Saturday, July 25, 2009

Thomas Lifson: "Sarah of Liberty"

Courtesy of Adrienne at

Thomas Lifson writing for the American Thinker:

Check out the reading matter Sarah carries with her, because she is obviously so intrigued that she wants to soak it up every free minute she has. My own views of Mark's book are on the public record.

Think of it as an outstanding tutorial in applied political philosophy, and you will begin to grasp the scope of Mark Levin's achievement. The fact that the book is lucid, unpretentious, and utterly accessible to anyone who cares to focus and think, means that it will elevate the quality of political thought and dialogue across a broad swath of the American populace.

Sarah Palin has already demonstrated a capacity to connect with ordinary Americans. This charisma frightens and angers many and the left, and not a few Republicans as well. I fully expect Governor Palin, whose mind displays the quality of a rapid learner who knows how to use what she has learned, to begin to ground her public statements in the philosophical depth so well-presented in Liberty and Tyranny.

The phony intellectual elitists, who have little or no understanding, much less grounding, in the fundamental ideas undergirding the American republic are not going to know what has hit them, once Sarah Palin returns to the public spotlight to discuss the future of our nation. The shallow conservative intellectuals, jealous of her connection to the taproot of the American spirit will also be bewildered.

More here.

Mark Levin noticed that Governor Palin was holding his book and tweeted this:

Look at what Sarah Palin is reading

Governor Palin also referenced Mark Levin's book in an earlier tweet:

CO Campbell spot-on in confirm hearing yest re:Stimulus Pkg; doesn't want Feds "bribing (AK) towards a program"& Stim $ can be seen as bribe
8:48 AM Jul 21st from TwitterBerry

Campbell's fiscally conserv.position on this = M.Levin's "Conservatism is antidote to tyranny bc its principles ARE our founding principles"
8:52 AM Jul 21st from TwitterBerry


Newt Praises Palin as Reformer, Energy Leader

The liberal blog Think Progress posted this video of Newt Gingrich speaking at the National Press Club last Wednesday:


Her knowledge of the energy issue is very real. And if you do start to see energy prices go back up I think there will be a pretty big interest in what she has to say about how we can use American energy — keep the money here in America and the fact that bowing to a Saudi king is not a substitute for energy policy.


Governor Palin's Anchorage Picnic

Gov. Palin serves constituents at the annual Governor's Picnic in Anchorage on Saturday.
Picture courtesy of Wilbur Mercer.

From the Anchorage Daily News:

Palin gave a speech of just a couple of minutes before serving food, including mooseburgers. People had to get in the food line to get face-to-face with teh governor, and throughout much of the three-hour picnic that line was hundreds of people long.

Here's some video from MSNBC:

UPDATE: (h/t bernie12) More video from the picnic:

More video:

UPDATE by Tim: The Gov tweets:

Wrapped up Anch Gov's Picnic, awesome. Now road trip to Fairbanks for farewell speech/changing of the guard. Camper full of kids & coffee...


W/kids in camper;on World's Best Rd Trip!To soar by Mt.McKinley&rushing rivers,we remember all of AK is BIG/WILD/GOOD LIFE;feel freedom here

UPDATE II by Tim: Another Tweet about the road trip to Fairbanks, including the soundtrack:

RdTrip7 hrs wKid Rock/Martina McBride/Big&Rich/Grtchn Wilson/Billy Currngtn/Hank/Toby/VanP/Blk I P's/Greenwd/Straight/etc&USO artists=heaven

UPDATE by Mel: Road trip:


ADN Wants to Stick Alaskans With $500,000 Bill

In a last ditch effort for attention, the Anchorage Daily News decided to take one of their remaining opportunities to smear Governor Palin before she leaves office.

In an editorial yesterday, they celebrate the illegal leaking of Thomas Daniel's preliminary report on the Alaska Fund Trust and use it to portray Governor Palin as unethical. They rehash Democratic investigator Daniel's flawed reasoning, and then add this absurd statement:

It's an embarrassing turn for a governor who rose to power as a crusader for higher ethical standards.

The only people who should be embarrassed are those who have turned the ethics process into an absolute joke. But in the ADN's warped view Governor Palin and her family should be embarrassed for not being wealthy enough to pay the substantial costs that stem from a seemingly endless series of frivolous ethics complaints. Or maybe the ADN is saying that the Palins should be embarrassed for not denouncing the generous efforts of supporters all over the country who recognize that these ethics complaints are nothing more than political attacks meant to destroy and bankrupt Governor Palin and her family.

Obviously Governor Palin hasn't accepted any money from the fund, nor was she involved in its management, and yet the ADN has the temerity to say that she should be embarrassed for having a legal defense fund that was vetted by the best attorneys in the country and was more restrictive than any other legal defense fund in existance.

The ADN editorial goes on say that the Alaska Fund Trust should return all the money it has collected so far, and that Governor Palin should raise any money she needs after she is a private citizen.

However, the ADN purposely ignored one of Daniel's recommendations: That the state of Alaska should reimburse Governor Palin for the cost of frivolous ethics complaints. Instead of allowing people from all over the country to give of their own free will, Daniel recommends that the people of Alaska be stuck with bill.

I guess the ADN apparently agrees with this opinion. They would like Alaskans to foot the $500,000 bill, rather than allow Governor Palin to accept the money donated (90% of which was in small amounts of $5, $20, $25 gifts).

The people who gave money to the Alaska Fund Trust wanted nothing in return. They simply wanted to help a decent and honest public servant who was being unfairly attacked. Even if they did want something in return from her, they can't get it now because, as of tomorrow, she will no longer be governor of Alaska.

But the ADN says that she must reject these donations.

Their editorial concludes with this:

If she does this -- if she takes the squeaky clean route with the legal defense fund controversy -- she could restore some of the luster to her somewhat tarnished ethical image.

Tarnished ethical image? Obviously, the facts are not important to the ADN, because Governor Palin has never been found in violation of any ethical law by the only body that has the authority to make that determination -- the Personnel Board. This includes Daniel's report since she hasn't accepted any money from the fund, and therefore did not violate any ethics law.

The ADN's intention here is to use the number of bogus ethics complaints to portray Governor Palin as "tarnished". I would say that the ADN has tarnished their unbiased image, but they never had one to begin with.

Is it any wonder that the ADN is struggling to keep afloat financially?

Just as a reminder, this is the same editorial board that gets it's material from the Daily Kos.


Addressing the Critics: Palin is an Honest Fighter and She Knows How to Pick Her Battles

I am weary of this, friends. But this absurd Washington Post article must be fisked.

Just look at this sentence:

Many complaints against Palin have been dismissed, a few are still pending, and several resulted in critical findings.

Several? What the hell are they talking about? They were all dismissed. One was settled with no finding of any ethics violation or any wrong doing. Several? That’s a damn lie.

And look at this:

Palin was accused of improperly billing the state for per diem expenses while she stayed at the family home in Wasilla. She was ordered to pay back taxes but has not disclosed the amount.

It's true that Zane Henning, who has already had one frivolous complaint tossed, filed a complaint about her per diems. But the fact remains that she was entitled to collect them. She didn't collect them for her kids or her husband, though she was legally entitled to do so. And the Juneau governor's mansion was undergoing extensive repairs at the time. She collected a $60 per diem in lieu of having the state put her up in a hotel or a rented apartment (which they did for Tony Knowles and Frank Murkowski for much much more money). You find me a decent hotel room for a family of seven for $60 a day. Here's a fact no one can dispute: She spent less that her predecessors! Sarah Palin and her family cost the State of Alaska less than her predecessors.

(As a side note, people often forget that state senator Kim Elton was charging the state per diems to travel from his house in Juneau to the State Capitol in Juneau! And he charged more money for per diems than Gov. Palin did! And his per diems were only covering the regular and special legislative sessions. Gov. Palin's were for the entire year. Where's the outrage, anklebiters?)

And as for the taxes on per diems, who "ordered her" to pay them? The IRS? How in the world would the WashPo know that? And it was not a matter of wrong doing. She had no idea that the per diems were taxable. That was only discovered when tax attorneys from around the country combed through her tax returns during the election.

One of the most disturbing aspects of this WashPo article is the oft repeated canard pushed by Andree McLeod that she and Palin were once close friends and collaborators. Our own Tim Lindell exposed the stupidity of this Saint Andree nonsense. The person claiming this is Andree. The historic record does not show that Andree "made Sarah Palin." Andree is a delusional nutjob who hates Sarah Palin. The leftwingers who control most of our mainstream media hate Sarah Palin; therefore, they are willing to believe a nutjob's delusions of grandeur.

I’ve noticed that whenever this absurd claim is made, the writers quote from the same two emails that Palin apparently sent to Andree McLeod once, but they never provide context as to what these two brief email conversations were about. I write hundreds of emails every week. I'm sure I've written nice emails to crazy people. I've even said complimentary things about people who I later learned were total nut jobs.

The WashPo writers note with wistful rue that if one runs as an ethics reformer, one invariably sets oneself up to be knocked down. Well, actually, no, not necessarily. Not in a world without Alinsky.

Alinsky and his followers are the ones who will target you if you run as a reformer. Never forget Rule #4 of Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals”:

Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules. You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity.

They made her live up to an impossible and nonsensical standard. They even changed the standard on her so as to keep her off balance. In the words of that great internet epigrammarian Jim Treacher, "They shot at her feet and then arrested her for violating the no dancing ordinance."

The clueless critics will ask, How will she handle the heat in DC if she can’t Juneau?

The answer is simple: The Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act doesn't exist in DC.

Here is the plain sad truth, people. If the confidentiality loop hole in the Executive Branch Ethics Act had been closed, this situation would not have existed.

Let me explain.

Alaska’s Legislative Ethics Act has a strict confidentiality provision. When you file an ethics complaint, you are not allowed to publicize it. If you do, the complaint gets thrown out automatically. This protects lawmakers from frivolous politically motivated complaints. If a frivolous complaint is filed, no one knows about it. And when it is dismissed because it is without merit, no one knows about it. Therefore, a lawmaker’s reputation is in no way tarnished by frivolous complaints.

Imagine if that same rule had applied to the complaints filed against Gov. Palin. Imagine that McLeod, Biegel, Henning, et al. were not allowed to publicize their frivolous complaints. Their stupid complaints were found to be without merit. They were dismissed. If confidentiality had been honored, then no one would have known about these complaints. There wouldn’t have been the “publicity stress” on Gov. Palin and her administration. She and her staff wouldn’t have felt the need to address these complaints publicly at all. They would have felt much more secure in the knowledge that politically motivated complaints would not harm their administration.

That wasn’t the case. Each one was publicized for maximum damage.

In Juneau, she was stymied by a legislature that made her personally the issue. They were playing politics with crucial priorities for Alaska (like the in-state natural gas bullet line) simply because they were her priorities. They made her personally the issue, and not the issues that she was actually pursuing. As a public servant who loves Alaska and wants the state to progress, she felt that the environment in Juneau was too toxic and that she could only advance the ball by passing it to Parnell.

She did not have the support of her own party, which is still led by a chairman who had to pay the largest ethics fine in the state’s history because Sarah Palin blew the whistle on his corrupt activities. The majority of the Republicans in Alaska hate her even more than the Democrats. Prior to the 2008 campaign, she had established a broad base of support in the legislature among Democrats and decent Republicans. After the election, the Democrats “went home” to their side. Perhaps they were taking marching orders from Outside. Who knows? Perhaps someday we’ll find out more.

But the AK GOP was even worse. There is no love lost between her and the still ethically challenged members of her state party. The difference between Juneau and DC is quite obvious – in DC she will have a party supporting her.

The critics will say, if she can’t take the opposition heat on a local level, how will she take it on a national level? After all these were just some inconsequential Alaskan bloggers?

Please. She is taking the heat nationally and locally. The hostility and hatred directed at her will not let up. These Palin-hating loons have sullied our political discourse, and they will no doubt continue to do so.

Sarah Palin knows that they will continue to attack her and her family. It won’t let up just because she is no longer the governor.

But if the Palins are forced to fight a never-ending battle with people who adhere to the politics of personal destruction, then it might as well be a battle of their own choosing. Sarah Palin chooses to address a larger audience and to fight the larger battle of confronting the great issues facing our nation.

The critics will claim that she is a narcissist and that she abandoned the people of Alaska.

Please. If she were truly a narcissist she would remain for another year and simply take a paycheck and enjoy all the government perks. The ethics complaints are being tossed one after another. But they are continuing to cost the state money. They are distracting her administration. She can’t get anything done because of this damn loop hole in the Executive Branch Ethics Act.

And in the meantime, the country needs her. We need a leader of the opposition.

She has achieved a position of national prominence, and the nation needs her to provide a message of fiscal sanity and a return to constitutionally proscribe limited government. These are the times for a bold new voice. We need Sarah Palin.

The political rules afforded to other politicians were never afforded to Sarah Palin.

By any objective standard her term as governor has been a resounding success.

She made real progress for the first time in over 30 years in getting a natural gas pipeline built. She increased her state’s revenue by instituting ACES, which encourages development. She reduced government spending and dramatically reduced her state’s federal earmark requests in order to encourage her state to be more self-reliant and less dependent on federal government. She even spent less in her own personal expenses than prior administrations. She fulfilled every promise she made when she campaigned for governor -- every one of them.

These are successes that any politician would dream of having, and yet few are willing to give Sarah Palin credit for these achievements.

Her children are attacked though other politicians’ children are off limits.

The rules of the game, as established by others, don’t seem to apply to her. So she decided to change the rules. She has now established her own rules. She is operating on her own terms, and she will take her message to the people of this country who are eager to find a way forward from a government that is incompetent in addressing the challenges facing our nation.

In this WashPo article she said:

I will take the battle nationally and I won't shy away from challenging the powerful, the entrenched, the corrupt and anyone standing in the way of getting our country back on the right track.

We've got your back, Guv. Raise the banner high. We'll rally!


Ann Coulter: Sarah Palin is "Already Bigger Than Obama"

This morning on CBS' "The Early Show Saturday Edition", there was a contentious debate over Governor Palin's future. In a mismatch, Ann Coulter took on David Frum and Bay Buchanan over their flawed reasoning. After Bay Buchanan said that Governor Palin damaged herself by quitting and not being prepared for the media, Ann replied:

Coulter countered, saying Palin can overcome any "quitter" label anyone associates with her. "I don't know that Sarah Palin wants to run for president," Coulter said, "but she's already a bigger story than the president of the United States. There were two stories yesterday. For the first time, this 'Mr. Popularity,' President Obama's popularity, public approval ratings fell below 50 percent, for the first time. And a former vice presidential candidate, Sarah Palin's public approval ratings fell to 40percent. What was the big story? She's already bigger than Obama. She attracts a crowd."

Coulter added, "She's up there, she's had 17, 18 ethics complaints filed against her. Everybody wants her to speak for them, everybody wants to attack her, and she has her hands tied behind her back because she has to be governor, not only in terms of fund-raising (for other GOP candidates and herself). ... She's too big to be stuck in a governor's office up in Alaska."

Then in an attempt to marginalize her, David Frum compared Governor Palin to the late Michael Jackson as way to show that she's unelectable. Coulter replied:

"The Michael Jackson comparison is silly, David," Coulter said. "Sarah Palin is not a singer. These are both (Palin and Obama) politicians."

"Apparently," Coulter continued, "she's getting ratings, or everybody wouldn't be constantly talking about her. She has a quality -- people are attracted to her and she's a quick study, she can learn if she wants to, and I totally disagree this is bad for her to quit. She's already done everything she needs to do. She turned over the governorship to the lieutenant governor, who's a fantastic right winger."

Then Bay tried to explain that Governor Palin broke the trust that the people of Alaska put in her, but Coulter shot that down as well:

"That's absolutely false," Coulter said. "The voters of Alaska are delighted with what she did, because they're sick of these investigations."

Ann Coulter: 1, David Frum and Bay Buchanan: 0


Why Romney Cannot Win

You all probably remember my good friend Michael van der Galien. He's the guy who wrote an 'ironic' post about the star qualities of Gov. Palin which led to a little back and forth between C4P and his site, Poligazette.

In all seriousness, Michael actually is a good friend of mine. He may be wrong about one big thing (i.e. his blind, uncritical support for the Mittrosexual Man), but he is right about a lot of other things. If I'd have to pick a man to stand next to me in the trenches to defend life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness against the socialist hordes of Obama & Co, Michael would probably be that man. But even the best of friends can have the odd argument, and well, he's asking for one with his latest post.

Unable - or is it unwilling? - to see the WaPo poll for what it is, namely a politically motivated push poll cut out of whole cloth for the purpose of 'phraming' Palin's farewell speech as Governor this coming Sunday as being merely another step on the inevitable road to oblivion, Michael decides to act as if the poll contains actually relevant pieces of data. I mean come on Michael, you're a serious citizen journalist. A poll that oversamples Democrats vs. Republicans by a good four or five percent (33D 22R), and that doesn't even use registered voters, let alone the infinitely more reliable category of likely voters, is not a serious poll and doesn't deserve to be treated like one. You know this as well as I do (as does your friend AP, whose anti-Palin hackery is getting beyond the stage of deeply tiresome), and still you decide to write about this poll as if it is divinely inspired. What possible motive could you have for this, apart from trying to promote the cause of your candidate by trying to damage that of one of his main contenders?

Well, two can play that game, Michael. In fact, I'll have a lot more to work with than you do. I'm not referring to the many serious objections to Romney's candidacy (his disastrous healthcare reform project in Massachusetts, his anti-Reagan statements in the early nineties, his flipflopping on a key issue like abortion) or the non-serious ones, like the fact that he's boring (as in: 50 people, Michael. 50. And half of them were probably on Romney's payroll. Then again, boring men sometimes do end up winning their party's nomination. They always lose in the end, but that's another matter), or the fact that he's a Mormon (who cares - apart from Mike Huckabee, that is?).

No, I'll limit myself to the most serious, and potentially most deadly, objection to Romney, which is that his own party's voters simply don't dig the man. Just look at the data from this poll by Democratic pollsters PPP (before you ask: it's a registered voters survey, with party ID 42D, 35R, 23I - a reliable survey basically, unlike the one you used for your post). The figures make pretty devastating reading for Romney-fans. Among all Republican voters, Romney is 12 points behind Huckabee, 22 points behind Palin. Among conservative Republicans (75 percent of the electorate in the GOP primaries), the gap with Palin is even wider: 23 percent (81-58). Oh and before you get your hopes up about Romney somehow making up this astronomical difference through his support among moderate Republican voters: forget it. Even among what should be his core constituency, Romney trails Huckabee by 8 percent and Palin by a whopping 19 percent.

Face it Michael: Romney's toast. He's a flipflopper, a fake, a phony, a guy who can't even decide which state he's supposed to be from (is it Michigan? Utah? Massachusetts? You tell me). People smell his fakery a hundred miles away, and they avoid it like the plague. That's the reason only 50 people showed up at that campaign event in New Jersey, that's why he finished third in the weakest presidential field the GOP had produced in the past hundred years or so. And that's why he's trailing the other main contenders for the 2012 nomination by at least ten percent - even among his supposed core constituency of moderates.

Three years is plenty of time to take away any lingering doubts voters may have about Palin's fitness for the presidency. But all the time in the world won't be enought to convince conservative Republican voters that Romney is really one of them. Because deep down inside, he simply isn't.

Now Michael, if you want more of this, all I can say is: bring it on. But I suggest you use the rest of this weekend to ponder the deeper meaning of Reagan's 11th Commandment. There is a war on for the soul of the American project, with an ultraliberal in the White House who is determined to change his country into a European-style social democracy, but for some reason moderate Republicans like yourself are more interested in fighting Gov. Palin. It reminds me of that old Churchill anecdote when an young backbench MP approached the great old man, pointed at the Labour benches and asked him what he thought of 'the enemy'. "The enemy?", he answered. "My boy, that is the opposition. The enemy is seated behind me."


"We should be afraid, but not of Sarah Palin"

The following letter to the editor was published in the River News Herald in Rio Vista, California:

FIRING BACK at “Taking Aim”

There seems to be a national epidemic of obsessive compulsive behavior commonly known as “Palin-itis”. While most often observed in mainstream media, it was most recently manifested locally in last week’s column by Al Eaton. The symptoms are an irrational and overwhelming need to mock, demean, denigrate and ultimately destroy Sarah Palin and her family. It can be done by lies, innuendo, half-truths, and of course, the ever popular unnamed and anonymous sources. I can’t help but wonder what they are afraid of.

According to the liberal playbook, it appears to be perfectly acceptable to adopt both a sexist and patronizing attitude toward Governor Palin. Mr. Eaton chose to employ “cutesy”, “folksy”, “”down-home, dumbed-down philosophy”, “attractive appearance”, and “adorable little wink” in his essay. The National Organization of Women will probably offer the same support to her and express the same moral outrage as they did with Carrie Prejean. By the way, what was their position on Letterman’s crude joke about her daughter? Maybe we should ask Don Imus about double standards. Mr. Eaton’s column vaguely resembled Todd Purdum’s puerile hit piece in Vanity Fair but then again, Mr. Eaton isn’t married to Dee Dee Meyers (Bill Clinton’s press secretary) and only had the liberal talking points with which to work. Obviously, this was not a level playing field. Maybe one should read Governor Palin’s commentary and analysis on cap and trade before concluding who is “dumbed-down.” Debate the message; don’t kill the messenger.

I particularly abhorred the reference to “political scandal or embarrassment on the horizon” and possibly being drawn into “one of the many criminal investigations that been popping-up in Alaskan politics.” The most cursory of research efforts would have easily established that there have been TWENTY ethics charges levied against Governor Palin and ZERO convictions. Apparently, one individual woman has filed five of those allegations. It almost made me think that Alaskans have become a bunch of Chicago “wanna be’s” when it comes to political corruption! Quite honestly, if I’d have run up $500,000 in legal fees defending myself against frivolous complaints and spurious allegations, I’d be looking for a better paying job as well!!

I am also annoyed by the effete intellectual snobbery inherent in general attempts to paint Palin supporters and conservatives as uneducated hicks. Too many people have confused their education with their diplomas. I do believe however, that there are too many voters who can’t tell the difference between Sarah Palin and Tina Fey; there are too many people who can’t tell the difference between what a person says and what a person does; there are too many people who confuse being articulate with being able to read from a teleprompter; there are too many people who confuse being cool with being competent; there are too many people who confuse feeling with thinking. You are certainly entitled to your own opinion but you are not entitled to your own facts. There is nothing uneducated about fiscal responsibility and protecting our borders and our way of life. There is nothing uneducated about clinging to religion and/or guns. Maybe more people should educate themselves about Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals. This 1940’s community organizer in Chicago was a communist and an atheist. (I recognize the redundancy.) He states that “you may have to destroy an economy to make people dependent on government.” No wonder his amoral strategy for the redistribution of wealth and social justice was contained in a book dedicated to Lucifer.

As a candidate, President Obama rightfully decried the half trillion dollar deficit of the prior administration. I don’t see how that has translated into giving President Obama and Congress leeway for exceeding a trillion dollar deficit this year alone! The stimulus bill, which many congressional representatives did not even read, for “shovel ready” projects to “jolt” the economy is not working. Furthermore, the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office now estimates that the House version of health care will itself cost more than a trillion more dollars and will not result in any appreciable reduction in health care costs. If it was possible for government to spend its way into prosperity, we wouldn’t be in this mess in the first place. I fear that just as that brilliant council of economic advisors “guessed wrong” on unemployment, they have guessed wrong and overestimated tax revenues so, just as in California, the problem will only worsen with time.

More people should educate themselves on our Constitution and see where it says government should be owning and running insurance companies, car companies, banks, homes and health care. I also wonder why Congress doesn’t have approval and oversight authority for thirty-some “czars” in this new shadow government. If there is a “narcissistic personality disorder”, I do not think it belongs to Sarah Palin but to another administration that is going where no administration has gone before. (My apologies to the Trekkies.) I believe we should be afraid, but not of Sarah Palin. Don’t you think it’s time to give her and her family a break? After all, you still have time to blame everything on George Bush!

William L. Garvin


Saturday Open Thread

Good Morning. Sorry that the Open Thread is late today. Mel is out of pocket, so you're stuck with me.

I have no links to articles to offer you because I still haven't had my coffee.

Just talk amongst yourselves, okay. We wrote quite a lot yesterday. Go read that again. You learn a lot more the second time around.

UPDATE by RAM: I've had my coffee by now. Today there will be any number of stories about Gov. Palin. Most of them will be the result of sloppy herd journalism. They'll be filled with innuendo and half-truths. I'm only one woman, so it will be difficult for me to take apart all of them. If you happen to own a blog and happen to fisk one of these article and would like us to link to it, let us know (

Oh yes, for those of you who are interested, C4P was featured in a Politico article yesterday. And, yes, it's true I volunteered for Obama for one day in early July 2008. I knew nothing about him other than that he defeated the Clintons. (I was sequestered away during the primaries working on a project and had finally emerged from my hibernation after months of media blackout.) I didn't like McCain, and all of my lib friends were telling me how wonderful Obama was. So I figured I'd check out his operation. When I saw the large Stalinesque poster on the wall advertising "change," I was skeptical. When they had us state our name and say what we intended to do to "help Barack," I felt a little weird. When I realized that they were bullsh*ting us about "Barack's principled position" in not taking campaign finance money, I was annoyed. When they made us huddle up and do the Howard Dean yowl as a "go team" exercise, I knew I'd had enough. These people were just too freakin' creepy for me. It was all about Obama and not about principles. That was the extent of my Team Barry experience. I'm not a Palin supporter because of Sarah Palin's personality. I support her because of her positions and her principles.


AP: Large Crowd at Gov. Palin's Picnic

Courtesy of Neal Karlinsky

From the Associated Press via the Mat-Su Valley Frontiersman:

WASILLA, Alaska (AP) -- More than a thousand people showed up for Gov. Sarah Palin's annual picnic held in her hometown of Wasilla.

Palin, who is resigning and leaves office on Sunday, used the occasion Friday to sign autographs and hand out hot dogs. The governor - dressed casually in blue jeans and a sweat shirt - was mobbed by well-wishers who offered up babies, books, calendars, skateboards and even their hands for autographs.


Several longtime picnic-goers said this year's picnic crowd dwarfed last year's.

More here.

UPDATE: (h/t beehive) Here's video of Governor Palin's remarks at the picnic:

UPDATE II: (h/t oneXSturtle) Here's more video from the picnic courtesy of the AP:

UPDATE III: A tweet from Governor Palin:

Great 3rd(& final) Governor's Picnic in hometown tonite;loved the focus: honoring military&Blue Star families;no politickin' just patriotism

UPDATE IV: (h/t Lorna Marie) From KTUU:

UPDATE V: Politico has a story on the picnic here.

UPDATE VI by Tim: Adrienne of Motivation: Truth was at the event and took lots of great photos.


Friday, July 24, 2009

Rush: Sarah Palin Can Win; Democrats and Media Fear Her the Most

Rush praised Governor Palin tonight on Fox News Channel's “On the Record with Greta Van Susteren”. Here's the video:


Obama's Crap vs. Palin's Goodness


Pathetic Haters to Sarah Palin: Leave or Stay, We Hate You Either Way

They hated her when she was their governor. And now they hate her because she will no longer be their governor...

That's the impression I get from reading yet another hack job by Associated Press hack-extraordinaire Rachel D'Oro.

D'Oro's headline is "Palin's mid-term resignation comes with costs to Alaska residents." The main thrust of her argument (and I call it an argument because D'Oro is clearly not writing a dispassionate and impartial news account; she's pleading her case and attempting to make a partisan point) is that Sarah Palin is costing the state more money in stepping down. Why? Because a special legislative session is being called.

However, even D'Oro allows for the fact that the special session would have been called by the legislature regardless of whether Gov. Palin stepped down or not. Lawmakers were already planning on calling a special session in order to override Gov. Palin's veto of the energy building code stimulus funds. They have a deadline for accepting the money, and they can't wait until the regular 90 day legislative session in January to override Gov. Palin's veto. They need to call a special session before then. It was going to happen anyways. Palin's decision has nothing to do with it.

However, during their special session, they will also probably take the opportunity to confirm the new lt. governor, Craig Campbell. They could allow him to remain as "acting lt. governor" until the next regular session in January, but they will probably confirm him during the special session. That's their choice. It costs about $100,000 per day for a special session. So, at most, confirming Campbell could cost $100,000. That is far less than the $2 million that the records requests and frivolous ethics complaints have cost the state.

But D'Oro's hand picked stooges also complain about the costs of the transition of government from Palin to Parnell.

Here's a newsflash, morons: transition of government always costs money! It cost a lot of money when Barack Obama replaced George W. Bush. Does that mean we should have left Bush in office? If Kerry had beaten Bush, it would have cost a lot more money for a transition of government than just keeping Bush in office. But that was not a valid reason to vote for Bush's re-election.

Really, the Associated Press and the anklebiting Palin haters in Alaska have rendered themselves ridiculous.

I notice that D'Oro cites critical letters to the editor in Alaskan newspapers, but she never mentions the numerous positive letters. She never mentions the thousands of Alaskans who are turning out to wish Gov. Palin the best and show their gratitude.

Sarah Palin will be remembered as one of the best governors Alaska ever had. She will certainly be remembered as their most famous. Her benefit to Alaska and her service to that great state is not over on July 26th.

I think she will always have Alaska in her heart and will always work for them, even though her critics and haters up there will never give her credit.

UPDATE by Tim: Does anyone recall any AP stories about transition costs when Governors Napolitano, Sebelius and Huntsman quit to work for Obama?


Yet Another Andree McLeod Ethics Complaint Bites The Dust

From the Gov's Twitter:

Another victory for my family/my admin/the people of AK; but the wins come @ great cost. Will link to presser when posted.

And here is the presser from the Governor's office:

Another Ethics Complaint Dismissed

July 24, 2009, Anchorage, Alaska – The Personnel Board has announced that another ethics complaint against Governor Sarah Palin has been dismissed.

The complaint, the sixth filed by Anchorage resident Andree McLeod, accused the governor of violating the Ethics Act by receiving her salary while campaigning for vice president. The accusation, lodged Monday, was dismissed as legally flawed and factually devoid of merit.

Governor Palin remained on duty, conducted state business, and communicated with her staff and her constituents. “Andree McLeod has failed to prevail on any of the ethics complaints she has filed against the governor,” said Mike Nizich, Palin’s chief of staff. “It appears her agenda is clear – she’s abusing the ethics laws to harass public officials.”

Our original post on this particular frivolous complaint by McLeod can be found here.

UPDATE: Here's the Personnel Board Report dismissing the complaint.


The Good Ole Boys Slam the Reformer

The New Republic has a hit piece on Palin. They spoke with every Palin hater in the AK legislature. All of the usual suspects were trotted out... Hawker, Ramras, Persily, etc...

They never seemed to mention the sort of things we’ve reported. They didn’t mention that Rep. Mike Hawker (R-Anchorage) was the man who coined the term the “Corrupt Bastards Club” or CBC for short. He was a charter member of the CBC. Many of his pals are in jail, but Hawker was lucky enough to avoid getting caught with his hand in the cookie jar.

But he had no problem witnessing the corruption around him.

He was on a boat with a lobbyist and two other lawmakers when the lobbyist bribed the other guys in exchange for their vote. He voted the same way as the lawmakers who were bribed, but he wasn’t paid for it.

The ADN reported on it:

...on Aug. 5, 2004, Prewitt took Anderson, Bobrick and state Rep. Mike Hawker, R-Anchorage and the head of two key budget panels, on his sailboat for a trip out of Whittier. Prewitt acknowledged he recorded the outing.


On the trip, when Hawker was asked if he was on the budget panel for health, education and social services, he responded: “I own the HESS subcommittee,” Stockler said. Wasn’t that kind of talk just boastful? Stockler asked. True, Prewitt said.

While Hawker’s name has come up in the trial as a supporter of private prisons and halfway houses, he wasn’t getting paid to take those positions, Prewitt said.

Oh, well, that’s good to know. He "wasn’t getting paid to take those positions" -- he was just hanging out with guys who were and cracking jokes about “owning” subcommittees. Sounds just like the sort of honest public servant we all want representing us.

Hawker persistently lies about Gov. Palin’s record. He lied about her funding of the Department of Public Safety – falsely claiming that she has under-funded it, when in fact she has increased their funding every year. Mike Hawker is a liar who hangs out with crooks and self-identifies with them. He’s lucky his fate was not the same as the other CBC members.

Hawker’s staffer, Larry Persily is another annoying Palin critic. He was a former editor at both the Anchorage Daily News and the Juneau Empire, two staunchly anti-Palin papers. Despite that, he briefly worked for the Palin administration as a staffer in the Washington, D.C. legislative liaison office, until he was replaced by Palin with Russ Kelly.

Persily went on an anti-Palin tear after she was nominated for VP. He was quoted in an article in Bloomberg on August 31st saying that Palin was not qualified. He appeared in a tinfoil-hat hit piece in the Guardian in October. He even wrote for the Huffington Post, and after the election he appeared on Alaska Public Radio Network to slam Palin and spin the election results against her.

He is often quoted as saying "Palin is like Evita Peron." Basically, he’s a disgruntled former employee who discovered the path to that "strange new respect" which is afforded anyone willing to bash Sarah Palin in the media.

And then we have Rep. Jay Ramras (R-Fairbanks). We exposed Jay for the creepy cynical ethically-challenged hack that he is. Ramras purchased over $172,000 in shares in BP right after voting against awarding the AGIA license for the natural gas pipeline to BP’s rival TransCanada. He then introduced legislation that was aimed at undermining TransCanada, which would have indirectly benefited BP and ConocoPhillips’ rival pipeline project. He continually talked up BP while criticizing TransCanada. After we exposed his huge BP stock holdings, he attempted to rectify the situation by purchasing over $125,000 in TransCanada stock – as if that would erase any appearance of a conflict of interest because now he would benefit no matter which pipeline project wins. In the end, Ramras violated the cardinal rule of public service: public office is not for personal profit. The Anchorage Daily News agreed with us.

First and foremost, Ramras is a hypocrite and a sexist creep. He is a hypocrite who skipped town for 32 days out of the 90 day legislative session and yet felt no shame in criticizing Gov. Palin for taking a 36 hour trip to speak at a charity event. That’s right. He played hooky for 32 days out of a 90 day session, and yet criticized Sarah Palin for leaving for 36 hours (a day and a half). The governor is on duty all the time. The legislature is in session for only 90 days, and yet Ramras was absent for 32 of them.

That’s Jay Ramras: a hypocrite who invested heavily in companies that have important business with the state and then used his official position to benefit his own stock investment.

These men are among Palin's constant critics. They like to claim that Sarah Palin didn’t care about Alaska any more. But they are the ones who were hurting Alaska with their corrupt self-dealing and their shenanigans concerning the natural gas pipeline.

One of their most appalling acts of political gamesmanship was their refusal to give Gov. Palin the $9 million preparatory funding she requested for the in-state natural gas bullet line. It was clearly her administration’s top priority for the last legislative session. They all know how crucial the need is for a stable natural gas supply to Southcentral Alaska. The natural gas fields there are depleting. They need that in-state bullet line. And yet these lawmakers played games with this crucial appropriation simply to stick it to Sarah Palin. That’s how dangerously petty these men are.

They ended up only giving her $7 million for the appropriation. As our K. Carpenter wrote:

The $9 million amounts to a .0775% of the budget! Yes, less than 1% of the budget!

What were the legislators thinking? Whew! The governor almost got away with something there. She only needs $7 million this year for that project!

Who was putting Alaska first and who was playing political games? I feel sorry for Alaskans to be left to the tender mercies of these corrupt bastards.

Sarah Palin was a corruption busting reformer. They hated her. They still hate her. The corrupt bastards in Washington fear her too.


Alaskan Bloggers Uncover A Vast Write-Wing Conspiracy

Well, chalk up a new high (or is it a new low?) in the level of vitriol and sheer frivolous silliness on the Alaskan Palin-bashing blogs. Virtually all of them, including Shannyn Moore, "Doctor Phil" Munger, Celtic Diva, the Mudflats - even Andrew Halcro - are linking to/echoing a claim by a French Trig Truth blog; the essence of the attack is that, because Governor Palin apparently signed thank-you notes to people who donated to help her with legal bills, she therefore must have been involved with the management of the Alaska Fund Trust.

How petty can you get? Wait, what am I saying? These are people who have gone after her on everything from her hair to her toenails - literally - and everything in between, including the logo on her jacket, the length of her skirts, and her childbearing decisions.

But attacking someone, and assuming evil intent, for writing thank-you notes in return for a good deed? Come on.

Halcro's piece sums up the essence of the meme they would like to create - essentially they're attempting to say that the Fund Trustee, Kristan Cole, is a corrupt liar. In order to do so, they misrepresent what she stated at her press conference, and then add in irrelevancies like thank-you notes and the fact that SarahPAC has mentioned the fund in the past.


As soon as the story broke, Palin's fund, the Alaska Fund Trust responded by saying the report was wrong because the governor was as never (sic) informed about the trust.


But yet today Cole is trying to sell the press that the governor didn't have a clue about the fund she granted permission for Cole to launch?

Halcro can't even present his allegation honestly - he fabricates his argument out of whole cloth, putting words in Ms. Cole's mouth that she never said. Let's look at Kristan Cole's press release:

I want to be clear on a point that has been misrepresented: The Governor is not and was not involved with the Trust. The Governor has never worked on or with the Trust. The Governor has not even accepted or requested one penny from the Trust or quite frankly anything of me. And I have never expected anything from her. Really it’s quite the contrary; as I, and many other caring folks across the country have only sought to help with this legal burden.

NOBODY has ever said the Governor was unaware of the Trust, or that her PAC and political advisers were unaware of it. In fact, that would be a pretty stupid thing to suggest, since the fund was given wide publicity at the time of its creation.

Others, like Mudflats, have tried to make hay out of out the fact that the fund was mentioned by SarahPAC spokespeople and on the SarahPAC website. So what? If you think back to the circumstances at the time of the fund's creation, that notification was probably necessary to protect Palin's political supporters.

When news came out of the huge legal bills placed on Governor Palin due to frivolous complaints, people were clamoring to help out. A Texas man named Clayton Paslay created a fund to solicit donations; however, the fund didn't meet legal guidelines. Now, Mr. Paslay seemed an honorable and sincere guy, but what was there to stop some scam artists from setting up a "Palin Defense Fund" and raising money in the Governor's name? As the organization representing the personal and political sides of Palin's persona (as opposed to the government side), it was perfectly appropriate to direct those people who wanted to contribute to the Alaska Fund Trust, as it is a known, trustworthy, Alaska-based organization with strict guidelines.

The bottom line: Governor Palin did not manage, operate, create or direct this Trust. Just because she's aware of it, or is appreciative of the efforts made on her behalf, doesn't mean she used her position as Governor to benefit personally. And this whole argument proceeds from a dumb assumption - i.e., that's there something wrong with having a legal defense fund to begin with.

I'm mystified by the need these folks feel to personally attack Kristan Cole. Shannyn Moore calls her a "spokesmodel". Mudflats skirts the edge of calling her out-and-out corrupt. And Professional Annoying Weenie Andrew Halcro, who's always up for some woman-bashing, essentially says she's a liar. I won't go through the rest of the pile-on but, looking through comments at all these sites, you even get attacks on her family.

By all accounts, Kristan Cole is a decent, respectable and trustworthy woman. She's a wife and mother and a small business owner. She overcame adversity in her life to achieve success. She takes time away from her family and business to serve on state boards, and is so completely non-corrupt that she refuses to accept travel and per diem expenses that she's entitled to. And, as many of us did, she apparently felt a desire to offer support to Sarah Palin in the face of a wave of politically-motivated attacks. We understand completely. It was the same motivation we had when we organized our own webathon to raise funds for her legal defense.

But apparently she's not entitled to any respectful treatment; she's forfeited that for the crime of being a friend of Sarah Palin.

The people writing these things make me ill, and I've actually been friendly with a lot of them in the past. I guess they're sacrificing everything in one last push before they become irrelevant. After all, who besides Dan Fagan is going to care about Andrew Halcro when Palin has left the Alaskan stage?


President Obama Uncomfortable with the Term Victory

Yesterday, in an interview with ABC News, President Obama was uncomfortable using the word “victory” to describe US goals in Afghanistan:

President Obama has put securing Afghanistan near the top of his foreign policy agenda, but "victory" in the war-torn country isn't necessarily the United States' goal, he said Thursday in a TV interview.

Read more here.

A caller today on Rush Limbaugh’s radio show took exception to Mr. Obama’s surprising pronouncement:

CALLER: Listen, while we're asking the president for apologies, I think the president should apologize to all those brave men and women he committed to the battlefields of Afghanistan. For him to suggest that victory isn't his objective, let me ask you this, does anybody doubt that the objective of every one of those brave warriors is victory? I mean this guy -- I can't even figure out where he comes from. It sounds as though he's afraid of achieving victory because then he'd have to apologize for that.

RUSH: I think you're right. I think there is a guilt that he has associated with US victory, US success. There is a guilt that it's somehow immoral and unjust because we have an unfair advantage going on in. But you are exactly right. If you're just tuning in, Barack Obama said that he doesn't like the word or the concept "victory" being tossed around when discussing things in Afghanistan because when he thinks victory, he thinks of Emperor Hirohito coming down from the mountains and signing a surrender agreement with MacArthur on the USS Missouri. I read that, I said, "What the hell?" But your perspective here, "Then what are these brave troops doing over there?"

CALLER: Exactly.

RUSH: He said all they're trying to do is prevent these people from attacking the US. But we're not. He said we can't achieve victory out there, Bill, because these people aren't even part of the country.

CALLER: Well, if this commander-in-chief is committed to anything short of victory, he should be impeached. When I read this I was so outraged, and thank God I have not lost anybody close to me in this war. But I could only think about the mothers, the fathers, the wives, the husbands, the children of these people we've lost, I can only imagine how they must feel when they hear the commander-in-chief say that, you know, victory really isn't the overarching concern in this. I mean, I can't believe this guy.

RUSH: Great point. Great point. Got a problem with victory. Then why have them there in the first place?

CALLER: Exactly. It's that or nothing should be the commitment because I guarantee you every one of those warriors is committed to victory.

It sounds like Rush and his caller have a better perspective on our mission in Afghanistan than Mr. Obama does. Governor Palin was prophetic in her RNC speech:

This is a man who can give an entire speech about the wars America is fighting and never use the word "victory" except when he's talking about his own campaign.

Well, we can’t say we weren’t warned.


Chris Cillizza: The Most Important Number in Politics Today

Chris Cillizza writing in his The Fix blog today:


That's the percentage of conservative Republican voters who have a favorable opinion of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, according to a new Washington Post/ABC News poll.

While the headline of the poll data was that a majority of Americans saw Palin in an unfavorable light and had little regard for her leadership abilities, the fact that more than three-quarters of self-identified conservative Republicans -- i.e., the GOP base -- view her in a favorable light may be the most important number in the survey.

Why? Because conservative Republicans are the ones who have the most sway in deciding the identity of their party's presidential nominee every four years. And, no matter what the general public thinks of Palin (or perhaps in spite of what the general public thinks) the base of the party loves her.

The wide chasm between how Palin is perceived by the Republican base and the general populace presents a real potential problem for GOP strategists.

Should she run, Palin would have to be considered the frontrunner given her strength with the most loyal voting constituencies in the party and the ideological composition of voters in the early states that tend to decide the nomination.

But, with her demonstrated problems in attracting independents -- just four in ten view her favorably in the Post data -- Palin could amount to a non-starter in a general election against President Barack Obama.

Knowing that, is there a rallying effect behind a single anti-Palin candidate -- former Gov. Mitt Romney (Mass.) would be the most obvious choice -- in order to keep her from the nomination and the party's chances at taking back the White House intact?

It's a question that Republicans will have to grapple with over the next few years. How they answer it could determine how competitive they will be in 2012.

Good point from C4P commenter TommyReport:

Here's what drives me nuts about Cilizza's analysis: her numbers among moderate Republicans and moderate Republican leaners is probably higher than that of both Huckabee's and Romney's OVERALL favorable among all Republican leaners and Republicans.

I would also like to point out a great post by JR this morning analyzing how skewed and biased many of these polls are and how the media is simply trying to shape public opinion with polls as Governor Palin prepares to leave office.

Plus, I would also point out to Chris that other than the GOP DC elites and pundits, I have not seen much of a "rallying effect" so far among the actual GOP voters for a Mitt Romney type candidate. Haven't we tried that already, Chris?


Memo to Governor Palin

Dear Governor,

In the unlikely event you ever end up inserting your foot in your mouth during a prime time press conference in front of the entire Washington press corps, the line to take will be:

"I could have calibrated those words differently."


What Kerry and Boxer Got Wrong About Cap and Trade

From The Foundry blog at the Heritage Foundation:

Kerry and Boxer first refute Palin’s claim that job losses are all but certain. Boxer and Kerry assert that investing billions of dollars in clean energy will jumpstart the economy by creating millions of jobs.


The reality is that it will destroy 1.15 million jobs. Higher energy prices ripple through the economy producing slower economic growth and higher unemployment. The Heritage Foundation’s Center for Data Analysis found that, for the average year over the 2012-2035 timeline, job loss will be 1.1 million greater than the baseline assumptions. By 2035, there is a projected 2.5 million fewer jobs than without a cap-and-trade bill. But Heritage isn’t alone in these estimates.

Please go read the entire piece here.


Article Points Out Investigator's Ties to Democratic Party

Fox News has a story up about Thomas Daniel, the independent investigator for the Personnel Board on Kim Chatman's ethics complaint about the Alaska Fund Trust, donations to Democrats:

Daniel has contributed $3,500 in recent years to Democratic causes, including $1,500 to Sen. John Kerry's presidential campaign in 2004 and $1,000 to Alaska Sen. Mark Begich's senatorial campaign last year.

The law firm where he is a partner, Perkins Coie, serves as counsel of record for the Democratic Party and its candidates, and attorneys there recently represented Obama's presidential campaign.


Daniel told that any lawyer hired to investigate a complaint is going to have political views, but that shouldn't interfere with the task at hand.

"This is not intended to be a political process," he said. "It's intended to make a determination of whether there is probable cause of an ethics violation."


"I don't know if the guy is straight or not," Coale said. "They should have disclosed this before. It doesn't mean you can't be objective. But in this situation, you don't want the appearance of bias."

The head of the board, Debra English, did not return a voicemail message requesting an interview.

Sharon Leighow, Palin's spokeswoman, said she was unaware of Daniel's contributions and ties to the Democratic Party but added, "I don't have any reason to believe he's unfair."

More here.


Stuart Schwartz: "Hating Sarah Palin - and Us"

Stuart Schwartz writing for the American Thinker:

Any way you look at it, it's us vs. them.

The media elite hate Sarah Palin with a passion -- the same passion they have used for decades to rant about us. We are the "primitive strain," the "booboisie," or, as The New York Times put it, the "Philistines." We are a people, according to Times columnist Maureen Dowd, that displays a "reptilian American desire " for prosperity and an innate disrespect for culture and our betters, who are the political and media elite that "must nurse us through our affluenza."

Welcome to Mainstream Media World, where Sarah Palin

Call it Palin Envy, Palin Derangement Syndrome or even Palin Jealous. But the irrational hatred pouring from a thousand well-fed mouths, dripping from manicured fingers, from the talkers and squawkers of mainstream media, is fueled by the increasingly angry certainty that we -- and Gov. Sarah Palin -- simply don't know our place.

More here.

UPDATE by RAM: Here's my favorite part of Schwartz's article:

Time magazine all but giggled when Palin was interviewed after her resignation "while plucking salmon from the family fishing nets aboard a boat" on the ocean. And the giggles came from both left and right: On Fox, Dana Perino, who served as President George W. Bush's press secretary and now works for an A-list beltway lobbying firm, expressed dismay that a serious political player would handle fish... other than the kind that is smoked, nestled on cream cheese over toast points, and dotted with capers. Real players take the time to stage interviews, she pronounced, her blonde locks swinging and giggle dripping with gravitas.

They don't get it: Sarah Palin is not a real player, just as we're not real players. Like us, she's a real person. And real persons don't do staged. We simply live life, doing what we can to "pursue happiness" and help others. Service counts: Gov. Palin, for example, had programs to help Eskimos struggling with winter food shortages.


The Media and DNC Revert to Campaign Mode

Since the end of the 2008 campaign we have been told by the media that Governor Sarah Palin is "finished," and that she can't possibly aspire to a prominent national office. As she enters her final days in office as Governor of Alaska, the media and the DNC have turned up the heat. As many of you know, Governor Palin penned an op-ed for the Washington Post in which she criticized the so-called "cap and trade" bill. The reaction from the DNC was as swift as the sting they felt from Governor Palin's pen. The DNC immediately broke the "in case of emergency" glass and brought forward Senator John F. Kerry to issue a response to Palin. Kerry took his marxist argument to the Daily Kos and HuffPo. Now, because John F. Kerry is an outright loser, the DNC has asked his marxist colleague, a known racist, Barbara Boxer to jump into the fight. If Palin is irrelevant to national politics -- why does the DNC run out these two dinosaurs to counter her? Do they do the same for Mitt Romney's op-eds? Makes one think.

So that covers the DNC -- now what about the media? C4P has covered many polls that have shown Governor Palin in a favorable national political standing, but, of course, these polls get no media attention at all. But, that is not to say that the media does not know about these polls. In fact, they are well aware of such polls, and one might think that could be one of the reasons that they decided to do some polling of their own. ABC and the Washington Post decided to lay out some of their ever-shrinking earnings to run a poll that shows that Palin is basically the most hated person in the history of the known universe. Conservatives and Republicans just don't understand -- Americans hate Palin! Get over it. She can't win anything, as we, the media, have been trying to tell you since the end of the presidential campaign. The media decides who gets to win what in this country!

My question is this: how come every negative poll on Palin receives broad mainstream attention, while the other polls do not? I'm sorry, we all know that answer already: Media Malpractice.

Along with the poll they produced, ABC also felt the need to write a smear article to go along with it (so they could analyze the data for us, you see) and the Washington Post got into the act as well. This might be a good time to point out that the ABC/WaPo poll surveyed random adults. Not likely voters. Not even registered voters. Random adults.

Respectable polling outlets such as Rasmussen seem to come to different conclusions regarding Governor Palin. One wonders if this is because they enter into polling without being in love with the Obama administration and hating Sarah Palin's guts (they also generally do surveys of likely voters, not random adults). Newsbusters has a past example of the kind of reporting done by one of the writers of today's anti-Palin WaPo article:

HONOLULU -- In his two weeks in Hawaii, Barack Obama has oozed island cool: the black shades and khaki shorts, the breezy sandaled saunter that suggested he had not a care in the world. Who said anything about the presidency?

He strolled shirtless near the beach, enjoyed a shave ice and a local seaweed-wrapped delicacy called Spam musubi. One day, the president-elect flashed the friendly "shaka" sign, shaking his pinky and thumb in a local surfing gesture.

They just lurve them some Obama. All Obama, all the time!

We also have the LA Times getting into the act. For some bizarre reason, the LA Times decided to discuss Sarah Palin and insane "Obama birthers" in the same paragraph:

The good news for bloggers and Palin fans is that thanks to SarahPAC, her political fundraising arm, SP is likely to be spending a good bit more time in the lower 48. That's what Alaskans call the continental U.S. since the current president's original homestate doesn't really count. And according to the birthers, he might well be from Kenya or somewhere foreign.


And if you weren't already despressed at the state of the American media -- check this out:

Jon Stewart Tops 'Most Trusted Newscaster' Poll

With the passing of Walter Cronkite, whose funeral later this afternoon will be webcast on, Time magazine has taken a poll asking 'who is the new most trusted newscaster in America.'

It's not Brian, Charlie or Katie.

NBC Nightly News anchor Brian Williams responds to TVNewser (tongue firmly planted in cheek): "I am reluctant to congratulate Jon, only because questions have been raised about the methodology of the poll. In some precincts, voting irregularities have been reported. People apparently thought they were either voting for Jimmy Stewart, Patrick Stewart or Danica Patrick. When asked to decide between Jon and me, several respondents answered, 'the tall one...' and yet their votes were not recorded. That's disenfranchisement."

This is what it has come to, people. Weep for the Republic.

(H/T Rusty) Check out this electoral report card on pollsters.

UPDATE by RAM: The political affiliation of the WaPO/ABC poll's "random" sampling was:

Democrat 33%
Republican 22%
Independent 41%
Other 4%

Gee, that's an honest poll.


Friday Open Thread

AP: Giant panda gives birth to twins in China

Reuters: Japan's "iron man" quits -- at 81

Ann Althouse: Thoughts on WD-40

Reuters: Goat's crowning as king of Ireland in doubt

Gainesville Sun: At SEC Media Days: Tebowgate


Thursday, July 23, 2009

Glenn Beck Praises Palin for State Sovereignty Resolution

Glenn Beck praised Governor Palin on his show today for being one of two governors in the nation to sign a resolution that affirms the Tenth Amendment, which states that "powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." Here's the video:


Vastly Intelligent President to Lowest Rated News Anchor: I'm Not Into Newspapers

(H/T Redstate)

We were told that Governor Palin was unqualified to be Vice President of the United States because she didn't provide specifics in answer to Katie Couric's question: "What do you read?"

Well, check this out:

Katie Couric: No, I’m not going to read - I’m not going to put you through that. But it was it was a tough column. And I’m just curious, A, have you read it? And, B, what’s your response?

President Obama: I, you know, I don’t spend a lot of time reading columns, Katie. The fact is that I am confident in the work that we’re doing.

Media Malpractice.


Chuck Heath and Piper Palin on the Eddie Burke Show

Here's the audio of Chuck Heath, Governor Palin's father, and Piper Palin, Governor Palin's youngest daughter, on the Eddie Burke Show this afternoon:


Parnell Wants to Stop Ethics Complaint Leaks

KTUU reports:

ANCHORAGE, Alaska -- Lt. Gov. Sean Parnell, who takes over for Gov. Sarah Palin on Sunday, said that he wants the Department of Law to come up with recommendations on how to stop leaks of confidential reports from ethics investigations.

An unknown source leaked a Personnel Board report Tuesday that found probable cause that Palin violated ethics rules with a legal defense fund, the Alaska Fund Trust.

Now Parnell wants Attorney General Dan Sullivan to come up with suggestions on how to stop future leaks.

"These leaks must stop," Parnell said via press release. "If we allow public officials to be tried and convicted in the press through abuse of the legal process, then the Executive Branch is at risk. The rule of law is threatened."

Better late than never I guess...

UPDATE by Tim: Here is the text of Parnell's press release:

Parnell Seeks to End Leaks of Confidential Information Asks Attorney General to Step In

(July 23, 2009, Anchorage, Alaska) - Lieutenant Governor Sean Parnell today asked Attorney General Dan Sullivan to provide recommendations on how to prevent leaks of confidential information in ethics probes.

Parnell’s request comes after the leak of an investigator’s confidential and preliminary report related to an ethics complaint filed against Governor Sarah Palin.

“These leaks must stop,” Parnell said. “If we allow public officials to be tried and convicted in the press through abuse of the legal process, then the Executive Branch is at risk. The rule of law is threatened.”

Parnell said that leaking the investigator’s preliminary report is just like walking into a courthouse, lifting some notes from the jurors’ break room and publishing them before all the evidence is in and before a verdict is reached.

Parnell recognized the need for accountability for public officials, but said the ethics laws are being abused.

“If confidential information was leaked from our courts, there would be an outcry,” he said. “There must be respect for the law when it comes to Executive Branch ethics investigations.”


Frederic Bastiat, Barack Obama, and Sarah Palin; UPDATED

There has been a lot of debate over the wisdom of Barack Obama’s monstrous $787 billion stimulus plan ever since he first proposed it. At the time he proposed the plan, Obama claimed the country may never emerge from the recession unless his plan was passed with alacrity. In fact, Obama wanted his plan passed so quickly that neither the Congress nor public were even given the opportunity to read the bill.

As time has passed, an increasing amount of people are coming to the realization that the plan has been an unmitigated failure and waste of money. The most visible and painful sign of this failure is the rising unemployment rate. In fact, the current unemployment rate is, predictably, higher than Obama said it would be even without his stimulus plan. Not only has the unemployment rate climbed well beyond what President Obama envisioned, but Obama himself now admits it will continue to rise or “tick up”, as he calls it. Although he won’t admit it, this indicates to me that even he knows his stimulus plan has been an abject failure.

Matt Cover, in an article he wrote for CNS News, discusses the fact that unemployment is higher with Obama’s plan than it would have been without it:

Unemployment hit 9.5 percent in June, according to the Department of Labor, putting the figure 2.5 percent higher than the White House had predicted it would be if a government stimulus spending program went into place. Moreover, the new figure is nearly one percent higher than where the White House said it would be without any stimulus spending at all.

Why has Obama’s huge government spending plan failed to stimulate the economy and produce all those jobs Obama promised? The answer is quite simple, as most economic issues are. I am reminded of Frederic Bastiat, a 19th century French economist and philosopher who opined that most bad ideas, economic or otherwise, are rooted in myths or, as he called them, “fallacies,” Since myths are difficult to eradicate, history tends to repeat itself until and unless said myth is itself eradicated.

Bastiat, a libertarian, is still known today for his intellect and vigorous defense of free markets. Bastiat was a master at using fables and parables to explain economic concepts in terms anyone could understand. He famously believed economics was an inherently simple topic and that most people understood economic issues intuitively. In a famous treatise written in 1850, the year in which he died, Bastiat fashioned his famous “fallacy of the broken window”. This is one of his most enduring legacies.

Henry Hazlitt, an economist who was influenced by Bastiat, explained the broken window fallacy in his book, Economics in One Lesson. Here’s the relevant excerpt:

A young hoodlum, say, heaves a brick through the window of a baker’s shop. The shopkeeper runs out furious, but the boy is gone. A crowd gathers, and begins to stare with quiet satisfaction at the gaping hole in the window and the shattered glass over the bread and pies. After a while the crowd feels the need for philosophic reflection. And several of its members are almost certain to remind each other or the baker that, after all, the misfortune has its bright side. It will make business for some glazier.

As they begin to think of this they elaborate upon it. How much does a new plate glass window cost? Two hundred and fifty dollars? That will be quite a sun. After all, if windows were never broken, what would happen to the glass business? Then, of course, the thing is endless. The glazier will have $250 more to spend with other merchants, and these in turn will have $250 more to spend with still other merchants, and so ad infinitum.

The smashed window will go on providing money and employment in ever-widening circles. The logical conclusion from all this would be, if the crowd drew it, that the little hoodlum who threw the brick, far from being a public menace, was a public benefactor.

Now let us take another look. The crowd is at least right in its first conclusion. This little act of vandalism will in the first instance mean more business for some glazier. The glazier will be no more unhappy to learn of the incident than an undertaker to learn of a death. But the shopkeeper will be out $250 that he was planning to spend for a new suit. Because he has had to replace the window, he will have to go without the suit (or some equivalent need or luxury). Instead of having a window and $250 he now has merely a window. Or, as he was planning to buy the suit that very afternoon, instead of having both a window and a suit he must be content with the window and no suit. If we think of him as part of the community, the community has lost a new suit that might otherwise have come into being, and is just that much poorer.

The glazier’s gain of business, in short, is merely the tailor’s loss of business. No new “employment” has been added. The people in the crowd were thinking only of two parties to the transaction, the baker and the glazier. They had forgotten the potential third party involved, the tailor. They forgot him precisely because he will not now enter the scene. They will see the new window in the next day or two. They will never see the extra suit, precisely because it will never be made. They see only what is immediately visible to the eye.*

John Stossel, of ABC News, takes another look at Bastiat’s broken glass fallacy in the following exceptionally well done video.

President Obama’s stimulus plan is a failure because he ignored the broken glass fallacy, as all government spending plans to stimulate the economy do. Manifest in Obama's plan is the idea that government can spend the money better and more efficiently than the private sector. What Obama and his fellow liberals don’t understand is that every dollar they spend has to come from somewhere. One can’t stimulate the economy by raising taxes and borrowing money from the private sector. In short, every dollar the government spends is a dollar the private sector cannot.

Bastiat understood this over 150 years ago, as does Governor Palin today. She intuitively understands Bastiat’s basic premise that individuals and businesses, which comprise the private sector, are much better able to stimulate the economy and thus, create jobs, than the government. The government simply needs to get out of the way and allow them to do so. Raising taxes and spending more money doesn’t stimulate anything other than unemployment as we're seeing today. In her RNC speech, Governor Palin deftly and effectively discussed the fallacies in Obama’s economic plans:

…Government is too big ... he wants to grow it.

Congress spends too much ... he promises more.

Taxes are too high ... he wants to raise them. His tax increases are the fine print in his economic plan, and let me be specific.

The Democratic nominee for president supports plans to raise income taxes ... raise payroll taxes ... raise investment income taxes ... raise the death tax ... raise business taxes ... and increase the tax burden on the American people by hundreds of billions of dollars. My sister Heather and her husband have just built a service station that's now opened for business — like millions of others who run small businesses.

How are they going to be any better off if taxes go up? Or maybe you're trying to keep your job at a plant in Michigan or Ohio ... or create jobs with clean coal from Pennsylvania or West Virginia ... or keep a small farm in the family right here in Minnesota.

How are you going to be better off if our opponent adds a massive tax burden to the American economy?

Somewhere, Frederic Bastiat is smiling, content in the knowledge that his philosophy of limited government is alive and well in Governor Sarah Palin.

Update: Illinois Conservative (Whitney) received an email from a friend and left it in the comments. It fits right in with the fallacy of Obama's stimulus plan.

Shortly after class, an economics student approaches his economics professor and says, "I don't understand this stimulus bill. Can you explain it to me?"

The professor replied, "I don't have any time to explain it at my office, but if you come over to my house on Saturday and help me with my weekend project, I'll be glad to explain it to you." The student agreed.

At the agreed-upon time, the student showed up at the professor's house. The professor stated that the weekend project involved his backyard pool.

They both went out back to the pool, and the professor handed the student a bucket. Demonstrating with his own bucket, the professor said, "First, go over to the deep end, and fill your bucket with as much water as you can." The student did as he was instructed.

The professor then continued, "Follow me over to the shallow end, and then dump all the water from your bucket into it." The student was naturally confused, but did as he was told.

The professor then explained they were going to do this many more times, and began walking back to the deep end of the pool.

The confused student asked, "Excuse me, but why are we doing this?"

The professor matter-of-factly stated that he was trying to make the shallow end much deeper.

The student didn't think the economics professor was serious, but figured that he would find out the real story soon enough.

However, after the 6th trip between the shallow end and the deep end, the student began to become worried that his economics professor had gone mad. The student finally replied, "All we're doing is wasting valuable time and effort on unproductive pursuits.

Even worse, when this process is all over, everything will be at the same level it was before, so all you'll really have accomplished is the destruction of what could have been truly productive action!"

The professor put down his bucket and replied with a smile, "Congratulations.You now understand the stimulus bill."


  © Blogger templates Newspaper III by 2008

Back to TOP