Categorized | Latest Entries, Watercooler

Meh Wednesday…

and the winner is….. Romney.  Good morning everyone! Well, we knew it was coming so in reality it is just meh…

Romney underperformed expectations but shoot me now if he wins South Carolina.  The Obama administration is throwing a huge party. Obama will eat Romney’s lunch.  I am holding myself together until after South Carolina and then I may need a straight jacket.

Another reason to put me out of my misery now, Daniel Hannan is coming to speak at CPAC.  I sooooo want to be there. I am a huge fan of Hannan’s and I want to see Sarah and Hannan meet. Wow, that would be amazing.

Continuing the theme from yesterday, one talking head on TV said it best: Investing 30M in a troubled company and making a 180M profit by bankrupting it isn’t capitalism. That is liberal math and that type of math is what is bankrupting our country.

Bill Krystol weighs in…

MUST READ on this issue. Dr. Melissa Clouthier weighs in too.

Perry weighs in using the word vultures…

Dan Riehl has a great article about capitalism vs corporatism which is the REAL issue.

Mark Levin weighs in on Bain and Romney. Thank you, he GETS IT!


So I am feeling hopeful that at least some conservatives see the real problem and issue. Hannity and Rush certainly don’t.

A court decides on Friday if anyone else gets their name on the VA ballot

A gold star for snarkiness!! I love the last paragraph

He is right… it worked for Huckabee

No fun in the Valley of the Sun…

An exodus of Indies… probably because there is little difference

Straight into the abyss

aaahhhhh support for a real free market…


The is a BIG step forward…

What is he smoking?

This guy’s stock has dropped significantly for me…

I’m waiting with baited breath…


Gov. Palin talked to Eric Bolling last night and Todd goes rogue:


Gov. Palin also spoke with Megyn Kelly and Brett Baier:

Have a great hump day everyone! Do something good for someone else.

Tags: , ,
  • BrianusBerkleianus

    My Dear Friends in Sarah,
    Happy Wednesday to you all!!
    I think her interview last night with Eric Bolling was splendid, and it definitely, IMV, keeps hope alive for those of us who are working and praying for SARAH 2012!!
    I think Sarah demonstrated that she is a Master of the Connotation.  She said a number of things that, if we look at them closely, imply many things that can only please those who want her to run.
    Here are some of the citations that I saw as highlights of the interview.  I shall save for last what I think was the most significant one.
    She refers to “obama’s clenched-fist, authoritarian, welfare-state policy that he has enacted that has chased jobs away from America.”  By using the epithet “clenched-fist,” she implies that obama is a Communist.  She doesn’t say it; she connotes and implies it with her skillful and colorful use of language.  We can almost hear and see the “anointed one” echoing and imitating his philosophical and spiritual forbear, Vladimir Lenin, and shaking a clenched fist, and belching out “All Power to the Soviets!!!””
    On Todd’s endorsement of Gingrich, and whether he consulted her on this endorsement, she says “First Dude Went Rogue.”  Brilliant.  First, she is saying that this is TODD’s action, not hers; SHE is NOT endorsing.  Second, by calling him “First Dude,” she gets us to thinking and pondering: “Is she looking BACKWARDS to Todd’s days as First Dude of Alaska, or is she perhaps looking FORWARD to his coming days as First Dude of the United States of America?!?”
    On the question of capitalism versus obama’s socialism and his “clenched fist,” she cites Thomas Sowell and his “conflict of vision.”  She also makes reference to Adam Smith and his “invisible hand.”  By citing a current, illustrious economist and also a classical thinker on economics from the eighteenth century, she is saying by implication that she knows her economics, and has solutions, time-tested solutions, for the disease and malaise that afflicts our nation’s economy right now.
    “obama is ‘related,’ philosophically speaking, to Lenin; I am ‘related’ to Sowell and Smith,” she says in effect!!
    Re Romney’s  candidacy: “You just never know in this world of politics; you know things are quite volatile and things can change, and more things perhaps can be revealed about a candidate that would make voters take a second look at somebody else … ”
    IMHO, this is superb, and works on two levels.
    First, and most obviously, she is implying that information could be revealed about Romney that would damage his campaign.
    However, I think it may go beyond that.  Even though the initial and surface reference is to Romney, because Bolling has just asked about him, her statement is couched in terms general enough to make us suppose that things could be revealed about MORE THAN ONE candidate.  In this context, who could be the person to whom voters would give a “second look”?!?  SARAH!!!  The SECOND LOOK is contrasted, IMV, with the FIRST LOOK furnished thanks to Katie Couric, Tina Fey and the other legions of commie fellow-travelers who savagely attempted to destroy Sarah’s name and reputation in 2008!!!
    In response to Bolling’s question of whether “President Palin” could pull the trigger on terrorists like osama bin laden, she says, “Without blinking an eye.”  Simply superb!!  Again, we have more than one layer of meaning and significance here.  The obvious one is that she would not hesitate to defend America.  However, notice how she does not “blink an eye” in responding to a question about a “President Palin”!!!!
    Finally, here is the weightiest, IMHO, citation from the entire interview (emphases mine).  She is “waiting just like probably 60% maybe 70% of the rest of Americans to be very, very confident in who it will be that can most starkly contrast THEMSELVES and their AGENDA and their EXPERIENCE and their INTENTIONS to lead the country with obama and what he has done to this country; so STILL WAITING for that VERY STARK CONTRAST TO BE REVEALED  and to really garner and gain the confidence of not just me, but so many other voters who are, you know, hoping that we CAN PRODUCE the best nominee to come up against obama … we have to make sure that we have the right candidate coming forward, and STILL NOT QUITE CONFIDENT yet in who that would be.”
    First, note her “litany”: Themselves; their Agenda; their Experience; their Intentions.  These are Sarah’s criteria that only Sarah herself meets!!
    Themselves = Personal Qualities
    Agenda = Governing Philosophy and Plans Based on that Philosophy
    Experience = EXECUTIVE Experience (in the context of a race for POTUS, Chief Executive of the United States)
    Intentions = Servant’s Heart versus a politician’s “heart”
    Is it not clearer than the luminous beauty of the Great Land that ONLY SARAH meets all four of these standards???!!!
    And note that she is “still waiting” for this “very stark contrast,” for a candidate who embodies this contrast, to be revealed!!
    She is hoping we “can produce” the best nominee.  Clearly then, the nominee has not yet been produced.
    Guys, this is a genius, a patriot, a true lady, who combines a genuine GENTLENESS OF SOUL towards the “little guys,” towards ordinary American men, women, and children, with a STEEL-SOULED RESOLVE AND TOUGHNESS versus America’s enemies, both foreign AND DOMESTIC.
    Please …
    RUN, SARAH, RUN!!!
    DEO VOLENTE, SARAH 2012!!!!
    God bless you all always!

    • LS as guest

      I particularly noted her repeated use of ‘authoritarian’ in describing Obama.  That is very, very good.  

      Meanwhile, can Gingrich survive this latest tough patch?  I don’t know.  I do know that Romney and Santorum would be dismayingly weak in a general election against Obama.  As certain as he is to not be the nominee, I can actually see Huntsman as the strongest of the current crop against Obama.

      And what exactly is the story with Paul’s hands off treatment of Romney, while he’s been so quick to savage the ‘not Romney’ challengers?  Is it possible that the entire primary process was rigged from the start?

      • BrianusBerkleianus

        Thanks for your thoughts, L S!!

    • KatieSilverSpring

      BRIANUS! this is a brilliant piece! how do you write like this so early in the morning, to say nothing of thinking like this??

      who ARE you?

      • cookboy

        He’s an academician, but I don’t hold it against him.

        • BrianusBerkleianus

          LOL … Greetings, cookboy!!!

      • BrianusBerkleianus

        Thanks, Katie!!!

        I am just a guy who was born and raised in Berkeley, California, and witnessed first-hand the full panoply of the ugliness of the Left in the 60s.

        I am a Latin and Greek scholar, a Catholic, and a sports fanatic (Cal Bears, Oakland Raiders, Oakland Athletics, especially).

        And I am one among the millions of Americans who love and admire Sarah!!

        God bless!!

    • LS as guest

      Oh, and one more interesting thing: in another of her Fox interviews last night: on the subject of Bachmann’s dropping out, she said that Bachmann, like her, was a good fiscal conservative who wouldn’t want to waste money.

    • BostonBruin

      Thanks for your excellent analysis!

      I think you saw the same thing I did in the Eric B. interview. Namely, that her exuding confidence in this interview may be the result of the fact that she knows something that we don’t know. Stay tuned!

      And, of course, when she talks about the candidate that offers the best stark contrast to Obama, she’s talking about herself.

      • BrianusBerkleianus

        Thanks, BB, and God bless.

        You will be presented this weekend, I imagine, with the same dilemma that I was during the regular season: Admiring Tim Tebow, but seeing him and his Broncos stacked up against your team: For me, the Raiders; for you, the Patriots!!

        I hope it is a great game.

        Take care!!!

    • cookboy

      Seems the levers and gears in the Noble Noggin of Berkeley continue to be well lubed and spinning beautifully. Nice to see ya!

      • BrianusBerkleianus

        LOL: Thanks, my friend!!

  • LS as guest

    One more thought, the governor, quite understandably, appears to have less than a nuanced understanding of NH politics.  

    If she did, she’d understand that yes, tepid Establishment Republicans tend to do well there (e.g., Romney, McCain), but also there is a libertarian streak in NH about as wide as Alaska’s.  Thus, the strong second showing of Paul should not be a surprise.  For example, he won outright in the northernmost and rural-most Coos county last night.

    • hrh40

      Are you saying they are not left of center? For example, aren’t some libertarians left of center?

      • LS as guest

        NH was historically quite conservative, but it has drifted into ‘purple state’ status over the past decade.  

        There are two ways in which it is ‘center left’, as she suggested: one is in its overall general election voting.  E.g., it is widely considered now to be a swing state.  The other is the strong leanings of a large portion of the GOP electorate, like most Republicans in the Northeast, responding to the liberalism of the media and many of their neighbors, to go for the ‘reasonable’, ‘responsible’, not strongly social-conservative candidate among the GOP options.

        But a very strong undercurrent across the GOP and independents within the state is libertarian-leaning.  NH and AK are probably the two most libertarian states that we have, and NH’s libertarianism is particularly of a small government and low tax variety.

        I think this matters a bit on two levels: 1) it explains Paul’s especially strong showing, which the governor had found to be a surprise, and 2) it suggests that rather than being a state that the governor more or less write off as ‘left of center’, it is a state for which small government, liberty appeals should be made.

        Because NH is part of the Boston media market, I expect that Palin’s personal approval ratings are not high there at all.  But things change, and I’d rather see her reach out to the common values she and the NH electorate have than simply dismiss the state as ideologically off.

        • hrh40

          She may also be aware of the mass Mass exodus to NH having also changed the demographics to left of center.

          I’ll have to watch again to see if Palin’s surprised at Paul’s showing; I missed that.

          • LS as guest

            Now MA she can write off!

  • LS as guest

    Sorry, so many disjointed thoughts here this AM, but I also found it interesting that the governor several times stressed defending our borders as the most basic function of the federal government.

    From that, it is not necessarily clear if her position on illegal immigration has stiffened beyond that of McCain, since it has become commonplace for the Establishment GOP to emphasize tightening borders as a diversion from its position on amnesty.  But I found it notable that she elevated it to a fundamental tenet of proper foreign policy.  

    It may simultaneously also signal her further retreat from the muscular interventionalism of the neocons.

  • section9

    I am warning you people now so you don’t get your undies in a wad when it happens. Especially you, Firelight. I saw something last night that only came to me this morning.

    Palin doesn’t give a rat’s ass what people think about what she does and what she says. That’s her great strength. Newt, Santorum, and Perry WILL collapse because they a Faux Palins who are not genuine conservatives. Someone might hold past South Carolina, but I think Mittens has the money to go there and at least score a plurality, which is all he has to do.

    So what’s a Palin to do? She has two choices:

    Enter the race soon, before CPAC, to stop Mitt’s Mittmentum cold. That would do it. That’s one option. That’s not what this column is about, however. This is about her OTHER option, her endorsement.

    If Sarah does not enter the race, she will endorse Ron Paul. If you saw her interview with Bolling last night, you saw the first inklings of this.

    If she doesn’t run, and she knows the other guys are zombies, Paul is the only one she will endorse in the primary. Look at what she said about him last night in the interview with Eric. It’s a real eye-opener.

    Why would she do this?

    Mitt’s people are going to go into the campaign with a Big Government, Statist record that reeks of cronyism and self-dealing. The platform will say all the right things but not really mean it. There’s a reason Mittens is silent about Mittcare.

    Palin may calculate that a strong, Paultard presence (allied with her people and reinforced by her people) may force the Rombots to the right and force Mittens to run more to the right than they want to. She may calculate that Gingrich is weakening beyond repair and that Paul is, like her, the only Republican with a dedicated, loyal following who can survive a protracted campaign against the Establishment.

    Thus, a coalition with Paul makes sense.

    Paul is also very pro-life, which helps in Palin’s decision making on the subject.

    Plus, Mitten’s people have been giving Palin the shaft since 2008. Hell itself hath no fury, as they say…

    Dont’ say I didn’t warn you.

    • Firelight

      Maybe, but I would think if she was going to do that Todd would have endorsed Paul. Much less riskier but sends the same message. Plus, he is Independent and not a Republican. It would make more sense.

      You could be right, however, don’t worry about me.  I have no expectations with Palin. I have things I would like to see from her but no expectations of getting any of that.  I am just along for the ride.

      • section9

        No. Todd wouldn’t endorse Paul now. That would be wrong. The Palins are trying to give Gingrich a leg up in Florida and South Carolina. Gingrich was the only one who had a snowball’s chance in Hades of beating Romney, and I hear Pluto likes his martinis on ice.

        Gingrich’s campaign appears to be running on vapor, however. If Palin herself endorsed Newt, and Newt lost, it would reflect poorly on Sarah. The MSM would laugh at her again, and she’s tired of being laughed at by these errand boys for the Regime.

        However, if Todd endorses and Newt folds up, it’s no loss.

        And Newt will fold up. I think he’s being blackballed by K-Street, which is firmly in Mitt’s back pocket.

        Paul is the only candidate in the race capable of being a placeholder for Palin’s aims against the Establishment over a protracted period of time without Palin having to get in the race herself.

        I too would rather see her in the race than endorse any one of these guys. I just don’t expect it. Since October 5th, I have learned to expect nothing from Palin except the unexpected.

        Nothing will happen until after CPAC, I guess. The field should be winnowed significantly by then.

        There is only one good thing about this dog of a campaign: Michelle Bachmann is out.

        • hrh40

          We have agreement! :)

          I, too, don’t think she’d enter before CPAC – or announce at CPAC. If she ever enters this year at all.

          But she is a master strategerist IMO. And no, I don’t think it’s all planned by her either. Let me explain.

          She has always had her finger on the pulse of the people because she is one of us and has always run as one of us. She always gets involved for the right reasons.

          Not for enriching herself with taxpayer dollars. Not for power; except to be able to get done things she sees not getting done, or stopping wrong things that are being done. Not prestige; she’s happy with her family. Not family honor; the Heaths/Palins don’t have anything to prove.

          So the fact that she’s not hungry for political power means she has the ability to pass up opportunities that others might not. See: Michele Bachmann 2011.

          And sometimes this passing up of opportunities (See: 2004 Senate race) proves to be the absolutely correct strategic decision. Even if that’s not why Palin made the decision. See: Stepping down from the AOGCC to expose corruption. Could’ve been the end right there. See: Stepping down from the governorship. And her ability to greatly influence 2010 and, perhaps, 2012.

          But I also think some of the strategery is brilliant on Palin’s part. She is a uniter. She is always seeing the Big Picture and points of commonality between herself and anyone. She keeps talking up Paul’s strengths, Santorum’s strengths, Newt’s, etc. She reaches out to union rank and file. She constantly talks up Independents.

          She knows we need to come together as a nation to survive.

          It is the good, honest, God-fearing Americans who will save this country. Had a long chat with Peter S. last night, and there certainly are decades-long groups that are controlling events. It goes beyond K street. I’m hoping he can come to Arizona and enlighten us all on his research. I’m doing some on my own, but he’s way ahead of me.

          We all agree something stopped Palin dead in her tracks. We need to educate ourselves on what it was. And it goes beyond Mitt’s money and the GOP Establishment. These folks are backed by more powerful, more secret groups.

          K, I’m sounding all doom and gloom conspiracy here. But research The Bilderberg Group. The Council on Foreign Relations. The Trilateral Commission. The North American Union. They may have websites, but there is much that is secret about them.

          And they have big power.

          Palin has no link to any of these groups, directly or indirectly, as far as we know. I find it telling how much everyone whines about the fact that she has such a close-knit, small group around her. What does this mean? The above-mentioned groups and others can’t get someone into her inner circle.

          I think they tried. And she said “I’m not for sale. I will not be shackled.” Sure, she meant campaign handlers and GOP establishment. But it could apply to others as well.

          I agree with Peter S that we need to do our research, educate ourselves and others, even beyond the day to day politics. We talk about the election being rigged. By who? And why?

          • cookboy

            Extra big like.

          • TENCOLE

            hrh….you’re scenario sounds like something from a book or movie.  If even a small bit of what you say is true, it will be an insurmountable task to tackle. *sigh*

            • Bill589

              “Difficult. Not impossible.” – GodFather II

          • BostonBruin

            If she has the “pulse of the people” (which I’m sure she does), then she must realize how demoralized the conservative voters will be if Romney is the nominee. This is compounded by the fact that we feel betrayed by several of her endorsements in 2010 – Pam Bondi, Nikki Haley, etc.

            Her plans to help conservatives get elected to down-ticket offices will be thwarted if Romney is the nominiee. As a result, the GOP will lose a lot of the seats that were won in 2010.

            • Firelight

              I agree, she must know that it will be the end of the Tea Party.

              People can only fight for so long and yes, they need a leader.  Every army needs someone who can see the big picture, energize the troops and provide direction.  We have been without and many feel that our big accomplishments (Nov 2010) produced no results so why keep fighting.

              If Romney is the nominee, he will send message down ticket to not cozy up to Palin. She won’t be as effective.

        • TENCOLE

          Section, if your theory that Sarah doesn’t endorse Newt because his loss would “reflect badly on her” is correct, then Sarah endorsing any of these “zombies” would result in the same thing.

          I don’t think Sarah will endorse anyone. She is going to focus on Obama and him only….I think she loathes Obama as much as I do.
          It will be very interesting what Sarah will do when Romney wins this thing. If she stumps for him, or endorses him…..Sarah and I are done.
          But I think she’ll finish what she started and keep going after Obama….making it an “anti-Obama” vote she after, rather than a “vote for Romney”.

          Now, I’ve been wrong about 99% of Sarah’s decisions, so who knows what she’s gonna do. My enthusiasm has waned since Oct 5th and I hold no expectations from Sarah… firelight, I’m just along for the ride.

        • Firelight

          The only thing I can think of is that she has a coalition with Ron Paul. They may both know that something is coming down the pipe that will destroy Romney and by not attacking him, they can’t be seen as being a part of it. 

          That is the only thing I can think of because we know that Palin wants to tell people what she really thinks of Romney and yet she doesn’t. That is just not like her.

          • hrh40

            Deleted for repetition of ideas …

    • hrh40

      More evidence for that argument is Paul is apparently telling everyone to drop out but Mitt.

      OTOH, why is Paul not attacking Mitt?

      Is he waiting for others to drop out before he goes after him?

    • LS as guest

      I don’t think that she will go so far as an outright endorsement of Paul, but I agree that she’s up to something of a limited Paul coalition.  

      The only hope of a brokered convention is if Paul continues to add delegates throughout the process–and then has reason to flex his power at the convention by holding out for someone other than Mitt or one of the other candidates as a compromise nominee.  It would take Paul and all of the not-Romneys in such a scenario to unite behind Palin as the outsider candidate for there to be any hint of daylight for Palin in such a situation.  Even that would be beyond tough however, given all the Establishment ex officio delegates who will be there as well.

    • BostonBruin

      Excellent article today at Legal Insurrection which substantiates your point:

      “Unless something dramatic happens in South Carolina or Florida, the populist movement within the Republican Party will have no place to go other than Ron Paul …”

    • BostonBruin

      She may also choose to endorse Ron Paul to keep him from running as a third-party candidate.

    • John_Frank

      I honestly don’t see Governor Palin formally endorsing Representative Paul. In fact, I don’t see her endorsing anyone before the end of the primary/caucus process.

      That written, I do see the possibility of an alliance or coalition between Palin and Paul in which the two set out their agreements and differences, so that each can maintain true to their beliefs, with the understanding that if the alliance or coalition wins, the ticket is Paul/Palin.

      Side note: Despite Paul’s rhetoric, should he win the GOP nomination and be elected as President, he will be hit with the sobering reality that he is now responsible for the defense of the nation. The result? Despite his rhetoric, he will find that he is compelled to adopt the necessary policies to fight Islamic jihad inspired terrorism to keep the country safe from attack.

      Should Romney win the nomination in the face of such an alliance or coalition, he would then be compelled to deal with both Paul and Palin for the sake of party unity. The possible understanding? Let Paul have a hand in writing the Republican platform, along with giving a speech at the convention, while selecting Palin as his Vice Presidential nominee.

  • hrh40

    Well, Daniel Hannan has been dismissive of Palin in the past, so since she’s my litmus test, I’m wary of Hannan as a Ruling Class conservative. Conservative yes, sorta’ like Rubio. But Ruling Class nonetheless.


    And since Palin’s last, depending on the schedule, it’s probably doubtful she’d meet Hannan.

    So don’t feel miserable, Firelight!!

    • Firelight

      I do realize that Hannan is a bit ruling class but I consider that he is from the socialist UK and I think that he is pretty bold there.

      I haven’t seen him be dismissive so that is news.

      I’m feeling much better hrh!!  :)

  • Bean Counter

    Mornin’ y’all. Just time for a drive by hit today. NH primary was a real yawner. SC should be a little more interesting. Another good interview by the Gov last night. Loved the hair! Since I’m all into hair these days, I was pleased that her “do” wasn’t a “don’t.”

    As always, I have no crystal ball, have no desire to get one, and have no clue what will or will not happen as this sordid mess plays out.

    And does anybody besides me think Callista Gingrich looks like Carson Kressley with a sex change operation?

    On that note, I’ll go fuss with my hair….

  • hrh40

    Another speaking engagement announced:

    This one is May 8 to 12 in Las Vegas. Skybridge Alternatives Conference (SALT).

    The plot thickens …


      That’s a KEYNOTE speaking engagement. ;))

      • hrh40

        Yep, she closes the conference Saturday morning. They knew enough not to have Gore or Gates close the conference.

        Rove gets a morning slot with Robert Gibbs. :)

  • senator20526

    Morning all……Pietro Leatherchest here….a hazy overcast  72 degree day in the great desert Southwest….Watching Ms. Bean get her hair curled would be more exciting than the NH primary. B
    oring. The Demoncrats are frothing at the mouth, waiting for Romney to win…Obamacare would be off the table and OWS crowd will go wild over Bain Capital. The wife is getting ready for our annual church rummage sale…..why is it all my stuff has to go?  Hey!! I wore that shirt yesterday………………..

  • Whitney Pitcher

    Happy Wednesday!

    Daniel Hannan perhaps has been dismissive of Palin in the past, but it is cool he is speaking at CPAC. He did defend and even praised Governor Palin on the creation of the word “refudiate”. He does seem to be big on getting rid of crony capitalism as well:

    This may be an oversimplification, but it seems that politicians, and perhaps many people in general, haven’t changed too much from high school. Just replace the “cool” kids with the Establishment/permanent political class, and the anti-establishment/movement politicians with the “nerds”, and it’s pretty much the same. Often times, the “cool/Establishment” kids find they have more fun with the “nerd/movement” kids, but they worry too much about what the “Establishment” thinks to change social/political groups.

  • cookboy
  • John_Frank

    The Laura Ingraham Show – Jim DeMint: The GOP should listen to Ron Paul

    Well, well, well … Jim DeMint is following Governor Palin’s lead.

Latest Watercooler Chat

Governor Sarah Palin’s Executive Accomplishments


Recent Comments

Latest Entries