Why I love Sarah Palin [Reader Post]

Loading

I love Sarah Palin. There, I’ve said it. While I’ve never met her, that is beside the point.

What is right on point however is why I love her. Sarah Palin bleeds American. She is not American simply because of an accident of birth. Rather, she understands what makes America different; she believes that America is exceptional and knows what makes it so; she is passionately pro-American without being jingoistic; she is willing to fight for what she believes regardless of who’s lined up against her; she is willing to put her credibility and reputation on the line to help others who share her views. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, she is a normal, average, regular person.

Sarah Palin did not grow up rich or attend an Ivy League school. She did not spend her life in a courtroom extorting money from corporations or small businesses. She did not spend her life in an ivory tower or in an editorial room pontificating about how the world works in some fantasy universe where government regulations make everyone pure and everything perfect in every circumstance. No, she has lived a fairly normal life, one you might call working class.

I remember back in ’88 or ’92 someone asked George H.W. Bush if he knew the price of milk, and he didn’t. He was of course pilloried for being “out of touch” with the common man. (Frankly it doesn’t bother me at all that the VP or President of the United States doesn’t know the price of milk… let someone else buy the milk, I’d rather him focus on knowing how much of our money government is wasting!) Sarah Palin probably knows the price of a gallon of milk. More importantly, she understands America from where the tire hits the road. She started out her political career at the PTA because she wanted to improve the education her children were getting. From there she spent four years on the Wasilla city council and six years as mayor. Next she was appointed to chair the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission and later defeated the incumbent to become the Governor of Alaska. In every one of those endeavors Palin showed herself to be not only capable, but effective and successful as well. Indeed, the latter two positions found her fighting an Alaska version of Tammany Hall.

She has demonstrated a willingness to fight for what she believes in, even if it is within her own party. She defeated the Murkowski machine in Alaska and she stood side by side with tea party candidates across the country in 2010, often against the wishes of the entrenched GOP establishment. Christine O’Donnell may have been a flawed candidate, but at least the citizens of Delaware had a choice between two distinctly different paths rather than the choice between the liberal and more liberal paths they would have had with Chris Coons and Mike Castle. They may have chosen bigger government, but at least for a change they had a choice, and Sarah Palin helped give them one.

Sarah Palin is also average in another way. She is not polished – or at least she wasn’t when she burst upon the national stage. She is not slick. She does not have a sound bit sized answer at the ready in case she gets asked any questions. Just the opposite, actually, often you can see her crafting an answer on the spot. The interview with Katie Couric was indeed painful to watch. The truth however is that her less than stellar performance in that and other early interviews were not signs that she was a dolt as many suggested, but rather the consequence of being thrown onto the world’s biggest stage with the klieg lights on max. You might say she was… shell-shocked. Many people, including myself, wondered how she could not name a single newspaper she read regularly or give a coherent answer on the Middle East. Knowing the answers and delivering them in front of a world wide audience are two different things. (Example: say the alphabet using nouns to represent each letter: Apple, Barrel, Continent etc. Now imagine having to do it in 20 seconds in front of 1,000 people and your job rests on your success…) Her poor performance communicated more about her interview preparation than her qualification to be President. Indeed a week later she outperformed Joe Biden in their debate, and few lefties would argue he was unqualified to be President. Her early performances were those of someone whose persona was not forged in front of camera. I’ll take someone who is right on the issues but flubs an interview 10 times out of 10…

And the issues are where Sarah Palin shines. Like Ronald Reagan, she understands that government is the problem more often than the solution. She understands that low taxes and fiscal discipline are an absolute necessity as government has no money other than that which it takes from taxpayers. She understands that Barack Obama was right when he suggested the Constitution “Says what the states can’t do to you. Says what the federal government can’t do to you, but doesn’t say what the federal government or state government must do on your behalf…” The difference is that to Obama and the left, that’s the problem whereas Sarah Palin understands that that is why the Constitution exists in the first place. She understands that an unconstrained government will continue to grow and usurp powers until eventually it strangles the life out of its citizens and our republic.

In addition to the issues, Sarah Palin seems to be made of steel. She has undergone a seemingly unending barrage of mocking and criticism to a degree that perhaps no other American politician has had to endure in modern times. Through it all however she has carried herself with grace, good humor and most importantly, she has understood that the issue is not her, it’s the country. The fact that she is willing to stand up and respond to the left – particularly the media – should not be seen as a symptom of being thin-skinned or even petty, but rather a desire to keep the focus where it should be, on policy and Constitutional government.

So the reasons I love Sarah Palin are thus: She knows what it will take to put the country back on solid economic footing. She’s a rabid Constitutionalist who will reign in the federal government. She will let American interests and the interests of the American people dictate American foreign policy rather than looking to international bodies for direction. She understands the importance of free markets, free trade and energy independence. She believes in American exceptionalism, and perhaps most of all, she understands that individual responsibility is the cornerstone of upon which character, community and country are built. Without that everything else collapses.

2012 is going to be the most important election in more than a century. Our nation has been shaken to its very foundations by an onslaught of government encroachment and unprecedented fiscal irresponsibility. In times like these, when those basic fundamental things that made America great in the first place are the very things being undermined, we would be lucky to have a ticket headed by someone who truly understands what it’s like to live and thrive as an average American, someone who didn’t spend most of her adult life in the insulated and unrealistic universe of liberalism consisting of courtrooms, college classrooms and the corridors of power that make up Washington D.C.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
164 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

@barbarjinks:

My goldfish has wiser things to say than Sarah Palin — and he doesn’t talk! (that should tell you something…)

This from someone who CHOSE the name barbarjinks…

@blast: You said:

ummm…. Wasn’t Joe Miller a tea party candidate that Palin (in her home state) endorsed and supported, and was beaten by the “defeated Murkowski machine” ?

Shows how little you know about Palin. Do some reading, blasty. She defeated Lisa Murkowski’s FATHER in the gubernatorial primary.

Yes, she backed Joe Miller and he had a strong showing. But politics being what they are, she got her name on the ballot, even though it went against the rules. Go figure.

Great article Vince. I did an article on her at my blog, back in July of 2009. It was about the far left and them attacking her because of fear.

Fear and the Far Left

@anticsrocks:

touche lol

@Ivan: The people here chasized Obana for missing the point where a decision should have been made. As far as an “illegal war”, most here were parroting what the left said when Bush went into Iraq. You missed the points people were making while wearing your rose colored glasses.

@Ivan:

Are you for her support for illegals having access to US citizenship via the dream act?

Still trying to flog that dead horse, Ivan? She’s strongly pro- border enforcement and then deal with illegals in country. She does not support amnesty, thinks President Reagan’s program failed and does not, let’s repeat that, does not support the Dream Act.

Video of her discussion with Davis Asner following the Obama/Calderone presser on illegal immigration:

Sarah Palin: Every state should have immigration law like Arizona

http://www.palintv.com/2010/05/19/foxbusiness-palin-every-border-state-should-have-arizona%e2%80%99s-law/

When did Libya attack us? Pan Am 103 and numerous other little incidents that were supported, directed, and financed by the former “Darling” of the Left, who made great press and interviews with his tents and witty answers 40 years ago.

ANTICSROCKS #66 Lisa’s name on ballot only through write -ins. A huge upset of Sarah’s tea party choice Joe Miller.btw Mata certified this in #61.

Exactly why, you, me and millions of others love the woman!
Because the liberals continue to play the race card- even though it has been proven so ridiculous, it still proves to be effective- Because of that, we’ve got to play their game and in order to win the republican party we need to nominate a black man or woman. I see that as our best bet. There are many who could step up, though most don’t have the experience we’d like—But, then neither did Obama. We have just got to win!

pedaling, I love the way you put it, and the ending on your comment,
WE HAVE JUST GOT TO WIN, THANK YOU

Pedaling says “We have just got to win” No white men or women allowed. Who’s playing the “race card?” Disgraceful!!

Oh Brother, Rich. Really? Gimme a break!
I’m just saying we need to have a strategy, for once.
I don’t claim to know what that strategy is –
So try not to be ridiculous.
Okay? Try Reeeaal hard!
I’m a Mitt Romney gal, but the truth is, he won’t get one black vote and we need to win the minority vote this time around, or at least do a lot better. What’s your idea? I’m open. Or maybe you’re an Obama fan. I don’t know. But, please don’t put words into my mouth.

Pedaling You said in#73 “In order to win the Republican party we need to nominate a black man or woman.” Where does that leave Mitt or Sarah or Marco Rubio? According to you, OUT because they’re not Black. Interested in other F.A. opinions on this.

@rich wheeler:

Actually, I believe she referred to Joe Miller as a mistake. The Palins later became rather cold toward old Joe “after” he received the endorsement. He evidently would not answer whether he felt Sarah Palin was capable of being president and a couple of other rookie campaign blunders, mistakes that soured his relationship with Sarah supporters and, Miller was not able to recoup from that. Not Palin’s fault, Miller blew it. “per Mata” in #60, inre Sarah Palin’s picks:

Of those that advanced, 61.1% won their elections. Even including the 10 who didn’t survive the primary, there was a 51.6% success rate. No record of endorsement by one who the media considers passe to be sneezed at.

PEDALING YES HE’S ON THE OTHER SIDE, DON’T TRUST HIM,
HE WILL DISTORT YOUR SENTENCES TO MEAN HIS GOAL,
BYE

Missy and Mata 51.6% success rate. A monkey throwing darts could do that well.Since when is 51.6% success rate anything but average. What was BHO’S %. Reid over Angle for starters

Now now, rich…. “a monkey”? Followed by asking of BHO’s percentage? tsk tsk… LOL

And now you really have me smiling, calling a 51.6% endorsement rate, which is really 61.1% of candidates in the election (convenient omission of facts perhaps?) “average”. Considering that the POTUS is sitting in the WH with 52.7%, I guess we can call that “landslide” your party likes to tout pretty darned “average” after all, eh?

But we’re not talking candidate vote results. We are talking about the amount of candidates endorsed by Palin who got elected. You know, that woman who the media touts as politically dead and powerless? You say a “monkey” could do that, and then bring up BHO’s endorsement percentage. Well… what is it? You brought it up as a comparison, as if that was to minimize the Palin influence on voters. So… where’s the facts?

I’ll warn you, tho… can’t be too terrific a stat since it was a severe pounding of the Dems in the 2010 election. So I guess “that monkey” ain’t so good, eh? Hey.. your words, not mine.

Thanks Bees. I figured. Have a good one. I’m off to conquer the day!

@Ivan: You say that Sarah is an internationalist *first* b/c she indicated that she would have stopped the massacre of civilians in Lybia. And would have done so BEFORE 15,000 were slaughtered! I don’t think so! Bob

@rich wheeler:

What was BHO’S %.

A lot of democrats were not wanting Obama’s endorsement in 2010, remember Joe Manchin:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/10/11/joe-manchin-ad-dead-aim_n_758457.html

btw, with your track record, one should not get too cocky.

@Curt:

Dems hold House and Senate in 2010 and win another electoral landslide in 2012 (massive if quitter Pallin runs) Semper Fi Wheeler

Mata Mata monkey and Obama. That’s your mind at work not mine.Do you agree with Pedaling in #73?
Missy Have Curt or A.C. ck my exact prediction of Dem/Repub. Sen. results in 2010 posted on A.C.’s blog one week prior to election.Also had Repub. House win on the nose.Your thoughts on Pedaling in #73?

Hey, you went there with your analogy, rich. I thought it was a truly bizarre and unPC association for you to liken Palin’s endorsement record to a monkey throwing darts, then ask of BHO’s percentage. Or is it that you only compare Palin’s average to a monkey, but BHO’s should be compared to another critter?

On those percentage stats, I do believe we are still waiting for you to produce those you believe to be superior, despite the fact the Dems lost their political azzes in 2010. That’s sure gonna take some magic manipulation of numbers, don’t you think? Hey, I’ll even widen the field for you… why don’t you tell us any lib/prog pundit or politician who has a better endorsement record?

Or do you intend to just sidle off into a different distraction and hope we don’t remember?

And no… I couldn’t disagree with Pedaling #73 more. I do not vote for anyone based on gender or race. I leave such motives for nominations and political strategy to the Dems.

Mata You know monkey throwing darts is an old stock picking analogy used many times before.For YOU to suggest Obama comparison is your mind at work and wrong.
I certainly agree with you on Pedaling’s unfortunate comments.
I have do doubt BHO’S endorsement rate higher than 51.6% but not as fast on the research as you.A friendly wager might quicken my pace.

rich: You know monkey throwing darts is an old stock picking analogy used many times before.

Actually, no I don’t. Nor do I recall that phrase before. Doesn’t mean someone hasn’t used it, but I don’t read everything on the forum. So I certainly know now. My mind, however, only followed your pattern in analogy. So now you know how people can misconstrue what you say. My suggestion is don’t assume people are familiar with “old stock pickin'” analogies when you decide to compare politicians with monkeys.

If you have no doubt that BHO’s endorsement picks of Dems, who lost their shirts in 2010, is a higher percentage, then I suggest you produce it. We’ll wait. Your incentive should be curiousity, and maintaining personal credibility. Therefore no friendly wager need be done to “quicken your pace”. Your credibility will simply hang in the balance for the duration. What haste you decide to apply is totally dependent upon how long you’d like to be mocked on this issue, right? :0)

@Skookum: When did Libya attack us? Pan Am 103 and numerous other little incidents that were supported, directed, and financed by the former “Darling” of the Left, who made great press and interviews with his tents and witty answers 40 years ago.

Yup. There is no doubt that Libya’s Gaddafi is a bad guy. He was also involved in the financing/ordering of Pan Am 73’s hijacking in Pakistan 2 years earlier. He seems to work thru Abu Nidal Organization quite a bit as a state sponsor of terror.

But it’s just not that simple, Skook. Libya did not attack the US. He financed/organized an attack on a private airline firm with global business entities, which was carrying a high concentration of US citizens (since it was headed to the US), as well as Brits and those from other countries. Out of the 270 airline victims, 190 were US citizens. I might also point out that the US Congress did it’s best in the previous years to destroy Pan Am themselves… but that’s another story.

Here’s the point… the State Dept names five states that sponsor terrorism. Libya is only one of those. The other four are Iran, Cuba, Sudan (can anyone say Darfur?), and Syria. Iraq used to be there, but that’s one down for the count.

So why Libya? To maintain consistency, using this standard of arguing the US was officially attacked by a state sponsor of terror, do we now go after the others? Do we use this same standard when Americans are killed in terrorist attacks in Bali or other locations as well? Do we track where the money came from to enable that act, and effect regime change in every country?

And what about those countries that offer them safe haven? That’s why we went after Afghanistan… they didn’t attack the US. The Taliban were providing safe haven to AQ. So do we now open the hornets nest of cleaning out terrorists in every nation who turns a blind eye to their presence?

This is beyond even our former super military capabilities… which are steadily being eroded by this Congress and CiC. Some quick facts about how immense that task is:

1: Arab and Iranian dictators oppress their subjects, and sponsor half of the world’s major terror groups.

2: 7 out of 19 of the most repressive regimes in the world, and their weapons of mass destruction, are located in the Middle East.

The question is, and has never been, whether Gaddafi is a piece of scum that should be wiped off the face of the earth. I think we all agree on that one. The question should be, what is the precedent set, and the new standard for wiping such scum off the face of the earth by using American military might?

Personally, if we were going to go out on a limb for a bad precedent and dumb foreign policy, I would have picked the obvious big target, Iran. Their young population is more educated and westernized than Libya’s, and they’ve already been making plenty of noise that the US decided to ignore.

The media and Democrats who whispered the warnings that Bush would invade Iran before he left office were attempting to portray him as a war monger. Oddly enough, we see who the real war mongers are… and they don’t even pick the more dangerous targets to boot.

ADDED: What about Somalia, attacking ships, including those owned by Americans?

So sorry to continue a way off topic subject here… apologies to Vince… but by April 30th of each year, the State Dept is supposed to provide the previous years “Country Reports on Terrorism”. Oddly enough, the most current one available was from 2009, assessing the 2008 terrorists activity, including state sponsored terrorism. Not sure what Hillary’s doing that 2010’s (assessing 2009) isn’t available. But I’d like to quote from the section about states that sponsor terrorism.

STATE SPONSORS OF TERRORISM: State sponsorship of terrorism continued to undermine efforts to reduce terrorism. Iran remained the most significant state sponsor of terrorism. Iran has long employed terrorism to advance its key national security and foreign policy interests, which include regime survival, regional dominance, opposition to Arab-Israeli peace, and countering western influence, particularly in the Middle East. Iran continues to rely primarily on its Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps-Qods Force to clandestinely cultivate and support terrorist and Islamic militant groups abroad, including: Lebanese Hizballah, Palestinian terrorist groups such as HAMAS and Palestinian Islamic Jihad, certain Iraqi Shia militant groups, and Islamic militants in Afghanistan, the Balkans, and elsewhere. Throughout 2008, the Qods force continued to provide weapons, training, and funding to Lebanese Hizballah to advance its anti-Israeli campaign and undermine the elected Government of Lebanon. Despite a dramatic decrease in attacks in Iraq since August 2008, security remains fragile, in part because the Qods Force continued to provide lethal support to select Iraqi militant groups that target U.S., Iraqi and Coalition forces. Iranian weapons transfers to select Taliban members in Afghanistan in 2008 continued to threaten Afghan and NATO troops operating under UN mandate and undermine stabilization efforts in that country. The Government of Iran also continued to pursue an expansion of its military ties during this period into the Western Hemisphere and parts of Africa, including through its IRGC-Qods Force.

If there was ever an example of a state, sponsoring terrorism in a direct assault on US – in this case, our military forces in Iraq – Iran is that example. Yet we’re in Libya?

And what does that same report say about Libya?

The United States rescinded Libya’s designation as a state sponsor of terrorism in June 2006. Libya renounced terrorism and weapons of mass destruction in 2003 and has continued to cooperate with the United States and the international community to combat terrorism and terrorist financing.

In November 2007, Egyptian cleric and al-Qa’ida (AQ) leader Ayman al-Zawahiri announced a merger between AQ and the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG). In an audiotape, al-Zawahiri urged AQ fighters to topple the Government of Libya, describing Muammar al-Qadhafi as an “enemy of Islam” and criticizing the 2003 decision to renounce WMD and terrorism. According to press accounts, LIFG maintains a limited presence in eastern Libya and has facilitated the transfer of foreign fighters to join insurgents fighting U.S.-led forces in Iraq.

On August 14, Libya and the United States signed a comprehensive claims settlement agreement to provide compensation to claimants in both countries who allege the other country‘s responsibility in incidents causing injury or death. Included in the settlement agreement are claims stemming from the 1988 bombing of Pan Am flight 103 in Lockerbie, Scotland, and the 1986 bombing of the La Belle nightclub in Berlin. On October 31, the Secretary of State certified to Congress that settlement funds had been received, paving the way for the confirmation of a U.S. Ambassador to Tripoli and the expansion of normalized relations.

This goes counter to the claims that “there is no al Qaeda in Libya”, made by the former Justice Minister, Mustafa Abdul Jalil’s (rebellion and transitional govt leader). Therefore, because the Arab League said “jump”, we’ve now ignored Iran – a country with direct US assault – to act in Libya and help AQ get rid of Gaddafi. Libya, like the dictators in Yemen and Egypt, were aiding the US in counterterrorism.

Yet we ignore Iran, and go after Egypt and Libya. Not unlike his support of the ousted Honduras President over their Constitutional law.

It appears that whatever either AQ or the Arab League wants us to do, the US is willing to be duped into doing their dirty work. Oh so not good.

@Missy:

She does not support amnesty

Really? Got a link for that? Because unless you do, I have a link where she states she is for a “pathway to citizenship”. Dream act personified.

@Bob:

@Ivan: You say that Sarah is an internationalist *first* b/c she indicated that she would have stopped the massacre of civilians in Lybia. And would have done so BEFORE 15,000 were slaughtered! I don’t think so! Bob

No, Bob. I say she’s an internationalist because she wishes to inject us into a fight which we have no business being in.

When did Libya attack us? And don’t mention 1988 as American administrations have since been very happy to do business with the Ghadaffi regime. Bush even took him off the terrorist list in 2003 or 2004.

Libya didn’t attack us or our allies. Now we’re in another war. Say good-bye to any restraint on government spending with a third war, Bob.

Mata The stock picking abilities of a monkey throwing darts at the WSJ vs. an analyst’s picks is something I heard often at MLPFS. I’ve used it here in our stock market discussions.Sorry you missed or forgot leading to your unfortunate statement.
Re completion of research to verify BHO’s endorsement %. Mock away.You know how I love those disagree checks.

@ mata:

Of those that advanced, 61.1% won their elections. Even including the 10 who didn’t survive the primary, there was a 51.6% success rate. No record of endorsement by one who the media considers passe to be sneezed at.

Not disputing those #’s, however do you believe Palin’s endorsement mattered that much in the final analysis? So a little over half of the people she supported won… in a year that the Republicans totally kicked ass… but she could not even get her candidate in Alaska, her home state, to beat a write in candidate.

MATA, I’m not surprise of those events because there is a strong support for MUSLIMS radicals,
brothers in the government, let’s say they are in the power play of the government,
those influencals woman that push for actions and have been listened are in GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS ALSO, all this in good feeling of the PRESIDENT AGREEMENT,
WHAT CAN AMERICA EXPECT FROM THIS IS FAVORITISM TO RADICALS MUSLIMS,
RIGHT FROM THE TOP GUY, FOLLOWED BY HIS OBEDIENTS DEMOCRATS,
WELL WE ARE BEGINNING TO SEE THEIR PUBLIC OUTRAGE LIKE US HERE IT TAKES ONLY ONE TO GET THE COURAGE TO GO PUBLIC ON THEIR OWN PARTY, THE LIBYA CONFLICT, THAT IS D. KUCHINI, AND WATCH FOR MORE,
THEY WILL COME WITH MORE STORYS,

Shows how little you know about Palin. Do some reading, blasty. She defeated Lisa Murkowski’s FATHER in the gubernatorial primary.

Yes, she backed Joe Miller and he had a strong showing. But politics being what they are, she got her name on the ballot, even though it went against the rules. Go figure.

LOL. I guess you did not read the same post above which said “She defeated the Murkowski machine in Alaska and she stood side by side with tea party candidates across the country in 2010, often against the wishes of the entrenched GOP establishment. ”
I am quite aware of what Palin did to Murkowski’s father… but obviously the “Murkowski machine” defeated Palin’s home grown tea party candidate. I wonder how Palin could have muffed up such an election on her own turf. Seems her political power in Alaska is less than a write in campaign of a Murkowski machine candidate.

blast, don’t forget it was not her own TURF anymore, It was her candidat TURF who was against the MURDOSKY MACHINE on their own TURF,
NOW why do you want to demise SARAH PALIN with that notation, we know, don’t bother to tell, but IF you don’t have anything better to claim, all there is to do for you is read instead of typing,

Mata–

Sorry for the late reply. I hadn’t been to the supermarket for three weeks and my mission for today was to restock the pantry. I guess keeping a stocked pantry sort of ties in with the question you asked me, which was:

If a segment of US citizens… be they unions, gangs, whatever… decided to go on a rampage and demand the immediate removal of Obama, destruction of the US Constitution, damage buildings, set fires, and generally cause chaos in the streets for the rest of the citizens – i.e. attempt at revolution – what action do you propose US law enforcement authorities take? And why?

Then, when you’re finished envisioning it as the SEIU and AFL/CIO, substitute militia/minutemen… the opposite political spectrum. In other words, leave out your agreement/disagreement with the political agenda.

The U.S. Constitution and the body of accumulated law (including English Common Law) is our peace treaty. It allows our citizens to live together in peace and prosperity with each other and (in theory) with the government. It separates America from a tribal type of societal organization where the strong and ruthless and the witch doctors rule. When anyone attacks the very foundation of what we have here in America, it puts us on a path back to the dark ages. We Americans were given a number of ways to peacefully change our government should it become tyrannical (as I believe it has).

That said, Armed rebellion is always the last resort provided by our founders should all other options fail. But as we have seen in Libya, kids with Twitter accounts and AK-47s are no match for jet aircraft and tanks. It would be the same in America, but thankfully, we are far from that point.

I agree, John Cooper. And like most events, the devil is in the details at the moment in time.

I have to wonder what I would demand of my law enforcement officers if we had a minority of citizens, engaging in violent protest and seeking to demand illegal ouster of our elected officials (even those I don’t like). What extent of force would law enforcement be able to use to curtail gangs of thug mobs? And what would we, as a nation, find acceptable for them to stablize the situation.

There is a thin line of balance when a government responds to violent mobs. On one hand, they are charged with securing the peace for all, yet cannot cross the boundary of peaceful redress of grievances. I suspect that our government and law enforcement agencies would handle it well. What I do wonder is just how out of control some factions of US protestors will go. That goes for extremists at both ends of the spectrum.

Certainly, in the US, an armed citizenry would have no chance against our military, should they choose to stand next to a CiC acting outside the boundaries of our Constitution. But as any law officer, soldier or veteran here will be quick to point out, their oaths are sworn to uphold the Constitution… not an out of control elected official.

In other countries, it’s more difficult. It’s hard to say if the mobs in Egypt, Yemen, Syria and Libya represent the majority of the country. Especially if the forces behind the protests are those with a less than freedom loving agenda. Without rights in their constitutions, or the ability to address tyranny, I can see why they resort to such methods… however futile. On the other hand, Egypt had a Constitution that the protestors sought to toss out the window. It can certainly be debated as to whether those activists had the right to dissolve the government instead of forcing a resignation, and following the channels in their existing document. At that juncture, one could make a case as to why an existing government… even a dictatorship… would seek to control those crowds with their military and police. Instead of following the channels of transition provided in the Egyptian Constitution, they created a vacuum, and changed the shift of power to martial law.

It’s a clusterf*#k, fer sure. And I’ve found myself pondering often whether the bad guys with the military in the ME are any worse than what may be the bad guys in the mobs, utilizing the power of the media to gain sympathy (and in the case of Libya, foreign militaries) to aid in their rebellion.

I’m certainly glad we’re here, and have many avenues of reversal of bad policies. But I have to say, if I saw protestors here making the demands to dismantle our Constitution and demanding illegal ousters of elected officials – using violence to that end – I’m not sure I wouldn’t support a heavy hand on reigning them in. At that time, they have become nothing more than a mob of criminals… and would need to be treated as such.

I think I broke your server. I hit the “Save” button when editing the my last post and everything went dark. I lost the changes I made, but they probably weren’t important anyway…

John Cooper, It’s not you, I was out not able to connect and just receive your last comment with surprise, and tryed to click on your reply and here I’m back with FA, IT did not last long,
bye

@blast: Not disputing those #’s, however do you believe Palin’s endorsement mattered that much in the final analysis?

Of course I do. Because Palin is the face of the tea party movement, which is tilting at the windmills owned by the traditional GOP establishment. You have to remember, blast, that most of these candidates were up against GOP nominees, with the power of their money and endorsements.

So a little over half of the people she supported won… in a year that the Republicans totally kicked ass… but she could not even get her candidate in Alaska, her home state, to beat a write in candidate.

What is it with you and rich that you prefer to focus on those that didn’t make it thru the primary (which may have had more than two candidates striving for the nomination), and ignore the 61.1% of election winners? Convenience of omission runs deep in you guys… That’s a pretty impressive track record of endorsements.

The fact that she, as a “discredited” politician in the media’s eyes, put herself on the line – and against establishment candidates – is the reason the media was following this story to begin with. They were hoping that an ultimate fail of Palin’esque type candidates would reveal that the radical, fiscal conservatives were but a small voice in the GOP, and she was powerless.

oops…. lesson should be learned. Because the media and Dems pronounce Palin as the political dead doesn’t make it so. She proved herself to be a very formidable voice in the party, much to the establishment GOP’s chagrin.

They are having their problems with these freshman Congressional ins even now, when they are standing firm on the fiscal promises they made to their constituents.

@ilovebeeswarzone:

Dude, she couldn’t even get her own candidate, Miller, to win in her home state. A write-in campaign? Isn’t that a first in the history of the Senate? And all of Alaska knew that voting for Murkowski was a vote against Palin.

Don’t Alaskans know Palin better than any one else? That is what I keep hearing. Why would Alaskans, if they loved Palin so much, vote against HER candidate?

Come on, guys. There’s spin and then there is utter bullship. If Palin couldn’t get Miller elected in her home state that is indicative of how weak she is.

Ivan– Ever been to Alaska?

We haven’t dealt with, why does Karl Rove and Charles Krauthammer, among others, treat Palin with disrespect? Here is what I think is going on. The Wm. F. Buckley rule was to vote for the most conservative candidate who can win. I think that Rove and Krauthammer do not believe that Palin can win the presidency (although they probably believe that she can win the Republican candidacy); therefore, they have initiated a subtle, howbeit, real, preemptive strike. Discourage her from becoming a presidential candidate so that she does not lose against Obama.

What we cannot deny is, the press has done a tremendous job in diminishing her. While with 2 of my relatives in California, they were talking about Palin, and the sum total of their conversation was, “She’s stupid.” “She sure is.” Yes, that really passes for political discourse in California. However, my point is, when she is spoken of in an unfriendly “news” outlet, notice how many times they manage to get the word “stupid” (or some synonym) into the conversation. It is jaw-dropping.

Don’t misunderstand me; I like her a lot; and much of that is because, I trust her. I believe that what she says is what she believes. With Obama, I don’t trust a smooth sentence that procedes from his mouth.

What gives me some hope is, this was a widely read essay with a lot of comments.

Yvan, poor DUD, what a way to solve your conflicts, you just have to say, you wont vote for her,
and the more you try to explain why that candidat did not win, I can play your game and say that the MURDOCSKY’S FAMILY, might have rig this very close election results with money today, you can get people to swear that you’r a donkey, bye

Is Sarah Palin still in Israel?

John Cooper, I didn’t want to mention it when I relay the news to MATA, because she was offend so many times, that I was afraid that a derange who threaten her would do some harm to her,
BY now she must be back or close, from what I read. bye

@rich wheeler: You said:

Since when is 51.6% success rate anything but average.

Um, is 52.7% average? That is the percentage of votes Obama got…

Barbarjinks, hi, I think you should eat your fishs, that would improve your brain.
as for presently, you’r hopless to recover, bye

From what I understand, Palin and hubby were supposed to leave Israel Tuesday (Israel’s Tuesday), or yesterday via US dates. That means she left before this morning’s bus bombing happened.

@rich wheeler: Re completion of research to verify BHO’s endorsement %. Mock away.You know how I love those disagree checks.

Well, rich… if you can’t back up your talking points, when I’ve provided ready data to mine, you’ll have to be reminded that when you spout BS… or attempt to repeat it again… you’ll be called on it. I figure this pretty much nullifies your argument that Palin’s endorsement record is dwarfed by the Zero’s.

Randy Collins, did you say you are an IDIOT?
I ‘m with you on how right you are,

anticsrocks, you’crack me up, I almost spit my mouthfullon my keyboard,

Mata I’m working it. So far boots on the ground support; Senate Reid win Boxer win Murray win Shumer win Blumenthal win Bennett win Gillebrand win TOTAL WIN 7 LOSSES O GOV. Brown WIN. UPDATE MANANA
That’s 8-0.If you know some losses or wins feel free to jump in. Thanks
ANTICROCKS BHO win in 2008 looks close until you compare it to “w”s 2000 and 2004 squeakers.

This Salon article may give you a reality check, rich… Save you some valuable time.

Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania became the fourth Democrat in seven months to lose a high-profile race despite the president’s active involvement. Specter’s career-ending loss raises questions of whether Obama can transfer even small portions of the political charm that catapulted him to the White House.

…snip…

In previous months, Obama’s endorsements and campaign appearances weren’t enough to save then-Gov. Jon Corzine’s re-election bid in New Jersey, Creigh Deeds’ run for governor in Virginia or Martha Coakley’s campaign in Massachusetts to keep the late Edward M. Kennedy’s Senate seat in Democratic hands.

Bryan Lentz in PA…. got O’nod. Lost. Official O’endorsement for Paul Kanjorski in PA as well… 25 years of service for that one. Sent home. Caprio in RI didn’t get the O’pat of approval. But he lost.

BTW, I know Bill Clinton endorsed Jerry Brown. Unaware of any Obama endorsement there. You wouldn’t be confused with having him show up for fundraisers as an endorsement, would you? Two different critters. One is an endorsement, the other is a side show entertainment to fill the coffers. Seems there was precious few of those O’nods. Probably because his Obama’s first three endorsement outings… Corzine, Coakley and Deeds… bit the dust big time in liberal strongholds to boot. He laid low this midterm.

So where are we so far with known endorsements/results? 8 wins, tossing you Brown, and 6 losses. ummmm… not looking too good yet, eh? Keep at it…. Wonder if you’ll find he even supported as many as 64 candidates?

But of course, you won’t know his percentages unless you figure out all who he actually endorsed, and who he didn’t. As Missy said, his endorsement wasn’t welcomed with open arms, as the Public Policy Polling nationwide showed.

PPP’s most recent national survey found that while Obama had a positive approval rating at 48/47, only 33% of voters were more likely to vote for a candidate endorsed by him while 48% said support from Obama would make them less likely to vote for someone. That’s because only 64% of voters who approve of the President say his endorsement would make them more inclined to vote for a candidate, but 91% who disapprove say Obama’s support makes it less likely they would vote for one of his preferred candidates.

Oh yeah… don’t think you can toss Cuomo to the Zero. After the bru haha of meddling in primaries with Paterson, he couldn’t afford to publicly admit to their meddling.

@Ivan: Did you ever think it might have had something to dowith the canidate? M Grandpa said, “You can make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear, but it still is a sow’s ear!”

Ms. Palin has my vote if she runs! She was rough around the edges at first. But then again I love her openness. She was so refreshing as a new face. I think she could out run the Newt, the Huckleberry, and the pretty Boy Rommey any day. The Newt would not recognize a “feeling” if it bit him on the butt. And the Huck is a professional politican, just like Rom. Thats why we are in this mess because of people like them. I wish we could get more real people. Say what you mean, mean what you say! But then agin there are others out there too that have my attention, if they run. Anybody remember “Keyes”.

Randy, hi, what is a sow’s ear, and I don’t mind looking ignorant,
but I’m scare of the answer,
bye

@ilovebeeswarzone: A sow is a mother pig. LOL