Sarah Palin Information Blog

Sarah Palin Web Brigade

  • Upcoming Palin Events

  • Sarah Palin’s Endorsees

  • Sarah Palin Channel

  • Amazing America

  • The Undefeated

  • ‘Stars Earn Stripes’

  • ‘Game Change’ Lies Exposed

  • Good Tidings and Great Joy: Protecting the Heart of Christmas

  • Our Sarah: Made in Alaska

  • America by Heart: Reflections on Family, Faith, and Flag

  • Going Rogue: An American Life

  • Other Sarah Palin Info Sources

  • Login/RSS

  • Governor Palin on Twitter

  • @SarahPalinUSA

  • Governor Palin on Facebook

  • SarahPAC Notes

  • RSS SarahPAC Notes

    • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
  • SPWB on Facebook

  • SPWB on Twitter

  • @SarahPalinLinks

    Error: Twitter did not respond. Please wait a few minutes and refresh this page.

  • Join the SPWB Twibe!

  • Posts by Date

    February 2011
    S M T W T F S
  • Categories

  • Archives

  • __________________________________________
  • Top Posts & Pages

  • __________________________________________
  • Recent Posts

  • Recent Comments

  • __________________________________________

Archive for February 16th, 2011

Governor Palin Dominates American Spectator & HotAir Straw Polls

Posted by citizens4palin on February 16, 2011

Cross Post:
Governor Palin 4 President Governor Palin Dominates Two More 2012 Straw Polls

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment »

REAGAN FLASHBACK: Margaret Thatcher: Reagan’s Leadership, America’s Recovery

Posted by Sarah Palin Web Brigade on February 16, 2011

Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher’s 1988 article at National Review Online about President Ronald Reagan: 

Margaret Thatcher

February 4, 2011 4:00 A.M.

Reagan’s Leadership, America’s Recovery

From the Dec. 30, 1988, issue of NR

There have not been many times when a British prime minister has been prime minister through two consecutive terms of office of the same president of the United States. Indeed there have been only three such cases so far. One was Pitt the Younger, who was in Number 10 Downing Street while George Washington was president. Another was Lord Liverpool, who held the prime ministership through the whole period in office of Pres. James Monroe. And I am the third. It gives me a vantage point which, if not unique, is nonetheless historically privileged from which to survey the remarkable presidency of Ronald Reagan.

I cannot pretend, however, to be an entirely unbiased observer. I still remember vividly the feelings with which I learned of the president’s election in 1980. We had met and discussed our political views some years before, when he was still governor of California, and I knew that we believed in so many of the same things. I felt then that together we could tackle the formidable tasks before us: to get our countries on their feet, to restore their pride and their values, and to help create a safer and a better world.

On entering office, the President faced high interest rates, high inflation, sluggish growth, and a growing demand for self-destructive protectionism. These problems had created — and in turn were reinforced by — a feeling that not much could be done about them, that America faced inevitable decline in a new era of limits to growth, that the American dream was over. We in Britain had been in the grip of a similar pessimism during the Seventies, when political debate revolved around the concept of the “British disease.” Indeed, during this entire period, the Western world seemed to be taking its temperature with every set of economic indices. 

President Reagan saw instinctively that pessimism itself was the disease and that the cure for pessimism is optimism. He set about restoring faith in the prospects of the American dream — a dream of boundless opportunity built on enterprise, individual effort, and personal generosity. He infused his own belief in America’s economic future in the American people. That was farsighted. It carried America through the difficult early days of the 1981–82 recession, because people are prepared to put up with sacrifices if they know that those sacrifices are the foundations of future prosperity.

Having restored the faith of the American people in themselves, the president set about liberating their energies and enterprise. He reduced the excessive burden of regulation, halted inflation, and first cut and, later, radically reformed taxation. When barriers to enterprise are removed and taxes cut to sensible levels (as we have found in Britain in recent years), people have the incentive to work harder and earn more. They thereby benefit themselves, their families, and the whole community. Hence the buoyant economy of the Reagan years. It has expanded by a full 25 percent over 72 months of continuous economic growth — the longest period of peacetime economic growth in U.S. history; it has spread prosperity widely; and it has cut unemployment to the lowest level in over a decade.

The international impact of these successes has been enormous. At a succession of Western economic summits, the president’s leadership encouraged the West to cooperate on policies of low inflation, steady growth, and open markets. These policies have kept protectionism in check and the world economy growing. They are policies which offer not just an economic message, but a political one: Freedom works. It brings growth, opportunity, and prosperity in its train. Other countries, seeing its success in the United States and Britain, have rushed to adopt the policies of freedom.

President Reagan decided what he believed in, stuck to it through thick and thin, and finally, through its success, persuaded others. But I still recall those dark early days of this decade when both our countries were grappling with the twin disasters of inflation and recession and when some people, even in our own parties, wanted to abandon our policies before they had had a proper chance to take effect. They were times for cool courage and a steady nerve. That is what they got from the president. I remember his telling me, at a meeting at the British Embassy in 1981, that for all the difficulties we then faced, we would be “home safe and soon enough.”

The economic recovery was, however, but part of a wider recovery of America’s confidence and role in the world. For the malaise of the 1970s went beyond economics. The experience of Vietnam had bred an understandable but dangerous lack of national self-confidence on the U.S. side of the Atlantic. Or so it seemed to outsiders. There was a marked reluctance in American public opinion to advance American power abroad even in defense of clear American and Western interests. And politicians struggled against this national mood at their electoral peril. 

President Reagan took office at a time when the Soviet Union was invading Afghanistan, placing missiles in Eastern Europe aimed at West European capitals, and assisting Communist groups in the Third World to install themselves in power against the popular will, and when America’s response was hobbled by the so-called “Vietnam syndrome.” And not just America’s response. The entire West, locked in a battle of wills with the Soviets, seemed to be losing confidence.

President Reagan’s first step was to change the military imbalance which underlay this loss of confidence. He built up American power in a series of defense budgets. There have been criticisms of this build-up as too expensive. Well, a sure defense is expensive, but not nearly so expensive as weakness could turn out to be.

By this military build-up, President Reagan strengthened not only American defenses, but also the will of America’s allies. It led directly to NATO’s installation of cruise and Pershing missiles in Western Europe. This took place in the teeth of Moscow’s biggest “peace offensive” since the Berlin crises of the early Sixties. That offensive included a Soviet walkout from the Geneva talks on nuclear disarmament and mass demonstrations and lobbies by “peace groups” in Western Europe. Yet these tactics failed, the missiles were installed, and the Soviets returned to the bargaining table to negotiate about withdrawing their own missiles.

President Reagan has also demonstrated that he is not afraid to put to good use the military strength he had built up. And it is noteworthy — though not often noted — that many of the decisions he has taken in the face of strong criticism have been justified by events. It was President Reagan who, amid cries that his policy lacked any rationale, stationed U.S. ships alongside European navies in the Persian Gulf to protect international shipping. Not only did this policy secure its stated purpose, it also protected the Gulf states against aggression and thus hastened the end of the conflict by foreclosing any option of widening the war.

The president enjoyed a similar success in the continuing battle against terrorism. He took action against one of the states most active in giving aid and comfort to terrorist organizations: Colonel Qaddafi’s Libya. We in Britain had experienced Qaddafi’s murderous methods at first hand when a member of the Libyan Embassy shot down a young policewoman in cold blood in a London square. We had no doubts about the reality of Libyan involvement. I therefore had no hesitation in supporting the American air strike, which has resulted in a marked reduction of Libyan-sponsored terrorism.

And thirdly, President Reagan has given America’s support to nations which are still struggling to keep their independence in the face of Soviet-backed aggression. The policy has had major successes: the withdrawal of Soviet forces from Afghanistan, due to be completed next February; the real prospect of Cuban withdrawal from Angola, encouraged by patient and constructive American diplomacy; and even the prospect of Vietnamese withdrawal from Cambodia.

These are all remarkable achievements, which very few observers predicted even three years ago.

Indeed, when we compare the mood of confidence and optimism in the West today with the mood when President Reagan took office eight years ago, we know that a greater change has taken place than could ever have been imagined. America has regained its confidence and is no longer afraid of the legitimate uses of its power. It has discussed those uses with its allies in the NATO alliance at all stages and with great frankness. Today our joint resolve is stronger than ever. And, finally, the recovery of American strength and confidence has led, as President Reagan always argued it would, to more peaceful and stable relations with the Soviet Union. 

For strength, not weakness, leads to peace. It was only after the Soviet threat of SS-20s had been faced down and cruise and Pershing missiles installed that the Soviets were prepared to embark on genuine arms-control negotiations and wider peace negotiations. It therefore fell to the president, less than four years after the Soviet walkout at Geneva, to negotiate the first arms-control agreement that actually reduced the nuclear stockpiles. And when he visited Moscow for the third summit of his presidency, he took the fight for human rights into the very heart of Moscow, where his words shone like a beacon of hope for all those who are denied their basic freedoms. Indeed the very recovery of American strength during his presidency has been a major factor prompting and evoking the reform program under Mr. Gorbachev in the Soviet Union. The Soviet authorities would have had much less incentive for reform if they had been faced by a weak and declining United States.

The legacy of President Reagan in East-West relations is the realistic appreciation that maintaining sure defenses, bridging the East-West divide, and reducing weapons and forces on both sides are not contradictory but policies that go comfortably together. Nothing could be more short-sighted for the West today than to run down its defenses unilaterally at the first sign of more peaceful and stable relations between East and West. Nothing would be more likely to convince those with whom we negotiate that they would not need to make any concessions because we would cut our defenses anyway. Britain will not do that. We will maintain and update our defenses. And our example is one which I hope our partners and allies will follow, because Europe must show that she is willing to bear a reasonable share of the burden of defending herself. That would be the best way for the NATO allies to repay America’s farsighted foreign and defense policies of the Reagan years.

When we attempt an overall survey of President Reagan’s term of office, covering events both foreign and domestic, one thing stands out. It is that he has achieved the most difficult of all political tasks: changing attitudes and perceptions about what is possible. From the strong fortress of his convictions, he set out to enlarge freedom the world over at a time when freedom was in retreat — and he succeeded. It is not merely that freedom now advances while collectivism is in retreat — important though that is. It is that freedom is the idea that everywhere captures men’s minds while collectivism can do no more than enslave their bodies. That is the measure of the change that President Reagan has wrought.

How is it that some political leaders make the world a different place while others, equally able, equally public-spirited, leave things much as they found them? Some years ago, Professor Hayek pointed out that the social sciences often neglected the most important aspects of their subjects because they were not capable of being examined and explained in quantitative terms. One such quality which resists quantitative analysis is political leadership. Which also happens to be the occupational requirement of a statesman.

No one can doubt that President Reagan possesses the ability to lead to an unusual degree. Some of the constituent qualities of that leadership I have referred to in passing — his firm convictions, his steadfastness in difficult times, his capacity to infuse his own optimism into the American people so that he restored their belief in America’s destiny. But I would add three more qualities that, together with those above, enabled him to transform the political landscape.

The first is courage. The whole world remembers the wit and grace which the president displayed at the time of the attempt on his life. It was one of those occasions when people saw the real character of a man when he had none of the assistances which power and office provide. And they admired what they saw — cheerful bravery in the face of personal danger, no thought for himself but instead a desire to reassure his family and the nation by jokes and good humor. 

The second is that he holds opinions which strike a chord in the heart of the average American. The great English journalist Walter Bagehot once defined a constitutional statesman as a man of common opinion and uncommon abilities. That is true of President Reagan and one of his greatest political strengths. He can appeal for support to the American people because they sense rightly that he shares their dreams, hopes, and aspirations; and he pursues them by the same route of plain American horse-sense.

Finally, President Reagan speaks with the authority of a man who knows what he believes and who has shown that he will stand by his beliefs in good times and bad. He is no summer soldier of conservatism, but one who fought in the ranks when the going wasn’t good. Again, that reassured even those who do not share those beliefs. For authority is the respect won from others by the calm exercise of deep conviction.

The results of that leadership are all around us. President Reagan departs the political scene leaving America stronger and more confident, and the West more united than ever before. I believe that President-elect Bush, a man of unrivaled experience in government and international affairs, will be a worthy successor, providing the forthright leadership which the world has come to expect from the U.S. President. We wish him well.

Margaret Thatcher is the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. 

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment »

PALIN FLASHBACK: Chuck Heath: I taught Sarah to shoot and butcher a moose … Washington won’t scare her

Posted by Sarah Palin Web Brigade on February 16, 2011

In this article at The Sun, Emily Smith reports on her interview with then Governor Sarah Palin’s father, Chuck Heath, about his famous daughter’s hunting experience.

I taught Sarah to shoot and butcher a moose … Washington won’t scare her

in Wasilla, Alaska

Published: 15 Sep 2008

SARAH PALIN learned to call the shots at an early age – she got to grips with a gun at eight and made her first kill at ten.

The moose-hunting mum-of-five from Alaska grew up shooting animals and skinning them on the spot before hauling the meat home for the family freezer. 

Sarah’s dad Chuck Heath shot a grizzly bear three years ago and its skin adorns a sofa in Sarah’s office. Now she is in the political bear pit after accepting the Republican Vice-Presidential nomination. 

Chuck told The Sun: “Sarah was always very determined. Whatever she lacked in skill she always made up in determination. She always tried her hardest to be the best at everything she did. 

“She was also very stubborn. I wasn’t mean to her but I taught her discipline. But I could seldom bend her if she’d made her mind up on something.

“She started shooting a gun when she was eight and shot her first animal when she was ten. It was something small, possibly a rabbit. 

“She is a really good shot. I taught her to shoot a moose and dress it, to fish and hunt for game.  

“We raised our family to be able to support ourselves – 90 per cent of our meat and fish we get ourselves.”

He admitted he was in a “dreamland” when Palin accepted the offer to run with Preidential hopeful John McCain. 

Mr Heath, who retired from teaching science and now works for the Federal Wildlife Services Program, continued: “I would tell those boys in Washington, ‘Don’t underestimate her.’ 

“She’s a hard worker and a determined lady. The Democrats won’t break her.” 

Palin served two terms as mayor of her home town of Wasilla, then in 2006 became Alaska’s youngest and first female governor. 

Now, at 44, the former beauty queen aims to become the USA’s first female Vice-President. 

I headed to Wasilla in moose-hunting season to experience for myself how the Republicans’ “pitbull in lipstick” grew up. 

Wasilla – whose population of 7,000 has been mocked by her Democrat rivals – is a colourful mix of prosperous oil workers, hunters and hard-grafting families 50 miles north east of Anchorage. 

The main street is lined timber yards, the ramshackle Mug-Shot Saloon – where prospectors once paid for beer with gold nuggets – and charmingly named shops, including Big Shot Taxidermy, Bunny Boots and Happy Hooker Tows. 

Here Sarah is like a rock star.  

She lives in a sprawling house on the banks of a lake and her handsome, part-Inuit, snowmobile champ husband Todd – the “first dude” – has his sea plane moored at the end of a pontoon.  

Jessica Steele, the creator of Sarah’s much admired hairdo, lives here too. She said Alaska’s governor could easily mix politics, children and highlights. 

Jessica, owner of the Beehive Beauty Shop in Wasilla, said: “We would talk about pedicures and manicures and moose and politics, all while Sarah was having foils in her hair and holding my baby on her lap. We worked on putting her hair up in a move to TONE DOWN her sexy image and make her seem taller. 

“We would talk a lot about how if she looked too pretty or too sexy, people wouldn’t listen to her.” 

Until Sarah was named as McCain’s running mate, her neighbours could walk right up to her front door. 

Now they have to get past a wall of state troopers and an army of secret service agents, dressed noticeably in black and whispering into radios. Just to be extra safe, two gunboats from the Alaska coastguard are on the fishing lake. 

In Wasilla, it’s all about firepower. Alaska’s gun laws say that anyone aged 18 can buy a rifle, or a handgun if you are over 21. In the Walmart supermarket the gun section is just a short stroll from the beauty section and the Hannah Montana make-up range, right next to the mobile phone chargers. 

Over at Wasilla’s specialist Chimo guns, business is brisk. 

Prices start at just 219 dollars (£110) for a three-inch handgun. 

Hunting here is a serious business. You can’t help tripping over stuffed 12ft bears, caribou heads and the odd walrus tusk. 

One local store even has a giraffe head or an entire stuffed lion eating a zebra for the more cosmopolitan hunting fan. 

Locals say a good moose kill could feed a family for the whole winter – served up as burgers, stew, chops and sausages – and if you can kill a good moose you are a local hero. 

In Alaska, hunter Palin has an approval rating somewhere north of 80 per cent – something akin to the Holy Grail in politics. 

The Wasilla, locals explain it is for reasons including “she’s a darn good shot and doesn’t take any nonsense from nobody” to “she’s the best goddamn-looking governor in the country.” 

At a town rally for Palin on Friday night, her dad and mum Sally were swamped by well-wishers.  

Sally said: “We are extremely excited for her. But we had no idea this was coming.  

“We had heard she was on the long list but we only learned that John McCain had picked Sarah when a relative called us and told us to turn on the TV.

“Since then I’ve barely had the chance to speak to her, she has been so busy. I did manage to reach her on the phone today and said, ‘Hang in there’, but she said she was doing great.”

Sarah was a good basketball player – dubbed Sarah Barracuda for her toughness – but entered beauty pageants to earn money for college, winning 1984’s Miss Wasilla. After she married Todd she helped him fish commercially in a 26ft boat with no cabin – physically demanding work in often treacherous conditions.

Borough mayor Curt Maynard, a close friend of the Palin family, told The Sun: “Nothing intimidates Sarah, she is fearless.

“I have seen her out hunting or fishing and taking on her political rivals. Her political rise has been so fast she seems unstoppable.

For McCain, she is an inspired pick – a woman who can hunt, fish and shoot as well as any man, a great mother and a politician who is not afraid to take on the established old guard.” It was Curt’s wife Linda, who is now running for the Senate, who persuaded Sarah to become a beauty queen in the Eighties.

Linda said: “Sarah was reluctant at first but I suggested she try because the prize money would help pay her college fees.

“I helped her get a dress and coached her about how to walk and answer the judges’ questions.

“The only part she didn’t like was the swimwear – she didn’t want people looking at her rear.

“But I never had any doubt that she would win – and of course that’s what happened.

“She was extremely attractive but she answered the judges’ questions in such a confident manner that I was amazed.”

Curt added: “We have all been blown away by Hurricane Sarah – now the rest of America will see what she is made of.”

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment »

POLL:Vote For Your Choice For Palin’s Vice President 2012

Posted by M.Joseph Sheppard At Palin4President2016 on February 16, 2011

It looks more and more certain, should she chose to run, that Sarah Palin will be the GOP’s nominee for president for 2012. Certainly the polls show the grass roots want a conservative by a two to one margin. This is further confirmed by the Hot Air poll,which was made certain there would be no mass double voting which had Palin as the runaway winner by more than 3 times the second place getters support.

The left wing media is already looking to choose Palin’s VP-as they have been unable to choose the presidential candidate this time, having met their match. Rather then let them get a bandwagon rolling for the candidate of their choice, and of course bearing in mind that Sarah will, as in everything, choose for herself, it will be noticed if a grass roots indication is shown.

Vote for your VP choice (only one vote per person allowed) and this will be passed along to key Palin supporters. If you choose “Other” you can leave who your preference was in the Comments section if you wish.


Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment »

Gov. Palin’s caution over embracing the ‘New Egypt’ is justified

Posted by joshpainter on February 16, 2011

– by Josh Painter
While the left accuses Sarah Palin of not being “ready for prime time” because of her remarks about Egypt, the early signs of what a post-Mubarak society in that land may look like indicate that the caution she expressed about whether the U.S. should embrace the Egyptian revolution is justified.

In an interview with CBN’s David Brody, Gov. Palin warned that we should not put America’s stamp of approval on the “New Egypt” until we know who’s going to fill the void:

“Is it going to be the Muslim Brotherhood? We should not stand for that, or with that, or by that. Any radical Islamists. No, that is not who we should be supporting and standing by … we need to find out who was behind all of the turmoil and the revolt and the protests so that good decisions can be made in terms of who we will stand by and support.”

Aaron Goldstein comments on the makeup of the committee the Egyptian military has appointed to draw up the country’s new constitution:

While the panel includes a member of the Muslim Brotherhood there are scarcely any Coptic Christians on the committee while women have been left off the committee altogether.

The exclusion of Coptic Christians is particularly galling when one considers the New Year’s Massacre of Copts in Alexandria which resulted in the deaths of 21 people. It seems the Egyptian military and the Muslim Brotherhood are determined to keep Coptic Christians even more marginalized in a post-Mubarak Egypt.

As to the exclusion of women, one must wonder if the Muslim Brotherhood would have participated in the committee had a woman been named to it.

The panel will work quickly, as it is expected to have the new constitution finished in just ten days time. The Egyptian people are scheduled to vote on it in two months.

While the left is correct in asserting that the U.S. should not expect the Egyptian idea of “democracy” to look like our own, it is missing Gov. Palin’s larger point: Egyptians should exercise their right of self-determination, but the U.S. should not be obligated to endorse it, especially if the process involves giving radical Islamists a seat at the table which excluding women and the the country’s principal religious minority.

The left, which has long claimed to be in the vanguard of fighting for women’s rights, always seems to take the side of militant Islamists when it comes down to those radicals subjugating their women. Our leftists have been meekly silent about the treatment of women in Muslim culture, a status which is less elevated that that of horses and camels. Moreover, recent omens from elements of Egypt’s revolutionaries regarding women and Israel are disturbing at the very least.

Sarah Palin was right to warn that we should be wary of throwing our support behind the the Egyptian revolutionaries until we are assured of who they are and how they will govern. The first signals the Egyptians are sending with the panel which will write its new constitution are not positive ones in any way, shape or form. Once again, Gov. Palin has proven that hers is the prudent view, while her critics on the left show themselves to be all too willing and eager to embrace all that the United States should stand against.

Cross-posted from Texas for Sarah Palin

– JP

Posted in Israel, Sarah Palin | Tagged: , , , | 2 Comments »

Leftist Kos Pollster PPP (D) Shows Palin Gains 5 Points On Obama In Last Month

Posted by M.Joseph Sheppard At Palin4President2016 on February 16, 2011

The Democratic party aligned pollster  PPP Polling who polls for the radical progressive website Daily Kos shows, in a head to head match up with President Obama that Palin has gained 5 points since their last poll one month previously  January 14th to February 14th.

Palin was behind 55% to 38% in January and is now at 52% to 40%. This is significant in a number of ways. first; it is a five point gain which, with nearly two years to go before the 2012 election leaves only a 12 point gap. At the current rate of gain this is well achievable and contrasts well with, for instance, the example of the 25 points Reagan was behind Carter at a similar point in time-or G.H.W. Bush behind Dukakis in the election year.

The other significant point is that Palin is back up to 40% in these head to heads. This is a position she has not been at since December 2010, and during which ensuing time she has been subject to even more attacks and vilification than is usual whilst Obama basked in the shameless media adulation over Giffords/tax compromise/SOTU. It can be further seen that the PPP Poll represents a Palin gain of 9 points on the Fox poll taken only a week earlier which includes a 5 point jump in her own rating from 35% to 40%-is something stirring which PPP has just picked up?

Given Palins remarkable recovery the breakthrough above 40%-which will be very significant, will not be too far away. Post link at: .

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment »

Political Genius Donny Deutsch Tells Clueless Piers Morgan”Palin Will Never Be Elected As She Can’t Win N.Y/Ca/Pa” (Just Like Bush)

Posted by M.Joseph Sheppard At Palin4President2016 on February 16, 2011

Political science expert Donny Deutsch took time off from his deeply intellectual “Love Guru” Show for an interview with Piers Morgan on CNN. During the interview Morgan, for some reason, asked Deutsch for his opinion on Sarah Palin. Deutsch’s bona fides as a political commentator having escaped me somehow.

Deutsch opined that Palin, despite her many qualities as an apparent media phenomenon would “never be elected president because she will never be able to carry the important blue states including New York, Pennsylvania and California.”

That is an interesting analysis, given that G.W. Bush managed to be elected, through the electoral college the first time in particular, without winning any of those “important blue states”. In point of fact Bush won without carrying Illinois and Michigan as well as New York Pennsylvania and California and in fact increased his electoral college majority the second time he ran.

This shows a number of facts.Firstly Morgan is a terrible choice to be an interviewer about American politics as, as a foreigner, he clearly doesn’t have a clue about the facts and figures of electoral history.

Any interviewer worth his salt would have brought up the truth of the matter instantly otherwise he would have lost all creditability. Morgan loses credibility on the historical facts, and not because of any seeming prejudice against the Republicans or Palin.

On the contrary he seems to have a bit of a crush on Palin as he advised previously she would be one of his most important “gets” alongside the Queen, and he waxed lyrically about her beauty in the Deutsch interview.

As for Deutsch he should stick to the silly television shows and leave politics, about which he clearly knows nothing, well alone.

The media never ceases to amaze at how poorly they hande the Palin phenomenon, whether on purpose, as with Time magazine recently “making stuff up about her” or apparently innocently, as in Morgan’s case, for which ignorance is no excuse.

Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments »

‘Sarah Palin again stomps the Hot Air Presidential field by a wide and comfortable margin.’

Posted by reagantman on February 16, 2011

Hot Air has an interesting article that breaks down poll numbers in an analytical way. Patrick Ishmael contends that Palin’s support is strong despite defections given the fluidity of the support for a large field of candidates going into the 2012 primaries.

Sarah Palin has the strongest army. Ishmael points out “while 54% of the average candidate’s supporters consider themselves ‘very committed’ backers, 82% of Sarah Palin voters consider themselves ‘very committed.’”

The polls which seem to be all over the place and the digs from the lamestream media and GOP establishment will mean nothing when the field actually announces. Yes, Sarah Palin will be starting with lower numbers than she would have had the media not lied and misrepresented her record. Given the opportunity to campaign fair and square and get her record out there, she can overcome that.

In an IBD/TIPP Poll, according to Investors Business Daily:

Most Americans (55%), however, think media coverage of Palin has not been fair and objective.
Only 37% say it’s been fair. That most Republicans (70%) see bias is no surprise, but a majority of independents (56%) agree.

This would lead us to believe that the public will look past the media this time around. The public’s observation of Palin will be one that is much more skeptical of how the media portrays her. People will take more pause for thought – meaning that surface observations and knee jerk reactions will give way to a more serious approach toward her.

This is not to say that the liberal media won’t try to pull an “operation chaos” to taint the minds of Republican voters during the primary. The question is are we sheep or will we overcome that media spin and insist that the best campaigner win? Will the GOP rank and file choose their nominee or will they allow the media to choose the least dangerous challenger to Obama?


Check out this great read from Conservatives4Palin:
David Solway: The More Sarah Palin Seems Unelectable, the More Electable She May Actually Be.

Listen to my Blogtalk Radio Show tonight at 11pm ET 8pm PT.

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment »

Governor Palin Wins National Review’s CPAC Straw Poll

Posted by citizens4palin on February 16, 2011

Cross Post
Governor Palin 4 President: Sarah Palin Wins National Review’s 2012 Presidential Poll (23,160 Total Votes)

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment »