Categorized | Sidebar Open Thread

Open Thread

The Charlotte Allen LA Times article about how the Governor may be the cure for the GOP in 2016 has now been published in the Dallas Morning News and the Chicago Tribune. Hopefully more major newspapers will publish the editorial.

Here’s a flashback to a previous Thanksgiving message from the Governor from a year ago.


Comment Policy: The Editors reserve the right to delete any comments which in their sole discretion are deemed false or misleading, profane, pornographic, defamatory, harassment, name calling, libelous, threatening, or otherwise inappropriate. Additionally, the Editors reserve the right to ban any registered poster who, in their sole discretion, violates the terms of use. Do not post any information about yourself reasonably construed as private or confidential. Conservatives4Palin and its contributors are not liable if users allow others to contact them offsite.

  • BrianusBerkleianus

    My Dear Friends in Sarah,

    Happy Friday to you all!!!

    I hope that you all enjoyed a blessed and peaceful and happy Thanksgiving.

    I know that MILLIONS of American Patriots are grateful and thankful to the All-Highest for the safe return home of Track in time for the holidays.

    Yes, unparalleled and unprecedented hatred has been directed and hurled and flung against the beautiful Heath/Palin family these last four years because they, both through their words and through WHAT THEY ARE, have defended and upheld American ideals.

    As is often the case, the haters make a lot of noise, and spew forth much noisome smog and smoke.

    BUT …

    Countless Americans quietly love this special family, and have joined hearts and prayers in gratitude at the safe return of a Citizen Warrior to his own.

    I suspect that Sarah and her dear ones have little conception of the myriads of Americans who have not forgotten, will not forget, cannot forget all that they have done and suffered and wrought for the Res Publica Americana.

    NUMQUAM OBLIVISCEMUR–We Shall Never Forget!!!

    I am posting again a piece from ten days ago. It posited twenty reasons in support of a very early announcement by the Governor for a 2016 POTUS run. Many "liked" this piece when it was posted on 13 November. Some objected to parts of it.

    That is what is great about our side, as opposed to the lock-step slaves and hordes of the Left: We can have honest and cordial disagreements that do not sunder the bonds of our friendship and comradeship in arms.

    So here again is that post from a week and a half ago.

    May the Will of the All-Highest be done and accomplished in the life of Sarah and in the life of America!!

    God bless, All!!

    Palin/West 2016–Deo Volente!!



    My Dear Friends in Sarah,

    Happy Tuesday to you all!!

    I would like to throw out an out-of-the box idea for your consideration this fine autumn morning. The Governor has never been a conventional or traditional politician; rather, she is a far-seeing stateswoman, who does things her own way ("I did it my way")… and her critics and enemies be damned.

    She should announce her run for the Presidency NOW!!

    OK, now that I have your attention :-), let me modify this statement a bit. She should declare her candidacy literally today, or, better, a couple of months from now, the night before or the night after obama’s second "inauguration."

    Here are a number of arguments to support such a move. Some of them may OVERLAP with others. Some or all of them may turn out, on examination, to bear little weight and merit. I am, after all, no political expert (Hell no!!), but just a simple citizen from Berkeley, California who hates what the Left is doing and has been doing to America for many years, and who loves America and loves our dear Sarah.

    We need to SHAKE things up, in my very humble opinion; Sarah needs, again IMHO, to shake things up–if the Good Lord so guides her.

    So, here goes:


    1) It IS an out-of-the-box idea, one that would stun and shake up the whole political Establishment. When one takes initiative, sudden and relentless initiative, in any field of human endeavor, one has psychological and mental momentum on one’s side.

    2) Such a move could UNITE CONSERVATIVES EARLY behind one candidate. It could forestall and block RINO efforts to do what they did this past election cycle: Set up several "stalking-horse" "conservative" candidates to divide our side, and allow the chosen RINO to come down the middle, as Romney did this last time.

    3) It would reward her millions of supporters, who waited so long for her to announce last time–and she never did. This time we would have the joy of a very early announcement.

    4) It would put immediate pressure on obama, on Speaker Boehner, and on the whole Federal government: The Cuda is watching you!!!

    5) It could bring back people to her banner that do like her, but were DISILLUSIONED when she did not run last time.

    6) She could start raising money right now, and organizing right now.

    7) The move could trick the Left and the RINOs into unloading their wrath EARLY on her–immediately upon her announcement they will go crazy, and attack, attack, attack; ridicule, ridicule, ridicule … and then the STORM will have passed, and she will be relatively immune from such attacks, because the public will be numbed from them, and such tactics will cease to resonate with many people when it counts–in 2016.

    8) She would thus make herself de facto head of the GOP, and especially the leader of the OPPOSITION to obama.

    9) She would constitute herself as the leader for the 2014 mid-term elections, in order to take back the Senate and consolidate the hold on the House–and maybe push for a new Speaker of the House.

    10) She would LIFT UP THE SPIRITS of millions of Americans, especially in the ARMED FORCES, who are severely demoralized by obama’s "reelection."

    11) It could head off any efforts to make the GOP a Democrat-lite Party, competing with the Dems in the giving away of "stuff."

    12) It would draw the fire of the Left on HERSELF, leaving, e.g., 2014 conservative Senate candidates relatively free from enemy fire.

    13) It could serve to distract obama from his mission to destroy America–Sarah has "lived in his head" since August/September, 2008, and really would after such a move.

    14) She would constitute herself as America’s SHADOW PRESIDENT, until we can formally oust the usurping regime in Washington, DC.

    15) She would thunderously raise RONALD REAGAN’S battle standard of BOLD COLORS, not PALE PASTELS.

    16) America, in the person of the Governor, would be standing up early, right at the start of obama’s second term, and saying, "We’re mad as Hell, and we won’t take this S*** anymore, ‘mr. president’!!!"

    17) It would serve as the casting down of AMERICA’S gauntlet, the SOUNDING OF AMERICA’S WARNING–We Shall Never Surrender!!

    18) If she announces the night before or after the "messiah’s" second inauguration, she would steal some of his thunder, in precisely the way that Senator McCain’s VP announcement on Sarah Palin Day, 29 August, 2008 in Dayton, Ohio, stole the thunder of obama’s "Styrofoam Greek columns" acceptance speech at the DNC in Denver the night before.

    19) If she simultaneously announces Lt. Col. Allen West as her VP choice, it would be a direct hit back at the new Congress, whose RINO leaders, through the device of redistricting, have tried to drive a great Patriot from the halls of Washington.

    20) IT WOULD BE SIMILAR TO WASHINGTON’S CROSSING OF THE DELAWARE on Christmas Day, 1776. The British and their Hessian mercenaries were settled comfortably into winter quarters. They were not expecting a fight. Patriots were demoralized. Washington struck out across the Delaware, attacked the Hessians at Trenton, New Jersey, won a signal victory, lifted up the hearts of Americans everywhere, and saved the Revolution–by a BOLD and totally unexpected move!!

    Anyway, these are just some ideas for contemplation on a chill autumn morning.

    God bless you all always!!

    DEO VOLENTE, SARAH 2016!!!


    • Pete Petretich

      I also like the idea of her announcing early. Should she also announce her VP early?

      • BrianusBerkleianus

        IMHO, YES–especially since Colonel West will not be in Congress.

        Thanks, Pete!!

        • Pete Petretich

          I hope this is the reason she’s been quiet lately.

          She would also have to walk away from her fancy Fox RINO News contract, which would help undercut the bogus story that she’s in it for the money…

        • Anno76

          Ooooooo, now two former politicians without a title. They won’t have to worry about being called "quitters" while running. Will rooooobiiiiiiiiiooooooooo or crispy cream be holding some type of office in 2016 and if they are, will they be labeled as "quitters?"

          PALIN/WEST 2016

          • BrianusBerkleianus

            Hi, Ann!!

            PALIN/WEST 2016!!!

            God bless.

          • MaMcGriz

             I don’t know. I reckon we’ll just have to watch the letterman show and find out, won’t we?

            snrk snrk snrrrrrk. :)

    • wisetrog

      Why should she draw the fire of the left on herself and risk losing 2016 just like 2012 for no reason?

      • BrianusBerkleianus

        Greetings, wisetrog!!

        The purport of my remark was that she would divert fire from other conservatives, which could help THEM to win in 2014, and would not prevent HER from winning in 2016 (she has already been attacked so very much, and yet she still stands).

        I.e., we get more conservatives in Congress in ’14, and President-Elect Sarah in 2016!!

        God bless.

      • WilliamShipley

        Because Sarah Palin has to either remove herself from the political field or draw the fire of the left.  She can’t ‘wait it out’, it will never go away.  The RINO + LEFT coalition has done her a lot of damage, including among people who vote Republican but haven’t been watching her closely.

        If she is going to make a run for President at some point, she is going to have to stop talking about ‘not needing a title’ and ‘not putting your faith in a politician’ and put herself forward as a Presidential candidate and begin making the case.  She has to say "I am the best candidate for President and here is why."

        She is never going to be reluctantly chosen by acclimation, she isn’t Washington or Eisenhauer being famous for winning a war.  She will have to fight to have the majority of the people know what she stands for.

        I personally think she should announce that she is a ‘likely’ candidate and begin the process. 

      • Elwanda Burrell

         Sarah Palin will be in the line of fire anyway she goes…..Romney lost in 2012 Sarah didn’t lose!!!!!

    • wpmwindsong

      Brianus, with all due respects, this talk about unity with Sarah rings really hollow for me when this site did nothing but not unify with her in 2012 regarding Romney.  I too have suggested that if she had intentions to run in 2016, she needed to do so as early as possible; but that is living in a fool’s paradise if anyone thinks that’s going to happen. 

      And while I agree with your statement, "Yes, unparalleled and unprecedented hatred has been directed and hurled and flung against the beautiful Heath/Palin family these last four years because they, both through their words and through WHAT THEY ARE, have defended and upheld American ideals", the same can be said of the Romney family who have been vilified by not only Obama with hundreds of millions of dollars of negative ads more than was spent against McCain but by none other than the supposed followers of the right who chose to drag their feet and actively demean in the vilest of terms the ticket that Palin supported 100%. 

      More people voted for Romney/Ryan than McCain/Palin, and Franklin Graham called out those who were the reason that Obama won.  Where was the unity there that Sarah clearly said was going to be?   People are saying that Romney ran a bad campaign, but he still got more votes than McCain while it seems that people are admitting that he did not get some votes because he basically "sucked".   That is an admission that there were many who should have voted who chose not to for reasons unrelated to defeating Obama. 

      If those who supposedly stand for freedom and liberty could not stand with Sarah, and Graham, for a candidate who represented the best alternative on the 2012 ballot in terms of values, experience, platform, and ability to get this country turned around, why would you expect unity around someone else?

      • wodiej

        well said.

        • jerseymark

          Really? Here is the problem with that point of view – Obama received several million votes less this time around than 2008 which raises the question, where did those votes go? Since, as BB points out, it appears that Romney/Ryan received about 700000 votes less than McCain/Palin, they certainly did not go to Mitt. Considering that the estimate of conservatives who stayed home in 2008 is 4 million, it is clear that Mitt’s strategy of ignoring his conservative base bit him in the rear.

          Now, the idea that just because Sarah indicated her support for Mitt and wanted us all to "unite" behind him fails to take into account the bedrock understanding that Sarah has concerning conservatives and her supporters in particular – namely that we think for ourselves. We also know that her support was less than completely enthusiastic and that in large part was perfunctory since she is still a "Republican". The fact that some here do not agree with the arguments that a Romney win could actually damage long term the conservative movement does not mean that such arguments have no weight. I did vote for Mitt as did my family but I was one who was quite concerned about the long term impact of his victory on the one hand and the possible long term benefits of an Obama second term. 

          • fb274

             What long term benefits are we to see from an obama second term?  I have read of possibilities of taking over 401Ks, IRAs of individuals to dole out in miniscule amounts monthly, taxes to be increased, insurance premiums to be increased, military diminished, welfare recipients to be increased from more job losses, more jobs lost from declaring more endangered species and curtailing the ability for the US to produce energy to make it self-sufficient.  Thanks, but I don’t particularly like HIS benefits and even though Romney was not my ideal candidate, he certainly would have been better than this FRAUD getting another 4 years of saying "I won".  My hope for him will be indictment and a long term in Leavenworth for all of the acts to date that are beyond the law and lying about them.

          • wodiej

            based on some statistics posted by Ron Paul supporters, if they had voted for Romney in the swing states, he would have won.  It’s too bad when people think staying home is preferable to saving their country.

      • BrianusBerkleianus

        Hi, wpm!

        With all due respect, my reply is simple: Mitt Romney is no Sarah Palin.

        People who were not inspired and fired by Mitt would be inspired via a Sarah candidacy, IMHO.

        Also, at least from a check of the internet, I find that Romney-Ryan did NOT get more popular votes than McCain-Palin.  It was McCain-Palin 59,948,323 to Romney-Ryan 59,134,475, by my research.

        God bless!

        • stevethird

          I’m with you Brian. I don’t think it is a stretch to presume that many did not vote for Mitt because of the very personalized and disdainful  beating he gave the Tea Party wing at the convention. The phony aye/nay vote counting comes to mind. Please don’t anyone say it didn’t happen…I watched with my own eyes for days. I had difficulty voting for Mitt. I had difficulty making phone calls for Mitt. I wrote him a check and got a sticker not because I wanted to, but because in the end I felt I HAD to. On the Left-Right spectrum I would place myself about 85% to the right. What that means to me is this;  If I had trouble pulling the lever for Romney, I can completely understand how the millions of people further right than I am would have had even more trouble than me, and some would, in fact, not have been able to do it all. And oh, btw, It’s true, Sarah Palin was a good soldier, and urged us all to vote for him, but I think she suspected he might lose, and that she would be blamed if she didn’t support him in some measure. She wouldn’t mention his name until shortly before election day, and even her election eve "endorsement" was more anti-Obama than Pro-Romney. Oh and let’s not forget, 10,000,000 fewer people (give or take a million) voted for Hussein this time around. Ten million votes floating in space looking for a place to land that MItt Romney and, more significantly, the GOPe could not provide a home for. All people who could not vote again for failed policies, but couldn’t commit to offensive elitism either, so on election day instead of voting, they went and got a cheeseburger instead. This isn’t about Sarah and in the end it isn’t even about Mitt…it’s about a dying political party that was served up a gopher ball, 75mph right down the pipe, and whiffed.

          • BrianusBerkleianus

            Thanks, Steve!

            And while I am an NFL (Raiders) and NCAA (Cal Bears) football fan, I can’t wait for baseball spring training …
            … I love your baseball metaphor at the end!

            God bless.

        • wpmwindsong

           Brianus, again with all due respect:

          1. If you check,_2012, you will find that the total for Romney currently is 60,103,685, and it increases daily as the vote is updated.  If you check in tomorrow, it will be greater.   

          2. The McCain number is based on the final number reported on January 20, 2009. I would not be surprised if Romney’s vote count ends up closer to Bush’s 62 million votes than McCain’s 60-million votes when all is said and done.

          3.  If Romney got more votes than McCain, and some of Romney’s votes were votes that he took away from Obama, which I would put in the range of half of the Obama 9.5 million votes that he beat McCain by, just who are you suggesting of the 4.5 million McCain’s voters who decided not to vote in 2012 when there was no doubt about Obama’s intent for another 4 years?  

          Are you suggesting it was the Palin voters who were not inspired?  Those 4.5 million voters would have defeated Obama’s 64.25 votes, which included all of the fraudulent and bribed Obama votes.  It is always hard to face reality, but Franklin Graham is not one to make assertions wildly.

          You are right that Romney is no Palin, but neither is Palin a Romney.  They both have, and had, strengths that were essential to restore America.  They drew a different total vote count; and it appears that Romney drew from the demographics that Sarah said that he needed to rather than the conservative base since he already had it, ie the independents and the Reagan Democrats.  It is just unfortunate that her base chose not to follow her lead.   Not good. 

          • lanahi

            Who cares what the comparative vote count was?  McCain and Romney were both losers.

        • Elwanda Burrell

           Romney/GOPe threw Sarah Palin, the Tea Party and Ron Paul’s supports under the bus and said you have to vote for me……not as easy to vote under the bus!!!!!! 

          • BrianusBerkleianus

            Thanks, Elwanda!

        • blueniner

          We have some here that would just love to say Romney had more votes that McCain Palin, they seem obsessed with bringing this up daily, its like they have a scoreboard with a tally, just to make others wrong, Im kind of sick of them.

      • Guest

        You have lost all sense of reason.

        Governor Sarah Palin and Governor Romney’s administrations were polar opposites. Governor Palin fought the CBC. Many conservatives have left the gop because of the CBC who have taken back the controls of the party since Reagan and have shut out the voices of the grassroots.

        Voting for Romney was a vote for the status quo of the CBC. Evidence of that fact was the "Rules Change" at the convention, continuing to make Boehner Speaker, Boehner’s shutting out any conservatives from leadership positions, Boehner getting rid of West, and Boehner’s dissing of Michele Bachmann and Steve King etc.

        It is not even worth commenting on your posts any longer as anyone who can put Governor Palin and the CBC poster boy Romney in the same sentence is in total denial.

        You have been the source of Romney Central on this site. From now on I will just delete your posts as you do not wish to hear the truth that the Republican party is O.V.E.R. Conservatives believe they no longer owe their vote to a party that IS Big Government and is moving the country left. And just like their leftists brethren who double down when their backs are against the wall, the the corrupt gopE’s mission is to convince you that you now have to accept illegal immigration. The gopE is fully aware that they no longer have the votes to win. That’s okay with them. They’d rather lose then lose power.

        Get used to losing as that is the "NEW NORMAL" for the gopE. And good luck with your severe case of Stockholm Syndrome.

        • BrianusBerkleianus

          Thanks, JRD!

          Palin/West 2016!!

          God bless.

          • Guest

             It is beyond unreasonable how a supposedly rational human being can see evidence of massive voter fraud in the election and choose to still defend a "pantywaist" who concedes because he never had to fight for anything in his life and believe the pantywaist party is going to ever change anything.

            It is plain as the nose on their face that the gopE only choose to fight conservatives not the leftists. "Better a Democrat than someone who is not one of us!"

            • BrianusBerkleianus

              Sarah of Alaska is a FIGHTER.

              America needs Sarah in these critical times!!

        • Christopher H Fromme

          This is the article that tells about Boehner and his treatment of conservatives.  Forget anything good coming out of the Republican Study Group for 2 years.

        • wpmwindsong

          There was no CBC in Massachusetts.  He fought the liberal Mass Assembly by vetoing over 800 bills (4 per week), of which he was overturned by 700+.  No milk toast there.  Romney was not part of the CBC.  He only served in public office for 4 of his 44 years in the private sector and he served without taxpayer pay.  He balanced 4 state budgets in a row.  Isn’t that what we needed in 2012 and which Palin supported? 

          You are making my point.  It was many on C4P who are the reason that Palin’s call for ABO with Romney/Ryan being the vehicle to do it was ignored.  There seems to be entirely too much joy about Obama winning among some here. 

          • lanahi

            What is the Bible verse:  "Because you are neither hot nor cold, I will spew you out of my mouth." 

            That’s what the voters did too.

            It IS tragic that Obama was reelected, all of us know that.  But the left is showing us more and more that socialism and big government does not work and we don’t want it.  With a Romney win, we would just reluctantly go back to the old status quo.  The status quo is no longer an option with more and more people.

          • Guest

            All you do is spew gopE propaganda. You don’t look up the facts. You just repeat the propaganda. You are making my point. You are D.E.L.U.S.I.O.N.A.L.  and in total denial.

            Romney IS the CBC!

            How did he get that unsecured loan from the FDIC for the Bain bankruptcy?

            FDIC chairman Bill Seidman, who had served as finance chair for Romney’s
            father when he ran for president in 1968.

            Romney’s past that you so conveniently choose to ignore.

            The FDIC documents on the Bain bankruptcy.

            Romney had inserted a poison pill in its loan agreement with the banks:

            Instead of being required to use its cash to pay back the firm’s creditors, the
            money could be pocketed by Bain executives in the form of large bonuses.

            The bonus loophole gave Romney a perverse form of leverage: If the banks and
            the FDIC didn’t give in to his demands and forgive much of Bain’s debts, Romney
            would raid the firm’s coffers, pushing it into the very bankruptcy that the
            loan agreement had been intended to avert. The

            losers in this game would not only be Bain’s creditors – including the federal
            government – but the firm’s nearly 1,000 employees worldwide.

            In March 1992, according to the FDIC documents, Romney approached the banks
            and played the bonus card. Allow Bain to pay off its debt at a deep discount,
            he demanded – just 35 cents on the dollar. Otherwise, the "majority"
            of the firm’s "excess cash" would "be available for the bonus
            pool to its officers at a vice president level and above."

            When the banks balked Romney now demanded that the banks and the government
            agree to a deal that was even less favorable than the last – to retire Bain’s
            debts "at a price up to but not exceeding 30 cents on the dollar."

            The loan agreement engineered by Romney had left the FDIC "virtually
            unsecured" on the $30.6 million it was owed by Bain.

            How had Romney scored such a favorable deal at the FDIC’s expense? It didn’t
            hurt that he had close ties to the agency – the kind of "crony
            capitalism" he now decries. A month before he closed the 1991 loan
            agreement, Romney promoted a former FDIC bank examiner to become a

            senior executive at Bain. He also had pull at the top: FDIC chairman Bill
            Seidman, who had served as finance chair for Romney’s father when he ran for
            president in 1968.

            It was a raw deal – but Romney’s threat to loot his own firm had left the
            government with no other choice. If the FDIC had pushed Bain into bankruptcy,
            the records reveal, the agency would have recouped just $3.56 million from the
            firm.This isn’t Romneyspeak BS. These are FDIC documents.

            • wpmwindsong

              The CBC was an Alaskan group that dealt with Alaskan Legislators making deals as elected legislators for personal gain.  It was who Sarah Palin exposed and caused to be removed from office and sent to jain in some cases.   The Undefeated explains it all, of which I assume you are aware.

              It has nothing to do with legal financial dealings in the private sector in 1991 in Massachusetts which caused no one to go to jail.  And last time I saw, Sarah never called Romney out as being part of the CBC, and she supported him 100%.  If anyone would know who was part of the CBC, it would have been Sarah.  

              • Guest

                Take your BS somewhere else. The CBC has evolved, it is the gopE .

                This is conservatives for Palin, not Romney central,

                The election is over and we don’t care about Romney here.

                Go to a support site for voters who are mourning Romney’s loss. Get help.

                • wpmwindsong

                  And where did you get this information that the CBC evolved into the gopE such that Palin would support a CBC gopE candidate 100%?  

                  For you to suggest such is to demean Sarah’s intelligence and integrity.   I perceive that many are using C4P for their own agendas and not Sarah’s.

                  • Guest

                     No projection is what you are doing, just like the leftists. You are trying to turn this site into something it is not.

                    The election is O.V.E.R.

                    This is conservatives4Palin. We have moved on.

                    If you still wish to talk about Romney and the election go somewhere else where you will be accommodated.

                    We are concerned with Governor Palin. She is not speaking about the election at all.

                    You are. Face it, You are stuck. For what reason? Where is this beating everyone up getting you?

                    You bought Romney hook, line, and sinker. The rest of us didn’t. Nobody wanted Obama to win but we aren’t sick that Romney lost. In fact, if you took a survey you will find that most of us couldn’t stand either candidate. The only thing we have to be happy about is the election is over. However, you are still stuck and no one cares to talk about this any longer.

                    Why don’t you go and do something nice for yourself. You worked hard and lost. There is nothing you can do to change the outcome. Not only are you beating up everyone else you are beating up yourself. You deserve better.

      • n4cerinc

        "More people voted for Romney/Ryan than McCain/Palin" – that line alone proves you live in an alternate reality. 

        And likening the treatment of Romney’s family to Palin’s family is laughable. Tell me, without looking it up, what is Romney’s grandchildren’s names? What are the names of his sons? What are they up to these days? If you can’t answer that without doing some digging, you have no basis for that comparison  I am sorry you put so much hope in the guy under who Same Sex marriage became law  and who provided for Abortions in his healthcare law, the two main issues with conservative Christians. Perhaps you need to check with your Party on how they choose their nominees. 

        • BrianusBerkleianus

          Thanks, n4cerinc!

        • wpmwindsong

          1. McCain had 59,948, 240 as a final count on 1/20/09.,_2008

          2.  Romney has currently 60,103,685 and changing daily.,_2012

          3.  I don’t know Romney’s grandchildren’s names.  What’s that got to do with anything.  I have trouble remembering not only the names but the number of my own 19+/- great grandchildren, my 25 grandchildren, all of whom will be paying for the debt that those who decided to not vote for Romney in 2012 as Franklin Graham lamented,

          4.  Romney was for a traditional marriage amendment, supported overturning Roe, V Wade with Constitutionalist Justices and had the 100% support of Sarah Palin, which apparently, on C4P, means squat.

          • lanahi

            " I don’t know Romney’s grandchildren’s names.  What’s that got to do with anything."

            You just arn’t getting it, wpmwindsong.  Just think about it.

      • Quiet_Righty

        "More people voted for Romney/Ryan than McCain/Palin…"

        I heard just the opposite.

      • devitor


        Romney / Ryan got 2.3 million less votes than McCain-Palin, so the statement that Romney got more votes than McCain is factually incorrect. As you may be aware, I have a survey running and so far 85 people have responded and 80 of them are Palinistas. I’m working on getting the survey out to the generic conservative sites. I don’t want to publicly announce how the survey is trending while it is still running, but I am watching it closely.

        Yes, Sarah called on us to unite behind the nominee (CPAC) and when that nominee was Romney, she called on us to unite behind him. This history, you correctly stated. For my part, I did so, only because of Sarah. I posted her messages on him all over and did my best to GOTV, but Romney could not close the deal with enough voters. The voter turnouts in the primaries were the canary in the mine for me and I knew that if he didn’t turn that around for the general, Obama was going to win. He didn’t turn it around. Obama won.

        Conservatives tend not to unite – we tend to eat our own. The Democrats on the other hand do unite behind their nominees and will stop at nothing to get their nominees elected. Whether our behavior is "thinking for ourselves," as JerseyMark suggested or something else – I honestly don’t know, but unifying behind nominees is not something we’re known for.

        When the survey results are published, we’ll know why at least the people sampled did not vote for him. But it should be obvious that enough voters felt strongly enough against Romney that even defeating Obama did not matter. So they either did not vote at all, or only voted down ticket or some form of third party.

        • wpmwindsong

          First, that 2/3 million less votes was days, if not weeks, ago.  As the late return votes are reported, Romeny currently has 200,000 more votes that McCain.  And it will ony increase.,_2008 for McCain based on the final official vote count on Jan 20, 2009.

,_2012 for Romney and changing daily.  That meme will have to go.

          I perceive that your survey will only support Franklin Graham’s analysis.

          Very sad. 

          • devitor


            So far, I have 85 responses. Only three out of the 85 took issue with Romney’s Mormonism. Two were of the “Mormons aren’t real Christians” mindset. The third one was a moderate who thought the GOP should “bang the Bible less.” But, these 85 responses I have are largely from our community. Once I really get it outside, that could change. But at least among those surveyed, religion was not the issue in the main.

            • wpmwindsong

              Thanks for sharing, even preliminarily.  Are you surveying only those who voted?  You’re not saying that of the 85 who voted, all but two voted for Romney, are you?  Or is it that of the 85 who did not vote for Romney, only 2 gave religion as the reason? 

              Franklin Graham was talking about those who chose to sit the election out, of which there were millions.  Why would he have made the point if his feedback was different?  I would say that he has a pretty good pulse on the broader community.  It would have taken only 120,000 votes in Ohio to flip it.  Who did not vote who could have, and should have? 

              There was just too much blog space spent on discussing the pros and cons of voting or not voting for Romney, most of which were made on broad generalities that would not expose a religious bias, while still making it seem that there was valid reasons for not voting on principle.  There seemed more discussion on C4P as to why not to vote for Romney than why to. 

              This following link gave all of the rational for not voting without dealing with religion, although it was a strong factor that did not need to be admitted.  This gentleman allowed that he would not vote for Romney, even if religion was not a factor, because Romney considered rape and incest were possible exceptions, even though Romney supported a Life Amendment, the overturning of Roe v Wade and in sharp contrast with Obama’s stand on infanticide.  That allows someone to suggest a reason for not voting without having to be based on religion. 

              Where there is smoke, there is fire.  For some reason, 4-5 million McCain voters did not vote for Romney who voted for McCain.  And it cannot be because they thought the Romney’s position on abortion is worse that Obama’s, or that he did not have the experience to turn America around, or that he was morally corrupt, or that he did not have Sarah’s support, etc.   

              If you are surveying your community, which is not identified, and the survey is of people who chose not to vote for Romney, they are in fact admitting to not voting for Romney, for whatever reason. That is a major admission that they were part of the reason that Obama won, just as Franklin Graham said.  Any reason that they give is less important that they did not vote.  That may be the more damning result of such a survey. 

              • devitor


                The survey is of people who either did not vote at all in the 2012 General or who did vote but not for either Romney or Obama – that is they voted third party either with an existing candidate on the ballot or a write-in; or they voted only down-ticket.

                Therefore, none of the 85+ people surveyed voted for Romney. Only three of these people cited religion as the reason as I noted before: two of them were of the “Mormons are not real Christians” mindset – that is the mindset from the link you provided. The third one felt the GOP was too religious. I’m not denying there are those people who are mired in a theological debate and made their voting decision based on that. To those “Christians,” who wouldn’t vote for a Mormon, I would only ask why is Mormonism not acceptable, but Black Liberation Theology and “God Damn America” is A-OK????

                Rev. Graham may have arrived to the conclusion that non-Romney voters were motivated by their dislike of Mormons, but what data does he have to support his conclusion? We know that millions of people did not vote or voted third party, but why? Just because Rev. Graham says it happened that way does not make it so. Did he survey or poll his congregation? Did he survey or poll anyone? If he did not do these things, it’s only his opinion – nothing more, nothing less.

                I’m not suggesting that my little survey is the end all or the be all. Of course it isn’t. I’m hoping to get the sample up to 400 people but that’s going to take time and possibly money. And even with a 400 sample that gives me a 95% confidence and +/- 5 margin of error. Once I hit the first 100, I’ll have a 95% confidence, but the margin will be +/- 10.

                Right now, most of the 85 people came from our Palinista community. I’d say at least 65 – to 70 of them. The survey was twice posted with the Freepers and also several times on my Twitter account. So, I’m waiting to see how that pans out.

                Yes, there was a lot of conversation here about principle. I liken the whole thing about principle to a conversation I had as a teenager with an adult friend. I was bellyaching about some girlfriend of mine. So, he listened. Then, he told me, “Ron. You’re right. Do you want to be right? Or do you want to have a girlfriend?”

                As to your last paragraph….

                “If you are surveying your community, which is not identified, and the survey is of people who chose not to vote for Romney…”

                I am surveying our community and the generic conservative community. The survey is of people who chose not to vote for Romney, thus….

                “they are in fact admitting to not voting for Romney, for whatever reason.” – That is correct. That’s who the survey is for.

                “That is a major admission that they were part of the reason that Obama won, just as Franklin Graham said.” – Correct.

                “Any reason that they give is less important that they did not vote. That may be the more damning result of such a survey.” – That is debatable.

                If the majority of those surveyed thought that Romney was not sincere/trustworthy in his positions; that he was not a true conservative, but a moderate running as a conservative, then his campaign was doomed before it even began. There was a lot of angst – especially in our community – against the GOP establishment and rightly or wrongly, Romney was perceived to be very much a part of it. We know from the many conversations that we had here that those who sat out the election or voted – but not for Romney – were not going to unite behind him and behind the party just on principle – even if it meant an Obama win – even despite the exhortations from Sarah herself. They were not having any of it and they simply were not going to give the GOP the satisfaction of forcing a moderate on them – never mind that he won the primaries and caucuses. This anger did come out in many of the responses – and in many comments here when I posted about the survey.

                In an email blast Frank Sartapia of the Staten Island Tea Party sent, he wrote,

                “The United States of America does not need two left-wing parties, and in my opinion those who believe that they can make the Republican Party more palatable to left-wing voters are fooling themselves. No Republican will ever be able to move as far left as the Leftists – the Democrats simply won’t let you.”

                That is the issue I think was operative here. “Mormons aren’t real Christians,” was just a small percentage – in my opinion.

                • wpmwindsong

                  You are being much too generous with your information.  Since you indicated that most of them were "Palinistas", how did you identify who was to respond to the survey?  Did you contact a broad sampling, but only asked those to respond if they did not vote for Romney, for whatever reason.  If so, how many total were contacted in order to get a sampling that amounted to 85 people?   And how many of the 85 voted but for someone else and how many chose not to vote at all? 

                  • devitor


                    When you see the results, you’ll know what I mean. The survey now has 101 responses. I did not contact anyone directly. It was posted here, my site, my syndication accounts, Free Republic and a few other places. I did not count up the voted third party vs not at all yet. Will do that when I close it out.

          • lanahi

            Romney lost.  McCain lost.  Those are the only important numbers.

            • wpmwindsong

              It is interesting that for a few days it was that Romney/Ryan didn’t get as many votes as McCain/Palin.   Now it is that the only important thing is that Romney and McCain both lost. 

              The other important thing, while I voted for both, in 2008 because of Palin and in 2012 because of Palin’s recommendation, is that McCain/Palin had no pathway to win with a 10 million vote deficit while Romney/Ryan did if enough of the 2008 voters had not sat out and voted like Palin asked them to do to defeat Obama.  

              • lanahi

                I never did get why it was important to anyone who got the most votes among them.  They both lost, they both got less votes than they had to get.

                • wpmwindsong

                  FWIWW, it was to prove originally that Romney ran the worst campaign ever because he couldn’t even get the number of votes that McCain/Palin did.  In the interest of accuracy, it was only appropriate to point out when that meme no longer existed.  So it has since morphed into they both lost, no big deal.  

                  • lanahi

                    And the arguing about it went on and on and on…and it wasn’t even an important point to begin with!  They both lost because they both sucked.

      • Elwanda Burrell

         Romney/GOPe didn’t unify the party…..Politics 101 when the primaries are over unify the party.  Obama and Hillary hated each other during the 2008 primaries and when the primaries was over it was love love love.  It is hard to vote under the bus……I voted but had to hold my nose and I was not smiling.

        • wpmwindsong

          What was he to do?  Sarah Palin said expliditely right after the concention that the conservative base was united behind the ticket and that the ticket had them locked up.  Who didn’t let Sarah into the secret that her supporters were not part of that unity?  I thought that she was the voice of the conservative base.  At least that is why I have supported her political instincts ever since 2008.  When did she miss the internal memo?

          • Elwanda Burrell

             It was not Sarah’s responsibility to unite the base……it was Romney’s and he failed to do the job. 

          • RebinTexas

            wpm – I am of the opinion that the majority of those who strongly support and follow Sarah did, in the end, vote for "squish" – as I have long called him, and as I voted. But you cannot overlook the impact that the GOPe rule changes foisted upon the party at the convention didn’t have an impact, nor the very negative campaign squish and his brethern ran in the primaries – more so than in the general. Then, too, he did NOT run a good campaign, did NOT provide a real, down-to-earth understanding of his vision for the country and the way forward. In my humble opinion, it was his to win or lose – and he lost……..not because of US here who mistrusted him, his instincts, his vacillating on issues, and the message he was and was not putting forth – but he lost because he and the GOPe do NOT understand that a strong, principled conservative with a positive vision for the country could win – instead they felt they were better off wobbling to get the middle, most of whom wanted much of what we here did.

      • lanahi

        Most of us voted for Romney despite the fact that he did suck.  What got to me were those who were already telling us to vote for Romney before the nomination.  We could have prevented his nomination but were told he was the most "electable".  Well, he wasn’t too electable, was he?  But the type of talk that was going on here made his nomination inevitable.  We all know that he was not the first choice of Sarah either, and she only minimally supported him after the nomination.

        I am perplexed by those who think they can predict what Sarah Palin is going to do in the future!   Whatever she does, it will be the right thing, because she has the guidance to know what to do, far beyond some stupid political advisers.

        Romney has no idea what Sarah Palin went through!  It’s laughable to even compare their experiences at the hands of the media and left, and certainly he had no problem with the GOP either!  It was simply a usual dirty campaign for him, not a character assassination over the course of four years.  He has no reason to complain about his treatment, especially since he did worse than that to his GOP opponents.

        It doesn’t matter what the numbers were between those who voted for McCain and those who voted for Romney.  They both lost, simple as that, so what difference does anything else make? 

        They both lost because they were not the choice of most people and were bad candidates.  They both lost because they were only better than Obama, not because they offered real hope in themselves. 

        There is no possible comparison between Sarah, Mitt, or McCain, and I think you know that too.  If Sarah fights for it, she’ll get it.

    • jerseymark

      One thing I am thankful for BB is your consistently wise and uplifting comments here on C4P. I know that many others here feel the same way so – Thank you for your contributions here.

      • BrianusBerkleianus

        Thanks, Jerseymark!!

    • Quiet_Righty

      You present many very good reasons for her to announce early. 

      On the downside, the GOP’s Stop Palin Express gets going sooner than it otherwise would. Right now they don’t care about her–I think.

      • BrianusBerkleianus

        Thanks, QR!

    • Christopher H Fromme

      I have 2 McLame/Palin yard sign that I saved from 2008 all that is necessary is to cover Mac with a big 2016 or Freedom party Pictures will follow when one is in my yard.

      • BrianusBerkleianus

        High Five, Christopher!!

    • $35927229

      "The purport of my remark was that she would divert fire from other conservatives.." I know what you are saying, but I hate the idea. I can’t even believe you my beloved Brianus would suggest such a thing.

      They will just have to be ready to suffer the slings and arrows for their beliefs and policies, no more letting Sarah take the hits. If they sail through untouched, they won’t thank Sarah or even acknowledge that Sarah diverted fire from them. Their egos won’t allow it. Remember Tucsan and the silence of her friends.

      No, we need strong conservatives, they must be tested by fire, the strong ones will survive, we have to "build" stronger conservative leaders, not shelter them from harm.

      I agree 100% with the rest of your post, BB.

      Palin/West 2016

      • BrianusBerkleianus

        Thanks, melory.

        I think what I meant to say is NOT that we want "fire" directed at our dear Sarah, but that, like it or not, it would happen if she announces early.

        The idea was to see a possible positive in such a doleful situation.

        Maybe I could have been clearer :-)!!

        God bless!!

  • ZH100

    Good morning all.

    Long before "public spending" became a topic of national debate Gov. Palin has fought to reduce spending and to enforce fiscal discipline as governor of Alaska.

    Gov.Palin has drastically reduced the growth of the state budget, which has helped to produce a record budget surplus.
    Alaska had its bond rating raised to AAA for the first time in the state’s history, largely due to fiscal improvements brought about by Sarah Palin while she was governor.

    Some links with information about Gov.Palin’s (impressive) fiscal record.

    ‘Palin’s Jobs Record Beats All Others in the GOP Field’

    From the article:

    "In terms of bringing down state unemployment rates versus the national average, Palin leads all other governors and former governors in the GOP field"

    ‘Governor Palin–Leading the Fight on Debt and Liabilities ; comparing and contrasting the records of Governors Palin, Perry, Pawlenty, Romney, and Huntsman in dealing with state debt and liabilities’

    Sarah Palin: A Record of Fiscal Conservatism (Part 1)

    From the article:

    "Sarah Palin served as Mayor/City Manager of Wasilla, Alaska from October 14, 1996 to October 14, 2002. As such, Palin was responsible for preparing, submitting, and executing the City’s annual budget for fiscal years 1997 through 2003. During this seven-year period, the City’s General Fund averaged an annual surplus of roughly $2.5 million, as illustrated in the chart below. Palin inherited a surplus of just $350,000 from her predecessor John Stein (fiscal year 1996). By 2003 she had grown the surplus to almost $3 million, with a 22.4% increase in revenue and a 15.6% reduction in spending."

    Sarah Palin: A Record of Fiscal Conservatism (Part 2)

    From the article:

    "Sarah Palin served as Governor of the State of Alaska from December 4, 2006 to July 26, 2009. As such, Palin exercised authority over the State’s annual budget for fiscal years 2008, 2009, and 2010. At the end of fiscal year 2007, Gov. Frank Murkowski, Palin’s immediate predecessor (whom she defeated in the 2006 Republican gubernatorial primary), left the State’s General Fund with a balance of roughly $7.6 billion. During the three fiscal years for which Gov. Palin oversaw the budget, the General Fund averaged an annual surplus of more than $2.6 billion, resulting in a total increase of $7.9 billion ? more than 100% ? over the fiscal year 2007 balance."

    Sarah Palin: A Record of Fiscal Conservatism (Part 3)

    From the article:

    "Requests for federal earmarks declined dramatically in each of the fiscal years for which Sarah Palin exercised budgetary authority for the State of Alaska. In FY2007, Gov. Frank Murkowski requested $350 million in federal appropriations, which Gov. Palin reduced to $256 million in FY2008, $198 million in FY2009, and $69 million in FY2010. Overall, Palin cut earmark requests by more than 80% during her tenure as Governor."

    ‘Governor Palin on the Issues: Monetary Policy’

    From the article:

    "Governor Palin stands firmly against the actions of the federal government in policies which simultaneously devalue our dollar, drive up our debt and leave us dependent on foreign sources of energy. She also stands against the actions of the Fed which inflate prices at a time when Americans are already on tight budgets and do nothing to aid employment."

    Another credit rating agency, Standard and Poor’s upgraded Alaska’s credit rating to its highest possible rating of AAA. The agency gives several reasons why it felt confident enough in Alaska’s fiscal climate to make such an upgrade. A few of these reasons are due directly to the policies implemented by Governor Palin.

    Paul Gigot: Governor Palin “Leading the Pack” on Monetary Policy  (November ,2010)

    From the article:

    "In a Wall Street Journal editorial  the editors noted the degree of sophistication Governor Palin is bringing to the table as she attempts to focus the nation’s attention on the disastrous repercussions which must result from a further inflating of the currency.

    Specifically, she referred to QE2, the Fed’s plan to pump another $600 billion to as much as $1 trillion into the economy via the purchase of U.S. government securities. Paul Gigot, editor of the Wall Street Journal editorial page, discusses the editorial and Governor Palin in the video."

    Palin v. Bernanke.
    Her Warning To the Fed Chairman Puts Her Out in Front on the Debate on the Dollar

    From the article:

    "One of the questions in respect of 2012 is how it has happened that the only major Republican figure, aside from Congressman Ron Paul, to stand up and be counted on the dollar is Sarah Palin."

    • ZH100

      As Governor Palin has said many times, she advocates for an “all of the above”approach to energy independence which includes solar, wind, nuclear, and clean coal in addition to the more traditional oil, gas, and coal.

      She supported development of renewable energy sources, developing a plan to have 50% of Alaska’s energy to be produced from renewable sources by the year 2025.

      ‘Palin unveils state energy goals; 2025 GOAL: At least 50 percent of state’s power to be from alternative sources.’    (January , 2009)

      "Gov. Sarah Palin has crossed swords with conservation groups over petroleum drilling, but she earned nothing but praise Friday after announcing the most ambitious renewable energy goals in the nation. At a news conference announcing her statewide energy plan, Palin called for 50 percent of Alaska’s power to be generated by renewable resources by 2025."

      ‘Sarah Palin’s Goal Of 50% Renewable Energy Use In Alaska Signed Into Law’ (June , 2010)

      From the article:

      "One of the first things Barack Obama did, once he took office, was to announce a pretty ambitious goal of having the United States get 25 percent of it’s energy from renewable sources by the year 2025. To date, little if anything, has been done by the Obama regime to reach this goal.

      On January 21, 2009 (Obama’s first full day at work) Sarah Palin, writing in the Wall Street Journal, praised this initiative strongly, while reminding Obama that conventional sources of energy will always be needed. She also announced that she was working on the goal of having Alaska get a full 50 percent of it’s energy from renewables in that same 2025 time frame."

    • BrianusBerkleianus

      Thank you and good morning, ZH!!

      I hope that you enjoyed a wonderful Thanksgiving!

      • ZH100

         Thank you ,Brianus and good morning!

  • ZH100

    ‘Setting the Record Straight – Sarah Palin and Sex Education’

    From the article:

    "NPR got it wrong back in 2008. As did the The Washington Post, MSNBC, ABC News and  The Wallstreet Journal .Unfortunately, many feminists have followed the<strong misinformation of the mainstream media."

  • PatrickDownUnder

    Good morning Palinistas!

    I hope you all had a happy Thanksgiving. We don’t have the pleasure of such a holiday down here, our holidays are based on monarchic commemorations and horse races. I can’t think of anything better than sitting down with a family of patriotic Americans and tucking into a juicy Turkey.

    It might not feel like you have much to be thankful for in these times, but I am sure you will find something. It’s America, after all…

    • BrianusBerkleianus

      God bless, Patrick!!

  • ZH100

    Debunking the false (!) meme that Gov.Palin has lack of knowledge on issues "outside of anti-corruption and energy policy."

    Gov.Palin has spoken out on almost all the issues, both foreign and domestic and has been proven right on many of her statements.

    For example:

    Sarah Palin Talks Cronyism, Economy, China, Liberty and Freedom at World Knowledge Forum in South Korea  (another successful unscripted Q&A)

    Long Island Association was an unequivocal success ; an hourlong, unscripted Q&A session where Governor Palin talked about the economy, the deficit, government spending, gun control, the environment, the rising cost of food, energy, Egypt and other foreign policy related issues in front of a group of socially liberal Democrats and Republicans in an area where the Democrat Party is strong.

    Excerpts of Sarah Palin’s Speech to Investors in Hong Kong

    Governor Palin’s  successful (unscripted) Q&A at the India Today Conclave
    The (unscripted) Q&A portion covered a lot of territory and included tough questions that ranged from foreign policy to American economics.

    Interview CNN’s Don Lemon Impressed that Governor Palin Answered All of His Questions

    Palin v. Bernanke
    Her Warning To the Fed Chairman Puts Her Out in Front on the Debate on the Dollar

    Opinion Journal: Palin vs. Bernanke

    ‘Amid media circus, Palin lays out policy positions’   ( by Byron York)

    From the article:

    "One thing many viewers have probably missed in all the horse-race speculation is that Palin is perfectly willing to discuss her positions on key issues, if anyone wants to ask. In fact, in recent days, weeks, and months, we’ve seen a lot of policy commentary from the former Alaska governor.

    Some of Sarah Palin’s Ideas Cross the Political Divide"  (by Anand Giridharadas)

    • ZH100

      ‘Setting the Palin Record Straight’  (by Jedediah Bila; 3/17/2011)

      "It’s truly astonishing the lengths that some will go to in order to try to discredit Sarah Palin.  Sure, the left-wing media loons are a given, but what about the folks on the Right who relentlessly brand her as unelectable, unintelligent, unpresidential, and/or unqualified?  What is their basis for those assessments?  And if she is so darn unelectable—why the need to consistently, near-obsessively attempt to tear her down?

      What’s most interesting about the repeated attacks on Palin – from the Left and the Right – is that they are routinely empty.

      They are often featured in online hit pieces that are void of any reference to her record and/or her contributions over the past two years to discussions of national and international significance. They focus on absurd criticism of her TLC series, which so many elitists deemed anti-intellectual and so many regular Americans deemed relatable. They call her a “quitter” because she resigned from the governorship, but don’t reveal the reality that she was faced with numerous frivolous ethics charges made by political operatives that were costing her state hundreds of thousands of dollars and her staff countless hours to refute.
      The fact that she made the right decision for Alaska, and that the charges were all ultimately dismissed, get buried under the frenzied need some have to try to sabotage her at all costs.

      And let’s not forget the manner in which the authors of these hit pieces so often compile every possible negative quotation on Palin they can find, particularly from the mouths of whom they consider to be the conservative intellectual elite.  The quotes are typically nonsensical and/or erroneous, and mark embarrassing moments for those who uttered them, as they tend to reflect a complete lack of awareness of Palin’s accomplishments, writings, and outspoken stand on policy initiatives.

      Since September 2010 alone, Sarah Palin has penned commentary on such topics as the unrest in Libya, the protests in Wisconsin, Obama’s 2012 budget proposal and State of the Union address, getting tough with Iran and standing with Iranians who seek democracy, challenging the specifics of President Obama’s energy policy, the omnibus spending bill, defeating the New START, opposition to state bailouts, tax policy, a message to Republican freshmen in Congress, opposition to quantitative easing, and more.  She has repeatedly been a leading voice—via television appearances and speaking engagements—against the dangers of ObamaCare and the risks of President Obama’s approach to energy.

      Let’s take a look at a few samples of Palin’s written commentary:

      On Obama’s 2012 budget proposal:  “The fine print reveals a White House proposal to increase taxes by at least $1.5 trillion over the next decade.  If you want to know how minuscule their proposed $775 million-a-year budget ‘cuts’ really are, please look at this chart.  The proposed cuts are so insignificant—less than 1/10 of 1% of this year’s $1.65 trillion budget deficit—that they are essentially invisible on the pie chart.  That speaks volumes about today’s budget.”

      On Iran:  “Much more can be done, such as banning insurance for shipments to Iran, banning all military sales to Iran, ending all trade credits, banning all financial dealings with Iranian banks, limiting Iran’s access to international capital markets and banking services, closing airspace and waters to Iran’s national air and shipping lines, and, especially, ending Iran’s ability to import refined petroleum.  These would be truly ‘crippling’ sanctions.”

      On energy:  “Right now Beltway politicos are quibbling over cutting $61 billion from our dangerously bloated $3.7 trillion budget.  Allowing drilling in the Chukchi and Beaufort seas will enrich federal coffers by $167 billion without raising our taxes.  If we let Harry Reid keep his ‘cowboy poetry,’ would the White House consider letting us drill?”

      On quantitative easing:  “If the President was serious about getting the economy moving again, he’d stop supporting the Fed’s dangerous experiments with our currency and focus instead on what actually works: reducing government spending and boosting business investment through good old-fashioned supply-side reforms (cutting taxes and reducing overly burdensome regulations).  Simply running the printing presses in order to avoid paying off your debts is no way for a great nation to behave.”

      My question to the critics: How is that commentary lacking in intellect?  How do you find her active leadership role in these important debates to be unpresidential?"

  • ZH100

    About Revere

    The media  were wrong about Revere (of course they will never admit that they were wrong).

    Anyway, distinguished historical scholars have come out endorsing Gov.Palin’s statement regarding Paul Revere.

    Here are some links about the Revere issue.

    Experts back Sarah Palin’s historical account

    From the article:

    "Sarah Palin yesterday insisted her claim at the Old North Church last week that Paul Revere “warned the British” during his famed 1775 ride — remarks that Democrats and the media roundly ridiculed — is actually historically accurate. And local historians are backing her up"

    Washington Times Editorial: The Palin version of history was correct about Revere

    From the article:

    "It soon turned out, however, that Mrs. Palin’s version of history was correct"

    Even NPR confirms that Gov.Palin was right about Revere (interview of professor Robert Allison Chairman of history dept Suffolk university Boston)

    From the interview:

    "BLOCK: So you think basically, on the whole, Sarah Palin got her history right.

    Prof. ALLISON: Well, yeah, she did."

    The LA Times concedes that Governor Palin was right too

    From the article:

    "You know how Sarah Palin said Paul Revere warned the British? Well, he did. Now, who looks stupid?"

  • ZH100

    Sometimes Gov.Palin is attacked and smeared by this smear:

    "She charged the state for “travel” expenses — a per diem allowance for meals — while living at her home in Wasilla and commuting to the governor’s office in Anchorage."

    As if Gov.Palin committed a crime.

    What is the true (factual) story about this "per diem allowance for meals"?

    The 90-something year old mansion in Juneau was greatly in need of repairs in order to make it serviceable as a chief executive’s home.

    With all of these renovations underway,  Gov.Palin could have opted to stay at a hotel with her family, but instead she saved the taxpayers money by staying in her own home.

    So she  could have forced the state to pay for her lodging (in a hotel or an apartment) in Juneau or in Anchorage. Instead she lived in her house in Wasilla and saved the state thousands of dollars by only requesting meal per diems. She asked for meal per diems, not lodging per diems.

    And she didn’t claim any per diems for her kids or her husband, though she was legally entitled to.

  • Pete Petretich

    Will Obama invite Gov. Chris Christie to his second inauguration?

    Will Christie bring along his gal pall Stan Coulter?

  • ZH100

    Obama’s Southeast Asia Trip All Style, No Substance

    From the article:

    "Diplomacy: So amid all the colorful and flirty photos from President Obama’s first tour of Southeast Asia, what did he actually accomplish? As usual, he served himself politically in what was largely a Potemkin mission abroad.

    It was obvious enough from the rubelike gaffes that the president hasn’t been particularly interested or attentive to the affairs of Thailand, Burma or Cambodia as he made his first trip since his
    re-election. It was pretty much all style over substance.

    In his tour of Burma, billed as an historic first visit since Burma’s 2007 move to democracy, it was clear he was in way over his head, even on small things. Obama repeatedly referred to the country’s Nobel Peace Prize-winning leader Aung San Suu Kyi as Aung Yan Suu Kyi, an astonishing error given her global fame.

    He also bungled the norms of Burmese polite address, calling Thein Sein, the nation’s leader "President Sein," an error comparable to addressing Cambodia’s Pol Pot as Mr. Pot.

    But he also undermined his supposed democracy mission, first by telling the Burmese leaders that he too wished he could govern without opposition, calling into question whether he himself believed in the representative government he was advocating.

    It didn’t help that he ignored the real heroes who helped push Burma toward a more open system — President and Mrs. Bush, as well as Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, Sens. John McCain and Mitch McConnell, seeming to take credit for it himself."

  • ZH100

    ‘Some of Sarah Palin’s Ideas Cross the Political Divide’  (September , 2011 )

    From the article:

    "But something curious happened when Ms. Palin strode onto the stage last weekend at a Tea Party event in Indianola, Iowa. Along with her familiar and predictable swipes at President Barack Obama and the “far left,” she delivered a devastating indictment of the entire U.S. political establishment — left, right and center — and pointed toward a way of transcending the presently unbridgeable political divide."

    • wodiej

      that is one of the many reasons I admire her. 

    • MaMcGriz

       Ah yes.

      This is of particular benefit to me right now.

      I found myself face to face with two otherwise bright and talented women who, at the mere mention of the name Wasilla turned into a pair of invidious crones. It began with ‘hey…isn’t that where that dumb-ass what’s her name..? yeah…the one that says she can see russia from her house…

      and Z, they were for real. It was remarkable.

      To their credit, when I pointed out they were referring to a SNL skit and a line spoken by tina fey, they both blinked and stepped back, somewhat off balance, and I saw the lights come on a little. But of course, they were on their way into switching into that unfortunate hysteria/uproar default mode in which so many operate on the Left. PDS.

      I quietly said, Ladies, you clearly haven’t done your own research about Governor Palin. I have."

      I told them when American women like them wake up and realize how badly they’ve been ripped off and what a tragic lie they’ve been fed about Sarah Palin and realize the tragic cost to is all, they’re going to want to kill somebody. I kept it light and non-adversarial, and brief. We were there to play music and the audience was waiting.

      That was the extent of the exchange, and I’ve been thinking since then about how to prepare for a next time it comes up, as I feel certain it will. I think it’s unrealistic to think I can send them links or furnish anything of any length or substance and expect them to be effective or have a positive impact.

      I want to bookmark a few things to send or give them, and I’d like your input.

      I think I’ll print out two or three ‘openers’ to keep in my guitar case. It needs to be something very basic, and very short. To be used to inform and/or ward off the few aggressive ones who attend and inevitably try and put their Lefty politics in everyone’s faces. They like to corner people or make scenes, and I don’t go there with them.

      Maybe I’m over-thinking it. Maybe I should do some stick figure cartoon panels. After all, a few of these people have phd.s and masters degrees. They’ll perhaps be very difficult to reach. lol

      Hey! I know! I can text it!! LOL

      Hey Lefty Grl, Sarah Palin is ur v.b.f.

  • John Benham

    Republicans are once again making a huge mistake by not exposing Rubio and Jindal as Userpers with respect to the Presidency.
    Neither are Natural Born Citizens because both had parents who were not US Citizens at the time of their birth.
    The original intent of the Constitution was that a President must be born of citizen parents.
    The Tearful Rino Boehner needs to be removed as he will not fight for what is right.

    Please spread this information to stop Rubio/Jindal

  • ZH100

    ‘Why Romney Lost the ‘Asian Vote’

    From the article:

    "The Pew Research Center’s June study, titled “The Rise of Asian Americans,” may contain some answers. According to Pew, 50 percent of U.S. Asians either identify as or lean Democratic, compared with only 28 percent who identify as or lean Republican.

    Asian Americans are more liberal than the general public (31 percent to 24 percent conservative) and say they prefer a bigger government with more services to a small government with fewer services (55 percent to 36 percent).

    On social issues, U.S. Asians are more or less aligned with their fellow Americans: 53 percent believe homosexuality “should be accepted” by society (compared with 58 percent of the general public), and 54 percent believe abortion should be “legal in all or most cases” (compared with 53 percent of the general public)."


    "As it turns out, the Vietnamese are one of the more Republican-leaning Asian subgroups, along with Filipinos. But poll data show most other Asian groups vote differently. Here’s Pew’s Democrat-to-Republican breakdown: Vietnamese, 36 percent to 35 percent; Filipinos, 43 percent to 40 percent; Koreans, 48 percent to 32 percent; Chinese, 49 percent to 26 percent; Japanese, 54 percent to 29 percent; and Indians, 65 percent to 18 percent. (The rest were unaffiliated or third party.)"

  • ZH100

    ‘Governor Palin and the Return of Jacksonian Foreign Policy’

    From the article:

    "In May, Governor Palin gave a speech at a “Tribute to the Troops” event at Colorado Christian University. As part of this speech, Governor Palin outlined a clear vision of American military policy, which has now become known as the Palin doctrine by many.

    Too often, pundits create a false dichotomy between neoconservatism and isolationism, but Governor Palin espouses neither.

    Her foreign policy vision is along the lines of Presidents Jackson and Reagan"

  • wodiej

    "Everyday, think as you wake up, today I am fortunate to be alive, I have a precious human life, I am not going to waste it. I am going to use all my energies to develop myself, to expand my heart out to others; to achieve enlightenment for the benefit of all beings. I am going to have kind thoughts towards others, I am not going to get angry or think badly about others. I am going to benefit others as much as I can." Dali Lama

  • wodiej

    “For in time of trouble He shall hide
    me in his pavilion; in the secret place of his tabernacle he shall hide
    me.”  Psalm 27:5

  • Escaped_Teleprompter

    Palin and the Tea Party
    The Tea Party will always be linked to Gov. Palin.  While many have been quick to claim the mantle of the Tea Party, only Palin could galvanize it and provide the focus to energize the grassroots.  Without Palin, the Tea Party would have been a fringe organization, instead of the political force that propelled conservatives to victory in 2010.  The apex of the Tea Party coincided with the time when Palin set out, in 2009-2010, to wrest control of Congress from Democrats in order to thwart their hegemony of Washington.  Later, when Palin declined to run, the Tea Party lost momentum and the excitement in the grassroots faded.  Such was her influence on the movement, that without her, many so-called "leaders" of the Tea Party that many considered invulnerability, lost or almost lost their seats. 
    What lies in store for the Tea Party?  Will conservatives again march and rally and confront the oppressing  political and cultural hegemony of the left?  This is easier answered if one knew what Gov. Palin’s plans are, for there does not seem to be anyone else who is capable of reviving the Tea Party and sparking conservative activism. 
    How it Was Really Like

  • wodiej

    Sarah Palin-One Step at a Time

  • wodiej

    Sarah Palin’s Red High Heels

  • OldPat

    As an unsupervised child left to play with fire or a moth drawn to flame, the American people are gonna get burnt.  The only question left to decide is how badly.  Sadly, the old adage – A democratic republic gets the government it deserves. – is as credible today as it was when I was a child, as true for the foolish as it is for the wise.

    In their collective wisdom, the people of our nation have decided to put a price tag on life – productivity.  I guess the joke’s on us ‘cause the idiots we put in charge shipped all our jobs overseas while we weren’t lookin’.  So tell me , friend, how are you gonna be productive without a job?  All the clowns know how to do is create confusion.

    Never was about jobs or life – just power, raw power.  You see, the triumvirate Palin warned us about had to convince us to give them the keys to the miracle – the economic engine that powered our nation, and they’ve been exporting it all over the world for forty years now.  The One-Worlders even gave it a name – outsourcing.  What you didn’t see was that a little bit of our freedom was attached to each one of those jobs we exported over the years.

    In 2012 the same trio (the PPC, CCC and LSM) decided to convince us to give them the keys to the ultimate miracle – life itself – and we did.  It also has an innocuous-sounding name to obfuscate its true purpose – the Affordable Care Act.  With a name like that, those ‘death panels’ she warned us about must be as American as Mom, apple pie and the flag.  LOL.

    For weeks now I have watched and listened to friends slice and dice the election results eight ways to Sunday and lay blame everywhere but at the feet of the true culprit.

    We all knew Mitt was an ’imperfect vessel’ who learned early on to let others do his fighting for him.  Indeed, he was a One-Worlder who made his fortune exporting our jobs.  When all was said and done, the ole ‘possum could not deny his true nature and fight for our way of life.  And now the right wing of the LSM is telling us Marco or Krispy Kreme will be our next savior.  Mush or skin tone – take your pick.  LOL. Well, I think I’ll just wait and see what our Moral Compass says about all that.

    If you’re still looking for someone to blame, look a little harder at the person looking back at you when you shave or put on your make-up in the AM because it really is the nature of a republic to get the government it deserves.  Despite your protestations to the contrary, it can be naught else. 

    Because of our nature, we conservatives have allowed the enemy within to slowly but surely alter our fellow citizens’ worldview for a century now.  Indeed, many of you would be shocked if you knew what good little socialists you’re raising under your own roofs. 

    Do you really think it was dumb luck that led progressives to select and focus on gaining control of our educational, political and communications systems?  Does the phrase ‘fifth column’ and the word ‘infiltrate’ mean anything to you?  Don’t you know those sands were meant for your footprints – not your heads?

    In closing, my sense of humor requires that I thank our friend and fellow defender of freedom, Diane Sawyer, for just being herself on election nite.  Unlike our bud, Katie, Who left her best work on the cutting room floor, ole Diane let it all hang out in primetime live.

    Rather than making all manner of jokes about what she was high on, I’ll just say, ‘Girl, you need help. Please get it before it’s too late. It’s there but for the asking.’ 

    Indeed, perhaps the American people should consider taking that same advice.  In spite of all we’ve done to her, she’s still standing, still there but for the asking thisThanksgiving weekend.

    • 1776er

      Very insightful post.

      What you are describing is the triumph of the 50 year "Long March" of Cultural Marxism ending in the Divided States of America that we witness today.

      It is the Gramscian Moment.  

      Antonio Gramsci was an Italian Marxists who died in 1937.  He witnessed the failure of Karl Marx’s and Lenin’s workers’ violent pitchfork Communist revolution.  The workers had the chance to unite and hang all the nationalists and capitalists in the First World War and its aftermath.  They didn’t.  Gramsci went another route. 

      Gramsci taught that Marxism would triumph not through the force of violent revolution but only via a Long March through the cultural institutions of Western Civilization.  This would be brought about by instilling a pessimism about those institutions–Cultural Pessimism–that would at first question the very foundations of long cherished traditional values, beliefs, customs and faith in core Western Institutions such as Religion, Marriage,  Family, Community, Constitutional Government. Then it would subvert them. In the end Cultural Pessimism would destroy them.  All of them.  Only when a critical state of cultural pessimism was achieved would the West be ripe for collapse into the basket of Marxist socialist doctrine and dominance.  

      The instrument of bringing about Cultural Pessimism and ultimately the destruction of everything we hold dear in Western Civilization and in particular the American expression of it is something called Critical Theory.  

      Critical Theory is an analytical technique that questions every assumption of Western thought from a Marxist perspective.  Basically, turn everything on its head.  Criticize everything.  God is good?  No, God is bad.  Marriage is good?  No, marriage is bad.  The Family is good?  No, the Family is bad.  The Constitution is good?  No, the Constitution is bad.  Wealth is good?  No, wealth is bad.  Law and order is good? Art is good?  Science is good?  Life is good?………

      We all had a brush with Critical Race Theory in the run up to the election.  That got dropped pretty fast didn’t it?  Barack Hussein Obama II embraced it in his heart at Harvard Law School in his late twenties.  He urged all his fellow Harvardians to do the same.  Critical Theory.  Antonio Gramsci.  Cultural Marxism.

      So, what is to be done?  A Counter Long March is required.  Call it a counter revolutionary movement, if you have to.  

      Pope Benedict has called for a year of Evangelization in 2013 in the Catholic Church.  Catholics need to be re-evangelized largely as a necessary response to the effects of 50 years of post- World War II Cultural Marxism prosecuted through a program of Cultural Pessimism about God and traditional religious values and beliefs aimed quite successfully at the Catholic Church.  Catholics need to be re-educated about the truth of what the Church teaches.   

      This is an example of an institution of Western Civilization finally, finally wakening to the cause and cure of the sickness that has enveloped it in the past 5 decades.  

      For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.  

      We need a similar American re-evangelization to persuade Americans anew that Individual Freedom and limited Constitutional Government is the path to our well being and security in the world.

      It may not be such a Long March as it may appear.  Marxism is a false promise.  It is an empty promise.  The only outcome it can produce is equality.  Equality of misery and slavery.  Proven.  Demonstrated. Over and over and over again.  That is all Obama and the Marxist Socialist Party of America aka the Democrat Party is capable of producing.  Even the Great Socialist Franklin D Roosevelt could not cure the Depression.  He was the first can kicker.  He knew he was robbing us in our time to put food on the table in the 1930s.  His successors me too’ed it down to the present.  Now the Marxist Socialist piper is demanding payment.  He wants us and our children.  

      Our fellow citizens–62 million of them– fell prey to the plan to instill Cultural Pessimism through the polarizing political tactics of Saul Alinsky, Barack Obama and the Chicago Marxist Mob.  They divided us by race/class/gender.  They convinced 50.62% of America that voting was the best revenge against the monster that the other 49.38% purportedly represents.  

      I’d sure call that the Triumph of Cultural Pessimism, wouldn’t you?

      The Gramscian Cultural Marxists finally conquered America in 2012.  They fooled America in 2008 with a false shimmering promise of Hope and Change hooey.  They bullied America in 2012 with the threat that "THEY are going to put you back in chains".  "THEY don’t pay their fair share".  "THEY hate women."  Race/class/gender Alinskyite polarization.

      Fear, envy, hate, lies and revenge are the dreams and the tools from the Marxist fathers.

      THEY think the 2012 50.62%/49.38% Divide of America is a permanent achievement.  THEY think they can keep us mired in cultural rot, economic misery, spiritual  despair and in a permanent state of  pessimism and division which is necessary to sustain the conditions required to  hang on to Marxist power.  

      THEY are wrong.   

      During the Blitz in London the Brits had a motto:  Keep calm and carry on.

      That is our job now.  We must keep calm, carry on and begin the task of re-evangelizing the hope filled message of Freedom contained in our Founding Charters of Liberty.  Sarah Palin called it drawing the contrast.  There are indeed  two paths to follow.  When you start down the wrong path what do you do?

      Who’s up for a Long March?

      • 1776er

        Just when you thought it was safe to eat the turkey.  Today’s dose of Cultural Pessimism brought to you by a Professor of Marxism and former "serious journalist".

        And then there’s always something like this from the Ivy League. They are very competitive you know.

        Mother Theresa was a "lying, thieving Albanian dwarf". Got that?

      • BrianusBerkleianus

        Great, 1776er!!

        Wonderful call to arms!

        One of the tricks of these vicious enemies is to pretend that "history" is on "their side," that there is an INEVITABLE movement in the direction they are promoting, as they try to force us to despair, surrender, and swallow their poison.

        You are so right about "critical theory."  It has a death grip right now on many humanities departments in American universities.

        I love too the fighting and common-sense spirit of a G.K. Chesterton, who says somewhere, in response to the idea that we "cannot turn back the clock"–Yes, we can, he says, in effect, if the clock shows the wrong time!!

        God bless!!

        • lanahi

           A friend of mine in England has a son who visited New Jersey as part of his job.  He was strongly impressed by the "live free or die" mentality there…in New Jersey!

          So, in comparison, it is still there…and growing.

      • lanahi

        Americans are basically conservative, but they also try to be fair to everyone, so they allow more cultural degrading than they otherwise would and try to be "politically correct".  I have a feeling we’ll be much less confused as the next four years progresses.

    • BrianusBerkleianus

      Thank you, OldPat, and God bless!

  • wodiej

    ZH-will you post the link for that video I like so well "On the Road w Gov. Palin"? thanks

    • ZH100

      Here you are.

      ‘On the Road with Governor Palin’

    • Kathleen

      I can see why you like it so much!  Nice footage and of course a very cool song to go with it.  Thanks for asking for it; that way I got to see it for the first time.  :-)

Open Thread

Governor Palin’s Tweets