly what Congress, the Senate and the Administration expect you to do, and this time is no different.

The issue now is the Fairness Doctrine. This is controversial legislation that, if passed, would regulate free speech on the radio. The Fairness Doctrine was first enforced in 1949, when the FCC regulated AM Radio. It was repealed in 1987 when the FCC deemed it to be unconstitutional. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is the champion of attempting to reinstate the Fairness Doctrine. With the Super Majority in place, it most likely will be reinstated if we don’t voice our concerns to our Representatives.

The act as it was in place previously required:

The FCC took the view, in 1949, that station licensees were "public trustees," and as such had an obligation to afford reasonable opportunity for discussion of contrasting points of view on
controversial issues of public importance. The Commission later held that stations were also obligated to actively seek out issues of importance to their community and air programming that addressed those issues.
http://www.museum.tv/archives/etv/F/htmlF/fairnessdoct/fairnessdoct.htm

Back in 1949, the doctrine focused on radio because that was the main media outlet at the time. It was abused politically throughout its existence and would no doubt again be abused. Presumably, the proposed reinstatement of the doctrine would mainly apply to radio as well, although it might be broadened to include satellite radio, FM radio and possibly the internet. Simply put, they want to silence conservative talk radio: the only media outlet where the Right currently has a true voice. Conservative talk radio has flourished since the repeal of the Fairness Doctrine and Democrats are threatened by it. With the doctrine in place, the government will be able to deem certain stations or personalities “too conservative” and by law they must present the other side.

Beyond conservative talk radio, this is a blatant violation of our right to free speech. There are no two ways about it: the Fairness Doctrine proposes to regulate free speech.

Many have speculated that this is one of the bills President Obama plans to pass within the first 100 days of office.

Obama has said that he’s not interested in the Fairness Doctrine. He has repeatedly said that when he takes office, he’ll address the economic crisis immediately. Why would the President-elect say he’s not interested in one of the most controversial pieces of legislation that has already been proven once to be unconstitutional? The answer: to keep the people focused on the crisis at hand. He’ll let the Super Majority do his dirty work for him and push the bill to his desk, then he’ll sign it.

In my opinion, the Fairness Doctrine is nothing less than an attempt at a civilized coup.

Regardless of whether you’re Democrat or Republican, it’s not the government’s job to decide what’s “fair,” or true, or false, or negative, or positive- to broadcast on the air. We live in a free society where the cornerstone is free speech no matter what that speech is.

Our 1st Amendment states:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Please contact your Representative:
https://writerep.house.gov/writerep/welcome.shtml

and your Senator:
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm

to tell them that the Fairness Doctrine is unconstitutional and violates our 1st Amendment right. We need to focus on what the Administration tries to get past us during this crisis.

Hockey Mom

They say being a hockey mom is an attitude. It's the understanding that you'll go the extra mile for your kids. You'll drive them to the frozen pond at 4am and watch them skate while you're huddled in your car drinking coffee, the only thing keeping you from hypothermia. You'll watch them play on team while they give and take vicious hits. You'll see teeth get knocked out and you'll bang on the glass and shout when you witness and injustice on the ice. As Palin said, you're a pit bull with lipstick.



This attitude is shared with many moms I know. Moms who aren't hockey moms but are nonetheless there for their kids at any capacity. As women we know we can, and do, anything. We bring home the bacon, fry it up and serve it to our families. We raise our kids, sometimes alone, while keeping the household in shape and earning the lion's share of income. We work hard for our educations and teach our kids everything we know, hoping they'll learn from our mistakes.


Palin received a lot of criticism for characterizing herself as a Hockey Mom. I won't rehash it here. Unfortunately, some saw it as derogatory or denigrating to public office. I see it as a badge of honor. Politics is a male-dominated field and it's refreshing to see a woman, a mom, who has taken her lumps and knows about the "real world" of raising kids and who's also in public office. As anyone will tell you, moms can see anything in a given day and have to deal with whatever it is with little time and fewer resources. That is a wonderful talent to have while in public office. If only our President could do so much.


Unfortunately, I missed the live telecast of Palin dropping the puck at the Flyers' home opening game. It's a shame, because the Flyers are my husband's favorite team and we watch every game on the NHL Center Ice package. We went to the museum that day and ended up staying a lot later than we planned, so we missed the first period. When I watched the Youtube clip I noticed the NY Ranger on the left seemed to go out of his way to shake her hand and I noticed his huge smile. I asked my husband who #19 was and he said Scottie Gomez. Ah, yes. I know Gomez, but had never seen him without his helmet so I didn't recognize his face. He's from Alaska. Maybe he knew about Palin and possibly supports her. I wouldn't be surprised if he did. After all, he has a hockey mom, too.

A final word to the "anonymous" smearers from the McCain campaign

I would like to ignore the recent smearing from inside the McCain campaign and close that chapter and move on. However, I don't believe for a second that they're done. I'm sure they're talking with publishers about book deals, to be strategically released two or three years from now - in order to hurt Palin all the more in her bid for the nomination. So, I'll write one final word to them.

To the smearers:

You thought you were so clever by infiltrating the campaign, earning the trust of McCain and Palin and then telling lies about her mere hours after the campaign was over. You are so original - not. You've only done what countless other traitors, backstabbers and gutless human beings have done since the dawn of time. Now you have revealed yourself and it ain't pretty. We can see your true colors, and more importantly, Palin sees your true colors.

You of all people should know Palin's character. You know this just gives her more strength to overcome whatever you plan to do to her. What can you say about her that hasn't been said in the past few months? What more can you say about her that would be more damaging that what the main stream media has put her through these past few months?

I have news for you: people like Palin, a lot. They like her so much they see her as future of the Republican Party. Republicans who have been disgruntled with their party for years saw new life in her. And despite the media hell she was put through her ticket garnered over 56 Million votes.

You revealed your hand. You made a very stupid mistake. You underestimate Palin. You did what numerous of her former opponents warned against. Do you really think over 56 Million people are going to believe you and your tripe after seeing what she's already been through? Did you happen to notice how magnificently well Palin overcame the intense media scrutiny when she had no preparation? You just gave her years of preparation for whatever you'll do thanks to your impatience to attack her.

You are a joke and a pathetic excuse for a human being. I pity you. What you did, and plan to do, says more about you, than it does her.

Fear drives attacks on Palin

It's been reported that some "anonymous" aides in the McCain campaign have smeared Palin today. There are videos, but I choose not to watch them because I'm tired of the needless attacking of this woman. She doesn't deserve this. She worked her tail off for this campaign. And for the very people who claimed to be on her side- that they turned on her at this hour is revolting and says much about their character.

Michelle Malkin has the story here:
http://michellemalkin.com/2008/11/05/the-mccain-campaigns-classless-cowards/

Ace of Spades has it here:
http://ace.mu.nu/archives/277522.php

Once again, I would guess that fear is their motivating factor. She is everything they aren't - classy, intelligent, loyal, optimistic, hard working, etc. The list goes on. They already perceive her as a threat to take the nomination in 2012. Just like the Left, they will attack her because they're afraid of her.

Sarah Palin, you don't deserve to be attacked like this, again, especially by your own party. Please know that there are many, many, people who support you and want you to continue to be a leader in the Republican party. Thank you for your all your hard work on this campaign.

Forget the losers who did this. They are pitiful, soul-less people with empty lives.

"There will be another day."

People Magazine ran a great story that gives me hope Palin will indeed return to the national stage after her Gubernatorial term is complete. As usual, she is positive and confident.

I posted some excerpts. Here's the link:

http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20238438,00.html?xid=rss-topheadlines

Sarah Palin: 'There Will Be Another Day'

By Oliver Jones Originally posted Wednesday November 05, 2008 04:40 PM EST

After shedding tears during John McCain's concession speech, Sarah Palin returned to Alaska on Wednesday to run the state in person after doing it by Blackberry from the campaign trail. "I am neither bitter nor vanquished," she told supporters in a phone call at an event at the Multi-Use Sports Complex in her hometown of Wasilla, "but very confident in the knowledge that there will be another day." Exactly what Palin will do next will be one of the most watched political stories of the coming years. Palin, already on the short list of those with a chance at the 2012 Republican presidential nomination, promises to be a less divisive figure than she was during this year's campaign. "If there's a role for me in national politics it won't be so much partisan," Palin, 44, tells the Chicago Tribune, while waiting in line for coffee at a Wasilla café. "It will certainly be a unifier-type of role."

Tearful Ending Palin – the real one – was welling with tears during McCain's concession speech, even as the Arizona senator who plucked the mother of five out of relative obscurity to be his running mate called her "one of the best campaigners I have ever seen." "I'm sure with her there's a sense she feels she was getting started," a senior McCain staffer tells PEOPLE. "She thinks if she had more time she might have been able to make more of a difference." Adds the staffer, "We haven't heard the last from her."

I sure hope not.

Congratulations to Barack Obama

Congratulations to Barack Obama on winning the election. I remember watching his keynote address during the 2004 DNC and knew he would be someone special in the Democratic Party. Although I greatly disagree with all of his political views, I respect his intelligence and passion. I'm also thrilled we elected the first African-American President.

As a conservative, I didn't vote for him because I don't think he'll be the best President for our country at this time. Most of his policy ideas make me fear for our freedom. But there are two great silver linings in all of this, one of which is that he clearly represents the Left. Now, the Left will have the opportunity to work together and develop their party without placing blame on anyone.

The same goes for the Right. We're currently in an identity crisis. McCain represented the center-right in this election. Obviously, he wasn't a true conservative or even Republican throughout his career. If elected, it would have shaped the party even more center-right than it already is. I think that would have been devastating to the party's future.

I do believe everything happens for a reason. McCain made one heck of a gutsy choice when he chose Palin as his running mate. That was probably the most risky thing he could have done. I applaud him for that. Even though they lost (and they were an amazing team- together, she made up for his shortcomings) the second silver lining is that America was introduced to Sarah Palin. She was invigorating and downright refreshing to the Republican party. She was music to our ears. I only wish I had known who she was sooner.

First day of Palin 2012 Campaign

Welcome to Sarah Palin 2012. Today is the first day of the campaign for the 2012 US Presidential Election - for all parties and potential candidates. The question on the minds of everyone who lost is: "what is the next step?"

As I learned Sarah Palin's political ideology over the last few months, I became a supporter and realized she's what our country needs. Although I'm disappointed she and McCain didn't win, I hope this is just the beginning of her political career on the national scene.

As she was confident she and McCain would win last night, she probably doesn't know exactly what the next step is in her career, or what could be possible. I started this blog hoping she will pursue the Presidency in 2012. Here's to the journey.