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

    August 2019
    S M T W T F S
    « Jan    
     123
    45678910
    11121314151617
    18192021222324
    25262728293031
  • Categories

  • Archives

  • __________________________________________
  • Top Posts & Pages

  • __________________________________________
  • Recent Posts

  • Recent Comments

  • __________________________________________

Archive for the ‘influential people’ Category

Sarah Palin To Al Gore: The Climategate Scandal Exists. You Might Even Say It’s Like Gravity: You Simply Can’t Deny It

Posted by Gary P Jackson on December 10, 2009

As you know, Sarah Palin just published a powerful Op-Ed in the Washington Post. In it she calls out Obama and all of the other scam artists who are trying to sell the world a bill of goods that will lead to the destruction of mankind worldwide. First it will be economic destruction, then societal breakdown, eventually leading to the complete destruction of the human race.

All of this is the service of a hoax that is driven equally by greed and sheer lunacy.

As you also know, Al Gore has come out and responded to Sarah’s Op-Ed. I’ll say this, as wrong and dishonest as Al Gore is, unlike most of the democrat/communists, Gore stuck to the subject, no personal attacks. But man is he wrong!

You can read more about what Gore had to say here.

Sarah was quick to respond:

Steven Hayward has a great article in The Weekly Standard on the Climategate scandal. Be sure to check it out.

The response to my op-ed by global warming alarmists has been interesting. Former Vice President Al Gore has called me a “denier” and informs us that climate change is “a principle in physics. It’s like gravity. It exists.”

Perhaps he’s right. Climate change is like gravity – a naturally occurring phenomenon that existed long before, and will exist long after, any governmental attempts to affect it.

However, he’s wrong in calling me a “denier.” As I noted in my op-ed above and in my original Facebook post on Climategate, I have never denied the existence of climate change. I just don’t think we can primarily blame man’s activities for the earth’s cyclical weather changes.

Former Vice President Gore also claimed today that the scientific community has worked on this issue for 20 years, and therefore it is settled science. Well, the Climategate scandal involves the leading experts in this field, and if Climategate is proof of the larger method used over the past 20 years, then Vice President Gore seriously needs to consider that their findings are flawed, falsified, or inconclusive.

Vice President Gore, the Climategate scandal exists. You might even say that it’s sort of like gravity: you simply can’t deny it.

– Sarah Palin

Here’s a recent letter from some physicists to the members of the American Physical Society. Apparently the physicists don’t think the “science is settled.”:

Dear fellow member of the American Physical Society:

This is a matter of great importance to the integrity of the Society. It is being sent to a random fraction of the membership, so we hope you will pass it on.

By now everyone has heard of what has come to be known as ClimateGate, which was and is an international scientific fraud, the worst any of us have seen in our cumulative 223 years of APS membership. For those who have missed the news we recommend the excellent summary article by Richard Lindzen in the November 30 edition of the Wall Street journal, entitled “The Climate Science isn’t Settled,” for a balanced account of the situation. It was written by a scientist of unquestioned authority and integrity. A copy can be found among the items at http://tinyurl.com/lg266u, and a visit to http://www.ClimateDepot.com can fill in the details of the scandal, while adding spice.

What has this to do with APS? In 2007 the APS Council adopted a Statement on global warming (also reproduced at the tinyurl site mentioned above) that was based largely on the scientific work that is now revealed to have been corrupted. (The principals in this escapade have not denied what they did, but have sought to dismiss it by saying that it is normal practice among scientists. You know and we know that that is simply untrue. Physicists are not expected to cheat.)

We have asked the APS management to put the 2007 Statement on ice until the extent to which it is tainted can be determined, but that has not been done. We have also asked that the membership be consulted on this point, but that too has not been done.

Bob Austin, Professor of Physics, Princeton

Hal Lewis, emeritus Professor of Physics, University of California, Santa Barbara

Will Happer, Professor of Physics, Princeton

Larry Gould, Professor of Physics, Hartford

Roger Cohen, former Manager, Strategic Planning, ExxonMobil

This is not science. This is religion with mathematics!

As if to put an exclamation point on the global warning lie, Ed Morrissey over at Hot Air has evidence that “scientists” have falsified data to the point of turning declines in temperatures into increases.

NOAA/GHCN “homogenization” falsified climate declines into increases

At least it did in Australia, where Willis Eschenbach took a look at the raw data to determine what effect the “homogenization” process at the NOAA’s Global Historical Climate Network had on the temperature readings. Like alchemists of old, it transformed decades-long declines in temperature into rapid upward spikes completely unsupported by any of the underlying data. Eschenbach calls this “the smoking gun at Darwin Zero,” and it demonstrates further why the East Anglia CRU (which relied on NOAA/GHCN) conspired to destroy evidence requested in a Freedom of Information demand — and why CRU may have destroyed its raw data archives (via Instapundit and Volokh Conspiracy):

The second question, the integrity of the data, is different. People say “Yes, they destroyed emails, and hid from Freedom of information Acts, and messed with proxies, and fought to keep other scientists’ papers out of the journals … but that doesn’t affect the data, the data is still good.” Which sounds reasonable.

There are three main global temperature datasets. One is at the CRU, Climate Research Unit of the University of East Anglia, where we’ve been trying to get access to the raw numbers. One is at NOAA/GHCN, the Global Historical Climate Network. The final one is at NASA/GISS, the Goddard Institute for Space Studies. The three groups take raw data, and they “homogenize” it to remove things like when a station was moved to a warmer location and there’s a 2C jump in the temperature. The three global temperature records are usually called CRU, GISS, and GHCN. Both GISS and CRU, however, get almost all of their raw data from GHCN. All three produce very similar global historical temperature records from the raw data. …

Then I went to look at what happens when the GHCN removes the “in-homogeneities” to “adjust” the data. Of the five raw datasets, the GHCN discards two, likely because they are short and duplicate existing longer records. The three remaining records are first “homogenized” and then averaged to give the “GHCN Adjusted” temperature record for Darwin.

To my great surprise, here’s what I found. To explain the full effect, I am showing this with both datasets starting at the same point (rather than ending at the same point as they are often shown).

Figure 7. GHCN homogeneity adjustments to Darwin Airport combined record

YIKES! Before getting homogenized, temperatures in Darwin were falling at 0.7 Celcius per century … but after the homogenization, they were warming at 1.2 Celcius per century. And the adjustment that they made was over two degrees per century … when those guys “adjust”, they don’t mess around. And the adjustment is an odd shape, with the adjustment first going stepwise, then climbing roughly to stop at 2.4C. …

Intrigued by the curious shape of the average of the homogenized Darwin records, I then went to see how they had homogenized each of the individual station records. What made up that strange average shown in Fig. 7? I started at zero with the earliest record. Here is Station Zero at Darwin, showing the raw and the homogenized versions.

Figure 8 Darwin Zero Homogeneity Adjustments. Black line shows amount and timing of adjustments.

Yikes again, double yikes! What on earth justifies that adjustment? How can they do that? We have five different records covering Darwin from 1941 on. They all agree almost exactly. Why adjust them at all? They’ve just added a huge artificial totally imaginary trend to the last half of the raw data! Now it looks like the IPCC diagram in Figure 1, all right … but a six degree per century trend? And in the shape of a regular stepped pyramid climbing to heaven? What’s up with that?

Those, dear friends, are the clumsy fingerprints of someone messing with the data Egyptian style … they are indisputable evidence that the “homogenized” data has been changed to fit someone’s preconceptions about whether the earth is warming.

Or, in the Climategate parlance, hide the decline. If what Eschenbach says is true — and he’s looking at the raw data — Australia hasn’t warmed at all, except in the fevered imagination of the GHCN. Did the CRU use the raw data or adjusted data to reach its conclusions? Since they’ve destroyed their raw data, we won’t ever know. But what we do know is that the “adjusted” data looks nothing like the raw data, and the rapid warming is as artificial as the thoroughly discredited “hockey stick” graph that started the AGW hysteria in the first place.

Is the Earth warming? Yes, since 1650, as Eschenbach reports. Is that warming trend natural? Perhaps, perhaps not. In order to make that determination, we need a completely transparent data set, one that is free of “adjustments” from advocates masquerading as scientists. As long as the current set of alchemists remain in control of the raw data, their work should be considered completely unreliable.

It’s obvious that Sarah is right to call out Gore and all of the other crooks and cranks who are pushing the global warming hoax. Like gravity, evidence is overwhelming that crooked “climate scientists” exist, and you simply can’t deny it.

We are very glad to see Sarah speak out on this because she is the one person with the gravitas on this issue, as well as the power, to cut through the clutter, and be heard. Sarah is the one person who can bring all of this to the nation’s attention.

So far, the corrupt Obamacentric media will not report on any of this. You have to read news from Canada or the United Kingdom to get the truth. Other than Fox, the American media has been completely silent on one of the biggest scandals in history, truly the greatest lie ever told.

And remember, this isn’t just a lie, this is a lie that will effect the lives of every man woman and child on earth. This is a lie that will destroy economies. This will destroy entire industries. Billions of people worldwide will become unemployed. Their radical environmental policies will cause billions world wide to starve to death.

We are seeing it now as we turn food into ethanol. There are shortages world wide because of this, and because farmers are growing fuel instead of food, food prices on the most basic of staples have risen dangerously high.

We’ve seen this kind of hysteria before. Back in the 1960’s the loons decided that DDT was the worst substance known to man, even though the “science” used was as faulty as it could possibly be.

A woman named Rachelle Sklar wrote a book called Silent Spring. Like Gore’s book, An Inconvenient Truth, Sklar’s book was filled with half truths and out and out lies. The bottom line is this, DDT was banned.

Now DDT is one of the greatest chemicals ever invented…. Seriously…. The guy who figured out DDT was a great pesticide won a Nobel Peace Prize. This of course is when that prize actually meant something.

DDT is very effective at killing mosquitoes. Mosquitoes, of course, carry malaria.

From a piece called: The Five Most Ridiculously Over-hyped Health Scares Of All Time:

# 1 DDT:

If you’re looking for another reason to hate that hippie friend of yours that won’t shut up about the plight of every plant, animal and insect in danger of extinction, DDT is a good place to start.

Widely considered the first major victory of the environmentalist movement, DDT was banned from use in most applications thanks to a series of insanely half-assed scientific experiments and a book about birds. That book, Silent Spring, was released in 1962 and argued that DDT was not only a carcinogen, but also damaging to wildlife and, especially, certain birds. The public, upon hearing about the possibility of having to live in a world without peregrine falcons and ospreys, did what it does best in situations like this–they lost their minds without a second thought.

Soon, pesticides were the cause du jour for environmentalists and average folks that believe whatever the hell they read, and DDT was banned in 1972. The problem was, the science quoted in the book was all kinds of faulty. One scientific study that purported to show that DDT exposure led to a higher incidence of leukemia in mice was later proven to be more than a little tainted. Turns out, the mice in the experiment were fed moldy food that contained aflatoxin, a known carcinogen. When the test was repeated minus the rancid food, the test results were exactly the same, except without all of the leukemia and stuff.

As for the birds, Audubon Society studies showed that 26 different kinds of birds actually increased in population during DDT’s heyday. In cases where bird populations did decline, it was revealed that in most cases the decline began either well before widespread use of DDT began or years after it was banned. Environmentalists dispute the findings, but on the other hand … who gives a **** about the damn birds? Especially considering …

In 1972, DDT killed fewer people than …

Freaking malaria.

See, what many people don’t know about DDT is that the person who discovered that it could be used as a pesticide actually won a Nobel Peace Prize. Why? Because it was kind of effective in fighting malaria. When spraying of DDT stopped in Ceylon (present day Sri Lanka), malaria cases rose from 17 in 1963 to 2.5 freakin’ million in 1969, an increase of approximately a bajillion fofillion percent. And to this day, the mosquito remains the deadliest killer Mother Nature has to offer, with a confirmed 2 million kills per year.

But, hey at least there’s a lot more ospreys around.

Here is a real world example of why anytime someone is out there shouting and screaming like their hair is on fire, and is trying to get you to buy into their fantasy, PEOPLE DIE! Millions of them!!

Right now, if you turn on one of the TV channels that push the “green” religion like an episode of the 700 Club, you know the ones, you’ll be bombarded with ads from charities that are raising money to buy mosquito nets in bulk and send them to Africa, where millions die each and every year from malaria!

In other words, primitive 13th century technology for the 21 century. It’s truly criminal when you consider that DDT is a perfectly safe chemical that was proven to kill mosquitoes and basically wipe malaria off the face of the earth!

This would be exactly like banning polio, smallpox, or other vaccines we all routinely are give when we are kids. Can you imagine the outcry if “scientists” claimed that such beneficial vaccines should be banned, based on dubious research!

And speaking of childhood, and DDT, when we were kids growing up in the mid-sixties in our small Texas town, the city came around once a week with a pick-up truck that had a fogger mounted in the back. This old Dodge truck would go down each and every street in town during the season, spraying DDT. We didn’t have a mosquito problem.

We did have, and still do have a HUGE problem with big black birds that make a mess everywhere! They were unaffected by the “evil” concoction!

You can read about all 5 of the most ridiculously over-hyped health scares that have effected our lives over time. All of them because of loons like Al Gore and Rachelle Sklar, each and every one of them with absolutely zero science or facts to back them up. But….READER WARNING….there is some “colorful language” included, so if you are easily offended, you probably shouldn’t click here.

This global warming hoax has real world implications to Americans. The regulations that being proposed will destroy our economy. It will see pretty much every manufacturing job in the country go away. The democrat/communists have moaned and groaned for decades that the “evil Republicans” send jobs overseas. Of course, like just about everything they say and do, it’s a lie. It’s usually policies thought up by the democrat/communists that have seen companies go somewhere else for cheaper labor and a friendlier business environment.

Even more dangerous than losing millions of jobs, at a time where unemployment is at Jimmy Carter levels, these coming EPA regulations will basically shut down our energy production. No coal, that’s a given. But oil and even clean natural gas, will see severe restrictions on both exploration and production.

Our national security is already at great risk because we depend on so many aggressor nations for oil. This dependence will only, to quote Barack Obama, “skyrocket!” We already send between $700 billion and $1 trillion a year overseas to aggressor nations to buy crude oil. We are not only sending a significant amount of treasure out of our nation, by doing so, we are funding our enemies who in turn use this treasure to wage war against us in any numbers of ways.

All of this is pure insanity. It’s why people like Al Gore, Obama, and all of their disciples need to be stopped. They are criminals. Al Gore is the Bernie Madoff of the climate change movement, and should be treated accordingly. Barack Obama is committing nothing short of treason with all of his actions against this nation and it’s people.

While you think about all of this, and what you know in your hearts must be done to bring these criminals to justice, re-read this from Sarah:

Former Vice President Al Gore has called me a “denier” and informs us that climate change is “a principle in physics. It’s like gravity. It exists.”

Perhaps he’s right. Climate change is like gravity – a naturally occurring phenomenon that existed long before, and will exist long after, any governmental attempts to affect it.

However, he’s wrong in calling me a “denier.” As I noted in my op-ed above and in my original Facebook post on Climategate, I have never denied the existence of climate change. I just don’t think we can primarily blame man’s activities for the earth’s cyclical weather changes.

What Sarah says is common sense. OF COURSE the climate changes! In most parts of the world we have fairly well defined seasons of winter, spring, summer, and fall. And believe me, as a Texan, it’s not impossible to experience all four of these seasons in one 24 hour period!

Climate change is real to the extent that weather happens. But to suggest that man has the ability to truly effect it in any measurable way is nothing but arrogance and folly.

If there truly was some danger, monies would be far better spent on adapting to the changes, not heading down the road of economic and societal destruction as we are now.

Advertisements

Posted in al gore, Barracuda, big government, Climategate, ECONOMY, Energy, Energy Independence, Environment, Facebook, Facebook note, global warming, Going Rogue, government control, Governor Palin, Governor Sarah Palin, influential people, National Defense, natural gas, Obama, Sarah Palin, Sarah Palin Web Brigade | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Sarah Palin To Headline First National Tea Party Convention

Posted by Gary P Jackson on November 27, 2009

Tea Party Nation has announced they are holding the first of it’s kind National Tea Party Convention in Nashville, Tennessee February 4-6 at the Opryland Hotel.

Sarah Palin will be the Special Keynote Speaker at the event:

Tea Party Nation is pleased to announce the First National Tea Party Convention. The convention is aimed at bringing the Tea Party Movement leaders together from around the nation for the purpose of networking and supporting the movements’ multiple organizations principle goals. This event will be co-sponsored by other national groups that believe in a responsible and limited federal government that is responsive to all the people. National Taxpayers Union, American Majority, Smart Girl Politics, and SurgeUSA are just a few of the organizations who will be on hand to contribute their time and talents to this convention.

Special Keynote Speaker for the event will be Sarah Palin, Governor of Alaska (2006-2009) and 2008 Republican Vice Presidential Nominee.

The convention will feature well-known speakers, workshops, seminars, information centers, and organizational tools for leaders to take back to their respective local Tea Party organizations.

Popular Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann will be one of the breakfast speakers at the convention as well.

Tea Party Nation, according to their website, is “a user-driven group of like-minded people who desire our God given Individual Freedoms which were written out by the Founding Fathers. We believe in Limited Government, Free Speech, the 2nd Amendment, our Military, Secure Borders and our Country!

This is obviously a major step for the nation. The Tea Party movement has been gaining steam since it’s beginnings, and is now turning into a serious political movement. On September 12, 2009 Tea Party members along with those from the 912 Project converged on Washington, D.C. Somewhere between 1.5 and 2 million patriots met up to rally against our radical, out of control government.

This national convention is the next logical step in the progression of this movement. This will strengthen the movement, and help coordinate all of the local Tea Party groups.

From Sarah Palin’s standpoint, this is obviously a good move. No one embodies the American Spirit, that rugged individualism, as well as Sarah Palin. Sarah is already favorite of Tea Party and 912 Project members, this will only solidify her standing. As we roll into 2010, and Sarah starts helping Conservative candidates nationwide, the support of Tea Party activists will be vital. The Tea Party groups will be the ones who will help run the ground game, who will knock doors and get out the vote.

Of course, as 2012 nears, having the support of the Tea Party groups will give Sarah a strong advantage over all others should she choose to run for President.

For more information on the National Tea Party Convention and Tea Party Nation, check here and here, respectively.

Posted in 2012, AKGovSarahPalin, Barracuda, big government, Governor Palin, Governor Sarah Palin, grassroots, influential people, Sarah Palin, Sarah Palin Web Brigade, Tea Party Nation | Tagged: , , , | 1 Comment »

Rasmussen: Sarah Palin’s Approval Rating Higher Than Barack Obama’s

Posted by Gary P Jackson on November 17, 2009

In a national poll conducted by Rasmussen on November 13 and 14, 2009 among 1000 likely voters, Sarah Palin is now polling higher in approval than Barack Obama.

In their latest poll, Rasmussen finds that 51 percent have a favorable view of Sarah Palin while 43 percent have an unfavorable view. Obviously, this is a very strong rating considering the constant bombardment the American public is subjected to by the corrupt media, telling them how “bad for America” Sarah Palin is.

If anything, this may be more of a statement on the shrinking influence the old, corrupt media has on the American public, than on Sarah Palin herself. It may also show that Americans are moving past the misinformation that is out there, and actually looking into Sarah’s record.

The question and answers from Rasmussen:

Do you have a very favorable, somewhat favorable, somewhat unfavorable or very unfavorable impression of Sarah Palin?

21% Very favorable

30% Somewhat favorable

14% Somewhat unfavorable

29% Very unfavorable

5% Not sure

Another question asks this:

Is Sarah Palin a divisive force in the Republican Party, or is she representative of a new direction for the party?

26% She is a divisive force in the Republican Party

41% She is representative of a new direction for the Republican Party

33% Not sure

Now this is an important question, as most feel the Republican party, as well as the democrat/communist party, has come off the rails. Being seen as a new direction for the party is certainly a good thing.

A separate Rasmussen Report, released Monday, November 16, 2009, finds that 59 percent of Republican voters feel Sarah shares their values:

Fifty-nine percent (59%) of Republican voters say former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin shares the values of most GOP voters throughout the nation.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that just 21% of Republican voters disagree and think the 2008 vice presidential candidate does not share their values. Twenty percent (20%) are undecided.

By contrast, 74% of Republicans say their party’s representatives in Congress have lost touch with GOP voters nationwide over the past several years. Only 18% of Republican voters believe their elected officials have done a good job representing the base.

The findings in these two surveys highlight the political debate within the Republican Party. Party leaders worry that Palin is pushing the GOP too far to the right to win general elections by aligning herself with Tea Party voters frustrated with both parties in Washington and the big government policies they have produced.

Still, just 18% of Republicans – and 26% of voters nationwide – see Palin as a divisive force within the GOP. A plurality believes Palin is representative of a new direction for the Republican Party. That view is held by 57% of Republicans and 41% of all voters. A plurality of Democrats aren’t sure what to think of Palin’s role within the opposing party.

Again, the story here is despite an all out assault by the corrupt state run media, Republicans feel that Sarah is basically one of them, someone who shares their values, feelings, and goals.

Bouncing that off the fact that these same voters think the GOP as a whole is going completely in the wrong direction, and a picture begins to form of where the voters would like to see America go, and who they would like to see take them there.

It’s also important to point out that these polls were taken before Sarah’s new book, Going Rogue, A American Life, has been in the public’s hands, or she started her media tour surrounding it. As more people see the real Sarah, her numbers can go nowhere but up.

We realize that the next Presidential election is three years away, a lifetime away in political terms, but the mid-term elections will kick into high gear in less than two months, and Sarah has stated that she plans to make an impact on those elections by endorsing candidates, and working with candidates who share her values. This polling indicates that anyone who receives Sarah’s support will likely receive the strong support of Republican voters, making Sarah the party’s king maker.

In contrast to all of this, Barack Obama continues to slide in the polls as Americans learn more about him, and actually experience his leadership, or lack there of.

In the latest Rasmussen tracking poll, Obama’s approval sits at 49 percent, with 51 percent disapproving.

27% Strongly Approve

39% Strongly Disapprove

49% Total Approve

51% Total Disapprove

In Rasmussen terms, this gives Obama a -12 in the “approval index.” Rasmussen takes the difference between those who strongly approve and strongly disapprove to come up with a “passion index.” Here too, Sarah betters Obama with a -8 between those with a very favorable and a very unfavorable.

Of course, the big thing here is the fact that while Obama is basically the media’s favorite son, and they carry his water quite well, covering up and failing to report many issues, or trying to down play them, while at the same time vilifying Sarah Palin like no candidate in modern history, Sarah still comes out on top.

To me, there is an important set of numbers, and a strong indicator that Sarah is winning the battle for hearts and minds. Some will look toonly the strongly approve and strongly favorable, and see that Obama looks better with 27 percent strongly approving vs 21 percent feeling very favorable towards Sarah.

But the big numbers to look at are these: While 29 percent of those polled have a very unfavorable opinion of Palin, 39 percent feel a strong disapproval for Barack Obama. A full 10 percent more of the voting public strongly disapprove of Obama vs Sarah.

Again, as Sarah is finally getting out there and letting America see the real person, not the caricature the media has invented, or the hamstrung version from McCain campaign, her polling numbers can only rise. America has had a good look at Obama, and doesn’t like what it sees. In my opinion, barring a complete and total change in policies and direction, which is highly unlikely, Obama’s numbers are not likely to recover.

As a final note, Rasmussen indicates a confidence rate of 95 percent on these polls. We tend to trust Rasmussen the most, because of their polling methods. Rasmussen polls “likely voters” which tends to be more accurate than polling “registered voters” or as many polls use “adults, ” which can give you wildly inaccurate results. Rasmussen has proven to be the most accurate in the last four election cycles, beginning in 2004.

Posted in 2012, Barracuda, Governor Palin, Governor Sarah Palin, influential people, Obama, Sarah Palin, Sarah Palin Web Brigade | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Glenn Beck’s Friday The 13th Nightmare For Liberals Across America: Beck Hosts Prominent Black Conservatives

Posted by Gary P Jackson on November 11, 2009

This is something I am promoting with great pleasure. It was two weeks ago when I opened an e-mail from Conservative blogger, man about town, and all around good guy Clifton B. Cliff was letting us know he would be appearing as a guest on the Glenn Beck show as part of a panel of prominent Black Conservatives. Of course, as a friend and fellow blogger, I was very excited. I knew This would be must see TV!

Now even better, we found out that another colleague and friend, Adrienne Ross, will also be part of this show as well. Man, this couldn’t get any better. Two great bloggers on one big show.

For those that haven’t had the pleasure, Clifton B, who writes as Another Black Conservative, is a must read. His blog covers all of the big topics of the day. Cliff is also a big supporter of Sarah Palin’s. In fact, that’s how we met. His blog is one you simply must bookmark.

Adrienne Ross and I share a lot of bandwidth on the blogs we contribute to. Her blog, Motivation: Truth takes a Christian Conservative look at the events that surround us. Adrienne is a teacher, by trade, and is also a strong supporter of Sarah Palin’s. She is very big in the Draft Sarah Palin 2012 movement. Adrienne’s blog has some great stories, including her trip to Alaska this summer. This is another blog that simply must be bookmarked, and read daily.

If you are a Glenn Beck fan, and well, who isn’t, you know he was rushed to the hospital last week for an emergency appendectomy. Glenn is doing fine and will be back hosting his show on Wednesday.

Glenn has had some very positive panels since he has moved his show over to the Fox News Network, and this will be no exception. So make sure you tune in on Friday, set your DVR, and get ready for the left wing loons’ worst nightmare!

Many thanks to the Left Coast Rebel for coming up with the cool poster to promote this event.

Posted in Governor Palin, Governor Sarah Palin, grassroots, influential people, Internet Activism, Media, politics, Sarah Palin, Sarah Palin Web Brigade, websites | Tagged: , , , , | 1 Comment »

Sarah Palin: My Thoughts From Hong Kong

Posted by Gary P Jackson on September 24, 2009

As a lot of people have been interested in what Sarah Palin had to say in Hong Kong to the CLSA Investors Summit, she has posted some excerpts on her Facebook page.

Many have asked to see my remarks as presented in Hong Kong. Here is an excerpt.

___Sarah Palin

So far, I’ve given you the view from Main Street, USA. But now I’d like to share with you how a Common Sense Conservative sees the world at large.

Later this year, we will celebrate the 20th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall – an event that changed not just Europe but the entire world. In a matter of months, millions of people in formerly captive nations were freed to pursue their individual and national ambitions.

The competition that defined the post World War II era was suddenly over. What was once called “the free world” had so much to celebrate – the peaceful end to a great power rivalry and the liberation of so many from tyranny’s grip.

Some, you could say, took the celebration too far. Many spoke of a “peace dividend,” of the need to focus on domestic issues and spend less time, attention and money on endeavors overseas. Many saw a peaceful future, where globalization would break down borders and lead to greater global prosperity. Some argued that state sovereignty would fade – like that was a good thing? – that new non-governmental actors and old international institutions would become dominant in the new world order.

As we all know, that did not happen. Unfortunately, there was no shortage of warning signs that the end of the Cold War did not mean the end of history or the end of conflict. In Europe, the breakup of Yugoslavia resulted in brutal wars in the Balkans. In the Middle East, a war was waged to reverse Saddam Hussein’s invasion of Kuwait. North Korea’s nuclear program nearly led to military conflict. In Africa, U.S. embassies were bombed by a group called al Qaeda.

Two weeks ago, America commemorated the 8th anniversary of the savagery of September 11, 2001. The vicious terrorist attacks of that day made clear that what happened in lands far distant from American shores directly affect our security. We came to learn, if we did not know before, that there were violent fanatics who sought not just to kill innocents, but to end our way of life. Their attacks have not been limited to the United States.

They attacked targets in Europe, North Africa and throughout the Middle East. Here in Asia, they killed more than 200 in a single attack in Bali. They bombed the Marriott Hotel and the Australian Embassy in Jakarta. Last year in Mumbai, more than 170 were killed in coordinated attacks in the heart of India’s financial capital. In this struggle with radical Islamic extremists, no part of the world is safe from those who bomb, maim and kill in the service of their twisted vision.

This war – and that is what it is, a war – is not, as some have said, a clash of civilizations. We are not at war with Islam. This is a war within Islam, where a small minority of violent killers seeks to impose their view on the vast majority of Muslims who want the same things all of us want: economic opportunity, education, and the chance to build a better life for themselves and their families. The reality is that al Qaeda and its affiliates have killed scores of innocent Muslim men, women and children.

The reality is that Muslims from Algeria, Indonesia, Iraq, Afghanistan and many other countries are fighting al Qaeda and their allies today. But this will be a long war, and it will require far more than just military power to prevail. Just as we did in the Cold War, we will need to use all the tools at our disposal – hard and soft power. Economic development, public diplomacy, educational exchanges, and foreign assistance will be just as important as the instruments of military power.

During the election campaign in the U.S. last year, you might have noticed we had some differences over Iraq. John McCain and I believed in the strength of the surge strategy – because of its success, Iraq is no longer the central front in the war on terrorism. Afghanistan is. Afghanistan is where the 9/11 attacks were planned and if we are not successful in Afghanistan, al Qaeda will once again find safe haven there. As a candidate and in office, President Obama called Afghanistan the “necessary war” and pledged to provide the resources needed to prevail. However, prominent voices in the Democratic Party are opposing the additional U.S. ground forces that are clearly needed.

Speaker of the House Pelosi, Defense Subcommittee Chairman Murtha, the Senate Armed Services Committee Chair, and many others, recently expressed doubts about sending additional forces! President Obama will face a decision soon when the U.S. Commander in Afghanistan requests additional forces to implement his new counterinsurgency strategy.

We can win in Afghanistan by helping the Afghans build a stable representative state able to defend itself. And we must do what it takes to prevail. The stakes are very high. Last year, in the midst of the U.S. debate over what do to in Iraq, an important voice was heard – from Asia’s Wise Man, former Singaporean Prime Minister, Lee Kuan Yew, who wrote in the Washington Post about the cost of retreat in Iraq. In that article, he prophetically addressed the stakes in Afghanistan. He wrote:

“The Taliban is again gathering strength, and a Taliban victory in Afghanistan or Pakistan would reverberate throughout the Muslim world. It would influence the grand debate among Muslims on the future of Islam. A severely retrograde form of Islam would be seen to have defeated modernity twice: first the Soviet Union, then the United States. There would be profound consequences, especially in the campaign against terrorism.”

That statesman’s words remain every bit as true today. And Minister Lee knows, and I agree, that our success in Afghanistan will have consequences all over the world, including Asia. Our allies and our adversaries are watching to see if we have the staying power to protect our interests in Afghanistan. That is why I recently joined a group of Americans in urging President Obama to devote the resources necessary in Afghanistan and pledged to support him if he made the right decision.

That is why, even during this time of financial distress we need to maintain a strong defense. All government spending should undergo serious scrutiny. No programs or agencies should be automatically immune from cuts.

We need to go back to fiscal discipline and unfortunately that has not been the view of the current Administration. They’re spending everywhere and with disregard for deficits and debts and our future economic competitiveness. Though we are engaged in two wars and face a diverse array of threats, it is the defense budget that has seen significant program cuts and has actually been reduced from current levels!

First, the Defense Department received only ½ of 1 % of the nearly trillion dollar Stimulus Package funding – even though many military projects fit the definition of “shovel-ready.” In this Administration’s first defense budget request for 2010, important programs were reduced or cancelled. As the threat of ballistic missiles from countries like North Korea and Iran grow, missile defense was slashed.

Despite the need to move men and material by air into theaters like Afghanistan, the Obama Administration sought to end production of our C-17s, the work horse of our ability to project long range power. Despite the Air Force saying it would increase future risk, the Obama Administration successfully sought to end F-22 production – at a time when both Russia and China are acquiring large numbers of next generation fighter aircraft. It strikes me as odd that Defense Secretary Gates is the only member of the Cabinet to be tasked with tightening his belt.

Now in the region I want to emphasize today: The reason I speak about defense is because our strong defense posture in Asia has helped keep the region safe and allowed it to prosper. Our Asian allies get nervous if they think we are weakening our security commitments. I worry about defense cuts not because I expect war but because I so badly want peace. And the region has enjoyed peace for so long because of our security commitment to our longstanding allies and partners.

Asia has been one of the world’s great success stories. It is a region where America needs to assist with right mix of hard and soft power. While I have so much hope for a bright future in Asia, in a region this dynamic, we must always be prepared for other contingencies. We must work at this – work with our allies to ensure the region’s continued peace and prosperity.

I know that you all — like all of Asia and indeed the whole world – has a keen interest in the emergence of “China as a great power.” Over the past few decades China’s economic growth has been remarkable. So has the economic growth and political liberalization of all of our key allies in Asia, Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan. Asia’s economic growth and political development, together with our forward military presence in the region and strong alliances, have allowed the region to prosper in peace for a long time. We hope that Asia will continue to be an engine of world economic growth, will continue to democratize and will remain at peace.

Our future is now deeply linked to Asia’s success. Our children’s future. We must continue to strengthen our key alliance with Japan, a country going through its own democratic change. Together the U.S. and Japan built the security umbrella under which so many Asians prospered. While there is so much attention to China these days, we cannot forget the importance of Japan in helping to make this the “Pacific Century.”

The recent elections in Japan demonstrated that voters wanted reform and an end to debt and stagnation. We have a substantial stake in Japan’s success — our alliance with must continue to be the linchpin of regional security.

With its open political system and vibrant democracy, South Korea wants to play a larger role on the international stage as well. Of course it wants us to work together toward a future where the peninsula is irreversibly denuclearized, and unified. But it also wants to play a global role. We need to work together with Japan, South Korea and our steadfast ally to the south, Australia, to make sure Asia remains peaceful and prosperous.

Australia rightly reminds us to keep our eye on Southeast Asia, where Indonesia has proved that Islam and democracy can co-exist. Indonesia has fought extremism inside its own border and is consolidating a multi-ethnic democracy that is home to hundreds of millions of Muslims. Those who say Islam and democracy are incompatible insult our friends in Indonesia.

Our great democratic friend India is also “looking East”, seeking a greater role in East Asia as well. Together with our allies we must help integrate India into Asia. If we do so we will have yet another strong democracy driving Asia’s economy and working on shared problems such as proliferation and extremism. And we must continue working with the region’s most dynamic economy, China. We all hope that China’s stated policy of a “Peaceful Rise” will be its future course.

You know better than most the enormous change that has taken place in China over the last thirty years. Hundreds of millions of Chinese have been pulled out of poverty as China has undertaken economic reforms that have resulted in unprecedented growth. Even today, China’s economy is projected to grow by some 8%. It is helping to edge the world out of recession.

China has amassed huge financial reserves. Chinese diplomats are engaged on every continent and, through its vote on the United Nations Security Council, China has become critical in gaining UN support on multilateral issues from Darfur to Iran to North Korea.

Just four years ago, then-Deputy Secretary of State Bob Zoellick urged China to become a “responsible stakeholder” in the international system. He observed the many benefits to China of a “benign international environment.”

The peaceful regional environment that China has enjoyed was created through the hard work of Americans, Japanese, South Koreans and Australians. Secretary Zoellick urged China to step up and play its role too. We are working with China to de-nuclearize North Korea. But to be a responsible member of the international community China should exert greater pressure on North Korea to denuclearize and undergo the fundamental reforms it needs. Zoellick urged China to play a greater role in stabilizing the international energy market by ceasing its support of dangerous regimes.

China could play a role in stabilizing its ally Pakistan, and working for peace in Afghanistan. There are many areas where the U.S. and China can work together. And, we would welcome a China that wanted to assume a more responsible and active role in international politics.

But Secretary Zoellick also noted that many of China’s actions create risk and uncertainty. These uncertainties led nations to “hedge” their relations with China because, in Zoellick’s words: “Many countries HOPE China will pursue a ‘Peaceful Rise’ but NONE will bet their future on it.”

See: this is the heart of the issue with China: we engage with the hope Beijing becomes a responsible stakeholder, but we must takes steps in the event it does not. See? We all hope to see a China that is stable, peaceful, prosperous and free. But we must also work with our allies in the region and the world in the event China goes in a direction that causes regional instability.

Asia is at its best when it is not dominated by a single power. In seeking Asia’s continued peace and prosperity, we should seek, as we did in Europe, an Asia “whole and free” – free from domination by any one power, prospering in open and free markets, and settling political differences at ballot boxes and negotiating tables.

We can, must and should work with a “rising China” to address issues of mutual concern. But we also need to work with our allies in addressing the uncertainties created by China’s rise. We simply CANNOT turn a blind eye to Chinese policies and actions that can undermine international peace and security.

China has some 1000 missiles aimed at Taiwan and no serious observer believes Taiwan poses a military threat to Beijing. Those same Chinese forces make our friends in Japan and Australia nervous. China provides support for some of the world’s most questionable regimes from Sudan to Burma to Zimbabwe. China’s military buildup raises concerns from Delhi to Tokyo because it has taken place in the absence of any discernable external threat.

China, along with Russia, has repeatedly undermined efforts to impose tougher sanctions on Iran for its defiance of the international community in pursuing its nuclear program. The Chinese food and product safety record has raised alarms from East Asia and Europe to the United States. And, domestic incidents of unrest — from the protests of Uighurs and Tibetans, to Chinese workers throughout the country rightfully make us nervous.

It is very much in our interest and the interest of regional stability that China work out its own contradictions – between a dynamic and entrepreneurial private sector on the one hand and a one party state unwilling or unable to adjust to its own society’s growing needs and desires and demands, including a human being’s innate desire for freedom.

I do not cite these issues out of any hostility toward China. Quite the contrary, I and all Americans of good faith hope for the Chinese people’s success. We welcome the rise that can be so good for all mankind. We simply urge China to rise responsibly. I simply believe we cannot ignore areas of disagreement as we seek to move forward on areas of agreement. Believe me, China does not hesitate to tell us when it thinks we are in the wrong.

I mentioned China’s internal contradictions. They should concern us all. We hear many Chinese voices throughout that great country calling out for more freedom, and for greater justice. Twenty years ago, many believed that as China liberalized its economy, greater political freedom would naturally follow. Unfortunately that has not come to pass.

Ummm, in fact, it seems China has taken great pains to learn what it sees as “the lesson” of the fall on the Berlin Wall and the demise of the Soviet Union: any easing of political constraints can inevitably spin out of control. But, in many ways, it is the essence of China’s political system that leads to concerns about its rise.

Think about it. How many books and articles have been written about the dangers of India’s rise? Almost as large as China – and soon to be more populous – virtually no one worries about the security implications of India becoming a great power – just as a century ago the then-preeminent power, Great Britain, worried little about the rise of America to great power status. My point is that the more politically open and just China is, the more Chinese citizens of every ethnicity will settle disputes in courts rather than on the streets. The more open it is, the less we will be concerned about its military build-up and intentions. The more transparent China is, the more likely it is they we will find a true and lasting friendship based on shared values as well as interests.

I am not talking about some U.S.-led “democracy crusade.” We cannot impose our values on other counties. Nor should we seek to. But the ideas of freedom, liberty and respect for human rights are not U.S. ideas, they are much more than that. They are enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and many other international covenants and treaties. They apply to citizens in Shanghai as much as they do to citizens in Johannesburg or Jakarta. And demands for liberty in China are Chinese, not American, demands. Just last year, many brave Chinese signed Charter 08, a Chinese document modeled on the great Czech statesman Vlacav Havel’s Charter 77. Charter 08 would not be unfamiliar to our Founding Fathers and was endorsed by Havel himself. No, we need not convince the Chinese people that they have inalienable rights. They are calling for those rights themselves. But we do have to worry about a China where the government suppresses the liberties its people hold dear.

Nothing of what I am saying should be seen as meaning conflict with China is inevitable. Quite the contrary. As I said, we welcome China’s responsible rise. America and China stood together against fascism during World War II, before ravages took over in China – we were ready to stand together with China to shape international politics after World War II. Much has been accomplished since President Nixon’s fateful visit. And again, we stand ready to work with what we hope will be a more open and responsible China on the challenges facing the 21st century.

All of you here know how deeply integrated the economies of the United States’ and China’s are. We rely on each other, sometimes unfortunately in unhealthy ways. America spends too much that we don’t have, and then we go to China as a lender of first resort. Our fiscal policy, lately, seems to be “tax, spend, borrow, tax some more, repeat” and then complain about how much debt China holds. America needs to gets its own fiscal house in order. That’s a Common Sense Conservative perspective. We can hardly complain that China holds so much of our debt when it’s over spending that created the debt.

But here’s the reality. If in fact the United States does the “right” thing – if we spend less and save more – then China will also have to rebalance its economy. We need to export more to China – and we’d like China to consume more of our goods – just as we need to save and invest more. This vital process – so crucial to both countries – is impeded by problems of market access.

We must talk about these issues with more candor. If China adopts policies that keep our highest value products out of their markets, by manipulating technical standards or licensing requirements, our economic relationship suffers.

Our economic interdependence drives our relationship with China. I see a future of more trade with China and more American high-tech goods in China. But in order for that to happen, we need China to improve its rule of law and protect our intellectual property. We need to avoid protectionism and China’s flirtation with state-assisted “national champions.” On our part, we should be more open to Chinese investment where our national security interests are not threatened. In the end, though, our economic relationship will truly thrive when Chinese citizens and foreign corporations can hold the Chinese government accountable when their actions are unjust.

I see a bright future for America in Asia. One based on the alliances that have gotten us this far, one based on free and open markets, one that integrates democratic India into East Asia’s political life and one in which China decides to be a responsible member of the international community and gives its people the liberty – the freedom – they so desperately want.

Sadly, however, our largest free trade agreement ever in Asia, with South Korea, sits frozen in the Congress. In contrast, China is behaving wisely in negotiating free trade agreements throughout Asia. We want an Asia open to our goods and services. But if we do not get our free trade act together, we will be shut out by agreements Asians our making among themselves.

All of you here follow global financial markets and economic policy closely, I know that it will come as no surprise to you that United States leadership on global trade and investment is being sorely tested at this moment.

We are struggling with a monumental debate on whether fiscal discipline, or massive government spending, will drive a sustained recovery. We are struggling to repair the excesses that grew in our own economy and served as a trigger to a catastrophic collapse in the global financial system. And we are attempting to do so under the weight of a global imbalance of debt and trade deficits that are not only unbearable for the world’s mightiest economy, but also unacceptable in that they foster tensions between global economic partners like the United States and China.

I am proud to be an American. As someone who has had the tremendous opportunity to travel throughout the United States and listen to the concerns of Americans in towns and cities across the country, I can tell you that there is a sense of despair and even crisis afoot in America that has the potential to shape our global investment and trade policies for years, and even decades to come. Never has the leadership of our government ever been more critical to keeping my country, and the world, on a path to openness, growth and opportunity in global trade and investment.

It would of course be a mistake to put the entire burden of restoring the global economy on the backs of America’s leaders. There is plenty of work for all of us to do in this matter. Governments around the world must resist the siren call of trade protection to bring short term relief during a time of crisis.

Those who use currency policy or subsidies to promote their nation’s exports should remain acutely aware that if there ever were a time in which such policies could be viewed as “tolerable,” that time has now passed. All participants who seek to find benefit in the global trading system must also take the responsibility of playing by the rules.

The private sector has responsibilities as well. For instance, it should not be the responsibility of government to dictate the salaries of bankers or the ownership of companies. And yet, due of the excesses committed by some, this is exactly where we find ourselves now because government now owns substantial portions of the private economy – even, unbelievably, in the United States.

These are challenging times for everyone, but we in the United States must humbly recognize that if we are to lead and to set the direction for the rest of the world, it must be by our example and not merely our words. And we must tread lightly when imposing new burdens on the imports of other countries.

Well, CLSA: My country is definitely at a crossroad. Polling in the U.S. shows a majority of Americans no longer believe that their children will have a better future than they have had…that is a 1st.

When members of America’s greatest generation – the World War II generation – lose their homes and their life savings because their retirement funds were wiped after the financial collapse, people feel a great anger. There is suddenly a growing sentiment to just “throw the bums out” of Washington, D.C. – and by bums they mean the Republicans and the Democrats. Americans are suffering from pay cuts and job losses, and they want to know why their elected leaders are not tightening their belts. It’s not lost on people that Congress voted to exempt themselves from the health care plan they are thrusting on the rest of the nation. There is a growing sense of frustration on Main Street. But even in the midst of crisis and despair, we see signs of hope.

In fact, it’s a sea change in America, I believe. Recently, there have been protests by ordinary Americans who marched on Washington to demand their government stop spending away their future. Large numbers of ordinary, middle-class Democrats, Republicans, and Independents from all over the country marching on Washington?! You know something’s up!

These are the same people who flocked to the town halls this summer to face their elected officials who were home on hiatus from that distant capital and were now confronted with the people they represent. Big town hall meetings – video clips circulating coverage – people watching, feeling not so alone anymore.

The town halls and the Tea Party movement are both part of a growing grassroots consciousness among ordinary Americans who’ve decided that if they want real change, they must take the lead and not wait to be led. Real change – and, you know, you don’t need a title to do it.

The “Tea Party Movement” is aptly named to remind people of the American Revolution – of colonial patriots who shook off the yoke of a distant government and declared their freedom from indifferent – elitist – rulers who limited their progress and showed them no respect. Today, Main Street Americans see Washington in similar terms.

When my country again achieves financial stability and economic growth – when we roar back to life as we shall do – it will be thanks in large part to the hard work and common sense of these ordinary Americans who are demanding that government spend less and tax less and allow the private sector to grow and prosper.

We’re not interested in government fixes; we’re interested in freedom! Freedom! Our vision is forward looking. People may be frustrated now, but we’re very hopeful too.

And, after all, why shouldn’t we be? We’re Americans. We’re always hopeful.

Thank you for letting me share some of that hope, and a view from Main Street with you. God Bless You.

__Sarah Palin

Posted in 2012, Alaska, Barracuda, big government, cap and tax, Conservative, D. C., ECONOMY, Energy, Energy Independence, Environment, Facebook, GOP, GOP / Conservative, government control, Governor Palin, Governor Sarah Palin, healthcare, influential people, National Defense, Native Americans, natural gas, North Korea, Obama, Obamacare, oil, President, reform, Republican, Ronald Reagan, Washington, Woman | Leave a Comment »

Being “Like Ronald Reagan” The Only Positive Political Description

Posted by Gary P Jackson on September 17, 2009

“Progressive” is becoming more of a dirty word, but all political labels – except “being like Ronald Reagan” – are falling into disfavor with many U.S. voters, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey.

“Liberal” is still the worst and remains the only political description that is viewed more negatively than positively. Being like Reagan is still the most positive thing you can say about a candidate.

So says the latest Rasmussen polling on the subject. Now for conservatives, “like Ronald Reagan” has been the only acceptable position for a politician to have, for a long, long time.

I’m sure the David Frums, Peggy Noonans, Colin Powells, and Kathleen Parkers of the world are hyperventilating right about now, as they are the ones always telling us the “era of Reagan is over.” I guess they are wrong once again! Shocking, huh?

It’s been twenty years since the great Renaldus Magnus, as he is affectionately known, has sat in the Oval Office, so why is he just as appealing today as he was back in his prime? I think it’s because Reagan was such a strong leader and just a great man, but that is probably way too simplistic.

Ronald Reagan was part of the American consciousness for most of the last century. I won’t attempt to write a biography here – there are plenty out there for folks to read and enjoy – but some of the highlights of Reagan’s career and how we came to love the man are certainly something to talk about.

Reagan was an actor, and while some called him a “B-Movie Actor,” he also gave us one of the most memorable characters of all time when he played George Gipp in the movie “Knute Rockne, All American.” While the movie itself was about famed Notre Dame coach Knute Rockne, one of the most memorable performances was Ronald Reagan playing George Gipp. Gipp was a great football player who died too young of a strep infection.

Now I’m going to tell you something I’ve kept to myself for years. None of you ever knew George Gipp. He was long before your time, but you all know what a tradition he is at Notre Dame. And the last thing he said to me, “Rock,” he said, “sometime when the team is up against it and the breaks are beating the boys, tell them to go out there with all they’ve got and win just one for the Gipper. I don’t know where I’ll be then, Rock,” he said, “but I’ll know about it and I’ll be happy.”

Pat O’Brien as Knute Rockne

“Win one for the Gipper” became part of the American lexicon. As for Reagan, the Gipper nickname stuck and became just another affectionate name we know him by.

Reagan was much more than just an actor. though. He was President of the Screen Actors Guild and a solid spokesman. He was also a democrat, who famously said: “I didn’t leave the democrat party, the democrat party left me.”

And Reagan, who had a sharp wit, never missed the chance to have fun with that:

In fact, one of the things that we all loved about Ronald Reagan was his ability to speak well and deliver great one liners as well as funny stories.

But Reagan was more than a good line and a bright smile. Reagan was also someone who loved America with all of his heart. He saw America as a “shining city on a hill” the world’s last best hope. Reagan was always concerned that Americans understood our great gifts of freedom and kept a constant watch for things that would cause Americans to lose those freedoms.

“Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children’s children what it was once like in the United States where men were free.”

Ronald Reagan

What really sets Reagan apart, at least for me, is how not only were his warnings appropriate for their time, but they can be applied to today’s events as well. In fact, it’s uncanny how the same things Ronald Reagan warned us about – communism and the slightly less oppressive socialism – are still real threats today.

For example, no one understood the danger to freedom and liberty that socialized medicine posed better than Ronald Reagan. Back in 1961, as they had been for decades, the democrat party was trying to shove socialized health care down an unwilling America’s throat. Reagan took part in the “Operation Coffee Cup Campaign” and went on a speaking tour, forcefully warning about the dangers of allowing the government to control health care.

Anyone who has actually read H.R. 3200, the most likely version of Obamacare to pass, knows Reagan was right then and even more right now! Obamacare is nothing less than a complete and total usurpation of the Constitution. It totally remakes American society, turning it into a communist state, with a centrally controlled government and centrally planned economy.

America was designed to be a loose confederation of states, coming together as a Republic for mutual benefit but with each remaining sovereign. It’s what the 10th Amendment to the Constitution is all about. Once Obamacare is passed, states rights and most individual rights go right out the window.

If we as Americans are to retain our freedoms and liberties, it is imperative that we listen to Ronald Reagan. It is imperative that we stop the government’s attempt to “reform” health care.

Now I am not saying health care doesn’t have its issues. It does. But health care in America is still the best in the world, has the highest quality, and is available in the most timely manner to the greatest number of people.

There are common sense plans out there. Plans that include major tort reform and the ability for Americans to shop for insurance nationwide rather than just within their state. There are thousands of insurance companies nationwide. The Obama regime claims to want “more competition” for the consumer’s dollar. What better way than to open the door for all Americans to shop all of the various insurance companies nationwide?

Ronald Reagan didn’t just warn us about socialized medicine, though. Few understood better than Reagan that liberalism was a losing proposition. That liberalism made absolutely no sense whatsoever. That liberalism was a contradiction all unto itself.

“Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they’re ignorant; it’s just that they know so much that isn’t so.”

Ronald Reagan

In another speech that absolutely applies today, Ronald Reagan speaks out on the dangers of allowing liberals to be elected to positions of responsibility.

In 1964 Reagan gave this speech at the Republican National Convention in support of Barry Goldwater, the candidate for President. The speech, entitled “A Time For Choosing” is one of the most iconic of all time. In fact, it has come to be known simply as “The Speech.”

If I had my way, this video would be required viewing by every school kid in America. In fact, it would be a required course to get a high school diploma, and there would be advanced teaching on it in colleges and universities nationwide.

It’s just that important!

What is rather chilling is how we can listen to Ronald Reagan 45 years later and apply absolutely everything he is saying to our current situation.

This might help explain why “like Ronald Reagan” is still the best thing you can say about a politician!

“The Speech”

Here’s a bit of an exercise for you. After watching the video, write down just how many things Reagan was talking about that not only exist in our current climate, but are even a greater threat today. Reagan understood all too well just how dangerous it was to allow government to grow too large and too powerful.

Ronald Reagan also warned that the “once honorable democrat party” was on a strong march towards socialism, or Marxism, as he called it. Today, we understand it as communism, plain and simple. We now have a President who was raised by communists, mentored by communists, and is now surrounded by and seeks advice from self avowed communists.

“A socialist is someone who has read Lenin and Marx. An anti-socialist is someone who understands Lenin and Marx”

Ronald Reagan

We are left asking ourselves just how in the hell this happened!

Ronald Reagan was an inspiration to America at a time when we needed it the most. America was in a slump. The American morale was as low as it had ever been, and the current national embarrassment, Jimmy Carter, had all but destroyed the economy forever. Carter had also allowed our military readiness to become dangerously low.

Our foreign policy was a joke. Under Carter, radical Islam was able to come to power in Iran and the greater Middle East. We are all suffering to this day because of Carter’s failures in this area. And frankly, our current White House occupant is following Carter’s lead.

I always laugh at the imagery surrounding Barack Obama. We were told when he was elected that the sea levels would lower, the skies would be brighter, and it would be rainbows and unicorns for all.

Well, I remember just how defeated Americans felt during the Carter years. Just how bad it was. We actually had a “misery index” concocted by the media just to tell us how bad our life sucked on any given day. Double digit unemployment, double digit inflation, and double digit interest rates on loans was the way of life in America.

Ronald Reagan represented real hope. It truly was “morning in America” once Reagan was elected. Reagan brought an intangible “it” factor with him that many leaders will never have. Reagan exuded optimism. He was our oldest President ever to take office, and yet he was the very picture of virility. Reagan was both a strong and forceful leader and America’s father figure, a kind man with a reassuring smile that simply told you everything was going to be just fine.

In no time America’s morale was high. America’s confidence was on the rebound. People were very proud to be Americans again. I remember those days well, and they were simply electric. The new feeling of optimism was amazing. You honestly felt like you could achieve anything.

I was a young man back then, but the feelings of this energy effected me greatly. Reagan had so much confidence that it spilled over onto the rest of us. It made us all see that absolutely anything was possible.

Now it took more than a few years for America to start to recover from the Carter fiasco – in fact, almost all of Reagan’s two terms. If a person were to go back, and just look at raw numbers, they would see that much of Reagan’s presidency saw economic numbers that, until the Obama presidency, wouldn’t have been all that stellar, but compared to where we had been, they were great.

The greatest affirmation of the difference Reagan made and of the love for him back then was his 1984 re-election. Now Reagan won an absolute landslide when he defeated Jimmy Carter in 1980. Reagan won 44 of 50 states in a three-way race that saw Republican John Anderson run as an Independent. Anderson being what we would call a RINO today. Reagan got 50.7 percent of the raw vote and Carter got 41 percent.

In 1984 though, the American people rewarded Reagan with an incredible 49 state win against former Vice President Walter Mondale, who barely won his home state and carried D.C. The Electoral College victory was 525 to 13, raw vote 58.8 percent to 40.6. To me that says it all about the confidence America had in Ronald Reagan.

History tells us that Reagan wasn’t a perfect man, but he was a great man. Reagan was able to shepherd American through some tough times. He defeated the Soviet Union without firing a shot. He brought new confidence to America, something that had been lacking. In time, it was the Reagan revolution that would end the 40 years of disastrous Democrat Party control of Congress, leading to a stunning victory for congressional Republicans in 1994.

It was truly Reagan’s moral compass, though, his strength and integrity, that made him such a great leader. A man among men. It was the moral clarity he had that allowed him to look into the eyes of the American people and tell them liberalism, communism, and socialism were evil. It was that same moral clarity that allowed him to stand at the Berlin Wall and demand, “Mr Gorbachev, tear down this wall!”

It was that same moral clarity, that same strength and integrity Reagan had then, that still makes being “like Ronald Reagan” so desired today.

So where do we take it from here? Who is “like Ronald Reagan”?

Some names that come to mind are people like Dick Cheney. Say what you will about the former Vice President – when he speaks, he speaks with moral clarity, strength, wisdom, and with the love of our nation in his heart.

Liz Cheney is her father’s daughter. She is sharp, tough, and has a solid footing. Then there is Michelle Bachmann. While not as well known, she is certainly cut from the Reagan cloth. Strong, forceful, and unwavering in her beliefs and values.

But one simply cannot talk about leaders who are like Ronald Reagan without bringing up Sarah Palin. The comparisons are easy to make. Like Reagan, Sarah Palin is a strong leader with moral clarity.

Sarah has shown this clarity throughout her career. From battling her mentor on the Wasilla city council over his attempt to use his position to set up a monopoly for his company, to her legendary battle with Frank Murkowski’s “Corrupt Bastards Club.”

For those that don’t know the story, Sarah had been appointed as Chairman of the powerful Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, the agency that regulates oil and natural gas in Alaska. Sarah had been appointed by Governor Murkowski after she had lost her bid for Lt. Governor. She was charged with overseeing ethics in her position.

Before long, Sarah realized she had a really corrupt shop. After being told to back off by her boss, the Governor, Sarah stepped down, “quit” as they say. Had to be a really tough decision. This was a high paying gig, six figures, and a powerful position from which to launch herself to even more powerful positions. After all, Sarah’s star was on the rise!

After Sarah “quit” she made it her project to go after the bad actors. As a result, she went after pretty much the entire Republican Party leadership, a profile in courage in itself, and a sure fire case of political suicide. In the end, some went to prison, some paid fines, others were forced to resign. Then she ran for and won the governorship.

Once in office, she was a strong leader. She was able to bring about sweeping changes and one by one fulfilled her campaign promises.

Claude Sandroff over at the American Thinker talks about the virtue of Sarah Palin. We all know the story of her post-election experiences. Before Sarah ran for Vice President, the Republican Party, still smarting from the reforms she brought and the folks she took down, wasn’t exactly pleased with her, but she had a fairly cordial relationship with the Alaska Democrats in the legislature.

Then came the campaign. It has been well documented that Barack Obama brought Chicago style politics to Alaska through his campaign chief-of-staff, Pete Rouse, and Rouse’s longtime friendship with Alaska State Senator, Kim Elton. Their attempt to derail Sarah with the phony “Troopergate” witch hunt is also well documented

After Sarah lost her in her effort to be Vice President, no one would have thought the Alaska Mafia would have remained so dedicated to the Chicago masters, but how many times has a losing vice presidential candidate become even more popular and sought after!

The word came out from on high to keep the pressure on, and the Mafia started recruiting folks to file phony ethics complaints against her. There was already one misguided woman, Andree McLeod, who made a career out of filing outrageous complaints. But the rest were all manufactured to damage Sarah, by using a favorite Democrat/communist tactic, right out of Saul Alinsky’s “Rules.”

This is where Sarah’s strength, courage, and moral clarity came into play. It would have been very simple to sit still and fight this stuff. I mean these charges were all nonsense, and all were thrown out. But the more she resisted, the more the Mafia filed, and at a quicker pace. And these leaches on society had not only cost Sarah personally, they had also effectively stopped her government from functioning and cost the taxpayers almost $2 million processing this mess. And if the pace of the complaints stayed the same for the rest of her term, these thieves were on track to cost the Alaska taxpayers as much as $10 million.

A lot of politicians would have stayed. They would have clung to power at all cost. Not Sarah Palin. As Sandroff puts it, this was:

“The very essence of virtue. It was Sir Thomas More resigning as Lord Chancellor and George Washington returning to Mount Vernon. It showed how rare virtue has become in our politics. It shows why we adore Sarah Palin and why we need her. And it explains why, even without office, she has become the most important political figure in America.”

One can only imagine the struggle Sarah had with this – or maybe it wasn’t a real struggle at all. Earlier in the year, just before a trip to visit her troops in Kosovo, Sarah Palin introduced Michael Reagan, the son of Ronald Reagan, at an event in Anchorage. While talking about how badly her critics wanted her to shut up and go away, she said this:

“They want me to sit down and shut up. But I won’t sit down, and I won’t shut up. Politically speaking, if I die, I die, but I will know I have spoken up! Stand up, speak up, be bold! Forget political correctness!”

History shows that Sarah has not sat down, and is not shutting up! At the time, many could not understand what Sarah was doing when she “quit.” These people simply didn’t understand her unwinnable situation. These are the types who would have “fought to the end,” costing their constituents more tax dollars, and damaging their state.

This was a stroke of genius though, and one I believe Ronald Reagan would have understood. Sarah, a star basketball player, was simply passing the ball off to someone, Sean Parnell, who could continue on with her policies, and not be hassled.

“He will win who knows when to fight and when not to fight. He will win who knows how to handle both superior and inferior forces. He will win whose army is animated by the same spirit throughout all its ranks. He will win who, prepared himself, waits to take the enemy unprepared.”

Sun Tzu, the Art Of War

Now that is a nice story, as far as it goes. A compelling one, in fact. But it is not the only reason why Sarah Palin is “like Ronald Reagan.”

No one can argue she is powerful. Who in the world but Sarah Palin can change the entire national debate with a few paragraphs posted on a networking website?

Sarah Palin not only had the moral clarity to understand exactly what Obamacare is, she was also able to distill it all down to a level of basic understanding. Her “death panels” said it all. And it wasn’t just the fact Sarah understood that Obamacare would most certainly lead to the rationing of care – she had the courage to say it the way she said it. She knew full well the wrath of both political parties, as well as the fringe media – Obama’s media – would come at her with full force. Sarah called Obamacare “downright evil.”

We all know Ronald Reagan had moral clarity regarding the Soviet Union. He called them an “evil empire.” His critics in both parties, lost it every time he did this, but it didn’t stop him from saying it.

Before Reagan’s famous “tear down that wall” comment in his speech in Berlin, his advisers were telling him “no way” and to steer clear of that sort of thing. They had to be resuscitated after he said it! But Reagan knew in his heart it needed to be said.

Reagan lived to see the Berlin wall come down and to see millions of East Germans become free.

Before Sarah took up the fight, critics of Obamacare might as well have been talking to their houseplants. They were trying to nuance things. Trying to be “statesmen,” at least in their minds.

Sarah looked at this mess, saw great evil. She saw a situation, that if continued, would lead America to certain disaster, and cause all Americans to lose precious liberties and freedoms. It’s that ability to not only recognize evil wherever you see it but to also have the courage to do something about it.

While the other so-called leaders in the Republican party were saying “slow down” Sarah wrote, “Not no, but HELL no!”

Because of Sarah Palin and her inspiration to others, Obamacare is in shambles. And that gives us another “like Ronald Reagan” trait. Sarah Palin inspires people.

Sarah has been inspiring people for a long time, but her speech at the 2008 Republican National Convention was huge. Expectations were high, and she hit a home run. As Michael Reagan wrote days later in a column titled “Welcome Back Dad“:

“I’ve been trying to convince my fellow conservatives that they have been wasting their time in a fruitless quest for a new Ronald Reagan to emerge and lead our party and our nation. I insisted that we’d never see his like again because he was one of a kind.

I was wrong!

Wednesday night I watched the Republican National Convention on television and there, before my very eyes, I saw my Dad reborn; only this time he’s a she.

And what a she!

In one blockbuster of a speech, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin resurrected my Dad’s indomitable spirit and sent it soaring above the convention center, shooting shock waves through the cynical media’s assigned spaces and electrifying the huge audience with the kind of inspiring rhetoric we haven’t heard since my Dad left the scene.”

After Ronald Reagan lost his presidential primary bid to Gerald Ford in 1976, most considered him washed up, a has been. Critics in both parties called him stupid, lazy, naive, inexperienced, even though he had been Governor of California! He was a B-Movie actor. Some even said Reagan was dangerous!

Reagan was from tiny Tampico, Illinois. He went to the “wrong” school, Eureka College. And Reagan was a small-town country boy at heart his entire life.

The Democrats hated Reagan with a passion, and so did the blue-blood, country club elite Rockefeller Republicans. The American people loved Reagan, though, and obviously still do. God bless Ronald Reagan, and may his spirit always remain the spirit that inspires us all.

Posted in Alaska, Andrea McLeod, Barracuda, big government, Conservative, Conservative of 2008, Conservative of the Year, D. C., ECONOMY, Energy, Energy Independence, Environment, establishment, ethics, ethics complaint, Facebook, Faith, Family, First Dude, freedom of speech, GOP, government control, Governor Palin, Governor Sarah Palin, healthcare, influential people, John McCain, liberal bloggers, media bias, Michael Reagan, National Defense, natural gas, Obama, Obamacare, oil, poll, President, Pro-life, Republican, resignation, RNC, Ronald Reagan, Sarah Palin, Sean Parnell, special needs, special needs children, sports, USA., veterans, Vice President, Washington, Wasilla, Woman | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Sarah Palin Takes Barack Obama To Task Over His Pathetic Speech And Personal Attacks On The American People

Posted by Gary P Jackson on September 10, 2009

Remember, Mr. President, elected officials work for the people. Forcing a conclusion in order to claim a “victory” is not healthy for our country. We hear you say government isn’t always the answer; now hear us — that’s what we’ve been saying all along.

– Sarah Palin

Barack Obama really showed himself Wednesday. Acting more like he was a two bit politician on the campaign trail rather than the President of the United States, Obama belittled his office to no end with cheap rhetoric, lies, and attacks on those who disagree with him.

In all of my life, I have never seen a President who just makes the Office so small, so unimportant. Last night Obama took the status of the Office to a whole new low.

We all know Sarah Palin had already put a double dose of heat on Obama before he ever stumbled into the congressional chamber and started up with his glorified Amway meeting.

This is nothing new for Sarah though, she has had Obama’s number since day one:

“This is a man [Barack Obama] who can give an entire speech about the wars America is fighting, and never use the word “victory” except when he’s talking about his own campaign.

But when the cloud of rhetoric has passed … when the roar of the crowd fades away … when the stadium lights go out, and those Styrofoam Greek columns are hauled back to some studio lot – what exactly is our opponent’s plan?

What does he actually seek to accomplish, after he’s done turning back the waters and healing the planet? The answer is to make government bigger … take more of your money … give you more orders from Washington … and to reduce the strength of America in a dangerous world. America needs more energy … our opponent is against producing it.”

From Sarah Palin’s Vice Presidential acceptance speech at the 2008 Republican National Convention.

What is really disappointing about Obama’s speech is how he was so far off his game. He was 15 minutes late to start with, prompting Dennis Miller to quip later on The O’Reilly Factor that this was a “ringing endorsement for government efficiency!”

My guess is Obama and his speech writers were still crafting a response to Sarah’s Wall Street Journal op-ed, as well as her Facebook slam from the day before.

During the speech Obama was like a child throwing a temper tantrum. Obama has lost the debate. America wants nothing to do with this fiasco. And instead of cutting his losses, and doing his job, he is bound and determined to shove his communistic, liberty and freedom stealing bill down America’s throat.

Another disappointment, in a night of disappointments, is the fact that Obama said absolutely nothing new. If this guy truly wanted to reform health care, and truly wanted to serve the people, he would have thrown the current mess in the trash can and come out with a clean sheet of paper. He just might have garnered some respect, and support. But he’s just not that smart. Obama is going to ride this ludicrous bill right into the ground.

We learned absolutely nothing new about his plan. All he had was his tired old Saul Alinsky tactics. Don’t talk about the issue, just attack people:

“Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it. In conflict tactics there are certain rules that [should be regarded] as universalities. One is that the opposition must be singled out as the target and ‘frozen.’…

….any target can always say, ‘Why do you center on me when there are others to blame as well?’ When your ‘freeze the target,’ you disregard these [rational but distracting] arguments…. Then, as you zero in and freeze your target and carry out your attack, all the ‘others’ come out of the woodwork very soon. They become visible by their support of the target…’

“One acts decisively only in the conviction that all the angels are on one side and all the devils on the other.”

Rule Number 13 from Alinsky’s “Rules For Radicals”

This is all Obama and his crew have. They have no real solutions, no new ideas. Obama is stuck trying to relive the failed Roosevelt years, using policies that took a bad recession and turned it into the Great Depression, and made recovery take years longer than it should have.

Obama is FDR on steriods, and without the charm and sophistication.

The democrat/communists haven’t had an original thought in almost a century.

They just keep on pushing those time honored big government ideas that have failed spectacularly since the beginning of time. And this Obamacare debacle is a true failure among failures. This thing will have the competency of the IRS, the efficiency of the Post Office, and the effectiveness of the Katrina recovery efforts.

So, instead of admitting failure, and sitting down with some adults to craft an honest plan, such as those that have been proposed by the Republicans, Obama just attacked everyone.

What was remarkable though, was Obama calling out Sarah Palin. Again, she is so far in his head he can’t resist, but just how pathetic is it to see the President of the United States, in the one of the most formal settings he can be in, have to resort whining and attacking a private citizen?

We all know the answer, of course. Sarah Palin is an actual leader, and Barry is not. Not even close. A lot of folks didn’t understand the logic behind Sarah’s decision to step down as Governor. I think now they understand.

Sarah had already delivered on every single campaign promise she made when she ran for office, and Obama’s Alaska Mafia had made it impossible for her to do her job. Besides costing her personally, the Obama surrogates had cost the Alaska taxpayers millions, and were on track to cost them more, with their continual filing of those bogus ethics complaints.

My guess is about now Obama is wishing he had left her alone to Govern Alaska in peace! Now she has nothing but time, time to take him to task on every move he makes.

Of course, Sarah is not one to let Alinsky style attacks by someone the likes of Obama to go unanswered. Sarah Palin has dealt with a lot tougher foes, and Chicago thug politics do not impress this gal. So last night after Obama’s glorified campaign speech, Sarah penned a scathing retort.

From Sarah’s Facebook Page:

Response to the President’s Health Care Speech

After all the rhetoric is put aside, one principle ran through President Obama’s speech tonight: that increased government involvement in health care can solve its problems.

Many Americans fundamentally disagree with this idea. We know from long experience that the creation of a massive new bureaucracy will not provide us with “more stability and security,” but just the opposite. It’s hard to believe the President when he says that this time he and his team of bureaucrats have finally figured out how to do things right if only we’ll take them at their word.

Our objections to the Democrats’ health care proposals are not mere “bickering” or “games.” They are not an attempt to “score short term political points.” And it’s hard to listen to the President lecture us not to use “scare tactics” when in the next breath he says that “more will die” if his proposals do not pass.

In his speech the President directly responded to concerns I’ve raised about unelected bureaucrats being given power to make decisions affecting life or death health care matters. He called these concerns “bogus,” “irresponsible,” and “a lie” — so much for civility. After all the name-calling, though, what he did not do is respond to the arguments we’ve made, arguments even some of his own supporters have agreed have merit.

In fact, after promising to “make sure that no government bureaucrat …. gets between you and the health care you need,” the President repeated his call for an Independent Medicare Advisory Council — an unelected, largely unaccountable group of bureaucrats charged with containing Medicare costs. He did not disavow his own statement that such a group, working outside of “normal political channels,” should guide decisions regarding that “huge driver of cost … the chronically ill and those toward the end of their lives….” He did not disavow the statements of his health care advisor, Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, and continuing to pay his salary with taxpayer dollars proves a commitment to his beliefs. The President can keep making unsupported assertions, but until he directly responds to the arguments I’ve made, I’m going to call him out too.

It was heartening to hear the President finally recognize that tort reform is an important part of any solution. But this concession shouldn’t lead us to take our eye off the ball: the Democrats’ proposals will not reduce costs, and they will not deliver better health care. It’s this kind of “healthy skepticism of government” that truly reflects a “concern and regard for the plight of others.” We can’t wait to hear the details on that; we look forward to working with you on tort reform.

Finally, President Obama delivered an offhand applause line tonight about the cost of the War on Terror. As we approach the anniversary of the September 11th attacks and honor those who died that day and those who have died since in the War on Terror, in order to secure our freedoms, we need to remember their sacrifices and not demonize them as having had too high a price tag.

Remember, Mr. President, elected officials work for the people. Forcing a conclusion in order to claim a “victory” is not healthy for our country. We hear you say government isn’t always the answer; now hear us — that’s what we’ve been saying all along.

– Sarah Palin

Posted in 2012, Alaska, Barracuda, bureaucratic, Conservative, Conservative of 2008, Conservative of the Year, D. C., ECONOMY, Faith, GOP, GOP / Conservative, government control, Governor Palin, Governor Sarah Palin, healthcare, influential people, Obama, Obamacare, President, Republican, Sarah Palin, Woman | Tagged: , , , , | 3 Comments »

Sarah Palin Spanks Obama On The Eve Of His Big Dog And Pony Show With Congress

Posted by Gary P Jackson on September 9, 2009

Sarah Palin hit Barack Obama and his crew with a double dose of good old common sense on Tuesday. She opened the day from her powerful Facebook page with a reprint of written testimony she has given the New York State Senate.

In her testimony, addressed to Senator Reverend Ruben Diaz, Chair, New York Senate Aging Committee, Sarah gives a point by point breakdown of what is wrong with the proposed Obamacare bill as well a stinging rebuke of our old buddy, Dr Ezekiel Emanuel, Dr Death to our readers.

She again lays out the case that Dr Death’s plans would ration health care and gives preferential treatment to people between the ages of 15 and 40 while rationing care, or depending on the circumstance, denying care to those younger than 15 or older than 40, such as the disabled.

Sarah also points out how this sudden acceptance of allowing the old to die before their time will lead to abuse.

Over in the United Kingdom, the National Health Service is an absolute mess. Conditions are unsanitary. Qualified doctors and nurses are in short supply. It is not uncommon for patients to go without food and water, sometimes drinking the water out of the plants in the room to stave off dehydration! And as simple symptoms of dehydration can cause a patient to mimic someone who is dying, for real, many patients who only need some water are basically left for dead!

Then there is this sort of thing that has happened to Rosemary Munkenbeck, whose father, Eric Troake, who entered hospital after suffering a stroke, had fluid and drugs withdrawn and she claims doctors wanted to put him on morphine until he passed away under a scheme for dying patients called the Liverpool Care Pathway

This of course, is Britain’s version of a death panel. Remember, a few shots of morphine are cheap compared to actually treating someone with a stroke, and doing things on the cheap is the priority, not actually treating patients.

You can read the whole story here.

For the complete footnoted transcript of Sarah’s written testimony to Senator Diaz, go here.

Of course, Sarah was just warming up with her Facebook posting. The real shot fired across Obama’s bow was an op-ed posted at the Wall Street Journal’s website, for the Wednesday print edition.

Here Sarah takes on the “Bureaucratization” of Obamacare.

The president’s proposals would give unelected officials life-and-death rationing powers.

Sarah Palin

We just went through the Van Jones debacle, so we know at least two things, for sure, about the Obama administration. One, Obama is all about appointing unelected, un-vetted, and unaccountable “Czars” to prominent positions of power. And two, every single one of these people we have looked at so far are complete and total loons!

Jones is a racist, cop hater, self avowed communist, and a 9/11 truther.

Dr Death believes in the Complete Lives System that uses formulas to determine who is worthy of health care, and who isn’t. Not only does he think the very old, and the very young are not as worthy as those “productive” to society, if you are disabled, well, I hope you have your burial insurance paid up, because you are fixin’ to meet up with Obama’s death panels!

Cass Sunstein, who Obama pretty much wants to allow to regulate every activity you do, thinks doctors should be able to harvest your organs when you die, at least I hope they wait that long, without your permission! Like most communists, Sunstein thinks the citizen is property of the state, for the ruling class to use as they see fit.

And this isn’t even the “weird” thing about Sunstein! He is also against hunting, fishing and all other manly-man activities, and wants to ban them. Now that is mainstream “progressive” communist. But the real punch line here is Cass wants to allow animals to sue humans in court!

Any animals that are entitled to bring suit would be represented by (human) counsel, who would owe guardian-like obligations and make decisions, subject to those obligations, on their clients’ behalf.

Cass Sunstein

Then we have John Holdren. This refugee from a bad science fiction movie thinks our Constitution would be OK with forced sterilizations and forced abortions for population control. I’m still pouring through my copy of the Constitution looking for the article and section that covers this!

Oh, and Holdren is also in favor of adding chemicals into the water supply to sterilize the population, as well. He wants both zero population and zero economic growth, worldwide. Just the guy to be working for the President when the economy is in the crapper!

If you want to know more about Obama’s “cream-of-the-crop” of modern scientific thought, try here.

You can bet Obama has plenty more men ,of equal quality to these, that will make up the Bureaucratization of Obamacare that Sarah Palin is talking about!

You have to really stop and ask yourself this: Do I really want a 9/11 truther, a crazy organ stealer and animal rights loon, someone who wants to sterilize me, forcibly, if necessary, or Dr Death, in charge of my health care?

From The Wall Street Journal:

Obama and the Bureaucratization of Health Care

By Sarah Palin

Writing in the New York Times last month, President Barack Obama asked that Americans “talk with one another, and not over one another” as our health-care debate moves forward.

I couldn’t agree more. Let’s engage the other side’s arguments, and let’s allow Americans to decide for themselves whether the Democrats’ health-care proposals should become governing law.

Some 45 years ago Ronald Reagan said that “no one in this country should be denied medical care because of a lack of funds.” Each of us knows that we have an obligation to care for the old, the young and the sick. We stand strongest when we stand with the weakest among us.

We also know that our current health-care system too often burdens individuals and businesses—particularly small businesses—with crippling expenses. And we know that allowing government health-care spending to continue at current rates will only add to our ever-expanding deficit.

How can we ensure that those who need medical care receive it while also reducing health-care costs? The answers offered by Democrats in Washington all rest on one principle: that increased government involvement can solve the problem. I fundamentally disagree.

Common sense tells us that the government’s attempts to solve large problems more often create new ones. Common sense also tells us that a top-down, one-size-fits-all plan will not improve the workings of a nationwide health-care system that accounts for one-sixth of our economy. And common sense tells us to be skeptical when President Obama promises that the Democrats’ proposals “will provide more stability and security to every American.”

With all due respect, Americans are used to this kind of sweeping promise from Washington. And we know from long experience that it’s a promise Washington can’t keep.

Let’s talk about specifics. In his Times op-ed, the president argues that the Democrats’ proposals “will finally bring skyrocketing health-care costs under control” by “cutting . . . waste and inefficiency in federal health programs like Medicare and Medicaid and in unwarranted subsidies to insurance companies . . . .”

First, ask yourself whether the government that brought us such “waste and inefficiency” and “unwarranted subsidies” in the first place can be believed when it says that this time it will get things right. The nonpartistan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) doesn’t think so: Its director, Douglas Elmendorf, told the Senate Budget Committee in July that “in the legislation that has been reported we do not see the sort of fundamental changes that would be necessary to reduce the trajectory of federal health spending by a significant amount.”

Now look at one way Mr. Obama wants to eliminate inefficiency and waste: He’s asked Congress to create an Independent Medicare Advisory Council—an unelected, largely unaccountable group of experts charged with containing Medicare costs. In an interview with the New York Times in April, the president suggested that such a group, working outside of “normal political channels,” should guide decisions regarding that “huge driver of cost . . . the chronically ill and those toward the end of their lives . . . .”

Given such statements, is it any wonder that many of the sick and elderly are concerned that the Democrats’ proposals will ultimately lead to rationing of their health care by—dare I say it—death panels? Establishment voices dismissed that phrase, but it rang true for many Americans. Working through “normal political channels,” they made themselves heard, and as a result Congress will likely reject a wrong-headed proposal to authorize end-of-life counseling in this cost-cutting context. But the fact remains that the Democrats’ proposals would still empower unelected bureaucrats to make decisions affecting life or death health-care matters. Such government overreaching is what we’ve come to expect from this administration.

Speaking of government overreaching, how will the Democrats’ proposals affect the deficit? The CBO estimates that the current House proposal not only won’t reduce the deficit but will actually increase it by $239 billion over 10 years. Only in Washington could a plan that adds hundreds of billions to the deficit be hailed as a cost-cutting measure.

The economic effects won’t be limited to abstract deficit numbers; they’ll reach the wallets of everyday Americans. Should the Democrats’ proposals expand health-care coverage while failing to curb health-care inflation rates, smaller paychecks will result. A new study for Watson Wyatt Worldwide by Steven Nyce and Syl Schieber concludes that if the government expands health-care coverage while health-care inflation continues to rise “the higher costs would drive disposable wages downward across most of the earnings spectrum, although the declines would be steepest for lower-earning workers.” Lower wages are the last thing Americans need in these difficult economic times.

Finally, President Obama argues in his op-ed that Democrats’ proposals “will provide every American with some basic consumer protections that will finally hold insurance companies accountable.” Of course consumer protection sounds like a good idea. And it’s true that insurance companies can be unaccountable and unresponsive institutions—much like the federal government. That similarity makes this shift in focus seem like nothing more than an attempt to deflect attention away from the details of the Democrats’ proposals—proposals that will increase our deficit, decrease our paychecks, and increase the power of unaccountable government technocrats.

Instead of poll-driven “solutions,” let’s talk about real health-care reform: market-oriented, patient-centered, and result-driven. As the Cato Institute’s Michael Cannon and others have argued, such policies include giving all individuals the same tax benefits received by those who get coverage through their employers; providing Medicare recipients with vouchers that allow them to purchase their own coverage; reforming tort laws to potentially save billions each year in wasteful spending; and changing costly state regulations to allow people to buy insurance across state lines. Rather than another top-down government plan, let’s give Americans control over their own health care.

Democrats have never seriously considered such ideas, instead rushing through their own controversial proposals. After all, they don’t need Republicans to sign on: Democrats control the House, the Senate and the presidency. But if passed, the Democrats’ proposals will significantly alter a large sector of our economy. They will not improve our health care. They will not save us money. And, despite what the president says, they will not “provide more stability and security to every American.”

We often hear such overblown promises from Washington. With first principles in mind and with the facts in hand, tell them that this time we’re not buying it.

You are so right Sarah, this time the American people just aren’t buying it!

Ronald Reagan was fond of saying that government wasn’t the answer to a problem, that government was the problem.

Back in 1964 Ronald Reagan gave a speech at the Republican National Convention. It ranks up there as one of the greatest speeches of all time. The speech, entitled “A Time For Choosing”, is so iconic, it has become simply know as “The Speech!”

Personally, I think this speech should be taught in school. It should be required learning in order to get a diploma. I feel this video, coupled with Sarah’s hard hitting op-ed should be enough to help all Americans understand that we need to stop Obamacare, and Obama himself right in his tracks, and get on with the process of taking America back.

Ronald Reagan warned the nation back in 1964 of the perils associated with putting a democrat in elected office. Pretty much everything he warned against, has come true, with the expected consequences, because folks elected democrats.

During the 2008 election Sarah Palin warned over and over about the perils of electing Barack Obama. Her warnings went unheaded, and everything she warned us about is coming to pass.

This time, listen to what Sarah Palin is saying, and stop this massive government intrusion in our lives before it is too late. I’m not sure we are going to get many more chances to get it right!

Posted in 2012, Alaska, Barracuda, big government, bureaucratic, Conservative, Conservative of 2008, Conservative of the Year, D. C., Facebook, Governor Palin, Governor Sarah Palin, healthcare, influential people, Obama, Obamacare, President, Ronald Reagan, Sarah Palin, special needs, special needs children, Washington, Woman | Tagged: , , , , | 1 Comment »

Barack Obama’s Dr. Death Cuts And Runs When Confronted About His Nazi-Like Death Panels, And Other Bedtime Stories About Czars!

Posted by Gary P Jackson on September 8, 2009

In the above video, panelists warn of the revival of eugenics under Barack Obama’s government health care takeover, through the denial of care to millions who would be judged not fit to live, just as in Nazi Germany.

Historian Anton Chaitkin does a wonderful job of exposing Dr. Death, who then realizes he has other business to attend to, and bails out before he really has to answer the allegations. As you heard on the tape, another unidentified attendee tries to ask a question about Dr. Death’s support of assisted suicide, which is quickly brushed aside.

Dr. Death, is basically a coward! If you are going to have the sort of disturbing notions this guy has, then you should be made to sit and defend them. But I guess it’s hard to defend the indefensible.

A few weeks back Sarah Palin introduced the nation to Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, Barack Obama’s “health adviser” and brother of White House Chief-of-Staff, Rahm Emanuel. In other words, Dr. Death.

When Sarah coined the term “death panels” she had Dr. Death in mind.

Now it’s been fun watching democrat/communists and ignorant Republicans scramble and try to say there are no “death panels.” Or even more hilarious, try and claim the so-called “end of life counseling” wasn’t a “death panel” but a good thing. Hell, I’ve even seen politicians and people that I actually thought had a half a brain go down this road. Very disappointing, but at least it helped me learn who not to worry about listening to any more!

You see Sarah Palin, and others, never mentioned “end of life counseling “or said it was a bad thing. As some of the left wing correctly noted (yes, I know, there truly IS a first time for everything) Sarah herself had passed a resolution as Governor of Alaska urging seniors to talk to their doctors and family about end of life decisions, and living wills. Of course, these weren’t to be government mandated programs, she was merely wanting to make sure seniors know these services were available through doctors and attorneys.

Oh the democrat/communists had Sarah now. They had her with the strawberries!

Well, not quite. You see unlike most of the media, and pretty much all of the politicians, on both sides, Sarah had actually done her homework on Obama, and his radical friends. Remember that warning she gave you about who Obama was “palin’ around with?” Well, as we have seen with Van Jones, Jeff Jones, Cass Sunstein, Mark Lloyd, Dr Death, and God only knows how many more, violent terrorist Bill Ayers was just the tip of a very large iceberg!

What we now know about Dr Death is that he, like many of Obama’s so-called Czars, is an absolute loon. I mean crazy, insane, perhaps psychotic. Dr Death is one of the main characters, in what would be a horribly cheesy SciFi movie, if he didn’t actually have the full attention of the President of the United States!

I know some of our more gentle readers get a bit weak in the knees when we start talking Nazis and the Obama administration, but other than early 20th Century American “progressives” who were very strong believers in eugenics, nothing and no one else can compare the group of truly evil men and woman that Obama has chosen to advise him on his Obamacare fiasco, as well as other misadventures he has planned.

Dr Death has been appointed to two key positions: health-policy adviser at the Office of Management and Budget and a member of Federal Council on Comparative Effectiveness Research.

Here are some of the various thoughts Dr Death has expressed regarding the administration of health care:

Vague promises of savings from cutting waste, enhancing prevention and wellness, installing electronic medical records and improving quality are merely ‘lipstick’ cost control, more for show and public relations than for true change.

(Health Affairs Feb. 27, 2008)

Savings,, will require changing how doctors think about their patients: Doctors take the Hippocratic Oath too seriously, “as an imperative to do everything for the patient regardless of the cost or effects on others”

(Journal of the American Medical Association, June 18, 2008)

Yeah, you heard that right. Dr. Death thinks that other doctors should just blow off their sacred Hippocratic Oath, for the “greater good!” I mean why give quality care to the old people, who worked all of their lives and made American the great nation it is, when someone younger might benefit more!

Dr. Death wants doctors to look beyond the needs of their patients and consider social justice, such as whether the money could be better spent on somebody else. “Social justice” is a communist code phrase that basically means income or wealth distribution.

All of a sudden old Joe-the-Plumber isn’t looking so stupid anymore, is he! He too tried to warn America about Obama and his desire the “spread the wealth.”

Emanuel believes that “communitarianism” should guide decisions on who gets care. He says medical care should be reserved for the non-disabled, not given to those “who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens . . . An obvious example is not guaranteeing health services to patients with dementia”

(Hastings Center Report, Nov.-Dec. ’96)

Translation: Don’t give much care to a grandmother with Parkinson’s or a child with cerebral palsy. Or children with Downs Syndrome. Gee, no wonder Sarah Palin doesn’t think very highly of this guy!

Here is how this obviously disturbed man justifies this:

Unlike allocation by sex or race, allocation by age is not invidious discrimination; every person lives through different life stages rather than being a single age. Even if 25-year-olds receive priority over 65-year-olds, everyone who is 65 years now was previously 25 years”

(Lancet, Jan. 31)

Now, did you follow that nonsense?

Basically he is saying that because you might have benefitted from superior health care when you 25, you are no longer entitled to it at age 65, because, well, you benefitted from it when you were 25!

Most 25 year olds are indestructible, at least in their own mind! Unless they are indeed disabled, which would doom them to those “death panels,” 25 year olds don’t need a lot of maintenance! Only a severe injury would normally see a healthy 25 year old needing a great deal of medical care and attention.

On the other hand, at 65, a productive member of society, someone who worked all of their adult life, and more than likely even as a youngster, will indeed need more medical care. I’m a long way from 65, but I’m also well past 25, and I can testify that as we get older, we find the need for more care!

Now in the sane world, the one we live in, someone at age 65, a person who helped make America the greatest nation on earth, someone who contributed a lifetime to working hard, rasing a family, and in the words of the communist, contributed to the “greater good”, doesn’t deserve to be forgotten, left to suffer from ailments that are easily treatable in America, and have been for decades, simply so someone else can have treatment.

Communism is evil in all of it’s forms. It is immoral for the government to steal money from those who earn the money and create society, and give it to those who don’t. If wealth distribution is evil, then what can we say of arbitrary health care re-distribution?

As communism and socialism are simply different sides of the same coin, I find this quote quite appropriate:

Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy. It’s inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.

Sir Winston Churchill

Dr Death believes in the so-called Complete Lives System. He has written:

Because none of the currently used systems satisfy all ethical requirements for just allocation, we propose an alternative:

Youngest-first, prognosis, save the most lives, lottery, and instrumental value..… When implemented, the complete lives system produces a priority curve on which individuals aged between roughly 15 and 40 years get the most substantial chance, whereas the youngest and oldest people get chances that are attenuated … the complete lives system is least vulnerable to corruption. Age can be established quickly and accurately from identity documents. Prognosis allocation encourages physicians to improve patients’ health, unlike the perverse incentives to sicken patients or misrepresent health that the sickest-first allocation creates.

A summary from Lancet:

Allocation of very scarce medical interventions such as organs and vaccines is a persistent ethical challenge. We evaluate eight simple allocation principles that can be classified into four categories: treating people equally, favouring the worst-off, maximising total benefits, and promoting and rewarding social usefulness. No single principle is sufficient to incorporate all morally relevant considerations and therefore individual principles must be combined into multiprinciple allocation systems. We evaluate three systems: the United Network for Organ Sharing points systems, quality-adjusted life-years, and disability-adjusted life-years. We recommend an alternative system—the complete lives system—which prioritises younger people who have not yet lived a complete life, and also incorporates prognosis, save the most lives, lottery, and instrumental value principles.

Another way to break it down:

Treating People Equally

1. Lottery

2. First-come, first served

Prioritization

1. Sickest first

2. Youngest first

Utilitarianism

1. Saving the most lives

2. Saving the most life-years

3. Saving the most socially useful

4. Reciprocity (paying back people who have ‘contributed’, such as organ donors)

If you have been following the news, you’ll know that some provinces in Canada already have monthly lotteries to assign patients to doctors. How’s that for establishing a death panel!

Lest you think Dr Death is the only disturbing person advising Obama, fear not, he has literally dozens of these loons ready, willing, and able to play the lead role in this bad horror flick!

Let’s look at Cass Sunstein, Obama’s “Regulation’s Czar.” Now this guy will be turned loose on almost every facet of American life and allowed to force feed you his wild schemes.

One of Sunstein’s notions is that your organs do not belong to you, and that at your death, the state should be able to harvest your organs, for use elsewhere. Now on the one hand, it’s not like you will be needing them or anything, but there are First Amendment issues here. Issues about freedom of religion. Some religions simply do not condone the desecration of the human body at death.

In the book Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, And Happiness, Sunstein laments that the main reason people don’t donate their organs is that they don’t choose to do so.

Evidently, for democrat/communists, it’s “hands off my body” when they want to murder babies, and most feel it is wrong, but “let me at ‘em” when they want to snatch your body parts!

Funny, the pro-death abortion proponents are constantly screaming about “freedom of choice.” Can someone please explain to me just how a democrat/communist’s brain processes that sort of logic?

One thing about it, between these death panels, assisted suicide lovers, and baby killers, one can really and truthfully state that the democrat/communist party is nothing more than a death cult that also wants to steal your hard earned money to do insane and unproductive things with!

Again, this would be fun to watch if it was just a bad movie, and you were kicked back drinking an adult beverage and laughing at these people. Unfortunately, all of this bunch has the sympathetic ear of the President of the United States!

Oh, and by the way, stealing your organs isn’t even CLOSE to being the most insane thing Cass Sunstein believes!

Not even close!

Like the Nazis before them, the current crop of democrat/communists that surround Obama are “nature freaks.” And I don’t mean like someone who enjoys hanging out in the great outdoors I’m talking freaks!

In 2002 Our man Sunstein said this:

“Any animals that are entitled to bring suit would be represented by (human) counsel, who would owe guardian-like obligations and make decisions, subject to those obligations, on their clients’ behalf.”

That’s right, this guy who Obama wants to put in charge of regulating pretty much everything you do, thinks animals should be able to sue humans! In another time this moron would be locked in a padded cell until he achieved room temperature!

I might remind you that Sunstein is a Harvard “legal scholar.” Reason number 11,347 to never send your kids to an Ivy League school, hire anyone who has even been to one, and for the love of all that is holy, never, ever vote for someone who went to one!

But wait, there’s more!

Now I won’t bore you with Van Jones, the radical cop hating racist, self avowed communist, and 9/11 truther. Thanks to Glenn Beck, this guy has been sent packing, back to being an obscure, hate filled nobody. But he too is an other example of the sort that Obama loves to surround himself with.

No, I want to talk to you about Obama’s science Czar.

John Holdren is one of those really crazy people who sit around all day and fret about overpopulation. But, thankfully, this one has just the plan. This loon actually believes he can make the case that our Constitution would allow the state to force women to have abortions if they had more than the officially sanctioned number of children people like him, and Barack Obama, deem proper!

Holdren has also favored forced sterilization or forced contraception. He wrote this:

Of course, a government might require only implantation of the contraceptive capsule, leaving its removal to the individual’s discretion but requiring reimplantation after childbirth. Since having a child would require positive action (removal of the capsule), many more births would be prevented than in the reverse situation.

This guy has all sorts of schemes in his pointy Ivy League educated head. One of his brilliant ideas was to put sterilization chemicals in the nation’s drink water.

Adding a sterilant to drinking water or staple foods is a suggestion that seems to horrify people more than most proposals for involuntary fertility control. Indeed, this would pose some very difficult political, legal, and social questions, to say nothing of the technical problems. No such sterilant exists today, nor does one appear to be under development.

To be acceptable, such a substance would have to meet some rather stiff requirements: it must be uniformly effective, despite widely varying doses received by individuals, and despite varying degrees of fertility and sensitivity among individuals; it must be free of dangerous or unpleasant side effects; and it must have no effect on members of the oposite sex, children, old people, pets, or livestock.

Again, there is no sign of such an agent on the horizon. And the risk of serious, unforeseen side effects would, in our opinion, militate against the use of any such agent, even though this plan has the advantage of avoiding the need for socioeconomic pressures that might tend to discriminate against particular groups or penalize children.

This sort of thing brings us back to the discussion of eugenics, and the above video. In the early 20th Century, eugenics were all the rage in America. All of the so-called intellectuals were enamored by the notion. One of the really prominent practitioners of this thought was Margaret Sanger. Sanger, who had ties to the Klan, founded Planned Parenthood as a way to rid the world of unwanted and undesirable children. She was naturally keen on aborting black babies, and this is truly one of the darkest legacies of the democrat/communist party. It is estimated that as many as 50 million black babies have been murdered by abortion over the decades.

Sanger, and her contemporaries were of great interest to Adolf Hitler, which of course, brings us full circle, and back to the Nazis. It was the American “progressive” movement that inspired Hitler with is idea for the Holocaust.

Now just in case you think these totally out of the mainstream and completely insane ideas do not reflect those of Barack Obama, allow me to point out that Obama supports infanticide. This is a truly barbaric act that is practiced when another barbaric act, late term abortion, is botched.

Basically, this ritual is practiced when an abortion mill doctor performs a late term abortion, but somehow botches the procedure and the baby survives, or, as normal humans call it, is born.

What is allowed to happen in these cases, is the new born baby is placed on a shelf, or in some dark closet until he or she perishes. It’s as inhumane as it comes. If only he or she was a puppy, Cass Sunstein would allow the baby to sue!

Now Obama is famous in the Illinois Senate for one thing, and one thing only, and that’s holding the record for voting “present” more than anything else. And yet, he managed to come out of his comma and vote against “born alive” legislation that would have outlawed this inhuman practice every time a bill would come up for a vote. You can learn more here.

Here’s the bottom line, Dr Death, Cass Sunstein, John Holdren, Barack Obama, and a whole cast of dozens more of these whacked-out Czars like them, have control of this nation. These Czars are illegal and unconstitutional. We must demand their removal. Every last one of them.

But you need to remember that these people want complete and total control of health care in America. And if you think that people who are in favor of forced sterilization, or forced organ harvesting don’t already have death panels ready to decide whether or not you are “worthy” of health care, then you have another thing coming.

Get off the couch, get in the game. Get involved and come together with like minded folks around you. Go to a tea party. Join the 9/12 Project. But get involved and don’t let up until all of these illegal and unconstitutional Czars have been sent packing. Don’t let up until Obama and the democrat/communists drop Obamacare and it is dead for good!

Then work as hard as you ever have in your life to help vote all of these people out of office in 2010 and 2012!

Then we can get real health care reform.

Here’s a final video to help you ponder all of this a bit from our friends at Joe Dan Media:

Posted in Barracuda, big government, Children with Special Needs, Conservative, Conservative of 2008, Conservative of the Year, D. C., Down Syndrome, ECONOMY, Environment, Faith, Family, GOP, government control, Governor Sarah Palin, healthcare, influential people, Internet Activism, Media, moderate, nationalization, Obama, Obamacare, President, Pro-life, right to life, RNC, Sarah Palin, special needs, special needs children, stimulus, veterans, Washington, Wildlife, Woman | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Once In A Lifetime Dinner With Sarah Palin Leads All-Star Charity Auction For Wounded Warriors

Posted by Gary P Jackson on September 7, 2009

A true once in a lifetime event, the winner of this celebrity auction will spend a memorable evening having dinner with former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin and her husband Todd. Sarah has graciously donated her time to help raise money for the Wounded Warriors Ride 2 Recovery program

Sarah whose son, Track, enlisted in the Army on September 11, 2007, is serving in Iraq. Sarah herself recently returned from a trip to Kosovo visiting her Alaska National Guard troops and Germany visiting wounded warriors.

Ride 2 Recovery is a program that helps wounded troops rehabilitate their injuries and rebuild their athletic ability. From their mission statement:

To improve the health and wellness of wounded warriors by providing a life changing experience that can impact their lives forever.

R2R supports Spinning® Recovery Labs and outdoor cycling programs at Military and VA locations around the U.S. to help injured veterans overcome obstacles they face. Cycling is an important part of the recovery and rehabilitation program for two reasons:

1. Cycling is an activity that almost all patients with mental and physical disabilities can participate.

2. Participation in the Ride 2 Recovery Program helps speed up the recovery and rehabilitation process.

The winner of the charity auction will be able to bring 4 friends along for what will be an incredible evening with the Palins. The winning bidder will be responsible for their airfare to Alaska and lodging. The bidding will open at $25,000.

The auction, which runs from September 8-18, will also feature other great experiences up for bid.

Former White House adviser Karl Rove, the “Architect”, as he is known, is offering, for the winning bidder and 2 friends, lunch at the famous 4-star restaurant, Bobby Van’s Steakhouse in Washington, D.C.

Rove, a Fox News contributor, and weekly op-ed columnist for The Wall Street Journal and Newsweek, will most certainly offer up an interesting and thoughtful lunch. The opening bid for lunch with “Bush’s Brain” is $7,500

Award winning conservative actor Gary Sinise, star of the CBS television series CSI: New York is offering up a set experience and wrap party to a lucky fan. Sinise is a well known supporter of the troops, giving generous amounts of his time to help. He also can be heard doing the voice overs for Army recruiting advertising. .

Gary also has a band, The Lt. Dan Band, named for his unforgettable character from the movie Forrest Gump. Sinese uses the band as a way to raise money for the troops, and also to entertain the troops on his many visits to see them in the field. You can learn more about his band here.

Other items up for auction include:

* Behind the Ropes at a PGA event with David Ferehty

* Lunch at the Capitol with Frank Luntz

* Meet and Greet at the Sean Hannity Show with Sean Hannity and Frank Luntz

* Meet, Greet and Dinner with Bret Baier of Fox Special Report and Steve Hayes

* Play’N’Stay at the World Golf Resort

* Phil Jackson Autographed Basketball

* Rob Lowe Autographed Hollywood Stars Dodger Jersey

To learn more about the Ride 2 Recovery program go here.

To learn more about the once of a lifetime all-star auction go here.

Even if you are unable to bid on these great events, please check out the Ride 2 Recovery website and make a donation on the behalf of a wounded warrior.

Posted in 2012, Alaska, Barracuda, fundraising, Governor Palin, Governor Sarah Palin, influential people, Sarah Palin, Todd Palin, USA., veterans, Woman | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »