About Me

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

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Archives

Blog Roll

 

Palin Wins One For the Gipper

If it had been written from the Governor's desk, an ethics violation would have been filed because she used her office to advance her national agenda. If it had been said during a Katie Couric interview, it would have been another "I can see Russia from my house" joke. If it had been said at a campaign rally, it would have been glossed over or not reported. But because she said it from her Facebook page, bypassing all of the processes described above, it resonated and it resonated loudly. In using the quotationed words "death panel," Sarah Palin not only "won one for the good guys" as Seah Hannity so eloquently complimented her, she won one for the Gipper as well, and turned the tide on the media loving Obama-ites in the process.
 
Ronald Reagan must be looking down from Heaven with a smile holding the LP record he recorded in early 1961 on Socialized Medicine. That was the first time the "death panel maneuver" was used to circumvent the press and go directly to the people on the issue of health care reform. Sarah Palin knows Ronald Reagan. She carries his presence and his philosophy in her servant's heart. And the liberals hate it.
 
Before the mainstream media had a chance to rebut the "death panel" statement, Sarah Palin's Facebook page note was rocketing across the internet, being linked to every computer in America via Twitter, TeamSarah.org and Conservatives4Palin.com. Suddenly, conservative columnists, radio show hosts and TV show hosts were all over it before CNN, the Washington Post and MSNBC could have it fact checked incorrectly without the use of the quotation marks.
 
Sarah Palin has defeated the Kobayashi Maru of politics. She resigned the office of Governor to "affect positive change.”  So far, it's working.
 
"When the leader of the free world is complaining about a posting on the former governor of Alaska’s Facebook page, he’s got problems," Chris Stirewalt writes in The Washington Examiner piece "The Thrill is Gone for Obama and the Media."
 
Is there schadenfreude in knowing that the same media that short circuited Palin's vice presidential run is now the same media that is frustrated by the people not getting their message on health care reform? Or is just that the people aren't listening to the mainstream media anymore?
 
Howard Kurtz complains in The Washington Post that despite all the media coverage, the Obama position is not winning: 
Perhaps journalists are no more trusted than politicians these days, or many folks never saw the knockdown stories. But this was a stunning illustration of the traditional media's impotence.
 
Still, it was a stretch for White House officials, who have a huge megaphone, to blame media coverage for the sinking popularity of health reform. It was equally odd for Gibbs to tell reporters that stories about Obama backing away from a government-run health plan were "entirely contrived by you guys" -- this after Gibbs and Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius had said on Sunday morning shows that such a plan was not an essential part of Obama's proposal.

For all the sound and fury, news organizations have labored to explain the intricacies of the competing blueprints. "NBC Nightly News" ran a piece examining how Obama's public health-insurance option would work. ABC's "World News " did a fact check on the end-of-life provision in the bill. "CBS Evening News" highlighted problems with the current system by interviewing some of the 1,500 people waiting at a free makeshift clinic in Los Angeles. Time ran a cover story on health care, titled "Paging Dr. Obama." And major newspapers have been filled with articles examining the nitty-gritty details. Those who say the media haven't dug into the details aren't looking very hard.

But the healthy dose of coverage has largely failed to dispel many of the half-truths and exaggerations surrounding the debate. Even so, news organizations were slow to diagnose the depth of public unease about the unwieldy legislation. For the moment, the story, like the process itself, remains a muddle.
No, Mr. Kurtz, the American people understand the story. There is no muddle about popular opposition to the measure. The only muddle is in the brains of elitists and the mainstream media who get thrills up their legs when Obama speaks.
 
The key to a Republican comeback lies in the moment that the American people realize the media has been lying to them. That moment may have just arived as citizens across the country read the health care bill and tweet links to its harshest provisions. The American people are doing just what Sarah Palin is doing. They are bypassing the media and communicating with each other via social networks.
 
The opposition to Obamacare is found in a grassroots that is now growing into a full blown natural turf lawn. Those in the media and the Obama Administration want to "cut that lawn." They mistook it for Astroturf. But Astroturf can't grow beyone its articificial capacity. Natural turf will overtake the land if its not "kept under control."
 
Our nation's founders would call this patch of grass "We the People."
 
The mainstream media and the propaganda arm of the Obama Administration have just met their death panel: the American people.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Senate Removes "non-existent" Death Panel Provisions from Health Care Bill

"I guess this arose out of a provision in one of the House bills that allowed Medicare to reimburse people for consultations about end-of-life care, setting up living wills," Obama said (at a townhall meeting 08/11/04). "Somehow it's gotten spun into this idea of death panels. Um, I am not in favor of that. I want to clear the air."
 
“It does us no good to incite fear in people by saying that there’s these end-of-life provisions, these death panels,” (Alaska Senator) Murkowski, a Republican, said. “Quite honestly, I’m so offended at that terminology because it absolutely isn’t (in the bill). There is no reason to gin up fear in the American public by saying things that are not included in the bill.“
 
Others have criticized the discussion of mandatory end of life counseling as distorting the facts. But for most who haven't actually read the bill, it's easy to shuffle off the rhetoric as just another shot from the right to discredit it. For those who have not only read the bill, but written extensive research pieces on it, there seems to be a different view.
 
Conservatives have agreed with former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin that she is right to be concerned about "pulling the plug on grandma," as the President calls it.  Sean Hannity, Mike Huckabee, Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh, all "right wing extemists," have agreed that bureaucrats making final decisions and the rationing of health care which would result from the cuts in Medicare would not be good for grandma. Add 52% of the American people, prominent doctors, lawyers and writers to this group and throw in a former Speaker of the House for good measure and that's a lot of right wing extremists, if you go by the rhetoric coming out of Nancy Pelosi's and Harry Reid's offices.
 
The U.S. Senate also thinks Palin is right, too. A day after Senators, Congresspeople and political pundits essentially called Sarah Palin "nuts" and dismissed the idea of death panels, the Senate removed all the provisions from the bill cited by Palin on her Facebook page in a follow up to her original statement.
 
"You Know Those 'Death Panel' Provisions Palin Was Ridiculed For Writing About? The Senate Finance Committee Just Dropped Them.." read the headline on a blog.
 
The Hill reported:
The Senate Finance Committee will drop a controversial provision on consultations for end-of-life care from its proposed healthcare bill, its top Republican member said Thursday.

The committee, which has worked on putting together a bipartisan healthcare reform bill, will drop the controversial provision after it was derided by conservatives as "death panels" to encourage euthanasia.
Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) was criticized by the usual suspects, The Daily Kos and The Huffington Post, for his involvement in getting the provisions removed. These are the same publications who initially denied the existence of such provisions.
 
Sarah Palin wrote a detailed follow up on her Facebook page in which she clarified:

These consultations are authorized whenever a Medicare recipient’s health changes significantly or when they enter a nursing home, and they are part of a bill whose stated purpose is "to reduce the growth in health care spending." [5] Is it any wonder that senior citizens might view such consultations as attempts to convince them to help reduce health care costs by accepting minimal end-of-life care?
Apparently, the facts got in the way of those who were trying to stop opponents of the measure from spreading "misinformation."
 
The American people will be thankful that at least someone read the bill and pointed out a very very serious problem with it. "Death Panels!" Sometimes you have to yell fire in a crowded movie theater, especially when it's really on fire.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Smear Campaign Now Targets The American People

On September 8, 2008,  FactCheck.org noticed an unusual amount of internet traffic smearing Sarah Palin.  Eric Erickson at Human Events pointed his finger specifically at David Axelrod when he wrote that "When those grassroots attacks are manufactured by public relations firms, they aren’t real: they’re astroturfed -- fake attacks designed to look like a grassroots movement."
 
Palin's poll numbers were high the day the smear campaign went full tilt, which discounts the possibility of an unhappy electorate coming out en masse to protest her selection as VP candidate. When she had just pushed the McCain campaign into a tie with Obama, the Obama campaign and its surrogates manufactured a false impression that there was a popular outcry against Palin.
 
Whenever confronted with a truth that could defeat them, Obama and his henchmen have always resorted to the Alinsky playbook.
 
RULE 12: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it." Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions. (This is cruel, but very effective. Direct, personalized criticism and ridicule works.)

Citizens who have spoken out at town hall meetings across the country are now being called "astroturfers" or "the mob" because they dare exercise their First Amendment rights. The President has instructed his followers to step up and appear at town hall meetings to disrupt the outcry. Nancy Pelosi thinks the insurance companies are behind this. Other Democrats and sympathizers in the media are saying the outcry is being orchestrated by the RNC or big business.
 
This outcry is coming from the bottom up. It's coming from the grassroots. Natural turf starts from real grass roots. Call them natural turfers, not astroturfers. Someone needs to explain to the Obama Administration that "We the People" actually do exist.
 
When Jimmy Carter blamed the American people for being in a malaise, he insulted them. When Barack Obama asks citizens to blame other citizens for our healthcare problem and accuses the American people for defending the status quo and not wanting to be constructive, he insults us.
 
Think of it as a way to file frivolous complaints against your neighbors. It worked against Sarah Palin in Alaska. Now it can work against you. Just email flag@whitehouse.gov and let the president know that your neighbor is a subversive because he or she has chosen to exercise his or her First Amendment rights to disagree with the President. Uh oh. This blog might be in trouble now.
 
We all saw what happened to Sarah Palin, Joe the Plumber, Carrie Prejean and others who have opposed the liberal agenda. If you are one of the 52% of the American people who are opposed to Obama's healthcare reform plan, you're next.
 
You, Joe Citizen, are now as important a target as Sarah Palin. You represent a threat to the liberal agenda. You must be marginalized. You must be silenced.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Losing American Jobs a Million Bucks at a Time

President Obama's healthcare reforms include a provision that the plan would be paid for by assessing a 5.4% surcharge on incomes over $350,000. This could be the poster child for the theory of "unintended" consequences. Consider how much the average person in this country makes and how much 5.4% of $1,000,000 is. Even remedial math students can understand the concept. If healthcare reform is passed, expect a lot of jobs to be cut.
 
The Heritage Foundation calculates the effect of the surcharge on a small business income of $1,100,000: "$44,000 might force the business owner to cut costs somewhere, and that could mean somebody’s out of a job."
 
The politically philosophical implications notwithstanding, this is simply immoral.
 
We are looking at a government program that will cost jobs at an alarming rate. Even if the business owner or individual who pays the surcharge cuts back in their own personal lives and doesn't cut jobs, it will still cost jobs.
 
The only way some are not going to get laid off is if the person who pays their salary and is being surcharged is a nice guy. And if he's a nice guy, he's going to cut back on his own personal contracting work or landscaping instead. I bet that will make you feel good when some poor carpenter or landscaper gets laid off because you kept your job.
 
For all the moral whining the left will do when conservatives "side with the rich," liberals still come up on the short end of the morality stick. Liberals have yet to learn that by soaking the rich to help the poor, the socialist tactic of redistributing wealth, is inherently linked to the capitalist tactic of downsizing the workforce. The two are not at odds with each, they are inherently linked economically speaking.
 
As a side note, soaking the rich now also means higher taxes for lower and middle income families down the road. We can't possibly have a fair taxation system in this country if the rich gain more of the ownership stake in the country and the percentage of people actually paying taxes drops below 50%. That's called an oligarchy. It also requires raising taxes on the poor and middle class when the time comes to set the tax structure back to normal.
 
Americans can't be fooled by the the Biden philosophy of it being patriotic to pay more than your fair share or the Obama philosophy of having skin in the game. For every dime the government soaks from any citizen, a dime's worth of productivity is lost. Giving up the fruits of your labor to fund government programs you disagree with is not patriotic. And noone should be required to have skin in a game they don't want to play.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »