When the lies pile up.

Now, I remember when this creep came up here and people were defending him. Even, conservatives. I was pretty put down that people would actually be for this deranged a-hole and the fact that the people who owned the house rented it to McGinnis... because they didn't like the Palins for whatever their personal reasons.

As an Alaskan, I would never want some punked out creep renting a house next to me. Alaskans for the most part are very private. We don't like people. No, I am not joking, we just don't like people. We especially don't like people who try to come into our personal space. They can get shot.... and it has happened before. McGinnis was lucky someone didn't try here.

So with that said, how do you think McGinnis is going to get out of the nasty email he sent to a well known Palin-Hater? Jesse is a a-hole... but I think McGinnis is going to be bankrupt soon.

Here is the article I am speaking about.

Place Your Bets - 2012 GOP Candidates

Charles Krauthammer is my favorite political analyst and columnist currently. In his column today, he is giving odds for the Republican nominees in 2012. Here is a summary of the likely candidates:

1. Mitt Romney: 5-1


2. Tim Pawlenty: 5-1


3. Mitch Daniels: 6-1


4. Haley Barbour: 7-1


5. Newt Gingrich: 12-1


6. Michelle Bachmann: 20-1


7. Donald Trump: Lions have a better chance at winning the Super Bowl

He mentions but doesn't give odds for those he believes aren't running - Sarah Palin and Mike Huckabee.

He does discuss the very deep 2016 bench. They are Paul Ryan, Chris Christie, Marco Rubio, and Nikki Haley. Personally, I would add Allen West and Bob McDonnell to his list.

So based on this list of Krauthammer's odds and my previous post of electoral college strategy, upon whom are you willing to place your bet?

Not Satisfied With Repetitive Chants, Protesters Take Up Primal Screams And Grunts

Uhhh. Ummm. This is a protest?



Near as I can tell, he's protesting over this.

The Atlantic Seeks To Renew Lost Credibility

Now that Andrew Sullivan-- AKA, Milky Glutes, Excitable Andi-- is heading over the The Daily Beast.

I'll be taking bets on how soon his first Trig Palin Truther posting is up.

Within the fist day is my bet.

Arrest Paul McCartney?

That's the question posed over at I Own The World.

Because there is a much clearer chain of events that links Paul to murder than there ever was linking Sarah Palin.



It only goes to show you that it isn't always the quiet ones (George Harrison).

Who Is Lauren Bendik?

Specifically, she said: "I think Sarah Palin should get shot instead of Gifford!!!" Legal Insurrection has the screen cap and some harsh words for her. A Time For Choosing has more about her also. YouTube took down the old video but it's still available here.  Her public comment on Twitter is at about the 1:50 mark.  

What I would like to know is it even possible to 'move beyond' uncivil discourse in the political battleground arena discussions when people like Lauren Bendik has no problem making fun of George Bush ("He can read?") and openly wish Sarah Palin was shot?

Nah, who am I kidding.


Twitter Users Wish Death on Sarah Palin from JoeKenha on Vimeo.

It's sad because she sounds like she's has an interesting story. Jewish girl whose parents split when she was younger. And this[Under Perseverance]:

I’ve been through a lot in my life and I’ve overcome many obstacles. I was born with spina bifida, a defect in the spine. When I was born, it was uncertain if I would be able to walk or keep up academically with my classmates. Not only can I continue but I was a straight A student in high school and continue to do well at Pacific. I enjoy pushing myself and hope to continue exceeding the expectation of others and myself in the future.

It's a shame she is so bitter.

Updated: Have a link back to Serr8d's place.

Video: Twitter Users Wishing Violence On Sarah Palin

Not sure if I can handle much more of this. Most of the twitter users listed probably can't see their hate if you laid it out in front of them. Or at least find some way to justify it.

Christine O'Donnell: Mea Culpa?

I see that Robert Stacy has another postmortem about Delaware— as if another one was needed— and I’ve been putting off doing mine so here it is.

Am I at fault for losing control of the US Senate by supporting Christine O’Donnell over Mike Castle and Chris Coons? No.

Need more?

The most grievous charge against Christine O'Donnell is that not only did she lose her race, she lost others as well. Usually, the names names Ken Buck in Colorado and Dino Rossi in Washington are dropped. I have to cry bullshit on that. A race in Delaware affects races two time zones away?

If— this is not an admission— that was the case, then Pat Toomey would have been affected as well. Much of Delaware is a suburb of Philadelphia. O’Donnell needed to advertise on Philly TV in order to cover a significant portion of the population in Delaware. Why didn’t she tank Toomey? He won.

It’s more about finger pointing and what-ifs more than anything else. It was said that Mike Castle had a proven track record— until he didn’t— with voters in Delaware and would have easily won the election-- until he lost.

So by that logic Linda McMahon should have had a cake walk with the proven liar that is Dick Blumenthal. She was the establishment pick by the GOP and the NRSC. She distanced herself from Sarah Palin and any Tea Parties. Yet she was soundly beaten by a guy who most likely to be typecast as a pedophile in most movies.

McMahon ran against Peter Schiff and Rob Simmons in the GOP Primary for Connecticut, both of whom were superior candidates. Schiff is an economic prophet and Rob Simmons is a certified war hero. On paper, she should have been dead last to the other two. But money talked and McMahon had the deepest pockets of the three.

But I have yet to see the spit on the sidewalk when people mention Linda McMahon’s race. No snarky ‘recriminations’ postings about her. No one is wailing in the streets wearing sackcloth and ashes. Her loss was almost as bad as Christine O’Donnell’s. If anything, McMahon’s loss is more directly related with the loss of Joe DioGuardi and Jay Townsend in New York. Connecticut is as much of a suburb of New York City as Delaware is of Philly.

I think most if the blame being directed toward O’Donnell is due to the fact that the Tea Party and Sarah Palin supported her. O’Donnell obviously wasn’t the party pick so with her loss the GOP and others are throwing their arms out of socket pointing towards her direction and blaming her from the 'potential control' of the Senate to their food coma they had on Thanksgiving.

Out of spite, the GOP and many others on the right-- acting as an echo chamber for the MFM-- repeated all the charges that the MFM has said about O'Donnell. She’s a religious kook, a witch (burn her), she’s paranoid, she turned Karl Rove inot a newt (he got better) and personally lost control of the Senate despite all evidence to the contrary.

If you wonder why she was thought to be paranoid, consider this. She didn’t receive any help from the Delaware Republican party. She was bad mouthed by Karl Rove repeatedly the very night of her primary win. And it took the NRSC about a day to try to squelch rumors that they weren’t going to support her. Any wonder where she might get the feeling that they were out to get her?

She had her faults. She was poorly organized with her campaign. I have it on good authority that they weren't really expecting to win the primary. The “I’m not a witch” ad was awful. The multiple cancellations for TV interviews. I think she stumbled out of the primary gate and never was able to find her footing. Understandable considering she was getting pummeled by both sides of the isle, which really isn’t an excuse but a statement of what happened to her.

What I know about her is that she wasn’t the strongest candidate but I still would have preferred her over Mike Castle any day of the week.

So do I still need to offer a mea culpa? I did miss-read the Big Red Wave, after all. Why take the ‘safe’ bet of Mike Castle when all the odds look to be in your favor?

Well, if you consider the recent vote in the Senate, chances are that Castle would have been one more Republican voting for the Farm bill that needed to be defeated.

So no, I don’t need to say I’m sorry for supporting O’Donnell.

If anyone says that O’Donnell lost someone else’s election, look behind that person. There is either a party loyalist hack or a wannabe party player saying that.

Do you know what was really scary about Christine O’Donnell? Nothing about being a witch or human sacrifice or that she was going to ban masturbation. It was that even though she was a known quantity in Delaware— she ran several times for office before— the rank and file of Republican voters rejected the party’s pick of Mike Castle. It wasn’t who she was but what she represented. She was a choice, not an echo. A departure from the normal power brokers and gave the people a real choice in that election.

That’s the real crime she is guilty of.

If Sarah Palin's Alaska Isn't Your Cup Of Tea. . .

Then in the interest of fairness, TLC is proud to present: Nancy Pelosi's San Fransisco.*

*Not sure if it's my server or not yet but the link was working for me fine last night. This morning, not so much. It's back up. Must have been only a hiccup.

Added: It's Nancy Pelosi's San Fransisco. Take that for what it's worth before clicking over.

Sarah Palin Did Warn Us

Via Conservatives 4 Palin who has more.

Reflections After A Day By The Reflection Pool

600,000 was the number I kept hearing about the total attendance. I hold that number to be more accurate than any number the Washington Post puts out.

As for ignoring advice, it's worked so far, why stop now?

Moving on.

No matter what's been reported on Restoring Honor, it was not a protest rally. It was more of a multi-denominational call to prayer for the individual. A call for those present and to those listening if they would be the ones to stand up and be the leaders this country needs for tomorrow. So they can put together what the leaders of today are tearing apart.

Beck did walk a delicate line between preaching and asking people to look within themselves for a higher power.

I'll try to do more on this later in order to do it justice. The concept of where morals and honor come have been known to fill a book.

A couple more things and a word of before signing off:

Thanks to Jim for putting this video together.



For the 'Swimming' incident that Smitty alluded to, it happened after lunch. We were walking back to garage where the van was parked when my daughter wanted to toss a penny in a fountain. She threw one in then wanted to put her hands in the water. I looked away for one second and the next thing I knew, she was head over heels in the fountain. It was still shallow enough she could stand up in it no problem but she was soaked head to toe. I did luck out. This was one of the few times I've had a change of clothes for her. When we got back to the van, I was able to get her into dry clothes. More shaken than anything.

Also, it was very nice finally meeting Adam and Sally, fellow bloggers in arms over at Conservatives for Palin, face to face after being only names on our secret "Palinlist" email.

Next time, I will stop by the Red Radio crew's after party. Couldn't very well attend with a fiver year old, could I?

Previously: On The Road To Restoring Honor.

MORE: When the rally is over, notice how nice and spotless the grass is?

On The Road To Restoring Honor. UPDATED

The road stretched out in front of me with a full cup of coffee to keep me company. I have a bag of Krispy Kreme doughnuts next to me. It takes a man at the end of his rope to despair into a bag of those. The chocolate glazed ones were tasty.

My five year old traveling companion (daughter, it's never too young to get them involved) informed me that the doughnut with rainbow sprinkles was "Yummy".

There were good signs along the way.

This was right before picking up my Samoan attorney blogger from The Other McCain, Smitty. Read what he was able to do when you have Wi-Fi access instead being limited to the realm of a LAN like myself.

The overflow of the crowds was almost out to the Washington Monument.

Smitty and I arrived right when the rally started and couldn't crowd our way up more than halfway up along the Reflecting Pool. Those press credentials I printed out myself could only get so far.

Will be posting an update later. Meanwhile, Bob Belvedere will be posting updates today also.

UPDATED: Reflections after a day by the Reflecting Pool.

When Ewoks Attack!

It's nothing like how it happened in Return of the Jedi. Those Ewoks were able to get a jab or two in on an AT-ST or two but that's how movies work. Fiction where the hero who is on his quest wins in the end.

It's much more sad and pathetic when Ewoks attack in real life.



Ace has more of the back story on Emily's List and their Furry themed ad.

Video: Katie Couric Uncensored

From the barbarians over at Conservatives 4 Palin who have more.



The obvious pick-up should be that Katie doesn't go into any of Gov. Palin's accomplishments. No mention of Palin running against an incumbent Republican Governor and then beating him in the primary or anything else like that in Palin's impressive record.

Mooseburgers and beauty pageants are what Couric mentions.

Yes, this Katie Couric:

Thanks to Treacher for the pictures.

Stay classy, Katie.

Shifting The Goal Posts?

UPDATE: This is one of the more ridiculous things I've heard in a very long time. That Sarah Palin herself will give up her Pro-Life position?

I said no such thing about Palin.

Read it again.

The same platform that can easily be done away with should the Republican nominee, whoever they are, feel like it in 2012.

If the GOP goes the way David Frum would like it in 2012, then the chances of a pro-abortion candidate are very likely.

Do I think Palin has a chance to be the nominee? I honestly have no clue. Whatever will happen, will happen.

But yes, Lisa Graas has shifted the goal posts. Way back where she wanted something where Palin talked about the plank specifically. Then it was the 14th amendment. I've tried to oblige her. It wasn't to her satisfaction.

I'm done trying to jump through her hoops.

Previously:
The gauntlet was thrown and the challenge laid bare was thus:

On a side note, I have challenged David Riddle, a contributor at Conservatives 4 Palin, to provide me with some quotes from Sarah Palin proving that she is a defender of our Fourteenth Amendment.  See, that's important since it's in our pro-life plank.

To which I replied back:

[Palin] gave a speech on Friday, May 14th to the Susan B. Anthony Organization. There was lots of talk about the Constitution throughout her speech and her support for it as well as endorse candidates who she’ll believe to support those same views. Thanks to the wonders of the internet, it’s available online.

I should have figured it wouldn't of satisfied Lisa Graas's question. She points back to the plank in the GOP Platform of 08. The plank that is by no way law of the land. The platform that lost in 08. The same platform that can easily be done away with should the Republican nominee, whoever they are, feel like it in 2012.

It's safe to say that Graas is for the most part a single issue voter. That's fine, its her choice. I can understand her hesitation at someone who is libertarian like Rand Paul. But I can't find what she wants regarding Palin using the exact verbs and noun in the correct syntax she's looking for. Palin is not a lawyer so I wouldn't expect any legal briefs on that one.

Far as I know, she didn't push any anti-abortion bills through the Alaskan State Congress. They would have been rendered moot if they were signed into law anyway. If the 14th Amendment was repealed, the Alaska would have a chance to be a pro-life state, if I remember my US Government class correctly. There's the catch-22 for Graas. Without the 14th, the Americans With Disabilities Act couldn't be enforce at the federal level and would be up to the individual states to act on it.

What Palin is trying to establish is coalition building. Getting to that proverbial 51% which wins elections and controls Congress.

But for now, I've said my piece and continue to agree to disagree with Graas.

So It Has Come To This: If This Doesn't Satisfy Lisa Graas's Question, I'm Not Sure What Will

Lisa Graas over at Genuine GOP Mom challenged me recently for evidence that Sarah Palin is really pro-life. Specifically, the plank in the GOP Platform what Graas linked to at the GOP election page for 08. You know, the one that Sarah Palin used when running on the GOP ticket as Vice President. 

Besides Palin’s actions—being louder than words—as a mom with a special needs child she sought to carry through the pregnancy. Instead of killing the unborn baby when he was diagnosed with Downs Syndrome. And as horrid as these numbers are, aborting a special needs child is something that 9 out of 10 mothers have done. She was in the 10% who carried her son to term. 

But Palin’s actions weren’t good enough for Graas. Graas wanted the flowery words. Mind you, flowery words from a used car salesman were enough for me buy a crap car when I was younger. Once bitten, twice shy. I’ll take someone’s personal actions over their words any day of the week.  Graas wanted something after Palin endorsed Rand Paul for Senate. 

The use of the language "Platform" in a speech.

Granted, Palin is not the Chief Expectative of a State anymore but a mere private citizen. Not even actively seeking office but who has more political clout than Mitt Romney or Newt Gringrich.

I have this.  A show of  support for the 14th amendment, in fact the entire Constitution.  She didn’t succeed from the Union as governor of Alaska.

“Not good enough”, is what Graas will probably say. And where I’ll have to counter with this: I have looked but failed to find where Palin lists off the amendments, checking off the pros and cons of each. But there is ample evidence where she talks (not actions, remember, talks.) about supporting those who are Constitutionalists.

Now I would imagine that when Palin talks about the Constitution of these United States, she means the initial document as well as all 27 amendments to the Constitution. Seeing how they are in fact part of the Supreme law of the land. She’s never released a Facebook note with an asterisk behind it saying for example, “*Except for that pesky 20th Amendment.”

For context, I believe in the Bible being the Word of God. I don’t believe a book here and there and consider the rest irrelevant but all 66 books. It’s the same with the US Constitution. I’ll treat it as the Supreme law of the land and will do my best to adhere to its laws (except for when they contradict the Bible’s commandments but that is a theological argument for later). And that includes the Amendments.

The Bill of Rights, absolutely they were needed. The 13th, banning involuntary servitude? You betcha. The 19th, we can talk about but it is the law of the land (And I’ll freely blow the Wolf Whistle of Sexism on me for that one. I. E. it’s a joke.). The 21st, God forgive me but I do love a tasty and cold micro brewed beer from time to time. And that’s only picking a few Amendments out at random.

Specifics, Graas will ask for one more time.

Very well, in the year of our Lord, 2010, she gave a speech on Friday, May 14th to the Susan B. Anthony Organization. There was lots of talk about the Constitution throughout her speech and her support for it as well as endorse candidates who she’ll believe to support those same views. Thanks to the wonders of the internet, it’s available online.



Or as Adrienne posted the key quote from Gov. Palin here:

It all comes down to life and how we're going to take a stand on protecting innocent life and deciding that nobody is beneath the protection of our laws.

Life, meaning all life, special needs and unborn and laws meaning all laws at the local, state and federal level, including the Supreme Law of the Land: The US Constitution.

I’m unclear of the exact hour and minute but I think that should satisfy Lisa Graas's query.

After listening to the speech, I don't believe that she actually said the word, 'Platform' but she did define what was covered under that particular plank.  Rather articulated her stance very well in fact.

If that doesn't quell her line of questioning, I'm not sure what will but I've said my piece about it.  Should it continue, it will be without me and I will wash my hands of this affair.

Death Panels Defined. This Time By Peter Orszag

First it was Paul Krugman and now Peter Orszag is explaining how Death Panels will work.

Rationing care by denying people the services they need in order to save money. Or you can listen to Orszag explain it himself.



He's talking about the Independent Payment Advisory Board that ObamaCare established. That's the panel who will decide what is the criteria so the population can be accepted or denied treatments because of what they have and how old they are. AKA, 'Death Panels'.

And the "quality of care" (as Orszag describes it) will go up naturally because if someone doesn't receive treatment, it won't be logged in hospital records. People will die sooner rather than later. Ergo, a healthy population and ObamaCare is a success in Orszag's eyes.

For everyone else, not so much.

Sign Of The Times

To start with, Ed at Hot Air had this gem from Governor Palin's visit to Eugene, Oregon, she drew a handful of people complaining about her visit.

To think, the irony is completely lost on these protesters.

Secondly, from Weasel Zippers. A new billboard in Texas has appeared. The first step to recovery is acknowledging your mistakes.

Heh.

The Back Story On The Sara Palin Tee Shirt At The Tax Day Rally

I saw this shirt last Thursday during the Tax Day Rally and wasn't sure about it. It was a first for me seeing this particular message on a shirt.

Fortunately, my fellow Barbarians in Arms were able to set me straight. A pro-Palin website called Annie Oakley use to sell them. Primarily based on this song.



It works for me.

Paul Krugman Defines How Death Panels Will Work Under ObamaCare

UPDATE: Linked by Carol's Closet.

Now that ObamaCare is the law of the land, Paul Krugman can be honest with what was in the bill.



The key quote from Krugman:

The Advisory Panel which has the ability to make more or less binding judgments on saying this particular expensive treatment actually doesn't do any good medically and so we are not going to pay for it. That is actually going to save quit a lot of money. We don't know how much yet. The CBO gives it very little credit but, but most, most of the health care economists I talk to think that's going be a really, uh a really major cost saving.

Or as Sarah Palin called it, 'Death Panels'.

Cross posted at Conservatives 4 Palin.