George Will Makes Predictable Assessment of the 2012 Election on 'This Week'

Today, on ABC's “This Week with Christiane Amanpour,” George Will made the following, predictable statement regarding the upcoming 2012 election now that Mike Huckabee is out. He said:

“This is the most open scramble on the Republican side since 1940 when Wendell Willkie came out of the woodwork and swept the field. I think — people are complaining this is not off to a brisk start. I think that’s wrong. I think we know with reasonable certainty that standing up there on the West front of the Capitol on Jan. 20, 2013 will be one of three people: Obama, [former Minnesota Gov. Tim] Pawlenty and [Indiana Gov. Mitch] Daniels. I think that’s it.”

It shouldn't surprise anyone that George Will holds the view that only establishment Republicans can beat Barack Obama in the 2012 election. He is after all, about as establishment as they come. This is just another example of the beltway elite seriously misreading the electorate, and more importantly, misreading the Republican base.

The reason the GOP primary race did not got off to a "brisk" start, is because the base is not happy with the current crop of announced candidates. Republicans around the country are not lining up behind any one person they know for certain is running. And I seriously doubt that you will see Conservative activists working too hard for a status quo contender. Times have changed, and the people of this country understand that we need bold, commonsense leadership. Not beltway business-as-usual, George Will approved politicians.

Mark Levin reminds us just how wrong George Will has been before.



(H/T: Doug)

Rabidly Biased Politico Promotes Anti-Palin Lunatics

It's one thing to be a run of the mill, left-wing press agency. However, on Monday Politico took their bias to a whole new (yes, rabid) level. On a morning when gas prices were approaching record highs, the EPA blocked drilling in the Arctic, Obama escalated America's role in Libya, and the IMF predicted that the Chinese economy will surpass our own in a few short years, this bastion of journalistic hackery chose instead to promote a group of nuts "on a mission" to destroy Governor Palin, as their top story. As William Jacobson noted:

Under the guise of reporting on the anti-Palin movement, Politico manages to dredge up almost every crank accusation against Palin. The fourth word in the first sentence of the article just happens to be "promiscuous." How nice.

In the course of the article, Politico manages to compare Palin to Charlie Sheen, Lindsay Lohan, Hitler, and Father Coughlin, but only because such people were controversial and celebrities, of course. And Politico did not make the connection itself, it merely quoted someone making the connection, that's how real reporters do it, right?

Politico even refers to Rebecca Mansour, an aide to Palin who helps with SarahPAC, as an "attack dog," with an embeded link in Mansour's name in the Politico article to the viciously anti-Palin Palingates website. This is beyond contemptible even for Politico.

Politico's writer, Ken Vogel sets out in this piece to legitimize crackpot websites like "Palingates" and authors like Joe McGinniss to make them mainstream for his own readers. After interviewing all of these individuals, Vogel indicates that legitimization is actually what these anti-Palin writers wish to accomplish:

A number of forthcoming books promise to delve deeply into — and, they believe, give mainstream credibility to — some of the more salacious Palin rumors and conspiracy theories that have sprouted in the anti-Palin blogosphere and on supermarket tabloid stands but have mostly been rejected by the mainstream media.

Well that settles any question about how "mainstream" Politico even considers itself.

The first person Vogel tries to pass off as a credible critic "on a mission," is the ever present Sherry Whitstine. Now I know Sherry is a fruitcake because I've had the unfortunate experience of having a back-n-forth with her online. This woman if full of anger and is a classic hater in every sense of the word.

Back in March of 2009, the aforementioned Rebecca Mansour wrote a piece noting that she had received an email from Whitstine in which Sherry referred to Governor Palin as "the whore that rides the beast." She wrote:

Today I encountered the most frightening case of Palin Derangement Syndrome (PDS) I've witnessed to date.

[...]

The "whore that rides the beast"? So now Gov. Palin is the "Whore of Babylon"?
If you have Google Toolbar and have it set to suggest search terms as you type, you can type in the words "whore of babylon" and "whore of babylon sarah palin" will pop up as a leading search -- even before "whore of babylon catholic church," and my fellow Catholics have been called the "Whore of Babylon" for centuries before Sarah Palin was ever born. This is the level of insane vicious hatred we're dealing with, friends.

[...]

People who are critical of Gov. Palin have the same First Amendment rights as the rest of us. However, people who behave in this manner of PDS-vileness should not be taken seriously by any news outlet or any other serious-minded person. Their behavior regarding Gov. Palin and her family discredit them from the word "go."

One would tend to think, but here we are two years later looking straight at a news outlet taking Whitstine very seriously, and even promoting her agenda for her.

The next person Vogel highlights as a credible foe, is far-left writer and Trig Truther, Geoffry Dunn. Dunn has been around for a long time and has made numerous claims about Governor Palin that are not true. Dunn used to write for HuffPo where his anti-Palin shtick was welcome, but now must look elsewhere to post due to his loony conspiracy theories. The Huffington Post banned Trig Truther posts from their site, which humorously now makes them much more credible than Politico. Go figure.

Next, Vogel turns to Frank Bailey's upcoming book which was actually written by Jeanne Devon. (Click here to see Jeanne in a mask attending an anti-Palin rally set up by the Democrat party)
I've read the transcript, and I can tell you that Bailey's book is garbage. We covered it extensively here and elsewhere.

What article promoting anti-Palin loons would be complete without a section cut out for Griffin? Griffin, who was fired from his teaching job for his online nuttiness, has a long record of deranged behavior regarding Governor Palin, amongst other things. It's truly mindbogglingly that any journalist would even admit to talking to Griffin, much less cite him as a reference.

Vogel then sets out to promote world reknown stalker, Joe McGinniss' new anti-Palin, Trig Truther book. McGinniss, also known for referring to Palin supporters as the "hounds of hell," has been given credibility by the mainstream press before, only later did they regret it. The man is crazy and giving him more than two seconds of airtime clears away any doubts of that.

Politico has never been a very unbiased source for news, but what they did on Monday will further denigrate their credibility. Giving proven liars, disgruntled losers, stalkers, and suspected psychopaths a platform to promote their agenda driven products, is NOT news. It certainly isn't worthy of a four page spread, splashed across readers screens, front and center at the beginning of a busy news week. The article was shameful, and only proves that those of us who have been preaching to our neighbors to not trust the media, are correct. Would Politico ever highlight and promote people who write books and blog articles about Barack Obama's alleged homosexuality or any other number of strange conspiracies about the President? Heck no, nor should they.

The title of the Vogel piece reads "Mission for anti-Palin movement: Expose her." Considering the article is full of baseless conspiracies and outright lies, the only one 'exposed' here is Politico. The nuts cited in the piece exposed themselves a long time ago.

I could end by asking Politico to be professionals and plea with them to stop their politics of personal destruction in regards to Governor Palin. That would be an empty plea considering so many writers over there are highly motivated to do just that. Perhaps we should just stop reading this garbage. I don't read the National Enquirer, and after what Politico did with this article, I don't see much difference between the two.

Mark Levin weighs in and coins a new name for the political rag - "Pervertico"

Bill O'Reilly Cranky That Governor Palin Ended His Interruptions

This evening, Bill O'Reilly took a shot at Governor Palin on his show regarding the last interview he conducted with her. If you recall, the governor rightly put an end to O'Reilly's annoying habit of interruption, by reminding him that he was indeed interrupting her. As you can imagine, Bill's ego suffered a bit of a bruising from the governor's action.

On tonight's episode of The O'Reilly Factor, Bill spoke with Chis Wallace to make himself feel better about it all. He compared his behavior as a media personality, with that of Chris Wallace, stating that it is mandatory for serious journalists like themselves to constantly interrupt their guests. I'm not sure how Wallace managed to allow himself to be used by O'Reilly in this manner considering that he is not the one with the horrible reputation of being a rude host. Not through persistent interruptions anyway... No, Bill O'Reilly is the one with the bad reputation and he knows it. Obviously Governor Palin struck a nerve (and an over-sized ego) when she called him out last week, otherwise he wouldn't have done this segment tonight.

The funny thing is that if Bill actually paid any attention to the answers his guests give, he would have realized that Governor Palin DID answer his question. The show's transcript states:

O'REILLY: Some people want mandatory retirement age where you would have to take it raised up to about 67. Are you for that? Do you want to raise that mandatory age to 67 retirement?PALIN: Everything -- everything is going to have to change for those who are enrolled in the program now and will be enrolled in the program now. But we do not change the pension benefit…

O'REILLY: I agree. The people who…

PALIN: …of those who are receiving it now and that what's people care…

O'REILLY: …brought in and the people who need it.

PALIN: And I really apologize that up here in Alaska we have the four second delay. So it's -- it's not an easy exchange…

O'REILLY: OK.

She said "everything" and the word "everything," in this instance, encompasses the topic being discussed, as well as other things that were not mentioned. Yes, plus more, if you will.

Most media personalities have to interrupt their quests at some point. However, Bill O'Reilly interrupts his guests every time they try to answer any of his questions. It's habitual and it's annoying.

Mark Levin also had a few choice words for the "8 PMer," after the show. Enjoy!

Christie Fans Actually Upset with Governor Palin for Going "Unscripted"

"I've said several times at this point, if he ran, Christie would be my choice." - DrewM.

After Governor Palin appeared on Fox Business Network this evening, some Chris Christie supporters (even though he has stated many times that he's not running for president) were a little upset. DrewM, who is a blogger over on Ace of Spades, voiced his outrage on Twitter over the little swipe the governor took at Christie when she said:

And with all due respect to Governor Christie, you know he has no choice but to cut budgets because he’s broke, his state is broke. What courage really is, is in the face of having a surplus when you have opportunity to spend spend spend other people’s money, you still choose to reign in government to let the private sector soar. That’s real courage, and by the way that’s what I did as Governor here when I engaged in hiring freezes and reduced earmarks by 86% and vetoed the largest amounts in our state’s history. Despite having a surplus that’s real leadership and that’s courage.

But I do appreciate that Governor Christie is willing to face the reality in his state and that is that they are going bankrupt. So he has to cut, he has no choice.

DrewM responded:

Imagine how much more courageous she could have been if she hadn't,um, what's the word? Quit.

Oh really? Now if Drew were a brainwashed liberal, I could at least give him the benefit of knowing that he doesn't know much. That's just not the case however. Drew seems versed in the story of why Governor Palin resigned, when she did. He even stated:

I've heard it all before. It's fine that she did it but she doesn't get a pass for it. Actions have consequences

And

I think it was perfectly understandable on human level. It's not fine in a political sense.

In other words, 'I understand why she had to resign, it's fine that she did, but I'm still going to attack her for it because hey, this is politics.' Could he be anymore transparent?

Knowing people like DrewM (and his leftist counterparts) exist, Governor Palin took a huge risk resigning from her post. She did so for the good her state and the people who had elected her. A good leader leads, but when that same leader is put into a position where their own presence is causing insurmountable attacks on the very thing they're supposed to be leading (which in her case was Alaska), that leader hands the reigns to someone who can carry out the agenda in peace. It was unselfish and the right thing to do.

A typical politician would have rode out the storm for their own career's sake. They would have had the people who financed them thus far, pay their legal bills, and would have no doubt had the support of their party to help them along the way. Governor Palin is no typical politician, which is why she came under such heavy attack in the first place.

Republicans should be seeking strong leadership. Governor Palin proved what a good leader she is by her record in office. She also proved the ability to make tough decisions, with the best interest of her constituents in mind. That is exactly what she did by resigning. In my view, that is a positive. It only appears to be a negative when political rivals spin it and repeat the words "quit!"

AllahPundit also weighed in on the governor's interview. He posted an interesting exit question, in which he said:

How is it that a Republican governor in a deeply Democratic state like Jersey is showing little courage by tackling unions and pension reform? The government may be broke, but Christie theoretically could go the Democratic route and push tax hikes or float bonds rather than demand cuts. And why do we assume that he’d have done differently than Palin did if he had the chance to govern a state — a red state, where he has an electoral advantage — with a surplus?

Answer: Chris Christie wouldn't get elected in a red state.

According to Conservative New Jersey, Christie's record is anything but. They post a list of "words and deeds" that punch holes in the narrative that his supporters have been touting:

• His budget passed only after three conservative Republicans were bullied into voting for it and the savings achieved in the budget were done at the expense of new taxes, new fees, federal Stimulus funds and accounting gimmicks; the 2% property tax cap will actually cause taxes to skyrocket; he has yet to propose the “across the board” tax cuts he promised as a candidate; the budget actually INCREASES state expenditures by 6% and the number of staff in the Governor’s office making $100,000 per year increases by ten;
• His confrontation with the unions is pure Kabuki theater with nothing accomplished but acrimony; he has yet to lay off a single state employee and his proposed 2011 state worker reduction plan is little more than window dressing;
• He has populated his cabinet with notorious liberals while firing the only true conservative - after slandering him;
• He has endorsed notorious RINO candidates in the 2010 mid-term election while avoiding (with one notable exception) contact with conservative candidates;
• He supports a multi-state Cap & Trade scheme known as the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative and is so committed to Cap & Trade that he used funds raised from RGGI’s carbon auctions to help balance the budget; he has directed that state funds be appropriated to subsidize “green” technology ventures such as off-shore windmills;
• He has refused to join other state attorneys-general in a joint lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of Obamacare while accepting federal funds for the implementation of a similar program on a statewide level;
• He is on record saying that he does not believe illegal aliens are here illegally; he has indicated that he supports amnesty for illegals; he generally favors strict gun control and he supports construction of the Ground Zero Mosque even as he condemns those who oppose it.

Not exactly the record of anyone I would have ever suspected Ann Coulter to support, but I digress...

While Governor Palin's words may have made Christie's fans cranky, there is no question that she was correct in her analysis. Just ask any Californian (like myself) who has been watching Jerry Brown these first few months of his administration. He's been making cuts, and making enemies because he HAS to. His record and even his budget are far from a conservative ideal model, but he is responding by making some necessary changes. He doesn't have a choice considering the fiscal mess the state is in.

Christie has said he won't run for president, but I'm sure the governor would welcome him to the race. For one thing, if she does decide to run, it will be nice to have another not-so Conservative candidate to thin out the others in the GOP pool. We as her supporters would also welcome the fact that these Republicans wouldn't be able to recycle another leftist meme by saying she isn't experienced. She has almost two decades of public service under her belt. How many does Christie have?

Chris Christie has taken unnecessary swipes at Governor Palin in the past. So, it wasn't out of line for her to return some fire and do so by exposing Christie for who he is.

Mark Levin, who has been trying to warn Conservatives about Chris Christie for some time, also weighed in. I leave you with his words.