ABOUT SARAH PALIN, HER POLITICAL FUTURE -- ONE FULL OF ABUNDANT PROMISE -- WILL DEPEND ON HER ACTIONS, WHICH MIGHT JUST AMAZE THE WORLD. I AM PLAYING A SMALL (BUT NOT INSIGNIFICANT ROLE IN HELPING ENSURE THAT FUTURE. HOWEVER, THE DEGREE TO WHICH ANYONE SUPPORTS HER SHOULD DEPEND ON SARAH AND NOT ON ME. I WILL SPEAK THE TRUTH AS I SEE IT, WHICH SHE DOES, AND WHICH ALL PEOPLE SHOULD DO.
In regard to the Sarah Palin effort, I've been associated with it for several months. I'll tell you a secret about the effort: it's a totally democratic undertaking. It's a true "coalition of the willing."
I sometimes list myself as part of the "National Coordination Team," but everyone who backs Sarah for higher office (and not just the vice-presidency) is a member of that national coordination team. Perhaps we should call it "the National UN-Coordination Team?"
I do not in any official sense represent Sarah Palin. I do not speak FOR her, but rather ABOUT her. What I say about Sarah -- or anyone or anything else -- represents my view. I will do my best to be truthful in anything I say, and I assure you I will be hard-hitting.
Obviously, I also don't speak for any other blogger, columnist, or individual associated with the advancement of Sarah's political career at the state and national levels. They can speak for themselves, and sometimes we will disagree, which is fine.
People who support Sarah Palin (mainly for the vice-presidency in 2008 and for the presidency at some later date) reflect a variety of viewpoints -- one is a liberal Democrat (!!!!) and the rest are mainly moderate, conservative, or libertarian Republicans or Independents. This is as it should be in any political movement that has at least a chance of success. If you're in a coaltion where everyone agrees with you, then you're in a losing effort.
There are currently about 45 bloggers and columnists who have affirmed support for Sarah. Some of these people who have the luxury of doing so are devoting full-time to the "Sarah Project." Others, including one sailor on active duty in the Middle East, are doing everything they can.
Presidential candidates favored by those who also back Sarah include: Mike Huckabee, Mitt Romney, Fred Thompson, John McCain, Rudy Giuliani, Tommy Thompson (who's withdrawn as a candidate), Ron Paul, and presumably others. There's no litmus test on this matter, but it probably would be a good idea for any serious presidential candidate to have Sarah's phone number on speed-dial.
The list of Republican candidates about whom I've said nice things is a long one. (If you want evidence of that, I'll provide it.) For those who care, I'm especially attracted to the presidential campaigns of (in alphabetical order): Rudy Giuliani, Mike Huckabee, Duncan Hunter, and John McCain. I believe Hunter and McCain have almost no chance of winning, but I have tremendous respect for both.
I will support the Republican ticket in 2008 -- no ifs, ands, or butts. As I've been saying, in politics "half-a-loaf" is the equivalent of a seven-course-meal. Any candidate who claims to agree with you (or me) on every issue is not passing what the computer geeks call "the straight-face test."
Most experts (and serious pollsters) think it's unlikely the Republican presidential nominee will win in 2008. I agree with that assessment (sadly), but that will have zero effect on my own efforts to help ensure that the next President is someone other than Mrs. Clinton. Unless she stumbles badly --and unexpectedly -- she will be the Democratic nominee in 2008.
According to the Gallup Poll, the second-most respected woman in America is Obama-supporter Oprah Winfey. The person at the top of the Gallup list is Hillary Rodham Clinton. I'm sure you don't need me to outline the implications of those poll results.
As for support for Sarah, it's primarily a matter of the head and the heart. If at any time an individual would like to withdraw his or her support for Gov. Palin, they're of course welcome to do so. There's no one to stop them. They would suffer no recriminations from me (or anyone else I know of).
However, if anyone makes defamatory or false statements about Sarah, I will respond, as I imagine would many other people. Also, if anyone makes false or defamatory statements about presidential candidates, including Democratic hopefuls, I will also respond.
Stephen R. Maloney
Ambridge, PA
Note: I'll write later today about Mike Huckabee's campaign strategy and, at some point, about false statements made about Rudy Giuliani.
Friday, September 7, 2007
Thursday, September 6, 2007
NOT "THE NOBLEST ROMAN": PORTRAIT OF A HUCKABEE DEFECTOR
TOMORROW (FRIDAY) I'M GOING TO DISCUSS RECENT EXAMPLES OF PEOPLE HURLING SLIME AT RUDY GIULIANI, REGARDED AS AN AUTHENTIC HERO BY MOST PEOPLE WHO RESIDE OUTSIDE THE POLITICAL FEVER SWAMPS. GENERALLY, HEROES ARE IMPERFECT BEINGS, BUT AT LEAST THEY'RE NOT "AVERAGE."
I urge everyone to read Adam Brickley's superb essay on how he originated the Sarah Palin Movement and how fabulously it's succeeding (also on blogroll): http://www.uccs.edu/~scribe/index.php?article=opinion-3
This morning (Thursday) on CNN there was a story about a 12-year-old Anglo-Hispanic boy who has leukemia and has started a very successful national campaign to find bone-marrow donors. He said, "As human beings, it's our responsibility to look out for others." (Out of the mouths of babes)
Yesterday, D. Roman of Wisconsin, a person who masqueraded for a few months one of the strongest Mike Huckabee backers (see comments at http://themaritimesentry.blogspot.com defected, apparently to support someone else. If Mother Theresa converted to Lutheranism, the surprise could not have been greater. I believe D. Roman represents the sickness -- moral, intellectual, and political -- that infects a small portion of the Republican Party, and I'll have much to say about him and his ilk over the next few days.
With his new-found political independence, Roman spent the post-debate period denouncing Mike Huckabee and Rudy Giuliani. The latter is justifiably an American hero to most people, and the former is on his way to becoming one. Roman is one of those moral and ideological sad-sacks who believes that disagreeing with a candidate on one or more issues means the subject of his venom must be "lying."
On Roman's site, I questioned his Christianity, something I do about once a century. Being a Catholic Christian (or a Protestant Christian) means fulfilling many obligations that we'd rather avoid. It doesn't mean manifesting a kind of "Church-Pew-Piety" apparently designed to make one feel good about himself. Also, it doesn't mean making malicious allegations about people (Huckabee and Giuliani) who hold views other than your own.
Christians are under a strict obligation (Commandment not Suggestion) to love their neighbors, all six billion of them, including "illegal" immigrants and the children (often American citizens) of those illegals. People who hate the Second Great Commandment are free, in a sense, to hate their neighbors, whether that neighbor be Mike Huckabee, Rudy Giuliani, or a Guatemalan scaling a fence to get into the land that historically welcomes the "huddled masses yearning to breathe free."
D. Roman is now denouncing me on various sites, pointing out that MaritimeSentry is one of those "his-and-her" operations and that I mistook S. Roman (his helpmeet) for him. Of course, he ascribes malice to my confusing his wife's screed about Giuliani with one of his. Frankly, he (or she) originally talked about removing "our backing" from Huckabee. I wondered if that "our" was a modern version of Queen Victoria's "royal we," as in "We are NOT amused."
My inference is that the Roman household is not one where spouses or children are encouraged to demonstrate a whole lot of intellectual or spiritual diversity. "We" would not be amused by such deviations.
D.R. takes issue with my view that they (he? she? bicycle built for 2?) "trashed" Mike Huckabee. Here's what they (the "I" version) said about the debate:
"I felt this was Mike Huckabee's worst debate. He struggled in the beginning and topped it off by insulting citizens who want a secure border, but he was extremely strong on Iraq and very articulate on that point. Ron Paul had some extremely good points, but came off as naive on foreign policy. Overall I think that Duncan Hunter and Tom Tancredo had their best performances and belonged on stage.
Tom Tancredo, a thoroughgoing nativist who once announced he was against "legal immigration," had a "good performance?" Rep. Tancredo is now getting 4% of the Republican vote and is getting a good chunk of his money from organizations that are rather virulently racist. (Note: I have a lot of admiration for Duncan Hunter, but his candidacy seems to have escaped the attention of the American people.)
One of the Romans mourned the lack of an appearance by Newt Gingrich, who campaigns in 1974 and 1976 I supported with money and time. My "break" with Rep. Gingrich reflected in part the fact that his first wife (of many), Jackie, and I were phone friends. Jackie is the one that Newt, after an apparently serious affair, approached in the hospital (where Jackie was being treated for cancer) and asked her to sign divorce papers. Later, of course, the second wife went the way of the first. One of the Romans (both?) denounced Rudy Giuliani for failures in his "persoanl" life. On that basis, they might well reconsider their admiration for "Newt."
Why "their" dismissal of Huckabee? Because he's not conservative enough on immigration or on the possibility of voting rights for the District of Columbia (which would add two Black Senators and a Black House member, presumably all Democrats). Also, strangely and almost comically, because he would sign congressional legislation banning smoking in public places. Personally, I smoke but if I were President I might well sign such a ban.
Most sane people agonize over the issue of "illegal immigration." In the Bible, Jesus doesn't seem to be strong on the issue of border security. Also, which of us -- if we lived South of the border and were facing a bad life for ourselves and our children -- wouldn't choose to climb over the fence?
To D. Roman, enforcement of "border security" -- something apparently only enforced when it involves brown people -- is a case of "rendering unto Caesar that which is Caesar's." Of course, under Caesar it was illegal to be a Christian, a point the Romans apparently haven't reflected on sufficiently. The line from the Bible goes on to say "render unto God that which is God's.
I've always had the uneasy feeling that God didn't give me any extra points for having the luck to be born in America. Somehow I don't believe God thinks more of me than He does the Hispanics who constitute our modern day "huddled masses yearning to breathe free." Living a Christian life is sometimes, as T. S. Eliot said, sometimes "hard and bitter agony."
From everything I see, Mike Huckabee --a Christian who talks the talk AND walks the walk -- agrees with me. In fact, the Family Roman's other bete noire, Rudy Giuliani, also seems at one with with us.
The Huckabee Movement, a strong one that's getting stronger, is lucky to be without the dubious "services" of D. Roman/S. Roman. They'll be much happier with another candidate, but I doubt the reverse is true.
(Note: This is not the last word on this subject.)
Take a look at larryperrault.blogspot.com for the YouTube video of the exchange between Mike Huckabee and the occasionally daffy Ron Paul.
Note: I was extremely impressed as I said yesterday by the marvellous response Sarah Palin made to a question about the supposed need to cut ehtical corners. She said:
SARAH PALIN: "Right. Well, that's why I think we need more real and normal and hardworking and blue-collar Alaskans to want to run for office and serve in these positions that are making decisions. Again, I will personalize this. I am not from that other world. My dad as a school teacher wasn't a mover and shaker developer making big bucks in the state of Alaska off of property development. My husband [a commercial fisherman and oil field worker] isn't that way. I am not raising my kids to be that way.... If you want to be in public service, it is being willing to serve Alaskans for the right reasons. It is having to have a servant's heart when you come into these positions. It's not to get rich."
Of course, some conservatives -- such as The Club for Growth types who also vilify Mike Huckabee and probably now feel the same about Sarah -- believe (wrongly) that it's better to have many servants than to be one. They're wrong. "As for me (and her), we shall serve the Lord."
I urge everyone to read Adam Brickley's superb essay on how he originated the Sarah Palin Movement and how fabulously it's succeeding (also on blogroll): http://www.uccs.edu/~scribe/index.php?article=opinion-3
This morning (Thursday) on CNN there was a story about a 12-year-old Anglo-Hispanic boy who has leukemia and has started a very successful national campaign to find bone-marrow donors. He said, "As human beings, it's our responsibility to look out for others." (Out of the mouths of babes)
Yesterday, D. Roman of Wisconsin, a person who masqueraded for a few months one of the strongest Mike Huckabee backers (see comments at http://themaritimesentry.blogspot.com defected, apparently to support someone else. If Mother Theresa converted to Lutheranism, the surprise could not have been greater. I believe D. Roman represents the sickness -- moral, intellectual, and political -- that infects a small portion of the Republican Party, and I'll have much to say about him and his ilk over the next few days.
With his new-found political independence, Roman spent the post-debate period denouncing Mike Huckabee and Rudy Giuliani. The latter is justifiably an American hero to most people, and the former is on his way to becoming one. Roman is one of those moral and ideological sad-sacks who believes that disagreeing with a candidate on one or more issues means the subject of his venom must be "lying."
On Roman's site, I questioned his Christianity, something I do about once a century. Being a Catholic Christian (or a Protestant Christian) means fulfilling many obligations that we'd rather avoid. It doesn't mean manifesting a kind of "Church-Pew-Piety" apparently designed to make one feel good about himself. Also, it doesn't mean making malicious allegations about people (Huckabee and Giuliani) who hold views other than your own.
Christians are under a strict obligation (Commandment not Suggestion) to love their neighbors, all six billion of them, including "illegal" immigrants and the children (often American citizens) of those illegals. People who hate the Second Great Commandment are free, in a sense, to hate their neighbors, whether that neighbor be Mike Huckabee, Rudy Giuliani, or a Guatemalan scaling a fence to get into the land that historically welcomes the "huddled masses yearning to breathe free."
D. Roman is now denouncing me on various sites, pointing out that MaritimeSentry is one of those "his-and-her" operations and that I mistook S. Roman (his helpmeet) for him. Of course, he ascribes malice to my confusing his wife's screed about Giuliani with one of his. Frankly, he (or she) originally talked about removing "our backing" from Huckabee. I wondered if that "our" was a modern version of Queen Victoria's "royal we," as in "We are NOT amused."
My inference is that the Roman household is not one where spouses or children are encouraged to demonstrate a whole lot of intellectual or spiritual diversity. "We" would not be amused by such deviations.
D.R. takes issue with my view that they (he? she? bicycle built for 2?) "trashed" Mike Huckabee. Here's what they (the "I" version) said about the debate:
"I felt this was Mike Huckabee's worst debate. He struggled in the beginning and topped it off by insulting citizens who want a secure border, but he was extremely strong on Iraq and very articulate on that point. Ron Paul had some extremely good points, but came off as naive on foreign policy. Overall I think that Duncan Hunter and Tom Tancredo had their best performances and belonged on stage.
Tom Tancredo, a thoroughgoing nativist who once announced he was against "legal immigration," had a "good performance?" Rep. Tancredo is now getting 4% of the Republican vote and is getting a good chunk of his money from organizations that are rather virulently racist. (Note: I have a lot of admiration for Duncan Hunter, but his candidacy seems to have escaped the attention of the American people.)
One of the Romans mourned the lack of an appearance by Newt Gingrich, who campaigns in 1974 and 1976 I supported with money and time. My "break" with Rep. Gingrich reflected in part the fact that his first wife (of many), Jackie, and I were phone friends. Jackie is the one that Newt, after an apparently serious affair, approached in the hospital (where Jackie was being treated for cancer) and asked her to sign divorce papers. Later, of course, the second wife went the way of the first. One of the Romans (both?) denounced Rudy Giuliani for failures in his "persoanl" life. On that basis, they might well reconsider their admiration for "Newt."
Why "their" dismissal of Huckabee? Because he's not conservative enough on immigration or on the possibility of voting rights for the District of Columbia (which would add two Black Senators and a Black House member, presumably all Democrats). Also, strangely and almost comically, because he would sign congressional legislation banning smoking in public places. Personally, I smoke but if I were President I might well sign such a ban.
Most sane people agonize over the issue of "illegal immigration." In the Bible, Jesus doesn't seem to be strong on the issue of border security. Also, which of us -- if we lived South of the border and were facing a bad life for ourselves and our children -- wouldn't choose to climb over the fence?
To D. Roman, enforcement of "border security" -- something apparently only enforced when it involves brown people -- is a case of "rendering unto Caesar that which is Caesar's." Of course, under Caesar it was illegal to be a Christian, a point the Romans apparently haven't reflected on sufficiently. The line from the Bible goes on to say "render unto God that which is God's.
I've always had the uneasy feeling that God didn't give me any extra points for having the luck to be born in America. Somehow I don't believe God thinks more of me than He does the Hispanics who constitute our modern day "huddled masses yearning to breathe free." Living a Christian life is sometimes, as T. S. Eliot said, sometimes "hard and bitter agony."
From everything I see, Mike Huckabee --a Christian who talks the talk AND walks the walk -- agrees with me. In fact, the Family Roman's other bete noire, Rudy Giuliani, also seems at one with with us.
The Huckabee Movement, a strong one that's getting stronger, is lucky to be without the dubious "services" of D. Roman/S. Roman. They'll be much happier with another candidate, but I doubt the reverse is true.
(Note: This is not the last word on this subject.)
Take a look at larryperrault.blogspot.com for the YouTube video of the exchange between Mike Huckabee and the occasionally daffy Ron Paul.
Note: I was extremely impressed as I said yesterday by the marvellous response Sarah Palin made to a question about the supposed need to cut ehtical corners. She said:
SARAH PALIN: "Right. Well, that's why I think we need more real and normal and hardworking and blue-collar Alaskans to want to run for office and serve in these positions that are making decisions. Again, I will personalize this. I am not from that other world. My dad as a school teacher wasn't a mover and shaker developer making big bucks in the state of Alaska off of property development. My husband [a commercial fisherman and oil field worker] isn't that way. I am not raising my kids to be that way.... If you want to be in public service, it is being willing to serve Alaskans for the right reasons. It is having to have a servant's heart when you come into these positions. It's not to get rich."
Of course, some conservatives -- such as The Club for Growth types who also vilify Mike Huckabee and probably now feel the same about Sarah -- believe (wrongly) that it's better to have many servants than to be one. They're wrong. "As for me (and her), we shall serve the Lord."
Tuesday, September 4, 2007
SARAH PALIN: HAVING "A SERVANT'S HEART"
I'M SKIPPING THE DEBATES TONIGHT, BECAUSE I'VE SPENT THE DAY FIGHTING OVER POLITICS (AND MORE) WITH LAURA, A WOMAN I LIKE A LOT BUT WHO STRIKES ME AS A WOMAN SUFFOCATING IN POLITICAL QUICKSAND. I LOVE THE COMMENTS BY SARAH PALIN BELOW -- THE ONES ABOUT "HAVING A SERVANT'S HEART." I BELIEVE CERTAIN STRICT CONSTITUTIONALISTS FORGET TWO THINGS: (1) THIS IS A GOVERNMENT "OF, BY, AND FOR THE PEOPLE"; (2) "THE CONSTITUTION IS NOT A SUICIDE PACT." (JUSTICE ARTHUR GOLDBERG). AS A CHRISTIAN, I HAVE SIX BILLION NEIGHBORS, AND THAT'S FINE WITH ME. THE MORE THE MERRIER.
We have another Blogger who's a Palin Fan, Brent. An Alaskan, he actually voted for Sarah in the last election. He posts at: http://americasbraveheart.blogspot.com/.
Another Palinite, John Tamburo, says it makes sense for his favorite candidate, Fred Thompson, to name Sarah Palin as his running mate. The article is named: "The Ideal Presidential Candidate," and you can find it at: http://conservativity.com/show.asp?A=424. Thanks John.
Yes, Sarah Palin has the support of people who are deeply conservative, as well as those who are libertarians, moderate-centrists, and even that endangered species known as liberal Republicans. But take a closer look at her ridiculously low disapproval rating in Alaska of 5%. If GWB had a disapproval rating of 5%, they'd be chipping away on Mt. Rushmore.
Five percent disapproval means Republicans adore her. Oh, it also means Independents and Democrats love her. On the matter of building public support, Sarah has done the political equivalent of squaring the circle. If her favorabiity rating continues as it is, Alaskans may start fitting her for a crown.
How does she do it? Perhaps the best answer I've seen recently comes from an Alaska blogger who goes by the in-your-face handle of "Theimmoralmajority." He's one of those people conservatives and libertarians love to hate: a no-holds-barred LIBERAL.
His September 2 column reprints Sarah's interview with the Anchorage Daily News (ADN), one that emphasized ethics in government. Of course, aside from Sarah and a few other intrepid souls, Alaska's relationship to political corruption is something like Typhoid Mary's to . . . typhoid.
Please take a look at TIM's column asking "Is Alaska's New Governor the Republican Savior?" http://theimmoralminority.blogspot.com/2007/09/is-alaskas-new-governor-republican.html
As a self-respecting liberal, TIM can't bring himself -- yet -- to utter a resounding "Yes." However, he does everything but get a tattoo of Sarah on his chest. He even suggests that Sarah's honesty may also make her the Democrats' savior.
IF YOU READ ONLY ONE COLUMN BY A LIBERAL THIS YEAR, LET TIM's BE THE ONE. He may picket my home -- hey, Ambridge is a long way from Alaska -- but I'm listing him as a Palin Fan.
The following is a question by the ADN followed by Sarah's answer:
ADN: "But I think you are also talking about the activities in the gray area -- the business relationships with, you know, a senator or congressman or a state legislator. Between someone with interests in the public process and the people running the public process." [Note: The ADN is asking if it isn't somehow okay to cut moral corners]
SARAH PALIN: "Right. Well, that's why I think we need more real and normal and hardworking and blue-collar Alaskans to want to run for office and serve in these positions that are making decisions. Again, I will personalize this. I am not from that other world. My dad as a school teacher wasn't a mover and shaker developer making big bucks in the state of Alaska off of property development. My husband [a commercial fisherman and oil field worker] isn't that way. I am not raising my kids to be that way.... If you want to be in public service, it is being willing to serve Alaskans for the right reasons. It is having to have a servant's heart when you come into these positions. It's not to get rich."
Gee, why are so many of us completely devoted to the cause of getting Sarah on the Republican ticket -- and ultimately helping (around 2012 or 2016) her get elected President of these United States? I've used a slogan for Sarah that says, "She is fresh, and everyone else is tired." Let me add that "She is honest while (almost) everybody everybody else is . . . well, something less."
Yes, my fellow traditional Catholics and evangelical Protestants, that "servant's heart" term is a verbal arrow -- one suffused with love -- directed right at OUR hearts. This a woman totally free of religious blather. Instead, she is totally committed to living a Christian life. AMDG as we say in the Latin tradition; "To the Greater Glory of God."
If this remarkable woman keeps up her stellar record, then someday the American people may elect her by acclamation. She exudes humility -- and foreshadows greatness.
Stephen R. Maloney
Ambridge, PA
National Coordination Team, Palin 4 VP
Note: There are great pictures of Sarah, her husband Todd, and her youngest daughter Piper on Adam's site at: http://palinforvp.blogspot.com/
We have another Blogger who's a Palin Fan, Brent. An Alaskan, he actually voted for Sarah in the last election. He posts at: http://americasbraveheart.blogspot.com/.
Another Palinite, John Tamburo, says it makes sense for his favorite candidate, Fred Thompson, to name Sarah Palin as his running mate. The article is named: "The Ideal Presidential Candidate," and you can find it at: http://conservativity.com/show.asp?A=424. Thanks John.
Yes, Sarah Palin has the support of people who are deeply conservative, as well as those who are libertarians, moderate-centrists, and even that endangered species known as liberal Republicans. But take a closer look at her ridiculously low disapproval rating in Alaska of 5%. If GWB had a disapproval rating of 5%, they'd be chipping away on Mt. Rushmore.
Five percent disapproval means Republicans adore her. Oh, it also means Independents and Democrats love her. On the matter of building public support, Sarah has done the political equivalent of squaring the circle. If her favorabiity rating continues as it is, Alaskans may start fitting her for a crown.
How does she do it? Perhaps the best answer I've seen recently comes from an Alaska blogger who goes by the in-your-face handle of "Theimmoralmajority." He's one of those people conservatives and libertarians love to hate: a no-holds-barred LIBERAL.
His September 2 column reprints Sarah's interview with the Anchorage Daily News (ADN), one that emphasized ethics in government. Of course, aside from Sarah and a few other intrepid souls, Alaska's relationship to political corruption is something like Typhoid Mary's to . . . typhoid.
Please take a look at TIM's column asking "Is Alaska's New Governor the Republican Savior?" http://theimmoralminority.blogspot.com/2007/09/is-alaskas-new-governor-republican.html
As a self-respecting liberal, TIM can't bring himself -- yet -- to utter a resounding "Yes." However, he does everything but get a tattoo of Sarah on his chest. He even suggests that Sarah's honesty may also make her the Democrats' savior.
IF YOU READ ONLY ONE COLUMN BY A LIBERAL THIS YEAR, LET TIM's BE THE ONE. He may picket my home -- hey, Ambridge is a long way from Alaska -- but I'm listing him as a Palin Fan.
The following is a question by the ADN followed by Sarah's answer:
ADN: "But I think you are also talking about the activities in the gray area -- the business relationships with, you know, a senator or congressman or a state legislator. Between someone with interests in the public process and the people running the public process." [Note: The ADN is asking if it isn't somehow okay to cut moral corners]
SARAH PALIN: "Right. Well, that's why I think we need more real and normal and hardworking and blue-collar Alaskans to want to run for office and serve in these positions that are making decisions. Again, I will personalize this. I am not from that other world. My dad as a school teacher wasn't a mover and shaker developer making big bucks in the state of Alaska off of property development. My husband [a commercial fisherman and oil field worker] isn't that way. I am not raising my kids to be that way.... If you want to be in public service, it is being willing to serve Alaskans for the right reasons. It is having to have a servant's heart when you come into these positions. It's not to get rich."
Gee, why are so many of us completely devoted to the cause of getting Sarah on the Republican ticket -- and ultimately helping (around 2012 or 2016) her get elected President of these United States? I've used a slogan for Sarah that says, "She is fresh, and everyone else is tired." Let me add that "She is honest while (almost) everybody everybody else is . . . well, something less."
Yes, my fellow traditional Catholics and evangelical Protestants, that "servant's heart" term is a verbal arrow -- one suffused with love -- directed right at OUR hearts. This a woman totally free of religious blather. Instead, she is totally committed to living a Christian life. AMDG as we say in the Latin tradition; "To the Greater Glory of God."
If this remarkable woman keeps up her stellar record, then someday the American people may elect her by acclamation. She exudes humility -- and foreshadows greatness.
Stephen R. Maloney
Ambridge, PA
National Coordination Team, Palin 4 VP
Note: There are great pictures of Sarah, her husband Todd, and her youngest daughter Piper on Adam's site at: http://palinforvp.blogspot.com/
Doc Holiday or Hillary Clinton? America's Fate Lies in Balance
SJ Reidhead (Cindy), who does the glorious Pink Flamingo website (see blogroll), has raised an entirely new possibity in the Presidential sweepstakes: her cat, Doc Holiday., apparently a registered Independent. One of her other cats, GeorgieW, passed away and is not eligible for the presidency, except perhaps in Mayor Richard Daley, Jr.'s Chicago. In any case, I urge you to visit Cindy's new blog: http://docholidayforpresident.blogspot.com/. The original Doc Holiday is responsible for an important political principle: if your opponents never see your back, they're much less likely to stab or shoot you there. Would that Alberto Gonzalez had heeded that advice.
Note: We in the Maloney Family have two cats: Larry Bird and Tigger Edward. Larry Bird, named after the basketball star of yesteryear, is 20 years old, which means Guinness Book status may be in his future. He's in good health. He eats three hours per day (mainly shrimp and other delicacies that are nearly unaffordable) and sleeps 20. The rest of the time he seems to spend reading an ancient history text.
I'll try to put up a picture of Larry, who mostly shuns publicity, later today.
Note: We in the Maloney Family have two cats: Larry Bird and Tigger Edward. Larry Bird, named after the basketball star of yesteryear, is 20 years old, which means Guinness Book status may be in his future. He's in good health. He eats three hours per day (mainly shrimp and other delicacies that are nearly unaffordable) and sleeps 20. The rest of the time he seems to spend reading an ancient history text.
I'll try to put up a picture of Larry, who mostly shuns publicity, later today.
Sunday, September 2, 2007
Sarah Palin, Not Just Another Aging White Guy :-)
The Political Tipster evaluates 10 possible candidates for the Republican vice-presidential nod. Here's what it says: "So the frontrunners for the second spot [on the ticket] seem to be Joseph Lieberman and Sarah Palin (with the latter being a possible future Presidential candidate)." Note: Since Joe Lieberman fails my test that the V-P can't be yet another grumpy old white guy, Sarah rises to the top.
And another Alaska blogger has climbed aboard what's becoming the world's most crowded bandwagon: the one led by Sarah Palin. Ash writes a piece titled: Guv Goddess 4 Prez 2012! He notes that: "Not only can she clean the clocks of corrupt lawmakers, but as a life long member of the NRA she cleans the A-K’s fish and game faster than Billary cleaning up evidence." You can find Ash's rollicking piece of Pro-Palin material at: http://ash1973.wordpress.com/2007/08/18/guv-goddess-4-prez-2012/
You meet some wonderful people on the Internet. One person worth knowing is Ron-Paul-fan and political intellectual
Laura Ebke. You can find her at the following. Let me just say that if you disagree with Laura, it might be a good idea to wear body armor. :-) She's tough.
laura@redstateeclectic.com
http://redstateeclectic.typepad.com
http://redstateeclectic.com
A big salute for Eric Dondero, a libertarian Republican who worked in the past as a staffer for Congressman Ron Paul, for writing a strong endorsement of Sarah Palin for V-P. His piece appeared on 8/26/07 on: http://libertarianrepublican.blogspot.com/. I urge you to visit Eric's site and perhaps join in on the interesting debates that are taking place in the libertarian community. Eric supports Rudolph Giuliani for the presidential nomination.
You'll note that one libetarian commenter (and enemy of taxes) criticizes Sarah for Alaska's $6.6 billion budget. In fact, 90% of the revenues for that budget come from oil taxes, and each state citizen gets $1500-plus annually from the oil fund. Also, keep in mind that Sarah vetoed a billion-plus of the capital expenditures voted by the legislature. She said the expenditures proposed were "not a state function." Sarah, we've got your back!
Oops, we missed a fine pro-Sarah piece by earnestexpostulations, who expostulated without our eagle eyes picking it up. Earnest, welcome to the Sarah Club. We will teach you the secret handshake when there is little or no moonlight. EE's piece is at: http://earnestexpostulations.blogspot.com/2007/07/perfect-republican-vp-no-matter-who.html
Couldn't have said it better. "Perfect" no matter whom she runs with, and it begins to look more and more likely that Run She Will. (Since Sarah has run a marathon, she would have no problem out-running me.)
If you missed the following from race42008.com when it came out, it's worth reading.
http://race42008.com/2007/05/30/veep-watch-gov-sarah-palin-sports-90-approval-rating/
Thanks to all those who are visting over Labor Day weekend. I'm communicating with several groups about building support for Gov. Sarah Heath Palin. As you'll note, there are a number (to say the least!) of articles about Sarah and the role she could play on the Republican ticket. I've also written recently about "Cobb" and Black conservative activists, as well as about Sen. Larry Craig and the apparent raw deal he got in Minneapolis. Regular columns will be starting no later than Tuesday. Adam has some great material about Sarah on his site: http://palinforvp.blogspot.com/. Also, see the fine new blog columns by Kazoo and David that endorse Sarah.
What I'd like to write about this week:
And another Alaska blogger has climbed aboard what's becoming the world's most crowded bandwagon: the one led by Sarah Palin. Ash writes a piece titled: Guv Goddess 4 Prez 2012! He notes that: "Not only can she clean the clocks of corrupt lawmakers, but as a life long member of the NRA she cleans the A-K’s fish and game faster than Billary cleaning up evidence." You can find Ash's rollicking piece of Pro-Palin material at: http://ash1973.wordpress.com/2007/08/18/guv-goddess-4-prez-2012/
You meet some wonderful people on the Internet. One person worth knowing is Ron-Paul-fan and political intellectual
Laura Ebke. You can find her at the following. Let me just say that if you disagree with Laura, it might be a good idea to wear body armor. :-) She's tough.
laura@redstateeclectic.com
http://redstateeclectic.typepad.com
http://redstateeclectic.com
A big salute for Eric Dondero, a libertarian Republican who worked in the past as a staffer for Congressman Ron Paul, for writing a strong endorsement of Sarah Palin for V-P. His piece appeared on 8/26/07 on: http://libertarianrepublican.blogspot.com/. I urge you to visit Eric's site and perhaps join in on the interesting debates that are taking place in the libertarian community. Eric supports Rudolph Giuliani for the presidential nomination.
You'll note that one libetarian commenter (and enemy of taxes) criticizes Sarah for Alaska's $6.6 billion budget. In fact, 90% of the revenues for that budget come from oil taxes, and each state citizen gets $1500-plus annually from the oil fund. Also, keep in mind that Sarah vetoed a billion-plus of the capital expenditures voted by the legislature. She said the expenditures proposed were "not a state function." Sarah, we've got your back!
Oops, we missed a fine pro-Sarah piece by earnestexpostulations, who expostulated without our eagle eyes picking it up. Earnest, welcome to the Sarah Club. We will teach you the secret handshake when there is little or no moonlight. EE's piece is at: http://earnestexpostulations.blogspot.com/2007/07/perfect-republican-vp-no-matter-who.html
Couldn't have said it better. "Perfect" no matter whom she runs with, and it begins to look more and more likely that Run She Will. (Since Sarah has run a marathon, she would have no problem out-running me.)
If you missed the following from race42008.com when it came out, it's worth reading.
http://race42008.com/2007/05/30/veep-watch-gov-sarah-palin-sports-90-approval-rating/
Thanks to all those who are visting over Labor Day weekend. I'm communicating with several groups about building support for Gov. Sarah Heath Palin. As you'll note, there are a number (to say the least!) of articles about Sarah and the role she could play on the Republican ticket. I've also written recently about "Cobb" and Black conservative activists, as well as about Sen. Larry Craig and the apparent raw deal he got in Minneapolis. Regular columns will be starting no later than Tuesday. Adam has some great material about Sarah on his site: http://palinforvp.blogspot.com/. Also, see the fine new blog columns by Kazoo and David that endorse Sarah.
What I'd like to write about this week:
- 1) On the September 5 FOX debate: I'm especially interested on how the candidates answer questions about the sanctity of life issue. Much of the talk recently has centered around a constitutional amendment that would overturn Roe v. Wade. However, the chance of such an amendment getting 67 votes in the Senate, and 38 votes by states is probably zero. (The last time the Human Life Amendment -- Hatch/Eagleton -- got a serious vote in the Senate was 1983, and it fell 18 votes short of the two-thirds majority needed for passage.)
- 2)On Giuliani's plans about how to win the nomination: It's an approach that differs greatly from that of the other candidates -- and has little in common with the strategy pursued by any Republican presidential canidate since the "Southern Strategy" days of the 1960s. I have a strong hunch that Giuliani believes that if he can win either New Hampshire OR Iowa, as well as Nevada and Florida, where he's well ahead, Super Tuesday (Feb. 5) would be icing on the cake. Apparently, Giuliani believes the "singe-issue" (anti-abortion, pro-gun, anti-illegals, anti-gay-marriage) voters are essentially the same individuals. His campaign is one that emphasizes winning the center (and center-right) Republicans and basically cedes most of the right-wing (generally misnamed "The Base") to other candidates, including Thompson, Romney, and Huckabee. Giuliani apparently expects the other candidates (ones relying on "The Base") to cut each other to pieces.
The following is my quote of the week, reflecting a common them in my political writings:
If we become the Party of the "angry, old white guys," Heaven help us. We're headed in that direction, and we need to change course in a hurry. (As an occasionally cantankerous older white guy, I believe I can say that.)
Friday, August 31, 2007
SARAH EFFORT AT TIPPING POINT: Support Pours In
NOTE: There are two columns -- the one below, and the one below that -- that I regard as important. I realize Senator Larry Craig has resigned, but I want to retract my initial condemantion of him. I rushed to judgment, and I was mistaken to do that. So, please take a look at both columns. Thanks. -- Steve
In the Palin Movement, one great thing after another continues to take place. TWO fine blog columns by David Anderson, a long-time admirer of Gov. Sarah Palin has two dynamite pieces in praise of her. You can find them at the following links: http://stoptaxing.wordpress.com/2007/08/30/why-sarah-palin-could-be-the-most-important-person-you-dont-know/
http://firststatepolitics.wordpress.com/2007/08/30/is-sarah-palin-the-best-hope-for-the-gop/
In the Palin Movement, one great thing after another continues to take place. TWO fine blog columns by David Anderson, a long-time admirer of Gov. Sarah Palin has two dynamite pieces in praise of her. You can find them at the following links: http://stoptaxing.wordpress.com/2007/08/30/why-sarah-palin-could-be-the-most-important-person-you-dont-know/
http://firststatepolitics.wordpress.com/2007/08/30/is-sarah-palin-the-best-hope-for-the-gop/
One new recruit to the Palin Movement sent me an e-mail with the following message: "You guys really do have me excited about Palin now. (And those are some great pics ... it's now wonder she can boast an 84+% approval rating...)"
Steve says: Some Republicans with the national Party in DC don't quite know what to make of Sarah's appeal, which is a shame. They tend to spend much of their time trying to preserve the Republican "Good Ole Boys" network, channeling money and support to individuals who have been around long enough to raise their own campaign funds.
Frankly, if we don't put excellent candidates forward (and see David Anderson's list of such people in the comments section of his blog) who are rigorously honest and great communicators, our future will be a gloomy one.
COBB (MICHAEL COBB BOWEN) FOR PRESIDENT?
I read a column by Michael Cobb Bowen, a Black conservative who blogs under the name "Cobb" (see his site on the blogroll). http://cobb.typepad.com/. He posts under the name "Cobb: Strictly Old School."
Discussing Hurricane Katrina, he builds on a point made by economist Larry Kudlow: that the $125 billion-plus in federal dollars that have gone to New Orleans should have been distributed to the 300,000 people remaining in New Orleans. Each of the people would have received $425,000. A family of four would have received $1.7 million.
In other words, New Orleaneans would have had enough money to do whatever was in their best interests. Let me add: It's probable that a big chunk of the money would have gone to rebuilding businesses, charter schools, homes, and the like that would by now have have made The Big Easy into The Big Success Story.
How would the $425,000 each help with the major problem of getting people to return home? Guess.
My question is this: why isn't the national Republican Party begging and pleading with Cobb to run for the state senate -- or for Congress -- or, eventually, for President? Also, he's a computer whiz who could be showing the Party how to use the Internet to build support among minorities.
Also, on Cobb's blogroll there are 100-plus sites listed. Most of them are Black conservatives who blog. Why isn't some Republican (other than just little me, of course) contacting them to ask for their support -- and to provide whatever assistance they need?
Do I agree with Cobb on everything? No, I don't, which puts him in the same category as the other 300 million Americans who disagree with me on something or other.
However, with most of the national Democrats (from Mrs. Clinton and Mrs. Pelosi to Mr. Murtha and Mr. Schumer), I don't agree with them on hardly anything. Ergo, let's see the Cobbs (and Michael Steeles) of the world become the subjects of serious discussion about how we're going to get them in the nation's highest offices.
The column below reprints Kazoo's thoughtful support of Gov. Sarah Heath Palin for the vice-presidency of our beloved country. Kazoo grew up near where I now live, and I grew up in the county where he now resides. As Kazoo suggests, Sarah's having the second spot makes eminent sense. I'd also like to direct you to Adam's site -- http://palinforvp.blogspot.com to see some wonderful pictures (courtesy of Alaskan Tricia Ward) of Sarah and her husband (Todd) with Alaska's teacher-of-the-year, Ina Boucher. Kazoo's excellent blog is at: http://kazoolist.blogspot.com/2007/08/palin-for-veep.html
Tuesday, August 28, 2007 (By "Kazoo")
Palin for Veep?
I recently came across the Draft Sarah Palin For Vice President blog via comments on a post on a friend's blog.Sarah Palin is the Governor of Alaska and while I'm not yet ready to throw all (2 1/4 ounces) of my blog's weight behind the Palin for VP movement, I think Palin would make a wise (though unfortunately unlikely) choice for Republican '08 Vice Persident. [Note from Steve: Palin backers include individuals who support nearly every one of the 10 presidential candidates who appeared in the first -- Reagan Library -- debate. The Palin Movement as a whole currently endorses no single individual for the presidency. FYI: Currently, a good number of Palin supporters are backing Gov. Mike Huckabee]
Quoting from an early entry on the Draft Palin blog:
"This blog is the result of about a month worth of research on potential Republican Vice-Presidential candidates for the 2008 election. ... I developed the following profile for the perfect VP candidate (using Rudy Giuliani as my presumptive presidential candidate):
1) A energetic, young, fresh face who will energize the electorate
2) Not connected to the current administration
3) Pro-Life
4) Pro-Gun
5) A woman or minority to counter Hillary or Obama and put to rest the idea that America only elects white males.
One of the first names I found that fit these qualifications was that of Sarah Palin, the recently elected Governor of Alaska. ...
After looking at every GOP governor, senator, and congressperson, I found that Palin had only become more appealing. From what I've read, she certainly is an "energetic, young, fresh face who [would] energize the electorate."
Frankly, I think she could even give Obama's charisma a run for its money.She also has a reputation for shaking up the political status quo, knocking off incumbents and chasing down corruption (even when it was Republicans committing the corrupt acts.)" [End of Adam's comments quoted]
[Kazoo's observation] That fits in really well with '08 being billed as "change election" and Americans being tired of the "political establishment." She also passes the "extremely like-able" test with an 84% approval rating. And, I can't see anyone being able to effectively run attack ads against her. She would just come off as being too sympathetic. Not because they'd be attacking a woman; more like if someone were to run attack ads against Ned Flanders.
[Kazoo adds -- and notice his warming up considerably to Sarah] Actually, now that I've finished jotting down my thoughts I can't think of a better choice for '08 GOP VP. If nothing else, maybe the momentum behind trying to have her be the VP will show that Republicans really are OK with candidates that aren't just white males.
(Not that that stereotype actually doesn't hold water ... first woman SCOTUS justice? Appointed by Reagan. First African-American male Sec. of State? Appointed by G.W. Bush. First African-American female Sec. of State? by Bush. First Hispanic Attorney General? by Bush (but witch-hunted out by white (Democratic) males Schumer, Leahey, Biden, Kennedy and Finegold.))
Perhaps my one final (fleeting?) reservation is that she probably best pairs up with Guillani, and he's certainly not my first choice.
But since he is (admittedly) the most likely choice, Run Palin Run! [End of comments by Kazoo]
Comment from Steve Maloney: I have said that I will back the presidential (and vice-presidential) nominees for the Republican Party. If the Republican nominees lose in the 2008 presidential election (presumably to Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton), I intend to begin working immediately to ensure that Sarah gets the Republican presidential nomination in 2012 to oppose -- and to defeat -- Mrs. Clinton. In Kazoo's piece, note how he starts out somewhat tentative about backing Sarah for V-P -- and ends up doing so enthusiastically. That's a process many Sarah supporters know well. I hope you'll join Kazoo in getting behind this remarkable woman.
Timothy Egan, an important Seattle-area newsman, says the following about Sarah: "The good news for Republicans is that the most popular fresh face is one of theirs — Gov. Sarah Palin, who looks like Tina Fey of “Saturday Night Live” fame. A marathon runner and commercial fisherwoman — whose kids are named Track, Bristol, Willow and Piper — Governor Palin knocked out an encrusted incumbent in the primary last year. She supports a new ethics bill designed to bring light to the long winter of Alaska politics."
Wednesday, August 29, 2007
MY RETRACTION AND APOLOGY TO SEN. LARRY CRAIG
"It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people’s minds." --Samuel Adams
This column, originally one about "President Hillary Rodham Clinton" (yikes) will change on Saturday and Sunday. I was one of the first bloggers to call for the resignation of Senator Larry Craig. He has resigned effective September 30 of this year, but now I believe my initial comments were hasty -- and, frankly, uninformed. I had assumed was some evidence of verbal solicitation or groping of the undercover policeman. In fact, there was NO SUCH EVIDENCE. The policeman was totally out-of-bounds in making pop-psychology assumptions about Craig's character. I rushed to judgment, and my readers have a right to expect more. (Note: The policeman said he didn't care about Craig's supposed "sexual preference," itself a loaded and arguably homophobic term). What what exactly were the police doing in the men's room? It now looks like entrapment to me. ) If you'd like to read the ENTIRE transcript of the exchange between Sen. Craig and the policeman, you won't hear it on the MSM. You can, however, find it by going to the following site (managed by a gay conservaive activist in Ottawa, Canda: http://gayandright.blogspot.com/ I urge you to read the transcript. You may well end up agreeing with "Fred" from Ottawa, who says, "No crime occurred here." As for straight Steve in Ambridge, PA (i.e., me), I agree that no crime occurred, but I also agree with Senator Craig's decision to resign -- mainly because of his misguided guilty plea. The story of Larry Craig may die, but it shouldn't, because it appears to be a major miscarriage of justice.
Welcome to all supporters of the Republican Party -- and supporters of any the five candidates discussed below. At the present time, I'm not endorsing any specific individual for the presidency (hoping only that HE will be a Republican). Like many others, I'm strongly encouraging consideration of Alaska Gov. Sarah Heath Palin for the second-spot on the Republican ticket.
As a favor to Gov. Romney, I'm not charging him $10,000 for my "Romneyites Unite" slogan. (Romney supporters, note the bottom of this column.)
In another piece, I recently mentioned my commitment to vote for the candidate nominated in 2008 by the Republican Party -- something that will happen "de facto" about February 5 (Super Tuesday of next year. Some people with a penchant for fantasy believe that all Republicans have to do is to nominate Mitt Romney, or Mike Huckabee, or Rudy Giuliani, or Fred Thompson, or John McCain (whose ship is listing badly these days), and we will cruise to an easy victory over Hillary Rodham Clinton.
In fact, the most reliable opinion surveys (Pew Research, Gallup, Stan Greenburg) show just the opposite, not only in their "snapshot" (day-by-day) forms but -- most ominously -- in their trend lines. I don't find many (read: ANY) expert analysts, conservatives or liberals, who disagree with me. We are also poised to take a major skunking in Congress, losing several Senate seats.
Granted, some folks (my GWB word for the day) may look at me as the boy crying "Wolf." However, the last time I "cried wolf" was in the election of 2006 when, you may recall, a wolf came and ate the Republican Party. A bigger, hungrier, meaner wolf could very well be licking his chops in November, 2008.
Why so much emphasis on Sarah Heath Palin, the wildly popular Republican Governor of Alaska, as a choice for the vice-presidential nomination on the Republican ticket? (Her approval rating of 90% is one GWB or any other elected official would pronounce "to-die-for.")
To explain the critical question "why," Let's look at the five distinguished Republican gentlemen I noted above: Huckabee, Romney, Giuliani, Thompson, and McCain. There's zero evidence any of them running on their own they can defeat Mrs. Clinton. Outside their immediate families, not many people believe victory is in the cards. Let's face it: Just because an individual -- say, you -- likes a candidate or even adores him doesn't guarantee more than one vote, yours.
Politically, Mrs. Palin -- the choice of all those intrepid souls on my blogroll -- resembles what in football terminology is called a "wedge-buster." That's the individual on the kickoff or punt team that races downfield to break up group of blockers (the "wedge") that's safeguarding the kick-returner.
There is a wedge -- one based on bad decisions and missed opportunities in the past -- walling off the Republican Party from a host of critically important voting groups: women professionals (teachers, journalists, nurses, doctors, lawyers, businesswomen), Blacks, Hispanics, young people (34 and under), non-white evangelicals, union members, and moderate-to-liberal Roman Catholics.
People in those groups probably make up 200-million plus of the 300-million Americans. (The Census Bureau has said there are now 100 million legal minorities in the U.S., the largest group being Hispanics --45 million -- with Blacks fairly close behind).
Gov. Sarah Palin can help us break through the political wedge and get to these groups. She would have appeal to all of the above segments, especially women professionals and younger people. Naming her to the vice-presidential ticket would be indicating something that would surprise a lot of voters: that we aren't just a bunch of aging white Caucasians offering the same programs as the Democrats but with slightly less funding.
In fact, as a committed wife and the mother of four children, she LIVES those values. As a person who revealed ethics violations by noted Alaska Republican politicans, she's going way beyond pious platitudes about honesty being "the best policy." In terms of her character and fidelity to God and family this woman is bullet-proof.
If you're interested in learning more about Sarah, please read any of the following, including the several essays by nationally recognized columnists, including Fred Barnes of FOX News and The Weekly Standard.
You can indicate your support for Sarah for V-P by leaving a comment either on my blog, or on Adam's at http://palinforvp.blogspot.com/. You can also send an e-mail to me at: TalkTop65@aol.com. Thanks for your interest.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_Palin (Short and accurate biographical information)
http://weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/013/851orcjq.asp (outstanding piece on Sarah by Fred Barnes, executive editor of The Weekly Standard and FOX News analyst)
http://blogcritics.org/archives/2007/08/17/235529.php (SJ Reidhead (Cindy), Article by the "Queen of the Blogosphere" on the Character and Potential of Sarah Palin)
http://columbian.com/opinion/news/07252007news173060.cfm (Essay by editor emeritus Tom Koenigger on Alaska and its remarkable Governor)
http://pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/opinion/columnists/vassilaros/s_517252.html (Essay by conservative columnist Dimitri Vassilaros in praise of the GOP's "Beacon of Hope")
http://kazoolist.blogspot.com/2007/08/palin-for-veep.html (A piece by the newest blogger for Palin -- signed up yesterday -- with a discussion of why he's doing so)
It might take 30-35 minutes to read and digest all the above pieces. It will be time well spent, because Sarah is at least a step ahead of nearly ever elected official in our nation.
In the next 4-5 days, I'm going to be asking Mitt Romney supporters to back Sarah. I don't know how many of them will -- somewhere between none and a few, perhaps -- but I'll make the best case I can. Do I believe Mitt Romney is a Christian? Well, he says he is, and that's good enough for me, since the ultimate issues of faith are between an individual and his or her God. Heck, my brother (not a Mormon) went to BYU, and that should count for something.
ROMNEYITES UNITE (behind Sarah).
This column, originally one about "President Hillary Rodham Clinton" (yikes) will change on Saturday and Sunday. I was one of the first bloggers to call for the resignation of Senator Larry Craig. He has resigned effective September 30 of this year, but now I believe my initial comments were hasty -- and, frankly, uninformed. I had assumed was some evidence of verbal solicitation or groping of the undercover policeman. In fact, there was NO SUCH EVIDENCE. The policeman was totally out-of-bounds in making pop-psychology assumptions about Craig's character. I rushed to judgment, and my readers have a right to expect more. (Note: The policeman said he didn't care about Craig's supposed "sexual preference," itself a loaded and arguably homophobic term). What what exactly were the police doing in the men's room? It now looks like entrapment to me. ) If you'd like to read the ENTIRE transcript of the exchange between Sen. Craig and the policeman, you won't hear it on the MSM. You can, however, find it by going to the following site (managed by a gay conservaive activist in Ottawa, Canda: http://gayandright.blogspot.com/ I urge you to read the transcript. You may well end up agreeing with "Fred" from Ottawa, who says, "No crime occurred here." As for straight Steve in Ambridge, PA (i.e., me), I agree that no crime occurred, but I also agree with Senator Craig's decision to resign -- mainly because of his misguided guilty plea. The story of Larry Craig may die, but it shouldn't, because it appears to be a major miscarriage of justice.
Welcome to all supporters of the Republican Party -- and supporters of any the five candidates discussed below. At the present time, I'm not endorsing any specific individual for the presidency (hoping only that HE will be a Republican). Like many others, I'm strongly encouraging consideration of Alaska Gov. Sarah Heath Palin for the second-spot on the Republican ticket.
As a favor to Gov. Romney, I'm not charging him $10,000 for my "Romneyites Unite" slogan. (Romney supporters, note the bottom of this column.)
In another piece, I recently mentioned my commitment to vote for the candidate nominated in 2008 by the Republican Party -- something that will happen "de facto" about February 5 (Super Tuesday of next year. Some people with a penchant for fantasy believe that all Republicans have to do is to nominate Mitt Romney, or Mike Huckabee, or Rudy Giuliani, or Fred Thompson, or John McCain (whose ship is listing badly these days), and we will cruise to an easy victory over Hillary Rodham Clinton.
In fact, the most reliable opinion surveys (Pew Research, Gallup, Stan Greenburg) show just the opposite, not only in their "snapshot" (day-by-day) forms but -- most ominously -- in their trend lines. I don't find many (read: ANY) expert analysts, conservatives or liberals, who disagree with me. We are also poised to take a major skunking in Congress, losing several Senate seats.
Granted, some folks (my GWB word for the day) may look at me as the boy crying "Wolf." However, the last time I "cried wolf" was in the election of 2006 when, you may recall, a wolf came and ate the Republican Party. A bigger, hungrier, meaner wolf could very well be licking his chops in November, 2008.
Why so much emphasis on Sarah Heath Palin, the wildly popular Republican Governor of Alaska, as a choice for the vice-presidential nomination on the Republican ticket? (Her approval rating of 90% is one GWB or any other elected official would pronounce "to-die-for.")
To explain the critical question "why," Let's look at the five distinguished Republican gentlemen I noted above: Huckabee, Romney, Giuliani, Thompson, and McCain. There's zero evidence any of them running on their own they can defeat Mrs. Clinton. Outside their immediate families, not many people believe victory is in the cards. Let's face it: Just because an individual -- say, you -- likes a candidate or even adores him doesn't guarantee more than one vote, yours.
Politically, Mrs. Palin -- the choice of all those intrepid souls on my blogroll -- resembles what in football terminology is called a "wedge-buster." That's the individual on the kickoff or punt team that races downfield to break up group of blockers (the "wedge") that's safeguarding the kick-returner.
There is a wedge -- one based on bad decisions and missed opportunities in the past -- walling off the Republican Party from a host of critically important voting groups: women professionals (teachers, journalists, nurses, doctors, lawyers, businesswomen), Blacks, Hispanics, young people (34 and under), non-white evangelicals, union members, and moderate-to-liberal Roman Catholics.
People in those groups probably make up 200-million plus of the 300-million Americans. (The Census Bureau has said there are now 100 million legal minorities in the U.S., the largest group being Hispanics --45 million -- with Blacks fairly close behind).
Gov. Sarah Palin can help us break through the political wedge and get to these groups. She would have appeal to all of the above segments, especially women professionals and younger people. Naming her to the vice-presidential ticket would be indicating something that would surprise a lot of voters: that we aren't just a bunch of aging white Caucasians offering the same programs as the Democrats but with slightly less funding.
If we become the Party of the "angry, old white guys," Heaven help us. We're headed in that direction, and we need to change course in a hurry. (As an occasionally cantankerous older white guy, I believe I can say that.)
As a communications major in college, Sarah Palin knows talk is cheap. Best of all, she doesn't blather on with abstractions about family values.In fact, as a committed wife and the mother of four children, she LIVES those values. As a person who revealed ethics violations by noted Alaska Republican politicans, she's going way beyond pious platitudes about honesty being "the best policy." In terms of her character and fidelity to God and family this woman is bullet-proof.
If you're interested in learning more about Sarah, please read any of the following, including the several essays by nationally recognized columnists, including Fred Barnes of FOX News and The Weekly Standard.
You can indicate your support for Sarah for V-P by leaving a comment either on my blog, or on Adam's at http://palinforvp.blogspot.com/. You can also send an e-mail to me at: TalkTop65@aol.com. Thanks for your interest.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_Palin (Short and accurate biographical information)
http://weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/013/851orcjq.asp (outstanding piece on Sarah by Fred Barnes, executive editor of The Weekly Standard and FOX News analyst)
http://blogcritics.org/archives/2007/08/17/235529.php (SJ Reidhead (Cindy), Article by the "Queen of the Blogosphere" on the Character and Potential of Sarah Palin)
http://columbian.com/opinion/news/07252007news173060.cfm (Essay by editor emeritus Tom Koenigger on Alaska and its remarkable Governor)
http://pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/opinion/columnists/vassilaros/s_517252.html (Essay by conservative columnist Dimitri Vassilaros in praise of the GOP's "Beacon of Hope")
http://kazoolist.blogspot.com/2007/08/palin-for-veep.html (A piece by the newest blogger for Palin -- signed up yesterday -- with a discussion of why he's doing so)
It might take 30-35 minutes to read and digest all the above pieces. It will be time well spent, because Sarah is at least a step ahead of nearly ever elected official in our nation.
In the next 4-5 days, I'm going to be asking Mitt Romney supporters to back Sarah. I don't know how many of them will -- somewhere between none and a few, perhaps -- but I'll make the best case I can. Do I believe Mitt Romney is a Christian? Well, he says he is, and that's good enough for me, since the ultimate issues of faith are between an individual and his or her God. Heck, my brother (not a Mormon) went to BYU, and that should count for something.
ROMNEYITES UNITE (behind Sarah).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
.jpg)
