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

    November 2019
    S M T W T F S
    « Jan    
     12
    3456789
    10111213141516
    17181920212223
    24252627282930
  • Categories

  • Archives

  • __________________________________________
  • Top Posts & Pages

  • __________________________________________
  • Recent Posts

  • Recent Comments

  • __________________________________________

Archive for the ‘Ronald Reagan’ Category

Paul Sracic: Don’t count out Sarah Palin

Posted by joshpainter on August 24, 2011

– by Josh Painter
*
Political science professor Paul Sracic, in a commentary published by CNN.com, admits that until just a few days ago, he did not consider Sarah Palin to be a “serious” candidate. But now he says that if she gets into the presidential race, she’ll be “a formidable candidate” – not just in the GOP primary, but in the general election should she win her party’s presidential nomination. What changed his mind? Something in SarahPAC’s “Iowa Passion” video:

In the video, the initial scenes of bright sunlight shining over Iowa cornfields lead into uplifting images of young people and young couples with children smiling and enjoying the day at the Iowa State Fair. In a phrase, it is “Morning in America.” Those of us of a certain age remember the Reagan campaign’s seminal commercial of that name, an advertisement that helped to secure his crushing landslide re-election in 1984.

Of course, since Reagan was already completing his first term in office, his commercial referred to what he claimed to have already done. Palin, on the other hand, is speaking to the future. In quasi-religious terms, she criticizes the lack of “faith” that Washington has in the American people, while confidently championing the coming “great awakening.” What this shows more than anything else is that Palin understands what Reagan always knew: Americans want to be optimists. More important, she is media savvy enough to know how to deliver that message in a captivating fashion.

My point is not that Palin is Reagan. They differ in many obvious and substantial ways.

[…]

Palin, however, has risen to prominence in a different age. Twenty-four-hour news stations provide much more exposure in a shorter period. Compared to Bachmann and Perry, at least, Palin is a veteran on the political scene. More significant, however, is the fact that, like Reagan, Palin has the correct media skills for the age.

[…]

What is most Reaganesque about Sarah Palin, however, is that on camera, her optimism about America appears natural. This is a quality that should not be underestimated, since it allows her the leeway to be negative without turning off voters by appearing mean-spirited. This offers at least the possibility that, despite her current low standing in the polls, she will be able to leap-frog over the more negative sounding Bachmann and Perry, and compete head-to-head with Romney.

Even more than they did in 2008, Americans want hope. What Palin’s handlers have in the former governor is a candidate they can cast in a pitch-perfect media campaign that blends a criticism of the Obama administration with a positive message about the future.

Prof. Stracic takes pains to point out that he is predicting neither a Palin presidency nor her nomination by the 2012 RNC convention. What he does make clear, however, is that Gov. Palin should not be counted out “before she has had a chance to campaign.” The political scientist concludes his opinion piece with a reminder that an ABC news poll in January 1980 showed Ronald Reagan far behind sitting President Jimmy Carter, down 30 points. And this was eight full months before Reagan had even won his party’s nomination.

Cross-posted from Texans for Sarah Palin

– JP

Posted in 2012, Ronald Reagan, Sarah Palin | 1 Comment »

Handel’s Finish Is More Evidence that Palin Is Republican Party’s Most Potent 2012 Prospect

Posted by Dr. Fay on July 27, 2010

After a somewhat grudging introduction, (perhaps his perception of Palin was influenced by JournoList hype?), John Nichols at The Nation concludes that Sarah Palin ” is becoming the definitional player in the GOP—much as another conservative outrider, and former governor, named Reagan was in the late 1970s.”   

Good thinking, Mr. Nichols.  Too bad you listened to the JournoList hype.  But welcome to the right side of the argument!

Slowly but surely, and admittedly without much competition, Sarah Palin is emerging as the most serious and effective player in the Republican Party.

[…]

But Palin’s endorsements in Republican primaries—her most significant political initiative since resigning her post in Alaska last year—have been more adventurous and more successful than her critics (and some of her allies) choose to imagine.

Palin’s picks are eclectic, some Tea Partisans and neo-libertarians (think Kentucky Senate candidate Rand Paul), some relatively mainstream conservatives (think California Senate candidate Carly Fiorina) running against Tea Party allies. Some have been predictable frontrunners, but others are back-of-the-pack outsiders. What has been most distinctive about her endorsements is a penchant for advancing the prospects of conservative women whose candidacies are changing the “good-old-boy” face of the party, particularly in the South.

Much has been made of the Alaskan’s early and steady backing of South Carolina gubernatorial candidate Nikki Haley, who faced opposition from significant elements within the party establishment and (as the state’s June primary approached) a steady stream of personal abuse from old-school Republicans. Haley was always a solid contender. But even after she took her hits she coasted to easy primary and runoff wins with Palin at her side.

On Tuesday, in an even bigger test, she had an even bigger impact.

Palin’s late-in-the-game endorsement of former Georgia Secretary of State Karen Handel shook up that state’s crowded GOP primary for governor. Here’s evidence of Palin Power: in early July polling, Handel was trailing far behind the race’s frontrunner, state Insurance commissioner John Oxendine, and was struggling for second-place position with another runner, former Congressman Nathan Deal.

When the votes were counted Tuesday night, however, Handel was a big winner—finishing in first when a substantial lead over Deal, who she is expected to face in an August 10 runoff. The frontrunner of two weeks ago, Oxendine, was training far behind.

What made the difference for Handel?

She shot up in the polls after Palin released a pro-Handel statement that read: “Though considered an underdog candidate (more power to her!), this pro-life, pro-Constitutionalist with a can-do attitude and a record of fighting for ethics in government is ready to serve in the Governor’s Office.”

 In fact, Handel was more moderate than some of the other candidates, but the approval of the Alaskan was enough to sway Georgia Republicans like Carolyn Draper, a 67-year-old retiree who told the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. “It influences me. I am a very conservative person and I have very conservative values, and I think Sarah Palin does, too.”

Draper is not alone.

“The Palin endorsement definitely helped,” Brad Coker, managing director of Mason-Dixon Polling & Research, which conducted the surveys on the race for Georgia newspapers, told the Journal-Constitution.

Handel’s first-place finish positions her as the frontrunner in the Republican runoff fight (which is required when no candidate secures more than 50 percent in the first round), as Haley did in South Carolina. And if she wins it will be as a Palin protégé—with a website that urges voters to “Join Sarah and Support Karen” and television ads that reprise Palin’s lipstick lingo from the 2008 Republican National Convention.

Are we seeing a pattern here? Tuesday’s voting in Georgia was telling. There’s not much question that Handel has Palin to thank for at least some of her success; the last Mason-Dixon poll found that 30 percent of Republicans said they were more likely to back Handel because of the Palin endorsement. Only 2 percent suggested they were less likely to back Palin’s pick.

This is a pattern that extends beyond Georgia, and it has serious political observers, like Merle Black, the political science professor at Emory University and historian of Southern politics, suggesting that Palin’s stamp of approval really is becoming a serious factor in GOP primaries.

“Palin has a very intense, loyal following among Republican primary voters,” argues Black.

What is perhaps most significant about Palin is that she is not taking the easy route when it comes to endorsements. She is wading into contests where the supposedly “smart” move would be to stay clear. That’s a mark either of a fool or a bold political player.

To be sure, there have been missteps. One of Palin’s picks, Idaho Congressional contender Vaughn Ward, melted down spectacularly after he got caught plagiarizing speeches by Barack Obama (kind of a deal-breaker with a lot of Republicans) and imagining that Puerto Rico was a foreign country. And her endorsed Congressional candidates in special elections against Democrats have been notably unsuccessful: New York Conservative Doug Hoffman in a traditionally Republican seat last fall and Republican Tim Burns lost a Pennsylvania race where GOP aides thought they would be competitive.

Palin has also stirred some resentment by backing establishment candidates such as former Iowa Governor Terry Branstad, whose comeback bid received a boost from the Alaskan prior to a June primary in which he beat more rigidly conservative contenders. The same thing happened in California, where her endorsement of millionaire Republican US Senate candidate Fiorina upset Tea Party activists who were backing a more consistent conservative, state Senator Chuck DeVore.

But when the votes were counted, Palin’s candidate had won the biggest primary in the biggest state. And, as Karl Rove says, it was Palin who “helped give conservative credentials to Fiorina”

What this adds up to is significant. If Branstad wins in Iowa, Palin will have a friendly governor in the first caucus state of the 2012 Republican presidential race. And if Fiorina wins, she will have an important ally in the state that will send the largest delegation to the party’s convention.

If she brings a solid base out of the South—with help from the likes of Haley in South Carolina and Handel in Georgia—it will be a lot harder to write Palin off.

After Palin’s political crack-up in 2008, and as someone who has reported on her ethically challenged tenure as Alaska’s governor, I was (like many Republicans) skeptical about her ability to master the intricacies of Republican primary politics on the national level—an essential first step in a presidential bid. But Handel’s finish on Tuesday, in combination with the other results she has contributed to, argue for a rethink.

The safer bet until recently was that Palin would opt out of the 2012 race, in order to keep making money and, perhaps, to position herself for a future run. But, like Ronald Reagan heading into the 1976 and 1980 Republican presidential primaries, she is beginning to establish a network of connections—and evidence of political savvy and influence—that make it harder and harder to dismiss her as a real prospect.

Juxtaposed against the gang-that-couldn’t-shoot-straight nature of the rest of the Republican 2012 pack, Palin is emerging as her party’s most potent prospect. A favorable result from Georgia will merely add to the argument that it is time to accept that Palin is becoming the definitional player in the GOP—much as another conservative outrider, and former governor, named Reagan was in the late 1970s.

The Republican primary runoff for the Georgia governor’s race will take place on August 10. Help Karen Handel finish with a double digit win!  Go here to donate or to volunteer your time for phone bank and other campaign activities. You do not have to be from Georgia to volunteer – just to vote.

Posted in 2012, Carly Fiorina, Georgia governor's race, Governor Sarah Palin, Karen Handel, Nikki Haley, presidential prospect, Republican, Ronald Reagan | Leave a Comment »

Schmidt vs Palin…No Comparison

Posted by Karen Allen on January 11, 2010

Posted in Governor Sarah Palin, Ronald Reagan, Sarah Palin, SARAH PALIN PHOTOS | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Battleground Poll: Conservatives Make Up 63 Percent Of America: What It All Means

Posted by Gary P Jackson on December 21, 2009

Here is the latest polling from Battleground. This comes right on the heels of Gallop polling that also shows the majority of Americans consider themselves conservative. This is no fluke either. And as much as we’d love to say that Obama is driving people away from his and his party’s rapidly dying ideology, the truth is Battleground polling, since 2002, has consistently found similar results. Battleground, a bipartisan polling group, has a record of being very accurate.

Bruce Walker over at the American Thinker has some great analysis:

The Battleground Poll and the Battle for America

There’s good news for conservatives in the latest Battleground Poll. The political implications are profound…if the already-energized conservative base takes even more initiative.

In August 2008, I wrote an article on “The Biggest Missing Story in Politics.” The article explains that conservatives are an overwhelming majority of America. One year later, I wrote an update on that theme, this time based on the Gallup Poll which showed that conservatives outnumber liberals in virtually every state in the union. I have been writing about the remarkable Battleground Poll results in many articles for many years.

The Battleground Poll reveals the internals of its poll. It also asks respondents the same demographic questions in each poll: What is your education level? What is your age? What is your religious affiliation? What is your marital status? Question D3 asks respondents to describe their ideology. The choices are “very conservative,” “somewhat conservative,” “moderate,” “somewhat liberal,” “very liberal,” and “unsure/refused.” Those asked by the Battleground Poll — if they dislike the liberal label — can call themselves moderates, they can refuse to answer, and they can express an uncertainty about their ideology. Only those certain of their ideology and willing to label themselves are considered conservative in the poll.

The Battleground Poll is not a Republican polling organization. It is, rather, one of the few bipartisan polling organizations. Republican and Democrat pollsters agree on the language of the questions for respondents, so that the questions asked are not only fairly worded, but unusually fairly worded. Republican and Democrat pollsters agree on the population sample, so that polls results are not skewed because too many Democrats, too many Republicans, or too many independents are included. The Battleground Poll also has proven very accurate over many elections.

The responses to Question D3 have been remarkably consistent. Respondents have changed dramatically about what they thought of President Bush or of the state of the economy or the most important issues facing our nation. Respondent may swing quite a bit about which party they support or trust the most. But in one single area of this long list of polling data, the American people have not wavered at all from Battleground Poll to Battleground Poll: About sixty percent of the American people, in poll after poll, year after year, describe themselves as “conservative.”

On December 16, 2009, Battleground released its latest poll. In this one, 63% of the American people described themselves as “very conservative” or “somewhat conservative.” The rest of America — not just liberals, but moderates and people who were unsure about their ideology or chose not to respond to that question, totaled only 37% of America. A measly one percent of Americans called themselves moderates; 25% of Americans called themselves “somewhat liberal“; and 8% of Americans called themselves “very liberal.”

This is no aberration. Consider in Battleground Poll results since June 2002 the percentage of Americans who have described themselves as conservative: June 2002 (59%), September 2003 (59%), April 2004 (60%), June 2004 (59%), September 2004 (60%), October 2005 (61%), March 2006 (59%), December 2007 (58%), July 2007 (63%), May 2008 (62%), August 2008 (60%), September 2008 (59%), and October 2008 (56%).

In the November 2008 Battleground Poll, for the first and only time, the straight question of “conservative” or “liberal” was not posed to respondents. Instead, the poll asked respondents two separate questions: fiscal ideology was asked in Question D6 and social ideology was asked in Question D7. The Battleground Poll clearly intended to refine Question D3. What were the results? Fiscal conservatives in Question D6 were 69% of respondents. Social conservatives were 53% of respondents and social liberals were 39%. While that sounds like social conservatism is a weak link, that is misleading: a whopping 34% of all Americans described themselves as “very conservative” on social issues, by far the largest very intense group in any Battleground Poll.

What does this mean for American politics today? It ought to boldly empower conservatives. The “right,” which every Democrat leader reflexively attacks whenever political opposition to his plans grows strong, boasts the overwhelming majority of Americans. This explains why the left’s ballot initiatives in California last year failed, in some cases, in every single county of the state and why the gay marriage ballot measure failed in liberal Maine. This also explains why Obama runs away from “labels” (all leftists do, and have for many years).

What it means in politics is that any true conservative against a true leftist should carry every state and win by a landslide. But it means more than that. Conservatives in the areas of culture, media, entertainment, and education are treated like unwanted stepchildren, or worse (despite the fact that conservatives on average are better-educated than liberals).

The worst victims of invidious bigotry in America today are conservatives. Only a tiny percentage of professors are conservative. The same is true for government-supported media like NPR, Corporation for Public Broadcasting, and the National Endowment for the Arts. Libraries are dominated by the minority left. How different would America be if fifty or sixty percent of teachers, librarians, professors, public media producers, and staff in government-supported organizations were conservative?

That ought to be a goal for conservatives. Winning elections is fine, but how much more vital is it for us to recover at least an equal voice in colleges, media, schools, libraries, and entertainment? What is wrong with us, the overwhelming majority of Americans, demanding not to be consigned to a ghetto or treated by Jim Crow standards? We begin by pointing out the obvious: conservatives are the majority of Americans, but we are almost invisible in our public and private institutions of education, information, entertainment, and study.

Then demand that those who want our tax dollars, our commercial business, our donations — anything, really, from us — treat us fairly, portray us honestly, and invite us into the halls of influence. It is a modest demand, but it is very important. It is a cultural “game-changer,” and that, more than anything, is what we need.

Walker nails it here. This is more than just about who wins elections. This polling shows that conservatism is greatly under represented in this country. The implications, for business, media, entertainment, and marketers are incredible.

Let’s take the media first. It’s no secret that liberals make up the bulk of those who choose “journalism” as their career. Even at the so-called “Republican” Fox News, liberals far out number conservatives on the payroll. Everywhere else, conservatives are almost non-existent.

Oh sure, every network and big newspaper has their “token conservative.” They all have their David Brooks or David Frums. But none are actually conservative. Most are “progressives” masquerading as conservatives. Is it any wonder that the newspaper industry is collapsing and the two cable news networks that aren’t Fox are going virtually unwatched?

A smart operator would shake things up and get back to being a news agency rather than a shill for the democrat/communist party. Their profits would soar, and America would be better for it.

The same goes for Hollywood. You ever notice that when Tinseltown makes a movie or television show that is family friendly that folks flock to them in droves? Shows like American Idol and Dancing With The Stars are huge hits because they appeal to a conservative audience. Now that’s not to say every show should be a version of these two, but it shows that Americans enjoy more wholesome fare than what they are generally served up.

Frankly, I enjoy films and shows that are considered “edgy.” There is absolutely a place for these sort of things. Where Hollywood loses me is when they turn otherwise entertaining and delightful movies and TV shows into nothing more than vehicles for liberal propaganda.

One has to look no further than the NBC/Universal to see this on display. Although under new management, NBC/Universal is the poster child for unrelenting propaganda. Owned by General Electric, whose CEO is an adviser to Barack Obama, NBC/Universal has pushed the global warming hoax to the max for years, going so far as having “green weeks” where all of their shows, and entertainment work the global warming shtick into the story line.

NBC uses their long running series Law and Order to bash conservatives, Christians, gun owners, pro-life advocates, and so on. Portraying them as evil and unstable.

It’s easy to see the motivation behind Law and Order. They despise conservatives and use tactics right out of Saul Alinsky’s Rules in order to demean and marginalize the object of their scorn. While the far left eat this up, conservatives, by nature, are too timid to act. This needs to change, and change big time.

Of course, for GE, it’s all about the money. NBC pushes “green” as much as possible because GE makes most of the implements of this movement. By hammering viewers constantly with propaganda, they hope to convince people to fall for the global warming scam. Hundreds of billions of dollars are riding on this deal for GE alone. Big Global Warming, if not stopped, will be a trillion dollar industry built on the back of the American people.

Again, smart operators in the entertainment industry would take a pass on all of the propagandizing and get back to just entertaining. The ones who do that will have great success and loyal viewers.

Now this is not to say that TV shows shouldn’t have messages built in. The greatest movie ever made, Casablanca, is one of the most patriotic films ever made. Whether it was intentional or by accident, this movie stirs great emotions, even to this day.

Years ago, television was leading the way with socially relevant programming. TV tackled tough subjects like racism and sexism. Important issues of the day and issues Americans agreed needed addressing. That was responsible and appropriate. What we see now is just pushing an agenda that most of the country doesn’t care for.

Liberals always have to force their agenda on the people, because few would willingly submit.

With all of that said, this has the greatest implications for the Republican Party. The Party is in shambles. For decades the so-called “moderates” have attempted to marginalize conservatives, and conservatism. It’s why they are completely out of power in Washington.

The country club, blue blood, Rockefeller Republicans, the RINOs and DIABLOs (Democrats In All But Name Only) are, and always have been, “progressives.” This is worse than liberal, and frankly all of us are guilty of labeling “progressives” as liberals. The “progressive” movement goes all of the way back to Teddy Roosevelt, a Big Government Statist. “Progressives” totally control the democrat/communist party.

Conservatives, when in power within the Republican Party, have always come out as winners. One has to look no further than the Great Ronald Reagan, who won two unprecedented landslide elections to the presidency, to see that conservatism is attractive to the American people.

We are seeing the same sort of buzz around Sarah Palin, an unapologetic conservative icon. Not since Reagan has a single politician truly aroused the American people.

Oh sure, Barack Obama achieved pop star status, but it was all smoke and mirrors. There was absolutely no substance. In fact, as it is now painfully clear, Obama had to lie about his actual agenda in order to win the election. Obama had to work over time to keep his radical associations from derailing his run for office. Of course, he had plenty of accomplices in the willing media to carry his water and hide the real Barack Obama. Now that he is in, the American people are mortified by the incredible mistake that was made. The American people are horrified now that any pretense that Obama isn’t an out and out communist is gone.

Bounce this off of Sarah Palin’s incredible popularity. Unlike Obama, she actually has decades of experience as an executive level leader. She has an actual public record, going back 20 years, that can be examined by all. She is quick to state her position on any given subject, and all one has to do is look back at her actual record as a public servant to see that she’s pretty consistent in her beliefs and agenda. In other words, if she is saying it now, she has a record of doing before. She doesn’t have to hide behind trickery and the slight of hand. She is what she is.

Sarah doesn’t have to hide from the American people who she is. She is genuine. In this way, Sarah Palin is just like Ronald Reagan: Outspoken and unabashedly conservative. People see this, and respond favorably.

The implications for the Grand Old Party are many, and great, but the biggest is the myth that the GOP needs to “moderate it’s message” to win elections. The current GOP wisdom, or what passes for it, is that we need to pander to the oh so precious “moderate” vote to win. (A whopping 1 percent of the population, according to this poll!) That we need to be a “big tent party” to regain power. The end result is a party that is nothing more than democrat/communist light.

Yes, there are differences in the parties, but on many issues top candidates from our party sure sound a lot like the democrat/communists, and certainly vote with them in their misguided effort to be bipartisan. Our last presidential candidate made one of his center piece talking points the fact that he was known for “reaching across the aisle.” You see where that got us! And I’m not just talking about the election!

Conservatism is the big tent. Always has been. In 1984 Reagan won crushing victories in 49 states by governing as a true conservative in his first term. A feat that hasn’t been, and may never be, duplicated. Running as an unbridled conservative, Reagan “only” won 44 states in 1980.

If you look around at the current political landscape, all of the stars are unabashedly conservative. Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachmann, Rick Perry, Jim DeMint, James Inhofe, Michael Williams, and Lt Col. Allen West are all solid conservatives and not afraid to say so.

Speaking of Michael Williams:

Williams is the Railroad Commissioner of Texas, a very powerful job, that among other things, regulates energy in Texas. Hmmm…..Sarah Palin had a powerful job in Alaska doing pretty much the same thing!

Williams is wildly popular in Texas, and a shoe-in to take Kay Baily Hutchison’s seat, giving Texas an actual conservative in the Senate for the first time, in some time. Make sure you check out his You Tube channel that is filled with inspiring speeches.

Then you have Lt Colonel Allen West, from Florida, who is running for Congress:

This is the message of conservatism. This is the message of liberty and freedom. This is the message of America. One of the most powerful speeches you’ll see.

The video below is what is considered the best speech given by any leader since Ronald Reagan’s iconic 1964 address to the Republican National Convention. In this speech Sarah Palin solidified her position as the new leader of the conservative movement:

Of course, the original is still the blueprint for greatness in America. I’ve always considered this “must see TV” and go so far as to say that schools need to teach an entire subject based on this speech alone, and no one should graduate high school without a working knowledge of it’s concept.

It’s amazing how much of what Reagan had to say still applies today. It’s chilling what decades of liberal control of our culture has done to us, as a nation. The destructive nature of liberalism is seen all over the fruited plain. It touches our lives daily. It makes our lives just a little less whole, just a little less free.

Few, if any, in Washington get it. Our nation has been taken over by the most radical elements on earth. Vicious elements that have no problem using brute force, as well as trickery and deceit, to see their agenda prevail.

Liberty and freedom are the enemy of the liberal movement. The current communists in Washington are the enemies of liberty and freedom. They only bring tyranny and oppression to the table. The opportunity is ripe for true conservative leaders to step forward and assume the mantle of freedom and liberty, of the American way.

America sorely needs conservatives to answer the call at every level We need conservatives to step up to the plate in local and national races. We need conservatives to seek careers in education, journalism, and the arts. Most importantly we need conservatives to stand up and speak out. You are by far the majority in this nation, it’s about time you realize this, and no longer remain passive, no longer remain silent.

America is a conservative nation and it’s time that our conservative nature is both respected, and celebrated. It’s time for our government to respect the will of the people. It’s our duty to replace those that won’t, with those that will.

Screw political correctness. Stand up, speak up, and be bold!

_____Sarah Palin

Posted in Barracuda, big government, bureaucratic, Congress, Conservative, conservative values, ECONOMY, Energy, Energy Independence, freedom in America, global warming, GOP, government control, Governor Palin, Governor Sarah Palin, lamestream media, Michelle Bachmann, Ronald Reagan, Sarah Palin, Sarah Palin Web Brigade | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Turn on the Ignition with Sarah Palin video

Posted by Karen Allen on December 6, 2009

Posted in book, book tour, Going Rogue, Governor Palin, Governor Sarah Palin, Ronald Reagan, Sarah Palin, SARAH PALIN VIDEOS | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Sarah Palin: Faith, Family, Freedom: Remembering What Really Matters: A Big Night In Missouri

Posted by Gary P Jackson on December 3, 2009

Last night Sarah spoke to a packed house at the College of the Ozarks in Missouri. Although these things are off limits to reporters, and who can blame ‘em, the tweets were flying. I’ll have some of the better ones, with links to all, below.

But first, here’s what Sarah has to say:

Faith, Family, Freedom: Remembering What Really Matters

My parents and I just had a wonderful time at “Hard Work U” – the school motto of College of the Ozarks. It earned that proud nickname because students there work their way through college and graduate with little or no debt. (In other words, a place after my own heart, and the hearts of others who worked their way through college and, like me, maybe took five years to finish because of work schedules!)

At tonight’s patriotic event at the college we heard some amazing personal stories of heroism and sacrifice by our military veterans in attendance, including members of our Greatest Generation, who we honored tonight. It was such an inspiration to hear their stories and affirm the principles that make this country great – faith, hard work, perseverance, patriotism, and public service.

All Americans need to hear from these true, proud patriots. May we never forget their fight for freedom. Their battles make the petty shots and irrelevant “challenges” some of us face today pale in comparison. I thank them for allowing us a healthy perspective and a reminder of what really matters.

– Sarah Palin

PS: Please enjoy the photos below from Arizona, New Mexico, and Missouri!

We’ve been given permission to reprint the copyrighted photos you see, but if you want to see more, please go to Sarah’s Facebook page, here.

*Gov. Sarah Palin signs a sticker during a “Going Rogue” book signing event at Cosco on Tuesday, December 1, 2009, in Tempe, AZ. Photo by Shealah Craighead. Copyright SarahPAC.

*Gov. Sarah Palin shakes hands with a supporter as he passes through the line at a “Going Rogue” book signing event at Borders bookstore on Wednesday, December 2, 2009, in Springfield, MO. Photo by Shealah Craighead. Copyright SarahPAC.

Here’s a video of Sarah arriving at Borders in Springfield:

The website: Governor Palin 4 President has a nice reporting of things. It seems 5,000 packed the house to see Sarah:

Point Lookout, Mo — Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin said tonight she doesn’t need an official “title to affect positive change” in the country. Palin told an estimated crowd of 5,000 packed in Keeter Gymnasium at College of the Ozarks that despite her resignation, she is moving on “in the battle with new strategy.”

Palin was the keynote speaker tonight during a convocation that honored World War II veterans and others connected to the private college with “Great American” awards. Palin was the inaugural recipient of the award for her contributions to promoting patriotism, said College of the Ozarks President Jerry Davis.

Silver Dollar City co-owner Sharon “Sherry” Herschend, an alumna of the school, was among seven people who received a Great American Award from the college. The military veterans participated in a program where they visited battlefields with students to teach the young people about sacrifices their elders made, Davis said.

As part of Palin’s speaking contract, College of the Ozarks sought to ban reporters from covering the speech. But the News-Leader and other local media outlets obtained free tickets and sent reporters to cover the speech from the bleachers. Palin’s speech came after spending three hours in Springfield autographing copies of her new book “Going Rogue” at Borders Bookstore on South Glenstone Avenue.

Palin talked about how she got started in politics, working her way up from the Wasilla, Alaska, City Council to mayor and then eventually to chair of the Alaska Gas and Oil Conservation Commission and governor of the state.

As a city councilwoman, Palin said she didn’t conform to the town elders’ standards for the status quo of governance. “I kind of went rogue, even back then,” Palin said jokingly, making a reference to her book title and history of going off-script while running for vice president last year.

Palin spoke to a friendly crowd that routinely applauded what she had to say about the current state of affairs in Washington, D.C., and her call for the country to return to its “pioneering values” of work hard, independence and taking care of your neighbors.

“History and common sense tells us that when government tries to take care of us, it ends up robbing us of our ability to help ourselves,” Palin said. “If we empower people to be free, providing a hand up but not a hand out … then we will become a more prosperous and generous nation.”

Here are a few choice tweets from the night. BTW, when you see @ SarahPalinUSA folks are of course referencing Sarah herself. Twitter has it’s own protocol, it seems.

From Chad Livengood of the News-Leader:

“Borders manager says Palin signed up to 1,200 books for 700-900 people in 3 hours. That’s a signature every 9 seconds. http://tiny.cc/MZlOj

“The Borders manager said yesterday he didn’t think they could handle anymore than 500 people, so they consider this good.”

“The first mention of @SarahPalinUSA gathers a standing applause at the convocation, which is underway.”

“College of the Ozarks is awarding @SarahPalinUSA its inaugural “Great American Award’ for her patriotism and spreading it.”

“C of O’s Jerry Davis: “If all you know about Sarah Palin is what the so-called mainstream media has to say, you’ve got a lot to learn.”

“Jerry Davis just introduced @SarahPalinUSA: “She has her hand on the heart beat of America,” he said.”

“@SarahPalinUSA on Jerry Davis: “I just love him. He’s such a hoot.” She says he’s like her in that he “goes off script” and goes “rogue.”

“Palin is talking about work ethic & pushing one’s self to better their lives. “I don’t believe in coincidences,” she said.”

“@SarahPalinUSA says she returned home from campaign trail to new political rivals, bringing Alaska gov’t to a “grinding halt.”

“@SarahPalinUSA is getting to why she quit: “We spent about 80% of our time fending off frivilous lawsuits.”

“@SarahPalinUSA says she resigned “with no scandals running me out of office, despite what the media desperately wanted to find.”

“Possible @SarahPalinUSA Quote of the Night: “You don’t need a title to affect positive change.”

You can read more of Chad’s take on the night here.

Fox2now, the local Fox affiliate, has some great video. It’s interesting to see young and old. One 20 something girl who drove in from St Louis is interviewed, as well as a guy of about the same age, who drove in from Arkansas, and says that not only does he feel that Sarah will be the leader of the Conservative movement by 2012, he also has hopes she will be the next Ronald Reagan!

Personally, when I hear younger folks mention the Great Renaldus Magnus with such reverence, it really makes me feel good about the direction our younger generation will take us. You can see the video here.

Citizen Palin 4 President, another website devoted to a Sarah Palin presidency, has more really great video, including a truly glowing report from Fox2now. The word rock star is used quite often! Check out the website and see the videos here.

Here are some tweets from Ron Davis:

“SP: ‘As ur spine is stiffened, the spines of others will be stiffened.'”

“Calls self mix of federalist, Jeffersonian.”

“SP: much media coverage ‘waste of ink.'” (Editor’s note: I agree!)

“Says ethics chgs were ‘game being played.'”

“On resigning: God has ‘so blessed that decision.'”

“Says US at crossrds in ‘economic, military n values oriented battles.'”

“Crisis abt nation’s identity, she says.”

Dave Catanese offers his take:

“In giving award to @SarahPalinUSA, C of O prez citing her dedication to military veterans as Governor.”

“@SarahPalinUSA now helping honor 7 World War II/Vietnam vets who participate in school’s Patriotic Travel Program.”

“Maybe College of the Ozarks president Jerry Davis should run for office. The guy’s a heck of a storyteller. Got more 1-liners than ”

“Jerry Davis’ intro: “If all you know about Sarah Palin is what the mainstream media says about her, you’ve got a lot to learn.””

“Davis cites Palin’s motto: “No more politics as usual.” “I’d like to see that in Washington myself,” Davis says to cheers.”

“Palin speaking now… “Davis is such a hoot.” Mentions FOX News appearance. Cheers. “I knew he was gonna go rogue,” Palin adds.”

“Palin says College of the Ozarks debt-free education should be model for the nation.”

“Palin says never thought taking 5 yrs to get a 4-yr degree would be an issue until the “lame-stream” media took issue with it.”

“Palin says she’s “an ordinary American given extraordinary opportunities” because she’s put her life in God’s hands.”

“Palin:”Despite what the media wants to..spin about my record…I will keep calling it as I see it.”

“@SarahPalinUSA cites journalism degree: “So much has changed in the world of journalism since then…Holy Moly!”

“@SarahPalinUSA touting work as city councilwoman in Wasilla, “bucking consensus.” “Only dead fish go with the flow,” she says”

“Palin says the reason she wants to keep gov’t power on the local level, because she’s lived it. Encourages involvement in local politics.”

“@SarahPalinUSA calls veep nod “honor of a lifetime” she doesn’t regret but outlining sacrifices she had to make”

“Palin now on 4th mention of media, says “media isn’t fond of common sense conservative values.” But adds she’s not whining”

“Palin also says during the campaign, “the media did spin” her lifestory into “something unrecognizable.” Can’t imagine why media is barred.”

“Palin mounting a complete defense against attacks, lawsuits, gossip and media coverage of her during ’08 campaign.”

“Palin says she prayed about how to stop “the hurt and paralysis” in her state. “Calling the audible has worked for my state,” she says.”

“@SarahPalinUSA now turning to issues, says “misplaced government interference” caused economic crisis, “not our free-market principles.”

“@SarahPalinUSA: “Things crashed…darnit… in the midst of our campaign.” “John McCain and I placed 2nd out of 2.”

“@SarahPalinUSA says it’s beyond ridiculous to complain about last administration’s spending when Obama has spent 4 times more.”

“@SarahPalinUSA hits POTUS for “apologizing” to foreign countries. No mention of Obama’s Afghanistan strategy.”

“Palin’s concludes her 50-minute speech to a standing O. I’m off to our satellite truck. See you live on Ky3 News @ 10!”

You can see all of Dave’s tweets here. He gives a great accounting of the event, but is clearly miffed that the media wasn’t allowed in, though, there he was! Again this is standard for private speeches. Poor fellow was stuck in the nosebleed section of gym, as well. But a nice summation on his part anyhow.

Catanese’s blog has some neat video of Sarah’s dad, Chuck rippin’ on the “liberal media back east” and of Sally, Sarah’s mom, that you can see here.

“The liberal media back east, they raise hell with her. She’s tough. It hurts us when they hit the kids, but when you’re a politician, that comes with the territory”

___Chuck Heath

As always, wherever Sarah goes, she is a hit. Sarah brings something that no one else out there can. Sarah has a quality about her that can’t be bought. It can’t be learned and it can’t be taught. It just is.

Many people compare Sarah to the Great Ronald Reagan, and of course, that’s a valid comparison, and one that makes a lot of sense. After all, Sarah has studied Reagan since she was a kid, and quotes him in almost every speech or interview.

Both Reagan and Sarah come from small towns, went to small schools, including the “wrong colleges” and have a working class background. Like Sarah, Reagan was even a sportscaster!

But it goes further than the superficial stuff. Sarah, like Reagan, has an unbelievably strong work ethic. She has the ethic of those who spend a lifetime working with their hands. Sarah understands why our founders designed our form of government, and believes in that direction.

Sarah understands that America is it’s people, not it’s government. That left alone, the American people have made this the greatest nation on earth.

Ronald Reagan railed against the government his entire career. Sarah is cut from that same cloth. Both know that government isn’t the answer, government is the problem.

One more important thing, like Reagan, Sarah sees America as “that shining city on a hill,” this wonderful place were men are free and everyone has a chance to succeed. A nation that is the envy of the world and has inspired other nations and other peoples to be free.

Sarah brings a good old fashioned common sense with her that is rare among politicians these days. She also brings a western independence and an Alaskan pioneering spirit, a can do kind of attitude, no doubt shaped by life in the rugged wilderness of Alaska.

It’s no wonder that the College of the Ozarks saw fit to honor Sarah with it’s inaugural “Great American Award” for promoting patriotism.

Posted in 2012, AKGovSarahPalin, autobiography, Barracuda, best seller, best seller list, book, book tour, BOOKS ABOUT SARAH PALIN, Facebook, Facebook note, Going Rogue, Governor Palin, Governor Sarah Palin, grassroots, Ronald Reagan, Sally Heath, Sarah Palin, Sarah Palin Web Brigade, speaking engagements | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Hating Sarah Palin: Why The Radicals In Both Parties Hate Her And America Loves Her

Posted by Gary P Jackson on November 30, 2009

In this latest piece from The American Thinker, C. Edmund Wright really hits the nail on the head why the radicals hate Sarah Palin. Why the mere thought of her existence drives them out where the buses don’t run. It also explains why the American people love this magnificent woman.

Hating Sarah

The Alaska Governor is far more than someone who appeals to the (conservative) base, she is someone who can make the base appeal to America.

This compact yet comprehensive diagnosis was made in the early hours of the Palin Derangement Syndrome (PDS) outbreak, when Sarah Palin was first being introduced to the nation. It still rings true as the Jurassic media continues a childish obsession with someone who does not control a single government lever.

Having said that, PDS has now matured past epidemic to full-blown pandemic status with a derangement component that is now insanely intense. Remember, Palin does not have one whit of legal authority over these people or anyone else. Yet as her elected status has ended, her effect on the elites has only increased. Perhaps it is time to update the correct initial diagnosis to contemplate the increased virulence of this mental and emotional malady.

To corroborate and condense the many valid commentaries out there on the Palin effect, allow me to submit diagnosis PDS 2:

The persistence and even growth of Palin’s popularity and impact on the national discussion now makes unavoidable the reality of the elitists’ worst fear: that there are more of us than there are of them. And we now realize it.

As many have correctly pointed out, the pundits’ vitriol and patronizing comments smack of a hatred and anger that only thinly veils the real emotion underlying their irrational behavior: Fear. Part of it is fear that she will indeed hold public office again. But it goes even deeper than that.

It is an increasing awareness that Palin’s impact is much more than a strong advocacy of conservatism as a sound political philosophy. These people are now finding it hard to escape the reality that her life is a compelling and real advocacy of conservatism as a powerful life philosophy. Life trumps politics.

And once the casual voter has related to Palin’s life philosophy as something that is true, practical and worth adopting, they are dead to liberalism forever. They will never again believe in “the electability” of moderates like McCain and never again fall prey to a “clean articulate black man” with a good tele-prompter.

If your life revolves around convincing Republicans to nominate folks like McCain or around electing people like Obama, this is a scary prospect indeed. Like the signature scene from “Alien,” this realization is causing the emergence from deep within the elites of something even uglier and more powerful than we imagined.

They will not admit this of course. In fairness, they may not even consciously know what is going on inside their insulated minds. And short of breathing — Palin is doing little to stoke this — and yet it is getting worse.

While people who live a conservative base type life have always outnumbered the elites, the last public figure who evidenced it simply by existing was Ronald Reagan. And yes, many of the attacks on Palin today are the same attacks Reagan endured decades ago and they are coming from the same quarters.

Palin and Reagan are similar in that they both can use a few simple words and communicate more truth to average Americans than the media elites can with rambling professorial or lawyer speak. When she told Charlie Gibson that “you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska,” she refers to a profound sense of reality one automatically gets when you see your mortal enemy every single day. Now I understood it the day she said it. Send a memo to David Brooks please.

Her comment about the Soviet Union would be no different than Joe Biden claiming he has a deep understanding of Amtrak service into Wilmington and how to fleece taxpayers for his transportation. If he were to say this, he would be absolutely right. Finally!

When Reagan quipped “tell ‘em the bombing starts in five minutes,” he spoke volumes about the good guys, the bad guys, our relative capabilities and our moral imperative. Brevity is the soul of wit — and does not require a teleprompter. Many Americans understood the genius in that so-called off-handed comment instantly. Oh, so did Gorbachev.

But to liberals uncomfortable with the idea of America having any moral imperatives or to moderate pundits and strategists afraid to choose corn flakes without referencing a focus group report, such certitude based on common sense and love of country is unsettling. This is not who they are, and they have convinced themselves that they are the country. They are the self proclaimed best and brightest and there are more folks who believe that than who believe otherwise — or so they think.

Like Reagan’s, Palin’s easy natural appeal shatters that delusion. And she is the first one to do so for any length of time in a long time. Oh sure, Newt Gingrich had his moments in 93-94 as he was building the Contract with America movement. He was feared and hated for a while, but the media succeeded in beating him up so badly he’s now as likely to agree with Gore as with Reaganism.

When Stormin’ Norman Schwarzkopf was rolling through Iraq in Gulf War I, George Bush 41 was feared with a 90% approval rating. Then he stopped Norman from stormin’ and misread his own lips on taxes and faded into an abyss with only 38% of the vote in 1992.

And of course, we saw the elites fear and hate Bush 43 the Cowboy as he enjoyed approval ratings over 80% for months. Under fire, he forgot that most people love cowboys and he hung up his hat and spurs. Thus he limped into history with barely one in five Americans’ approval — ironically discrediting a conservative movement he never believed really existed.

So while the elites eventually beat back Gingrich and the Bushes, they seem to know they will never do that to Palin. They never could do it to Reagan either. Like Reagan, Palin seems to arrive at her beliefs with too much foundation to ever rattle. That gives power to her spoken and written words that other Americans can sense.

Yes, there are more of us than there are of them. Sarah Palin has reminded us — and them — of that fact. And it drives them bananas.

Folks, this is spot on. It can be condensed down to this. Sarah is real. Sarah doesn’t just talk the talk, she walks the walk. Sarah actually lives the life she advocates. That’s rather unique in today’s political atmosphere.

The attacks on Sarah Palin are unending. If you are someone who follows her like we do, you see it constantly. But there is never any “there” there, to their attacks. No substance. The amount of mental and verbal gymnastics the radicals, in both parties, go to is quite amusing.

Form sending, count ‘em, eleven AP “fact checkers” to look into her book, to the latest “scandal” that (OMG!) Sarah is flying to some of the stops on her nationwide book tour, the smell of fear these people have of this gal is palpable!

Sarah Palin is only a surrogate for all of you, the normal hard working American people. The “elites” in both parties loathe you, and now fear you, as well. When they attack Sarah Palin, they are also attack us, they attack what America is really all about.

Remember that the next time you read some ridiculously unhinged story lamenting Sarah Palin and telling you how bad she is for you. What they are really saying is YOU are bad for you and YOU are bad for America.

Posted in 2012, AKGovSarahPalin, Barracuda, character assassination, Going Rogue, Governor Palin, Governor Sarah Palin, Ronald Reagan, Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin, Sarah Palin Web Brigade, Sarah Palin's faith | Tagged: , , , | 1 Comment »

Sarah Palin’s Cancer Screening Concerns, Death Panels Alive And Doing Fine In The UK

Posted by Gary P Jackson on November 20, 2009

Cancer is a vicious killer, and one that hits home for me, having lost my dad at an early age, and several close friends to the dreaded disease. The good news about cancer though, is through innovation and research, by top scientists, survival rates have soared.

One of the really important developments that have lead directly to more cancer survivors is early detection through screenings. But if the communists in Congress, and Obama have their way, this will come to a grinding halt.

You see, screening costs money. Not only do those tests cost money, but so do the follow up tests as well treatments. Many cancer treatments are highly successful, but highly expensive, as well.

One thing we know, for sure, when the federal government unconstitutionally takes over health care, there will be a finite amount of money to be spent on caring for the sick. To make these dollars stretch, expensive treatments and many tests will have to be stopped, or postponed. Decisions to do this will be made by unelected and unaccountable boards of so-called experts, or as Sarah Palin has labeled them, death panels.

These “experts” won’t necessarily all be doctors, but they will be bean counters.

We’re seeing a couple of issues already, and ObamaCare hasn’t even passed. The first is in breast cancer screening. The U.S. Preventative Services Task Force has made the recommendation that we no longer do mammograms at age 40. It is their idea that 50 is the proper age to start, and those self exams? Forget about ‘em!

From Breast Cancer.com:

The standard schedule of starting screening mammograms at age 40 may soon change, and breast cancer prevention strategies would be improved, according to the U.S. Preventative Services Task Force. Women may not begin to have screening mammograms until they are 50, and they may cease doing breast self-exams altogether, if the newest guidelines for breast cancer screening from the USPSTF are widely adopted. In Canada and the United Kingdom, 50 is already the age at which screening mammography is begun. These new guidelines may have an impact on what health insurance providers will pay for.

The U.S. Preventative Services Task Force, a branch of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, has updated its recommendations for breast cancer screening. After using computer simulation models to project the results of different screening strategies, the task force said that they recommend the changes because they want to cut down on the “harms” and risks of testing, which they believe do not outweigh the benefits. They cite too many false positives, unnecessary biopsies, anxiety, or in short, overdiagnosis. Their November 2009 guidelines suggest:

* Women between 40 and 49 years old should not be having routine screening mammograms. Instead, they say that women should make an informed decision about screening mammography before 50, and weigh their potential risks and benefits with their doctors.

* Women who are 50 to 74 years old should be having a screening mammogram every other year, because the risk for breast cancer increases as you age.

* Women over 74 years old are not given specific guidelines about routine screening mammography – as their risk of death from heart disease and other ailments is greater than from breast cancer.

* Women of any age should not be taught to do breast self-exams, but BSE is not forbidden.

* Clinical breast exams will not be required before screening mammograms, because CBE appears to add no benefit to the information gained from a mammogram.

In 2002, the USPSTF guidelines for breast cancer screening stated that women 40 and older should have annual mammograms to screen for breast cancer. The American Cancer Society and the National Cancer Institute have also agreed on screening mammograms for women ages 40 to 70. The The American Cancer Society will maintain their recommendation to start screening mammograms at age 40.

Mammography is not a perfect tool and neither is a breast self-exam. But it seems odd to take away these two tools, which we have been told are important, for women aged 40 – 49. This same battle has been fought before, in the mid-1990s. It was resolved by 1997, when the National Cancer Institute agreed to support mammograms for women in their forties.

In an editorial published in Annals of Internal Medicine, Dr. Karla Kerlikowske says that the focus should shift from screening and early detection to breast cancer prevention interventions. But for this to be effective, Dr. Kerlikowske says that we need a better risk model, more research on prevention, and standards “for routinely assessing risk factors, calculating breast cancer risk, and reporting risk to women and providers in an easily understandable format.” Couldn’t we wait, until more research has been done, before we change screening guidelines? Won’t women be more at risk for ten years of their lives, if they are not having a mammogram and doing their self-exams?

This sentence hit me like a ton of bricks, just because of the wording:

Women of any age should not be taught to do breast self-exams, but BSE is not forbidden.

Are you kidding me? “BSE” stands for breast self examination. And this government death panel is telling women they shouldn’t learn how to do them, but are not “forbidden” from learning how and doing them. How generous of them.

That one word, “forbidden,” when talking about what one can and cannot do with their own body, in the privacy of their own home, tells you all you need to know about the entire process that is coming down the pike, and the mentality of those who will sit in judgement on these death panels.

You will notice too, that in making this recommendation, this death panel references the UK and Canada as their model of inspiration. Two counties that have such great health care, because of government control, that those who can, leave the country for treatment of anything more complex than a head cold.

From Deroy Murdock at National Review Online:

Compare America’s system with Canada’s and Great Britain’s. The latter are single-payer, universal health-care programs in which medical treatment is free at the point of service (Yay!), although citizens eventually pay for it through higher taxes (Boo!).

According to Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development data, there were 26.6 MRI machines in the U.S. per million people in 2004. In Canada, there were 4.9 such devices, while Britain enjoyed 5. For every 100,000 Americans, 2006 saw 436.8 receive angioplasties. Among Canadians, that figure was 135.9, while only 93.2 Britons per 100,000 got that cardiac procedure.

Maybe that’s why, among American men, heart-attack deaths in 2004 stood at 53.8 per 100,000. In Canada, 58.3 men per 100,000 died of cardiac arrest, while coronaries buried 69.5 of every 100,000 British males.

The fatality rate for breast cancer, according to the National Center for Policy Analysis and Lancet Oncology, is 25 percent in the U.S., 28 percent in Canada, and 46 percent in Great Britain.

Among those diagnosed with prostate cancer, 19 percent die of the disease in America. In Canada, 25 percent of such patients succumb to this disease. And in Great Britain — an Anglophone NATO member and America’s closest ally — prostate cancer kills 57 percent of those who contract it. That is triple the American fatality rate.

Here’s an interesting chart, for those who like charts:

………………………………………….US……… Canada………..UK…………..

CT Scanners.(per 1MIL)……………………32.2………..10.7…….…….7

MRI machhine(per 1MIL)…………………..26.6………….4.9……….….5

Angioplasties(per100K)……………………..436.8………135.9……….93.2

Bypasses(per100K)……………………………84.5………..72.7…..…..43.4

Male Heart MI death(per 100K)………………53.8…..…..58.3………..96.5

Female Heart MI death(per100K)……………29.5……….28.1.…..…..33.4

Breast Cancer fatality%)……………………..25…………28……………46

Prostate Cancer fatality(%)………………….19…..…….25….………..57

Male all cancer fatality(%)……………………33.7………47…………..56

Female all cancer fatality(%)…………………37.1……..42……………44.2

Notice, there is a serious lack of medical equipment in Canada and the UK, specifically, MRI machines and CT scanners, equipment that American hospitals use extensively on a daily basis to save lives.

You will also notice that breast cancer is slightly more likely to kill you in Canada, and probably will kill you in jolly old England. And if you are a guy, you really don’t want to live in either Canada or the UK. In the UK prostate cancer is death sentence for most.

Sarah has weighed in again on this craziness, as now the death panels are recommending changes in other screenings:

Cancer Screenings – Rational Advice or Rationed Care?

Today at 1:10am

It was a breath of fresh air to finally hear the Democrats admit to their health care bill as “a lot of show and tell and razzmatazz,” (see Democrat talking points, in reference to my book). At least now we’re all on the same page when discussing the problems with their monstrous government health care “reform” plan.

Now, tonight, more disconcerting news – the New York Times reports of new guidelines to scale back cervical cancer screenings. The recommendation from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists comes on the heels of another recommendation to limit breast cancer screenings with mammograms. There are many questions unanswered for me, but one which immediately comes to mind is whether costs have anything to do with these recommendations. The current health care debate elicits great concern because of its introduction of socialized medicine in America and the inevitable rationed care. We need to carefully watch this debate as it coincides with Capitol Hill’s debate and determine whether we are witnessing the early stages of that rationed care before the Senate bill is rushed through as well.

Another question is why these women-focused cancers are seemingly receiving substandard attention at a time when proactive health and fitness should be the message. Every woman should encourage rigorous debate to ensure that our collective voices are heard. We are paying attention to Washington’s health care proposals, and we want to hear what helps patients the most.

We need answers: Is early screening not saving lives? Why do doctors’ groups disagree? Did costs play any role in these decisions to change the recommendations on breast and cervical cancer screenings? We need assurances that everything we’ve heard this week about fewer tests for women’s cancers is a result of patient-focused research and providing the best care for the right reasons, and not because of bureaucratic pressure to control costs.

Obviously the first thought that comes to mind when hearing of these new recommendations from bureaucratic panels is “rationed care.” It’s fair – and healthy – to ask if that’s what Washington has in mind with a government-controlled takeover of a health care system.

– Sarah Palin

The rationing of health care is the only way ObamaCare will work. Again, there will be a finite amount of money budgeted to the nation’s health care. Our “benevolent leaders” will “generously allow” only a certain amount of the money they confiscate from us to actually be used to keep us in good health.

I mean, look, some of this money is desperately needed for more important projects, like keeping ACORN and SEIU in the “community organizing” business. How else will the

democrat/communists keep the glorious people’s revolution alive?

I promised you more still on death panels. (Like this ain’t enough!) Here’s an alarming report from the BBC:

Liver cancer drug ‘too expensive’

A drug that can prolong the lives of patients with advanced liver cancer has been rejected for use in the NHS in England, Wales and Northern Ireland.

The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) said the cost of Nexavar – about £3,000 a month – was “simply too high”.

But Macmillan Cancer Support said the decision was “a scandal”.

More than 3,000 people are diagnosed with liver cancer every year in the UK and their prognosis is generally poor.

Only about 20% of patients are alive one year after diagnosis, dropping to just 5% after five years.

‘Disappointed’

Campaigner Kate Spall, who won the right to have two months of treatment for her mother, Pamela Northcott, in 2007, said it had prolonged her life by four-and-a-half “precious” months.

It had allowed her 58-year-old mother, from Dyserth in Denbighshire, “closure” and “peace”, she told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme.

“The problem in Mum’s case is it took a year for me to fight for the treatment, so we’ll never know how well she could have done,” she said.

Prof Jonathan Waxman: “I’m very unhappy about the way these decisions are made”

“We had extra time, which was very precious to us all, her symptoms were helped greatly. And, more importantly, for Mum it was a case of getting some closure and peace.

“The psychological feeling when a group of people decide that you cannot have a treatment that can help you is really devastating.”

Cancer Research UK’s chief clinician Peter Johnson said the decision was “enormously frustrating” because there was no doubt about the drug’s effectiveness.

He said: “There’s no alternative treatment and there are no other places for people to go. It is expensive, but the only issue is cost and the number of patients affected are quite few – there’s probably only six or seven hundred patients a year.”

Nexavar – also known as sorafenib – had already been rejected in Scotland, despite studies showing it could extend the life of a liver cancer patient by up to six months.

‘Devastating disease’

The Scottish Medicines Consortium ruled that “the manufacturer’s justification of the treatment’s cost in relation to its benefit was not sufficient to gain acceptance”.

Andrew Dillon, chief executive of NICE, agreed: “The price being asked by [the manufacturer] Bayer is simply too high to justify using NHS money which could be spent on better value cancer treatments.”

And the group’s clinical and public health director, Peter Littlejohns, added the drug was considered “just too expensive” by its advisory committees.

Nexavar is routinely offered to cancer patients elsewhere in the world, and Mike Hobday, head of campaigns at Macmillan Cancer Support, said he was “extremely disappointed” at NICE’s decision.

“It is a scandal that the only licensed drug proven to significantly prolong the lives of people with this devastating disease has been rejected, leaving them with no treatment options,” he said.

Alison Rogers, chief executive of the British Liver Trust, said: “The decision to reject a treatment for advanced liver cancer is a huge blow for patients.

“This is a treatment to extend life for people where all other options have run out.

“It is particularly hard for people with liver cancer given that treatments for many other advanced cancers have been given the green light by NICE.

“People with liver disease often face stigma and discrimination and sadly this decision feels like a further disadvantage to them.”

Earlier this year, a government review of end-of-life treatment said NICE should give extra weight to drugs that could extend a patient’s life.

The Department of Health said NICE was not ignoring that recommendation, but the NHS could not just pay for any drug at any cost.

The UK is a very totalitarian system when it comes to patient care. The system also strips it’s citizens of many basic liberties and freedoms we take for granted in America. As I wrote in an earlier piece, not only do they have death panels in the UK, these government monstrosities have evolved into what I am calling “lifestyle panels.”

I had included this from the Brussels Journal:

Kerry Robertson, 17, and Mark McDougall, 25, haven’t broken any law. But they are on the run from the authorities, and from their home in Dunfermline, Scotland.

Less than eight weeks ago the couple were excitedly planning their wedding. They had booked church ceremony for the 5th of September, a Saturday. She had already chosen and bought her wedding dress. They had bought the rings, and invited 20 guests. Two days before the big day, however, social services told them that their wedding would have to be cancelled. Fife Council wrote a letter, objecting to the marriage, to Dunfermline Register Office, who consequently refused to marry the couple.

Social services claim Kerry cannot understand what marriage means, because she has learning difficulties. They are mild, it seems. She is able to read and write, and is going to college to “catch up.” Her partner Mark told the Daily Mail: “‘I didn’t even know she had learning difficulties until we’d been dating for two months.”

Kerry is 29 weeks pregnant – with a boy they have named Ben. “Although Ben isn’t born yet,” Kerry says, “I already love my baby and know I will be a good mum. Mark and I talk to him inside me every day and tell him we love him. We’ve already bought him clothes and my cousin, who recently had a baby, has handed down a beautiful crib for him.”

Social services say that Kerry – a college student – isn’t intelligent enough to bring up her child with Mark. They plan to allow the couple only a few hours with Ben after he is born. Then Ben will be taken from Kerry and Mark, and placed with foster parents.

I went on to add:

Let’s think about this for a minute.

Here are a couple of young kids in love. They were excited and planning a nice wedding, when all of a sudden, a Big Government drone steps in and through their own “expertise” decides they are not fit to be parents because the girl is a little “slow.”

Under those guidelines, if adopted in America, would Barack Obama be allowed to keep his kids? I mean this is the guy that thought he had traveled to 57 states on the campaign, and had 1 or 2 to go. Would that make Obama a little “slow” in the eyes of the almighty bureaucrat?

Can you imagine?

My point? Allowing the government control over anything can be dangerous, even for the most noble of reasons. It’s why our founders wrote a Constitution that was design to allow the several states and all citizens, great freedoms, while restraining the federal government. In the past 100 years we have seen a rapid shift to the exact opposite, as “progressives” both democrat/communists and Republicans have grabbed more control, and wrestled many freedoms from the several states, and the American citizen.

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

All of these new “recommendations” that are suddenly coming down from these faceless panels are the canary in the coal mine for what is to come if we allow Obama and his radical communist agenda to succeed., if we allow ObamaCare to become law.

This is can all be stopped, but you must be willing to put every single ounce of effort you can muster to achieve that goal. We are at war in this nation. Oh, it’s not a shooting war, but it is a war nonetheless. We are war with radical communists who want to “fundamentally change” America into something it was never meant to be.

It’s a failed prescription. Communism, socialism, Statism, whatever “ism” you want to call this evil, has destroyed nations world wide every time it has been tried. Just because this group of radicals think they are the ones smart enough to make it work doesn’t make it so!

The surest way to lose most, if not all, of your most fundamental freedoms and rights is to allow the Obama regime to continue along this path of certain destruction.

As I write this on an early Friday afternoon, I realize the U.S. Senate is about to vote on a 2000 plus page piece of liberty destroying garbage that absolutely no one has read, or understands.

This multi-trillion dollar affair will raise taxes, destroy our quality of health care, and give the government powers that will, for all practical purposes, void our Constitution, completely usurp it.

Speaking of the Constitution, it only took four sheets of paper to write the most significant and enduring political document in the history all mankind. Our Constitution is the envy of the world, and the absolute blueprint for the freedom of all mankind. Four sheets of paper.

By contrast, the lunacy that is our current radical communist controlled Congress, has produced bills in the House and Senate of a combined total of nearly 4100 pages. Incredible.

Here’s a good time to remind everyone the words of the Great Ronald Reagan on the dangers of allowing these radicals to take over our lives through health care. This is from the successful Operation Coffee Cup Campaign against socialized medicine in 1961:

Isn’t it time that all of America listens to one of our greatest leaders in history?

You can read more about the horrors in Canada and the United Kingdom here and here.

Posted in Barracuda, big government, ECONOMY, Family, Governor Palin, Governor Sarah Palin, healthcare, healthcare bill, Medicare, Obama, Obamacare, Ronald Reagan, Sarah Palin, Sarah Palin Web Brigade, special needs, special needs children, Woman | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Sarah Palin To Obama: Maybe You Need To Look At How Reagan Fixed The Economy

Posted by Gary P Jackson on November 13, 2009

During the election cycle, and those heady first days of Barack Obama’s presidency. Barack Obama sold himself, depending on the audience, as Abe Lincoln, FDR, JFK, and the Great Ronald Reagan. Of course, it was all smoke in mirrors, as the President Obama most resembles is Jimmy Carter, our worst President in history, up until Obama took office.

Obama has us caught in an economic quagmire, and there is no end to this mess in sight. It’s not just that Obama is horribly inexperienced, or that he has zero experience in the private sector. It’s not even the fact that he has zero business experience, never running a business, or having a job in business, not even a lemonade stand. The rest of the problem lies in the fact that he has surrounded himself with Marxist and “scholars” who also have no idea how business, and capitalism works. All they have are theories, and theories don’t put food on the table.

With that said, Obama has reverted back to his community organizing days. Rather than setting a course that is tried and true, a course that we know for a fact will work, Obama has called for yet another summit to ask for suggestions. Some leadership, huh.

This will be the same Marxists, “scholars” and other assorted misfits and malcontents who steered Obama in the wrong direction in the first place. But as always, Obama pretends he wants “all ideas” and has made a token invitation for input from those in the know. Not that he’ll listen, of course.

With that in Mind, Sarah has give Obama some solid advice, follow Ronald Reagan!

Thank you, Washington, for Requesting a Demonstrably Good Idea

I commend the president for acknowledging today that “there are limits to what government can and should do” to ease our 10.2% unemployment rate – the highest it’s been since 1983. I also applaud his call for suggestions and expression of openness to considering “any demonstrably good idea.” Taking him at his word, I’d like to suggest this one: let’s learn from history and follow the example of the man who occupied the White House in 1983 and was able to transform an even worse recession than the one we’re currently experiencing into the largest peacetime economic expansion in American history.

When you realize the magnitude of President Reagan’s achievements, there is absolutely no reason why anyone would ignore his “demonstrably good” example. If you want real job growth, cut taxes – including capital gains taxes and small business payroll taxes – and slay the death tax once and for all. If you want to stimulate the economy and help poor and middle class families, cut payroll taxes so that more Americans can keep and invest more of what they earn.

If you want lasting economic expansion and prosperity, get the federal government’s budget under control. Instead of more pork-laden stimulus plans, let the free market correct itself. That’s what Reagan did, and history proves it worked.

In his comments today, the president honorably suggested that he welcomes our ideas on how to put America’s economy on the right track. But, there also seemed to be a suggested chastisement of the private sector’s efforts to right some economic wrongs when he said, “…small businesses and large firms…have not yet been willing to take the steps necessary to hire again.”

As business owners seek to expand, or just to keep doors open today, it’s not as if they are refusing to hire out of spite. Given a pro-private sector environment they will be only too happy to hire more people and grow their businesses. Perhaps if leadership in Washington reassured them by, for example, cutting tax burdens and making government more efficient, it would send our businesses a message that it’s safe and smart to expand today.

These are difficult times for so many Americans who are out of work. I implore our leaders to not threaten our economy’s job creators with increased taxes and job-killing schemes like cap-and-tax and the government health care takeover. Government needs to get out of their way and off their backs so that they can grow and hire again.

The lessons of history are clear. We’re blessed to have so many lessons from which to learn, and we’d be smart to emulate successes in America’s past. Our economic recovery decisions should be based on the same free market principles that Reagan employed. They work, history proves it, and I thank our president for asking for this input.

– Sarah Palin

Sarah Palin herself knows about economic turnarounds. When she took over as Governor of Alaska things were a mess. Not only was the budget out of whack, there were huge ethics issues and other issues left over from the Murkowski administration. Sarah quickly set things in motion by slashing budgets as well as putting the Governor’s unneeded jet up for sale. She even got rid of the executive chef, and staff, at the Governor’s mansion. She also went on to drive herself, in her own car, most of the time.

The results? Sarah balanced the budget, and left a surplus, using core conservative values and common sense. She passed sweeping ethics reform, to boot.

Folks who have studied Reagan know that his presidency is a model for how to do things, especially on the economy. Reagan’s efforts gave us the longest, and largest, peace time expansion in history.

Let’s hope that Barack Obama listens to Sarah Palin rather than the usual suspects, and does the right thing, for once.

Posted in 2012, Alaska, Barracuda, big government, Conservative, ECONOMY, Facebook, Going Rogue, Governor Palin, Governor Sarah Palin, Obama, Obamacare, President, Ronald Reagan, Sarah Palin, Sarah Palin Web Brigade, Washington | Tagged: , , , | 2 Comments »

Sarah Palin: Let’s Follow Reagan’s Example

Posted by Sarah Palin Web Brigade on November 13, 2009

Transcript of Governor Palin’s Facebook post:

Thank you, Washington, for Requesting a Demonstrably Good Idea
Thursday at 7:54pm EST

I commend the president for acknowledging today that “there are limits to what government can and should do” to ease our 10.2% unemployment rate – the highest it’s been since 1983. I also applaud his call for suggestions and expression of openness to considering “any demonstrably good idea.” Taking him at his word, I’d like to suggest this one: let’s learn from history and follow the example of the man who occupied the White House in 1983 and was able to transform an even worse recession than the one we’re currently experiencing into the largest peacetime economic expansion in American history.

When you realize the magnitude of President Reagan’s achievements, there is absolutely no reason why anyone would ignore his “demonstrably good” example. If you want real job growth, cut taxes – including capital gains taxes and small business payroll taxes – and slay the death tax once and for all. If you want to stimulate the economy and help poor and middle class families, cut payroll taxes so that more Americans can keep and invest more of what they earn.

If you want lasting economic expansion and prosperity, get the federal government’s budget under control. Instead of more pork-laden stimulus plans, let the free market correct itself. That’s what Reagan did, and history proves it worked.

In his comments today, the president honorably suggested that he welcomes our ideas on how to put America’s economy on the right track. But, there also seemed to be a suggested chastisement of the private sector’s efforts to right some economic wrongs when he said, “…small businesses and large firms…have not yet been willing to take the steps necessary to hire again.”

As business owners seek to expand, or just to keep doors open today, it’s not as if they are refusing to hire out of spite. Given a pro-private sector environment they will be only too happy to hire more people and grow their businesses. Perhaps if leadership in Washington reassured them by, for example, cutting tax burdens and making government more efficient, it would send our businesses a message that it’s safe and smart to expand today.

These are difficult times for so many Americans who are out of work. I implore our leaders to not threaten our economy’s job creators with increased taxes and job-killing schemes like cap-and-tax and the government health care takeover. Government needs to get out of their way and off their backs so that they can grow and hire again.

The lessons of history are clear. We’re blessed to have so many lessons from which to learn, and we’d be smart to emulate successes in America’s past. Our economic recovery decisions should be based on the same free market principles that Reagan employed. They work, history proves it, and I thank our president for asking for this input.

– Sarah Palin

Posted in big government, cap and tax, Facebook, healthcare bill, Ronald Reagan, Sarah Palin, Washington | Leave a Comment »