About Me

Name: Patrick S. Adams
Email: patsworld1@comcast.net Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Archives

Blog Roll

 

Eight Republicans Blew The Game

Republicans lost by 7 votes in a nailbiter that was decided by a missed field goal. The New York Giants won the 1991 Superbowl the same way.

After gaining enough momentum to shut down the phone system, Newt Gingrich led the army into it's biggest battle yet. With perfect strategy, popular opinion and down home grassroots action, the people told Washington what they thought. Washington didn't listen. Then the Republicans fumbled the ball in the end zone. The ball went through Buckner's legs. Jackie Smith dropped the winning touchdown in the end zone. We worked so hard for this and came up short. Nailbiter. Heart breaker.

It was one of the best political showdowns I have ever seen. Despite the All Michael All the Time channels (including FOX - dissapointing), I was glued to C-Span watching the likes of Cantor and Bachmann arguing the cause eloquently. Republicans had momentum. It looked like they had a shot.
 
Kevin Glass of Townhall.com gives us the names of the scoundrels:
 
Mary Bono Mack (Calif.-45)
Mike Castle (Del.)
Mark Steven Kirk (Ill.-10)
Leonard Lance (N.J.-7)
Frank LoBiondo (N.J.-2)
John McHugh (N.Y.-23)
Dave Reichert (Wash.-8)
Chris Smith (N.J.-4)


All Republicans. They voted for the Cap & Trade Bill and cost the party a must win. Pundits shouldn't worry as much about the Republican party as they should about these individuals.

There will probably be primaries required and lots of money spent to undo boneheadedness like this. Eventually those seats could hurt the GOP in the overall comeback planned for 2010 unless these candidates can be replaced. Those Republicans that voted for the bill hurt their party straight through the heart. The debate over whether the party should go right or left is over. These Congressmen not only let the Republican party down, they let their country down. They hurt not only conservatives, but moderates as well.

The party found its garbage. Unfortunately, it came during one of the biggest votes in U.S. House recent history. But it is done. It is behind us now. The cleansing came at the wrong time, but at least the cleansing came.

Now it's off to the Senate to see how many more of the GOP's own have bought into the destruction of liberty. Michele Bachmann stated it best. The vote was a choice between liberty and tyranny. Tyranny won because our party blew the game. And we blame it all on those 8 Congressmen I named above. Scott Norwood missed the field goal.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Light At the End of the Tunnel

Regardless of what happens with Cap and Trade and Obama healthcare reform, we take solace in the fact that the American people will either wake up now and oppose those poor pieces of legislation in Congress or they will wake up later after those initiatives have passed.

I always tell all who are frustrated with the current state of affairs that there is ultimately a light at the end of the tunnel, even if that tunnel ends up getting destroyed to make us rush to the light.

We're in a situation, as lethargic America usually is, that will ultimately result in our victory. It took all the mistakes that led to Pearl Harbor, a powerful Soviet threat and 9/11 to motivate Americans to fight the Japanese and Nazis, win the cold war and embark on the War on Terror. Unfortunately, Americans did not oppose tyranny or terrorism until it became an obvious existential threat to our country. But when they did, they did it with a furor and a vengeance. Therein lies our hope.

It will take the Obama policies many months in play before we will actually experience the harsh effects they will have on our country. As citizens go to work, spend time with their families and plan for their future, the creeping nature of how Obama's policies will be implemented will be like a tide coming in. Suddenly and unexpectedly, Americans will find themselves in the water. At that time they will revolt (figuratively) and demand that we return to prudent economic principles and the concept of a strong national defense.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

It's a Matter of Trust

Billy Joel wrote "it's always been a matter of trust." For constituencies and their candidates, there is a bond that can be as strong as bonds are in a family. Political candidates forge a deep connection with their supporters. They represent their voice, their dreams and their beliefs. They are looked up to the way the head of a household would be looked up to. Only, they have hundreds of thousands, possibly millions of people looking to them for leadership as compared to maybe five or six. The standards don't change even if the numbers do. Leaders put themselves in a position of trust. When that trust is broken, according to Def Leppard "you're bringin' on the heartbreak."
 
Mark Sanford showed us this week that, like Billy Joel wrote, "The closer you get to the fire the more you get burned." As a rock star among fiscal conservatives and libertarians with a strong record as governor of South Carolina, Mark Sanford was positioned to get to the "qualifying round" of America's greatest race (no not the Daytona 500), the race for president. He seemed to be a candidate that had no holes. He appeared to be a strong family man, as religiously faithful as the next guy and deeply committed to the future of the United States of America.
 
And then our hearts were broken.
 
Those who believe in the real God understand that the ultimate glory in life is also undermined by the most horrible of sins. And while many on both sides of the aisle can debate the story of Adam of Eve, it's pretty obvious that there was an apple involved and we have been dealing with that problem ever since.
 
Human nature is not liberal or conservative. It is. Existence occurs before essence because in the absence of existence there is no essence. As such, we mere mortals are not capable of truly grasping the greatness of God no matter how hard we try. We all may have different religious views, but I do know this: if you honestly and objectively examine the limited information we have before us, you probably want to take into consideration that no matter what tricks the universe throws at us, we should agree that there is something bigger about this than just "me."
 
For some reason, those who miss this always end up getting burnt.
 
Mark Sanford is the Gary Hart of our time. He was loved by his supporters. They wanted so bad for him to become president. Like Hart, he was a purist to his ideology. Though their ideologies were different, what their supporters saw in them was the same. They saw themselves, their hopes and their dreams. All it took was one stupid little "me" moment for Sanford and Hart and "we" got caught up in the collateral damage.
 
Liz Sidoti of the AP writes "'They live their lives more in a fishbowl, and that has responsibilities and costs with it,' (Stanley Renshon, a political psychologist at City University of New York) said, adding that an adulterous politician doesn't just betray his family's trust, he also betrays the public's trust."
 
We know that the candidates who have no holes and who are the most pure among us are the strongest. As the best among us, they are the most capable of advancing our agenda. When trying to get what you want in the world of power politics, you want your best warrior out there. Although politics is life, it's also a game. As such, your best warrior is there because even though they can't guarantee you a win, they give you the best shot at it.
 
A great warrior overcomes the evils of life. They buck "business as usual" and set their site on conquest, not for themselves but for everyone. They are motivated by what their supporters believe in. In turn, their supporters are are motivated by what they believe in.
 
While spouses fall romantically in love with each other, candidates and their constituencies fall ideologically in love. Any violation of either trust is adulterous in its own way. It's hard to trust a politician that can't be honest with the one who should be his or her biggest supporter and strongest vote. What a candidate does romantically for their spouse, they do ideologically for their constituencies. Love of either kind is a two way street. The stronger the level of attraction between the two, the more trust that's required to make sure that bond isn't broken.
 
So you have a candidate that you love. You are banking on that person to deliver on what you believe in. And you see what just happened to Mark Sanford. At any time, your dream can go puff without having any control over it. It's existential. With a bullet, we could have lost Ronald Reagan within the first months of his presidency. We lost Robert Kennedy that way. But we lost Mark Sanford and Gary Hart to an "arrow," not a bullet. Regardless, their followers' cause was stopped and their followers' dreams were shattered.
 
Each of us has a candiate that we love. You will never know if they can go the distance. It's a matter of trust. It's a matter of taking a leap of faith that tells you there's a better chance this person is going to go all the way than the other ones. It's a matter of trusting in the standard and knowing that your candidate trusts in that standard as much or more than you do.
 
As heartbreaking as it is to see what happened to Sanford, we take solace in the notion that while he may have fallen, the standard itself has not. We will continue to ideologically love candidates who represent that standard.
 
Our candidates will either fail us or they will become heroic when they have beaten the odds and avoided the temptations of corruption and infidelity while effectively dodging the arrows of misfortune as they advance our agenda. The yearning for leaders like Abraham Lincoln and Ronald Reagan will only cause us to seek out more heroes and heroines to put on the political pedestal despite the emotional risk we must take in doing so.
 
Some may now look at their candidates and be cynical because of Mark Sanford. Some may hope that this is the final lesson for future politicians. We all remember pictures of "The Monkey Business" and shake our heads going "oh no, not again." But we know one thing about standards and values. The offenses may be repeated, but the values stay the same. Therein lies the existential conundrum. You have the choice to root for your candidates and your causes or pack it in and go home.
 
I know how it feels. For the sake of this article, I am not going to name my candidates (fill in name of your candidate here). But I thought about them today. I imagined what would have happened if they were Mark Sanford. I prayed and then I cried.
 
Then I pledged to myself that it's still just a matter of trust. I'm always going to have to trust.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Unravelling of Obama

While many are busy with a concentrated effort to oppose Obama healthcare reform among a number of domestic issues, the worldwide lens aimed directly at the President, without his approval mind you, reveals flaws in his foreign policy. The President wasn't counting on Iran going into a revolution and North Korea sending out the "buy a nuke here" boat. He just wanted to show up on ABC Wednesday night and sell us healthcare. Too much too fast and even those on the right can't figure out which issue to go after him on. There are so many. Americans are really busy right now surviving and all they want to do is complain about taxes over a couple of beers. This barage of the liberal agenda is just causing mental overload. As such, expect Americans to "break up" with the President at some point in the next year or so.
 
For the first time in his admistration, President Obama is running into friction both domestically and on the foreign front. A President under this much pressure cannot get it all right. Unfortunately, it's his fault because the energy and clout he had to use to nationalize things here at home leaves him shooting blanks when it comes to dealing with foreign aggressors. If he fought the right wing, Fox News and non-partisan freedom movements as hard as he should be fighting totalitarianism, young women being gunned down in the streets of Iran and a nuclear Korea (now setting up it's 4th of July bottle rocket aimed at Obama's home state of Hawaii), he'd be winning right now.
 
It wold be cool to see the American president strong arming foreign dictators the way he strong arms American businesses and taxpayers. It would also be cool to see the president going as light on American businesses and taxpayers as he is on foreign dictators.
 
The only foreign policy area that resembles a consistency to his domestic policy is his "meddling" in the affairs of Israel. Ronald Kessler writes in Newsmax.com, "Morton Klein, president of the Zionist Organization of America...says leaders of Jewish organizations are rethinking their support of Obama in light of his attitude toward Israel." These words would not be strong enough to quote without a timeline back to Obama's past where, during the campaign in January 2008, Noah Pollak wrote on commentarymagazine.com:
There has been an awakening in recent days to the presence of a disturbing number of foreign policy advisers to the Obama campaign who harbor hostile views of Israel. Ed Lasky of the American Thinker has been doing serious work on the subject, and his two pieces — here and here — are must-reads. Caroline Glick adds to the discussion here.
This position would be further backed up had the L.A. Times released footage of Obama attending a dinner with radical William Ayers where it is universally accepted in media circles that there was a lot of anti-Israel rhetoric on the tape.
 
Consider now that the president has been as limp as a dead plant in his response to the situation in Iran, a country that has vowed the destruction of Israel. It's an inconvenient truth for the President to know that he cannot back democracy and advance his own agenda simultaneously, since those agendas conflict.
 
Rasmussen.com reports as of June 22, 2009:
The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Monday shows that 33% of the nation's voters now Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Thirty-four percent (34%) Strongly Disapprove giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -1. Today is the second straight day the President’s rating has been below zero (see trends).
The rabble is starting to get a little rowdy.
 
Five months into his presidency, Obama takes his hardest hit from a new media journalist. While his policies are unpopular, his job approval remains high. Yet, Andrea Tantaros, a highly qualified communications expert and writer, is the first new media detractor (if you don't count internet trolls calling Obama a terrorist or an a-hole) to stand up and say, in her blog published as a Fox News Op Ed piece, "The politician who has been billed as 'untouchable' will soon be revealed for what he is: an amateur who lacks the credible answers and the ability to really lead." This quote will take a year to grow legs given how long it took America to figure out that Jimmy Carter had the same problem.
 
Di ck Morris wrote on 4/28/09: "When the Obama administration crashes and burns, with approval ratings that fall through the floor, political scientists can trace its demise to its first hundred days." The overkill of his hurry up offense on domestic issues is beginning to backfire. The loyal sheep here at home may continue to protect their egos as to why they voted for him until they find an excuse in the mainstream media's lies to back off their uninformed pull of the lever, but the North Koreans and Iranian mullahs smell blood now and they're coming.
 
Obama is probably finding out that it's easier to use a teleprompter and the media to control his own country than it is to control the world. It's going to be hard to digest the disruption to his quest for power as he waits for events to "unfold" in time for him to have his pow wow with the leader of a country that's about to buy nuclear weapons from another country that's practicing to nuke Hawaii and smelling 19 less interceptor missiles in Alaska as another opportunity to corner the scrawny kid from Chicago and take his lunch money.
 
The "annointed one's" walk on water might just fall short of shooting down a missile, boarding a North Korean ship and getting government run healthcare passed. And when he falls in, even if our mainstream media purposely ignores it as Iran's media ignores their situation now, it will end up on Twitter and Youtube. The average guy on the street will watch the unravelling of Obama on their PC, even as the 48 inch plasma TV in the background continues to spew statist propoganda.
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Positive Opposition to a Very Expensive Mistake: Obama Healthcare

The Obama administration wants to make you think there is a pressing need that we radically overhaul healthcare in this country that it has to be passed before the end of this year's legislative session. Banks may be in dire straights, the mortgage companies going into "compliance mode," and auto companies are now being run out of Washington D.C. all in the name of "it has to get done right now." The American dialogue under previous administrations has always be more deliberative than it is now in both Congress and the media. So, why the rush?
 
There is a race with time that has to be won if radical, improperly debated and highly expensive policies are going to get passed into law before they are addressed in the arena of ideas. There is no argument right now in the halls of Congress or on the airwaves of approving networks that we need to more seriously analyze what the long term effects of these short term solutions are going to be. But, if an argument is let in, the possibility exists that the truth and logical conclusions, properly drawn and documented, might be too much for those who cover it while trying to finish off the glass of kool aid.
 
Lazy liberalism is when you have both houses of Congress, the media and popular support on your side and you just phone it in. By not allowing opposing viewpoints on the "ABC Special: Mr. President Tell Me How Socialized Medicine Works," tells me that not only has ABC landed a nice deal for showing an infomercial, but the liberals have a pretty easy shot at manipulating facts since the president isn't interested  in listening to opposing points of view, unless they are those from Iran.
 
The enormous costs of healthcare reform far outweigh the need for immediate government takeover. We'd be better served as a nation if the private sector took some time in straightening out its health insurance industry and tort system, which would reduce health care costs dramatically before even having to spend one taxpayer dime. Think of it like exercising the private sector and getting it in shape before the government has to fill in the gaps as opposed to just taking a lot of taxpayer money we don't have and throwing it a system that's not ready for it yet.
 
Electronic medical records is an innovative product that could help average Americans cut through bureaucratic red tape when filing insurance claims, but it is would be a disaster if placed in the hands of the government.
 
It could possibly take about two years or so, but the insurance industry could be given vast reductions in regulation and implement the use of confidential electronic medical records in exchange for a simple rule: pay your claims. By reducing costs in that sector, you could deflate the cost of insurance without sacraficing the financial stability of insurers.
 
The government could first address the retraction of burdensome regulations on the insurance industry and follow that up with a more heavier hand that coordinates charities, non-profit organizations, enitlement programs, free market debt purchasing services and credit counseling companies and marries them with billing offices and collection agencies who are responsible for the accounts receivables of doctors and hospitals throughout the country. This effort would steer everyone toward clearing up medical bills and debt in an efficient and profitable way that benefits both consumer and business.
 
At the same time, the extra burden of having to be worried about malpractice and other lawsuits can be taken from the shoulders of medical practitioners and administrators and placed into the hands of legal departments at medical malpractice insurance companies that would benefit from lower regulation and a decline in frivolous lawsuits. Tort reform would save a chunk of money for the medical industry and put medical malpractice insurance companies into the watchdog position in place of a government bureaucracy.
 
Private medical boards could continue to evolve also as a policy review board. Patients would have a right to question a doctor's decision by appealing to a medical board instead of hiring an attorney on commission.
 
There is an issue of portability, which has to be more deeply addressed in another blog. The amount of money being taken out of the checks of tax paying Americans is ridiculous compared to the benefits they get from the government. If that same money was placed in a portable "bubble" that citizens could take from employer to employer, it would vastly cut down on the cost of healthcare because it could be invested in the private sector. A portable healthcare policy that can be plugged into an employer's benefit package would save everyone tons of money.
 
These are a lot of ideas that have to be discussed and looked into further. There are a lot of details in creating these kinds of changes in the healthcare industry. And there isn't a lot of money required to properly debate and reach consensus. There also isn't a lot of money available to do the president's radical plan either.
 
There is also the issue of too much government. Rushing a healthcare bill through now without allowing the private sector to contribute first to cost saving messures and by not thoroughly examining the potential pitfalls of allowing the government to have unfettered access to everyone's medical records is simply bad government.
 
President Obama has taken over the banking industry, the mortgage industry and the auto industry in varying degrees. In rushing through his healthcare plan, he is basically saying he wants to open up an insurance company as well that will gobble up the private market. Sarah Palin jokingly referred to the president's takeover of the auto industry when she asked Sean Hannity "do you want to buy a car?" Well what if President Obama was to ask "do you want to buy some health insurance?"
 
The briefcase would look good with the suit. But Obama's selling the wrong product.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

This is One Ethics Violation That Should Be Filed

If Barack Obama was governor of Alaska, he would have easily faced an ethics violation for abuse of power. Take the firing of Inspector General Gerald Walpin. According to Fox News, “Obama's move follows an investigation by IG Gerald Walpin of Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson, who is an Obama supporter and former NBA basketball star, into the misuse of federal grants by a nonprofit education group that Johnson headed.” In Washington, this is not an ethics violation, but rather a puff of smoke that may say there is a fire somewhere.

Stimulus money is going quickly to bureaucracies and quasi-government agencies while the private sector suffers, seeing bailed out companies now going bankrupt as the government takes over banks, auto companies and big tobacco while the next effort toward taking over healthcare will more than likely be followed by measures designed to regulate corporate pay in whatever becomes left of the private sector.

“With intervention from Michelle Obama, the Americorps inspector general was given the boot and replaced — for doing his job too well, it seems, and uncovering squandering of funds by favored contributors, educational institutions, and left-wing groups," according to Michelle Malkin, a well respected conservative blogger.

ABC is reporting a contradictory report of Mrs. Obama's involvment. "Josh Earnest, Deputy White House Press Secretary, says: 'The anonymous source quoted by Youth Today suggesting that the First Lady was somehow involved in the decision to replace Mr. Walpin is false...'"

If Mrs. Obama is involved, it would demonstrate, from a political scientist’s point of view, that there is a serious difference between how the federal government views the spouse of a president's involvement in a decision to dismiss a government official who was not covering his political butt properly to how a state government views the spouse of a governor's involvment in firing a government official to protect a family from a rogue state trooper, a decision that would have been made the same way even if the family threatened was not the governor's.
 
In Alaska, this could be an ethics violation. In Washington, this is business as usual. 
 
It also makes you wonder what's really happening with the stimulus money.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Liberals Inadvertently Make Palin Relevant Again

If Sarah Palin had given a speech introducing Michael Reagan in Anchorage then came to New York to appear at a fundraiser to help assist children with autism and noone knew about it, would it be a big deal? If Sarah Palin did what every other politician and pundit does and was interviewed by a major news network, a few days later shouldn't that have have faded?  If she appeared at a Republican fundraiser, then flew back to Alaska to resume her job as governor, would anyone have noticed? Apparently, the left did and they brought her back into the spotlight faster than those characters in old monster movies could say "oh no, Godzilla."
 
So what exactly happened here?
 
Sarah Palin was quietly governing Alaska, devoting her time and energy to her job and her constituents. She ventured out once to give a speech in Evansville, Indiana. Everyone freaked out then because she left the state, so Palin went home, put her head down and worked on the legislative agenda, the stimulus money and the gas pipeline. As a diligent steward of her office, the governor was doing pretty much what every other governor in America was doing: trying to keep big government off its back. Then Sarah Palin decided to step out to celebrate Founders day and to attend a fundraiser on Long Island for children with Autism.
 
That's when the liberals flipped out and went wingnutty whacko.
 
Along the way, she spoke to Sean Hannity and attended the annual joint fundraiser for the National Republican Congressional Committee and the National Republican Senatorial Committee, which gave MSNBC fodder for this hit piece.
 
John Ziegler, who produced the documentary "Media Malpractice: How Obama Got Elected and Palin Was Targeted" went on MSNBC to point the finger at them as being complicit with Obama's victory and Palin's defeat. There is a connection between the hate bloggers in Alaska (Shannyn Moore, AkMuckracker, etc.), the Huffington Post, The Daily KOS and the mainstream media. That connection is as big as a fiber optics cable that goes from Homer to New York where the likes of Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow tie it all together for the unsuspecting viewers.
 
It started with the Michael Reagan speech. Shannyn Moore and AKMuckraker attended the speech. After the speech, Palin flew to Auburn, New York to celebrate Founders Day. The visit according to UPI "was a fundraiser for Seward House, a museum and the former secretary of state's (William Henry Seward) home, and was part of Auburn's Founders Day celebrations." Sarah Palin was celebrating the man who assisted in bringing Alaska into the union. The smear mongers from Alaska, Moore and Muckracker, had an affiliate in New York who saw everything in Auburn, including Governor Palin's interview with Sean Hannity. The events are described on AKMuckraker's blog The Mudflats.
 
There is just way too unhealthy of an obsession in that.
 
At the same time, usual culprit The Huffington Post was trying to get a story about Sarah Palin plagiarizing a story by Newt Gingrich and Craig Shirley to fly. "Blogger Geoffrey Dunn, who is writing a book about the former Republican vice presidential candidate, made the accusation on the Huffington Post Web site." The story was a non-story and was tossed on the stack of ethics violations, which turned out to be non-stories also.
 
When Governor Palin went to a New York Yankees Game with former mayor Rudy Giuliani, the morning shows on liberal networks were taking some swipes at her. For example, NewsBusters reported:

VH1 comedian Chuck Nice appeared on Tuesday's "Today" show and compared Alaska Governor Sarah Palin to the sexually transmitted disease herpes. He mocked, "But, Sarah Palin to the GOP, this is what I've got to say, she is very much like herpes, she's not going away."
This story was also carried on Gateway Pundit, where a commenter responded:
the more nonsense the lefties spew, the greater the power Palin has. As she gets stronger, they ratchet up the hate. That is the telltale sign.

She scares the hell out of them becasue she is the only one that has the stones to say the truth. What scares them even more is people are really listening to her
This was followed by the David Letterman fiasco. Read all about it on Conservatives4Palin.com. David Letterman made jokes that seemed to be directed at Sarah Palin's daughter, Willow, since Willow had attended the Yankee game which was referenced during the joke (her daughter got knocked up by A-Rod during the 7th inning). Letterman and spokesmen claimed they were referring to adult daughter Bristol, but the jokes were in poor taste, mean spirited and if what Letterman and his people are saying as they back-pedal is true, poorly written.
 
Sarah Palin addressed Letterman's back-pedal in an interview with Matt Lauer on the Today Show.
Matt, I would say that you and anybody else are extremely naive to believe that very convenient excuse of David Letterman's the other day. It took a couple of days for him to think of that excuse that, no, he wasn't talking about my daughter who was there with me at the game, the 14-year-old, he was talking about some other daughter. Well, I think that's a weak excuse. 
I'm not one to give the opposition help or advice. But as a political scientist, political junkie and all around political guy, I scratch my head in amazement at the stupidity of the left. What they did was akin to chumming the waters because they were afraid of the shark. Then they tried to kill the shark and failed. Instead, the obsession with the shark got everyone on the boat killed. If I was a liberal, I would have completely ignored, cover-up, minimized the effect or whatever I could do to make sure that Sarah Palin's name wasn't tossed about the press like a lightening rod which you know was going to draw her supporters out of the woodwork. Trying to destroy someone by exposing how much bigger their army is than you thought is not smart politics and it's not smart war.
 
If the liberals did nothing, most people who aren't political junkies like me would have hardly noticed Palin was there.
 
I for one was not convinced by the liberals that Sarah Palin is irrelevant, dumb or a non-contender for 2012. In fact, they convinced me even moreso the opposite.
 
Monica Crowley told Bill O'Reilley yesterday that Sarah Palin represents "an existential threat to liberalism." Ann Coulter told Sean Hannity yesterday that the left is "terrified" of her. Michelle Malkin asked Gretchen Carlsen why people like Letterman would want to go after "the most popular politician in the Republican party?"
 
When a pitbull gets you in its teeth grip, it's not coming off your arm. Why would you provoke it?

If you think the liberals are so overwhelmed with fear and trembling now, wait until the GOP presidential primaries.
 
Sarahpac should send a thank you note to everyone who participated in this round of Palin Derangement Syndrome. Exposing liberalism for the intellectually and morally bankrupt ideology that it is is only made easier when liberals help by making such a tactical mistake.
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (4) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

D-Day, Reagan and Courageous Conservatism

Today is a day to remember American heroes. Our America is not apologetic, socialist or built on bailouts. Our America is proud, free and built on the sweat of individuals who together comprise a country of great soldiers, leaders and citizens.

We remember the soldiers who fought for us on D-Day and in all wars to protect the freedoms we hold dear. Even liberals have these freedoms. Those rights cannot be taken from them by our government or our Constitution. Liberals have free speech rights. They have the right to elect a president (as we so painfully see). But when they speak out against enhanced interrogation procedures, for gay marriage and abortion and against using the words "war on terror," we must remind them that if they invite our enemies with their words and deeds to become re-energized by thoughts that we are soft, arrogant or immoral, then those liberals who speak out against our country will lose their rights, not because America was too arrogant, but because America will cease to exist.

We remember the passing of the great Ronald Reagan. Unlike our current leader, he spoke boldly and proudly of what America has done for the world. He made us feel good about our country. He didn't make us feel like we were aggressors, torturers, red necks or bigots. He didn't define some groups as winners and others as losers. He didn't take from those who earned and give it to those who didn't. He stopped the Soviet Union and ended the cold war. Under Reagan, Russia stood down. Under Obama, Iran and North Korea build up.

The time for courageous conservatism is here. The majority must be silent no longer. As we honor our America, we must take our stand by voting for conservative candidates, attending tea parties and becoming politically active. Let not your hearts be troubled, America. We can still speak out and resist the current policies being enacted in Washington.

There are some who feel their voices won't be heard or that America's days of greatness are behind us. There are those who see what the liberal smear machine can do and how having the power of the presidency helps liberals keep conservative voices quiet. But this is not a time to fear. This is a time to have courage and to speak up. This is Patrick Henry time.

When Sarah Palin called Carrie Prejean after Prejean was so visciously attacked by the left, she established a solidarity with Americans who fear their voices would be silenced. She demonstrated not only by talking the talk, but by walking the walk that she was not afraid and stood behind Carrie Prejean 100% in the face of the liberal smear machine, a smear machine that has so ruthlessly and visciously gone full tilt to silence Palin only to find Palin louder and more defiant. She is an example to all of us that courageous conservatism can stand any attack the left may wish to throw at it.

Palin addressed the crowd as she introduced the great Ronald Reagan's son, Michael, in Anchorage on Tuesday night. She talked about those who tried to silence her by filing frivolous ethics complaints against her in Alaska (all of which were tossed out).

"Those are the folks who want to tell me, they want to tell you, to sit down and shut up. We will not do that. I just can't, because I love my state. I love my country."

"...politically speaking, if I die, I die," Palin told the crowd. "I’ll know that I have spoken up and I will speak up to thank people like Mr. Reagan as we honor his dad, to encourage you too, Alaskans, to do the same and don’t just hang in there and go along to get along but stand up and speak up, and be bold and demand that Washington be prudent with our public monies and prioritize for America’s security, and forget the political corectness that makes one guard your conversation, and couch our words so cautiously that they lose meaning, and we lose effectiveness, and then we lose hope because we start thinking that politicians are only worried about their poll numbers and attracting campaign contributions for their next bid so that they can hold on to some title and some position."

We can keep our America alive by speaking out, remembering the heroes who fought in our wars and honoring our leaders who speak with our voice.

God bless America, even while it is in exile.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »