Friday, January 16, 2009
AP Lies About Sarah Palin
Following is a slightly modified version of a friend's commentary on the Associated Press' s bad reporting on Gov. Palin and its unwillingness to recognize the smear campaign -- an endless stream of lies -- against her.
Team Sarah member John Hopkins (a budding journalist) posted a blog lately re: an AP article in which correspondent Michael Gormley exonerates his organization from spreading lies about Palin, based on only ONE claim, that the media tried to say that Trig was really Bristol's son.Gormley claims that this was "only" the domain of bloggers, and clean, uncorrupted AP had nothing to do with that.
But the "blogger" (Markos Markos) who spread the story, on The Daily Kos, was a Newsweek columnist, and both CNN and MSNBC picked up that ball and ran with it. (Of the two, only MSNBC has issued a formal apology.)Still, Gormley's article is relentlessly mocking of Palin: "She messed up her first interviews, didn't show much of a grasp of the issues and, dontcha know, had a speech pattern that was widely mimicked. Sarah Palin? You betcha. But Caroline Kennedy also fits the bill."
How can he even compare the two?? Caroline Kennedy is, in actuality, a fine writer who has done two books on the Constitution. But she's never held elective office, never run a city, let alone a state. So, how can one say she and Sarah are "both" political incompetents?
Here's the link:http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090109/ap_on_re_us/palin
Gormley, like so many journalists, dwells in a world where their primary goal isn't to provide verifiable information. Rather, they're driven mainly by a desire to curry favor with their peers, i.e., other self-styled "journalists." They're blissfully unaware of any America that exists outside America's biggest metropolitan areas.
And how did Palin "mess up her first interviews"?
Oh yes, I remember, She didn't know what Charles Gibson meant by "The Bush Doctrine," a term that media journalists made up and which has covered over time no less that FOUR so-called "Bush Doctrines." One possible definition of said "Doctrine" is to "kill them [terrorists] before they kill us," a view Gov. Palin certainly shares. Another Bush principle is to encourage the spread of democracy in the Middle East and Central Asia, which would also get Sarah's approval.
Note: Don Imus, who avoids political correctness, accurately characterized Charles Gibson as "a pretentious fool," and he labeled Katie Couric as "a little rodent." Gibson and Couric inhabit a liberal universe where they get paid millions of dollar for reading news reports mainly written by others.
But here's the shocker.
Google "AP stories about Sarah Palin, 9/1/08 - 11/4/08," and you pull up - ONLY FOUR STORIES - all of them relatively balanced. Gone are any stories about the vicious attacks, about Bristol, about the bogus "Troopergate," about Sarah (who's worn spectacles since age 10) supposedly wearning glasses to look more intellectual, about the wardrobe purchases, about her calling Africa a country, etc. etc. etc.
Gone, gone, gone. They never existed, don'tcha know?? WE never said them! WE'RE fair and honest journalists!!
Thursday, January 15, 2009
Obama: Cooking Up Economic Catastrophe

If Gov. Sarah Palin can get 51% of the women's vote in 2012, she will win by a significant margin. That shouldn't be impossible, given that she IS a woman, but nothing is easy when you go against the Obama Machine.
What about Obama's "$1 trillion stimulus package?" It's a much-larger dose of the 'medicine' that made us sick in the first-place -- over-borrowing and giant dollop of inflation by running the money-printing-presses 24X7. If a country gets drunk on bad financial practices, the way to solve it is not to open up another bottle.
How on God's earth is it the right thing to do to borrow another trillion from the Communist Chinese and basically send the bill to our grandchildren and great-grandchildren?
The economic historian Niall Ferguson (Oxford, Harvard, Stanford), who's an admirer of Sarah Palin, has written about the orgy of credit and financial promises in the U.S. and said that it has led to a $70 trillion "unfunded liability. That's a nice way of saying we have financial obligations that we as a nation have no way of paying.
The answer is NOT to borrow more. The answer is to start living, as individuals and a nation, within our means.
Many people are responsible for the economic situation, including Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, and Barack Obama, all big-time recipients of "donations" from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the major culprits in the housing crisis.
Chances are that the Obama presidency will be a calamity. I'm not wishing that, just saying that it's inevitable.I heard today that the price of crude oil today was $36 a barrel, down a "little" from the high a few months ago of $140. The marketplace, which can be brutal when necessary, is "handling" the problems for us. Wall Street speculators -- not "supply and demand" -- drove oil prices up to unsustainable levels, and now economic fundamentals have sent oil futures into free fall.
The thing about windfall profits is that they're ultimately followed by windfall losses, which seem to be going around a lot these days.
Investment analyst Howard Ruff is right about 50% of the time, but his recent remarks about where we're headed economically are right on target. He says."We are in for some rough times, and it's laughable that the same people who caused the problems are now being hailed as our saviors.
"First, we will continue to plunge into a major deflation period [falling real prices] which wi ll be characterized as a 'recession,' and later in the year as a 'depression.' Deflation and inflation are always monetary phenomena.
"Second, deflation will evolve into a run-away-hyper-inflationary depression because of what government will do to try to prevent deflation, which is synonymous with depression and has overtones of the 1930s.
"The government is creating money at a rate unprecedented in all of American History, with deflation and depression, driving their decisions, as politicians hate deflation. That is why they have been inflating the currency at varying rates for decades."
Look for Barack Obama to take the current mess that is the U.S. economy -- and make it worse. Look for him, as several NY Times reporters recently speculated, to be a one-term President. Look for Sarah Heath Palin, four years from next week, to become the 45th President of the U.S.
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
Israel, Palestine: Winning PR Battle
On Thursday noon, I'll have up a piece called "Obama: The Coming Economic Calamity." Friday's column will be: "Obama: a One-term Presidency." Hope to see you here! (Note: On January 20, this site will have unique posts focused on the Obama presidency. On my other blog (http://draftpalin2012.blogspot.com) I will continue to write about Gov. Palin and related issues.
Sarah Palin in her office with Israeli flag on the window (circled in red)
Note: I spent 30 years in public relations for some of America's most controversial industries. Winning the PR battle takes tremendous energy and laser-life focus. Wars and national political campaigns are not won through timidity. Confront your foes directly and throw them off stride. Always keep them on the defensive. Use every means at your disposal, including media interviews, blogs, e-mail messages, and talk radio.
Sarah Palin in her office with Israeli flag on the window (circled in red)A member of TeamSarah.org sent out a message today about a CNN Poll that showed twice as many Americans supported the Palestinians as did the Isrealis. My response:
Israel has not done a good job on the public relations front, and those of us in the Sarah Palin camp can learn from this situation. Hamas, a thoroughly disgusting and murderous outfit, is better at propaganda. With Israel and with Gov. Palin truth -- reality -- will not get any help from the media, which handles ideas poorly and relies excessively on images, which can be profoundly misleading
With Israel and Palin, we need to have many voices -- and not the Tower of Babel -- expressing a simple, coherent message. E.g., "Hamas has fired 6,000 rockets and terrofized, killed, and injured peace-loving Isaeli citizens. They must be stopped at all costs. Americans would feel no differently if rockets were descending on our towns and cities. By firing rockets from populated areas Hamas has declared that its people, especially women and children, are expensable."
The message must be repeated continually -- and by various people. The same approach is necessary with the ongoing smear campaign against Sarah Palin. People who make the smears, against a country or a candidate, must be identified and excoriated
Note: I spent 30 years in public relations for some of America's most controversial industries. Winning the PR battle takes tremendous energy and laser-life focus. Wars and national political campaigns are not won through timidity. Confront your foes directly and throw them off stride. Always keep them on the defensive. Use every means at your disposal, including media interviews, blogs, e-mail messages, and talk radio.
Labels:
Hamas,
Israel,
Palestine,
Sarah Palin,
Smears Against Palin
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
Hammer Away at Palin Haters
Note: on Jan. 20, 2009, the posts on this site will diverge from those on my other site: http://draftpalin2012.blogspot.com. This site will focus on the presidency of Barack H. Obama. The other site will concentrate on the future presidency of Gov. Sarah Heath Palin. I hope you'll visit both sites regularly.
Sarah Palin: Ready to Ride Her Way to the White House?
I've had an interesting discussion with Silvia, a member of TS, dealing in part with "friends" who mindlessly repeat the smears made against Sarah that originate from the endless Obama Campaign and are spread through "hate-sites" such as The Daily Kos and Moveon.org.
Here are Silvia's comments:
I admire Gov Palin because she has the executive experience she's built from the ground up. I connect to her experience as a mother as well.Recently, I argued with a friend who 'claims' to have heard on Fox News that Gov Palin increased funding for special needs education AFTER her nomination. Now this liberal friend despises Fox, yet he was able to walk away [and retain] that lie. The real record was on CNN, where they cited the factcheck website. (http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/sliming_palin.html)
WE NEED TO GET THE GOVERNOR'S RECORD OUT THERE, not her personal stuff but her ACCOMPLISHMENTS. That remains a major challenge.Silvia
My response:
Silvia, you make excellent points, and I'll try to use your comments on my blog (http://draftpalin2012.blogspot.com/) -- and respond to them.Obama managed to run with no accomplishments, including his laughable tenure as a "community organizer." perhaps asked why they're so gullible. When Sarah's media critics throw a stone,
As for your friend, I think such people need to be "beaten up" (metaphorically). If they're spreading lies, they should be informed that's what they're doing -- and we need to respond with an avalanche of boulders.
Ask your friend who he thinks it is (hint: Axelrod handles the smears/lies and they come through The Daily Kos) that's providing her with such misinformation?People like to feel comfortable with their illusions. Let's make them uncomfortable.
Sarah herself is doing that now, with her comments about "class" and the dismissing of Katie Couric as a narcissist and Obama shill. When such people are confronted aggressively, they fold quickly.
Monday, January 12, 2009
Sarah Must Win Dems, Indies

Sarah Palin at huge rally in Jacksonville, FL stadium . . .
Please participate in the effort to come up with a slogan for Sarah Palin to use in future campaigns. You can do so by going to: http://www.teamsarah.org/forum/topics/share-ideas-for-sarah-slogan I've give my own suggestion tomorrow.
As I've said before of the people in the Palin Movement, our goal shouldn't be to become "the nation's most congenial, PERMANENT MINORITY." In politics, there's really no such thing as a "moral victory." You either win in glory, or lose in devastation, as happened last November.
In a state like PA (and many other big ones), we need to figure out how to reach out effectively to Indies and Dems, including ones who are pro-choice. (Reading poll data carefully, it's clear that many "pro-choice" people are actually more pro-life than pro-abortion.)
At this point, we're 7 million-plus votes behind Obama, and we need to make up the difference. We can't do that by being ideological purists.
I keep saying, "We need to deal with our world as it is, not as we'd like it to be.' I spent a lot of time in the campaign working with Hillary Supporters who backed -- or leaned toward -- McCain-Palin. I didn't do it because I adored Hillary -- I do not -- but because there was no other way to win than by getting many Hillary Supporters, some of them pro-choice (strongly) and some pro-life, with most of them in the middle.
In the election, it appears we got about four million of Hillary's Supporters. We needed six million-plus, but without the four million it would have been a true landslide for Obama.
In my book, I will discuss the major feminists (Elaine Lafferty, former editor of Ms.; Shelley Mandel, president of the LA chapter of NOW; and, especially, Camile Paglia) who have strongly backed Sarah. There are many others in addition to the women I've named. I want them to continue their efforts, because we need such people to help us win.
I don't want to lose the social conservatives, far from it. However, Sarah Palin clearly is the best possible candidate they can get to run effectively for President. It will be challenging enough for her win -- I believe she can -- but it would be impossible for any other Republican. I don't under-estimate the ruthlessness of the Obama Campaign, which was the direct source of the smears against Sarah.
Frankly, I have zero interest in Sarah running a race she can't win, and I believe she feels the same way. She knows that millions -- tens of millions -- of her supporters are the working middle-class and even the working poor. Seeing the 10,000 people at Sarah's Beaver County rally, it became clear to me that these sure weren't your stereotypical Republicans. I estimate that at least 100 were members of the UMW, proudly wearing their "Clean Coal" hard hats.
I felt very comfortable with these people and talked to hundreds of them as they waited in line for up to four hours. One older man had been a member of the Boilermakers Union for 50 years. He bragged that he'd convinced this wife, for the first time in her life, to vote Republican (for McCain-Palin).
On Sean Hannity's radio program, a Democratic woman, an animal rights activist, was talking to Sean while, in the background, her three daughters were chanting, "Sarah Palin! Sarah Palin! SARAH PALIN!" The woman, a Sarah-backer herself, said, 'I'm afraid the neighbors are going to think I've become a Republican!"
We need that woman (and her daughters and millions like them) on our side.
As I've said before of the people in the Palin Movement, our goal shouldn't be to become "the nation's most congenial, PERMANENT MINORITY." In politics, there's really no such thing as a "moral victory." You either win in glory, or lose in devastation, as happened last November.
In a state like PA (and many other big ones), we need to figure out how to reach out effectively to Indies and Dems, including ones who are pro-choice. (Reading poll data carefully, it's clear that many "pro-choice" people are actually more pro-life than pro-abortion.)
At this point, we're 7 million-plus votes behind Obama, and we need to make up the difference. We can't do that by being ideological purists.
I keep saying, "We need to deal with our world as it is, not as we'd like it to be.' I spent a lot of time in the campaign working with Hillary Supporters who backed -- or leaned toward -- McCain-Palin. I didn't do it because I adored Hillary -- I do not -- but because there was no other way to win than by getting many Hillary Supporters, some of them pro-choice (strongly) and some pro-life, with most of them in the middle.
In the election, it appears we got about four million of Hillary's Supporters. We needed six million-plus, but without the four million it would have been a true landslide for Obama.
In my book, I will discuss the major feminists (Elaine Lafferty, former editor of Ms.; Shelley Mandel, president of the LA chapter of NOW; and, especially, Camile Paglia) who have strongly backed Sarah. There are many others in addition to the women I've named. I want them to continue their efforts, because we need such people to help us win.
I don't want to lose the social conservatives, far from it. However, Sarah Palin clearly is the best possible candidate they can get to run effectively for President. It will be challenging enough for her win -- I believe she can -- but it would be impossible for any other Republican. I don't under-estimate the ruthlessness of the Obama Campaign, which was the direct source of the smears against Sarah.
Frankly, I have zero interest in Sarah running a race she can't win, and I believe she feels the same way. She knows that millions -- tens of millions -- of her supporters are the working middle-class and even the working poor. Seeing the 10,000 people at Sarah's Beaver County rally, it became clear to me that these sure weren't your stereotypical Republicans. I estimate that at least 100 were members of the UMW, proudly wearing their "Clean Coal" hard hats.
I felt very comfortable with these people and talked to hundreds of them as they waited in line for up to four hours. One older man had been a member of the Boilermakers Union for 50 years. He bragged that he'd convinced this wife, for the first time in her life, to vote Republican (for McCain-Palin).
On Sean Hannity's radio program, a Democratic woman, an animal rights activist, was talking to Sean while, in the background, her three daughters were chanting, "Sarah Palin! Sarah Palin! SARAH PALIN!" The woman, a Sarah-backer herself, said, 'I'm afraid the neighbors are going to think I've become a Republican!"
We need that woman (and her daughters and millions like them) on our side.
Labels:
FL Palin Rally,
Jacksonville,
Sarah Palin,
Sean Hannity
Saturday, January 10, 2009
Sarah Palin: The Abortion Issue
Picture of Trig Palin as a newborn . . .I count myself as strongly pro-life, but I've argued for a pragmatic approach to the abortion issue. I know, you know, and Sarah knows there is nothing like a majority in the Congress -- or among the states (three-fourths of them needed) to pass a constitutional amendment outlawing abortion. The last time a Human Life Amendment (see Wikipedia) was brought up in the Senate was 1983, and it failed to get even a majority, let alone the two-thirds vote it needed.
Justice Antonin Scalia, who is personally opposed to abortion, has said, "The Constitution does not permit abortion. The Constitution does not prohibit abortion."
The critical point here is not whether one "agrees" with Scalia, but rather that what he says is true, which it is. (The implication in Scalia's statement is that the issue should go back to the states, which probably isn't going to happen. Things will stay as they are.)
Scalia is sometimes sniffed at by leftists as an "originalist." In fact, an originalist is someone who believes the Constitution means what it says. It doesn't mean what the latest Gallup Polls indicate a majority wishes it said.
Sarah's core group is anti-abortion. However, as her number of supporters grows, it will become more and more diverse.
People will also come to understand that Gov. Palin embraces a combination of conservative, libertarian, and populist principles. Her motto has been: "Serve the people." Her motto is NOT "Serve the people who believe exactly as I do."
She has said she personally opposes abortion, but that she has no interest in "criminalizing" it. By the way, neither do I. Neither I guess would Scalia.
One of the chapters in my book on Sarah Palin will deal with feminists who support her, including Elaine Lafferty, Shelley Mandell (the head of the Los Angeles chapter of NOW who endorsed Sarah), and Camille Paglia. That chapter will deal with Sarah's obligation as a potential President to those women and others like them. The key is a question of respect -- respect for those whose views differ from Palin's on one or more issues.
I've had discussions with some strong pro-lifers , including one woman who heads a pro-life PAC. She understands very well what I'm saying about abortion as an issue, that it's one of conscience and education, not laws, and she generally agrees. In time, I think most of the staunch pro-lifers on in Sarah's camp will also agree.
No one sound of mind wants to paint Sarah into a corner that would lead to her inevitable defeat. We can't ask her to run in an imaginary America; she has to run in the nation as it is. Sarah is a person who leads by example, not by barking out orders and using strong-arm tactics.
Friday, January 9, 2009
Palin "Real Deal": John Ziegler

The John Ziegler interview with Sarah has been much in the news Thursday and Friday. I strongly recommend that everyone take a look at Ziegler's comments on his impressions of Gov. Palin and her family. You can see by clicking on the link below.
http://johnziegler.com/editorials_details.asp?editorial=182
Following are some key points Ziegler makes about Sarah:"[In the long interview in Wasilla] we saw the genuine Sarah Palin and it is patently obvious that this is the only one that exists. She is the real deal.
"As a former TV sportscaster and radio talk show host, I have interviewed a lot big-time 'celebrities,' and . . . though you could argue that Sarah Palin was the most prominent I have ever spoken to one-on-one, she was also by far the nicest, most sincere and, seemingly, honest subject that I have ever questioned.
"I now know that Sarah Palin is exactly who I thought she was. I also know now, with moral certitude, that the media assassination of her, her character and her family was one of the greatest public injustices of our time."
Labels:
Alaska,
John Ziegler,
Sarah Palin,
Wasilla
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)