Sarah Palin 2012

Rick Santorum sweeps...

2012-02-08T10:57:00.001-06:00

and I didn't get 10 comments into some posts on "conservative" blogs before they started screeching "Santorum can't beat Obama. Romney needs to change his strategy in order to appeal to the base." These people are relentless. And they never learn.

Apathy

2012-02-08T08:00:00.000-06:00

Whenever the subject comes up about conservatives feeling apathetic about voting in this election, we're met with a barrage of voices screaming "You better vote or else you're being unpatriotic! If you stay home you're going to let our country burn to the ground! If you don't vote you're disrepecting people who have died to give you the right to vote! If I have to hold my nose and vote for Romney, you have to too! You voted for McCain in '08 so why can't you vote for Romney now?! I don't care who the nominee is I'm voting against Obama!"

I wonder if these people would be so hard-core about voting for the Republican nominee, whoever it is, if the nominee were Palin. Sure, now they're all hell bent on evicting Obama, now that Palin is out. But before she was out, they were hell bent on discouraging her run. THAT was their goal. They kept saying she was unelectable - well if Romney is so electable why are you trying so hard to convince everyone to vote for him? Sure, he's electable if you tell everyone to vote for him and he's the only one standing. When people use their CHOICE to either vote or not vote, or nominate someone they actually agree with, then he's not so electable anymore.

Does the GOP understand the meaning of the two-party system?

2012-02-07T09:20:00.001-06:00

I was watching Fox News this morning and someone made a comment about candidates being "too conservative" to win the general election. I have always wondered why the GOP used that line. Despite ALL the evidence, they think the majority of the country leans left. So they want to nominate a RINO in order to "win." Not only that but they'll actively destroy true conservative candidates in order to get their nominee.

Do they not understand the two-party system? The liberals are supposed to nominate their candidate, and the conservatives nominate their candidate. Each of the candidates is an alternative to the other. It doesn't do any good to nominate someone with ideas a little more watered-down than the other. What is the point of voting? This creates voter apathy among the Right and then the liberal candidate wins. Then the GOP uses that win as "proof" that the country leans left. At this point I think the GOP is just furthering the Left's agenda. Our group of potential nominees is so bad, so so so very bad. We desperately need new leadership in the party, or an entirely new party.

The reasons why Palin didn't run

2012-02-07T09:09:00.000-06:00

I'm wondering what happened behind the scenes that would cause Palin not to run. To me it was crystal clear that she was running and then poof she suddenly wasn't. She mentioned her family being a reason, and since then has referenced her family's wishes many times. But it seems like they were on board with the idea of her running - at least from the outside. It didn't seem like anyone in her family was upset or worried. I remember when President Bush decided to run for POTUS and his daughters expressed their displeasure publicly. We didn't see any evidence of that from the Palin family.

The other reason might be the establishment GOP. They might have withdrawn support financially or through endorsements. I have pondered this many times. It seems like the GOP really didn't want her to run. I wonder if someone said something to her that would cause her to withdraw. And I honestly believe Rick Perry ran in order to scare her off. He came in and all the "conservative" pundits immediately touted him as the best nominee, having the "conservative" credentials plus the elite background that they love. He received the GOP support very quickly. He's also a man and they wanted a man, not a "crazy woman." I wonder if the establishment GOP realizes they made a huge mistake?

The Palin supporters are to blame for this mess?

2012-02-02T10:59:00.000-06:00

There seems to be a theme going around that before Palin declared she wasn't running, her supporters "drove away" the good conservative candidates. And if Palin had announced sooner, or if her supporters were more open-minded then we would have much better candidates now. Riiiight. Those people really don't know the first thing about the conservative movement do they? Palin supporters never looked to her as the One. True. Leader. We all, Palin included, want to get the country back on track. We want a conservative who will have the guts to undo Obama's failures, someone who will honor the constitution, reduce debt, increase freedom, shrink the size of government, etc. Palin could do that, so could any number of people. Palin could only be president for four or eight years, and that's only one office. We need a long term solution. It was always about conservatism from the ground up. Sure, our first choice was Palin, but we all have second and third choices, too. We would love a Rubio, or West, or Thompson, or anyone with conservative bonafides. But the pundits won again and only elite establishment candidates are left. It's not our fault. It's THEIR fault.

Ironic

2012-02-01T10:50:00.000-06:00

I love how Ace of Ace of Spades posted about how Sarah Palin is not a lightening rod anymore, and posts about her don't garner as much attention as they used to. Soooo ironic coming from the guy who used to ~~slander~~ mention her name in every other post in order to gain hits for his site. Otherwise known as a flame war between commenters. He would even gleefully join in the comment section to attack Palin supporters. Awww, it's just not as fun anymore is it, Ace? The human punching bag is gone; I wonder why? Could it be because of people like Ace, who turned his readership against her in a malicious way. It was either hate her or GTF off his blog. Remember, Ace is supposed to be conservative. This is the kind of reality Palin was facing: "conservatives" openly and cruelly attacking her on major blogs.

I totally understand that it's his blog; he can say whatever he wants (he mentions that often). But he can't lament the fact that he's losing readers and interest now that Palin is gone. Dude, you wanted her gone more than anyone. When you attack true conservatives within an inch of their lives, don't cry when they go home and you're left with a bunch of losers.

"conservative" pundits

2012-02-01T10:36:00.002-06:00

Have you noticed that the big time, major, popular, so-called "conservative" outlets have really picked up the Obama-bashing? They spent nearly all of 2010 and 2011 pointedly attacking Sarah Palin, making sure she wouldn't run. Now that she's not, they've decided to get back to the real issue: our country going down the toilet under Obama's leadership. You know why - they want us to be mad and angry so we'll vote for their guy, now that they're guy is guaranteed to win the nomination. Where was all this gnashing of teeth during Obamacare or any one of Obama's job-killing, economy-crushing, freedom-taking policies? To them, the real enemy was a conservative mom from Alaska. SHE had them shaking in their drawers. I'm so fed up with them. And I hope they know that I see right through their bullsh*t.

I hope they're happy. If they had spent that time uniting and trying to find a solution maybe Palin would be the nominee, or someone else who, you know, is a conservative who could get the job done. Since we spent all that time in a circular firing range we're now stuck with a Washington Insider and Romneycare. Good work, guys! You really did your job, there.

These people really showed their true colors. They are nothing but pure elitists, holding all of us true conservatives down. They are not conservatives. At all.

Depressed and bitter

2012-02-01T10:24:00.001-06:00

It's been almost four months since Sarah announced she wasn't running. I thought the pain, disappointment and bitterness would disappear. It hasn't. Now that our choices are horrifyingly bad, I actually feel worse. I'm going to try and muddle through this election. It's not going to be easy. Or pretty.

Sarah Palin's endorsement for 2012

2011-10-12T10:30:00.000-05:00

Sarah Palin making an endorsement all depends on her popularity and influence at the time. Even if he's someone who meets Palin's criteria, her endorsement could potentially hurt his campaign based on her public perception. He may not even want it. If it's Perry or Romney...forget it; I'm sure she will not endorse them. If I had to make a prediction, I would bet that Palin doesn't endorse anyone in this cycle. This election is too volatile to take risks.

However, if it looks like Palin supporters are so disenchanted by next year that they aren't going to the voting booth, then I think she'll come out and tell us to vote Republican, even if it's Romney or Perry. She loves the country too much to see Obama win (again) due to apathetic voters.

Good point

2011-10-11T15:47:00.000-05:00

I thought of another possible reason why Sarah decided not to run - maybe she thought she couldn't win, that the media would destroy her chances and then we would definitely have to face another Obama term. By taking herself out, she's removing any possible obstacles that she would bring to the election. That's what all the so-called conservative haters kept saying would happen, and maybe there was a bit of truth to that. I always thought we needed a strong conservative no matter what; that it wouldn't matter if it was a choice between Romney or Obama because both are so bad. But I guess there is a bigger picture, that defeating Obama really is the #1 goal here, and one of the reasons why Sarah decided not to run was that she could possibly be an obstacle for accomplishing that goal.

Who will take this country back?

2011-10-07T12:22:00.001-05:00

Maybe I'm a little too depressed today, but I'm really starting to think that no one is going to be able to take this country back. For the past three years we've all said that we can't afford a second Obama term. Obamacare will go into effect, we'll be trillions more in debt, more judges and czars appointed, etc. It was imperative that we elect someone in 2012 who could undo everything Obama has done.

It was an enormous task, but we had the strongest fighter with a proven record who we could put our faith into and work with to get it done. Now that she is out, it makes it really hard for me to stay in, too. It's hard not to think that Sarah is telling us it's a lost cause. I know, I know, I'm being way too negative right now and need to think of the bigger picture. But still. The Tea Party was my hobby. Supporting Sarah was my hobby. I took time away from my family to participate. With Sarah stepping back and saying that she needs to be with her family, that she's not willing to lead, then maybe I need to take a step back as well.

I'm being "Negative Nancy" right now I realize this. I'm not usually this way. But in my opinion there is literally no one who could change our country for the better like Sarah could. Even the strongest conservative doesn't have her bonafides and her ability to fight corruption and win. I'm starting to think that it's inevitable that our country will descend down into socialism and there's nothing we can do to stop it. We're too outnumbered. Yeah, I know her political career isn't over. She could be elected president when she's 65 and that would be great, but where does that leave us now, in 2012? Where will our country be in 20 years when she could come back?

I need to get outside and get some air. Sarah not running has changed my perspective on a few things. I'm being WAY too negative about our prospects.

What money?

2011-10-06T10:25:00.000-05:00

I saw an idiotic comment on a "conservative" blog this morning that said:

"Now we know what her bus tour was all about - $$$!"

What money did she make off her bus tour? Did she sell tickets? No. I only saw her encouraging people to visit cities and landmarks that played an important role in our country's history. Was she promoting her books? No. Her books have been out for years and whoever wanted to read them has already done so.

I hate this argument that Palin stayed in for the money. People who say that never knew her, never stood with her, and in my opinion have let their minds wander to a very dark place. Sarah Palin was the person telling us that money and power corrupt; she wasn't part of that corruption. She was trying to fight it. She was never in it for the money. Get a grip you "conservative" haters.

There will never be a President Sarah Palin

2011-10-06T07:53:00.000-05:00

Even though I've slept on it and had time to process this news, I'm still devastated. Probably even more than when I first heard it.

I know I haven't been around here much lately. Since my daughter was born it's been a roller coaster and I haven't had time to do much of anything, much less keep a blog. But I still always loved Sarah and fought for her whenever/however I could.

Of course I understand her reasons and this decision doesn't make me dislike her or what she stands for. No one could ever know what she had to go through, what her family had to go through, her marriage, etc., so I understand completely. It's just that her decision makes me feel less hopeful that someone like me, someone who is a political outsider, someone who has a family and a small business, could ever run for and win the presidency. I'm faced with the bleak options of the 2012 elections knowing no one could ever come close to her. More than that, I'm facing an America that's corrupt and being taken over by socialism and the strongest fighter in my corner has just bowed out.

But I guess that's what Sarah has been trying to tell us this summer. She can't be the leader of a movement. We need something bigger than a movement. We need to change our country from the bottom up. We need to be the movement, not follow a leader. I know she never wanted to be someone like Obama was in the 2008 election; someone who people could say they supported because it was "cool." She wanted to help restore our country and we all need to actually do it, not just follow a leader.

With this decision she's just showing again how human she is. She has feelings and loves her family just like the rest of us. She's not a power-hungry, win-at-all-costs political robot like most of the candidates out there. That's honorable. She has integrity. But I still wish she had made a run for it.

Executive experience debate

2011-07-12T08:29:00.000-05:00

In a recent Facebook post, Palin emphasized the importance of having executive experience in running for POTUS.

Second, the office of the presidency is too important for on-the-job training. It requires a strong chief executive who has been entrusted with real authority in the past and has achieved a proven track record of positive measurable accomplishments. Leaders are expected to give good speeches, but leadership is so much more than oratory.

That could be directed at a number of current potential candidates, and President Obama is the embodiment of the truth of that statement due to his lack of experience before being elected into office. Look where we are now with a president who had zero executive experience prior to the presidency.

Michele Bachmann took it as a jab from Palin, responding with

Bachmann said executive experience doesn’t matter if it comes with “more of the same big government as usual.”

“This election will be about quite simply, who can lead that restructuring effort,” Bachmann said, referring to turning around the economy and working to repeal the federal health care reform law.

“Executive experience in government is one thing, but not when it comes to a promise of more of the same big government as usual,” she continued.

That has to be one of the stupidest things I've read in awhile. It's completely incorrect for one thing, saying everyone in the field who has executive experience will create bigger government. And in the process of trying to defend her own lack of executive experience, made an argument that executive experience is a bad thing.

Watching Michele Bachmann spin and spin and spin her gaffes is getting painful. I'm starting to feel a lot of second-hand embarassment for her now. Palin is doing a great thing by dropping these little nuggets of wisdom and Bachmann going to extreme stupidity in spinning it her way. Give her enough rope and she'll hang herself politically.

A commenter at HotAir named "INC" explained executive experience beautifully:

Bachmann’s statement is ridiculous.
Executive experience does matter.
That’s how you find out if you’re a leader rather than a supporter.
That’s how you find out if you have the ability to articulate vision and purpose so that others will understand.
That’s how you find out if you can lead by example and bring out the best in people so that they know the end goal is worth the discipline and sacrifice.
That’s how you find out if you can assess people’s abilities and put them into the right job.
That’s how you find out if you can learn to delegate and leave micromanaging behind.
That’s how you find out if you know how to encourage and when to challenge.
That’s how you find out if you can take a group and lead them through ups and downs to success.
For Bachmann to say this really shows her lack of executive experience–not to mention poor logic, because a good executive leader wouldn’t grow government just to grow it, but assess, analyze and implement what’s needed.

I would even add that being a good leader with a good record of executive experience is more important than IQ. But that's an argument for another day.

From C4P - Palin is the only person who vetoed energy portion of Obama's stimulus

2011-07-12T08:01:00.000-05:00

I read this on Conservatives4Palin. If Rick Perry decides not to run, then:

Governor Palin will be the only one in the field who can say that she vetoed some of Obama’s stimulus package. In the unlikely event that Rick Perry enters the contest, Governor Palin will still be the only person on stage who can say that she vetoed the energy portion of Obama’s stimulus package. She didn’t just oppose Obama’s stimulus package through her words, nor did she just cast the same vote that every other moderate or conservative Republican member of Congress cast. She is the only person in America who can say that she vetoed the energy portion of Obama’s stimulus package. She doesn’t talk about this very much and the “conservative” media won’t bring this up because it’ll help her. Let’s make sure we remind GOP and GOP-leaning indies who really opposed Obama’s stimulus package and who was the only one to back up his or her opposition with deeds and not just words.

This is a fact that needs to be immediately known by anyone thinking about voting. That's why I linked it from C4P. I remembered it when I read there, but it wasn't a fact that was at the top of my brain. This is an important policy decision by Palin that appeals to everyone in this country. I need to spread the word.

The Undefeated show times

2011-07-12T06:00:00.003-05:00

The Undefeated opens July 15th!

For me, the best way to find a movie showing in my area is to go to www.movietickets.com and input your zip code and movie you want to see. They'll have a list of results for theaters and showtimes.

Please see The Undefeated when it opens this weekend! We need to show our support and spread the word!

Palin's Newsweek cover and article

2011-07-11T10:40:00.000-05:00

A good read and pretty fair article. They get some jabs in here and there, and heap praise on Obama, but it's still pretty fair. As we know, Newsweek is floundering financially. They need a boost to remain on the market and solvent. They can't afford to do a hit piece because even Newsweek is smart enough to know how popular Palin is. I take their fair tone with a grain of salt. They're not going to offend the last of their dwindling readers yet; I'm sure they'll wait until much closer to the election to go all in for Obama no matter the cost.

But I will say that this article will be very good for Palin's image. For those who say that Palin never speaks to anyone outside of Fox News. For those who are on the fence, and for those who are reading Newsweek in waiting rooms and lobbys throughout the country. In other words, those who are outside of the conservative blogosphere and not already die-hard Palin supporters. I think this article is a great stepping stone to position her nationally as a competitor against Obama, not just other Republicans.

This article addresses the most worrisome part of her campaign and her career - the decision to step down as Governor. Newsweek did a great job handling the nuances of that decision, even for a left-wing magazine. I think people who didn't really know all the issues surrounding that decision will be better informed about it after reading this. And that's what I was hoping for - that the general public would understand her decision and look at her career and life as a whole, not just this one part of it. The resignation doesn't define her. And in order for that to happen more pieces like this need to come out. It's a truth that I don't like to admit. But the corrupt media has a stranglehold on our country. Not many people are going to suddenly wake up and be conservative out of nowhere. They either need to have a knee-jerk reaction to something they vehenmently disagree with, or they change their mind slowly over time. Those whose minds change slowly over time do it by reading articles like this.

Gov. Rick Perry 2010 campaign memory

2011-06-29T11:17:00.000-05:00

I know this isn't very substantive, but I wanted to post this memory I have of Rick Perry's 2010 gubernatorial campaign. I was at Palin's book signing for Going Rogue, which was in December of '09. I got in line very, very early in the morning and just waited with the others until 9am when the doors opened. While waiting, a horde of Perry '10 campaign volunteers descended upon us wearing matching shirts. They walked through the line and asked each person if they supported Rick Perry for Governor in 2010. I was in the second portion of the line and watched them until they got to me. When a person answered "yes" they would ask if that person wanted to sign up to be a volunteer. If that person didn't want to be a volunteer they would press and ask why not, and badger them until they submitted their name, phone number and email address. If a person said they did not support Perry then they would badger and pester and ask them why not. They would say "he's friends with Palin and she supports him." They were UBER annoying. When they got to me I just said "yes" because I didn't want to be bothered with explaining why I didn't. I refused to sign my name, though. The guy next to me said no he didn't support Perry because he didn't think anyone should have three consecutive terms in office.

The worst part was that the same horde of volunteers went through the line again about two hours later and asked everyone again and we all had to repeat our answers. It was infuriating. They were pushy and aggressive. My take on the general consensus of the people waiting is that no one really supported Perry. Despite knowing Palin supported him, we were all just kind of "meh" and over him. I don't really think there's a lot of Texas support for him and Palin's endorsement STILL confuses Palin supporters. Perry is not the conservative Texas hero that outsiders are making him out to be.

The "flake" Michele Bachmann

2011-06-28T08:50:00.000-05:00

I'm sure you've all heard Chris Wallace asking Michele Bachmann if she's a flake. When I first watched it my knee-jerk reaction was being offended on Bachmann's behalf. The fact that no one would ask that question to a man, even a flakey man. Bachmann kept saying she's a "serious person" in defense of the question. Then it started to sink in a little. I thought about it more and realized that was pretty out of character for Chris Wallace. I started thinking something else was going on.

Later that night (yes, I'm way too obsessed with this stuff) I remembered how months ago Mitt Romney said that Sarah Palin was not a serious person. Bachmann used the same exact words to defend herself. It makes me think Bachmann may be a stalking horse for Romney, and maybe even perhaps angling for the VP slot if he wins the nomination. I read HotAir regarding this issue and some of the commenters noted that Bachmann has been making herself out to be the darling of the Left-wing news outlets such as MSNBC and CNN. I didn't know that since I never watch those networks. It appears that she's pumping herself up to be the "media pick" such as John McCain last year.

On to Chris Wallace. I didn't write about this earlier because I thought it was just too much "background" to get into on this blog, but Bachmann has hired notorious Palin-hater Ed Rollins as her 2012 campaign manager. Several weeks ago Rollins was going around MSNBC saying that Palin was stupid and that Bachmann is smart and "every bit as attractive" as Palin - barf. Why she would hire such a misogynist is beyond me, but it's crystal clear that she hired a Palin hater to do her dirty work trashing Palin while she can be in the background above it all just like Obama and his cronies do. Now to the point - I think Chris Wallace asked the "flake" question to take her down a peg for what Rollins said about Palin. She'll have to prove that she's more intelligent in her own words. He's not going to let her get away with trashing Palin behind her campaign manager. It's like he's giving her a tiny taste, maybe 1/10,000th of the pain that Palin continues to go through in the media.

This is all just my opinion, and it may be all conspiracy, who knows. When one ~~is obsessed with~~ follows politics like I do, you tend to read way too far into things. Anyway, I think the "flake" question was very well-played by Wallace to expose the trash that Bachmann associates herself with, and it exposed her as the lightweight she is. Considering she didn't accept his apology right away and whined about it for almost two straight days shows she can't stand the heat in this kitchen.

Obama flubs Medal of Honor...again

2011-06-24T10:56:00.001-05:00

I'm starting to think he really hates this Medal. From Blackfive:

I had the great honor of seeing some of you because a comrade of yours, Jared Monti, was the first person who I was able to award the Medal of Honor to who actually came back and wasn’t receiving it posthumously."

As we all know, SSG Sal Giunta, of the 173rd Airborne, was the first living recipient (2011) of the MOH who fought in Iraq/Afganistan. SFC Jared Monti, 10th Mountain Division, was KIA in Afghanistan in 2006. He was posthumously awarded the MOH by Obama in 2009.

So he mistakenly said that someone didn't win posthumously, when he actually did. What an insult. And to add to that insult, he, Obama, was the one who awarded the living recipient, so how could he mis-remember that??

If this sounds familiar, you may remember that Obama made a similar mistake on the day of the Ft. Hood shooting. During his live press conference, he gave a "shout out" to Jim Crow and said that he won the Medal of Honor. But Crow hadn't won it since it's only awarded to combat veterans. Crow won the Medal of Freedom which is given to civilians.

I believe Obama hates the military and does everything he can to undermine its traditions, history and honor by insulting MOH recipients. What a horrible president.

New address for "Texans for Sarah Palin" blog

2011-06-23T10:54:00.000-05:00

Check out Josh Painter's blog, Texans for Sarah Palin:

http://texansforsarahpalin.blogspot.com/

It is the former "Texas for Sarah Palin" blog. I'm updating the blogs I follow to the new address. Stop on over and check it out. He has great information and insights on Sarah Palin.

If Sarah Palin didn't run

2011-06-20T09:44:00.000-05:00

I'm saying "if" because I know she is going to. But hypothetically, if she didn't run, it would be the most disappointing thing that happened to women in a long time. If she didn't run, it would mean that everyone at NRO who think women should leave the room, won. It would mean that the Left who are terrified of strong women, won. It would mean that her enemies who did everything to smear her and her family, won. It would mean that she would be reduced to a "kingmaker" for the men. It would mean a return to business as usual in DC. It would mean nothing will ever change in our country. It would mean Obamacare will be in full effect and never repealed. It would mean our country would go down a shit hole so deep it would take a revolution to get it out.

But she is running, so I know there's still hope.

No one is writing about what this means to women. Have you noticed how many people are so absolutely convinced she's not running? Does the dinosaur media think women would be happy just to be a kingmaker? Do they think we should be satisfied with that, while the boys run the country? Do they think about what that would do to Palin's own personal dignity? I honestly believe they think she should be happy she got as far as she did and not try to accomplish anything more. Beggars can't be choosers, you know. They are so ancient. They are so condescending and chauvinistic. I'm wholeheartedly talking about the Right elite establishment, too. People who are that convinced she's not running don't know anything about her. They haven't read her books and don't understand her passion. She's not going to play second fiddle to anyone (no VP ever again, no kingmaker) and she loves this country too much to not try and stop the bleeding if she can. She knows she has a chance so she's going for it. The people who think she's not running are just hoping she doesn't.

Liberal women do everything to protect men, coddle them and forgive their mistakes. They luuuurve Bill Clinton to this day. That's why it's taken so long for a liberal woman to run for President, in my opinion. The men of the Right are bewildered by women who do it all. They don't understand them, and want them to go away. I'm sensing that the men of the establishment Right are starting to loathe Palin and Michele Bachmann for being strong, take-no-prisoners women.

Even though I don't support Bachmann politically at all, I'm glad she's taking the bull by the horns and running for POTUS in 2012. She needs to strike while the iron's hot, just like a man in her position would do. It's good for women. When Palin runs and wins the nomination, a true paradigm shift will occur. Thank goodness.

Some media's treatment of Weiner was very similar to Palin

2011-06-20T09:06:00.001-05:00

Update:

I just realized that what politicians do in their private lives do affect them in office, as far as they could be blackmailed with what people find. If a lobbyist or political enemy of Weiner found evidence, photos, etc. of his private bad behavior then they could blackmail him into doing many things in order to keep the photos out of the public. And I remember after the Arnold love-child news broke some people thought that a lot of his weird actions as governor now made sense, as in, he could have been blackmailed into doing them with info about his child and extra-marital affair. Or he could have had other affairs that he was being blackmailed with. So yeah, that stuff needs to be exposed. People who hold office can't do that stuff because it puts the office at risk. They need to resign if caught. I wholeheartedly disagree with how Weiner behaved and I do now understand why he was dogged. It just really creepily reminded me of how Palin was treated and seeing him resign sent a chill down my spine. Knowing he wouldn't have resigned if he hadn't been dogged with it. But yes, what he did was so wrong and inexcusable. He needed to go and it was good that people found out what he was doing.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Original post:

Let me preface this by saying I wanted Anthony Weiner to resign and I'm glad he finally did. That he might have been saying innapropriate things to an underage girl is disgusting. However, (even though I'm glad conservatives controlled the message) I'm really sickened by the actions of the conservative bloggers who dogged, dogged, attacked, dogged, uncovered dirt, dogged, grabbed screen shots, dogged, posted filthy and embarassing private conversations to the world, dogged, until Weiner was forced to resign. I believe that was dirty politics just to get someone they don't like out of office. I know it felt good to see that arrogant blowhard get knocked down a peg. And it felt good to see him cry and that his career unraveled, but that was wrong, and it reminded me of how the corrupt media treats Palin.

Palin was (is) dogged, dogged, dogged, and had umpteen frivolous lawsuits filed against her just because the other side wanted her out of office and out of the spotlight. They wanted to take down their most feared opponent and did it by any means necessary. Until she was forced to resign. She called it "political bloodsport."

Now the main difference is that Weiner actually did something bad and lied, while Palin did nothing bad. Her detractors simply made up stuff and took her down financially by filing lawsuit after lawsuit, knowing she would have to resign because of it.

Palin didn't cry when she resigned. She pointed at her enemies, called them out and promised she wouldn't just sit down and shut up.

Weiner's supporters are so upset, saying he didn't need to resign and that he should still run for NYC mayor, as he was planning to do. I kind of agree. Minus the underage girl allegations, I don't think Weiner really did anything wrong as far as holding office goes. He wasn't bribing anyone, breaking the law, or using his office for corruption. He had a messy private life. His sham marriage is exposed. He took marriage vows that he didn't keep, and probably had zero intention of keeping. But as far as holding office he seemed passionate to the Left's cause and was doing whatever he needed to further it. So I say let the voters decide. The state of California seems to be happy to be going down the Lefty shithole by electing liberal after liberal, so maybe NYC will follow. I know I don't care who's mayor of New York. I do care about my mayor, my Governor, my President, whom I have some power to elect by my vote.

The media shouldn't attack people like this. They shouldn't bury stories, either. They just need to report the facts. If someone discovered Weiner was innapropriately speaking to an underage girl, that needed to be reported by ALL networks and that is a resigning offense. If he's using his office for corruption and bribery that should be reported. But this attacking day after day until someone cracks, is just evil and wrong. I hate how our politicians are attacked and treated like they're criminals constantly, just because we don't like them and want them to resign. The Left tried every trick in the book to get GWB to resign or impeached. I'm assuming they did to Richard Nixon as well and succeeded. They did it to Palin and succeeded. And now I see that the Right will do the same thing. I don't like it.

A Tale of Two Campaigns

2011-05-25T09:57:00.000-05:00

Last night it was announced that Sarah Palin will be debuting "an epic documentary" about herself in Iowa next month.

And yesterday the White House announced that they created an official position to deal with Obama's "negative online presence."

This is the beginning of one of the biggest showdowns in history.

"Conservative" Tucker Carlson tries to destroy Sarah Palin...again

2011-05-24T09:57:00.001-05:00

There are a lot of Republicans and right-leaning independents who don't necessarily like Sarah Palin, but they don't hate her, either. That is understood and known, and what Palin supporters like myself run into on a daily basis with friends and family members. And there are a handful of conservative bloggers who don't really like her, either. There is only one, however, that would actively try to take her out in brazen attacks like the Left does, and that is the Daily Caller.

The Daily Caller was co-founded by Tucker Carlson, who seems to present himself as a conservative, and sometimes even a little libertarian. I watched him a few years ago on a Fox News special exposing the public school curriculum and loved it. When he started The Daily Caller I fully supported and visited it often. The Daily Caller was the only news outlet that got a hold of and published JournoList postings, exposing many of the corrupt media of their shameful coordinated news agendas.

I was seriously confused then, in March of this year when the DC published a hit piece on Palin. Even worse, they interviewed her under the guise of being a conservative ally and used her quotes against her. Their baseless attack was incorrect and pure spin, and Palin had to publish a correction on SarahPAC.

And they just did it again by publishing a trusted Palin aide's personal twitter postings with the tabloid headline "'Big Boss' is Gonna be Angry." Seriously...wtf. That's just juvenile right there. That's worse than a middle school student newspaper. That's just unbelievable. What the hell are they doing? I would expect to see a headline like that on DailyKos or Huffington Post, but the Daily Caller? I just don't understand it. All I can think is that they're trying to get hits, or they just really hate her and don't want her to run. The right-leaning folks who don't like Palin use actual arguments and constructive criticism to prove their points. They don't write hit pieces and "scandals" because it takes away the legitimacy of their arguments. So this is just stupid.

The "scandal" is hardly that. The trusted aide is Rebecca Mansour, who is famously one of Palin's staunchest supporters from day one. She co-founded the website Conservatives4Palin and went on to become one of Palin's spokespersons. What an unbelievable honor. Her opinion on Bristol possibly hurting Sarah's career aren't exactly hidden, either. I remember her postings very well on the subject back at C4P. She received some push back for what she wrote back then, from commenters and co-bloggers at the site. But she stood by her words. And to be honest, she was telling a truth and sometimes the truth is unfair and hurts. I don't read C4P everyday, but I'm sure her opinion has evolved (just like everyone's) now that we see how Bristol is perceived in the public eye. We ALL move on from our past - Sarah, Bristol, Mansour, me, you, everyone. Bristol's made a great life herself just by being HER. And she's managed to live her own life with a separate identity from her mom, while they both love and support each other. It's a beautiful thing. So it's not fair to bring back something that Mansour wrote back in 2009 when everything has changed.

The only people who look bad out of this is the DC. They have shamed themselves for the last time as conservatives and respectable bloggers write them off for good. They are nothing but a trashy, classless, tabloid middle school expose' machine. They are nothing. And we should all take them off our reading lists, and Carlson should lose his respected positions everywhere for being a part of this trash.

Stop the presses!! Front page MSM news!! A Palin insider has written a tell-all!!!

2011-05-23T11:19:00.000-05:00

Way to be predictable, Frank Bailey...way to try and cash in on your time with the Governor like every other greedy famewh*re who gets within one mile of her. You must be really hard-up for cash. From the AP:

(The book is) based on tens of thousands of emails that Bailey said he kept during his time with Palin.

LOL

I'm sure everyone is breathlessly awaiting the release of your stalker emails, you transparent tool.

Also a golf clap goes to the AP, in writing that Palin had a "brief stint" as Governor. Well played, AP. You really got her good! //not

Palin's statement is a reflection of modern feminism

2011-05-20T15:51:00.000-05:00

Yesterday Palin was a guest on Greta van Susteren and said "I think my problem is that I do have the fire in my belly (to run)." Interesting that she referred to it as a problem. I take Sarah at her absolute word in that she is still weighing her decision to run or not and a large part of it is because of the affect it'll have on her family. She views the fire in her belly as a problem because she has this longing to fulfill the ultimate career ambition, but she's also a wife and mom whose primary responsibility is to protect her children and family. Given her history with the media, we know they'll all be attacked and that's a huge risk to take.

I see this as a dilemma in modern feminism. If Palin were a man, there's absolutely zero question that she would run. There's a phrase I've heard a few times which is "working women don't have wives." Meaning, men can go out and fulfill every career ambition to their utmost potential and know their wife will be back home taking care of their home and children. Women who want to fulfill every career ambition outside the home usually don't have that luxury. For mothers, their number one priority is always their children. Sarah alone could run against Obama in 2012 with one hand tied behind her back and still win in a landslide. But the reality of life is that she can't just think of herself. She has to think of her family - how the media will treat them, how they'll live in the future no matter what the outcome of the election, the travel, the long hours, the time away from them. All of these things men don't ever have to think of. Men aren't perceived as selfish or bad fathers if they run a tough presidential campaign. But women are, and if they're Republican women that means their children will also be attacked ruthlessly on the national stage.

It's sad to think we still have these "problems" in today's society. As a woman and mother, this touches a nerve and deeply affects me. I can't wait for the day when we don't have to think about this anymore. When women's motherhood isn't questioned by running for office. When Republican's children aren't attacked because of their parent's beliefs. I hope it changes.

Rick Perry's trial balloon

2011-05-18T13:52:00.000-05:00

Things that make you go hmmm...

Back in February, I was thinking that Texas Governor Rick Perry could run in 2012. Being from Texas and watching him govern the past 10 years or so, there was never any doubt in my mind that he would run for president someday. It was only recently that I thought it could be in this election cycle.

Conservative blogs were ablaze yesterday with the rumor that Rick Perry could be running in 2012. No doubt this rumor was planted by Perry's camp itself. This was a trial balloon. He has strongly denied he's running for POTUS, so this was a test to see how the public would react to him running. For instance, a few months ago people were literally begging NJ Governor Chris Christie to run despite his constant denials. Since then, dirt has been dug up on him and now the calls for him to run are reduced to crickets. During the Perry discussion yesterday on the blogs, Perry's negatives were discovered and discussed. This is exactly what Perry wanted to see - if there were any deal breaker in his record that would make it impossible to run and win this cycle. Just like when everyone found out Christie was unelectable. Christie can now say that he never wanted to run anyway, it was just a rumor.

Things that make me go hmmm: (1) he's a close friend of Sarah's, which I never understood; (2) because of their friendship I highly suspect that he could be a VP pick for her; (3) he seems to be playing the same strategy as Palin which is a "wait and see which candidates decide to run and then make a decision;" (4) my opinion only, which is only a hunch, is that he and Palin are working together on campaign strategies. My conspiracy theory: He could already be in on being Palin's VP pick. He could possibly have zero interest in POTUS this cycle, and has only released this rumor in order to determine if he would be a good VP candidate. If anything too big came out then he would be out. That's why this trial balloon was released.

I'll discuss my thoughts on Perry's governing record in future posts. The quick summary is that he's been a big government Republican and is getting slightly more conservative as time goes on. That's why I never understood their friendship and their mutual endorsements of each other. He's always been a little RINO-y to me, but I'll keep my mind open.

Arnold post

2011-05-18T13:25:00.000-05:00

I wrote the Arnold post before the news broke that he fathered a child outside his marraige. I wanted to clarify that I wasn't comparing him and Palin substantively, only on their mass superstar voter appeal (at the time he first ran). The guy is obviously a massive tool and brazen liar. He needs to just disappear for awhile and stay out of the public eye - movies, politics - and try to repair the relationship with his kids.

Palin's Paul Ryan endorsements are paying off for us long-term

2011-05-17T09:52:00.001-05:00

Palin endorsed Paul Ryan's Roadmap on December 10, 2010. To my knowledge she was the first major contender to do so. When I wrote about it on this blog, I mentioned how at the time Ryan's Roadmap was considered somewhat of a risky proposition that only serious conservatives would endorse to either their success or their peril.

Now it's May 2011 and Ryan's Roadmap has become one of the most significant arguments in nearly every debate. Each candidate is framed on whether or not they endorse his plan and to what degree. Even the President had to make a rebuttal to Ryan's budget proposal during the budget talks. Not only has this piece of policy become so significant, but Ryan himself has become the go-to guy on our country's economic issues. Would this have happened if Palin hadn't endorsed the plan back in December?

Last Sunday, official 2012 candidate Newt Gingrich slammed the Medicare component in Ryan's budget proposal to his peril. Every major conservative pundit has declared Gingrich done in the 2012 race. I don't know if he did this to make waves in order to get the focus on him and to get more popularity or something, but whatever he wanted to accomplish completely backfired. The 2012 candidates need to realize that we are really fed up with big government and we're not going to forgive gaffes like this so easily.

Palin endorsed this plan in December. She endorsed Ryan's policy credentials throughout the past two years. It's because of her high profile endorsements that these economic policy debates are happening. She has such a great eye for who is going to be good for this country and who is passionate about their work. She's already paved the way for us picking a great nominee in 2012 - one who can go toe-to-toe with Obama and one who is not a RINO squish. Gingrich has been weeded out because of her. That's got to be a great feeling.

This campaign cycle reminds me of the "Schwarzenegger effect"

2011-05-16T09:24:00.000-05:00

I just saw on Fox News that by this date in 2007, 10 candidates had already announced they were running for POTUS for the 2008 election. For this cycle, only four have formally announced. Why the difference? Sarah Palin. Everyone is waiting for her to either say yes or no. There is no way anyone on the fence (Republican or Democrat) who might have trouble raising money would even think to run if Sarah were running, too. There's just no way anyone could raise enough money, or attain the same level of name recognition she has. It kind of reminds me of when the state of California did a recall on their Governor. A handful of candidates were running to be the one to replace him. But when Arnold Schwarzenegger announced he was going to run, pretty much all the other candidates dropped out, including the guy who led the charge on the recall. I remember him specifically crying in an interview saying there was no way he could compete with Arnold who has more money than anyone and was one of the biggest box-office movie stars of all time. Palin might even be more popular now than Arnold was at that time. So this is definitely reminding me of that recall, and the effect one superstar candidate can have on an election.

First 2012 GOP debate is tonight - Palin not attending

2011-05-05T09:21:00.000-05:00

The first GOP debate of 2012 is being held tonight in Greenville, South Carolina. Here's the list of participants:

Herman Cain
Gary Johnson
Ron Paul
Tim Pawlenty
Rick Santorum

Um...yeah. With the exception of Cain, that group is pretty pathetic. I'm so glad Palin is skipping this debate. If this is the best the GOP has to offer, then I think in a few months the entire country will be begging Palin to run. And I think this is exactly why Palin has waited to make her announcement. As the candidates start shaping up, compared to Palin they are just so un-inspiring and yawn-worthy. If we really have to choose from a list like this (give or take a few) we're going to be pretty bummed.

Showing the photo to congress just smacks of "ruling class"

2011-05-05T09:13:00.000-05:00

Yesterday OBL's death photo was shown to select members of Congress and the Senate. They all spoke to the press and reiterated that the photos are real and provide confirmation of OBL's death.

Well in that case, why don't they show it to the rest of us? Who exactly is working for who here? This just smacks of political elitism and that the Washington beltway insiders consider themselves our betters and rule over us. It's like they're saying "you unwashed masses aren't allowed to see it, but don't worry the photos are real; oh and by the way, shut up and stop asking us for them."

There was a reason the Bible was translated to English and church services stopped being conducted in Latin. It's because everyone is equal and deserves to have access to the same information so they can make their own decisions and form their own opinions. This administration not allowing access to the proof of OBL's death is denying us the basic freedoms that are written in the Constitution, in my opinion.

Palin gives best advice on Twitter

2011-05-04T14:42:00.000-05:00

Oh how I wish we had President Palin right now! :) I will settle for her Twitter postings for the time being:

Show photo as warning to others seeking America's destruction. No pussy-footing around, no politicking, no drama;it's part of the mission

I don't want to see the photo, personally. But I want it to be available as a matter of public record. Obama is showing an astounding lack of leadership right now. He is bowing down symbolically to the Muslims. He is apologizing to them.

In case Obama forgot, OBL is responsible for the murder of thousands of innocent Americans. We watched hundreds of people jump off a building to their death, live on TV. Osama bin Laden is responsible for those deaths. We need to show the rest of the world and anyone else even thinking about doing that to us again, that this is how you will end up. Shot in the head and dead if you kill our citizens.

9/11 was the most brazen attack that anyone has ever done to this country. We need to show the world that we don't put up with it, and that photo is the proof. More than that, we will NOT bow down to Muslim demands. We don't worship their god; we don't obey their laws. We do not give them the same honor that we give our troops and others who sacrfice for our country. Release the photos already.

OBL's death brings questions on birth certificate release (for me)

2011-05-04T14:22:00.000-05:00

Osama bin Laden's death is a relief to us all and an amazing accomplishment for our troops. The 10-year hunt is finally over. However, Obama's actions before and after this event have left many confused and feeling odd rather than happy. There was the Donald Trump show which seemed, to me, to unravel to a perfect end of Obama releasing his long form birth certificate. Very weird occurance for someone who has done everything imaginable to keep it hidden. Then a week later, Obama makes an announcement that OBL is dead and we killed him. I'm wondering why he even bothered with the birth certificate now. Was it because he thought people wouldn't trust him on the OBL death announcement? Did he know that he wasn't going to show the death photo, and then think that people would label him as hiding everything - the BC and now the death photo?
Not to get all conspiracy-theory on you, but Trump's call to release the BC came out of nowhere. And because of the insurmounting pressure of Trump's demand, Obama was forced to release the BC. See? He couldn't just produce the BC easily after ~~two~~ three years of hiding it. In literary terms, he needed an agent or external force to push him into this action. If you remember, for weeks before Trump made his demand, the corrupt media kept asking Republicans if they thought Obama was born here. Off the top of my head I know Palin, Michele Bachmann and Tim Pawlenty were asked repeatedly in recent interviews and they ALL refused to take the bait. They ALL said it was a distraction from the real issues. Then Trump comes in coincidentally, poses as a Republican and demands it. Then Obama releases it.

And now Obama is refusing to release OBL's death photo. Obama's actions cause so much chaos and confusion. This is a moment where everyone could unite and be happy together. But Obama's weird actions, from not releasing the photo to treating the corpse with honor and according to Muslim tradition, have left most of us feeling empty, confused and second-guessing ourselves.

I've moved on and don't really care one way or another. It was just a thought in my head. But I do think it's very strange how this all happened given that Obama knew where OBL was for months. I'm just glad OBL is dead. It truly is a time to celebrate.

SarahPAC's new website

2011-04-20T10:25:00.000-05:00

On April 18, SarahPAC quietly launched a new website design. This website streamlines everything related to Sarah Palin: her ideas, her facts, her candidate picks, where to donate, where she'll be, her media appearances, her Facebook and Twitter posts and more. Many independent Palin supporters and bloggers have been compiling and publishing this information over the years, but this is the first time she has done it herself. This quiet unveiling looks to me like another brick in laying the groundwork for her announcement to run in 2012. There was no fan fair, no youtube announcement, only an email to those already subscribing to SarahPAC.

This website is spectacular. She makes no bones about where she stands on the issues. She lays it all out on the line clearly. Compare her site to Mitt Romney's, which is just one page where you can sign up for emails or donate. He doesn't say anything about his opinions, not even that he's a Republican! Tim Pawlenty's website is very good, better than Romney's. He at least publishes information about where he stands on the issues. Overall, this website puts her directly in the field of GOP candidates.

America's first "Facebook President" - You Betcha!

2011-04-20T10:07:00.000-05:00

I've said this before but I'll say it again. I think Governor Palin is amazing for not playing into the corrupt media's hands. The corrupt media is a hostile den of vipers salivating at the chance to destroy her with her own words. Katie Couric and Tina Fey have won numerous awards for their part in tarnishing Governor Palin's image. And recently, the so-called conservative bloggers and right-leaning news sites have attempted to destroy her career in a campaign seemingly coordinated amongst them. The Governor got burned by The Daily Caller as recently as last month, a place where one would usually assume to be friendly to the conservative cause - not anymore! It seems like any outlet can fall prey to knocking Palin around for ratings.

So I'm happy she's stuck with getting her message out her own way using Facebook, Twitter, editorial pages and other means where the corrupt media can't twist her words and make her seem like something she's not. She's untouchable that way. Most of the establishment Republicans have criticized her for not going on the "Sunday shows" like candidates in years past. Well, I think she's smart for avoiding them. Who watches them anyway? And why take the chance that they'll edit her a' la' Katie Couric, or that others would take a soundbite out of context and use it from here to eternity incorrectly. The critics look like pathetic zookeepers trying to lure her into that den of vipers with any kind of bait possible. Not gonna happen.

Hi there

2011-04-20T09:41:00.000-05:00

Hi all - I apologize for not posting very much recently. I have been overwhelmed in a really good way with taking care of my baby and figuring out my routine. However, I need to get back to my hobby, this blog, because there is so much exciting stuff going on and I know that Sarah will make her announcement in the near future in her own special, unique way. I am so enjoying this time of campaigning by all the candidates. There is so much HOPE that we'll be able to take our country back in 2012. I look forward to experiencing it with you.

Again, this is what being presidential looks like

2011-03-24T13:18:00.005-05:00

If they think Palin has no chance...why are they making a movie about her?

2011-03-10T09:53:00.000-06:00

I found this on Creative Minority Report. HBO is making a movie about Sarah Palin's 2008 VP candidacy, in which Julianne Moore will play Palin. CMR reminds us that Moore is an advocate for Planned Parenthood and gay marriage in real life.

Given that, who else could Hollywood possibly have considered to star as Sarah Palin in a new HBO movie? Conservatives all over the country are resting easy knowing that this should be the fairest portrayal of a conservative hero since Barbra Streisand's husband James Brolin played Ronald Reagan.

~~All~~ most of Hollywood and the corrupt media thinks Palin is a joke, a loser and has no chance of winning. Yet they are making movies about her, and constantly talk about her. Will HBO make a movie about Mitt Romney? Have they even made one about The One yet? Why does she take up so much space in their heads if they hate her so much and think she'll lose easily? Because they know the truth: Palin would absolute destroy President Putt-Putt in 2012 if she decides to run. They're doing everything in their power to discourage her from running. I agree with CMR, let's just ignore this HBO movie. We already know it's going to be full of lies and slander and be a ridiculous portrayal of Palin. It's not worth the energy to get worked up about it.

Proof that corrupt media will tear down any GOP nominee

2011-03-10T09:39:00.000-06:00

Last night I was watching "Conan," the new late-night talk show hosted by Conan O'Brien. In the opening monologue he made a "joke" about Newt Gingrich and his adulterous past. Gingrich is currently exploring his options for running for president.

This appears to be the way they will attack Gingrich if he decides to run. This "joke" was like a trial balloon for the new JournoList. It also fits into Alinski rules quite well. Attack a candidate personally instead of on the issues. Ignore all his policy ideas; ignore the fact that Gingrich has admitted and apologized for his adultery - just keep harping on that one thing over and over. Remember when they wouldn't shut up about how many cars and houses the McCains have?

This is proof that any GOP candidate no matter who it is, will be attacked and systematically dismantled by the corrupt media. Don't fall for the "she's unelectable because of Tina Fey" excuse for Sarah Palin. If not Palin, they'd be making fun of any other GOP candidate. Gingrich hasn't even formally announced that he will run and they're already attacking him. This is going to be a very tough race.

The Left standing on the necks of women and minorities

2011-03-09T15:34:00.000-06:00

Have you ever voted for your local elections such as mayor, city council, etc. and not known who the candidates are? Have you ever driven by political signs that say "Joe Smith for City Council Seat 1" and you didn't know which party the candidate belonged to? This is bad, but if the candidate is a woman and I don't know which party she belongs to, I always assume she's a liberal. It's a knee-jerk reaction. I shouldn't have that reaction being a Palin supporter and woman myself who agrees with her. I know many women who love Palin, more than those who don't. So why do I get this reaction?

Because the women's movement and liberal feminists like Hillary Clinton and Oprah have brainwashed us all into thinking that women must be liberal or else they "aren't women." Yes, many feminists accused Palin of not being a woman since she is a conservative.
The result? Since most of America is conservative, that means conservatives won't vote for women because if they don't know them, since they'll assume she is a liberal and therefore not vote for her. I know it's bad to not know your candidates, but sometimes it's impossible to keep up with local politics. They're not as accessible and sometimes city and county lines are blurred. My point is the same: conservative women have to be very outspoken about their viewpoints or else people will assume they're leftists. Conservative women won't get elected otherwise. This keeps the Leftist cycle going.

The same with minorities and gays. The Left has adopted these groups and have labeled them "not ___" if they are conservative. They undermine their very identity if they are conservative. The result is the same as with women: the larger public assumes minorities and gays are Leftists. They create a separation. Politically, there's no difference between a gay conservative, straight conservative, female conservative and black conservative. The Left hates that. They don't want conservatives to unite based on their ideology. They want to divide conservatives by attacking minority groups based on their identity. The Left's main goal is to promote wealth redistribution and socialism at all costs. I pity the women, minority groups and gays who have fallen for their mind games.

I have to admit I'm confused about unions

2011-03-03T19:44:00.001-06:00

With the events surrounding Wisconsin and Indiana I'm getting more and more confused about unions, to the point where I don't think I even understand their basic premise. I thought unions were labor employees who form a solid coalition to negotiate salary, hours, physical risks, etc.

I don't understand why teachers need a union. When the union at the company where I work threatened to strike, (they had no intention of striking and evil management called their bluff) I, a non-union employee, had to train to do a union job in case of a strike. That job was a desk job not unlike my own, yet it was considered eligible for union membership. These are jobs that have zero physical risk, not even driving a company car. What I have seen time and again is that these union employees get paid much more than their non-union counterparts and get vastly more benefits, stock options, healthcare and 401k company contribution as well. There is animosity between the two groups. Because evil management are employees, too. If these jobs do not include physical labor under severe conditions then I don't understand why they are unionized.

Secondly, if the point of a union is to form this coalition to negotiate pay and everything else, then why do they need to pay dues? Their huge bargaining chip is that they will strike if they don't get what they want. So it seems to me like they could accomplish this without paying dues to the union. What is that money being spent on? To me is screams bribe money, or money used for extorsion purposes.

And if the point is to not get screwed over by management then what is stopping the management from forming their own union? What is stopping me and the rest of the peons in my department from forming a union against the managers in our own little section of the company? It seems completely pointless to me.

When the whole Rod Blago-selling Senate seat thing happened there was a lot of talk about the SEIU and who was communicating with them over who would fill the seat. Why? Is that who Blago was taking money from? If so, then why weren't they on trial?

Do we even need unions anymore? Shouldn't labor and employment laws cover whatever unions do? And if we do need unions then can we do away with making them pay dues? These stockpiles of money are making me nervous. Not just for Wisconsin and Indiana but for every entity that has a union.

"Palin has the base, but not the Independents."

2011-03-02T11:42:00.000-06:00

To which I say:

You cannot consider yourself an Independent if you would vote for a Radical Leftist. The "Independents" who voted for Obama in 2008 are Radical Leftists. "Independents" who would consider voting for Hillary or Obama in 2012 are Radical Leftists.

Next.

Michelle Obama's middle finger to America

2011-03-01T19:15:00.001-06:00

I don't have to dig up a bunch of news stories to tell you that Michelle Obama has been seen in the news eating short ribs, hamburgers, fries and ice cream extensively. News stories don't just pop up out of nowhere. This is a concentrated effort to show that Obama has been gorging herself in public on extremely unhealthy foods while at the same time using her First Lady status to regulate what we eat. I have a theory on this phenomena.

Obama knows how hypocritical she looks, but she doesn't care. She wants everyone to see how she's living. She wants you to know that she indulges frequently on the exact same foods she is ~~forcing~~ telling us not to eat. Why? She's flipping us off. She's chipping away at our most basic freedom - to decide as human beings what to eat. It's a slap in the face to our democracy. She's acting like royalty, like a Queen who indulges in every whim while her subjects starve. She's playing out this little fantasy and taking it to dangerous extremes. Because she hates the freedom we have as Americans. She hates that anyone can eat an ice cream cone anytime they want. She wants the satisfaction of eating ice cream knowing that everyone else can't, and she wants us to look at her with envy. Basically saying "I can eat these foods but you can't," which is not far from her and her husband's thinking on most things: "I can have whatever healthcare I want, but you're going to have the healthcare we give you." "I can have guns, but you can't. "I can ride in a limo, but you need to ride a bicycle." "I can go on extravagant vacations to Spain, Vail and Martha's Vineyard, but you need to stay home and keep working and give your extra money to the State," and on and on and on. The Obamas LOVE to be living symbols of their ideology. We just need to see them for what they are.

A diamond (quote) shines through the muck

2011-03-01T12:44:00.000-06:00

Since Karl Rove has busted on the Tea Party and Sarah Palin, he's become the new darling of the corrupt MSM. In this trashtastic article by New York Magazine, the author praises Rove as a campaign architect that any GOP hopeful would be grateful to have on their team (yeah right). His dream candidate? Jeb Bush. Ok, please gag me now. This is a dumb article with an even dumber premise, but there was one golden nugget to take away from it, a quote by Palin's Chief of Staff:

“Of all the potential candidates, Governor Palin would no doubt be the one desiring new energy and ideas,” says her chief of staff Michael Glassner, “and, refreshingly, hiring advisers who aren’t entrenched in any political machine.”

To me this is a clear indication that she is keeping her options open to run. First, she tips readers that she has a Chief of Staff. Not news to Palin supporters like me, but it is news to the daily readers of NY Mag. If she were just a private citizen cashing in on speaking engagements and playing kingmaker, she wouldn't need an organized staff of that caliber. Second, Glassner refers to her as a potential candidate. That is a generality, yes, but it's distinct in the fact that if she weren't running, she probably wouldn't have bothered to comment on the article, much less be referred to as a potential candidate. Third, her campaign slogan for Governor was "New Energy for Alaska." Saying she "desires new energy" in this quote is like a little hint to her supporters. Fourth, hiring advisers/appointing cabinet members who aren't entrenched in the political machine will be a major campaign theme. She really can change Washington based on the fact that she's not a Washington insider and that she fought Alaska's corrupt insider system and won! To me, this quote is golden and reads like a wink-wink that she is firmly planning to run. The way it's delicately worded also carves her out of the field of potential candidates by saying she's "the one" (only one) who is not going to play by politics as usual.

A good thing about Obama being in office

2011-03-01T11:11:00.000-06:00

Is that he's forcing true conservatives to take a stand. Conservative heroes are coming out of this movement and being recognized for the amazing leaders they are. There have been several but the ones that come to my mind are Arizona Governor Jan Brewer and now most recently Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker.

Walker called out union thugs and now has called out Obama himself. Good for him! Because Obama is so extreme he ends up drawing lines in the sand and forces us to pick a side. Because with him, there is no compromise; there is no middle ground. It's his way or the highway. Which has turned out to be a good thing to bring these good leaders to light and expose the ones with no guts.

Downer

2011-03-01T08:00:00.001-06:00

I read several right-leaning news sites and blogs and it upsets me that they put so much effort and energy into convincing their readers to dislike Sarah Palin. They all have their talking points:

She's unelectable...and
She doesn't go on Meet the Press or CNN...and...??

And they never suggest any alternative candidates who will be better than her. I'm hugely disappointed. As conservatives, we all should be happy about what we've accomplished and how we've rebounded since the 2008 election. The tide has turned against Obama. The 2010 midterms were great and we have a huge chance to win in 2012! But all they can do is wring their hands about how Sarah Palin doesn't go on Meet the Press. Some of them have gotten quite hostile. They're trying to make Palin supporters seem crazy. Why? Why do they go to such extremes? I wouldn't care if this was coming from DailyKos or HuffPo, but these attacks are from the Right. It's like the closer we get to the 2012 campaign, the attacks and accusations have ramped up full force. I don't get it. This is the most disappointed I've been since I've been following Palin.

Obama's team makes preemptive strike to take out Romney

2011-02-28T13:58:00.000-06:00

Why now? From The Hill:

President Obama pointedly praised on Monday the healthcare program Republican Mitt Romney installed as governor of Massachusetts.

Obama singled out Romney for praise over his state's healthcare plan, which shares similarities with the president's national healthcare reform, in a bit of backhanded praise for the likely Republican presidential candidate.

"I agree with Mitt Romney, who's recently said he's proud of what he accomplished in Massachusetts," Obama said at a gathering of governors at the White House.

The comment is a kind of kiss of death for Obama's would-be foe in 2012.

Why didn't he wait until the primaries to do this? It would be much more effective during the primaries where Romney would have to scramble to formulate a response during his campaign. Does Obama's team think that Romney is the current frontrunner and wants to take him down a peg before he officially starts to run? Well this this just gives him more time to draft and test possible responses (which I'm sure he has been already, but still). It seems like Obama tipped his hand and executed a campaign strategy too soon. Is he hoping Palin runs? Or maybe he thinks he has something up his sleeve for Palin, too (yeah right). I'm kind of shocked that he played this card so early. I don't know what it means.

The 2012 race of GOP hopefuls

2011-02-23T09:57:00.000-06:00

The playing field of possible GOP candidates has been dwindling down quickly. Either they announced that they aren’t running, or they’ve had irreparable incidents that have disqualified them. Two years ago, I would have said that then-SC Governor Mark Sanford had it in the bag. I’m not exaggerating when I say he was the darling of the GOP next to Palin. Now, not so much. Here’s a list of the potential candidates I’ve made so far:

Potential candidates who are out
Former SC Governor Mark Sanford: embarrassing behavior surrounding an extra-marital affair disqualified him
Current LA Governor Bobby Jindal: said he will not run, had awkward State of the Union response, questionable fiscal record
IN Rep. Mike Pence: formally announced he will not run for POTUS but has his eye on IN Governor
SD Sen. John Thune: formally announced he will not run for POTUS

Potential candidates who appear to be running, but have slim-to-no-chance
Former MA Governor Mitt Romney – Romneycare
Current IN Governor Mitch Daniels – his “truce” on social issues, sided with Democrats on “Right to Work” bill
Businessman Donald Trump – no political executive experience
Businessman Herman Cain – lacks name recognition, no political executive experience

Potential candidates who appear to be running and have a chance (besides Palin)
Former MN Governor Tim Pawlenty
Current MS Governor Haley Barbour
Former U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. John Bolton

Current NJ Governor Chris Christie is in a unique position where he has flat out said he will not run several times, but conservatives everywhere are begging for him to. Ann Coulter even said that we'll lose the general if he specifically is not the nominee.

Are there any others you think should be in the list or any mistakes I made? KY Sen. Mitch McConnell? AZ Sen. Jon Kyl? Current TX Governor Rick Perry?

This is what a President looks like - Palin's response speech

2011-01-12T13:08:00.001-06:00

Thank you Sarah, for standing firm in your beliefs, and being an oasis in the desert of partisanship gone mad.

I can't even begin to describe my feelings over the past few days. My heart goes out to the victims and their families over this senseless tragedy.

Sarah Palin: "America's Enduring Strength" from Sarah Palin on Vimeo.

It looks like Hillary will run in 2012

2011-01-05T13:00:00.000-06:00

Bill Richardson, former Governor of New Mexico, is a friend of the Clintons. Recently Richardson went on a "diplomatic" trip to North Korea. Why? As then-Governor of New Mexico, he didn't really have much input in our relations with North Korea. I realize he was a former foreign diplomat, but there are tons of former foreign diplomats and they're not traveling to North Korea. He had to obtain permission from the White House and State Department in order to travel.

I put two and two together. This trip came at the very end of Richardson's term, so he wasn't just a private citizen going to North Korea; it provided him the opportunity to form official "diplomatic" relations. It will enhance Richardson's foreign policy cred even moreso. The State Department (i.e. Hillary) would not have ok'd this trip if he was going to run for POTUS on his own. She's building her brigade. If she runs, she could very well win the Democratic nomination. She could pick Richardson as her VP and use this trip as a promotion tool for him.

Given how volatile our relationship is with North Korea, can you imagine the State Department giving the governor of Nebraska, Idaho, Vermont, or any other state the ok to take a diplomatic trip there? No. Why would they even need to? Why would Richardson even need to unless he is planning on being appointed to a cabinet position again? So, that leads me to believe that the only reason Richardson went is because he's a friend of the Clintons. He's been a player inside the Beltway for over 20 years. This was a political favor for someone, probably several people: Richardson to Hillary, Obama to Hillary, and possibly a few more. It was a blip on the news cycle but I believe this trip is a big indicator that Hillary has decided to run.

Question: Would you make the effort to attend the Palin inauguration?

2011-01-04T13:47:00.003-06:00

I'm still pretty busy and not had much time for analysis of current events, so I'll post a question out there for you.

Would you attend Sarah Palin's inauguration should she be elected as POTUS?

It will be a monumental event, especially if it's the next term. It will end Obama's socialist/communist agenda then and there (and after only one term!). She is a strong conservative and the polar opposite of him policy-wise. Every sane person will breathe a sigh of relief when she's elected. Not to mention the fact that she'll be the first woman president.

I've thought about it a lot. Personally, she's my favorite candidate (of course) and a huge personal inspiration to me. I waited in line for hours in the dark and braved sub-30 degree weather to attend her book signing. I've written this blog for over two years following her career since the 2008 election. I've read her books, watch every speech I can, read transcripts, watch her interviews and TV appearances. I will help with her campaign should she run, in any way I can. But that's all from the comfort and convenience of my home and local city.

By 2013, my daughter will be two and we'll most likely not have taken a family vacation yet. I don't know if we could take her to a big event like that with her being only two. However, I think it would be an important event for her to attend and say she was there later in life. But if we don't take her, I don't even think I could go alone and leave her at home. Also, would it be worth the cost? On one hand, it's something we could watch on TV. On the other, it's a monumental point in history that I would greatly love to see in person.

I don't know. What do you think? We've always said that if our favorite sports team ever ended up in the championship game/series we would go, since it doesn't happen very often. Sarah Palin being inaugurated as POTUS would be on an epically larger scale than a sports team, to me. Would you travel to attend her inauguration, or the inauguration of someone you really liked and inspired you? If so, who?

Merry Christmas!

2010-12-23T14:35:00.001-06:00

I hope you have a very Merry Christmas

See you back here January 3, 2011!

Palin FB post: Helping Haiti this Christmas

2010-12-22T14:26:00.000-06:00

Seeing the photos Palin posted on her Facebook page about her trip in Haiti broke my heart. When I saw the six-month-old orphan baby who has cholera and pneumonia, it brought tears to my eyes and made me hold my own 3-month-old girl and thank God for the blessings I have. My girl probably weighs double what he weighs and she's half his age. I am so broken hearted. I pray that he makes it. My heart goes out to him.

This is a good reminder of The Reason for The Season. I will be praying for Haiti. The photos below are from Palin's Facebook post.

Helping Haiti this Christmas

If you are still looking for a cause to donate to this Christmas, allow me to make a suggestion. Todd, Bristol, Greta Van Susteren, and I recently traveled to Haiti to witness first hand the amazing work done by Rev. Franklin Graham’s organization Samaritan’s Purse. Bristol wrote about our experiences on her Facebook page here.

In an effort to fight a deadly cholera outbreak in Haiti, Samaritan’s Purse has flown over a dozen flights carrying vital medical supplies to the two cholera treatment centers it has been running since the start of the outbreak. These centers, run by medical volunteers from the U.S., Canada, and the UK, have helped save the lives of nearly 5,000 patients.

The cholera treatment centers are part of a larger Samaritan’s Purse effort aimed at restoring the human dignity and economic independence of the Haitian people. Since the disastrous earthquake in January of this year, Samaritan’s Purse has spent $29 million on relief, helping more than half a million people by building 10,000 shelters (more than half of the shelters built in Haiti to date have been put up by Samaritan’s Purse); providing non-cholera related medical assistance (including 250 surgeries) to a total of 43,000 patients; providing clean drinking water to more than 75,000 people; and clearing the rubble from 179 building sites.

None of this would have been possible without the generosity of countless small donors. With all the blessings bestowed upon us in this great country of ours, we also have an opportunity to share those blessings with people who are less fortunate. Samaritan’s Purse is doing exactly that – saving lives one person at a time.

If you’d like to support the great work Samaritan’s Purse does in Haiti and around the world, please visit their website.

Below you’ll find some photos of our Haiti visit taken by Greta Van Susteren. They show what we saw at a temporary housing camp, at the cholera clinics in Bercy and Cité Soleil, and at a meeting where we helped to bring smiles to children’s faces by handing out shoeboxes filled with presents as part of Samaritan's Purse’s worldwide Operation Christmas Child.

- Sarah Palin

At Redstate, Palin leads preferred pick for GOP 2012 candidate by a landslide

2010-12-20T11:09:00.000-06:00

I read this at HillBuzz.

http://www.redstate.com/erick/2010/12/18/2012-asked-another-way/

Much praise goes to those guys at HillBuzz. They know certainly know how to run a campaign and read the inside story that most people are too oblivious to see. They noted that Erick Erickson, editor at Redstate, used to be pro-Romney, but has now started to openly support Palin in 2012.

But ever-present is Romney's quest for power and these online poll results, not matter how small an insignificant they seem to be, will sting Romney bad. He and his minions go online all day trolling conservative sites trying to pump him up and put Palin down. He is probably the #1 political insider who spreads nasty rumors and myths about Palin.

From HillBuzz:

I know this Redstate poll is just a poll on a website, but if the Romney Guys lose control of places like Redstate, Ace of Spades, and other conservative sites…it makes it that much harder for them to carry out their Romney 2012 plans because they were counting on lockstep support from the usual suspects to install this “it’s his turn!” candidate for the next presidential race.

I certainly hope so.

Double standard re: crying in public

2010-12-18T11:45:00.000-06:00

Palin draws attention to the fact that there's a double standard regarding crying in public for men versus women. In her Good Morning America interview she said she couldn't get away with crying the way John Boehner frequently does.

While Palin said she had "respect" for her fellow Republican's emotional side, she suggested he gets a "pass" because he's a man.

"I don't know if a woman would be given a pass necessarily. That's one of those things where a double standard is applied. I'm sure if I got up there and did a speech, and I started breaking down and cried about how important it is to me that our children and grandchildren are provided great opportunities, I'm sure I would be knocked a little bit for that."

But Palin said it was OK, since double standards only encourage women in politics "work that much harder" and "be that much tougher."

That is so, so true. Women in general, not just politicians, are not allowed to cry in public at all lest they be deemed hysterical, psychotic, hormonal, crazy, emotional and not a serious adult. But men crying in public is endearing and it doesn't take away their credibility in the least. It is a double standard and I'm glad Palin addressed this.

By the way, I left the quote I pulled from the Yahoo article as-is. I don't know why the author put scare quotes around the words "respect" and "pass." Just another example of bad/pathetic journalism. There's no need for scare quotes because Palin does have respect for Boehner and men do get a pass for crying. I can't believe these idiots get paid to write.

Lesson for people who say "I like Palin, but she's unelectable"

2010-12-16T16:15:00.000-06:00

Today Scott Brown announced that he is in favor of repealing DADT.

…Brown’s backing means that – on paper – supporters of the repeal have 61 senators in favor of the bill.

This is a lesson to everyone who says that Sarah Palin is unelectable. Scott Brown was certainly electable. He was the one with enough appeal to attract "moderates and independents." He was massively propped up by establishment Republicans and the Tea Party alike as a candidate for everyone. By the way, the fact that he failed to thank the Tea Party in his acceptance speech was a bad omen.

Now we see his true colors. He may have been against ObamaCare, but he seems pretty Left on everything else, even fiscal matters. Now his vote could mean a repeal of DADT - a vote that we all thought would go the other way. He's also said that he won't be in favor of repealing ObamaCare now that it's here.

This is a lesson to show us that "electability" means nothing! It does absolutely no good to elect these people when they vote against what we believe in. They won the election - so what? We sacrificed everything to get him there. We know Palin will vote the way we believe. We know she has conservative values. We can vote for her and if she wins the general election, great! If she doesn't, a Democrat will be in office. If we vote for a RINO who wins the general election, essentially a Democrat will be in office, too.

This is also a lesson to us regarding the MSM and RINO news outlets like NRO and The Atlantic. Scott Brown was the darling of those places, and to some extent, the MSM as well. He was the kind of candidate, like McCain, that the media loves to prop up. We need to learn our lesson so these mistakes don't happen anymore.

New moonbat argument: "Palin was harming her kids by exposing them to Kate"

2010-12-16T16:01:00.000-06:00

She can't win. Even when she *clearly* is a fantastic mother, her family is extremely close, she's very in tune with her kids, etc., the moonbats can't give her one ounce of credit. The new meme going around the internet the past few days is that Palin was exposing her kids to harm by camping with Kate Gosselin. They refer to when Kate asked Piper "you think this is fun?" as an example (the only example) of the "harm" she inflicted on the Palins. Yes, that was inappropriate to say to a child. However, as a parent, you don't ever think another parent is going to say something like that to your child. You assume that another parent, especially one who has eight kids and who you just invited to be a guest in your home, isn't going to act rude and nasty. But Kate did.

This was a lesson to be learned for the Palin children - they saw a grown woman throw a temper tantrum for something that was so insignificant it was embarrassing. They saw a grown woman force her kids to leave a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity because she was cold. Piper was a fan of Kate + 8 before meeting them, and after she met them it's safe to say she's no longer a fan. That is another lesson: the stars you idolize could end up being something far different than you imagined them to be.

These lessons learned hardly mean that Palin is a bad parent. Quite the opposite. Kate Gosselin is not harmful in any way and "exposing her kids to Kate" is not harmful in the least. These crazy people need to get a life.

Palin is a genius for featuring Kate Gosselin on Sarah Palin's Alaska

2010-12-14T16:21:00.000-06:00

Ever since she was announced as McCain's VP pick, Palin has been compared to Kate Gosselin by deranged PDS sufferers. They say she's just a mom who is trying to be famous like Kate. They say she seeks the limelight while other people raise her kids, and that she uses her kids as props like Kate. They say both try to make themselves look like good moms but are really phony divas who don't take the time to educate their kids. I've also heard them say that electing her would be like electing Kate Gosselin.

I was a little nervous when I heard that Kate would be featured on Sarah Palin's Alaska. I thought Palin would be selling herself short by hanging out with her. But I soon found out once again that this was brilliant strategic move by Palin. By standing side by side with her, people can see the gigantic, grand canyon of a stark contrast between the two.

Kate proved herself to be the phony, rude diva she is. Viewers could see that Palin is a great mom who knew exactly how to entertain the kids. She also loves her kids more than life. Kate was shown in her full temper tantrum glory by complaining, making rude comments about her hosts' home, and throwing food on the ground that she deemed unacceptable to her. Worst of all, Kate paid no attention to her children while Sarah, her brother, father, Willow and Bristol (who was there but wasn't shown) played with Kate's kids and did fun kid stuff with them. Kate's kids had a fantastic time while Kate pouted under a tent. Kate yanked her kids from the campsite when they were having fun. It was awful. Kate missed out on a great educational opportunity for her kids because of her own diva-ish behavior. Palin, on the other hand, takes every opportunity to give her kids a geography or life lesson, which she did in this episode. Palin also mentioned that Kate's kids stayed with a nanny. That comment stands alone in contrast to Palin, who never has needed one despite having five kids, a career and a young child with Down Syndrome.

Kate told Sarah "you're really going to stay here seriously?" meaning she thought that they were going to play for the cameras for an hour or so before packing up and heading to a 5-star hotel. Sarah responded "yeah" like duh, of course I'm going to stay here. That showed the haters that yes, Sarah really is an outdoor person. She really does camp with her family. It's not just an image she created.

Now no one can say they are alike. Palin can point out how different they are because it's all captured on film. Anyone who tries to maintain that Palin and Kate are like peas in a pod will be slapped down immediately. So, having her on the show actually did more to open the eyes of people who might not have liked her before. Brilliant move.

On the surface, Ryan endorsement seems pivotal to 2012

2010-12-12T16:19:00.000-06:00

Those of us entrenched in following Palin are not surprised to see that she endorsed Wisconsin Representative Paul Ryan's Roadmap for America's Future. The content of which is policy that her supporters could easily identify as in line with Palin's views.

However, I will admit I was surprised to see so many comments and posts throughout the blogosphere saying that this endorsement legitimizes Palin as a presidential candidate in their minds. I also hadn't really noticed that Ryan is one of Palin's favorite politicians. I can't believe I didn't notice that, or the view that endorsing this would make her a serious candidate to those who hadn't previously thought of her that way. (Maybe being pregnant most of the year explains how I missed it :)) Ace said endorsing the Roadmap is risky. Well, Palin is all about taking risks so that did not surprise me in the least. There's also this myth among RINOs that she doesn't discuss substantive issues or policy and this is the BIG tipping point where she finally does. Well, if you read her Facebook posts, Going Rogue, America by Heart, her Twitter feed, watch her interviews, listen to what she says on Fox as a contributor...you'll see that she addresses substantive policy daily.

In any event, I'm happy for the change of heart and I welcome it. If this is what it took, then I'm very happy she endorsed it. Where's Romney and Huck and what do they think of the Roadmap?

The endorsement also seems to be pivotal in that many (including myself) are recognizing that Palin really likes Paul Ryan, a lot. She endorsed his views in February and August of this year, too, which I read about at Hot Air.

Palin is definitely doing two things with the Roadmap endorsement: (1) bringing conservative policy reforms to the forefront of the national discussion; and (2), bringing attention to Paul Ryan, again.

She could possibly be doing a third or fourth thing: (3) setting the scene to pick Ryan as her VP; or (4), pushing Ryan to run for president and giving him the ammo to do so by her endorsement of his policy ideas.

In her interview with Mary Hart earlier this year, Palin said (paraphrased) that she'll run for President in 2012 if there isn't a better candidate who will take on the tough task of undoing what Obama and the Left has done to this country. So, she could be hinting that Paul Ryan could be one of those better candidates. But in the February article linked above, Ryan said that he won't run in 2012 point blank. So maybe she's grooming him for her VP pick?

Either way, this endorsement has proven to be pivotal for the 2012 candidates. Palin, for publicly supporting this policy and seeing those who are not publicly supporting it, and Ryan, who may run for President or could be picked as a VP.

Slow Saturday OT thought

2010-12-11T14:00:00.022-06:00

When I was in the 2nd grade the elementary school I attended held a carnival to raise funds. The "painting" I did for art class was auctioned off (are you surprised that my parents had the highest bid?). My brother and I were having so much fun going through all the carnival events and playing the games.

One of the events was a cake walk. I didn't know what that was. My dad explained it to me. There are numbers placed on a circle on the ground and everyone stands on one. While the music is playing everyone walks around the circle until the music stops. Someone draws a number and if it's the one you're standing on, you get to pick a cake.

I played. Sure enough, I won. I looked in wonder at the table of cakes. I asked my dad if I could choose a chocolate one. He said I could choose whichever one I wanted. I chose a single-layer chocolate cake that had sprinkles. It's one of the fondest childhood memories I have.

To think if Michelle Obama had her way back in those days I would have never experienced that memory. She's trying to end bake sales in schools. How stupid.

What Palin chooses to include on Sarah Palin's Alaska

2010-12-10T11:18:00.000-06:00

This is why Palin is the most honest "politician" we'll ever see. I put politician in quotes because she defies all definitions of the modern politician. She is not one. She's a citizen and public servant trying to do the best for her country.

Imagine if Mitt Romney or Mike Huckabee had the opportunity to do a show like Sarah Palin's Alaska. They probably would take every opportunity to show how awesome they are, how they would be such amazing presidents, how they never make mistakes and are always right. They would try to smooth over and explain some of their past mistakes such as RomneyCare and Huckabee's Infamous Pardons. They would try to appeal to the largest audience as possible by projecting themselves as center-right politically. They would try to makeover their image in the most electable way possible.

However, we see Palin on her show attempting to climb a portion of Denali being scared out of her mind. It took her 45min to make one small step upward when she was unsure of where to place her feet. Later in that episode we see Todd able to scale that same portion in about 45 seconds. We see her kids fighting in the back of the RV, we see the Palin family in their commercial fishing business, and the traditions of cleaning the fish (blood and guts) with Todd's grandmother. We see Palin hunting and skeet shooting. These are all things that other candidates would never show, never. They would never be seen holding a gun, or cleaning fish on a table outside their grandmother's home - never. They would never show their kids as being anything other than perfectly well-behaved children. Track was featured trying to take over the family business and not really getting off to a good start. He slept in, broke the trailer and left it in the driveway, etc. To me that was very real. It looked like what every family in America who has a small business goes through when their children are transitioning to take it over. But Romney, et. al. probably wouldn't feature any kind of struggles like that because they would be afraid of how it affects public opinion and electability.

Politicians and pundits on the Right and Left have criticized her for being too conservative and unelectable in her image. They think she should be more generic, not do a television series, not have her daughter be on Dancing with the Stars, not hunt and fish - all so as not to offend "independents and moderates." What does Sarah do? She goes all-in showing her true life, fish blood and guts included. She basically says "I don't care what they want me to do. I'm going to follow my heart." She's taking this opportunity to show America who she is. This show will appeal to Independents who don't take the time to research or read her books. It's easy to watch TV, and it's entertaining, so those people will definitely be able to be amazed by her easily just by watching every week.

And I think that's why she's been criticized for doing this show. You know all the potential 2012 candidates (including Obama) would kill to have her show. They're so jealous. But they know that (1) they will never be given that chance because they're boring as dry wheat toast; and (2) if they did, no one would watch it and it would be an epic flop. So they fling mud. Meanwhile, Palin is just gaining more popularity by being herself and showing her true life unapologetically.

John Bolton for Palin's VP pick

2010-12-08T14:17:00.000-06:00

I read in National Review Online that John Bolton is considering a run for POTUS in 2012. Besides Palin, he's one I would love to see run and would vote for him in a heartbeat. His passion and his strength is (obviously) foreign policy.

I've long thought that Bolton should be Palin's VP pick if she decides to run. I've also thought that one of her perceived shortcomings is her lack of foreign policy experience. Picking Bolton would immensely help her national electability in that regard.

In my opinion, Palin needs to overcome two major hurdles in order to be elected: her "quitting" the governorship; and her perceived lack of foreign policy experience. With this blog I've tried to address both points extensively and will continue to do so.

With his record and experience, Bolton pretty much resolves her foreign policy "shortcoming." In the NR piece, he says China will be a major factor:

This administration, and the Bush administration in its later years, badly handled China — handled it badly on North Korea’s nuclear program and its trade manipulation, including its ongoing discrimination against foreign business and investors. Both administrations have been too deferential to China in dealings across the full spectrum of issues.

On Palin being a potential nominee:

I don’t know enough about her views on foreign policy to comment, but the Republican field is filled with people who would be better than Obama on foreign policy.

I'll take it a step further and say that his statement reads to me that he is angling for a VP pick from the GOP nominee. He praises all potential candidates saying that any of them would be better than Obama. He is non-committal on Palin and says he doesn't know her views on foreign policy, yet you know damn well he knows. He doesn't want to fully support Palin and alienate the GOP nominee if it's not her. He's playing it cool for now and testing the waters, which is fine. He didn't come out and denounce her immediately like most insecure candidates have. I'd venture a guess that he's pretty in line with Palin as far as foreign policy views.

I believe he knows his POTUS campaign would not be very successful considering how popular some of the frontrunners are and how "niche" he is. Pretty much only political junkies have a thorough knowledge of him and his background. He probably would not be able to raise enough money or popularity to be the nominee, but he's laying the groundwork to be picked as the VP.

I've read his biography and will quote it here from time to time. It's compelling and he's an amazing person. He's not as charismatic as Palin (who is), but it's abundantly clear that he's passionate about protecting our country, protecting our troops and keeping America safe. He knows how to play the inside political game, and he knows how to negotiate with foreign diplomats. In short: he's the total foreign policy package.

He did get this zinger about Obama into the NR piece:

After four years of practicing, he’ll almost look like a commander-in-chief.

Haha. Good one. Maybe he is as charismatic as Palin after all.

So much packed into this little statement

2010-12-03T10:25:00.000-06:00

On the fishing episode of "Sarah Palin's Alaska," Palin made what could be considered an off-hand remark, that when Track was two months old it broke her heart to have to call her mother and ask her to watch him for two weeks while she finished the fishing season.

Every single mother can relate to this statement. When a mom plans to go to work after having a baby either by choice or necessity, it doesn't mean that she won't miss her baby terribly. It doesn't mean that it won't break her heart to leave the baby with someone else. It doesn't mean that she won't worry about the level of care the baby will receive. Every mom can relate to that one little sentence.

Palin has obviously chosen to have a career in addition to raising her children, but that doesn't mean she's turned into a battle-hard stereotypical "feminist" who is robotic and rigid. She loves her children and loves her career. She manages to have both. She is the picture of modern motherhood.

From Sarah: Happy Veterans Day

2010-11-11T12:21:00.000-06:00

A post on her Facebook page:

On this Veterans Day, please take a moment to remember all those who served in uniform past and present. Though the words in this famous poem are about a soldier, they apply to every member of our armed services. God bless them all. May we never forget the sacrifices made to secure our liberty.

It’s the Soldier, not the reporter,
Who has given us the freedom of the press.

It’s the Soldier, not the poet,
Who has given us the freedom of speech.

It’s the Soldier, not the politicians,
Who ensures our right to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.

It’s the Soldier who salutes the flag,
Who serves beneath the flag,
And whose coffin is draped by the flag.

Nancy Pelosi could be single-handedly responsible for her party's losses, yet Sarah Palin is the political idiot?

2010-11-05T11:11:00.003-05:00

Since the election results came in the corrupt media have been trying to create a story that Palin's endorsements have not been as successful as predicted. For instance there was this story on Yahoo's front page this morning: "Despite mixed record, Palin talks up her 2010 impact." I read it and kept waiting for the bad news that was going to tell me Palin was a bad "picker," that she's not politically savvy, that she's an idiot, and...nothing. There was no there, there. The author literally made a story out of nothing.

I thought about Nancy Pelosi. She was the one who encouraged Congress to vote for Obamacare. All those Congressmen and women went home that summer and faced mobs of angry constituents telling them straight out that they hated the bill. Pelosi said that "they would have to pass the bill to find out what's in it." Pelosi committed career suicide for herself and for every Democrat voted out of office this year. She is the one who lost the House for the Democrats, literally. They all listened to her, were threatened by her somehow to vote against their constituency. They ended up going right off the cliff. Where is the corrupt media talking about how stupid Pelosi is for doing that? Why aren't they talking about how un-savvy she is, and how she's the worst Speaker of the House of all time? Why aren't they talking about how she wastes taxpayer money on her extravagent private plane the way they bagged on Palin for her RNC clothes (that were not taxpayer funded)? And so many other things.

It looks to me like Pelosi is the idiot here. She's the biggest loser from this election and I can't wait until she comes up for reelection and gets her you-know-what handed to her. Palin is the most politically-savvy person this country has seen in a LONG time. No one can pick candidates like her, connect with the American public like her, speak like her, be as engaging as her - the list goes on. The corrupt media continues to grasp at straws trying to discredit her. It'll never happen.

Freaking awesome video from SarahPAC

2010-11-05T11:11:00.002-05:00

Palin is hopeful and happy about the election results. This video took me right out of my doldrums that I was in since Harry Reid got reelected. I'm pumped up now and realize we really accomplished a lot in this cycle. This video is pure awesome and has been very well-received, even the BBC took notice.

Friday musings

2010-11-05T10:37:00.000-05:00

Why does Shepard Smith have two shows on Fox?

I actually like him; yes I know he leans left. But I think he has a sense of humor that most people just don't get. Nevertheless...two shows...too much.

Good, but not good enough in my opinion

2010-11-03T09:34:00.001-05:00

I'm very happy we took the House last night and we sent a strong message overall that we are serious about how much we dislike this Democratic-controlled government. I think Florida had the best results - Marco Rubio won by a landslide, Alan Grayson was thrown out on his rear end, Rick Scott is leading in the Gubernatorial election and Allen West won. I only wish Delaware, Nevada, California and Alaska had followed suit.

For those saying that the Tea Party candidates Christine O'Donnell, Sharron Angle and Joe Miller were weak, not good enough, not vetted, etc. - I have a bone to pick with you. If those three had won we would have take the Senate, correct? Harry Reid is pretty much the Devil Himself so I don't care who flippin' runs against him; I want him out. No one could be worse. People seem to forget that a Senator is not the President. They don't have to conduct Middle East Peace Talks or Push the Button. They don't host state dinners for foreign leaders and are not the face of our country. What they do is write legislation and vote on it. Voting is the only thing that matters. I don't care if they're not the most professional or the best looking; I care about how they're going to vote. I personally didn't like Sharron Angle's speech patterns and mannerisms but I sure would have liked the way she voted. I wouldn't want her to be the President but she wouldn't have the same responsibilities where that kind of thing matters now would she? See what I mean? So instead of having the Senate majority and three more good Senators who will VOTE the way we want them to, we're still stuck with Healthcare Harry and Lisa Murcookoo.

I really hope the RINO elitist establishment doesn't take those losses as a sign that the Tea Party is fringe and not able to produce winners. Linda McMahon and Carly Fiorina were the "electable" and "center-right" candidates that the pragmatic elites supported and they lost as well. I think in the states where we had unfortunate losses we have to blame the voters in those states, if we have to blame someone. Either they haven't seen the light yet, or they've decided to put their heads in the sand.

Overall it was a good night but I'm a little disappointed. I think it'll take a few days for it to sink in and I'll feel better and realize how good these results really are.

It's finally here!! Election Day!

2010-11-02T11:44:00.000-05:00

We all need to get out and vote!!! It's time to put words into action. All the pundits are trying analyze why people are "angry" and the reasons why we're frustrated with Obama's term. They think it's because of unemployment, or the economy, or healthcare; but really it's about one thing: limiting our monstrous government's overreach into every aspect of our lives. It's about adhering to the Constitution and getting our country back on track. We've finally opened our eyes to see the folks in Washington DC not representing us, and instead just trying to grab as much power and money for themselves as possible. Today is the first step in turning that around and getting back to a good place in our country. Let's vote!!

I take her at her word, but I know she's running, and this is the best evidence yet

2010-10-28T13:16:00.000-05:00

I saw this on Conservatives4Palin this morning. It's the best confirmation from Palin herself that she will run in 2012.

I do take her at her word that she hasn't yet decided, but based on the words she used to answer the question, and her overall involvement in daily politics thus far, all points to a huge possibility of her running in 2012.

"Tough choices," that's a great phrase right there. That means she won't stand by and let a RINO squish take the nomination. She wants someone who will make the tough choices to repeal Obamacare, to take steps in significantly reducing government's reach, to undo all that Obama has done. There are several potential candidates who will not have the guts to do those things. She will.

She didn't give the usual "no" response when asked about running for President. She said it's too soon to decide, which is the truth. But meanwhile she is laying the groundwork for a run just in case.

Look for the rest of the interview with Mary Hart on Entertainment Tonight, tonight at 7:30pm EST.

Summer Break!

2010-06-14T09:50:00.001-05:00

Hi all, thank you for being so patient with me. This has been an exciting year for Sarah and for me, too! I'm having a baby and getting prepared for it is very time-consuming! There's also the little problem of being exhausted all the time, dealing with all the other symptoms and also having a full-time 8am-5pm job. But I'm super excited for the next chapter and literally can't wait!!! I'm taking a break from my blog for the summer so I can completely focus on the baby.

But don't worry, I'll be back to cover the lead up to the November elections! After the baby's here and in a routine I'll be back to blogging regularly. I don't want to miss any more action. I'll still be supporting Sarah whatever she does I just won't be able to blog about this summer.

Thank you again for your patience!! Have a great summer!

I'm sure he thought he'd be a hero, but instead he's going to prison

2010-05-03T15:16:00.000-05:00

During the 2008 campaign there were a few people so crazy that they voluntarily fell on the sword for Obama, probably thinking that they would be national heroes or rewarded with a seat in his administration. For instance there was "Troopergate" and the myriad of baseless ethics complaints, and not to mention David Kernell, the son of a (Democrat) congressman, who hacked Palin's email account thinking that he would set the world on fire with its "scandalous contents." He thought he was going to win the Congressional Medal of Honor and be BFF with Obama.

Instead, the 22-year-old was found guilty of using criminal means to interfere with a federal election, convicted of a felony and will probably get some time in prison. Was it worth it?

Palin E-Mail Snoop Found Guilty on Two Charges

PC World
Obstruction of justice and computer fraud convictions could carry hefty jail time.
Paul Mcnamara
May 3, 2010 3:33 am

A federal jury in Knoxville last week convicted David Kernell, 22, of two charges in connection with the 2008 episode where he accessed the personal Yahoo e-mail account of Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin and then initiated a worldwide rummaging of its contents.

Kernell was found guilty of computer fraud - a misdemeanor subject to a prison term of up to one year -- and obstruction of justice, which carries a maximum 20-year sentence. He was found not guilty of wire fraud and the jury deadlocked on a fourth charge of identity theft, according to a report by WBIR.com.

Illegal immigration and oil spill crossover

2010-05-01T08:00:00.007-05:00

Since the massive Gulf oil spill many politicians are trying to stop all offshore drilling. Most Leftists are opposed to local drilling anyway, and this seemed like the "perfect opportunity" for them to propose stopping it altogether. Never let a crisis go to waste, as Rahm would say. I've read on conservative blogs and news outlets that the Left wants an "all or nothing" solution to their problems but I don't necessarily agree.

The Left wants to be perceived as the empathetic party, and the one that cares about emotions and feelings. For instance, they'll show a picture of a bird covered in oil while proposing to cut off all offshore drilling. But they won't discuss local businesses that will suffer if we stop offshore drilling. They won't show how the economy will suffer, or how taxes will go up for everyone because we'll have to keep buying foreign oil. Or the massive job losses that will occur for everyone associated with drilling. They won't discuss how Louisiana and the other drilling states will be devastated if we stopped offshore drilling. They won't discuss solutions to prevent future spills and make the system better. No, they won't discuss any of that but they'll show a picture of a bird covered in oil.

That's a huge pet peeve of mine, too. They won't even discuss any other possible solution except the one they want to push. They won't even mention any consequences to their proposed actions. It's like they live in a vacuum and they think everyone else is so dumb that we'll fall for a picture of a bird covered in oil and go along with their proposals without question.

The crossover point I wanted to make is the issue of illegal immigration. This is another issue where the Left reveals itself as not willing listen to any other viewpoint except their own and NOT the party of feelings, empathy and emotions. I live in North Texas and this is obviously a hot topic. There have been many crimes in my area committed by illegal immigrants, including DUIs that killed innocent people and police officers falling in the line of duty. If the Left cared about emotions they would highlight these tragic deaths that wouldn't have happened if the illegal immigrant didn't live here. If the Left wanted an "all or nothing" solution they would have a knee-jerk reaction to deport illegal immigrants instead of their knee-jerk reaction of amnesty. So they're sympathetic, but only to the people and viewpoints they want to be sympathetic to. In this case, they could give a darn about the victims of these crimes but are very sympathetic to the illegals who commit the crime. And their "all or nothing" solution is the one that just so happens to coincide with their agenda.

The bottom line is the Left will use whatever tactics necessary to push their socialist agenda and they hope you're dumb enough to fall for it. They are gutless and certainly not the party of feelings and empathy.

Friday OT thought: Pres who makes $5.5M per year thinks you make too much money

2010-04-30T13:36:00.000-05:00

Prosperity for me but not for thee! Please follow the link and watch the video. I can't embed from Real Clear Politics here but it's very worth it to click over and take a look.

PRESIDENT OBAMA: "Now, what we’re doing, I want to be clear, we’re not trying to push financial reform because we begrudge success that's fairly earned. I mean, I do think at a certain point you've made enough money."

Reuters: Americans are more committed/loyal to country than anything else

2010-04-29T11:20:00.000-05:00

The corrupt media is slowly waking up to the fact that Americans think their government is broken and we are totally committed to getting it back and fixing it. Reuters ran a story today about how loyal the average American is to their employer, commercial brands, country and get this...their families. It turns out that out that the majority feel most loyal to their country, even more than their family. This is huge. It recognizes the massive shift in our psyche, and how real the tea party movement has become.

Reuters tried to bury the lede by focusing on loyalty to employers but the evidence is loud and clear and cannot be hidden. Americans love their country and don't like the direction it's currently going in.

Americans more loyal to brands, country than company
Reuters
By Walden Siew Walden Siew – Thu Apr 29, 12:12 am ET

NEW YORK (Reuters Life!) – Americans are more loyal to their favorite soft drink, television show or car brand than they are to their employer, according to a joint Reuters/Ipsos poll.

But they are most committed to their country, followed by their family and their doctor.

"The most surprising thing was that country, which is more abstract, was No. 1, ahead of your family or spouse," said Timothy Keininghan, the author of the poll and a co-author of the book, "Why Loyalty Matters."

"There's a general belief that the government is broken, and people want to fix it," he said.

Seventy percent of Americans questioned in the survey said they are more loyal to their country now than they were two years ago.

continued...

Sarah's gift for SRLC attendees

2010-04-10T07:00:00.001-05:00

I love this! Palin's people left these on the chairs for the attendees at the SRLC. Great signature gift!

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/right-now/2010/04/caribou_jerky_from_sarahpac.html

Video of Palin's SRLC speech

2010-04-09T14:44:00.000-05:00

I saw on Hillbuzz a commenter provided this link to Palin's speech.

Palin's speech at the SRLC

2010-04-09T13:26:00.000-05:00

Palin tweeted this:
SarahPalinUSA: You can watch my speech today at the Southern Republican Leadership Conference live at http://www.livestream.com/srlc

Watch live streaming video from srlc at livestream.com

Obama to Palin: Sit down and shut up

2010-04-09T13:18:00.000-05:00

Recently Palin appeared on Sean Hannity's show criticizing Obama's nuclear "strategy." The "strategy" being the controversial practice of telling the world that we won't use nuclear weapons on countries that sign a worthless piece of paper, or on countries who don't have that technology. Palin compared it to kids playing in a schoolyard and telling a bully that if he punches you in the face you won't punch him back.

The problem with the strategy, as Palin notes, is the fact that you're telling your enemies what you're going to do in response to being attacked. This makes us less safe and doesn't protect us. We have to keep our enemies guessing. We may or may not use certain technologies, and we may or may not use them to a certain degree - but we have the option to do whatever we choose. Telling our enemies (and we do have enemies) exactly how we will respond to a direct threat from them is very troubling.

Obama was on Good Morning America this morning interviewed by George Stephanopoulos and Stephanopoulos asked Obama about Palin's criticism. Guess what Obama's response was? A very arrogant, dripping with smugness: "Last I checked, Sarah Palin's not much of an expert on nuclear issues." Interesting response, Obama. I guess he thinks Americans are so stupid that we wouldn't notice that he didn't answer the question. He also brings attention to his own lack of experience in nuclear issues. Tell me your experience Mr. President, please. That should have been Stephanopoulos' next question. Sarah Palin's experience is not the issue. The issue is his dangerous and stupid nuclear strategy that leaves the US and our allies less safe. The issue is bullying our ally Israel into signing a worthless document that will make them less safe in the face of serious legitimate threats. If you take away Palin and listen to her argument on its own, it's a serious counter-point to Obama's strategy and it deserves a response. Obama is telling Americans: "Palin doesn't deserve a response. People who don't have nuclear experience don't deserve a response. People who hold Palin's same views on the subject don't deserve a response." I'm glad this is what my President thinks of Americans.

For the record, Palin does have nuclear experience, way more than Obama did when he was elected President. Palin was Governor of Alaska and there is a nuclear defense facility there. Also she was in charge of the Alaska National Guard - so Obama was wrong.

Here is the Smugness-in-Chief, if you have the stomach:

SRLC is tomorrow - Palin will speak

2010-04-07T14:00:00.001-05:00

The Battle Begins for 2012 GOP Contenders
CBS News Political Hotsheet
April 7, 2010 9:48am

Every four years, in between presidential elections, conservative activists gather to take stock of some of the most prominent names in the Republican Party -- and consider which of them has what it takes for a successful run for the White House.

That gathering, the Southern Republican Leadership Conference, takes place this Thursday through Saturday in New Orleans. Among the speakers will be Newt Gingrich, Ron Paul, Bobby Jindal, Michael Steele, and Sarah Palin, whose speech will be closely watched for signs as to whether the former Alaska governor is serious about a presidential run or is opting instead a lucrative media career.

Notably absent, oddly enough, will be the only two prominent Republicans who have been doing the most staff hiring, fundraising, travel and networking to lay the groundwork for a 2012 run: Former Massachusetts governor and 2008 GOP presidential hopeful Mitt Romney, who has elected to continue his book tour instead of coming to the conference, and Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, who pulled out in order to attend a welcome home ceremony for members of the armed forces.

Both men are widely expected to jump in the race, but both have their liabilities. While Romney has worked hard to establish his conservative credentials after taking moderate positions on some issues as Massachusetts governor, some on the right continue to be skeptical of him. And the passage of a health care reform package that looks a lot like the health care bill Romney signed into law in Massachusetts has had the ex-governor straining to make the case that the Massachusetts model has legitimate differences with what conservatives derisively call "ObamaCare."

Pawlenty, meanwhile, is unknown to most Americans. While he has been making all the right moves to prepare for a presidential run, including raising money for and endorsing anti-spending Republican candidates, he has not come close to capturing the imagination of the GOP faithful. Perhaps in an effort to break through and generate a little buzz -- and also draw a distinction with Romney -- Pawlenty is pushing a lawsuit to overturn the health care bill. (He's also not skipping the conference entirely -- organizers tell Hotsheet he plans to send in a video address for the event.)

The current landscape means that many conservatives are hoping that a plausible alternative to Pawlenty and Romney emerges in the coming months -- perhaps spurred by a winning speech at the conference seen by many as the unofficial kickoff to primary campaign season.

Palin, seemingly the brightest light in the GOP, remains a polarizing figure who many Republicans believe could not win in a general election; she has also laid little groundwork for a presidential run. The activists gathered at the conference will be looking for signs that the 2008 GOP vice presidential nominee is interested in a run and willing to do the necessary hard work to win -- or if she seems content to focus on her burgeoning media career, including her planned television show, "Sarah Palin's Alaska."

Continued…

Unabashed Palin support from Podhoretz at WSJ

2010-03-29T14:57:00.000-05:00

Norman Podhoretz wrote a fantastic column in today's Wall Street Journal on the heels of Palin's Tea Party event last Saturday. He targets "conservative intellectuals" who hate Palin and buy into the Democrat-fueled lies and smears about her. They're the wannabe cool kids (with the cool kids being ultra liberal elite) who will throw anyone under a bus to gain approval even if goes against their principals. Podhoretz touches on these matters in his column.

What I am trying to say is not that Sarah Palin would necessarily make a great president but that the criteria by which she is being judged by her conservative critics—never mind the deranged hatred she inspires on the left—tell us next to nothing about the kind of president she would make.

Take, for example, foreign policy. True, she seems to know very little about international affairs, but expertise in this area is no guarantee of wise leadership. After all, her rival for the vice presidency, who in some sense knows a great deal, was wrong on almost every major issue that arose in the 30 years he spent in the Senate.

What she does know—and in this respect, she does resemble Reagan—is that the United States has been a force for good in the world, which is more than Barack Obama, whose IQ is no doubt higher than hers, has yet to learn. Jimmy Carter also has a high IQ, which did not prevent him from becoming one of the worst presidents in American history, and so does Bill Clinton, which did not prevent him from befouling the presidential nest.

Palin rocks the "house" at two huge events!! Continues to inspire...

2010-03-29T14:00:00.000-05:00

It's been a busy and successful past few days for Palin!! She stumped for John McCain in Mesa, AZ last Friday where an estimated 4,000 people showed up to hear them both speak. The very next day she lent her star power to the Tea Party Express kickoff event in Searchlight, NV, and motivated the crowd of tea-partiers (some estimates at 25,000) to take back our country and "fire" Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi. Searchlight, NV is Reid's home town. The events were huge and I believe they shifted the momentum back to the Common Sense Conservatives and the movement to Repeal. She was able to direct the energy in a positive way, by continuing to focus on the November elections. Go Sarah!

Take back the 20!

2010-03-25T09:49:00.000-05:00

Since I have limited access to Facebook and Gmail, I was just now able to read Palin's email message on March 23 regarding the House members she wants to keep an eye on who voted for Obamacare. She wants to organize efforts to vote these 20 members out and replace them with Commonsense Conservatives. If you live in any of these districts then you have the power of your vote. For the rest of us, we can donate to challengers, and boycott donors. And we can all come up with more ideas to win back our country in November.

We're paying particular attention to those House members who voted in favor of Obamacare and represent districts that Senator John McCain and I carried during the 2008 election. Three of these House members are retiring—from Arkansas's 2nd district, Indiana's 8th district, and Tennessee's 6th district—but we'll be working to make sure that those who replace them are Commonsense Conservatives. The others are running for re-election, and we're going to hold them accountable for this disastrous Obamacare vote. They are: Ann Kirkpatrick (AZ-1), Harry E. Mitchell (AZ-5), Gabrielle Giffords (AZ-8), John Salazar (CO-3), Betsy Markey (CO-4). Allen Boyd (FL-2), Suzanne M. Kosmas (FL-24), Baron P. Hill (IN-9), Earl Pomeroy (ND-AL), Charlie Wilson (OH-6), John Boccieri (OH-16), Kathy Dahlkemper (PA-3), Christopher Carney (PA-10), John M. Spratt, Jr. (SC-5), Tom Perriello (VA-5), Alan B. Mollohan (WV-1), and Nick J. Rahall II (WV-3).

We'll aim for these races and many others. This is just the first salvo in a fight to elect people across the nation who will bring common sense to Washington.

I believe Palin also has a poster-type graphic representing these 20 targeted representatives. I will try to track it down and post it on the blog.

Update on Palin's Travelogue

2010-03-25T09:39:00.000-05:00

Sarah Palin's Alaska was purchased by Discovery Communications and the network decided to air the program on TLC, which they own.

From the Hollywood Reporter:

Discovery Communications has finished its deal with the former Alaska governor for her reality show, with the company planning to air the series on its TLC channel.

As first reported in THR, Discovery Communications edged out rival A&E Networks for the show, with the remaining question being which of its suite of channels would air the program. Discovery Channel is considered the flagship brand, and certainly a home for travelogues, though the company felt Palin's appeal was better suited toward mom-friendly TLC. The network is best known for "Jon & Kate Plus Eight," and also airs "Cake Boss," "Little People, Big World" and "American Chopper."

Palin's "Travelogue" will be on the Discovery Channel

2010-03-24T09:41:00.000-05:00

From Newsmax:

Palin Travel Show Coming to Discovery
Wednesday, 24 Mar 2010 08:13 AM

She is one of Alaska's most famous daughters, and now Sarah Palin will be taking the viewing public around her state in a new Discovery "travelogue," according to Hollywood trade journal Variety.

The divisive former Alaska governor, who inspires both unbridled admiration among supporters and unmitigated horror among detractors, will reportedly star in the new series in the role of tour guide.

"'Sarah Palin's Alaska' will center on interesting characters, traditions and attractions in the 49th state -- with the ex-VP candidate as a guide," Variety reported in its online edition Tuesday.

Officials for Discovery Communications have yet to make a statement on the new show, but Variety noted that Palin had a brief cameo in the Discovery Channel's 2008 documentary on Iditarod -- a sled race in which her husband Todd competes.

The new show "is believed to have fetched more than one million dollars an episode -- a hefty price tag for a freshman unscripted cable skein," Variety said.

But Palin is also a big draw, and is likely to attract viewers from among her supporters and curious critics, as well as political observers watching for clues as to whether she will run for president in 2012.

Palin has not ruled out a bid for the top office, after her failed 2008 vice-presidential run alongside Republican presidential candidate John McCain.

Newsbusters: CNN interview about healthcare or Palin?

2010-03-24T09:33:00.000-05:00

I applaud Newsbusters for watching CNN, MSNBC and the rest of the corrupt media because I couldn't do it without losing my lunch. Yesterday they found CNN's Rick Sanchez interviewing Floria representative Alan Grayson to discuss the historic healthcare bill passing, but instead the interview quickly turned into a Palin bashing fest.

After spending a few minutes getting the outspoken Floridian's views of what happened in the House Sunday, Sanchez moved on to what he and his producers must have felt was a more important topic: "Let me ask you about something that just went on between you and Sarah Palin. You got into a little bit of a scuffle recently."

[transcript of interview]

Add it all up, in a six minute interview with a member of Congress just hours after a historic vote in the House, Sanchez spent half of the time chatting with the man about his caustic opinion of Sarah Palin.

Now THAT'S good journalism.

Anniversary: "Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death!"

2010-03-23T13:07:00.000-05:00

Today is the anniversary of Patrick Henry's powerful speech in which he said "Give me liberty or give me death!" delivered on March 23, 1775. From Wikipedia:

"Give me Liberty, or give me Death!" is a famous quotation attributed to Patrick Henry from a speech he made in a court hearing on March 23, 1775, at St. John's Church in Richmond, Virginia, and is credited with having swung the balance in convincing the Virginia House of Burgesses to pass a resolution delivering the Virginia troops to the Revolutionary War. Among the delegates to the convention were future US Presidents Thomas Jefferson and George Washington. Reportedly, those in attendance, upon hearing the speech, shouted, "To arms! To arms!"[1]

Romney looks back, Palin moves forward

2010-03-23T05:00:00.001-05:00

Comparing Mitt Romney's first statement yesterday with Palin's is like night and day. Romney's was dry, boring, stale, defeatist with an air of condescension. Take for instance this portion:

[Obama] promised better; we deserved better. His health-care bill is unhealthy for America. It raises taxes, slashes the more private side of Medicare, installs price controls, and puts a new federal bureaucracy in charge of health care. It will create a new entitlement even as the ones we already have are bankrupt. For these reasons and more, the act should be repealed. That campaign begins today.

A rambling, droning statement that is spent mostly discussing the bill we're already familiar with. It reads like a college-level paper: a dry re-hash of well-known facts, concluded with "for these reasons, X should be done." There is no passion, no new ideas in his statement. Also note how he says the act "should be" repealed, using the passive voice. It's a pie-in-the-sky idea according to Romney, not an achievable goal. The whole piece is him looking backward and then at the very end says "it should be repealed." How? When? Where? Who will lead? He doesn't even take a proactive lead! Saying the bill "should be repealed" is as effective as "hope and change." It's empty rhetoric without action to back it up. He needs to provide more than half a sentence of an idea to stir some passion with voters.

Palin's statement was the opposite. She was energetic, enthusiastic and called everyone to action at a specific place in time, November elections. She empowered her readers and gave them real hope to repeal the bill.

We mustn’t be discouraged now. We must look to November when our goal will be to rebuke big government’s power grab, reject this unwanted “transformation” of America, and repeal dangerous portions of Obamacare that will bury us under more Big Government control.

She takes the lead on the repeal by giving us information on how to do it. She spells out a goal. She tells us we can throw out the corrupt Democrats and elect true patriots who will vote according to the will of the people. It starts with us, the voters. She firmly believes a repeal can be achieved. She states that we can't be discouraged because it would be too easy to feel that way. Romney is reveling in the misery, Palin is telling us to buck up. Palin stirs passion and hope with her words, Romney puts readers to sleep. It's crystal clear that Palin will be more effective than Romney in getting a repeal done.

Palin: Health Care Debate Is Between Socialism and Those Who Love America

2010-03-22T21:45:00.000-05:00

Here she is firing us up again! No waffling, no whining. From Gateway Pundit, Sarah's appearance on Hannity tonight:

Palin: November is coming!

2010-03-22T14:38:00.000-05:00

Palin's Facebook post via The Corner. Please go to her Facebook page and read the whole thing.

This is just the beginning of our efforts to take back our country. Consider yesterday’s vote a clarion call and a spur to action. We will not let America sink into further debt without a fight. We will not abandon the American dream to government dependency, fewer freedoms and less opportunity. Change is made at the ballot box. If we work together, we can renew our optimistic pioneering spirit, revive our economy, and restore constitutional limits.

Stand tall, America. November is coming!

We need Sarah more than ever

2010-03-22T10:36:00.000-05:00

I apologize for the lack of posts. I am going through a huge transformation at home that's taking up all my free time and energy. It's a good thing that's happening, but unfortunately this blog has fallen off the to-do list. But I am going to make a concerted effort to get back to posting regularly because of last night, because of the way our country is going - time is of the essence and we can't give up.

Sarah is the only one who can reverse this monstrosity. We need a leader to take charge and repeal. She's the only one who has the guts to pull this off. Forget Romney, forget Huckabee, forget Pawlenty. We need a REAL leader, and we need someone who is not afraid to take on the beltway. I know Sarah cares about this country the way we do, and she values freedom the way we do. She's a citizen just like us and she'll fight for us.

We also need to throw out everyone who voted "yes" yesterday. Fire. Them. All. They put their political agenda ahead of the will of the people. They purposefully rejected their constituents and we need to make them pay in November. Nancy Pelosi needs to be impeached.

As our President says, the time for talk is over. We need to act. We need to repeal this bill somehow. We need to vote these thugs out of office and we need to elect Sarah in 2012. Our future depends on it.

Here are some starting points.

Special Editorial: Repeal - The Weekly Standard
"Luckily, key parts of Obamacare--especially the subsidies--don’t go into effect until 2014. So what Republicans have to do is to make the 2010 and the 2012 elections referenda on Obamacare, win those elections, and then repeal Obamacare."

Your mission is to drive every Leftist from power, to defund the DNC, and to repeal what was done yesterday. - Hillbuzz
"It is our mission in life, as of today, to see to it the Democrat Party is sent to the dust heap of history with the Whigs and other extinct political animals whose time on this Earth came to an end. To thunderous applause in the case of Democrats, in our opinion."

What Freedom Demands - Hotair
"The decision is up to us. Our representatives will fight various legislative battles in the months to come… and then we will speak in November. As the voters of the United States ponder what to say, it would profit us to think long and hard about the freedom Democrats are trying to take from us tonight, and what freedom demands.

Yes, it makes demands. Freedom is not a gift. It is not given to you by the government, in a precise dosage that can be adjusted to match a politician’s diagnosis of what ails the body politic. Your forefathers won an impossible Revolution against an invincible foe to declare the self-evident truth that your rights descend from your Creator. Whether that Creator is a transcendent God, or a random combination of genetic material in the primordial soup, it is a power that existed before the first king assumed his throne, or the first president was elected. Liberty burns in your imagination, flows through your veins, and rings through your words."

SarahPAC raises $1.4mil in 6mos

2010-02-01T09:41:00.000-06:00

Great news!! SarahPAC has raised $1.4 million in just six months and they have $900k cash on hand.

"We are thrilled. Common sense Americans know the direction we need to take this country and that Sarah Palin will be instrumental in taking us there this year. We look forward to the journey ahead!" Said Meghan Stapleton. Senior Advisor and Spokesperson.

They are solid fundraising numbers that show the Republican mega-star's organizational strength.

By comparison, fellow 2012 GOP nomination frontrunner Mitt Romney's PAC raised about $800,000 more for the year and Tim Pawlenty's PAC raised nearly $1.3 million in the last quarter of 2009.

However, Sarah PAC officials feel they did the majority of this while Sarah was writing her book and raised most of the money with the help of the Internet and small events.

"We are excited as we feel that we've just begun to tap the Governor's support. More than 14,000 everyday men and women contributed more than two million dollars to SarahPAC last year with little effort on our part. The money came in through the Internet and a handful of fundraisers and we are grateful for everyone's support." Said Tim Crawford, SarahPAC Treasurer.

Obama's dig at Palin and 2012 campaign slogan

2010-01-28T10:29:00.000-06:00

While watching the SOTU last night with my husband I noticed a few times Obama said the word "quit." That is a buzzword for me and any other Palin supporters. Ever since she made her decision to resign from office the Left has accused her of being a quitter. They repeat that line constantly. When I heard Obama say it I immediately thought it was a subtle dig at Palin. My husband didn't think so.

His speech was definitely not a state of the union; it was a campaign speech. It was all about looking forward, glossing over any mistakes he made and generally propping himself up as awesome. Since the tone of the speech was campaign instead of presidential, I started to feel like it was campaign time again and how would Palin compete against him if they both had their parties' nominations.

Obama ended the speech with a loud, enthusiastic and rousing "We don't quit. I don't quit!" To me that was a clear campaign slogan for 2012. I can picture him running ads with the clip of him saying that. Obama will do everything to undercut Palin and destroy her before she can run for President. I have no doubt that his phrase was intended for her, like a warning shot. It was also a cue for his rabid supporters to contine with the "she quit" meme. My husband did not agree with me, but I still see it that way.

McCain on the SOTU

2010-01-28T10:00:00.000-06:00

I watched this on Fox & Friends this morning and I really liked what John McCain had to say about Obama's state of the union speech. I know Palin was on Hannity discussing it but I can't find the video.

Texas Gov hopeful Medina slams Palin - really?

2010-01-28T09:45:00.000-06:00

Last week I posted my support for Texas gubernatorial candidate Debra Medina's idea to eliminate property taxes. I still stand by that support but does she really think she's going to win over conservative voters by dissing Palin on - of all things - her clothes?

Debra Medina's campaign manager is quick to point out that the GOP hopeful isn't spending "Sarah Palin money" on clothes. Medina has spent just more than $2,000 in campaign donations on her wardrobe for the campaign, according to the Dallas Morning News. Palin, by contrast, spent more than $150,000 in her failed bid for VP.

I am so frustrated that candidates everywhere, in any state, use Palin as their measuring stick to gain votes. Palin is so popular that merely mentioning her name in connection with anything gets thousands of search engine results for them. What a cheap thing to do. I don't know who Medina's campaign manager is but he or she should be fired immediately for making that statement. A struggling conservative candidate should not throw another conservative under the bus. That's just going to turn off potential voters.

NYT reporter accuses Palin of not being a good journalist

2010-01-25T11:30:00.001-06:00

This is really rich. The irony is just too much. Mia Navarro, a New York Times reporter, weighed in on Palin's journalistic chops.

Exactly what does a journalism degree mean in the case of a politician whose often harsh views of her opponents and of controversial subjects are widely known? (Not to mention someone who has complained that she has been treated unfairly and felt injured by the "elite" media she now joins and has plenty of scores to settle?)

If you're a bleeding heart liberal, or even if you aren't, would you be confident that "Journalist Palin" would represent your own views accurately and fairly after an interview?

Navarro starts her article trotting out the ultra liberal talking points to smear Palin which are (1) continue to push the idea that Palin "complains about the media's treatment of her;" and (2) continue to push the idea that Palin has a score to settle with the McCain campaign aides.

Okay, glad that's out of the way. It's clear that Navarro has never listened to Palin's "complaints." If she had, she would know that Palin was indeed treated unfairly and continues to be treated unfairly by the corrupt media. Does she care? No. Her concern about the state of journalism is merely a coverup for a not-so-thinly veiled attack on Palin.

Back in the day when I attended journalism school, we were taught how to present the facts, and answer the "what, who, when, where and why," but that wasn't the most important lesson imparted. Above all was the sense of mission in delivering the news to the public in an impartial way so readers and viewers could make informed decisions by themselves.

I guess Navarro doesn't watch Chris "tingle" Matthews or the rest of MSNBC. I suppose she doesn't read her own newspaper, either. The lefty bias is so rampant in the media they are one in the same. It's not even worth mentioning because it's so obvious. The fact that Navarro used a column allegedly about journalistic integrity as a Palin hit piece proves my point.

Navarro seems to have no faith in journalism. She said that someone with widely-known political opinions would prevent someone from being a good journalist. Why? Presenting the news from an objective standpoint has nothing to do with personal views. A good journalist can do it, and do it well. Navarro should try it sometime. To be a journalist doesn't mean you have to be a robot with zero personal opinions. Sports reporters do it all the time - they have favorite teams they root for but present game analysis detached from that. Navarro is oblivious to this. Instead she just pushes the talking points that the rest of liberal media tells her. What a hack.

Possibly a great candidate who doesn't have a chance

2010-01-23T06:00:00.000-06:00

While getting everything ready to file our taxes this year I started thinking about property tax. Ours are outrageously high and it really hit me how unfair it is. Even if you completely paid off your house you still would not "own" it. The government owns your land and house, period. If you failed to pay the increasingly high property taxes then the government would take away your property - but this is property you supposedly own! Imagine if you bought furniture but had to pay the furniture store a yearly fee to keep it, would that be considered "owning" that furniture? No

I bing'd "eliminate property tax" to see if there was a group or movement or something that supported eliminating property taxes altogether and classifying them as unconstitutional. Lo and behold, one of the first results was a campaign website for Debra Medina for Governor of Texas. Who? I never heard of her. I looked at her page.

If Texans are to remain free from the ever-encroaching state, Big Brother, we must own our property, on that we must not compromise and we must not surrender. In order to protect against subservience to that growing state, we must eliminate property tax in Texas and we must protect against abusive eminent domain seizures. We must be free to own that for which we labor. Texas can lead and Texas will lead…when we protect that which keeps men free.

I just found a candidate who I might really like, too bad she has no chance of winning the primary.

For fairness' sake, I went to Perry's website to see what he has to say about property taxes.

Working with the legislature, Gov. Perry helped pass the strongest property rights protection in the state’s history through House Joint Resolution (HJR) 14. Gov. Perry campaigned for this measure, which voters enshrined in the Constitution by approving Proposition 11, so the legislature can’t weaken it without the people giving their permission at the ballot box. When voters added Proposition 11 to the Constitution this November, they forever prevented the government from taking private property to give a developer or enhance tax revenues.

Eh...my property taxes are still high, and I really don't think there was a possibility that my property would be given to a developer anyway. And he doesn't say anything about eliminating property taxes completely.

Palin has endorsed and will campaign for Perry in his re-election bid as Governor, which means this whole discussion is moot. He will win it all. This is one instance where I don't really agree with Palin.

She and Perry have seemingly been friends for years and she's very familiar with his policies. I have no doubt that her endorsement is 100% solid. However, Perry is running for his third term. I don't think anyone should be in office that long, not even Palin. He's part of the establishment and has shown RINO tendencies in the past. Also, had she gotten to know the crop of candidates I think Medina is someone she might like. She reminds me of Doug Hoffman and Scott Brown, the unlikely conservative candidate who has a fighting chance to win. She usually likes to stand behind those types of candidates.

As I said I just found out about Medina and I really liked her website and her ideas. But I haven't done extensive research on her yet. I know Perry will continue to be a good governor and much better than RINO Republican Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison any day. I just really like the idea of eliminating property taxes. I hope we can do it some day.

Friday Funny

2010-01-22T14:20:00.002-06:00

"Forget the truck. Everybody can buy a truck." -Barack Obama

Doesn't it feel good to get the last laugh?