Socialized Medicine: Handing Out Premature Death Sentences

No, this is not a scare-tactic. It is a bonafide news item from the Daily Telegraph over in the United Kingdom.

From Kate Devlin:

In a letter to The Daily Telegraph, a group of experts who care for the terminally ill claim that some patients are being wrongly judged as close to death.

Under NHS guidance introduced across England to help doctors and medical staff deal with dying patients, they can then have fluid and drugs withdrawn and many are put on continuous sedation until they pass away.

I’ve actually seen this done in the United States. My family requested that my father be kept sedated until he passed. But we already knew that there was no hope for his recovery and we wanted to make sure that he did not become conscious or feel any pain.

That isn’t always the case over in Britain.

Read on:

But this approach can also mask the signs that their condition is improving, the experts warn.

There is a major difference in a family making a decision and a doctor following a government guideline that was hammered out by bureaucrats who had never been to medical school or even knew the first thing about any particular patient.

Here is the real kicker:

“Forecasting death is an inexact science,”they say. Patients are being diagnosed as being close to death “without regard to the fact that the diagnosis could be wrong.

“As a result a national wave of discontent is building up, as family and friends witness the denial of fluids and food to patients.”

When the government pays the bills, the government makes the decisions. That is what makes socialized medicine so unpalatable to Americans. We want as little government as possible in our lives. Dems and libs seem to have a great deal of difficulty understanding that.

But, even more importantly, it highlights the “end-of-life” concerns that people like Sarah Palin and others have expressed over the past few months:

The scheme, called the Liverpool Care Pathway (LCP), was designed to reduce patient suffering in their final hours.

Developed by Marie Curie, the cancer charity, in a Liverpool hospice it was initially developed for cancer patients but now includes other life threatening conditions.

It was recommended as a model by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (Nice), the Government’s health scrutiny body, in 2004.

It has been gradually adopted nationwide and more than 300 hospitals, 130 hospices and 560 care homes in England currently use the system.

But there are major pitfalls in determining whether a patient is actually entering their final hours. Medications can cause unresponsiveness or unconsciousness. Dehydration can lead to symptoms completely unrelated to the patient’s primary ailment.

Further, poor care can lead to other conditions that can be mistaken for signs of impending death.

As a result, many people are put on the Pathway prematurely.

Just another wonderful contribution to medical care from the practitioners of socialized medicine.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

Sentenced To Death On The NHS
Kate Devlin
Daily Telegraph
September 2, 2009

The Audacity Of Arrogantly Proclaiming A Partnership With God

You know, if a Republican or a Conservative Christian ever made a remark like Obama made yesterday, it would be a front-page news story for two-weeks while every major leftist news outlet in the nation would repeat it as a “macaca” moment. But for reasons that the average rational American is already keenly aware of, the press is giving Obama a pass on this one.

Here is what he said while addressing about 1000 Jewish Rabbis during a conference call:

In a morning conference call with about 1000 rabbis from across the nation, Obama asked for aid: “I am going to need your help in accomplishing necessary reform,” the President told the group, according to Rabbi Jack Moline, who tweeted his way through the phoner.

“We are God’s partners in matters of life and death,” Obama went on to say.

I am not aware of any other President in the history of the United States of America who ever had the arrogance or the impudence to elevate himself to the same level as Almighty God the Father.

But this quote also validates what Gov. Sarah Palin said when she expressed her concerns that Obamacare would result in “death panels” that would stand in judgement of her parents or her Special Needs son, Trig. If man were to elevate himself to the level of God, man would then have the power to arbitrarily decide life and death. History has shown (as recently as Nazi Germany) that man should not assume such power.

As I said, if a Conservative ever made a comment like this, Old Media would do everything in its power to crucify the person making it. But, because Obama is a leftist/Socialist and Old Media usually plays cheerleader for him, you will read almost nothing about it in major newspapers or even mentioned on network broadcast news shows.

You can access the original article on-line here:

‘God’s Partners In Matters Of Life And Death’
Adam Kredo
Washington Jewish Week
August 19, 2009

Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel Tries To Tap-Dance His Way Out Of His Own Writings

Jake Tapper isn’t a hard-core leftist, but he is easily manipulated by the left. Tapper looks at the responses that Dr. Emanuel gives for the recent criticism of his writings about rationing of health care and the “complete lives” philosophy for determining who gets what health care and how much.

According to Tapper at ABC News:

One of the passages written by Emanuel and used as evidence by Palin and others that he would favor withholding medical care from those who aren’t productive members of society include a 1996 contribution to the Hastings Center Report, in which he said that under the “civic republican or deliberative democratic” construct, “services provided to individuals who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens are not basic and should not be guaranteed. An obvious example is not guaranteeing health services to patients with dementia. A less obvious example is guaranteeing neuropsychological services to ensure children with learning disabilities can read and learn to reason.”

Is he saying, as Palin and others have suggested, that those who aren’t “participating citizens” should have no guarantee to health care?

“No,” Emanuel says, “and I think I made it pretty clear I wasn’t endorsing that view, I was analyzing that perspective and what it might mean in practical terms. The rest of the text around that quote made it made it pretty clear I was trying to analyze it and understand it, not endorse it.”

But, from the text of Where Civic Republicanism And Deliberative Democracy Meet as published in a 1996 Hastings Center Report, we see the following:

Thus, it seems there is a growing agreement between liberals, communitarians, and others that many political matters, including matters of justice- and specifically, the just allocation of health care resources–can be addressed only by invoking a particular conception of the good.

Procedurally, it suggests the need for public forums to deliberate about which health services should be considered basic and should be socially guaranteed. Substantively, it suggests services that promote the continuation of the polity-those that ensure healthy future generations, ensure development of practical reasoning skills, and ensure full and active participation by citizens in public deliberations-are to be socially guaranteed as basic. Conversely, services provided to individuals who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens are not basic and should not be guaranteed. An obvious example is not guaranteeing health services to patients with dementia.

Nowhere did Dr. Emanuel say that his thinking was hypothetical. This last paragraph excerpt made it pretty clear what his stance on the issue is. His conception of “the good” is policies that “ensure healthy future generations, ensure development of practical reasoning skills, and ensure full and active participation by citizens in public deliberations-are to be socially guaranteed as basic.” In layman’s terms, that means that only those who are deemed “productive” should be getting medical coverage.

Tapper goes on to present another misleading explanation of the January 31, 2009 article published in The Lancet that Dr. Emanuel co-authored:

The oncologist suggests that his words are being twisted because opponents “don’t have a solution” to the health care reform debate. “Maybe the only tactic is to sow fear and use whatever means you have to attack whether that’s grounded in reality or not… If you don’t have good arguments you use whatever you got, I guess, to say things that are distortive and untrue.”

He says “there have been previous attempts to come after me and after some of my colleagues, but this is certainly on a completely different scale and magnitude. I’ve never been mentioned on Sunday shows in this light and certainly never on the floor of Congress. The distortions are much larger than I’ve ever seen or would have believed could happen.”

But, let’s see what he wrote in that article and whether or not it jibes with his current claims:

When implemented, the complete lives system produces a priority curve on which individuals aged between roughly 15 and 40 years get the most substantial chance, whereas the youngest and oldest people get chances that are attenuated.

Strict youngest-first allocation directs scarce resources predominantly to infants. This approach seems incorrect.

No twisting there at all. Dr. Emanuel is clear and unambiguous as to what he believes. And the following graph shows where he believes resources should be rationed:

(Source: Principles for allocation of scarce medical interventions; Govind Persad, Alan Wertheimer, Ezekiel J Emanuel; The Lancet, January 31, 2009)

You can clearly see where Dr. Emanuel believes that the very young and the very old should fall in the priority curve. We can assume that such low priorities will also be held for Special Needs patients as well.

You can cross reference this with Sections 1162 and 1177 of HR3200. The parallels are undeniable.

When Gov. Palin voiced her concerns about Trig and her parents being denied medical care based on their “productivity,” she was very justified.

Conculsion: Dr. Emanuel can spin and tap-dance all he wants. But he cannot run and hide from what he has written and published. And we should not allow him to even try.

People work hard their entire lives to ensure that their families are taken care of and to ensure that they themselves are taken care of in their twilight years. HR3200 would only serve to undo all that work and allow the government to come in and change the plans that people had made for themselves years before.

Is Sarah Palin At Least Close To Being Right About “Death Panels?”

In order to answer that question, we need to look into HR3200 and analyze what is written in the relevent sections that may pertain to Special Needs patients or the elderly and how those sections may be used to deny care to members of those groups.

Sec. 1177 on page 354 of HR3200 (America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009). The title reads: “EXTENSION OF AUTHORITY OF SPECIAL NEEDS PLANS TO RESTRICT ENROLLMENT.” That section essentially makes it legal to turn away patients like Trig Palin.

Sec. 1162 of HR3200, under which on page 335 the government will be empowered to approve treatments that are established by “outcome-based measures.” This loop-hole will be used to deny care to elderly and Special Needs patients as some of the measures considered will include “patient mortality and morbidity following surgery” and “health functioning (limitations of activities of daily living).”

Sec. 1123 that begins on page 424 of HR3200. Under that section on page 430 is written:

The level of treatment indicated under subparagraph (A)(ii) may range from an indication for full treatment to an indication to limit some or all or specified interventions. Such indicated levels of treatment may include indications respecting, among other items—

(i) the intensity of medical intervention if the patient is pulse less, apneic, or has serious cardiac or pulmonary problems;
(ii) the individual’s desire regarding transfer to a hospital or remaining at the current care setting;
(iii) the use of antibiotics; and
(iv) the use of artificially administered nutrition and hydration.

Although the above references subparagraph (A)(ii), subparagraph (A)(i) essentially gives the government control over any medical orders relating to the covered individual.

From what I’ve read of HR3200, Gov. Palin is closer to getting it right than any of her detractors are. In fact, I have yet to see any of her detractors actually reference anything in HR3200 to prove her wrong about the government possibly denying care to the elderly and Special Needs patients.

You can access HR3200 on-line here:

America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009

Media Treatment Of Sarah Palin: Where In Her Quote Did She Say “Could Kill My Down Syndrome Baby?”

Leftists never cease to amaze me with their blind alligiance to anyone who comes out with a leftist screed, even if such screed is proven to be a lie.

All over the Internet, you read about idiots repeating, like trained parrots, the same lie over and over. Somewhere, someone twisted the facts and claimed that Sarah Palin said that Obama’s “death panels” could kill her Down Syndrome baby.

Well, let’s test that claim by comparing it with the actual statement that Sarah wrote on Facebook:

The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama’s “death panel” so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their “level of productivity in society,” whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil.

Yes, she did use the words “death panel.” But that is the limit of the truth in the leftist claims. Nowhere in the above quote did she say “kill my Down Syndrome baby” or anything about killing her grandparents.

But that doesn’t matter to leftist liberals. They simply follow their leaders like sheep without even bothering to check out whether they are being told the truth or not. Then, these same “enlightened” progressives go out and repeat the lie like mindless trained parrots.

We should note that Gov. Palin did say the following: “based on a subjective judgment of their ‘level of productivity in society,’ whether they are worthy of health care.”

In that, her concerns are extremely valid as I pointed out in the following post:

And Speaking Of People Carrying Swastikas
84rules
August 6, 2009

In that post you will find the writings of Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, advisor to Barack Obama on health care issues, who embraces a health care policy known as the “complete lives system” in which infants, elderly and special needs patients are deliberately denied medical treatment so that others (i.e. more productive people) will always have adequate care.

If any libs out there want to argue this point or argue the misquote, please feel free to leave a thoughful response. I’d love to hear from you.

Obama Administration Quashes Biden’s Comments About Israel

I remember back during the 2008 Presidential election that libs and Dems were hurling insults at Sarah Palin saying that she was “stupid” or “not smart enough.” Well, let’s contrast that with what has been happening with Vice President Joe “Gaffe” Biden.

He made a gaffe about Franklin Roosevelt going on television when the market crashed in 1929. But Roosevelt was not president yet and television was not commercially avaliable at the time.

He made a gaffe when he asked a wheelchair-bound man to “stand up and take a bow.”

Sarah Palin never did or said anything that even came close to these two gaffes and they are only a small representation of Biden’s repertoire.

Now, the Obama administration has had to step in once again and undo whatever damage Biden did by talking.

From Breitbart:

The Obama administration poured cold water Monday on any notion it is giving Israel the green light to attack Iran or that it is reconsidering plans to engage diplomatically with the Islamic republic.

Vice President Joe Biden said in an interview broadcast Sunday that the United States would not stand in the way of Israel in its dealings with Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

But State Department spokesman Ian Kelly rebuffed suggestions from reporters that Biden could be seen as giving the Jewish state a green light to attack Iran, which it views as an existential threat.

I think Biden was pretty clear in what he said and left little room for interpretation. Here is his quote: “Israel can determine for itself — it’s a sovereign nation — what’s in their interest and what they decide to do relative to Iran and anyone else. We cannot dictate to another sovereign nation what they can and cannot do when they make a determination, if they make a determination, that they’re existentially threatened.”

Seems petty clear to me.

You can access the complete atory on-line here:

US Not Giving Israel ‘Green Light’ To Attack Iran
AFP via Breitbart
July 6, 2009

How Stupid Does James Carville Think We Are?

I’m actually on vacation right now, but I will post a few things before I pack up the family and head to the beach for the rest of the week.

Got this in an email from James Carville as the DNC tries to beg for money from me:

At midnight tonight, the FEC deadline hits and we will have to report how much money we have in the bank. As of now, we’re still $43,124 away from hitting our million dollar goal.

If we hit our goal, that means the media is gonna judge that President Obama still has momentum on his side when it comes to health care and everything else. If we fall short, they’ll be saying that Newt Gingrich and Sarah Palin, with the over $14 million they just raised for Republicans, are stealing our thunder.

First, does Carville actually believe that the media will ever say that Barack Obama has lost momentum? If he really does believe that, then he has an IQ lower than the average American because Joe and Jane Average American know better than to believe something as crazy as that.

Second, does Carville believe that the media will ever place the philosophy of a Conservative Republican over that of a leftist Dem? Again, only the most gullible and naive will believe any of this.

The Dems really do need to come up with a better message if they are trying to outspend and outscore a political party they’ve been declaring “dead” over the past several months.

Just something to think about.

Sarah Palin: 14, Democrat Smear Campaigners: 0

Sounds like a football score, doesn’t it? Well, Gov. Sarah Palin (R) of Alaska has shut out the Democrats who began fabricating bogus charges against her almost immediately after she was announced as John McCain’s running mate in last year’s Presidential election. If you need any more evidence of how ineffective the Dems are, you need look no further than their bumbling efforts at trying to smear her.

From Amanda Carpenter of the Washington Times:

Mrs. Palin, who became a target of such complaints after being named Sen. John McCain’s running mate, is 14-for-14 in fighting off the complaints. She’s been cleared of 13 charges by the independent State Personnel Board and of another complaint by the Federal Election Commission (FEC).

After the latest complaint in Alaska was dismissed last week, Mrs. Palin’s team said that having to fend off the pile of accusations was wasting state money.

“This complaint cost the governor personally, and the state of Alaska, thousands of dollars to address,” said Thomas Van Flein, the governor’s attorney. “It is regrettable that the ethics process has been diverted for partisan purposes by some, but it is also commendable that the board remains focused on the law.”

But the Democrats felt so threatened by Gov. Palin that they continued the complaints long after the polls closed:

Even after the election was over, the stream of complaints continued.

Alaska residents challenged Mrs. Palin’s trips out of state to attend a campaign event for Sen. Saxby Chambliss, Georgia Republican, and to speak at a pro-life breakfast in Indiana, as well as for conducting television interviews in her state office.

The latest complaint to be decided was filed by Anchorage resident Linda Kellen Biegel, who took issue with Mrs. Palin for wearing to a public function a jacket made by a company that sponsored the governor’s husband, Todd, a snow machine racer. Ms. Biegel asked the personnel board to determine whether Mrs. Palin was abusing her position to serve her personal and financial interests.

Mrs. Palin called the complaint “asinine political grandstanding,” and the board’s independent investigator said there was no evidence of wrongdoing.

That says alot about Gov. Palin’s strength of character. Not only in her being able to show all 14 complaints as being patently false, but also for the fact that the Dems feel so vulnerable to her politically that they need to attack her like this.

She most certainly is a threat to the leftist hate-mongers in America, but throwing false charges and bogus accusations in her direction was probably the dumbest thing the Dems could have done.

You can access the complete story on-line here:

Palin Fends Off Ethics Charges
Amanda Carpenter
Washington Times
June 8, 2009

Debbie Stabenow Wants ‘Hearings’ For Fairness Doctrine Censorship

Check out this exchange between Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) and radio host Bill Press:

BILL PRESS: Yeah, I mean, look: They have a right to say that. They’ve got a right to express that. But, they should not be the only voices heard. So, is it time to bring back the Fairness Doctrine?

SENATOR DEBBIE STABENOW (D-MI): I think it’s absolutely time to pass a standard. Now, whether it’s called the Fairness Standard, whether it’s called something else — I absolutely think it’s time to be bringing accountability to the airwaves. I mean, our new president has talked rightly about accountability and transparency. You know, that we all have to step up and be responsible. And, I think in this case, there needs to be some accountability and standards put in place.

BILL PRESS: Can we count on you to push for some hearings in the United States Senate this year, to bring these owners in and hold them accountable?

SENATOR DEBBIE STABENOW (D-MI): I have already had some discussions with colleagues and, you know, I feel like that’s gonna happen. Yep.

First, it is a well-known fact that attempts to bring back censorship under the guise of a “Fairness Doctrine” are nothing more than attempts to squelch the opposition’s point of view.

But even more interesting is that Stabenow want hearings on the issue.

I say: “Bring it on!”

I’ll bet that Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, Laura Ingraham, Monica Crowley and Mark Levin will have a five-way fist fight to see who will be the first to march into those hearings and rake those Senators over the coals.

The conservative talk radio hosts who do show up and testify will expose every hypocrisy and every double-standard people like Stabenow hold. For example, why does Stabenow want “fairness” brought to talk radio but is perfectly willing to allow programs like Today Show, Good Morning America, Larry King and newspapers like The Washington Post and New York Times, to continue to be biased towards the leftist-liberals?

That is exactly the type of hypocrisy that would be highlighted during these hearings.

Further, talk radio hosts will bring to the fore-front many stories that television and print media largely ignored. For example, why did the media give Obama a pass for his relationship with the racist Reverend Jeremiah Wright but came down so hard on Sarah Palin for her main-stream religious views? Why was Obama not fully vetted by the media while an Army of reporters stormed Alaska looking for any dirt they could find?

These and other issues will come to light if Stabenow really does hold these hearings.

I say: “Let’s do it! Let’s start peeling back the onion!”

It would be one of the best things to happen in America in a long time.

You can access the transcripts and a video on-line here:

Sen. Stabenow Wants Hearings On Radio ‘Accountability’; Talks Fairness Doctrine
Michael Calderone
The Politico
February 5, 2009

Caroline Kennedy: The Dems Cover-Girl For Entitlement Over Experience

Back during the Presidential campaign, the Dems beat a very insincere drum about Gov. Sarah Palin’s qualifications. They said that she didn’t have any experience and therefore was not qualified for the position she would have been voted into had the GOP ticket won.

Do the Dems really believe this? No, they don’t. The problem with their criticisms of Sarah Palin has been brought out into the light over the proposed appointment of Caroline Kennedy to fill the vacated New York Senate seat should Hillary Clinton become the next U.S. Secretary of State. It is the problem of a double-standard.

Let’s compare the self-made woman Gov. Sarah Palin to the Kennedy heiress Caroline Kennedy.

Gov. Palin has done her own work, stood on her own and has actually been voted into office starting with the local politics of Wasilla, Alaska before moving on to the State Politics of Alaska and then was introduced to the nation this past year. She has a resume of independence, hard work and accomplishment.

Caroline Kennedy was born into a rich family with a very recognizable name. That’s it. Nothing more. She has never been voted into office nor has she ever stood on her own. The only thing she brings to the table is a recognizable name.

Steve Chapman, writing for Town Hall, notes some interesting points that we need to be aware of about Ms. Kennedy and why any Democrat supporting her would be two-faced:

Kennedy is a well-spoken, pleasant woman who is indistinguishable from many other rich folks who would never be considered for a seat in the nation’s highest elected body. Indistinguishable, that is, except for her name, which in some minds confers magical powers denied to ordinary mortals.

If she had been born Caroline Kelly, no one would indulge her expressed desire to become a United States senator. But because of her pedigree, Paterson appears to think she’s doing him a favor instead of the other way around.

Kennedy is the latest example of the rise of “branding” in American politics — in which merely coming from a particular family is taken as a qualification for office.

Anyone who is willing to say that Kennedy is fit for office must also be willing to recant any criticism they had of Gov. Palin’s apptitude and fitness. Sarah Palin is light-years ahead of Kennedy in qualifications and experience, yet the Dems, like well-trained parrots, kept repeating over and over that she wasn’t suited to national public office.

But somehow, they think that an unqualified woman whose only asset in life is that her name is “Kennedy” is a good thing. However, the name “Kennedy” isn’t always remembered as being a profile in courage.

More:

In the Kennedy case, of course, not everyone would agree that Caroline’s Uncle Ted has been a boon to the nation during his years in the Senate — quite the contrary, since he has long been one of the most liberal lawmakers on Capitol Hill. That’s without even taking into consideration the minor matter of Mary Jo Kopechne, the young woman he killed in a mysterious car wreck in 1969.

Other Kennedys have fallen short in office. Joe Kennedy, son of Robert, was known as a telegenic lightweight during his time in the House of Representatives. Rep. Patrick Kennedy (D-R.I.), son of Ted, has made news mostly with his drug use and traffic accidents. Kathleen Kennedy Townsend, daughter of Robert, was elected lieutenant governor of Maryland, but in 2002 managed the feat of becoming the first Democrat in more than three decades to lose a governor’s race in that state.

And let’s not forget William Kennedy Smith’s sexual improprieties.

This all comes down to Caroline Kennedy’s (and many Dems’) belief that somehow, bearing the name Kennedy entitles one to office regardless of how inexperienced the Kennedy is.

If the Dems want to be taken seriously as the party of “change,” they need to shout down any possible appointment of Caroline Kennedy and demand that all proposed appointments for the vacated Senate seat must abide by the same standard that they held Sarah Palin to during the 2008 Presidential campaign.

Should we be serious about this? You betcha!

You can access the complete article on-line here:

Caroline And The Lure Of Royalty
Steve Chapman
TownHall.com
December 18, 2008

John Fund: Obama Was Mute On Illinois Corruption; Who Is The “Specifically Named Individual?”

I am not sure if Patrick Fitzgerald meant for it to happen, but as more people research the criminal complaint against Rod Blagojevich, more tidbits of information come out, many of which were unexpected and quite possibly deeply embarrassing to those who would like to appear as if they weren’t involved in anything.

John Fund doesn’t directly say this, but his column in the Wall Street Journal sets up the scenario for just such a story. From his column:

This week Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich was arrested on charges that he conspired to sell Barack Obama’s U.S. Senate seat, among other misdeeds. At first the president-elect tried to distance himself from the issue: “It is a sad day for Illinois. Beyond that, I don’t think it’s appropriate for me to comment.” But it quickly became clear that Mr. Obama would have to say more, and yesterday he called for Mr. Blagojevich to resign and for a special election to fill the vacant Senate seat.

What remains to be seen is whether this episode will put an end to what Chicago Tribune political columnist John Kass calls the national media’s “almost willful” fantasy that Mr. Obama and Chicago’s political culture have little to do with each other. Mr. Kass notes that the media devoted a lot more time and energy to investigating the inner workings of Sarah Palin’s Wasilla, Alaska, than it has looking at Mr. Obama’s Chicago connections.

We all knew that the leftist-leaning media was in the tank for Obama. What the media didn’t know was how badly it would all explode on them if something like the Blagojevich scandal came up. Now, the media looks at least as silly as Blagojevich does since they can no longer claim to be the “watchdogs of government.” If I had watchdogs who were so incompetent as to miss this, I’d have them put down and get new watchdogs. If the media had done their job during the 2008 campaign, we’d have known about the corruption in Illinois long before any of this happened.

More:

Mr. Obama has an ambiguous reputation among those trying to clean up Illinois politics. “We have a sick political culture, and that’s the environment Barack Obama came from,” Jay Stewart, executive director of the Chicago Better Government Association, told ABC News months ago. Though Mr. Obama did support ethics reforms as a state senator, Mr. Stewart noted that he’s “been noticeably silent on the issue of corruption here in his home state including, at this point, mostly Democratic politicians.”

Yes, it is that Democratic Culture of Corruption that the Democrats refuse to clean up. The hypocrisy of the Dem party is staggering.

But this also sets up a new story that comes from the criminal complaint filed by the FBI against Rod Blagojevich. Section 101 of the complaint states:

b. ROD BLAGOJEVICH asked what he can get from the President-elect for the Senate seat. ROD BLAGOJEVICH stated that Governor General Counsel believes the President-elect can get ROD BLAGOJEVICH’s wife on paid corporate boards in exchange for naming the President-elect’s pick to the Senate. Governor General Counsel asked, “can [the President-elect] help in the private sector. . . where it wouldn’t be tied to him? . . . I mean, so it wouldn’t necessarily look like one for the other.” ROD BLAGOJEVICH’s wife suggested during the call that she is qualified to sit on corporate boards and has a background in real estate and appraisals. ROD BLAGOJEVICH asked whether there is something that could be done with his wife’s “series 7″ license in terms of working out a deal for the Senate seat. ROD BLAGOJEVICH stated that he is “struggling” financially and does “not want to be Governor for the next two years.”

c. ROD BLAGOJEVICH said that the consultants (Advisor B and another consultant are believed to be on the call at that time) are telling him that he has to “suck it up” for two years and do nothing and give this “motherf*cker [the President-elect] his senator. F*ck him. For nothing? F*ck him.” ROD BLAGOJEVICH states that he will put “[Senate Candidate 4]” in the Senate “before I just give f*cking [Senate Candidate 1] a f*cking Senate seat and I don’t get anything.” (Senate Candidate 4 is a Deputy Governor of the State of Illinois). ROD BLAGOJEVICH stated that he needs to find a way to take the “financial stress” off of his family and that his wife is as qualified or more qualified than another specifically named individual to sit on corporate boards. According to ROD BLAGOJEVICH, “the immediate challenge [is] how do we take some of the financial pressure off of our family.” Later in the phone call, ROD BLAGOJEVICH stated that absent getting something back, ROD BLAGOJEVICH will not pick Senate Candidate 1. HARRIS re-stated ROD BLAGOJEVICH’s thoughts that they should ask the President-elect for something for ROD BLAGOJEVICH’s financial security as well as maintain his political viability. HARRIS said they could work out a three-way deal with SEIU and the President-elect where SEIU could help the President-elect with ROD BLAGOJEVICH’s appointment of Senate Candidate 1 to the vacant Senate seat, ROD BLAGOJEVICH would obtain a position as the National Director of the Change to Win campaign, and SEIU would get something favorable from the President-elect in the future.

Well, who are these people?

Senate Candidate #1 is Valerie Jarrett, an Obama advisor who also served as Daley’s Chief of Staff. Jarrett is very close to the Obamas.

Senate Candidate #4 is either Dean Martinez, Bob Greenlee or Louanner Peters, all of whom are Deputy Governors of Illinois.

Who is the “specifically named individual?” That answer comes from Truthteller at No Quarter Blog.

It is Michelle Obama, the soon-to-be First Lady of the United States of America.

No Quarter notes that Michelle “was appointed to to the Board of TreeHouse Foods, a WAL-MART vendor, on June 25, 2005, even though she did not have experience in the private sector previous to the appointment.” A link to that news story is here:

Michelle Obama’s Ties To Wal-Mart Cut
Lynn Sweet
Chicago Sun-Times
May 23, 2007

Those ties were cut in 1987 due to Wal-Mart’s ongoing conflict with organized labor and the Obama campaign didn’t want the conflict of interest. But even so, Michelle got quite a bit of cash out of the deal. According to the above article, compensation was “$51,200 from TreeHouse in 2006. She leaves the board with an option to buy 2,266 TreeHouse shares at a strike price of $29.65. Shares closed at $28.10 Tuesday.”

So, why is this relevent? No Quarter quotes Section 87 of the criminal complaint:

87. By law, after the President-elect’s resignation of his position as a U.S. Senator, which was effective on November 16, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH has sole authority to appoint his replacement for the two years remaining of the President-elect’s Senate term. See 10 ILCS 5/25-8. During the course of this investigation, agents have intercepted a series of communications regarding the efforts of ROD BLAGOJEVICH, JOHN HARRIS, and others to misuse this power to obtain personal gain, including financial gain, for ROD BLAGOJEVICH and his family. In particular, ROD BLAGOJEVICH has been intercepted conspiring to trade the senate seat for particular positions that the President-elect has the power to appoint (e.g. the Secretary of Health and Human Services). ROD BLAGOJEVICH has also been intercepted conspiring to sell the Senate seat in exchange for his wife’s placement on paid corporate boards or ROD BLAGOJEVICH’s placement at a private foundation in a significant position with a substantial salary. ROD BLAGOJEVICH has also been intercepted conspiring to sell the Senate seat in exchange for millions of dollars in funding for a non-profit organization that he would start and that would employ him at a substantial salary after he left the governorship.

No Quarter goes on to say:

Blagojevich, in other words, assumed Obama would appoint his wife to a Board for the political favor of selecting Valerie Jarrett for the Senate seat. Blagojevich is not a stupid man. Indeed, he only assumed Obama would participate in this “pay to play” scheme, for he knows Obama is acutely aware how the game is played in Illinois and in Chicago. This explains why Blagojevich mentions Michelle Obama and her lack of qualifications to serve on the Board of TreeHouse Foods when he discusses how Obama could appoint Mrs. Blagojevich to a Board for the political favor of appointing Jarrett to the US Senate seat. Michelle, after all, was appointed to sit on the Board of TreeHouse foods AFTER Obama was elected to the US Senate. Moreover, Michelle Obama’s salary at The University of Chicago nearly TRIPLED after her husband gained the power to submit earmark requests on her employer’s behalf. Just appoint the spouse to a Board and increase his or her salary if you need a political favor from an Illinois politician. That is how the “play to pay” game is played.

Now, this in no way says that Michelle Obama is involved in the Blagojevich scandal. But it does show how scandals like this can bring certain facts and information to light that the people involved do not necessarily want brought out. Michelle Obama’s high-paid employment at jobs for which she had no experience is a prime example of such information.

I am sure that Barack Obama would have preferred that this remain covered and hence his desire to remain “mute,” because now it puts his wife and her business affairs into a spotlight that cannot be turned off. If something comes up from Michelle’s past to haunt them, it is not something that either one of them can claim they had no knowledge of.

You can access the two articles on-line here:

John Fund: Obama Was Mute On Illinois Corruption
John Fund
The Wall Street Journal
December 11, 2008

Michelle Obama Is The “Specifically Named Individual” On Page 64 Of The Affidavit Submitted By FBI
No Quarter Blog
December 9, 2008

Video: Obama Supporters Interviewed, Show Extremely Limited Knowledge Of Their Candidate

The liberals are not happy about John Ziegler’s video and what is being portrayed on it. Twelve Obama supporters were interviewed right after they voted in order to see how Old Media influenced their vote and whether or not they had gotten the full and correct story. It does not paint the libs in a very good light at all.

But that isn’t the full story. An even bigger part of the story is the telephone poll conducted by Zogby which showed how voters knew almost nothing about the Obama/Biden ticket but were more often able to answer correctly the questions about the McCain/Palin ticket, specifically questions which dealt with those stories that Old Media pushed out about the Republicans. the questions that the Obama supporters were not able to answer dealt with issues that Old Media deliberately held back. Things like William Ayers and such.

Here are the results of that poll:

512 Obama Voters 11/13/08-11/15/08 MOE +/- 4.4 points

97.1% High School Graduate or higher, 55% College Graduates

Results to 12 simple Multiple Choice Questions

57.4% could NOT correctly say which party controls congress (50/50 shot just by guessing)

71.8% could NOT correctly say Joe Biden quit a previous campaign because of plagiarism (25% chance by guessing)

82.6% could NOT correctly say that Barack Obama won his first election by getting opponents kicked off the ballot (25% chance by guessing)

88.4% could NOT correctly say that Obama said his policies would likely bankrupt the coal industry and make energy rates skyrocket (25% chance by guessing)

56.1% could NOT correctly say Obama started his political career at the home of two former members of the Weather Underground (25% chance by guessing).

And yet…..

Only 13.7% failed to identify Sarah Palin as the person on which their party spent $150,000 in clothes

Only 6.2% failed to identify Palin as the one with a pregnant teenage daughter

And to show exactly how badly Old Media screwed the pooch in trying to get Obama elected:

And 86.9 % thought that Palin said that she could see Russia from her “house.”

Sarah Palin never said that. Tina Fey said it on Saturday Night Live, but Old Media, either because they were so in the tank for Obama or because they are incompetant and don’t know how to do proper research, simply allowed the story to go without trying to correct it.

And here is John Ziegler’s interview on Fox News with some elements of his video as portrayed on Hannity & Colmes:

How The Media Helped Obama Get Elected
Fox News
November 19, 2008

Media Malpractice. How Obama Supporters Knew Very Little About The Election
Fox News
November 17, 2008

Sean Hannity is absolutely correct. The year 2008 will go down in history as the year in which journalistic integrity died.

You can access the complete web entry on-line here:

How Obama Got Elected
John Ziegler

Zogby Poll: Obama Supporters Didn’t Know Their Candidate

This poll has been the subject of a great deal of controversy, not for what it contains, but more for the fact that it was actually conducted.

According to Zogby:

Just 2% of voters who supported Barack Obama on Election Day obtained perfect or near-perfect scores on a post election test which gauged their knowledge of statements and scandals associated with the presidential tickets during the campaign, a new Zogby International telephone poll shows.

When the controversy broke, Zogby stood by the results:

Zogby Statement On Ziegler Poll

More on the poll and its results:

Only 54% of Obama voters were able to answer at least half or more of the questions correctly.

The 12-question, multiple-choice survey found questions regarding statements linked to Republican presidential candidate John McCain and his vice-presidential running-mate Sarah Palin were far more likely to be answered correctly by Obama voters than questions about statements associated with Obama and Vice-President–Elect Joe Biden. The telephone survey of 512 Obama voters nationwide was conducted Nov. 13-15, 2008, and carries a margin of error of +/- 4.4 percentage points.

It seems those who took the poll knew more about the McCain/Palin ticket than they knew about their own ticket:

Ninety-four percent of Obama voters correctly identified Palin as the candidate with a pregnant teenage daughter, 86% correctly identified Palin as the candidate associated with a $150,000 wardrobe purchased by her political party, and 81% chose McCain as the candidate who was unable to identify the number of houses he owned. When asked which candidate said they could “see Russia from their house,” 87% chose Palin, although the quote actually is attributed to Saturday Night Live’s Tina Fey during her portrayal of Palin during the campaign. An answer of “none” or “Palin” was counted as a correct answer on the test, given that the statement was associated with a characterization of Palin.

Obama voters did not fare nearly as well overall when asked to answer questions about statements or stories associated with Obama or Biden — 83% failed to correctly answer that Obama had won his first election by getting all of his opponents removed from the ballot, and 88% did not correctly associate Obama with his statement that his energy policies would likely bankrupt the coal industry. Most (56%) were also not able to correctly answer that Obama started his political career at the home of two former members of the Weather Underground.

Nearly three quarters (72%) of Obama voters did not correctly identify Biden as the candidate who had to quit a previous campaign for President because he was found to have plagiarized a speech, and nearly half (47%) did not know that Biden was the one who predicted Obama would be tested by a generated international crisis during his first six months as President.

Should this concern us? Absolutely. It shows how an uninformed American electorate can be manipulated.

It also shows how the MSM did the entire nation a huge disservice by not vetting Barack Obama and wasting so much time trying to dig up useless dirt on Sarah Palin.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

Zogby Poll: Almost No Obama Voters Ace Election Test
Zogby International
November 18, 2008

To view the survey results:

Survey Results

Sarah Palin The Fiscal Conservative Reformer

Matt Lewis over at Town Hall has done his research and put together some good quotes about Sarah Palin’s true record of reform before her nomination as Vice-Presidential candidate on the GOP ticket.

Here are the quotes:

“Republican primary voters in Alaska are ready for a change and are rallying to the fiscally responsible leadership embodied by Governor Palin.”

– Pat Toomey, 9/24/2007

“Palin’s veto ax lops $268 million from budget”

– Achorage Daily News Headline, 5/24/2008

“(Palin) has come out and told her own congressional delegation, all Republicans, ‘Stop with the earmarks! It’s wrong, it’s wrong! Even when it benefits us in Alaska.'”

– Michael Medved, 12/21/2007

“Palin’s tough spending cuts drew criticism from Republican legislators whose pet projects were vetoed.”

– Fred Barnes, 7/16/2007

“This week, it was Palin who singlehandedly killed the leading symbol of Republican spending excess in Washington: the Bridge to Nowhere.”

– Patrick Ruffini, 9/29/2007

And here is Governor Palin’s Fiscal Record, also before she was nominated:

July 1st, 2007 – Massive line item vetoes (lopping almost a quarter-billion dollars off of a $1.8 billion capital budget).

Dec. 11th, 2007 – Palin’s proposed budget slashes earmark requests, and dramatically slows growth of government.

March 23rd, 2008 – More vetoes in the “supplemental budget”. Palin also demands that legislators explain their pork projects to her personally before she signs off on any of them. This issue was particularly hilarious because the budget was for “emergency spending” and it included (among other things) the construction of batting cages and gun ranges.

May 24th, 2008 – Second consecutive year of huge line-item vetoes in the state’s capital budget (over a quarter-billion dollars this time, 10% of the total capital budget).

Can you imagine having that kind of integrity, that kind of fiscal responsibility in the White House?

I think that after the four years of the socialism we are about to see, Sarah Palin’s record is going to look better and better.

You can access the original blog entry on-line here:

Palin The Fiscal Conservative Reformer
Matt Lewis
TownHall.com
November 14, 2008

Palin Saboteurs Want To Kill Her Career Now

In the current political climate here in the United States, it is pretty easy to see who the effective politicians are and who the potential movers and shakers may be. Given the attacks made against Sarah Palin in the days and weeks after the election, it is pretty clear the the Alaskan Governor is among the most effective politicians in the GOP and her potential to move and shake things is nothing short of awesome.

That is why some people are trying to kill her career right now. Mostly these attacks come from Democrats who simply cannot accept a strong, independent woman in politics. But some attacks do come from within the GOP from people who are afraid of losing their own power within the party.

Floyd and Mary Beth Brown have penned an excellent column about this over at Town Hall. Here are a few of their observations:

Attacks on Gov. Sarah Palin by McCain campaign staff at first appear to be a case of making her a convenient scapegoat, but the attacks have a more devious motive. This post-election barrage is the first volley of the campaign to choose the Republican nominee in 2012. The Washington, D.C. based establishment that rules the GOP wants her career over now. She threatens them.

Yes, I agree. Sarah Palin is a big threat to those put party before country, whether Democrat or Republican. That is one of the reasons we like her so much.

Sarah Palin brought a vibrant, fresh face to the Republican Party. The GOP elitists saw how she easily connected with voters. Palin drew huge crowds of up to 30,000 people anxious to see and hear her. The crowds flocking to see Gov. Palin bond with her culturally. She has the potential to garner Obama- or Reagan-like devotion.

The Republican Party needs this grassroots energy and her reform agenda after a decade of broken promises and the disappointing Bush presidency.

Looking back at history, you see resemblances of Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan in Palin. Both Thatcher and Reagan were dismissed and insulted by their own party stalwarts. “Useful idiot” was a term once leveled at President Reagan.

Sarah Palin is not an Ivy League lawyer nor is she anything like the elitists of either party who have completely lost touch with the American people. She is one of us; one of the common people; someone who knows what it is like to live in Main Street America.

That is why she is being attacked.

Remember the Shakespearean play Henry V? Henry actually disguised himself and walked among his troops in order to get a better understanding of what they were thinking and what they believed. Sarah Palin has not only walked among us, she has lived among us and that makes her the most influential politician in the GOP and America in general right now. That also makes her the biggest threat to the political elite.

That is why the Dems and certain Republicans are so scared.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

Palin Saboteurs Want To Kill Her Career Now
Floyd and Mary Beth Brown
TownHall.com
November 14, 2008

Video: Sarah Palin Addresses The Republican Governor’s

Sarah Palin, despite the insults and personal attacks thrown at her by those who are afflicted with Palin Derangement Syndrome or the insults hurled by those who can’t accept a strong, independent woman in politics, still gives one hell of a speech.

She addressed the Republican Governor’s Association recently and gave her remarks on the current political landscape and where we should go from here.

Regardless of your opinion of her, she is going to be around on the American political scene for a very long time. Here is what she had to say:

According to Town Hall:

Sarah Palin called on fellow Republican governors to keep the new president and his strengthened Democratic majority in check on issues from taxes to health care as she signaled she’ll take a leadership role in a party searching for a new standard-bearer.

Palin noted that Congress is led by the likes of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Rep. Barney Frank, and said it was incumbent upon GOP governors to ensure that the federal government doesn’t take over the health care system. She said if Obama and the new Congress “err on the side of excess taxes, we have to show them the way.”

You can access the complete article on-line here:

Palin Urges GOP Governors To Keep Democrats Honest
Brendan Farrington
TownHall.com
November 13, 2008

Steve Schmidt Makes A Statement About The Palin Rumors

I’m kind of wondering why it took two days for someone from the McCain campaign to finally come out and give us some information, one way or the other. But, Steve Schmidt is suspected of being one of the major leakers who has been disparaging Sarah Palin, as I noted in a previous blog posting:

Fox News Goes Tabloid Trash With Sarah Palin Rumors
84rules
November 6, 2008

Greta Van Susterin has been contacted by Steve Schmidt. According to GretaWire at Fox News:

I just got a call from Steve Schmidt, of the Senator McCain campaign. He has never originated a call to me before.

He said the report (and it has gone viral on the internet and other MSM) that Governor Palin came to the door in a towel is a UNTRUE. He said: “NEVER HAPPENED.” He said he only saw her in business suits or in sweats on the plane relaxing between events.

So, how many of the other rumors can we believe, if any at all?

Greta will get the first post-election interview with Sarah Palin next Monday.

You can access the original post on-line here:

READ THIS!!
Greta Van Susterin
FoxNews.com
November 7, 2008

The Cowardly Character Assassination Of Sarah Palin

So, those idiots in the McCain camp who started those rumors about Sarah Palin have made their mark. All they have done is awakened a sleeping giant. Michelle Malkin explains why over at Town Hall:

Let’s assume for a moment that the McCain rumormongers are telling the truth about Palin (and I don’t believe they are). Who would it damn more: Palin, or McCain and his vetters, who greenlighted her for the vice presidential nomination? Don’t need a fancy Ivy League degree to figure that one out.

In introducing her to America, McCain praised her independence and backbone: She “stands up for what’s right, and she doesn’t let anyone tell her to sit down.” The inside snipers are now roasting her for that very attribute — redefined as “going rogue” — because she had the nerve to try to schedule media interviews on her own. The nerve of her!

Palin’s response to the campaign fragging? At a late Wednesday night airport press conference in Anchorage, immediately upon landing home after the election defeat, she smiled cheerfully. The Alaska governor shrugged off the “foolish things” said by the McCain saboteurs, and simply said, “It’s politics. … It’s rough and tumble and you’ve got to have a thick skin just like I’ve got.”

She certainly has thicker skin than the cowards who hid behind the cloak of anonimity and started sniping at her. And the attacks against Sarah Palin have come from the most usual places:

Hollywood savaged Palin. Journalists mocked her. Liberal blogs slimed her. Opponents cursed her, Photoshopped her, hacked her e-mail, hanged her in effigy, called her bigot, Bible-thumper and bimbo, and attacked her husband and children. But nothing Palin endured during the election season compares to the treatment she’s receiving from these backstabbing blabbermouths who worked on the same campaign she poured herself into over the last three months.

Sarah Palin worked her heart out. She energized tens of thousands to come out when they would have otherwise stayed home. She touched countless families. I didn’t agree with everything she said on the campaign trail. But she vigorously defended the Second Amendment and the sanctity of life more eloquently in practice than any of the educated conservative aristocracy. And she did it all with a tirelessness and an infectious optimism that defied the shameless, bottomless attempts by elites in both parties to bring her and her family down.

The attacks were relentless and incredibly sexist and chauvanistic. Libs will never accept that a strong, independent woman can achieve success without the agenda driven help of a leftist organization. Thus, they launched the largest, sexist smear campaign in history. And the idiot insiders of the McCain camp have jumped on the bandwagon.

But let’s look at what McCain himself wrote:

“The most important thing I have learned, from my parents, from teachers, from my faith, from many good people I have been blessed to know, and from the lives of people whose stories we have included in this book,” John McCain wrote in “Character Is Destiny,” “is to want what they had, integrity, and to feel the sting of my conscience when I have risked it for some selfish reason.”

John McCain not only failed to make that message stick with the electorate, he apparently couldn’t persuade his own staff to heed his advice and practice what he preached.

And unless the GOP comes out and condemns this leftist-style character assasination of a great American like Sarah Palin, they will not get one thin dime from me in any kind of contribution. Further, those engaged in such a dishonorable action should be purged from the GOP forever. I ask that all true Conservatives adopt the same stance and send a loud and clear message to the RNC.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

The Cowardly Character Assassination Of Sarah Palin
Michelle Malkin
TownHall.com
November 7, 2008

Fox News Goes Tabloid Trash With Sarah Palin Rumors

Normally, Fox News is a quality news outlet that has more integrity and balance than any other news outlet. Not so, today. Somehow, Fox let itself slide to the level of the National Enquirer when it ran with some wild rumors about Sarah Palin that originated from “unnamed” sources.

Kerri Houston Toloczko wrote a nice column for Regular Folks United in which she identifies the sources and has some choice words for them. From her column:

News has been circulating around GOP insiders for weeks that McCain campaign honchos Rick Davis and Steve Schmidt were planning to blame Sarah Palin for McCain’s loss. This was expected to be an effort to punt the blame for their own failures to the side of the ticket that was most popular with the base, attracted the largest rally crowds, and scared the living bejeepers out of the opposing party.

The slander was projected, and appeared immediately after the election.

What was not anticipated was the disgraceful level of venom-laden vitriolic drool that dribbled from their camp, and their use of a respected Fox News reporter as their personal tool for deflecting their own accountability.

Last night on the O’Reilly Factor, McCain campaign embed Carl Cameron laid out Davis and Schmidt’s case against Palin with glee that channeled junior high mean girls, and details only worthy of the National Enquirer on its darkest day.

If these were real charges and real concerns, Schmidt and Davis would not have hidden behind the cloak of anonimity and would instead have put their names out for all to see right from the very start. This is clearly a sour grapes response to the election loss. Further, I doubt that Schmidt and Davis would have started such idiotic rumors about any male candidate.

The slanders included idiotic notions that Governor Palin didn’t know Africa was a continent or that she didn’t know the three nations that made up NAFTA. Only the most gullible and naive (or the most die-hard Democrat) would believe such nonsense slanders. These slanders are right up there with Barack Obama claiming there are 57 states, or Joe Biden claiming that President Franklin Roosevelt got on TV after the market crash in 1929. Hell, even the bit about Biden telling a man confined to a wheelchair to “stand up and take a bow” didn’t reach this level.

Given that Sarah Palin was reared by two school teachers, owned a business and rose up to become the Governor of Alaska, it is pretty easy to see how idiotic Davis and Schmidt are for starting such rumors.

Toloczko goes on:

As a human person, I was shocked. As I woman, I was disgusted. As a conservative who understands how important this new fresh face has been to our political renewal; I was incensed.

As a Republican, I was ashamed.

Senior campaign officials should stand up like grownups and take responsibility for the outcome of the campaign instead of throwing the girl under the bus. Fox News’ Carl Cameron should go to rehab for his apparent case of Stockholm Syndrome after spending months on McCain campaign planes and buses.

And Bill O’Reilly should designate all of them as “pinheads” and apologize to Governor Palin for showing such personally damaging and politically counterproductive rumors and innuendos the light of day.

Ironically, as the head honchos of McCain’s failed campaign attempt to deflect their own inadequacies in such a disgusting and defamatory manner, they have ensured that they will never be hired again. What they have demonstrated without question is that they cannot be trusted.

I would have expected something like this from, say, Kathleen Parker or Christopher Buckley or even Peggy Noonan. But for Bill O’Reilly to consciously participate in this kind of slander was unthinkable up until now.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

Im-Palin Sarah: Fox Joins Weasels In Post Campaign Rumor Game
Kerri Houston Toloczko
Regular Folks United
November 6, 2008

An Open Memo To The Conservative Elite

Along the same lines of my last post which referenced Bob Parks, Matt Lewis over at Town Hall has a few things to say about the RINOs among us. He wrote a memo to them congratulating them on their contributions to the 2008 Presidential race. His primary recipients are Kathleen Parker, Peggy Noonan, David Brooks, David Frum and Christopher Buckley. (I’d add George Will to that list too.)

Here are a few of the highlights he hits on:

You gave the media an excuse to assert that “conservatives” hated Sarah Palin so much that they were jumping off the McCain campaign like rats off a sinking ship. Despite the fact that Palin was reinvigorating the conservative movement and drew huge crowds, you felt the irrational need to ignore the evidence and insist that Sarah was a walking blonde joke.

Great job!

Of course, you probably lost you any credibility you had with real conservatives…you know, the rank-and-file voters. But, hey, I’m sure it was more than worth it considering that you became overnight sensations on the Georgetown cocktail circuit (where people wouldn’t have given you the time of day had you actually stuck by your beliefs).

And Matt also notes:

You’d never met Gov. Palin, you had no personal connection to her, so why not throw her under the bus? A little intellectual dishonesty never hurt anyone, and being good pseudo-conservative intellectual, you understood the benefit of behaving as a self-interested individual. Ayn Rand would be so proud of you.

Unfortunately, you goofed up on just one little issue. You forgot about the long-term impacts of your decisions; you turned a blind eye to the out-and-out ideology of Barack Obama.

… High taxes, the fairness doctrine, universal healthcare, more regulation in all aspects of your life….that’s all going to be at least partially your fault. And frankly, I lied about Ayn Rand being proud of you — she’d probably smack you in the face for allowing such a dramatic erosion of your personal freedoms.

I can only think of the Disney movie The Incredible Mr. Limpet and the one scene where a chorus of women sing in the background: “Be careful what you wish for!” right before Don Knotts gets turned into a fish.

Well, the circular firing squad will be over soon enough. We conservatives now have a better idea of who our true allies are and who the members of the fifth column among us are.

We’ll work it from here.

You can access the original posting on-line here:

An Open Memo To The Conservative Elite
Matt Lewis
TownHall.com
November 5, 2008