Archive for the ‘Sarah Palin’ Category
Will Sarah Palin Still Run For Office From A Fox Studio? Will Huckabee?
Monday, January 11th, 2010
Will Sarah Palin run for office from a Fox studio? Will Huckabee? Maybe. Could they? The answer, of course, is yes. Will they? Probably.
Some people are taking the news of Sarah Palin ending up on TV as proof that she has no presidential aspiration. To which I respond with the mature, “As if.”
Ex-governor Huckabee is sure as shootin’ running for the Presidency, or was, until the whole cop-killer thing happened. He still might. He believes that America needs him. Bad. And so does Sarah Palin. And so does Mitt Romney. And so does Newt Gingrich. And probably, so does Rick Perry. And Tim Pawlenty. The list goes on and on.
Ed Morrissey believes that Palin might put off her presidential hopes:
However, a multi-year deal may mean that Palin will wait to run for higher office. She could either go for the Senate or the presidency next, but either way, she’d have to start building a campaign no later than a year from now. Media outlets generally cut off analysts when they start building campaigns to avoid the necessity of giving opponents free air time for responses. A multiyear deal doesn’t preclude the possibility of entering into a campaign in 2011, but it indicates that Palin isn’t yet envisioning such a step.
That’s not necessarily a bad idea anyway. Palin is young and has plenty of opportunity to run for office, with 2016, 2020, and 2024 all being very realistic for her in terms of presidential campaigns. The Fox appearances will give her an opportunity to hone her craft while keeping expectations in check. Taking her time would be a smart move, and at least since her resignation from office, Palin has been making a series of smart moves.
Well. Time will tell. There is also something to be said for striking while the iron is hot. And right now, Sarah Palin is THE counter balance to Barack Obama. All of the other aforementioned folks wouldn’t be paid attention to at all if they operated like Sarah Palin and communicated via Facebook. And four years could turn into eight or even twelve years if the next president is Republican and I think he or she will be.
Do you think this a good move for Sarah Palin? Vote here now:
Sarah Palin Spoke The Truth About Death Panels: Of Course The Government Will Ration And Deny Care
Wednesday, December 23rd, 2009
How will the government “save” money? 1. Ration 2. Pay less for what they do cover 3. Increase taxes
As to the whole “Death Panel” deal, and Jim DeMint’s finding that the Senate legislation includes a provision forcing future Senates to never get rid of, um, Death Panels, I mean, rationing boards. You know that pointy headed group who will decide the fates of 300 million Americans? Yeah, them.
Anyway, here’s what Sarah Palin said:
Last weekend while you were preparing for the holidays with your family, Harry Reid’s Senate was making shady backroom deals to ram through the Democrat health care take-over. The Senate ended debate on this bill without even reading it. That and midnight weekend votes seem to be standard operating procedures in D.C. No one is certain of what’s in the bill, but Senator Jim DeMint spotted one shocking revelation regarding the section in the bill describing the Independent Medicare Advisory Board (now called the Independent Payment Advisory Board), which is a panel of bureaucrats charged with cutting health care costs on the backs of patients – also known as rationing. Apparently Reid and friends have changed the rules of the Senate so that the section of the bill dealing with this board can’t be repealed or amended without a 2/3 supermajority vote. Senator DeMint said:
“This is a rule change. It’s a pretty big deal. We will be passing a new law and at the same time creating a senate rule that makes it out of order to amend or even repeal the law. I’m not even sure that it’s constitutional, but if it is, it most certainly is a senate rule. I don’t see why the majority party wouldn’t put this in every bill. If you like your law, you most certainly would want it to have force for future senates. I mean, we want to bind future congresses. This goes to the fundamental purpose of senate rules: to prevent a tyrannical majority from trampling the rights of the minority or of future congresses.”
In other words, Democrats are protecting this rationing “death panel” from future change with a procedural hurdle. You have to ask why they’re so concerned about protecting this particular provision. Could it be because bureaucratic rationing is one important way Democrats want to “bend the cost curve” and keep health care spending down?The Congressional Budget Office seems to think that such rationing has something to do with cost. In a letter to Harry Reid last week, CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf noted (with a number of caveats) that the bill’s calculations call for a reduction in Medicare’s spending rate by about 2 percent in the next two decades, but then he writes the kicker:
“It is unclear whether such a reduction in the growth rate could be achieved, and if so, whether it would be accomplished through greater efficiencies in the delivery of health care or would reduce access to care or diminish the quality of care.”
Though Nancy Pelosi and friends have tried to call “death panels” the “lie of the year,” this type of rationing – what the CBO calls “reduc[ed] access to care” and “diminish[ed] quality of care” – is precisely what I meant when I used that metaphor.
This health care bill is one of the most far-reaching and expensive expansions of the role of government into our lives. We’re talking about putting one-seventh of our economy under the government’s thumb. We’re also talking about something as intimate to our personal well-being as medical care.
This bill is so unpopular that people on the right and the left hate it. So why go through with it? The Senate is planning to vote on this on Christmas Eve. Why the rush? Though we will begin paying for this bill immediately, we will see no benefits for years. (That’s the trick that allowed the CBO to state that the bill won’t grow the deficit for the next ten years.)
The administration’s promises of transparency and bipartisanship have been broken one by one. This entire process has been defined by midnight votes on weekends, closed-door meetings with industry lobbyists, and payoffs to politicians willing to sell their principles for sweetheart deals. Is it any wonder that Americans are so disillusioned with their leaders in Washington?
This is about politics, not health care. Americans don’t want this bill. Americans don’t like this bill. Washington has stopped listening to us. But we’re paying attention, and 2010 is coming.
- Sarah Palin
I don’t think people quite grasp how right Sarah Palin is about this bureaucratic board. In each insurance company, a case manager can be influenced and advocate on behalf of the patient. With iron-clad bureaucratic recommendations, there will be no negotiation, no risk-taking. There will be no incentive to make the customer happy. None.
And people will die. Far more than the 30K or so number that libs cite, when decrying how many uninsured people die. No, this will be state-sponsored withholding, denying and sitting by while people die. It’s not that people couldn’t be helped, it’s that they don’t fall under arbitrary criterion.
Health care recommendations will be politicized and facts will have little to do with it: Witness mammogram recommendations. This issue is very important to me personally. I have a child who survives because the doctors tried. They made a judgment call. The insurance company pays for it. But in Europe, my son would not be alive. In some countries, a baby born before 26 weeks is allowed to die. These tiny babies take resources, you know. And it’s not fair to everyone else.
So, don’t listen to libs talk about the people who die because of lack of care. These are the same people who show no regard for helpless life. They routinely use utilitarian arguments. They will do so with health care. Sacrifice will be for the “greater good”.
Sarah Palin is right.
Why Is The Governator In Copenhagen When His State’s Economy Is In The Crapper? And, “Saracuda Tougher Than Schwarzenegger”
Thursday, December 17th, 2009Politics Daily’s Matt Lewis baits the lefties at MSNBC:
Should President Obama be over in Copenhagen? If his goal is an empty, symbolic gesture, yes. If he cares about America, no. It doesn’t serve America’s interests to negotiate with 3rd world thugs and pretend that giving these regimes money will make the climate better.
The whole summit is a hypocritical farce.
Best part of the video: When the lefty brays about the 5% increase in green jobs and Matt responds that California ranks 33 in the United States in job creation.
Also, the reporter doing the questioning is so vehement in his opinion about climate change. I’m a Christian and have less blind faith. Good grief, these guys are such true believers it’s embarrassing.
Sarah Palin Has Rehabbed Her Image: Now What?
Monday, December 14th, 2009
If you haven’t seen Sarah Palin’s Conan appearance, watch it here, now:
After watching, you’ll see why Legal Insurrection’s William Jacobson says this:
Palin thus took on the pervasive liberal and Democratic caricature of Palin, and did so in a humorous and sympathetic way. Palin was allowed to fight mockery with mockery. Touché.
Palin’s appearance on the Conan show may mark a turning point. The mainstream media, very begrudgingly and in small steps, is shifting its approach to Palin as polls show Palin’s popularity rising. Palin’s appearance on Oprah brought the show ratings it had not seen in years.
Obama used his appearance on Oprah, and other entertainment media love, to establish his popularity. Which is why it damages Obama’s image so badly when SNL mocks Obama. At this point, Obama needs the media more than the media needs Obama.
Palin, by contrast, established her popularity independent of, and despite, the entertainment media. When it comes to Palin, the entertainment media is following not leading. We have reached the point where the mainstream entertainment media needs Palin more than Palin needs the media.
I agree. Sarah Palin’s success with humor, for me, was/is pivotal. She must transcend the media by engaging them humorously. And she did that in spades.
This segment and the book tour and the Facebook page and the Op-Eds have succeeded to do one thing: Bring Sarah Palin back to neutral ground. That’s it.
At this point, Sarah Palin is neither a positive or negative in the minds of those who care the least and matter the most: the middle-of-the-road American centrist independent who swings elections and decides policy fates.
Neutral is a good place to be. President Obama would like to be neutral with these people. Unfortunately for him, he’s not neutral. In fact, independents are running away from President Obama.
So, Sarah is doing well. Pushing her into the solidly positive direction will take deft political action from here on out. Her success will depend on her endorsements within the Republican party and her policy positions generally.
As for endorsements, her word can be a deal-maker and/or breaker in squeaker races. In tough Republican fights, Sarah Palin risks getting caught in the cross-fire of two heavy weights (as is happening in Texas).
Other places, Sarah Palin could burnish her image as an outsider and endorse the conservative, underdog candidate. Here, she risks the candidate losing and by default, losing her own mojo as a driver of opinion. On the upside, she could be perceived as a different sort of politician by supporting, across the board, any politician who is an outside-the-beltway, kick-the-bums-out candidate. Of course, this won’t endear Palin to the beltway establishment. And, if she does end up in national office, she’ll want to work with these people. Maybe.
Washington, D.C. is a cess-pool populated by venomous snakes. Even within the Republican party, insiders want Palin to shut up. When she called out some of the consultants on the McCain campaign, she made enemies. She is feared and loathed within her own party. And yet, Palin already wields enough power that these people must give good face. For now.
The difficult road is ahead for Sarah Palin. It will take all the political skill she can muster to navigate these waters. She has enemies within and without. Better to not think about it and move forward, and continue to make brave decisions.
Someone asked me,”What does she have to lose?” Well, for someone who really cares about the direction the country is going, she loses her ability to help the country to reverse course. I actually think she does care about the country and fumbling the good will she has built and the support of those behind her, would be a loss for all involved.
Sarah Palin Hits ‘Em Where It Hurts–Updated: Jon Stewart Feels Frum’s Pain
Friday, December 11th, 2009
Could there be anything worse for President Barack Obama than his nemesis agreeing with him? I don’t think so. From CNN:
Sarah Palin had some rare praise Thursday for President Obama after the president delivered his Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech in Oslo. But the former Republican vice presidential nominee added that she would like to see the president act more like his predecessor, George W. Bush.
“I liked what he said,” Palin told USAToday in an interview after the speech.
Palin said the president’s remarks had a familiar ring. “I thumbed through my book quickly this morning to say ‘Wow! That really sounded familiar.’ because I talked in book too about the fallen nature of man and why war is necessary at times.”
But Palin suggested Obama could learn a few things from former President Bush.
“We have to stop those terrorists over there,” she told the paper. “We’ve learned our lesson from 9/11. George Bush did a great job of reminding Americans every single day that he was in office what that lesson is. And, by the way, I’d like to see President Obama follow more closely in the footsteps of George Bush and [Bush's] passion keeping the homeland safe, his passion for respecting – honoring our troops.”
Well, then. If Sarah approves….David Frum must disapprove:
When Barack Obama got word of the prize in October, he said he would accept “as an affirmation of American leadership.” But in Oslo he did not speak as leader of all America, but as leader of a party – and as a party leader who cannot refrain from snide insituations against the motives – not only of his opposite-party predecessors – but of all who worked with them, including the leaders of many allied governments.
So, on the substance, President Obama was refreshingly “realistic”. On style, he was still a “graceless”, long-winded bore.
Well, you can’t have it all.
P.S. Can anyone disagree with the statement? Sarah Palin is the opposing voice to President Barack Obama. Or this? She is gutsy.
UPDATED:
Via Newsbusters
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | Mon – Thurs 11p / 10c | |||
| Obama’s Nobel Speech | ||||
|
||||
The Sarah Palin Standard
Wednesday, December 9th, 2009
Perfection. Anything less than perfection (definition of perfection to come later) is reputation wrecking for Sarah Palin and for any person, organization or, in this case, op-ed page of the Washington Post, who dares rub elbows with this smelly undesirable.
Matthew Continetti says this:
But that’s not the point of this post. The point is that Palin continues to be held to a ridiculous standard by the scribblers and bloggers who are outraged that she’s still around and opines from time to time on the issues of the day. This is America, folks. Best-selling authors write op-eds. That’s what they do. Moreover, Palin happens to have an extensive background in energy issues, from her time on the Alaska Oil and Natural Gas Conservation Commission, to her stint as governor of Alaska. Her opinions on the subject of energy are considered.
The reaction to her is not, however. As Palin critic Megan McArdle memorably put it: “I really wish the media wouldn’t act like, well, a bunch of elitist hooligans who are out to get her. I’ve coined a new phrase to cover the situation: Palinoia. It’s when you think people are out to get you, and then they do their best to justify your erroneous belief.”
The liberals want conservatives to shut up. They want to present things like “the science is settled” and not be questioned. They want to forward shoddy redistributive legislation and do it unencumbered by opposition.
Most of all, they want a conservative woman they thought they’d banished from the arena of ideas to just. go. away. And she’s not. How dare she?! How dare she oppose them? How dare anyone take her seriously?
The only way for Sarah Palin to redeem herself to these snarling jackals is to change her ideological beliefs so she can be “smart like them”. And if she ever gets smart like them, then she’ll be perfect.
How The Left Went Wrong By Not Getting It Right About Sarah Palin–UPDATED
Tuesday, December 8th, 2009Sarah Palin turns out to not be the mindless, soulless creature the left painted her to be during the 2008 election season.
The liberal press, the leftist bloggers, and the activists who hate Sarah Palin succeeded in turning Sarah Palin into a cartoon during the election cycle and many people were inclined to believe them. Sarah Palin interfered, at the time, with what voters wanted at the moment: young, hip, new, black. If she was turned into a moose-killin’, baby-making, no paper-reading, dummie, then people could justify a decision they already wanted to make. And that strategy also worked only as long as the man they elected, Barack Obama stayed young, hip, and new.
Reality hit President Obama who had the misfortune of having to live up to sky-high expectations. But don’t feel too sorry for him. They were his own creation and they came at the expense of women like Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin. As his star fades, people look around and see what they passed over.
Sarah Palin is looking better.
Her new book Going Rogue has sold 2.7 million books and counting. I have it and continue to read it and the more I read it, the more I like Sarah Palin. And that’s the whole point of the book, really: to get Sarah Palin back to neutral public perception ground; to humanize her. She was a cartoon. Now, in her own words (and after reading it, I don’t know how anyone could capture the cadence of rhythm of her rhetorical and prose style, it’s so unique) she’s saying who she is. And she’s believable. And she’s not stupid.
And she’s normal.
The bar was set so low for Sarah Palin, that she’s surprising everyone, including the press. People are even rethinking the Katie Couric interview and Ms. Palin made a really good point: Why not release all the tape, unedited and uncut? If Sarah Palin comes off as such a complete moron, it should harm Sarah Palin worse, not make her look better. A win-win for the left and the press, but Katie Couric won’t release the tape. Too bad, it makes Katie Couric look more like a partisan hack, if that were possible.
Over the next year, I’m guessing that Ms. Palin will just be not scary. In the mean time, she’s hopefully boning up on foreign policy, philosophy, etc. There are hints in her speeches that she’s doing just that.
The press and left will still call her stupid. They did that with Ronald Reagan (doddering grandpa) and Gerald Ford (fumbling moron) and George W. Bush (blathering idiot). Why? Because anyone who disagrees with leftist conventional wisdom is, by definition, stupid. So, once again, the bar will be set so low, even a McChimpyhaliburtan can leap it.
President Obama (dithering on Afghanistan) and the Climategate folks and the Congressional Dems cutting of grandma’s healthcare, have destroyed any reverence for pseudo-intellectualism. Pointy-headed smart looks ineffectual and maybe even evil.
Americans like a pragmatic, action-oriented politician. Smart enough, but not waffling (Obama), haughty (Kerry), and humorless (Gore). By over-selling intellectualism and reducing enemies to mindless dunces, the press and left are themselves, the caricature.
Sarah Palin is turning into a real, fleshed-out human being. Now that she’s established a bare minimum, she can turn toward policy questions. And she has. She has been a fearless critic or encourager depending on President Obama’s policy choices. And if the President keeps making poor choices, her criticism will look genius.
The Left made a big mistake scorning Sarah Palin. They created a solid core of adoring fans and created an image so cartoonish, that she is bound to exceed expectations.
UPDATED:
Andrew Malcolm of the LA Times Top of the Ticket notes the juxtaposition:
Obama’s new Gallup Poll job approval number is 47%. Last month it was 53%.
Regular Ticket readers will recall how in this space in late November we pointed out that Obama’s closely watched job approval slide was coinciding with Palin’s little-noticed rise in favorability. And it appeared they might cross somewhere in the 40s.
Well, ex-Sen. Obama, meet ex-Gov. Palin.
The new CNN/Opinion Research Poll shows Palin now at 46% favorable, just one point below her fellow basketball fan.
Podcast: Ali Akbar Talks Political Strategies From Texans To Palin
Tuesday, December 8th, 2009Health care debating, governor to president making and Sarah Palin hating all get discussed in this fast hour.
You can find Ali Akbar here.
Download MP3
To subscribe on iTunes, just click here!
When Melissa isn’t on the radio, you can find her at melissaclouthier.com and on Twitter. Her username is MelissaTweets.
Sarah Palin Is Funny, Barney Frank Is Boring
Sunday, December 6th, 2009That’s what it seems like from the Gridiron speech Palin gave. Don Surber has a round up of the quotes. Go read them, Sarah really goes after the press–in a funny way.
Andrew Malcolm has a great article [and a great pictue] on the event. Here’s an excerpt:
Palin appeared in a brand-new role for the possible 2012 Republican presidential candidate — joke-teller as the GOP’s representative at the annual winter Gridiron Dinner, a 124-year-old group of Washington writers and guests who hold such regular opportunities for political writers to mingle with the power people who really matter.
Speakers there — past ones have included someone named Barack Obama — are intentionally funny — or trying to be, anyway — and usually off the record.
But an exception allowing news coverage was made tonight given the intense interest in Palin, who attracted about twice the usual dinner crowd.
And she appeared to succeed better than her Democratic counterpart, Rep. Barney Frank. It was a refreshingly different look at Palin, who’s more often quoted as a media scold and harsh critic of what’s-his-name in the White House.
Palin, whose intelligence has been widely challenged by many in her audience, said she was pleased to appear before an elite audience of intellectual heavyweights: “Or as I like to call it, a death panel.”
Well. Sarah Palin keeps proving herself to be quite the politician. It seems she does inspire fear and loathing, for good reason. She is formidable.
Andrew Sullivan Begins The Week Doing Another Sarah Palin Gynecological Exam
Monday, November 30th, 2009Andrew Sullivan, is, in a word, tedious:
I’ve emailed Bellow asking him about the fact-checking process for “Going Rogue.” Getting an on-the-record confirmation that, for example, Harper Collins reviewed the medical records proving Palin’s multiple medical stories (including corrected hospital records by her own account) would be a useful piece of information. Since it appears that the McCain campaign knew nothing of these rumors, and indeed, by some accounts, nothing even of Bristol’s pregnancy, it would be reassuring to know that someone somewhere has actually sought proof of some of Palin’s wildest embellishments or total fantasies.
Sullivan does produce some useful psychological insight into stalkers and conspiracy theorists. They aren’t motivated by facts or reality. And, in fact, engaging them is pure folly as their aims are not truth, but connection to their obsession. The problem for Andrew, is that Sarah Palin is just so far away and detached from him. If only he could be with her. If only he could be her.
Alas, some things are not to be. I hope the Palins have good bodyguards.
