There was an error in this gadget

Support Governor Palin At SarahPAC

Sarah Palin To Obama: Humility & Honesty About Iraq Can Inspire Trust

Tuesday, August 31, 2010 0 Responses
Later today, President Obama will speak to the American people about Iraq. No doubt he will laud the “end of major combat operations” by the date he randomly selected some 18 months ago. His press secretary Robert Gibbs also gave us a glimpse of what else he might say, telling the Today Show this morning that ”What is certainly not up for question is that President Obama, then-candidate Obama, said that adding those 20,000 troops into Iraq would, indeed, improve the security situation, and it did.”

Iraq in 2010 is indeed a very long way from Iraq in 2006, when violence and sectarian conflict threatened complete chaos. But then-candidate Obama did not support the course that brought us here as his press secretary now claims. On January 10, 2007, when President Bush announced the surge, Senator Obama insisted that the surge would actually increase sectarian violence: “I am not persuaded that 20,000 additional troops in Iraq are going to solve the sectarian violence there. In fact, I think it will do the reverse.” Barack Obama was clearly in opposition to the surge strategy.

Had we followed the course advocated by then-candidates Obama and Biden, the Iraq war would be remembered now as a crushing defeat for the United States and our allies. Al Qaeda in Iraq and Iranian supported extremists would have claimed victory over America – with grave implications for us throughout the region and the world. Iraq would have descended into full-scale civil war. Iraq’s neighbor would have likely been drawn into the conflict. Parts of Iraq would have been made a safe haven for terrorists to train and plan for attacks far beyond Iraqi borders.

Fortunately for all of us, these events did not occur. They did not occur because America changed strategy in Iraq. President Bush decided to increase our forces in Iraq and pursue a counterinsurgency strategy – a course long advocated by Republicans in Washington. This “surge” policy in 2007 was opposed by many – most notably and adamantly by Senators Obama and Biden. In October 2006, as the violence was spiraling out of control, Senator Obama actually advocated reducing our troop presence: “It is clear at this point that we cannot, through putting in more troops or maintaining the presence that we have, expect that somehow the situation is going to improve, and we have to do something significant to break the pattern that we’ve been in right now.”

In response to President Bush’s State of the Union address on January 23, 2007, Senator Obama said: “I don’t think the president’s strategy is going to work…My suggestion to the president has been that the only way we’re going to change the dynamic in Iraq and start seeing political commendation is actually if we create a system of phased redeployment. And, frankly, the president, I think, has not been willing to consider that option, not because it’s not militarily sound but because he continues to cling to the belief that somehow military solutions are going to lead to victory in Iraq.”

Senator Joe Biden, just before the surge was formally announced, actually declared: “If he surges another 20, 30 [thousand], or whatever number he’s going to, into Baghdad, it’ll be a tragic mistake.”

In May 2007, Senator Obama voted against funding our troops in Iraq. Reporters have insinuated that I haven’t been telling the truth on this fact, but consider the fact: he did not support additional troop funding. Had his position prevailed, our troops would have been forced to leave Iraq precipitously and chaos would have ensued. Goodness, even Senator Biden voted for the funding and had to admit this about Senator Obama and others who opposed it: “My colleagues voted against the funding to make a political point. There’s no political point worth my son’s life. There’s no political point worth anyone’s life.” As the mother of a soldier who spent his year in Iraq recently, I have to agree with Biden on that point.

As it became clear in the summer of 2007 that the surge strategy was working, Senator Obama was still stubbornly in denial about the success our American troops were having, saying: “My assessment is that the surge has not worked and we will not see a different report eight weeks from now.” What willful blindness he showed with that assessment.

And even in November 2007, when everyone could see the success of the surge in reducing violence and increasing political space in Iraq, Senator Obama said: “Finally, in 2006-2007, we started to see that, even after an election, George Bush continued to want to pursue a course that didn’t withdraw troops from Iraq but actually doubled them and initiated a surge and at that stage I said very clearly, not only have we not seen improvements, but we’re actually worsening, potentially, a situation there.” 

As Americans tune in to watch President Obama, it is important to remember the facts. He opposed the surge. He predicted it would fail. He said it would make things worse even after it dramatically improved the situation. He voted to cut off funds for our brave soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines fighting in Iraq. For months he refused to accept that the surge he fought was actually a spectacular success. As President Obama usually likes to look backwards and declare the state of everything to be “George Bush’s fault,” my hope is that tonight he stays consistent and looks backwards, and in this case acknowledges that credit should be given where credit is due.

Along with the points that Bill Kristol made yesterday, I too have some suggestions for the president. President Obama, please show grace, humility and some honesty before the American people tonight. Please don’t declare “Mission Accomplished” and then saunter away with an assumption that your opposition to the Iraq strategy was key to our troops’ success. Please end the political posturing. Admit you were wrong about the surge. Recognize what our brave armed forces have achieved. Admit that the strategy long advocated by Republicans, proposed by President Bush, led by Generals Petraeus and Odierno, and executed by thousands of America’s finest – our brave men and women in uniform – brought violence under control and made responsible withdrawals possible. The more honest you are about the past, the more likely it is you will gain the support of the American people for your Iraq policy in the future. We need to be able to trust the White House war strategy, as our children’s future depends on it. Being honest with us tonight is a good starting point in building trust.

- Sarah Palin

Read more...

(Video) Sarah Palin On Obama’s Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy

Monday, August 30, 2010 0 Responses
Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy Revived
Sarah Palin responds to president's identity politics

Read more...

Sarah Palin Post: Obama On Iraq Poor Leadership No Credit To GW, McCain, Troops & Billions Wasted

Monday, August 30, 2010 0 Responses
KHAN BANI SAAD, Iraq – A $40 million prison sits in the desert north of Baghdad, empty. A $165 million children's hospital goes unused in the south. A $100 million waste water treatment system in Fallujah has cost three times more than projected, yet sewage still runs through the streets
As the U.S. draws down in Iraq, it is leaving behind hundreds of abandoned or incomplete projects. More than $5 billion in American taxpayer funds has been wasted — more than 10 percent of the some $50 billion the U.S. has spent on reconstruction in Iraq, according to audits from a U.S. watchdog agency.
That amount is likely an underestimate, based on an analysis of more than 300 reports by auditors with the special inspector general for Iraq reconstruction. And it does not take into account security costs, which have run almost 17 percent for some projects. […]
Christensen acknowledged that mistakes have been made. But he said steps have been taken to fix them, and the success of the program will depend ultimately on the Iraqis — who have complained that they were not consulted on projects to start with.
"There's only so much we could do," Christensen said. "A lot of it comes down to them taking ownership of it."
The reconstruction program in Iraq has been troubled since its birth shortly after the U.S.-led invasion in 2003. The U.S. was forced to scale back many projects even as they spiked in cost, sometimes to more than double or triple initial projections.
As part of the so-called surge strategy, the military in 2007 shifted its focus to protecting Iraqis and winning their trust. American soldiers found themselves hiring contractors to paint schools, refurbish pools and oversee neighborhood water distribution centers. The $3.6 billion Commander's Emergency Response Program provided military units with ready cash for projects, and paid for Sunni fighters who agreed to turn against al-Qaida in Iraq for a monthly salary.
But sometimes civilian and military reconstruction efforts were poorly coordinated and overlapped.
Iraqis can see one of the most egregious examples of waste as they drive north from Baghdad to Khan Bani Saad. A prison rises from the desert, complete with more than two dozen guard towers and surrounded by high concrete walls. But the only signs of life during a recent visit were a guard shack on the entry road and two farmers tending a nearby field.
In March 2004, the Corps of Engineers awarded a $40 million contract to global construction and engineering firm Parsons Corp. to design and build a prison for 3,600 inmates, along with educational and vocational facilities. Work was set to finish in November 2005.
But violence was escalating in the area, home to a volatile mix of Sunni and Shiite extremists. The project started six months late and continued to fall behind schedule, according to a report by the inspector general. […]
Another problem was coordination with the Iraqis, who have complained they weren't consulted and often ended up paying to complete unfinished facilities they didn't want in the first place.
"Initially when we came in ... we didn't collaborate as much as we should have with the correct people and figure out what their needs were," Christensen said. He stressed that Iraqis are now closely involved in all projects. […]
The U.S. military pinned great hopes on a $5.7 million convention center inside the tightly secured Baghdad International Airport compound, as part of a commercial hub aimed at attracting foreign investors. A few events were held at the sprawling complex, including a three-day energy conference that drew oil executives from as far away as Russia and Japan in 2008, which the U.S. military claimed generated $1 million in revenues.
But the contracts awarded for the halls did not include requirements to connect them to the main power supply. The convention center, still requiring significant work, was transferred to the Iraqi government "as is" on Jan. 20, according to an audit by the inspector general's office.
The buildings have since fallen into disrepair, and dozens of boxes of fluorescent lightbulbs and other equipment disappeared from the site. Light poles outside have toppled over and the glass facade is missing from large sections of the abandoned buildings.
Waste also came from trying to run projects while literally under fire. […]
By contrast, the Basra children's hospital — one of the largest projects undertaken by the U.S. in Iraq — looks like a shining success story, with gardeners tending manicured lawns in preparation for its opening. But that opening has been repeatedly delayed, most recently for a lack of electricity.
The construction of a "state of the art" pediatric specialist hospital with a cancer unit was projected to be completed by December 2005 for about $50 million. By last year, the cost had soared above $165 million, including more than $100 million in U.S. funds, and the equipment was dated, according to an auditors' report.
Investigators blamed the delays on unrealistic timeframes, poor soil conditions, multiple partners and funding sources and security problems at the site, including the murder of 24 workers. Bechtel, the project contractor, was removed because of monthslong delays blamed on poor subcontractor performance and limited oversight, the special inspector general's office said. A Bechtel spokeswoman, Michelle Allen, said the company had recommended in 2006 that work on the hospital be put on hold because of the "intolerable security situation."
In an acknowledgment that they weren't getting exactly what they hoped for, Iraqi officials insisted the label "state of the art" be removed from a memorandum of understanding giving them the facility. It was described as a "modern pediatric hospital."
Hospital director Kadhim Fahad said construction has been completed and the electricity issue resolved.
"The opening will take place soon, God willing," he said.
Residents are pleased with the outcome. One, Ghassan Kadhim, said: "It is the duty of the Americans to do such projects because they were the ones who inflicted harm on people."
Source: 
Sarah Palin @ SarahPalinUSA


Read more...

(Video) Sarah Palin Posts: Obama Economic Team Should Go

Saturday, August 28, 2010 0 Responses
GOP Leader: Obama Economic Team Should Go


Victory is the Only Option



In January 2007, the situation in Iraq was grim. The evening news was dominated by horrific accounts of indiscriminate violence—torture, kidnapping and killing—that had left millions of innocent civilians desperate and defenseless against a ruthless terrorist enemy.  […]
When President Bush announced the troop surge, it was widely viewed as our last chance to prevent Iraq from spiraling into an irreversible descent towards chaos—an outcome which would have given terrorists a safe haven to plan attacks against the United States and our allies and to directly threaten our national interests in the region.
[…]
Not everyone was convinced, however. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D.-Calif.) claimed that the strategy had failed just weeks after it had begun. Her views were echoed by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D.-Nev.), who declared in April 2007 that “this war is lost.”
Then-Sen. Barack Obama, who campaigned on his opposition to the Iraq war, flatly declared that the troop surge would not work: “I am not persuaded that 20,000 additional troops in Iraq is going to solve the sectarian violence there. In fact, I think it will do the reverse.”
I’m sure glad our troops proved them wrong. And I’m sure glad President Obama didn’t listen to Sen. Obama. […]
With all due respect to them, our troops who have served so courageously in Iraq deserve the credit for the success of the surge and, along with the Iraqi people, the turnaround in Iraq.
The success of the troop surge is undeniable. By taking the fight to al Qaeda, other terrorist threats, and the insurgency, our men and women in uniform succeeded in providing greater security to the Iraqi population and giving the government the time to build capacity to more effectively meet the needs of the Iraqi people. As a result, the drawdown of U.S. troops that began in 2008 has been able to continue. I commend President Obama for listening to our commanders in the field and working closely with them, the Iraqi people, and the Congress to ensure that we continue making significant strides there. […]
This discussion wouldn’t have been possible, however, were it not for the courage and sacrifices made by our troops, as well as their families. It is with great pride and profound gratitude that we reflect on all that our men and women in uniform have done, and all that they continue to do, to advance freedom abroad and strengthen our security here at home.
Mr. Boehner, a Republican, is minority leader of the U.S. House of Representatives. He represents the 8th District of Ohio. 
Source: 
Sarah Palin @  SarahPalinUSA

Read more...

Sarah Palin: Union Brothers and Sisters, Join Our Commonsense Cause!

Thursday, August 26, 2010 0 Responses
Two years ago almost to the day, I was thrilled to meet with union members at the Alaska AFL-CIO Convention in Anchorage to sign important job-creation legislation related to the Alaska Gasline Inducement Act. As a former card-carrying IBEW sister married to a proud former IBEW and later USW member, it was a great moment for all of us. Our Alaska union brothers and sisters helped build our state! Many of them risked their lives to complete our infrastructure, including the Trans-Alaska Pipeline that stretches over treacherous mountain ranges from the North Slope oil fields to Valdez. By signing that job-creation bill surrounded by union members, I was paying tribute to them and acknowledging that they would be valued partners in the construction of Alaska’s long awaited natural gas pipeline. I was honored that day to receive a standing ovation from them for signing a bill that provided a Project Labor Agreement to bring good jobs to these good men and women.

Today, AFL-CIO president Richard Trumka came to Alaska (on a trip paid for with union dues) to preach the usual Beltway nonsense. There was a bit of the politics of personal destruction thrown around, and he mixed it in with the same old big government agenda that has been rejected in union halls, town halls, and voting booths all over our country.

I’m not sure why he’s attacking my record when I’m not the one responsible for the policies resulting in continued mass unemployment and a weak economy (that would be the man in the large white house on Pennsylvania Avenue). Among my “crimes,” the union boss cited the fact that I sometimes write notes on my hand (guilty as charged!); that I appear on cable television every once in a while to comment on the news (it’s called the First Amendment, Rich); and that my commonsense conservatism makes him laugh. Well, I guess that’s better than the failed leftwing big government policies of “his friend” Barack Obama, which makes the rest of us cry.

Trumka’s even worried I’m going to get violent against him. It’s kind of ironic that a union boss has the gall to accuse anyone of threatening violence. After all, we remember the violent attempts by SEIU to intimidate those who wanted to make their voices heard in last year’s town halls. And unlike Trumka, I never threatened that any effort to break a picket line would lead to violence. Come to think of it, neither did I ever hide behind the Fifth Amendment during a federal investigation about union corruption. Then again, I was just an ordinary, card-carrying union member, not one of the big shots who ended up, unfortunately, giving unions a bad name.

Trumka’s attempts to put himself on the side of the working man and woman would be more convincing if he weren’t a career union boss who’s spent most of his life in DC. No surprise then that his priorities aren’t the priorities of the average working man or woman, but of the Beltway power player. My fellow union brothers and sisters have had their union dues squandered for far too long by a few of the union bosses who work for partisan politics and not the good blue collar Americans who have to fund their cushy salaries.

Trumka purposely misquoted something I said in a speech I gave in Texas a few months ago. Let me clarify things for him: I never called union members “thugs.” You lie. I called some union leaders “thugs.” And I refuse to apologize for that because they have acted like thugs – at least in this day and age.

In the past there were many great union leaders who courageously defended the rights of workers. Unions were founded for all the right reasons! They were to give working men and women the clout to negotiate fairly with their employers and to fight for decent pay and working conditions. The unions of old would often end up fighting big government on behalf of the little guy. Today’s unions seem to be big government’s most enthusiastic supporters. It’s turned into some nonsense when union bosses back the government takeover of the car industry, and the mortgage industry, and the entire health care sector. And with the help of big government they aim to push through card check legislation that some characterize as being unfair to workers, and even un-American, because of its insistence on stripping workers of their right to privacy with a secret ballot. And that’s not just me voicing concern over card check – ask current union members how comfortable they are with what some of their leaders are saying about the legislation.

To my hardworking, patriotic brothers and sisters in the labor movement: you don’t have to put up with the scare tactics and the big government agenda of the union bosses. There is a different home for you: the commonsense conservative movement. It cares about the same things you and I care about: a government that doesn’t spend beyond its means, an economy focused on creating good jobs with good wages, and a leadership that is proud of America’s achievements and doesn’t go around apologizing to everyone for who we are.

This November, you have a choice. You can go with the flow and merely pull the lever the way they tell you to. Or you can join millions of others, and take a stand for freedom and independence and dignity, while still being part of a greater working community.

Join us. I promise you, you won’t regret it, and Americans who want good jobs for our families will be better off for it!

- Sarah Palin

Read more...

Sarah Palin Post: Texas Fights Obama's 'global-warming power grab'

Thursday, August 26, 2010 0 Responses
The state's slogan is "Don't mess with Texas." But the federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is doing just that, and at stake is whether the Obama administration can impose its global-warming agenda without a vote of Congress. […]
The EPA, determined to move forward anyway, is attempting to rewrite the Clean Air Act administratively via a "tailoring rule," which would reduce the number of regulated sources. The problem with that approach? It's illegal. The EPA has no authority to rewrite the law. To pull it off, the EPA needs every state with a State Implementation Plan to rewrite all of its statutory thresholds as well.
Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott and Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Chairman Bryan W. Shaw saw the tailoring rule for what it really is: a massive power grab and centralization of authority. They are fighting back, writing to the EPA:
"In order to deter challenges to your plan for centralized control of industrial development through the issuance of permits for greenhouse gases, you have called upon each state to declare its allegiance to the Environmental Protection Agency's recently enacted greenhouse gas regulations - regulations that are plainly contrary to U.S. laws. ... To encourage acquiescence with your unsupported findings you threaten to usurp state enforcement authority and to federalize the permitting program of any state that fails to pledge their fealty to the Environmental Protection Agency. On behalf of the State of Texas, we write to inform you that Texas has neither the authority nor the intention of interpreting, ignoring or amending its laws in order to compel the permitting of greenhouse gas emissions." […]
Federalist principles have allowed Texas to become the strongest state in the union. The Lone Star State leads the nation in job creation, is the top state for business relocation and has more Fortune 500 companies than any other state and is the top state for wind generation. President Obama said he wants to double U.S. exports in five years; he could look to Texas, as we are the top exporting state in the country. The Obama administration could learn a lot from Texas.  […]
Texas is the nation's energy-production capital, but the air we breathe is cleaner today than it was in 2000, even though the state's population has grown by nearly 3.5 million people. Between 2000 and 2008, Texas' nitrogen oxide levels decreased by 46 percent and ozone levels dropped by 22 percent, compared with national reductions of 27 percent and 8 percent, respectively. All major Texas metropolitan areas meet the 1997 federal eight-hour ozone standard, with the exception of the Dallas-Fort Worth area, which is within 1 part per billion of meeting the standard.
Source:

Read more...

(Video) Sarah Palin Post: Joe Miller & Lisa Murkowski Debate See Who'll Protect The Constitution

Sunday, August 22, 2010 1 Response
RUNNING: Lisa Murkowski and Joe Miller (Part 2/2)


RUNNING: Lisa Murkowski and Joe Miller (Part 1/2)



Sarah Palin
I believe Joe is the better choice for Alaskans. Joe has the right values; he is ready to help lead the greatest state in our exceptional nation; he is Alaska's true Commonsense Conservative choice, and I'll be proud to vote for him for the United States Senate.  Please join my family and me in supporting Joe Miller.
Todd Palin
Joe Miller isn’t afraid to shake things up in order to get the job done, and that’s exactly what we need in Washington today. We need reliable conservatives who have the backbone to fight for fiscal reforms, and will protect Alaska’s freedoms and opportunities with a passion that matches the size of our great state!
Mike Huckabee
I [am] pleased to support Joe Miller for U.S. Senate from Alaska. A former State Magistrate and Federal Judge, Joe possesses a deep understanding of the law, but more importantly understands its impact on the people...With the federal government encroaching quickly into every aspect of our lives – we need Joe in the U.S. Senate to help Congress make the correct decisions to bring Washington back to the limited role envisioned by the Founding Founders...Please join me in supporting Joe Miller – let’s make him Alaska’s next Senator.
Mark Levin, author and radio host
Do you think Murkowsky should be elected in the Republican primary? There's a conservative running against her, you know. His name is Joe Miller. Now far be it from me to tell Alaskans what to do, but my attitude is, "you want to save this country," then...Senator [Murkowski] needs to go! Alaska...Joe Miller. That's the conservative!
Source:

Read more...

Sarah Palin Post: Check this out! WWE Linda McMahon wants to be the next US Senator!

Saturday, August 21, 2010 0 Responses
Linda McMahon (of WWW fame!) wants to be the next US Senator from Connecticut.  Griff Jenkins is chasing her down this weekend and doing a special segment for us for ON THE RECORD at 10pm Monday.  Griff just emailed me this pic as a tease for you and for me:



































Source:
On The Record w/ Greta: Check this out! WWE Linda McMahon!

Read more...

Sarah Palin: Joe Miller is Ready to Win for Alaska!

Friday, August 20, 2010 0 Responses
Alaska is so full of potential for great private sector jobs and responsible resource development for the future of the Last Frontier – if only the federal government would stop its overreach and let Alaska thrive. We need a Senator who understands this and promises to stand up for Alaska and fight Washington’s liberal agenda. We’ll get that in Joe Miller!

We’re pleased to learn that recent poll results show the Alaska senate race between Joe Miller, a decorated Desert Storm war veteran, former judge, and proven Commonsense Conservative, and incumbent Lisa Murkowski is getting very close. Joe Miller has surged in the polls and is gaining strong momentum, while Lisa Murkowski has taken a big downward loss.

Constitutional Conservatives and Independent voters in Alaska have discovered what the far-left Huffington Post concluded and boasted – that Lisa Murkowski is a ”center-right Democrat.” Our country does not need another Democrat in the Senate voting for the Obama agenda which is bankrupting us. Alaska deserves a senator who will not talk one way in the Last Frontier and then vote the opposite way in the Beltway. It’s time for Alaskans who are concerned about endless bailouts, ever increasing debt and deficits, and the government take-over of health care (all planks Lisa Murkowski has walked) to get behind Joe Miller.

Alaskans are learning more about Joe. Here’s what we know: We know that Joe will not vote for amnesty for those who break our laws, but we know Lisa has already voted for amnesty – on May 25, 2006 on S. 2611, and voted against funding for the border fence. As Joe says: “It is a simple question. Are we a nation of laws? I believe we are. Therefore, the President must enforce our immigration laws as written and secure our borders, not sue the state of Arizona for acting where the federal government has failed to do so.”

We know Joe won’t support more bailouts, but we know Lisa already has. We know that Joe won’t vote for job-killing cap-and-tax legislation, but we know Lisa will because she co-sponsored a cap-and-trade bill and boasted of her commitment to “the issue of climate change” and carbon taxes.

We know Joe will vote to repeal Obamacare, but we know Lisa won’t because she said that repealing this government control of health care “is not the answer.”

And this is very important: we know that Joe can be counted on to vote with Commonsense Conservatives in the Senate, but we can’t count on Lisa because she has voted with Democrats over 300 times and Human Events rated her one of the top five “Senate RINOs.”

Joe may be the underdog in this fight (because by using the power of a politician’s incumbency after being given her Senate seat by her father, Lisa Murkowski has outspent Joe six to one), but Alaskans see through this and are recognizing Joe’s ability to be a real leader. Lisa Murkowski is endorsed by special interests and unions. Joe Miller is a man of the people, endorsed by the people. But as Alaska comes into its own, it’s important to remember that this election is not just about Alaska; it’s about our whole country. Remember, when it comes to the Senate, Alaska is just as important as California or New York. One vote is one vote. Our Alaska election affects the entire nation. That’s why good conservative leaders and organizations from around the country are looking at this race and have stepped up to endorse Joe – including Governor Mike Huckabee, Mark Levin, Lars Larson, Laura Ingraham, Red State, and the Tea Party Express.
Joe’s campaign needs to raise about $30,000 for a crucial final media buy. We can do it if we all pull together. Please go to Joe’s website at http://joemiller.us/ and donate to his campaign. Let’s raise $1,000 for each of the 30 years this senate seat has been locked in by the Murkowski family. The only way for our state to reach its potential, and to save our country, is to elect reformers who will fight for Alaska and all America and will stand up against the liberal Washington agenda.
- Sarah and Todd Palin


Read more...

Sarah Palin: Defending the Fight to Cast off a Conservative’s “Shackles”

Thursday, August 19, 2010 0 Responses
Does anyone seriously believe that Dr. Laura Schlessinger is a racist? Anyone, I mean, who isn’t already accusing all conservatives, Republicans, Tea Party Americans, etc., etc., etc. of being racists?

Adversaries who have been trying to silence Dr. Laura for years seized on her recent use of the n-word on her show as she subsequently suggested that rap “artists” and other creative types like those producing HBO shows who regularly use the n-word could be questioned for doing so. Her intention in discussing the issue with a caller seeking advice was not to be hateful or bigoted. Though she did not mean to insult the caller, she did, and she apologized for it. Still, those who oppose her seized upon her mistake in using the word (though she didn’t call anyone the derogatory term) to paint her as something that she’s not. I can understand how she could feel “shackled” by those who would parse a single word out of decades of on-air commentary. I understand what she meant when she declared that she was “taking back my First Amendment rights” by turning to a new venue that will not allow others the ability to silence her by going after her stations, sponsors, and supporters.

I, and obviously many others, have been “shackled” too by people who play games with false accusations, threats, frivolous lawsuits, misreporting, etc., in an effort to silence those with whom they disagree. That’s why I tend to defend people who call it like they see it while others stop at nothing to shut them up. I learned this valuable lesson when the partisan obstructionists in my state tried to shackle, bankrupt, and destroy my family and supporters, and my record, with endless frivolous litigation when I returned from the Vice Presidential campaign trail. In order to shake off the shackles they wanted to paralyze us with, I handed the reins to another, much like Dr. Laura is doing, so that these obstructionists who hated a Commonsense Conservative agenda wouldn’t win. I didn’t retreat; I reloaded in order to fight for what is right on a fairer battlefield. So, more power to someone with good intentions who refuses to be shackled by their detractors when they are falsely accused of being racist.

Dr. Laura did not call anyone or any group of people the n-word. Curiously, the same criers over this issue didn’t utter a word when White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emmanuel called a group protesting the Obama Administration’s actions, “f***ing retards.” When this presidential spokesman uttered this term I commented that the President would be better off not including Emmanuel in his circle of advisers, and my opinion was based not just on the crude and disrespectful term Emmanuel used to label people, but because he too often gives the President very poor advice. I was called intolerant and narrow-minded by many on the Left for commenting on that issue. Many of these same Leftists are now spinning the Dr. Laura issue into something it is not. As usual, their hypocrisy and double standard applications are glaring.

- Sarah Palin

Read more...

Sarah Palin Post: Please Watch This Video On The Ground Zero Hamas-que

Wednesday, August 18, 2010 0 Responses



The board members of Keep America Safe, Liz Cheney, Bill Kristol and Debra Burlingame announce the release of "We Remember," an ad featuring first responders and family members of the victims of the terrorist attacks of 9/11 who are speaking out in opposition to the proposed Ground Zero Mosque. We believe their voices should be heard throughout our country and we encourage you to pass their message along


Source:

Read more...

(Video) Sarah & Todd Palin take Greta on a tour of ANWR & Prudhoe Bay (drill, baby, drill!!!)

Tuesday, August 17, 2010 1 Response

ANWR: A National Security Need?
Sarah and Todd Palin take Greta on a tour of ANWR, Prudhoe Bay, make a case for drill, baby, drill


'On the Record' in Valdez
Greta and Sarah Palin look on their visit to the pipeline in Valdez




Sneak Peek: 'On the Record' in Alaska, Pt. 3
A preview of Part 3 'On the Record's ' special series in Alaska: Greta tours Valdez

Read more...

Sarah Palin: Legitimate Questions for Obama

Sunday, August 15, 2010 0 Responses
Mr. President, should they or should they not build a mosque steps away from where radical Islamists killed 3000 people? Please tell us your position. We all know that they have the right to do it, but should they? And, no, this is not above your pay grade. If those who wish to build this Ground Zero mosque are sincerely interested in encouraging positive "cross-cultural engagement" and dialogue to show a moderate and tolerant face of Islam, then why haven't they recognized that the decision to build a mosque at this particular location is doing just the opposite? Mr. President, why aren't you encouraging the mosque developers to accept Governor Paterson's generous offer of assistance in finding a new location for the mosque on state land if they move it away from Ground Zero? Why haven't they jumped at this offer? Why are they apparently so set on building a mosque steps from what you have described, in agreement with me, as "hallowed ground"? I believe these are legitimate questions to ask.

- Sarah Palin

Read more...

(Video) Sarah Palin on Freedom Watch w/ Judge Napolitano: Lawyers Threatened Governors To Accept Obama Stimulus

Friday, August 13, 2010 1 Response

Read more...

(Video) Sarah Palin Remembers Senator Ted Stevens On Fox’s Americas Newsroom & On The Record w/ Greta

Tuesday, August 10, 2010 1 Response



Read more...

(Video) Sarah Palin To Dead Media: Stay Classy LSM

Monday, August 09, 2010 0 Responses
While filming the Alaska documentary in Homer, I had a brief discussion with a local lady who, in typical Alaska style, decided to give me her two cents worth about my political leanings, American politics in general, and much else besides. It’s what makes our politics so uniquely democratic: two people discussing the things they care about, even though they respectfully disagree about just about everything (you can watch a brief video of the encounter).

The LSM has now decided to use this brief encounter for another one of their spin operations. They claim I – wait for it – “appear to roll my eyes” when the lady tells me she’s a teacher. Yes, it’s come to this: the media is now trying to turn my eyebrow movements into story lines. (Maybe that’s why Botox is all the rage – if you can’t move your eyebrows, your “eye rolling” can’t be misinterpreted!) If they had checked their facts first, they would have known that I come from a family of teachers; my grandparents were teachers, my father was a teacher, my brother is a teacher, my sister works in Special Needs classrooms, my aunt is a school nurse, my mom worked as a school secretary for much of her professional life, we all volunteer in classrooms, etc., etc., etc. Given that family history, how likely is it that I would “roll my eyes” at someone telling me that they too work in that honorable profession? Stay classy, LSM.
One good thing to come out of this little episode, though, is that it helps to remind people once again that Alaska is a great state full of independent-minded people. I look forward to introducing you to some of them in the forthcoming documentary series on life in Alaska! The show will remind you to get outdoors, breathe in God’s creation, and taste the freedom!
- Sarah Palin


Read more...

Sarah Palin: Please Read WSJ - Higher Dividend & Cap Gains Taxes LOWER Revenue. Limit Deductions?

Monday, August 09, 2010 2 Responses
No serious economist thinks higher dividend and cap gains taxes are efficient ways to raise revenue. Why not limit deductions for high earners instead?

Friday's weak employment report reminds us anew of the flagging U.S. economic recovery. While the Obama administration discusses additional stimulus packages, Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner is arguing that we should roll back key elements of the Bush tax cuts passed in 2001 and 2003. The administration is particularly skeptical about the benefits of today's lower rates on dividends and capital gains.
The tax on dividends, for example, is currently 15%, but it could increase to as high as 39.6% if the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts expire. On top of this, a new 3.8% tax on investment incomes for high-income earners begins in 2013 to help pay for ObamaCare. The administration's arguments for higher taxes on capital center on fairness and the need for deficit reduction.
These arguments are seriously mistaken. The relationship between investment, capital and wages is such that workers are better off if capital is not taxed at all. […]
There are at least four channels through which Mr. Bush's tax reform (proposed and passed) raised the long-run productive capacity of the economy—that is, increased the size of the pie. First, since lower taxes mean higher returns to investors, those investors allocate more funds to corporate capital. Corporations can raise capital for investment more cheaply. As a result, the nation's capital stock and output increase.
Second, reducing or eliminating the differential tax treatment between corporate and noncorporate investments means that investment flows are not channeled artificially by tax considerations and the overall productivity of the economy increases.
Third, lowering or eliminating taxes on capital mitigates distortions in our financial structure. Prior to 2003, equity financing was disadvantaged relative to debt financing, with taxes levied twice, at the corporate level and again at the investor level. Because interest payments to debt holders are deductible at the corporate level, debt financing was taxed only once, at the investor level. This system contributed to over-reliance on debt financing. The 2003 tax cuts reduced this bias substantially. Nonfinancial companies went into the recent crisis with lower leverage as a result, a very good thing. […]
If the Obama administration's goal were truly fairness, it could propose an increase in the average tax rate on higher-income earners without raising marginal rates—for example, by limiting deductions. Does the Treasury really believe that raising dividend and capital gains taxes addresses its fairness concerns at the lowest cost in terms of reduced economic activity? […]
If President Obama is interested in promoting growth now and in the future, he should commit to retaining the low tax rates Congress passed in 2003.
Mr. Hubbard, dean of Columbia Business School, was chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers under President George W. Bush.
Source:

Read more...

Sarah Palin: PolitiFact Gets "Pants on Fire" Rating For Their Spin On Democrats' $3.8 Trillion Tax Hike

Thursday, August 05, 2010 0 Responses
Yesterday, PolitiFact.com fact-checked my statement about the coming $3.8 trillion Obama tax hike – the largest tax increase in history. They did such a bad job of it, however, that I feel compelled to fact-check the fact-checkers.
First of all, they claim that there are Democrat proposals which would “keep the tax cuts for individuals who make less than $200,000 and couples who make less than $250,000.” 
Unfortunately for PolitiFact, no such proposal exists. They admit as much, by the way, when they state that “There are no formal congressional proposals yet to keep the Bush tax cuts in place, so we don’t have precise estimates from official sources like the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.” That doesn’t stop them, though, from claiming I “confuse the issue” by “using numbers that assume all the tax cuts are going away. That is not the Democratic plan nor is it President Obama’s plan.” 
Plan? What plan? There is no plan. All we have is smoke and mirrors based on an old Obama campaign pledge that if elected, he would exempt families making less than $250,000 a year from “any form of tax increases.” But this pledge was already watered down before he was even elected. First vice-presidential candidate Joe Biden lowered it to $150,000. Then campaign surrogate Gov. Bill Richardson lowered it even further to $120,000
A few months after the inauguration, even that last promise disappeared in a puff of smoke. When asked to reaffirm the White House’s commitment to the campaign promise of no tax increases for families earning less than $250,000, Obama’s spin doctor David Axelrod declared the President had “no interest in drawing lines in the sand.” 
The truth is that as of today, Democrats haven’t taken any action to extend any part of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts for any income group – and in this case doing nothing equals hitting American taxpayers with a massive $3.8 trillion tax increase. 
What we do know for certain is that the White House is more than willing to raise taxes on families with incomes of less than $250,000. Democrat Senator Max Baucus admitted as much during the debate about Obamacare when he stated that “One other point that I think it’s very important to make is that it is true that in certain cases, the taxes will go up for some Americans who might be making less than $200,000.” 
PolitiFact doesn’t dispute the $3.8 trillion estimate of the cost of repeal of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts. It admits that “Palin’s estimate of $3.8 trillion over 10 years is within a reasonable range, if you’re talking about all taxpayers.” And yet somehow it continues to argue that I’m wrong, based on a proposal it admits doesn’t exist which in turn is based on a phantom campaign pledge which Democrats have already broken anyway. I call that a “Pants on Fire” statement.
To prevent PolitiFact from making similar mistakes in future, it would be helpful if the White House and the Democratic Congressional leadership finally mustered the courage to table their plans to let the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts expire. Mr. President, publish your proposals, and we’ll duke it out. You can argue in favor of a multi-trillion dollar tax hike in an age of economic uncertainty and mass unemployment, and we’ll argue for fiscal sanity combined with serious spending cuts. I for one look forward to such a debate.
In the meantime I suggest the St. Petersburg Times hires a few extra staff to fact-check its fact-checkers. It might help it prevent being caught with its “pants on fire” again in the future.
- Sarah Palin

Read more...

(Video) Sarah Palin On Hannity: Obama Talks Tough on Immigration & Obama’s Lack of Cojones

Wednesday, August 04, 2010 0 Responses
[0:00:00] ... former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin over the weekend accuse the president of lacking -- is and based on his approval ratings it appears that Americans agree now ...
[0:00:32] ... joining me now with reaction is former Alaska governor Fox News contributors Sarah Palin. Governor welcome back. -- you're doing yeoman work Tom thanks for having RIE -- a lot of loose did you expect the ...
[0:08:38] ... governor stay right -- much for Governor Palin coming up right after the break plus two. ...


Read more...

Ronald Reagan Quotes

Deals At Amazon

Get Your 2-Sided Palin Apparel (LOL on back)

Get Your 2-Sided Palin Apparel (LOL on back)

Palin For President T-Shirts

Palin For President T-Shirts

Friends

Governor Palin 4 President Facebook:

You Can Get Involved ==> Organize 4 Palin

You Can Get Involved ==> Organize 4 Palin

Join Draft Sarah Committee

Join Draft Sarah Committee

SUBSCRIBE or E-Mail Max Dige at sarah2012gop@yahoo.com

GOVERNOR ADVOCATES:

NEWS ARCHIVE:

LIVE TRAFFIC

VISITORS BY COUNTRY

free counters

Visitors:

My Profile

My photo
Washington, DC, United States
I live in DC and a I can be reached at sarah2012gop@yahoo.com