The IUSB Vision Weblog

The way to crush the middle class is to grind them between the millstones of taxation and inflation. – Vladimir Lenin

Archive for the ‘Palin Truth Squad’ Category

Sarah Palin’s I Told You So Barack! Quotes Previous Speeches Where She Predicted It All.

Posted by iusbvision on August 8, 2011

For someone who the left said wasn’t qualified, her analysis of what is going on and where we have been going has been far ahead of the “experts”.

Sarah Palin:

In the coming days we’ll sort through the repercussions of S&P’s downgrade of our credit rating, including concerns about the impact a potential interest rate increase would have on our ability to service our suffocating $14.5 trillion debt.

I’m surprised that so many people seem surprised by S&P’s decision. Weren’t people paying attention over the last year or so when we were getting warning after warning from various credit rating agencies that this was coming? I’ve been writing and speaking about it myself for quite some time.

Back in December 2010, I wrote: “If the European debt crisis teaches us anything, it’s that tomorrow always comes. Sooner or later, the markets will expect us to settle the bill for the enormous Obama-Pelosi-Reid spending binge. We’ve already been warned by the credit ratings agency Moody’s that unless we get serious about reducing our deficit, we may face a downgrade of our credit rating.” And again in January, in response to President Obama’s State of the Union address I wrote: “With credit ratings agency Moody’s warning us that the federal government must reverse the rapid growth of national debt or face losing our triple-A rating, keep in mind that a nation doesn’t look so ‘great’ when its credit rating is in tatters.”

One doesn’t need a Harvard Law degree to figure this out! Just look across the pond at Europe. European nations with less debt and smaller deficits than ours and with real “austerity” plans in place to deal with them have had their ratings downgraded. By what magical thinking did we figure we could run up perpetual trillion dollar deficits and still somehow avoid the unforgiving mathematics of a downgrade? Nothing is ever “too big to fail.” And there’s no such thing as a free lunch. Didn’t we all learn that in our micro and macro econ classes? I did at the University of Idaho. How could Obama skip through Columbia and Harvard without learning that?

Many commonsense Americans like myself saw this day coming. In fact, in June 2010, Rick Santelli articulated the view of independent Tea Party patriots everywhere when he shouted on CNBC, “I want the government to stop spending! Stop spending! Stop spending! Stop spending! STOP SPENDING!” So, how shamelessly cynical and dishonest must one be to blame this inevitable downgrade on the very people who have been shouting all along “stop spending”? Blaming the Tea Party for our credit downgrade is akin to Nero blaming the Christians for burning Rome. Tea Party Americans weren’t the ones “fiddling” while our country’s fiscal house was going up in smoke. In fact, we commonsense fiscal conservatives were the ones grabbing for the extinguishers while politically correct politicians and their cronies buried their heads in what soon became this bonfire.

With S&P and others now warning that we could face another downgrade if we don’t get serious about our debt problem (i.e., recklessly spending money we don’t have), Washington needs to wake upbefore things get worse! We’re already hearing murmurs about QE3, which is just madness and will further debase our currency at a time when the dollar’s status as the world’s reserve currency is already being questioned. The loss of the dollar’s reserve currency status would adversely impact us in every conceivable way. Our standard of living would decline as imports become more expensive (including imports of foreign oil), government wouldn’t be able to finance deficits as cheaply, and American corporations – employers – would lose a competitive edge. It would be another crack in our status as a financial superpower.

 

Now we’re all getting hit with rising food prices too. Back in November of last year, I predicted this would happen when the Federal Reserve dropped a $600 billion money bomb called QE2 on us! That’s short for “quantitative easing 2.” It’s a fancy term for running the printing presses and creating money out of thin air – which drives down the value of the dollar and makes the price of everything more expensive.

As I predicted six months ago, these policies will lead us down a path where for the first time in our history our fate will be taken out of our own hands and placed in the hands of the world’s capital markets. They will force us to make the responsible decisions that our leaders are unwilling to make. Just as the destinies of the Central Valley farms have been taken out of your hands by the federal government’s overreach into your water rights, so the destiny of our nation will be taken out of our hands because our leadership has failed to get our financial house in order.

This isn’t some theoretical threat any more. It’s already happening. The world’s biggest bond investment fund PIMCO announced last month that it was dumping U.S. Treasury bonds. The head of PIMCO, Bill Gross, one of the world’s preeminent debt investors, warned that the U.S. is in serious risk of default with our trillion dollar deficits and no end in sight. And last week, credit rating agency Standard & Poor’s downgraded our credit outlook to “negative” – that’s the first time that has happened to us since the attack on Pearl Harbor. The IMF has even given us formal notice that, unless we do something to deal with our debt problem, we could tip the world economy into another recession.

It is a disgraceful and embarrassing situation when the United States finds itself justifiably chastised in the same tone normally reserved for near-bankrupt economies.

And in this, like in shutting off your water, the federal government has failed you. Their reckless spending and destruction of the dollar will make access to available credit for farmers and small business owners harder to get. And it will make transportation costs higher because it will hit everyone at the gas pump. You see, because the Obama White House won’t let us drill domestically, we’re forced to import oil that we pay for in dollars. So, when the value of the dollar drops, the price of gas goes up. And if you think $4 a gallon is bad, wait till you see what life is like at $6 or $7 a gallon.

Last November, the so-called smart people all laughed at me when I warned them of this. They told me not to make such a big deal about rising prices. Well, guess what – it became a big deal all on its own.

In fact, there was an editorial in the New York Sun that said – and I quote: “As gasoline is nearing six dollars a gallon at some pumps, the cost of groceries is skyrocketing, and the value of the dollars…has collapsed to less than a 1,500th of an ounce of gold. Unemployment is still high. Shakespeare couldn’t come up with a better plot. But how in the world did Mrs. Palin, who is supposed to be so thick, manage to figure all this out so far ahead of the New York Times and all the economists it talked to?”

Well, I’m sure the New York Times writers will remember the famous line: “You don’t need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows.” And right now the American economy is in the howling, hot headwinds of a gathering storm. We’re printing up and buying up our own notes at an unprecedented rate, and the Fed is artificially holding interest rates down to nearly zero. Anyone with commonsense could see what was coming. Unfortunately, common sense is in short supply among our leaders. It’s like they never believe that the rules of common sense apply to them. They think somehow we’ll escape from the consequences of their policies. It’s the same magical thinking that allows them to run up trillion dollar deficits and still think that we can “win the future.”

Every other generation has weathered recessions by sacrifice and belt tightening. But our leaders today decided that they could magically paper over the tough decisions by running the printing presses. A little history lesson might have showed them how well that worked out for Germany in the 1930s. The Weimar Republic inflated its currency so much that it took a wheel barrel full of paper money to buy a loaf of bread. That might be the main thing I remember from Mr. Crum’s history class at Wasilla High, but it told me all I needed to know about the inflationary dangers of a weak currency and why we must avoid it. What a shame Mr. Crum didn’t teach at Harvard.

 

That was just three months ago, and things have already gotten worse. We have to face this storm head on. It won’t be easy, but there are real solutions to grow our economy and reduce our debt.

First, we need to get serious about our deficit. No more accounting gimmicks. No more cuts in “out-years” that never materialize. The permanent political class in D.C. might be fooling themselves with these Enron-like accounting games, but they’re not fooling the world’s capital markets. And we don’t need any more happy talk from the White House about “investing” in solar shingles and really fast trains. The White House shouldn’t even bother floating these new spending programs. We can’t afford them. Period. We need to stop this deficit spending, balance our budget, repeal Obamacare, cancel all unused stimulus funds, and reform our entitlement programs. We have to have an adult conversation about our spending commitments; circumstances have changed, and we must adapt. I know none of this will be easy, but, “thick” or not, the average American outside the D.C. politico bubble knows that we no longer have a choice! We will have entitlement reform and a balanced budget; it’s just a matter of how. We can do it ourselves in a calm, methodical, and responsible manner, or we can wait for the world’s capital markets to ram it down on us. Let’s be responsible and do it ourselves. And let’s get serious about reducing the size of government across the board and rooting out waste. How many more reports (that today are destined to merely gather dust on the shelf) do we need about duplicative and unnecessary programs before we actually do something about government waste?

We need to get this economy moving again, and the real stimulus we’ve been waiting for is domestic energy development. We must reduce our dangerous dependence on foreign oil by responsibly developing natural resources here. This will provide good paying jobs, reduce our trade deficit, increase federal and state revenue, ensure environmental standards, and actually stimulate our economy without incurring any debt. That’s real stimulus! Affordable, plentiful, and secure energy is the foundation of every thriving economy. Let’s make it the foundation of ours. Let’s do the opposite of President Obama’s manipulation of U.S. energy supplies. Let’s drill here, build refineries, and stop kowtowing to foreign countries in asking them to ramp up energy production which makes us even more beholden to them as we rely on their foreign product. Let’s move on tapping our massive domestic natural gas reserves. Natural gas is the perfect “bridge fuel” to a future when more renewable sources are available. It’s clean, it’s green, and we’ve got a lot of it. Let’s drill. Let’s build an infrastructure for natural gas cars and power plants. Energy development can help kick start our economic engine.

In addition to energy security, I embrace a pro-growth agenda that can make American corporations far more competitive on the global stage. (I will be writing more about this in the coming days.) We need to tell the world, “America is open for business again!” And let’s welcome industry by reducing burdensome regulations. The Obama administration keeps strangling businesses in red tape. From the EPA’s rulings to that nightmare known as Obamacare, the Obama administration is hanging one regulatory albatross after another around the private sector’s neck. Let’s get government out of the way and give the private sector room to breathe, grow, and thrive. We can provide businesses confidence to expand and hire Americans in a stable environment.

Be wary of the efforts President Obama makes to “fix” the debt problem. The more he tries to “fix” things, the worse they get because his “solutions” always involve spending more, taxing more, growing government, and increasing debt. This debt problem is the greatest challenge facing our country today. Obviously, President Obama doesn’t have a plan or even a notion of how to deal with it. His press conference today was just a rehash of his old talking points and finger-pointing. That’s why he can’t be re-elected in 2012.

Our economic news is disheartening and the task before us can seem daunting, but we must not lose our sense of optimism. People look around today and may see only the negative. They see a culture and a nation in decline, but that’s not who we are! America must regain its optimistic pioneering spirit again. Our founders declared that “we were born the heirs of freedom.” We are the heirs of those who froze with Washington at Valley Forge, who held the line at Gettysburg, who freed the slaves, carved a nation out of the wilderness, and allowed reward for work ethic. We are the sons and daughters of that Greatest Generation who stormed the beaches of Normandy, raised the flag at Iwo Jima, and made America the strongest and most prosperous nation in the history of mankind. By God, we will not squander what has been given us!

Our destiny is still in our own hands if we pick ourselves up and act responsibly and quickly. We must all get involved. Concerned Americans must seek truth, work harder than ever, and be willing to sacrifice today to ensure freedom tomorrow. Please get engaged in 2012 electoral politics and support experienced, vetted, pro-free market fiscal conservatives who will dedicate all to preserving our Republic and protecting our Constitution.

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Economics 101, Palin Truth Squad | Leave a Comment »

Note to Possible Presidential Candidates on Communications Strategy

Posted by iusbvision on June 13, 2011

If you get into a siege mentality you greatly limit the talent that that can help you and you also give gatekeepers too much power. Leadership isolates. While that is always a problem it becomes a dangerous problem when you are the leader of a group that has a siege mentality.

The siege mentality exacerbates a mass assumption that anything that comes from outside the group cannot possibly be correct. Therefore you must always keep some people around you who are mature enough to be loyal two you while being skeptical of you at the same time; “Yes Boss” doesn’t always serve you well.

When a candidate is under attack by a hostile press, you do not put yourself on a fortress, you put the press inside of a fenced in ring and shoot arrows into the fence when necessary. If your organization does not understand what I just explained you are already in trouble.

Posted in 2012, 2012 Primary, Chuck Norton, Palin Truth Squad, True Talking Points | Leave a Comment »

CNN: Palin’s Email Show Her to be Hard Working Governor

Posted by iusbvision on June 11, 2011

CNN reporter actually tells it like it is. The poor guy is doomed.

But much the rest of the elite media is clipping statements mid sentence and trying to make it as salacious and ridiculous as they can, prompting this response from the guys at Fox, and even earning the scorn of Democrat Party strategist Kirsten Powers:

Posted in 2012 Primary, Chuck Norton, Palin Truth Squad | Leave a Comment »

Palin bashers on “Paul Revere” eat crow. Paul Revere’s own words verify Palin correct.

Posted by iusbvision on June 8, 2011

Sarah is clearly exhausted in this video. She is on a tour talking to people non stop day after day and living on a bus with never enough sleep and reporters dogging her every move. If I follow you around 24/7 on such a tour and tape everything how many moments of non perfect articulation am I likely to get on tape? Even so, Sarah gets this piece of history correct.

Prof. William A. Jacobson, a law professor at Cornell gets the truth from Paul Revere’s own words.

Letter from Paul Revere to Jeremy Belknap, circa 1798:

I observed a Wood at a Small distance, & made for that. When I got there, out Started Six officers, on Horse back, and ordered me to dismount;-one of them, who appeared to have the command, examined me, where I came from,& what my Name Was? I told him. it was Revere, he asked if it was Paul? I told him yes He asked me if I was an express? I answered in the affirmative. He demanded what time I left Boston? I told him; and added, that their troops had catched aground in passing the River, and that There would be five hundred Americans there in a short time, for I had alarmed the Country all the way up. He immediately rode towards those who stopped us, when all five of them came down upon a full gallop; one of them, whom I afterwards found to be Major Mitchel, of the 5th Regiment, Clapped his pistol to my head, called me by name, & told me he was going to ask me some questions, & if I did not give him true answers, he would blow my brains out. He then asked me similar questions to those above. He then ordered me to mount my Horse, after searching me for arms.

Says Prof. Jacobson:

“Palin’s short statement on the video was less than clear; that sometimes happens but the part of the statement which has people screaming — that Revere warned the British that the colonial militias were waiting — appears to be true.”

 

UPDATE:

[Editor’s Note – I listened to a clip from NPR. The NPR reporter was all geared up to have their official goto historian on to blast Governor Palin. You could hear the excitement in the reporter’s voice, it was unmistakable. It was also unmistakable how deflated said NPR reporter became when their history professor said that Sarah’s remarks were correct. I must confess to taking a certain pleasure at said reporter’s expense.

I found the clip – http://www.npr.org/2011/06/06/137011636/how-accurate-were-palins-comments-on-paul-revere ]

There were actually signal shots involved in his exploits. See “Paul Revere’s Ride” by David Hackett Fischer. Hint: There were multiple rides. As far as sounding the bell, she obviously means “alarm bells” as a figure of speech. ]

This film recreation of Paul Revere’s Ride also had his run in, and warning to the British.

The Ride – Paul Revere short educational film piece

Patterico has a list of most of the leftist bloggers and elite “media reporters” who just could not bring themselves to do a few minutes worth of homework.

ABC News is at it again. They post no retraction or any mention of the historians who said that Sarah was correct. I noticed that several of the comments of people who tried correcting ABC were vanishing. So I posted a comment telling them about the letter mentioned above and asked them for a correction. Soon after my comment was deleted.

The hit piece from ABC was written by Sheila Marikar and when one examines her twitter page it seems obvious that she views the Governor with a degree of contempt. So naturally ABC made her their official Palin correspondent for the 2012 election http://abcn.ws/mrWLIa .

This is no different than Sarah Palin’s “Party like it’s 1773” comment. The elite media and the leftist bloggers went nuts calling her names “Doesn’t she know that the Boston Tea Party was in 1776” … oh really… Boston Tea Party.

[Editor’s Note – So lets take a walk through ABC’s Hit Piece Memory Lane. 

ABC News has had the most unethical Sarah Palin coverage I have seen. 

In the infamous interview with ABC’s Charlie Gibson, ABC cut out many of the substantive parts of her answers to foreign policy questions. Gibson misquoted Palin when he scolded her for saying that Iraq was a “mission from God”. Palin never said it in that context as the full quote was selectively edited. Palin’s answer about the “Bush Doctrine” was also correct; as there are six “Bush Doctrines” with Sarah naming one and Gibson naming one.

When ABC’s Barbara Walters asked Sarah Palin the infamous question again “what do you read” they edited out the books she mentioned about law, philosophy and history such as Liberty & Tyranny by famed attorney and legal scholar Mark Levin.

ABC Calling Sarah Palin “Barbie” – LINK

ABC saying that “Limbaugh has a history of making racially offensive comments” – but offered no proof  – LINK

ABC  – If you oppose Obama on policy, your racist – LINK

ABC does an infomercial for ObamaCare yet refuses health care ads from Republicans – LINK (2)

ABC questions asked to Republicans vs Democrats – LINK and I could go ON and ON.

Related:

See “Attitude Change Propaganda” at Work Courtesy ABC News. UPDATED!

ABC News Managing Editor: I didnt even know about the ACORN story.

In The Tank: NBC & ABC Refuse Health Law Ads from Conservative Groups. – UPDATE: ABC Medical Correspondent is Obama $$$ Donor!

VP Biden’s daughter on film with cocaine. ABC, CBS, and NBC offer no coverage. When “Biden” and “Cocaine” are searched on the NBC site it gives you a picture of Bristol Palin….

ABC’s Jake Tapper Not Giving the Full Story on Alaska Earmarks

Newsbusters Slams ABC and Gibson for Editing Out Key Portions of Palin’s Statements (that made her look good).

Hey Gibson! About that Bush Doctrine: There are SIX of them. Palin was right again.

ABC News Get’s It Wrong In Palin Interview

More Media B.S. – ABC News Broadcasts Bogus Palin Hit Piece Before McCain Speech

]

Posted in Chuck Norton, Click & Learn, Journalism Is Dead, Leftist Hate in Action, Palin Truth Squad | Leave a Comment »

The Atlantic Monthly: On Second Thought, Sarah Palin was a Great Governor

Posted by iusbvision on May 11, 2011

Every once in a while, the elite media (Democrat Media Complex) remembers that they are journalists and when they think they can get away with it they tell the truth or at least get much closer to it. Of course they had to destroy Sarah Palin first with all of their lies, editing chop jobs and other malfeasance, but at least now they can say “hey we reported what a good job she did”.

[Editor’s Note – Here is something else you might not know. In the infamous interview Palin had with Katie Couric over those couple of days, Katie would ask Sarah the same questions over and over again. This frustrated Palin and some of her answers became flippant as she was just getting sick of Couric’s badgering. The flippant answers are what NBC put on TV. 

This is while Steve Schmidt, (who was hostile to Palin from the beginning because he despises religious conservatives and made that clear in his own writings)  who ran the incompetent McCain communications machine, kept her off talk radio where she had a lot of experience, and wanted Sarah to behave in a way Schmidt wanted, Sarah just could not be herself.

In the infamous interview with ABC’s Charlie Gibson, ABC cut out many of the substantive parts of her answers to foreign policy questions. Gibson misquoted Palin when he scolded her for saying that Iraq was a “mission from God”. Palin never said it in that context as the full quote was selectively edited. Palin’s answer about the “Bush Doctrine” was also correct; as there are six “Bush Doctrines” with Sarah naming one and Gibson naming one.

When ABC’s Barbara Walters asked Sarah Palin the infamous question again “what do you read” they edited out the books she mentioned about law, philosophy and history such as Liberty & Tyranny by famed attorney and legal scholar Mark Levin.]

This Atlantic  article isn’t perfect, but from a leftist outfit that often just publishes smears and hate that can be debunked in mere moments, it is quite good where it is just explaining the facts and not editorializing for the left.

Sarah Palin did not just “raise taxes” as MSNBC tried to spin this piece, Sarah Palin pushed through an entirely new royalty structure for the oil companies buying oil from the people of Alaska. The old royalty system was not just a good deal for the oil companies, it resulted in a royalty so low that the people of Alaska were being ripped off (details HERE). The Murkowski machine was corrupt and on the take, they were also corrupt in the contract bidding process which Palin also fixed.

As far as I know, this is the first elite media publication to tell the truth that Dick Morris told us way back in mid 2008 (and what we have told you in dozens of articles ever since):

So why do so many of the American people not know this Sarah Palin? Why did the elite media, who knew all of this, not bother to tell you?

Atlantic:

As governor, Palin demonstrated many of the qualities we expect in our best leaders. She set aside private concerns for the greater good, forgoing a focus on social issues to confront the great problem plaguing Alaska, its corrupt oil-and-gas politics. She did this in a way that seems wildly out of character today—by cooperating with Democrats and moderate Republicans to raise taxes on Big Business. And she succeeded to a remarkable extent in settling, at least for a time, what had seemed insoluble problems, in the process putting Alaska on a trajectory to financial well-being. Since 2008, Sarah Palin has influenced her party, and the tenor of its politics, perhaps more than any other Republican, but in a way that is almost the antithesis of what she did in Alaska. Had she stayed true to her record, she might have pointed her party in a very different direction.

Inside the Alaska capitol hangs a framed copy of the front page of the Anchorage Daily News for September 11, 1969, its headline—“Alaska’s Richest Day: $900 Million!”—stretching above a picture of purposeful-looking men in suits carrying large briefcases and about to duck into a car. The briefcases contain a fortune that is being rushed to the airport and on to a bank in San Francisco, so Alaskans will not forgo a single day’s interest. This is the proceeds of the state’s first oil-lease auction since the discovery, a year earlier, of the massive oil deposit at Prudhoe Bay on Alaska’s North Slope, to this day the largest in North America. The headline captures the euphoria over the massive payout by the world’s leading oil companies—a windfall that transformed the state’s politics, economy, and self-image almost overnight.

Throughout most of its history as a territory and, after 1959, as a state, Alaska was a tenuous proposition, a barren outpost rich in resources yet congenitally poor because the outside interests that extracted them didn’t leave much behind. The main obstacle to statehood was convincing Congress that Alaska wouldn’t immediately go bust. It still relies heavily on aid from Washington, and that, combined with the federal government’s holding title to 60 percent of its land base (the state itself holds 28 percent more), generates a robust resentment of federal power. The colonial mind-set is reinforced by the intensity of the state’s politics, a common attribute of remote settlements like Alaska, as the historian Ken Coates has noted—think Lord of the Flies.

To suddenly strike it rich opens up all sorts of possibilities, but there can be problems too. The legislature exhausted its fortune without meeting Alaskans’ outsize expectations. And although oil brought jobs and revenue, it also ensured that a state long accustomed to economic subservience would be beholden to a powerful new interest. Oil is more important to Alaska than the movie business is to Los Angeles or the auto industry is to Michigan. Stephen Haycox, a professor at the University of Alaska at Anchorage, writes in Frigid Embrace, his history of the state’s political economy, “The oil industry is, for all practical purposes, Alaska’s only private economy.”

This binds the state’s fortunes not just to the price of oil but also to the fate of the three giants that dominate Alaska: BP, ExxonMobil, and ConocoPhillips. Oil taxes supply almost 90 percent of the general revenue, so oil is the central arena of state politics. The industry is forever trying to coax lower taxes, lighter regulation, and greater public investment by promising jobs and riches—or, on occasion, threatening to withdraw them.

In 1978, the Democratic legislature tried to secure the state’s share of oil profits by establishing a corporate income tax over the bitter opposition of the oil companies, which sued to overturn it. They lost in every venue, including, finally, the U.S. Supreme Court. But the real battle was fought in the statehouse.

The oil industry contributed mainly to Republicans through the 1960s and ’70s, but came to realize that it needed broader alliances, and in the late ’70s began courting Democrats too. The strategy paid off. In 1981, the oil companies, through their allies in the legislature, launched a coup, ousting the speaker of the house and key committee chairmen. Then they revoked the corporate income tax. For the next 25 years, oil interests ruled the state almost uninterruptedly.

Palin’s rise began in 2002, when, term-limited as mayor of Wasilla, she ran for lieutenant governor. Little known and heavily outspent, she beat expectations, losing only narrowly and showing an exceptional ability to win fervent support. Afterward, she campaigned for Frank Murkowski, the four-term Alaska senator come home to run for governor. Palin traveled the state speaking about Murkowski, and making herself better known. When he won, she was short-listed to serve the remainder of his Senate term, and even interviewed for the job. But it went to his daughter Lisa instead. (Palin acidly recounts the patronizing interview with the new governor in her memoir, Going Rogue.) Palin got the low-profile chairmanship of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, a regulatory body charged with ensuring that these resources are developed in the public interest.

By the time she arrived, the notion that Alaska’s oil-and-gas policy operated in the public interest was getting hard to maintain. The industry controlled the state, and especially the Republican Party. Other than a modest adjustment to oil taxes that squeezed through in 1989 after the Exxon Valdez oil spill, the hammerlock held. Alaskans were coming to regard this situation with suspicion and anxiety. The problem wasn’t just that the state was starved of revenue from its most valuable resource. It was also the failure to develop another resource to which the oil companies held title: Alaska’s bountiful supply of natural gas. It’s always been understood that North Slope oil would one day run dry. Someday, perhaps as soon as 2019, there won’t be enough oil left to push through the trans-Alaska pipeline—a catastrophe, unless the state somehow replaces the revenue. For this reason, building a gas pipeline has long been a political priority, and one the oil companies have balked at.

From her spot on the oil-and-gas commission, Palin touched off a storm over these anxieties. One glaring example of the unhealthy commingling of oil interests and Republican politics was her fellow commissioner and Murkowski appointee, Randy Ruedrich, who was also chairman of the state Republican Party. Less than a year into the job, Ruedrich got crosswise with Palin for conducting party business from his office (and, it was later revealed, giving information to a company that the commission oversaw). When he ignored her admonitions to stop, she complained to Murkowski’s staff, but still nothing happened. So Palin laid out her concerns in a letter to the governor and the story leaked to the media. In the ensuing uproar, Palin became a hero and Murkowski was left no choice but to fire Ruedrich from the commission.

Palin got strong support from an unlikely quarter: Democrats. “She had the appearance of someone who was willing to go in a different direction,” Hollis French, a Democratic state senator, told me. “We subsequently learned that she’ll throw anyone under a bus, but that wasn’t apparent at the time. It looked like real moral courage.”

Even so, Palin’s actions were presumed to have ruined her prospects. Murkowski and Ruedrich still ran the party. Breaking with them made her no longer viable as an ordinary Republican or a recipient of oil-company largesse. To continue her rise, she needed to find another path. Palin alone imagined that she could. In this and other ways, she displayed all the traits that would become famous: the intense personalization of politics, the hyper-aggressive score-settling—and the dramatic public gesture, which came next.

Palin was clearly the victor (Ruedrich paid the largest civil fine in state history), but she quit the commission anyway. In Going Rogue, she says only that as a commissioner, she was subject to a gag order that Murkowski refused to lift. But quitting didn’t void the gag order. What it did was thrust her back into the spotlight and reinforce her public image. It also gave her a rationale to challenge Murkowski.

All of this turned out to be shrewd politics, because Murkowski’s governorship proceeded to fall apart, thanks to his brazen sense of entitlement. After failing to persuade the Homeland Security Department to buy him a personal jet (to help “defend, deter or defeat opposition forces”), he ignored the legislature’s objections and bought one with state funds. But it was his handling of matters vital to the state’s future that finally threw open the door for Palin.

Murkowski made up his mind to strike a deal with the major oil producers to finally build a gas pipeline from the North Slope. He cut out the legislature and insisted on negotiating through his own team of experts, out of public sight. This rankled all sorts of people because, beyond his arrogance, Murkowski had distinct views about oil and gas that many others didn’t share.

Alaska’s parties align differently from parties elsewhere—they’re further to the right and principally concerned with resource extraction. The major philosophical divide, especially on oil and gas, is between those who view the state as beholden to the oil companies for its livelihood, and will grant them almost anything to ensure that livelihood, and those who view its position as being like the owner of a public corporation for whom the oil companies’ interests are separate from and subordinate to those of its citizen-shareholders. “Oil and gas cuts a swath right through ordinary partisan politics,” Patrick Galvin, Palin’s revenue commissioner, told me.

Murkowski’s willingness to cater to the oil producers, and his secrecy, caused tensions in his administration that burst into view when he announced his deal, in October 2005. It was a breathtaking giveaway that ceded control of the pipeline to the oil companies and retained only a small stake for Alaskans; established a 30-year regime of low taxes impossible to revoke; indemnified companies against any damages from accidents; and exempted everything from open-records laws. In exchange, the state got an increase in the oil-production tax. (Palin later released a private memo in which Murkowski’s top economic adviser complains that he has “gone completely overboard” and is treating “Alaska as a banana republic in order to secure the gas line.”) The deal conceded so much that Murkowski’s natural-resources commissioner, Tom Irwin, publicly questioned its legality—and was summarily fired. Six of Irwin’s aides quit in protest, and the “Magnificent Seven” became a cause célèbre. In the end, the legislature rejected the gas-line deal. But, in a twist, it agreed to the oil tax—which had been intended as an inducement to pass the rest of the package.

Palin came out hard on the other side of the philosophical divide from Murkowski—and made it personal. She announced she would challenge him for governor. She assailed the “secret gas line deal” and the “multinational oil companies that make mind-boggling profits off resources owned by all Alaskans.” She put an “all-Alaska” pipeline at the center of her campaign. And she declared her intention to hire Tom Irwin to negotiate the deal. “She’s what I call ‘alley-cat smart,’” Tony Knowles, the former Democratic governor, told me. “It’s not about ideology. She knows how to pick her way down the political route that she feels will be the most beneficial to what she wants to do.”

Murkowski’s tax was discredited almost immediately. Just after he signed the new Petroleum Profits Tax, the FBI raided the offices of six legislators, in what became the biggest corruption scandal in state history. During the legislative session, the FBI had hidden a video camera at the Baranof Hotel, in Juneau, in a suite that belonged to Bill Allen, a major power broker and the chief executive of Veco Corporation, an oil-services firm. The tapes showed him discussing bribes with important politicians, and revealed the existence of a group of Republican legislators who called themselves the “Corrupt Bastards Club” and took bribes from Allen and others. (Several were later sent to prison.)

In the Republican primary, Palin crushed Murkowski, delivering one of the worst defeats ever suffered by an incumbent governor anywhere. She went on to have little trouble dispatching Knowles, an oil-friendly Democrat. “A lot of people on the East Coast, when they think of Sarah Palin now,” Cliff Groh, a former state tax lobbyist, told me, “some five-letter words come to mind: Scary. Crazy. Angry. Maybe some others. But the five-letter word that people in Alaska associated with her name was clean.”

You betcha.

Posted in 2012 Primary, Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Palin Truth Squad | 2 Comments »

Sarah Palin: What We Were Saying One Year Ago About Obama’s Failed Energy Policy

Posted by iusbvision on April 1, 2011

Related – The latest lie from the left: Two-thirds of oil and gas leases in Gulf inactive

 

It’s unbelievable (literally) the rhetoric coming from President Obama today. This is coming from he who is manipulating the U.S. energy supply. President Obama is once again giving lip service to a “new energy proposal”; but let’s remember the last time he trotted out a “new energy proposal” – nearly a year ago to the day. The main difference is today we have $4 a gallon gas in some places in the country. This is no accident. This administration is not a passive observer to the trends that have inflated oil prices to dangerous levels. His war on domestic oil and gas exploration and production has caused us pain at the pump, endangered our already sluggish economic recovery, and threatened our national security. Through a process of what candidate Obama once called “gradual adjustment,” American consumers have seen prices at the pump rise 67 percent since he took office. Meanwhile, the vast undeveloped reserves that could help to keep prices at the pump affordable remain locked up because of President Obama’s deliberate unwillingness to drill here and drill now. We’re subsidizing offshore drilling in Brazil and purchasing energy from them, instead of drilling ourselves and keeping those dollars circulating in our own economy to generate jobs here. The President said today, “There are no quick fixes.” He’s been in office for nearly three years now, and he’s about to launch his $1 billion re-election campaign. When can we expect any “fixes” from him? How high does the price of energy have to go?

 

So, here’s a little flashback to what I wrote on March 31, 2010, at National Review Online’s The Corner:

 

Many Americans fear that President Obama’s new energy proposal is once again “all talk and no real action,” this time in an effort to shore up fading support for the Democrats’ job-killing cap-and-trade (a.k.a. cap-and-tax) proposals. Behind the rhetoric lie new drilling bans and leasing delays; soon to follow are burdensome new environmental regulations.  Instead of “drill, baby, drill,” the more you look into this the more you realize it’s “stall, baby, stall.”

 

Today the president said he’ll “consider potential areas for development in the mid and south Atlantic and the Gulf of Mexico, while studying and protecting sensitive areas in the Arctic.” As the former governor of one of America’s largest energy-producing states, a state oil and gas commissioner, and chair of the nation’s Interstate Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, I’ve seen plenty of such studies. What we need is action — action that results in the job growth and revenue that a robust drilling policy could provide.  And let’s not forget that while Interior Department bureaucrats continue to hold up actual offshore drilling from taking place, Russia is moving full steam ahead on Arctic drilling, and China, Russia, and Venezuela are buying leases off the coast of Cuba.

 

As an Alaskan, I’m especially disheartened by the new ban on drilling in parts of the 49th state and the cancellation of lease sales in the Chukchi and Beaufort seas. These areas contain rich oil and gas reserves whose development is key to our country’s energy security. As I told Secretary Salazar last April, “Arctic exploration and development is a slow, demanding process. Delays or major restrictions in accessing these resources for environmentally responsible development are not in the national interest or the interests of the State of Alaska.”

 

Since I wrote the above, we have even more evidence of the President’s anti-drilling agenda. We have the moratorium in the Gulf of Mexico as well as the de-facto moratorium in the Arctic. We have his 2012 budget that proposes to eliminate several vital oil and natural gas production tax incentives. We have his anti-drilling regulatory policies that have stymied responsible development. And the list goes on. The President says that we can’t “drill” our way out of the problem. But we can’t drive our cars on solar shingles either. We have to live in the real world where we must continue to develop the conventional resources that we actually use right now to fuel our economy as we continue to look for a renewable source of energy. If we are looking for an affordable, environmentally friendly, and abundant domestic source of energy, why not turn to our own domestic supply of natural gas? Whether we use it to power natural-gas cars or to run natural-gas power plants that charge electric cars, natural gas is an ideal “bridge fuel” to a future when more renewable sources are available, affordable, and economically viable on their own. It’s a lot more viable than subsidizing boondoggles like these inefficient electric cars that no one wants. I’m all for electric cars if you can develop one I can actually use in Alaska, where you can drive hundreds of miles without seeing many people, let alone many electrical sockets. But these electric and hybrid cars are not a quick fix because we still need an energy source to power them. That’s why I like natural gas, but we still have to drill for natural gas, and this administration doesn’t like drilling or apparently the jobs that come with responsible oil and natural gas development. They don’t have a coherent energy policy. They have piecemeal ideas for subsidizing impractical pet “green” projects.

 

I have always been in favor of an “all-of-the-above” approach to energy independence, but “all-of-the-above” means conventional resource development too.  It means a coherent, practical, and forward-looking energy policy. I wish the President would understand this. The good news is there is nothing wrong with America’s energy policy that another good old-fashion election can’t solve. 2012 is just around the corner.

 

– Sarah Palin

Posted in 2012, 2012 Primary, Chuck Norton, Energy & Taxes, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration, Palin Truth Squad, Regulatory Abuse | Leave a Comment »

Sarah Palin: Why Is It That the US Often Tells Israel That They Need to Back Off?

Posted by iusbvision on March 24, 2011

Indeed.

Terrorists go into Israel and cut the throats of an entire family and the people in Gaza are dancing in the streets.

Hamas is launching rockets against Israeli civilians again.

Hamas set off another bomb in Israel.

Check out the video’s on the web site and at MEMRI.org and you will see Hamas state run TV using kids cartoon dubs and such to teach hate, genocide, killing Jews etc. There is no way to negotiate with people like that.

If Cuba launched rockets at us for 20 minutes, we would make it into the 51st state. They have been launching them at Israel for 20 years and still Israel shows so much restraint that its enemies are not deterred.

The entire interview is here. Sarah goes in-depth into several policy areas here so if that is something you care about be sure to watch:

 

UPDATE – Israel boarded a ship headed for Gaza with 50 tons of weapons, including six Iranian made anti-ship missiles of Chinese design.

Posted in 2012 Primary, Chuck Norton, Israel, Palin Truth Squad | Leave a Comment »

Tammy Bruce on Sarah Palin India/Israel trip

Posted by iusbvision on March 21, 2011

The press in both India and Israel was very positive. No matter what you think about Sarah Palin this trip helped her and served her well. Her prepared comments were well done and policy substantive, which, as Tammy points out, explains the American elite media brownout on the coverage. The conference in India can be seen HERE. Transcript HERE.

Posted in China, Chuck Norton, Israel, Palin Truth Squad | Leave a Comment »

Sarah Palin Speech at India Conclave: America and India are a testament to the positive force of human aspirations

Posted by iusbvision on March 20, 2011

India Today published the text of the entire text of the speech HERE.

 

Posted in 2012 Primary, Chuck Norton, Energy & Taxes, Palin Truth Squad | Leave a Comment »

More Attitude Change Propaganda from the NYT Against Palin

Posted by iusbvision on March 18, 2011

NYT:

Palin’s Successors (Republicans Too) Seek to Dismantle Her Energy Legacy

JUNEAU, Alaska — While every online swipe from former Gov. Sarah Palin still draws national attention and stirs fresh speculation about her political ambitions, back home she is no longer quite so imposing.

Even as she casts herself as an energy expert and is quick to attack the Obama administration on oil and gas issues, the two most prominent energy policies she put in place as governor of Alaska face new challenges less than two years after she left office.

Gov. Sean Parnell, Ms. Palin’s fellow Republican and former lieutenant, has announced that it is his top priority to undo parts of major oil tax increases that Ms. Palin made law. He argues that high state taxes, not just federal regulations, are preventing oil companies from exploring new drilling in Alaska and therefore jeopardizing future state revenues.

“Lower taxes means more competitive,” Mr. Parnell said last week. “It means more jobs.”

Sounds pretty bad doesn’t it? It is intended to. As the article goes on it does not indicate just what Changes Gov Parnell wishes to make. So how do you really know her “legacy” is at stake? The narrative that the NYT wishes you to believe is that even the Republicans thought she was misguided and had no idea what she was doing.

Are you ready for the truth? This is wht the NYT decided you didn’t need to know.

Before Gov. Palin blew the whistle about the bribes to keep the Alaska Oil Royalties down Alaska had nearly the lowest oil royalties in the world. You can examine a chart at the following link – http://www.iraqdividend.com/World_Oil_Tax_Policies.pdf

When she ran for Governor Mrs. Palin promised to make the royalties competitive so that the Alaska citizens were not getting ripped off. In fact, Governor Palin sent much of that money to Alaska residents in the form of checks directly to citizens. On top of that Alaska now has a $12 billion rainy day fund (that Democrats are itching to blow).

So what was Governor Palin’s plan? Here are some highlights of bill:

1 – 20% production tax credits for oil and gas investment in Alaska

2 – 22.5% tax rate on “net” positive cash flow or “Production Tax Value”

3 – Progressivity: A higher tax rate (.25) kicks in when oil sells for more than $55 per barrel.

4 – Requires a report in 2011 about how well all the incentive provisions are working to enhance exploration, development and production in the state.

The taxes the oil companies had to pay on the value of the oil increased by 22% which still puts Alaska at a below average tax rate for oil drilling. This is still a good deal for oil companies, but not one that leaves Alaskan’s short changed.

So what is the problem? As the Alaska Daily News reports, the progressive increases in the tax rate per barrel of oil get pretty high when you see oil going to $120 or $130 mark. ADN points out that most legislators did not foresee such prices as being likely. When the price of a barrel of oil gets rather extreme as it is today that tax goes up too high thus making it more profitable to pull oil resources out of Alaska and place them elsewhere.

Here is an even bigger rub, Governor Palin’s bill accounted for this and as you can see section 4 above demands a report in 2011 to see how the bill’s rates and incentives are working to prevent decreases in oil production and potential job loss. Thanks to OPEC and Obama’s illegal off shore drilling ban this is exactly what we are facing. This mandated report, as well as others, show that production and investment in Alaska has fallen since the 2009 oil price spike and is now getting worse.

As a result Gov. Parnell wishes to adjust the progressive part of the oil tax downward to attract more production and job expansion. Governor Palin would have done exactly what Governor Parnell is doing now. Parnell is not reversing Palin’s legacy, he is reaffirming it.

Posted in 2012 Primary, Chuck Norton, Energy & Taxes, Journalism Is Dead, Palin Truth Squad, True Talking Points | 2 Comments »

Now Russia, along with Mexico, Spain, Cuba, and China are building oil wells just miles off our shores while Obama keeps Americans out. UPDATE – Steve Forbes: Obama repeating Carter’s mistakes.

Posted by iusbvision on March 6, 2011

Related:

Obama Administration Held in Contempt for Violating Court Order

API: Recent Studies Show Obama Drilling Moratorium Will Cost 50,000 Jobs; 160,000 by 2032.

Heritage: Anti-Drilling Policies Costing Federal Government Billions in Lost Revenue

Had enough yet?

Washington Times:

The Obama administration is poised to ban offshore oil drilling on the outer continental shelf until 2012 or beyond. Meanwhile, Russia is making a bold strategic leap to begin drilling for oil in the Gulf of Mexico. While the United States attempts to shift gears to alternative fuels to battle the purported evils of carbon emissions, Russia will erect oil derricks off the Cuban coast.

Offshore oil production makes economic sense. It creates jobs and helps fulfill America’s vast energy needs. It contributes to the gross domestic product and does not increase the trade deficit. Higher oil supply helps keep a lid on rising prices, and greater American production gives the United States more influence over the global market.

Drilling is also wildly popular with the public. A Pew Research Center poll from February showed 63 percent support for offshore drilling for oil and natural gas. Americans understand the fundamental points: The oil is there, and we need it. If we don’t drill it out, we have to buy it from other countries. Last year, the U.S. government even helped Brazil underwrite offshore drilling in the Tupi oil field near Rio de Janeiro. The current price of oil makes drilling economically feasible, so why not let the private sector go ahead and get our oil?

The Obama administration, however, views energy policy through green eyeshades. Every aspect of its approach to energy is subordinated to radical environmental concerns. This unprecedented lack of balance is placing offshore oil resources off-limits. The O Force would prefer the country shift its energy production to alternative sources, such as nuclear, solar and wind power. In theory, there’s nothing wrong with that, in the long run, assuming technology can catch up to demand. But we have not yet reached the green utopia, we won’t get there anytime soon, and America needs more oil now.

 

 

UPDATE Steve Forbes: Obama repeating Carter’s mistakes…

You need to watch only a few minutes of cable news analysis to realize just how ludicrous our national energy policies have become. As escalating tensions and chaos unfold in Egypt, Libya and other Middle Eastern nations, one energy analyst suggested that if Libyan oil supplies were to fail, the United States would rely on Saudi Arabia for its oil needs. If that statement alone doesn’t put U.S. leaders on red alert, the looming national energy crisis may soon become reality.

The Obama administration is repeating the mistakes of President Jimmy Carter’s failed energy policies, which marred his term and stigmatized the 1970s. They are leading us straight into another national energy disaster.

Key members of the Obama administration believe this friction abroad underscores the need to move away from oil and gas entirely and shift to boutique forms of alternative energy. Their lack of political will to drill for oil and gas compromises our national security and jeopardizes economic recovery.

It skirts the colossal elephant in the room: Oil and natural gas produced here in the United States are likely to still account for at least 57 percent of domestic energy consumption by 2035. Not to mention that energy production here can relieve the U.S. from the dangerous grip of foreign petro dictators.

Unfortunately, this administration’s Department of the Interior, with the most anti-oil-and-gas record in U.S. history, is sabotaging any real chance of avoiding the pending energy crisis because of its continued hold on deepwater drilling permits in the Gulf of Mexico.

When Interior Secretary Ken Salazar heads before the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee on Wednesday, Americans — particularly the 9.2 million directly or indirectly working in the oil and gas industry — would be ill served if the question isn’t asked: Are the thousands, and counting, of out-of-work Americans in the Gulf region and beyond a worthwhile consequence of your department’s freeze?

 

 

 

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Economics 101, Energy & Taxes, Palin Truth Squad, Stuck on Stupid, True Talking Points | 1 Comment »

Sarah Palin takes on O’Reilly and Christie: It is more brave to reign in government and reform when you have a surplus like I did.

Posted by iusbvision on March 6, 2011

Sarah Palin with David Asman:


And with all due respect to Governor Christie, you know he has no choice but to cut budgets because he’s broke, his state is broke. What courage really is, is in the face of having a surplus when you have opportunity to spend spend spend other people’s money, you still choose to reign in government to let the private sector soar. That’s real courage, and by the way that’s what I did as Governor here when I engaged in hiring freezes and reduced earmarks by 86% and vetoed the largest amounts in our state’s history. Despite having a surplus that’s real leadership and that’s courage.

But I do appreciate that Governor Christie is willing to face the reality in his state and that is that they are going bankrupt. So he has to cut, he has no choice.

Gov. Christie had that coming. He started making completely unprovoked backhanded compliments to her and that is a mistake. No one is going to get the GOP nomination without her blessing and that is just a simple reality. Blue collar Republicans love Sarah for one big reason; she says how she is going to govern and does it. There is a huge chunk of voters who are sick and tired of being lied to. Those who pay attention gravitate towards her, those who follow the elite media false narrative don’t.  I have never met a Sarah hater who can tell you much about her governing record. Sarah haters also have another problem, in that they don’t know Obama’s record either.

This was Sarah’s shot across Chris Christie’s bow. Her message seems clear, “Keep dissing me Chris and guess where the next shot goes”. Tammy Bruce believes that Christie is hoping to be a President Mitt Romney’s Attorney General. Tammy would not say that unless she had a source. Tammy’s comments can be seen in the video below.

 

 

Tammy is a brilliant former leftist, former President of NOW and today is a conservative gay woman. What is interesting, and here is a little note to those professors who both loved and hated me, Tammy Bruce as a philosopher has had more influence on me than perhaps anyone.

I like Gov. Christie’s communications style when he is direct and straight, not doing backhanded compliments. I like that he is tough on budgets and is taking on the teachers union that has broken the state and fought tooth and nail to preserve the status quo of failing public schools. But respectfully, where where you Gov. Christie, when Sarah Palin left Alaska to take Obama on and for almost a year was the only national figure doing so? Where where you when Sarah Palin was helping to form, solidify and fund raise for tax payer groups, Tea Party groups, and candidates? Where were you when she was the only major politician with a national presence fighting ObamaCare? Where were you when Sarah Palin took the slings and arrows while turning public opinion against Nancy Pelsosi and the policies of this White House?

2010 would not have happened without Sarah and you would not have been elected if she were not so effective in sounding the alarm and changing the national mood against the Democrat leadership’s far left agenda. Does anyone believe the elite media would have reported that the Democrats increased deficit spending over a factor of six without the coverage Palin got while she sounded the alarm?

So as far as I am concerned, and I know both of your staffs are going to see this on Google Alerts, this spat ends right here right now. There are bigger fish to fry and we do not need a circular firing squad. I likely speak for a great deal of pundits and bloggers when I tell you both to knock it off.

Hey Bill stop interrupting me ….. ouch


Sarah Palin “Unscripted”



Sarah on Judge Jeanine: This is a great interview. 


Sarah on the Bob & Mark Show: Another great interview. 


Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Palin Truth Squad, True Talking Points | Leave a Comment »

British Student Calls Out Michelle Obama. Defends Sarah Palin.

Posted by iusbvision on March 5, 2011

Meet the lovely and quite brilliant YouTube personality Laurbubble.

I sent Laurbubble the following message:

You have just figured out the American left. They make a “policy” and cry “WERE SAVED!” without any regard for the unintended consequences of their policy. The policy usually makes matters worse as you have so eloquently described. Usually the policies they make for the “public good” increase the stock of one of their contributors, or stick it to those who donate to the other party.

The more the planner’s plans fail the more the planners plan.

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Corporatism, Culture War, Government Gone Wild, Health Law, Palin Truth Squad, True Talking Points | 1 Comment »

Kathleen Parker ousted from CNN for the same reason she was hired.

Posted by iusbvision on February 27, 2011

 

I was tossing and turning in my mind if I should write this article or not. It is the same old story with so called “conservatives” who have little intellectual substance who, in an act of desperation for attention, start attacking conservatives of substance with with name calling or unsupported accusations to get “instant stardom” by the leftist elite media; just ask Davids Brooks and Frum who now only have traction within New York City. Ask John McCain who used to say that the elite media was his constituency till he ran against The One. The day after McCain won the primary, the love affair was cut off, the elite media turned on him in unison, the NYT falsely accused him of having an affair and for the first time refused to publish his letters to the paper.

As a former radio talk show host myself if I switched sides and attacked there is little doubt that I would get offers from leftist media and or newspapers to work. It is a story that has happened a dozen times. What a conservative says is not “newsworthy” to the elite media until said conservative attacks a Republican candidate with something “saucy”.

The elite media makes its news decisions based of leftist dogma. Conservatives know that and when they want to cash in they know what to do to get attention. However that success is very limited and such so called “conservatives” cannot draw in a wider audience because they lose credibility with conservatives, traditionalists and independents.  I did not watch the show more than a few times because it was boring and neither of the people on had much substance in their views. Besides who wants to watch a “crossfire”  like show with a liberal Republican sellout and a leftist politician who likes prostitutes? There just isn’t enough substantive conflict to make the show interesting.

Imagine if you will, “CROSSFIRE” with David Frum & Joe Lieberman. They would agree 70% of the time and it would be a snoozer. But at least Joe is an honest man who I can respect.

With that said there is NO chemistry between these two. Let us say the obvious. Parker finds Spitzer revolting because he is. He is dismissive of her and talks over her in a way that is misogynistic and she is trying too hard to be liked by CNN’s small audience.  This does not make for good TV.

I am way behind in my writing anyway so I was going to just blow this off, but then John Ziegler wrote the article I would have written, but included a dimension to it that only he could deliver.

John Ziegler:

But the primary reason why the program couldn’t work is also the very reason Parker got the gig in the first place [Emphasis ours  – IUSB Vision Editor]. She was clearly hired because she was perceived as a “conservative” who was willing to vigorously attack Palin, while not holding any particularly strong conservative opinions which might offend the largely liberal CNN audience. It is hardly a secret that the best (and perhaps only) way for an unknown or career-challenged conservative to achieve mainstream media acceptance is to be a sellout to their supposed cause (just ask Arianna HuffingtonPeggy NoonanDavid BrooksDavid FrumMichael Smerconish, or Joe Scarborough, to name only a few).

Criticizing Palin (along with endorsing Obama) has quickly become the most reliable path to instant notoriety/credibility for ambitious “conservatives,” and Parker became the poster child for this phenomenon. When I went on CNN during my film’s first release, I was actually asked to respond to a Parker quote about Palin. This was especially absurd because Parker had no special knowledge of Palin and was virtually unknown before she “led” Palin’s “assassination.” Had Parker praised Palin, CNN would never have found the quote remotely newsworthy.

However, there is apparently a downside side to getting a show this way. Much like a guy who spends all his cash to get the girl and has nothing left to keep her, Parker had no capital with which to make the show a ratings success. Conservatives, most of whom don’t trust CNN to begin with, had no reason to tune in, and she was such a soft and colorless “conservative” that she didn’t even make for a fun punching bag for the liberal audience, or her overrated co-host (based on my experience Spitzer is actually quite dumb). The sad reality of cable news television today is that you must be polarizing to “succeed.” Moderation or wimpiness simply won’t work, especially when such a temperament is clearly contrived, and not backed up with any real talent.

With no spark, no friction, no talent, and no audience base, Parker brought nothing to the table, and the show was clearly doomed. In the end, she got the fate that she clearly deserved, only probably better.

There is also an interesting secondary element to Parker’s demise which might make media pundits a little more hesitant to attack Sarah Palin. Since the 2008 election, many of her biggest media critics have found themselves out of a job. Keith Olbermann, Rick Sanchez, David Shuster, Alan Colmes, Campbell Brown, John Roberts, Larry King, Harry Smith and Parker are all prominently mentioned in my documentary and all of them have been let go from TV jobs since Obama got elected.

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Leftist Hate in Action, Palin Truth Squad, Republican Brand | Leave a Comment »

Obama Administration: We will not enforce DOMA

Posted by iusbvision on February 25, 2011

What if a President Palin had behaved this way? Does anyone doubt that the elite media would be asking for her impeachment?

Calling the law unconstitutional he says he wont enforce it – LINK.  But wait, ObamaCare was declared unconstitutional and he is ignoring the ruling. His offshore drilling ban also unconstitutional and he ignores that and then ignores being held in contempt of court.

If it comes to the court ruling demanding the end of the offshore drilling ban he is ignoring which has resulted in a 13% drop in domestic oil production, the ruling finding O-Care unconstitutional he is ignoring, the uncalled for revocation of coal mining permits, the EPA now making “law” via abuse of the regulatory power in spite of the will of Congress, the FCC regulating the internet in spite of Congress and the courts telling them no, the refusal to enforce the Voting Rights Act when it comes to the Black Panthers and now this, what we are seeing the refusal by this president to recognize any limits on his power, be it the laws of Congress, the courts or even separation of powers.

This is also demonstrated by some of his judicial nominees such as Elana Kagan who wrote in a law review article that government should redistribute speech and that government has no interest in preserving a marketplace of ideas. In essence that government should pick whose and what speech is good for society.

He is abusing that regulatory power given by Congress, which is supposed to be used to make the laws Congress passes easy to comply with and understand, as a tool for social engineering.

Megyn Kelly comments:

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Government Gone Wild, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration, Palin Truth Squad | Leave a Comment »

Sarah Palin & The Leftist Psyche

Posted by iusbvision on February 8, 2011

Posted in 2012, Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Leftist Hate in Action, Palin Truth Squad | 1 Comment »

Gallup: 70% of Americans say Republicans should consider tea party ideas

Posted by iusbvision on January 31, 2011

Can you say “main stream’? I knew ya could.

PRINCETON, NJ — About 7 in 10 national adults, including 88% of Republicans, say it is important that Republican leaders in Congress take the Tea Party movement’s positions and objectives into account as they address the nation’s problems. Among Republicans, 53% rate this “very important.”

tdld4jukwkgcf_vsk1g1gq.gif

These results are from a USA Today/Gallup poll conducted Jan. 14-16, prior to President Barack Obama’s State of the Union address.

 

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Palin Truth Squad, Post 2010 | 1 Comment »

Democrat Politicians Stingy on Charitable Giving – UPDATED!

Posted by iusbvision on December 30, 2010

UPDATE – John Stossel on who gives more? Republicans or Democrats?

There have been several studies on this issue and the results are always the same, Republicans, especially religious Republicans, donate much larger amounts of their income to charity.

This bears out in tipping as well. In 1992 while I was working part time as a driver for a pizza chain I was delivering to students on the Notre Dame campus. After the transaction was completely done I asked the payer who they were supporting in the upcoming election (Bush41 or Clinton). As it worked out 76% of Republican voting customers tipped and only a small fraction of Democrat voting customers tipped (7% or 17% – I don’t recall which one as this was 1992). I talked to Rush Limbaugh about my experience as tipping was a frequent subject that week on his show. WSBT heard my call and was incredulous. They managed to track me down and had a very skeptical reporter follow me around the next night on deliveries. I followed the same procedure and the numbers worked out again within a percentage point. When they did the TV spot on me I said it was because conservatives are more compassionate than liberals and as I recall the WSBT anchor delivered that news with some degree of scorn in her voice.

 

 

This is nothing new.

FLASHBACK:  Palin gives more to charity in 1 year than Biden did in 8 and she has less income.

So what about the rest of them?

Liberals Give ‘Til It Hurts (You)

By Ann Coulter

Liberals never tire of discussing their own generosity, particularly when demanding that the government take your money by force to fund shiftless government employees overseeing counterproductive government programs.

They seem to have replaced “God” with “Government” in scriptural phrases such as “love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.” (Matthew 22:37)

This week, we’ll take a peek at the charitable giving of these champions of the poor.

In 2009, the Obamas gave 5.9 percent of their income to charity, about the same as they gave in 2006 and 2007. In the eight years before he became president, Obama gave an average of 3.5 percent of his income to charity, upping that to 6.5 percent in 2008.

The Obamas’ charitable giving is equally divided between “hope” and “change.”

George W. Bush gave away more than 10 percent of his income each year he was president, as he did before becoming president.

Thus, in 2005, Obama gave about the same dollar amount to charity as President George Bush did, on an income of $1.7 million — more than twice as much as President Bush’s $735,180. Again in 2006, Bush gave more to charity than Obama on an income one-third smaller than Obama’s.

In the decade before Joe Biden became vice president, the Bidens gave a total — all 10 years combined — of $3,690 to charity, or 0.2 percent of their income. They gave in a decade what most Americans in their tax bracket give in an average year, or about one row of hair plugs.

Of course, even in Biden’s stingiest years, he gave more to charity than Sen. John Kerry did in 1995, which was a big fat goose egg. Kerry did, however, spend half a million dollars on a 17th-century Dutch seascape painting that year, as Peter Schweizer reports in his 2008 book, “Makers and Takers.”

To be fair, 1995 was an off-year for Kerry’s charitable giving. The year before, he gave $2,039 to charity, and the year before that a staggering $175.

He also dropped a $5 bill in the Salvation Army pail and almost didn’t ask for change.

In 1998, Al Gore gave $353 to charity — about a day’s take for a lemonade stand in his neighborhood. That was 10 percent of the national average for charitable giving by people in the $100,000-$200,000 income bracket. Gore was at the very top of that bracket, with an income of $197,729.

When Sen. Ted Kennedy released his tax returns to run for president in the ’70s, they showed that Kennedy gave a bare 1 percent of his income to charity — or, as Schweizer says, “about as much as Kennedy claimed as a write-off on his 50-foot sailing sloop Curragh.” (Cash tips to bartenders and cocktail waitresses are not considered charitable donations.)

The Democratic base gives to charity as their betters do. At the same income, a single mother on welfare is seven times less likely to give to charity than a working poor family that attends religious services.

In 2006 and 2007, John McCain, who files separately from his rich wife, gave 27.3 percent and 28.6 percent of his income to charity.

In 2005, Vice President Cheney gave 77 percent of his income to charity. He also shot a lawyer in the face, which I think should count for something.

In a single year, Schweizer reports, Rush Limbaugh “gave $109,716 to ‘various individuals in need of assistance mainly due to family illnesses,’ $52,898 to ‘children’s case management organizations,’ including ‘various programs to benefit families in need,’ $35,100 for ‘Alzheimer’s community care — day care for families in need,’ and $40,951 for air conditioning units and heaters delivered to troops in Iraq.”

(Rush also once gave $50 to Maxine Waters after mistaking her for a homeless person.)

The only way to pry a liberal from his money is to hold tickertape parades for him, allowing him to boast about his charity in magazines and on TV.

Isn’t that what Jesus instructed in the Sermon on the Mount?

“So when you give to the needy, do not announce it with trumpets, as the hypocrites do … But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, so that your giving may be in secret. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you.” (Matthew 6:2-4)

In my Bible, that passage is illustrated with a photo of Bill Gates and Warren Buffett.

At least the hypocrites in the Bible, Redmond, Wash., and Omaha, Neb., who incessantly brag about their charity actually do pony up the money.

Elected Democrats crow about how much they love the poor by demanding overburdened taxpayers fund government redistribution schemes, but can never seem to open their own wallets.

The only evidence we have that Democrats love the poor is that they consistently back policies that will create more of them.

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Culture War, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration, Palin Truth Squad | Leave a Comment »

Salon Publishes MULTIPLE Calls for Torture, Murder of Sarah Palin

Posted by iusbvision on December 29, 2010

Is anyone surprised? Our friends at Big Journalism caught only one of these, there are more. Below is what we found just browsing for about five minutes. There are thousands of hate screeds against Sarah Palin and Republicans in general on Salon,  many of which contain violence and rape imagery; the few we picked out were some of the most… shall we say… colorful.

By the way THIS is what we mean by Palin Derangement Syndrome…

Via BigJournalism.com:

Liberal online political magazine Salon.com published a letter to the editor Friday that called for the murder of 2008 Republican vice presidential nominee former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin.

The letter was written in response to a mocking article at Salon titled, Good Morning America’s painfully friendly interview with Sarah Palin by Alex Pareene.

Pareene snarkily sums up the GMA interview:

“The interview was basically split into a couple of distinct sections: How awesome is your family, how bad is Barack Obama, how awful are people who criticize you, and how awesome is America?”

The first letter published in response to the article calls for Palin to be electrocuted by a cattle prod by convicted dog abuser Michael Vick:  “Vick gets a pet to torture and we get rid of Palin. A win-win for everyone!”

Michael Vick, the starting quarterback for the Philadelphia Eagles, is a convicted felon who spent time in prison for dog fighting and animal cruelty.

That letter has apparently sat in the pole position under the article in the Letters to the Editor section since it was posted “Friday, December 17, 2010 12:33 PM ET.”

The Letters section for the GMA article lists 65 letters published over four pages. Each letter has a “flag” button to call attention to Salon editors about objectionable comments. It seems no one at Salon finds it objectionable for the site to publish an explicit call for murder.

Salon’s Editor at Large  Joan Walsh is a regular on MSNBC and CNN. Will Chris Matthews, Joe Scarborough or Wolf Blitzer attack Walsh for prominently publishing a call for the murder of Sarah Palin? Will Walsh do the right thing and publicly apologize to Palin and pull the letter?

How soon will the Democratic Party front group Media Matters for America come along and slurp up this large chunk of vomit from Salon?

So I went to Salon and started looking at the comments – WARNING NOT SAFE FOR WORK –

Friday, December 17, 2010 01:24 PM ET

Palin Will Likely Be Assassinated

If she gets anywhere near the Presidential nomination, she will probably catch a bullet in the head.

I seriously doubt that the corporations who really run America want this stupid twat fucking up shit in D.C.

They prefer a smoother kind of criminal like Obama.

Friday, December 17, 2010 04:23 PM ET

I Shit In Sarah Palin’s Foul Cunt.

Fuck her and fuck her retarded family.

Fuck the GOP.

Fuck Ronald Reagan’s maggot-ridden corpse.

Fuck their evil Jesus and their sick Bible.

Fuck John Wayne and his tiny dick.

Fuck Rush Limbaugh and his cancerous soul.

Fuck George W. Bush and his cocaine-addled peabrain.

Fuck Dick Cheney and his tiny mechanical heart.

Fuck Karl Rove and his self-hating homosexuality.

Fuck Condosleeza Rice and her self-hating racism.

Fuck G.I. Joe, Captain America and The Girl Next Door.

Fuck Glenn Beck, Mitt Romney, Joseph Smith and every other batshit crazy Mormon huckster.

Fuck Miss America and all the Ships at Sea.

Fuck Barack Obama and his cowardly sellout ass.

Fuck anyone who ever supported our troops.

Fuck our troops.

Fuck God.

Fuck The Flag.

Fuck Apple Pie.

Fuck The Golden Arches.

Fuck Bank of America.

Fuck General Motors.

Fuck Joe Lieberman, Joe McCarthy and Joe the goddamn Plumber.

Fuck the South.

Fuck Texas. Twice.

Fuck the KKK.

Fuck John Birch.

Fuck Barry Goldwater.

And fuck any motherfucker who disagrees with me.

Saturday, December 18, 2010 01:39 AM ET

Calif Mike: The main stream media should stick to the old proven strategy of tearing her apart. There is no real entertainment without blood.

I hear you, brother.

I tried to convince the networks to have that obnoxious dumbass bitch torn apart and eaten alive by starving dogs, but their pussyhole executives wouldn’t buy it.

mm

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Leftist Hate in Action, Palin Truth Squad, Violence | 1 Comment »

Ambassador John Bolton explains why the New START Treaty with Russia is a bad deal for America

Posted by iusbvision on December 29, 2010

Hmm this is what Sarah Palin said a while ago.

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Leftist Hate in Action, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration, Palin Truth Squad, Stuck on Stupid | Leave a Comment »

November: Durable Goods orders drop 1.3%, Consumer Spending up .4%, Savings down to 5.3%, Capital Goods down 6.8%

Posted by iusbvision on December 29, 2010

Welcome to our flat-lining economy. Up a little here, down a little there. Some numbers creeping up for a few months to flat-line again. This is what regulatory uncertainty, a loss of confidence and even fear of over reaching government does to an economy.

Bloomberg:

New orders for manufactured durable goods in November decreased $2.6 billion or 1.3 percent to $193.7 billion, the U.S. Census Bureau announced today. This decrease, down three of the last four months, followed a 3.1 percent October decrease. Excluding transportation, new orders increased 2.4 percent. Excluding defense, new orders decreased 2.3 percent.

Transportation equipment, also down three of the last four months, had the largest decrease, $6.2 billion or 11.9 percent to $45.5 billion. This was due to nondefense aircraft and parts, which decreased $6.6 billion.

Shipments

Shipments of manufactured durable goods in November, also down three of the last four months, decreased $0.7 billion or 0.3 percent to $195.8 billion. This followed a 1.0 percent October decrease.

Transportation equipment, down four consecutive months, had the largest decrease, $1.6 billion or 3.3 percent to $46.5 billion.

Unfilled Orders

Unfilled orders for manufactured durable goods in November, up ten of the last eleven months, increased $3.4 billion or 0.4 percent to $825.7 billion. This followed a 0.7 percent October increase.

Machinery, up ten consecutive months, had the largest increase, $2.1 billion or 2.0 percent to $106.3 billion.

[Gotta hire people to make the less common models – not happening – Editor]

Inventories

Inventories of manufactured durable goods in November, up eleven consecutive months, increased $1.9 billion or 0.6 percent to $319.1 billion. This followed a 0.6 percent October increase.

Transportation equipment, also up eleven consecutive months, had the largest increase, $1.1 billion or 1.3 percent to $84.3 billion.

Capital Goods

Non-defense new orders for capital goods in November decreased $4.9 billion or 6.8 percent to $66.1 billion. Shipments decreased slightly to $64.8 billion. Unfilled orders increased $1.3 billion or 0.3 percent to $505.3 billion. Inventories increased $0.7 billion or 0.5 percent to $135.2 billion. [This number hurts. Capital goods are tools and equipment used for making things and doing big things, like making or expanding factories. It takes investors money to buy these things.  – Editor]

 

Reuters:

The Commerce Department said spending rose 0.4 percent after increasing by an upwardly revised 0.7 percent in October. Economists polled by Reuters had expected spending, which accounts for about 70 percent of U.S. economic activity, to rise 0.5 percent last month after a previously reported 0.4 percent gain in October.

The report also showed the Federal Reserve’s preferred measure of consumer inflation — the personal consumption expenditures priceindex, excluding food and energy — rose 0.1 percent after being flat for four straight months. In the 12 months through November, the core PCE index rose 0.8 percent, the same margin as in October and still the smallest year-on-year gain since records started in 1960. [There is little confidence in the Federal Reserves method of measuring inflation any more as some in the media and politicians are now openly mocking it. In short, no inflation my ear…  – Editor]

The gains in spending were the latest to suggest an acceleration in the growth pace this quarter after output increased at a 2.6 percent annualized rate in the July-September period.

Spending was supported by a 0.3 percent increase in incomes, which was slightly more than the 0.2 percent rise that economists had expected. Incomes rose 0.4 percent in October. Consumers also dipped into their savings to fund purchases. [Incomes are up largely because temp hiring is up. Temps get no benefits so they tend to get higher wages – Editor]

Spending adjusted for inflation rose 0.3 percent after advancing 0.5 percent in October. The seventh straight month of gains bolstered views the spending pace gathered momentum in the current quarter after growing at a 2.4 percent rate in the July-September period. [Whoa now look at that .3% number. So if consumer spending went up .4% and adjusted for inflation the number is .3% that means 25% of the increase in consumer spending was inflation, of which the Federal Reserve says is super low. This is another example of how Sarah Palin was way out ahead of this one.  Those in the elite media who mock her have not been paying much attention as she has been making predictions in several policy areas way out ahead of everyone else, getting mocked for it, but being proved correct again and again. – Editor]

The savings rate slipped to 5.3 percent last month, the smallest since March, from 5.4 percent in October. Savings dropped to $614.8 billion, the lowest level since March.

 

 

mm

 

 

 

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Economics 101, Palin Truth Squad | 1 Comment »

Bill Whittle on Palin Haters: It is easier to attack those with integrity when you have none.

Posted by iusbvision on December 21, 2010

This is one of the finest explanations of the propaganda and psychology used by the far left and the elite media as I have ever seen.

Posted in 2012, Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Leftist Hate in Action, Palin Truth Squad, Republican Brand | Leave a Comment »

Lessons in Humanity: Habeas Corpus and the Presumption of Innocence

Posted by iusbvision on December 19, 2010

Aside from the important legal and philosophical points addressed in this brilliant scene. There is also a communications theory lesson as well. Often we have talked about “Attitude Change Propaganda” (ACP). Attitude change propaganda is a tactic elite media journalists, academics with an agenda, and political hit men have used for years and continue to use to this day. ACP is when you pick out some of the facts and present them with an attitude; an emotionalism that implies a narrative. This is what Admiral Satee and her interrogator use quite effectively in this scene (until she takes it to far and the gig is up).

A classic example of this ACP tactic is at 4:27 in the video when the interrogator asks, “Captain can you tell me just what happened on star-date 44390 – let me refresh your memory”. ABC used this exact same tactic in the Charlie Gibson interview of  Sarah Palin when he asked, “the Bush doctrine, enunciated September 2002, before the Iraq war”. What ABC was counting on the viewer not knowing is that there are six Bush Doctrines, and how was Sarah supposed to remember which one was articulated on which date? She answered with one of the six recognized Bush Doctrines and Charlie Gibson said it was wrong and threw another in her face.

At 10:00 in the video Captain Picard gives the same warning that appears in Federalist Paper #1 by Alexander Hamilton:

Worf:  I believed her. I helped her. I did not see what she was.

Picard: Villains who twirl their mustaches are easy to spot. Those who clothe themselves in good deeds are well camouflaged.

Worf:  I think, after yesterday people will not be so ready to trust her.

Picard: Maybe, but she, or someone like her will always be with us waiting for the climate in which to flourish spreading fear in the name of righteousness (A classic example of why we should not trust those who use a crisis to gain power**). Vigilance Mr. Worf – that is the price we have to continually pay.

 

**

Rahm is best known for saying, “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste. And what I mean by that is an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before,” at the Wall Street Journal CEO Council in Washington, D.C. on November 19, 2008.

 

Posted in 2012, Campaign 2008, Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Palin Truth Squad | Leave a Comment »

Palin to Senate: Vote NO on START

Posted by iusbvision on December 17, 2010

I really do not care what you may think of Sarah Palin at this moment because this is an issue that every good American can get behind. The latest START Treaty gives away the farm and was very poorly negotiated to put it mildly.

I am aware that a long time ago Democrats opposed missile defense because it was Ronald Reagan’s idea but it is time to get over it. The way nuclear and ICBM technical proliferation has spread around the world the United States and our closest allies need missile defense. I would like one leftist to explain to us how being vulnerable and letting yourself get blown up is some kind of virtue.

The Governor is spot on with these critiques of the START Treaty.

Palin in National Review:

The proposed New START agreement should be evaluated by the only criteria that matters for a treaty: Is it in America’s interest?  I am convinced this treaty is not.  It should not be rammed through in the lame duck session using behind the scenes deal-making reminiscent of the tactics used in the health care debate.

New START actually requires the U.S. to reduce our nuclear weapons and allows the Russians to increase theirs.  This is one-sided and makes no strategic sense.  New START’s verification regime is weaker than the treaty it replaces, making it harder for us to detect Russian cheating.  Since we now know Russia has not complied with many arms control agreements currently in force, this is a serious matter.

New START recognizes a link between offensive and defensive weapons – a position the Russians have sought for years.  Russia claims the treaty constrains U.S. missile defenses and that they will withdraw from the treaty if we pursue missile defenses.  This linkage virtually guarantees that either we limit our missile defenses or the Russians will withdraw from the treaty.  The Obama administration claims that this is not the case; but if that is true, why agree to linking offensive and defensive weapons in the treaty?  At the height of the Cold War, President Reagan pursued missile defense while also pursuing verifiable arms control with the then-Soviet Union.  That position was right in the 1980’s, and it is still right today.  We cannot and must not give up the right to missile defense to protect our population – whether the missiles that threaten us come from Russia, Iran, China, North Korea, or anywhere else. I fought the Obama administration’s plans to cut funds for missile defense in Alaska while I was Governor, and I will continue to speak out for missile defenses that will protect our people and our allies.

There are many other problems with the treaty, including the limitation on the U.S. ability to convert nuclear systems to conventional systems and the lack of restriction on Russian sea launched cruise missiles.  In addition, the recent reports that Russia moved tactical nuclear weapons (which are not covered by New START) closer to our NATO allies, demonstrate that the Obama administration has failed to convince Russia to act in a manner that does not threaten our allies.

If I had a vote, I would oppose this deeply flawed treaty submitted to the Senate. Just because we were out-negotiated by the Russians that doesn’t mean we have to say yes to this. New START’s flaws have to be addressed in the form of changes to the treaty language that, at a minimum, completely de-link missile defense from offensive arms reductions.  Other issues would have to be addressed in the ratification process.  If this does not happen either now or next year, Senate Republicans, vote no!

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration, Palin Truth Squad, Russia | 1 Comment »

Bill O’Reilly Interviews Sarah Palin

Posted by iusbvision on December 17, 2010

Great interview of Governor Palin; fun and informative.

For those of you who do not know, TLC had the Gosselin clan come to Alaska to go roughing it with the Palin clan. Kate didn’t handle it so well to put it mildly although the kids seemed to have a great time. It was not the most presidential moment so I am not sure I would have advised the Palin’s to take that risk. With that said the Palin’s despise elitist haughty attitudes and the segment demonstrated that. It also demonstrated that Alaska is called the last frontier for a reason. It is not for the timid.

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Culture War, Palin Truth Squad | Leave a Comment »

Sarah Palin’s Full Haiti Press Conferance

Posted by iusbvision on December 16, 2010

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Palin Truth Squad | Leave a Comment »

Patheos Magazine on ‘Palin Enragement Syndrome’

Posted by iusbvision on December 15, 2010

By Timothy Dalrymple

The fight over Sarah Palin is about a lot more than Sarah Palin. It’s about what America means. It’s about what things are truly good and trustworthy. It’s about the worldview and the values that will guide our government and society.

Neither the ferocious outpouring of hatred and derision she has received from the Left, nor the enthusiastic support she has received from the populist ranks of the Right, is caused by her actual record. Many of my liberal friends, whose contempt for Palin outstrips even the contempt they felt for George W. Bush, know little of her record. And half of what they know is wrong, as election-season falsehoods and exaggerations have hardened into “fact” in the minds of Palin’s cultured despisers. And many of my fellow conservatives know more about Barack Obama’s record than they know about Sarah Palin’s.

That’s for good reason. It’s not really about her past. Neither is it about her policies. Her conservative stances are a necessary but not sufficient explanation for why the Right loves and the Left loathes her. Many others who defend the same policies evoke nowhere near the same reaction.

Why, then, does every Sarah Palin item at the Huffington Post fill up with thousands or tens of thousands of hateful comments? Why have we seen, ever since she appeared on the national scene, articles like, “Why They Hate Her,” “Why They Hate Sarah Palin,” “Why Some Women Hate Sarah Palin,” “Why Elite Women Hate Sarah Palin,” “Why Feminists Hate Sarah Palin,” “Why Do Liberals Hate Sarah Palin,” “Why Jews Hate Palin,” “Why Do Jews Hate Sarah Palin So Much,” and even “Americans Hate Sarah Palin”? Why do we find “Hate Sarah Palin Days” at The View and t-shirts professing hatred for Palin and not for Bobby Jindal? The mere sight of her is enough to raise the hackles of most progressives, and the recent success of her daughter on Dancing with the Stars drove many to fits of apoplexy.

So what is the reason for Palin Enragement Syndrome?

The loving and loathing, at least for most, have little to do with her past or her policies. They have to do with her persona. For the populist Right, Sarah Palin is a personification of all that is still good about America: rugged individualism and bootstrapping success, toughness and pluck, firm devotion to Christian family values, a commitment to the cause of life, and the kind of folk wisdom that cannot be gained through graduate degrees but is packaged in common sense and reinforced through the experience of a hardscrabble life. Palin also represents the blue-collar and no-collar ideal of a leader who comes up from the general ranks in a time of great trial in order to restore sanity and common-sense clarity to a government gone mad.

For the cultural elitists on the Left, Palin lacks everything they pride themselves on possessing, possesses everything they pride themselves on scorning, and stands for everything they pride themselves on opposing. She lacks cosmopolitan tastes and elite university credentials, a well-worn passport and fluency in foreign tongues, a blueblood vocabulary and literary speech patterns, not to mention a fashionable address and a vacation home on Martha’s Vineyard. She possesses a beauty-queen title and the wrong kind of good looks, a large brood of lily-white children with outdoorsy names like Track and Piper, a commoner’s cadence and a steady supply of you-betcha folksy phrases, and a background in conservative white evangelical and even Pentecostal churches. And she stands for the defense of the unborn, for heterosexual marriage, for premarital abstinence, for the extraction of our natural resources, for small government and second amendment rights, for conservative Judeo-Christian traditions and for American exceptionalism.

 

Patheos makes a good point here, especially for those who suffer from Palin Derangement Syndrome or have some type of emotional negative reaction to her I have noticed one thing that every last one of them I have encountered has in common, they are almost completely ignorant of her record as  a governor, regulator, mayor, city councilman and small business owner.

Take the emotionalism and the attitude that the media has attached to the Palin name ans ask them if they would consider voting for a candidate who did the following:

Oversaw the Growth of a small city  by a factor of four as mayor while keeping services at a level to meet the challenge and while maintaining low taxes.

Rooted out the corruption of bought off Republicans in state government and sent many bad actors packing. [For which much of the Alaska GOP hates her for and opposed her every step of the way. For Example GOP Senate leader Lyda Green tried to have the Alaska State of the State address moved an hour later so that Palin could not catch the last flight out of Juneau so that she would miss her sons high school graduation the next morning. Juneau is an on island so you have to fly out.  How much Chicago machine corruption did Obama root out?]

Cut the state budget while maintaining state services.

Cut the governors personal expenses by 80% over the previous governor.

Implemented a plan to begin weening the state off federal “earmarks”.

Pass sweeping ethics reforms and reform a state contract bidding process that was rigged and controlled by cronies.

That is just a sample of the Sarah Palin governing record. This also shows why the elite media and the Democrats do not wish to engage her on the facts and are primarily interested in smearing her.

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Culture War, Palin Truth Squad | 1 Comment »

Photo of the Year: Sarah Palin Stalking a Caribou on the Alaskan Plain

Posted by iusbvision on December 15, 2010

Sarah Palin Stalking a Caribou

Sarah Palin Stalking a Caribou

She stalked her prey, shot it square in the neck, field dressed it and took it home to freeze for dinner.

Liberals freaked ;)

Tonight’s hunting episode of Sarah Palin’s Alaska “controversial”? Really? Unless you’ve never worn leather shoes, sat upon a leather couch or eaten a piece of meat, save your condemnation of tonight’s episode. I remain proudly intolerant of anti-hunting hypocrisy. :) – Sarah Palin

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Palin Truth Squad | Leave a Comment »

Associated Press Article on Palin Haiti Trip a Series of Lies

Posted by iusbvision on December 14, 2010

The AP is on a tear lately with the false narratives and attacks. This is the status of what Palin called the “lamestream media” and it makes you wonder if a one of these reporters actually went to J-school.

A suggestive AP photo started this false narrative – Huffington Post Blasts Sarah Palin for Getting “Movie Set” Treatment in Haiti – Secret Hair Stylist Ends Up Being Daughter Bristol

Then ABC played editing games with Sarah Palin’s interview with Barbara Walters –ABC Edits Out Substantive Parts of Sarah Palin’s Answer on What She Reads

Now this via the nice folks at US4P:

The Associated Press provided another example as to why the media cannot be trusted to cover anything Governor Palin does fairly. AP “reporter” Jonathan Katz, wrote an article about the governor’s recent trip to Haiti with Franklin Graham and Samaritan’s Purse. Katz opens his article by saying:

Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin began a tightly stage-managed visit to Haiti on Saturday in which she visited cholera clinics while avoiding crowds and the press.

“Stage-managed” eh? As to imply that this is just some sort of staged political photo-op, no doubt. It wasn’t, but regardless it is not Jonathan Katz’ job as an AP reporter to make that assumption in the first place.

He then goes on to say (emphasis mine):

Palin, who traveled in part by helicopter, provided access on her tour solely to the U.S. cable network Fox News.

Graham’s organization, Samaritan’s Purse, refused to discuss Palin’s itinerary with other media and asked Haitian and American reporters to leave its compounds, citing a “security lockdown.”

It should be noted that Greta Van Susteren was asked by Franklin Graham (this is not the first time Greta has accompanied Graham on an overseas trip) to come to Haiti, it wasn’t Governor Palin who set that up.

Rebecca Mansour weighed in on Twitter to say:

Jonathan Katz of the Associated Press is a liar. He knows very well that Samaritan’s Purse was in charge of press in Haiti, not Gov. Palin.

Also

I told him myself repeatedly. He also knows very well that for security reasons, Samaritan’s Purse did not want to release their itinerary.

Katz and others in the media seem to be saying two different things in their articles about Governor Palin’s trip to Haiti. They imply it was a photo-op on one hand, then complain about a lack of access on the other. So which is it? I gather this is just more, ‘throw the kitchen sink‘ at Governor Palin to see what sticks.

Jonathan Katz then writes:

Associated Press television journalists saw Palin talking with foreign aid workers. She wore cargo pants, a T-shirt and designer sunglasses on her first trip outside the United States since speaking to investors in Hong Kong last year. That speech was also closed to the media.

Why is JonathanKatz reporting on Governor’s Palin’s wardrobe? The last time I checked, Katz wasn’t a fashion reporter. Who cares what Governor Palin wore on a humanitarian mission? Some might say that it was sexist of Katz to include that in his article. I’ll leave that up to readers to decide for themselves.

By the way, as Ian noted earlier, Governor Palin and Franklin Graham held a press conference on Sunday in Haiti from the Samaritan’s Purse camp. So, no this trip was not closed to the media. You can see a photo from that presser here.

Update: I was just reminded that the Hong Kong speech was not closed to the media. Katz was wrong about that as well. The Wall Street Journal covered the Hong Kong event here.

mm

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Dirty Tricks, Journalism Is Dead, Leftist Hate in Action, Palin Truth Squad | 1 Comment »

Jim Rogers: Fed understates inflation (Sarah Palin Was Right Again)

Posted by iusbvision on December 14, 2010

Sarah Palin was attacked by a reporter for stating that there is inflation in spite of the denials of the Fed.  Palin ended up being correct (and so did we). Now Jim Rodgers weighs in.

Reuters:

(Reuters) – U.S. government inflation data is “a sham” and is causing the Federal Reserve to vastly understate price pressures in the economy, influential U.S. investor Jim Rogers said on Tuesday.

The U.S. central bank uses inflation data that relies too heavily on housing prices, Rogers told the Reuters 2011 Investment Outlook Summit, and he criticized the Fed’s $600 billion bond-buying program.

Rogers, who rose to prominence after co-founding the now defunct Quantum Fund with billionaire investor George Soros some four decades ago, said he was betting against U.S. Treasuries. “I expect interest rates in the U.S. to go much, much, much higher over the next few years,” he said.

The core personal consumption expenditure index, which removes food and energy costs, is the Fed’s favored measure of inflation and was flat in October for the second straight month.

“Everybody in this room knows prices are going up for everything,” Rogers told the Reuters Summit.

The Fed began its $600 billion bond buying program last month, its second round of quantitative easing [this means monetizing the debt – printing more dollars and lowering the value of all of the dollars you have – Editor], to boost a sluggish U.S. economy, citing excessively low inflation and high unemployment.

 

 

 

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Economics 101, Palin Truth Squad | Leave a Comment »

Deranged Palin Haters File FCC Complaints Over Bristol’s Dancing Success

Posted by iusbvision on December 14, 2010

File this one under “you just cant make this stuff up folks”

The Smoking Gun:

DECEMBER 6–In the days after Bristol Palin was voted into the finals of “Dancing with the Stars,” viewers from across the country wrote to the Federal Communications Commission accusing the ABC show of everything from running a “payola type program” to “encouraging and promoting teen pregnancy.”

Many of the complainants, whose letters were obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request, were upset that, as one Oregonian put it, “the top scores were voted off yet Sarah Palin’s daughter remained on.”

One viewer from Pittsburgh alleged that the show’s voting system had been “fixed by extreme supporters of the Tea Party and Radical Right-Wing. I find that it has become a political platform for Sarah Palin to improve her image and ooze her political slime.” The aggrieved correspondent continued, “Bristol is not a star, what did she do, she had sex and got pregnant. Lets reward her…I made several call to ABC’s complaint line and I hope that their phone lines melt. It has become a political movement, with Tea Party websites instructing on how to vote for Bristol. Ridiculousness!”

Another source of grievances was a hug delivered to the 20-year-old Palin by one of the show’s judges, Carrie Ann Inaba.

Noting that “no other dancer was called over for a hug,” one viewer claimed that the clinch was a “signal for the GOP/Tea Party supporters of Sarah Palin to ‘stuff’ the vote for Bristol Palin, who on both dates had to be dragged over the dance floor.” The writer added, “My 96 year old Mother-in-Law can dance better than Ms. Palin…I want my Government to protect me the viewer from deceptive practices.”

A Cerritos, California resident reported that the “physical contact” made by Inaba “sets the contestant up for thinking the judge will favor them. She was impartial to one and partial to the others.”

 

One commenter who claimed to be a former FCC CAMS operator stated:

An ex FCC employee here. I worked in the FCC National Call Center in the mid to late 90’s. I and others that worked in the call center took millions of complaints in that time. Hundreds thousands of complaints were about “conservative or Republican” oriented broadcasts. It was easy to determine, by questioning many liberal callers, that the caller had never watched the television show or listened to the radio broadcast the caller was complaining about. Consumer Advocate Mediation Specialist (CAMS) FCC call center employee frequently heard the same complaint, word for word, 50 to 100 times in one day!

The conservative call in complaint campaigns that were organized, almost exclusively had to do with religious issues, not about an issue as mundane and lacking merit for complaint as Bristol Palin’s “Dancing with the Stars”!

Liberal callers were and still are, the most verbally abusive, vicious, obscene people showing an extreme lack respect and disdain for the CAMS working at the call center. The liberal callers threatened to file a complaint about me (and other CAMS) with their representatives or senators when we did not comply with their demands to remove conservative shows from TV and radio. No congressional inquiry was made about my refusals. Conservatives frequently wrote their representatives praising the CAMS they had spoken to, liberals did not! The politicians forwarded copies of these letters to the FCC. What “these” liberals don’t understand is that the FCC has no legal authority, due to the restraints of the Constitution of the United States, to do anything about an issue such as, Bristol Palin “Dancing with the Stars”! But I am sure that the liberals would change the Constitution, if they could, so all conservative programming could be banned forever from television and radio broadcasts! I am in my 60’s now, and it seems every year as I get older, the liberals grow worse in their expectations and their vitriol!

 

 

 

Posted in 2012, Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Leftist Hate in Action, Palin Truth Squad | Leave a Comment »

ABC Edits Out Substantive Parts of Sarah Palin’s Answer on What She Reads

Posted by iusbvision on December 13, 2010

[gigya src=”http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/eyeblast.swf?v=hd6UuzSU2G” width=”518″ height=”419″ quality=”high” wmode=”transparent” allowFullScreen=”true” ]

This is why you NEVER do an interview with anyone in the elite media without having your own cameraman take film of the entire interview.

Sarah Palin reads CS Lewis, fine, but serious books about the law, philosophy and the Supreme Court… well we can’t have that as it goes against the narrative ABC wants to propagate so an important substantive fact is left out; namely Palin’s mention of “Liberty and Tyranny” by Mark Levin.

Expectedly MSNBC goes after Palin for mentioning CS Lewis. One of their pundits even said that Lewis is “just a guy who writes kids books”. Of course anyone who is educated knows that C.S. Lewis is considered a great writer on many subjects such as theology, philosophy, government etc. I wonder what other facts ABC edited out this time.

ABC and CBS in the infamous 2008 interviews edited out substantive sections to several of her answers to make it look like she had no substance.

Levin states what he learned in the video below, but I believe that Levin gets it wrong in making it “about him”.  

Mark Levin is president of Landmark Legal Foundation. Previously he served as Landmark’s director of legal policy for more than three years. He has worked as an attorney in the private sector and as a top adviser and administrator to several members of President Reagan’s cabinet. Levin served as chief of staff to U.S. Attorney General, Edwin Meese; deputy assistant secretary for elementary and secondary education at the U.S. Department of Education; and deputy solicitor of the U.S. Department of Interior. He holds a B.A. from Temple University, where he graduated Phi Beta Kappa and magna cum laude, and a J.D. from Temple University School of Law.

Mark is a frequent contributor to, The Corner on National Review Online.

Mark Levin is also the author of the best selling books, Men in Black, Rescuing Sprite and Liberty and Tyranny.

Levin’s book “Men in Black” is the best selling book on the history of the Supreme Court of all time.

Posted in 2012, Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Leftist Hate in Action, Palin Truth Squad | Leave a Comment »

MSNBC Devotes ‘News’ Time to Asking if Bristol Palin Has a Facebook Ghost Writer

Posted by iusbvision on December 7, 2010

More of the same from MSNBC which has become the network of hate. You don’t see Republicans attacking candidates (or former candidates) kids like this and you don’t see this nonsense on FOX.

Via NewsBusters:

MSNBC Anchor Thomas Roberts began by reporting on Bristol’s high school transcript.

ROBERTS: Some people are saying that maybe Bristol has a ghost writer. As I said, she graduated from high school –

SMALL: Maybe?

ROBERTS: Has roughly a 3.5, a 3.5 grade point average. So smart young lady.

SMALL: Right.

ROBERTS:  But there’s been postings on her page where she used the word “canard.”

SMALL: Canard. I know a dude, I know a guy named Canard. That’s how black I am. Spelled with a K. Don’t even think about the words she used. If she’s using subjects and predicates together in a sentence, somebody else is writing it for her.

ROBERTS: Well, it just seemed like, you know, there were some words didn’t seem like they would be in the vocabulary, or in the firing back of, you know –

SMALL: She never used the word canard in her life.

ROBERTS: You know, I had to go to Dictionary.com to look it up.

SMALL:  If I didn’t have a friend named canard, I wouldn’t use it either. So come on.

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Leftist Hate in Action, Palin Truth Squad | Leave a Comment »

Bristol Palin and John Ziegler Blast Keith Olbermann

Posted by iusbvision on December 3, 2010

This is great fun to listen to.

IUSB Vision Editor’s take: I am all for the counter attack, and indeed I am a master of it (no need of modesty today, but just ask some of those who took me on), BUT… fortunately Olberman’s ratings are so low and MSNBC is so small time and marginalized that he is not a threat to any Palin. It is probably best to ignore him as he has exiled himself into irrelevance. I say this because the Palin’s are such overwhelmingly huge stars when compared with anyone on MSNBC that even a masterful response serves to help MSNBC. There is an old saying about those who misbehave, “just make sure you spell my name properly”. I am not saying ignore attackers, but under the circumstances it is likely best to ignore this particular attacker.

 

Posted in Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Culture War, John Ziegler, Palin Truth Squad | Leave a Comment »

Sarah Palin’s “refudiate” wins Oxford University Press’ “Word of the Year”

Posted by iusbvision on November 19, 2010

Hey pinhead lefty – yes they mean it and are 100% serious.

By the way, I noticed that “nom nom” was named as an honorable mention word. In MMORPG’s such as World of Warcraft the term is used exactly as Oxford indicates, an expression of delight while eating.

Oxford University Press:

Refudiate


has been named the New Oxford American Dictionary’s 2010 Word of the Year!

refudiate verb used loosely to mean “reject”: she called on them to refudiate the proposal to build a mosque.
[origin — blend of refute and repudiate]

Now, does that mean that “refudiate” has been added to the New Oxford American Dictionary? No it does not. Currently, there are no definite plans to include “refudiate” in the NOAD, the OED, or any of our other dictionaries. If you are interested in the most recent additions to the NOAD, you can read about them here. We have many dictionary programs, and each team of lexicographers carefully tracks the evolution of the English language. If a word becomes common enough (as did last year’s WOTY, unfriend), they will consider adding it to one (or several) of the dictionaries we publish. As for “refudiate,” well, I’m not yet sure that it will be includiated.

Refudiate: A Historical Perspective

An unquestionable buzzword in 2010, the word refudiate instantly evokes the name of Sarah Palin, who tweeted her way into a flurry of media activity when she used the word in certain statements posted on Twitter. Critics pounced on Palin, lampooning what they saw as nonsensical vocabulary and speculating on whether she meant “refute” or “repudiate.”

From a strictly lexical interpretation of the different contexts in which Palin has used “refudiate,” we have concluded that neither “refute” nor “repudiate” seems consistently precise, and that “refudiate” more or less stands on its own, suggesting a general sense of “reject.”

Although Palin is likely to be forever branded with the coinage of “refudiate,” she is by no means the first person to speak or write it—just as Warren G. Harding was not the first to use the word normalcy when he ran his 1920 presidential campaign under the slogan “A return to normalcy.” But Harding was a political celebrity, as Palin is now, and his critics spared no ridicule for his supposedly ignorant mangling of the correct word “normality.”

The Short List

In alphabetical order, here are our top ten finalists for the 2010 Word of the Year selection:

bankster noun (informal) a member of the banking industry perceived as a predator that grows rich at the expense of those suffering in a crumbling economy: trillions of dollars are flowing to the banksters in the form of near-zero interest loans.
[origin — 1930s: blend of banker and gangster]

crowdsourcing noun the practice whereby an organization enlists a variety of freelancers, paid or unpaid, to work on a specific task or problem: Kodak used social media crowdsourcing to engage its customers in their naming contest.
[origin — early 21st cent.: on the pattern of outsourcing]

double-dip adjective denoting or relating to a recession during which a period of economic decline is followed by a brief period of growth, followed by a further period of decline: higher food and energy prices could increase the risk of a double-dip recession.

gleek noun (informal) a fan of the television series Glee.
[origin — early 21st cent.: blend of Glee and geek]

nom nom (informal) exclamation an expression of delight when eating.
pl. noun (nom noms) delicious food.
verb (nom-nom) eat delicious food with obvious enjoyment.
adjective (nom-nommy) descriptive of delicious food.
[origin — imitative; popularized by the noises made by the character Cookie Monster on Sesame Street (usually as “Om nom nom nom”)]

retweet verb (on the social networking service Twitter) repost or forward (a message posted by another user): people love to retweet job ads.
noun a reposted or forwarded message on Twitter.

Tea Party a US political party that emerged from a movement of conservatives protesting the federal government in 2009.
[origin — allusion to the Boston Tea Party of 1773]

top kill noun a procedure designed to seal a leaking oil well, whereby large amounts of a material heavier than the oil—e.g., mud—are pumped into the affected well.

vuvuzela noun (also called vuvu) a long horn blown by fans at soccer matches.
[origin — South African, perhaps from Zulu]

webisode noun 1. an original episode derived from a television series, made for online viewing.
2. an online video that presents an original short film or promotes a product, movie, or television series.
[origin — 1990s: blend of Web and episode]


 

Posted in Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Culture War, Palin Truth Squad | Leave a Comment »