Monday, February 28, 2011

First-in-the-Nation Caucus

via Standing4Palin
February 28th, 2011 by ChiConservative

“The Action begins in Iowa. It’s where everything starts for everyone.”- George H. W. Bush

In a little less than a year from now, Iowa voters will flock to one of the 1,784 caucus precincts in the state to take part in a tradition stemming all the way back to the 1840s-the selection of a nominee for President of the United States. This is where it all begins. Candidates will have given dozens of speeches and shaken thousands of hands. Staffers and volunteers will have searched every nook and cranny of the state looking for new supporters to add to their army. But the strength of one’s organization is made manifest on that day as voters choose who they want to lead the country over the next four years.

But why do we start in Iowa? And why is it so important?


Since 1846 when it first became a state, Iowa has used its caucus system to elect its presidential nomination delegates. However, Iowa leading off the nominating process is actually a recent phenomenon. It wasn’t until 1972 that the Democratic Party pushed the Iowa caucus back to January to allow more time between the caucus and the party’s national convention. Four years later, the Republican Party, after noticing how much attention and coverage the caucus received, followed suit and made Iowa the first stop on its schedule.

For many years the caucus system as a whole was used as the preferred method of choice in the nominating process. However, this changed after the notorious 1968 Democratic Convention in Chicago. And many party leaders got together and established the “McGovern-Fraser Commission” to implement reforms that would include more people in the process and not just party bosses and insiders. As a result, we began to see a dramatic shift from caucuses toward more “open” primaries, especially when the Republican Party, once again, followed in the Democrats’ footsteps and adopted similar changes.

Today, only 9 states still have the caucus system in place, and 41 states have either split caucus/primary systems or just primaries.

What is a Caucus and what is the Process?

A caucus is general term used for a political group or gathering. The Iowa caucus involves a process where, on the day of the election, voters go to a designated location (whether it be a school, town hall, or library) in one of the state’s 1,784 precincts and voice their preference for their party’s nominee. Registered members of each party are allowed to attend their party’s meeting. It’s not the same as a primary where voters simply show up and go into a booth and cast their vote. A caucus functions quite differently and the process typically lasts much longer.

The process for the Iowa Republican caucus is actually fairly straightforward. Voters go to the designated location within their precinct where participants will plead the case for their particular candidate to try and attract people who are weakly committed or truly undecided. After all the campaigning is done, each person is then given a blank sheet of paper where they write down the candidate of their choice and place it in a ballot box. So, in a sense, it sort of acts like a “quasi-primary.” They then select delegates to go on to the county convention, where they then choose delegates for the district convention, and then new delegates are chosen for the State Convention, and then ultimately the National Convention. Delegates are technically considered unbounded, but tend to reflect the results of the caucus.

Does Iowa Produce Presidents?

There are some analysts who look down on the Hawkeye State and don’t feel that a state of 3 million people deserves the enormous attention that it gets every Presidential cycle. There’s also the belief that the nature of its caucus system only drags out voters who are the most active (which often represents the extremes of both parties) and thus, its participants represent views that are not in line with the majority of Americans. The question then becomes: does the winner of the Iowa caucus take that new momentum and capture the nomination and ultimately the Presidency?

If we look at a few examples from the last 40 years, the results are mixed.

In 1972, the ultra liberal George McGovern took a surprising 2nd in the Iowa Democratic Caucus. However, he was able to take this result, in addition to an unexpected 2nd in New Hampshire, to capture the party’s nomination-only to be trounced in an epic landslide by Pres. Nixon. Four years later, an unknown governor from Georgia named Jimmy Carter basically made Iowa his 2nd home and surprised many when he won the Iowa caucus. His win gave him increased exposure and familiarity, which enabled him to also win the New Hampshire Primary. He then captured the nomination and defeated a weakened Gerald Ford for the Presidency.

Four year later, another unknown candidate named George H.W. Bush followed Carter’s strategy and placed a primary importance on Iowa and campaigned tirelessly throughout the state. His efforts were aided by the fact that Reagan, following the awful advice given to him by his campaign manager John Sears, campaigned for only a total of 40 hours in the state. Bush seized the opportunity and pulled off an incredible upset, besting the front-runner Reagan by 2%.

The win propelled Bush’s numbers in New Hampshire and put him ahead of Reagan in most polls in the state. His newfound “Big Mo” would have likely carried him to a victory in New Hampshire had there not been 5 weeks between contests. This gave Reagan just enough time to abandon the Sears playbook to criss-cross the state talking to voters- exercising his unparalled strength as a retail campaigner. And if Reagan hadn’t won New Hampshire, it’s almost certain he wouldn’t have become President.

Lastly, in 2008 Barack Obama shocked the political world when he defeated Hillary Clinton in the Iowa Democratic Caucus. Though Hillary had been ahead of Obama by as much as 25-30% points in national polls, his campaign knew that if they won Iowa and a few of the other early primaries the national numbers would eventually change. A loss, on the other hand, would almost surely mean the end of his campaign and would only reinforce the feeling of “inevitability” surrounding Clinton’s nomination. Obama’s victory created a surge in donations, a rise in poll #s in New Hampshire, and also kept the super delegates at bay. He went on to narrowly defeat Hillary for the nomination and ultimately won the Presidency.

Though a win in Iowa doesn’t necessarily lead one to a party nomination or the Presidency, a very poor showing will certainly end one’s candidacy. Moreover, it’s impossible for an unknown candidate to afford skipping Iowa, and it’s extremely risky for a candidate with name recognition to do so. As Charles Cook states, “If you look at the last seven presidential elections, 13 out of 14 have gone to a candidate who won either the Iowa Caucus or New Hampshire primary or both.” So overall, the Iowa Caucus is an incredibly important first step in the nominating process and that will likely be the case for many years to come.

Is Retail Politics Still Key in Iowa?

Some analysts today contend that Iowa is becoming less and less dependent on grassroots mobilization and more focused on the use of “wholesale” politics that typically characterizes many large primary states. They point to the influence money plays in politics, the rise of social media, and the increasing role of advertising and commercials in recent elections. In 1996, Steve Forbes spent heavily on ad-buys leading up to the Iowa caucus, yet only mustered a disappointing 4th place finish. He recognized the importance of personal contact and organization and adjusted his strategy to include more time “on the ground.” And in 2000, he finished a strong 2nd behind eventual nominee and President George W. Bush.

Most operatives tend to agree that while new 21st century media tools such as Facebook or Twitter can help spread a candidate’s message and mobilize voters, nothing beats having boots on the ground, a strong organization, and personal contact with the candidate. Sarah Taylor of Freedom First (Pawlenty’s PAC) says that retail politics is still most important and grassroots is “absolutely essential.” Iowa State political science professor Steffen Schmidt says that while these fairly new tools have been particularly effective in recent elections and shouldn’t be ignored, being competitive in the Iowa caucus demands actual face-to-face interaction with voters.

The first big test of a candidate’s organization comes at the Ames Straw Poll. It takes place in August in the year prior to the Iowa Caucus and brings people from all across the state in support of their candidate. Though the results have no bearing on the official Caucus, they can provide a real boost to a candidate’s campaign. Since its creation in 1979, the winner has gone on to capture the party’s nomination 2 out of 5 times, and 3 out of 5 times they’ve won the Iowa Caucus.

The genius Mike Allen of Politico stated recently that it’s a sure sign Governor Palin isn’t running because neither she, “nor anyone on her behalf is courting top donors, early-state activists, or experienced operatives-all of whom are getting locked down, day by day.” His brilliant analysis avoids the obvious: if Governor Palin is planning on running for President, she’s likely not going to be doing most of those things anway.

She’s going to do things her own way, following her unfailing instincts, and implementing her own playbook. Once she does, the state of Iowa won’t know what hit em’ and the other candidates won’t stand a chance.

Important Dates: Ames Straw Poll-August 13th 2011; Republican Iowa Caucus-February 6th, 2012

About the Author Mid 20s, independent, one of the organizers for the Chicago Meet-up, I've run 3 marathons including the Boston Marathon. Try to excel in everything I do. Love to read, a few books that helped shape my philosophy include Witness, The Way the World Works, and Atlas Shrugged. I think Sarah Palin would make a fantastic President.

Sunday, February 27, 2011

Palin Will Draw a Contrast With Obama in Her Visit Next Month to India

Sunday, February 27, 2011 9:42:13
By PRANAY GUPTE, Special to the Sun

Sarah Palin’s choice of an international venue to deliver an address on “My Vision of America” is canny. She will speak in March before India’s business, political, diplomatic, academic and media elite at the annual India Today Conclave. The gathering arguably possesses the biggest private-sector megaphone in the world’s largest democracy. And while the delegates may not be a microcosm of the country’s 1.2 billion mostly poor people, they certainly make decisions that matter.

Mrs. Palin’s choice is also shrewd because her visit to India will come barely three months after a celebrated one by President Obama. Her appearance is certain to elicit comparisons, however superficial. A presidential visit, replete with pomp and pageantry, is far more of a visual and verbal feast than that of a private citizen, even if she happens to have been an erstwhile governor of Alaska and a former running mate in an American presidential election.

Nevertheless, Mrs. Palin’s India journey is an important one. For one, Indians would like to hear a clearly defined sense of America’s political and economic trajectory. Mr. Obama’s message during his trip last November was replete with predictable bromides and the usual rhetoric of bilateral friendship. He announced some major business deals that would enhance American exports, but these had been anticipated. Indians were less than happy that, however subtly, the president sought to underscore that, in Washington’s view at least, there was parity between an economy of $1.4 trillion, and a neighboring one – Pakistan – whose GDP is $167 billion.

The Obama Administration’s concept of parity, however, has less to do with economics than with a hope — becoming increasingly vain — that Pakistan will be a robust ally in the global fight against Al Qaeda’s terrorism.....


And given her personality, Mrs. Palin most definitely will make friends in India, which has already begun souring on President Obama for his perceived failure to follow through on promises made on his state visit. Happily, Mrs. Palin will be a political tourist; she will have no obligation to make any pledges, other than of accelerating her personal friendships in a land known for its warmth and hospitality.

Mr. Gupte is a contributing editor of The New York Sun.

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Congratulations, Todd Palin!

Team 11, made up of 'first dude' Todd Palin and Eric Quam finished Alaska's 2000 mile Iron Dog Snow Machine Race in second place last night.

It was down to the wire for this race that had started last Sunday, and the final couple hours proved to be very exciting, as The Palin/Quam team was in first place heading to the turn around at North Pole Alaska. They were in great position to win (Todd is a four time champoin of this grueling race) when tragedy struck and Palin's Snow Machine stopped moving. (We were tacking the racers via GPS on-line) He had had an accident and Quam was forced to turn around and go back to check on his partner.

This setback allowed the second place team of Tyler Huntington and Chris Olds, who had been virtually on their heels, to move into the lead. This is the order they ended up finishing in, with Team 7 (Huntington, Olds) taking home the first place trophy for the second year in a row.

It was a thrilling, down to the wire ending for such a long marathon of a race. This years contest was especially grueling as they racers had to combat a viscous life threatening storm, several accidents and sub -50 below temps as they raced across the ice and snow.

“I think these guys are the toughest men on the planet,” Said Governor Sarah Palin, “Girly men don’t ride the Iron Dog.”

Congratulations to all who finished, but a special shout out to Todd and his partner for finishing in the money and in second place!

Governor Palin was interviewed just before the finish here.

Saturday, February 26, 2011

Palin and the ABP Crowd

From our friends at Coloradans4Palin

Palin and the ABP Crowd

In recent weeks, a somewhat humorous trend has developed. Many establishment types have been trying to take down Sarah Palin. However, they cannot attack her directly because that would just make them look petty; Palin has the highest approval rating of any of the candidates within the GOP (76%). Swayed by the lamestream media or by their own elitist tendencies, they are desperate to find a strategy to subvert the will of their base by preventing her from running and winning. We call them the Anyone But Palin crowd.

They've propagated the lie that she's stupid or inexperienced. That hasn't held up. They've tried ignoring her. People pay attention to her anyway. They've promoted a string of failures in her stead (Daniels, Christie, Romney, etc.). Daniels called a "truce" on social issues, increased deficits under Bush, and caved to the unions on right-to-work. Christie supports cap and trade, is weak on illegal immigration, and condones radical Islam. Romney was the first to implement socialized healthcare, supported abortion, and flip flops around more than a fish out of water. He even changed the paperback version of his book to try to make Romneycare look better! Rick Santorum tried attacking her directly, criticizing Palin's ability to handle politics because of her kids (he has 7 to her 5). His remarks were immediately seen as sexist and backfired rather quickly. Nothing they have tried has worked.

Finally, someone in the establishment is giving up. Jennifer Rubin, token "conservative" at the Washington Post, finally admits that none of their candidates have succeeded.
All of that leaves many Republicans wondering, "Is that it?" Periodically, a wave of optimism rolls through the electorate. Chris Christie will run! Umm, doesn't seem so. Paul Ryan will change his mind? Eh, he doesn't seem anxious to put his young career on the line so soon.
Republicans, at the end of February, have no officially declared candidates (other than businessman Herman Cain). They have no frontrunner. They have no obvious late comer who could swoop in to wow the base. In sum, rather than too many candidates, as the punditocracy predicted, they have too few. The search goes on.
Admittedly, her article contains many flaws (Palin is probably running, and is probably the front runner, and will indeed swoop in to wow the base - don't know how she missed that one!), but at least she has the courage to admit what the establishment can't quite bring themselves to say yet. All of their candidates are flawed.

There is Nobody But Palin (NBP).

Sarah Palin - A Hero Comes Home

Sarah Palin: Even Conservatives Duped by Liberal Media Branding

American Thinker
February 26, 2011
By Lloyd Marcus

This article is not about endorsing Sarah Palin for president. It is about illustrating the liberal media's ability to brand an image. Case in point, conservatives saying Palin is not smart enough to be president.

The Left launched their "Sarah Palin is Stupid" campaign the next day after her incredible VP nomination acceptance speech. A woman, pretty, smart, witty, confident and bold with an ability to inspire and fire up the conservative base, Sarah Palin was the Left's worst nightmare. They were livid. The only thing which could have made it worse would have been if Palin was black. The Left would have surely lost their minds.

The clarion call went out, "Palin MUST be destroyed!"

When Sarah Palin appeared on Saturday Night Live, I watched with a bunch of my conservative friends. My friends laughed and made comments such as, "This is great. It shows Palin is a good sport and doesn't take herself too seriously."

I thought, "This is wrong. Why help the Left sell the message to their audience that Palin is stupid?" Humor is a powerful sales tool.

The assault on Palin's intellect intensified daily. Every word out of Palin's mouth was dissected and placed under a microscope. Then, viewed through a lens tainted with the paradigm that "Palin is stupid". Who amongst us could withstand our every utterance judged with such extreme scrutiny?

Conservatives saying under their breath at cocktail parties that Palin isn't too bright is evidence the liberal media's branding of her has worked on some level.

Frustratingly, the facts completely prove otherwise. Palin was extremely successful as Governor of Alaska.

For crying out loud, what has His Royal Obamaness achieved qualifying him to run the country? Nothing. Obama was a community organizer. He taught people they were entitled victims of an unfair America and how to extort freebies. He only served 144 days in the senate before running for president.

Obama's presidential qualifications: He is half black and liberal. This won him 100% liberal media support and 96% of the black vote. Obama is well spoken and looked good in a swim suit.

Remember when Obama said America had 57 states? Immediately to his defense, the liberal media said, "Obama was tired". Imagine if Palin had said the same thing. The liberal media would have gagged us with at least three days of 24/7 coverage of the story. Every report would parrot the same mantra, "This conservative woman is truly an idiot".

While the liberal media no longer enjoys their Walter Cronkite single voice "bully pulpit", their ability to brand a person or issue is still quite powerful. They took a man who had never run a business, state or donut shop and convinced millions of Americans he was a political leader unlike any before him. Obama was the smartest guy in the room; eminently qualified to run America and probably the world.

Brilliantly despicable, the liberal media exploited Obama's race to get their liberal black guy elected. They deemed any attempt to subject Obama to the normal vetting procedures for one applying for the position of Leader of the Free World to be racist. Even Obama's anti-America associates and racist pastor of 20 years did not matter.

With fake Greek columns on the set behind him, extra reverb on his voice and a teleprompter, the democrats with liberal media support branded Obama, in the minds of millions, as The Messiah. He was "The One we have been waiting for". You could almost hear angels singing, "Ahhhhhhhhh!"

Meanwhile, without special effects, Sarah Palin truly is a super woman epitomizing everything feminists claim to wish for all women. She has achieved extraordinary success in and outside of the home. And yet, Palin is successfully branded by the liberal media, an idiot, in the minds of many.

Clearly, Palin's presidential qualifications far exceed Obama's. As I stated, this article is not about endorsing Palin for President. I am simply illustrating the liberal media's power to shape an image and public opinion, including opinions of some conservatives.

We tea party patriots have made tremendous inroads in countering the liberal media's propaganda and getting out the truth. This is why they are franticly burning the midnight oil conceiving ways to shut down talk radio and control the internet.

While the liberal media's ability to shape public opinion is in severe decline, they remain relentless. They still believe they set the rules of engagement, defining what behavior and comments are deemed racist and uncivil. They even think they can select our candidates; dictating who is and who is not electable.

Some on our side still crave to be accepted by the liberal media. They are embarrassed to be named among those "crazy tea party people". Thus, they pander to the Left saying things like, "They're right, Palin is a joke. And yes, we conservatives should be willing to work with liberal democrats". Unfortunately, willing to work with always means compromising our values, not theirs. Thank God, most of us get it. We realize the left simply must be defeated.

Liberal mainstream media, your glory days of distorting the truth, monopolizing coverage and totally controlling public opinion are over. We The People truly are Taking Back America!

Thursday, February 24, 2011

One Girl Revolution

More of Sarah

Palin Haters Continue Assault, But Why?

M Catharine Evans
February 24, 2011
via American Thinker

Sarah Palin continues to be a repository for the Left's paranoia. Ever since her arrival in St. Paul,Minnesota the self-motivated, good-looking, charismatic, conservative Governor has been subjected to all-consuming assaults coming from both genders and both parties.

Just like blaming white people or Jews or Christians for all the evil in the world, engaging in hate speech targeted at public figures incites a collective hatred. In Palin's case the drumbeat of "she's stupid" has risen to such a crescendo that the word itself has instigated all kinds of malicious gestures and mockery.

Palin, as a palpable symbol of American exceptionalism, comes on to the world stage at precisely the time America's greatness is being challenged from all sides. Along with the millions of real conservatives that have rallied around her message, Sarah Palin's mere existence portends a major shift away from covert and corrupt politics toward a restored vision of real hope.

Excerpt. read the full article here.

The difference between voting present and real leadership.

Two days ago an announcement came from the The United States concerning the violence in Libya, demonstrating our natural position in world leadership saying,

"NATO and our allies should look at establishing a no-fly zone so Libyan air forces cannot continue slaughtering the Libyan people."

Today, NATO officials responded.

via YNet News

NATO forces may attack forces loyal to Muammar Gaddafi if the Libyan air force continues to bomb anti-government protesters, the London-based al-Quds al-Arabi reported, citing a European official claiming the US had threatened to intervene in the violence.

It should be noted, however, that the original statement did not come from President Obama. It was not a White House directive nor was it a statement released from Congress.

It came in the form of a Facebook post from a housewife in Wasilla, Alaska.

We posted the full release here: Here’s to Libya’s Freedom

Sarah Palin is not in office, but is she in fact the equivalent of a shadow President? This is what real leadership looks like.

Meanwhile, somewhere hiding out in the White House, Obama voted present.

Mike Gallagher Practically Endorses Palin for President

National syndicated talk show host Mike Gallagher gives a rousing defense of Governor Palin while outlining why she is our best hope to defeat Barack Obama.

Wednesday, February 23, 2011

Palin Headed to India Next Month to Keynote International Conference

Palin Headed to India Next Month to Keynote International Conference
via HotAir

Palin will speak on March 19 at the India Today Conclave in the capital city of New Delhi, according to an event schedule. Her remarks are titled “My Vision of America.”

Her visit will give her a chance to burnish her foreign-policy credentials in a country that boasts one of the world’s fastest-growing economies — and will spark further talk about whether she will run for president next year.

It will be her first trip abroad since September of 2009, when she spoke to a business group in Hong Kong.

Tuesday, February 22, 2011

Here’s to Libya’s Freedom

Governor Palin weighs in on the crisis in Libya.

Here’s to Libya’s Freedom
by Sarah Palin Tuesday, February 22, 2011 at 8:59pm
via Facebook

It’s a little perplexing looking at the White House today. There was a statement on the horrible earthquake in New Zealand, and certainly our hearts go out to all those affected by this horrible natural disaster. But nothing on the slaughter in Libya?

The protests in many places in the Middle East affect regimes that have cooperated with the U.S. on issues from peace with Israel, fighting al Qaeda, hosting our military forces, or cooperating against Iran’s nuclear ambitions. Gaddafi’s Libya is different.

For four decades, this tyrant has held power. Gaddafi was Osama before Osama hit the scene. He ordered the bombing of a disco in Germany to kill Americans. When he paid the price for that – after President Reagan rightly ordered retaliation – he directed his agents to blow up Pan Am Flight 103. They did, and more than 250 innocent people died.

Gaddafi tried to come in from the cold in 2003 – scared by the demonstration effect of Iraq. But we should have no illusions. Gaddafi is a brutal killer and Libya – not to mention the world – would be better off if he were out of power.

Now is the time to speak out. Speak out for the long-suffering Libyan people. Speak out for the victims of Gaddafi’s terror. NATO and our allies should look at establishing a no-fly zone so Libyan air forces cannot continue slaughtering the Libyan people. We should not be afraid of freedom, especially when it comes to people suffering under a brutal enemy of America. Here’s to freedom from Gaddafi for the people of Libya.

- Sarah Palin

Monday, February 21, 2011

Here All Along

Sarah Palin Makes a Splash on Long Island

Okay, one more great article on Governor Palin's fantastic performance last week in Long Island. This comes from Jedediah Bila in Human Events.

Sarah Palin Makes a Splash on Long Island ^ | February 21, 2011 | Jedediah Bila

She was relaxed, but spunky. She was real. She was armed with stats. She was unapologetic about her convictions. She was tough on President Obama’s agenda. She was fed up with the status quo. She was “sick and tired of the games that are being played in Washington, D.C., because we’re talking about our money, we’re talking about our kids’ future, we’re talking about our republic and the solvency of our republic.” She was willing to laugh at herself. She was confident about her experience.

And yes—she was wearing leopard heels.

The woman? Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin. The event? The Long Island Association’s 2011 Annual Meeting and Luncheon, during which Palin replied extemporaneously to a series of questions from LIA CEO and President, Kevin S. Law. Topics included gun control, energy independence, health care, entitlements, Obama’s budget, the debt ceiling, the Tea Party, protests in Egypt, the 2012 presidential election, and more.

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Jedediah Bila is a HUMAN EVENTS columnist and television commentator. For more information on Jedediah, please visit Follow Jedediah on Twitter.

Sunday, February 20, 2011

Full Video: Governor Palin’s Q&A At Long Island Association – February 17 2011


Here is Governor Palin's full unscripted and wide ranging Q & A session from last Thursday's event in Long Island.

It's no wonder the media has to lie and distort what she says.

She was really really good – the facts and figures, the humor, the common sense, you could sense that the business people in the crowd were shaking their heads in agreement. She spoke honestly and from the heart, and it's so refreshing to hear a politician “tell it like it is”.

Watch as she totally captivates this mixed crowd of New York business people.
She was outstanding!
(after the introduction there is about 20 seconds of silence before the sound comes back on. Also, I apologize for the formatting, it's just a little larger than it needs to be.)

Saturday, February 19, 2011

The Advent of Sarah Palin: Noisy Panic Grips the Elites

The Republican Party, at least since the administration of William McKinley, has been perceived as the party of privilege...the party of the elites. While not always fair, the GOP Establishment seems to have an almost endemic hostility to the kind of grassroots, populist movements typified by the TEA Party and Sarah Palin. The GOP Establishment has sought, with almost complete success, to quash such movements over the past century. A small government populist conservative has only crept into the GOP hierarchy twice in the last century, both times in completely unanticipated fashion and both times beyond the control of the elites to stop. It is about to happen again.

The first time was in 1923 when a little known former governor of Massachusetts, who had been a surprise selection as Vice President in 1920, Calvin Coolidge, succeeded the corrupt Warren G. Harding. Elected governor in 1918, Coolidge had been known mainly as a friend to World War I veterans (giving the Massachusetts veterans a $100 bonus), a budget hawk who used his veto pen to slash 4 million dollars from state budget, enabling the state to retire some of its debt, and a staunch opponent of tax hikes.

He vetoed a bill that would have raised legislators' pay by 50%. Coolidge accomplished quite a lot in the two years (or half term) he spent as Governor. Of course, he had been a member of the City Council and mayor of Northampton, Massachusetts (population: 5,000)for most of the ten years preceding his (half) term as Governor. If that sounds familiar, it should. His resume bears an uncanny similarity to that of the current GOP frontrunner deemed unqualified by the elites, former Governor, Mayor and City Council member Sarah Palin of Alaska.

Succeeding the corrupt, Establishmentarian Warren Harding, Coolidge proved to be a splendid President. He cut the top marginal tax rate from 73% to 25%, spurring unparalleled growth and prosperity that continued until 1929-30. His Establishment successor, Herbert Hoover, in response to a financial crisis on Wall Street and an economic downturn, reacted by raising taxes sharply from 25% to 63%, hiking corporate taxes by 15% and strangling international commerce with the Smoot Hawley tariff.

It was not Roosevelt, but the Establishment Republican Hoover who increased taxes most sharply and precipitated the worst and longest economic catastrophe in American history. It is little wonder that Coolidge had been "cool" to Hoover, his Commerce Secretary, once remarking that "for six years that man has given me unsolicited advice—all of it bad." Not until the next populist conservative insurgency, fifty years later, would tax rates fall as sharply as the Establishment GOP had hiked them in 1931. And, not coincidentally, it would also take fifty years for the peacetime economy to soar to the heights it had reached throughout the 1920s.

While the Coolidge insurgency had occurred quietly through Presidential succession, the Reagan ascendancy occurred through national upheaval of Watergate, stagflation, unemployment and American malaise at home and abroad. It was an "in your face" insurgency that challenged two sitting Presidents, one Republican and one Democrat. In 1974, with Nixon's Presidency teetering, the Establishment had succeeded in denying Reagan the Vice Presidency when Spiro Agnew had resigned, opting instead for the bland Establishment foot soldier, Gerald Ford. In so doing, it showed that its "next in line" method of choosing nominees did not apply to populist conservatives, since Reagan--as the runnerup to Nixon in Miami Beach in 1968 and the leader of the Conservative movement--would have been, by anyone's calculation, next in line for the Presidency.

When Reagan observed Ford's big government policies and appeasement of the Soviet Union, he decided not to take no for an answer and challenged Ford for the GOP nomination in 1976. In so doing, he brought down upon his head a withering fire from the Establishment that persisted until election in 1980, even occasioning a walkout of the 1980 convention by the Party Vice Chair Mary Dent Crisp and a third party challenge from one of his GOP competitors, John Anderson.

As soon as Reagan was nominated, the Establishment counterinsurgency began in earnest. First, the nomination of his Establishment challenger, George H.W. Bush, as Vice President all but assured that the Reagan era would be a brief eight year interregnum from Establishment hegemony over the GOP. The entree of key Establishment aids such as James Baker as White House Chief of Staff, only served to solidify this shadow government in waiting, which emerged in 1988 to purge the Reaganites and reclaim the party.

The Establishment elites in 1980 realized that they could not prevent Reagan from pursuing policies which they found anathema--deep tax cuts and a RE-MORALIZATION (in contrast to the demoralization of the Nixon-Ford-Cater years) both of domestic and foreign policy. Domestically, Reagan's re-moralization involved the unapologetic defense of the Judeo-Christian tradition of America (including the right to life), welcoming evangelicals and conservative Catholics into the GOP tent.

Internationally, Reagan rejected the moral equivalence represented by detente, bluntly calling the Soviet Union "the focus of evil in the modern world" and initiating a military buildup that planted Soviet Russia firmly on the ash-heap of history, liberating perhaps half a billion people from its oppressive yoke. The elites despised both moves but bided their time until their restoration represented by George H.W. Bush.

Like his historical antecedent, Herbert Hoover, in responding to an economic downturn, Bush raised taxes and was promptly shown the door in 1992, fracturing the great Reagan coalition for a generation. This mattered little to the elites within the GOP, who had regained their prize--firm control of the party--and an even firmer resolve not to relinquish it. From 1988 until the present, the GOP has five times nominated candidates who are elitists by birth, the four Bush nominations and that of John McCain (the son and grandson of four star Admirals).

Only in the case of the ancient Bob Dole, an Establishment lap dog of long standing who earned his chops defending Richard Nixon and then Gerald Ford, did the Establishment have recourse to a non-hereditary prince and then only in 1996, a year in which the GOP Establishment was perfectly comfortable with a loss that would set the table for a Bush restoration in 2000. So great was the grass roots revulsion against Dole that Pat Buchanan, a weak candidate with many flaws, managed to win Louisiana, Alaska, place second (to Dole) in Iowa and to win New Hampshire before the GOP Establishment, in utter panic, closed ranks around Dole to defeat him in Arizona.

In 2012, the Establishment faces the gravest threat to its grip on power since at least 1980 and perhaps ever. Like 1996, it has no one of any stature or charisma to trot out as its champion. The firmament is buckling with TEA party intensity in a way that far surpasses both 1994 and 1980. And the incumbent Democrat President, to whom the GOP Establishment would normally cede a second term in order to regroup, is mortally wounded among white voters who inhabit, in disproportionate numbers, the battleground states of the Midwest where the next election will be decided.

But perhaps most important of all, the Establishment has lost control of the nomination process for the first time since 1980. This time, it faces--not the acerbic and off putting Buchanan--but a candidate of unparalleled skill and charisma that it has been unable--in spite of continuous assaults for nearly three years--to destroy. The elites have tried alternately to flatter her, to savage her, and to threaten her, anything to deter her from running, all without success. In so doing, the Establishment (Democrat and GOP) has spent the heavy "artillery" that it would normally save for the general election and it now lies defenseless in her path, biting its tail and frothing at the mouth, but utterly impotent to stop her from assuming control of the Party and the Presidency.

Worse yet, at a youthful 47, Sarah Palin will cast a long shadow over the next three or four decades of national and GOP politics, making the kind of elitist recrudescence which occurred after Reagan well nigh impossible. It is a perfect storm, a confluence of circumstances that will not just sweep the elite Establishment from power but promises to hold it at bay for a generation. The election of 2012 will be noisy and full of kerfuffle as the GOP Establishment's death rattle reaches its crescendo. Not to worry. It will fall silent on November 6, 2012. R.I.P.

Brices Crossroads

Friday, February 18, 2011

Sarah Palin Hints at Her 2012 Plans

Governor Palin was in Long Island New York speaking to a group of over one thousand New York business leaders on Thursday. She took questions for over an hour on a wide range of topics and absolutely charmed and captivated everyone in the room.

The moderator was Long Island Association's President Kevin Law, a democrat, who came away very impressed both by the Governor's sharp grasp of several issues and her ability to win people over with her sparkling personality. He stated that most left the session with a far higher opinion of Governor Palin than they may have had coming in.

This is a key point. Governor Palin has been the subject of left wing media attacks and scorn for over two years, and the narrative that most people have of her is not reality based. She was asked about her relatively low polling numbers and admitted, if she is going to turn those around she's going to have to get out there (in Iowa!) and do some traditional retail politicking so people can get to know the real Sarah Palin.

I've spoken with many, many conservatives in Iowa who say they really like her, but are afraid the media has 'damaged' her to the point she may not be 'electable.' Of course, this was the goal of all the smears from the media. The governors performance in a sometimes hostile environment yesterday should go a long way to allay those concerns.

Governor Palin is one of the best retail politicians we've ever seen, and it won't be hard for her to turn around any false impressions once people get to see her in action.

You can read more about Governor Palin's event here (along with a very interesting poll on whether or not she could win):

Sarah Palin: I'm "still thinking about" running for president

Thursday, February 17, 2011

Sarah's America

Good morning Palin supporters! This is a great way to start the day.

Wednesday, February 16, 2011

Sarah Palin, The Quitter??

My friends at Alaskans4Palin have posted an important article that I have to share. Iowans need to understand the truth surrounding Governor Palin's resignation, this sets the record straight.

Sarah Palin, The Quitter??

There are a few loud voices in Alaska that are dependable in their hatred for Sarah Palin. For the most part, they are extreme left wing liberals or rejected Palin administration job applicants and they are certainly still out there. The media in Alaska, like most other places in the country, is no different. One of their favorite memes is that Sarah Palin is a quitter.

On July 3, 2009, Sarah Palin announced her resignation as the Governor of Alaska to a small contingent of local reporters, standing in her backyard on the shores of Lake Lucille, surrounded by family and friends. There were 18 months and one legislative session left in her term. Many in the lower 48 that day waited over an hour for video feed of the speech to be finally available outside the state. In the meantime, national networks started spinning with second hand reports. First they reported she was not seeking re-election. Then they started getting word that she was stepping down. They immediately began questioning why. Was she under FBI investigation? Was she having an affair? What was she trying to cover up? This questioning began before her words even had a chance to make it outside the state.

Citizens of the state listened in disbelief to our Governor. She had taken on the corrupt Alaska Republican Party and had weathered the glaring spotlight of a national campaign, yet seemed to be suddenly caving to the pressures of a small sect of liberal Alaskans. These few Alaskans had been providing the lower 48 with information about how ‘Alaskans’ felt about the Governor for quite some time. They had also been engaged in harassing the Governor since her return from her Vice Presidential campaign.

She announced the press conference at the last second, not giving national media the opportunity to arrive. Her message was for Alaskans. When she began, the Governor seemed shaken. Her husband, Todd, had flown in from Bristol Bay to stand by her side. I immediately knew that this wasn’t a simple statement of not seeking re-election. She talked about Alaska’s value to the world and the country. She talked about the resources we hold. She pointed out the achievements her administration had already accomplished during her term as Governor. And then she announced her resignation. The text of her statement in part as released by the Governor’s office:

“…Political operatives descended on Alaska last August, digging for dirt. The ethics law I championed became their weapon of choice. Over the past nine months I've been accused of all sorts of frivolous ethics violations - such as holding a fish in a photograph, wearing a jacket with a logo on it, and answering reporters' questions.

Every one - all 15 of the ethics complaints have been dismissed. We've won! But it hasn't been cheap - the State has wasted THOUSANDS of hours of YOUR time and shelled out some two million of YOUR dollars to respond to "opposition research" - that's money NOT going to fund teachers or troopers - or safer roads. And this political absurdity, the "politics of personal destruction" ... Todd and I are looking at more than half a million dollars in legal bills in order to set the record straight. And what about the people who offer up these silly accusations? It doesn't cost them a dime so they're not going to stop draining public resources - spending other peoples' money in their game.
It's pretty insane - my staff and I spend most of our day dealing with THIS instead of progressing our state now. I know I promised no more "politics as usual," but THIS isn't what anyone had in mind for ALASKA.

If I have learned one thing: LIFE is about choices!

And one chooses how to react to circumstances. You can choose to engage in things that tear down, or build up. I choose to work very hard on a path for fruitfulness and productivity. I choose NOT to tear down and waste precious time; but to build UP this state and our country, and her industrious, generous, patriotic, free people!

Life is too short to compromise time and resources... it may be tempting and more comfortable to just keep your head down, plod along, and appease those who demand: "Sit down and shut up", but that's the worthless, easy path; that's a quitter's way out. And a problem in our country today is apathy. It would be apathetic to just hunker down and "go with the flow".

Nah, only dead fish "go with the flow".

I WILL support others who seek to serve, in or out of office, for the RIGHT reasons, and I don't care what party they're in or no party at all. Inside Alaska - or Outside Alaska.
But I won't do it from the Governor's desk.

I've never believed that I, nor anyone else, needs a title to do this - to make a difference... to HELP people. So I choose, for my State and my family, more "freedom" to progress, all the way around... so that Alaska may progress... I will not seek re-election as Governor.

And so as I thought about this announcement that I wouldn't run for re-election and what it means for Alaska, I thought about how much fun some governors have as lame ducks... travel around the state, to the Lower 48 (maybe), overseas on international trade - as so many politicians do. And then I thought - that's what's wrong - many just accept that lame duck status, hit the road, draw the paycheck, and "milk it". I'm not putting Alaska through that - I promised efficiencies and effectiveness! ? That's not how I am wired. I am not wired to operate under the same old "politics as usual." I promised that four years ago - and I meant it.

It's not what is best for Alaska.

I am determined to take the right path for Alaska even though it is unconventional and not so comfortable.

With this announcement that I am not seeking re-election... I've determined it's best to transfer the authority of governor to Lieutenant Governor Parnell; and I am willing to do so, so that this administration - with its positive agenda, its accomplishments, and its successful road to an incredible future - can continue without interruption and with great administrative and legislative success.

My choice is to take a stand and effect change - not hit our heads against the wall and watch valuable state time and money, millions of your dollars, go down the drain in this new environment. Rather, we know we can effect positive change outside government at this moment in time, on another scale, and actually make a difference for our priorities - and so we will, for Alaskans and for Americans.”

Her statement was clear. Her administration was stymied by the politics of personal destruction. The time, energy, and resources of the state were being used to defend her from relentless attacks. It was clear that this type of attack was the new normal in Alaska politics. And she thought the State deserved better.

Immediately upon her resignation, she did what most Alaskans would do. She sought shelter and solitude in the familiarity of hard work on the shores of Bristol Bay.

The national media, desperate to explain her actions using anything except the reasons she had just stated, began a 24-hour spin cycle attempting to develop alternative reasons. The FBI had to issue an unprecedented statement, stating she was not under any type of investigation by them. We can assume that was in response to an unprecedented number of media requests.

The Palin’s granted interviews to several national media outlets just days later. CNN, ABC, and NBC were among the throng that flew reporters and film crews out to the remote location in hopes of unveiling the “real story”. The Governor, in full Alaskan fishing gear and with family in tow, reiterated her reasoning to the inquisitive reporters.

I encourage those hoping to find the truth behind her resignation to start by listening to her words. Time has passed and we have had the advantage of seeing what the future has held, both for the Governor and for the State.

Governor Palin announces her resignation

KTUU reports:

CNN interviews

ABC interviews

And if you only have time to watch one, Andrea Mitchell interviews
It’s a little less than 6 minutes. It reiterates her consistent message.

The decision she made that day had profound implications for herself, her family, our State and our Nation. In order to fully understand the decision and its ongoing effects, one needs to know the players and the history of Alaskan politics. In the coming weeks, Alaskans4Palin will discuss the key players, their past relationships to the Governor, the ethic complaints, and the cost involved that led to the decision by our Governor to put the well being of the State before her own. We will explore the reactions of both the left and the right in more detail. We take a look at the path Governor Palin has taken since leaving office as well as the progress of the key projects her administration set in motion.

Those outside the State who wish to dismiss her as a quitter are likely missing some of this key information regarding Alaskan politics. Those within the State who make the same charge are likely the same people who supported the obstacles that shackled her administration. Liberals will continue to make the charge, as it is getting increasingly difficult for them to attack her in any other way.

Those who seek truth need to hear the other side of the story. The left wing liberal media and bloggers have spewed their hatred and skewed perception of Governor Palin’s resignation for long enough.

The truth is that many Alaskans, while disappointed to lose her leadership, continue to support her today. We view her resignation as our Governor as one of the greatest forms of intentional self-sacrifice ever seen in Alaskan politics. To purposefully give up power, for the good of the people, is unheard of in politics today. Greed, money, and power keep politicians fighting for elected titles long past their expiration date. Our Governor, made a decision that might not have been the best for her personally or politically, but it was the best for the tax paying constituents of the State. She said "Politically, if I die, I die", making it clear that she understood the implications her actions could have on her political future. But as Governor, she stepped up and acted in the best interest of the people she represented that day. And for that I am personally grateful.

The More Sarah Palin Seems Unelectable, the More Electable She May Actually Be.

From Brices Crossroads
via C4P

The DNC/Mainstream Media strategy…the unelectability card, as it were…succeeds in dispiriting only political junkies and only those who are ignorant of history and blind to the historical and demographic advantages Governor Palin possesses as well as to her tenacity. She is not going to give up, so they have essentially lost the war. As has been pointed out here and elsewhere, Obama’s severe polling deficits with the white vote nationally, represented by the 60-37 percent thumping his party took in the recent midterms, severely imperils his reelection. No one can face those numbers, which are even more foreboding in the heavily white midwestern battleground states, and hope to win. The last best hope of the DNC/MSM axis was to deter Palin from running, and it has failed. Their feeble efforts to do so reveal just how little the lunatic Left appreciates the mettle of this latest foe. As many savvy German generals realized privately that America’s entry into World War II, before the GIs even fired a shot, spelled doom for them, so many in the Democrat left privately realize that the failure to deter Palin’s entry into the 2012 race similarly dooms their man.

Second, her willingness and ability to unite the old Reagan coalition, to unapologetically make social conservatives full partners in her coalition will allow the GOP in the 2012 election, to breathe from both its lungs, social and economic, which it has not done since Reagan. With Palin, the GOP will not be fighting with one hand behind its back as it has done under the Bushes, the Doles and McCain
Finally, the full bore assault on Governor Palin is beginning to provoke a backlash, which may well culminate when she stands on the debate stage with President Obama and the one white demographic that Obama has not lost by double digits–white college educated women–watch her and, swelling with pride, murmur collectively “She’s one of us”. Such a dam break is not only possible but quite likely and, if it comes, the landslide of 2012 may eclipse that of 1980. The Reagan Democrats who were unknown and undefined before the Gipper’s great landslide, will give way to the Palin Democrats, professional white women who, seeing one of their own on the threshold of the greatest office the world has ever known, will break for her and break hard driving Obama from office and lifting Sarah Palin to the Presidency of the United States.

Pajamas Media » Can Sarah Upstage Barack?

Pajamas Media » Can Sarah Upstage Barack?

Iowan's 4 Palin!

Let's start the morning with a little video of Governor Palin in Iowa and some of her great fans.

Tuesday, February 15, 2011

Review: America By Heart

What Palin Believes and Why

Wes Vernon
The Washington Times
December 28, 2010

Sarah Palin has read the writings of such intellectual giants as Milton Friedman, Alexis de Tocqueville and Whittaker Chambers and such historical leaders as Abraham Lincoln, John F. Kennedy, Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher.

In “America by Heart: Reflections on Family, Faith and the Flag,” she cites the published letters between John and Abigail Adams in this nation’s infancy as well as the speech of Calvin Coolidge (probably one of America’s most underrated presidents) on the occasion of this nation’s 150th birthday.

Beyond that, the 2008 Republican vice-presidential nominee – recently in USA Today – offered us her insight regarding Iran’s nuclear capabilities and ambitions.

Such displays of research and knowledge are not likely to prevent critics from disparaging her intellectual heft. Indeed, one is left to wonder if they would credit Mrs. Palin’s gravitas if she were to author her own comprehensive encyclopedia blindfolded and without notes or research material at hand.

The former Alaska governor’s second best-seller brims with historically significant details (many not widely known). Moreover, she discusses at length in well-ordered terminology who she is, what she believes, why she believes it and why she pursues her very public path whether or not she ultimately joins the presidential sweepstakes 2012.

As of this writing, it is likely that Mrs. Palin has not decided if she will seek the Republican nomination next year. Recall that she resigned as governor of Alaska only because her enemies, through frivolous lawsuits, made it impossible for her to govern. Such abuse of the legal system would be far more difficult if she were president.

As the author of this philosophical tell-all ponders a run next year, she writes about how she was badgered with questions as to how she would “balance” family life with White House responsibilities if she were to attain that higher station.

“They really don’t get it,” she writes. “I really don’t ‘balance’ anything. We [the family] do it together. And if we had won, we would have done the White House like we have done everything else as a team. And by the way, Ms. Reporter, I assume you’re asking all male candidates the same question.”

In addition to supporting Tea Party-like candidates in the 2010 primaries and general elections (with more successes than failures) Mrs. Palin explains what she sees as America’s greatness while also noting that, yes, we have had our failures, early slavery being the most conspicuous. But the author quotes Constitutional Convention delegate James Wilson as declaring at the time that the gathering had succeeded “in laying the groundwork for banishing slavery out of this country.”

George Washington, in addressing religious tolerance, congratulated Americans for creating a government “which gives to bigotry no sanction.”

The Palin view of America, as the political landscape has evolved in recent decades, is that it has become less a federal republic than a 50-state colony of Washington, D.C.

Even the most intimate details of family life are no longer beyond government reach, quite unlike in the days of our country’s birth, when, the author tells us, “The Founders took it for granted that strong families instilled in children the habits and disciplines necessary for those children to govern themselves in adulthood.”

John and Abigail would have been shocked, we’re told in “America by Heart,” if only they could imagine that 232 years hence, Washington would seek “to tax every aspect of our daily lives in the name of building a ‘green’ economy … that rides roughshod over the more responsive level of government, our state government … that is spending away our children’s and grandchildren’s patrimony … that … regards us as citizens of an all-powerful nanny state.” (Mrs. Palin wrote all this before our first lady intoned that when it comes to our kids’ diets, “We can’t just leave it to the parents.”)

Hardly an issue of the day is untouched in this book:

On Obamacare: “We didn’t want it, couldn’t afford it, and it made no sense, but Washington passed Obamacare anyway, raising our bills and limiting our freedom of choice.”

Government busybody contradictions on children: “… at the same time they are busy downplaying the importance of the traditional family, liberals are busy justifying expanding government in the name of ‘the children.’ “

On today’s self-described “women’s movement”: “Modern feminism’s idea of a ‘real’ woman isn’t so much a woman as a liberal.”

The old-line media and its assorted allies in the snobocracy have “done a job” on Mrs. Palin in two short years. Sudden celebrity imposes a heavier burden on conservative women than on most. In “America by Heart,” we learn about this woman’s inner strength to persevere, whatever lies ahead.

Wes Vernon is a Washington-based writer and veteran broadcast journalist.

Monday, February 14, 2011

The Truth Behind the White House’s Budget Spin

The Truth Behind the White House’s Budget Spin

by Sarah Palin on Monday, February 14, 2011 at 2:12pm

Today the White House finally produced its proposal for the 2012 budget. Beware of the left’s attempt to sell this as “getting tough on the deficit,” because as an analysis from Americans for Tax Reform shows, the White House’s plans are more about raising taxes and growing more government than reducing budget shortfalls.

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

UPDATE: As J.D. Foster of the Heritage Foundation points out: “...the President proposes a budget that keeps the federal government on a thoroughly irresponsible and unsustainable course.” Please read the Heritage Foundation article and understand the $775 million in proposed cuts noted above are what the White House’s budget director Jacob Lew identified as reflecting what they perceive as some “tough calls.” Yet, as noted, they are a drop in the bucket; and the White House’s total proposed cuts for this year are still not at all enough to make us solvent.

- Sarah Palin

The Demoralization of Palin Supporters

The Demoralization of Palin Supporters

From Sheya at Conservatives For Palin

Ever since Governor Palin stepped on to the national stage, there has been a coordinated attempt to take her out. The liberals, the media, and even people in her own party have been on a rampage to destroy her. They went as far as sabotaging her administration to force her to resign so they could use another talking point against her. I’ve said this before but if Governor Palin hadn’t resigned, they would have went with the talking point that if she really cared about her state, she would have resigned. Nothing Governor Palin did was good enough for them. All this was in an attempt to demoralize the Governor and keep her out of national politics.

What they didn’t calculate is that Governor Palin is pretty good at taking the shots – as a matter of fact, they only make her stronger. The more they attack her, the stronger she gets. With that effort failing, they have to divert to plan B: demoralize her supporters. Peel off her base slice by slice. Frustrate us and make sure we eventually give up.

First, they label us stupid and uneducated with the hope that will break us. Hey, no one wants to be told they are stupid.

Then they’ll tell us that we shouldn’t kid ourselves, she’s not running, “She isn’t doing anything that potential candidates usually do”, “She isn’t building a team”, “She’s got nothing in Iowa”. Basically telling us to quit while we’re ahead.

When that doesn’t work, it’s on to the next level. She doesn’t like doing the things candidates usually do like retail politics, so even if she does run, no way she can win Iowa. They won’t tell you that retail politics is Governor Palin’s trademark, as Whitney Pitcher has pointed out here.

Next, they’ll throw us a little bone and admit that Governor Palin is the only candidate in the race that can outmatch Obama’s numbers in crowd attendance. They’ll admit that she has the star power and can raise money, but they’ll try to knock us down by convincing us that the crowds will only be there out of curiosity and just to watch the show, saying “they won’t actually vote for her”. So even the crowds mean nothing.

Moving on to the next level; “she can’t possibly win the nomination, let alone the presidency”. They’ll pick a couple of states that they claim should be strong for her and then they will produce polls showing her down in the states they picked. For good measure, they’ll even tell us that her own state hates her.

When everything fails, they’ll wait for a good opportunity and pounce. For example, they’ll accuse her of murder. That should definitely do it for her. Do a poll when she’s knocked down showing that the majority of Americans have an unfavorable opinion of her and hope that by this point, we’ll all get fed up. And to be sure, the murder thing nearly worked. In the days following the Arizona shooting, the conservative blogs and many pro-Palin sites, including many of supporters of the Governor, had all but given up hope.

But as Nicole Coulter points out, Governor Palin’s supporters are resilient. When we get slapped in the cheek, we’ll take the hit for a couple of days, wipe our tears, then turn around and eagerly welcome the slap on the other cheek. Because every slap they give us convinces us that everything they are telling us is wrong. If Palin’s opponents really believed their narratives, they wouldn’t have been slapping us in the first place.

The truth is that they know she is the only one that actually can win. Why attack her if she has no shot? If they truly believed she can’t win, why not prop her up? Wouldn’t they rather have her up against Obama than someone they believe can actually beat him? The media and the pollsters make it sound like the election will take place the day she announces. What they don’t tell you is that there will probably be close to eight months between an announcement until the first vote takes place in Iowa, followed by ten months until election day.

As for the polls, they mean nothing at this point. There are people under the assumption that she is not running, and there are those who think she will but have been caught up by the media distortions in believing she can’t win. These people will of course, tell pollsters that they wouldn’t vote for her. If you have an option of voting for someone that you believe will run against someone you believe won’t run, whom would you back? No one likes to appear that they are backing a losing horse, especially one that’s not even in the race. Read more about the secrets behind the poll numbers in “The Polarization of Sarah Palin”

Once Governor Palin announces whether she’s running or not, she’ll meet the American people in their own homes, she’ll talk with them, and they will listen. She will challenge her opponents, she will do the debates, she will release her governing platform, she will do the speeches, events, campaigning and interviews.

The crowds will line up to “listen” to her and they will love her and agree with what she stands for. They will be there to support her – they will campaign for her and vote for her. When the voters hear her, they will realize that everything was just a coordinated attack to destroy her and she’ll become immune from attack. Her numbers will dramatically go up and her support will increase to unprecedented levels.

Governor Palin has always been best as the underdog. She isn’t expecting to be handed the presidency on a golden platter. She’s a fighter and wants to fight for it and she wants to earn it and will. It’s up to us, her supporters, to stand with her now and fight with her. For two years, Governor Palin has been taking the shots on our behalf. Now it’s up to us to take the shots for her. The battle will be tough, but we will stand tall together, we will fight, we will not give up and we will win.

In the end, the media will be right about one thing: all those states they declared as Palin territory…well yes, they are.

Sunday, February 13, 2011

Obama honors Sarah Palin's short & tweet advice on Iran

This is an amazing example of how Governor Palin has the ability to affect public policy with a mere Tweet or Facebook posting.

Sarah Tweets and Obama jumps!

From The Examiner:

Today, President Obama honored Sarah Palin's short and tweet advice following the overthrow of Mubarak in Egypt. That's another testament to the confidence that Palin fans have in her keen common sense mastery of presidential policy directives.

In a mere 140 character Tweet, Sarah Palin challenged both the sitting American president, Barack Hussein Obama and the national media.

Certainly, Palin has demonstrated the executive power of the value of just a very few words, well placed - from her tweet to the president's ear. A transcript of events follows.

From Sarah, short and tweet to Obama:

  • Sarah Palin
    Media: ask "Will Obama Admin exert as much 'constructive' pressure on Iranian govt to change & allow freedom ~ as they just did for Egypt?"
    Top Tweet
  • Fox's "News Alert": Sarah Palin tweets President Obama advice on how to deal with overthrow of Mubarak in Egypt
  • The White House said Saturday that, off the heels of 18 days of Egyptian protests that ousted President Hosni Mubarak, Iran should allow its people to demonstrate.

    Tehran had praised Egyptians for rising up against Mubarak’s secular government, calling it an Islamic awakening. Yet some trace the roots of the grass-roots, social-media-driven revolt in Egypt to the Green Revolution protests against President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s last election and demanding democracy.

    Opposition leaders Mir Hossein Mousavi and Mehdi Karroub, both candidates in that election, wanted to stage a rally Monday in support of uprisings in Tunisia and Egypt. But the regime quickly put a damper on the permit request, calling the rallies “riots by seditionists.”

    “By announcing that they will not allow opposition protests, the Iranian government has declared illegal for Iranians what it claimed was noble for Egyptians,” National Security Adviser Tom Donilon said in a statement released by the White House on Saturday.

    “We call on the government of Iran to allow the Iranian people the universal right to peacefully assemble, demonstrate and communicate that’s being exercised in Cairo,” he said. ( Bold emphasis/author - Today, as reported by the the Hill)