Emails, Lies and Politics how the Mainstream Media and the Progressive party cheapens America

40 replies [Last post]
Observerofu
Observerofu's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/14/2010

Alaska releases some 20,000 personal emails of then Governor Sarah Palin and the Media frenzy begins. Everyone from the New York Times to the League of Women voters
go to Juno Alaska, not the most accessible city in America, to start digging, not for Gold but dirt.

Why?

What is this almost fanatic focus on Sarah Palin? Is it she is an outspoken Conservative woman or is it the fact she refused to lay down take the abuse and be destroyed by her detractors? I believe it's more the latter. The Opfor of politics tried to destroy her, tried to break up their marriage even, but yet she still survives not only just survives but turned it around and got fairly wealthy because of it.

God Bless America.

So why is it that Media, the left and even some from the Center and Right want to see her shutdown?

I don't know if you are a Nascar fan, but there was a Driver that elicited such response in the viewing public. Dale Earnhardt was that driver. You either loved him or you hated him. There was very little in between. Dale was in my opinion one of the largest figures in Nascar, when he spoke everyone listened and he did more to change the sport then most imagine. On the track he was relentless. If you had the lead with a lap or two to go your worst nightmare was to have your spotter tell you that #3 was on your bumper, because 9 out of 10 times if Dale could loosen you up he would. He was a winner.
A lot of people however don't know his real story off the track. His charity is not so well known.

Sarah is a lot like Dale in that she engenders the same reactions either you love her or hate her. But the hate her crowd almost does so with a frantic zeal that borders on obsession.
The recent muck-up is over her statements on Paul Revere. Never-mind the fact that she was Historically accurate and she used the analogy in context she is torn to smithereens from the "enlightened" media who didn't take a moment to check their facts. Nope they just ran with the story that Sarah was a moron and wrong.

Do we even have an unbiased media anymore or have they all just turned into muckrakers? Media bias is real and easy to spot. Just turn on any of the so called Main stream media outlets or read any of the main stream papers and you can view it nightly. America is tired. Tired of politics as usual. Tired of the lies. Tired of Politicians telling us what is right for us. Tried of Government dipping into our pockets for their spending foolishness. Tried of being thought of as sheeple to be led.

We have had it and we are not going to take it anymore. These attacks by the Progressive media and the Progressive party's campaign of financial destruction of our wealth as a Nation must end.

It cheapens us all and it cheapens America.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Robert Murdoch - losing control?

Will the scandal regarding the 'right' media mogul (Murdoch) on the English soil reach the states? Is this the beginning of the downfall of the 'right' control of certain aspects of the media? Interesting turn of events.

Observerofu
Observerofu's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/14/2010
Hasn't hurt George Soros and his control of the Mainstream Media

So I suspect Murdoch will survive.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Unethical practices?

Has there been a scandal involving Soros? Thanks for the update.

Observerofu
Observerofu's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/14/2010
Well crashing several Country's Economies

may well qualify as unethical, but then again in the Liberal world maybe not.

Thanks for playing.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
DM - Soros

Is one of those evil hedge fund people and made all his money this way.

However, since he supports the left no one on the left cares.

Just say'in

roundabout
roundabout's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/01/2011
SOROS

Yes, he is a liberal.
He spends billions on democratic and capitalistic projects. He was instrumental in putting democracy in Hungary with money and effort.

He did his best by money contribution to beat George W. Bush for his second term.

I wish he had been successsful, don't you?

JeffC
JeffC's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/21/2006
Its really simple OOU

Y'all keep trying to think up deep psychological reasons for the left to dis Sarah. It's really very simple. She is ignorant and her ideas are whacko. The question is why she has become such an icon of the right. We're talking about a person who was selected by your Party to be in line to be President who was completely flustered when asked what magazines and newspapers she read. The team that selected her was so stunned by her ignorance that they banned her from any contact with the press. And for good reason. You wonder why we are concerned that she might become President of the United States?

You are so blinded that you either refuse to see the truth or are intentionally misrepresenting her to avoid her looking like the idiot that she is. "..she refused to lay down take the abuse and be destroyed by her detractors..." Uh, no. She quit resigned as Governor because she crumbled under the pressure.

And you know that she was completely baffled when the lame-stream media asked her that gotcha question, "What have you seen on your tour?" She barely knew who Paul Revere was and gave the stupidest answer to such a soft-ball question that I've ever seen. You know it and so did the hoards of followers who then tried to rewrite history on Wikipedia to support her rambling and ignorant answer.

There is no need for psychoanalyst. She is a lazy, frighteningly ignorant person who has found her place on FOX. She is safe there and can be assured that no one will ask her any question that a fifth-grader could not answer. Enjoy her commentary on FOX. After the American people got a glimpse of her intellect during her last campaign, she will never be elected to anything again.

Mike King
Mike King's picture
Offline
Joined: 11/29/2006
Jeff

Calling Ms Palin names is certainly within your prerogative, but please tell me you place our current Commander in Chief in the same category. When we talk of executive experience, she obviously possessed an advantage in 2008 over a junior senator who got his job thanks to the selection of one Alan Keyes by a bunch of fools.

Please take Mr Obama away from a teleprompter and allow the media to ask questions that require no advance notification, and I think America will realize that he is in that same category and a grievous mistake has been made.

On the other hand, if your intent is to shackle the American public to the whims of those in Washington, you are on track for success.

roundabout
roundabout's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/01/2011
MIKE

President Obama has had several press conferences, many lately, where he answered all questions rationally for an hour. No teleprompter used nor could it be.
Actually Bush had similar problems as Palin with his "Bushisms," whole books have been written there were so many!

"Those in Washington," if it is such a terrible place why do they all want to got there---it won't change once they are there!

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
JeffC - I don't

get it, if the Republicans nominate Palin or Bachmann; Obama will win hands down. So, you should just let the Republicans self-destruct and hope that they put up one of these people.

Of course maybe you actually want Obama to lose?

JeffC
JeffC's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/21/2006
Thanks PTCO but...

I don't have any influence. I'm just commenting. It's not like my opinion is going to sway an election. Suits me if y'all pick Bachmann or Palin.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
Not Y'all JeffC

I am not Republican, it doesn't matter to me who they select both parties speak with one voice when it comes to governance, there is not wit of difference between the parties when it comes to actually doing something about the power of government over our lives. They both want to increase it.

I was simply pointing out that it appears that you care about the Republican candidate that can't win, getting the nomination. Therefore, I concluded you didn't want Mr. Obama to win.

Observerofu
Observerofu's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/14/2010
PTCO just an FYI

"Republican Candidate" Extends Lead vs. Obama to 47% to 39%
Margin marks first statistically significant lead among registered voters
http://www.gallup.com/poll/148487/republican-candidate-extends-lead-obam...

Even Bachmann beats Obama right now. Heck anyone beats him right now and it's only going to get worse for him.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
OOU - Maybe

Maybe, but remember the President will have a billion dollars to spend, with that kind of money he or his handlers would have to be complete idiots to lose the next election.

It's all about the money and power, it has nothing do do with what the people actually want, this is the myth of democracy. Democracy always cascades into paying off special interests and both parties have a lot of special interests to pay off.

Observerofu
Observerofu's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/14/2010
True so True

sad isn't it.

roundabout
roundabout's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/01/2011
I swear, you believe anything!

How can Gallup or anyone predict a winner between President Obama AND AN UNNAMED CANDIDATE?

Do you really thin Palin could beat him? The headache lady? The Pizza Man? The Evangelical-Holiness Governor from Texas? The Mormon? Obama's Ambassador to China? etc.

There may be a candidate who could, but you all don't seem to want them.

Observerofu
Observerofu's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/14/2010
Jeff why do you care?

Why are you trying so hard to convince everyone that she is a moron?

Why should you care? Let the Republicans nominate her if she is running which she isn't btw and you win.

So why are you trying so hard?

JeffC
JeffC's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/21/2006
Just being helpful OOU

In your initial post you seemed unsure of the reason. If I was blogging about how swell Al Sharpton was and couldn't figure out why people disagreed with me, I'd hope you would clue me in.

Observerofu
Observerofu's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/14/2010
The Liberal doth protest too much, methinks.

but if that is your excuse then so be it..

I do find it funny how your side tried to eviscerate her over the Revere statement all calling her a moron, but NOW where are those same enlightened pundits?

Your case is a little weaker for it Jeff. It just shows it doesn't matter what she says the hatred you guys have for her overrules any common sense.

I have always been the type when I see bully's picking on a little guy I tended to go stomp on the bully's.

You guys need some stomping on.

JeffC
JeffC's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/21/2006
Not sure what you mean OOU

What about her Paul Revere ramblings has changed to make it less dumb?

And I don't hate her at all. I don't hate anybody. She'd be a hoot to go hunting or fishing with.

Palin's a non-issue. She ain't running, as you said, and she's made $26 million last year feeding the masses. Hurray for her! We don't have anything like that on the Ds side and I have been seriously considering approaching FOX and writing a book, "Are the Liberals Freaking (family blog) Insane?". Get interviewed by Rush and Sean and Laura. Have Worldnet and O'Reilly give my book away to subscribers. It seems so far-fetched now that 40 years ago, Jimmy Carter was the moderate-conservative (liberal on race to be sure) Naval officer and small businessman, running against the Kennedy/McGovern liberal factions of the Democratic Party. I am not necessarily their friend. Give me $5 million.

As for the peeps on my side, point taken; but I'll tell you tell you a secret. I'm approaching the point of being so alienated by both sides that I'm not sure I have a side. Your side alienates me more. By default only I am supporting your opposition. This is an all encompassing political view on many topics. On the specific matter of not extending the debt limit and thereby harming the United States, your side is bordering on activities that border on traitorous; if it's not a bluff.

I expect a resolution. If not, then Obama invokes the 14th Amendment and declares the debt limit unconstitutional and gets his way anyway while your TEAs will have shown themselves to be enemies of the United States.

The debt limit was raised seven times under Bush. There is nothing special about this raise except that the House Republicans have latched on to it with their demands. It is beyond politics as usual and exposes the United States to the humiliation of defaulting on debts for partisan political purposes. The United States of America defaulting on its debts because the TEA Party Republicans in the House decided to bring the country down to satisfy their ideology.

As you well know, the House originates the budget. The Republicans can do whatever they can with their 2012 budget and keep the politics internal. That's the proper venue. Not the debt limit vote where the House Republicans, your Tea Party, want the USA, the United States of America, THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, to face the world community and humbly say that we can't pay our bills. Unthinkable! This crisis is craven Republican politics only.

I've never seen anything like it. I feel very strongly about it. I am appalled. I am outraged.

Stomp away.

bad_ptc
bad_ptc's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/18/2006
Jeff & hunting with Caribou Barbie

Sorry Jeff but I’d rather take my chances with President Chaney than Caribou Barbie.

As per one critique of her hunting prowess:

And that’s just what Sarah Palin did. The former governor of Alaska brought a TV crew on weekend-long trip to the Arctic tundra to do some shooting for her Sarah Palin’s Alaska show on TLC (The Learning Channel) and her shortcomings became evident immediately. Among her errors:

She shot 4-5 times at a wandering caribou and missed

When she shot the first time and missed, she panicked and shot at it as it moved, apparently thinking it would be easier to hit that way than when standing still

She took no practice shots

She didn’t check the sites (they were off)

She didn’t carry her own rifle; she let her father and his friend carry it for her (her father is 72-years-old to Palin’s sprightly 46)

She let her father load the rifle

When the rifle was passed to her, Mama Grizzly “moved her finger inside its trigger guard, a breach of basic safety rules” as one website noted

“On leaving her hunting camp one morning, Ms Palin pointed to the horizon and declared ‘Let’s go west.’ There followed an awkward pause. “That’s east,” noted her father.”

She was under-armed (her father called her weapon a “varmint rifle” yet she expressed concern that it might have a kick)

As far as fishing with her, that would be fine if, she and I were two different bodies of water with at least 10 miles of separation; something akin to going to two different high schools together.

Why is it a good thing when Palin is on a national bus tour? Because then we'll know where NOT to be.

Palin is the best thing to happen to the Democratic Party, ever!

Observerofu
Observerofu's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/14/2010
Jeff Presidents can not raise the debt ceiling.

That is under the purview of Congress. If Obama does so lawsuits will be filed the next day and it will be found unconstitutional.

btw-she was correct on the Revere statement. So many liberal pundits had hoof and mouth disease it was funny watching them backtrack.

JeffC
JeffC's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/21/2006
Sure he can OOU

Last week Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell proposed legislation that would authorize President Obama to raise the debt ceiling then the House can vote on a resolution disapproving it. Obama would then veto that resolution. Voila! Obama raises the debt ceiling and the House Republicans get to claim that they voted against it.

Alternately, Obama can just say he is raising the debt limit by Executive Order because default is unconstitutional under the 14th Amendment.

If you want to believe that Palin's answer was anything but befuddled, instead of admitting that the question was to complex for her to answer, it suits me. Paul Revere made his midnight ride, amidst all the warning shots and bells a-ringing, to warn the British.

I learned a different version.

Observerofu
Observerofu's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/14/2010
Well Jeff you may think he has the power to ursurp

the Constitution I don't. Article 5 clearly places the Authority under Congress not the Executive Branch and I will bet you anything that Courts are going to agree with me on this with the exception of a few radical judges. But then again when has the Constitution ever restrained the Government, especially this one.

There will be no default. We take in over $200 Billion dollars per month.
We can pay the interest, all entitlements, Social Security and Military and it would leave us $33 Million. Not an ideal situation but a workable one.

The "default" is just a scare tactic from your side, much like Granny having to eat cat food if this isn't done.

JeffC
JeffC's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/21/2006
The Republicans are usurping the Constitution

By forcing a default, the Republicans are usurping the Constitution.

Your scenario is sheer fantasy. "We can pay the interest, all entitlements, Social Security and Military and it would leave us $33 Million. Not an ideal situation but a workable one."

I guess we can just get rid of the FBI and release all the criminals from Federal prisons instead of paying for guards. There is really no need for Federal Courts to operate. We can stop all research and development, and stop paying defense contractors. There is no need to inspect the food supply so we can shut down the USDA. We can lay off the air-traffic controllers. No need for border patrols or customs agents.

Y'all have it all figured out.

Lunacy.

Spyglass
Spyglass's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/28/2008
So JeffC

You don't see ANY room for ANYTHING to be cut?

I've said it before and I'll say it again, anyone who thinks one party has all the answers and the other party is clueless, I'm not sure how to take them.

There has to be something that we can do without.

I'll start with having signs on the interstate every 10 miles or so telling me it's called the Eisenhower Interstate System. TOTAL waste of money.

Mail delivery 6 days a week, TOTAL waste of money.

Congress in session more than 2-3 months a year, TOTAL waste of money.

Any study of cow farts. TOTAL waste of money.

Now it's your turn.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
JeffC - All

a drop in the bucket, we can pay for this too.

Essentially we would downsize the government by 44%, I am certain that we could find the 44% without jeopardizing public safety, national security or justice.

Now I know that you believe all the services that government provides like food inspection, , CDC, EPA, Energy, etc. are real and needed but there are a whole lot of folks that don't, including me.

It will all boil down to priorities when the debt is cut off from our spend thrift friends in Congress. It will all be up to the President to decide what programs are eliminated, scary uh?

There is only one certainty about all of this, we can’t and mustn’t continue to spend like drunken sailors.

The math just doesn’t add up Jeff.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
Duplicate

#

Ninja Guy
Ninja Guy's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/26/2010
JeffC, First We Need to Stop Paying

all retired military veterans, including the ex-Commanders In Chief! Those 4 alone are costing us tens of millions a year! That's a lot of Braves tickets that could be bought but can't:)

Observerofu
Observerofu's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/14/2010
Jeff we are going to have to raise taxes

that is a foregone conclusion, but NOT before a Balanced Budget Amendment is put before the States. You see Jeff we don't trust the Government to get it's fiscal house in order. WE CAN NOT KEEP KICKING THIS CAN DOWN THE ROAD Jeff.

There is no more road.

We cannot confiscate enough wealth to pay the bills.

We cannot keep raising taxes on businesses and expect them to create jobs.

We cannot allow this spending orgy to continue.

No more shrimp treadmills.

No more programs for Prostitutes in China.

No more programs for genitalia washing in Africa.

We cannot afford it anymore Jeff. Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and Welfare has to be addressed. That can has sailed over the cliff.

JeffC
JeffC's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/21/2006
Suits me OOU

The TEA cult controls the House. They can write next years budget and I will look forward to the wailing and gnashing of teeth. That's politics and the Parties can shred each other to their hearts content.

My objection is the damage to the country if there is a default. That is outside of political considerations in my opinion. This is not a proper venue.

Observerofu
Observerofu's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/14/2010
Jeff the Gravy Train has run out of Gravy

or do you believe we can spend in perpetuity?

roundabout
roundabout's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/01/2011
Jeff

And you forgot the "taking of our guns!" (which she can't shoot anyway)

roundabout
roundabout's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/01/2011
FYI: In AJC today

What we spend for:
Defense 25%
Pensions 21%
Health 23%
Welfare 13%
Interest 5%
Education 3%
Transportation 2%
Protection 2%
General Govt. 1% (all numbers rounded)

Our Debt:

Us 42.2% (Treas, etc.)
Soc. Sec. Trust 17.9%
Foreign (other) 11.6%
China 7.5%
Japan 6.4%
UK 3.4%
Brazil 1.3%
Civil Service Ret. 6.0%
US Military retire.2.1%
Oil Export Nat. 1.6%

(Note: about 1/3 from foreign sources)(Little less than half from Us)

(All Interest must be paid first) (We take in about 40% of needs monthly, and borrow the rest)

If we skip rest of payments other than interest and entitlements, we will hurt the economy by so many people not spending.

I don't know what they may work out with the Credit Rating people in case of only paying out what we have.

roundabout
roundabout's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/01/2011
OOU: budget

The 14th amendment stipulates that debt is to be paid that was spent by law!
All spending currently is by law! Especially for pensions, etc.

What do you think has not been authorized by law?

Between that and the daily income, all bills could be paid!

Credit rating be darned!

Observerofu
Observerofu's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/14/2010
Roundie-NOT

Constitutional for the President to raise the debt ceiling and that is not negotiable. Read Article 4 Amendment 14. Then read Article 5. Sums it up right nicely.

Congress has the authority not the President.

roundabout
roundabout's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/01/2011
OOU

Didn't know congress could pass anything without the President's signature or 2/3 vote override!

2/3 vote in the Senate is impossible!

I don't think the Constitution even foresaw a debt limit! How would they know?

We need to bring that Constitution up to date.

Observerofu
Observerofu's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/14/2010
If you believe that then you Sir are an idiot

nuff said.

The Constitution need to be adhered to not changed.

roundabout
roundabout's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/01/2011
OOU

You aren't thinking. are you?

We have already had to amend it numerous times---once twice for the same thing---both ways!

Do you want it changed about a balanced budget?
How about Abortion?
How about one term limit?

Do you know where the Land of Nod is?
Do you think Slaves are worth only 3/5 of a white person?

We are somewhat advanced now.

I can't see in a thousand years star-trekkers worrying about the Constitution very much!

People like you, if you had your way, would ban sex. Between anybody.

Observerofu
Observerofu's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/14/2010
The 14th is an amendment

It has already been done. What would you propose to amend?

btw- I would ban sex for you.. You should not breed. Can't fix stupid.