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

    June 2019
    S M T W T F S
    « Jan    
     1
    2345678
    9101112131415
    16171819202122
    23242526272829
    30  
  • Categories

  • Archives

  • __________________________________________
  • Top Posts & Pages

  • __________________________________________
  • Recent Posts

  • Recent Comments

  • __________________________________________

Posts Tagged ‘Michelle Bachmann’

S.E. Cupp On Religion, Tea Parties, Barack Obama, Michelle Bachmann, And Sarah Palin

Posted by Gary P Jackson on April 17, 2010

One of our favorite Conservative commentators, S.E. Cupp, has written a new book: “Losing Our Religion: The Liberal Media’s Attack on Christianity” In support of this book S.E. sat down for an interview with Newsmax TV and discussed a variety of topics from religion, and the media’s continual disdain thereof, as well as Barack Obama’s radicalism and how the media simply can’t handle strong, smart, and attractive Conservative women.

S. E. makes some interesting and provocative points:

On religion, media bias, and her atheism:

I am an atheist but I’m not one of those militant atheists. I simply don’t believe. I envy the faithful. I’ve always defended religious freedom. I’m grateful for mine and I’m grateful for everyone else’s.”

I defend especially Christianity in this country because it seems to be under attack, and I’m bothered by the idea that the media has taken a side in this fight. I’m really bothered as a writer, as a member of the press, that the Fourth Estate has become so openly hostile to 80 percent of the country. This is a huge majority. And 90 percent of the country believes in God.

To go after a majority like this means they’re really not a representative media. They don’t deserve to be called mainstream.

I think the media is socially secular and increasingly so, and I think the judgment and the morality inherent in Christianity or any religious system is really threatening to a secularist movement like the media. If the media can go on unjudged, I think that makes them fairly happy.

I knew what I was getting into when I started researching this book, but I did not know the scope and scale until I really got into it. It’s not just The New York Times and CNN and MSNBC, places you’d expect. It’s on the blogosphere. It’s online. It’s the Huffington Post. It’s Salon.com. It’s USA Today. It’s radio. It’s everywhere. You really have to look hard not to find it.

The “worst offenders” include be Salon.com, Cupp says. “CNN is pretty bad. The New York Times is pretty bad only because of the clout and influence that paper has. You would expect them to be a bit more responsible. MSNBC is terrible. Some of the talking heads there like Olbermann, Rachel Maddow, Chris Matthews — these guys really have it out for Christianity.”

On Barack Obama:

[Barack Obama has an] “affinity for radical Marxist theology.”

If you look at some of his own testimony about his religious education, whether in his book or his speeches, he discusses at length his decision to follow black liberation theology, the kind of Christianity espoused by Reverend [Jeremiah] Wright and a number of other well-known pastors around the country.”

Obama describes it as not particularly a Christ-driven move on his part but as sort of a recognition of the black social causes of the time. That’s what really drove him into Christianity. When you actually read about it, it’s far more radical than the Pentecostalism of Sarah Palin or the Baptism of a Mike Huckabee. Yet those folks are constantly painted by the liberal media as being fanatical and fringe.

“If anyone bothered to look at Obama’s black liberation theology, they would have no choice but to recognize that it’s an incredibly radical — and I would even say extreme — version of Christianity.

On Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachmann, conservatism, and the left wing media’s inability to deal with “pretty” Conservative women:

One, the liberal media always have a difficult time dealing with pretty, conservative women. They just don’t know what to make of it. She [Sarah Palin] can’t be that smart because she’s too pretty. She can’t be galvanizing because she’s too dumb.

Two, they’re frustrated by the fact that this is a self-made woman. They spent eight years telling us that George W. Bush was this nepotism experiment gone wrong. Well, here’s a woman who came from nothing, who worked her way up to become a successful wife and mother, had an amazing political career — the first female governor of Alaska and the youngest.

This is unequivocally an accomplished woman, and the right kind of accomplished woman if you ask the liberal media — the kind that did it on her own. That bothers them because they really dislike her policies.

I think it takes a lot of courage in today’s day and age to stand up as Michele Bachmann and Sarah Palin have and say look, I believe there’s a traditional role for the family. I believe in traditional values. I’m a proud Christian.

That is an act of courage today, sadly. And I think the liberal media wants to position a Bachmann or a Palin as somehow backwards or lost in time, unsophisticated, a relic.”

Conservatism rightly resists the changing tide, the changing social mores. The whole idea of conservatism is to preserve what we think is good. So these flag bearers like Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann, women no less, I think are really throwing mud in the eye of the liberals who would rather see them locked up in some museum.”

Check out S.E. Cupp’s new book: “Losing Our Religion: The Liberal Media’s Attack on Christianity” at Amazon.com.

Advertisements

Posted in Uncategorized | 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 »

Michelle Bachmann Speaker Of The House? You Bet’Cha!

Posted by Gary P Jackson on November 27, 2009

As usual, our friends at HillBuzz have hit on a provocative idea.

If you’re not a regular reader of HillBuzz you are missing out on some great reading. I discovered this group during the 2008 election cycle. The guys over there a lifelong democrats who got really fed up with the direction the party has gone. As the site’s name implies, they are huge supporters of Hillary Clinton, but let me tell you, you won’t find any stronger a group of Sarah Palin supporters out there.

I enjoy HillBuzz because they bring an entirely new perspective to the debate, a while different line of critical thinking. Classify the group any way you wish, but they certainly understand Conservative principles and values, and articulate them in they own unique style.

Anyhow, they have a very interesting idea here that many on our side would not have thought of: Michelle Bachmann as Speaker of the House. Now if you are a strong Conservative, you’re a fan of Micelle Bachmann. Like Sarah Palin, Bachmann is a tough, strong woman. Bachmann is absolutely fearless in her position as a Congresswoman. She has zero reservations when it comes to standing up for the Constitution, and taking on those who would run afoul of it’s intent.

Here’s what HillBuzz has to say:

Today we had an interesting breakfast at Nookie’s Tree (pumpkin pancakes, yo) with a friend of ours deeply involved in local Democrat politics here in Illinois. He’s a firm backer of Governor Quinn, and wants Hoffman to win the Dems’ Senate nomination (and is working hard behind the scenes to take corrupt mob banker Alexi Giannoulias down before he can win the Dem primary next year). Because of our support of McCain/Palin and the other stances we’ve taken since the takeover of the Democrat Party and its occupation by Utopian radicals, we’ve had little contact with this friend because the lot of us here have become “toxic” in Dem circles in Chicago. That’s fine with us, honestly, because we can’t in good faith work for a party that behaves the way it does, and treats women and gays the way it so enjoys doing.

But, our friend is a great conversationalist, and enjoys scrying into the future as much as we do. He believes Democrats will hold the Senate in next year’s midterms, but that Harry Reid will be defeated, by Sue Lowden most likely, and Dick Durbin will be installed as the new Senate Majority Leader (which will be a Christmas present to Republicans, since Durbin is a truly stupid and bumbling man, worse than Reid if that is even humanly possible).

He also thinks Democrats will indeed lose the House, as he’s hearing of more House members deciding not to seek re-election, knowing their votes on Utopicare will doom their careers. They have all been promised highly lucrative post-government jobs by Nancy Pelosi, however, so many of these Dems are willing to take the bullets for Utopiacare so that they can make millions in the coming years by working as “consultants” and then lobbyists, with Pelosi and the DNC’s employment agency placing them into golden parachutes (more like golden showers, if you ask us. Google it.).

What’s unclear to us is who the GOP has lined up to take Pelosi’s place if they get control of Congress.

Someone like Michelle Bachmann would be incredible, but our friend insists she’s not even on the long list, let alone the short list for the job. “Remember, Republicans are all about “whose turn it is” and “who has been waiting longest for the job”. There is no sense of timeliness with them, and never any consideration for who would be best to lead the party. They just get in a line and years later it’s their turn to be the nominee or the Speaker or whatever. That’s how Republicans do things, and that’s why they are so beatable usually”.

Every day, we want to know more and more about Michelle Bachmann because, like Sarah Palin, we are witnessing someone at the start of her national career who will be around for a very long time, with the potential to change American politics as we know it.

The Tea Parties could install Bachmann as Speaker, we believe, if the Tea Party Movement itself grows, buckles down, and becomes a larger force to be reckoned with going into 2010.

Palin herself could help deliver Bachmann unto the Speaker’s chair, if the candidate Palin campaigns for next year mostly win, and the next Congressional majority owes a lot to Palin. It appears Palin and Bachmann are friendly, if not already allies. Palin would be well-served with one of her own as Speaker. That could help Palin’s groundgame in 2012 immensely.

Speaker Boehner seems to be the way Republicans would go, because he looks like he’s next in line, but he’d be such a bad choice in our opinion. He’s not bold enough, not gutsy enough, and not memorable enough.

Whoever replaces Nancy Pelosi needs to be a firecracker. We also think the GOP needs to put a woman in that Speaker’s chair. Because of the misogyny the Democrats have wallowed in for the last two years, many women are open to voting Republican for the first time in their lives. Republicans, thus, have the once-in-our-lifetime chance to be seen as “the party for women”. Some of you might not like identity politics, but a great deal of independents sure do.

Independents decide elections…and many former Democrats are now independents who would like to see a woman succeed Pelosi.

Bachmann would make a dynamic, relevant, and capable Speaker, in our opinion.

A firecracker like that tossed into the top spot in the House would light a fuse that could blow Dr. Utopia from office in 2012, taking the rest of the Liberals in Congress with him.

What are your thoughts on Speaker Bachmann? Could it happen? Should it happen?

What happens if it happens?

Obviously, I have to echo their questions to the reader. Could it happen? Should it happen? And, what happens if it happens!

Sean Hannity calls Michelle Bachmann the “second most hated Conservative woman in America,” a title she seems to relish. (We ALL know who the most hated Conservative is!)

Michelle will be a featured speaker at the first annual National Tea Party Convention. Sarah Palin, of course, is the Special Keynote Speaker at this event.

I’m not sure just how well Sarah and Michelle know each other, but the folks over at HillBuzz are certainly on to something with this idea. People already mention a Sarah Palin/Michelle Bachmann ticket for 2012 often. If you spend any amount of time on Conservative websites, you’ll see this mentioned constantly. I think what HillBuzz is saying though makes a lot of sense, and would certainly be beneficial to Sarah Palin, and a Palin presidency.

Look, I like John Boehner. I also like my own Congressman, John Carter, he’s a great Conservative leader. But the idea of someone bold like Michelle Bachmann as Speaker of the House is fascinating. And bold leadership is what we need right now. Ronald Reagan used to caution against the temptation to “paint in pale pastels.” Reagan always championed “painting with bold colors.” What Reagan meant was we need bold leadership, bold leaders who will strive to do great things.

Sarah Palin is obviously someone who fits the bill, but what of Michelle Bachmann? I think one has to look no farther than the dressing down she gave Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke to see she is all business:

Here Michelle gives an impassioned speech on the House floor in which she takes to task our new “total gangster government.”

Look, I have been one of those who has been on the Palin/Bachmann for 2012 bandwagon. I think it would be a superb ticket. You have two strong, bold women. Both mothers who are raising a large family.

Michelle, like Sarah has 5 children, and has also been a foster parent to 23 other children. Personally, I think motherhood has given both of these great women a perspective the “good old boys” will never have on things. And I say this as a typical, old fashioned “good old boy.”

Here’s where it makes sense to have Michelle Bachmann as Speaker, rather than Vice President to Sarah Palin. If Sarah runs, and I know all of us will do everything in our power to encourage her to, she is going to want to bring sweeping changes to government.

We all know her philosophy. We all know she wants to shrink government, cut waste, and usher in great reforms. Sarah will also have a strong domestic energy agenda, as well as an economic growth agenda, and a very aggressive national security agenda. Michelle Bachmann would be a strong ally. She could easily help Sarah’s agenda, which is America’s agenda.

Having a strong, bold leader like Michelle Bachmann as Speaker of the House would be of great benefit to a President Sarah Palin, and of great benefit to the nation. Our next Congress and next President are facing the herculean task of dismantling the failed democrat/communist quagmire that has been created by allowing “progressives” to have a foothold in government. Budgets will have to be slashed, certain programs eliminated.

We need a bold energy policy, one that actually creates energy, and makes America independent from the whims of other nations. We also must retake our rightful roles and responsibilities as the world’s only superpower.

Both Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachmann get it. They both know what lies ahead. Most Conservatives think these two would make a great team, and now, thanks to our friends at HillBuzz, we see just how that team might look!

Posted in 2012, Barracuda, ECONOMY, Energy, Energy Independence, Environment, establishment, Governor Palin, Governor Sarah Palin, Hannity, Michelle Bachmann, Sarah Palin, Sarah Palin Web Brigade | Tagged: , , , | 1 Comment »