► Show Top 10 Hot Links

Posts Tagged ‘Sarah Palin’

In Defense of Sarah Palin

by Mojambo ( 336 Comments › )
Filed under Politics, Republican Party at March 29th, 2010 - 10:30 am

Whatever shortcomings and inexperience that Governor Palin has – nobody should doubt her patriotism, common sense, decency, and commitment to victory.  I think she deserved a better running mate then who she had in 2008.  Norman Podhoretz, one of the greatest post war intellectuals of our time, points out that her instincts are far better then those of her so-called  critics. What annoys the hell out of me is when mediocrities such as Colin Powell, David Frum,  and Kathleen Parker question her competence as opposed to the lying sack of spit who now occupies the oval office. Btw catch the reference to “Iowahawk”.

by Norman Podhoretz

Nothing annoys certain of my fellow conservative intellectuals more than when I remind them, as on occasion I mischievously do, that the derogatory things they say about Sarah Palin are uncannily similar to what many of their forebears once said about Ronald Reagan.

It’s hard to imagine now, but 31 years ago, when I first announced that I was supporting Reagan in his bid for the 1980 Republican presidential nomination, I was routinely asked by friends on the right how I could possibly associate myself with this “airhead,” this B movie star, who was not only stupid but incompetent. They readily acknowledged that his political views were on the whole close to ours, but the embarrassing primitivism with which he expressed them only served, they said, to undermine their credibility. In any case, his base was so narrow that he had no chance of rescuing us from the disastrous administration of Jimmy Carter.

[…]

podhoretz
Associated Press

What I am trying to say is not that Sarah Palin would necessarily make a great president but that the criteria by which she is being judged by her conservative critics—never mind the deranged hatred she inspires on the left—tell us next to nothing about the kind of president she would make.

Take, for example, foreign policy. True, she seems to know very little about international affairs, but expertise in this area is no guarantee of wise leadership. After all, her rival for the vice presidency, who in some sense knows a great deal, was wrong on almost every major issue that arose in the 30 years he spent in the Senate.

What she does know—and in this respect, she does resemble Reagan—is that the United States has been a force for good in the world, which is more than Barack Obama, whose IQ is no doubt higher than hers, has yet to learn. Jimmy Carter also has a high IQ, which did not prevent him from becoming one of the worst presidents in American history, and so does Bill Clinton, which did not prevent him from befouling the presidential nest.

Unlike her enemies on the left, the conservative opponents of Mrs. Palin are a little puzzling. After all, except for its greater intensity, the response to her on the left is of a piece with the liberal hatred of Richard Nixon, Reagan and George W. Bush. It was a hatred that had less to do with differences over policy than with the conviction that these men were usurpers who, by mobilizing all the most retrograde elements of American society, had stolen the country from its rightful (liberal) rulers. But to a much greater extent than Nixon, Reagan and George W. Bush, Sarah Palin is in her very being the embodiment of those retrograde forces and therefore potentially even more dangerous.

[…]

Read the rest here: In Defense of Sarah Palin

Texas-Sized Lesson

by Mojambo ( 156 Comments › )
Filed under Elections 2010, George W. Bush, Republican Party at March 5th, 2010 - 11:00 am

Although not an expert on Texas politics,  I do recognize a Republican (think John McCain) who has spent far too much time developing Potomac fever and her name is Kay Bailey Hutchison. I am particularly glad that the author called out the Bush/Rove/Karen Hughes  “new tone” strategy mentality of being gentlemen and reaching out to your opponents. I know that Rick Perry seems to have Texas’s economy in a lot better shape then most states and as far as Medina goes – that 9/11 Troofer moment on Beck’s show was a bit much.

by C. Edmund Wright

While the ever-helpful Jurassic media is trying to force-feed conservatives and Republicans groupthink analysis of Rick Perry’s thumping of Kay Bailey Hutchison (KBH), the GOP had better heed the main lesson: The “new tone” era is over.

Consider: The political team and concepts that dominated the Lone Star State just ten years ago and subsequently engineered two presidential elections just got whipped in what amounts to an intramural contest in their own state.

KBH’s incompetent primary campaign was itself a caricature of the senior senator — and it was precisely that caricature that her opponents wanted to portray. Perry and Tea Party candidate Debra Medina did not have to do much but get out of the way and let the KBH campaign prove that the senior senator and her top advisers were indeed all creatures of Washington who are hopelessly out of touch.

And for some reason, Hutchison, along with advisers Karl Rove and Karen Hughes, thought that the best way to counter this was to bring in George Bush 41, George Bush 43, and James Baker to campaign. Were John McCain, Bob Dole, and Olympia Snowe too busy to come?

Oh, and to top it off, the Hutchison campaign ads featured endorsements from the traditional liberal newspapers. Conversely, Perry brought in Sarah Palin to campaign for him and proudly addressed numerous tea party rallies.

[…]

… Remember that Rove was the architect of Bush’s “new tone” governing and communications strategy that was implemented right after Bush was declared the winner in 2000. The new tone was much like being able to “work with people.” The first new tone decision was to not even debate the national raw vote situation, a decision that still fuels anti-Republican sentiment to this day.

The bottom line is that the new tone was never called for by Americans. To think so was to be rather tone-deaf. Any strategy based on the assumption that people just could not get along — and ignores the possibility of legitimate and deep ideological divides — misses the point. By definition, the new tone more or less meant not debating your opponents very vigorously before compromising with them on almost everything.

Read the rest here: Texas-Sized Lesson: The New Tone Era Is Over

Katie Couric: Return of the Palin Slayer

by Mojambo ( 197 Comments › )
Filed under Politics at February 15th, 2010 - 1:15 pm

I never understood and never will, the attraction that Katie Couric holds for so many people. First off the woman is 53 and is still called “Katie”?  Second – I personally am not into “perkiness”. Third, she is not very bright and belongs more with the Barbara Walters School of “Feelings” Journalism. In fact I expect her one day to be a regular on The View. When she asked Sarah Palin what newspapers she read I wish Sarah would have asked her what newspapers she herself reads. I never could understand why the alphabet networks go for the Couric’s and Diane Sawyer’s to host their evening news while a splendid newsman such as Brit Hume is shunted aside (another reason we should be grateful for having Fox News – they hired him to anchor “Special Report”).

by Stuart Schwartz

You know they’re worried.

Big government, big media, big Barack — they’re all worried. And they’ve brought in the knight in designer armor, the savior of all that is Washington and New York and Rodeo Drive, privileged and Democratic — Katie Couric.

Katie the Palin Slayer is back.

The CBS Evening News anchor is on the cover of Harper’s Bazaar this month, all progressive chic and mainstream media glitter. And just a week ago, she genuflected before Barack Obama to open the Super Bowl on CBS.

[…]

Neither her eighth cover for the glamor magazine nor the Super Bowl interview are meant to inform. Instead, in concert with the White House, Katie is hitting the “reset” button on a failing presidency. I’m-Katie-Couric-and-I’m-here-to-admire-you. Barack, Nancy, Harry, Rahm — don’t worry, got you covered.

They need Katie and her media platform. The Tea Party is gaining ground, The U.S. Congress and Obama job approval ratings are at historic lows, newspapers — long an arm of the Democratic Party — are failing at a record rate, and the networks — bastions of liberalism — are hemorrhaging viewers.

And — OMG!!! — Sarah Palin is back! Quick, hand me the wooden stakes and call Katie!  Katie Couric isn’t doing journalism; rather (or…Rather), she is 911 for the Obama agenda.  The natives are restless, and who better to call on than Katie the Palin Slayer?

And so Katie has again swung into action. Hail the “conquering Couric,” the Washington Post exults, “a power broker in stiletto heels.” Katie’s back, and as Robert Browning might have written had he been funded by a grant from the Obama administration, “the condom’s back on the banana — all’s right with the world.” (The original line read “God’s in his heaven”; this is Obama safe schools czar Browning, National Endowment for the Humanities poetry.)

Of course, she had no choice. You see, Katie hearts Barack. They are part of what New York Times columnist David Brooks proudly calls the “intellectual class,” a political and media elite that knows what’s best for the rest of us.

[…]

Read the rest: Katie Couric: Return of the Palin Slayer

Sarah Palin’s friendship

by Mojambo ( 73 Comments › )
Filed under Barack Obama, Iran, Israel at February 12th, 2010 - 5:30 pm

Caroline Glick nails it on the head regarding who Sarah Palin supports and who hates her. I think that it is shameful that so many people who should know better take a condescending and snobbish approach to the woman with the different accent and the area from which she was raised. I am not one of those who wants Sarah to run for president, but right now she is the only one standing up and rallying opposition to the Obama agenda. To treat a friend (Sarah)  as an enemy and an enemy (Obama) as a friend – that is the very definition of folly and ingratitude.

by Caroline Glick

US President Barack Obama is an inept, incompetent leader. More than his failure to pass his domestic agenda on healthcare and global warming despite his Democratic Party’s control over both houses of Congress, Iran’s announcement on Thursday that it is a nuclear power and has the capacity to produce weapons-grade uranium is a testament to Obama’s feckless incompetence. Even his most ardent supporters are admitting this.Take the New York Times. In a news analysis Thursday of Obama’s failure to prevent Iran from advancing with its nuclear program, David Sanger wrote that for Obama, the last year has been “a year in which little in his dealings with Iran has gone the way that the White House expected.”

Since Obama first announced his wish to sit down with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad at a Democratic presidential candidates’ debate in the spring of 2008, the 44th US President’s only strategy for dealing with Iran has been to appease its leaders. And as of Tuesday, he still believes that ingratiating himself with the regime is his best bet.

On Tuesday Obama wouldn’t admit that appeasement has failed even as all of Iran’s top leaders said they were expanding their illicit uranium enrichment activities. The most he would do was acknowledge that the regime’s leaders “have made their choice so far, although the door is still open.”

As for sanctions, well, Obama said it will take “several weeks” to put those together at the UN.

The distressing truth is that Obama’s aim has never been to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. His whole “sanctions-if-engagement-fails” strategy is just a ruse. The Obama administration has never intended to place sanctions on Iran. As one senior administration official told the New York Times, the purpose of the sanctions talk is to get the Iranians to agree to negotiate. As he put it, “This is about driving them back to negotiations, because the real goal here is to avoid war.”

Got that? As far as Obama is concerned, Iran with nuclear weapons isn’t the main concern. Israel using force to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons is the main concern.

——————————

On Saturday, former Alaska governor and Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin gave the keynote address at the Tea Party Movement convention in Nashville, TN. As she did in the presidential campaign, Palin electrified her audience in Nashville by credibly channeling the populist impulses of American voters. In her signature line she asked, “So how’s that hopey changey stuff working out for ya?”

Palin excoriated Obama on his handling of US foreign policy. Among other things, she noted that a year into his quest to appease dictators, America’s international standing is in shambles. “Israel, a friend and a critical ally now questions the strength of our support,” she added.

Palin bellowed that on issues of foreign policy, there is no room for self-delusion. As she put it, “National security, that’s the one place where you’ve got to call it like it is.” And then, “We need a foreign policy that distinguishes America’s friends from her enemies and recognizes the true nature of the threats that we face.”

——————————

Palin, who is considering a run in the 2012 Republican presidential primaries is using her public platforms to reassemble the coalition of security hawks, social conservatives and blue collar workers which propelled Ronald Reagan to the White House in 1980. Her support for Israel serves her in building support among both security hawks and social conservatives.

Unlike Obama’s empty protestations of support for Israel, Palin’s support is obviously heartfelt and therefore will not diminish while Obama remains in office. And as Palin becomes stronger, her ability to influence the US debate in a manner that constrains Obama’s freedom to intimidate Israel into allowing Iran to become a nuclear power will rise.

Read the rest here: Sarah Palin’s friendship