Sarah Palin

Just warnin' ya.

An amusing/horrrfying welcome video from our friends at Media Mattters.

PolitiFact's Lie of the Year:

Of all the falsehoods and distortions in the political discourse this year, one stood out from the rest.

"Death panels."

The "death panels" phrase was created by Sarah Palin, but has its roots in the coordinated campaign to scare voters with the idea that Democratic health care proposals would create mechanisms for euthanizing elderly or sickly persons. It was outrageous and obviously false – that's what it's the "Lie of the Year" – but that didn't stop leading Missouri Republicans from helping to spread the lies.

Notable Show-Me State propagators of the Lie of the Year include:

• Rep. Roy Blunt, who said it's "easy" for the death panel debate "to go either way." Blunt repugnantly refused to smack down the falsehood on KTRS in August. "I think it's easy for that debate to go either way," he said. "You know, when they start talking about doing this every five years, then you do begin to wonder, now, just how committed is the federal government to being sure that that decision's already been made by you well before you and your family face it." 

Yesterday, Sarah Palin said asking about Barack Obama's birth certificate was "a fair question."  Speaking to a conservative talk radio host she said: "I think it's a fair question, just like I think past association and past voting records -- all of that is fair game. The McCain-Palin campaign didn't do a good enough job in that area." But today, she walked that back a bit, and and claims she just meant voters can ask whatever they want.

Contrast that with from Roy Blunt's birther fiasco.  In late July, Blunt said, "What I don't know is why the president can't produce a birth certificate. I don't know anybody else that can't produce one. And I think that that's a legitimate question -- no health records, no birth certificate."  When asked repeatedly to clarify those remarks, Blunt stood by them. From an August 5 article in the News-Leader:

Blunt, for his part, stands by his previous statements, a spokesman said. But he declined further comment at an energy policy event Tuesday in Strafford.

"What I actually think is that you guys don't have any capacity to talk about that in a legitimate way, so I'm going to stop talking about it," Blunt told a reporter.

In a headline story from Newsmax published earlier this week, we read: 

[Sarah] Palin, who was a lightning rod for criticism during the presidential campaign, warned that America is in "a dangerous place economically" because Congress is debating healthcare reforms that would affect up to one-sixth of the U.S. economy, without keeping the public informed about exactly what provisions are being proposed. And she doesn't think that void of information is accidental, either.

"There are so many questions right now that I'm like every other American," Palin told Newsmax, "just kind of scratching my head saying, 'When are we going to get the answers so that we can debate this very responsibly and very intelligently?'

More at www.penroseonpolitics.wordpress.com

Sarah Palin's upcoming trip to the College of the Ozarks received a small mention on The Rachel Maddow Show last night. It was followed by a segment on George W. Bush's new motivational speaking tour, which was far more amusing.

As I watch more and more coverage from media outlets of interviews with “average Americans” giving “their opinions” I become less believing of the common political and media mantra of the intelligence of the average American. While there are many Americans who are politically, financially, and socially savvy, there is also a large number who are not. My question is, “Are all opinions of equal value?”

An example would be a major medical operation, is my opinion as layman of the same value as that of say a neurosurgeon? Is an uninformed, illogical opinion of equal worth as someone who has spent years studying, reading, and researching an issue? I believe there are three categories of thought in this country and most of us fit into some combination of the three.

Friday, Roy Blunt spoke with KTRS' McGraw Milhaven about health care and his Senate campaign. Blunt was given a clear opportunity to separate himself from the dishonest, outrageous "death panel" claims. He could have completely disavowed the lies from Sarah Palin, Chuck Grassley and other Republican leaders, but chose to nurture the hysteria instead.

Host: There's one part of the country -- Democrats - that are saying "There's no such things as these 'death panels' in the bills."  And Sarah Palin and Chuck Grassley, Senator Chuck Grassley, last night said, "There is."  How do you see it?  Do you see these death panels in this legislation?

Blunt: No, you know, I see Medicare paying for consultations about end-of-life issues. I think it's easy for that debate to go either way. You know, when they start talking about doing this every five years, then you do begin to wonder, now, just how committed is the federal government to being sure that that decision's already been made by you well before you and your family face it.

It's not easy to see how the debate could "go either way." It's complete junk, and Blunt knows it (or should). 

Janese Heavin of The Columbia Daily Tribune had a good article yesterday about the "war strategies" employed by conservative opponents of health care reform.  Here's an excerpt: 

Health debate goes awry
‘War strategies’ muddle issues.

Lucille Schriewer is scared: The 76-year-old said she has heard that a proposed health care reform package would let the government send her to an early grave by denying her benefits. After all, she reasoned, Social Security is in trouble. “OK, so if they can refuse to let us have medical attention, we’ll die and that’s one less check the government has to send out,” Schriewer said.

Read More »

She may have a lot of time on her hands now, so why not?

Republican candidates from other states are very hesitant about appearing with Sarah Palin, especially without knowing why she so abruptly and irresponsibly announced her retirement.

Roy Blunt doesn't share those concerns. "I think she would be helpful," he told The Hill.

I hope Sarah Palin comes to Missouri and winks at me.

John McCain just surrendered to the right wing of the Republican Party.  In an act of appeasement, he served up a half-baked Alaska governor to sweeten his presidential ticket--a woman whose political thinking resembles that of Sen. Rick Santorum. 

In his first important decision as the soon-to-be nominee of the GOP, McCain failed the judgment test.  Looking past such imminently qualified possibilities as Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, Gov. Christy Todd Whitman, and Gov. Tom Ridge, he chose the 44-year-old Gov. Sarah Palin as his running mate.

In making this selection, the McCain camp hopes to invigorate Evangelical voters and pick up some of the 18 million Hillary supporters.  Indeed, Palin has a compelling life story--one that might be featured  during the State of the Union address.  Religious fundies may fall for her, but don't look for Hillary backers to flock to Palin.  While they share the same anatomy,  they don't share the same agenda and, as Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schwartz pointed out, "Sarah Palin is no Hillary Clinton."

During a time of national peril, when our greatest threat is radical Islamic terrorism, it might be a good idea to have a  president-in-waiting whose foreign policy experience consists of more than just living next door to Russia and Canada.  Palin, by her own admission, “hasn’t paid attention to the war in Iraq.”  She also told reporters recently that she was unsure what role the vice president plays in government.  Imagine the national furor had Sen. Biden made such statements.