Friday, February 26, 2010
Tuesday, February 23, 2010
But while both Palin and MacFarlane seem to benefit from the controversy they're generating, there is a loser in this fight, and it's MacFarlane. Why? Because the joke wasn't funny.
He's right. The joke wasn't funny. It was nowhere near being remotely humorous.
The MacFarlane sensibility puts a premium on being offensive, and that's fine when the jokes are soundly constructed, but too often Family Guy jokes aren't clever or well written, they're just shocking. To some people (me included, at times) the shock value is enough to inspire some uncomfortable tittering, but jokes like that don't stand up to scrutiny. If you take two seconds to think about them, you realize it wasn't that funny to begin with, and it certainly doesn't work on a subsequent viewing, when you're expecting it.
I don't watch Family Guy, but supposedly the author of this article does. Even he acknowledges the show can cross the line at times when it comes to offending people.
Simply restating a fact in a different context, like the fact that Palin has a child with Down syndrome, isn't funny, even if you dislike Palin or disagree with her politics. There's a lot to like about Family Guy; the arcane pop-culture references kill me, as does anything that features a talking baby. But if MacFarlane is going to climb into Palin's sandbox, he's going to have to equip himself with much sharper material.
Like a wise man once said, don't mess with momma bear. Seth MacFarlane will learn his lesson.
One of the incidents that happened in the last week or so was Sarah Palin criticizing the TV show Family Guy for its display of boorishness where it insults Down's Syndrome children and Trig in particular.
However, one of the voice actresses, Andrea Friedman, felt the need to voice her opinion about this criticism. Let it be noted that Ms. Friedman has Down's Syndrome, yet has succeeded admirably in life. This is something for anyone to be proud of. However, I do take issue with certain topics she mentioned and will address them as respectfully as I can.
Five observations I made from a recent television interview of the actress:
1. Sarah Palin did not not directly attack or criticize the aforementioned episode of Family Guy, but let Bristol Palin express an opinion that reflected both the views of mother and daughter.
2. Bristol Palin was not attacking any actors or actresses, but the writers.
3. Who is Friedman to say that Trig is not having a normal life? Is she his mother? Is she his caretaker? All she sees are a few photos or videos of him from time to time. That's all any of us ever see. This gives her the knowledge then to claim that Trig is not having a normal life? How? It doesn't, and the criticism rings hollow as it belies an underlying ignorance. Sarah Palin is the the mother children. She doesn't need tips on parenting from anybody.
4. Andrea Friedman also said Sarah Palin uses Trig in order to get votes. How? Perhaps she thinks that choosing life over death, and serving as inspiration for many others is a cheap political ploy, but I always thought it was the ultimate sign of a mother's love for her unborn child that she allows him the gift of life instead of bowing to the pressure of the world where children with Down's Syndrome are aborted nine out of ten times. Perhaps I am looking at it the wrong way. But I don't think I am.
5. Finally, Friedman made a comment that quite frankly is offensive on of itself, as she said that Sarah Palin carries Trig around like "a loaf of bread". There is no way to parse this. This is a politically motivated attack made for reasons that escape me for the moment. She has no right to judge Palin's parenting abilities. It's none of her business, and it defies all contrary evidence. Everytime I have seen Governor Palin with her youngest son she shows him the utmost in affection and care. Someone who claims otherwise is simply lying.
Warning to the left-attacking Sarah Palin as some sort of bad mother will only redound upon yourselves, and the consequences will not be pleasant. It will only make you appear worse in the end, and will strengthen the resolve of her supporters.
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
It doesn't look like she's attacking the technology to me, but merely referencing its ubiquity. After all, she uses it herself. Just another media smear attempt.
'See, they said that, I didn't,' she said, reports CBS. 'Just you watch now, too, because somebody will be here with their little Twittering thing, and it's going to be on the Internet any minute now.'
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
Fox Hollywood – What a Disappointment
Yesterday at 9:41pm
People are asking me to comment on yesterday’s Fox show that felt like another kick in the gut. Bristol was one who asked what I thought of the show that mocked her baby brother, Trig (and/or others with special needs), in an episode yesterday. Instead of answering, I asked her what she thought. Here is her conscientious reply, which is a much more restrained and gracious statement than I want to make about an issue that begs the question, “when is enough, enough?”:
“When you’re the son or daughter of a public figure, you have to develop thick skin. My siblings and I all have that, but insults directed at our youngest brother hurt too much for us to remain silent. People with special needs face challenges that many of us will never confront, and yet they are some of the kindest and most loving people you’ll ever meet. Their lives are difficult enough as it is, so why would anyone want to make their lives more difficult by mocking them? As a culture, shouldn’t we be more compassionate to innocent people – especially those who are less fortunate? Shouldn’t we be willing to say that some things just are not funny? Are there any limits to what some people will do or say in regards to my little brother or others in the special needs community? If the writers of a particularly pathetic cartoon show thought they were being clever in mocking my brother and my family yesterday, they failed. All they proved is that they’re heartless jerks. - Bristol Palin”
- Sarah Palin
Monday, February 15, 2010
In the episode titled "Extra, Large, Medium," teenage son Chris dates a mentally disabled girl who has an accountant for a dad and a "former governor of Alaska" for a mom.
No names were mentioned, but it appears it is a jab at the former Alaskan governor who recently slammed White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel for using the word "retard,"...
This pathetic excuse for a plot doesn't surprise me, as these types of shows tend to be caustic, crude, and liberal in their morals. That's the reason I don't watch them, though I'm not sure if Palin will respond to this. It may not be worth the effort.
Sarah Palin may very well be the worst presidential candidate in the history of U.S. elections. It’s not because she’s a Conservative and I’m a Liberal. It’s because she’s plain unqualified to manage a game of “Civilization IV,” much less the political affairs of the office of the president.
Life isn't a video game. Otherwise, all those WOW buffs would be running the world.
Typically, it’s hard to judge people based on their educational alma maters. However, every president since Lyndon B. Johnson has been to a very prestigious university, ignoring the brief period an actor with terrible leadership qualities led the country between 1981 and 1989. It shows having a good education is necessary to even become the president, much less become a good president. Bush was actually a Harvard grad, if you can believe that.
Small wonder Reagan was the best President?
Palin, meanwhile, hasn’t had a position of national prominence. Her highest office was the position of Alaska governor, and she resigned that position after two-and-a-half years. Her previous international political experience involved looking at Russia from her house.
I guess being Governor of Alaska isn't a position of national prominence. But hey, I don't repeat lines from a late night comedy program off as truth.
Another day, another PDS rant. This one isn't worth refuting though. The outright ignorance displayed by the writer is the best evidence of its inauthenticity.
Friday, February 12, 2010
Honoring Alaska’s Olympians
Today at 12:48pm
As the opening ceremony of the Vancouver Olympic Games begins tonight, I’d like to join my fellow Alaskans in applauding the hard work and dedication of the seven Olympians from the Last Frontier: Callan Chythlook-Sifsof (the first Alaska Native Olympian) competing in Snowboard Cross; Jeremy Teela and Jay Hakkinen competing in the Biathlon; Kikkan Randall, James Southam, and Holly Brooks competing in Nordic Skiing; and the Mat-Su Valley’s very own Kerry Weiland competing on the U.S. Women’s Hockey Team.
I’ve had the honor of meeting some of these fine athletes with outstanding work ethic. These great Olympians are the pride of Alaska and will bring honor to Team USA!
- Sarah Palin
Alaska Steps Forward Towards Energy Security
Yesterday at 11:29am
Congratulations are due Exxon and the State of Alaska’s Department of Natural Resources for completing the first development well at Point Thomson in northern Alaska. This is a huge field full of domestic crude, and it’s time to drill for it!
This week we’ve witnessed great progress toward more energy security for Alaska and our entire nation. What began as hefty trucks and hard working men and women heading up an ice road last year, to the commencement of drilling at Point Thomson, this progress has finally led to Exxon’s announcement today of completion of its first development well to produce oil and gas. Our “tough stance” with big oil and perseverance in insisting that Alaska’s resources be developed instead of warehoused while foreign countries are busy developing their oil and gas reserves has paid off to the benefit of everyone involved.
Drill here, drill now... energy independence is a national security issue that can’t be ignored any longer.
Tue at 5:09pm
Many of us appreciated the President mentioning in his State of the Union address that “tough decisions” had to be made regarding offshore drilling. People have had doubts about his seriousness in regards to domestic energy policy because our Department of the Interior is dragging its feet on Virginia’s offshore oil and gas leases. Still, we’ve held out hope that America’s voice will be heard on energy.
And now Vince Haley at Big Government reports this shocker:
In April of 2009, during a discussion about offshore exploration in San Francisco, Salazar said that President Obama directed him to “to make sure that we have an open and transparent government” and that “these are not decisions that are going to be made behind closed doors.” Salazar went on to say that President Obama wanted to make sure that DOI was “maximizing the opportunity for the public to give us guidance on what it is that they want to do.”
Yet, more than four months after the comment period ended, the Department of the Interior has failed to make any public announcement about the results, even though sources have told American Solutions for months the comments show a 2-1 advantage in support of offshore drilling.
It took American Solutions almost four months and the power of the Freedom of Information Act to finally uncover indirect confirmation that, out of over 530,000 comments submitted, pro-drilling comments outnumbered anti-drilling comments by a 2-1 margin.
In an email dated October 27, 2009, Liz Birnbaum, director of the Minerals Management Service, informs other Interior officials that a preliminary tabulation of the results of the comment period had not yet gone to Secretary Salazar, adding “[s]o the Secretary can honestly say in response to any questions that he’s [SIC] has not yet seen the analysis of the comments – staff is still working on it. I did, however, confirm to him the 2-1 split that these guys [at American Solutions] are emphasizing.”
When a public employee is on record condoning purposeful deception of the American people, the taxpayer should no longer have to fund his or her job. Secretary Salazar should immediately fire Liz Birnbaum for purposefully deceiving him, and in turn, the American people. It’s not possible for the Secretary to honor pledges of openness, honestly, and transparency in government if his staff is going to deliberately undermine such pledges.
Public opinion polls already measure near 70% support for offshore drilling, so the results from a public comment period that reflect the same public sentiment should not be surprising. But after all this talk of wanting the public’s input, Secretary Salazar and his team must find it a real stumbling block to have to explain all their anti-energy development actions in light of the comment period results to which they previously attached such great importance.
As Haley notes in his article, it’s astonishing that the Obama administration is dragging its feet on offshore drilling at a time when we’re so desperate for economic recovery and jobs. It’s no surprise that an overwhelming majority of Americans support offshore drilling: it will provide millions of good jobs and billions in revenue, and it will make us more secure by reducing our dependence on foreign oil.
Mr. President, we appreciate you asking for our input. We’ve provided it, so thank you for accepting it. With no time to waste, it’s time to listen to the American people – finally – and drill, baby, drill!
- Sarah Palin
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
As for the Chris Wallace interview, that was her best one ever, hands down. While even I will acknowledge that interviews are Sarah Palin's Achilles' heel, she knocked this one out of the ballpark. Assertive and confident, she never backed down and displayed a command of the issues. My favorite part was when she went after Wallace for making the Rush-Rahm comparison. Refusing the premise, she succinctly answered in the only correct way possible-"Rush Limbaugh was using satire..."-and made the critics of her look like fools.
Monday, February 8, 2010
Condolences to the Murtha Family
Today at 1:07pm
Todd and I would like to express our condolences to the Murtha family on the passing of Rep. John Murtha. Rep. Murtha served his country honorably as a Marine in Vietnam and later became the first Vietnam veteran elected to the House of Representatives. Our thoughts and prayers are with his family. Semper Fidelis.
- Sarah Palin
The poll, conducted Feb. 1-3, showed just 44% of registered voters approving of Obama's job as president. 47% disapprove. But among indie voters, Obama's approval rating sits at a terrible 29%, while his disapproval rating is at 57%.
Obama's 44% job approval rating is the lowest he has scored in any non-internet poll since moving into the WH, according to a review of data compiled by Pollster.com.
And while GOPers strive to avoid attacking Obama personally, for fear of offending voters who see him in a favorable light personally, even that aura of invincibility is wearing off. Independent voters view Obama negatively, too, by a 39% favorable to 52% unfavorable margin. All registered voters still see Obama favorably by a 50%-44% margin, but that's down 5 points in just 2 months.
Voters are disappointed in what they got with Obama's first year. The poll shows 47% believe Obama has failed to meet their expectations -- including a quarter of Dems, 65% of GOPers and 53% of indie voters -- while just 42% say he has met their expectations. 38% say Obama's policies are moving the country in the wrong direction, while 37% say they're making the country better.
She imagines herself as some big, conservative, independent thinker. When she doesn't like Rahm Emanuel, the President's chief of staff, using the word "retards" to describe liberal groups, she says Emanuel should be fired.
Then her buddy Rush Limbaugh comes out and says, "Our political correct society is acting like some giant insult's taken place by calling a bunch of people who are retards, retards."
Chris Wallace asked her about that Sunday, and Palin practically wrestled herself to the ground so she didn't make Limbaugh - who seems to take her seriously - mad at her. What Palin tried looked trickier than some yoga positions.
Palin: "Rush Limbaugh was using satire."
No, he wasn't. If Palin believes that, she really is more limited, and bubble-headed, than Paris Hilton. If not, she is simply a transparent phony.
Actually, Rush was using satire. You see, I just happen to be listening to his prgram where he carefully explains everything he said, and how he meant it in a satirical context. Here is the transcript:
RUSH: Oh, my God! And they want to say that Obama is showing guts in standing up to people? Okay, here's the last word on this -- the last thought on Rahm Emanuel and Harry Reid. I took some liberties. For those uncomfortable with the favorite words of leading Democrats, "Negro" and "retarded," I have a question: Are you comfortable with the words or with Harry Reid and Rahm Emanuel? I am uncomfortable with the men and the manner in which they used these words. Words don't generally offend me. I try not to give people the power to offend me. But Harry Reid and Rahm Emanuel, they do offend me and they scare me and they worry me. These men have cold hearts. They are statists. They have power over all of us. They are trying desperately to exercise that power. In fact, my friends, I am so uncomfortable with these men, I purposely chose to use a rhetorical tool -- satire, s-a-t-i-r-e -- to ridicule and humiliate them. That tool is an effective blunt object in breaking through walls put up by State-Controlled Media to protect Democrats.
For those of you in Rio Linda, here's the definition: "The use of irony, sarcasm, ridicule, or the like in exposing, denouncing, or deriding vice, folly, et cetera." I used Harry Reid's words and Rahm Emanuel's words, not mine, to expose and punish their behavior. I used satire to wash their mouths out with soap and made an uncomfortable point. Because the State-Controlled Media would have run any Republican out of office (as in George Allen and "Macaca") if they had been caught saying what Reid and Emanuel said, just as they're trying to run me off the radio for repeating what they said. Now, I'm not going to hold my breath waiting for Saturday Night Live or the late-night comedians to treat Democrats the way they treat Republicans. If some would choose different methods to expose Reid and Emanuel, fine. We share the same goals and both are useful in getting results. Do not doubt me. Aside from the State-Controlled Media, everybody involved got the point -- and so did they. Their outrage is totally fake and totally predictable.
Nothing more for me to add. Rush has spoken.
Sunday, February 7, 2010
Friday, February 5, 2010
Seriously, you can't make this up. If Governor Palin did something like this, she would be tarred and feathered by the media as being an anti-military dunce. However, if you're Obama, you get a pass.
Thursday, February 4, 2010
He pontificates at length about how he justifies his pro-choice beliefs after ridiculing Tim Tebow over an advertisement he has not seen yet (which makes me wonder how he knows it is "nonsense"). He touts his own rational abilities in this little diatribe, while simultaneously degrading another individuals thinking skills, but in so doing has opened up his own logical faculties to scrutiny.
The main problem I have with his little article is that the whole thing is a straw man. You want to talk about fallacious reasoning? This is a prime example. He says "The following is what passes for logic in the Tebow mind. His mother was advised by doctors to abort him, but she refused, which is why Tim is here. So abortion is a bad thing. Masterful conclusion."
Really, Dawkins, is that what he said, because I haven't seen the ad yet. And neither have you, unless you have somehow constructed a time machine and have already watched the Super Bowl and know the outcome. In that case, drop me an e-mail telling me who won.
So in refuting a commercial who haven't seen, you invent a caricature of the pro-life position. How convenient. I have always known the pro-lifers to think that every human has the right to live, and that scientifically the fetus or embryo is a human being, therefore it deserves the most basic human right of all-life. But that's just me. You evidently have a different line of reasoning, one that begins and ends with postulation over alternate realities concerning who could or could not have been born. I'm not going down that road. That's talk usually reserved for sci-fi message boards that don't get much web traffic.
What I will do is ask of you is consider the situation I am about to describe (and since you like to fight dirty, so to speak, with your words I will do the same). Let us say a man's wife is in a car crash, extensively damaging the nervous system and causing her to slip into a coma. The doctors say she will make complete recovery but she will have to be on life support the entire time or she will die. The life support can be provided at home at minimal cost, so that is not an issue. However, one doctor argues that the plug should be pulled because in this case, there is no functioning nervous system, and there won't be one for a year, therefore the woman in question is for all intents and purposes dead. Therefore termination would be perfectly ethical, and would save the caretaker time, money, and effort. Complications could arise he says, and he also argues that potential life is not life, and is not necessarily worth saving.
Who would take such a medical professional seriously if such a situation actually occurred? Any decent human being would find such advice to be revolting. And yet Mr. Dawkins recommends this very same thing in his article. He would willingly terminate a fetus-scientifically proven to be a distinct human life-and destroy whatever chance he or she has at life, all because it did not have a functioning nervous system. And this what he calls logic? This is what he calls reason? You know what I call it? An outright disgusting display of wanton disregard for human life.
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
An original fable made in honor of Alaska's Marmot Day.
Moral: Don't expect others to do all the work while you reap all the benefits.
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
Why I'm speaking at Tea Party convention
By Sarah Palin
Later this week I'll head to Nashville, where I'll have the honor of speaking with members of the Tea Party movement. I look forward to meeting many Americans who share a commitment to limited government, common sense and personal responsibility. This movement is truly a grassroots, organic effort. It's not a top-down organization; it's a ground-up call to action that already has both political parties rethinking the way they do business.
From the town halls last summer to the protests and marches in the fall to the game-changing recent elections, it has been inspiring to see real people — not politicos or inside-the-Beltway professionals — speak out for common-sense conservative policies and values. As with all grassroots efforts, the nature of this movement means that sometimes the debates are loud and the organization is messier than that of a polished, controlled machine. Legitimate disagreements take place about tone and tactics. That's OK, because this movement is about bigger things than politics or organizers....
The soul of the Tea Party is the people who belong to it — everyday Americans who grow our food, run our small businesses, teach our children how to read, serve the less fortunate and fight our wars. They're folks in small towns and cities across this nation who saw what was happening to our country and decided to get involved. Thank God for them. Many of these good Americans had never been involved in their government before, but now they attend town hall meetings and participate in online forums. They write letters to the editor. They sign up to be precinct leaders and run for local office and support other independent patriots. They have the courage to stand up and speak out.
Their vision is what drew me to the Tea Party movement. They believe in the same principles that guided my work in public service — whether I was working on the PTA and city council or serving as a mayor, commissioner or governor. I look forward to meeting some of these great Americans this weekend.
Recently, some have tried to portray this movement as a commercial endeavor rather than the grassroots uprising that it is. Those who do so don't understand the frustration everyday Americans feel when they see their government mortgaging their children's future with reckless spending. The spark of patriotic indignation that inspired those who fought for our independence and those who marched peacefully for civil rights has ignited once again. You can't buy such a sentiment. You can't AstroTurf it. It springs from love of country and the knowledge that we can make a difference if we just stand up and stand together.
I thought long and hard about my participation in this weekend's event. At the end of the day, my decision came down to this: It's important to keep faith with people who put a little bit of their faith in you. Everyone attending this event is a soldier in the cause. Some of them will be driving hundreds of miles to Nashville. I made a commitment to them to be there, and I am going to honor it.
But participation won't be limited to those in Nashville who have a ticket. It's much bigger than that. Because the Tea Party movement is spread out across the country — with no central offices or annual events — this is an opportunity to connect with like-minded folks. Yes, there will be speeches given in a room in Nashville. But we'll also be speaking with thousands of Americans watching online at twitter.com/SarahPalinUSA, or through various news outlets. And the conversation will continue on my Facebook page.
I will not benefit financially from speaking at this event. My only goal is to support the grassroots activists who are fighting for responsible, limited government — and our Constitution. In that spirit, any compensation for my appearance will go right back to the cause.
The nature of the Tea Party movement means there may never be a "perfectly orchestrated" event: Democracy in action doesn't come with a manual. But we must not get caught up in the politics or the controversies that some hope will distract from the heart of the movement. The focus must remain on our ideas and beliefs, and on supporting those ideas and beliefs however we can.
This weekend, it's Nashville, but in March, I'll head to Searchlight, Nev., for the kickoff rally at the Tea Party Express III. In April, I'll be in Boston for a Tea Party gathering there. Across the country, tea-partiers will be sharing our vision for America's future, a vision that promotes common sense solutions to out-of-control spending and an out-of-touch political establishment.
The process may not always be pretty or perfect, but the message is loud and clear: We want a government worthy of the fine Americans that it serves. And we're going to keep spreading that message one convention, one town hall, one speech and one election at a time.
Sarah Palin, the former governor of Alaska, was the 2008 Republican nominee for vice president.
Freedom, Influence, Security Shrink as Budget Balloons
Today at 2:04pm
The White House recently announced its pricey Childhood Obesity Initiative to tell us what we should feed our kids. Helpful I’m sure – but most Americans would rather see government focus on other important areas right now. We know what our kids should eat: more healthy food, less junk food. There – we just saved Washington a ton of money by announcing that finding on personal responsibility.
What does demand our full attention is the newly released $3,800,000,000,000 federal budget. The president and Congress have a huge job tackling the problem staring right at us as we look at a budget we obviously can’t afford. America’s freedom and security are endangered as we become beholden to other nations, thanks to ballooning deficits and debt. One congressman just warned that our nation may become insolvent if we don’t make better decisions starting now. As noted in a New York Times article today, unless “miraculous growth” or miraculous unforeseen change is on the horizon, America’s freedom, influence, and security will continue to erode. (Personally, at this point I believe it wouldn’t hurt to ramp up our nation’s humble request for the divine miraculous change and wisdom we’ll need to see us through.)
Getting our arms around this will take all of us working together, making sacrifices, taking more personal responsibility, and sending elected leaders to Washington that we can trust. That’s why some of us may come across as strident in our efforts to call out the White House and Congress. We want to trust you, Washington; we want to work with you, but we cannot stomach some of the things being rammed down our throats. Your actions to pile on more debt make no sense, so we must question your motives and intentions. For instance, there’s just no room for expensive, dangerous, and unsustainable new initiatives like Obamacare, Cap and Tax, and a dramatically expanded federal payroll. These government-growing proposals will obviously cause more problems than they’ll solve. They are just further steps towards insolvency.
Steps towards insolvency are steps away from freedom. They’re steps towards destruction. It’s the reason we ask why we should swallow what's coming out of Washington.
The Wall Street Journal has a brilliant column by Gerald Seib today. It reads in part:The U.S. government this year will borrow one of every three dollars it spends, with many of those funds coming from foreign countries. That weakens America’s standing and its freedom to act; strengthens China and other world powers including cash-rich oil producers; puts long-term defense spending at risk; undermines the power of the American system as a model for developing countries; and reduces the aura of power that has been a great intangible asset for presidents for more than a century.
“We’ve reached a point now where there’s an intimate link between our solvency and our national security,” says Richard Haass, president of the Council on Foreign Relations and a senior national-security adviser in both the first and second Bush presidencies. “What’s so discouraging is that our domestic politics don’t seem to be up to the challenge. And the whole world is watching.”
In the 21st-century world order, the classic, narrow definition of national-security threats already has expanded in ways that make traditional foreign-policy thinking antiquated. The list of American security concerns now includes dependence on foreign oil and global warming, for example.
Consider just four of the ways that budget deficits also threaten American’s national security:
• They make America vulnerable to foreign pressures.
The U.S. has about $7.5 trillion in accumulated debt held by the public, about half of that in the hands of investors abroad.
Aside from the fact that each American next year will chip in more than $800 just to pay interest on this debt, that situation means America’s government is dependent on the largesse of foreign creditors and subject to the whims of international financial markets. A foreign government, through the actions of its central bank, could put pressure on the U.S. in a way its military never could. Even under a more benign scenario, a debt-ridden U.S. is vulnerable to a run on the American dollar that begins abroad.
Either way, Mr. Haass says, “it reduces our independence.”
• Chinese power is growing as a result.
A lot of the deficit is being financed by China, which is selling the U.S. many billions of dollars of manufactured goods, then lending the accumulated dollars back to the U.S. The IOUs are stacking up in Beijing.
So far this has been a mutually beneficial arrangement, but it is slowly increasing Chinese leverage over American consumers and the American government. At some point, the U.S. may have to bend its policies before either an implicit or explicit Chinese threat to stop the merry-go-round.
Just this weekend, for example, the U.S. angered China by agreeing to sell Taiwan $6.4 billion in arms. At some point, will the U.S. face economic servitude to China that would make such a policy decision impossible?
Please read the rest of Seib’s column here. Our out-of-control spending is weakening our country. We can no longer afford to kick the can down the road to the next generation. We need to have a serious discussion about our spending priorities before it's too late. Commonsense conservatives have a sincere desire to work with the White House on these challenges, and we’re thankful for those in Congress making the offer to help.
- Sarah Palin
Are You Capable of Decency, Rahm Emanuel?
Yesterday at 5:32pm
The newly-released mind-boggling, record-smashing $3,400,000,000,000 federal budget invites plenty of opportunity to debate the merits of incurring more and more debt that will drown the next generation of Americans. Never has it been possible to spend your way out of debt. So... let the debate begin.
Included in the debate process will be opportunities for our president to deliberate internally the wisdom of this debt explosion, along with other economic, military and social issues facing our country. Our president will discuss these important issues with Democrat leaders and those within his inner circle. I would ask the president to show decency in this process by eliminating one member of that inner circle, Mr. Rahm Emanuel, and not allow Rahm’s continued indecent tactics to cloud efforts. Yes, Rahm is known for his caustic, crude references about those with whom he disagrees, but his recent tirade against participants in a strategy session was such a strong slap in many American faces that our president is doing himself a disservice by seeming to condone Rahm’s recent sick and offensive tactic.
The Obama Administration’s Chief of Staff scolded participants, calling them, “F---ing retarded,” according to several participants, as reported in the Wall Street Journal.
Just as we’d be appalled if any public figure of Rahm’s stature ever used the “N-word” or other such inappropriate language, Rahm’s slur on all God’s children with cognitive and developmental disabilities – and the people who love them – is unacceptable, and it’s heartbreaking.
A patriot in North Andover, Massachusetts, notified me of Rahm’s “retarded” slam. I join this gentleman, who is the father of a beautiful child born with Down Syndrome, in asking why the Special Olympics, National Down Syndrome Society and other groups condemning Rahm’s degrading scolding have been completely ignored by the White House. No comment from his boss, the president?
As my friend in North Andover says, “This isn’t about politics; it’s about decency. I am not speaking as a political figure but as a parent and as an everyday American wanting my child to grow up in a country free from mindless prejudice and discrimination, free from gratuitous insults of people who are ostensibly smart enough to know better... Have you no sense of decency, sir?”
Mr. President, you can do better, and our country deserves better.
- Sarah Palin
On a side note, there is also a Marmot Day in Michigan celebrated as well.
Update: One thing I forgot to mention is that this is a poll of self-identified Republicans, not the general population.
Monday, February 1, 2010
Obamacare = Stray Dog, So Says President
Sat at 12:27pm
What am I missing, folks? We’re called obstructionists and made to feel uninformed in the Obamacare debate as we point out this is not a patient-driven, market-oriented approach to health care cost challenges. We’ve been saying for months that this is government takeover of our personal choices of insurers and doctors. We’re called liars when claiming that this is all about government mandates and control of up to a sixth of our economy.
And yet, shockingly, the president admitted yesterday exactly what we’ve been saying: that his Democrats and lobbyists have crafted bills that in fact will prevent us from keeping our current insurance and/or choosing our own doctor. He said:The last thing I will say, though -- let me say this about health care and the health care debate, because I think it also bears on a whole lot of other issues. If you look at the package that we’ve presented -- and there’s some stray cats and dogs that got in there that we were eliminating, we were in the process of eliminating. For example, we said from the start that it was going to be important for us to be consistent in saying to people if you can have your -- if you want to keep the health insurance you got, you can keep it, that you’re not going to have anybody getting in between you and your doctor in your decision making. And I think that some of the provisions that got snuck in might have violated that pledge. [emphasis added]
Thanks to Tom Bevan at RCP for spotting this. The president’s statement is shocking, enlightening, and in an odd and unfortunate way also encouraging. Folks, this admission tells us we’re not off-base and we need to stay vigilant so we’re not missing anything else in this scheme. This trillion-dollar government takeover of our health care system is full of “stray dogs and cats” (the president’s words, not mine), and that’s what we’ve been saying all along.
Commonsense conservatives have better ideas on how to start tackling rising health care costs. Reps. Paul Ryan, Mike Pence, Eric Cantor, John Boehner, and others have offered solutions. I commend their efforts to counter the White House’s attempt to ram Obamacare through as these Congressmen seek bipartisan, sensible solutions. I implore them to speak louder because we’re listening, and we’re counting on them!
- Sarah Palin
The former Alaska governor has declared that she will campaign for McCain. How could she not? Where would she be without him? In Juneau -- still toiling at the governor's desk, unknown to most of us in the lower 48 (except for a few pundits at The Weekly Standard) and with no millions from a book contract. Loyalty and decency demand she stand by her man. And she'd look darn silly if, after claiming that McCain was the most qualified man to lead the United States in these perilous times, she now said he wasn't up to being a senator.
While I disagree that Palin would be nowhere without McCain, it does speak to the importance of her showing loyalty to McCain, a person she once campaigned for as President. Besides, if the Governor was to formally endorse Hayworth or simply sit out the primary, we all know the mainstream media would make a big a deal of it, shouting from the rooftops that Palin had turned against McCain. In short, there is no winning move for Sarah Palin that will garner her the support of everyone so she must do what she thinks is right. What else can we expect of her?