With just two days to go on the "Vote for your choice for Sarah Palin's Vice-President" poll"
Link: http://recovering-liberal.blogspot.com/2011/02/astonishing-results-too-date-for-vote.html
Allan West is running away as the choice of Republican supporters as the 2012 choice for Vice-President serving with Sarah Palin.with over 45% of the vote in a potential field of 14.
West, when asked about his possible intentions in respect of the VP nomination said, according to a report in 'The Hill':
"I have to pray about it and I have to clear it with my wife and two daughters," said West, "I never thought that seven years ago when I retired here I'd be a United States congressman, and that I'd be standing in front of your news camera. So we don't know what the future holds, but I'm always willing to serve my country."
Clearly if the 'Point Of View' poll result is any indication he would find substantial support for his candidacy.
One factor however is the experience issue which may have prompted poll voters to give Rudy Giuliani a solid second place-well ahead of any other VP pick on the poll list.
Saturday, February 26, 2011
Friday, February 25, 2011
David Brooks/Andrew Sullivan Boost Mitch Daniel's.The Kiss Of Death In Action
"Run Mitch Run" propounds David Brooks, pet conservative of the ultra-East Coast liberal New York Times.
I won't bore anyone with the details-they are at the link if people can be bothered to read the paean.
This is the absolute kiss of death to any chances Daniel's might have had for the GOP nomination.
This was basically next to nil up to today because of his call for a "pause" on social issues and his flip flopping on the union controversy.
The final nail in the coffin is the sad news, for him, that Andrew Sullivan has issued a piece agreeing with Brooks and supporting Daniels.
Palin supporters thank both of these RINO's for their anointed choice-which is in reality the last rites.
I won't bore anyone with the details-they are at the link if people can be bothered to read the paean.
This is the absolute kiss of death to any chances Daniel's might have had for the GOP nomination.
This was basically next to nil up to today because of his call for a "pause" on social issues and his flip flopping on the union controversy.
The final nail in the coffin is the sad news, for him, that Andrew Sullivan has issued a piece agreeing with Brooks and supporting Daniels.
Palin supporters thank both of these RINO's for their anointed choice-which is in reality the last rites.
Thursday, February 24, 2011
Vanity Fair Goes Utterly Insane "Palin's Trip To India Will Cost Taxpayers More Than $200 Million A Day
The once great publication Vanity Fair has plumbed the absolute depths of Palin Derangement Syndrome by headlining, in their "culture" section no less the question "Will Sarah Palin's trip to India cost taxpayers $200 million per day?"
The author-whose name I won't write as to give her credit for being an actual human being is going too far, then goes on to equate Michele Bachman's legitimate querying of the cost of President Obama's visit to India based on a calculation that included secret service,air force one, media and ancillary costs.
Palin is going as a private citizen of course so there should be no cost whatsoever to the taxpayer-in fact,presuming she is being paid for her speech there,which is not confirmed, then the taxpayer will benefit as she pays the tax due on that income.
Notably a correspondent questions whether the author has calculated the cost of President' Obama's family trips to Spain, and latterly skiing in Vail.However since that doesn't fit in with Vanity Fair's consistent hatchet jobs on Palin the question will go unanswered.
One question that is not unanswered is "is the east Coast media in the tank for Obama and suffering from PDS?"
Obviously the author is trying to be satirical-and failing badly, all she has done is make a once great publication look childish.
My point is that PDS has so rattled their brains (sic) that they would actually come up with such idiocy to try and denigrate Palin. They are utterly pathetic.
The author-whose name I won't write as to give her credit for being an actual human being is going too far, then goes on to equate Michele Bachman's legitimate querying of the cost of President Obama's visit to India based on a calculation that included secret service,air force one, media and ancillary costs.
Palin is going as a private citizen of course so there should be no cost whatsoever to the taxpayer-in fact,presuming she is being paid for her speech there,which is not confirmed, then the taxpayer will benefit as she pays the tax due on that income.
Notably a correspondent questions whether the author has calculated the cost of President' Obama's family trips to Spain, and latterly skiing in Vail.However since that doesn't fit in with Vanity Fair's consistent hatchet jobs on Palin the question will go unanswered.
One question that is not unanswered is "is the east Coast media in the tank for Obama and suffering from PDS?"
Obviously the author is trying to be satirical-and failing badly, all she has done is make a once great publication look childish.
My point is that PDS has so rattled their brains (sic) that they would actually come up with such idiocy to try and denigrate Palin. They are utterly pathetic.
Gallup Poll Of 1.326 Republican Supporters On Moral Values;Palin/Huck 47% Romney/Newt 13%
A new Gallup poll covering issues that are indicated as important to 1,326 Republican and Republican leaning voters is instructive as an indication of the thinking of the grass roots as the time for declaration of intent by possible candidates approaches.
If the Palin/Huckabee voters are included as one block,which common sense surely dictates and the Romney/Gingrich voters are similarly congregated a clearer picture emerges.
National Security and Foreign Policy: Palin/Huckabee 42% Romney/Gingrich 26%
Social Issues& Moral Values: " " 47% " " 13%
Business& Economy: " " 30% " " 28%
Gov't Spending& Power " " 29% " " 30%
As can be seen in the categories of business/economy/government there is not any real clearly perceived difference between the two groupings. But in the categories of moral leadership and world leadership/defending American exceptionalism the Palin/Huckabee pairing is substantially out in front.
This leads to a conclusion that faced with a similarity on economics and government and looking for a point of differentiation to make their choice the Republican supporters have clearly defined what they are looking for in their 2012 nominee.This has been born out time and time again in poll after poll where the Palin group has more than double the support of Romney.
If Huckabee chooses not to run and Palin does then, based on previous direct polling, and the above analysis Palin is in a very strong position to obtain the nomination.
If the Palin/Huckabee voters are included as one block,which common sense surely dictates and the Romney/Gingrich voters are similarly congregated a clearer picture emerges.
National Security and Foreign Policy: Palin/Huckabee 42% Romney/Gingrich 26%
Social Issues& Moral Values: " " 47% " " 13%
Business& Economy: " " 30% " " 28%
Gov't Spending& Power " " 29% " " 30%
As can be seen in the categories of business/economy/government there is not any real clearly perceived difference between the two groupings. But in the categories of moral leadership and world leadership/defending American exceptionalism the Palin/Huckabee pairing is substantially out in front.
This leads to a conclusion that faced with a similarity on economics and government and looking for a point of differentiation to make their choice the Republican supporters have clearly defined what they are looking for in their 2012 nominee.This has been born out time and time again in poll after poll where the Palin group has more than double the support of Romney.
If Huckabee chooses not to run and Palin does then, based on previous direct polling, and the above analysis Palin is in a very strong position to obtain the nomination.
Academy Awards A Front For Liberal Agenda To Destroy Traditional American Family
The kids are not all right.
Once again the denizens of Hollywood are using their unique propaganda tool, the Academy Awards, in the aid of their warped social philosophy.
It is a fair assumption, one only has to peruse the cover of a gossip magazine,that a higher proportion of neurotics,drug users, out and out societal misfits, and the just plain mad who compose a proportion of the entertainment industry in numbers well above the national average will be gathered together on awards night.
On top of their collective neuroses, and surely actors by their very profession are subject to various manifestations of eccentricity, they have, through the massive reach of their medium, enormous power, wealth and great influence on the average person.
Thus what just a few years ago would have been considered a gross perversion, if not illegal and generally not even possible, same sex couples adopting, or creating via the loving mechanics of a turkey baster, babies.
High profile entertainment industry types, can, through their wealth and media power, undertake actions which if a normal person attempted it they would be castigated or even arrested for breaking societies taboos. Over the years we have seen these structures of society attacked and then broken and then made commonplace by actors.
At one time, not too long ago for a couple, heterosexual that is,gays would have been unthinkable, to live together openly in a sexual relationship would have been impossible,especially if children were involved.
Then major "stars" started doing so, the radical communist Vanessa Redgrave springs to mind as an example.
Shock horror newspaper headlines followed, then the glossies started to make it "interesting' and shortly after it became "normal" irrespective of what example it set for society and the effect it would have on children of such relationships. Of course such unstable relationships composed of unstable people break up one after another with untold harm on the innocents who are caught up in such horrors.
That aspect of normal society undermined the next attack,Gay and lesbian same sex relationships adopting children hove into view. Again, the unthinkable becomes,via the wealth,"prestige", and power of entertainment types perfectly acceptable to society. Elton John and partner adopts, how is it possible for men of their age in the first place to adopt an infant? Cynthia Nixon's "fiancee' gives birth amongst recent examples.
There are no long term studies on how children who grow up in these unnatural parenting relationships adjust in society.What sort of difficulties to they encounter at school amongst their peers? Do the have trouble establishing an heterosexual relationship?
What effect will this have on population trends amongst Western nations and if they decline what will be the economic effects and the social effects as more third world labor is needed to take up the slack?
Hollywood doesn't care-all the denizens care about is satisfying their ego's, carnal nature and their hedonism "Cocaine is God's way of telling you you have too much money" Robin Williams is quoted as saying, Lohan, Sheen-well the list of examples is endless. Now having children has become their latest status symbol. It started with the adopting out of Africa craze and now has spread to same sex couples.
There are no barriers to satisfying their needs for those in the entertainment industry. Same sex parenting a no no? The propaganda machine starts. The first foray was The Birdcage with lovable characters, then "The kids are all right" whose premise is " look we lesbian parent couples are not weird, we have all the "normal" family problems and squabbles just like everyone else so our parenting is "normal"-just like everyone else.
Society has accepted that same sex couples can and should they wish live in a relationship protected by law-it is called a civil union. Where the public has had the opportunity to vote on the matter, even in ultra-liberal California, they have rejected same sex "marriage."
Perhaps same sex parenting should also be put to the popular will, which is after all society itself, because if same sex marriage is not acceptable then perhaps same sex parenting which has the potential to inflict much psychic damage, is too important to leave to the propaganda mill that will be on show at the Academy Awards.
Once again the denizens of Hollywood are using their unique propaganda tool, the Academy Awards, in the aid of their warped social philosophy.
It is a fair assumption, one only has to peruse the cover of a gossip magazine,that a higher proportion of neurotics,drug users, out and out societal misfits, and the just plain mad who compose a proportion of the entertainment industry in numbers well above the national average will be gathered together on awards night.
On top of their collective neuroses, and surely actors by their very profession are subject to various manifestations of eccentricity, they have, through the massive reach of their medium, enormous power, wealth and great influence on the average person.
Thus what just a few years ago would have been considered a gross perversion, if not illegal and generally not even possible, same sex couples adopting, or creating via the loving mechanics of a turkey baster, babies.
High profile entertainment industry types, can, through their wealth and media power, undertake actions which if a normal person attempted it they would be castigated or even arrested for breaking societies taboos. Over the years we have seen these structures of society attacked and then broken and then made commonplace by actors.
At one time, not too long ago for a couple, heterosexual that is,gays would have been unthinkable, to live together openly in a sexual relationship would have been impossible,especially if children were involved.
Then major "stars" started doing so, the radical communist Vanessa Redgrave springs to mind as an example.
Shock horror newspaper headlines followed, then the glossies started to make it "interesting' and shortly after it became "normal" irrespective of what example it set for society and the effect it would have on children of such relationships. Of course such unstable relationships composed of unstable people break up one after another with untold harm on the innocents who are caught up in such horrors.
That aspect of normal society undermined the next attack,Gay and lesbian same sex relationships adopting children hove into view. Again, the unthinkable becomes,via the wealth,"prestige", and power of entertainment types perfectly acceptable to society. Elton John and partner adopts, how is it possible for men of their age in the first place to adopt an infant? Cynthia Nixon's "fiancee' gives birth amongst recent examples.
There are no long term studies on how children who grow up in these unnatural parenting relationships adjust in society.What sort of difficulties to they encounter at school amongst their peers? Do the have trouble establishing an heterosexual relationship?
What effect will this have on population trends amongst Western nations and if they decline what will be the economic effects and the social effects as more third world labor is needed to take up the slack?
Hollywood doesn't care-all the denizens care about is satisfying their ego's, carnal nature and their hedonism "Cocaine is God's way of telling you you have too much money" Robin Williams is quoted as saying, Lohan, Sheen-well the list of examples is endless. Now having children has become their latest status symbol. It started with the adopting out of Africa craze and now has spread to same sex couples.
There are no barriers to satisfying their needs for those in the entertainment industry. Same sex parenting a no no? The propaganda machine starts. The first foray was The Birdcage with lovable characters, then "The kids are all right" whose premise is " look we lesbian parent couples are not weird, we have all the "normal" family problems and squabbles just like everyone else so our parenting is "normal"-just like everyone else.
Society has accepted that same sex couples can and should they wish live in a relationship protected by law-it is called a civil union. Where the public has had the opportunity to vote on the matter, even in ultra-liberal California, they have rejected same sex "marriage."
Perhaps same sex parenting should also be put to the popular will, which is after all society itself, because if same sex marriage is not acceptable then perhaps same sex parenting which has the potential to inflict much psychic damage, is too important to leave to the propaganda mill that will be on show at the Academy Awards.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)