Obamacare Ruled Entirely Unconstitutional

Monday, January 31, 2011

Roger Vinson, A U.S. District Judge in Florida, has ruled Obamacare unconstitutional, not part of it either--the whole thing. Many have challenged its constitutionality from the beginning. Governor Palin, for one, has often referred to it as "the mother of all mandates." Once again, this is America, and in America people cannot be forced to purchase anything. I reported here that U.S. District Judge Henry Hudson in Richmond, Virginia ruled that President Obama's "health-care legislation goes beyond Congress’s powers to regulate interstate commerce." It did not address other provisions of the bill. Today's ruling, however, renders the entire bill unconstitutional.

The Conclusion (emphasis added):

The existing problems in our national health care system are recognized by everyone in this case. There is widespread sentiment for positive improvements that will reduce costs, improve the quality of care, and expand availability in a way that the nation can afford. This is obviously a very difficult task. Regardless of how laudable its attempts may have been to accomplish these goals in passing the Act, Congress must operate within the bounds established by the Constitution. Again, this case is not about whether the Act is wise or unwise legislation. It is about the Constitutional role of the federal government.

For the reasons stated, I must reluctantly conclude that Congress exceeded the bounds of its authority in passing the Act with the individual mandate. That is not to say, of course, that Congress is without power to address the problems and inequities in our health care system. The health care market is more than one sixth of the national economy, and without doubt Congress has the power to reform and regulate this market. That has not been disputed in this case. The principal dispute has been about how Congress chose to exercise that power here.30 Because the individual mandate is unconstitutional and not severable, the entire Act must be declared void.


In closing, I will simply observe, once again, that my conclusion in this case is based on an application of the Commerce Clause law as it exists pursuant to the Supreme Court’s current interpretation and definition. Only the Supreme Court (or a Constitutional amendment) can expand that.

Read more here.

This is not over. It will be challenged and will probably go all the way to the Supreme Court. It's good to know, however, that the Constitution still matters in this country. Had the Obama administration listened to the American people, and to Governor Palin who called it early--rather than choosing to ram health care down our throats in this manner--things could have been vastly different.

(h/t Whitney)


PDS & the Disinviting of Bristol Palin

Saturday, January 29, 2011

Bristol Palin has been disinvited to speak about abstinence at Washington University in St. Louis because some campus whiners and actress Kate Walsh have decided it's not a good idea. Bristol has been a voice for abstinence by sharing her own story, advising that waiting until marriage is better. It's a message so needed, especially on college campuses, and instead of having her come to share her message, Washington University has caved. So it's not acceptable for a Palin (You know that's what this is all about) to speak, but it's all right for Van Jones, controversial former White House green jobs czar and self-professed communist, to have spoken there?

Cubachi points out the Left's incredible hypocrisy and derangement:

In the new era of civility and “new tone,” liberals continue to prove how much of a farce their calls are. They claim to be for free speech and respectful difference of opinion yet, if you’re last name is Palin or you’re a conservative, then that’s the exception.


Yet, students happen to protest because they claim Bristol is being overpaid. Really? A woman who was pregnant as a teen doesn’t have the experience? Uh huh. The irony that liberal students who are supporters of big government programs are protesting because of costs.

Did they have that issue when Van Jones spoke at the university? (h/t: Nick Marschel on twitter)

Universities are bombarded with liberal orthodoxy. Anyone who happens to contrast their views with one that is conservative or Christian is often mocked, ridiculed, or prevented from voicing opposition.

Read more here.

John Hayward of Human Events writes:
Washington University in St. Louis is planning a “Student Sexual Responsibility Week” next month. They decided to invite Sarah Palin’s daughter Bristol to speak about abstinence at the event. Bristol is the Teen Abstinence Ambassador for The Candie’s Foundation, a group dedicated to preventing teen pregnancy. She’s also become a popular media figure in her own right, having appeared on one of television’s most popular shows, Dancing With The Stars.

Campus leftists immediately tugged on their jackboots and flew into a towering pillar of rage. Today they were able to intimidate the university and Palin into calling off her appearance – the latest evidence that campus liberals could teach Hosni Mubarak a thing or two about suppressing dissent.


A November 2010 report from the Student Life newspaper at Washington University said that the Green Action environmentalist group paid disgraced Obama cabinet member Van Jones a $5000 honorarium, which is the maximum allowed for appeals made over the summer. Green Action tried to get another $2500 for him, but the Student Union Treasury voted them down. If Van Jones is worth five to seven thousand dollars, Bristol Palin for $20,000 is the deal of the century, especially since she would be speaking on the important topic of teen pregnancy, not the dead-end hysteria of economy-killing environmental radicalism. Also, Van Jones may have a lot of political influence, but his name isn’t exactly “marquee.” Nobody knows who he is except conservative pundits, communists, 9/11 conspiracy theorists, and Barack Obama.

Another claim made by the campus left is that Palin was “too controversial” to speak, a consideration that obviously doesn’t apply to people like Van Jones. You can see how a young mother discussing the perils of teen pregnancy would be more controversial than the views of a self-described Communist who was run out of the most radical Administration in modern history, because he entertained the notion that George Bush was the real villain behind the 9/11 attacks.

Elevating this line of reasoning to totalitarian art, Sean Janda wrote in Student Life that Palin’s appearance would “fundamentally shift the discourse that this event will create. Instead of discussing issues regarding abstinence in college, students will discuss the suitability of Ms. Palin as a keynote speaker. In this way, Ms. Palin’s appearance will suppress dialogue about the issues that Sex Week is meant to address and, instead, spark dialogue about Treasury’s use of its money.”

In other words, because the campus left is mad with hatred at the Palin family, her presence would be too much of a distraction. Their resistance automatically makes her too controversial to be allowed to speak, which means anyone they really dislike would instantly hit the same level of controversy, and be silenced. I don’t know what else is being taught at Washington U, but Sean Janda seems to understand fascism pretty well.

So let's take a look at who is replacing Bristol. Dr. Katie Plax, a professor at the university who has ties to George Soros and campaigned for President Obama. How very...interesting. It's even more interesting that an actress, a Planned Parenthood-er called for the students to boycott Bristol's appearance. Hayward states:
The real reason for suppressing Palin was provided by actress Kate Walsh, a Planned Parenthood drone who Twittered “Welcome to the idiocracy!” and asked “What does she know about college or abstaining?” when encouraging students to boycott the Palin appearance. Walsh herself is a highly educated graduate of… well, actually, she dropped out of the University of Arizona to do theater. It should also be noted that Walsh starred in the movie Legion, in which mankind was only saved from annihilation at the hands of avenging angels because a young single mother decided not to have an abortion.

Oh, the irony.

Read the full Human Events piece here.

Bristol Palin has used her influence and her experience to make a difference in the lives of people. Many young people look up to her and find inspiration in what she has gone through and her dedication to helping others as they make decisions in their own lives. She had the opportunity to bring that message to Washington University. Instead, she's out--because she's a Palin. They want us to believe, however, that she's out because she's too expensive and controversial. What's really expensive is ignorance and allowing Leftist PDS sufferers to get in the way of free speech and a common sense, much-needed message.

(h/t WendyGav and Cubachi)


Governor Palin: On Sputnik vs. Spudnut

Friday, January 28, 2011

Governor Palin via Facebook:

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


Governor Palin on the Bob and Mark Radio Show

Thursday, January 27, 2011

Governor Palin was on the Bob and Mark Radio Show today further discussing the President's State of the Union address, three things she would do if she were president, and her reaction to her poll numbers in Alaska. She also mentioned the recent ridiculous gossip about her husband, Todd.

(h/t Kelsey)


Governor Palin to Keynote Reagan's 100th Birthday Celebration

Great news heading into Reagan/Palin Appreciation Month. According to Big Government:

Governor Palin Chooses Young America’s Foundation’s Reagan Ranch Center as the Backdrop for her Speech to Honor the 100th Anniversary of Ronald Reagan’s Birth

Young America’s Foundation announced today that Governor Sarah Palin will give the keynote address on February 4 at its Reagan 100 Opening Banquet at the Reagan Ranch Center in Santa Barbara, California, for the 100th anniversary celebration of President Reagan’s birthday. Governor Palin was Alaska’s youngest and first woman governor and the first female Vice Presidential candidate in the history of the GOP.

“I am very excited to have been selected to address Young America’s Foundation’s Reagan 100 dinner,” Governor Palin said. “Young America’s Foundation has been sharing the values of President Reagan with young people for more than 40 years, and there is no organization more committed to preserving freedom’s future.”

To commemorate the 100th anniversary of Ronald Reagan’s birth, Governor Palin will reflect on the seminal speech by President Reagan, “Time for Choosing,” that discussed the risks and rewards before an America at a crossroads in the early 1960’s. Governor Palin will draw parallels to today while calling for young people to continue the Reagan revolution into the future.
Read the rest here.

(h/t Whitney)


Governor Palin: Obama’s Message to America: The Era of Big Government is Back, Now Help Me Pay For It

Governor Palin breaks down President Obama's State of the Union address via Facebook:

The President’s State of the Union address boiled down to this message: “The era of big government is here as long as I am, so help me pay for it.”


Americans are growing impatient with a White House that still just doesn’t get it. The President proves he doesn’t understand that the biggest challenge facing our economy is today’s runaway debt when he states we want to make sure “we don’t get buried under a mountain a debt.” That’s the problem! We are buried under Mt. McKinley-sized debt. It’s at the heart of what is crippling our economy and taking our jobs. This is the concern that should be on every leader’s mind. Our country’s future is at stake, and we’re rapidly reaching a crisis point. Our government is spending too much, borrowing too much, and growing too much. Debt is stifling our private sector growth, and millions of Americans are desperately looking for work.

So, what was the President’s response? At a time when we need quick, decisive, and meaningful action to stop our looming debt crisis, President Obama gave us what politicians have for years: promises that more federal government “investment” (read: more government spending) is the solution.

He couched his proposals to grow government and increase spending in the language of “national greatness.” This seems to be the Obama administration’s version of American exceptionalism – an “exceptionally big government,” in which a centralized government declares that we shall be great and innovative and competitive, not by individual initiative, but by government decree. Where once he used words like “hope” and “change,” the President may now talk about “innovation” and “competition”; but the audacity of his recycled rhetoric no longer inspires hope.

Real leadership is more than just words; it’s deeds. The President’s deeds don’t lend confidence that we can trust his words spoken last night.

In the past, he promised us he’d make job creation his number one priority, while also cutting the deficit, eliminating waste, easing foreclosures in the housing markets, and making “tough decisions about opening new offshore areas for oil and gas development.” What did we get? A record $1.5 trillion deficit, an 84% increase in federal spending, a trillion dollar stimulus that stimulated nothing but more Tea Party activism, 9+% unemployment (or 17% percent if you include those who have stopped looking for work or settled for part time jobs), 2.9 million home foreclosures last year, and a moratorium on offshore drilling that has led to more unemployment and $100 dollar a barrel oil.

The President glossed over the most important issue he needed to address last night: spending. He touched on deficit reduction, but his proposals amount to merely a quarter of the cuts in discretionary spending proposed by his own Deficit Reduction Commission, not to mention the $2.5 trillion in cuts over ten years suggested by the Republican Study Committee. And while we appreciate hearing the same President who gave us the trillion dollar Stimulus Package boondoggle finally concede that we need to cut earmarks, keep in mind that earmarks are a $16 billion drop in the $1.5 trillion ocean that is the federal deficit. Budget cuts won’t be popular, but they are vitally necessary or we will soon be a bankrupt country. It’s the responsibility of a leader to make sure the American people fully understand this.

As it is, the American people should fully understand that when the President talks about increased “investments” he’s talking about increased government spending. Cut away the rhetoric and you’ll also see that the White House’s real message on economic reform wasn’t one of substantial spending cuts, but of tax increases. When the President talks about simplifying the tax code, he’s made it clear that he’s not looking to cut your taxes; he’s looking for additional tax revenue from you. The tax “simplification” suggested by the President’s Deficit Reduction Commission would end up raising taxes by $1 trillion over the next decade. So, instead of bringing spending down in line with revenue, the President wants to raise our taxes to pay for his massive spending increases. It’s tax and spend in reverse: spend first, tax later.

And the Obama administration has a lot of half-baked ideas on where to spend our hard-earned money in pursuit of “national greatness.” These “investments,” as the President calls them, include everything from solar shingles to high speed trains. As we struggle to service our unsustainable debt, the only thing these “investments” will get us is a bullet train to bankruptcy.

With credit ratings agency Moody’s warning us that the federal government must reverse the rapid growth of national debt or face losing our triple-A rating, keep in mind that a nation doesn’t look so “great” when its credit rating is in tatters.

Of course, it’s nice to give a speech calling for “investment” and “competition” in order to reach greatness. It’s quite another thing to advocate and implement policies that truly encourage such things. Growing the federal government is not the answer.

Take education for example. It’s easy to declare the need for better education, but will throwing even more money at the issue really help? As the Cato Institute’s Michael Tanner notes, “the federal government has increased education spending by 188 percent in real terms since 1970 without seeing any substantial improvement in test scores.” If you want “innovation” and “competition,” then support school choice initiatives and less federal control over our state and local districts.

When it comes to energy issues, we heard more vague promises last night as the President’s rhetoric suggested an all-of-the-above solution to meeting our country’s energy needs. But again, his actions point in a different direction. He offers a vision of a future powered by what he refers to as “clean energy,” but how we will get there from here remains a mystery. In the meantime, he continues to stymie the responsible development of our own abundant conventional energy resources – the stuff we actually use right now to fuel our economy. His continued hostility towards domestic drilling means hundreds of thousands of well-paying jobs will not be created and millions of Americans will end up paying more at the pump. It also means we’ll continue to transfer hundreds of billions of U.S. dollars to foreign regimes that don’t have America’s interests at heart.

On the crucial issue of entitlement reform, the President offered nothing. This is shocking, because as he himself explained back in April 2009, “if we want to get serious about fiscal discipline…we will have to get serious about entitlement reform.” Even though the Medicare Trust Fund will run out of funds a mere six years from now, and the Social Security Trust Fund is filled mainly with IOUs, the President opted to kick the can down the road yet again. And once again, he was disingenuous when he suggested that meaningful reform would automatically expose people’s Social Security savings to a possible stock market crash. As Rep. Paul Ryan showed in his proposed Roadmap, and others have explained, it’s possible to come up with meaningful reform proposals that tackle projected shortfalls and offer workers more options to invest our own savings while still guaranteeing invested funds so they won’t fall victim to sudden swings in the stock market.

And what about that crucial issue confronting so many Americans who are struggling today – the lack of jobs? The President came to office promising that his massive, multi-trillion dollar spending programs would keep unemployment below 8%; but the lack of meaningful, pro-free market reforms in yesterday’s speech means his legacy will almost certainly be four years of above 8% unemployment, regardless of how much he increases federal spending (or perhaps I should say because of how much he’s increased it).

Perhaps the most nonsensical bit of double-speak we heard last night was when the President said that hitting job-creators with a tax increase isn’t “punishing their success. It’s about promoting America’s success.” But government taking more money from the small business entrepreneurs who create up to 70% of all jobs in this country is not “promoting America’s success.” It’s a disincentive that will result in less job creation. It is, in fact, punishing the success of the very people who created the innovation that the President has supposedly been praising.

Despite the flowery rhetoric, the President doesn’t seem to understand that individuals make America great, not the federal government. American greatness lies in the courage and hard work of individual innovators and entrepreneurs. America is an exceptional nation in part because we have historically been a country that rewards and affirms individual initiative and offers people the freedom to invest and create as they see fit – not as a government bureaucrat does. Yes, government can play an appropriate role in our free market by ensuring a level playing field to encourage honest competition without picking winners and losers. But by and large, government should get out of the way. Unfortunately, under President Obama’s leadership, government growth is in our way, and his “big government greatness” will not help matters.

Consider what his “big government greatness” really amounts to. It’s basically a corporatist agenda – it’s the collaboration between big government and the big businesses that have powerful friends in D.C. and can afford to hire big lobbyists. This collaboration works in a manner that distorts and corrupts true free market capitalism. This isn’t just old-fashioned big government liberalism; this is crony capitalism on steroids. In the interests of big business, we’re “investing” in technologies and industries that venture capitalists tell us are non-starters, but which will provide lucrative returns for some corporate interests who have major investments in these areas. In the interests of big government, we’re not reducing the size of our bloated government or cutting spending, we’re told the President will freeze it – at unsustainable, historic levels! In practice, this means that public sector employees (big government’s staunchest defenders) may not lose jobs, but millions of Americans in the private sector face lay offs because the ever-expanding government has squeezed out and crippled our economy under the weight of unsustainable debt.

Ronald Reagan said, “You can’t be for big government, big taxes, and big bureaucracy and still be for the little guy.” President Obama’s proposals last night stick the little guy with the bill, while big government and its big corporate partners prosper. The plain truth is our country simply cannot afford Barack Obama’s dream of an “exceptionally big government” that may help the big guys, but sticks it to the rest of us.

- Sarah Palin

Read it here.


Governor Palin and Greta Discuss SOTU

Wednesday, January 26, 2011

Here's Governor Palin with Greta last night discussing President Obama's State of the Union address:

Part I:

Part II:


Governor Palin Discusses the SOTU on Greta Tonight

Governor Palin will appear on "On the Record" tonight to discuss President Obama's State of the Union address. Tune in to Fox News at 10 p.m. Eastern.


William Dixon Breaks Down 'What Exactly is Wrong with Sarah Palin...'

Read this article by William Dixon about what's behind the disdain for Governor Palin by those on the Left and the Right:

Rush Limbaugh is fond of saying the left will always tell you whom they fear by making that person the focus of their most virulent attacks. The left despises Sarah Palin. They say she is stupid and incapable of ever assuming the role of president. They mock her education, (B.S. University of Idaho), her small town background and her political accomplishments ( 2006 - 2009 Governor of Alaska ). When she resigned the governorship, they said she was a quitter. Just recently, the left indicted her as being responsible for the shooting of Congresswoman [Giffords] in Arizona.

But what of pundits on the right, the Peggy Noonan-Karl Rove types? They hold Palin in equally low esteem. And what of conservative women? Many just viscerally dislike her. Ask them about Palin. You’ll get a response which begins with a shaking of the head and some comment about being inexperienced. Press them for facts. You will find most of these women ignorant of Palin’s background and remarkable accomplishments. Why is that?

Is it because Sarah Palin does not look at all like the admired but camera-challenged women in government, such as Hillary Clinton and Justice Sotomeyer? She has not the stern, formal look of a Maggie Thatcher, the British Prime Minister who turned around England’s economy nor of Golda Meir, the tough former leader of Israel. Palin is softer, attractive, plain spoken albeit with a sometimes irritating voice. Does her appearance put people, especially women, off?


Sarah Palin is openly Christian and prays regularly. She was president of a Christian group in high school. She is “pro life” and rejected terminating her last pregnancy when she found she was carrying a baby with Down’s Syndrome. Perhaps that is the problem for some of her critics.

It seems unlikely that her performance as mayor of Wasilla, cutting taxes while expanding the town’s facilities so that it could grow, would be anything but a plus. Just so her role as a member of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission. She outed two corrupt officials, one of whom was chairman of the state Republican Party.

Was she wrong in running for governor to oust a corrupt and wasteful officer of her own political party? Was it lack of wisdom which led her to sell the state plane, cut expenses of her office by 75 percent and pass a bipartisan ethics bill? Was she impolite in chasing away the oil company lobbyists so that she could start work on a stalled pipeline for natural gas? Not likely.

President Obama was elected because he appeared to be extraordinary. His academic pedigree and soaring rhetoric shielded from voters his appalling lack of real-world experience and complete lack of substantial accomplishments. His presidency is struggling.

By contrast, Sarah Palin, despite her talents and obvious achievements, seems very ordinary. Americans, believing the smears and punditry, will likely reject Palin without really getting to know her. Once again the nod will go to a member of the cultural elite, a group which has routinely failed to govern well.

Read this in its entirety here.

Let me make two points right away. First, I have never found Governor Palin's voice "irritating." I'm not sure where that comes from. Second, I disagree with Dixon's final point: the nod will not go to an elite just for the sake of selecting an elite. We are in a unique time in political history, a time where people are fed up to the ceiling with politics as usual. I choose to believe that once the campaigning--with its competitive primary season, speech-making, fact-checking, and lovers of truth holding the lamestream media's feet to the fire--ends, the American people are going to know the candidates, and they will respond by speaking loudly and clearly in the voting booth. And should Governor Palin decide to run, they will know her. This, I believe, will cause her to be the last one standing.

William Dixon's piece should be quite thought-provoking for those who need to do some soul-searching about why they harbor such disdain for Governor Palin. Those of us who are not so deranged are not surprised by many of the points he makes. Governor Palin is an accomplished woman whose record alone merits the respect of being considered a formidable, viable candidate for President of the United States.

(h/t Doug Brady)


Governor Palin Speaks in Reno Tonight

Tuesday, January 25, 2011

President Obama will be delivering the State of the Union address tonight, and in unrelated business Governor Palin will be speaking at the Weatherby Hunting and Conservation Award Dinner in Reno, Nevada.

Politico reports:

And in Reno, Nev., former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin will be giving a speech to the Weatherby Hunting and Conservation Award Dinner. The group has previously played host to former President George H.W. Bush as well as the late Arizona Sen. Barry Goldwater — who spoke at the dinner during his insurgent campaign for the GOP nomination in 1964.

A Palin aide said the speech — one of two she is giving in Nevada this week — is just another talk to a private group and isn’t designed to rebut the president.

(h/t Ian Lazaran)


Governor Palin at Lubbock Christian School Fundraiser

Last night Governor Palin spoke at the Lubbock Christian School and, according to Alyssa Dizon of Avalanche-Journal, received a warm reception. She writes:
Despite the heightened level of security concerns, the Lubbock Christian School fundraiser featuring Sarah Palin garnered ample support from area residents and created a unique connection between Alaska and Texas.

Palin, former Alaska governor and vice presidential candidate, addressed about 1,400 people Monday night during LCS’ annual fundraiser at the Lubbock Memorial Civic Center.

Palin said Texas and Alaska are alike because they are “good beacons of freedom” and share similar values and work ethic, said Kristen Vander-Plas, president of the Lubbock Christian University College Republicans.

She said she was impressed by Palin’s willingness to go forward with her fundraiser appearance with added security despite the recent shooting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords in Arizona.

Many in the audience were LCS alumni, Vander-Plas said, and the audience as a whole was receptive to Palin’s message as was evident in their frequent applause and cheers.

Some, like Bob Wood, were drawn to the event through sheer curiosity.

He said he came to hear Palin although he does not always agree with what she says.

Others were avid Palin fans wanting to see the woman who made a huge splash in American politics in 2008.

“I believe in Sarah Palin and what she represents for America,” said Linda Hunt of San Angelo, who won free tickets for the event. “Her enthusiasm, her love for America, her honesty and her core values of representing the people and not just special interests.”

Still, LCS alumni and sponsors said the main purpose of the evening was raising money for the school — having Palin present was an added bonus.

Kimberly Chitwood of Minnix Commercial Construction said someone as well-recognized as Palin at the annual fundraiser is a rare opportunity to attract people and support for the school.

“I thought it’d be interesting and we enjoy Sarah Palin,” said Ross Shamburger, who bought tickets for the fundraiser on the first day they were sold. “It’s an exciting, great opportunity for LCS. Hopefully, they’ll raise a lot of money.”

(h/t Whitney Pitcher)


February is Reagan/Palin Appreciation Month

Monday, January 24, 2011

As February approaches, I ask that you join Governor Palin's supporters in celebrating Reagan/Palin Appreciation Month. Fay, publisher of Sarah Palin Information Blog, announces:
February is the month five of our presidents were born (4 past and 1 future). It also marks the 100th anniversary of President Reagan’s birth. We would celebrate Governor Palin’s and President Reagan’s birthdays anyway, but since the liberal media has called for a Palin moratorium, the authors at the Sarah Palin Information Blog have decided to spearhead a Reagan/Palin Appreciation Month. We want to honor Reagan for his outstanding service to our country, and we want to honor Governor Palin for her accomplishments and for all she continues to do for our country.

President Reagan fought Communism from the time he worked in Hollywood through his years in office and won the Cold War without firing a shot. His famous line, “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!” will ring through history. America prospered during his Presidency as Reaganomics stimulated the economy, increased employment, and cut taxes and government expenditure. Ronald Reagan’s policies also increased the strength of our military.

Governor Sarah Palin has stood up and spoken out fearlessly in defense of conservative principles and national security when others remained silent,and she has taken the darts and arrows for doing so. And we have seen over an over that she was right. Her tireless efforts during the mid-term elections also helped elect men and women who will represent the American people instead of the establishment. All of her supporters are waiting anxiously in the hope that she will run for President and help lead our country out of the mess the current administration has gotten us into.

During February, as we celebrate President Reagan’s legacy and Governor Palin’s accomplishments, the Palin-friendly blogs that participate in Reagan/Palin Appreciation Month will be ramping up their coverage of all things Sarah Palin in a show of support for Governor Palin. We are asking all Sarah Palin supporters to sign the Reagan/Palin Appreciation Month Proclamation. Palin-friendly blogs that want to participate in this celebration can request to be added as sponsors of the Proclamation by using the Contact Petition Sponsor button on the petition website after signing the Proclamation.

February is barely a week away now, so let’s get organized to have a great month of celebration for two great Presidents – one who has finished his course and one who is waiting in the wings to bear his torch.


Governor Palin's USA Today Editorial: America's Lifeguard

Governor Palin wrote an editorial about Ronald Reagan for the USA Today:

I had the privilege of coming of age during the era of Ronald Reagan. I like to think of him as America's lifeguard. As a teenager, Ronald Reagan saved 77 lives as a lifeguard on the Rock River, which ran through his hometown of Dixon, Ill. The day he was inaugurated in 1981, a local radio announcer famously declared, "The Rock River flows for you tonight, Mr. President."

The image of the lifeguard seems to represent what Reagan was to America and to the freedom-loving people of the world. He lifted our country up at a time when we were in the depths of economic, cultural and spiritual malaise. We were told that we must accept that the era of American greatness was over; but with his optimism and common sense, President Reagan held up a mirror to the American soul to remind us of our exceptionalism.


Reagan showed us that despite a deep recession, there could still be morning in America. He could speak to the economic troubles facing ordinary Americans because he understood what it was like to live through a Great Depression where families scraped to get by. And yet, he saw us recover from our Great Depression, and under his leadership we experienced the greatest peacetime economic boom in our history. He could speak to our fears that our years as a superpower were over, because he understood what it was like to see America at war and really fear that we might lose. And yet, he saw us win two world wars, and under his leadership we won the Cold War without firing a single shot. Reagan's belief in American greatness was rooted in historic fact, not blind optimism. He was a sunny optimist because he knew that our best days are yet to come.

Today, when we hear the worry in the voices of Americans wondering where the jobs will be for our children and grandchildren and wondering if the world will be safe and prosperous in the years to come, we should remember Reagan's faith in our inherent heroism and greatness. When we see people around the globe looking to the White House for leadership, we should remember Reagan's steel spine. He understood America's purpose in this world and what we need to do to secure liberty. As Margaret Thatcher said of him, "He sought to mend America's wounded spirit, to restore the strength of the free world, and to free the slaves of communism." He sought those things and he succeeded.

This year, as we celebrate the centennial of Reagan's birth, let's remember the lifeguard from the Rock River who rescued us with his optimism and common sense. We need more lifeguards like him.

Read the full editorial here.


Frank Miele: Governor Palin Must Never Shut Up

Sunday, January 23, 2011

Frank Miele puts pen to paper to express some of the things I've pointed out in times past: there is nothing extreme or scary about the values Governor Palin espouses--not to those who actually listen. He also points out how absurd is the notion that those who lie about her, twist her words, and make accusations against her do so because they expect her to do something she has not--and must not--do: shut up. In his article, "What's so scary about Sarah?" he writes:

Some people don’t like Sarah Palin.

As an intellectual exercise, you might want to ask yourself why that is.

Is it because they don’t like her personally or because they don’t agree with her ideas?

I suppose some people might not like her because she speaks with a funny accent, or because she is from a rural state or because she likes to hunt and fish.

I think we can all agree that people who don’t like her for any of those reasons, or because (shudder!) she goes to church, are narrow-minded and not really worthy of serious consideration. Besides, all of those characteristics could apply to Abe Lincoln just as easily, and from what we know he was considered quite likable personally.

But what if it is her ideas that people don’t like? Isn’t that fair?


Whatever happened to that civility we keep hearing about? It doesn’t seem to apply when people talk about Sarah Palin. She has been vilified and smeared from the instant she arrived on the national scene as John McCain’s vice-presidential pick. People have wished for her death. They have insulted her children. They have twisted her words. They have painted her as incoherent and illogical and finally — with the Tucson shooting — as an inspiration for killers.

And that’s just what her fellow Republicans have said about her!

Here’s a sampling at random:

Former Reagan speechwriter Peggy Noonan: “...there is little sign that she has the tools, the equipment, the knowledge or the philosophical grounding one hopes for, and expects, in a holder of high office.”

Columnist Kathleen Parker: “Clearly Out Of Her League.”

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich: “I think that she’s got to slow down and be more careful and think through what she’s saying and how she’s saying it.”

Former George W. Bush speechwriter David Frum: Palin “should stop talking now.”

Those last two comments seem to represent the mainstream Republican view of Palin — and certainly the mainstream Democratic view: SHE SHOULD JUST SHUT UP.

But why?

Well, let’s face it, the usual reason people want to see someone else shut up is because they disagree with that person’s point of view. It’s not rocket science. The more your enemy talks, the more chance there is that someone will listen.

And what exactly is it that Palin is saying that mainstream Republicans are afraid of? What is she saying that scares all establishment politicians?

When you analyze her scary ideas, they usually come down to this — a belief in individual liberty and responsibility, a belief in limited government, a belief in American exceptionalism, and a belief in a Creator.

So what part of those things is offensive or stupid? What part of that “agenda” do mainstream Republicans want to run away from?

Individual liberty, responsibility, and limited government? Those ideas come from our Founding Fathers. American exceptionalism? That idea comes from a study of history. Belief in a Creator? That idea is the bedrock on which all our liberties are built. Look in the Declaration of Independence if you don’t want to look in the Bible.

Just to make sure there was nothing scary about Sarah, I read the full text of Sarah Palin’s Facebook statement about the Arizona shooting, which has been widely denounced as reprehensible, mostly by Democrats such as Chris Matthews and Jon Stewart. PoliticusUSA blogger Sarah Jones attacked the statement for its “volatile, incendiary rhetoric.” Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s spokesman said it showed “a complete ignorance of history — or blatant anti-Semitism.”

I encourage you to read Palin’s statement for yourself (see link below). Or watch it on Facebook. Just visit www.facebook.com/sarahpalin and look for the posting under the terrifying title, “America’s Enduring Strength.”

I can find nothing in it that any patriotic American — Republican, Democrat or independent — could possibly disagree with. It begins with a broken heart, mourning and “a healing process for the families touched by this tragedy and for our country.” It ends with a prayer for the victims of the tragedy and a plea for “God’s guidance and the peace He provides.” In between, there is a lengthy meditation on the American spirit, the American political system, and American values.

It is a very thoughtful statement — filled with the kind of serious discourse we claim that we as Americans want our leaders to engage in — but because it was made by Sarah Palin, it was immediately dismissed as self-serving and sophomoric. Pundits pounced to persuade the consumers of cable news that Palin was once again fomenting hate. That Palin is not like the rest of America. That her ideas are somehow foreign and unattractive. That she is mean-spirited and downright stupid.

But listen to what she actually said about the shooting in Tucson and the debate that followed, and you will find out that she was just the opposite — kind-hearted, generous and thoughtful.

“Our exceptional nation, so vibrant with ideas and the passionate exchange and debate of ideas, is a light to the rest of the world,” Palin said. “Congresswoman Giffords and her constituents were exercising their right to exchange ideas that day, to celebrate our Republic’s core values and peacefully assemble to petition our government. It’s inexcusable and incomprehensible why a single evil man took the lives of peaceful citizens that day...”

See anything you disagree with there?

How about this?

“The last election was all about taking responsibility for our country’s future. President Obama and I may not agree on everything, but I know he would join me in affirming the health of our democratic process. Two years ago his party was victorious. Last November, the other party won. In both elections the will of the American people was heard, and the peaceful transition of power proved yet again the enduring strength of our Republic.”

Not too radical, is it?

But what really bothered Palin haters is that she actually responded to their outrageous claims that she was somehow responsible for what the alleged pot-smoking, Bush-hating gunman did in Tucson. In other words, they were once again mad at her for daring to speak.

“Like many, I’ve spent the past few days reflecting on what happened and praying for guidance. After this shocking tragedy, I listened at first puzzled, then with concern, and now with sadness, to the irresponsible statements from people attempting to apportion blame for this terrible event,” she said.

“Vigorous and spirited public debates during elections are among our most cherished traditions. And after the election, we shake hands and get back to work, and often both sides find common ground back in D.C. and elsewhere. If you don’t like a person’s vision for the country, you’re free to debate that vision. If you don’t like their ideas, you’re free to propose better ideas. But, especially within hours of a tragedy unfolding, journalists and pundits should not manufacture a blood libel that serves only to incite the very hatred and violence they purport to condemn. That is reprehensible.”

Well, it’s easy to see why the irresponsible journalists and pundits who blamed Palin for the shooting deaths in Tucson would take offense at being chastised. But for the life of me I can’t see why the American public would consider Sarah Palin dangerous because she told the truth.


Palin likewise has been wrongfully accused, the blood in Tucson laid at her feet, and yet she was supposed to accede to this libel without protest for the sake of presumptive “civility.” Again, the message to Sarah Palin both before and after her Facebook statement is the same: Shut up, Sarah!

But Sarah did not shut up, and her words — for those who can be bothered to study them — are thoughtful and profound.

“In an ideal world all discourse would be civil and all disagreements cordial. But our Founding Fathers knew they weren’t designing a system for perfect men and women. If men and women were angels, there would be no need for government. Our Founders’ genius was to design a system that helped settle the inevitable conflicts caused by our imperfect passions in civil ways. So, we must condemn violence if our Republic is to endure.”

Nor does she leave it in the abstract. She provides evidence from nearly a year ago that she abhors political violence, and has said so publicly.

“As I said while campaigning for others last March in Arizona during a very heated primary race, “We know violence isn’t the answer. When we ‘take up our arms,’ we’re talking about our vote.” Yes, our debates are full of passion, but we settle our political differences respectfully at the ballot box — as we did just two months ago, and as our Republic enables us to do again in the next election, and the next. That’s who we are as Americans and how we were meant to be. Public discourse and debate isn’t a sign of crisis, but of our enduring strength. It is part of why America is exceptional.”

Please read the entire text of Palin’s statement. Let me know if you are offended by any of her praise of American ideals. And as you meditate on the vast difference between what she said and what the mainstream media would have you believe she said, please pay close attention to the following words:

“No one should be deterred from speaking up and speaking out in peaceful dissent, and we certainly must not be deterred by those who embrace evil and call it good. And we will not be stopped from celebrating the greatness of our country and our foundational freedoms by those who mock its greatness by being intolerant of differing opinion and seeking to muzzle dissent with shrill cries of imagined insults.”

If you don’t like Sarah Palin, that’s your business. But if you try to shut her up, that’s everybody’s business. She is the voice of liberty. Silence it, and we all suffer.

Amen, my brother. Amen!

Read the full piece here.

(h/t Doug Brady)


MSNBC Axes Keith 'PDS' Olbermann

Saturday, January 22, 2011

MSNBC has been a leader in nasty, vile, slanderous rhetoric about Governor Palin. So much so that I simply cannot stomach them; I don't even try. Keith Olbermann has been among the chiefest of offenders. But no more. If he's going to continue his PDS-inspired hate-fest, he will have to do it somewhere else. MSNBC, merging with Comcast, axed him last night.

Josh Painter breaks down Olbermann's record, putting his anti-Palin mania into perspective:

Keith Olberman, has been abruptly fired by MSNBC, apparently during Friday night's show. More here. Just last month he dubbed Bristol Palin the "Worst Person In The World" for her role as an ambassador for abstinence with the Candies Foundation, and as recently as Tuesday misrepresented a CNN poll in a ridiculous attempt to tie Sarah Palin to the Tucson shootings.

Olby has been a frequent critic of Bristol's mom beginning just days after she was announced as John McCain's running mate more than two years ago. On September 17 of 2008, he falsely accused Gov. Palin of cutting funding for the Special Olympics by half in Alaska. He has bashed the first woman to be both governor of Alaska and the Republican Party's vice presidential candidate as a "phony" and an "idiot," and has named her "Worst Person In The World" a number of times. The hysterical host also labeled Gov. Palin and other critics of ObamaCare "subhumans," "ghouls," and "fiends." After Sarah Palin called David Letterman out for making a crude sexual "joke" about her teenage daughter Willow, Olbermann called the governor "sanctimonious, holier than thou, exploitative, undignified, pedantic, childish, self-inflicting, insipid, backwards, embarrassing, over-reactive, overreaching" as well as a "delusional lunatic." Even after all of his slandering of Sarah, the not-too-bright Bathtub Boy couldn't seem to understand why she would not be itching to appear on the network of hate, referring to her as a coward and throwing in for bad measure "idiot-woman" and "idiot." And that's only the highlight reel.
Read more here.

You reap what you sow, and Olbermann has sown much hatred, ill-wishes, and downright evil seeds regarding Governor Palin. I'll leave it at that.


Rush Limbaugh: Palin Would Wipe the Floor with Obama

Friday, January 21, 2011

The Right Scoop reports:

Rush reads a great piece over at Legal Insurrection entitled We Just Witnessed The Media’s Test Run To Re-Elect Barack Obama. The premise is that if Republicans are going to allow the Left to pick our candidates for us by letting them destroy the ones they don’t like, just as they are trying to do to Sarah Palin with this false narrative from the AZ shooting, then we might as well hang up our chances of victory in 2012.

Rush summarizes the article this way:
The Left is terrified of [Sarah Palin]. The Left knows that she would wipe the floor with Obama. Our intelligentsia on the Right-Wing know that she would wipe the floor with Obama. That’s what all of this means. …

The point of this is that if Republicans are going to sit by and watch Palin savaged, they’d better be prepared to sit by and watch the next one get savaged; and the next one because that’s what’s coming.

(Video retrieved from C4P)


Tune in to my Interview on 'The Grizzly Hour' at 10:00 P.M.

Thursday, January 20, 2011

At 10:00 p.m. Eastern tonight, I will be a guest on Palin Promotions' "The Grizzly Hour." If you'd like to listen, log on to www.blogtalkradio.com/palinpromotions. We will be talking about Governor Palin, her interview with Sean Hannity this week, and her Martin Luther King Day Facebook note. We will also discuss my recent interview with Sistah Talk TV. If you'd like to call in to ask a question or make a comment, the number is (347) 989-0503.


The Left Hates Governor Palin. Why?

I could probably cover my living room walls with opinion pieces written about why such hatred for Governor Palin exists. "Why the Left Hates Sarah Palin" by Robin of Berkeley is definitely one of the best. The sister hits the nail squarely on the head. She writes:


My mind flashed to this awful memory after hearing that Palin was being scapegoated for the Tucson Massacre. Palin has been a target of the left's wrath from the moment she was nominated for vice president. Many conservatives have tried to explain why.

Some say it's jealousy, which is true; Palin is a lovely woman with a handsome husband. She's also a self-made woman; Palin has risen to power on her own, without the coattails of husband or father.

Some conservatives believe that the hatred is a result of brainwashing; this is true, as well. Liberals respond robotically, like Pavlov's dogs, whenever Palin's name is uttered.

But there's a darker reason for the abject hatred of Palin, and the clues can be found in that Catskill Mountains bunk. Because evil can manifest when people project their own badness and shame onto another.

People on the left hate Palin for one simple reason: because she is everything they are not. She is their polar opposite because her life journey has diverged from the prescribed liberal path.

Palin was raised to be self-sufficient and independent since "idle hands are the devil's tools." Little Sarah was up at the crack of dawn, hunting with her dad; in sharp contrast, liberal kids like me were still fast asleep.

Palin didn't have life handed to her on a silver platter, like so many in the ruling class. Instead, Sarah balanced school, chores, jobs, and sports. While liberal girls like me were glued to the boob tube, Sarah had no time for sloth.

Palin attended church with her family on Sundays. On Sunday morning, young liberals like me were recovering from Saturday night.

From her devout Christian upbringing, Sarah learned to be a good girl. In contrast, I learned everything I needed to know about how to be a modern girl from the monthly Playboy Magazine, which was conspicuously displayed on our living room table.

Sarah dated and then married her high school sweetheart; I learned that my body was a commodity that I "owned." And I could use my body -- and allow it to be used -- to temporarily still the pangs of loneliness.


And then, out of the blue, Sarah Palin, like a majestic bird in flight, swooped onto the scene of a depraved and deprived nation. With her children and grandchild, her religion and her patriotism, Sarah is the antithesis of everything the progressives stand for. Palin is not just pro-life, but she emanates life -- and good, clean living.

And what does the left do? They try to drag her through the mud to sully her. The hardcore among them want to eliminate her, even if this means putting her life at risk.

The progressives "joke" about gang-rape, make pornographic movies about her, and leer at her legs. (Would any of this be tolerated against Michelle Obama?)

Palin's church was torched during the primary, a vicious crime that was hushed up by the MSM. And now, with the smears about Tucson, death threats against Palin have soared.

Yes, leftists attack Palin because they envy her beauty; and true, she's a political threat. But the main reason for the hatred is something deeper and darker.

Leftists loathe Palin because she has retained something that was stripped from them years ago: a wholesomeness, a purity of heart. People on the left despise Palin because she shines a bright light on their shame and unworthiness, which they try desperately to deny.

The progressives, like that brutal gang of abandoned girls, want to drag Palin down into the gutter with them; they want to spoil her. Of course, their efforts will be futile; Palin is fueled by a Spirit that isn't simply her own.

The left knows only how to point fingers, and threaten, and menace. Why? They are lost, abandoned children as well; they have shunned the only Force who could wash them clean and bring them home again.

Read Robin's full article here.


Benyamin Korn and I Discuss Governor Palin on Jewish Independent Talk Radio

Tuesday, January 18, 2011

Benyamin Korn of JewsforSarah and host of Jewish Independent Talk Radio spent his WNTP radio broadcast Saturday discussing Governor Palin with me. We talked about his recent interview with Lawrence O'Donnell on MSNBC, my recent interview on Sistah Talk TV, and how the issue of race injects itself into our support of the Governor among both Jewish Americans and Black Americans. Sometimes that results in very heated, unreasonable accusations, but Korn asserts that this Minority of Two, as he calls it, has both the ability and responsibility to bring Governor Palin's common sense conservative message to communities that have for too long been played by the Left.

(Audio access courtesy of Kristi King)


Governor Palin and Sean Hannity - Exclusive Interview Video

Monday, January 17, 2011

In her first interview since the Tucson tragedy, Governor Palin spoke openly and honestly with Sean Hannity tonight. In this exclusive interview, they discuss the accusation that she is responsible for the shootings, her use of the term "blood libel," and the impact the Left's blame-game might have on her political future. One thing is certain: she will not sit down and shut up.

(Videos retrieved from C4P)


Governor Palin and Sean Hannity Discuss AZ Shooting Tonight - Video Preview

Governor Palin has granted Sean Hannity her first interview since the Tucson, Arizona shooting. The interview will take place tonight on his Fox News show at 9 p.m. Eastern. Hannity called in to "Fox and Friends" this morning to preview tonight's talk with the Governor, her video address after the tragedy, and what has transpired as a result. See clip below.

(Video retrieved from Josh Painter)


Governor Palin: Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

Via Facebook, Governor Palin posted the following in honor of Martin Luther King Day:

“Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.” - Martin Luther King, Jr.

Today is a day to reflect on the life and legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Dr. King dedicated himself to justice and the struggles of an imperfect world. In the face of fierce opposition, he stood up for the oppressed, and he ultimately sacrificed all for equality and freedom. His was a remarkable life of love and service for all mankind. His work must continue.

With Dr. King’s faith in God and his unwavering hope in a brighter, stronger future, let us recommit today to continuing his work for a more peaceful and just nation.

- Sarah Palin


Happy Martin Luther King Day

Today we celebrate the birth of a man who took a stand for freedom, a stand that ultimately cost him his life. May we continue the fight for freedom and justice in every aspect of life.

Let freedom ring!


Benyamin Korn and I Discuss Governor Palin & 'Blood Libel' on Jewish Independent Talk Radio at 5:00 p.m. Eastern

Sunday, January 16, 2011

Tune in this evening to Jewish Independent Talk Radio where I will be host Benyamin Korn's guest. Benyamin, of JewsForSarah, and I will discuss Governor Palin and her use of the term "blood libel" to describe the despicable blaming of the Tucson, Arizona shooting on people on the Right. We will also delve into the topic of being a Jewish American and a Black American who support Governor Palin, something Korn has called a "Minority of Two."

The show will air live in less than an hour on 990 am – WNTP Philadelphia, a Salem Radio affiliate. You may listen live worldwide by going to WNTP.com. If you miss the live airing, you may later listen at the website by going to Download @ “Archived.” I will have the audio posted later as well.

Benyamin was on MSNBC (or more accurately, MSDNC) with Lawrence O'Donnell on Friday evening discussing "blood libel" and did a good job defending Governor Palin with the facts.

Take a look:

(Video retrieved from C4P)


The Idiocy of Blaming Palin

You get the point.

(h/t Ron Devito)


Voices of Reason on AZ Shooting, Governor Palin, and 'Blood Libel'

Saturday, January 15, 2011

What are people saying about Governor Palin since the Arizona shooting tragedy a week ago? You have obviously heard much of the nonsense, but there are some voices of reasons, as well. Michael Savage, Dennis Prager, and Rev. Franklin Graham speak up.

Michael Savage, whom I usually listen to only in small portions, makes a statement about her leadership in this situation and compares it to that of others who are considered 2012 hopefuls. Clearly, Governor Palin's video address about last Saturday had nothing to do with 2012; however, Savage's comments on her leadership merit a listen (courtesy of PalinTV).

Dennis Prager, a Jewish American, discusses the "blood libel" on his radio show. He, of all people, understands what a blood libel is--and he knows that she used the term correctly. He also discusses the irrational hatred people have for the Governor. Prager passionately takes apart the idea that she needs to offer an apology, as some have demanded--including a Congresswoman. He captures how utterly insane this is. Governor Palin has been accused of being responsible for murder and bloodshed, and she is supposed to apologize?! He calls the response to her and the treatment she endures "gratuitous hatred," "over the top," and he says it "puts morality on its head." He adds, "They owe her an apology."

In Prager's appeal for moral honesty, he discusses that the Left engaging in this blame-game either hate Governor Palin, are a bunch of liars, or both. I say both! Hey, disagree on the issues, yes, but with the Governor it runs deeper than that--always. Prager states, "I don't care if you like her or not. I care whether you like virtue or not, whether you like moral standards or not." These people absurdly blamed her for the shooting. Then when she spoke up, they picked apart her words where she called them out for using this tragedy to engage in disgusting political posturing, assigning the term "blood libel" to it. So they follow that up with labeling her anti-semitic. These are further examples of their moral depravity and their diabolical hatred, as if anyone needed more evidence. The bottom line, as explained by Prager: "She has been lied about with regard to murder. That is a blood libel!"

Listen to Prager's broadcast:

Rev. Franklin Graham discusses Governor Palin's character as well as the inappropriateness of using death and destruction for political gain. David A. Patten reports:
“I have been shocked at the reports from those suggesting that former Governor Sarah Palin has some level of responsibility for the horrific shooting in Arizona,” Graham said in the statement posted Tuesday on the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association (BGEA) website.

“I got to know Governor Palin when she served as governor of Alaska,” stated the younger Graham, who is BGEA’s president and CEO.


Graham went on to praise Palin as “a kind and compassionate, God-fearing woman who believes with all her heart that Jesus Christ is the Way, the Truth, and the Life.”

Graham’s statement strongly suggested that he views political attacks based on the tragedy to be highly inappropriate.

“Whether you agree with her politics or not, it is outrageous to suggest that her political opinions encourage violence toward anyone,” Graham declared.


"Hasty accusations have already been made before much information is known and an investigation has occurred,” he stated. “I believe this is counterproductive and could in itself incite hatred."

Of course, the reverend is correct. The Left's reactions do incite hatred, and Governor Palin has been dealing with a plethora of death threats--even more than she normally has to contend with. It's insane. Earlier this week, I posted a YouTube video which was a compilation of disgusting threats and death wishes directed at the Governor. Interesting, YouTube decided to remove the video in the name of privacy protection or something. No, we need to unmask the hateful souls who publicly called--and are still calling--for the death of Governor Palin.

On this issue, I turn to Big Journalism:
As you can imagine, after the video first posted to YouTube, viewers were disgusted. In fact, quite a few from both the right and the left were sickened enough to let some of those Twitter users know that their behavior was reprehensible. And when the heat got to be too much for one user, she complained to YouTube about her precious privacy. Because she was “just voicing anger” in a public tweet and doesn’t want anyone “attacking her” back on Twitter.

This of course after publicly wishing death on a public figure.

Read the full report about that here.

The video is still out there because someone else posted it. It can be seen here. The hatred is intense and real, and who's going to do something about that? Will the far-Left radicals come out on this? Point fingers on this? Work to stop this? Or are they too busy demanding an apology from Governor Palin for simply existing? Sadly, we already know the answer.


John Hayward: Top 5 Absurd Responses To The Palin Video

Wednesday, January 12, 2011

You already knew the feigned offense to Governor Palin's video address today was absurd, but let's go through the motions nonetheless. John Hayward writes "Top 5 Absurd Responses To The Palin Video: Eight minutes of video produces a full day of meltdown":

I was going to write a nice introductory paragraph, but I think I’ll just say “For crying out loud…” and get on to business.

1. The phrase “blood libel” is an affront to Jews: I guess that would make Glenn Reynolds and me anti-Semites too, since we both used the phrase before Palin did. Well, we’re not, and neither is she.

Anyone who thinks they’re scoring points against Palin with this ridiculous complaint could not be more mistaken. The vast majority of Americans, listening to breathless liberals run through the detailed history of medieval slander they just memorized, will blink a couple of times and ask, “So what?”

“There are few more freighted phrases in the history of hate than ‘blood libel’,” Howard Fineman shrieked in the Huffington Post. Horsefeathers. Ninety per cent of the people trying to make hay out of the term heard it for the first time three hours ago.

Incredibly, AOL News quotes former Gore speechwriter Robert Lehrman describing the use of “blood libel” as a coded message to Jewish reporters. “Because the Right and some Tea Party people, like Tony Katz, talk about the Jewish-dominated media, the unspoken implication is this: Most people won’t get this, but you Jewish reporters know what I’m saying.” So the Tea Party is full of bigots who think Jewish reporters respond to dog-whistle language? Way to defuse that “Climate of Hate,” Mr. Lehrman!

Some Palin critics are even suggesting she’s too stupid to know what the “blood libel” was. Let me assure them I know exactly what the term means, and I knew before last week. I first heard “blood libel” used many years ago, as a metaphor for contemporary Palestinian propaganda against Israel, and became interested in the historical precedent. I consider the metaphor apt in this case as well. That’s why I used it.

“Blood libel” is not a capitalized reference to a specific event, like “Holocaust.” It has a history, but so do many of the terms we commonly use today. Let me give the floor to Alan Dershowitz for a moment:

The term “blood libel” has taken on a broad metaphorical meaning in public discourse. Although its historical origins were in theologically based false accusations against the Jews and the Jewish People,its current usage is far broader. I myself have used it to describe false accusations against the State of Israel by the Goldstone Report.

If you’re Jewish and sincerely find the use of this term offensive, I do apologize for inadvertently hurting your feelings. Obviously that was not my intent, or Sarah Palin’s. Your feelings are your own, and it is not my place to judge them invalid. I would only ask you to consider the massive propaganda effort of the last few days, designed to slather the blood of Tucson across the entire conservative movement, and decide for yourself if there is sufficient similarity to historical events to justify calling it a “blood libel.”

2. You can see a teleprompter reflected in Palin’s glasses during the video: I’m sorry, I’m laughing too hard to type a response to that one. Please insert your own Obama joke in this space.

3. Palin made the “Climate of Hate” worse by responding to the slander against her: I can see why liberals would try to double their bets by pushing this pathetic line, but if I were you guys, I’d shut up and hope to God everyone forgets I tried. The only people who will buy that argument are the ones who thought using the dead of Tucson as political props was a good idea in the first place.

Let me be blunt, liberal America: no one, outside your own fever swamps, trusts you to decide what discourse is “fair”, or where the “Climate of Hate” begins and ends. You don’t get to drop buckets of blood on Palin for days, then call her a hatemonger for responding. Your behavior over the last few days is a crime against discourse, and you did not get away with it.

4. Palin is trying to “insert herself” into the Tucson story: Boy, dehumanizing people is hard when they actually show up to respond, isn’t it? Once again, the Left is assuming Americans are too slow-witted to remember who dragged Sarah Palin into this terrible story. The Left is wrong, and looks absolutely foolish by trying to hypnotize millions of people into forgetting the last three days of wall-to-wall press coverage.

5. Palin should have been more “inclusive”: In other words, she should have pled guilty on a few of the murder counts against her, and cut a deal with her media prosecutors. Maybe she could have chuckled at the mischievous spirit of those lovable scamps who accused her of providing Jared Loughner with a hit list, and baking his mind in an oven of hateful rhetoric.

She did repeatedly call for unity and the peaceful resolution of our spirited differences, but she really should have flogged herself and promised to support ObamaCare, just to build some bridges with the Left. She could have won a victory over herself, and learned to love Big Media.

The Tucson blood libel was nothing less than a deliberate attempt, willingly assisted by top figures in the media, to end meaningful discourse by ruling one side completely illegitimate. It’s tough to be less “inclusive” than that. The proper response to the hatred of the Left is not submission, or negotiated surrender. Sarah Palin demonstrated leadership by sweeping both options off the table today. Now that we’re through with that nonsense, we can get back to our passionate arguments, clear in the understanding that no one will be able to silence anyone else. As Palin said in her video, that’s one of the reasons America is so exceptional.

Well said.

(h/t Hal)


Jews Stand with Governor Palin's Use of 'Blood Libel'

Early this morning, Governor Palin released a video address about the Arizona shooting this past Saturday.

The Governor expressed her sincerest sadness at this tragedy, her disappointment in those who have used it to promote their political agenda, and her hope in America's enduring strength. Her message was the right one and one that we are the better for hearing.

Of course, because it was Governor Palin who delivered the message, many of the same people who disgustingly seek to blame her for the actions of a lone, deranged murderer, Jared Loughner, seek to find fault in the message she delivered. Because she called them out on their irresponsible, hateful attacks on her and others on the Right, because they make their money playing partisan games with real issues that affect all Americans, and because her name is Sarah Palin, they had to find something with which to find fault. What was it this time? The use of the term "blood libel."

Their need to pick apart everything Governor Palin does and says is really getting tired, and Americans are growing weary. You'd think, after undergoing intense criticism from even some on the Left for playing politics with pain, they'd get a clue and cut out this ridiculous obsession with demonizing all things Palin. Their tactics haven't worked--except to anger all fair-minded, truth-loving Americans--but they persist.

So today the complaint is that use of the term "blood libel" is an affront to our Jewish brothers and sisters. Well, we're hearing quite a bit from some Jewish people, and they say something entirely different.

Pamela Geller commits her life to issues that affect Jewish Americans. She takes on the radical Left with unwavering fortitude and is never guilty of holding back. Would she agree with Governor Palin's assessment that what has transpired since Saturday is indeed "blood libel"? She writes (emphasis added):
Today Sarah Palin responded to the vicious blood libel leveled against her by the army of destroyers. The ferocious, relentless attacks on Sarah Palin are a testament to her greatness, proof of how deathly afraid of her they are, like Dracula to the silver cross.

Obviously she agrees with the Governor's assessment. So why, then, this attack--once again--on her? Geller continues:
Here's the thing. The mission by objective of the haters, the party of destruction, is to ruin the best, the brightest, the good. The left has, day after day, month after month, year after year, decade after decade, trafficked only in ruin and destruction, focusing on the most effective leaders on the right.

Read Pamela Geller's full piece here.

Jewish Americans for Sarah Palin also issued a statement today:
Sarah Palin got it right.

Falsely accusing someone of shedding blood is the definition of a blood libel – whether it’s the medieval Church accusing Jews of baking blood in Passover matzos, or contemporary Muslim extremists accusing Israel of slaughtering Arabs to harvest their organs – or our political partisans blaming conservative political figures and talk show hosts for the Tucson massacre.


“Blood libel” does not refer exclusively to accusations against Jews. It does not refer only to medieval episodes that resulted in pogroms. It is a term that has been, and continues to be, legitimately used in contemporary American political discourse by all sides. Governor Palin’s use of the term is accurate, reasonable, and squarely within the bounds of accepted political discourse. It is her opponents’ attempts to falsely connect her to the Tucson massacre which is inaccurate, and unreasonable, and beyond the pale of civilized discourse.

Click here to read this entire piece concerning historic and current use of the term.

Sheya of Conservatives4Palin, Organize4Palin, and PalinTV--and a devout Jew--shares his heartfelt thoughts. I will excerpt the piece, but please read it in its entirety:

As many of our readers know, I am an observant Jew. I observe the Sabbath and all the Jewish Holidays. I went to Jewish schools and so do my kids. Not only do I live by all the rules, I am part of the Jewish culture and I even look the part.

Ever since I was two years old, I was told stories of Jewish persecution and blood libels. I was told how the Jews were accused for using the blood of Christian children to bake matzoh bread. I was told the stories of how whenever there was a murder in town the Jews were blamed for it. Whatever the scenario, the chain of events were the same. The Jews were accused of a murder, followed by calls for their deaths, followed by riots and then killings of all the Jews. At all time when the Jews spoke up and defended themselves, they were told to sit down and shut up and further killings took place just for that reason alone.

After the horrific killings in Tucson this Saturday and the finger-pointing at Governor Palin begun, I was mad and I was angry. Not that I’m not used to seeing irrational criticism thrown at Governor Palin, I’m used to seeing that by now and frankly I have come to expect it. But this time it was different; this time it felt as if all those stories I was told as a kid were coming to life. A heartless murderer shot and killed innocent victims. Governor Palin, who is hated just because she exists, was blamed, and that was followed by a flood of calls for her death on Twitter and Facebook. If this isn’t a blood libel than nothing is.

I have just spoken to many of my Jewish friends. Neither myself nor any other Jew I know is offended by Governor Palin’s comments. On the contrary, based on what we know and were taught about blood libels, this is exactly what this was: a blood libel.

The term blood libel wasn’t invented to define what happened to the Jews; it’s just that what happened to Jews were blood libels, and this term fits perfectly to what happened to Governor Palin.


I am a proud observant Jew, and I am always proud to stand with Governor Palin, but today we are also partners in blood.

Read more here.

Adam Brickley, another C4P colleague and Jewish brother, shares his personal story in his piece, and this is some of what he says about the term:
The media is abuzz today about Gov. Palin’s use of the term “blood libel” to describe the left’s appalling exploitation of the Arizona tragedy to demonize conservatism. Supposedly, this is an insult to the Jewish community given that “blood libel” can be defined as a purely anti-Semitic act, which requires one to accuse Jews of using human blood in religious rituals (which is the origin of the term). So far the debate has focused on semantics, highlighting technical definitions rather than the spirit in which the act was carried out.


Now, fast-forward to 2011, and we are talking about whether it is appropriate for Sarah Palin to use the term “blood libel” to describe the fashion in which she was personally blamed, despite irrefutable evidence to the contrary, for a savage and demented mass murder. In my mind, there is no question. This was blood libel of the most savage kind. There is absolutely no difference between what I felt I feel now, as a member of a movement falsely accused of gunning down a Congresswoman, and what I felt when my family’s Judaism was used as supporting evidence in a campaign to falsely accuse us of psychotic threats of violence. I can’t imagine how Gov. Palin herself must feel after having been personally accused, considering that I was moved almost to tears simply as an anonymous member of the broader “tea party”.

“Blood libel” was coined as a term to describe false accusations of ritual murder against the Jewish people – but it’s an action verb, and it’s an act that can be committed in the future against anyone. We cannot and should not deny people the right to call this despicable act what it is. If we do so, we allow the perpetrators to continue using one of the most painful and traumatizing propaganda tactics ever invented.

Read Brickley's full article and learn about his own experience with blood libels by clicking here.

There is much more out there, and perhaps we're not done with this issue, but the bottom line is really the same bottom line it was yesterday, the day before, and the day before that. The Left simply wants to tear down Governor Palin no matter what she says or doesn't say. Their issue with her has nothing to do with rational thought, honest debate, or issues of importance. Their issue with her is that she...well, that she is. They cannot figure out why she has not yet sat down and shut up, packed it in, turned off the lights. They have thrown absolutely everything at her--yes, even blood libel. Yet she continues to stand--and stand she will.

I stand with her.


  © Blogger template Noblarum by Ourblogtemplates.com 2009

Back to TOP