NY Times: Palin’s Well-Timed Reminder to Freshmen

Did Governor Palin's well-timed Facebook post influence this afternoon's events on Capitol Hill? New York Times writer Michael Shear posted an article today pondering the matter. He wrote:

Sarah Palin has impeccable timing.

The former Republican vice presidential nominee took to her Facebook page Thursday afternoon to warn freshman Republicans in the House that they just might face primary opposition if they cave in to demands by their party to raise the debt ceiling.

“All my best to you, GOP Freshmen, from up here in the Last Frontier. Sincerely, Sarah Palin,” she wrote. “P.S. Everyone I talk to still believes in contested primaries.”

Just two hours later, House Speaker John A. Boehner was forced to postpone the vote on his proposal to increase the debt ceiling at the last minute, apparently facing a revolt among some of those very members.

The House delayed the vote on Mr. Boehner’s bill, moved onto the business of naming post offices, and eventually went into recess.

There is no proof that Ms. Palin’s online missive was even read by any of the wavering Republicans or played any role in helping to stir up the sheep in Mr. Boehner’s flock.

But the former Alaska governor is very good at capturing media attention when she wants it. And refusing to go along with what the establishment — especially the Republican establishment — wants is one of the ways she does it.

I do take issue with Mr. Shear's slight insinuation there, that the governor was looking for media attention. As was obvious from the Scott Conroy interview with CBS from earlier today, the "conventional wisdom" in Washington DC is that Governor Palin does things strictly FOR media attention. Just how ignorant is DC "conventional wisdom" anyway? Do these people not realize that Governor Palin could pick up the phone at any given time and call any reporter of her choosing to get some "attention" if that is what she wanted? No, Sarah Palin doesn't do things so people will feed her ego. That's a trait usually reserved for the non-hobbits who currently reside in the nation's capitol.

Beyond that, it is interesting the how things panned out today. GOP House leaders had been telling the media that their bill was as good as passed, then all of the sudden, it wasn't. Shortly after she republished her letter to the freshmen congress-members from last November, things in the House shifted. Her statement was a reminder about principles and it was a timely reminder, indeed.

Bill Maher is a National Disgrace

Last Friday, Bill Maher did what he has to do to get attention and that is to cross the line of basic human decency. Lacking any actual talent or ability to convince people that a massive centralized government and perpetual race-baiting are the answers, Maher's stock-in-trade is to insult people who are better than him. He obviously lacks the mental fortitude (as does his audience) to make an intellectual argument backing up his beliefs. No, instead he sinks to the gutter to trash children (some small and one disabled) to tear down the other side. During his last show on HBO he said:

Now, I’m not saying that sexism doesn’t exist and isn’t real. And we can’t, but we can’t throw around the word “sexist” just to stop people like me from pointing out that Michele Bachmann, now running second for the Republican presidential nomination, isn’t a dangerous nincompoop. And when I point out that Sarah Palin is a vainglorious braggart, a liar, a whiner, a professional victim, a scold, a know-it-all, a chiseler, a bully who sells patriotism like a pimp, and the leader of a strange family of inbred weirdos straight out of “The Hills Have Eyes,” that’s not sexist. I’m saying it because it’s true, not because it’s true of a woman.

John Nolte, took Maher to task for his comments, but he also took the "eunuchs" of the Republican establishment to task for once again, remaining silent in the face of the most despicable attacks against Governor Palin and her family. John wrote:

But from everything I’ve seen — including most of the paragraph quoted above aimed at Governor Palin herself — all of those comments were directed at adults perfectly capable of defending themselves. No one will argue that any and all of those comments were in poor taste, even for a HBO program proud of such things, but the real line that was crossed Friday night was Maher’s astonishingly obscene attack on Sarah Palin’s family — which obviously includes her children.

 

For all intents and purposes, on national cable television, Bill Maher called a Down Syndrome child an “inbred weirdos straight out of ‘The Hills Have Eyes’”.

This is beyond the beyond and yet we’re hearing nothing about it — even from our side.

You’d probably hear more from our side if someone had launched a similar attack on Barack Obama’s family.

In “The Undefeated,” Andrew Breitbart famously and perfectly labels a Republican establishment — that has for years refused to defend Palin against the most vile attacks, as “eunuchs.” This refusal is mainly due to the fact that they want her destroyed. They’re all well aware of what she did to Alaska’s corrupt, fat, and lazy good ole’ boys’ club and for that reason a “President Palin” terrifies them (and should).

But what’s most troubling is how too many on our side mostly ignore these constant attacks on Governor Palin’s family — especially her children.

This isn’t just unchivalrous, it’s an act of depraved indifference.

I couldn't agree more. You can read John Nolte's entire piece here.

In fairness, since the time Nolte published his article on Big Hollywood, the new Fox show called "The Five" (with two panelists I would consider "establishment," albeit of the non-official variety) also addressed Maher's comments. Frances Martel noted:

Greg Gutfeld opened the floor on the matter with a scathing monologue attempting to figure out what Maher was up to with his comments. “I’m sure that slur is a lurid explanation for a family with a disabled child,” he noted, though argued that Maher would never admit it– as he has similarly done with other comments. If Maher contends that his opinion’s aren’t sexist, he asked, “are they just hate?” Gutfeld left that question unanswered, but went further to examine Maher’s character. “So what do you make of a guy who says wrong things and then runs scampering from them?” he asked.His initial answer was “a coward,” but he passed that label on to his audience for listening to his say what he said without protest– in fact, with applause. For them he had his harshest words: “After all, his awful statements fester unchallenged in an echo chamber, and effusive slophouse of flapping, approval-seeking seals. So let’s keep him there, just to remind us that they still exist.”

This entire episode is absolutely shameful. From Bill Maher, to his vile guest, to his screeching audience, to the silence of women's groups and most of GOP establishment, it was an utter disgrace.The fact that this country rewards people like Bill Maher with fame and fortune should give us all pause.

Governor Palin has taken abuse of this kind for a long time now. The left has indicated that anything goes when taking shots at her and/or her beautiful family. The left will attack her children and get paid handsomely for their efforts. Enough is enough... I don't generally push boycotts, but if you're paying to have HBO in your house every month, you're also paying for Maher's car and rewarding him for being a scumbag. Just keep that in mind.

Update: Jedediah Bila and Andrea Tantaros appeared on Hannity's show to discuss Maher's comments.

Tucker Carlson Exposes His Own Sexism on Twitter (Updated)

Tucker Carlson has done some good work in the past... His site, The Daily Caller, is a frequent stop of mine and many other Conservatives. They were responsible for exposing the Journolist scandal, which highlighted the planning and coordination of many members of the left-wing press. I will always be grateful to Tucker's team for bringing that story to light. This is also why I am so angered by Tucker's recent actions. I thought he was better than this.

If you haven't heard by now, Monday evening, Tucker Carlson posted a disturbing tweet about Governor Palin which said:

Palin's popularity falling in Iowa, but maintains lead to become supreme commander of Milfistan

Aside from Tucker's sheep-like response to warped poll numbers, he also failed to take ownership of his sexist comment. He deleted the original (which is why I had to link to a retweet) obviously aware that what he had posted, was wrong. Unfortunately for him, many people had already seen it and responded. You can't put the toothpaste back in the tube, Tucker.

Is this the sort of treatment that Conservative women, who want to get involved in the process, are expected to put up with? Is it okay for male columnists (Conservative or otherwise) to continue objectifying women in the world of politics? No it's not!

The best thing Tucker Carlson could do, is admit that what he tweeted was wrong, apologize to Governor Palin, and urge his fellow colleagues to be respectful with their language and written word. What he did was demeaning and offensive, and there is no place for it in Conservative circles.

Update: This is a poor attempt at an apology. Tucker Carlson tries to cover his tracks this morning by repeating the same mistakes he made last night. He wrote:

Apparently Charlie Sheen got control of my Twitter account last night while I was at dinner. Apologies for his behavior.

He didn't take responsibility for his comment and he fails horribly at humor. Try again, and Tucker... you're not funny.

Update II: Almost a day later, he finally apologizes:

I'm sorry for last night’s tweet. I meant absolutely no offense. Not the first dumb thing I’ve said. Hopefully the last.

Alan Colmes Needs Some "Divine Intervention" Himself

Alan Colmes (yes he's still around) decided that he found himself a 'gotcha' moment after Governor Palin sent the following message on Twitter Sunday:

He posted the following on his blog, "Liberaland" titled "Sarah Palin’s Gulf Solution: “Divine Intervention”:

When President Obama invoked God during his prime time speech, he was criticized for going in that direction. But will the critics be as ardent in response to Sarah Palin’s statement that what is needed is “divine intervention”? Bill O’Reilly pointedly asked Palin, “What would you do?” At the time there was no answer, but now we know.

[He posted screen-capture of the governor's tweet here]

And Louisiana state senators have designated Sunday a day of prayer, believing that may be the only way to solve the crisis.

The governor's tweet was in reference to Louisiana state senators call for a day of prayer. She did not offer this up as her "solution" to the current problem at hand. As a Christian, she understands that prayer plays an instrumental role but is not the end of the road when dealing with a crisis. You need to take charge, set your priorities, and manage the proper people to get solutions. While your at it, it's a good idea to ask for God's help and guidance. This "solution" must be far more complicated than Alan Colmes mind can comprehend.

Colmes says that the president was criticized "for going in that direction," during the horrendous speech he gave last week from the Oval Office. But the link he provides to back up that statement says the president was criticized from "both right and left" and was done so for different reasons.

The first critic in that article is Rachel Maddow, who "questioned whether "prayer" was really the appropriate request given the enormous complexity and magnitude of the problem." Not to read too much into what Maddow was saying (impossible, as I am her direct opposite) but I think she was just looking for more, 'taking charge, setting priorities, and managing the proper people' to deal with this situation. Prayer obviously not being enough action from the Commander in Chief.

The second critic the article lists is Newt Gingrich, who simply stated, "I hope he means it." If he did mean it, it wouldn't hurt the situation, that's for sure.

It's actually the one part of his speech that didn't make me cringe. I see nothing wrong with the President of the United States of America asking for God's help in a time of need. There is nothing wrong with that, what so ever. So, the insinuation Colmes piece is trying to convey to his left-wing audience, that won't click on that link to read more, is that someone on the right attacked Obama for invoking God, so they should feel free to attack Palin for doing the same.. It's nonsense, and should be an argument below a professional commentator like Colmes, but he does work on the left where the standards are much lower.

He also adds to this post, "Bill O’Reilly pointedly asked Palin, “What would you do?” At the time there was no answer, but now we know." I assume he thought that was a fun, snarky way to tie the piece together. However, it's not true at all.

O'Reilly asked what her main point would be if she were the one giving the speech. He said, "What would you do? Tell the nation tonight, what you would have said, your main point in that speech. Go."

She replied, "Stopping the gusher. That's the number one priority of the nation." She then goes on to say that Obama's priorities have been off since the beginning of this disaster. How terrible it is that his priorities are still so messed up that he spent that speech talking about getting a Cap-n-Tax bill passed.

One thing is clear, is that had it been President Palin in the Oval Office the day this all began, the administration's priorities would have been focused in the right direction from the jump. Allowing for the ability to get the right people put in the right places to ensure all avenues are explored and that the number one job, the "number one priority" for this nation IS "stopping the gusher," not paying off cronies with phony carbon credit rackets. Besides, Governor Palin has offered a lot of advice to the current president in dealing with this crisis. She's given him names of experts, suggested that he should wave the Jones Act, and even offered to give him advice over the telephone. None of that advice has been taken, and the oil continues to flow into the Gulf.

Sarah Palin vs. Snobbery

"In order to acquire a growing and lasting respect in society, it is a good thing, if you possess great talent, to give, early in your youth, a very hard kick to the right shin of the society that you love. After that, be a snob." -Salvador Dali

Meet the snobs

(Ricochet.com audio excerpt from 6/10/2010 Episode 20: The Year of the Spanking.)

"Sarah Palin makes me nervous. I like her because I like her enemies. She's got the right enemies... So ya know, I'm, I'm, I like that (nervous laugh)... I'm exactly that shallow. But I'm just not.... There's something... I'm not sure, I mean, I just I, I hate borrowing the vocabulary of her detractors"
– Rob Long, online talkshow talker.

By all means, jerk. Go right ahead...

Since he can't quite put his finger on what makes him "nervous" about Governor Palin. He may as well double-down upon what is actually cowardice, by just stealing left-wing talking points in an utterly lazy fashion. I know Governor Palin has given a hundred interviews since the 2008 Presidential election but hey, let's talk about that Katie Couric hit-piece as though it wasn't a highly edited, highly contentious "interview." Give me a break.

One one hand, this podcast was composed of some talking heads from the establishment giving some minimal 'props' to the most active political force on the Conservative side, Sarah Palin. They acknowledge a job well done, so far in the primary elections with her endorsements and her overall political 'shrewdness.' On the other hand, it was like listening to a parody of pseudo-intellectual, 'elitist,' wannabe political players (on the record, for Mitch Daniels) sipping overly expensive rotted fruit, talking about that "really off-putting" pleb.

Shortly after it was posted to their site, Claire Berlinski, one of the commentators from the podcast wrote up a quick, ironically titled blog called, "Palin and Snobbery." It says:

During our podcast conversation about Sarah Palin, I noticed that everyone seemed to express some variant on the sentiment that they wished they liked her more because she so obviously infuriates the people they most loathe... It's a curious kind of blackmail. Why should we pretend to love her just because pantywaist leftists are snobs about her? If the same snobs refuse to eat Velveeta, that still doesn't mean it's a great cheese.

It seems as though Claire doesn't want to be labeled a "pantywaist" leftist-snob like Governor Palin's most deplorable detractors. As well, she shouldn't be. She's not a leftist after all, just a pantywaist snob. By the way, if you melt Velvetta cheese with some good New Mexico salsa, green chili, and jalapenos, it makes for a great queso dip. But I digress...

After listening to that clip many times I never found one instance where these people differed with Governor Palin on policy or even on her endorsement picks. It's painfully obvious that these people's only issue is that of Governor Palin's background. This becomes so blatant when the host, Mr. Long starts to sing the praises of the backgrounds shared by the female candidates from California. He said:

"Meg Whitman. Meg Whitman... Princeton and Harvard and building one of the biggest corporations in America. Carly Fiorina, Standford and MIT and one of the big-time business careers of the last twenty-five years. Nobody can look down his nose at Meg Whitman or Carly Fiorina."

So tell me something Mr. and Mrs. Elite. What is so wrong with Governor Palin's background? Growing up in an all-American, humble, hardworking family that instilled the values and ethics shared by the majority of Americans. Is that something to be ashamed of? Please enlighten us, the unwashed masses because logically speaking, I'm not getting where you're coming from.

Sarah Palin was brought up to work hard, do the right thing, and stand up for what she believed in. On top of that, she had to work for everything she has gained in life. Nobody handed her a thing. She had to go to college where she did and how she did because of the hand she was dealt. She had to pay for it herself! I don't know about you but I certainly look up more to those in our society who had to overcome obstacles in life to achieve success, versus those that where given success on a silver platter. I think it certainly says much more about one's depth of character and ability to thrive.

When I first started following Governor Palin a few years ago, I had no idea what her background was. I didn't think it was important to look it up immediately after I read about this fantastic, fiery public servant that was taking the fight for energy independence to Washington. To be honest, when I did find out about her background, it only made me like her more. I think the Ivy League educated in our country have failed to notice that they are the one's that have gotten this country into the shape it's in. American's are not as oblivious however. A common theme on Main Street USA for years has been, no matter what political party one belongs to, that these professional elite politicians have no clue what they are doing. Give me someone who has had to live on the most minuscule of budgets, and you will see someone who is a problem solver. The working-class of America may not have attended elite Ivy League institutions, but I happen to think they have more common sense in their little fingers, than the entirety of the establishment in New York and Washington. I won't quote George Will here, you've read it before.

I wonder if people like this, who are obviously trying to dissuade people from supporting Governor Palin by downplaying and distorting who she is, understand that the numbers aren't on their side. By spewing out meaningless, snobbish diatribe like this clip, they only make her more appealing to more Americans. Something else I find funny is that by the establishment shunning Sarah Palin, that actually translates on Main St. to 'not corrupt.' Seeing that, then learning that no corrupt politician ever found an ally in Governor Palinc that and she is their foe and the foe of their apologists, will actually go over well in this political environment.

People are sick of having to second guess the motives of their elected officials. Insiders aren't much appreciated these days. In the "year of the spanking" people are looking for REAL change. That includes getting rid of the establishment hordes in Washington and in our own local communities. This also includes fighting along side those within the Conservative movement, like Governor Palin to get better representation and hold those that are trying their best to destroy this nation, accountable.

Governor Palin is facing attacks from all sides in her day to day struggle to help this nation. She represents the people and if the people have the power and the influence, they think this threatens their prominence. The do indeed look down their noses at Governor Palin, as they also look down their noses at us. May this be the "year of the spanking" indeed, and may these elitist jerks from the republican side of the aisle get spanked right along with their pantywaist, leftist golfing buddies.

Sarah Palin's Endorsements Getting Downplayed

It's amazing to me that if anyone else had as successful of a record in picking winners in elections as Governor Palin has, the entire media and political establishment would never question that person's impact on a race. I can only imagine if, back in March when Mitt Romney endorsed Nikki Haley, her numbers had shot up as she took over the lead, the praise that would be heaped upon the the former Governor of Massachusetts.

If you haven't noticed, Governor Palin's endorsements are getting downplayed in the media and from pundits and politico's on both the left and "right" side of the aisle. I say "right" but I really mean the establishment. The most downplayed victory in her column is definitely the California Senate race where she picked Carly Fiorina. I think there are many reasons people who have no interest in praising Governor Palin are downplaying this particular race. For one, it was a very high-profile, widely covered campaign. For two, it's in California, a blue state if there ever was one, and to the narrative creating establishment, that victory translates differently than it would somewhere down south. It's all about perceptions...

The truth of the matter is that Sarah Palin's endorsement of Carly Fiorina had a huge outcome on that race. HUGE! Some hack in the Northeast has no clue what effect Governor Palin's endorsement had in California. But guess what? I'm sitting in California as I pound this blog post out, so I think I have better insight than 'Pundit's-4-Mitt' might have.

It just so happens that I was supporting Chuck DeVore up to the day Governor Palin announced she was supporting Fiorina. I wrote about it here. I had decided then, that I was going to agree to disagree with the governor and continue my support of DeVore. Until he reacted like spoiled child for not getting his way, and proceeded to start calling people names. At that point I took a second look at Carly and decided the "child" had also been lying to me about his opponents record. To be perfectly honest though, the fact that Governor Palin endorsed Carly immediately gave her credibility in my eyes. I've studied Governor Palin on the issues, I know how principled she is, and I know she would never steer me in the wrong direction... That said, I happily voted for Carly Fiorina in my neighbor's garage last Tuesday, and I would do it again.

I talked with a lot of Conservatives from my neck of the woods about the election after Governor Palin endorsed Fiorina. Some did not change their support for DeVore, some did. But everybody I talked to that had been supporting Tom Campbell shifted to Fiorina after Palin stepped in. Campbell had a lot of people fooled, but Governor Palin's endorsement certainly got everyone's attention and that led to a more in depth examination of the race and all the candidates for the voters. In this state of low attention spans, that is nothing short of amazing. In case you haven't noticed, politics are not Californians strong point.

So much for my own personal experiences ... Let's look at the numbers.

From Chuck DeVore's own website from a poll dated on April 22nd, 2010:

Republican race for U.S. Senate in California, in which Chuck DeVore and Carly Fiorina are shown to be in a statistical tie. The poll, with a margin of error of +/-3.7%, showed Tom Campbell with 31%, Carly Fiorina with 17%, and Chuck DeVore with 14%.

I didn't see any new poll numbers posted after that for a long time. I remember complaining about it at the time. Anyway, SurveyUSA posted this on May 24th, 2010 (keep in mind that Govern Palin endorsed Carly on May 6th)

In the Republican primary for US Senator, support for former Hewlett Packard CEO Carly Fiorina is up sharply in the past 2 weeks, from 24% on 05/10/10 to 46% today 05/24/10. Fiorina's support has more than doubled among women, seniors, Hispanics, the less educated, and in the Inland Empire. During these 2 weeks, Former Congressman Tom Campbell's support dropped 12 points, from 35% on 05/10/10 to 23% today 05/24/10.

So when a writer based out of the Northeast says "But political observers doubt that Palin was all that instrumental in Fiorina’s California Senate primary victory," never mind the all too common unnamed sources, that person doesn't know what they are talking about. The numbers in the SurveyUSA poll do not match their theory. I'd love to spend an entire post ripping that whole article to shreds considering the writer uses a certain PPP poll to come to some other conclusion, but I've only got so much time tonight. It's just another hack job, hit-piece in my opinion, designed to kill the morale of Palin supporters, and create misconceptions... Blah blah blah.. When will these people understand that we don't care what they think and that their words hold no weight with us?

In other endorsement outcome related distortions... Today, I kept hearing GOP pundits try to play down Governor Palin's endorsement of Nikki Haley to the extent they could get away with it, and play up Mitt Romney's support. As I previously stated, Mitt endorsed Haley back in March and his support had nowhere near the effect that Governor Palin's did. Nikki Haley still had a low name recognition throughout the months following Romney's nod. Speaking of which, where was Mitt when the 'Good ole Boys' club started to viciously attack Nikki Haley in one of the lowest acts of political hatchery I have ever witnessed? I didn't hear, see, nor read any statement of support from him even though it was clear that these "men" claiming to have had affairs with Nikki, where obviously political operatives. Governor Palin on the other hand, released a statement the very first morning the attacks started. Which calmed the voting public, and helped the Haley Campaign to continue their efforts to seek the nomination.

In all the articles and interviews I've seen downplaying Governor Palin's positive effect on the elections, the person doing the downplaying never mentions an election that happened not too long ago in New Mexico. Susana Martinez won the New Mexico GOP gubernatorial primary race on June 1st. Governor Palin had endorsed Susana on May 15th at which time her and her opponent, Allen Weh were virtually tied in the polls. Martinez ended up getting 51% of the vote, while Weh only received only 27%. Attention pundits, that was AFTER Governor Palin endorsed her. For your information, my mother just so happens to live in New Mexico and she can vouch that Governor Palin made the difference in that race. I have talked to her about it on more than one occasion.

What I'm taking away from this negative downplaying is that all of the power establishments see that Governor Palin has an effect on this nation, a role in the debate, and sway with the voters, and they don't like it. That's too bad because candidates form around the nation are asking for, and receiving endorsements from Governor Palin. If this woman had no sway or had "too many negatives" why on earth would candidates be tripping over themselves to get an endorsement? It doesn't make sense on any rational level but these are Governor Palin's detractor's after all. Since when have they ever been rational?

UPDATE: In no way am I trying to diminish the job any of these candidates and their staffs did. Obviously they all ran very good campaigns and at the end of the day, the victory is due to their own performance. I wish them all the luck in the world winning in November.

Sarah Palin's Energy Tax Warning

Sunday, Governor Palin posted the following message on her Twitter page:

"So..because BP, subcontractors & govt screwed up WE get punished w/energy tax that jacks prices & kills jobs & opportunity?Nope,wrong answer"

Roger Ebert, being the brain of the left, had no idea what she meant. I doubt he ever will but if he does ever connect the dots, he'll never admit it. Moving right along...

Most of us are familiar with the energy legislation that has been a primary goal for the Obama Administration since day one. It was known in the beginning as "Cap and Trade," or as Governor Palin liked to call it, the "Cap and Tax" bill. The title got a bad rap (thanks in part to Governor Palin) so they have repackaged it, like they always do, and now it is called the "Clean Energy Jobs and American Power Act." Failed presidential candidate and current Senator for Massachusetts, John Kerry is sponsoring the new effort. The premise remains the same however, this is nothing more than an attempt to tax the air we breath.

Governor Palin is very savvy. She knows the left's playbook like the back of her hand. She understands that they actually do adhere to the words of Rahm Emmanuel, to "never let a serious crisis go to waste.” With the ongoing Gulf oil leak, this could mean very bads things on the horizon for Americans. Which translates to very good things in the eyes of the administration when it suits their agenda.

Last week, I was stunned (shouldn't have been) when I saw this ad play on CNN. In fact it made me so angry, I posted a tweet about it at that time.




Ah, very deceptive isn't it?

The group calls itself "VoteVets" and has connections to many big players on the left. It is a Soros backed group that was originally started to attack President George W. Bush in 2006 and in my opinion, undermine the war effort in Iraq. Jon Soltz, the Co-Founder and Chairman actually worked for the Kerry Campaign back in 2004, so this group that tries to portray itself as some sort of honest player on any matter, is anything but. In short, 'don't believe the hype.'

There is a game being played right now by the Obama Administration, and they are using this crisis and their cronies to play it. We all need to be very watchful and cognizant of the methods they will use to gain their end goal. Look out for the spin that comes from their offices and the offices of their friends in the media.

I'm concerned that the Obama administration in all their socialistic glory, may also consider nationalizing much of the energy sector because 'BP failed so badly, you see.' His complete 'hands-off' approach to dealing with this crisis may just be a way to highlight a private sector failure. A private industry that is "too big to fail." I don't know, it's just a theory but it does worry me. For now, perhaps Obama could forget about his golf, his parties, and his politics and give Tony Hayward a call. The Deepwater Horizon rig exploded on April 20th and Obama has yet to even talk directly with the CEO of BP about it.

The writing is on the proverbial wall. Sarah Palin is trying to warn Americans what the left's plans are. The health care bill was an indicator of how this government will ignore any public dissent on the matter too. That does not matter, we must press on anyway. We still have to get the word out, educate people, make a stink by contacting our representatives, and just do anything we can to stop this "energy" bill from passing.

"Greenie's" Try to Distort Sarah Palin's Position on Oil

Last Tuesday, Governor Pain posted the following on her Twitter page:

I guess the answer to that question is 'no!'

They don't get it and don't ever expect them to express or even understand their own political positions that helped create the current crisis that is taking place in the Gulf. I'm not blaming them for the rig explosion or even the drilling taking place offshore (Lord knows their Subaru's run off of pixie dust). However, drilling in shallow water has long been a concern of environmentalists. They even expressed "outrage" when Barack Obama recently granted a permit for oil drilling in shallow water in the Gulf of Mexico.

Kieran Suckling of the Center for Biological Diversity said, "How is it that shallow water drilling suddenly became safe again?"

You see, to the far-left of the green variety, ANY drilling offshore or onshore is bad. While having been unsuccessful in stopping drilling in our country all together, they have forced the industry into positions such as deepwater drilling, further and further offshorse. The location of the current leak in the Gulf, which is over a mile below the surface, is the primary reason those working on stopping it are having such a hard time. It's too far and due to the pressure, unsafe for any human to travel to. Even the "containment box" British Petroleum tried to lower into the ocean, couldn't withstand the conditions of the deep-water.

That's why Governor Palin posted this on her Facebook page Wednesday:

Look, here’s the deal: when you lock up our land, you outsource jobs and opportunity away from America and into foreign countries that are making us beholden to them. Some of these countries don’t like America. Some of these countries don’t care for planet earth like we do – as evidenced by our stricter environmental standards.

With your nonsensical efforts to lock up safer drilling areas, all you’re doing is outsourcing energy development, which makes us more controlled by foreign countries, less safe, and less prosperous on a dirtier planet. Your hypocrisy is showing. You’re not preventing environmental hazards; you’re outsourcing them and making drilling more dangerous.

Extreme deep water drilling is not the preferred choice to meet our country’s energy needs, but your protests and lawsuits and lies about onshore and shallow water drilling have locked up safer areas. It’s catching up with you. The tragic, unprecedented deep water Gulf oil spill proves it.

Somehow, "Talking Points Memo" took the governor's earlier tweet and deduced that she meant that she was against offshore drilling. Their snarky write-up states:

"Ah, the halcyon days of "drill, baby, drill of known reserves and promising finds in safe onshore places like ANWR." If only Extreme Greenies understood what she really meant, we could have halted all coastal drilling and just focused on Alaskan reserves."

She never said what they are implying but they are left-winger's and that's what left-winger's do. They never miss an opportunity to twist, stretch, bend, and mangle Governor Palin's words to fit one of their meme's or to just outright distort her context.

They then go on to quote Governor Palin being as consistent as I've known her to be on this issue saying, "that while Interior Department bureaucrats continue to hold up actual offshore drilling from taking place, Russia is moving full steam ahead on Arctic drilling, and China, Russia, and Venezuela are buying leases off the coast of Cuba." Why yes, they have.

I see that the left is using the disaster in the Gulf as a opportunity to attack us in favor of drilling. Not only are they deflecting any political pressure Obama is feeling from his inability to "plug the damn hole" or get the feds into a position of helping instead of hindering efforts, they would also like to get a shot in on us while they're at it. As usual they over-simplify the entire issue and get stuck on scary words like "drill baby drill." They perpetually miss the point.

We need oil. It is the bloodline of any industrialized nation. Like it or not, that is the way it is, "greenies." The fact is that Governor Palin has been the leading voice in boosting domestic production of energy supplies with an "all of the above" approach. She has always pushed to keep petrol dollars in American hands, with American families, and not in the hands of wannabe tyrants, anti-American regimes that fund terror, and feeding certain royal family's appetite for cocaine.

The original reason I was drawn to support Governor Palin, as far back as 2007, was her stance on oil and energy production. I see, as she does, the link between energy and economy, and energy and security. Governor Palin spoke what had been in my mind for years on these topics. She has never wavered or changed her stance. She has stood strong for responsible, domestic production that this nation so vitally needs, and thankfully the American people are smart enough to agree with her.

What About the Stalker's Politics?

I watched that pathetic interview Matt Lauer conducted Tuesday morning with stalker, Joe McGinniss, who is living next door to the Palin family. It's safe to say many things about the interview itself bothered me, but I'm wondering where Matt Lauer's journalistic nature to 'tell the story' went? Lauer asked McGinniss a few questions, and sort of had an ' aw shucks, it's just crazy Uncle Joe' attitude towards the interview. Only later did I find out, through Governor Palin's Facebook statement that NBC didn't even fulfill their word to tell her side of the story through a statement her and her husband Todd had provided. Nonetheless, Matt Lauer also omitted disclosing the "why" of the entire ordeal.

Matt Lauer does point out one obvious motive Joe McGinniss has for whoring himself to his preferred media outlets, being that of book sales. However, Lauer never asked Joe just what it was that lead him to write the book in the first place. Author's usually write about things they are knowledgeable of or interested in. Outside of his past stalking and whatever he read in left-wing rags, McGinniss knows virtually nothing about Sarah Palin. Could it be that Joe McGinniss is a far-left political hack with an agenda?

I know it's obvious to those of us that are on Governor Palin's side, otherwise known as "The Hounds of Hell," but what about the viewers at home? I was pretty much on to the fact that McGinniss was a far-left nut after the Portfolio hit-piece he wrote back when Governor Palin was serving her last term in office. But just how far left this guy really is didn't occur to me until I read the Politico article the other day where he repeated the same line his son had said in a different article, that Sarah Palin "incites hate."

For an example of real hate, please check out Karen Allen's piece where she detailed the hatred Governor Palin receives every day from the oh so "tolerant" left.

Once again we have to play "can you imagine if this were a Conservative?" If Barack Obama had lost the election, gone home to Chicago and some right-wing political hack with an agenda and a creepy habit of following him around the country, moved in next door to him, just what kind of response would there be from the media? And he's a man! Not that it matter's considering I think a house protected by Sarah Palin is a much safer house than one protected by our current president, but that's a topic for another day.

So this angry little man, named Joe McGinniss doubles-down on his "incites hate" meme and then goes for the "Nazi" blow... I've got news for the audience at home that was robbed of the truth of the matter in this story. "Journalists" that say Conservatives like Sarah Palin "incite hate" and are like "Nazi's" when said Conservatives are merely defending themselves and their families, are as far-left as left can go. They are not Journalists any more than I am. Trust me, I have been in verbal combat with these suckers (left-wingers) for years. I know the way they talk and the adjectives they use. I even know why they do it. It's all about marginalization, and it's a tactic their hero, Saul Alinsky perfected.

I have many examples of those on the left calling those of us they disagree with "Nazi's." The one that sticks in mind the most is a Noam Chomsky interview given earlier this year while at the University of Wisconsin. The reason for that is because I got into a two day, back-n-forth with a left-winger over the very issue of their side using this terminology. Anyway, here is what known far-left (I would label him an anarchist) radical has to say about Conservatives:

“I’m just old enough to have heard a number of Hitler’s speeches on the radio, and I have a memory of the texture and the tone of the cheering mobs, and I have the dread sense of the dark clouds of fascism gathering"

"I, like most of the American people, don't begrudge people success or wealth. That is part of the free-market system.’ People see that and are not happy about it. People want some answers. They are hearing answers from only one place: Fox, talk radio, and Sarah Palin."

The fact that Noam didn't come right out and say the word "Nazi," should be a good indicator of just how far left Joe McGinniss is. It is more than repugnant that the left has virtually destroyed the meaning of the word "racism" and now they wish to flush the horrific truth of the holocaust and the ruthless reign of the Socialistic Nazi Party of Germany. Two things the left loves to do... Rewrite history and change the meaning of words, i.e. "liberal."

We did get one update from Matt Lauer's interview with the stalker. Now McGinniss is claiming that he just so happens to be renting that house. He didn't really go there to spy on Governor Palin, or anything. It's just a 'great deal' or some such thing. So I guess this means it wasn't planned out by a vindictive owner after all? At least that's the story today.

I did a little poking around and found out some information about the woman that will be joining Joe up on Lake Lucille this Wednesday. McGinniss stated in the Lauer interview that his wife, Nancy Doherty will be joining him for 'Stalk-fest 2010.' Maybe if Matt had looked into Joe's wife's background, there may have been a clue as to just what McGinniss is doing in Wasilla.

For starters, Nancy is a "scholar" and a "meticulous editor and writer." From what I can tell she mostly does editing, and outside of the work she does for her husband and son, she has only one major book under her belt. A book titled: "Stealing Reality: The Rise of the Right, the Fracture of News, the Lessons of Karl Rove." Ironic isn't it? Something tells me that if Governor Palin ever wanted to invite Karl up to Alaska for a Bar-B-Que, now would be a good time.

Then there's this little blurb that caught my eye on her biography page for Mount Holyoke where she is listed as a "scholar" and had also attended in the sixties during her college years.

"Mount Holyoke was the right place at the wrong time for me,” she said. “I was there before the ‘revolution.’"

She left in 1966.

Take whatever you want from that and feel free to read it in it's entirety. I provided a link to the original entry.

What all this boils down to is that not only does Joe McGinniss have a financial interest in his actions, he has political interests as well. Then there is the creepy obsessive stalker business that I think may be a side effect of his original motives. Whatever the case, this situation continues to be absurd and the media continues to play along. By not asking any relevant questions and not showing any sign of understanding what the victims, the Palin family are going through, they have proven themselves able to fall even further down the wormhole of an irrelevant, for the left-wing only, press.

Stalker, Joe McGinniss Interviewed by His Biggest Fan, Dave Weigel

Dave Weigel is standing by his man, providing a forum for renowned "creepy stalker," known liar, and suspected plagiarist, Joe McGinniss. Friday evening he posted a piece called "Joe McGinniss talks about why he moved in next to Sarah Palin" in the Washington Post. Weigel was an obvious choice for McGinniss to use as his 'message man' considering Dave has shown sympathy for Joe's disturbing behavior. Weigel was also taken to task by many bloggers (I'd love to link examples but there's just too many) for his indefensible, defense of McGinnis, and rightfully so.

Weigel starts the article:

When a source told Joe McGinniss that he could rent the house next to Sarah Palin's Wasilla, Alaska, home, the author was sold.

A room at the Best Western, not far away, would have been prohibitively expensive. The landlord of this house, meanwhile, offered it to McGinniss for $1,500 per month after a friend of the author recommended him as a solid alternative to the other people asking about the property.

"She was talking to this mutual friend of ours and said, 'I've got to find someone we're comfortable with,' " McGinniss said Friday evening from the deck of the house -- a deck that became famous after Palin posted a photo of it on Facebook this week. " 'My biggest concern is the Palins' privacy, especially the children.' So this mutual friend said, 'Well, you know, I think you're in luck. Joe McGinniss is going to be coming back here, and you couldn't find a better guy, just the right sort of person to move in and guarantee their privacy.'"

Wait a second... In the last post I wrote on this matter, I quoted Joe McGinniss Jr. claiming that the property owner sought out Joe McGinniss. According to him, the owner, Catherine Taylor did that because she knew he was writing an unfriendly book about Governor Palin and that she did this as some sort of retribution to the Palin's over some financial dispute. Here, McGinniss Sr. contradicts his son's comments and instead says that some shadowy third party initiated the rental agreement. I'll stick with my first and perpetual instinct to never trust the words of a left-wing crackpot. Who set up the deal that placed this jerk next door to the object of his obsession, and his meal-ticket, is still up for debate.

Weigel's piece then says:

What happened next, said McGinniss, came as a total surprise. He had planned to keep the news off the Internet and tell the Palins himself that he'd be their neighbor as he wrapped up his biography of the former governor.

McGinniss had written a Portfolio piece about her leadership, and a critical Daily Beast piece on her book tour for her memoir, "Going Rogue," but he hoped to keep things civil and introduce himself anew to Palin and her husband, Todd.

Okay, first of all McGinniss is not writing a biography. He's writing an attack book called "Sarah Palin's Year of Living Dangerously." The title honestly makes me laugh out loud... It's that stupid. Secondly, the idiotic Portfolio piece was not about her "leadership." That was drive-by, pseudo-journalism at it's worst. Governor Palin said that article resulted in her "Department of Natural Resources announcing that his work is the most twisted energy-related yellow journalism they’d ever encountered." Yeah Dave, that's not an honest article about a former governor's leadership, but then again, you're not an honest journalist so what do I expect?

It continues:

"'I wanted to say, 'I'm writing this book, but I hope we can just get along as good neighbors, and after that, you'll never hear from me again,'" said McGinniss. "That's basically what I told Todd on Monday when he came over. He didn't really want to hear that.

"He took off on how my Portfolio piece was a bunch of lies, and a smear, and all this and all that, and he said, 'You going to be putting the microphones in now, and the surveillance cameras?' I said, 'Listen, you don't know how lucky you are that I'm renting this place because that's exactly what's not going to happen as long as I'm here. I won't see you, you don't see me, this will be fine.' He talked for a few more minutes beyond that, and he got, I'd say, increasingly hostile. And then he left, and I was still out here on this deck, where I'm sitting right now, when they took that picture for Facebook."

So Todd got "increasingly hostile" did he? You don't say... Perhaps it was the Portfolio hit-piece that was Todd's first clue that Joe was there for no good reason. It also could have been the fact that McGinniss told a reporter ""I'm not intending to write a salacious book about Sarah Palin's sex life. But if it's true, I'll find out." Maybe that, plus Joe's location is what upset Todd Palin.

I guess this piece of human trash (Joe) considers getting visibly angry (I'm sure Todd wasn't smiling at the guy) as "hostile." Well good for Todd. I agree with those who have said Todd deserves a medal for 'courageous restraint.' Where I come from, right or wrong, your face would get bloodied for such antagonistic behavior. Joe McGinniss, consider yourself lucky for 'picking a fight' with such good, civilized people.

He goes on:

After that happened, McGinniss -- who is hoping to finish his local research for the book by Labor Day -- became the target of fury from Palin fans. After radio host Mark Levin gave out the author's e-mail address, McGinniss got 5000 messages in four hours, eventually shutting down the account. Wasilla police and state troopers are keeping an watchful eye on the place, although McGinniss said no one had come to the house to threaten him on Friday. He simply didn't anticipate the scale of Palin's response.

"I would term this hysterical," said McGinniss. "The mayor said to me, when I chatted with him in his office a couple of days ago, 'You know, if Sarah had the brains that we like to think she has, Todd would have come back and said, do you know who's living next door? This son of a bitch McGinniss who wrote that Portfolio piece. He's writing a book about you. Sarah should have baked a plate of cookies, and come around the fence, and said hi, and laughed about this.' I would have happily accepted a cookie, and then in my book I would have had a lovely scene about how gracious she had been." McGinniss sighed. "She is, in many ways, a very gracious person."

I don't think the mayor really said that but if he did, vote for the other candidate next time, Wasilla! Perhaps the good folks at the Frontiersman should ask the mayor next week if he said that and if he did, what the hell was he thinking?

Regardless, Joe thinks a cookie from Sarah Palin would have been an appropriate response to his invasion. He's toying with readers of the Washington Post in more ways than one here. This man is one of those guys who thinks he's smarter than he actually is, therefore he plays mind games with those around him. He's trying to say 'hey look, I'm reasonable, just trying to get my scoop. I was going to be nice to her but her and that husband of hers are just so darn mean, so now I have to write a bunch mean things about her, you see.'

By the way, YES Joe, Sarah Palin is indeed a very gracious person. That's the first time I've seen the truth associated with his words, but when he's right, he's right. I have read many accounts from people who know her and who have met her, that have stated as much.

Weigel's piece continues (emphasis mine):

While Palin intimated that McGinniss could watch the family when it went swimming, he said that only the edge of their land near the lake was visible from his property. He was deeply offended by the implication, not thinly veiled in Palin's note and subsequent interview with Glenn Beck, that he would be peering in on the children.

"These little kids, I couldn't care less about them," said McGinniss. "I have my own kids and grandkids to care about. I don't have any interest in Palin's kids. I'm not going to write, oh, I saw Trig run across the lawn, and I saw someone else change his diaper. I haven't been writing for 40 years to wind up on that level. I'm just very offended by this."

I highlighted the first part of that statement because I thought it was very telling. Mark that as the second time I have seen the truth come from McGinniss. He most definitely doesn't care about Sarah Palin's children. I imagine the kids aren't going to get to play outside much this summer as he has sort of pushed everybody away from certain areas of their own property. He unapologetically has taken certain freedoms away from these children. It's very obvious to the world that Joe McGinniss could care less about the Palin kids.

Mr. McGinniss should understand as a parent that whenever there is a threat around, a parent's instincts are to protect their young. Joe McGinniss' past behavior of hit-pieces, stalking, and now this invasion are threatening. It is perfectly acceptable and understandable for Sarah Palin's first concern be the safety and privacy of her children. For McGinniss to be "offended" by the notion that he would write at that level is laughable. Consider the company Mr. McGinniss keeps while he is in Alaska. It seems Joe likes to hang around the Alaskan lefty goon squad when he's not stalking his subject or her family. See Rich Crowther's piece for further details on that.

More from Weigel:

Palin supporters have argued that McGinniss has made a nuisance of himself by previously delivering a copy of a previous book to the Palin home and by betting on a dinner with Palin in a charity auction. McGinniss said the first encounter was friendly, and the second was a "spoof."

"I just kept bidding because there was nothing else to do and it was fun," he said. "She offered dinner with herself for a price? Well, if a journalist could pay the price, it would be responsible journalism to try and win that prize. I knew I couldn't pay the price, so I wasn't in there as a serious bidder."

This is what this man considers "responsible journalism." No wonder I'm sitting here writing about this clown, again! This is another example of mental pretzels being woven by McGinniss trying to cover his own ass for his past behavior. He says "I wasn't in there as a serious bidder," but he bid $68,000! He's just trying to change the subject again and distort the meaning of what he was originally doing.

He said "She offered dinner with herself for a price?" Way to cheapen an auction for a wounded warrior fund, Mr. McGinniss. Then again, I wouldn't expect someone from his background to appreciate a military charity. Instead he makes a underhanded, snarky, sexist comment insinuating Governor Palin was offering herself "for a price." This guy is a scumbag through and through.

Weigel ends it:

McGinniss said he will limit his interviews on this topic, appearing on NBC's The Today Show next week, before getting back to his own work. And he told the Post that he had been a responsible neighbor, shooing off a pair of Minnesota tourists who stepped onto his property to take photos of Palin's home.

"Look, this is a pain in the ass for them," he said. "I understand that. If I were her, I'd be upset. I'd be annoyed. But I'd be an adult about it, and I would figure out, okay, how can we resolve this in a way that's not going to make into something that everybody gets obsessive about? By being here I have learned things, and I've gotten an insight into her character, into her ability to incite hatred, that before I only knew about in the abstract."

There's that 'inciting hatred' meme again like we heard from Junior McGinniss the other day. Lefty, mud-slinging apples must not fall to far from the tree.

Mr. McGinniss has no idea who the Palin's are. He is testing their ability to put up with an enormous amount of crap from a deranged old man with nothing better to do than to harass a family that just so happens to have a mother that doesn't agree with him politically. He's trying to see if he can push their buttons enough to provoke a reaction he can write about in his book and generate more publicity for it's release. He is going to fail and he is going to fail miserably. The Palin's will not be provoked to do anything and he is simply going to have to rely on his old method of lying.

Joe McGinniss... Go to Hell and take Dave Weigel with you.

Sarah Palin's Neighbor Did What Now?

Ben Smith at Politico has posted another story related to now famous stalker, Joe McGinniss titled "Palin neighbor sought author as tenant." It says:

Sarah Palin's next-door neighbor sought out author Joe McGinniss as a tenant, McGinniss's son said.

"No one is stalking anyone," Joe McGinniss, Jr., a novelist whose father is the non-fiction writer, wrote in response to an email from a Palin supporter who confused his email address and his father's. (He shared the email with me.) "A woman was renting her house and sought out the author because the Palins had crossed her (owed her money for renovations she had done at their request and never paid her for). So she knew McGinniss was writing the book and found him and offered him the house."

The neighbor "turned down more lucrative offers from the National Enquirer who wanted the house so they could 'stalk' and take pictures, etc... She said no," he wrote.

McGinniss, Jr. wrote that Palin is "inspiring a lot of hate in people, appealing to so many of people's worst instincts. Sad and scary." And he defended his father's decision to rent the house:

[I]f you were writing a biography of Tiger Woods and had the chance to move in with him, or his pool house, or rent next door or down the street from him -- it would be journalistic malpractice not to. As a writer, you go where the story is, get as close as you can to it. People who write about politics, campaigns, they travel with the candidates, stay in the same motels, ride the bus, eat breakfast, hang out any and everywhere they can to get access. It's pretty basic. We want to read the work of someone who is as close to their subject as possible. That's called reporting. And when it's for a book about someone, all the more important to be close....

He's not stalking or peeping or peering or meddling. He's simply fulfilling his obligations to his publisher and his readers and himself -- to get as close to the subject of his book as possible. You'll never see tabloid photos or depictions of backyard activities. He's a professional writer with great integrity and an amazing sense of fairness.

The Tennessee woman to whom he responded, whom McGinniss, Jr. said was "the most rational-sounding" one, called the journalist a "leech" and wrote that, if a reporter moved in next to her, " I can only imagine how outraged and invaded I would feel."

McGinniss, Jr. added, "Sarah Palin's middle-school style reaction to an author renting next door is quite something. But maybe my father's grandchildren, when they fly up to visit, can make some new friends. They'd probably have a lot of fun together actually."

The fact that he said Governor Palin is "inspiring a lot of hate in people" should be a clear indicator what a far-left crackpot Joe McGinniss Jr. (and most likely Senior as well) is, but that's besides the point for now.

At first glace it appears as though Junior is covering for his crazed father's actions by making up excuses and shifting the blame to the owner of the property. While trying to rescue his father's reputation may be the case, something may be up with the owner as well.

In two separate interviews given this week, Governor Palin has stated that they tried to contact the owner to purchase the property or rent it out again but the owner never returned their calls.



Junior McGinniss implies that the Palin's owed this woman money and that was what this owner, a lady by the name of Catherine E. Taylor was seeking some sort of revenge for. That doesn't add up at all. If the Palin's "owed" her money, why would she NOT respond to them when they tried to contact her?

Sarah Palin is no deadbeat and she certainly can afford to pay her bills. Just pick up any "mainstream" publication from about two months ago for full disclosure on every dime she has made within the last year. Sarah Palin has a public image to maintain and she would not skip out on paying bills risking a possible future political career, her livelihood, or the reputation of the many candidates her PAC works so hard to support. This explanation makes no sense.

If there was any motive at all for Taylor to 'seek revenge' on her neighbors, this proves she sought out a tenant with a history of unsavory behavior in regards to Governor Palin. I think Whitney summed up Joe McGinniss' shady history well in her piece titled "The Palins Can See a McCreep from their House!" She wrote:

Joe McGinniss is an author who writes true crime and non-fiction novels. Most well known is his book about Richard Nixon's 1968 presidential campaign that he wrote as a 26 year old. He has also written a book about a year traveling through Alaska published in 1980 and is currently writing an anti-Palin book due out next year. He has written several Palin hit pieces over the past year and a half. He wrote a piece for the no longer existent Conde Nast's Portfolio. This piece is full of quotes from noted Palin detractors, and McGinniss called her Alaska's Eva Peron. The false claims made in this piece regarding McGinniss's assertions have been debunked here. McGinniss also made an attempt to win an auction for dinner with Governor Palin, the proceeds going to Ride2Recovery effort for combat victims (Cathy Maples won the auction). He bid on this auction event because he " would have enjoyed the opportunity for a frank exchange of views with Gov. Palin."

McGinniss has stopped by the Palin's home before in his "research" for his book prior to his move to the Palin's neighborhood, stopping by the Palin's home once last fall to drop off a copy of his book, Going to Extremes. A story published last November by the New York Daily News quoted McGinniss as saying, " I'm not intending to write a salacious book about Sarah Palin's sex life. But if it's true, I'll find out" (emphasis mine). McGinniss also spent significant time analyzing every move of Governor Palin's book tour over the winter, even stopping by at one of the book tour stops in Florida

These latest comments from Joe McGinniss Jr. are cause for concern. Many people have many questions and I'm really not trusting this left-wing crackpot to give the public any straight answers. No matter who sought who, the fact of the matter remains. Joe McGinniss is a morally depraved, intrusive individual that has no business taking up residence next to the Palin family. I don't care if he calls himself a journalist or not. The damage to his reputation is done and this is merely an attempt by his camp to paint Sarah Palin as the 'bad guy' when we already know that she and her family have been victimized in this case.

Ruth Marcus' Distorted Commentary on Sarah Palin

Today is just another day, which means another day for the media to lie, spin, and distort anything Sarah Palin does or says. Our shinning example for the day would be by Washington Post Columnist, Ruth Marcus in an article she wrote titled "Sarah Palin's fact-free commentary on Paul and BP."

Ruth claims that an interview Governor Palin gave to Chris Wallace on FOX last Sunday "pushed" her "over the edge." I certainly hope she can recover from that... Marcus had a good cranky rant about Rand Paul, which I'm not going to get in to here. Rachel Maddow's "gotcha' moment with Dr. Paul has been discussed ad nauseum by others and I wholly agree with Governor Palin that one shouldn't have theoretical discussions with "TV character's" that want to harm them, politically.

Ruth Marcus then went on to attack Governor Palin for mentioning the obvious. That being the fact that IF President Obama were a Republican, the Lamestream media would most likely have a different narrative playing on the pages of their publications and on their news programs in regards to the administrations response to the Gulf oil leak. At the very least, they would have mentioned the fact that Obama received the largest sum of campaign cash from the oil company responsible for the leak, British Petroleum, in the last twenty years. Marcus said:

Then there was Palin's best-defense-is-an-untrue-offense response to questions about the oil spill in the Gulf. The cheerleader for "drill, baby, drill" suggested that President Obama was in the pocket of Big Oil:

She then attempts to quote Governor Palin:

"The oil companies who have so supported President Obama in his campaign and are supportive of him now -- I don't know why the question isn't asked by the mainstream media and by others if there's any connection with the contributions made to President Obama and his administration and the support by the oil companies to the administration. If there's any connection there to President Obama taking so doggone long to get in there, to dive in there, and grasp the complexity and the potential tragedy that we are seeing here in the Gulf of Mexico."

Marcus quite obviously left some keys words out of the quote. What Governor Palin actually said in full context:

I think that there is perhaps a hesitancy to — I don't really know how to put this, Chris, except to say that the oil companies who have so supported President Obama in his campaign and are supportive of him now — I don't know why the question isn't asked by the mainstream media and by others if there's any connection with the contributions made to President Obama and his administration and the support by the oil companies to the administration.

If there's any connection there to President Obama taking so doggone long to get in there, to dive in there, and grasp the complexity and the potential tragedy that we are seeing here in the Gulf of Mexico — now, if this was President Bush or if this were a Republican in office who hadn't received as much support even as President Obama has from B.P. and other oil companies, you know the mainstream media would be all over his case in terms of asking questions why the administration didn't get in there, didn't get in there and make sure that the regulatory agencies were doing what they were doing with the oversight to make sure that things like this don't happen.

I take it Ruth Marcus didn't bother to do much research before writing this article because Governor Palin reinforced this point that her criticism was actually directed at the media more so than Obama when she wrote the following on her Facebook page:

In the course of discussing the administration’s failure to get to grips with the oil spill, I pointed out that the media was rather silent on asking if there was a connection between the White House’s hands-off response to the spill and the undisputed fact that Barack Obama was BP’s top recipient of both PAC and individual money for the last 20 years. Please note that I never claimed there was a conspiratorial connection; rather, I was saying that it’s odd that so few in the media have asked that question. In fact, I believe Major Garrett is one of the few reporters to pursue the issue. You can be sure that if this were a Republican administration, at the very least the media would be asking that question nonstop.

I had no trouble interrupting what Governor Palin said at the time. I knew she was criticizing the media for taking it's current day role as administration lapdog, instead of an objective press. Perhaps Ruth has journalist blinders on that inhibited her view of the point that was being made. I really don't think that is the case however. The truth is that Governor Palin was right and I think Ruth Marcus knows it.

I sat in a news room through the entire Bush presidency. I witnessed the media try to frame almost everything that man did during his term as some sort of 'payoff' to his "oil buddies." From the wars we were in, to Hurricane Katrina, to the nation's energy policies... The media had a 'Bush is a corrupt oil man' meme going and they ran with it for eight long years. The meme is no longer in play during an Obama administration.

Did Ruth Marcus just miss the point, or did she try to distort the premise of the argument? I think the answer to that question is pretty clear.

Marcus self-righteously declares in the article that"Facts are stubborn things." Indeed they are and I couldn't agree more, Ruth! Fortunately for the rest of society, we have access to them outside of the dinosaur press.

Writer, Stalker Joe McGinniss Moves in Next Door to Sarah Palin

This is just unbelievable...

Governor Palin posted a rather disturbing Facebook note late Monday evening.

(A photo she posted of the stalker himself with the words "Hi, Neighbor! May I Call You “Joe”?)

Spring has sprung in Alaska, and with this beautiful season comes the news today that the Palins have a new neighbor! Welcome, Joe McGinniss!

Yes, that Joe McGinniss. Here he is – about 15 feet away on the neighbor’s rented deck overlooking my children’s play area and my kitchen window. Maybe we’ll welcome him with a homemade blueberry pie tomorrow so he’ll know how friendly Alaskans are.

We found out the good news today. Upon my family’s return this morning from endorsement rallies and speeches in the Lower 48 states, I finally got the chance to tackle my garden and lawn this evening! So, putting on the shorts and tank top to catch that too-brief northern summer sun and placing a giddy Trig in his toddler backpack for a lawn-mowing adventure, I looked up in surprise to see a “new neighbor” overlooking my property just a stone’s throw away. Needless to say, our outdoor adventure ended quickly after Todd went to introduce himself to the stranger who was peering in...

Joe announced to Todd that he’s moved in right next door to us. He’s rented the place for the next five months or so. He moved up all the way from Massachusetts to live right next to us – while he writes a book about me. Knowing of his many other scathing pieces of “journalism” (including the bizarre anti-Palin administration oil development pieces that resulted in my Department of Natural Resources announcing that his work is the most twisted energy-related yellow journalism they’d ever encountered), we’re sure to have a doozey to look forward to with this treasure he’s penning. Wonder what kind of material he’ll gather while overlooking Piper’s bedroom, my little garden, and the family’s swimming hole?

Welcome, Joe! It’ll be a great summer – come borrow a cup of sugar if ever you need some sweetener. And you know what they say about “fences make for good neighbors”? Well, we’ll get started on that tall fence tomorrow, and I’ll try to keep Trig’s squeals down to a quiet giggle so we don’t disturb your peaceful summer. Enjoy!

- Sarah Palin

I can't imagine how utterly frustrating it must be to have your home sanctuary, the place you and your family reside in peace, totally violated in this manner. Exactly how far does the left (mostly media types) plan on going in their quest to destroy Sarah Palin? They still haven't figured out that they CAN'T destroy her!

Even now with this, she is mocking this vile bastard with typical Palin humor and some rather lovely comments about the changing seasons. She's handling this much better than I would be but it has still got to be a horrid thought to know that a man that wishes you and yours nothing but harm is so close to your children and home.

In the coming days I want to find out more about this book he is writing. What kind of publisher would pay a known plagiarist the kind of money that it would take to make the move up to Wasilla? Who does he know? I have all kinds of questions. Like, what will the media say about their fellow traveler making such a sadistic move to write his garbage? Probably nothing. As low as the left has sunk and as far as the media has gone left, they will excuse it if they cover it at all.

So I say, rock on, Palin family. Haters will be haters, keep doing your thing no matter how creepy the hate gets. I will say an extra prayer tonight for that family. I will pray for their safety and strength to cope with this horrible creature they find in their midst.

As far as Joe McGinniss is concerned... Just know that when you pull a stunt like this, it's all down hill from there.