25 posts tagged “sarah palin”
On October 6th I posted Bill Warner’s disdain for Lt. General Stanley McChrystal as the military leader in Afghanistan and Sarah Palin for a speech in Hong Kong that included her current thoughts on Islam.
Warner’s complaint is that these two do not have a grasp about the correct actuality about Muslim tenets to be in the positions they are either in or aspire to be in.
Another excellent writer exposing the tenets of Islam picked up on Warner’s piece and focused on the Palin’s Facebook description of her time in Hong Kong. Ben’s Blog took Palin to task for her ignorance of Islam because she followed the politically correct path of Islam is not evil, terrorists are. Or anyway that is my take on a brief summary.
Ben is very specific and so I cannot fault his thinking; nonetheless I had some thoughts that I posted in the comment section:
Ben you would be surprised how many Conservative Republicans feel Sarah Palin is not bright enough for Higher Office. I am not one those Conservatives.
Palin's total lack of knowledge about Islam is not unique. Leftists and Conservatives alike tend to believe spoon fed information concerning the religion of evil. Would Palin find advisors in the know if indeed she runs for Higher Office? I pray that is the case.
Bush began with Islam is Islamofascism. Whether or not that is a good description of Islam is debatable however at the least it had the seeds of knowing Islam inspired violence and not peace. Then as Bush began to backtrack by describing Islam as the religion of peace. One has to think that Bush caved into State Department Republicans of the nature of James Baker and the deception of American-Islamic organizations such as CAIR.
As it stands now I believe Palin is flexible enough yet political enough to grasp the wickedness of Islam yet not having to commit to a public understanding of such an understanding. To publicly announce Islam is evil would be political suicide in America today.
That is one lesson Palin or any Conservative candidate can learn from President Barack Hussein Obama: Deny everything, promise what your followers and centrists want to hear and attack the attackers' credibility for criticism.
P.S.: No anger here. Palin definitely has to change her vision of Islam.
With those thoughts in mind I discovered an article at Investors.com concerning Palin’s time in Hong Kong that is more on the positive side.
JRH 10/11/09 (Hat Tip: Don Moore of the Blind Conservative List)
I have pointed out I am one of those rare Conservatives that is in favor of Universal Healthcare. I must point out though I am not in favor of the Federal government being the direct manager of a National Universal Healthcare. My vision for Universal Healthcare leans more toward government regulation of mandatory health insurance provided by the free market private sector.
My dip into altruism is a plan of government oversight making sure insurance plans are affordable for the poor and not burdensome on small scale entrepreneurs. I can even see the government picking up some of the cost for those whose income precludes a budget of a monthly premium.
The point is Healthcare should be made readily available to all citizens and legal immigrants. It is a travesty that the wealthiest nation in the world does not offer easy access to the medical needs of people human beings. Picture the opposite of humanity. That picture is inhumanity.
Now that I have the Slanted Left salivating in glee and the Slanted Right planning my funeral, I need to provide a little clarification of my thinking.
Government managed socialized Universal Healthcare is a disastrous method to implement Universal Healthcare in America. I am noticing that President Obama’s Universal Healthcare cares less for the human being and more to the molding of a healthy society at the expense of those whose needs may not fit the government litmus test of providing life saving care for those who may die even with such care. Those diagnosed as terminal or a probability of terminal and the elderly Americans may be on the “let them die comfortably” list.
My fellow Americans allowing the government to manage this kind of power over a life should be considered horrific.
Much to my gratification one my favorite Republicans has weighed in on Obamacare. That person is Sarah Palin.
Israpundit has a quote from Sarah Palin’s August 7, 2009 entry on her Facebook page:
On August 7th, Sarah Palin wrote in her facebook page
The Democrats promise that a government health care system will reduce the cost of health care, but as the economist Thomas Sowell has pointed out, government health care will not reduce the cost; it will simply refuse to pay the cost. And who will suffer the most when they ration care? The sick, the elderly, and the disabled, of course. The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama’s “death panel” so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their “level of productivity in society,” whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil.
That reference to death panels caused a storm of protest from Obama’s supporters and Palin haters. But it only took seven days for them to capitulate.
I don’t know if Sarah Palin coined the “death panel” phrase but the existence of such a concept in Universal Healthcare is inhumane and uncaring.
I am also delighted to read that some pundits writing in media that is not considered the so-called right wing fringe had this to say about Palin’s entrance into the Obamacare debate:
Palin Wins
If she's dim and Obama is brilliant, how did he lose the argument to her?
The first we heard about Sarah Palin's "death panels" comment was in a conversation last Friday with an acquaintance who was appalled by it. Our interlocutor is not a Democratic partisan but a high-minded centrist who deplores extremist rhetoric whatever the source. We don't even know if he has a position on ObamaCare. From his description, it sounded to us as though Palin really had gone too far.
A week later, it is clear that she has won the debate.
President Obama himself took the comments of the former governor of the 47th-largest state seriously enough to answer them directly in his so-called town-hall meeting Tuesday in Portsmouth, N.H. As we noted Wednesday, he was callous rather than reassuring, speaking glibly--to audience laughter--about "pulling the plug on grandma."
The Los Angeles Times reports that Palin has won a legislative victory as well:
A Senate panel has decided to scrap the part of its healthcare bill that in recent days has given rise to fears of government "death panels," with one lawmaker suggesting the proposal was just too confusing.
The Senate Finance Committee is taking the idea of advance care planning consultations with doctors off the table as it works to craft its version of healthcare legislation, a Democratic committee aide said Thursday.
Sen. Charles E. Grassley of Iowa, ranking Republican on the committee, said the panel dropped the idea because it could be "misinterpreted or implemented incorrectly." . . .
The Palin claim about "death panels" was so widely discredited that the White House has begun openly quoting it in an effort to show that opponents of the healthcare overhaul are misinformed.
You have to love that last bit. The fearless, independent journalists of the Los Angeles Times justify their assertion that the Palin claim was "widely discredited" with an appeal to authority--the authority of the White House, which is to say, the other side in the debate. One suspects the breathtaking inadequacy of this argument would have been obvious to Times reporters Christi Parsons and Andrew Zajac if George W. Bush were still president. And of course this appears in a story about how the Senate was persuaded to act in accord with Palin's position--which doesn't prove that position right but does show that it is widely (though, to be sure, not universally) credited.
One can hardly deny that Palin's reference to "death panels" was inflammatory. But another way of putting that is that it was vivid and attention-getting. Level-headed liberal commentators who favor more government in health care, including Slate's Mickey Kaus and the Washington Post's Charles Lane, have argued that the end-of-life provision in the bill is problematic--acknowledging in effect (and, in Kaus's case, in so many words) that Palin had a point.
If you believe the media, Sarah Palin is a mediocre intellect, if even that, while President Obama is brilliant. So how did she manage to best him in this debate? Part of the explanation is that disdain for Palin reflects intellectual snobbery more than actual intellect. Still, Obama's critics, in contrast with Palin's, do not deny the president's intellectual aptitude. Intelligence, however, does not make one immune from hubris.
For a wonderful example of such hubris, check out this post from David Kurtz of TalkingPointsMemo.com:
Is there anything quite as unsettling as when the nation's political class (and I use that term broadly to encompass the occasionally political, like the tea partiers) turns its fleeting but intense focus to a new (for them) and complex topic, like end-of-life issues?
It seems like years of painstaking work to nudge our death-denying culture toward a more frank and humane approach to our own mortality and dying could be erased by one misguided national discussion set off by none other than Sarah Palin.
Except that Palin didn't "set off" this discussion; President Obama did by trying to ram through legislation postalizing the medical system with no time for debate or reflection. How to care for dying patients is a serious, sensitive and complicated matter, one with which American families struggle every day. If you truly don't want the "political class" involved, your quarrel is with the man who is pushing for more federal involvement in this most personal of matters. It's entirely understandable that people would respond to such an effort by shouting, "Keep your laws off my grandma!" (James Taranto in Wall Street Journal)
There is an intellectual coup for Sarah Palin against the Obamassiah.
Ted Belman of Israpundit continues with another Palin Facebook entry:
Troubling Questions Remain About Obama’s Health Care Plan
I join millions of Americans in expressing appreciation for the Senate Finance Committee’s decision to remove the provision in the pending health care bill that authorizes end-of-life consultations (Section 1233 of HR 3200). It’s gratifying that the voice of the people is getting through to Congress; however, that provision was not the only disturbing detail in this legislation; it was just one of the more obvious ones.
As I noted in my statement last week, nationalized health care inevitably leads to rationing. There is simply no way to cover everyone and hold down the costs at the same time. The rationing system proposed by one of President Obama’s key health care advisors is particularly disturbing. I’m speaking of the “Complete Lives System” advocated by Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, the brother of the president’s chief of staff. President Obama has not yet stated any opposition to the “Complete Lives System,” a system which, if enacted, would refuse to allocate medical resources to the elderly, the infirm, and the disabled who have less economic potential. [1] Why the silence from the president on this aspect of his nationalization of health care? Does he agree with the “Complete Lives System”? If not, then why is Dr. Emanuel his policy advisor? What is he advising the president on? I just learned that Dr. Emanuel is now distancing himself from his own work and claiming that his “thinking has evolved” on the question of rationing care to benefit the strong and deny the weak. [2] How convenient that he disavowed his own work only after the nature of his scholarship was revealed to the public at large.
The president is busy assuring us that we can keep our private insurance plans, but common sense (and basic economics) tells us otherwise. The public option in the Democratic health care plan will crowd out private insurers, and that’s what it’s intended to do. A single payer health care plan has been President Obama’s agenda all along, though he is now claiming otherwise. Don’t take my word for it. Here’s what he said back in 2003:
“I happen to be a proponent of a single payer universal health care plan…. A single payer health care plan – universal health care plan – that’s what I would like to see.” [3
A single-payer health care plan might be what Obama would like to see, but is it what the rest of us would like to see? What does a single payer health care plan look like? We need look no further than other countries who have adopted such a plan. The picture isn’t pretty. [4] The only way they can control costs is to ration care. As I noted in my earlier statement quoting Thomas Sowell, government run health care won’t reduce the price of medical care; it will simply refuse to pay the price. The expensive innovative procedures that people from all over the world come to the United States for will not be available under a government plan that seeks to cover everyone by capping costs.
Our senior citizens are right to be wary of this health care bill. Medical care at the end of life accounts for 80 percent of all health care. When care is rationed, that is naturally where the cuts will be felt first. The “end-of-life” consultations authorized in Section 1233 of HR 3200 were an obvious and heavy handed attempt at pressuring people to reduce the financial burden on the system by minimizing their own care. Worst still, it actually provided a financial incentive to doctors to initiate these consultations. People are right to point out that such a provision doesn’t sound “purely voluntary.”
In an article I noted yesterday, Charles Lane wrote:
“Ideally, the delicate decisions about how to manage life’send would be made in a setting that is neutral in both appearance and fact. Yes, it’s good to have a doctor’s perspective. But Section 1233 goes beyond facilitating doctor input to preferring it. Indeed, the measure would have an interested party — the government — recruit doctors to sell the elderly on living wills, hospice care and their associated providers, professions and organizations. You don’t have to be a right-wing wacko to question that approach.” [5]
I agree. Last year, I issued a proclamation for “Healthcare Decisions Day.” [6] The proclamation sought to increase the public’s knowledge about creating living wills and establishing powers of attorney. There was no incentive to choose one option over another. There was certainly no financial incentive for physicians to push anything. In fact, the proclamation explicitly called on medical professionals and lawyers “to volunteer their time and efforts” to provide information to the public.
Comparing the “Healthcare Decisions Day” proclamation to Section 1233 of HR 3200 is ridiculous. The two are like apples and oranges. The attempt to link the two shows how desperate the proponents of nationalized health care are to shift the debate away from the disturbing details of their bill.
There is one aspect of this bill which I have not addressed yet, but it’s a very obvious one. It’s the simple fact that we can’t afford it. But don’t take my word for it. Take the word of Doug Elmendorf, the director of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. He told the Senate Budget Committee last month:
“In the legislation that has been reported we do not see the sort of fundamental changes that would be necessary to reduce the trajectory of federal health spending by a significant amount. And on the contrary, the legislation significantly expands the federal responsibility for health care costs.” [7]
Dr. Elmendorf went on to note that this health care legislation would increase spending at an unsustainable rate.
Our nation is already $11.5 trillion in debt. Where will the money come from? Taxes, of course. And will a burdensome new tax help our economy recover? Of course not. The best way to encourage more health care coverage is to foster a strong economy where people can afford to purchase their own coverage if they choose to do so. The current administration’s economic policies have done nothing to help in this regard.
Health care is without a doubt a complex and contentious issue, but health care reform should be a market oriented solution. There are many ways we can reform the system and lower costs without nationalizing it.
The economist Arthur Laffer has taken the lead in pushing for a patient-center health care reform policy. He noted in a Wall Street Journal article earlier this month:
“A patient-centered health-care reform begins with individual ownership of insurance policies and leverages Health Savings Accounts, a low-premium, high-deductible alternative to traditional insurance that includes a tax-advantaged savings account. It allows people to purchase insurance policies across state lines and reduces the number of mandated benefits insurers are required to cover. It reallocates the majority of Medicaid spending into a simple voucher for low-income individuals to purchase their own insurance. And it reduces the cost of medical procedures by reforming tort liability laws.” [8]
Those are real reforms that we can live with and afford. Once again, I warn my fellow Americans that if we go down the path of nationalized health care, there will be no turning back. We must stop and think or we may find ourselves losing even more of our freedoms.
Sarah Palin uses the word “nationalized health care.” She should have used the word “socialized healthcare.” Like I said before there is a need for Universal Healthcare in America; however a socialized government managed Universal Healthcare will be like Big Brother dictating to the lives of Americans eroding personal Liberty in America.
A national standard does need to exist but that is to ensure Capitalism does not run amok down the other side of the scale toward inhumane medical charges to maximize the profit beyond the scope of the life of the individual. Profits and ownership is good and the American way, but human lives are priceless and should not be measured by the profit share. I am saying make money but not by exploitation.
I am also saying do not allow the government to dictate the management of your medical. The government should only certify citizens are protected and that the market is fair. This may also entail reform on how Doctors must maintain insurance for themselves to protect themselves from frivolous litigation.
Unfortunately Obamacare may have to be the starting point for Universal Healthcare to begin in America for I believe the Slanted Right does not have the cajones to initiate a profitable regulated Universal Healthcare because of the lobbyists that prefer the status quo. The status quo is not acceptable. People suffer in the current status quo medical system.
As I have said before better an initiated Obamacare now and the Conservatives chipping away the socialism in exchange for a regulated market as time goes on instead of maintaining the status quo. If some high profile politicians can get on board to offer an alternative to Obamacare then do it now. The alternative plan is the best way to counter the socialistic Obamacare system.
Check out this idea as an alternative at We The People Health. I am not saying this is the best alternative to Obamacare but it is viable option to explore or to build upon for other viable alternatives.
JRH 8/16/09
Sarah Palin gives a very charismatic farewell speech as she departs as Governor of Alaska. This gal is a leader.
Say the name ‘Sarah Palin.’ The very name evokes images that are wildly supportive to extreme castigation.
Those that are supportive are admirers of her charisma and stand for moral values.
Those that castigate Palin either propagate the lie that Palin is an unintelligent moron or are listeners to that lie. The primary sources of that lie politically are Leftists and the Mainstream Media (MSM) who undoubtedly fears Palin will have an influence in Conservative politics. The Leftist fear - if unwittingly prophetic - is probably based on an individual that can capture the minds and hearts of voters which President Reagan did in the ‘80’s. Thus the fear is another Conservative revolution that would reverse the socio-economic horrid transformation that President Barack Hussein Obama has began to implement.
So I love finding a credible writer that points out these deficient lies are indeed fabrications to propagandize mainstream America. That person I found is Bill O’Reilly.
JRH 7/21/09
Bill Adams writing for the American Thinker gives us an Alaskan view of Sarah Palin departing as Governor of Alaska. Adams touches on the Left Wing MSM’s horrendous mercilessly attacking Palin and family not on ideas but rather on her belief system. There actually are not that many ideas to attack for Palin was a success as administrator of the State of Alaska.
Then Adams touches on how Democrats in Alaska filed ludicrous after ludicrous ethics violations within the State Congress. Nearly of have ethics violations have been dismissed that have made it to an examination. The outcome of the Leftist strategy was to bury Sarah Palin in legal bills that became a distraction as the executive administrator of Alaska.
Adams moves on to touch on possible personal options for Palin. There is also a discussion of an actual impact Palin can have on the Conservative movement in America especially in light of the Obamasiah.
JRH 7/15/09
Many Republicans and definitely the Left are not supporters of Sarah Palin. I am. She represents the best hope for social conservatism to offset the Obama Agenda to transform America into a Secular Humanist nation devoid of its Christian heritage.
Here is an essay I agree with that is pro-Palin:
JRH 7/6/09
Here is today’s shocker! Sarah Palin is resigning as Governor of Alaska. The official reason seems to be she chooses not be a lame duck governor since has said she will not run for re-election in 2010.
I can imagine the Leftists will concoct some licentious reason since they attempted to do when Palin ran for Vice President.
Those looking at the silver lining hope she is going to prepare for a run as the Republican nominee for President in 2012. Maybe I should back track that last sentence. I suspect the mainline Republicans dread Sarah Palin running for a National Office let alone the Presidency.
I am one Republican who prays she gives it a shot. Palin is a strong personality that does not back down to her critics and will have executive experience as a Governor of a State. Her foreign policy may be her greatest weakness but as an executive she will know how to select experience advisors that fits her Conservative agenda.
http://cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/up/player/popup/index.php?cl=14306137
JRH 7/3/09
In case you live under a rock or only listen to the anti-Palin Left you may not have heard that sexagenarian David Letterman has called Sarah Palin a slut and made a kiddie porn comment about Palin’s 14 year old daughter being knocked up by Yankee player Alex Rodriguez.
Amazingly the Barack Hussein Obama channel … err … I mean MSNBC attempted to dilute Letterman’s character assassination of Palin and the kiddie porn joke about Willow Palin and Alex Rodriguez. In an interview with Contessa of MSNBC, John Ziegler pointed out the evil of Letterman. When Ziegler began to be hostile about MSNBC this Contessa chick actually said she was offended by Ziegler and cut him off and specifically told the audio/visual guys to cut Ziegler’s mike. Imagine that. Contessa cuts Ziegler off after lambasting MSNBC coverage of Letterman’s kiddie porn comment.
You can catch Governor Palin’s comment about David Letterman in an interview that radio talk radio man Ziegler did HERE.
There is a social blog network on Ning that has a group called Team Sarah.
Within that group is a blog post encouraging people to write to CBS to complain about Letterman’s inappropriate to kiddie porn comments. I encourage you to read it and participate according to the simple information made available to pummel CBS.
There is the sense that Letterman won’t be chastised by CBS because he is such a cash cow for the network. These people encourage a boycott of CBS or CBS sponsors to make a point. Personally I find it more cathartic to express my feelings. Which ever the case please do something to let Letterman know he stepped over the line.
I was watching FOX and Friends this morning and viewed what was supposed to be a Letterman apology.
"We were, as we often do, making jokes about people in the news and we made some jokes about Sarah Palin and her daughter, the 18-year-old girl, who is — her name is Bristol, that’s right, and so, then, now they’re upset with me," Letterman said. "These are not jokes made about her 14-year-old daughter. I would never, never make jokes about raping or having sex of any description with a 14-year-old girl. I mean, look at my record. It has never happened. I don’t think it’s funny. I would never think it was funny. I wouldn’t put it in a joke…"
"… Gov. Palin, if you’re watching, I would like you to consider coming to New York City — even Todd — as my guests, or leave Todd at home. I’d love to have you on the show. It’d be exciting. All right, so there, I hope I’ve cleared part of this up. Am I guilty of poor taste? Yes. Did I suggest that it was okay for her 14-year-old daughter to be having promiscuous sex? No." (FOX News)
Oops! Letterman is saying he didn’t mean the kiddie porn comment about Willow and Alex Rodriguez. NO! NO! Letterman meant that single unwed 19 year old mother Bristol Palin would be getting “knocked up” by Alex Rodriguez.
Did I miss something? Was this an apology? It sounds more like a justification for the “slut” comments about Governor Palin and inappropriate sex comments about the Palin’s daughter Bristol. So it is okay now to make crude sex comments about a politician’s daughter because she is over the age of 18?
I wonder what would happen if Rush Limbaugh, Michael Savage any Conservative spokesman or comedian would make crude sex comments about President Obama’s girls?
I will tell you what would happen. There would be such a huge MSM clamor to end the careers of anyone that would dare to make sexual innuendos about the President’s children or his wife Michelle for that matter. Governor Palin may not be President BUT she is a Governor of a State in the Union of the United States of America.
Letterman needs to get a spank’ in!
JRH 6/11/09
Bristol Palin and Levi Johnston became the proud parents of a seven pound seven ounce baby boy named Trip Easton Mitchell Johnston. The birth was December 29, 2008 at about 5:30 AM in Palmer, AK.
Of course the notable Grand Parents are Todd and Governor Sarah Palin. The less known Grandmother is Sherry Johnston who seems to found herself in a spot of trouble.
I wonder if the crazy Left will mention this as some sort of Slanted Right diabolical occurrence when in fact it is a blessing of God.
JRH 12/30/08 (Hat tip to Right in a Left World)
There has been a lot of post election ’08 talk about Sarah Palin being representative of the Conservative wing of the Republican Party in 2012.
Honestly I have not been attentive if there has been any feedback from Palin concerning designs for 2012 so I have to admit I may be writing about something that is irrelevant.
I believe Governor Palin as of 2008 would be an excellent GOP representative in 2012. Yet I have no illusions that 2012 is a ways off. Barack Hussein Obama has not even had an opportunity to succeed or fail in his political ventures. Let’s be honest, BHO’s decisions for the positive or negative will be the shaper of the potential leaders of the GOP’s future. Governor Palin is only one possibility.
Saying that, the continued hostility the Left is giving a former defeated VP candidate is amazing. I mean the Leftist smear is still in action against Palin. Why?
It is an indication there is fear from the Left that Governor Palin may pull an old Governor Reagan and become so popular that the decisions of “The One” may thrust Palin into a populist Conservative spotlight.
The Dems are currently basking at the return of power that is reminiscent of possibly FDR power. Friends that is a lot of political power, indeed it is more political power than Reagan enjoyed as President.
I am guessing if the Dem Mainstream Media does its utmost to frame Governor Palin in a negative light the MSM will do its part in preventing values voters from being represented in the U.S. Government.
In saying this, the Political Action Committee known as Our Country Deserves Better is doing its best to counter the MSM.
Our Country Deserves Better has sent out emails promoting Sarah Palin and focusing on MSM media bias. In this email ABC is the target of exposing obvious bias.
I am posting the email pretty much as it was ...
GO TO SLANTRIGHT.COM TO READ THE EMAIL
