Comments: Was A Key Anti-Palin Blogger Hired to Attack Her By Progressives?

"If she really is the ditzy Caribou Barbie they constantly make her out to be, then why are they even bothering discussing her?"

I've been wondering the exact same thing! When was the last time you ever saw the losing VP candidate get this kind of attention this long after the election?

She may not be that great a politician, but it is clear that the Democrats and Liberals see her as a threat! Anyone who can put the "fear of god" so to speak into the Loonie Left can't be all bad!

Posted by Wolfman George at August 11, 2009 11:35 PM

"I don't think that she's a great politician, but I do love the way she's a catalyst to bring out the crazies."

My buds and I have discussed this many times over the last few months. Here is what we came up with.

They love to beat down on her because she is:

1. Very pretty (sexy librarian image)
2. Is happily married (never divorced)
3. Didn't get an abortion (and never has had one)
4. Likes to keep her kids close (and not afraid of displays of public affection)
5. Talks like a "regular" (read hillbilly or white trash) person.
6. "Talks back" to almost anybody and everybody at any time. (you never can tell or know what she is going to say)
7. Is NOT a politician like others, so she must be something weird.
8. Calls a spade a spade and is proud of it.
9. Uses words that are rude and crude (to liberals anyway)
10. Cleaned up a cesspool of corruption in Alaska.

Which when you add all of the above together....

SCARES THE SHIT OUT OF THEM, because other than ridicule and smears they don't know how to handle her.

I heard one liberal say that she is like a loaded gun in the hands of an angry white trash slut. And he wasn't playing for a joke.

Papa Ray
West Texas

Posted by Papa Ray at August 11, 2009 11:51 PM

It's not the Liberals and Democrats that see her as a threat, it's Republicans. Liberals and Democrats love her and are constantly thrusting her and her antics into the spotlight to have her be the face of the opposition party. The only way Palin will ever be a threat to Liberals and Democrats is if they can Michael Steele and put her in charge of the NRC. She would be lethal to the Left if that ever happened and if she did the job right (and she probably would), she would be impossible to beat in 2016.

It's Republicans that have done more damage to her than anybody on the Left and the media has just gladly broadcast it. The Left just keep it in the spotlight. The slash and burn pieces from the McCain campaign, the scathing op/ed pieces from Gingrich and the likes, the way she was disrespected at the big NRCC fundraiser this year and every time she opens her mouth, some Republican is quick to come out and shove her foot in it. They are afraid she'll run in 2012. She'll never make is past the primaries and her base which is strong and loud, is not enough to win elections. Her strong and loud base will probably out of protest, refuse to vote and Obama will comfortably win re-election (and you think the Left are threatened by her...silly people). The Republicans just don't know what to do with her. They don't like her and yet, she's a necessary evil (for now). I think Palin has figured out that anything the Left says or does only strengthens her base and her resolve. It works to her advantage. It's the Republican attacks that she can't handle and the Moderates, Independents and Libertarians believe she's an idiot.

Put her in charge of the NRC and let here do the whole "grass roots" thingy (which she is awesome at) and lay the groundwork for a 2016 run. That's where she has the potential of being a seasoned, experienced and unbeatable candidate.

Posted by Lipiwitz at August 12, 2009 12:16 AM

She's one of the few conservative politicians today (maybe the only one) with an inherent grasp of the Left's iniquities and idiocies, and a clear and devastating way of communicating it. The Left knows this and their hounding hatred is proof. Her comment "death panels" was morally and politically perfect, and may have killed Obamacare. She is underestimated by everybody but the Left, and we should take note of that. We should have learned a long time ago to trust the Left on this one point: whoever they hate the most is the man or woman of most value.

Posted by rrpjr at August 12, 2009 12:18 AM

Could anyone really be that clueless about her appeal, she warned us quite clearly what the Obama administration would be like, that's why
they created this political framework partially illustrated in Dan's piece. She respects the soldier, sailor, policeman, small businessman. She's prolife but by deed rather than just words. They had to hack her words with an editing cudgel
and have Tina Fey do a weak impression, to obscure
who she really was. The Romney crew has been undermining her at every turn, but cap n trade and now Obamacare, is really her fight. As she saids she doesn't need a title to affect change,
that has been always true, otherwise she couldn't
have pulled off such upsets. forcing the oil commission to clean up its act, fighting the establishment first to win the governor's race, than bringing a fair deal on the pipeline

Posted by narciso at August 12, 2009 12:30 AM

"...I don't think she's a great politician..." all the more reason to support her. Politicians are a bunch of narcissistic, palm greasing, you scratch my back... screw the tax payer crooks. We don't need a great one of those. She's a smart, appealing, can do, reformer with common sense and a love for America. You keep the politicians, I'll go with change.

Posted by Jayne at August 12, 2009 12:46 AM

This fantasy of the Left being afraid or threatened by here is laughable at best. Her current approval rating is at 40% and she isn't even running for anything yet. Sorry, but the Left aren't going to threatened by that. There is no need. She will never make it past the Republican primaries.

Posted by Lipiwitz at August 12, 2009 12:55 AM

ROFL....."she may not be a "great politican". God I hope not. If she was a great politican instead of using a little post on facebook to change the debate on healthcare could you imagine what she could do with say a news conference.

Of course she is a great politican. she posts a message on facebook on friday at about 4:00pm and the President of the USA is trying to discredit that message by tuesday. Show me another Politican with that "greatness"

And which policy is it you do not agree with? her stand on the 2nd amendment? her belief in smaller government? her documented stand on cutting spending? her policy on life issues? Just what policy do you find hard to accept?

Posted by unseen at August 12, 2009 12:57 AM

As far as the left being afraid of her. They are not. They are afraid of her message. the same message that started a revolution in 1776. It is a timeless message that all statists are afraid of. They could care less about Palin the person. They are attackig her message by attacking her. SOP for liberals. That is why they attack every conservative that believes in individual freedom. From Fred thompson, Rush, Palin, goldwater, beckley, Reagan etc. the left can not fight the message. what are they going to fight it with? "no i believe you people are too stupid to govern yourselves?" or "we know best so sit down and shut up?" or "Stalin's ideas were correct it was the man that was wrong?"

the left has no defense for the message of the founding fathers so anytime someone gets on the national stage and starts talking about Jefferson, Madison, washington et all the left paints those people as wackos, dumb idiots etc.

And until people wake up and defend the conservative voices from this assualt the left will continue to win.

Posted by unseen at August 12, 2009 01:05 AM

SP hits a nerve w/everyday folks. She is not "like them"...she is them. It is that ability SP has that helps her communicate w/the work a day heros that make up the majority of Americans is what scares the heck out of the limo lib elites and powerhungry nut jobs who have owned DC for way too long. Unless they destroy her in every way, the pigs at the trough of our tax $$ know that their days are numbered. If you watch the way the angry citizens (AKA Mobsters) talk, that is the same way that SP talks. I am hoping that the libs use the nuke option and ram all of these changes through Congress. You will see a tidal wave of rejection come 2010 and I suspect that over 120 seats in the House will change hands. The American people (SILENT MAJORITY NO MORE) are mad as hell and they will take their revenge. DEMOS WILL BE THROWN OUT ON THEIR A$$E$. But Repubs be wared, if you are elected you better deliver and cut gov programs, taxes, and reduce the deficits or there will be even worse retribution in 2012.

Posted by nocoen at August 12, 2009 01:18 AM

Ahhhh unseen...attacking the Left about freedoms. I imagine you voted for Bush? You people spent the last eight years stripping us from every freedom imaginable. You couldn't even read the Constitution because you spent every waking moment trying to burn it every chance you got. George W. Bush stripped more freedoms and liberties from us than any other President in history. Want an example?

Today, there were an enormous amount of protesters out front of the venue where Obama gave his town hall meeting today. Under Bush, they never would've been allowed to stand out front. They would've been forced to stand in a parking lot 6 blocks away. I know...I was one of them. I'll take Obama's freedom any day over Bush's and Palin's. Name one freedom that has been taken away from you in the past 6 months. Name one!

But that's the great thing about freedom...you can run her and see how far you get.

Posted by Lipiwitz at August 12, 2009 01:25 AM

I imagine you voted for Bush? You people spent the last eight years stripping us from every freedom imaginable.


How much credibility do you think you have after making an idiotic assertion like this one? I mean, really, there's hyperbole and then there's just rank stupidity.

Posted by ECM at August 12, 2009 01:48 AM

Lip,

thanks for proven my point. attack the messenger not the message. what possible point does my voting record have to do with my post? What freedom has obama taken away? how about the freedom to fail? from the banks to the autos. you can not have upward mobility in a society if you also do not have downward mobility.

Posted by unseen at August 12, 2009 04:56 AM

Which freedom are those, freedom to communicate with terrorists, well the NY Times, the Washington
Post, and even PBS have made that possible again
by telling all the methods we've used. One could argue that the TARP which has put the banks and
the auto companies under government control is a restriction, but that's not a freedom we're likely to get back under this administration

Posted by narciso at August 12, 2009 07:53 AM
You people spent the last eight years stripping us from every freedom imaginable.

I'll say it again. This one is too stupid to talk to.

Posted by Pablo at August 12, 2009 09:12 AM

The liberals haven't learned a lesson they should have learned a long time ago: The more you tear down a person or company the more the people want to go to that person or company to find out what the fuss is. Businesses learned this years ago. You don't tear down your competition.

Tell the nation not to listen to Rush Limbaugh and millions more people tuned in to find out why they shouldn't listen to him. Tell them not to listen to Sara Palin and they want to know why, so they go to her blog a conservative blogs.

The liberal's complaining is the best FREE advertisement the conservatives could have. People who haven't listened to Rush, or read Sara's and the conservative blogs are now doing it. The more listeners and viewers a person the more they are worth, so they get more money coming in. If Sara owns her own blog and has advertising on it, she is getting paid for each hit to her blog. Whoever owns it is making a bundle off of the hits. KEEP UP THE FREE ADVERTISEMENTS LIBERALS.

Posted by Smorgasbord at August 12, 2009 01:42 PM

She's continuing in the fine tradition of Dick Cheney.

She says things that make sense but she says them in such a way as to drive Minitru and the rest of the Dem machine crazy so they blare her words out without changing them and they never, ever think of not repeating them (their favorite way to sideline conservatives, if nobody hears what you say, did you really say it?).

What other conservatives have that ability?

Posted by Veeshir at August 12, 2009 02:03 PM

I haven't heard anyone chime in with an actual answer to Lipiwitz's question ("Name one freedom that has been taken away from you in the past 6 months. Name one!"), except for Unseen, who correctly identified one of the hallmark faults of capitalism: "You can not have upward mobility in a society if you also do not have downward mobility."

I'm not knocking capitalism in general. I am saying that he has correctly stated a truth about our capitalist system. It's also a truth that we have never had, do not have, nor will we ever have a truly "free market" capitalist system in America. The government has always and will continue to play a role in "managing and regulating" commerce.

As for Palin, please, she doesn't need any help by "progressives" to attack her credibility. She needs only to continue speaking. Palin has a self-destruct mechanism built into her persona.

As for Nocoen's statement: "DEMOS WILL BE THROWN OUT ON THEIR A$$E$. But Repubs be wared, if you are elected you better deliver and cut gov programs, taxes, and reduce the deficits or there will be even worse retribution in 2012."

I have a question for you. IF the Democrats do lose their House and Senate majorities in 2010 (and they may very well do that because of arrogance and poorly communicating their agenda, I'm sorry to have to admit), and the Republicans do regain the majorities but fail to "cut gov programs, taxes, and reduce the deficits", PLEASE do enlighten us in regards to the "even worse retribution in 2012" that they would experience.

What new party will the voters choose to replace the Republicans in 2012, should they win in 2010 but not meet your expectactions? Or, are you implying that the Democrats would regain majorities in in 2012?

Posted by Dude at August 12, 2009 02:16 PM

The media merely uses Sarah Palin bashing as a method of detracting readers from the true activities underway and underground by the Democrats and their thugs. By distraction, the right gets to defend her, and the left get to pile on to the critique...and the real issues get ignored. She is being used. Fact is, the media do not give a damn...she is a whole lot more substantive than any of the hollywood celebraties that they cover ad nauseum. So, they are not serious other than their innate elitism about Sarah Palin. They keep all sorts of stuff going about her, because the public eats it up. The public had rather fight about her, than figure out what the heck the Healthcare deal is all about.

Posted by RUFUS at August 12, 2009 03:30 PM

The public had rather fight about her, than figure out what the heck the Healthcare deal is all about."
Posted by RUFUS at August 12, 2009 03:30 PM

Ditto, you've nailed that one.

Posted by Dude at August 12, 2009 05:28 PM

except for Unseen, who correctly identified one of the hallmark faults of capitalism: "You can not have upward mobility in a society if you also do not have downward mobility."
Posted by Dude at August 12, 2009 02:16 PM

this is not a bug of capitalism it is a feature. socialists do not understand that. It is the stick to the carrot. the chance for upward mobility makes you tak risks, to expand, to grow. the chance of downward mibility makes you take less risk. thus capitalism ensures by having both that a portion of the population will be risk takers and a portion of the population will not. Thus you have the possiblity of growth as well as steady secure foundation.

It is when the downward mobility is outlawed by government that those in power start taking on more risk which leads to systemic risk which brings the entire system down. If the CEO's of Goldman, chase AIG were allowed to fail and become beggers in the street a lesson would have been learned and capitalism would have been strengthen. As it is the downward mobility was stopped and capitalism was reduced and socialism was strengthened.

Socialism's answer to this lack of downward mobility is to attack all risk takers which ensures that upward mobility is also stopped which gives no mobility and a status quo of mind numbing poverty with elite rulers.

Posted by unseen at August 12, 2009 10:24 PM

and as far has some addtional freedoms taken away by Obama.

His increase of the debt has taken away my future economic freedom but of course bush and Clinton also took that away. Just not as much and not as quick.

His healthcare proposal would take away my freedom of choice since it requires me to sign up for healthcare or be fined

His attacks on tax havens has taken away my freedom to conduct business overseas as forgien banks will no longer open accounts for Americians due to the IRS requirements.

His attacks on the Financal sector has taken away my freedom to take on risk which means I have less chance of upward mobility

His support of the freedom of choice act would take away the freedom of doctors to NOT perform abortions.

his support of Washington Dc and Chicago's tough firearm laws has taken away those citizens rights to defend themselves.

His support of the Bush era patriot act has taken away my freedom to be secure from unreasonable searches

His support of Unions over the bondholders in GM and chrsyler bankruptcy has put my private property rights in jepordy.

should I go on?

It seems to me that Obama is keeping all the wrong stuff that bush did and doubling down on even more statist crap.

Posted by unseen at August 12, 2009 10:42 PM

I haven't heard anyone chime in with an actual answer to Lipiwitz's question ("Name one freedom that has been taken away from you in the past 6 months. Name one!"),********Smart people can see the writing on the wall, why should we wait for the freedoms to be taken away before sounding the alarm?
In other words, Dude, what good will it be to wait until we cannot use a gun, or keep a reasonable portion of our pay, or blog without being turned into the White House police? Lipshitz' question is not the correct question to be asking at this time. The question should be what freedoms do you think will be taken from you and why do you think that? Maybe a good dose of fear and skepticism would have helped other countries avoid loss of freedoms BEFORE THEY HAPPENED. You're really dumb.

Posted by Jayne at August 12, 2009 11:25 PM

Hey unseen, can you please give actual legislation numbers to these "freedoms" you've been stripped of? I don't need you to point anything out in the legislation, I'll read it myself. Just would like these HRs that have stripped you of these "freedoms". I mean, its been only 6 months in office and that's an awful lot of freedoms stripped away in such a short time and yet, not a lot of protesting or punditry from the right over losing all these "freedoms". Seems fishy.

The attack on tax havens is especially priceless. Tax evasion is a freedom now? But just not for Obama cabinet members right? Some view of freedom you got there Chavez.

I wouldn't dare call you a liar because that requires intelligence. You're just regurgitating talking points from those who think for you but at least your leaders gave you actual examples where this is true? Do you require points of actual honesty when you regurgitate these talking points? Hopefully? Please, could you provide those for me so I can be proven wrong by your superior mental prowess.

Posted by Lipiwitz at August 13, 2009 12:45 AM

I think Jayne has given a more honest answer...stupidity combined with paranoia.

Posted by Lipiwitz at August 13, 2009 12:46 AM

Lip,

what is it with liberals attacking the messenger and not the message?

Do you deny that Obama sujpports the Freedom of choice bill making its way thru Congress that would require doctors to perform abortions regardless of their feelings on the subject? and may cause catholic hospitals to close their doors?

Do you deny that Obama supports the gun laws in chicago and Dc?

Do you deny that HR3200 makes it illegal to opt out of health isurnace?

Do you deny that Obama's Sec of tres is atm working to rewrite all rules of the finacial sector to "control risk"?

and you pt about it only being 6 months....is the entire problem. too much too fast and all in the wrong direction

as fas as tax heavens I think jasonpye.com lays it out pretty well here:
There is certainly a case to be made for tax havens, as explained by Daniel Mitchell and Richard Rahn. The main reason being that tax havens encourage competition, keeping tax rates low. By eliminating the competition, big-government types have no reason to keep confiscatory taxes low.

Targeting tax havens misses the point. If the "problem" is so rampant that you are taking action, maybe it is a sign that our tax system is burdensome and broken. Too bad we can't look in the mirror and see that we are the problem, not tax havens.

or if you need more info check out the cato foundation.

and of course Obama's action breaking contract law during the bankruptcy preceedings should worry every law adbiding citizen.

So yet to see you refute any of the above. you asked for freedoms Obama as taken away. I gave you plenty of examples yet you can not defend one of them. /instead you want to attack me. typical liberal

One final thought I have not even mentioned cap and trade which would give whole new meaning to the term command economy. And with all these arguments liberals wonder why people are angery enough to protest and boo thier congressman. See what you see is good we see as evil. I believe in individual freedom. you by your support of the liberals show you believe in central command and control government which leads to a LOSS of individual freedom. but don't debate that. attack the messenger yet again

Posted by unseen at August 13, 2009 03:28 AM

Ok lets see...

1) That means you'd have to re-legislate the Hyde act so the first one is a no-brainer. Secondly, Bush allocated $2.2 billion to Planned Parenthood. That's $2.2 billion worth of abortions. More tax payer dollars than any other President since abortion was legalized of either party. And your outrage was where? Easy enough...nowhere! You're a hypocrite on that one buddy as with most of your "buddies".

2) Not sure of gun laws in Chicago but the gun law in DC was overturned by SCOTUS so obviously he doesn't support a law that no longer exists. Helloooo?

3) There are about 4 versions of HR 3200 right now and it is not law as of yet (but rest assured, it will be). Billions of my tax dollars go for paying for the uninsured so ubetcha! I support it. That's not depriving me of a freedom, that's saving my tax cash (and I'm just loving my Obama tax cut right now).

4) After the financial meltdown we just had because deregulation turned Wall street into the Wild Wild West, there are people on BOTH sides of the aisle asking for that. Hellooooo???? You whine and snivel about Freddie Mac and Fannie May and NOW you suddenly don't want regulation? Pick an opinion and stick with it for more than 10 minutes will you.

Maybe you have a point about our tax system being burdensome and broken but the law is still the law and nobody should be allowed to break the law. Tax havens are post office boxes in third world countries where fat cats illegally stash there cash. Pretend they were Democrats, you'd respect the law then now wouldn't you.

And for the record, I disagree strongly with Cap and Trade. I believe it's a cumbersome and too expensive piece of garbage legislation. Our free market society is actually doing a by far better job with companies going green and companies racing ahead of the curve with green technology. Leave that be for a few years and see what progress is made than re-visit the issue if necessary.

Posted by Lipiwitz at August 13, 2009 03:50 AM

Now I've just spent the last 10 minutes pinching myself to make sure I'm not existing in a nightmare parallel universe and...well I'm not. Caribou Barbie has got a valid point (God I can't believe I just typed that) here:

http://www.conservatives4palin.com/

The legislation either needs to be re-worded to where it clearly means what it is intended to mean or it should be eliminated all together.

Posted by Lipiwitz at August 13, 2009 04:00 AM

Jayne,

Thanks for your insight. As usual, it's a pleasure to discuss current events and issues with an intellectual giant such as yourself.

Posted by Dude at August 13, 2009 09:44 AM

let's see hyde amendment covers medicaid. the FOCA would make it illegal to refuse to perform an abortion. where do I say anything about funding. good if you are going to debate get your facts straight. As far as bush goes. We are not talking about bush. Bush was a liberal republician who pretended to be conservative to win an election then governed as a liberal except for security issues. Got that. and is the reason Bush has 255 approval ratings when he left office. Obama ran as a moderate/blue dog dem in the south and west. and is now governing as a far left liberal with the same result Bush had on that stratgey.

2) Obama supported the gun law in DC until it was overturned. He still supports the new Gun laws DC adopted after Keller to keep guns out of citizens hands thru forms and more forms.
Chicago has one of the toughest gun laws in the country and Obama is 100% in favor of those laws. Period.

3) there are not 4 versions of HR3200. there is one HR3200. Hr3200 was voted out of committee before recess. The other versions of healthcare reform are stuck in committee thus if a floor vote comes up in the House after recess HR3200 is the ONLY bill the house can vote on at this time. the others are still in committee and the prospects are not good that they will every see the light of day esp after the recent poll numbers. HR3200 is the ONLY bill the FULL HOUSE can legally vote on at this time and thus is the only bill that needs to be debated at this time.

4) the finacial meltdown was not caused by "the wild west actions" It was caused by federal programs that skewed the lenders to lend to people with risky credit, it was caused by FDIC which causes banks to seek risker investments to grap depsoits, it was caused by the implied government guarentee to backstop fannie and freddie, it was caused by a energy policy that the liberals have been pushing for 30 years that made gasoline go to $4.00/gal. It was caused by outsourcing which CLinton started with Nafta, Bush followed with free trade and WTO admission of CHina. It was caused by corruption within the fed government that sold tax breaks for companies to outsource jobs. Deregulation did not cause the meltdown and the only ones that are calling for more enforcement of the sector are the statists and those they were able to brain wash into believing that capitalism is bad. If real 1005 capitalism was ever given a chance in this country again the economic rebound would shock everyone.

5) when you fill out your tax returns do you not look for every legal deduction that you can get to lower your tax bill. Tax havens are not illegal per say. It depends on who uses them and why and with what money. For instance earnings outside the USa if brought into the US will be tax at US rates therefore companies creat tax shelters to keep those earnings offshore so they will not be taxed twice. That to me is sound business. would you pay taxes twice if you didn't have too.

the dems do tax aviodence at every oppurtunity. Kennedy's money, Kerry's money all in trusts that are not taxed. The assualt on tax havens is a sign of an out of control government. Usally the first sign of a country going into dictator/socialist mode is a flight of capital from that country. Obama is trying to nip that option in the bud.

while I don't believe in AGW and instead think the Sun and natural forces are at work just like they have been for millions of years I have no problems if companies trying to better their bottomline adopt green policies. My problem comes when the gov dictates it.

and for your next post if you listen to Palin without the MSM filter you will find Palin makes sense 90% of the time.

Posted by unseen at August 13, 2009 11:37 AM

Unseen, Palin called it "Obama's death panel". It was actually legislation introduced from Republican Senators Jason Isakson (GA) and Susan Collins (ME) so, Palin lied! It is not "Obama's death panel" and Palin relies upon her supporters to be too stupid to research and/or validate anything she says which to intelligent people, doesn't make any sense at all. The MSM filter just points it out. They also point out her hypocrisy when she whines, snivels and plays victim over her children being exploited and then turns around and exploits her own special needs child with the "death panel" statement to score political points. We wouldn't even know who her children were if she didn't drag them in front of every camera she could find. The new governor is smart enough not to do that if you haven't noticed. But I agree that the divorce nonsense was over the top and the youngest kid not being hers was a tabloid magazine, not the MSM but hey lets exploit the youngest one over that to score victim points shall we. Hypocrisy!

The Hyde amendment covers all government programs but please, feel free to point out in the new legislation where it says elective abortions will be paid for. And the reason I bring up Bush is because you fake outrage over it now but were silent for eight years. Where was your outrage then. I love how most pro-lifers are actually pro-life when it suits there agenda. What about all those poor babies under the Bush regime? Well Bush is Conservative...screw them!

There are four different versions of HR3200 and there is no finalized bill yet. The recent pool numbers are not bad but not as good as they would've hoped. Too much confusion. Town hall meeting protests really in the end, don't matter. It's not like you people are going to vote for him if he changes his mind about it and quite honestly, he doesn't need your votes that he never had to begin with. The head count on the town hall meetings are not as impressive as you would like to believe. Not enough to win elections anyways.

The financial meltdown was caused by the elimination of the Glass/Steagall Act of 1933 which was enacted by Congress after the 1st wild wild west mentality crashed the market and sent the country into a depression. For 66 years...no problems. Also the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999 which caused the massive merging of financial services companies for banking, investment, insurance and mortgage and subsequently caused the huge conglomerates to become "too big to fail". Evidently people never heard of the expression "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!" Apparently there's no money in it. It also doesn't help when financial experts and whistle blowers were sounding all the alarms about the impending doom and the SEC Chairman, Christopher "Heck-of-a-job-Brownie" Cox was completely negligent and incompetent on his job. Another outstanding contribution from the Bush Administration. This Liberal energy policy? I'm not sure what orifice you pulled that out of since there is no Liberal energy policy on Wall Street.

Tax deductions are legal. Taking profits made in America and stashing them in off shore accounts to avoid legally paying the taxes on them is illegal. Now if a company was doing this and the CEO was chosen for Obama's cabinet, well I'm sure you would know the law then now wouldn't you? What's the difference between ignorance and stupidity? Ignorance is CHOOSING to be stupid. My point is you didn't hesitate to point out Kennedy and Kerry money (without any proof as usual) so you are familiar with the law but only applying it to the Left while you continue to make excuses for yourselves. Gee, no wonder you lost the last two elections so bad. Google!

Have any idea how much the government "dictated" to us over the past eight years and if anybody cared about like you suddenly (and magically) cared about it? We we're moonbats (whatever the hell that is), terrorist sympathizers, nazi appeasers and the list goes on and on and on. The Constitution you suddenly care about even though I'm willing to bet you never even read it stood in the way of you and your ideology to do what you really wanted to do. If you could have done it, you would have burned the Constitution.

Posted by Lipiwitz at August 13, 2009 07:06 PM

This is why Sarah Palin makes a lot more sense than her supporters care to admit:

http://www.gov.state.ak.us/archive.php?id=1094&type=6

If you want a "death panel", just go to Alaska. Thanks to former governor and now Alaska blogger, Sarah Palin...you have one!

Posted by Lipiwitz at August 13, 2009 08:21 PM

Nice try, but that doesn't add up to a death panel to me, think before you link

Posted by narciso at August 13, 2009 11:25 PM

narciso...it's the exact same legislation. I love how Grassley said the legislation can be misinterpreted less than 24 hours after he misinterpreted it by claiming it would "pull the plug on grandma". Not enough:

"Death Panel" opponent Newt Gingrich and HIS secret Nazi death plot to murder old people:

http://views.washingtonpost.com/healthcarerx/panelists/2009/07/right-gingrich.html

Carefully read the 2nd paragraph. Now I would never say Newt's a hypocrite. The former Republican Speaker of the House who on his spare time, led a crusade to crucify Clinton over his infidelity (along with Sanford, Ensign, Craig, Foley & Vitter). In his spare time between kinky sex sessions with is mistress while his wife was in the hospital battling cancer. Obvious question is obvious, did Newt's wife have a government run health care plan? I'd ask Newt but he probably doesn't know considering he was "busy".

Not enough: Check out our favorite talk show host, Rush Limbaugh. Rush will read copy from one of his biggest advertisers, Legalzoom.com. For a small fee, legalzoom.com will allow you to participate in the secret Nazi death plot to murder old people by purchasing and preparing a living will for yourself or a family member. To quote Rush Limbaugh: "It's the smart thing to do! Just do it! Legalzoom.com"

And then you can always stop in a talk to Michael Schiavo. He can discuss with you from now until doomsday about Socialist Big Government and Socialist Big Government ideologues intruding themselves into a personal family situation that quite frankly, is none of their damn business. He would probably get a kick out of the fact that suddenly, you give a crap. The Terri Schiavo bill or what was termed the "Palm Sunday Compromise" was the absolute most blatant Socialist attack on out Federalism in the past 50 years.

Posted by Lipiwitz at August 14, 2009 01:06 AM

Lip,

you post is so full of holes i don't know where to begin. Bush was not conservative he was a liberal rep {i.e a campassionate conservative} You liberals wonder were all the outrage was? did you not see the elections of 2006 and 2008? the final aprroval numbers of Bush in the 20% range? How much more outrage do you want. Conservatives voted out the rep rinos and installed "blue dog dems" in their place. Conservatives left Bush years ago and only supported his handling of the iraq war at the end.

The finacial rules that were changed happened under Clinton not Bush thus if you say that was what was responsible for the finacial meltdown than I guess you should hold Clinton as the person to blame.

the hyde amendment is not a federal wise regulation. It covers medcaid only. That is why Planned parenthood can still get funding. freedom of choice bill that would require doctors to perfrom abortions is a different bill.
as far as Palin using her kids. I guess you are ok with people attacking Obama's kids since he used them on stage in photo ops during the campaign etc. He recently used his oldest in /russia after the disarmament talks making her wear a peace shirt. But go on about Palin using her kids please.

The death panel line was a classic. hit the mark

the White house is in panic mode. Polls are bad and getting worse for Obama, thankfully.


The liberal energy policy of last 30 years can be summed up as follows: fossial fuel bad. No drill, no dig, no burn. and that policy of attacking new devolpment of energy production from coal fired power plants, to oil rigs and nuclear production has caused this country to be at the mercy of the middle east and other exporting energy states. and had the direct result of $4.00/gal gas which led those living pay check to pay check to default on their loans and homes {suprime you know} which started a chain reaction as the house of cards of our fiat economy unraveled. If energy would have stayed low most people would have been able to make the payments but with an increase in fuel, food and interest rates the house of cards unravaled. the effort by the dems to get lenders to lend to deadbeats and the poor further weakend the economy when things went bad. You call that capitalism? that is not capitalism. that is government at its best.

I have read the declaration, the consitution, the federalist papers, etc many times. Have taken many courses in college with those documents as the basis of the course. And I will have to agree with Thomas Paine from Common sense government is a necassary evil. Those that can not understand that are doomed to live in a dictatorship and never experience the joys and yes hardships of freedom.

Profits in tax havens are usally profits earned OUTSIDE the USA and have already been taxed by that country. If those companies bring those profits back to the USa they are taxed again.

the rest of your rant is nonsense.

Posted by unseen at August 14, 2009 01:17 AM

Lip,

Newt and all of congress has private insurance paid for with public money. they have 17 private insurance policies to choose from.

rush and legalzoom? seriously?

what part of private and public do you not understand? It is the right thing to do to protect yourself. It is not the right thing to do to have the "government" protect you. One is called individual freedom the other is called a dictatorship. In a free country people have the right not to fill out a will or a DNR etc.

Most of your posts seem to not understand this basic concept. Individual freedom vs governmental fiat.

The consitution says the government has /limted powers. That the states have the powers that were not granted to the fed gov and that the powers not granted by the people to the states nor the federal gov remain with the people. God gave us inalienable rights we gave the governments its limited powers. Get it. logic is hard for you it seems

Posted by unseen at August 14, 2009 01:25 AM

"what part of private and public do you not understand? It is the right thing to do to protect yourself. It is not the right thing to do to have the "government" protect you."

Does this mean that we should abolish the armed services, fire and police services, the FBI, CIA, EPA, SSA, EPA, Medicare, Homeland Security, etc., etc. etc.?

According to your logic, unseen, it would be the "right" thing to do. Granted, we'd have to amend the Constitution to abolish the armed services.

Hey, let's just get rid of all these foolish government services that offer us protection of one kind or another. Who needs a society, anyway?

Posted by Dude at August 17, 2009 11:50 AM