Friday, December 31, 2010

Happy New Year!

As we head into 2011, I want to wish everyone a healthy, happy and prosperous new year.

I look forward to contributing to the dialogue about Sarah Palin in 2011, a year in which she may announce her run for president. If she does (as most of us hope she will) announce, it will be an exciting time to part of the Palin army.

Let's all stand behind our great leader in 2011.

Governor Palin has Run Her PAC Better than How Obama, Clinton, and Romney Ran Their PACs.

Center-Right David Solway Writes that “There is Probably No One More Qualified for the White House than Sarah Palin”

A Message from SarahPAC

Jeffrey Lord: Berwick Sets Up Death Panels By Fiat

Mark Belling: Reagan-Palin Similarities are Striking

Saturday, December 25, 2010

A Merry Christmas from Patrick’s World USA

It’s great to be here in sunny Florida with my mom, sister and nephew. My son will join me here tomorrow for the week. It’s an opportunity to be joyful for being with one’s family. It is also an opportunity to say hello and be thankful for all my friends. So from the Reaganesque land of Patrick’s World USA where Sarah Palin has taken the reigns of leadership from our dearly departed Ronnie, I wish all of you who read my blog and follow me on Twitter a special, blessed and Merry Christmas.

It’s important that we all send out Christmas greetings to all the patriots who fight to return our country to its Constitutional roots – a restoration that will bring us back to what our Founders had envisioned for the future of our country and the role of government. We are a strong group of people. We have taken time from our lives to write, volunteer and support strong commonsense conservatives in their quests for public office knowing that they are running not to obtain seats of power from which to personally benefit, but to obtain seats of power from which they could serve us, the people who make this great nation shine.

The idea that people would want to go to Washington with a “servants heart” is foreign to arrogant liberals, intellectuals and establishment types who see their leadership positions as perches from which they can look down on the little people and dictate to us what they think is in our best interest. In November, we began to turn that tide when we voted to return the House of Representatives to the Republicans and closed the gap in the Senate. This is merely a first step.

As we set our eyes on 2012, we will again be assessing the performances of our Congressional representatives. In other words, we’re making a list and checking it twice. We’re going to find out who’s naughty or nice so that in 2012, when Sarah Palin comes to town, those who sweep in on her coattails can plug some of the holes that are still there following the 2010 midterms.

We see you when you’re voting for DADT, START and the Food Safety Bill. We know when you’re awake (when you stand firm on de-funding Obamacare and writing a budget that is fiscally sound). Earmarks will only lead to coal in 2012’s political stocking. So you better be good for goodness sake. I’m talking Jim Demint and Michele Bachmann good.

And of course, we wish Sarah Palin and her family a merry Christmas. We know they will be looking at the biggest decision their family has ever had to make going into the new year. We pray that their prayers are answered and that they are given the Divine inspiration that they will need in order to make a decision that will best serve our country. And should Sarah decide to run, we need to not only pledge ourselves to the cause, we must also convince others that if we all stand together, united, that we can break the deadly grip that liberalism and progressivism has on our country.

I’m just beginning to make a Christmas list which won’t be turned in until next year. It’s a tall order, but one that miracles on 34th Street are made of. Someday we will prove that what we are saying is right.

There was a time when the tax system and monetary policy of our country allowed for wealth to flow as production was incentivized and incomes rose in proportion to one’s contribution to the economic engine’s growth. It was a long time ago when Ronald Reagan stood beneath a refurbished Statue of Liberty to celebrate our nation’s independence during a time of great abundance.

It’s time to refurbish again so that Sarah Palin can stand in the restored honor of a great nation and celebrate a phoenix’s rise from the ashes.

Merry Christmas and God bless you all.

Friday, December 24, 2010

Twas the night before Christmas, when all through Wasilla

Twas the night before Christmas, when all through Wasilla
Not a creature stirred, not even Fedzilla
The stockings were hung by the bear rug with care,
In hopes that St Nicholas soon would be there.

The children were nestled all snug in their beds,
While dreams of exceptionalism danced in their heads.
And mamma at her laptop, and Todd in his cap,
Reading some Huffpo before yelling out “crap!”

When out on the lawn there arose such a clatter,
She sprang from her seat to see what was the matter.
Away to the window she flew like she’d done,
Tore open the shutters and loaded the gun.

The moon on the breast of the new-fallen snow
Gave the lustre of mid-day to objects below.
When, what to their wondering eyes should appear,
But a gaggle of press, “are you running next year?”

There was McGinness, Sullivan, Katie and more
Markos, Arianna and the usual draw
More rapid than vultures and cursers they came,
And Todd whistled, and shouted, and called them by name!

"Now Mudflats! now, Homer! now, Diva and Griffin!
On, Norah! On, Ed Schulz! on Maureen and Mika!
To the top of the porch! to the top of the wall!
Now dash away! Dash away! Dash away all!"

As dry leaves that before the wild hurricane fly,
When they meet with an obstacle, mount to the sky.
So up to the house-top more troopers they flew,
Santa’s sleigh full of supporters, and Barbarians too.

And then, in a twinkling, they heard on the roof
Ted Nugent set his shotgun as he appeared with a poof.
It said “Fox” on the sled, just as we turned around
Down the chimney Sean Hannity came with a bound.

He had Beck and Levin, and Laura and Michelle,
"It’s time to send these animals straight back to hell."
The tweeters for Palin had come with their twibe,
Tammy and Jedediah would all soon arrive.

Her eyes-how they twinkled! Todd’s smile how merry!
This year was their year for liberals to bury!
The poor talk show hosts, poor Rachel and Keith
Were no match for ratings compared to Chuck Heath.

The Establishment shuttered seeing this scene.
They could do nothing to get Sarah off the TV screen.
Bristol was dancing and Sarah was camping
Oh, my, we all asked why all the foot stamping?

We were laughing and glad, because we have her back.
Santa knew all was good as he hoisted his sack.
A wink of her eye and a nod of his head,
Soon gave us to know we had nothing to dread.

She spoke not a word, but went straight to her chair,
To Facebook the Democrats to let them know she’s still there.
And laying her thumb on the tip of her nose,
She wiggled her fingers and cheered “our army grows!”

She sprang to her keyboard, the liberals were bitter,
When she posted what Santa said that night on Twitter.
She tweeted his shout out, ‘ere he drove out of sight,
"Happy Christmas Palinistas, to all a good-night!"


Tuesday, December 21, 2010

My Political Observations on a Day When the Moon Was Eclipsed

It was a once in a 372 year event. There was an eclipse of the moon on the winter solstice. In 1980, there was a similar event politically. The Left was repudiated at the polls at the same time the GOP Establishment was; and the grassroots gave us Ronald Reagan. The odds of something like that happening in a political system where socialist-progressives and crony capitalists control the two opposing political parties leaving the rest of us, well, out in the dark are, let's just say, astronomical. But like the eclipse that happened 374 years ago and like the next one that will happen in 2094, it can and will happen again.

The political sun, the Earth and the moon are lining up in a similar way as they did in 1980. The only real variable here is that there are a lot of people that weren't here or who were too young to remember it. So, this time around they get to watch it fresh, just like many of you all did last night with the eclipse.

But I've seen this "eclipse" before. When the political moon is completely darkened by the shadow of an Earth that has wandered into the way of the light, for every action there is a reaction. As the shadow wanes and we begin to see the light shine on the half moon again, we are reminded that there is still darkness that must have to go before the full moon shines brightly again.

In that remaining sliver of darkness, we have liberals who become unhinged at the prospects of a 1980 remake and we have Establishment types who prefer not to read the lips of their own leaders (especially when it comes to placating Democrats). Just look at how they are voting on things like DADT and START. Look how some of them react to Sarah Palin.

Observe Ron Devito's experience whenever the "Sarah Palin idiot-ometer" was used on the night he attended Adrienne Ross's appearance on Sistah Talk.
Finally, the show went live. Almost immediately upon the utterance of the words “Sarah” and “Palin,” the anger and hatred began boiling up in Penwah, who was seated at the left-most side of the table. She started screaming that Adrienne was “ignorant,” “had been played,” “had not gotten off the plantation,” and “This is what is teaching our kids? God help them.” Adrienne took it all in stride like a professional.
Now observe Devito's experience with someone who is supposedly on our side.
After the show, my wife and I went to a party that my lawyer had invited us to. He was a delegate on the floor of the 2008 RNC convention and saw Gov. Palin’s speech live. At the party, he introduced me to someone who he thought would be a good supporter of Gov. Palin’s. Those who know me, know that my wife is rather liberal. When she expressed her view, this man literally exploded. “Obama, Clinton, all of them should be hung [sic]!” “I don’t know how you could be married to her! I’d have killed and buried her by now,” he said about my wife. About the illegal immigrants, he said, “send them all home in body bags!” About Gov. Palin, he said, “if she gets nominated, we have another four years of Obama.” So much for that “good supporter of Gov. Palin” idea….

So, how could I stay married to my wife whose politics are diametrically opposed to mine? Simple. Love transcends politics. I’ve been with women whose politics were the same as mine. And, I’ve been married for 14 years (this December 23).

The African-American raging woman that was Penwah and the Caucasian raging “Tea Partier” that was this unnamed man to me were the same person in spirit. Their hate and their extremism brought them to the same place. Hate is hate. Indeed, I remember one of my teachers telling me that extreme rightism and extreme leftism are curves on the circle that both lead to tyranny and dictatorship.
Palin Derangement Syndrome is Palin Derangement Syndrome. It is a mental Napolean complex in people who fear that their inadequacies are exposed by those who have accomplished more than they have.

This is not about right versus left. This is about positive versus negative. It is about courage versus fear.

For example, those who criticized Palin for supporting candidates that lost to the Establishment, check out Palin's Vindication (h/t Texas For Sarah Palin):
Well, guess who just voted with the House of Representatives' lame-duck Democratic majority to ignore military concerns and repeal "don't ask, don't tell"? "Republican" Mike Castle did.

Guess who just voted for the Dream Act, which would have granted amnesty and instant eligibility for welfare and government education benefits to millions of illegal aliens, costing the taxpayers tens of billions of dollars? "Republican" Mike Castle did.


Palin this year saw to it that Tea Party-backed Joe Miller wrenched the Republican Senate nomination away from Murkowski, whose corrupt father was ousted from the governor's mansion by Palin in 2006.

Liberal voters helped Murkowski win a write-in campaign against GOP nominee Miller in the general election. But Miller clearly would have voted against the Dream Act, the "don't ask" repeal and New START — while likely voting for a tax-cut extension deal.

Then there's the much-derided Sharron Angle, GOP Senate nominee for Nevada this year and another Tea Party citizen-politician endorsed by Palin. So hated was she that an ABC-TV host repeatedly used a profanity on-air to describe the gaffe-prone Angle.

But whatever the former teacher and state assemblywoman's flaws, a win over her opponent, Harry Reid, who will continue as Senate majority leader next year, might have stopped him from joining with soon-to-be ex-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to enact a radical postelection, lame-duck agenda.

The lesson: When Mama Grizzly roars, maybe the Beltway know-it-alls should listen.
We simply cannot let the Establishment get their way again in 2012. The painful truth for those that don't understand it is that Palin is the way. We can all sit here and gripe about Obama and socialism. We can all sit here and worry about picking a candidate that can win. But the fact of the matter is it is not a candidate's future at stake here, it's ours.

If the Establishment chooses the GOP nominee or if the people don't back their words with action, the idea that tables need to be flipped and that business as usual in Washington has to stop will not come to its fruition. Heed these words and remember what Ronald Reagan said about the thousand years of darkness. We almost slipped into those thousand years in 2008. Let's hope the "trembling tigers" who fear Palin's "electability" wake up and at least hold their noses and jump in the pool. The strong ones, the Palinistas, will make sure nothing bad happens to them if hey are wiling to take the plunge. But if people on our side want to become members of the same idiocracy that gave us Obama as an unintended consequence of RINOism, it's not going to work. It will be 2008 all over again and all this work will have been for naught.

We know we will never convince the kool aid drinking Obot liberals to support Sarah Palin. But we need to convince the people on the Republican side. With all of us behind her, she is not only electable, she is unstoppable.

Thursday, December 16, 2010

Ronald Reagan Won in 1980 Because the People Didn't Like Jimmy Carter

Oh, there goes that ReaganTMan again. Ronald Reagan is God. Ronald Reagan could do no wrong. Ronald Reagan was the greatest president ever. So on and so on, this blogger hears it. But the fact of the matter is, all bias aside, Ronald Reagan was not elected in 1980 because he was the great mythical figure we know him as now. Ronald Reagan was hated by the left and gave Rebublican Party insiders and elites "agida." And, he wasn't exactly portrayed with glowing colors by the media either. Reagan won in 1980 because the people didn't like Jimmy Carter.

During an era without internet and the 24 hour news cycle, it would take Ronald Reagan longer than it would have today to win over the American people and secure their vote. People remember the landslide win in 1980, but no one remembers how the "Jimmy Carter" effect propelled him into office. Americans were disillusioned with Jimmy Carter. With less than two weeks until the election, Carter still held a slight lead in the polls as many fence sitters wavered and fretted over the idea of electing  a B movie actor with no real academic background to replace him.

Liberals thought there was no way he'd get elected. The Republican Establishment thought the party nominated the wrong guy and that this mistake would put Carter back in for another 4 years. But the American people thought otherwise and it was their vote that eventually counted the most.

Eventually, the people decided that they could not take 4 more years of Carter. When push came to shove, the "unelectable" conservative extremist who acted in a critically mocked movie with a monkey was elected president by a reluctant public which was more interested in freeing itself from the Carter malaise than chasing some hokey dream about a shining city.

When Ronald Reagan said "there you go again" during the final debate in 1980, he didn't convert the naysayers into Reaganites. However, he did give them some level of hope that maybe, just maybe, this crazy guy was at least capable of handling himself in front of a camera without the need for a sweater and a fire. Replacing the baseball player who had every ball go through his legs with someone who would have it hit off his body instead didn't necessarily insure that you'd get the out, but at least he was a better player than the other guy, if at all by not that much in the minds of many.

Jedediah Bila wrote:
His common-sense approach irked many ivory-tower academics. Plenty of GOP establishment big shots feared he would play by his own rules rather than theirs. Stuck-up elitists weren’t often amused by his jokes or the gift he had of looking into a camera and talking straight to the American people. And there was something so real about him -- something relatable -- that distinguished him from many politicians who were trying so hard to create an image of themselves they thought the public would like.
In defiance of conventional wisdom, Reagan didn't stick his finger into the wind and decide what positions to take. He stood firm on a platform of strong national defense and limited government.

Fast forward to today where much of the dialogue is like watching a remake of a 1978 classic "Is he electable?" Only this time, the lead role is played by a woman from Alaska who fired up the Republican base in much the same way that Reagan did in 1976 - some would argue like he did in 1964.

Today, a Fox News poll came out that doesn't bode well for President Obama.
About a third of voters -- 35 percent -- think Obama deserves to be re-elected. A slim 53 percent majority says the country would be better off with someone else.

Half of independents and one in five Democrats think the country would be better off with someone else as president.
The media and the punditry will waste its time, like they did in the late 1970's, wondering if "she's electable." But will you ever hear them ask if the Obama effect could put Sarah Palin into the White House the same way that the Carter effect put Reagan in? If  the 53 percent majority that says the country would be better off with someone else, does it matter who that someone else is?

Half the independents are up for grabs. 53 percent of the country says we'd be better off with someone else. Sarah Palin is in a good position to win the GOP nomination. Polls show her doing well in Iowa, South Carolina and Ohio. Should she get the nomination, those who are stuck between a rock and a hard place are going to have to make a decision. And that decision will have to be for the "someone else."

Informal polling (me talking to friends who talk to friends) always turns up "I like her but I think her negatives are going to hurt her." If all the people who say they like her but think her negatives are going to hurt her, she'd win. Because, other than liberals who will never vote for her, the doubters always base their doubt on their perception of what other people think about her. That perception has been mostly formulated by the mainstream media.

When meteorologists use climate data to predict the actions of pending storm, they compare the scenario to past scenarios for similar storms. Put the blocking high pressure over Greenland, run a cold front through the deep south and have a wave of energy move out of the midwest into the Gulf of Mexico and the ingredients are there, based on history, for a storm to run up the east coast. Will it snow from Richmond to Bangor? The models don't give you a lock on it, but probably it will snow. Yet, there are always those that say, ah it'll never happen. The next day, they find themselves shovelling their driveways.

The weather pattern is almost exact to the tee for Palin as it was for Reagan. We have a Carteresque president. We have a disgruntled public. We have a GOP Establishment looking to cash on this for, well, cash. And then you have everyone wondering, questioning and doubting whether Sarah Palin can win. Okay, guys, talk amongst yourselves. I'm looking at the computer guidance and it shows a storm on the National Mall in January 2013.

The Reagan supporters were staunch and deep, as are the Palin supporters. Reagan supporters gave him the base and the strength from which to run, as do the Palin supporters do for Sarah. But in the end, it was the people who voted for "anybody but Carter" that put Reagan over the top. The same will hold true for Palin who will win the presidency because of the "anybody but Obama" vote.

Wednesday, December 15, 2010

Most Ridiculous Items of the Day

Allow me to serve it up smorgasbord style rather than having to write several columns on numerous topics. To quote the late great Archie Bunker: “geez, Edith, the woild’s going to hell in a handbasket. We may want to call this one the from bailouts to pork bills to traitors and back edition.

The Irish Parliament just approved an 85 billion euro bailout from the European Union. What are they, California? This whole New World Order thing is starting to look like an international ponzi scheme. If we keep bailing each other out, who’s going to have the money to pay each other back?

The fiscal irresponsibility is happening not just overseas, but here at home as well. How did we allow what could have been a pretty good tax deal to deteriorate into another big government stimulus plan? How on Earth did we figure out how to take “it is hereby affirmed that the Bush tax cuts are extended for two years and the unemployment benefits are extended to 99 weeks” and turn that into nearly 2,000 pages? You need a Christmas tree twice the size of the one on the national mall just to hang all the earmark ornaments.

Isn’t it lovely that Michael Moore bailed out Julian Assange and then went on Countdown with Keith Olbermann to defend the accused sex offender and international intelligence terrorist. They talk about Assange like he is some whistleblower who is shedding light onto the dark secrets of our oh so morally bad foreign policy. Uh, guys. It’s called national defense.

But here’s the kicker. For decades, George Soros and the Michael Moore’s of the world have been working the underbelly of our institutions to implement the New World Order and to tear at the fabric of American sovereignty. This all goes on in secret of course. Private communications and clandestine tactics are not new to lefties like Soros and his paid minions who work diligently under the surface to undermine the American culture and its institutions.

(Read More About Soros tactics here: Soros Operation Comes After Ken Cuccinelli and Mark Levin )

These people are traitors. If we ever get our own version of a Wikileaker, it would be great if they could uncover “cables” or communications that show how millions of dollars in dirty left wing money goes to bloggers and companies that subliminally as well as openly continue to plant the seeds of New World Order progressivism into the minds of the unknowing. Oh how sweet it would be to uncover their dark little secrets and plaster them all over the New York Times.

And for those of you who think that Sarah Palin is not the best hope America has had since Ronald Reagan because you believe the media, keep thinking that way and they win. These scoundrels of international progressivism and American liberalism (and their complicit media) will never be stopped until we unite together and crush them. Do you think they are not united? They are so tightly knit that if they were a sweater, you’d need wire cutters to get it off.

And us? What are we doing? We’re bickering over whether Michael Steele should be the RNC chairman. We’re arguing over whether “she is qualified or not.” Let's hope we haven't spent the last two years attending tea parties and town halls just to turn it back over to the RINO GOP Establishment in 2012 because of party infighting and because we let the Left dictate the narrative.

Guys, get your act together. Stand tall and stand proud as conservatives.

Blogger's Note: Check out my BlogTalk Radio Show tonight. We will be discussing topics mentioned in these posts:

Policy Wonk Palin Lays Out Her Substantial Ideas

Governor Palin on the Issues: Entitlement Programs
 by Whitney Pitcher of Conservatives For Palin

HubPages: A hockey mom from Wasilla beats back the darkness

Soros Operation Comes After Ken Cuccinelli and Mark Levin

"Think Progress is a George Soros operation connected to John Podesta’s Center for American Progress," according to infowars.com. They wasted no time in complaining about the ruling against Obamacare by a Federal Judge in Virginia by marginalizing Mark Levin - claiming (try not to laugh too hard) that the right wing has stacked the court and that the mainstream media has not covered Cucinnelli's use of conservative media to advance opposition to the the health care law.

Think Progress writer and Soros surrogate George Zornick complained that Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli is beneffiting from "an aggressive public relations campaign to provide political cover for their radical effort to overturn a popular bill." It's so popular that 60% of likely voters at least somewhat favor repeal of the health care law while 34% are opposed according to the latest Rasmussen poll. Other polls also trump the outlier USA Today poll cited in the hypocritical and intellectually dishonest piece.

It's ironic that with widespread accusations of AstroTurfing against George Soros that Zornick would finish his piece with this laughable point:
A crucial part of Cuccinelli’s war on health care reform is clearly the public relations push; the New York Times reported yesterday that “[w]ithin hours of the judge’s decision on Monday, [Cuccinelli's] political Web site was advertising on the conservative drudgereport.com and other Web sites.” Unfortunately, Cuccinelli has relied on poisonous, dishonest media figures like Mark Levin to help make his argument — a fact rarely mentioned in the mainstream media coverage.
Apparently, Levin hit the nest by having Cuccinelli on his show. That's the best way one could interpret the attack on him as a "poisonous, dishonest media" figure and "extreme hate radio host." The Soros people see their tactics being turned effectively against them. And they don't like it. Cuccinelli and Levin need to pat themselves on the back for controlling the Left's game by being smarter, faster and more savvy than the master of puppets and his team of paid surrogates.

Monday, December 13, 2010

Finding America's Way Back Through the Dark Night

Remember two years ago and how desperate it looked? Okay, conservatives. Get ready for the next two years. It's getting better.

A hockey mom from Wasilla beats back the darkness
Palin Can Now Shoot Down the Media Instantly

Brit Hume completely missed the Palin influence on the conservative movement in his disappointing final piece of an otherwise well done series where the first five episodes were very informative. The movement is much stronger than he portrayed it as he ended the series. It's time to show America what we're made of.

Saturday, December 11, 2010

How a Potentially Good Deal Went Bad

Initially, when word of the tax deal reached between the Obama administration and Congressional Republicans came down people were happy that we would get the tax cuts extended for all and that the unemployment benefits would be extended as well. Then we started looking more closely at the deal. Alarm bells went off when Senator Jim Demint questioned it, Sarah Palin questioned it, Rush Limbaugh questioned it, Charles Krauthammer questioned it and then the conservative punditry and blogosphere questioned it. What happened?

What usually happens: Congress turned it into a Christmas tree and started loading earmarks onto the bill. And, the Republicans missed an opportunity to demand that the Obama administration agree to fund the unemployment benefits out of the existing stimulus money or cut spending somewhere else to fund it.

Why the problem with using the stimulus funds? Well, that's Obama's slush fund to grease the unions and the civil service just in time for his 2012 reelection bid. If you remember, some of the stimulus funds were set aside for "projects" in 2011 and 2012. Without those "projects," Obama runs out of money and is forced to borrow again. If he does that, the 2012 GOP presidential nominee can heap buckets of criticism on him as a deficit spender who is in bed with special interests.

Obama is obviously over his head. He thinks that the stimulus money is going to help the economy enough to get him reelected. Of course, he's deluded. So why not use the money for extending unemployment? And worst of all, if this guy is in so over his head and so deluded, why don't the Republicans strike now while the iron is hot and the election results are fresh in everyone's mind?

Republicans can't be unreasonable and nitpick this thing to death. But they should fight a lot harder to get tax cuts extended straight up and then work out how to fund extending unemployment benefits without hitting the country's near limit credit card again. Ethanol and other earmarks should left out.

Friday, December 10, 2010

Policy Wonk Palin Lays Out Her Substantial Ideas

The woman who the left and even some GOP Establishment types called a lightweight and not substantive on policy is giving us some pretty good insight into specifics about her policy positions.

Forget the garbage you read in the mainstream media and look for yourself. Sarah Palin has been rolling out extremely insightful policy positions since leaving the governorship in Alaska. Watch how this prospective 2012 presidential candidate communicates her ideas through her own writing and in interviews she has been giving to non-Fox related outlets. You are seeing the unveiling of the plan for what she would do if elected president in 2012.

Palin is formulating, much in the way Reagan did, key policy issues that she would be focusing on as president. According to  TIME's Jay Newton-Small:
Asked via e-mail what she would do if elected, Palin carefully says the first priority "of the next Republican President" should be "to sign a bill for the repeal and replacement of Obamacare with true free-market, patient-centered reform." Obamacare's repeal, she adds, "would help to cut future deficits. It would also send a strong signal to America's workers and employers that government is back on their side and is no longer seeking to impose its one-size-fits-all 'solutions' from above." Palin says she would "also look for entitlement reform, as well as a systemwide audit of government spending with a goal to move us toward zero-based budgeting practices and, ultimately, a balanced budget. We need to start really living within our means. As any mother or father will tell you, don't spend what you don't have."
And Reagan isn't the only one spoke about reawakening America's industrial Giant. Palin has the plan for reviving our economy. We don't need to print money. It's in the ground in our untapped oil and gas reserves, in our mines and in the capitalistic ingenuity that non-government steered green technology may hold for our future. In her National Review Article "Drill" Palin wrote:
Building an energy-independent Amer­ica will mean a real economic stimulus. It will mean American jobs that can never be shipped overseas. Think about how much of our trade deficit is fueled by the oil we import — sometimes as much as half of the total. Through this massive transfer of wealth, we lose hundreds of billions of dollars a year that could be invested in our economy. Instead it goes to foreign countries, including some repressive regimes that use it to fund activities that threaten our security.
Palin continued unveiling more policy today in the Wall Street Journal where she addressed the tax code and entitlements in a pretty convincing way.
The Roadmap would also replace our high and anticompetitive corporate income tax with a business consumption tax of just 8.5%. The overall tax burden would be limited to 19% of GDP (compared to 21% under the deficit commission's proposals). Beyond that, Rep. Ryan proposes fundamental reform of Medicare for those under 55 by turning the current benefit into a voucher with which people can purchase their own care.

On Social Security, as with Medicare, the Roadmap honors our commitments to those who are already receiving benefits by guaranteeing all existing rights to people over the age of 55. Those below that age are offered a choice: They can remain in the traditional government-run system or direct a portion of their payroll taxes to personal accounts, owned by them, managed by the Social Security Administration and guaranteed by the federal government. Under the Roadmap's proposals, they can pass these savings onto their heirs. The current Medicaid system, the majority of which is paid for by the federal government but administered by the states, would be replaced by a block-grant system that would reward economizing states.

Together these reforms help to secure our entitlement programs for the 21st century. According to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the Roadmap would lead to lower deficits and a much lower federal debt. The CBO estimates that under current spending plans, our federal debt would rise to 87% of GDP by 2020, to 223% by 2040, and to 433% by 2060. Under Rep. Ryan's Roadmap, the CBO estimates that debt would rise much more slowly, peaking at 99% in 2040 and then dropping back to 77% by 2060.
She is planning trips overseas to build up her foreign policy credentials. She spoke in Hong Kong about a year ago. She will be going to Haiti this weekend. And, she has plans to visit the UK and Israel in the coming year. She is Reaganesque in her foreign policy. She believes in a strong military, not coddling adversaries ("we win, you lose") and working with allies toward crafting good international agreements. She has recently criticized the START Treaty.

Since 2008, Palin has been a naturally intelligent and evolving candidate who carefully studies the issues. These traits are not new to her. She has given her intellectual time to issues confronting Alaska while governor. Although criticized for being shaky on foreign policy issues when selected as McCain's running mate, the fact of the matter is Palin could have explained in mind numbing detail ACES or the TransContinental AGIA natural gas pipeline because that's what she was doing at the time. And because she was nose deep into those issues, it's understandable that she would not have been reading volumes on the Bush Doctrine on Alaska state time.

Because the media has created such a picture of Palin that is so out of touch with reality, it may sound funny when some see this writer describe her as a policy wonk. But she is; and therein lies their "misunderestimation" of her.

Wednesday, December 8, 2010

Did You See What Mark Dent Posted On the Anchorage Daily News?

Yeah, I want everyone to see this piece of crap.

I have no problem linking to a hit piece on Sarah Palin because I know if people see the negativity and see the crap, good people will be repulsed by it. Those who feed into it, find another planet. You're not welcome here.

Every good hearted and good minded person in America should read this piece of toilet paper because people need to know how low scum really is. You will never get people to understand the truth unless you show them the ugly side. This is the ugly side.

Come on Palin army. Let's show these a-holes at the ADN what we think about them.

This is war. What these cookie eating kool aid drinking pieces of trash need is a good rhetorical ass kicking.

Monday, December 6, 2010

The Last Time Christine O'Donnell Checked, America Was About Free Enterprise

She's had her ups and downs. She's been a political pundit, a PR relations consultant and a political candidate. She has had financial trouble and she's managed to keep herself afloat. So now the critics are complaining that she's able to write a book and she's getting offers that she would never have gotten had she not become so "notoriously" well know. If we could all be so lucky.

For those who sit around on the couch and criticize their political villains without having their tax records scoured, their sex lives put in tabloids or their motives questioned, the prospect of Christine O'Donnell making money as a result of her Senate run is simply unacceptable. How dare she cash in on losing an election? How dare she do what every one of us trying so hard to do: make money.

This is supposed to be a free enterprise country. People struggle for years, decades in O'Donnell's case, before they break the seal and start seeing some real income. But, breaking that seal doesn't come from whining, criticizing or begrudging others their own. It comes from hard work. It comes from going after it day after day, week after week, month after month and year after year. There are sacrifices that have to be made.

It's called perserverence. It's a success principle.

Christine O'Donnell put her name and reputation on the line. She was scrutinized by the press and by her political opponents. She was smeared and she was criticized. Paying your rent? A few hundred dollars. Filing with the Federal Elections Commission? A few more hundred dollars. Finally getting paid for putting up with the bull&%*t? Priceless.

Do you know what Christine O'Donnell went through to get Sarah Palin's endorsement? She wrote her. She asked surrogates to help her. She called her PAC. She publicly asked for it. Then she got in her car and drove to the Restoring Honor rally in DC and pulled every string she could until she could get to see Palin face to face. They talked. Palin went home and slept on it. Then it came. Her endorsement helped her win the Delaware GOP senatorial primary.


Christine O'Donnell spent long days campaigning for months. She couldn't take clients in her consulting business because she was running. That was income she could have made without having her name dragged through the mud. But, O'Donnell had a bigger vision. Yes, the visibility she gained because of her run for Senate will help her make more money than she would have otherwise.

And good for her.

In my America, opportunity rules and it trumps whining.

Palin Derangement Syndrome is a Medical Condition

Palin Derangement Syndrome (PDS) is a serious physiological and psychological disease that strikes those with a predisposition toward idiocy or negativity. It also strikes those with low self esteem who put others down so as to compensate for their own personal inadequacies.

Its symptoms include diarrhea of the mouth, magnified personal misery, loss of bowel and bladder control and vomiting green (like in the movie "The Exorcist”). In extreme cases, the head may spin.

People who have "electile dysfunction" are especially prone.

If symptoms last more than four hours, seek immediate medical help as this could be signs of a more serious medical condition. PDS is easily diagnosed by subjecting the patient to Sarah Palin's name and observing their response.

A sampling of the numerous cases that have been diagnosed:

Palin Derangement Syndrome: Case #860,749
Palin Derangement Syndrome: It's The New Yorker's time of the month
A PDS moment – brought to you by the Joy Behar Show
Video – Sarah Palin, Vanity Fair, and Keith Olbermann’s Worse Person?

Sunday, December 5, 2010

Keeping Bush Tax Cuts Doesn't Raise Deficit

President Obama today complained that the middle class tax cuts should have passed the Senate after the House voted to pass a bill to extend the Bush tax cuts to only those making under $250,000 a year by incorrectly citing a non-existent increase to the budget deficit as his argument. Then the President said he would veto any tax bill unless an extension of unemployment benefits was passed as Democrats downplayed real effects that would have on the deficit.

"'Those provisions should have passed,' Obama told reporters," according to Reuters. "I continue to believe that it makes no sense to hold tax cuts for the middle class hostage to permanent tax cuts for the wealthiest 2 percent of Americans -- especially when those high-income tax cuts would cost an additional $700 billion that we don't have and would add to our deficit."

"In conversations with Majority Leader Harry Reid and Speaker Nancy Pelosi today, President Obama threatened to veto a compromise deal on the Bush Tax cuts if an unemployment extension was not included," according to Fox News.

Congress is trying to find ways to fund an unemployment benefits extension. Republicans are on record as favoring the extension in benefits as long as that extension doesn't raise the deficit.

According to the Huffington Post:
Republicans and conservative Democrats have opposed reauthorizing the benefits without offsetting their deficit impact by cutting spending from elsewhere in the budget. But those same lawmakers have not insisted that tax cuts for the rich, estimated to cost nearly $700 billion over 10 years, be offset in any way. A yearlong reauthorization of unemployment benefits would cost roughly $60 billion.
What the search engines, the Huffington Post, Democrats and the President don't tell you is that there is no real increase to the deficit if we extend the Bush tax cuts. The deficit doesn't go up if the Bush tax cuts are left in place. Assuming with liberals that the hit to the economy and small businesses doesn't affect the numbers, raising taxes on those making over $250,000 would cause the deficit to go down by $700 billion over ten years. If they extend the tax cuts, nothing happens to the deficit.

It's already the private sector's money and they are just trying to dig their hands into it. It's funny how the Democrats only become deficit hawks when they want to put their hands into your pockets. But notice how they relax about deficit spending when an entitlement is needed.

Extending unemployment benefits would cause a real increase in the deficit of $60 billion over one year unless they are paid for, as Republicans want, out of the stimulus. It's deficit neutral to keep the tax cuts and pay for unemployment out of the stimulus. That would be the way to get it done. Then everyone could go home.

Wednesday, December 1, 2010

It's Simply Common Sense

-from my Townhall blog

There are some serious changes that need to be applied to the way our government works. We have gotten into the mess we’re in because we have allowed a socialist progressive agenda to weave its way into the fabric of our political structure and its institutions. Now that many are putting forth commonsense Constitutional solutions, those who fight to keep the status quo are demeaning those on the right as being shallow, backwards or out of touch. Yet, the things that are being put forth really are what they are at face value. The ideas are simple, but based on time tested truths and economic theory.

If anyone has been watching Brit Hume’s series, The Right, All Along: The Rise, Fall & Future of Conservatism on Fox News Channel on Sundays at 9pm and 12 midnight ET, you are getting an education in the history of the conservative movement in America. During the 1900’s communists and progressives infiltrated our government disguising themselves as classical liberals. They worked toward creating a hybrid system whereby government would ultimately be the rule maker because, in their eyes, the government had to look out for the people.

During the industrial revolution as the waves of immigrants who came here in the early and mid 1900’s, workers were becoming more and more concerned about exploitation, harsh working conditions and unfair pay. Unionization began as a response to business owners and corporations who put their bottom line ahead of safety, fair wages and the well-being of their workers.

The Left played on this sentiment, and as they always have, used the emotional argument that since people were being wronged, the government would have to step in and insure that there was social justice. Good people who were not affiliated with the progressive movement saw this and simply went along thinking it was the right thing to do. Who wouldn’t want the government to protect people from wrongdoing if they weren’t aware of a hidden agenda?

But the conservative movement saw how these sentiments were being usurped by communists, socialists and progressives whose real agendas went far beyond that of just looking out for the worker or the consumer. Many today demean conservatives as backwoods simpletons who cling to guns and religion. But the fact is, conservatism is an intellectual movement conducted by those who are seen as non-traditionally intellectual. Conservatism has been able to go a level deeper in order to get to the real nature of man only to discover that it is the left’s complication of things that needs to be undone with an even greater amount of intellectual thought and tact.

The policies that need to be carried out to save our country are truly simple. It’s the articulation of these policies and the education of masses of people who need to understand why conservatives are in such a state of urgency that requires the real brain power here. All of this groundwork must be done if these policies are ever to be implemented.

When a potential political candidate does a reality television show or has her daughter dance in a nationally televised contest, the gravitas lies in the why one would use these methods to capture the attention of a public that lives in an American Idol society and which is fed conflicting political information 24-7. By capturing the attention of non-political junkies and those who don’t follow this stuff like we do, the conservative movement can get their consent and understanding when, in the past, they've usually left these areas of communication wide open to liberals uncontested.

It’s not that the American people are stupid. It’s just that they are busy working and raising their families. They merely want to sit down for an hour or two and get away from things. But it is during that time that the liberals have been able to infiltrate their minds by monopolizing the pop culture. This is now changing. That change is necessary if the conservative movement is ever going to get its message through.

In their studies, conservatives like William F. Buckley, Ayn Rand, Barry Goldwater, Russell Kirk and Ronald Reagan saw that many of the things that the government was trying to do to correct the so called wrongs or ills of the society were actually harming the very people they were seeking to help. The private sector economy thrived long before the imposition of government regulations, the progressive tax structure and unionization. Suddenly, millions of people were subjected to the heavy hand of a government that was supposed to be there to help them.

People will argue that if the government didn’t step in and allow unions to form and set up agencies like OSHA and others specific to certain industries so as to regulate what could and could not take place in the workplace or in their relationships with the consumer, that businesses would continue to exploit their workers and line their pockets off the sweat of their brows and by ripping off the consumer.

But the government overstepped its Constitutional boundaries and got into the business of micro-managing industries and corporations. Instead of passing commonsense laws that could be enforced through our court system, they created government bureaucracies and began telling businesses how to run as opposed to how not to run. You can see the results of the Leftist infiltration today in the burdensome regulations that force people to forego going into business and the fact that our government now owns car companies, banks and mortgage companies along with traditionally government owned entities like railroads and the postal service.

This massive intrusion into the private sector has been accompanied by a crony capitalism whereby those who are on the right (or should I say left) side of unions, industries that look to capitalize on fears of global warming, research and development companies that are more about social engineering than they are about capitalistic innovation, food production and airport scanner companies can benefit more from a cozy relationship with lobbyists and the government than they can by actually selling their products in a real free market.

The collapse of the carbon credit trading industry is an example of how Leftists, in advance of what they thought would be cap and trade legislation, began to set up infrastructures for companies that would profit off the sales of these carbon credits. These so called “capitalistic ventures” could not survive without the government creating a false market. So when the global warming science was debunked and cap and trade died out as a result, these so called “capitalists” could not survive having not been conditioned in a truly free market. Their business models were dependent on the government forcing people to do something against their will.

But they had a back-up plan. The Food Safety bill will all but eliminate our ability to grow our own food without governmental restrictions down to the very seed a farmer plants. People who sell products that are in compliance with this law have been preparing in much the same way carbon trading companies have. Traditional food production companies and particularly small farmers that don’t comply with this law are not losers in the free market, they are losers chosen by government which once again has stuck its ugly head into the only system man has ever know that can most equitably distribute goods and services.

True innovation in the energy sector is bottled up by EPA regulations and moratoriums on drilling and energy production. The financial industry is now being micro-managed in such a way that capital is harder to get. Yet, it is being micro-managed by the same government that gave us the housing market and home mortgage crash. It is as if the government is holding back the horse while pushing the mule.

Lenders should be given more leeway in how they extend credit and what risks they are willing to take, not less. This should be accompanied by a warning label that says “participate in the free market system at your own risk: if you don’t succeed, don’t ask for a bailout. “ The caveat to that, of course, is that if businesses walk the wire more carefully knowing there is no safety net, they will be run more efficiently which will cause capital to be better spent and greater returns on investment will be less likely eaten up by government bureaucracy.

The government’s only role in the free enterprise system should be to moderate disputes in civil court and to make sure people aren’t committing fraud. You don’t need layers of bureaucracy to stop fraud. You simply need an attorney general and clear concise law. Don’t mistake this conservative’s view that we don’t need regulation as meaning we don’t need oversight. Regulation is rule of man. Oversight is rule of law.

Unleashing the industrial giant in America is going to take one simple idea. It’s so simple that whenever people put it forth, they are criticized for not being substantial or for not delving into the minutiae of policy. What the elites fail to understand is that the deepest policy fact of a simple slogan like drill, baby, drill is just that: drill. The rest of what will happen comes later. That’s the good part.

Manufacturing and resource development along with changing the tax code are the obvious commonsense keys to what it will take to awaken this country’s economic engine. Not only will our national security interests be well served by developing more sources of energy here at home, but collateral businesses will develop. You will need to build and maintain machinery to do oil and gas exploration. You will need to have the construction industry reawakened so they can build homes for the workers who will have to live near these projects. Collaterally, the service and financial sectors will grow way faster from this real type of activity than it could ever hope to do so under a redistributive stimulus program based on after tax dollars. Food stores, restaurants, delis and so on will open to cater to everything from a worker getting a cup of coffee in the morning to employing electricians, plumbers and landscapers to help with home projects.

The answer to solving the deficit lies in our resources. We are sitting on trillions of dollars in wealth that can be generated from this type of an undertaking. By reawakening the industrial giant, we can create the type of money flow that brought prosperity to us in the 1980’s. Only this time, we can learn from the government spending side as well. Revenues doubled under Ronald Reagan, but spending tripled. This was a waste bi-product of a materialistic society that thought the party would never end combined with a Democratic Congress that Reagan had no choice but to bargain with in order to get his economic packages through.

If the Tea Party achieves its objectives, we could continue to fill the halls of Congress with deficit spending cutting hawks and reunite them with supply side economic experts just in time to have a true conservative elected president in 2012. To that end, I see no one other than Sarah Palin who can motivate the country to take the measures needed to achieve this and the kind of policy that must be enacted in order to save this country from insolvency, loss of status in the world and the type of decline we are witnessing in European socialist style democracies.

The real engine that will drive this thing will ultimately come from the energy sector. Sarah Palin wrote:
Building an energy-independent Amer­ica will mean a real economic stimulus. It will mean American jobs that can never be shipped overseas. Think about how much of our trade deficit is fueled by the oil we import — sometimes as much as half of the total. Through this massive transfer of wealth, we lose hundreds of billions of dollars a year that could be invested in our economy. Instead it goes to foreign countries, including some repressive regimes that use it to fund activities that threaten our security.
Instead of creating false markets with Cap and Trade or a Food Bill, why not tap into real markets where real money can be generated? Combine this with a revamped tax structure and you have the makings of a financial behemoth the world has yet to see. This will encourage investment instead of the fleeing of capital that we see now.

By instituting a flat tax of 18% on all income over the poverty limit and by implementing a 5% VAT to all non-essential consumer items, the government can light up this industrial monster in ways we have not seen since Reagan dropped the top tax rate from 90% to 29%. Add a private option to social security and medicare and the children of tomorrow could be looking at having at least $200,000 in their accounts by retirement if they simply took $25.00 out of their paychecks every week starting at age 18.

Economists have figured that we have a finite ability to raise revenue regardless of what the tax rates are. When taxes are at a certain low point on the Laffer Curve we can collect the same tax revenue from a larger base as we an when taxes are at a certain high point from a smaller base. Since we look to grow our economy and want to involve more people in the wealth generation process, we obviously would look to find the lowest possible tax rate which would create the largest base possible before we reach diminishing returns.

It makes sense that lowering taxes to a certain point helps the economy grow. And, given that no matter how high (90%) or how low (28%) we tax the rich, we historically have collected no less than 14.4 to 20.9 percent of GDP over the past five decades, averaging 18.2 percent. So, it would make more sense to set a flat tax rate of 18.2%, pass a balanced budget amendment and restrict federal government spending to only the necessities of running the government. Some entitlements, ear marks and regulatory agencies would have to be reviewed and eliminated based on certain guidelines.

A 5% VAT tax would be based on consumption. Thus, more revenue would come into the coffers based on how much we produce and buy. This money could be used to pay down the national debt. Since it will take decades to do that, and since social security and medicare reforms would be working efficiently by then, once the debt was paid off. we could adjust the VAT down and eventually use it as a way to cover gaps in entitlements in a limited capacity.

While clean in theory, the idea of doing away with home mortgage interest and charitable donation deductions is a much harder rock to move in reality. A better way to approach this would be to allow these deductions to come out of the amount of money that is earned up to the poverty level. For example, if the poverty level is $22,050, you could theoretically cap the deductions there whether you made $22,050 or $22 million. In the end, you may end up settling on a flat tax rate of about 20% to make up for this, but still given the fact that with that and the 5% VAT, it would be guaranteed that no more than 25% of every American's income would go to the federal government even as the national debt is paid off. If states controlled their taxation,in a a decade or two, we could live in a country where less than 33% of our income is taken from us by the government.

Some may look at this and think the poor couldn't afford to pay a flat tax. There are adjustments that could be made. On one hand, you want want to give poor and middle income people more skin in the game. On the other you don't want to make it too burdensome. Currently, the rich make all the rules because they pay all the taxes. If you didn't want to be too rigid and still felt a little liberal about it, you could try eliminating taxes on those below the poverty limit and adding a millionaire tax surcharge to make up the difference. It would still be far less progressive than today's tax structure, but you would then have to eliminate deductions for mortgage interest and charitable contributions. Or you could go to a two tax tier structure that still averages out to 18.2% per person and keep the deductions.

By reducing the corporate income tax to the same level as the individual rate, you could ignite an influx of capital into this country that now goes elsewhere into less regulated and less taxed environments. How do you call it social justice when the regulatory environment that liberals love so much chases capital away from us and into markets that have no environmental standards and pay their workers next to nothing?

Corporate payroll tax (the taxes your company pays on their side that you don’t see) could still fund the entitlement portions of medicare and social security as we are weaned off the current versions of them. Safety nets would remain in place of course, and we would still keep our commitments to the people who have paid into the system up until now. Yet, the demands on the corporate side through the taxes they pay for each worker could steadily decline as younger workers opted into private ownership of their retirement vehicles.

Unlike the Health Care mandate, which is a newly created mandate that requires everyone to purchase health insurance from a governmentally damaged system where health insurance companies become nothing but quasi-governmental agencies after complying with all the regulations and are barred from competing in a truly fair marketplace across state lines, the retirement fund mandate would not be a new mandate placed on a severely disrupted and poorly overhauled system. Instead, the mandate already exists where we are required to give the government money out of our earnings so that they can put it into a ponzi scheme that is now running in the red. We would simply change the investment vehicles into which this money would go.

As for the Health Care Law that will destroy 1/7th of our economy, it must be repealed and replaced with a more commonsense private sector approach. This means tort reform and the selling of insurance across state lines. It means devising sensible ways of covering people with pre-existing conditions. And it means devising sensible ways of using the Medicaid system along with a voucher system to help those who truly can’t afford health care coverage.

Unlike the original proposal for health care reform which offered a public option, social security and medicare could offer private options. A smorgasbord of both government and private sector insurance and investment programs could be offered as part of a package that creates a “bubble” or an entity that you would own. The only restriction on this would be that you could not access or borrow against this bubble unless you were disabled or reached the retirement age. The investment portions of this bubble could be passed down to your estate should you die prematurely or still have money in the system having lived out your retirement years. It would go to your estate as any other ordinary income or wealth would. Therefore, future generations could be bolstered by the remains of these new types of “social security” funds.

A traditional safety net system could be maintained out of the employer’s matching portion of what they currently put into social security now. Those retiring without a large bubble or those who could not accumulate a large enough bubble due to disability could still receive the equivalent of what social security recipients would receive under the old system, but the percentage of the population receiving this benefit would be about 20% the size it is now. This would be what the creators of the original social security system had intended to begin with.

If we could convince the people that the government can move from playing the role of social engineer back to the original role that was intended by our Founders – that of the referee – than we can begin the revive and renew America again.

The social services issues that confront our country can still be addressed by state and local governments in partnership with charities and religious organizations where the rules could be set locally, not in Washington.

The idea that the states give the federal government so much money and then it goes back to the states, or even worse is redistributed amongst the states is an appalling, wasteful strategy. Money should go directly to the source. If it is to run the federal government, it should go to the federal government as should money to run state and local governments should.

This would surely take a lot of power out of the federal government’s hands as well. Federal money comes with mandates. Many of the laws as they apply to driving and commerce circumvent the Constitution because they are passed by states that would lose federal funding otherwise. These mandates not only erode our freedoms, but cause money to be passed through too many hands where it is watered down by the time it gets back to us.

This type of federalism will enable each state to run according to the nature of their industries and the will of their people instead of as part of a “one size fits all” federal policy.

In summary, removing the regulatory burdens (that stifles our economic growth and which bars us from tapping into our abundant resources), replacing the progressive income tax structure with flat and fair taxes, reforming social security and medicare, repealing Obamacare, returning the focus of the federal government back to what it is only Constitutionally mandated to do, cutting spending, enacting a balanced budget amendment and returning to the type of federalism envisioned by our Founders whereby the people and the states takes back responsibility for providing services that are not the Constitutional responsibilities of the federal government are simple ideas that elites and naysayers might dismiss as unrealistic or unreasonable. But the fact of the matter is, what they offer now is pure disaster not only in its complexities but in its underlying philosophy which assumes that individuals and states are incapable of acting freely to secure their general welfare.

It is up to conservatives to learn how to effectively communicate the underlying reasons why it is imperative that we adopt these policies as well as to explain how they will benefit our society as a whole. We live in dangerous times. We can dismiss the words of Sarah Palin and conservative thinkers at our own peril or we can embrace them and have faith in God and our abilities as citizens of the greatest and last stand on Earth. We can take our future in both hands and manifest the prosperity and success of a nation that is still at the very beginnings of its adulthood in relation to other nations which have been around for thousands of years or we can go into our next thousand years in darkness.

Total Pageviews