About Me

Name: Dan Abbett
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Archives

Blog Roll

 

Why They Hate Sarah Palin

Who is “they” you ask? They would be members of the liberal news media, leading members of the Democratic Party and yes many in the GOP. You see, “they,” for varying reasons, soundly believe that Sarah Palin is the reason that Republicans lost so decisively in 2008. And “they” would be right, just not for the reasons most of them think. It was precisely the fact that the GOP had lost sight of the values and ideals so epitomized by Sarah Palin that fractured the Party and why she poses such a threat to the left.

It is no secret that Republicans, and conservatives in particular, were very unhappy with the fiscal policies and domestic agenda of the Bush administration. It is also no secret that many Republicans, and especially conservatives, were less than enamored with John McCain as their nominee in 2008. What most of Sarah Palin’s critics fail to understand is that the Republicans lost in 2008, not because of liberal promises or the false criticisms heaped on Gov. Palin but because their candidate espoused the mindset of the GOP elite that believes Republicans should be more like the Democrats. 

What can be said of the contest between John McCain and Barack Obama is that many Republicans did not vote for John McCain; they voted for Sarah Palin. Sarah Palin is a primary reason for a new enthusiasm and energy in the Republican Party that had all but died in the latter years of the Bush administration.    It is for these reasons that Republican elites are excoriating her, and her ability to energize Republicans as a whole that is causing the Democrats to attempt to destroy her politically.

The Democrats have been successful in painting the Republican Party as the party of hate. Nowhere, however, has hate been on such prominent display as the hatred Democrats had for George Bush and that which is now equally prominent for Sarah Palin. For a woman who is not presently in elected office or declared she intends to run for higher office, the acerbic contempt for this woman by the “self-proclaimed” elite is staggering.

As she begins her book tour for her new book, “Going Rogue,” the long knives are out to deny her even a modicum of celebrity status. The media is especially in full search and destroy mode, as they echo Democrat talking points and mumble their mantra of maliciousness. 

For example, supposed “conservative” columnist David Brooks of the New York Times has called Sarah Palin a joke. Actually, Mr. Brooks, the joke is on you and we are laughing at you, not with you. And speaking of jokes, Chris Matthews of MSNBC couldn’t help but notice the “monochromatic” face of the throngs waiting to get a signed copy of Sarah’s book. That ain’t monochromatic Mr. Matthews, that’s our America.   

Evan Thomas of Newsweek insists she is hurting the GOP. Yes, Mr. Thomas, Sarah Palin does hurt the GOP from an elitist’s perspective and that is a definite problem for the myopic view of the way they want the Party to be.  Then, there is the article in Newsweek featuring Sarah Palin in flattering jogging attire with the innocuous headline, “How do you solve a problem like Sarah?” Surely, no conclusions as to the intent of the article can be drawn from that lede.

That which truly drives this visceral disgust for all things Sarah is the fact that not only do they despise her for her colloquial style, they also recognize that she both connects with and energizes that great unwashed in the middle. Those who have ascribed unto themselves the status of “elite,” would just as soon this crass segment of our population be disqualified from voting for much more than dogcatcher.        

So, while Sarah Palin’s critics are busy with their campaign to demean her, shredding what remains of the very fabric of their objectivity and simultaneously exposing the shallowness of their arguments, she continues to accomplish the very thing that causes the left to display their primal screams. Sarah Palin energizes and motivates the thinking, working, productive segment of this nation.

It is this energized, motivated, majority of Americans that really scares the hell out of the left, not Sarah Palin. It is also, why, “they” are so rabid in their hatred for this woman. 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Clowns To The Left Of Me

The word that is used to describe the criminal trials that will result from Attorney General Eric Holder’s decision to move the trials for 9/11 mastermind, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, and his four associates to a civilian venue is “Circus.” A few other words come to mind for this act of political idiocy but they are best left in the locker-room or the lyrics of “Gangsta Rap.”

Other thoughts come to mind as well, such as, “what was he thinking?” To speculate on his motives at this point, however, would be nothing more than conjecture and now is not the time for conspiracy theories. What is not speculation is the fact the Holder’s actions in this regard have raised the hackles of mainstream America at a time when they are already suspicious and wary of the direction President Obama and his administration are taking this nation.

The phrase used to describe the failure of both our law enforcement and intelligence agencies to act on the warning signs leading up to the events on 9/11 was, “they failed to connect the dots.” It implies that there was a trail of clues that should have led to action by these agencies to preempt the horror of that day. This phrase applies well to the current administration in terms of avoiding a pending political disaster. 

From the public angst for his domestic agenda, to a foreign policy teetering on collapse, the clues are abundant and the signs unmistakable, they all read, “don’t go there.” In this regard, Barack Obama and those who advise him appear to be seriously “dot challenged.” To now add the idiocy of what will surely be show trials for those who planned and executed the most horrific attack on American soil is beyond challenged, it is serves in essence to give the middle finger to our military and the victims of that day.

To also add to this, “not-so-precision” juggling act now occurring in the center ring, Obama has asked Congress, an independent arm of government, to put their investigations into the murders at Fort Hood on hold until after the completion of investigations now under way by the military and law enforcement agencies.  Those would be the agencies that are directly under Obama’s control. The why of this request is enough to peak one’s curiosity.

If this were not curious enough, all this comes on the heels of Obama “rejecting every proposal he requested from his security team for a strategy for Afghanistan after he rejected the plan he personally commissioned as a result of rejecting the strategy in place when he assumed office.” One can almost hear the Kaliope playing in the background.

The people look to the Congress and the president for leadership in dealing with the current deep recession, rising unemployment rate and spiraling deficit. In return, and over their loud objections, they are being force-fed budget busting healthcare and cap and trade legislation, the inevitability of substantial personal tax increases and penalties on business guaranteed to stifle job growth. 

And now, with this absolutely inane decision by the Attorney General to make an international mockery of our legal system, our military and our national security, you not only have to wonder what are they thinking, you have to wonder if they have a political death wish as well. 

Either Barack Obama and the members of his administration, to include the Democratic leadership in both the House and Senate, are in command of a logic and a strategy of incredible political mastery or they hold the people in such contempt that they believe no one will notice their buffoonery. How else to explain this overt defiance of the passionate objections of the people?

The clowns on the left believe those on the right are jokers, hicks and rubes; too politically inept to see this circus act that is the Obama administration. What they fail to understand is that the people are tired of their clowning around and come Election Day, the joke will almost certainly be on them.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Victim of the Vanquished

The opinions of the motives that led to Army Major Nidal Malik Hasan’s carnage at Fort Hood in Texas is a case study of why we are still under constant assault in Afghanistan and why stability in Iraq is still in serious jeopardy. We face an enemy that will slaughter as many innocents as possible as a fundamental strategy of their war on Western Civilization and the response to their ruthlessness is to “win their hearts and minds.” It makes as much sense as petting a Rattlesnake to prevent it from biting you. 
 
What signal does it send to that enemy, when the initial reaction to a devout Muslim with sympathies for homicide bombers and shouting “Allahu Akbar” as he unleashed a rain of bullets on his fellow soldiers, is to declare him a “victim.” As thirteen valiant members of our armed forces lay dead or dying, the immediate politically correct reaction was to ensure no affront to the Muslim religion. We invite attack at the hands of Islamist extremists because as they cut out our hearts as we forgive them for their sins. 
 
As it was before 9/11, the system created to protect the people from such horrific acts of carnage and violence utterly failed. The root cause of this failure is termed political correctness but it is deeper than that; it is the manifestation of the hideous attempt by an elite class to control the thoughts and actions of the very people they are supposed to represent. 
 
By turning the people into targets of ridicule and humiliation should they appear to speak insensitively against a protected group or ideology, the people remained silent, they didn’t want to get involved. By virtue of their inaction, over forty people became the target of an ideology sans remorse for its brutality and thirteen of them paid the price for that silence with their lives. 
 
The system failed at every level, to include this time elements of our military, the one organization whose discipline and training should have prevented it. In spite of the warnings however, in spite of the overt confessions by Major Hasan that he sympathized with radical Islamists, to include correspondence with a radical Muslim Imam with ties to 9/11 terrorists, political correctness prevailed.
 
Rather than ask the most obvious question first, was this an act of terrorism by a lone radical Islamist, the immediate reaction was to point the finger of blame on the insensitivity of the members of our armed forces. Instead of an assassin, Major Nidal Malik Hasan became a victim. We face a serious problem as a nation in terms of our future and our national security, when the first reaction to an act of terror is to make its victims secondary to the ethnicity of their murderer.
 
There would appear to be no shortage of institutions at which to point the finger of blame for not acting more aggressively to have stopped this quite preventable slaughter. Far be it however, for Federal Law officials and Intelligence agencies to admit culpability in failing to act on clear signs that Major Hasan posed a potential problem.
 
The fickle finger of blame instead conjured excuses of post-traumatic stress disorder, stress over his pending deployment to Afghanistan and having been teased about his Muslim faith by fellow soldiers. Everywhere that is except the probability this was a premeditated act of Jihad against the enemies of Islam by a radical Islamist sympathizer.  
 
Now that the dysfunction of all parties is clear, enter the Congress to hold hearings to assess where the finger of blame should ultimately rest. Before we haul senior members of our armed forces before self-righteous, finger-pointing, tongue-wagging, pompous members of Congress, the finger needs first to point at the real cause of the problem. That would be the very members of Congress, and especially the Department of Justice, who have politicized or criminalized our war on terrorism, and are solely responsible for the imposition of the politically correct rules of behavior now constraining the effectiveness of our armed forces, law enforcement and intelligence agencies.

As for Army Major Hasan, he continues to receive victim status by the politically correct who refuse to address reality. It is disgusting irony that Hasan is now considered the victim of those he vanquished.   
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The House has Voted, Now We Vote

Yes, the Democrats were cheering on the House floor after they forced a vote on a bill that a majority of the people, even by liberal polls ,said they didn't want.  Imagine, cheering the fact that they had just told their constituents to go take a flying leap.

Phone calls didn't work, faxes and emails were ignored and face-to-face was ineffective as well. The only thing left is to do exactly what the career politicians are warning us not to do, force every incumbent in office to run against a candidate of "OUR" choice and back that candidate with our support and our money.

And while we are at it, a daily barrage of those emails faxes and telephone calls to both district and congressional offices needs to happen until November. By their actions, they have made us angry; they won't like us when we are angry.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

About that Swing Vote

The segment of the electorate that is often referred to as the “swing vote,” is typically comprised of those who classify themselves as independents, moderates and undecided. In the off-year elections in Virginia and New Jersey however, the “independents eschewed moderation and decided against the current direction and policies of both the Congress and especially the White House.”
 
The analysis of the outcome of those gubernatorial races and the significant point swing from the results in 2008 where Obama won handily, as did several Democrats in House and Senate races, has been thorough. The speculation as to the shift in the independent vote away from the Dems and to the Republicans has been weighed from nearly every conceivable angle. There is one factor that has not appeared to make the cut however, impugning the people.
 
Clearly, the sentiment and attitude of this nation was behind Barack Obama and the pledges he made during the 2008 presidential campaign. As Obama has sidestepped, re-evaluated, back-pedaled or put those pledges on the back burner however, many of those who originally supported Obama are beginning to question his integrity. For this blasphemy, they have been labeled racists, angry mobs, un-American and evil mongers; hardly labels that would endear the people to anyone or any issue.
 
Further, the current leadership in both the White House and in Congress seems to believe that the people are devoid of intelligence. How else could they respond to the criticism of their position on the issues with such drivel and doubletalk? One can argue for example, that the results of the recent election were local and not, as some suggest, a referendum on the Congress or the president but it is audacity in the extreme to declare those results a “win” for the Dems. Yet, this is precisely the “spin” Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi put on that outcome.
 
To add to the insults of the intelligence of the electorate, the complete denial of any negative reflection of the election results with respect to current government policies is to take “playing Ostrich” to a whole new level. On one hand, you have White House Press Secretary, Robert Gibbs, insisting that the huge swing in the independent vote for the Republicans was “not” a referendum on President Obama. On the other hand, you have Senior Advisor to the president, David Axelrod, insisting that the election “was” a referendum on conservative values as a result of their loss of the NY-23 congressional seat. 
 
It is this constant refusal to face political reality that has alienated so many of the swing voters. Moreover, it isn't just the doubletalk that voters are upset about; it is more about being ignored. The American people did not vote for massive deficit spending and intrusive government in 2008; they have been ignored. They said no to cap and trade as well, they were ignored. They are emphatically saying no to a government takeover of healthcare and on this, they are ignored with malice a forethought.
 
In spite of the overwhelming turnout for the "House Call" rally to bring attention to Congress of the people's rejection of the healthcare bill that was before the House of Representatives, Speaker Pelosi pushed for an immediate vote. That isn't leadership that is tantamount to publically slapping the people in the face. The current leadership in both the White House and in Congress apparently couldn't care less as to the voice of the people or the adverse consequences their policies will have on them.
 
The Democrats are drowning in denial but unlike that river in Egypt, this is a river of purely stubborn, hubristic ignorance of what clearly stands before them. It is precisely why the elections in Virginia and New Jersey were, in many ways, a referendum on both the Congress and the White House, and yet, the White House insists that there is no reason to change direction on their policies or agenda.
 
In short, the current administration has publically demeaned its critics, oblivious to the potential for alienating them. They have pushed policies over the significant public objection to those policies and they increasingly ignore the growing animosity of a people they believe irrelevant to their objectives. And they can’t understand why they are losing the swing vote.  
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

High Risk Factor

There is much at risk as we evaluate the issues facing this nation and the stakes are extremely high. From the critical questions of how best to proceed in the Middle East to developing realistic economic strategies that will revitalize American businesses, we cannot afford to address these issues in terms of their political price tag. 

The American people have been sending a signal to Washington to govern, not rule and if both the Republicans and the Democrats continue to ignore them, at some point, the people are likely to take matters into their own hands. It is in this regard that many Americans are beginning to look at our government in terms of investment. It is our money that is being invested in government programs and those programs are more and more becoming very high risk. The question for Republicans, is, can they “capitalize” on this attitude?

There appear to be two key factors that will have significant influence on the Congressional races in 2010. First is the growing disappointment among moderate and independent voters with the policies of the Obama administration and the second is the segment of society that was once referred to as the “silent majority.” Both factors could be quite positive for the Republicans in 2010 but it is unclear if the leadership in the Party is paying any attention.

If Republican elites weren't paying attention before however, surely they can't ignore the significance of what has happened in the run up to the special election in New York’s 23rd Congressional district. To ignore these rumblings from the majority of the American people is to do so at their political peril. 

Of all the events that have occurred since the elections in 2008, of great significance is the phenomenon referred to as “Tea Parties.” Political events have always been organized and sponsored by political party activists, candidates and special interest groups. Tea Parties by contrast, are the clearest example of actual grassroots politics to occur in tens of decades.

The key point that Republicans must take away from this newfound grassroots activism is to recognize the passion that is stirring in the electorate and tap into it, not view it as simply an emotional outburst from the great unwashed. To misread or dismiss this passion is to underscore exactly why the people are so agitated. Specifically, the government no longer represents their interests and is completely out of touch with real America.

Curiously, the current Republican leadership has been trying to "shush" these vocal members in their Party. They have expressed their concern with the vociferous outcry from the heathen masses that attended Tea Parties and crowded Town Hall meetings this past summer. They demand a more subservient posture, lest the sensitivities of the moderates be offended. 

If the Republican leadership continues to refuse to get on board with this new attitude in America, an attitude that is more than just an organized protest by some special interest group, they will lose far more than a few squishy moderate votes.

The left is in full campaign mode to diminish the momentum that has been generated by grassroots America. They are attempting to demean, humiliate and characterize those now fully engaged in the political process as “knuckle-dragging” Neanderthals. The Republican Party leadership would do well to ignore these taunts; the message their constituents are sending them is “Can you hear us now?”

The cliché is trite but appropriate; the sleeping giant that is mainstream America is now quite awake and is in no mood to be led, coerced, intimidated or threatened. In short, they fully expect those whom they elected to represent them, to legislate, not dictate. Should those in elected office fail to understand that point, they will learn the lesson of high-risk politics the hard way.  

Mainstream America has reached the point where business as usual in Washington has exceeded the law of diminishing returns. They intend to cut their losses among those now in elected office who fail to deliver on the people’s business. To do otherwise is a risk they aren’t willing to take. 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »