Wednesday, June 29, 2011

Verum Serum's Powerful Review of The Undefeated

John at Verum Serum has a powerful review up of The Undefeated as well as a look at Sarah Palin's character and presidential prospects. Here's his conclusion:
"To be honest, I went into the film thinking Palin didn’t have a chance at the nomination, much less beating Obama. Too damaged by her time in the spotlight. It wasn’t her fault (in my opinion) at least not mostly, but nevertheless the story about her was written. There’s no coming back from a media savaging like the one she has endured.

"After seeing the movie I believed she could win. I don’t know how or when, but I believe she could do it. It won’t be by waiting her turn and being the heir apparent of the party bigwigs. That’s not the way she does things. It’s not the way she’s built. If she does it, it will be by making her own path, clearing the brush with a machete or her bare hands if necessary. She’s compared herself to a pitbull and a mama grizzly, but I think that may be underselling herself a bit. She’s more like the Wolverine of national politics, lots of people have drawn blood but, so far, no one can stop her.

"As to the big question still on the table, The Undefeated made me think she’s almost certainly going to run. Maybe now, maybe in four years, but I think she wants it deep down and I think anyone who thinks the full frontal assault by the media has her beat…just go see the movie."
The whole review is well worth the read.

Monday, June 27, 2011

Anita Dunn Trumps George Will

Everyone from Mediaite to National Review (which posted the Mediaite video) is hailing George Will's statement on John Huntsman:
“In almost every cycle there’s a Republican who appeals to people who don’t really very much like Republicans . . . Mr. Huntsman’s announcement that he would take the high road had a whiff of moral arrogance about it and we will see. He said ‘I’m not going to run down my opponent.’ He stood where Ronald Reagan stood. And when Ronald Reagan stood there in 1980 he said this about his opponent, Jimmy Carter, ‘A litany of despair of broken promises of sacred trusts abandoned and forgotten.’ That’s politics.”
But the real jewel comes from former White House communications director Anita Dunn talking about Michele Bachmann and picking winning candidates.
Chrystia Freeland: So, Anita, isn't Michele Bachmann your fantasy? I mean are you talking her up partly because the Democrats would love to run against Michele Bachmann.

Jonathan Karl: The answer is yes.

Anita Dunn: No, I learned a long time ago not to try to pick candidates and this kind of thing. I remember very well Democrats feeling that Ronald Reagan was the candidate we wanted to face in 1980 because we didn't want George Bush or Howard Baker for God's sake.
UPDATE: Even funnier is that George Will supported Howard Baker and George H. W. Bush ahead of Reagan in the 1979 Republican primaries. Mark Levin:
"A couple of quick things: 1. As I demonstrated last week [March 9, 2011 show (about the 31:00 mark)], remarkably George Will missed the Reagan Revolution not only in 1976 but as late as 1980. In the 1979 Republican Presidential Primary, his first choice was Howard Baker, his second choice was George H. W. Bush, and his third choice was Reagan. Not until days before the 1980 general election did he write on November 3, 1980 that Reagan deserved election. For all his wonderful columns, the Republican electorate better understood the needs of the nation and the excellence of a potential Reagan presidency than Will. It is hard to believe he was so wrong about a matter of such great import, despite Reagan's presence on the national scene for many years."

160 Million Women Missing . . . Aborted

Ross Douthat shows seriousness in his current column:
". . . the number of “missing” women has risen to more than 160 million, and a journalist named Mara Hvistendahl has given us a much more complete picture of what’s happened. Her book is called “Unnatural Selection: Choosing Boys Over Girls, and the Consequences of a World Full of Men.” As the title suggests, Hvistendahl argues that most of the missing females weren’t victims of neglect. They were selected out of existence, by ultrasound technology and second-trimester abortion."
[emphasis added]
Unfortunately, this genocide is not due to some madman tyrant. It comes from Western helpers like the Rockefeller Foundation and Planned Parenthood.
". . . Western governments and philanthropic institutions have their fingerprints all over the story of the world’s missing women."

"From the 1950s onward, Asian countries that legalized and then promoted abortion did so with vocal, deep-pocketed American support. Digging into the archives of groups like the Rockefeller Foundation and the International Planned Parenthood Federation, Hvistendahl depicts an unlikely alliance between Republican cold warriors worried that population growth would fuel the spread of Communism and left-wing scientists and activists who believed that abortion was necessary for both “the needs of women” and “the future prosperity — or maybe survival — of mankind,” as the Planned Parenthood federation’s medical director put it in 1976."
[emphasis added]
Murder and "kindness" have been mixed in one lethal cup. Douthat sums up:
"This places many Western liberals, Hvistendahl included, in a distinctly uncomfortable position. Their own premises insist that the unborn aren’t human beings yet, and that the right to an abortion is nearly absolute. A self-proclaimed agnostic about when life begins, Hvistendahl insists that she hasn’t written 'a book about death and killing.' But this leaves her struggling to define a victim for the crime that she’s uncovered."
. . .
"Here the anti-abortion side has it easier. We can say outright what’s implied on every page of 'Unnatural Selection,' even if the author can’t quite bring herself around.

"The tragedy of the world’s 160 million missing girls isn’t that they’re 'missing.' The tragedy is that they’re dead."
The whole column is worth a read.

Republican with Highest Approval Rating Not Running--Yet

Kirsten Powers' tweet:
"Palin has a 63 percent favorability rating in new AP poll So much for the fake media meme that voters hate her"
From the Associated Press story (5th paragraph from the end!):
"Republicans still give Romney the highest favorability rating among announced candidates, at 61 percent. Palin, who's keeping everyone guessing about her intentions, is holding steady, too, with a 63 percent favorability rating."
[emphasis added]
Fancy that. Republicans like Sarah Palin best and they have for awhile since her "favorability rating" "is holding steady". Digging the stats out of the text (AP doesn't make it easy), here are the Republican favorability ratings:

63% - Palin
61% - Romney
54% - Bachmann
43% - Gingrich
43% - Pawlenty
23% - Huntsman

16 Heroes Who Died June 18 to June 26, 2011, Fighting in Afghanistan

June 17 at Khowst province, Afghanistan: Spc. Scott D. Smith, 36, of Indianapolis, Ind.

June 18 in Kandahar province, Afghanistan: Pfc. Brian J. Backus, 21, of Saginaw Township, Mich.

June 18 in Uruzgan province, Afghanistan:
Sgt. 1st Class Alvin A. Boatwright, 33, of Lodge, S.C.,
Sgt. Edward F. Dixon III, 37, of Whiteman Air Force Base, Mo.,
Staff Sgt. Alan L. Snyder, 28, Worcester, Mass., and
Spc. Tyler R. Kreinz, 21, Beloit, Wis.

June 19 in Helmand province, Afghanistan: Pfc. Josue Ibarra, 21, of Midland, Texas.

June 20 in Kandahar province, Afghanistan: Pfc. Gustavo A. Rios-Ordonez, 25, of Englewood, Ohio.

June 20 in Ghazni province, Afghanistan: Sgt. James W. Harvey II, 23, of Toms River, N.J.

June 20 in Kunar province, Afghanistan: Pfc. Joshua L. Jetton, 21, of Sebring, Fla.

June 21 in Helmand province, Afghanistan: Lance Cpl. Jared C. Verbeek, 22, of Visalia, Calif.

June 22 in Kunar province, Afghanistan: Spc. Levi E. Nuncio, 24, of Harrisonburg, Va.

June 22 in Helmand province, Afghanistan: Cpl. Gurpreet Singh, 21, of Antelope, Calif.

June 24 in Landstuhl, Germany from injuries sustained in Kandahar, Afghanistan on June 15: Spc. Nicholas C. D. Hensley, 28, of Prattville, Ala.

June 25 in Helmand province, Afghanistan: Sgt. Marlon E. Myrie, 25, of Oakland Park, Fla.

June 26 in Helmand province, Afghanistan: Gunnery Sgt. Ralph E. Pate Jr., 29, of Mullins, S.C.

Saturday, June 25, 2011

Cases of Adult Diabetes Double From 1980

"The number of adults with diabetes worldwide has more than doubled since 1980 to 347 million, a far larger number than previously thought . . . ."
. . .
"The estimated number of diabetics is markedly higher than a previous projections that put the number at 285 million worldwide. This study found that of the 347 million people with diabetes, 138 million live in China and India and another 36 million in the United States and Russia."
Though 70 percent of the rise in occurrence of diabetes is due to population growth and aging, 30 percent is due to increased incidence of the disease.

Elevated blood sugar and inadequate blood sugar control "can lead to serious complications like heart disease and stroke, damage to the kidneys or nerves, and to blindness" and presently causes 3 million deaths annually around the world. That number is expected to increase.

For a good understanding of what causes "inadequate blood sugar control" see Gary Taubes' Why We Get Fat: And What to Do About It.

61% Angry at the Media

So reports Rasmussen.
A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 61% of Likely U.S. Voters are at least somewhat angry at the media, with 26% who are Very Angry. Thirty-six percent (36%) don’t share that anger, including 13% who are Not At All Angry at the media.
61% is a filibuster proof Senate.

The only slight silver lining is that more people (69%) are angry at the policies of the federal government than at the media.

Reporters seem clueless to the implications. No page 10 (not to mention page 1) stories on this. (Just did a search at the Oregonian and Associated Press sites, and not a peep on this.)

Think of the startling level of incompetence that would be involved if 61% of Americans were angry at their doctors. Not just dissatisfied, but angry. That would be a page 1 story. Further underlining why 61% are rightly angry at a media that picks and chooses its stories on the basis of personal bias.

Sunday, June 19, 2011

7 Heroes Who Died June 13 to June 16, 2011, Fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq

June 13 in Wasit province, Iraq:
Staff Sgt. Nicholas P. Bellard, 26, of El Paso, Texas
Sgt. Glenn M. Sewell, 23, of Live Oak, Texas

June 14 in Farah province, Afghanistan: Pfc. Eric D. Soufrine, 20, of Woodbridge, Conn.

June 14 in Paktika province, Aftghanistan: Staff Sgt. Jeremy A. Katzenberger, 26, of Weatherby Lake, Mo.

June 15 in Kandahar province, Afghanistan: Pvt. Ryan J. Larson, 19, of Friendship, Wis.

June 16 in Helmand province, Afghanistan: Sgt. Mark A. Bradley, 25, of Cuba, N.Y.

June 16 at Boston, Mass., of wounds suffered June 6 at Baghdad, Iraq: Spc. Marcos A. Cintron, 32, of Orlando, Fla.

Friday, June 17, 2011

Governor Christie Didn't Do Himself Any Good

Governor Chris Christie didn't do himself any good in telling a questioner that it was none of her business where he sends his children to school.

It certainly is a voter's right to ask about how an elected official responds in his private life to stresses which have a basis in government policy.

Between his beginning and ending assertions that his own choices are his personal business, Christie did make some good points.

1. That he chooses to have religious instruction a part of his children's education and so sends them to parochial schools. That's addressing a real issue about the anti-religious bent of public schools as well as the importance of religious instruction in a child's life.

2. That as governor he works for the good of all the children in his state.

He could have pointed out that parochial and private schools do a much better job of educating children for much diminished funding, and that the state should look to them for guidance on how to both improve education and lower funding needs.

Instead, he went straight to bluster. Unfortunately, the "none of your business" comments fuel the hypocrisy of government officials who themselves are isolated either by income or perks from the impact of legislation or judicial or administrative rules they too easily impose on the rest of us.

This is the kind of unforced error both in style (in his rude initial response to a not rudely stated question) and in substance (in disparaging accountability from the governing class) that will give Governor Christie problems should he choose to run for the presidency.

H/T The Weekly Standard

Monday, June 13, 2011

12 Heroes Who Died in Afghanistan and Iraq June 6 - June 12, 2011

June 6 in Baghdad, Iraq:
Spc. Emilio J. Campo Jr., 20, of Madelia, Minn.
Spc. Michael B. Cook Jr., 27, of Middletown, Ohio
Spc. Christopher B. Fishbeck, 24, of Victorville, Calif.
Spc. Robert P. Hartwick, 20, of Rockbridge, Ohio
Pfc. Michael C. Olivieri, 26, Chicago, Ill

June 8 in Najaf province, Iraq: Pfc. Matthew J. England, 22, of Gainesville, Mo.

June 9 in Helmand province, Afghanistan:
Cpl. Matthew T. Richard, 21, of Acadia, La.
Lance Cpl. Nicholas S. O’Brien, 21, of Stanley, N.C.

June 11 in Faryab province, Afghanistan: Capt. Michael W. Newton, 30, of Newport News, Va.

June 11 in Helmand province, Afghanistan: Lance Cpl. Jason D. Hill, 20, of Poway, Calif.

June 12 in Helmand province, Afghanistan:
Lance Cpl. Joshua B. McDaniels, 21, of Dublin, Ohio
Lance Cpl. Sean M. N. O’Connor, 22, of Douglas, Wyo.

Obama Would Resign to Protect the Nation. Wasn't That Palin's Point?

From USA Today:
"'If it was me, I would resign,' Obama told NBC News.

"Obama also said: 'When you get to the point where, because of various personal distractions, you can't serve as effectively as you need to -- at the time when people are worrying about jobs, and their mortgages, and paying the bills -- then you should probably step back,' Obama told NBC News."
Wasn't protecting Alaska from false ethics charges on the governor and tying up the executive branch there why Governor Palin resigned?

Seems resigning to protect the people you're supposed to serve is not only okay but honorable.

Sunday, June 12, 2011

Media Shamelessly Invading Privacy of Average People in Palin E-Mails

One of the things about the rush of major media outlets to put the Palin e-mails online is the horrific invasion of privacy of thousands of average citizens.

As I've been reading through the e-mails so quickly supplied to me and every other internet user by major news outlets, I've noticed the many e-mails sent to Governor Palin by people like you and me, who in no way are "public" figures.

Not only are their names out there, but their e-mail addresses and house addresses.

This is SHAMEFUL! Those personal details should have been redacted out, if not the name the e-mail addresses and house addresses. But this is nothing unusual for modern journalists. Anything to sell a paper, attract internet traffic, and make a buck.

That information was in the FOIA documents, but the state of Alaska at least had the decency not to broadcast it all over the internet. Like any other public documents, a person needed to have physical access to find that personal information and write it out rather than just digitally copy and paste.

I'm sure that almost all the people are fine with having the content of their messages published. That's what we do in blog commenting. And, though most blog commenters don't use their real names, probably those who wrote to Governor Palin are fine with having their names attached. The horrific part is having their e-mail and house address published. How many internet commenters would comment if they had to leave that information online? Would you? Do you?


Sifting Through the Palin E-Mails

Transparency, wanting to voters to know her positions and study issues
Glad my statement's on record- I took off my Gov's hat, gave my personal opinion as
Alaskans at this point expect me to not duck the obvious follow-up questions from,
reporters when they ask about ballot props (that question: "well how will YOU, Sarah, be voting on the issue?")... and then I asked Alaskans to study up, make up their own minds, ignore the rhetoric on BOTH sides of the campaign, look at the website for info.
- - -
Leo/Talis- I'm not clear on why DOT would not want to release the 80-page KABATA document that ADN requested under foia last week. Please release the kababta info so no one's speculating that our admin is hiding any Knik Arm info from the public.
Also, pls set up with Janice a time for kabata folks to give us an update and to share their plans to move the project forward. Thank you
- - - -
Wanting to give clear explanations
He stopped me to ask if I was "surprised" at seeing the overland numbers being so much more economic than my previously held belief (in the campaign, he reminded me) that LNG was king. I said Alaskans didn't have all the info back the[n], he pressed to ask if I was "surprised". I said I was.

Didn't have time to explain it's not so much a surprise today - that's not the point- the point is now we HAVE the info and it's extremely valuable to finally have after decades of not.

If anyone gets a chance to corner him and elaborate, please do.
- - - -
Making events simple, inexpensive and being willing to have her and her family serve and clean up
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Mon Jun 09 12:10:19 2008

Subject: Re: Copper River King Arrived
Tonight's great for Todd and me - now these type of events can be quite informal and
still be successful . There's a Costco in Juneau , if you know what I mean. And my family is quite capable of setting out food and cleaning up afterwards.

Saturday, June 11, 2011

Media Clowns; Serious Palin

The media (especially the New York Times and Washington Post) have made Governor Sarah Palin's e-mail dump into a circus. Unfortunately, they cast themselves as the clowns.

Meanwhile, across town, Governor Palin has been found doing serious business. From Politico about the 1:55 mark:
"The e-mails (not only ?) show like how effective she is, but it shows how attentive she is as governor. She’s paying very close attention to stuff. You know, ranging from small issues to very large issues. She’s very hands on with her staff in terms of not only reaching out and soliciting advice, but offering her own. She is, like, very decisive in a lot of these things."

Astonishing that there is a major political figure in the country who turns out to be honest and straight forward when one actually has the chance to dig through their e-mails. As Stephen Bannon notes (about the 7:05 and 38:00 marks), Palin is like Reagan in that for both of them "words and deeds are one and the same".

H/T Josh Painter

Friday, June 10, 2011

Palin E-Mails: Questions on Personal Targeting and Media Incompetence

Has any other former (or sitting) governor of a state, who served from 2006 to 2008, had to turn over their e-mails? Governor Kulongoski hasn't had to. Has even Rod Blagojevich had to?

So, what's with the personal targeting? Seems to be the result of rooting out corruption in the state and offending major leaders in both parties. A badge of honor for Palin.

What's with the New York Times and the Washington Post asking readers to help them go through the documents? Has this ever been done before on any issue? How about on the quarter-million WikiLeaks documents 24,000 of which the New York Times staff was apparently easily able to sort and classify as: "secret", "noforn" and "secret/noforn"? Sounds like personal targeting--and extreme lack of professionalism.

Apart from the rank bias, this shows the low level of current mass media journalists. They gripe about having to follow a bus to figure out where someone is going. If you have trouble following a bus, then you will need help understanding standard government e-mails.

Why do they fear and hate Governor Palin so much? The great thing is that she knows they tried to do the same thing with Ronald Reagan and failed. They continue to scrape the bottom of the barrel trying to find some new weapon, but the only ones left are sleazy and lame. Which says reams about them and why fewer and fewer people pay for their news.

Thursday, June 09, 2011

Woolsey and Palin: Obama's Dangerous Policy of Giving Away Defense Secrets

Governor Sarah Palin:
As Governor I fought the Obama Administration’s plans to cut funds for missile defense in Alaska. So imagine how appalled and surprised I was to read this article by former Clinton CIA Director James Woolsey, appropriately titled “Giving Away the Farm,” concerning President Obama’s latest bizarre actions relating to missile defense.

President Obama wants to give Russia our missile defense secrets because he believes that we can buy their friendship and cooperation with this taxpayer-funded gift. But giving military secrets and technologies to a rival or competitor like Russia is just plain dumb. You can’t buy off Russia. And giving them advanced military technology will not create stability. What happens if Russia gives this technology (or sells it!) to other countries like Iran or China? After all, as Woolsey points out, Russia helped Iran with its missile and nuclear programs. Or what happens if an even more hardline leader comes to power in the Kremlin?

We tried buying off the Kremlin with technologies in the 1970s. That policy was a component of “detente,” and the hope was that if we would share our technologies with them, they would become more peaceful. Things, of course, didn’t work out that way. The Kremlin took western technologies and embarked on a massive military building program. History teaches that peace comes from American military strength. And a central component of that has always been technological superiority. Why would President Obama even dream of giving this away?

Members of Congress saw how foolish President Obama’s gambit was, so they put a section in the defense appropriation bill that specifically forbids the federal government from spending money to share these technologies with the Kremlin. President Obama actually threatened to veto the defense appropriation bill over this section of the law! Fortunately, the House passed the bill with a veto-proof majority, a whopping 322 to 96. Attention now turns to the Senate.

Why is it that President Obama seems to work so hard to give things to our enemies, while at the same time asking friends and allies like Israel to make sacrifices?

During these tough economic times when we are facing massive deficits and a competitive global economy, does President Obama really want to give away technologies that the American taxpayer paid lots of money to develop? Giving away our missile defense secrets won’t make us safer. What it will do is create a situation where we are facing an arms race with ourselves. Russia gets access to our technologies, and we are forced to spend even more money because of the need to stay ahead. Does this make sense to you? Me neither. File this under “WTF.”
From James Woolsey's and Rebeccah Heinrichs' article cited above:
President Barack Obama's administration recently threatened to veto the defense budget, citing "serious concerns" over provisions that limit the U.S. missile defense know-how that the White House is permitted to share with Moscow. This is the sort of information that Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, in his earlier days, would have assigned his spies to steal. Through its single-minded pursuit of "resetting" relations with Russia, the Obama administration may simply be willing to hand over this information and, in doing so, weaken U.S. national security.
. . .
The letter [from 39 Republican senators to President Obama], spearheaded by Sen. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.), requested the administration provide the Senate with assurances that it will not share sensitive information with Moscow. The senators cited the problem that sharing this information with Russia poses in light of its history of espionage and technological cooperation with Iran and Syria.

They're right to be concerned. Tehran is thumbing its nose at Washington and doubling down on its missile program. The director of national intelligence, James Clapper, told a congressional panel in March that Iran "would likely choose missile delivery as its preferred method of delivering a nuclear weapon" and that the Islamic Republic "continues to expand the scale, reach and sophistication of its ballistic missile forces, many of which are inherently capable of carrying a nuclear payload."

Wednesday, June 08, 2011

16 Heroes Who Died in Afghanistan May 28 - June 7

May 28 - Lance Cpl. Peter J. Clore, 23, of New Philadelphia, Ohio, died May 28 while conducting combat operations in Helmand province, Afghanistan.

May 29 - died May 29, in Wardak province, Afghanistan: Capt. Joseph W. Schultz, 36, of Port Angeles, Wash.; Staff Sgt. Martin R. Apolinar, 28, of Glendale, Ariz.; Sgt. Aaron J. Blasjo, 25, of Riverside, Calif.

May 30 - Pfc. Anthony M. Nunn, 19, of Burnet, Texas, died May 30, in Paktika province, Afghanistan.

May 31 - Spc. Richard C. Emmons III, 22, of North Granby, Conn., died May, 31, in Logar province, Afghanistan

June 2 - Sgt. Jeffrey C. S. Sherer, 29, of Four Oaks, N.C. died June 2, in Zabul province, Afghanistan

June 3 - Cpl. Paul W. Zanowick II, 23, of Miamisburg, Ohio, died June 3 while conducting combat operations in Helmand province, Afghanistan

June 4 - died of wounds suffered June 4, in Laghman province, Afghanistan: Sgt. Christopher R. Bell, 21, of Golden, Miss.; Sgt. Joshua D. Powell, 28, of Quitman, Texas; Spc. Devin A. Snyder, 20, of Cohocton, N.Y.; and Pfc. Robert L. Voakes Jr., 21, of L’Anse, Mich.

June 5 - died June 5, in Khost province, Afghanistan, of injuries suffered as the result of a helicopter crash: Chief Warrant Officer Kenneth R. White, 35, of Fort Collins, Colo., and Chief Warrant Officer Bradley J. Gaudet, 31, of Gladewater, Texas

June 6 - Sgt. Joseph M. Garrison, 27, of New Bethlehem, Pa., died June 6 while conducting combat operations in Helmand province, Afghanistan.

June 7 - Cpl. William J. Woitowicz, 23, of Middlesex, Mass., died June 7 while conducting combat operations in Badghis province, Afghanistan.

Sarah's New Video and a Winning Strategy

Available at SarahPAC

And a fun post on the power of Palin: Palin can 'snap her fingers' for money, run and beat Obama, warns GOP expert. Dee Dee Benkie makes the "snap her fingers" and raise tons of money point as well as where Palin's winning votes will come from.

1) Palin "will motivate the base, will over-produce with the base".

The author of the article, Devonia Smith, makes a further important point.

2) The election will be between two polarizing candidates and "might very well be a case of 'May the best polarizing candidate win'".

These are crucial points when 40% of Americans self-identify as conservative and only 21% as liberal. So Palin would start out with twice the number of "base" voters to appeal to. She has to peel off less than a third of the moderate voters, while Obama would have to get more than 2/3rds.

And Palin won't have a cratered economy, having driven up a huge national deficit to unsustainable levels, or the unpopularity of Obamacare to carry.

H/T Ian Lazaran

Tuesday, June 07, 2011

Michele Bachmann Hires Basher Ed Rollins

And Rollins immediately begins bashing Governor Sarah Palin who is not even a declared candidate in the primary race.

Professor William Jacobson lays it out at Le-gal In-sur-rec_tion.
Sure enough, Rollins having just been hired by Bachmann, is at it again (via Ben Smith):
Michele Bachmann's new top consultant, Ed Rollins, began his tenure with scathing criticism of potential Bachmann rival Sarah Palin.

"Sarah has not been serious over the last couple of years," Rollins told Brian Kilmeade on his radio show, Kilmeade and Friends. "She got the Vice Presidential thing handed to her, she didn't go to work in the sense of trying to gain more substance, she gave up her governorship."

He suggested that the contrast would favor Bachmann.
"Michele Bachmann and others [have] worked hard, she has been a leader of the Tea Party which is a very important element here, she has been an attorney, she has done important things with family values."

"She is probably the best communicator [in the GOP field] now that Mike Huckabee's not in there," he said.

Rollins has long been skeptical of Palin, but his new role with Bachmann suggests that criticism will become part of her campaign, though she has publicly praised the former Alaska governor
. . .
Update: Ed Rollins is on the Chris Matthews show as this update is being written, and is going out of his way to belittle Palin, including saying that Palin ""doesn't matter if she doesn't run." Rollins also jumped on the Paul Revere controversy. According to Rollins, Palin "has the movie star quality but it doesn't go very far."
Rollins is not only a basher, he's erratic (ran the Ross Perot campaign for awhile). His appointment is not a good sign for Congresswoman Bachmann's ability to appoint quality people to high administrative offices, not to mention the Supreme Court.

Compare that to Palin and her staff. They have only done policy evaluation of other Republicans and that only when directly asked. Palin even went so far as to welcome Bachmann to the primary race and praise Mitt Romney in her interview with Chris Wallace on Sunday.
"WALLACE: . . . Is there room in the race for the two of you [Palin and Bachmann] or would you split the same base of voters?

"PALIN: No, we have differences, too. I have many years of executive experience, too. And she has her strengths that she will to add to the race. But, no, yes, there's certainly room. The more, the merrier. More competition, the better."
. . .
"WALLACE: There are of people that think you love stepping on [Romney's] toes.

"PALIN: Not his. I'll step on -- I'll step on the toes of those who are making poor decisions for our nation. I have faith that Mitt Romney is one who desires to make good, sound, fiscally responsible decisions for our nation. I don't have a problem stepping on toes of those, though, who keep screwing up."
For Bachmann to choose a man who immediately begins bashing Sarah Palin to head the Bachmann campaign is a bad blunder. I say this as someone who really, really likes Michele Bachmann and admires her for standing firm when the liberal howitzers fire away at her.

Wow! Filmmaker Talks About Palin Film (The Undefeated)

No wonder Jim Geraghty is so high on it.

UPDATE: Stephen K. Bannon has done his homework. He speaks eloquently about how neither the MSM nor conservative commentators have done real, insightful research on Sarah Palin. Three times he takes conservative pundits to task (at the 11:30, 17:50, and 22:45 marks). They should be hanging their heads in shame.

Bannon believes Palin is one of the most effective and productive politicians of our age and a person of intelligence, tenacity and substance. He seriously likens her to Reagan. Bannon also did a film on Reagan (In the Face of Evil).

Another Historian Supports Palin's Revere Account

And on NPR, no less (listen here).
BLOCK: We are going to fact-check Palin's Paul Revere history now with Robert Allison. He's chair of the history department at Suffolk University in Boston.

Professor Allison, welcome to the program.

Professor ROBERT ALLISON (Chairman, History Department, Suffolk University): Thanks, Melissa.

BLOCK: And let's review Paul Revere's midnight ride, April 18, 1775. He's going to Lexington, Massachusetts. And according to Sarah Palin, he's riding his horse through town sending warning shots and ringing those bells. True?

Prof. ALLISON: Well, he's not firing warning shots. He is telling people so that they can ring bells to alert others. What he's doing is going from house to house, knocking on doors of members of the Committees of Safety saying the regulars are out. That is, he knew that General Gage was sending troops out to Lexington and Concord, really Concord, to seize the weapons being stockpiled there, but also perhaps to arrest John Hancock and Samuel Adams, leaders of the Continental Congress, who were staying in the town of Lexington.

Remember, Gage was planning - this is a secret operation, that's why he's moving at night. He gets over to Cambridge, the troops start marching from Cambridge, and church bells are ringing throughout the countryside.

BLOCK: So Paul Revere was ringing those bells? He was a silversmith, right?

Prof. ALLISON: Well, he was - he also was a bell ringer. That is, he rang the bells at Old North Church as a boy. But he personally is not getting off his horse and going to ring bells. He's telling other people - and this is their system before Facebook, before Twitter, before NPR, this was the way you get a message out is by having people ring church bells and everyone knows there is an emergency.

And by this time, of course, the various town Committees of Safety, militia knew what the signals were, so they knew something was afoot. So this is no longer a secret operation for the British.

Revere isn't trying to alert the British, but he is trying to warn them. And in April of 1775, no one was talking about independence. We're still part of the British Empire. We're trying to save it. So this is a warning to the British Empire what will happen if you provoke Americans.

BLOCK: And Sarah Palin also was saying there that Paul Revere's message to the British in his warning was: you're not going to take American arms. You know, basically a Second Amendment argument, even though the Second Amendment didn't exist then.

Prof. ALLISON: Yeah. She was making a Second Amendment case. But, in fact, the British were going out to Concord to seize colonists' arms, the weapons that the Massachusetts Provincial Congress was stockpiling there.

So, yeah, she is right in that. I mean, and she may be pushing it too far to say this is a Second Amendment case. Of course, neither the Second Amendment nor the Constitution was in anyone's mind at the time. But the British objective was to get the arms that were stockpiled in Concord.

BLOCK: So you think basically, on the whole, Sarah Palin got her history right.

Prof. ALLISON: Well, yeah, she did. And remember, she is a politician. She's not an historian. And God help us when historians start acting like politicians, and I suppose when politicians start writing history.
[emphasis added]
So far the main "expert" who says Palin is wrong is not a historian but Joel J. Miller, who appears to have no history credentials, but has written three books in different subject areas, one a popular history of Paul Revere. Unfortunately for National Review, they chose him to write on Palin and Revere. Doesn't do much for their reputation or for Miller's. Usually a popular history isn't subjected to the glare of being reviewed by history professors. Poor Miller put himself up against commentary by real historians and doesn't do so well.

UPDATE: Link to Paul Revere's written account of his ride and warning the British Regulars.

UPDATE2: Some of Governor Palin's information came from the vicar of the Old North Church.
"[Rev. Stephen T.] Ayres said he welcomed Palin, her parents, and her daughter Piper to the church on the morning of June 2, as she traveled the East Coast on her “One Nation” tour. He gave them the usual “one if by land, two if by sea” lesson, but added in how Revere founded the church’s bell-ringing guild in 1750 as a teen and how he warned the British after being arrested on the night of his famous ride that the minutemen had been alerted."
H/T Aaron Gee

Monday, June 06, 2011

Omaha Beach D-Day Heroes

Assault landing. One of the first waves at Omaha. The Coast Guard caption identifies the unit as Company E, 16th Infantry, 1st Infantry Division.

This is the view of heroes--some to die, some wounded, all fighting for our country and our freedoms. It makes me weep to look at it.

I thank God for them.

Boston Herald: Experts Back Palin's Historical Account

Boston Herald:
"Sarah Palin yesterday insisted her claim at the Old North Church last week that Paul Revere 'warned the British' during his famed 1775 ride — remarks that Democrats and the media roundly ridiculed — is actually historically accurate. And local historians are backing her up."
. . .
"In fact, Revere’s own account of the ride in a 1798 letter seems to back up Palin’s claim. Revere describes how after his capture by British officers, he warned them 'there would be five hundred Americans there in a short time for I had alarmed the Country all the way up.'

"Boston University history professor Brendan McConville said, 'Basically when Paul Revere was stopped by the British, he did say to them, ‘Look, there is a mobilization going on that you’ll be confronting,’ and the British are aware as they’re marching down the countryside, they hear church bells ringing — she was right about that — and warning shots being fired. That’s accurate.'”
McConville, a history professor, contends that Palin's comments, though right, were "lucky". Let's hope he doesn't treat his students that way when they do well on an essay test even though he thinks they don't deserve a good grade.

I've taught for over a decade at college level in two different cultures and never had a student able to bluff a short essay answer with an improbable interpretation.

Another professor (linked on my sidebar) gets to the heart of the issue:
"But Cornell law professor William Jacobson, who asserted last week that Palin was correct, linking to Revere quotes on his conservative blog, said Palin’s critics are the ones in need of a history lesson. 'It seems to be a historical fact that this happened,' he said. 'A lot of the criticism is unfair and made by people who are themselves ignorant of history.'”
H/T The indispensible Drudge Report

UPDATE: LA Times' Andrew Malcolm chimes in:

Sunday, June 05, 2011

VDH: Imagine . . . President Palin

Victor Davis Hanson commenting last week on current lawless presidential actions:
"Imagine the reaction of the New York Times, NPR, or a Senator Obama had a President Palin decided to bomb Iran off and on for 70 days without congressional consultation, or had she decided to throw open the U.S. border to any from Europe who could fly in, or had she violated union contracts to favor junior Wall Street creditors, or had she demanded that an Al Gore organization plop down several million in a contingency fund for the damage it had done oil workers by obstructing efforts of companies to gain oil leases."
Of course, President Palin would not act arbitrarily and lawlessly in that way. But, it's nice to imagine President Palin.

Saturday, June 04, 2011

Howard Dean: Palin Could Beat Obama in 2012

George Will, call your office.

From The Hill:
"Dean says his fellow Democrats should beware of inside-the-Beltway conventional wisdom that Obama would crush Palin in a general-election contest next year.

“'I think she could win,' Dean told The Hill in an interview Friday. 'She wouldn’t be my first choice if I were a Republican but I think she could win.'

"Dean warns the sluggish economy could have more of a political impact than many Washington strategists and pundits assume.

“'Any time you have a contest — particularly when unemployment is as high as it is — nobody gets a walkover,” Dean said. “Whoever the Republicans nominate, including people like Sarah Palin, whom the inside-the-Beltway crowd dismisses — my view is if you get the nomination of a major party, you can win the presidency, I don’t care what people write about you inside the Beltway,' Dean said."
Dean pointed to Bill Clinton's upset of George H. W. Bush in 1992.

Governor Dean might also have pointed to Nixon's comeback in 1968, Reagan's win in 1980, or even Obama's winning over Hillary Clinton in 2008.

Thursday, June 02, 2011 Nails Martin Bashir

It's hard to carry off sanctimonious.

H/T Aaron Worthing

Wednesday, June 01, 2011

Roger Simon Schools David Brooks

Politico's Roger Simon:
"On NBC’s 'Meet the Press With David Gregory' on Sunday, New York Times columnist David Brooks dismissed Palin by saying that 'running for president is not ‘American Idol.’ And I think people may agree with her, they may like her, but that doesn’t mean they’re going to vote for her.'

"Brooks may be right. People might decide to vote for a candidate they don’t agree with and don’t like. It doesn’t happen very often, but I suppose it could happen this time."
[emphasis added]
Ouch! That left a mark.

H/T Doug Brady

Michael Steele on Palin's Bus Tour

UPDATE: Transcript here.

MSNBC is doing a better job than Fox News of reading the Palin tea leaves. A bonus is unconventional Michael Steele commenting on unconventional Sarah Palin.

Visit for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Unlike many conservative bloggers, I liked Michael Steele and was sad to see how Republican party leaders and conservative bloggers trashed him.

H/T Josh Painter

Obama and Palin Guestbook Proficiency

Hmm. Wonder if posting this:

was an unconscious comparison with this which President Obama wrote just last week: