Tag Archives: sarah palin

What do Sarah Palin, Barack Obama, and Ron Paul have in common?

The Three Horsemen

All we need is Death on a pale horse and we have the full quartet.

What do you mean you don’t know what they all have in common?

You didn’t know all three of them are never wrong, know everything about every subject, have a perfect plan, and all three can walk on water, turn water to wine and while still alive are already up for sainthood.

Right about now a good portion of people are saying something like, how dare you compare _______ to the other two.  But it kind of proves my point.

All three of them have followers who will defend them to their dying breath, without question without exception.  And this is a problem…especially conservatives and libertarians who are supposedly the ones who use their brains.  Now personally as a conservative, I and my fellow conservatives endlessly mock liberals for blindly following their leaders with the unquestioning lockstep goosestep of a Nuremberg march…but it doesn’t help when we have people on our own side who do the same.

For instance for some people on the right I can’t critique Sarah Palin without being called a RINO and a liberal.

For a disturbing portion of libertarians (or at least the vocal ones) Ron Paul is still in incapable of wrong.

There is something seriously, seriously wrong here.  People are not perfect and they shouldn’t be treated as such.  No one ever agrees with someone 100% of the time and if you do you should question your judgement.

I loved Reagan as  President.  I can name a dozen things I think he was wrong on.  I loved Romney, there are a dozen or more things I think he wasn’t right on.  I believe Aristotle’s philosophy is perhaps as a whole the most logical argument ever presented…it’s full of problems.  I can agree with people, support them, push for their ideas without believing them to be absolutely perfect.   Why because no one is perfect.

Ron was a racist, an anti-Semite, a hypocrite and if in control would have either been utterly powerless or would have killed government programs too fast to let society adjust to change and thus caused more problems than the government programs themselves.  That doesn’t mean he was wrong about auditing the Fed, or cutting back on government spending, taxation and regulation. Although correct in theory on many of his wishes, as demonstrated with his newsletter, he is not a good manager or leader.

In theory I agree with a lot of what Sarah says.  Of course since it’s all a collection of vague one-liners it’s kind of hard to find an actual point to disagree with.  But despite this lack of substance there are quite a few in the Republican Party who hang on her every word.  For god’s sake, she pulled a cheap prop trick with a Big Gulp (which I’ve seen at least a dozen people already do) this weekend, and from the reaction you’d swear she was Moses come down from the mountain with the Commandments.  Does anyone forget that she was in support of using federal funds for the biggest pork project one could imagine (the bridge to no where) or that during the VP debate she suggested that the solution to fixing the education system was to throw money at it.  Or how about her backing of RINO politicians like McCain.  I don’t care if he made her his running mate, the man is a corrupt, brainless, liberal.  His major piece of legislation is an assault on the First Amendment.  And she endorsed him.  There is no possible excuse for that, but watch so called conservatives one minute who would rightfully be howling for McCain’s blood the next minute defend Sarah’s endorsement to the death. It’s sad and disgusting.  And given that she has no depth to speak of, only quips and charisma, and that everything she does is motivated by what’s good for Sarah, not necessarily the country, I feel comfortable in saying that Sarah Palin is the Republican Party’s Obama.  A vainglorious hack who leads an army of sheeple.  To my knowledge she has made no concrete statements regarding plans/solutions to Republican issues other than the promoting our big loosers ; ending abortion and gay rights – yeah those are the two most pressing problems our country is facing today – that’ll solve all our problems.

Yes we all understand why liberals don’t question anything about their leader, Barry.  To hell about the corruption, the drone war*, the gun running, the cover up in Benghazi, the pork, the opulence, the incompetence.  Obama is the savior and one must not question the one true God.  We’ve come to expect this sort of idiocy from liberals.

But we’re conservatives and libertarians.  We’re supposed to think, goddamnit!  We’re supposed to care about ideas more than people.  We’re supposed to care about truth/substance more than perception.

Now maybe if their followers could be less psychotic and admit the faults of Ron or Sarah I wouldn’t attack them so much.  I mean they serve a needed purpose in the party. You need people/firebrands like Sarah Palin who can energize the base.  You need policy extremists like Ron to keep us honest. You need people who can use a stunt like a 13 hour filibuster to rally the troops.  But you also need people like Cantor (and I still hold a little hope for McConnell) who can cut the deals when they need to be made, lest we lose on everything.  And we need leaders like Paul Ryan and Mitt Romney, who in the spirit of Reagan, know how to balance these two ends of the party and when to use one and when to use other to best achieve their goals.  But right now we don’t put enough faith in those leaders because both sides, the establishment and the ideological purists, hate the other and won’t talk to each other admitting we have a common enemy to kill.  You know once liberalism and progressivism has been reduced to the political relevancy of the Whig party, conservatives and libertarians can rip out each others throats to their heart’s content for all I care, but NOT ONE SECOND BEFORE THAT!

And the first step is to admit that our icons are not perfect. Until we can stop treating political figures like they are prophets from God and utterly infallible, we are not going to be able to prioritize and work together to kill the beast that is the Democratic Party.

Here’s a test, if you can’t name 10 things** you disagree with the person you are supporting, you’re not thinking.  There is no person on Earth you can agree with on everything, especially in politics, where even the best have to make deals that to someone not aware of all the ins and outs looks like a bad call. If you can’t find 10 things you disagree with a politician on, go back and do research, because you obviously haven’t done any.

Maybe the way to deal with all of this is to make a list of what needs to occur in our country and maybe we can all agree on the top 3/5 and then together start there and work our way down and we might find that as we accomplish the goals forward some of the items lower on the list will become not as important will self correct to an extent.  It’s worth a try or we will just become as irrelevant as the Whig destiny we would wish on the other party.

*I have no problems with a drone war in theory…but a weapon that should be used with the precision of a scalpel is being waved around like a broadsword in the hands of a Berserker.  That’s a problem.

**I’d even go as far as to say that if you can’t come up with 10 nice things to say about someone you oppose you’re admitting you don’t know much as well.  (Yes I can say 10 nice things about Barry, Sarah and Ron if I had to, like I perfectly agree with Barry’s 2009 statement that running up the debt is unpatriotic.  But even though I am not so blinded by bias that I can point out that they are human and thus not entirely without any redeeming values or positions, that does mean that when taken as a whole, they do not come up very, very lacking.)

7 Comments

Filed under Conservative, Evils of Liberalism, GOP, Government is corrupt, Obama, People Are Stupid, politics

Stupid Liberal Quote of the Day–Palin doesn’t know what government is for

What to hit.  Obama’s economic plan will take a few blogs to tear apart, so we’ll wait for this next week for that one (or three).  Well I could do a little more destruction of Ricky’s concession speech (but John Stewart did such a good job, any further words on my part would be overkill) so instead I will turn to my least favorite liberal: Sarah Palin.  She’s probably my least favorite because she trots out trite liberal populism and then gets conservatives blamed for her idiocy.  If I was a conspiracy theorist I might have Manchurian Candidate statements here, but frankly the left isn’t that bright (which is also the main reason why this birther shit is nonsense, they don’t have the brains to organize a conspiracy of that level).

No clue as to what Conservative actually means...

When praising Allen West as a possible VP pick for Romney (and anyone liberal Sarah backs I have serious doubts about):

“[He] understands the Constitution, and wants to put government back on the side of the people.”

And this line makes me want to scream.  How does anyone think this woman is conservative?  Let’s ignore the bridge to nowhere.  The taxpayer money to pay for her TV show.  The fact that in her debate with Biden her grand solution to fixing education was just to throw more money at it.  (You really have to give the left credit here, intentionally or more likely accidentally by repeatedly attacking Palin they have caused the knee jerk right to waste time and resources in defense of a person whom we should be absolutely condemning).  And let’s really forget that she endorsed uber-liberal the corrupt John McCain for the U.S. Senate (yes I know everyone forgets McCain’s scandals from the late 80’s but this man sells his votes for cash like he was Rick Santorum).  But most of all she doesn’t understand what a conservative believes is the purpose of government.

Government is there to protect our rights from those who use force (Police, criminal courts, prisons, military).  Government is there to provide rules and regulations in systems that cannot come up with them for themselves (rules of the road, weights and measures, printing money, contract and tort law, etc.).  Government is there to provide an impartial system to work out arguments (Civil court).  And on very rare occasions it is there for large scale infrastructure creation that cannot be created without a central authority (the interstate highway system…private companies however can often take over after the initial creation).  Notice what it’s not?  It’s not on your side.  It’s not there for you.

It’s a necessary evil that ideally should do as little as possible to maintain a system that allows you to pursue Happiness (failure or success is up to you).

Contrary to Lincoln’s overstepping rewrite of the Declaration, government is of and by the people, but not for the people.  Government isn’t supposed to be for you.  It’s supposed to be against those who would do harm and a neutral arbiter but never for anyone.  Government for the people always leads to giving and helping with the best of intentions, but paves a road of corruption, inefficiency and destruction.

Now to be fair maybe Sarah chose her words poorly, as I’m sure most people do not make the hair splitting distinction between a government that protects your liberties and a government that is for you.  But this is not the time to get slipshod in our wording (as Sarah’s always is).  This is not 1992, 1996, 2000, 2004 or 2008 (otherwise known as a battle between big government Tweedle-dee and big government Tweedle-dumb, although 2008 was actually between big government Tweedle-dumb and big government Tweedle-dumber).  This is 2012.  We actually have a candidate who not only preaches lower taxes, small government, closing loopholes, less regulation, efficiency and less spending, we have a guy who actually has done what he’s talking about.  For the first time in almost 30 years we actually have a true contest of ideas a contest between big government and small government—between government for the people and a government of laws and limits.    This is not the time for Sarah’s mindless demagogic drivel…

Sarah, you’re a liberal and a hack—shut up.  Your platitudes have no place here.

What we need is more of this…

Leave a comment

Filed under Capitalism, Conservative, Constitution, Economics, Election 2012, Evils of Liberalism, Free Will, GOP, Government is corrupt, Government is useless, Mitt Romney, People Are Stupid, politics, Stupid liberal quote of the day

Stupid Liberal Quote of the Day…RINOs pretend they’re Republicans

“What we saw with this ridiculous opposition dump on Newt was nothing short of Stalin-esque rewriting of history.”

This particularly dumb statement, not surprisingly comes from RINO Sarah Palin.  Palin who loves pork projects that provide bridges to no where.  Palin who never met a liberal RINO she wouldn’t support.  Palin who to this day takes tax payer subsidies.  The ever conservative Palin, who during her governorship, her state had the highest per capita amount of pork barrel projects at the expense of tax payers from the rest of the country. The populist who never met a liberal spending project or liberal spender that she didn’t love.  Yeah her.

Yeah well now she is backing the most liberal GOP contender (let me feign shock for just a second…I’m shocked, shocked!)  in the race, Newt Gingrich…although like a liberal she doesn’t actually have the spine to come out and endorse him, no, she wants to hedge her bets so that there won’t be a backlash when her boy goes down (because it’s really not that Sarah is a liberal, she’s not really anything, her only guiding political principle is saying or doing whatever keeps Sarah in the limelight).

But she seems to feel that the attacks on Newt are unfair.  Stalinistic.  That just because people in the Reagan White House can’t agree on what their opinion is doesn’t mean that it’s rewriting history.  What it means is he was a Congressmen, in the minority, one of 435, during Reagan’s years.  Most Congressmen are beyond forgettable.  So to rewrite history and say that Newt was a driving force in the Reagan years would also be “Stalin-esque,” wouldn’t it Sarah?  Newt probably didn’t have much to do with Reagan or his movement.   Partly because Newt is just an opportunist who will use whatever tactic he can to gain power.

But let’s see what the biggest impression Newt made on Reagan and his copious diary entries…

From page 123 of the Reagan Diaries, Monday January 3rd.  “Newt Gingrich has a proposal for freezing the budge at the 1983 level.  It’s a tempting idea except it would cripple our defense program.”  Defense, that would the be central focus of the Reagan administration, right?  Thanks Newt.  I’m sure the Politburo wished your proposal had gone through.  That’s the biggest impression Newt made on Reagan, a fun but hopelessly naive idea.  That is the only time Reagan mentions Newt, in a diary that goes into detail about everything (even detailing how Prince Charles takes his tea).  Yeah, Newt you and Reagan were tight.

The attacks on Newt’s history in the Reagan administration come from the fact that Newt was the one who first tried to rewrite history, portraying himself as Reagan’s trusty right hand. If the attacks have gotten a little vicious it’s only because Newt’s claims were so preposterously absurd.

The fact of the matter is that Newt has a long history of endorsing liberal ideas when they are politically expedient and personally beneficial and endorsing conservative ideas when they were expedient and personally beneficial.  In fact I think he has a track record of making major changes in his core beliefs every 19 years or so…

1 Comment

Filed under Stupid liberal quote of the day