Archive for June, 2011

I am a student of history and politics, which is for me, a fascinating study for many reasons.

I can think of no other political figure that has inspired so much hate and vitriol as Sarah Palin.



From the moment that she was announced to be the running mate of John McCain, the outcry began.  I don’t need to recap it all here.  If you’re reading this and not swearing at me, you know what was said.  And if you are reading this and swearing at me, you’re probably repeating it as fast as your lips will allow.

Never mind the fact that many of the complaints were shallow, untrue, or didn’t reflect what the complainer’s real problem with her was, they were said anyway, and repeated ad nauseam, especially by people who had the public’s ear, even if they didn’t have the public’s mind.  And it didn’t stop there.

A media that never spares the horses when it feels obliged to lecture others about their lack of tolerance couldn’t wait to rush to make targets of her family too.

In a campaign where a stern-faced, left leaning object of worship lectured the press about leaving his family alone after his wife made provocative remarks while campaigning for him, the media happily turned and redoubled its scrutiny on Palin’s children, happily reporting rumors that the latest addition to the family was not her’s, finding fault with her daughter Bristol, who had unprotected sex with a publicity seeking, self-centered douchebag, and becoming pregnant in the process (marking one of the rare instances where liberals have considered it bad in recent memory for a teenager to become pregnant out of wedlock…perhaps the real crime was that she didn’t rush to her local Planned Murderhood™ Center to snuff her child in her womb?), and cracking wise with creepy sex jokes about her daughters, a la David Letterman. At least when noted dignitaries and cultural icons like Sandra Bernhard wasn’t on stage talking about how they’d like to see Palin gang-raped by a bunch of black men, showing that nuanced and brilliant wit and tolerance that the left is always telling the rest of us we should have…just like them.

And McCain’s loss in that election didn’t silence these critics.

Think about that. First, I cannot recall a single instance when there has been a single outpouring of sheer, unrefined hatred for a Vice Presidential candidate. From the ferocity of the attacks, if you had just crawled out from under a rock in the last few weeks of the campaign, you’d swear that the ticket had been reversed, based on the reporting that was going on. And then to have it continue after the election had ended? Unprecedented.

Seriously. Between the everlasting meme that “Sarah Palin is Stupid” that was the Left’s default position that has fed the myth of her unelectability repeated in some quarters on the right, you’d think that there would be no need to repeat her name ever again, and that if never given another line of print by the media, she would simply become a footnote in the history of Presidential politics, like Geraldine Ferraro. But if anything, the attacks intensified and continued. No attack too stupid, and no dismissal spoken from one of “ours” too illogical (like Michael Medved’s recent “The only reason she’s a national political figure at all is because she is kind of pretty. If she looked like Olympia Snowe or Susan Collins, do you think anyone would pay attention to her?”) The NYT’s recent “Help us data-mine all of Governor Palin’s emails because the dirt HAS to be there” campaign is only the most recent example that she cannot possibly be as easily dismissed as some want so desperately for us to believe. Why?

Because she turns every single lie the left has tried to enshrine as truth in the last 40 years on its ear.

1. Women can’t be mothers and be fulfilled. Children are an impediment to having a career.

Except when this isn’t true. Which then lead to the contradiction of a few feminists criticizing her mothering skills, and suggesting that she shouldn’t be governor since Bristol managed to get pregnant, and Trig was born. To this, I say, parents would love it if their children would always reflect the wisdom we try to impart upon them, and not do things that we have counseled them against. I know of no account of Bristol’s pregnancy that boiled down to Palin saying to her daughter “Has that ne’er do well knocked you up yet? No? Well drag his ass down to the bedroom! Todd and I can’t wait to be grandparents! C’mon ya little tramp. Start gettin’ busy!”

I didn’t have to be a parent to know two things. First is that no matter how smart your kid may be, or how much might have told them not to do something because of the impact it might have on their life, kids are rebellious. Just ask Billy and Franklin Graham. Second, if teenagers want to have sex, they will find a way, and they will manage to pull it off right under your nose. I used to be a teenager long ago. I know this to be true. And at some point, no matter what you say, or how often you say it, your kids will make their own choices. And that is what happened here. Instead of making lame attempts to berate the Governor, people ought to be noting that she didn’t ramble on in front of an open mic about her grandchild being a punishment to her daughter. As much as the word “Hypocrisy” was tossed around in relation to the matter, very few people in the media took note of the consistency that didn’t have Bristol killing her child, like Barry Sotero would have insisted on for his own children.

2. Sarah Palin exposes the myth of feminist solidarity.

The Governor ran against her own party to get elected to the governorship of her state. You’d think that such a feat would be a victory for women. And you’d be correct. But Sarah Palin also did it not just with the help of her family, which in fact, did not hold her back, but with the help of her husband, who she has remained married to for many, many years. This was in contravention to the declarations of feminists over the past decades, the conventional wisdom of which boiled down to “Children are a burden, and men degrade and demoralize women.” This was the reason for the knee-jerk attacks from the word “Go!”, and why they haven’t let up since. It is the reason why this

was not decried in the strongest terms by women regarded by the left to be leadership figures, and when not applauded by them, at least greeted with the stony silence of tacit approval.

This is the reason why the usual suspects HAVE to destroy her. And this is why they will look the other way when attack dogs like Bernhardt say things that reveal a less-than favorable perception of black men (which would have been denounced as RACISM! thirty seconds after uttered if said by a conservative). That is why they pounce on any remark that strikes them as wrong, such as the Governor’s recent remarks about Paul Revere warning the British about us, even if it is in fact correct, which causes the party to straighten up, and act as if all the cool kids have chosen to wear egg on their face in the same fashion that they are. (And frankly, I like her take on it. It was a time when the world was about to change, in no small part because of the way that we do things here, and ordinary people defied conventional wisdom by standing up to the world’s most powerful military power and saying that things were going to be different. It reveals the thinking of a person who has a fire in their belly that has been long absent in the federal government, and a willingness to take a fresh look at something that hadn’t been seen that way in well…ever.) It’s why pseudo-intellectuals like the insufferable Martin Bashir can wax poetic about how Palin having a flag on the front of her tour bus might possibly be a violation of the US Flag Code without a trace of irony, or reflection on the Obama campaign’s out-and-out defacement of the flag by placing Dear Leader’s countenance on it in the last election.

I don’t know if Sarah Palin is going to run for President. I don’t know if she would. I do know that we owe her a debt of gratitude for first changing the game, and second for making the Left gleefully expose its own inconsistencies and hatreds. The best part is that they still cannot even see it, but the message is most definitely out. And it is spreading.

Read Full Post »

…who wants to choke the s*** of the people on “our side” of the political spectrum when they keep attacking the non-expert/experienced politicians who have decided to endure hostile, partisan reporters spelunking in their sphincters and uteruses, and the scorn and derision of pundits, who often have done nothing remotely risky in their lives other than ordering iffy fish at swanky restaurants or daring to buy a suit off the rack, rather than visiting their tailor for their latest Armani.

I’d like to know when so many conservatives bought into the idea that our leaders must be drawn from the pool of experts and experienced politicians.  A careful reading of the Federalist Papers and other assorted writings make it clear that the Framers certainly never envisioned a government consisting of career politicians and professional experts rich in “knowledge” largely or completely unsupported by real world experience.  But honestly, as far afield as we have strayed from so many other things that they intended, I find this gradual acquiescence less frustrating than the unrestrained contempt that so many of these so-called conservative “journalists”, talking heads, and their devoted followers have for people like Sarah Palin, Herman Cain, or even Michelle Bachmann.

Whether it’s the vacuous and groundless criticisms leveled at Sarah Palin, (She’s dumb, she’s a hillbilly, Trig isn’t hers, OMG, she didn’t give a polished and pat answer to the hostile reporter’s query, its her fault the nutbar shot Gabby Giffords, or that she’s a quitter because she decided to stop costing the taxpayers of Alaska money fighting boundless and, ultimately frivolous ethics complaints and resigned the governorship), the “he doesn’t have a policy plan for every single contingency” leveled at Herman Cain, someone who I would wager has more ideas that would actually grow the economy and jobs in his little finger than The President and all of Congress have between themselves and their legions of advisors and staff.  Besides, I’m quite sure that the only reason an “electable candidate” like Mitt Romney can cogently answer a specific foreign policy question because at least one or more paid advisor has advised him on a safe, or expected answer to such question.  Be honest, do you think at his first inauguration, George W. Bush was planning to spend the majority of time in office in charge of conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, or that he thought that we would suffer a devastating terrorist attack on our soil that would kill thousands of American civilians, or that a cadre of career Democratic appointees going through a revolving door at Freddie and Fannie would feed an unsustainable bubble by guaranteeing bad loans and personally enriching themselves in the process, despite it being brought to his attention once in office, and his numerous warnings to Congress about their dreadful oversight after it was brought to his attention.

The fact that these criticisms come from people who haven’t decided to subject themselves to the inevitable criticism and scrutiny directed at these candidates is irritating.  These people aren’t making the decision to run because they want power.  Despite the claims to the contrary, they don’t do it for “the fame”.  I’m quite certain that Governor Palin hasn’t appreciated “the fame” that has made her daughters the focus of David Letterman’s creepy sexual innuendos, or Andy Sullivan all but petition the courts to make his own gynecological examination of her nethers.  I’m equally certain that Herman Cain didn’t decide to move into the public eye and run for office because he’d like to be President.  Representative Bachmann on the other hand, clearly enjoys driving partisan hacks like Chrissy “Tingles” Matthews insane when she purposely doesn’t play the role that he hamfistedly tries to maneuver her into.  But then, to hear some talking head with a complete lack of understanding of the tax code prattling on and pretending to know more than her would lead me to frustrate the sputtering simpleton at every opportunity as well.  No, these people made the decision to step away from their lives because they could no longer ignore the fact that decades of leadership by the experienced and the experts isn’t working.  And what thanks do they get?  A complete eclipse of consideration by self-appointed deciders obsessed with talking points, elaborate plans which may or may not survive the events of the potential candidate’s administration, ‘electablity’-otherwise known as the careful positioning that ensures that the candidate doesn’t really have a position that would evoke a strong feeling by any potential voter, and policy expertise informed by, well, more experts.  And then they lament months later the fact that the new boss is largely undistinguishable from the old boss.

I have an idea.

How about you journalists, pundits, loyal followers and other deciders who purport to be on our side try a novel strategy this time?

Shut the hell up and let us decide, m’kay?

Read Full Post »

I suppose congratulations are in order.

Over the past 40-odd years, the American Left has consistently chiseled away at the values and mores that built a nation, employing pretzel logic, ridicule, double standards, and a thinly veiled contempt for those in society who refused to adopt the “modern view” of how society should view itself.  The effect of this ongoing assault has been as subtle as it has been pernicious, as listening to the talk of the day’s news and scandals reveals.

First up, we have the unfortunately named Tony Wiener, Representative from New York, and lowbrow demagogue.

Tony’s Twitter account made news this week when a picture of a boxer brief covered penis was sent through his twitter account to a young co-ed at a college in the state of Washington.  Tony, predictably, alleged his account had been hacked, and he immediately contacted the authorities and filed a criminal complaint lawyered up and hired a tech consulting firm to find out how the hack had happened.  However, many people were still inclined to believe him, or at least give him the benefit of the doubt, so he had to tell a reporter who asked if the picture was of him that he couldn’t say “With Certitude” if it was him, thus failing the smell test for wives nationwide.  The story still enjoys a life of its own, due in no small part to the Congressman’s last name, which with the subject material, has caused this story to have a life of its own.   The real story is that Wiener, a vicious little toad who wants desperately to be taken seriously, can’t say if the picture is of him?  Why are there pictures of his crotch in existence at all?  And why is a man in his 40s who is married interacting at all with young female tweet followers anyway?

Second, we have noted scumbag John “Two Americas” Edwards.

It wasn’t enough that Edwards cheated on his dying wife with a much younger woman during his run for President and Vice President.  It wasn’t enough that he then lied about fathering a child with the mistress, and tried to get an aid to take responsibility for his indiscretions and virility.  Now, according to a federal grand jury, this multimillionaire used campaign funds to pay to keep his mistress kept and under wraps.

Of course, both are not without their supporters, who are quick to say things like “What does it matter that the Congressman sent a picture of his crotch to a comely young co-ed?  That is a matter for him and his wife.”  or “Edwards is being indicted for having an affair.’  Both positions ignore a significant root truth.  If these men were not worthy of the trust that their wives put in them, they are not worthy of the trust of voters.  What’s more, do we want to be represented by people who are so easily swayed from their commitments?  If the people who sleep with them can’t trust them, what makes you think that they will remain loyal to constituents?

The ugly truth that any Republican would share with you is that it isn’t “a private matter” when a public official doesn’t take these commitments seriously.  And it is a truth that is well-known by the media, who would take every opportunity to shame officials who had committed similar offenses if that (R) resided after their name.  So what makes Democrats different?  Nothing.  Having the (D) after their name doesn’t mean that they are more trustworthy.  It means that the Press, which is supposed to be the eyes of society, and the Democratic constituencies have much lower expectations for these candidates.  It shows in their excuses (Everyone does this, It was just this one time, It is between them and their spouse, It isn’t the public’s business).  And it is conspicuous in the questions that they don’t ask, such as “Congressman, why shouldn’t we consider your judgment suspect when it is obvious that you enjoy photographing your privates?” or “Can you explain for us why it is right and proper for a 40-something married Congressman to be conversing with a 20-something college student about anything?”  or the more pointed “What would you say to the girl’s father, or your constituents who might be parents to 20-something young college students about your conduct?”

And in the case of someone like John Edwards, similar questions could be asked, along with a more pointed “How do you think your children feel about your infidelity and lying?” 

The defenders of these men and others like them will, of course say “You don’t have any right to make those kinds of judgments.”, but they are wrong.  No man is perfect, and as a result, no man has a right to expect perfection.  What we do have a right to expect is that the people we elect to public office will not prove themselves unworthy of the trust that we place in them, and that when they are caught betraying the trust that others have put in them, be it the trust of their spouses, or the trust of a voter, that they respect us enough to not lie to us about it, and to ask their defenders not to insult our intelligence with ridiculous denials like “Justice Thomas’ supporters hacked his Twitter account to make him look bad” or to call those with enough dignity to demand an acknowledgement of shame from those bathing in it hypocrites for demanding it of the people who asked them for their trust. 

It isn’t hypocrisy to expect a certain course of conduct from those who ask us for our trust; it is hypocrisy to only hold one group to a set of standards and make excuses for the other’s bad behavior.  It is gross negligence to do it in a way that continues to draw attention from that point, which is the one that really matters.  That kind of sloppy thinking is why the third point is an issue.  Because there is a story, which says nothing pleasant or right about us, but it is concealed by the misdirection and dishonesty that marks the discussion of his notoriety.

Dr. Jack Kevorkian is dead.

And Hell’s demons welcome one of their own home.

I lived in Michigan during the time in which this grisly murderer was making his house calls, and obliterating his Hippocratic Oath.  There are those who will maintain that there is a “right” to “die with dignity”, and that Kevorkian was a “pioneer” who helped to spark the euthanasia debate in this country.  I doubt if, in retrospect, those patients of his who were discovered in motel rooms, or the one whose kidneys the good doctor removed and offered to the first taker would agree that they met their end with the degree of dignity that they sought to preserve.  But then considering the fact that several of the people he ushered out of life’s embrace were not terminally ill, but were depressed, or that it was his actions, not those of his patients, which actually caused their deaths, I too see the man as a pioneer of sorts…a prolific mass murderer who had the unique distinction of being upfront about his actions, and largely managing to avoid the consequences for them, at least until now. 

I won’t celebrate his life, but I will, at least, gratefully acknowledge his death.

Read Full Post »