This ain't Hell, but you can see it from here

Category: John McCain/Sarah Palin

  • Palin Predicts President’s Putz-Poor Policy

    What with Russian forces seizing all major control points in the Crimean Peninsula today, numerous sources are pointing to the prediction of Sarah Palin back in the 2008 campaign that just such a scenario was possible under a weak president like Barack Obama. Here’s the way she called it:

    “After the Russian Army invaded the nation of Georgia, Senator Obama’s reaction was one of indecision and moral equivalence, the kind of response that would only encourage Russia’s Putin to invade Ukraine next,”

    Vice-presidential candidate Palin was at the time, in 2008, mocked and ridiculed for her political naiveté by gloating gurus of geopolitics for daring to advance the idea that a clueless Commander in Chief might not measure up to such a challenge. But here we are, six years down the road of all our lives, and just who is being proved to be savvier in world affairs, that confident, Moose-Shooting Mama from Alaska or America’s embarrassingly naked emperor who once grandly proclaimed he would command the seas? Not to take away from Sarah’s geopolitical awareness but anyone with any attentiveness to what goes on around this globe could have seen this coming just as Palin did; but, sadly and tragically, not the affirmative action product who now inhabits that so all important oval office whose grand educational process apparently left him ignorant of this:

    Due to its northern latitudes, Russia has always been cursed with a lack of warm water ports that are naval operational year-round. The much more agreeable climate of the Crimean Peninsula at Russia’s southern extreme is what led to Lord Potemkin’s creation of the Black Sea Fleet in 1783, based in Sevastopol. Over the past centuries, Russia has made the Black Sea their backyard lake with a mighty naval presence that extends through the Bosporus into the Mediterranean. Additionally, the air arm of the Russian Navy has made the Crimean Peninsula a major base of operations. That fleet with its air resources has been a strategic player in much of the political events transpiring in the Med and beyond for decades.

    So it should come as no surprise that Russia would not look favorably on losing the long term investment in infrastructure they have in the Crimea to a Ukranian government eagerly seeking political and economic alignment with the European Union. I hate to admit it but the Obama Administration is somewhat correct when it characterizes the Russian military takeover of strategic control points in the Crimea as an uncontested arrival. The reason for that is that the Crimea has always been a part of Ukraine that cleaved closely to the Russian mother country more so than the provinces to the north.

    But please, help me here; the next time you hear some liberal twit diss Sarah Palin as too inexperienced to operate on the national stage, point out that she had the superior world view back in 2008 to foresee a foreign policy problem of which the unaware, intellectual lightweight now in our White House had no glimmer. Let’s face the truth here, folks: Vladimir Putin has the political strength and courage to decisively do what is right for his country at a critical moment in world history, while our metrosexual misfit dithers in indecision. Perhaps Osama Bin Laden had a more correct world view than we supposed when he compared his movement’s struggle to one between the strong horse and the weak horse.

    What would you wager that done-dead Bin Laden would place his bet on the strong horse, Putin, and dismiss this lame and limping, politically-fueled, polished pony, Obama, who was too intellectually morally and spindly-legged to have been in this all important world race to start with?

    Crossposted at American Thinker

  • “I can see Russia from my house”

    It looks like the Russians own the Crimea now, according to the New York Times. Who could have predicted it? Well, Sarah Palin for one. From CNN;

    In 2008, when she was the GOP vice presidential nominee, Palin questioned in a speech whether then-Sen. Barack Obama would have the foreign policy credentials to handle a scenario in which Russian President Vladimir Putin invaded Ukraine.

    “After the Russian army invaded the nation of Georgia, Senator Obama’s reaction was one of indecision and moral equivalence – the kind of response that would only encourage Russia’s Putin to invade Ukraine next,” she said in Reno, Nevada on October 21, 2008.

    The former Alaska governor was happy to highlight her prediction on Friday and scold those who criticized her 2008 comments.

    So, I’m just wondering, if Sarah Palin was too stupid to be Vice President, what does that say about the Obama/Bite Me ticket?

  • McCain mumbles something about popular culture

    Because that’s the only thing going in the world today, John McCain and some other Senators wrote a letter to the producer of “Oh Dark Thirty” in regards to their portrayal of the torturing of al-Qaida’s No. 3 leader, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. Apparently, they think the poplar opinion that bin Laden’s location was tortured out of KSM, or at least, a way to locate him. But McCain, because there’s nothing else to do in Washington today wrote to Sony;

    In their letter to Sony, the lawmakers said the “use of torture in the fight against terrorism did severe damage to America’s values and standing that cannot be justified or expunged. It remains a stain on our national conscience. We cannot afford to go back to these dark times, and with the release of `Zero Dark Thirty,’ the filmmakers and your production studio are perpetuating the myth that torture is effective. You have a social and moral obligation to get the facts right.”

    Ho-hum. Waterboarding is not torture, I don’t care how you look at it. So get over it, Johnny. My conscience isn’t stained. The issue I might have with the film is that if they show the killing of bin Laden like they did in that POS National Geographic thing, the inaccuracy is glaring. In that movie, the SEAL was shown deliberately double-tapping bin Laden, but according to the eye witness account of Matt Bissonnette in his book, “No Easy Day“, bin Laden peeked around the corner of the door to his room and got drilled without anyone even knowing it was him and it took several minutes for them to report that bin Laden was dead because they couldn’t ID the body because his face was disfigured.

    I mean if McCain has nothing else to do in Washington, what with the impending Obama Tax Hikes and gun control legislation being jammed through to Congress, then he should at least complain about something important in the movies. Didn’t McCain once say that Washington is Hollywood for ugly people – he doesn’t have to live up that.

  • Dealing with buyer’s remorse

    I had a conversation yesterday with an old friend with whom I hadn’t spoke for years. After the niceties, she began bashing Obama for doing nothing successfully. I said, “Wait! I bet you voted for him didn’t you?” She said that she pleads the fifth amendment, but then that she had “believed in him”. I asked “believed in what?” She couldn’t tell me what, except that she had thought that Obama “cared”.

    Then she went on to tell me how she’d watched the interview with George W. Bush that was on National Geographic last week and that it had completely changed her opinion of him. Before the interview she had thought he was an arrogant, smarmy, cold person, but that interview made her think he was a warm and caring person. I told he that was because she got to watch him without the context of his words filtered through the media prism.

    Now, I understand that one conversation with one person doesn’t represent a monumental shift in the politics of the country, but knowing this person like I do, she’s greatly influenced by the media. When the media didn’t bother to criticize Obama’s lack of experience and leadership, but focused on his vacuous “hope and change” message, they abrogated their responsibility to the American voting public, but that’s not news to most of the readers here.

    This economic morass in which we find ourselves today should, but won’t teach the media a lesson. I know my friend will vote for the next shiny object that runs for office, it’s just part of her nature, but the media needs to review it’s standards, such as they are, and adhere to their constitutionally guaranteed contract with the American voter.

    I’m not sure John McCain would be doing much better than Obama, but, I have to think he couldn’t be doing worse. AT least he wouldn’t have wasted a year on getting health care reform passed, he wouldn’t have wasted a summer-plus putting off the extension of the Bush tax cuts, he wouldn’t have been spinning his wheels on Guantanamo, he wouldn’t have been holding “beer summits” to smooth over hurt feelings.

    Added: The Washington Times says “Obama’s a flop in states he flipped in 2008“

  • The Palin email frenzy

    The Media Palin-hunting-expedition were fed 24,000 pages of email yesterday in response to a Freedom of Information Act request from several media outlets. So the journalistic numbnuts descended on Alaska yesterday. The Washington Post has farmed out their research to their readership to plow through the emails for dirt on the former governor. Thus far, they’ve only found stuff that most of us already knew;

    Palin felt passionately about issues of importance to her state, the documents show, and she waged battle with foes large and small. That included detractors on obscure government commissions as well as multinational conglomerates seeking access to Alaska’s vast oil and gas reserves. She twice refers to one major oil executive with a derogatory nickname and complains that phone calls with him did not go well.

    You know what? I’d have more respect for the Post and whoever else took part in that FOIA if they’d been this tenacious and inquisitive with Barack Obama during the campaign for the 2008 election. I don’t remember any major media outlet asking even the most basic of questions about his tenure in the Illinois State Legislature. No one was asking what qualified him to be President…and we’re paying for that lack of journalistic curiosity now. And Sarah Palin isn’t even a candidate for the 2012 election yet.

    I interpret this quixotic enterprise to be an indicator of how the Left, in general, and the Washington elitists, in particular, fear a Palin candidacy without the McCain albatross around her neck. I’m pretty sure that they know that Palin’s name next to Obama’s on the ballot is an easy choice for 2012.

  • Falling in the same old trap

    Republicans tend to pick their presidential candidates from two categories. The first being whoever’s turn it is (example: Bob Dole), the second being whoever Republicans think Democrats will vote for, too (example: John McCain). I knew in 1993 that Bob Dole would be the candidate in 1996…because the GOP convinced us that it was his turn. And he lost. The Democrats told us from the primaries in 2000 through 2008 that they would have voted for McCain, and, of course, everyone believed them…until November 2008 when they didn’t.

    Now we’re looking down the barrel of that gun again. Look at the results of the Wall Street Journal/NBC poll. Mitt Romney (21%) leads tied-for-second-place Mike Huckabee/Donald Trump (17%). Two of the three are the “Democrats will vote for them” candidates. Mike Huckabee has been trying to convince us that its his turn since 2008.

    House Speaker Newt Gingrich got 11%, just ahead of former Republican Vice Presidential nominee Sarah Palin’s 10%. Former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, considered a strong contender by political handicappers, remains largely unknown, with just 6% support. Rep. Michele Bachmann of Minnesota had 5%, former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum 3%, and Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour with just 1%.

    Why Gingrich leads the last few, I have no idea. Someone ought to remove that lecherous, backstabbing politician from the party. There are two, maybe three out of the crowd I’d vote for – but I’m not thinking about how Democrats vote when I make my choices.

    If you look back at the 2000 election with your 20/20 hindsight, who would rather have as President in the ensuing eight years; Al Gore, John McCain or George W. Bush? The Democrats would have chosen Al Gore or John (the Bush tax cuts are for the rich) McCain. I think America made the right choice.

    You can’t believe those lying cocksuckers when they tell us who their choices are among Republicans.

    Democrats are making their choices of a Republican presidential candidate based on who their candidate can beat. That’s why they picked McCain in 2000 and 2008. But, for some reason, the GOP falls for it almost every time.

    And if you can believe the WSJ/NBC poll, we’re about to fall for it again.

  • Palin frightens Left

    This morning, the Washington Post provides two opposing opinions of Sarah Palin. The first is a news story about a poll, a Washington Post/ABC poll in regards to support for Palin among Americans;

    Although Palin is a tea party favorite, her potential as a presidential hopeful takes a severe hit in the survey. Fifty-five percent of Americans have unfavorable views of her, while the percentage holding favorable views has dipped to 37, a new low in Post-ABC polling.

    There is a growing sense that the former Alaska governor is not qualified to serve as president, with more than seven in 10 Americans now saying she is unqualified, up from 60 percent in a November survey. Even among Republicans, a majority now say Palin lacks the qualifications necessary for the White House.

    Palin has lost ground among conservative Republicans, who would be crucial to her hopes if she seeks the party’s presidential nomination in 2012. Forty-five percent of conservatives now consider her as qualified for the presidency, down sharply from 66 percent who said so last fall.

    Qualified? I don’t even know what that means anymore after watching the amateur talent show that currently occupies the West Wing of the White House. That clown car skit that careens in one direction then comically switches direction 180 degrees, dumps off riders and skitters off into the stands.

    Of course, a similar poll in the late 70s might have discovered the same sentiment in regards to Ronald Reagan.

    But it’s difficult to overcome the media’s trumpeting of the two smartest guys to ever work in the White House – Obama and Biden. Obama has never made decision and Biden had never voiced a policy decision that was right. Poll the public on that, Washington Post.

    The other article is an opinion piece by David Broder in which he warns the Democrats that Palin can actually beat them in 2012 if they don’t take her seriously.

    Freed of the responsibilities she carried as governor of Alaska, devoid of any official title but armed with regular gigs on Fox News Channel and more speaking invitations than she can fulfill, Palin is perhaps the most visible Republican in the land.

    More important, she has locked herself firmly in the populist embrace that every skillful outsider candidate from George Wallace to Jimmy Carter to Ronald Reagan to Bill Clinton has utilized when running against “the political establishment.”

    George Wallace? Hardly. But the most instructive part of the article isn’t in Broder’s piece, it’s in the readers’ comments a sample of which I’ve captured for posterity;

    broderpalin-comments

    I’ll grant that the Washington Post’s readers are hardly representative of mainstream American voters, but it does demonstrate the fear level in regards to Palin among Democrats. If you support Palin, you’re a clown, a pervert and a Nazi. Some of you who were here during the 2008 elections remember that the main reason the leftists didn’t support Palin was because she was “scary” – apparently more scary than Joe Biden who has been consistently wrong on every US policy for the last thirty years. Joe Biden who plagiarized his way through college and still only got mediocre grades…which he lies about these days.

    Yes, Republicans might be moving away from Palin – but they do that. They run away from viable candidates because they listen to Democrats and pick candidates the Democrats tell Republicans they like – which is how we got John McCain on the ticket.

  • Falling into the media’s trap

    CBS News has published a new poll that declares Sarah Palin radioactive for Republicans. According to them, only 1 in 4 Americans view Sarah Palin favorably;

    Just 23 percent of those surveyed in a new CBS News poll have a favorable view of the former Alaska governor. That matches her favorable rating in July, when Palin announced she was resigning from her job as governor.

    Thirty-eight percent, meanwhile, have an unfavorable view of Palin — also roughly matching her July rating. Another 37 percent say they are undecided or haven’t heard enough, despite the spotlight on Palin in recent days tied to the imminent publication of her memoir, “Going Rogue.”

    I’m pretty sure Ronald Reagan polled about the same way in 1977. The media pounded him pretty badly in the Republican primaries and treated him like a crank through Carter’s rush to give away the Panama Canal and reward draft dodgers with amnesty. Three years later, the American voter was tired of being blamed for our national problems constantly, being told how to dress in our own homes, being scolded for spending more time on our families than being part of the community and our national malaise.

    Now, the media is trying to prevent Sarah Palin from stealing our attention from the President’s wildly successful presidency the same way they did Reagan. He was able to overcome the media bias against him with only Commentary magazine and The National Review as a megaphone.

    The LA Times notices how scared the Democrats seem to be of Palin;

    Every few minutes another note from Democratic National Committee operatives and others dropped into electronic mailboxes across the media-verse, helpfully passing on even the tiniest tidbit of negative news about Palin.

    You know how sometimes a friend tells you how much he/she doesn’t really care about….

    …someone else. Really doesn’t! And repeats it a sufficient number of times that you become convinced of precisely the opposite?

    So here we are nearly three years away from the next election, at about the same point that Obama began his run at the 2008 election, and the media is trying to convince us that Palin doesn’t have a chance to win. I wonder why?