Five Reasons a Sarah Palin Run Helps the GOP

Every pundit on the Left desperately wants us to believe that a Sarah Palin presidential run will be devastating to Republicans and hand the 2012 election to President Obama. Don't listen to them. If they didn't fear her, they wouldn't spend so much time and money smearing her. The purpose of their constant badmouthing of the former Alaska Governor is to cast doubts. Period. And among the Republican party elites and strategists, it seems to be working. But keep in mind these folks don't know how to plan for a campaign that doesn't pay lip service to at least some statist Democratic ideas and policies. Trying to win the votes of Democrats, of course, is exactly how to lose an election if you're a conservative.

A Sarah Palin presidential run, contrary to the conventional wisdom of political pundits, is exactly what the Republican Party needs. Here are five reasons why:


1) She's the only candidate with Rock Star Status: As much as I like Tim Pawlenty, he doesn't exactly draw a crowd. Same goes for Newt and Mit. Campaigns, more than any other form of marketing, operate on the basis of a "bandwagon" psychology. Even if Palin doesn't emerge as the nominee, her entrance into the race boosts enthusiasm and expands media coverage to get more people paying attention to conservative ideas.

2) She's relentless and fearless defending conservatism: While a good portion of the GOP field will want to carefully watch their criticism of President Obama's failures and offer measured responses to left wing talking points, Palin won't back down and is the most likely candidate to take her critics on and call their demagoguery out. She has a way of looking strong when attacked and making naysayers look petty. This makes it a lot harder for the liberal media to paint Republicans as being against women, children, minorities, seniors, and puppy dogs. In fact, we might get to watch the Left self-destruct trying to paint her as a monster.

3) Fundraising draw: Her high profile and the media coverage that comes with it should provide GOP candidates down-ticket with more opportunities to raise cash. Her appearance among the tea party crowd is a huge fundraising boost for congressional candidates.

4) Makes other GOP candidates raise their performance: The Left will find this statement laughable, and yet who can they offer (besides Obama and Hillary) to compete with Sarah? Does Debbie Wasserman Schultz realize the beat-down Palin would give her in a head-to-head national election? Palin's entry into the presidential race makes her a top three contender and forces the other top GOP candidates (in my opinion Pawlenty and Romney) to step up their game. This means by the time the general election rolls around, Republicans should be well polished and better organized to take on the Obama/OFA machine.

5) The Win/Win Theory: If Sarah Palin emerges as the nominee, she has built a groundswell of support, survived tough questions, performed well at debates, shed the lightweight celebrity moniker and positioned herself as a serious contender. If she loses the nomination, it's because she was more celebrity than expert and hey, don't those Republican voters look smart and mainstream for not choosing her?

The Boy King's Speech

President Obama's speech from Cairo Thursday has been getting hammered by conservative pundits and Republican presidential candidates alike. Newt Gingrich called it one of the most dangerous speeches given by a sitting American president. Mitt Romey said the president threw Israel under the bus. Even timid Jon Huntsman, who served under Obama and might be the biggest RINO to ever run for president since, well, John McCain, had choice words for the president's failure to stand by Israel.

Obama's Cairo speech was so one-sided in its criticism of Israel for failing to deliver peace in the Middle East, Jimmy Carter immediately wished he had given it.

I have not heard the speech in full, and frankly I'm not going to waste my time. What I have heard sounds like the same old cliches and strawmen that always show up on The One's Teleprompter. However, it does seem a tad transparent (if not politically astute) for those Republican candidates with the weakest conservative credentials, many of whom are struggling in the polls and have failed to make headway against the president's domestic agenda, to suddenly rabidly attack him for not cuddling up close enough to Israel. In other words, a few folks might be trying too hard.

I know I may be the only conservative blogger to make this observation, and I don't mean to downplay this administration's hostility to Israel - it has been close to disastrous. But was this really any worse than Obama's first Cairo speech? Or his Fourth of July invite to Iranian ambassadors for hot dogs while demonstrators in Tehran were being beaten and tortured? Or his support of an impeached Honduran president trying to become dictator for life? No. Today's speech, even with the articulation of a return to Israel's 1967 borders, hardly veered from the status quo. The president rehashed and recited political grievances without ever taking a serious stance. No sharp turn was made in U.S. foreign policy.

What continues to be dangerous is this president's belief that his placid prose is some type of panacea, that his soaring rhetoric can actually solve the problem. Arabs killing each other, protests turning violent, churches burnt, autocratic regimes suppressing dissent, bloodshed along the border with Israel, hey, no problem. Obama's got a speech for that.

President Bush was criticized by the Left for allowing his Christian faith to guide him in his decisions, as if following Jesus' teachings could somehow be a bad thing. But President Obama's overblown confidence in his own messianic abilities seems to be far worse and the consequences of such delusions of grandeur are undoubtedly more destructive.

All of this leaves the casual observer asking: What's the point? The president's speech won't change Cairo (which may already be changing for the worse). It won't change Syria. It certainly won't change Hamas or Hezbollah. And the president already won his Nobel Appeasement Prize, so it's not like he needs to campaign for another one. Unless you think of yourself as a god with the ability to make oceans recede and a planet heal, seriously, what's the point of delivering a speech for every would-be crisis?

Talk is cheap, but Obama seems to think he has the golden tongue.

That $10,000 Suit Looks Good on Obama, Not so Good to America's Underemployed

Who knew an empty suit could cost so much? In the Guardian's reporting of the Dominique Strass-Kahn sexual assault case againt a New York maid, mention was made of the IMF chief's penchant for luxury items, including specially tailored suits that can cost anywhere between $7000 and $30,000. But buried in the copy is an even more interesting tidbit that applies to our fashion chief. It seems President Obama has also purchased some of these suits, at least according to France Soir:

Strauss-Kahn is suing a French newspaper that claimed staples of his lifestyle included luxury homes and sought-after works of art. France Soir also said he had several handmade suits made by Barack Obama's tailor – a claim (Strauss-Kahn) denied. The tailor, a 75-year-old Frenchman from Marseille, sells suits for between £4,300 and £21,000.

But the Guardian isn't the only one to notice Barack's new wardrobe. A Politico article back in March observed:

From the moment he stepped into the public eye as the junior senator from Illinois, nothing much had changed in Barack Obama's sartorial world until this year, when he suddenly gussied up his closet with a rack of new suits. For the most part, the president has shed his traditional center-cut suit coats in favor of jackets sporting two side vents, a sleeker look that originated on London's Savile Row to cater to the riding set.

Of course, being dressed to kill is not a crime and we should want our president to look nice. But any wardrobe that runs into the hundreds of thousands of dollars while most Americans are struggling to survive a recession mired by inflation and record gas prices is tone deaf to say the least. Throw in the 70 plus rounds of golf, the family vacations on taxpayer dime, all the lavish parties thrown at the White House, etc., and it paints a picture closer to His Royal Highness than an American President. Let them wear cake, indeed.

There's a lot more to dissect about Strass-Kahn, who represents a whole new breed of socialists, rich and pampered playboys who can afford $3000 a night hotel rooms while guarding the people's money and being exempted from paying taxes. France's leading socialist is so comfortable putting his hands on what doesn't belong to him, in fact, that a lowly chambermaid appeared to be his for the taking. Except she wasn't.

House of Common

It makes a good headline so I might as well write about it.

I have no major qualms about the White House's invitation to rapper Common as part of the poetry festivities this week. If anything, I might be offended by what's considered good poetry by today's standards, but the pathetic state of art is a long topic for another day.

I also don't have any qualms with those who find the WH decision offensive given some of Common's lyrics. For the lazy thinkers like Jon Stewart who argue Common's defense of cop killer/fugitive Assata Shakur is the equivalent of a Johnny Cash song, though, I would like to point out that Cash's lyrics dealt with fictional characters.

To address Stewart's point, there wasn't really a Boy Named Sue. Eric Clapton's "I Shot the Sheriff" (technically Marley's) was also a fictional song. Common's lyrics glorifying the coward responsible for slaying Trooper Werner Foerster and wishing President Bush dead are about very real people.

Then there's this gem from his track Sex 4 Suga:

I like your way, it's going down
Hips are moving all around
Round and round, upside down
A once was lost but now I'm found

Sweetheart that you get me another round
Sweat in like you loosing pounds
Touch the ground, make a sounds
Sugar, ooh, sugar, you wear the crown


Doesn't exactly scream Wordsworth, does it? If this is what our First Lady considers outstanding achievement in poetry, then the English language is truly on its way to becoming as dead as Latin.

Let's be honest. Older Americans generally don't like rap music. Not even the lamest Vanilla Ice tune. It would be foolish to suggest a generational gap doesn't play some role in this controversy. However, I find it insincere that the Jon Stewarts of the world would mock those who think the White House should use better judgment in picking their guests. And I find it ridiculous Jon Stewart would in essence mock law enforcement officers and the family of the slain trooper who have expressed concern over the invite.

We all know if any performer was ever stupid enough to include a song lyric about "burning Obama", the Left would throw a fit, demand the label remove the artist, and attack any conservative who appeared within a country mile of them, let alone the White House. Which is how I knew Mike Huckabee wasn't running for president yesterday the minute he hauled Ted Nugent on stage.

The inclusion of Common at the White House for an "Evening of Poetry" says more about how pathetically common our president is than how uncommon the rapper's lyrics rate. The poem Common performed for Mr. Obama ends with the line "For One King's Dream He Was Able to Barack Us" repeated over and over, and could be easily summed up as "Sweet Sweet Barack's Badasss Song." It's brown-nosing and it's lame. Sex 4 Suga would have been a more appropriate choice given the sycophancy offered by so many celebrities to this administration.

Art is supposed to reveal truth to power, not flattery at the expense of truth. You would have found very little of that from any of the poets at the White House Thursday night. And Common might have been the most talented there. One poet read what I can only describe as a traffic report. Another observed her shoes in nauseating detail. Not only are our kids being indoctrinated at school, they're being taught by illiterate English professors.

I'd be far more satisfied if the administration did get radical and invite someone more willing to shake things up, not kiss up, because ultimately, shouldn't poetry be about an exchange of ideas? Maybe Paul Ryan can break down his Path to Prosperity in verse next year (don't worry, I'm half-kidding).

There are plenty of real issues for Americans to focus on, and I would argue rap lyrics are among the least newsworthy. But it would be nice if the so-called intellectuals in the White House had a propensity for encouraging discourse rather than creating an echo chamber of cliches and self-worship.

Seinfeld, Animal Kingdom, and the Triple Crown

I love horse racing. I know that's a completely random fact about me, but growing up I had the chance to spend a few summers in Ruidoso, N.M. where the family used to pass a day or two at the track. I could have spent the whole summer there learning the ins and outs of handicapping, but fortunately my folks were wiser. I found the whole process fascinating, especially trying to decipher the racing form and follow the statistical trends that would lead to the clues of the eventual winner. Needless to say, I've been hooked ever since. Kentucky Derby Day is must-see TV in my house (hats are optional).

This makes missing this year's live event all the more heartbreaking. Our cable went out (thanks Time Warner) and I was forced to find the race online at the last minute. In case you missed this year's derby, Animal Kingdom, a European horse at 20-1 odds, came from behind down the stretch to claim its first victory on dirt. Amazingly, it was only the horse's fourth career start, the fewest for a Derby winner since Exterminator in 1918.

Whether or not the grass specialist has a chance at the Triple Crown is anyone's guess. Dialed In, the favorite at Churchill Downs, ran the fastest last half mile since Secretariat in 1973, managing to close from last to 8th after a slow start, and might provide the toughest competition of The Preakness. Nehro, the runner-up in in the Race for the Roses, may not race again until the Belmont. Shackleton is another horse which finished fourth at the Kentucky Derby after leading for most of the last half mile and could be stiffer competition at the shorter distance (by the way, is there a rarer skill than calling the action of a live horse race?)

Besides the exhilaration and pageantry, one of the most creative aspects of horse racing is in the names themselves. This led to a game on twitter, well, a couple of games actually, where I am increasingly spending more of my time. One was called #DCDerbyNames (making up horse names having to do with Washington politics) and the other was called #SeinfeldDerby (horse names taken from expressions and/or characters from the TV show Seinfeld).

Since I am a huge Seinfeld fan, I mostly played the second game, although Jim DeMint's Julep, Between Michelle and a Tamale, and Rein In Spending were three of the more clever DC Derby names we came up with.

Below, my friend Charlie (@NotUFatJesus on twitter) and I have compiled a list of what we felt were the best Seinfeld Derby Horse Names. That is to say besides being memorable Seinfeld themes, you could actually imagine these names showing up in a race (speaking of pop culture, there was a horse in this year named Stay Thirsty, My Friend after the Dos XX ad)


BEST SEINFELD DERBY HORSE NAMES:

1. Serenity Now
2. Master of My Domain
3. Rochelle Rochelle
4. Yada Yada
5. Hate the Drake
6. Indian Giver
7. Bosco
8. Spare a Square
9. On a High Note
10. Del Boca Vista
11. Real and Spectacular
12. Cherish the Cabin
13. Maestro
14. Urban Sombrero
15. Summer of George
16. Top of the Muffin
17. Feats of Strength
18. Unbridled Enthusiasm
19. Man Hands
20. Poppy's Sloppy
21. Newmanium
22. Tippie Toes
23. Rhymes with Delores
24. Hold the Reservation
25. A Horse About Nothing

Coming soon, links to all the pertinent episodes (hopefully).

Note: this was previously posted on Tuesday before blogger.com went down and started having issues.

It's Not About Islam

Setting: The USS Carl Venson, an aircraft carrier somewhere in the Arabian Sea.

ENSIGN: So this is it. The body of America's most wanted. Know what's planned for it?

LIEUTENANT: Shark chum. Take some photos, weigh the son of a bitch down, and throw him overboard.

CAPTAIN: Not so fast, lieutenant. I just received my orders from the president. He wants to make sure Bin Laden has a proper burial in accordance with Sharia Law.

ENSIGN: Are you kidding me?

CAPTAIN: Nope. We're a civilized country and we're going to do this civilized.
 
ENSIGN: Are you kidding me?

CAPTAIN: Nope.

LIEUTENANT: Compared to what some of our men have been through, I'd say dumping him overboard without much fuss is civilized. 

CAPTAIN: Sorry, gentleman. I have orders. Shouldn't take more than 45 minutes.

ENSIGN: That's longer than it took the second tower of the World Trade Center to collapse.

CAPTAIN: I'm sorry, but the president is worried about a retaliation if we don't give the body an Islamic burial.

ENSIGN: Retaliation from who? Al Qaeda? They hate us anyways.

CAPTAIN: No, from more mainstream Muslims.

ENSIGN: I thought this wasn't about Islam?

CAPTAIN: It's not.

LIEUTENANT: What about the 9/11 families who never found their loved one's bodies in the rubble, let alone the chance to give them a proper burial? Giving the killer such dignified treatment seems unjust.

CAPTAIN: While I'm sure it may be difficult for some of them to understand, we must show the world this isn't about Islam. That outweighs everything.

ENSIGN: But by conducting a religious ceremony in accordance with Sharia Law, aren't we in essence letting Osama's religious convictions outweigh everything?

CAPTAIN: We don't want angry Muslims rioting in the streets.

ENSIGN: Why would they be angry if it's not about Islam?

CAPTAIN: It's not about Islam.

LIEUTENANT: This man perverted Islam. He insulted Allah. He killed hundreds of Muslims. There is no place other than Hell for such a man. We should dump his body into the ocean and be done with it. Hitler was Roman Catholic, but obviously he gave God the middle finger. I think Catholics would have been offended if Hitler had been given a Catholic funeral, if his religion was elevated beyond who he was in real life. But somehow you are saying with Bin Laden it's the opposite.

CAPTAIN: Hitler wasn't given any type of funeral. His body was confiscated by Russia.

LIEUTENANT: You're dodging the question.

CAPTAIN: I understand your objections, but you have to see the bigger picture. We wouldn't want to piss off the Imams. We have to take their sensitivities into account, or it could make an already delicate situation more dangerous for our troops on the battlefield.

ENSIGN: You're saying we have to take the sensitivities of radical Imams into account but not the sensitivities of Americans, and it's still not about Islam?

CAPTAIN: That's right. Islam is peace. Now I want you to meet the Muslim cleric who will be conducting the ceremony...

LIEUTENANT: A cleric who is not about Islam?

CAPTAIN: No, he's Muslim and he's brought his Quran. The whole thing shouldn't take more than fifty minutes. We'll have the body wrapped appropriately. And of course no women should be present. Sharia is very specific about this. Also, try and look solemn. We'll be filming it for Al-Jazeera just in case his execution is viewed unfavorably by the Muslim world.

ENSIGN: But it's not about religion.

LIEUTENANT: Nope. Of course not.

MUSLIM CLERIC: (begins praying) O Allah, forgive Osama and have mercy on him, keep him safe and sound and forgive him, honor the place where he settles and make his entrance wide; wash him with water and snow and hail, and cleanse him of sin as a white garment is cleansed of dirt. O Allah, give this warrior a house better than his house and a family better than his family. O Allah, admit him to Paradise and protect him from the torment of the grave and the torment of Hell-fire; make his grave spacious and fill it with light. O Allah, do not deprive us of the reward and do not cause us to go astray after this.

CAPTAIN: Thank you. Would anyone like to add a word to the prayer?

LIEUTENANT: Yeah. God bless America. Now send this devil back to Hell.

WaPo Fact Checker Attacking GOP After 2 Year Absence Under Obama

Democrats don't lie. They are such outstanding purveyors of truth that it would be foolish (and possibly racist) to fact-check their claims as they radically expand the powers of the federal government. Either that, or the Washington Post is just a shill for the Democrats.

I suspect most of us would bet our lives on the latter. It's hard to find more obvious proof than the fact that the Washington Post Fact Checker was inoperative for the two years in which Democrats overwhelmingly controlled the federal government and held a supermajority in Congress. Not one claim was fact-checked during this period of unprecedented government expansion to radically intervene in more citizens' lives from health care to financial reform. The WaPo watchdog became a lapdog, going completely AWOL from Barack Obama's election in November of 2008 until January of this year. 

Now that Republicans have some power in Washington again, it's been fired up to attack them of course, misrepresenting Paul Ryan's proposed solution (the only solution from either party on the table) to shore up America's finances and steer clear of government insolvency.

Here's Washington Post's Glenn Kessler's own statement about the revival of Fact Checker after a two year absence:

Welcome to the new Fact Checker column. My colleague Michael Dobbs started the column during the 2008 campaign and now The Washington Post is reviving it as a permanent feature. We will not be bound by the antics of the presidential campaign season, but will focus on any statements by political figures and government officials... we will not be limited to political charges or countercharges. We will seek to explain difficult issues, provide missing context and provide analysis and explanation of various "code words" used by politicians, diplomats and others to obscure or shade the truth.

The only one shading the truth is the Washington Post. Their perversion of fact checking is mired by which statements are chosen by whom in an effort to spin their own ideology. Ever since Media Matters was founded, it's been the new favorite tool of the Left. You have to hand it to the Democrats for finding more clever ways every year to be deceitful.

Hat tip to Karl at Hot Air.