Monday, January 31, 2011

Quote of the Day (January 31, 2011)

“MSNBC does not have a political agenda" - and milk shoots out of your nose
John Sexton at Verum Serum:
" becomes clear that Palin is MSNBC’s Emmanuel Goldstein, the fictional villain from Orwell’s 1984. Their coverage (and that of much of the MSM) amounts to a daily two minute hate which serves their political and business interests even if – as in the case of the Arizona shootings – it has little to do with reality."
- JP

Will Sarah Palin speak at CPAC?

What is "the right thing" to do about CPAC this time?
As February approaches, the annual speculation about whether Gov. Palin will speak at CPAC has started up again. At Politico, which depends heavily on speculation, Ben Smith notes that even though the governor is not scheduled to speak at any of this year's CPAC events, he interprets SarahPAC's co-sponsorship of a CPAC 2011 reception to mean that Gov. Palin and David Keene have "patched things up."

Although a couple of choice speaking slots still have "TBA" status on the CPAC agenda, Jerry Wilson is convinced that Sarah Palin will not attend:
" must stick firmly in the throat of Washington insiders and wannabes that Sarah Palin can bypass them without missing a beat. She can pick her spots, selecting such prizes as being the keynote speaker at a high profile sanctioned event marking Ronald Reagan’s one hundredth birthday. She speaks to more people in a second with one Facebook page than all the speakers at CPAC combined will reach in a year. Simply put, Palin doesn’t need CPAC. And she doesn’t seem all that inclined to make an appearance there because it’s been elevated to mandatory status by those seeking to enhance their own status."
We honestly don't know whether she will show up at CPAC or not, nor does anyone else but Gov. Palin and perhaps a few of her closest aides.

- JP

More Quote of the Day Honorable Mention, Part 206

"You can't please everyone" Edition

Steve Peoples at Roll Call:
"The top elected official in New Hampshire’s largest city, Manchester Mayor Ted Gatsas... hasn’t heard a peep from the Palin camp. He advised candidates against intentionally skipping New Hampshire, a move that some think Palin will make if she decides to seek the presidency... At least one person thinks Palin could be an instant contender in New Hampshire, regardless of when she jumps into the race. It’s all about name recognition, according to former Rep. Jeb Bradley, now the state Senate Majority Leader. 'If Gov. Palin decided she was going to run and wanted to invest the resources in New Hampshire, she’d be a credible candidate right away. There’s no question about that,' Bradley told Roll Call last week..."
Rep. Jack Kingston (R-GA), via Jim Galloway:
"To Sarah Palin’s credit, you have a national network of very energized fans."
Mark Vogl at Nolan Chart:
"Liberals and Democrats could be in real trouble as women take their place in the conservative movement. Elections could even more greatly shift to the right. MargaretThatcher in England, Reagan's partner, demonstrated just how effective a woman conservative can be in leading a nation. As women manifest the politics of their position, as small business owners, as leaders in church, as victims of government policies intended to keep women in submission, a new wave of voters and leaders will surge into the conservative ranks. Sarah Palin is the harbinger of a new American woman, and with that a renewed conservative America!"
Kevin Dujan at Hillbuzz:
"I think President Reagan would have really liked Governor Palin, on a very personal level."
CJ at An Angry American:
"Tracy Morgan... Classy guy, right? He's an idiot, TNT has apolgized for the fact that he's an idiot and I chalked it up to PDS. But what I don't understand is how a supposed liberal, a warm, tolerant, accepting human being, posting on another blog can actually say the remark was made because Governor Palin dresses 'sexily'. Yup. It's Governor Palin's fault for being beautiful and dressing well. And spoons make Rosie O'Donnell fat..."
"Comedy Gold! Chris Matthews, who derides Palin as stupid, says Panama Canal is in... EGYPT!"
M. Joseph Sheppard at A Point of View, and Whitney Pitcher at C4P:
"It is nonsensical,and yet another aspect of the liberal smear machine, to say that Palin has no policies -- she has clearly set out her economic vision. They do however admit that she has a 'values' standpoint... Unfortunately for them, and their ilk, it is the unbeatable combination of moral values and common sense economics which will sweep away the detritus of the liberal past as 'the plain people whom Lincoln so loved' reassert themselves and their values in 2012 with Palin."
Common Sense:
"Sarah Palin Drives them Crazy - I like that..."
DrJohn at Flopping Aces:
"I have grown to loathe Politico. It is a self-serving group of Journolistas masquerading as real news people. Today Jonathan Allen put out a hit piece hacking at Michele Bachmann. And it employed a typical slimy Politico technique- anonymous derision... Politico has a history of using anonymous sources to damage Republicans, especially those named Sarah Palin... The media has its reputation staked in Sarah Palin being an idiot. Palin is not an idiot. She is very bright. She is witty. She is politically astute. And she is capable. Politico and the rest of the left wing media do not want this to become common knowledge. They are engaged in a cover-up- a cover-up of their own bias, malpractice and incompetence."
Noel Sheppard at NewsBusters:
"Hmmm. 'Targeted Republican incumbents.' I guess it's okay to do this 23 days after Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.) was shot, but... inappropriate for Sarah Palin to do virtually the exact same thing months before last year's midterm elections."
Noel Sheppard at NewsBusters:
"As NewsBusters has been reporting, the folks at MSNBC last week - in particular Chris Matthews - spent a great deal of time attacking former Alaska governor Sarah Palin and Congresswoman Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) for comments they erroneously felt disqualified the conservative women from public office. Will this network and its commentators pay as much attention to Sen. Chuck Schumer's (D-NY) remarks on CNN's 'State of the Union' Sunday wherein he claimed the three branches of government are the House, the Senate, and the president... Imagine for a moment Palin or Bachmann saying something this stupid. So-called journalists - especially those on MSNBC! - would have a field day with it."
Rob Port at Say Anything:
"It’s been fascinating to watch the liberals and... media try to marginalize Sarah Palin by casting her as some sort of an idiotic bimbo. Palin has irritated the collective left to the point of distraction. To the point where their claims about her irrelevancy are, well, pretty ironic given the endless coverage they devote to Palin."
Patrick X. Coyle at Human Events:
"It’s ironic that Obama, the leader of the American Left, has called for civility when it is his followers on college campuses that have eagerly denounced, shouted-down, and even assaulted those who dare express different viewpoints from their own. Many conservatives have already written on the Left’s reaction to the shootings and how it blamed Sarah Palin and the Tea Party for somehow encouraging Jared Lee Loughner to launch his murderous rampage. Some were shocked the Left would dare stoop to that level, yet this really shouldn’t surprise anyone. Many of today’s leftist pundits learned their tactics from their college professors and administrators. It is on our campuses where this type of hate, vitriol, and violence regularly occurs against conservatives."
sundancecracker at Honey Trail:
"Assange is Skeered of Palin…. and Biden (?) ... I can understand the idiot being scared of Sarah Palin, who is by all measures the strongest conservative in America right now... But worried about Joe 'Big-Effen Deal' Biden? pffffftt… That ranks right up there with fear of the Tooth Fairy."
Dr. Richard Kelley, Chairman of the Board of Outrigger Hotels and Resorts:
"This week I had a unique opportunity to explore another facet of the global Travel & Tourism industry and, at the same time, get a glimpse of one of today’s most talked-about personalities, Sarah Palin. The occasion was a fundraising banquet of the Weatherby Foundation International, which immediately preceded the annual meeting of Safari Club International (SCI). Both events were held in Reno, Nevada. Both organizations are dedicated to ethical hunting, preservation and wildlife conservation... Sarah Palin was the keynote speaker at the Weatherby event and captivated the audience... Listening, I could personally relate to Gov. Palin’s proposition that outdoors activities are a great means of developing family relationships and instilling values in the next generation because I did something very similar with my own children."
- JP

Hotline: Gov. Palin outraises Mitt Romney, rivals at year's end

Governors Palin and Romney lap the field in the fundraising race
National Journal's Hotline On Call reports that Sarah Palin led all of her potential rivals for the 2012 GOP presidential nomination in end-of-the-year fundraising, even finishing ahead of her closest competitor Mitt Romney:
Both Palin and Romney filed impressive year-end fundraising reports, due Monday at the Federal Election Commission. From Nov. 23 and Dec. 31, Palin's Sarah PAC hauled in $279,000. She finished the year with $1.3 million in her campaign account.

Palin's total is particularly striking because she outraised Romney using only a federal political action committee. Romney's series of state level PACs set up in Alabama, Iowa, Michigan, New Hampshire and South Carolina, detailed in a New York Times report last year, allows big donors to max out both to Romney's federal committee, the Free and Strong America PAC, and to his state organizations, which often have higher contribution limits.

That state network helped Romney outraise Palin in the previous reporting period, which covered mid-October to the end of November. He wasn't as fortunate in the final reporting period of the year. In the last five weeks of 2010, Romney's federal PAC raised almost $175,000 and his state PACs hauled in $36,000, bringing his total haul to almost $211,000 -- less than Palin's take for the same period.

Hotline's Jeremy P. Jacobs says Gov. Palin's fundraising success shows that she has cultivated a dedicated network of contributors, most of them small donors. As for the other potential GOP candidates, none of their fundraising efforts even came close to those of the two front runners.

- JP

Cornhucksters: Ethanol Salesmen Who Would Be President

What other special interests will these guys cave to?
In a National Review Online op-ed earlier this month, Katrina Trinko observed that four of Sarah Palin's potential rivals for the 2012 GOP presidential nomination are stuck on ethanol:
What kind of Republican supports high tariffs on imports, dubious green tax credits, and consumption mandates to prop up unprofitable environmental darlings? The ethanol-loving midwestern kind, especially the ones running for president.

Currently, imported ethanol is slapped with a 54-cent-per-gallon tariff, while oil companies receive a 45-cent tax credit per gallon of ethanol blended into their gasoline. Both the tariff and the tax credit have just been extended for another year, thanks to a bipartisan push from Cornbelt politicians. In case these provisions aren’t enough to help the industry hobble its way to satisfying profits, lawmakers also decided to mandate that U.S. consumption of renewable fuels (which will certainly be almost entirely corn-based and cellulosic ethanol) reach 36 billion gallons by 2022. And that’s just the assistance provided on the federal level.

There are four potential midwestern 2012 Republican presidential nominees: Minnesota governor Tim Pawlenty, Indiana governor Mitch Daniels, South Dakota senator John Thune, and Indiana congressman Mike Pence. When it comes to doling out favors to the ethanol industry, none of them can credibly claim his attitude was “just say no.”

Does it matter? Absolutely: As this year’s tariff and tax-credit extensions showed, even a Tea Party–driven small-government surge can’t stop politicians from kowtowing to the ethanol lobby. Further, a Republican president who is willing to carve out exemptions for ethanol interests will lack credibility when he battles spending or tax breaks benefiting other special interests. And finally, while some claim that ethanol will allow our nation to achieve energy independence, the fact that the highest approved corn-gas blend is only 15 percent ethanol (and is approved only for certain automobile models from 2007 or later) suggests that an America running on corn is unlikely in the extreme.

Mike Pence has announced that he does not intend to seek national office. But a seemingly unlikely friend of the ethanol lobby is already stalking Pence's prime location on Ethanol Alley. Newt Gingrich is a product of the southeast, not the midwest. But he is no less a snake corn oil salesman than his four counterparts in the American heartland, as a WSJ editorial, published today, reveals:
The former Speaker blew through Des Moines last Tuesday for the Renewable Fuels Association summit, and his keynote speech to the ethanol lobby was as pious a tribute to the fuel made from corn and tax dollars as we've ever heard.


Of course, the ethanol boom isn't due to the misallocation of resources that always stalks inflation. It is the result of decades of deliberate industrial policy, as Mr. Gingrich well knows. In 1998, then Ways and Means Chairman Bill Archer tried to kill ethanol's subsidies for good, only to land in the wet cement that Speaker Gingrich had poured.

Yet today this now-mature industry enjoys far more than cash handouts, including tariffs on foreign competitors and a mandate to buy its product. Supporters are always inventing new reasons for these dispensations, like carbon benefits (nonexistent, according to the greens and most scientific evidence) and replacing foreign oil (imports are up). An historian of Mr. Gingrich's distinction surely knows all that.

Given that Mr. Gingrich aspires to be President, his ethanol lobbying raises larger questions about his convictions and judgment. The Georgian has been campaigning in the tea party age as a fierce critic of spending and government, but his record on that score is, well, mixed.

Do we need to blend ethanol with our gasoline? Yes, but only as a fuel oxygenate and only in very small amounts. That was the original idea when it was discovered in the previous decade that the chemical compound MTBE, which was then the oxygenate of choice, was leaking from fuel storage tanks into the groundwater. MTBE was an excellent anti-knock agent, and it was hailed as a much less toxic solution to increase the octane level of gasoline than lead, which had been used for that purpose for much of the previous century. But environmental and health concerns, the same factors that lead us to substitute MTBE in the place of lead, brought us ethanol as a replacement for MTBE.

Ethanol was first blended with gasoline at a 10 percent concentration (E10), which is much more than enough corn in the gasoline for it to serve its function as an oxygenate. But an ethanol lobby quickly coalesced around the corn product, and soon it was pushing for higher concentrations of ethanol in each gallon of gasoline. E10 will soon give way to E15, and the lobby wants to see even high blend levels, such as E-85, the so-called "flex fuel."

As a motor fuel, ethanol is not without its issues. At higher concentrations, the net lower energy of the blend becomes a factor. A vehicle will get somewhat lower fuel mileage compared to conventional 87 octane unleaded gasoline. Although many modern American cars are capable of burning E-85 with no harmful effects to the engines, this is not true for all of them, particularly older models. Many owners of small engines, used in lawn mowers, trimmers, outboard marine applications, etc. have reported severe damage from ethanol blend use, even at concentrations as low as 15 percent. And until cellulosic ethanol production become feasible, economically and otherwise, the sugar and corn we currently use will remain at higher prices than they would if the only demand for corn was for use as food.

The fact is that natural gas, coal, and oil continue to provide the most efficient use of energy defined by what it costs in dollars and energy (fuel and labor) to find, extract and refine, versus the amount of energy they provide for those dollars and energy. Of these three, the environmental lobby least favors coal and oil, although it is not very fond of any of them because they are not considered "renewable" resources. But natural gas, when used as a motor fuel, has too many advantages to be ignored. It is relatively cheap, clean-burning (Honda's CNG-powered Civic GX is greener than a Toyota Prius hybrid), and plentiful. We're living right on top of massive deposits of it, and it's not just located under a few corn-growing states. At least half of our country's states have some natural gas reserves. The Natural Gas Supply Association says those reserves are sufficient for at least 60 years at current use levels, according to its most conservative estimates. Only 56 percent of the crude oil refined in the U.S. comes from North America, but 98 percent of the natural gas we consume is produced here.

What's holding natural gas back? Nationwide, there are only about 1,500 natural-gas refueling stations for motor vehicles, and only about half of them sell to the public. California and Oklahoma lead the nation in offering the most locations where owners of CNG-fueled vehicles can "fill up." If we're to invest in our infrastructure, natural gas refueling stations will likely provide more bang for the buck than money spent in other ways.

There's another factor holding back the use of natural gas, and that is the commitment to rely on it to make the United States truly energy secure and energy independent. Of all the potential candidates for the 2012 GOP presidential nomination, only one stands alone as the leading proponent of the use of natural gas as a "bridge fuel" between gasoline and the alternative "wonder" fuels of the future, such as hydrogen. Her name is Sarah Palin.

Related: Sarah Palin, energy and the media left narrative

Update: Ed Morrissey comments:
We have an opportunity to reform government, perhaps the greatest such political opening in almost a century. Farm subsidies in general have to be on the table, but that’s especially true for ethanol and corn in particular. Ethanol has simply proven to be too costly, too difficult to transport, and not an effective enough substitute for gasoline to be practical or cost-effective. Subsidies only hide that fact from consumers at the gas pumps and the showrooms, but the cost to taxpayers for the years of subsidies demonstrate the decades-long failure. Even Al Gore admits ethanol is a bust, for Pete’s sake.

Republicans don’t need a presidential candidate who wants to conduct business as usual by buying farm votes with promises of our money. We need a candidate who recognizes the historical moment for change, rather than the opportunity to sell more of the same.
- JP

Day By Day (January 31, 2011)

Walk like an Egyptian
Good morning! It's a wonderful life if we just take it Day By Day:


Please support Chris Muir's pro-Palin Day By Day.

- JP

Sunday, January 30, 2011

Quote of the Day (January 30, 2011)

Yet Another Blatant Bill Maher Lie
Herb at
"If the Media would have told the truth about Barack Obama as many times as they and Bill Maher have lied about Sarah Palin, we might be a lot better off right now..."
- JP

Welcome Alaskans4Palin and Hoosiers for Sarah Palin

Two great new blogs
We welcome two new blogs to the Palinosphere. Alaskans4Palin is a great looking state blog which just went live a couple of hours ago. With a staff of contributors who are all Alaskans, A4P will live up to its name. But even more importantly, this blog will be a vehicle to show that Gov. Palin still has strong support in her home state, despite the worst efforts of the left and its trained media to try to make Americans believe just the opposite.

Hoosiers For Sarah Palin went active last Tuesday, and it will help plant the Palin banner in Indiana, a state in which she also enjoys considerable support. Her warmly received speech to Indiana Right to Life in April of 2009 is still considered one of her best. Morgan's blog has a clean, uncluttered appearance which is easy to read and appeals to us.

The roster of state-based Palin blogs continues to grow, and we wish these two new sites all the best as they work hard for our favorite Mama Grizzy. Please make the jumps to both blogs and browse around. They are both definitely worth following, in our opinion.

- JP

Politico makes things up, blames Reno reporter

A tangled web indeed
Politico has been making things up about Sarah Palin again:
Palin’s putting the safety catch on her references to weapons in the wake of Rep. Giffords's shooting.

Her speech last night to the Safari Club in Reno was closed press, but thanks to the Reno Gazette-Journal's David Jacobs putting his ear to a closed door, we’re hearing the former Alaska governor’s new line.

Palin dropped the "reload" phrase from her routine, telling the audience of hunters "don't retreat, stand tall" — a shift from her now infamous and well-known "don't retreat, reload" line that played on a loop on cable in the after the Tucson shooting.

In the wake of the tragedy, Palin came under attack for having put Giffords's district in crosshairs on her website.
Andy Barr wrote the brief article from which the excerpt above was taken. Notice that Politico makes the assumption, based on what another reporter wrote after trying to listen to Gov. Palin's address through a closed door, that the Mama Grizzy had somehow been forced to retreat from her often used "Don't retreat, just reload" phrase. Barr or his editors had titled his piece "Palin retreats, won't reload", and published it on Politico's website.

But SarahPAC's Rebecca Mansour wouldn't let Politico get away with making things up, and she showed just how unfounded was the website's assumption when she tweeted:
For the record, this story is inaccurate Yesterday in Reno Gov. Palin did say her trademark line "Don't retreat, reload."
Politico quickly scrubbed Barr's article and then posted a rewrite to the original story's url:
Palin’s firing back after a Nevada newspaper reported she put a muzzle on her trademark "Don't retreat, reload!!" phrase in the wake of Rep. Giffords's shooting.

Her speech last night to the Safari Club in Reno was closed press, but the Reno Gazette-Journal's David Jacobs put his ear to a closed door.

He reported Palin dropped the "reload" phrase from her routine, telling the audience of hunters "don't retreat, stand tall" — a shift from her now infamous and well-known "don't retreat, reload" line that played on a loop on cable in the after the Tucson shooting.

But Palin aide Rebecca Mansour denied that the former governor dropped the line, suggested to her by her father.

"The governor actually did use the phrase 'Don't retreat, reload,'" Mansour told POLITICO in an email. "She also said, 'Don't retreat, stand tall.'"

"Her father, Chuck Heath, was present at the speech yesterday, and the crowd cheered when she pointed to her Dad and repeated this favorite saying of his," the aide added.
The rewritten article is titled "Palin retreat? She's reloading," and Poltico never printed a retraction or an apology. Politico's editors instead are trying to put the blame on the Reno Gazette Journal's David Jacobs. But here's what Jacobs wrote:
“Don’t retreat, stand tall,” Palin told the crowd as she emphasized the importance of “responsible conservation.”
Jacobs never mentions in his article that Gov. Palin also said, "Don't retreat, reload" in her speech, but he also never implied that she didn't say it. There was no reason for Barr's editors to make that assumption, but make it they did. Why? Because Politico is also looking for an angle on a Palin story where Gov. Palin can be portrayed as inconsistent, weak, backing down, etc. In other words, any type of negative spin the leftist website can try to associate with the 2008 GOP vice presidential candidate, it will pursue.

Bad enough that Politico scrubbed the original article, but pointing a finger at a local reporter is really unprofessional, not to mention low down. We couldn't find a cache of the original Politico article, so thoroughly was the scrub job, but fortunately some newspapers and associated websites republish Politico news articles. One of those sites is, where we found the original piece intact.

To paraphrase Sir Walter Scott, "Oh what a tangled web the media left weaves, for they always practise to deceive!"

- JP

More Quote of the Day Honorable Mention, Part 205

"Sarah Smiles" Edition

Wayde at Conservative Galaxy:
"We interrupt the fake media’s call for civility in order to lambaste Jonathan Freedland of the who authored a seriously silly piece pertaining to Barack Obama’s Tuscon speech, coupled with pitching some gratuitous cheap shots against Sarah Palin... Johnathan, are you really that stupid to think that somebody falsely accused of being an accessory to murder should just let that stand? Palin drives the left bonkers because she nails their hypocrisy and non-stop lying deftly and with poise. The more they pile on with vicious rumors and vitriolic rhetoric that include targeting her family, the more 'Sarah smiles', then fires back salvos of truth and sanity that unmasks them."
Stacy McCain at The Other McCain:
"Nothing says 'academic freedom' like kowtowing to a few hundred students who signed up for an anti-Palin Facebook page..."
Jimmy 'Rent Is Too Damn High' McMillan via AOL News:
"Haters -- those who don't like Sarah Palin. That's what they are. Sarah Palin: I love you because America gives you the constitutional right to do whatever you want to do as a woman. And people don't think you can do because you're a woman. They try to make a mockery out of you. But you stand up for your rights and stand strong for your rights. And don't let anyone try to cut you down. Not only are they talking about Sarah Palin. They're talking about me."
Glenn Reynolds at Instapundit:
"Why They’d Rather Talk About Sarah Palin (Cont’d): IMF to US: Better Start Taking Care Of Business."
Yonoson Rosenblum at Mishpacha:
"The treatment of Palin by American Jews and Jewish groups is indefensible and demonstrates their own lack of concern for Jewish interests. Palin has consistently been one of the most ardent defenders of Israel, and she wields a great deal of influence over millions of American Christians who share her views. Given the alacrity of the Jewish attacks on her, who could blame her if she were to ask: What kind of people consistently pay back good with bad and show such little gratitude for those who mean them only good?"
Big Sky Blog:
"How rude of Gilbert & Sullivan to fail to include any references to beheading Sarah Palin, leaving it up to the clever folks in Missoula instead!"
Kathy Shaidle at Five Feet of Fury:
"Children’s production of ‘The Mikado’ calls for beheading of Sarah Palin... This doesn’t surprise you, does it? I was at a house party last year, where a spindly 'male' academic in trendy eyewear opined, apropos of nothing, that Sarah Palin should be 'buried.' You know, like they do with women in Afghanistan before they stone them?"
James Taranto at WSJ's Best of the Web Today:
"Perhaps Olds made a clerical error and one of Andrew Sullivan's works got into the Arthur Sullivan file."
Anthony Martin at
"No doubt the minions of the Leftwing will justify the scene on the basis of it being 'art' and 'fiction,' just as they did when Hollywood produced a movie about the assassination of George W. Bush, who was a sitting President at the time of the film's release. However, what if the subject of the play had been, say, the beheading of Barack Obama? Or the rape of Michelle Obama? ... The Left, the mainstream media, the talking head pundits on TV, and Democrats in Congress would be calling for endless investigations into to whether or not the producers of such horrid depictions were co-conspirators in a homegrown terrorist plot. Yet so far, no one from the Left has yet to decry the film depicting the assassination of George W. Bush, nor has there been one bit of outrage from the Leftwing concerning the despicable and highly suspicious addition to an innocent play which subjected children to a call for Sarah Palin's beheading. Civility?"
Mark Whittington at Yahoo!'s Associated Content:
"What is next? A production of 'Macbeth' in which Lady Macbeth wears glasses, has a familiar hair style, and says, 'You betcha?'"
Suzanne Fields at The Washington Times:
"When Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann got together during the midterm election campaigns, they were dismissed by certain politicians and pundits as 'Thelma and Louise,' as real-life stand-ins for the two innocent housewives whose bucolic romp across America became a killing spree... Not so long ago, Hillary Rodham Clinton was the Lady MacBeth of the nightmares of men who were afraid she was on her way back to the White House... Although Mrs. Clinton was attacked as 'uppity,' having climbed to power as a 'wife of,' such accusations are mild by the new standards. More tempting female targets have replaced her. Mrs. Palin‘s conservative philosophy is as legitimately criticized as Mrs. Clinton‘s liberal agenda once was. Her critics nevertheless attack by innuendo, taking aim (pardon the expression) with appeals to anachronistic female stereotypes."
Violet Socks at Reclusive Leftist:
"Ms. Magazine refers to Palin as 'Caribou Barbie'... The magazine that used to be the voice of feminism is now apparently the voice of selective sexism."
Maria S at Dodo Can Spell:
"Looking at what's happening in Egypt, Alan Caruba has that feeling of déjà vu. The implications if Egypt goes the way of Iran spells one of the greatest disasters for the entire world. '...The fate of the Suez Canal is the biggest geopolitical concern at this point. A lot of oil transits through it in much the same way it does through the Strait of Harmuz. Years of growing dependency on Middle East oil while our own vast reserves were locked up and neglected will demonstrate why the policies of several administrations have been not just short-sighted, but incredibly stupid...' Can we already say Sarah Palin was right when she insisted that the USA should keep drilling for oil in its own land and not depend on the Middle East? And yet people seem to think she does not have what it takes to be Madame President. Hmmmmmmmmmmm..."
Mark Goldblatt at NRO's The Corner:
"Just wondering who’s going to be the first New York Times columnist or MSNBC commentator to blame the chaos in Egypt on Sarah Palin."
Ray Thomas at The Bull Cutter:
"Joan rivers apparently didn’t get the memo from the 'elite rulers' to 'moderate her tone' and use non-incendiary words. She’s still calling Sarah Palin a 'Nazi,' showing her complete ignorance about just what 'Nazi' means, and calling Sarah’s daughter Bristol, 'stupid.' There will be no change in how liberals and Democrats (a repetitious phrase, that) talk, and what they say. Mostly because the call for 'moderation of tone' is to 'shut up' conservatives and other non-liberals."
- JP

Will Palin backers vote 3rd party if she isn’t nominated? (Updated)

Something for the Vichy Republicans who attack her to consider
According to the findings of a new Rasmussen Reports national survey, nearly half (46 percent) of Likely Republican Primary Voters who support Sarah Palin for president say they are at least somewhat likely to vote third-party if she isn’t nominated by the GOP. 22 percent of them say it is Very Likely:
That puts the GOP in a tight spot since one-third (33%) of all likely primary voters say Palin is the front-runner they least hope wins the party’s presidential nomination.

Among all likely Republican Primary voters, 35% say they are at least somewhat likely to vote for a third-party candidate if their favorite candidate doesn’t win the nomination, with 13% who are Very Likely to do so. Most GOP Primary voters (56%) still say they are unlikely to vote for a third-party candidate if their favorite does not win the nomination, with 27% who say it’s not at all likely. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

While the third-party feeling runs strongest among Palin supporters, 35% of those who support former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee feel that way, including 13% who say they are Very Likely to vote third-party if he doesn’t get the nomination. Among those who back former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, 31% say a third-party vote is likely, but only nine percent (9%) say it’s Very Likely.

Update: Just for the record, Gov. Palin has said that she believes that the GOP, not a third party, is the best channel for Tea Party activists to use to accomplish their goals. Gov. Palin is a loyal Republican -- she always has been one. So she will most likely support whomever the GOP nominates for president if that candidate is not her.

Unlike Sarah Palin, however, your editor has never been a member of the Republican Party. The only political party I have ever registered under was the Democrat Party, back in my "New Democrat" days. When the New Democrats proved to be the Old Democrats with a different name, I changed my voter registration to independent. Although I have voted Republican for more than two decades, I've never trusted the GOP enough to sign up as a member. To this very day, the Republican Party has not shown me that it takes its own political platform seriously, and it continues to allow certain of its members to viciously attack good Reagan conservatives like Gov. Palin. When the GOP officially condemns such attacks and pledges to support its own platform, I may reconsider joining it.

So count me among those Palin supporters who "may" vote third party if the governor is not its nominee for president in 2012. If another Reagan conservative such as Sen. Jim DeMint is nominated, I'll support him. But I refuse to go into a voting booth and hold my nose again while marking the ballot for a Vichy Republican. If the nominee is a Conservative Lite or any other kind of Vichy Republican, I'll take a look at who the third parties have nominated. If there is a suitable Reagan conservative among those nominees, my support will go to him or to her. If not, I'll likely write in Gov. Palin's name on my ballot.

I'm a Reagan conservative, not a Republican. I owe the party of Bush, Dole and Frum nothing. That I am not a member of the GOP is the party's fault, not mine. And if some people are not happy with that attitude, then that's their problem, not mine.

- JP

Bresciani: 7 reasons America needs Sarah Palin in 2012

She "has come to a very propitious moment in time to seize the day"
Although Rev. Michael Bresciani admits that Rep. Michele Bachmann is his personal favorite, he nevertheless argues that realistically, Sarah Palin is the best choice for president in 2012:
1. The simplest howbeit most important reason Sarah Palin is the best choice for President in 2012 is because she is not Barack Obama.

2. The second reason is because she has the most exposure of all the candidates. While Obama may attempt to raise a billion bucks for his campaign treasury Sarah has been climbing into the view and the hearts of millions of Americans though her work with the Tea Party, the mid-terms and her TV series on Alaska not to mention her two books, both well received throughout the nation. She would be the most well known candidate of all, right out of the gate.

3. Although it could easily be misconstrued on the most fundamental level Sarah will make a good candidate on her appearance. She is a lovely person that for many typifies the classic beauty of the American Woman. In a world where appearance counts for much she has it all. She is beautiful, well poised and dignified at all times. She would be a credit to the nation in the company of other world leaders and would certainly be respected for her manner, graceful charm and personality.

4. Sarah has faith in God... She is not likely to be found quoting Bible verses everyday in her public life but to silence the complainers and please the true believers we only need to see her live out what she believes not play the role of the preacher.

5. Sarah Palin is well endowed with what we know as character and integrity... We have heard the pompous declare that Sarah may not be intelligent enough to hold up the Presidency to a high standard. The best answer to that is Barack Obama. Here we have a superbly educated man that has led the nation to the brink of bankruptcy, the highest jobless rate and earned the title of being the head of the most corrupt administration in U.S. History... Palin can be trusted to surround herself with the very best and that is the best we can hope for.


6. Sarah's background and upbringing in one of the most rugged states in the country along with her desire to make America less dependent on foreign oil will no doubt serve to guide her decisions around the environmental lobbyists, excessive EPA regulations and do what is right for the nation. The average American is left scratching their heads when it comes to Obama's energy policies. How can a nation that is sitting on vast reserves of natural resources look to the ever tumultuous Arab nations to supply their needs. Should a Muslim succeed to the Presidency of the EU (predicted by some) with one simple executive order that leader could plunge the American system of transportation and industry into disarray and bring it to a screeching halt.

7. The seventh reason I believe Sarah would be the best choice in 2012 is because she is affording America a real chance to make history. She would become our first female President. Obama... is still running on a lot of pop culture energy with the young and the clueless who don't care much about roots and history but that's not where Middle America comes from and this election will be a call to such people. If the call they answered in the mid-term elections is any indicator; Sarah has come to a very propitious moment in time to seize the day.

She has been a wonderful mother, a good Governor and a great rallying force in America since she was cast on the scene by John McCain in the 2008 race. She can be the very best choice in 2012 for all of the above reasons and a long list of others too numerous to cover in one article.

- JP

RGJ: Sarah Palin speech raises $200K for Safari Club in Reno

“Excitement was building for days ahead of Palin’s visit”
Some 2,000 formally-dressed members of the Safari Club International, after paying $100 each for what the Gazette-Journal billed as “Reno's hottest ticket,” crowded into the Peppermill Resort Spa Casino's Tuscany Ballroom Saturday night to hear Sarah Palin speak of the importance of protecting the environment and how Hunting and fishing are part of the American “heritage” and the nation’s “exceptionalism”:
“Don’t retreat, stand tall,” Palin told the crowd as she emphasized the importance of “responsible conservation.”

Palin also spoke of Second Amendment rights.

“We need to keep tabs on what the White House is telling us,” she also said.

She later said Americans would need to “count on Congress,” where the GOP regained control of the U.S. House of Representatives in November’s election.

But Palin emphasized the importance of local governments in setting policy.

“The best (management) is local” not “bureaucrats thousand of miles away” in Washington making the decisions, she said, drawing on her experience as mayor of Wasilla, Alaska, before becoming that state's governor.


Political science professor Fred Lokken of Truckee Meadows Community College said he considers Palin’s Safari Club appearance a “coup” for Reno and an “excellent” move for her.

“It’s always been a who’s who of some of the prominent conservative Republicans, so frankly for her either to get the invite or be able to wrangle the invite, it really helps her as she tries to position for 2012 and after,” he said. “This is one of the places to the seen.”

Palin’s visit will carry momentum beyond Reno since the Safari Club event draws visitors from afar, many of them wealthy.


“Being able to come to a group like this (gives) some street cred that might help her to sort of reestablish or bolster her efforts at building a campaign for 2012,” Lokken said. “It’s a guns rights place. They are huge in the Second Amendment. Her whole connection to Alaska probably makes her one of the most logical people they have had in years.”

Smith predicted that in a few months, Gov. Palin will return to Nevada for an appearance at “Republican headquarters.”

h/t: Fay


From leftsite The Daily Beast's take on the same event:
She admits that she "threw a little politics" into her recent TLC reality show by dragging the crew to the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge on the pretense of hunting caribou. Her real purpose? Showing viewers that ANWR is a "barren, desolate, less-than-pristine place"--perfect, in other words, for lots of new oil drilling. "If a caribou needs to be sacrificed for the sake of energy independence," she adds, "I say, 'Mr. Caribou, maybe you need to take one for the team.'" She mentions how some media figures have pledged not cover her at all in February, and says the boycott "sounds good" to her: "because there's a lot of chaos in Cairo, and I can't wait to not get blamed for it--at least for a month."


In public, Palin tends be guarded about her plans for the future. But earlier in the evening, she dropped a small hint about her potential ambitions. After some boilerplate comments about how "local government is the most responsive and responsible to the will of the people" she paused for a moment and stared out across the ballroom. And then came this: "that's why I think every president should have a run at gaining experience by being a councilmember, a mayor, a governor, a VP candidate, a commercial fisherman, a hockey mom." As the attendees cheered, Palin made a halfhearted attempt to quiet them down. "No, I'm kidding," she said, beaming. "I try to be funny some times. I'm kidding." But they hoped she wasn't.
And a good after action report on this event at Free Republic here.

- JP

Day By Day (January 30, 2011)

Jimmy Carter 2.0
Good morning! It's a wonderful life if we just take it Day By Day:


Please support Chris Muir's pro-Palin Day By Day.

- JP

Saturday, January 29, 2011

Quote of the Day (January 29, 2011)

Missoula Children’s Theater does “The Mikado.” What could possibly go wrong?
Warner Todd Huston at Right Pundits:
"Of course, what a reference to beheading Sarah Palin is doing in a play written in 1885 featuring a story set in medieval Japan is anybody’s guess. But, hey, we have that wonderful new tone and everything going for us still, right?"
- JP

David Coughlin: Enter Sarah Palin's World

She continues to prove that she’s better than those who play dirty
In American Conservative Daily's "News and Views" for January 29, 2011, David Coughlin devotes a portion of his opinion piece to commentary on Gov. Palin:
The more time that the Mainstream Media devotes to attacking her is more proof that Sarah Palin is the Democrat’s worst nightmare and deserving of more conservative attention. Among the most astonishing phenomena of the current political scene in the U.S. is the relentless percussion of hatred, animadversion, revilement and outright dissimulation hurled against Sarah Palin, the mirror image of the orgy of adulation which Barack Obama enjoyed prior to his election and in the auroral days of his administration. The media have clearly gone beyond the limits of reason or propriety. Let’s enter the world of Sarah Palin for a moment:
  • If she grants interviews to Oprah or Barbara Walters, she’s accused of wanting to be a celebrity; If she denies those interviews, she’s labeled a coward.
  • If she’s quiet when viciously attacked, she’s accused of hiding; If she speaks up, she’s described as injecting herself into the story.
  • If she addresses health care reform, bailouts, and QE2 via columns, Facebook, and Twitter, she’s accused of not engaging in unscripted conversations; In 2008, she was criticized by many for calling it like she saw it and going off script at campaign events.
  • When she resigned as Governor, she was labeled a quitter; I assure you that if she hadn’t resigned, she would have been painted by many as a self-centered hypocrite who didn’t care about Alaska.
  • Many on the Left and Right are ready and willing to pounce on Sarah Palin’s every move. The question is why, and the answer is simple: She’s just a regular person like you and me:
  • She’s a regular person who has managed to pack convention halls and book signings, to release two bestselling books, to launch a successful and unconventional television series, to boost the ratings of every television show she has appeared on – and she has done it all just by being herself.
  • To top it all off, she’s -- heaven forbid -- happy.
  • While running a city and a state, she managed to keep her values intact.
  • She sustained a successful marriage and prioritized her children.
  • She kept smiling and loving life.
  • She even made time for those 5 a.m. runs.
What the Democrats and their supporters earnestly fear is not only that Palin may be around for the indefinite future, but that she is indeed potentially electable in 2012 and must be stopped at all costs. This is perhaps the principal motive for so libelous a spectacle as the left’s all-out debauch of vilification. To the business-as-usual politician and/or media hack, she’s simply maddening:
  • They say she’s not smart enough. (Translation: She doesn’t speak our pretentious language.)
  • They claim she’s too controversial. (Translation: She stands by principle, even when it’s unpopular.)
  • They declare she’s not presidential. (Translation: She doesn’t play by our rules, and that scares the crap out of us.)
  • They insist that her TV series proves she’s not a serious politician. (Translation: If she pulls a Reagan, we’re screwed.
Palin also has something else, something not possessed by previous targets. She has a following...

- JP

Newsbusters: Palin Nitpicker Matthews Puts Panama Canal In Egypt

Tweety's Instant Karma Moment
Chris Matthews spent much of his MSPDS talking head time over the past week repeatedly attacking Gov. Palin and Rep. Bachmann with what NewsBusters Associate EditorNoel Sheppard reports were "cherry-picked and distorted quotes far afield of their intended meaning." But on Friday's edition of his “hardball” program, the heckling host stepped in the donkey dung, saying that the Panama Canal is in Egypt:
Someone must have spoken in Matthews’ earplug, for he corrected himself moments later


In fairness, I know full well that Matthews is aware of what countries these respective canals reside in.

This was a mistake. People make them.

The problem is that folks like Matthews, who so desperately hate Palin and Bachmann, are hanging on their every utterance looking to pounce on anything that can be twisted and misconstrued to embarrass and defame these conservative women.

As we demonstrated last week, this is even when the comments aren’t nearly as out of line as people like Matthews claim.

Contrary to the prevailing liberal meme, Bachmann did not state last Saturday that the Founding Fathers ended slavery before the Emancipation Proclamation and the Civil War.

Unlike what Matthews reported Thursday, Palin did not say the Russians beat us in the Space Race. Even the perilously liberal Tommy Christopher admitted as much Saturday.

When Sarah Palin had a slip of the tongue and said "North Korea" when she meant to say "South Korea," the left refused to give her a break, even though -- as was the case with Matthews' gaffe -- she corrected herself almost immediately. One of the memes that the Democrat/Media Complex pushes hard is that she doesn't know geography and is unfit for high office. But when Obama said that there were 57 states, and Matthews manages to magically transport the Panama Canal to the land of the pharaohs, it's not a problem. Joe Biden is so prone to gaffes that he's been issued a permanent pass by his fellow liberals, no matter what he says, including his latest outlandish uttering that Egypt's Mubarek "is not a dictator."

It's the hypocrisy, stupid.

- JP

University Bans Bristol, Spreads Oppression, Bigotry, Hate

The message is, “Don’t bother coming, Bristol, or we’ll shout you down..."
Jonathon Burns imagines a scenario in which Washington University’s student government had treated Al Sharpton the way it treated Bristol Palin:
Sharpton would OWN the media cycle. He’d have the heads of the entire Washington University administration. He’d demand to speak. He’d demand a higher honorarium. He’d demand greater minority employment, and a Wash U contribution to Sharpton’s National Action Network. Plus, he’d want public apologies from dozens of people, sensitivity training for the student government, and a host of other minor concessions. He’d publicly embarrass the students and the school for their patent racism.


Millions of college students have been indoctrinated with the importance of diversity – so long as that diversity includes approved races, ethnicities, political ideologies, backgrounds, etc. If you’re conservative, from a rural area, and you’re supporting abstinence, well, let’s just say that kind of diversity isn’t desired.

No, instead of supporting diversity, the celebrated ideal of college land, let’s applaud and bow to bigotry.

And of course the Establishment Media is in lock step behind the bigots. Huffington Post and St. Louis’ own Riverfront Times each attacked Bristol (instead of the bigots).

Let’s not kid ourselves, here. what has transpired at Wash U is nothing short of bigotry and hate.
The leftists are attempting to cloak that bigotry and hate by arguing that that their main reason for banning Bristol is that they consider her speakers fee to be too expensive. But Burns refudiates that lie by pointing out that Gloria Steinem, whose usual fee is $20,000, plus two round trip first class tickets, was brought to Washington University to speak last spring:
No, these antics by a pocket of the student body weren’t about money. They were about shutting down, boxing out and otherwise suppressing Bristol. They were about preventing a point of view from being expressed on their campus simply because they didn’t like the Bristol’s ethnicity. So they decided to use heavy intimidation.
We disagree with Burns on one minor point. Bristol's ethnicity has nothing to do with it. Her surname and her point of view, on the other hand, have everything to do with it. If her name were Bristol Boxer or Bristol Biden, and she had intended to speak against abstinence, she would have been welcomed by campus "progressives" with open arms.

But such supposition and imagination have no place in the 1972 world of campus radicalism these leftists live in. Back here in the real world, Bristol's attorney issued this statement:
"Bristol was invited to speak with college students as part of a panel. Evidently she has now been disinvited because of apparent concerns by some vocal members of the undergraduate community.”

“Bristol is deeply disappointed that an institution that publicly claims to 'listen to diverse and sometimes conflicting perspectives, to contribute rigorous academic standards and unbiased scholarship to discussions, and to encourage a civil discourse in which a pluralistic society can respectfully address complex and difficult issues' would withdraw an invitation to a speaker because of 'uproar' over their assumed content of her message or even worse, because of her last name."
- JP

More Quote of the Day Honorable Mention, Part 204

"Breathtaking" Edition

Mark Whittington at Yahoo!'s Associated Content:
"The pledge by the Washington Post's Dana Milbank to ignore Sarah Palin for the month of February has caused the Hollywood Reporter to run the numbers on the former Alaska governor on her mentions in the media. The results are, mildly speaking, breathtaking... If Sarah Palin were really stupid, or crazy, or diabolical as her detractors suggest, she would have become marginalized long ago and would have dropped off the media's radar screen. But the obsession continues, even in the teeth of calls to not cover her. This writer's theory is that in their hearts those suffering from Palin Derangement Syndrome know that she is not stupid, or crazy, or even diabolical. She is a relatively young, telegenic, articulate purveyor of conservative thoughts and values with a large following. She is the one person in America, aside from Barack Obama, whose name is mentioned in the same sentence as 'President of the United States.' She is an existential threat to everything the left holds dear. In their nightmares, liberals see Sarah Palin raising her hand, saying, 'I solemnly swear—' as Barack Obama, George W. Bush, Bill Clinton, and George H. W. Bush look on."
Joe Newby at
"MSNBC has an almost unhealthy obsession with Sarah Palin. We conservatives refer to that as 'Palin Derangement Syndrome' and it seems to affect almost everyone at the network."
J.E. Dyer at
"The Western counterpart of the Tiger Mom—the American counterpart in particular—can arguably be identified as the Mama Grizzly. Palin is one instance of the type: a mother of five, she runs a family business with her husband, but raising her children is Job One. She doesn't expect her children to be perfect; she teaches them principles for honest and honorable life, and accepts that the day will come when she must trust them to act on those principles... When Palin thought things could be done better in the community where her children were growing up, she went out and did them. That's pure Mama Grizzly. When she concluded that the American life she wanted for her children needed defending, she took on the mantle of political leadership."
Glenn Reynolds at Instapundit:
"Why They’d Rather Talk About Sarah Palin (Cont’d): Foreclosure activity up across most US metro areas."
T. D. Williams at Terrance this is stupid stuff:
"Cillizza makes a couple of strange assertions. The first, in trying to keep Ross Douthat from looking clueless, is that Charles Krauthammer is a more important conservative voice than Palin. Krauthammer could be more important if you don't count ability to change existing or proposed legislation (e.g., who had more impact on actual content of the Obamacare bill and reaction to it, Palin or Krauthammer?)... The second... comes after noting that Palin easily draws crowds of 10,000. Cillizza then tells us that not everyone in the crowd will vote for Palin. Duh! I wonder how many times he made that observation about the crowds Barack Obama drew in 2008... In the 2008 campaign Palin's crowds were always enthusiastic, and the vast majority of those interviewed clearly said they would vote for her."
A "Fox & Friends" Viewer via The DC:
"Wow, Ben [Smith, of Politico], you have some free time this afternoon, obviously, and you’re not using it to write another smear piece on Palin."
Geoffrey Dickens at NewsBusters:
"NBC's Today show never covered Democratic Congressman Steve Cohen comparing Republicans to Nazis, but on Friday co-anchor Meredith Vieira determined Sarah Palin's mocking of Barack Obama's Winning the Future slogan as the precise moment when the new era of 'civility' in Washington, came to an end. After Vieira opened this morning's show announcing: 'End of civility? Sarah Palin takes a shot at President Obama's call for winning the the new tone of togetherness in Washington already over?' she brought on MSNBC's Lawrence O'Donnell to chastise Palin and Republican Congresswoman Michele Bachmann."
Lt. Dave Parker of the Anchorage Police Department:
"It was just guilt by innuendo, nothing else... They will do anything to destroy the platform Sarah Palin is standing on."
Mark Vogl at America Today:
"I am one of those Americans who knows who he wants for the next President. Her name is Sarah Palin... This nation is in pain. We are hurting. We are lost. There's no pride in America. The certainty of the Ten Commandments and the Bill of Rights have been replaced by the chaos of Animal Farm, and lunacy of the Mouse that Roared. We dont need Don Trump... we dont need Mitt Romney, both from the northeast, both from the RINOs. We do [need] Sarah. She is our hope, she is our leader..."
Drew McKissick at Conservative Outpost:
"Those who blame violent political rhetoric and imagery for the Arizona tragedy... had no comment about pictures... of a gun pointing at the head of a Sarah Palin cutout or comments among their supporters wishing she were gang raped."
Dana Loesch at Big Journalism:
"Well Of Course MSNBC Folks Didn’t Like Palin’s 'WTF'... From a network that took part in the fake baby Trig speculation that occurred when Sarah Palin first appeared on the national stage, WTF is suddenly 'juvenile.' It’s not juvenile, it’s hysterical and an obvious joke. When did progs become such clenched cheek, non-humorists? I thought conservatives were supposed to be stiff and unfunny. Geez. Stop stealing our stereotypes!"
Ed Morrissey at Hot Air:
"Palin has a strong following in the Tea Party movement; she’s as close to a national leader as it has. That means Palin would require somewhat less organizing, at least to start a national campaign, than others in the Republican Party."
Man of the West at Fear an Iarthair:
"The toughest, most outspoken, unafraid person out there is Sarah Palin.
If any of her rivals were real conservatives... or truly expert economists, or had strong military backgrounds, etc., I would be forced to revise my opinion. But they aren't, not as far as I can tell. None of them have any qualifications so outstanding that I am willing to overlook what I see as a fundamental lack of spine. So, yeah, with some reservations, I am very much open to the concept of President Palin. At least I've no doubt about which side she's on, or whether she's willing to fight. Besides that, she drives Leftists nuts. Gotta love that."
Allie Winegar Duzett at Accuracy in Academia:
"At almost any gathering of the self-described intellectual elite, it seems that irrationally celebrating hatred of Sarah Palin is practically mandatory."
Soviet space expert James Oberg via Instapundit:
"I'm seeing up close how 'Palin Derangement Syndrome' can compel otherwise intelligent people to foam at the mouth and babble nonsense to prove they're right and she's wrong. The historical view is that the early Soviet victories in the Space Race led to the US response of the Apollo program, whose triumph validated the superiority of US space technology -- which had profound diplomatic, military, commercial, and cultural consequences. When Reagan challenged the USSR with Strategic Defense in the 1980s, Apollo had given that challenge credibility -- and the same pundits in the West and in Russian who pooh-poohed SDI had also pooh-poohed the odds of Apollo working. Proven wrong once, they lost credibility when Gorbachyov had to decide when/.if to pull the plug on the USSR's own hideously expensive space weapons programs (eg, Polyus-Skif and Buran). Soviet leadership came to believe, rightly or wrongly, that SDI was a lethal threat to them, based on the success of Apollo that had only been made possible by the stinging US defeats in the early Space Race, It's more complicated, but the essence is, Palin was right: the Soviets sowed the seed of their own collapse by setting off the Space Race."
- JP

What if Sarah Palin had said that Mubarak is not a dictator?

“I can see Cairo from my house!”
‘Whose Bright Idea Was It to Send Joe Biden Out to Talk About Egypt?’ That's the Question of the Day, says Stacy McCain...
...asked by Blake Hounshell of Foreign Policy in response to the latest eruption of Bidenism":
Asked if he would characterize Mubarak as a dictator Biden responded: ‘Mubarak has been an ally of ours in a number of things. And he’s been very responsible on, relative to geopolitical interest in the region, the Middle East peace efforts; the actions Egypt has taken relative to normalizing relationship with — with Israel. … I would not refer to him as a dictator.’
Remember how in 2008 we were told that Biden was such a brilliant choice as running mate and that Obama would benefit enormously from this guy’s vast experience in foreign policy?

- JP

Day By Day (January 29, 2011)

Quick Investment
Good morning! It's a wonderful life if we just take it Day By Day.


Support Chris Muir's pro-Palin Day By Day

- JP

Friday, January 28, 2011

Quote of the Day (January 28, 2011)

‘Civility,’ Unless It’s Sarah Palin
Stacy McCain at The Other McCain:
“Of course, TNT makes the perfunctory apology, but all of Tracy Morgan’s show-business friends will high-five him for those remarks. He will not lose any work as a result. He will not be made a pariah. The demonization of Sarah Palin has been made entirely acceptable by liberalism’s culture commissars, who declared open season on her in August 2008. And yet they consider themselves the proper persons to lecture the rest of us about 'civility.'”
- JP

Why President Obama's Afghanistan Flub Matters

Sorry Mitchell Bard (and other lefties); You can't have it both ways
Here's President Obama telling reporters, “As I said, we will be out of Afghanistan by the end of this year… Combat operations in Afghanistan have ended”:

Obama actually doubled down on his gaffe and said "Afghanistan" twice. Doesn't he know the difference between Iraq and Afghanistan? Well that depends. If you were one of those who insisted that Sarah Palin misspeaking about North Korea and South Korea meant that she was unqualified for high office, then we have a foreign policy crisis on our hands:
Saying "Afghanistan" instead of "Iraq" is something that any of us could easily do.

But here's the thing: Any of us did not stand up two four years ago and claim we were qualified to fill a job that is the American presidency. We haven't written books, made speeches, endorsed candidates and spoken to the (slobbering left-wing) media as if we were policy experts. And we haven't been letting White House personnel leave their jobs to organize a 2012 presidential reelection bid.

In short, more should be expected of President Obama than any of us, based on how he has portrayed herself, and how he is treated by the same media that lied to get him elected.

The real story, though, isn't that Obama said "Afghanistan" instead of "Iraq." Let's be honest: Vice President Joe Biden could have just as easily blown a line like that.

No, the real story is that Obama was discussing a complex, precarious, highly dangerous issue as if he were an expert, even though he clearly isn't.
h/t: Jim Hoft

- JP

More Quote of the Day Honorable Mention, Part 203

Special "WTF" Edition

Ed Morrissey at Hot Air:
"Specifically, Palin’s comment refers to Obama’s contention that we have to 'make sure we aren’t buried under a mountain of debt.' Hello? We already are buried under $14 trillion in debt, almost equal to our entire gross national product — a place where we were heading anyway under Presidents and Congresses of both parties, but accelerated substantially in the last four years under Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, and Obama as both Senator and President. His proposed budget for FY2011 had a projected $1.3 trillion deficit when he submitted it, and now it’s estimated at $1.5 trillion. The W in WTF doesn’t just mean 'what' but also 'where,' as in where has Obama been for the last four years?"
Patty at A Tangled Web:
"Sarah Palin spoke for many when she commented on President Obama’s recent State of the Union speech with a pithy, 'WTF?'"
pghpuma at Free US Now:
"Kudos to Governor Palin, who had the absolute K’s to actually – with the straightest face – assert that there were 'a lot of WTF moments' in the SOTU speech. I love the plateau to which this woman has arrived in the tempering storm of media/liberal assault on her very right to exist!"
Jennifer at Cubachi:
"Palin said it best. Obama leaves everyone asking, WTF?"
Chris Wysocki at WyBlog:
"Barry's re-election theme, announced during his State of the Union campaign kickoff rally, is 'Winning The Future.' Or, WTF. Sarah Palin drove a stake into the heart of that gem on Greta last night... And nothing exposes Obama's mendacity quite like Sarah Palin's little play on acronyms. Which is why the usual liberal defenders of Dear Leader's domestic depredations are apoplectic... WTF indeed."
Yael at Boker tov, Boulder!:
"Whether she runs for president or not, Sarah Palin is a breath of fresh air, courageous, honest and direct."
Mike at Axis of Right:
"Too many Republicans are afraid of what the media will say if they are too critical of the left. No one has more reason to be afraid than Palin, who has faced the most coordinated propaganda smear campaign in modern times. Yet she still refuses to back down. Her numbers are down right now, but if she runs, she will have the money and organization necessary to get her message out unfiltered. If she does, those numbers will improve."
Wild Thing at PC Free Zone:
"Sarah was on fire [Tuesday] night... She is goading the WH and the press on purpose -- love it!"
Clifton B at Another Black Conservative:
"Sarah Palin must have read several million minds [Tuesday] night with that line... The second Sarah Palin makes a comment like this one next month, the left will abandon their Palin embargo and go right back to spewing their bile all over the place. Oh well, at least they were smart enough to pick the shortest month out of the year to attempt their hopeless endeavor."
Crawdad at The Crawdad Hole:
"Way To Fail... Consider the SOTU message train officially off the rails... I blame Sarah Palin."
The Editors of The Washington Times:
"President Obama seems to have cribbed his new campaign theme from Newt Gingrich, or maybe Saddam Hussein... Winning the future – or as Sarah Palin quickly abbreviated it, WTF – has been used in American political rhetoric dating back to the 19th century and was particularly common during and shortly after World War II."
Timothy Donovan at TCUnation:
"That was one great WTF moment hearing Sarah Palin say that Obummer's speech had a lot of WTF moments."
Taylor Marsh:
"Sarah Palin wasn’t the only one who thought 'winning the future' was ridiculous, though she is the only one who short-handed it to 'WTF.' Twitter exploded on Tuesday night with sarcastic references to 'winning the future,' because it was so ridiculously crafted. Palin’s pals have come up with a graphic that’s now bouncing around, using Obama’s signature symbol."
Kevin Dujan at Hillbuzz:
"Reason #5,678,934 why this woman is incredible... Could you ever imagine... Mittens Romney speaking as plainly and telling the truth like Governor Palin?"
"At some point in the near future, Sarah Palin will be accused of causing global warming because she exhales CO2 with every breath. It's no more absurd than the current Palin controversy du jour: Palin on Obama's ‘Winning the Future’: WTF Is a ‘Spot On’ Abbreviation. How absurd is it? This much: MSNBC’s Matthews Slams Palin for ‘WTF’; Gave Grayson a Pass with ‘STFU’"
- JP

Noel Sheppard: Matthews is bashing Palin and Bachmann - again

Divining meaning isn't Matthews' strong suit
NewsBuster Noel Sheppard comments on Chris Matthews' Thursday attack on Gov. Palin for her "WTF" quip about Obama's plagiarized State of the Union slogan "Winning the Future" and his equally obsessive bashing of Congresswoman Michele Bachmann for three consecutive nights:
Matthews, much as he has been doing with Bachmann and Palin for quite some time, took two sentences from the former Alaska governor's lengthy interview with Greta and turned them into a federal case that he and the rest of the so-called journalists in America today will likely lambaste for weeks until the next time Palin utters something they can take out of context, misconstrue and ridicule.

Let's be clear: Palin didn't say the Russians won the Space Race. She said, and I quote, "their victory in that race to space."

As Matthews certainly knows, that's what Sputnik represented at the time and still does now: the Soviet Union beat us into space with the launch of that satellite, and it was a seminal moment for the United States because it started a larger Space Race between the two countries to see who could get a man out there and back while eventually going to the moon.

As such, the Soviets DID win the first round, and any third grader knows that's what Palin meant.

But divining meaning isn't a strong suit for Matthews or most of his liberal guests, especially when the object of their disaffection is a conservative being cherry-picked.

- JP

Sarah Palin: On Sputnik vs. Spudnut

Let’s get back to common sense values
Gov. Palin posted another common sense commentary Friday on Facebook:
On Sputnik vs. Spudnut

Please read this article by the Hoover Institution’s Research Fellow Peter Schweizer. Schweizer, who has written extensively on the subject of the decline and fall of the Soviet Union, offers a Washington Post writer an important refresher on the real history of Sputnik, since many critics are engaged in misreporting:
Palin’s other point is that Sputnik was the sort of government bureaucratic program that got the Soviet Union in trouble; it’s an example of what eventually did them in. Citing Wikipedia (what journalistic ingenuity!), Stromberg argues that actually the Soviet Union didn’t have a debt problem until some “thirty years after” Sputnik. Perhaps instead of relying on Wikipedia, Stromberg might have consulted Robert Gates’ book From the Shadows which chronicles, in part, his career as a Soviet analyst at the CIA. (Just in case they are unaware at the Post, this is the same Robert Gates who is now the Secretary of Defense.) On page 173, he accurately points out that the CIA knew early on of the “Soviet economic crisis. From the late 1950s, CIA had clearly described the chronic weaknesses as well as the formidable military power of the Soviet Union.”
Read the whole thing here.

Now, in a recent interview I mentioned analogies that could relate to solutions to our economic challenges, including the difference between a communist government’s “Sputnik” and the private sector’s “Spudnut.” The analogies I mentioned obviously aren’t comparable in size, but highlight a clear difference in economic focus: big government command and control economies vs. America’s small businesses.

If you’re near Richland, WA, you should stop by The Spudnut Shop, where you’ll find an all-American success story of a family owned small business that for over 60 years has been serving up a product that people want to buy. Businesses like this coffee shop don’t receive big government bailouts. They produce something with their own ingenuity and hard work. And here we see the former communist Soviet Union’s advancement (before its government debt-ridden demise) vs. America’s small businesses that are the backbone of our economy.

We’d be well off if we had a greater appreciation for the free market ingenuity of ordinary American entrepreneurs, both great and small – whether they make high-tech gadgets or potato donuts. And this goes for all our small business owners – whether they run a family farm, a commercial salmon fishing business, an auto shop, a print shop, a consulting firm, a restaurant, you name it. Our government should show them more respect by not punishing their success and limiting their ability to hire more people by over-taxing and over-reaching into their businesses. Don’t stifle their growth with burdensome regulations like Obamacare and cap-and-tax. Government should be on their side, not in their way.

I believe and trust in the strength of America’s private sector. But I sometimes fear that the current administration in Washington distrusts or discounts the individuals who have built this country; hence their belief that only a distant bureaucratic elite in D.C. can make decisions for our small businesses that will provide American opportunity. This administration’s thinking is wrong. We don’t need a command and control economy that “invests” our money in their half-baked ideas. We need freedom, reward for hard work, and a re-invigorated sense of personal responsibility and work ethic, especially among our young people.

We need to be as motivated and optimistic as our parents, grandparents, and great-grandparents, many of whom started out with nothing but a dream as they built a life for themselves by the sweat of their brow. They didn’t ask for bailouts. They didn’t expect anything from anyone. They wanted the freedom and opportunity to work hard and prosper by their own merits. If at first they failed, they took their lumps, dusted themselves off, got back up, and tried again until they succeeded. They didn’t retreat. They built this country and they passed on to us more prosperity and opportunity than has ever been bestowed on any generation in human history. We must not squander that inheritance. Let’s get back to their common sense values.

- Sarah Palin
- JP