New Contact Email

Monday, November 24, 2008

New Pro-Palin 527

H/T: Marc Ambinder.

Brand new Sarah Palin ad, produced by a Conservative PAC. Watch it here.

PAC spokesman Sal Russo said they have received $2 million in donations for the ads, which will start running tomorrow in Alaska and will include a national buy. “We wanted to give Sarah Palin the reassurance that despite the critics, Americans by and large appreciated her service and want her to continue to be a voice.”
He said there was some “back and forth” about whether the political ad would air on the television networks. He said it would air on cable news outlets. In Alaska, the ad is airing in primetime Wednesday.

I can hear all the potential 2012 candidates saying to themselves…”I have no chance to secure the nomination if Palin runs”.


Mountain Mama said...

LOVED IT! Wouldn't it have been cool if WE all had made such an ad for her? Why didn't we think of this first!?

That reminds me: I hope the Palin family publishes a cookbook! I want to know how to make Moose Chili, too!

Meanwhile, seriously: this ad keeps Sarah's fantastic qualities in front of the American public. Good JOB!

techno said...

My contention that Sarah would have a hard time raising money and make her presence known in the early primary states was always based on the idea that some credible candidates would put themselves forward to compete with her; of course if this is not the case and Sarah went unopposed she could run for-re-election in 2010 and then get herself ready for 2012. Wow, if this happened, this would be a greater miracle than Obama winning the Presidency.

The Dunns said...

I think the idea is good, but I'm not so sure about the execution. It seems a little cheesy and I can almost hear the jokes that are going to come from Sarah's detractors after it airs. Oh well, I guess any publicity is good publicity?

manajordan said...

I really appreciated this ad. Governor Palin needs to know that so many people thank her.
Thanks for posting it.

Chris said...

Lest we remember it took four years of Jimmy Carter to give us Ronald Reagan. Fortunately Carter did not have the chance to do any damage to the Supreme Court.

Now we have a pure liberal theologian inheriting a faltering unstable economy. That is a prescription for disaster.

Its not too high a price to pay however if its the price for admission to seeing Gov. Palin on the Capitol steps January 20th, 2013 taking the oath of office as the 45th POTUS.

She is now the defacto leader of the conservative wing of the Republican party. The country club liberals in the GOP will never accept or support her. So be it. Good riddance to bad rubbish.

All she's got to do is borrow Reagan's play book from 1977-1980 and she will make history in four years. There is nothing Obama can say or do in 2012 to defend the havoc the left is about to inflict on this country.

Magic Puzzle Box said...

I'm glad someone is doing this because the campaign was so vicious. The attacks definitely needed some answer from supporters since we've been made out to be the biggest idiots and even dangerous. Besides, if it wasn't for her entry into the race, I wouldn't have been the wiser regarding the big Zero's media distortion campaign. The attacks on Palin made it clear that something unusual was going on that needed my attention.

knowitall said...

Thank you, Sarah Palin.
God bless you and your family!!!

Lisa - Mother of Nine said...

I like the idea, but I think The Dunns were right about the execution.

I mean it was fine in the sense that it spoke to all of us. We enjoyed it because these were people we could relate to. But the nasty comments below the video, which seemed to be the types of comments made by teenagers who can't stand their parents and grandparents, reflected the gap between older, rural adults and younger, urban, people.

On the other hand - (I'm thinking it through) maybe it doesn't matter. I mean, these were real people expressing real feelings. To heck with what anyone else thinks.

I know we're supposed to care because they say we can't win if we don't win young urban people. But ever since the election we've been getting nothing but pressure from the left to change. We aren't accepted for who we are and what we think. We're supposed to jump on the bandwagon and be part of the new, "united America."

I was listening to some of the pundits saying conservatives need to come to the center and forget all the Christian morality if we're ever to win back the White House. It made me sick to hear that. I thought...but even if that effort were to be successful, who would be winning the White House? Not us. Do you understand what I'm saying? Unless the Repubilcan candidate understands our values and represents our issues, we aren't winning even if the Republican wins.

Moving to the center doesn't do us any good. Being who they want us to be means nothing if in the process we lose who we are and all that we stand for.

Yes, the video was cheesy. but maybe that was because that's who we are. Simple and cheesy. And I guess I love those people in the video for it. Even the little lady at the end. Because look at them - who do they remind you of? They are my neighbors, my church family, my grandparents, and my friends. I'm proud of them.

I might be naive, but sooner or later young people grow up and realize Mom and Dad were right. Maybe by 20012 or 2016 a certain number of Obama fans will have grown up.

Rats, it's another late night posting when I'm very tired. Hope this made some sense.

knowitall said...

I can help but love you, lisa

M. Minnesota said...

I agree with the Dunns and Lisa Mother of Nine on the Thank you SP Ad. The ONE QUESTION I would like to ask anyone in this group or any of the FOX All stars or Super Smart Conservative Radio Hosts/Election analyists is this: During RONALD REGANS two Presidential elections was ACORN even a factor in those elections? Was ACORN even an Organization during those two elections? Has ACORN grown in size and corruption to permanantly solidify States like Ohio, Florida and Pennsylvaina? The ACORN question has to be answered by the Conservative wing of the Republlican Party. Any Presidental Candidate who may want to Run like Reagan will need to have ACORN dealt with or they will loose. Before the election ACORN seemed to be in the news all the time. Is ACORN still being investiated? Also, More Saddleback Style open Forums are needed.

knowitall said...

that should read:

I can't help but love you, lisa

knowitall said...

i asked my wife to look at the ad for Sarah.
her comment was that the ad was meant to thank Sarah. She said Sarah can not help but like it.

Mountain Mama said...

You made sense, all right, Lisa. Knowitall, I think you meant, "I CAN'T help but love you," right? (smile)
Okay, I checked out the remarks at the bottom of the page where the video of this ad is: ACK! What vicious people are out there, full of hate for every NORMAL thing or person!

Well, I think we all ought to turn our attention to this, because if this guess is correct, the whole world is going to change completely very soon:

by Mike Evans

Why would a Prime Minister who has resigned and is leaving office in eight weeks meet with a lame-duck president who is also leaving office in eight weeks?


President Bush is meeting today with Prime Minister Ehud Olmert. The reason for the meeting is that Olmert is appealing to Bush to approve the attack on Iran’s nuclear reactors. Last May 13-16, I was invited to Jerusalem by President Peres for his conference which President Bush attended. Prime Minister Olmert appealed to him then to approve the attack; Bush would not give him the approval he sought.

Ehud Olmert resigned as Prime Minister on September 21, 2008. He is filling the seat until general elections take place on February 10, 2009. There is no reason for a lame-duck president and an equally lame-duck prime minister to meet except to pursue the above-stated purpose. The price of oil has dropped below $50/barrel. The greatest dilemma these two men faced was when oil was over $100/barrel, an Israeli attack would have created a potential for a short-term surge in oil prices. Now that oil is at its lowest level in months, Israel needs approval for fly-over of Gulf Sunni States based upon plausible deniability during the mission.

The Sunni States despise the Shia and are adamantly opposed to a nuclear Shia State which would be a terrific threat to them, the 200-mile Persian Gulf and the State of Israel. The next prime minister will likely be my old friend Benjamin Netanyahu. When I was an advisor to Prime Minister Begin, I asked him to appoint Benjamin to his first government job. Therefore, if Olmert authorizes the attack against Iran’s reactors, Netanyahu can say, “It wasn’t me; Olmert’s gone.”

Bush, on the other hand, can do precisely what Ronald Reagan did with Iraq’s Osiris raid. Prime Minister Begin authorized Israel to destroy Iraq’s French-built nuclear reactors on a Sunday. When Reagan was informed by George Schultz at Camp David, he said, “Oh well, boys will be boys.” Plausible deniability! Reagan then turned around and gave a lecture against Israel and suspended arms sales to Israel for a brief period.

Because of the fact that Iran has just announced that enough centrifuges are online to build an atomic bomb, Israel feels that the emergency is now. Former Israel Chief of Staff Moshe Ya’alon who endorsed my book, Showdown with Nuclear Iran, calling it the “most extensive book on the subject,” has told me that under no circumstance would Israel hold back once Iran has enough centrifuges to build the bomb. Israel knows Obama will not allow them to attack once he takes office. The only way they can attack is to do so before the inauguration, while they have the support of George Bush.

I pray for a miracle to occur that causes Iran completely to abandon its nuclear weapons program.

Short of a miracle (which means that God has other, always-better plans), I pray that Israel succeeds in this attack against Iran.

I wish I lived in less interesting times....

knowitall said...

regarding israel:





techno said...

I am a football fan. With that in mind I'm going to use football analogies to detail 10 variables or facts that make Sarah's '60 day run at glory' even more astonishing and remarkable: 1)You're Matt Cassell of the NE Patriots-for years you have watched from the sidelines with a clipboard in your hand and never started a regular season NFL game; then suddenly you're thrust into the national spotlight 'when you're number is called by the coach'(Brady injury);you take a while to get your sea legs and many pundits predict your team will not be competitive with you at the helm, but finally after some minor successes, uneven performances and occasional setbacks you 'find yourself' 2/3 of the way through the season-you begin to perform at a top level (catch fire) and perhaps continue that crescendo to the end of the season; as I write this the jury is still out for Cassell but for Sarah Palin this is exactly what happened as she got stronger and more confident in her interviews and her daily solo stump speeches; perhaps McCain was prophetic and regretful in saying: "If I had known the boost that Sarah would have given my campaign (in fund raising and volunteers)I would have put her on the ticket much sooner," (signed her earlier and at least given her some exposure to training camp)2)as a follow-up, Sarah's entrance into national politics is like a marquee free agent who has been a superstar in the Canadian Football League (Governor of Alaska), who obviously hasn't gone through a NFL training camp with the team he is going to quarterback, is not too familiar with the players and coaches and finally doesn't know the playbook and has to thus be brought up to speed by the coaching staff in special sessions (the McCain team preparing Sarah in foreign affairs and McCain's stances as a Senator and his policy positions in the current campaign).In football this is a given. Even Brett Favre, a veteran campaigner who had retired and not gone through training camp in 2008, took a few games to get acquainted with his new team the NY Jets, its players and coaches and the plays and schemes they employed in given situations. Was Brett Favre incessantly lambasted and ridiculed by the NY Times prior to Week 1 and during the regular season on the basis that he wasn't ready to quarterback the Jets because he wasn't completely conversant with the NY Jets entire plan of attack? No. In fact there has hardly a whimper from the peanut gallery. Was Sarah, a newcomer to the national political scene, given the same courtesy and chance to ready herself to do battle or at least gain her bearings? No. And was Sarah indeed raked over the coals relentlessly and mercilessly by the MSM and nutroots for 6 days leading up to her convention speech? You betcha! In the name of perspective, I wonder how many vituperative critics of Sarah follow football. For Brett Favre the playoffs and the Super Bowl will not occur for 4 months; for Sarah it would not have been until October 2, the day of the VP debate and on November 4th-election day. 3)From day 1 of the Patriots training camp in 2008 how many reporters asked Matt Cassell every single day whether he would be ready to be the Patriots' QB if Tom Brady went down? (Probably the chances of Brady going down from an injury is much greater than McCain dying in office.)Probably not a one, although the thought probably lingered in the back of many sports columnist's mind. If this did actually happen what kind of answer could Cassell or should Cassell given? "Here's what I know and can control: I prepare myself physically and mentally to meet the challenges of a new day. I am accustomed to working hard, being diligent on whatever my undertaking is to better understand how to perform (serve) better; but I know what my role is, but if I have to step in to a new role, let me make take this opportunity to make it abundantly clear, I feel confident and ready that I will be able to perform that undertaking (my duty) to the best of my ability if called upon anytime during the season (McCain dies)." Did Sarah utter these words in a timely fashion? No. I think that the McCain campaign did Sarah and itself a major disservice by not rebutting the 'inexperience' argument at the outset. Sarah should have seized upon the opportunity given to her at her unveiling in Dayton to utter these words to forestall any criticism of her credentials. Whether it was the strategy of the campaign not to allow her to address the issue immediately or Sarah's choice not to, we'll probably have to wait for books on the McCain campaign to come out. But I do believe in trying to bury or not refer to the issue that this was a glaring error of the campaign and seriously damaged its credibility. By adopting a football analogy and the Brett Favre example the McCain team could have, I believe, blunted some of the criticism that Sarah had to be brought up to speed(learn a new playbook), especially in the realm of foreign affairs. This should have been the number one priority in the unveiling of Sarah (obviously Sarah's speech at the convention should have added to her overall credibility). Perhaps I should have been strategizing for the campaign. 4) You can compare the news of the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy and the general meltdown of the financial markets and the accompanying bailout package to a football team losing two of its best defensive players; what the McCain campaign was left with in the 2nd half of the campaign was the ability for Sarah to put up points in bunches whenever she had the ball, by the same token the McCain campaign was not being able to make inroads into Obama's lead because they could stop Obama from 'making his points' as well; thus Obama won by a touchdown. 5)McCain's decisions from the beginning of the meltdown to the passing of the bailout package on October 3 can be equated to a head coach who has not adapted his defensive playbook or scheme or brought in free agents to accommodate losing his 2 best defensive players and instead refused to consider any new or bold alternatives (not voting for the bailout, naming his economic advisor team, accurately attributing blame to the Democrats names in the sub-prime crisis). 6)when the backup QB enters the game the tendency in football is to 'limit the damage' that the opposition can cause and thus protect the 'novice' from blitzing and intricate pass defense schemes by keeping more players into block, making shorter passes and generally running the ball more often-playing it safe; this is what the McCain campaign tried to do with Sarah during the first half of the campaign as they brought her up to speed but at the same time keeping her away from interview opportunites in which she could have 'fumbled away' or 'thrown away' the game. 7)when the McCain campaign did open up the playbook (interviews with Gibson and Couric)it could be compared to coaches who have a bias towards pocket passers (MSM interviews) over designing the game plan around the natural running or roll-out capabilities of their superstar QB (interviews initially that should have gone to right-wing talk radio and/or right wing pundits on Fox News, Weekly Standard or the National Review). 8)not allowing the use of Wright or the full exploration and exploitation of Obama's associations by Sarah is like allowing Sarah access to the full playbook but not allowing her to make the best use of it to exploit the opponent's defensive schemes or its tendency to play prevent defense in the 4th quarter (last 15 days of the campaign.)9) as a follow-up the McCain campaign apparently kept Sarah 'on a tight leash' which allowed her little or no variation to her script. This is similar to Brett Favre not being allowed to audible at the line of scrimmage after he has learned the playbook to increase the chance of success on that play and eventual victory (ad libs in a speech.)10)If Cassell goes on to take the Pats to the playoffs, sports reporters will have to admit he shows a lot of promise and if given the opportunity to start for another team in 2009 his experience in leading the Pats for a season should stand him in good stead. Sarah should be viewed the same way. She has endured the most outrageous ridicule and vilification of any VP candidate from the tag team of Democrats and the MSM in the history of the Presidential politics; she has emerged standing fully upright in the thrust and parry of a two month campaign season that she had little time for which to prepare. Sarah definitely has been battle-tested. Would a NFL team that definitely needs a starting QB in 2009 not at least give Cassell serious consideration? If Sarah decides to run for President in 2012 she will start with training camp (the ups and downs of a primary season, the sharpening of her message through countless number of stump speeches and town halls, and the ability of the fans (the voters) to assess the cut of her jib and see her mettle tested by the media, her GOP opponents and the Democrats. Ask any football player. Not having a training camp to prepare for the regular season sets a player back for at least 1/3 of the season and maybe 1/2. Sarah will definitely be ahead of the curve the next time she chooses to run for national office.

techno said...

the 10 questions the GOP must ask itself before going forward: 1) why is there a perceived dichotomy between the grass-roots support for Sarah and party apparatus professional politician support for Sarah? 2)How effective was ACORN? Did Obama literally steal any state from McCain because ofand voter fraud? 3)How far behind the Democrats is the GOP with regards to technology? 4)Was Obama's victory inevitable considering his charisma and the political climate? 5)Should the GOP revert back to a closed primary system to give its members a bigger say on who represents them as the GOP standard-bearer in 2012? 6)What can be done to counter the immense power the MSM has to define GOP candidates and to ridicule them? 7)How can the GOP narrow the money advantage that the Dems have over them in the Presidential election? 8)Why was the McCain campaign perceived to be a poorly run campaign and if so who is to blame and what can be done better in 2012? 9)Why are Republicans resorting now to attacking each other (especially Sarah Palin)rather than Obama and his merry men and women? 10)What is the proper role of government in society?

Mountain Mama said...

Hi, Knowitall!
I typed the URL exactly as you posted it, and the website now says this article is archived----and requires a fee to view.
Basically, what was the point of Paul Sheehan's article? Is it just further corroboration that Israel is indeed poised to attack Iran?
Can you imagine the response by Hamas and other terrorist groups, or by nearby opposing nations, to such an attack by Israel on Iran? The Neareast will explode in violence, and we'll possibly be drawn into it (as though we aren't busy enough with Iraq/Afghanistan).

And how are we to afford any proper defense? How will a new front in this war vs. radical Islamism NOT further negatively impact the economy?

I can't believe the RUDE, selfish, and arrogant calls for Bush/Cheney to step down and let The One (plus Mr. Gaffe Machine) take over the administration NOW----as though THEY are going to be able to save this economy any better than Bush's team could.

NO government official wants to tell Americans the truth, that AMERICANS THEMSELVES caused this economic mess, by putting into office politicians who will give Americans what they want: LOTS OF CREDIT to buy stuff they don't need, but just want----most of which they truly cannot afford......

Scott said...

i was thinking last night about what if obama and McCain's campaign plans were reversed? what would the reaction of hollywood and the left have been to McCain if he was the one asking them to be taxed more? Basically do they pay attention to the issues.. what makes them vote democrat?

knowitall said...

Mountain Mama,

Go to realclearpolitics.

scroll down about two screens to realclearworld

it is about the third of about 5 articles there from sidney australia

it confirms your story about an attack on Iran.
If the oil prices shoot back up to over $100 then, I would think, it's the end of the automakers

Scott said...

the article worked for me.. here it is

Israeli hawks ready to fly on Iran

Prepare for war. Last week I met the Boogie Man, the former head of the Israeli Defence Forces, General Moshe "Boogie" Ya'alon, who is preparing the political groundwork for a military attack on Iran's key nuclear facilities. "We have to confront the Iranian revolution immediately," he told me. "There is no way to stabilise the Middle East today without defeating the Iranian regime. The Iranian nuclear program must be stopped."

Defeating the theocratic regime in Tehran could be economic or political or, as a last resort, military, he said. "All tools, all options, should be considered." He was speaking in the tranquillity of the Shalem Centre in Jerusalem, where he was, until last Thursday, one of Israel's plethora of warrior-scholars, though more influential than most.

Could "all options" include decapitating the Iranian leadership by military strikes, including on President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who has called for Israel's destruction? "We have to consider killing him," Ya'alon replied. "All options must be considered."

That's why he's called Boogie. This is significant, for several reasons. Ya'alon has decided to enter what he called "the cold waters of Israeli politics". He will run for the conservative Likud party in the general election in Israel on February 10. Likud is leading the opinion polls. So I could have been speaking to Israel's next defence minister or, at least, an influential member of the next cabinet.

He is not known for making idle threats. Ya'alon is a former paratroop commander and was deputy leader of the Israel Defence Forces from 2000 to 2002, then chief of staff from 2002 to 2005, during the most recent Palestinian uprising, or intifada. He is credited with shutting it down.

Events are moving quickly. The Israeli Atomic Energy Commission has estimated that Iran will have produced enough highly enriched uranium by the end of next year to produce a nuclear bomb. Next year is widely regarded in Israel as year zero for the strategic decision about Iran's nuclear program.

"There is a growing sense of anxiety here, from the top levels down," said Eran Lerman, a former senior member of Israel's Directorate of Military Intelligence. "The anxiety is built on the knowledge that the Iranians are pressing ahead. The centrifuges are whirring away. Next year will be critical."

Boogie Ya'alon agrees. He has long regarded Iran as the main wellspring of instability and terrorism in the region.

"I was chief of staff during Operation Iraqi Freedom [the US invasion of Iraq in 2003] and I was surprised the US decided to go into Iraq instead of Iran … Unfortunately, the American public didn't have the political stomach to go into Iran."

Ya'alon does. "Military intervention would not be one strike. It needs to be a sustained operation … Any military strike in Iran will be quietly applauded by Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and the Gulf states. It is a misconception to think that the Arab-Israeli conflict is the most important in the Middle-East. The Shiite-Sunni schism is much bigger, the Persian-Arab divide is bigger, the struggle between national regimes and jihadism is much bigger. And I can't imagine the US will want to share power in the Middle East with a nuclear-armed Iran."

The Boogie doctrine is mainstream, not fringe, in the Israeli strategic debate. "We cannot accept a nuclear Iran, we cannot be reconciled to it," Major-General Amos Gilad, the head of the Defence Department's Diplomatic Security Bureau, told The Jerusalem Post last Thursday.

"Israel is preparing for an attack on the Iran nuclear facilities," Dr Jonathan Spyer, a senior research fellow at the Global Research in International Affairs Centre, told me in Tel Aviv last week.

"Sanctions won't work against Iran. Only a military action against Iran will work," Professor Efraim Inbar said. "I know the Israeli military is preparing its capacity to destroy the Iranian nuclear threat."

Inbar is another of Israel's warrior-scholars, a former paratrooper who is professor in political studies at Bar-Ian University and Director of the Begin-Sadat Centre for Strategic Studies. He does not accept the argument, popular in America, than the Iranian nuclear facilities are already impregnable to attack. "I'm a paratrooper. If you are committed, if you are willing to pay the price, you can destroy the target."

Inbar also believes the Iranian regime, by spreading Persian and Shiite power, is widely unpopular in the Sunni Arab world.

In effect, Israel has already conducted a test run into an enemy country and been encouraged by the results. In September last year, Israeli Air Force jets destroyed a nuclear facility under construction in Syria. Israel never said a word. Syria never said a word. No government in the Middle East ever said a word.

"Israel's raid on Syria was greeted by a thunderous silence from the rest of the region," Eran Lerman said. "What that silence told us was that the rest of the region regard Syria as part of the Iranian problem. If Iran obtains the bomb, even if they don't use it or threaten to use it, they will have positioned themselves in a way that will transform this region into a much more dangerous place. Iran has influence on the Shiia communities, not just in Iraq and through Hezbollah in Lebanon but in Syria and the Gulf states. The position of the moderate states in the Gulf will have been rendered more fragile."

Lerman, too, believes next year will be year zero. "Unless the pace [of developing Iran's nuclear program] is slowed down, we will need to face some bitter decisions within a year. The sanctions have failed.

"The Iranian regime's need for a nuclear bomb is a reflection of the profound crisis in which it finds itself after almost 30 years in power. They promised the earth and the country is in disarray. The regime has failed to create or sustain stable social structures. So the last validated remnant of the Iranian revolution is to destroy Israel."

Israel is preparing accordingly. The message is now clear.

Mountain Mama said...

All righty, then! I just can't imagine how even The One is going to manage to pull us out of the huge mess we'll be in, when (not if) Israel attacks Iran.

I bet THAT is why Obama suddenly has a lot of grey hair: it isn't that he used Grecian Formula before; it's that the classified information and terrorism reports he's receiving have genuinely shocked him! I bet he has a newfound respect for Bush, who has absolutely received tons of unfair flack for taking actions he HAD to take, without being able to tell and therefore terrify the population in order to justify those actions.

Mountain Mama said...

P.S. FORGET "next year is year zero;" the Israelis will strike before Jan. 20, Obama's inauguration day----and they'll use our missiles the obliterate at miles-deep levels----and the Iranians will KNOW we helped Israel, so terrorist groups like Hamas will try to strike US, and not just retaliate vs. Israel.

hrh said...

Some Sarah supporters are trying to close the technology/Internet gap with the Dems on Sarah's behalf.

Check out

Mountain Mama said...

Did anyone see on television today the Sarah Palin PAC ad referenced by Adam here? It was supposed to show in several places, starting today.

Again, THANK you, Sarah Palin! for all you did to help the ticket and stay positive about conservatism!

Somehow, the media still does like to keep her in the news. In a few moments, Fox News' "The O'Reilly Show" will feature a segment about how Republicans (like US!) still favor Gov. Palin. Well, of course we do!

Mountain Mama said...

WOW! Fox News ran the entire ad on O'Reilly's show!---for free (I hope?).
A.B. Stoddard, Associate Editor of "The Hill" Newspaper, said Republican leaders supposedly saw "sobering numbers" about Obama's win, and have decided Palin's appeal "is not that broad." She admitted that "McCain staffers [threw] her under the bus."

O'Reilly's substitute, John Kasich, retorted, "McCain didn't lose because of Sarah Palin; she rallied the base! He lost because of the war and George Bush."

Stoddard insisted, "Republican leaders are trying to model for the future, and you don't go to Palin.... For 2012, Rep. leaders need to address the pocketbook issues, and widen the appeal."

Okay, so MEMO TO SELF:
"Stoddard is NOT a real conservative, and she wants to avoid real conservative goals, and instead mesh the Republican Party goals with those supposedly held by Independents, who in reality, though, NEVER know what they want and vote instead for silly reasons like 'appeal' or 'change.'"

SO sick of that......

12thMan said...

If this is all true about Israel going gung-ho on Iran I guess KOS Joe will become Santa Claus. Who needs six months? Of course, I guess this is strike 1 that nothing changed as a result of caving into Europe.

Speaking of nothing changing, liberal bloggers are just in agony since Sarah "won't go away" now that she's going to stump for Chambliss. Not that there's any love for that snake in the grass, but there's something larger at stake here, and she knows it. WOOHOO! Three weeks after That Day, you'd think they'd be all Chris Matthews right now but we're talking about, well as Gene Wilder once put it, the common clay of the New West. You know, MORONS!

Oh well, oil might as well be back into triple digits, since $4/gal will be back by my birthday thanks to Barry. Maybe everybody'll leave Sarah alone now with the "WAAAAAAAAA what's she gonna do now that there's no oil money for AK?'............NAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH

12thMan said...

"Republican leaders are trying to model for the future, and you don't go to Palin.... For 2012, Rep. leaders need to address the pocketbook issues, and widen the appeal."

Yep, Du Fuss. Hey here's an idea A.B., how about Pawlenty/Crist? FEEL THE EXCITEMENT! Or how about we do something about the 12th amendment so we can get AH-NOLD Schwarzenkennedy on the ballot eh? Not to mention the BOLD FUTURISTIC MOVE of a 76 y/o McCain and an 89 y/o Dole. Now THAT'S experince baby!!!!!!!!

Seriously, the sad thing is here that people like this get paid..............

laurence said...

Far right conservatives are marginalized within the republican party simply because they don't represent main-stream Americans. The same is true of far left democrats. That’s why you will never see either in the white house. Both are un-electable IMHO. The center rules.

Mountain Mama said...

Far right conservatives are marginalized within the republican party simply because they don't represent main-stream Americans. The same is true of far left democrats. That’s why you will never see either in the white house. Both are un-electable IMHO. The center rules.

MOST conservatives are center-right, which is PRECISELY what the nation polls as, btw.

Palin, I'll have you know, Laurence, happens to be CENTER-RIGHT, not far right.

Mountain Mama said...

OOPS! Sorry that I forgot to put quotes around that first paragraph, which was written by Laurence.
<< ! >>

Mountain Mama said...

Sorry; I'm tired, getting ready for Thanksgiving....

I forgot my MAIN point re. Laurence's paragraph:

Like HUNH? that no "far left Democrat" will ever be in the White House!!!!!!

Guess again: look who won! Obama is THE most liberal Senator----that's a fact, not subject to debate----not to mention that his associates are EX-TREME-LY liberal! To wit:
A. His dinner friends, Bill and Bern Ayers, the former UNrepentant domestic terrorists,
B. His pastor, Rev. Wright, who promotes a RADICAL version of Christianity (liberation theology) and praises racist, anti-whites Farrakhan,
C. The man Obama called his mentor when O. was a teenager: "Frank," who was a passionate Communist and unrepentant pedophile.

You haven't really read about Obama, now have you, Laurence?

knowitall said...

Peggy Noonan is on the attack again against Sarah, according to

"With friends like this, who needs enemies?"

Tinkerbellee said...

"Palin,...happens to be CENTER-RIGHT, not far right."

I'm truly curious about what you consider the difference between center-right and far-right.

Can you give me some examples of views/policies that a far-right politician would hold/advocate that a center-right would not? And which current Republican politicians would, in your opinion, fit in the 'far right' category?

techno said...

In being successful in the 2012 Presidential campaign the GOP has to decide what is the optimum in two main areas: 1)When should a GOP ideally declare his or her intentions to run for President? 2)How much money needs to be raised to compete and should GOP forgo the $84m public campaign financing in running the fall campaign and run on its own?

Mountain Mama said...

Well, hello there, Tinkerbellee! Long time, no trolling!

Sure, you're on..... No problem, and not at all tricky:

FAR right Republicans/conservatives, as their far leftist counterparts, are intolerant and highly judgmental.
Far-right-leaners tolerate NO abortion whatsoever (not even to save the life of the mother, or for rape or incest), reject women's rights entirely ("keep 'em barefoot and p.g."), support NO rights for illegal aliens or homosexuals, and are highly isolationist.

Sarah Palin is center-right, as are most Americans in EVERY carefully-taken poll (it's amazing how liberals will slant their poll questions; bleah!). She doesn't legislate her privately-held views. For example, she allowed to go into Alaskan law a provision for gay couples, and she won't severely restrict abortion.

Most Americans, btw, support restricted abortion rights----but allow some rights. Generally the polls indicate that most Americans want women to have the abortion very early, or go ahead and have the baby and give it up for adoption; they reject 2nd or 3rd trimester abortions.

Americans also THOROUGHLY reject partial-birth abortion, which is rightly understood as INFANTICIDE. Even Congress found (much to the chagrin of some liberals there) that there are NO, NONE, NADA "valid" medical-health reasons for a woman to undergo such a procedure. It is ALWAYS faster and safer for the woman's health to remove the baby by C-section, rather than maneuver it to be birthed breech, stopping to KILL the baby by sucking out its brains. (Sorry to be vivid, but this grossness is why Americans RIGHTLY reject this barbaric, SICK abortion method.)

Obama, on the other hand, TOTALLY qualifies as a far-left politician. Regarding abortion, he even said, and I heard him say this, that it wouldn't be "fair" to keep a baby alive who had somehow NOT been killed by an abortion procedure! Obama said that keeping the infant alive would violate the woman's choice to have aborted it!!

Wrong-O, buddy boy! If that baby survived, then by heaven, the medical personel there should try to save its life!!!! Obama is just a barbarian in this regard, and I am NOT far-right to believe this! A child who survives the horror of an abortion IS A LIVE BABY, and deserves to be intubated and fed and cared for, just as any other live DEPENDENT baby does. (Or dependent disabled adult does.) The mother can just give it away, not kill it as a baby!!!!!!!

Do NOT get me started on the right to live for disabled folk. They are in our midst for us to learn unconditional love, how to serve others joyfully, and how to treasure even "small" (to "normal" people) increases in skills as HUGE and magnificent victories.

On a much lighter note, hey, Tinkerbellee:
have you ever sent anyone Teleflora flowers? They have a cute Tinkerbell arrangement----and when online, moving viewers' computer-mouse makes a trail of Tink's light. Have fun!

Mountain Mama said...

P.S. I suppose Pat Buchanan would qualify as "far right." I like him, though.....

Mountain Mama said...

Dearest Knowitall:
I read the article, and frankly, I think Noonan is on to something. Truly, the Leftists would love to paint ALL Republicans as far-right idiots, and slam Palin as the leader of such ignoramuses.

I understand why Noonan felt let down by the Palin pick. I do NOT understand why she didn't keep her big yap shut about it and come out supportively, helpfully.

At any rate, I am certain that Palin will never again get upset with an interviewer's biased or snotty question (as Palin did with Couric a few times, such as "What do you read?" HOW OFFENSIVE?!), and that Palin will never again, as she admitted she did with Couric especially, allow her upset feelings to cause her to answer vaguely, on purpose.

Gov. Palin will never do that again, because she saw how the leftists twisted her shocked response to "prove" she's stupid, which she is NOT. No, Palin has already learned to deflect the question to point out gently the BIAS of the question. Sometimes she answers it thereafter, but sometimes it's inappropriate to answer the question, particularly if it is RUDELY posed.


techno said...

Just to let you all know there is now a weekly radio show devoted to everything Sarah called Sarah Palin radio: (you can podcast it as well-it will be broadcast 4-5PM PST on WS radio)

12thMan said...

laurence said...

"Far right conservatives are marginalized within the republican party simply because they don't represent main-stream Americans. The same is true of far left democrats. That’s why you will never see either in the white house. Both are un-electable IMHO. The center rules."

Um, Laurence. John McCain ran as a CENTRIST candidate, Bob Dole ran as a CENTRIST candidate. I wasn't aware of the latter's presidency nor was I aware that we were gearing up for the former's.

You can even make the argument that both Bushes have been centrists, which leaves them in the no man's land of not being embraced by conservatives, yet being scorned by Democrats, the majority of which are either solid left or hard left. Today's Democrats would have no room for Harry Truman or JFK (see Miller, Zell; Lieberman, Joe), and anything to the right of Mao or Marx is considered far right, that's why you always see Sarah put in the same boat with Ted Stevens and Don Young on these leftist blogs when they have nothing more in common than a state.

I wouldn't 100% label Ronaldus center-right but that's about as close as you're going to get; Clinton, who at best was a centrist, had to shift his policies to the right; and it's no coincidence that when GWB governed as an actual center-right conservative was when he had his greatest success.

12thMan said...

"At any rate, I am certain that Palin will never again get upset with an interviewer's biased or snotty question"

She has to be one heckuva woman NOT to get as upset as I did when watching Charlie, you know who loves to sit down and chat with the American people for half an hour every night like he was FDR or something, and Katie, the same person who's so deeply concerned about experience and qualifications that she took the CBS gig (coming from that hard-hiiting bastion of news Today) without batting an eye, continuing to disgrace Ed Murrow's profession worse than anybody outside of Keith Dobermann and Chrissy Matthews.

Seriously how flat out stupid can people be not to know that she actually ANSWERED the Bush Doctrine question ("In what respect?") knowing that BD has been used BY THE SAME FREAKING MEDIA for about eight different things?! Not to mention the horribly taken-out-of-context "Mission from God" quote which was done so by lopping off about half of it. Hmmmm, Rush gets kicked off of ESPN when his critique of Donavan "There are TIES in the NFL? No ****?" gets pared down to "Overrated black QB" and OTOH this is alright?

Katie is OTOH the least respectable of any big three news anchor in history. She deserves absolutely nothing. About the only thing I thought Sarah honestly did wrong was when she said she'd come back with some examples. But that's not a real biggie nor is it really important unless she's going to ask Barney (loves) Frank why he turned away the same push for regulation.

She's learned since the election: You want an interview? You do it on MY terms. This is why the next three years are going to be so fun to watch.

M. Minnesota said...

I hope that there is a HUGE turnout of people as Gov. Palin goes down to Georgia next week!

If anyone wants to know what is happening in the Minnesota Senate Recount go to:
It is a great, reliable and legit site.
Have a Wonderful Thanksgving!

techno said...

10 reasons that conservatives and traditional Americans are or should be upset with the election of Obama and the trends in present-day America: America was not founded as a multicultural nation; now it is being turned into one through the government turning a blind eye to illegal immigration 2)many historians claim that American 'patriotism'or 'flag worship' was imposed primarily as a repudiation of Europe; now it appears American elitists want to embrace European ideals and not be out of step with philosophy of the United Nations 3)e harmony now having to change its business model and set up a separate web site in NJ to accommodate gays looking for gay partners 4)that the subprime mortgage mess was not properly laid at the feet of Bill Clinton and the Democrats in Congress 5)'socialism' or 'redistributing wealth' is now considered main stream in America 6)traditionally most Americans have not looked to government for handouts or bailouts; in 2008 the exception has become the norm; it appears Obama wants to go back to the Hoover prescription of curing the economic slowdown in 1929-1933; higher taxes and tariffs and restricting trade which precipitated the Great Depression; 7)America was founded as a Judeo-Christian nation to which life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness were considered inalienable rights given to all Americans by God; now it appears Obama wants to turn America into a secular humanist nation in which a culture of death (abortion), suppression and repression (the repeal of the Fairness Doctrine and thousands of lawsuits) and happiness is only permitted under government and bureaucratic auspices becomes the norm and in violation of the founding of the Republic 8)'white guilt' has been tranformed into a feeling of regret (1865-1975)by whites to a feeling of acquiescence that we must somehow expiate the sins of our forefathers and allow Obama and all minorities the opportunity to gain power over the white power structure to exert payback; if that means destroying the America as we once knew so be it-because the America they once knew as they see it was rotten to the core' 9)Hollywood once made uplifting movies that made you feel better when you left the theatre; now the filmmakers are only concerned about having a forum to communicate their own agenda and not entertaining the audience 10)the MSM was once made up of men and women of integrity who knew the difference between truth and propaganda, falsehood and exaggeration and humor and ridicule. When a deliberate lie is aired as the truth but in essence propaganda, when a bad performance is exaggerated by the MSM to accurately represent the intelligence and capability of a candidate and thus completely distorts the ability of the messenger not out of license but out of malice and with the definite purpose of spreading falsehood, and when TV shows that promote comedy and humor become forums that become worthy of the Inquisition and arenas to spew out one-sided vicious neverending ridicule and vitriol, conservatives throw their arms in the air, get down on their knees and pray for and await the Second Coming.

Pasadena Closet Conservative said...

I'm thankful that my fellow conservative bloggers have such intelligence and character. God bless you, and have a happy Thanksgiving!

Lisa - Mother of Nine said...

Thank you Pasadena, Knowitall, Adam, Mountain Mama, techno, M. Minnesota, (by the way, I was raised in the Twin Cities), Scott, 12th man, the Dunns, Manajordan, Chris, Magic Puzzle box, HRH and all the others - AND the Palins - I pray that you all have a great Thanksgiving.

M. Minnesota said...

The new Pro-Palin 527 Thank -you SP Thanksgiving edition is nice, but I would encourage (NO,PLEAD!!!)with all Gov. Palin supporters on this list to go to You Tube and enter the title "A Million voices for Sarah Palin".This SP support video is very well done!! And IT MEGA ROCKS!!!!!
I WISH I HAD THE CAPITAL TO AIR THIS VIDEO NATIONWIDE!!!! Maybe our friends who produced the Thank you SP Thanksgiving edition could raise money to air it? The Video was posted two days after the selection (oops!) election. The video reaches out to the younger people (music) without offending the older set.

Have a Great Thanksgiving everyone!!!