Tag Archives: Sarah Palin

The Mainstream Media Displays Their Bigotry in Arizona

Posted on by
1

This weekend’s shooting in Arizona was a tragedy. Our thoughts and prayers are with the victims and their families.

From what is know about the shooter, Jared Loughner, it is safe to conclude that he is mentally unstable.

Seemingly minutes after the shooting was first reported, the media  jumped on the ‘Tea Party militia’ explanation. It was automatically assumed that Loughner was a registered Republican, and probably a Plain supporter. In reality, a case can be made that Loughner is a Leftist. Loughner listed the Communist Manifesto as one of his favorite books, was described as “left-wing” in 2007, and was a critic of President Bush.

Never letting the facts get in the way of a story, The New York Times, led by Paul Krugman, laid blame for the shooting at the feet of Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck and other conservatives. Members of Congress, and their amen corner in the media, have determined that Sarah Palin is to blame for the shooting. Arizona Sheriff, and well documented political hack, Clarence Dupnik, targeted rhetoric from talk radio and cable news:

The Left has developed a cottage industry decrying the evils of ‘profiling.’ Every security measure implemented at, say, the airport, is applied equally to all travelers, from young Muslim men, to old Norwegian grandmothers, all because we are so averse to profiling.

The Left has demonstrated their aversion to profiling in the past. When Nidal Malik Hasan shot up Ft. Hood, yelling “Allah Akbar!” we were told to wait for the facts and not jump to any conclusions.

However, when there is a chance that the suspect may be a conservative, it is safe to run wall to wall coverage of pure speculation, and assert conclusions based on that speculation as fact.

When a terrorist tried to bomb Time Square last year Mayor Michael Bloomberg immediately asserted that the terrorist was a “homegrown maybe a mentally deranged person or someone with a political agenda that doesn’t like the health care bill or something.” Turns out the Time Square bomber was… a Muslim terrorist.

But this weekend in Arizona a Democratic Congresswoman was shot and the media immediately assumed the shooter was a Tea Party member, inspired by Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck. How did the media reach such a conclusion before the facts came in? They profiled.

The Left sees every conservative as a Timothy McVeigh waiting to happen. Isn’t that the very type of profiling the Left professes to abhor? If the shooting in Arizona had been politically motivated, would it not seem pertinent to the case that the judge who was shot and killed was a Bush appointee? And lets not forget that if anything, Jared Loughner is a man of the Left, not the Right.

The Left has created yet another double standard. When it comes to terrorists flying planes into buildings, it is ‘wrong’ to profile Muslims. We are almost asked to believe that the fact that all 19 of the 9/11 hijackers were Muslim was incidental. However, when a lone nut, who happens to be white, opens fire on crowd, it must be the Tea Party. What is on display is the Left and the media’s bigotry, their bigotry against all those ideologically at odds with them.

By the way, when President Obama said “if they [Republicans] bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun,” that was okay, right? Only ‘right-wing extremists’ can incite violence, right?

MSNBC: Who’s This C.S. Lewis Fellow?

Posted on by
7

The trouble with MSNBC panelists isn’t that they’re ignorant, it’s that they know so much that isn’t so. Well, except for Richard Wolffe – he’s just ignorant.

In an interview with Barbara Walters, Governor Palin said that she reads C.S. Lewis for divine inspiration. Lewis was a prolific writer. He is best known for his Christian faith, and his faith’s influence on his work. Among his more famous works are: The Screwtape Letters, The Space Trilogy, and yes, The Chronicles of Narnia. Even his children’s books had a strong Christian message.

With the above in mind, take a look at enlightened and well read member of the media, Richard Wolffe’s analysis of what Governor Palin reads:

To deride C.S. Lewis as merely an author of “a series of kids’ books” would be like remembering Winston Churchill as a hobby bricklayer. Another one of Palin’s critics, in this case one of her most vindictive and vociferous ones, has egg all over his face.

The dirty secret about the ‘enlightened’ Left is that they don’t read. Sure, in college they cracked open Barbara Ehrenreich and Naomi Naomi Klein, but that’s about the extent of it. Most Marxists probably haven’t ever read Marx.

Even Chris Matthews looked embarrassed in that clip. It is entirely possible that Richard Wolffe’s first exposure to C.S. Lewis came with the movie adaptations of Narnia series. But don’t look behind the curtain, remember, Palin is the dumb one and only the brilliant Left can stop hayseed America from supporting her.

(H/T The Blaze)

The Left Throws a Hissy Fit

Posted on by
6

Last week on TLC’s Sarah Palin’s Alaska Governor Palin went caribou hunting. The hunt was successful. The left is throwing a collective histrionic fit. They are up in arms that someone would dare kill an animal. Doesn’t that rube Palin know that grocery stores grow meat!?

First, there is the always reasonable Aaron Sorkin (who has at least one thing in common with President Obama):

Like 95% of the people I know, I don’t have a visceral (look it up) problem eating meat or wearing a belt. But like absolutely everybody I know, I don’t relish the idea of torturing animals. I don’t enjoy the fact that they’re dead and I certainly don’t want to volunteer to be the one to kill them and if I were picked to be the one to kill them in some kind of Lottery-from-Hell, I wouldn’t do a little dance of joy while I was slicing the animal apart.

I’m able to make a distinction between you and me without feeling the least bit hypocritical. I don’t watch snuff films and you make them. You weren’t killing that animal for food or shelter or even fashion, you were killing it for fun. You enjoy killing animals. I can make the distinction between the two of us but I’ve tried and tried and for the life of me, I can’t make a distinction between what you get paid to do and what Michael Vick went to prison for doing. I’m able to make the distinction with no pangs of hypocrisy even though I get happy every time one of you faux-macho s***heads accidentally shoots another one of you in the face.

So I don’t think I will save my condemnation, you phony pioneer girl.

Aaron Sorkin – always a cool and logical analyst. Where else can you go for “I get happy every time one of you faux-macho s***heads accidentally shoots another one of you in the face”? Can you imagine William F. Buckley Jr. writing “visceral (look it up)”?

Next, the always even tempered tempest in a teapot from the New York Times, Maureen Dowd, penned her weekly masterpiece on the topic of Palin’s hunting:

“My dad has taught me that if you want to have wild, organic, healthy food,” she pontificated, “you’re gonna go out there and hunt yourself and fish yourself and you’re gonna fill up your freezer.”

Does Palin really think the average housewife in Ohio who can’t pay her bills is going to load up on ammo, board two different planes, camp out for two nights with a film crew and shoot a caribou so she can feed her family organic food?

It’s amazing that Palin patronized Neiman Marcus during the campaign. Couldn’t she have spun cloth to sew her own clothes?

…The poor caribou in the Arctic Circle, a cousin to Santa’s reindeer, had to die so Palin could show off her toughness to voters and try to boost ratings on her show that have slipped since its premiere. (Next Sunday, she’s dragging up nine Gosselins to go shooting and camping.)

Sarah’s view of America is primitive. You’re either a pointy-headed graduate of Harvard Law School or you’re eviscerating animals for fun, which she presents as somehow more authentic.

In movies with animals, they often have a line in the credits assuring that no animals were harmed. In “Sarah Palin’s Alaska,” they should have a line at the end assuring that “almost every living creature involved in this show was harmed.”

If only liberals cared as much about human beings getting killed! Are Dowd’s questions even supposed to be serious? Palin is not recommending that Dowd open up her window and hunt down caribou in the Upper West Side of Manhattan. The program is called Sarah Palin’s Alaska. It is a travelogue. Caribou hunting is something that can be done in Alaska. It’s really that simple. Does Dowd come off as just a bit over the top in her shrill review?

Maureen Dowd, Aaron Sorkin and their claque have a rather primitive view of America:  you’re either a dumb hillbilly from ‘flyover country’ or an enlightened  scion with an Ivy League degree.

You have to love Sarah Palin’s ability to irk all the right people.

The Wrong Answer From Romney

Posted on by
1

Former Massachusetts Governor and obvious 2012 candidate Mitt Romney sat down with Jay Leno earlier this week to talk about a variety of issues. When offered the bait, Romney refused to take a swing at Sarah Palin. Complimenting Palin instead was admirable, and Romney deserves credit for not throwing out an unfair attack at Palin, a new favorite activity of many in the GOP establishment.

That being said, many conservatives have felt tentative at best about a Romney presidency. In the following clip, Governor Romney explains why he “loved” serving as governor (skip to 0:33):



“Being governor is probably the best job you can think of because you have a real impact on the lives of people you care about… you approve schools, you get healthcare for folks…”

It is important to take note of unguarded statements made by politicians. When they go off script, even for a few brief sentences, it lets you know what they really think. Governor Romney’s professed “love” of serving in government so he can do things for people is troubling. It is reminiscent ‘the great engineer’ – Herbert Hoover.

The progressive wing of the Republican party is always looking for ways the government can be used to implement ‘conservative’ policies. The most recent terminology used was a call for an ‘energetic’ government. Of course, the notion that a gargantuan government can be used to implement conservatism is noxious and contradictory. Conservatives believe that the government that governs least, governs best.

Governors and presidents are not supposed to be “getting people healthcare.” The best thing the government can do is get out of the way and let people purchase whatever medical insurance they want. The GOP experiment with “kinder, gentler” and “compassionate” conservatism has been disastrous. Republicans should not be New Deal lite. The GOP has to offer a choice, not an echo. The Democrats are the party of big government. The GOP is the liberty party. Republicans should be about giving people the right to chose how to run their own lives, without interference from faceless and nameless bureaucrats. Romney’s “love” of government is worrisome. His desire to use the government to “do things for people” is a red flag.

Establishment v. Sarah Palin

Posted on by
3

In 1976 and 1980 the establishment lined up against Ronald Reagan when he sought the Republican nomination for president. Reagan was the anti-establishment candidate, a role he relished. In fact, then Governor Reagan began his presidential run in 1976 by announcing that unlike President Ford, who had worked in Washington for decades, Reagan was an outsider.

The best example of Reagan touting his anti-establishment views came in 1977 at the Conservative Political Action Conference:

And let me say so there can be no mistakes as to what I mean: The New Republican Party I envision will not be, and cannot, be one limited to the country club-big business image that, for reasons both fair and unfair, it is burdened with today. The New Republican Party I am speaking about is going to have room for the man and the woman in the factories, for the farmer, for the cop on the beat and the millions of Americans who may never have thought of joining our party before, but whose interests coincide with those represented by principled Republicanism. If we are to attract more working men and women of this country, we will do so not by simply “making room” for them, but by making certain they have a say in what goes on in the party…
The New Republican Party I envision is one that will energetically seek out the best candidates for every elective office, candidates who not only agree with, but understand, and are willing to fight for a sound, honest economy, for the interests of American families and neighborhoods and communities and a strong national defense. And these candidates must be able to communicate those principles to the American people in language they understand.

Reagan wanted to fundamentally transform the GOP, and organize it around the principle of freedom. Party elites like being the “dime store New Deal” party. Who was the establishment candidate running against Reagan in the 1980 primary? George H. W. Bush.

Comparing any candidate to Ronald Reagan at this point is an exercise in futility. Every candidate claims they are Ronald Reagan, even if they have more in common with Nelson Rockefeller. However, some parallels between President Reagan and Governor Palin are undeniable. The most obvious example would be their respective abilities to drive the establishment of the Republican Party berserk.

The establishment is lining up to stop a potential presidential run from Sarah Palin, as Politico reported:

Top Republicans in Washington and in the national GOP establishment say the 2010 campaign highlighted an urgent task that they will begin in earnest as soon as the elections are over: Stop Sarah Palin.
Interviews with advisers to the main 2012 presidential contenders and with other veteran Republican operatives make clear they see themselves on a common, if uncoordinated, mission of halting the momentum and credibility Palin gained with conservative activists by plunging so aggressively into this year’s midterm campaigns…
“There is a determined, focused establishment effort … to find a candidate we can coalesce around who can beat Sarah Palin,” said one prominent and longtime Washington Republican. “We believe she could get the nomination, but Barack Obama would crush her.”

Now the First Family of the GOP establishment is going on the offensive against Governor Palin:

In the same interview the Bushes refused to say a bad word about Barack Obama or Bill Clinton. Democrats are out of bounds, but movement conservatives are fair game. What the establishment fails to understand is that their ganging-up against Governor Palin only improves her chances. It was the “kinder, gentler” conservatism of George H. W. Bush and the elites in the party that the voters have rejected. Conversely, the conservatism of Ronald Reagan, Newt Gingrich and Sarah Palin, built around the organizing principle of freedom, is a sure winner.

Palin on Inflation and Liberty

Posted on by
1

Governor Palin recently sat down with Judge Andrew Napolitano to discuss the policies of the Federal Reserve, fiscal policy in general, and what she expects from elected officialis who are identified with the Tea Party:

Part 1:

Part 2:

Sarah Palin is the only serious presidential candidate taking the Federal reserve to task. Restoring integrity to the dollar and combating inflation was a key tenet of President Reagan’s. Reagan called inflation “as violent as a mugger, as frightening as an armed robber, and as deadly as a hit man.” Inflation is a backdoor tax on Americans.

In their quixotic quest to jump-start the economy through monetary policy, the Federal Reserve has been printing trillions of new dollars, the latest manifestation being the QE2 (quantitative easing) policy. The problem is, due to the uncertain environment created by Obama’s vacillation on tax rates, in conjunction with the Democrats’ anti-business rhetoric and policies, and excessive government spending, businesses and investors do not know what to expect.

In an uncertain environment it is not possible to plan for the future. Not being able to plan for the future prevents businesses from expanding and creating new jobs. In uncertain times people or institutions with money hold onto their capital, waiting for the storm to pass. The measurement for the rate at which money is circulated is known as the velocity of money/circulation. The current velocity is lower than it has been in half a century. Simply put, that means money is not moving – goods and services are not being exchanged. With this low velocity the Fed can print all this money and no one notice it in their day-to-day transactions. The new money is not put into circulation due to the uncertain environment. However, once more predictable times come, there will be trillions of new dollars introduced into the stabilized economy. The rapid increase in the velocity of money will create too many dollars chasing to few goods – inflation. The net result will be substantial devaluation of cash savings that people have accumulated.

It is imperative that the next President restore integrity to the dollar and fight off inflation. Once again, remember, the devaluation of the greenback is a covert way for the government to essentially raise taxes. When inflation strikes the value of saving decline while the prices of goods increase. Inflationary policies have the same effect on you that a tax increase would – you have less spending power (of course, inflation causes many other problems).

On another note, Palin’s admonition that the government does not have a revenue problem, it has a spending problem is Reaganesque The argument that tax cuts cost the government money displays a total lack of respect for property rights. Besides the fact that tax cuts raise government revenues, income is the property of the earner, not the government. Taxes represent the amount of personal property that the government seizes. ‘Lost revenue’ to the government assumes that capital belongs to the government and they decide how much you are allowed to keep. this notion is the basis of the elitist mentality that plagues both parties. Governor Plain’s statement, almost a throwaway line, demonstrates a different understanding of the role of government. Plain’s instinctual reflex is that earners, not the government, are the rightful owners of the fruits of their labor. This is sadly a rarity in government.

All in all, this was a very encouraging interview from the woman that will lead the GOP to the White House in 2012.

(H/T to TRS on the video)

PDS Sufferers Latest Scandal: Tea Party Manipulating Dancing with the Stars

Posted on by
2

In what is potentially the dumbest Palin controversy ever ginned up by PDS (Palin Derangement Syndrome) sufferers (sorry Andrew Sullivan), the media is investigating claims that Tea Party members are flooding the lines on ‘Dancing With the Stars’ to advance Bristol Palin, the eldest daughter of Governor Palin. What the controversy is is beyond me. Isn’t the point of the show for the audience to vote for their favorite dancers?

In this video, one of many that could have been used, ‘respected’ newsman George Stephanopoulos actually dedicated an entire segment of a news program to investigating this ‘controversy’:

You could not make this stuff up. It is beyond absurd that the alleged news media is weaving up a conspiracy about Tea Party voting on a reality(?) TV show. When did Robert Welch start writing the news?

(H/t Hot Air)

Update: This story keeps on getting better. From the Smoking Gun:

Man Shoots TV Over Bristol Palin Dancing

Steven Cowan, 66, allegedly became so enraged by Palin’s success that he actually fired a shotgun round into his television, triggering a 15-hour standoff with Wisconsin cops.

According to a criminal complaint, Cowan’s wife called police Monday evening to report that her husband had blasted the TV and was threatening to kill himself. Cowan, who had been drinking, became angry while watching Palin, 20, perform on the ABC program.

As Palin was dancing, Cowan “jumped up and swore, saying something to the effect of, ‘The fucking politics.’ Steven was upset that a political figure’s daughter was dancing on this particular show when Steven did not think that she was a good dancer,” the complaint notes.

Strictly Right Radio episode 71

Posted on by

Did Ari and Andrew catch Sarah Palin’s Alaska on TLC? You Betcha! Discussions on airport security, the debt commission, Canadian protectionism, free speech and more, all on this action packed episode of Strictly Right.

Listen Online:

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

Subscribe to Strictly Right Radio in iTunes.

Conservatism Wins Every Time It’s Tried

Posted on by
4

Rob Ford’s election puts to rest the myth that conservatives have to compromise their principles to win.

When Rob Ford announced his intention run for mayor of Toronto you would not have been blamed for laughing at the proposition. Toronto is quite possibly the most liberal city in North America. The current mayor, who was elected for two consecutive terms, is a shade to the left of Fidel Castro. No way would Toronto elect an unapologetic, uncompromising conservative, or so the thinking went. However, Rob Ford ran a campaign grounded in common sense conservatism. And he won an overwhelming victory.

If conservatism can win in Toronto in can win anywhere. Rob Ford being elected Mayor of Toronto would be like Sarah Palin being elected Governor of New York. The lesson is, conservatism wins. The ‘experts’ incessantly tell us that the only way conservatives can win is by moderating, and becoming leftist-lite. In reality, milquetoast conservatives lose. If the only option is between a principled big spender  and an unprincipled big spender, why would voters ever go for the unprincipled option?

Instead of trying to appease the pseudo-conservative intelligentsia, conservatives should focus on first principles. Common sense ideas like low taxes and limited government are sure winners. Whenever conservatism is on the ballot, it wins. The most difficult challenge is getting conservatism on the ballot.

Establishment party officials do their best to smear, defame and defeat conservatives within their own party. Remember, this year’s batch of Tea Party backed candidates had to take on their own party, often in hotly contested primaries. In fact, many in the establishment refused to endorse victorious Tea Party candidates (see: Crist, Charlie). The ruling class fears citizen legislators who are inspired by a belief in limited government.

Despite the best efforts of the elites and their toadies in the media, conservatism wins. Rob Ford’s victory should embolden conservatives everywhere.

Media Coverage of Sarah Palin v. Kirsten Gillibrand

Posted on by
Reply

Remember in 2008 when the media reported that Republican staffers accused the Palins of being “Wasilla hillbillies looting Neiman Marcus from coast to coast”? That very same media that ran headlines like “RNC shells out $150K for Palin fashion,” “Palin Clothes Spending Has Dems Salivating, Republicans Disgusted,” and “Sarah Palin’s Shopping Spree: Yes, There’s More...” As it turned out, tales of the Palin’s shopping sprees were proved to be utterly false. However, in a move shocking to none, the media is singing a different tune when it comes to a Democrat’s shopping habits.

November’s edition of Vogue magazine (otherwise known as ‘the bible’ over at Strictly Pop) has a six-page spread featuring Harry Reid’s “hottest member” of the Senate, Kirsten Gillibrand. Politico reports that:

The Vogue feature shows a different side of the senator, too: On one recent evening, Gillibrand hit Saks Fifth Avenue in Manhattan for Fashion’s Night Out, where she tried on clothes, chatted up designers and even hit the dance floor where, as Van Meter puts it, “she cut it up like a seasoned pro.”

Isn’t that nice. So happy to hear that Sen. Gillibrand enjoyed her “fashion night out,” whatever that means. When conservatives buy clothes they are ‘out of touch’ and insensitive to the plight of the indigent. When liberals go on shopping sprees they are lauded.

Jonathan Van Meter, who wrote the Vogue story, commented “She wasn’t worried about how it was going to be perceived, and I loved how she wasn’t concerned about that. Some women lawmakers refuse to be fashionable and [Vogue Editor-in-Chief] Anna Wintour thinks, ‘Well, why can’t you be?’” Now we’re heaping adulation on politicians that don’t care about how their actions will be interpreted by their constituents. One can only wonder what Mario Cuomo thinks about Sen. Gillibrand’s lack of compassion.

The media double standard is once again on full display. Sarah Plain is described as an unfit mother because she entered politics. On the other hand, Nancy Pelosi ‘balanced the country on one knee, her family on the other’ when she was elected Speaker in 2006. The Palins were smeared for the RNC buying outfits for them, without the consent of Palins. Meanwhile, the left reports on how wonderful it is that Sen. Gillibrand is getting her ‘close-up.’