Monday, October 31, 2011

Panic! Occupy Wall Street Protestors are now the 100%

Multi-millionaire Michael Moore has spent the last few weeks expressing support and identifying with the Occupy Wall Street movement.

Piers Morgan, one of the many hard-left CNN hosts, asked Michael Moore for an explanation of his actions in light of the fact that he’s a part of the 1%. The fact that Morgan challenged a fellow liberal may have appeared surprising at first and not in sync with the pass he usually hands them. It quickly became obvious though that his attempts to reason with Moore, albeit uselessly, was not in contradiction to his support for either OWS or Moore. He simply wished for the OWS protestors to be able to boast how the 99% has been joined by those in the 1%, thus garnering 100% support of the people. Moore, however, refused to cooperate, and turned and twisted his tongue in every way possible in order to avoid admitting the truth about his wealth which currently totals to fifty million dollars.

Listening to his fumbling mumblings, a panic and fear gripped me. Until now, as I watched videos of the OWS protestors which represent the 99%, I was comforted by the fact that 1% of the nation hasn’t joined them. I therefore dreamt and hoped of joining the 1% rich so that I too would be excluded of the OWS crowd. However, after listening to a 1% guy blast those who’ve helped him attain his wealth and identify with the OWS movement, there is no longer even a 1% which one can join to escape the kinship of the OWS crowd.

Buffett’s plea to pay more taxes despite the millions he owes in back-taxes was echoed at a San Francisco million dollar fundraiser for Obama last week attended exclusively by those making up the top of the 1%. These weren’t bitter gun clingers, but smart college-educated individuals who agree that the 1% should pay the tuition and most of the living expenses of the other 99%. Of course when discussing the 1% it somehow excludes them in action, but that is only understandable since they play the same game Michael Moore played on the Piers Morgan Show.

Until now they claimed to represent 99% of the people, now with the support of liberal richies such as the Moores and the Buffetts, they have succeeded in getting 100% of the country on their side.

Unless of course I’ve misunderstood the entire percent issue and the OWS is the one percent including Michael Moore, while the rest of the country makes up the other 99%.

Sunday, October 30, 2011

Free Diapers to Stimulate the Economy! What's Next?

Mark Steyn
wrote a terrific piece yesterday, raising awareness over Pennsylvania’s newest Awareness Day, “Diaper Need Awareness Day.” 

Last Thursday was officially "Diaper Need Awareness Day" in the state of Connecticut. Were you aware of it? There are so many awareness-raising days, it's hard to keep track. Maybe we could have an Awareness-Raising Day Awareness Day.

At any rate, the first annual Diaper Need Awareness Day was proclaimed by Dan Malloy, governor of the Nutmeg State, and they had a big old awareness-raising get-together in New Haven.

It's not clear yet whether they've got an official ribbon. We're running a bit low on ribbon colors these days: It's not just pink ribbons for breast cancer, but also teal for agoraphobia, periwinkle for acid reflux, pink and blue ribbons for amniotic fluid embolisms and pinstripe ribbons for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis.

We could use a Ribbon-Hue Awareness Day to raise awareness about how we're falling behind in the race for more ribbon colors.

If you're wondering what sentient being isn't aware of diapers, you're missing the point: Connecticut Rep. Rosa DeLauro is raising awareness of the need for diapers in order to, as Politico reported, "push the federal government to provide free diapers to poor families."

Congresswoman DeLauro has introduced the "DIAPER" Act — that's to say, the Diaper Investment and Aid to Promote Economic Recovery Act Act. So don't worry, it's not welfare, it's "stimulus." As Fox News put it, "A U.S. congresswoman in Connecticut wants to boost the economy by offering free diapers to low-income families."

And, given that sinking bazillions of dollars into green jobs schemes to build eco-cars in Finland and a federal program to buy guns for Mexican drug cartels and all the other fascinating innovations of the Obama administration haven't worked, who's to say borrowing money from the Chinese Politburo and sticking it in your kid's diaper isn't the kind of outside-the-box thinking that won't do the trick?

 Don’t forget Cash for Clunkers, half a billion dollars to Solyndra, bank bailouts, and government takeovers amongst the many other brainy ideas Obama has implemented which haven’t yet succeeded in jump-starting the economy.

"At a million-dollar San Francisco fundraiser today, President Obama warned his recession-battered supporters that if he loses the 2012 election it could herald a new, painful era of self-reliance in America."

Oh, no! The horror!

"Self-reliance" is now a pejorative? Nice to have that clarified. And San Francisco, a city that registers more dogs than it has kids enrolled in its schools and in which adults are perforce the children they never bothered having, seems as good a place as any to make it official.

In less enlightened times, "self-reliance" was the great animating principle of the American experiment.

By the standards of the day, George III was one of the most benign, caring rulers on earth: You were his mewling charges, and he was the regal babysitter.

'Self-Reliant': A Bad Thing?

Then a bunch of settlers in small towns clinging to wilderness and thousands of miles from His Majesty The Nanny decided they didn't need him and they could stand on their own. What's the word for that? Oh, yeah: self-reliance.

Be sure to read the entire article over here.

Dan Malloy and Congressman DeLauro deserve the “most creative method to create more dependency on government” award, which is given yearly behind closed doors.

Though one can only wonder how Planned Parenthood would react to such a “stimulus” plan. One can already receive free food, free housing, free education, and free college. Adding free diapers to the list leaves one to wonder what excuse they can use to continue convincing the poor to abort their unborn babies.

Friday, October 28, 2011

Democrat's no longer differentiate between Good and Evil, but between Class and Race

Throughout global history most countries were led by either dictators or monarchs. These leaders often imposed their will on the people using one of two similar methods. They divided and oppressed the people by creating class division or race derision, thus surrounding oneself with a core loyal base while intimidating and stifling the others.

During the feudal era, Europe's class system, designed by those in power, placed the majority of the people on the bottom rung where they served as serfs (close to slavery). This was followed by knights, lords, and then the king. To keep them from gaining power, movement was forbidden between the classes. 

Class division is still rampant in India, where the poor or “the untouchables” have lived and still live lives of misery, much like the serfs. The upper castes have refused to mingle or have any contact with “the untouchables” although the last few years have finally begun to show a relaxation between the castes and greater opportunity for those from the lower castes.

Communism and socialism are additional forms of government who rule via class division. Although officially abolishing all class with the intention to make everyone equal, the results have proven to be otherwise. The majority of the people have been forced to be equally poor and tormented to form one large low class while a small percentage enforced the laws for the rest and lived luxurious lives which the others could only dream of.

Other governments heavily divided the country via their distinction of race. The two methods aren’t necessarily a contradiction, and governments often employed both. A specific religious group or ethnicity would be targeted because of their race, and would then be forced to the bottom rung of the social and economic ladder.

India’s division is largely based on religion between the Hindus and the Muslims. During the Medieval Era Spain had tormented all those who hadn’t accepted the Christian religion, burning the “traitors”
alive at auto de fes. Chechnya and Bosnia are more recent examples of extreme racial division and torment which led to genocide. Saddam Hussein’s treatment of the Kurds in Iraq was of similar nature, and most Arabic countries are still extremely hostile to all non-Muslims. Hitler’s actions during World War II, where his goal to annihilate all Jews took preference over winning the war, is the ultimate example of race discrimination.

In a surprising twist for the first Republic in the world, the Democrat Party’s focus during the last several decades have changed from the distinction between evil and good, to division based upon race and class. Their actions cannot and are not being compared directly to those of murderers, though they do raise some questions. 

Although the party leaders have often become rich off the backs of the people, they blast hardworking successful entrepreneurs who’ve made it to the top financially. All millionaires are depicted as greedy and uncaring despite the facts usually proving otherwise.

Although the Democratic Party considers itself the party of the poor, who have helped the poor since FDR’s days with endless financial programs, the opposite is true. Handing someone food stamps, welfare, free housing, free student loans, and all the rest promote laziness and poverty since all incentive to work hard and earn money disappears. The Democrat Party also shamelessly pits race against race so that they can collect their votes at the end of the day. They thus harp on the inequalities for blacks and Hispanics ignoring the faults which lie directly with them. 

If the Democrats would truly care for Americans, they wouldn’t harp on one’s skin color or country of origin. The average American doesn’t do so since they see and value each individual for who they are. The Democrat Party, though, considers all voters and ordinary citizens to be bumbling fools who only need to be toyed with in order to receive their votes. They will therefore say one thing in front of the poor and do the direct opposite behind closed doors with the rich. They therefore demonize all who are enlightened to the truth of their actions such as tea partiers, conservatives, and many other open-minded Americans, for ignorance is the most valuable tool for the left.

Blasting those old white bitter folks cling to their guns and religions is a direct attack on race, religion, class, and age. There are good and evil people in every category, race, ethnic group, etc. and the Democrat’s decision to ignore the facts and instead dump an entire class into the evil basket is extremely disturbing. Race baiting in order to promote one's self image is despicable and should not be tolerated.

It is time for America to wake up and smell the coffee. Elections are coming up in a bit over a year from now and much effort must be invested to inform those unaware of the Democrat’s actions. It is time to turn the country back to one united unity where all good is respected and all evil is hated without a glance to race, religion, ethnic group, or social class.

Thursday, October 27, 2011

Obama’s Massive Mathematical Miscalculation

Obama held a lavish fundraiser in San Francisco Tuesday, where he harshly
criticized Republicans for voting down another millionaires’ tax which would be used as stimulus bill #3 using the following false information to build support for his bill.
Last week we had a separate vote on a part of the jobs bill that would put 400,000 teachers and firefighters and police officers back on the job. And it was paid for by asking people who make over a million dollars a year to pay one-half of 1 percent more in taxes. So for someone making $1.1 million a year, that’s an extra $500 that would save 400,000 jobs all across the country. And not just any jobs, but jobs that are vital to the well-being of our kids and our communities.

Most people I know who make more than a million dollars a year would make that contribution willingly. (Applause.) They’re patriots. They want to see America strong. But all the Republicans in the Senate, 100 percent, voted no.

Obama glibly peeled off the first digit of the correct figure, remaining with a total which is less than ten percent of the true total. A half a percent of 1.1 million is nowhere close to five hundred dollars; it’s actually $5,500. For those who are tempted in blaming the teleprompter for the glaring error, that excuse is no longer valid. With the TOTUS stolen, the buck stops at Obama. It therefore seems like the spender-in-chief needs to do some serious brush-up on all math including simple math equations, though perhaps he only needs lessons in how to speak the truth.

Let’s take a look at the facts. There are currently 3.5 million Americans who are millionaires. When calculating the cost to create a job using Obama’s figure of $500, his claims amount to somewhere between five and ten thousand dollars a job. Having thrown hundreds of billions to waste without creating any real jobs, he is now attempting to fool the public once again that he can create jobs with significantly less money.

Since the bill Obama proposed to congress dealt with the percent and not some misleading mathematical miscalculation, let’s take a look at the true figures. If we assume they each earn only 1 million dollar (although many obviously earn much more) the figures amount to the following; 19,250,000,000 or nineteen billion two hundred fifty million. In truth though, the figure would be much higher, probably at least double. I guess though, that when dealing with Obama standards of 800 billion dollars, 19 or even 40 billion isn’t that large of a sum to spend. It’s like increasing your ten-year old child’s allowance with one a single quarter.

When calculating using the lowest figure, each job would cost $48,125 to create, though it would more likely amount to approximately one hundred thousand dollars per job. I guess we should congratulate Obama in having mastered the ability to pretend being capable of creating jobs at half (and possibly a sixth) of its previous cost. At his first stimulus, Obama spent over 800 billion dollars to create or save according to the CBO somewhere between 1.3 and 3.5 million jobs. I guess the CBO doesn’t see too big of a difference between the two figures, much like Obama’s inability to correctly calculate what a ½ percent of 1.1 million dollars equals to.

According to the CBO’s figures, the stimulus cost us somewhere between $228,055 and $631,538 per job. Yeah, there’s a big difference between the two figures, but since it doesn’t involve their money (which Democrat politician pays his taxes?) they couldn’t care the slightest bit. Despite their claims of having created/saved so many jobs, unemployment continued to rise throughout all that time, thus making the creation of even a single job questionable even with these ridiculously high figures.

Although Obama has learned to adjust his mathematical figures so that his phony job creations should appear cheaper, his current bill would create as many jobs as the previous stimulus: Zero.


It has come to my attention that the error lies in my research, not in Obama's math skills (at this current example.) When I heard talk about this speech I searched and read the speech which is linked above, and then wrote the article based upon the speech. It seems that the actual bill will only tax a 1/2 percent of every dollar earned after one million dollars, something Obama hadn’t mentioned in his speech. Thus, if someone earns 1.1 million dollars, only the .1 million will be taxed. This amounts to $500.00. If anyone has a link to the actual wording of the bill presented to the senate, please leave it in the comments, since all I found were liberal/MSM sites citing a Biden math lesson.

Wednesday, October 26, 2011

New York City is leading the Destruction

As a New Yorker, much focus has been given recently to New York, the Occupy Wall Street movement, and Bloomberg’s senseless response. New York has recently joined a tough competition with the likes of Oakland, California and other liberal strongholds as to who can better waste the taxpayer dollars handed to them while neglecting and shrinking aid in areas which the taxpayers would benefit most.

Rush Limbaugh had said of NYC, that before his first visit he imagined the streets and bridges to be paved from gold since taxes are higher than average and the population is far larger and crowded than that of equal areas. How shocked he was to see that the streets are riddled with more potholes and cracks than the average city across America.

New Yorkers are pretty much resigned to the fact that their taxes will continue to increase while basic services will decrease. The MTA is the sample of bureaucracy gone awry. After raising the fares several times within the past few years, eliminating quite a few bus and train lines, and cutting the amount of buses and trains per line, they are once again complaining of a lack of funds.

Their newest solution? Remove all wastebaskets from all subway stations! For those of you scratching your heads in confusion, here’s the explanation. Since the city can’t handle the trash removal of the 468 stations, often leading to overflowing bins, they’ve hit a brainstorm of a solution! Removing all cans will remove all garbage, thus saving them loads of money spent to empty the waste baskets while eliminating the rats who’ve overtaken the subways. They have currently already removed all cans from two large stations and will be conducting a two month trial before proceeding across the rest of the city.  
Since I bet you couldn’t figure out for yourselves what the results would be, here’s an image at one of the two stations after the removal of the cans.


As an aside, trash pile-ups in the tracks is the most common cause for track fires, and the removal is usually the cause of considerable delays. Sure seems like a money-saving idea, don’t you agree? And those poor rats are surely starving these days!

In case you’re wondering when, where, and what is done with the millions of taxpayer money, have no fear. Bloomberg has plenty of resources at hand when he politely requested from the “law-abiding” Wall Street Protestors to temporarily evacuate Zuccotti Park so the city can clean their filth.

So no more trash cans so you can get rid of your empty cup of coffee, but protestors, go ahead and use our streets as public bathrooms, we’ll clean it up for you!

Yes, New York City is surely leading the way as to what this country may look like with four more years of Obama and liberalism in control.

Flat Tax Versus Fair Tax

The Fair Tax has been created and adopted by a considerable chunk of the conservative movement, though if ever implemented, can very possibly prove to be a disaster.

Its supporters desire to abolish the payroll tax, the entire IRS, and the progressive income tax where each individual is taxed different rates based on the amount they earn. Abolishing these taxes requires creating an alternate venue from which the government will be able to make up the lost money, and thus the fair tax was created. The plan; instead of taxing one’s income, tax every single dollar spent whether for luxuries or basic purchases including rent, utilities, and health care. The fair tax would operate at a flat rate with its creators touting thirty percent as enough to replace the other taxes.

When Warren Buffet falsely claimed that his secretary was paying more tax than he was, it was easy to provide a rebuttal and prove his statement was false since earners with higher incomes are placed in one tax bracket which has a higher tax rate than those with lower incomes. With the Fair Tax, however, Buffett’s currently false claim may very well become the norm. How? Let’s take Mr. Millionaire who earns one million dollars a year and compare him to Mr. Low Earner who earns twenty thousand dollars a year. Mr. Millionaire’s annual expenses add up to $100,000 dollars a year, spending only a tenth of his income. He is therefore taxed thirty percent but only on the ten percent he spent, which equals to thirty thousand dollars which is only three percent of his entire income.

Although the rich spend more money than the poor, the larger one’s income the smaller percentage they actually spend. They also tend to spend considerable amount in areas which won’t be taxed under the Fair Tax such as business investments, building factories, etc. Surprisingly, of the 3.5 million millionaires in America, many are first generational millionaires who don't drive luxurious cars or lead a frivolous lifestyle. As for those who do, they often vacation out of country, and will have an extra incentive to do so with the Fair Tax, since it will be tax-free.

On the other hand, Mr. Low Earner earns twenty thousand bucks a year of which he spends fifteen thousand dollars or seventy five percent of his annual income on food, clothing, rent, and other expenses. His total taxes thus equal four thousand five hundred dollars which is 22.5% of his entire income. This is a significantly larger chunk of his income than that which Mr. Millionaire is paying.

I used two individuals from opposite ends of the spectrum as the examples in order to highlight and make obvious the stark contrast between them. Here’s a list compiled by Forbes with the average household income before taxes, followed by the average annual expenditures of these groups. Notice how the more one earns, the smaller percentage of the paycheck actually spent.

Poorest 20%: $9,168 Expenditures: $17,837
Middle 20%: $41,614 “ “ $36,980
Richest 20%: $132,158 “ “ $83,710

Because of the disadvantage to the lower earners, the proposers of the Fair Tax have included in their plan a pre-bate which will be doled out monthly to every single U.S. citizen. The pre-bate for 2010, which will be based on the poverty level expenditures of the current year, was $
2,491 annually per household (double if it’s a two-adult household) with an additional $860 annually per child and a cap at seven children. The result of these pre-bates would be that all those near or under the poverty line wouldn’t have to actually pay any taxes, with some of them actually walking away with extra cash in their pockets.

The figures used in the above two examples (Mr. Millionaire and Mr. Low Income) did not include the pre-bate since I wanted the flaws of the entire system to be obvious to all. The results though are still troubling. Although Mr. Low Earner’s tax rate is lowered to only a little over ten percent in taxes, Mr. Millionaire remains with an even lower rate of 2.75% taxes

The Fair Tax clearly won’t work for the low and middle income earners without the formation of a gigantic new bureaucracy. When trying to get rid of one arm of government the results shouldn’t include the creation of an equally large system. The implementation of an entire new bureaucracy is never worth it, no matter the benefits. As with other entitlement programs, a system such as the pre-bates is guaranteed to cause illegals and others to milk the machine via fraudulent methods.

Furthermore, although the Fair Tax may seem like a wonderful idea, there are too many gray areas, and not only with the pre-bates which will most likely lead to forgery and stealing. In 2009 the one percent highest earners paid over forty percent of the total amount of income tax that came in. With the Fair Tax, this will no longer be the case since Warren Buffet and his equals don’t spend the majority of their income. They invest and save a large percentage of it. The very rich are also most likely to vacation out of country, which will amount to millions being spent elsewhere without being taxed. They can also afford to purchase high-end products out of the U.S. thus once again circumventing the Fair Tax. Therefore, although the promoters of the fair tax have declared a 30% tax rate sufficient to replace the progressive income tax and payroll tax, others calculate it would have to be set at forty percent or even higher in order to effectively generate enough income for the federal government.

The Fair Tax would make all products sold within the country considerably more expensive thus discouraging shopping expenditures from tourists and residents alike. Although goods are currently pretty expensive because the corporations pass down their high taxes to the consumer it is still far lower than it would be if the Fair Tax is implemented. The higher prices will also lead to the blooming of the black market and discourage to buy products in America. The largest brunt of the tax would thus be felt by the low and middle earners since the average American, unlike the highest earners, spend the bulk of their paycheck on necessities.

Additionally, the claims that the Fair Tax would completely shut down the IRS is untrue. Although its size would be decreased drastically, someone would still need to monitor the shop owners, landlords, doctors, and other companies that will be in charge of collecting and passing on the appropriate sums of tax. A new bureau will also need to be created to manage the pre-bates.

The Fair Tax also doesn’t tackle another serious issue plaguing this country related to taxes, which is the disconnection between the fifty three percent who support the other forty seven percent. The Fair Tax will continue to promote and even strengthen this divide where half of America pays taxes while the other half receives extra cash. One of the reasons why Washington has been able to revamp the tax laws causing it to spiral completely out of control is that almost fifty percent of the nation doesn’t pay any taxes. The changes thus affected only half the country and half the voters. Furthermore, the changes are usually implemented in stages, affecting only one specific income group or groups at a time, thus affecting an even smaller percentage of people. Therefore, despite the protests of those whose taxes were raised, these politicians were able to have their way and still get reelected by the other larger percent of people which were unaffected by the change.

It also doesn’t take into account those living in states which already have sales tax, especially those which have a high sales tax. The effect will be disastrous for shops and shoppers alike. One last point, the fair tax is a theory which has never yet been implemented in a national form and it is unknown whether it would be a success.

An alternative solution which other conservatives promote in lieu of the current system is the Flat Tax, where everyone would pay an equal percentage of their income regardless to the amount they earn.

The current tax code which divides America into separate brackets will no longer exist, and politicians will no longer have an easy field igniting class warfare in order to promote their own interests. The rich will all pay their fair share since all loopholes and tax breaks will be eliminated. The flat tax will also create millions of new taxpayers who will pay the same low rate as the rest of the country. It will be low enough not to hurt them seriously yet significant enough for them to feel a sense of unity with the rest of the country. With everyone will pay an equal percentage of their income to the federal government it will result in the entire country being equally affected by taxes and equally outraged over wasteful government spending using taxpayer dollars.

The Flat Tax has been implemented in many countries across the globe including Ireland, Hong Kong and many former communist countries, almost without exception at a rate below 20%, with those countries having seen tremendous economic success. The current proposal in the U.S. is at 17%, and although not set in stone, will not rise higher than twenty percent. It probably won’t need to be higher than the teens since the elimination of loopholes will create an influx in tax money.

The Flat Tax allows the first ten thousand dollars every taxpayer earns to be earned tax-free. Thus, the very poor will pay no taxes while those making somewhat more will pay tax on the remainder which will amount to a minimal figure. Thus, if the tax rate would be at 17% Mr. Millionaire would pay $168,300 (he would save $1700 dollars on the first ten thousand dollars he earns which doesn’t decrease his tax significantly.) Mr. Low Earner would pay an equal percentage of 17% totaling only to $1,700 annually (and would save an equal $1700 which slashes his taxes in half and does make a significant difference). No complex government program is necessary to ensure taxes are not too high for anyone, as with the Fair Tax, while the government continues to receive their necessary funding.

One of the many problems with the current progressive income tax which the flat tax eliminates is the many brackets taxpayers are divided into with higher tax rates for higher earners. An individual earning a figure at the top of one bracket is better off staying within his current income than somehow increasing that income. This is so since earning those few extra bucks will cause him to enter the next tax bracket where the tax rate is significantly higher, thus ultimately leaving with him with less money than before his raise. This discourages employees or small business owners who are at the borderline between brackets from increasing their income, since the end result is a decrease.

The Flat Tax resolves this issue, since one pays an equal percentage per dollar no matter how much you earn. The billionaire and the pauper will each pay the same percentage per dollar. Mr. Millionaire will pay the same percent per dollar earned as Mr. Low Earner. Mr. Low Earner, who may have made the calculation under the current system that earning any additional income will serve to his detriment, will be encouraged to seek an increase in income because his taxes won’t increase directly with each raise. Additionally, Mr. Millionaire won’t get away with his paying an equal percent of taxes despite his out of country vacations and saving habits, unlike at the Fair Tax.

The elimination of all complex tax brackets, tax breaks, and loopholes significantly simplifies the process, allowing taxpayers to file their taxes on a simple postcard. The Flat Tax will also eliminate all double taxations including the abolishment of the death tax, capital gains tax, no double taxation of saving, and no double tax on dividends. By taxing income only one time, a flat tax is easier to enforce and more conducive to job creation and capital formation.

In light of the above information, the conservative movement should drop their support of the Fair Tax since it will create more bureaucracy, more entitlement, stunt the economy, and benefit the very rich and very poor with the burden falling on the middle earners, stunt the economy.

The Flat Tax on the other hand is a better and simpler solution, although it could use some minor tweaks. It should include abolishing the payroll tax, even if it will involve raising the flat rate with several digits. The only serious opposition against it is the forty seven percent of this country who currently pay zero taxes and who will be taxed equally together with the rest of the country or those benefiting from loopholes. However, I think it’s only fair everyone should pay their fair share. Obama has always demanded shared sacrifice. I don’t see it as such, but rather that each citizen has a responsibility to the country and should thus contribute their fair share to support its expenses such the military where a few endanger their lives doing their utmost to protect the many living peacefully in this country.

None of the current candidates have currently fully embraced either of the two plans.

Tuesday, October 25, 2011

Hilarious Video! Angry Brooklyn Man Saws Parking Meter in Half with Chainsaw!

Hilarious Video of guy in Brooklyn sawing off a meter after the Meter Maid hands his partner a ticket!

Although NYC is the place for this to happen, this video though is most likely staged. The most obvious hint is the "16th Precinct" on the side of the police vehicle, a precinct which simply doesn't exist in NYC.

Tuesday, October 18, 2011

As per the current GOP Field, it is possible for Rick Santorum to become the new Frontrunner?

This is neither an expression of support for Santorum nor a prediction as to who will win the nomination. It is simply an overview of the GOP presidential field in advance of the eighth debate which will take place tonight.

The GOP presidential scene has been a constant seesaw of action. Potential voters watched as Bachmann rose to the top only to lose her momentum after winning the Iowa Straw Poll because of Perry’s entrance onto the scene, her lack of executive experience, and her debate gaffes which she chose to repeat and stand by. Her appointment of Ed Rollins as campaign manager only caused her trouble, first causing many in the Palin camp to oppose her, and now having Rollins badmouth her and shrugging off all blame for her campaign’s failures while placing it squarely on her shoulders.

Perry too experienced the frontrunner experience immediately after the launch of his campaign, although it fizzled out just as quickly. His diminished status is largely due to his awful performance at the debates and also because of the big blotches on his record such as Gardasil, immigration, and crony capitalism.

Despite the downs the Perry and Bachmann campaigns have recently experienced no candidate should be ruled out, as the McCain campaign has taught us in 2008. Both Bachmann and Perry can still experience a comeback via a victory in one of the first states such as Iowa or South Carolina. Since there’s still over two months until the Iowa Caucus, there’s still ample time for the candidates to take turns in playing the frontrunner role.

Gingrich carries personal baggage and suffered a strong hit when he called Paul Ryan’s plan “right wing engineering.” However, with Perry and Bachmann performing so poorly in general and especially at the debates, Gingrich’s excellent performances have caused his earlier comments to be forgiven or forgotten by many. The last few weeks showed a continuous rise in Gingrich’s poll figures, and he has recently overtaken Perry for the spot in third seat. If Cain takes a hit, Gingrich may possibly be the one to benefit.

Romney is the only candidate who’s been amongst the frontrunners since the start of his campaign without losing his spot, thanks to the establishment’s complete backing. It’s important to note though that which Michael Barone pointed out; that Romney’s poll figures topped 25% in only three out of eighty polls taken this year, thanks to tea party conservatives’ staunch opposition against the flip flopper. However, his presidential demeanor, loads of money, and many endorsements continue to make him a serious player with strong chances of winning the nomination. As it appears right now, one will have to wait for the actual primaries in order to determine whether the establishment will once again have their way.

Paul’s foreign policy which is equal to or worse than Obama’s will keep him from winning the nomination especially in such turbulent times despite his economic talk.

This leads us to Herman Cain, the current frontrunner. Cain is a successful business executive who talks the talk in regard to conservatism. On the flip side, he has proven to be hasty in judging events and others such as at the Perry rock incident, and more importantly, has no record to prove he could walk the walk. True he was extremely successful in the private sector, but the private and public sector although interrelated are very different, and many former businessmen became terrible or corrupted politicians. Many are therefore wary of handing the presidency to someone who hasn’t yet held any political office where one is tested whether they are truly loyal to the ideals they spouted during the campaign or whether corruption and cronyism can affect or overtake them.

Now that Cain is in the spotlight, his ideas, proposals, and comments are being placed under careful scrutiny and thorough questioning. He will probably be grilled tonight over his joke/non-joke regarding an electrified fence at the border, and about the details surrounding his 999 plan. Time will tell whether he will be able to remain in the lead or share a similar fate as those before him.

This brings us to the final candidate in this discussion, Rick Santorum. Santorum is the only conservative who hasn’t had yet a turn in being frontrunner. Although Santorum is not an option for many conservatives because of his endorsements of moderates such as Spector in 2004 and a host of other RINO’s in 2010, His record is quite conservative. He doesn’t seem to have any serious baggage, though perhaps because it has never been dug up or brought to center-stage since he’s never been the frontrunner or anywhere close to such a position. Santorum is quite articulate and has had some good moments during the brief time-slots he was allotted at the debates such as when he took on Ron Paul for his comments on Iran’s nuclear programs and his entire approach to foreign policy.

So far, the process of the current primary has been; have someone shoot to the top, dissect him or her, and then throw them down to the dogs. Bachmann’s campaign is seriously derailed with Ed Rollins, her former campaign manager, badmouthing her as is typical in the political world (think Steve Schmidt.) Meanwhile, Perry’s numbers hit an unbelievable low with him polling at three percent in Florida and in the single digits in Iowa. Not surprisingly, a Perry Iowa Operative jumped ship and thrown his support behind Santorum. It therefore seems as though Santorum’s chance has arrived to take a stand in the limelight and have the focus turned to him. The right ad, campaign message, plan, reaction, or debate performance can all be the catalyst of a sudden Santorum surge. Similarly, a Cain collapse could result in voters looking around and taking a look at the candidate standing in the side. If a Santorum surge indeed occurs one would then watch to see whether he will remain standing, or fall like his predecessors.

Now we’ve got to let tonight’s debate take place and see how each candidate performs.

Sunday, October 16, 2011

“Occupy Wall Street” Protestors considered as law-abiding by the Nanny of NYC

A complete month has passed since the “Occupy Wall Street” protestors have parked themselves in the midst of Manhattan. Thousands of loonies have set up camp in a park across Wall Street and are adamant to remain there until their unknown demands are met.

Mayor Bloomberg, in his classic graciousness to everyone and anything except for the cities’ residents, proudly welcomed the protestors and proclaimed that they may remain indefinitely as long as they abide all the laws.

Bloomberg’s statement hasn’t come as much of a surprise to the residents of NYC, since the city is one of the centers of liberalism and is led by an environmentalist power-hungry liberal. Its dedication and allegiance is thus solely to the planet, the environment, and the liberal agenda. His failed attempts to appeal to the protestors simply mirrors his past behaviors such as his applause and support for the Ground Zero Mosque or his immediate jump to blame tea partiers when a bomb was discovered in Time Square.

Bloomberg’s statement may at first glance appear to be reasonable and fair, except when one take note of the total lack of action towards the lawlessness amongst the protestors, in a city where minor offenses meet harsh punishments.

In a city where meter maids and traffic cops have replaced many regular cops, additional regulations are passed regarding every step an individual takes, and fines for the slightest offense becomes the norm, Bloomberg’s treatment of the protestors is extremely ironic. Why, for damaging a public tree one can be slapped with a fine of up to $15,000 and/or imprisonment anywhere from 90 days to a complete year. However, apparently defecating, urinating and having sex in public, open drug dealing and many other crimes committed by the protestors aren’t considered criminal enough for it to be considered as not “abiding the laws” although ordinary citizens would’ve long been handcuffed and fined for lesser actions.

The fact that the place has become a public bathroom in addition to a garbage dump hasn’t concerned Bloomberg in the least. This is actually surprising from the mayor who’s notorious for the large fines handed out because of a stray piece of paper the wind has blown over onto your property or even onto the road within 12 inches of the sidewalk. Apparently it wasn’t the cleanliness or lack of it that spurred him to create these laws, but the additional venue to milk some money out of the citizens while promoting a noble cause.

One can thereby understand Bloomberg’s comments in the face of the blatant lawlessness and his apathy towards the protestors’ actions. Since these individuals are obviously broke, and fining them would be a waste of time since it’s guaranteed to never be paid, why not pretend instead that no laws have been broken? Besides, why bother enforcing the laws if those committing the crimes aren’t tax-paying citizens or a part of those dangerous tea party right wingers?

I guess some of these protestors will have to chop down a tree, make a salt and trans-fat party, or commit some other liberal offense for the nanny of the state to realize that not all laws are being abided.

This article was cross-posted at

Sunday Shows, Softball Questions, and Bob Scheiffer

The Sunday Shows are long known to be dominated by liberal hosts who invite a disproportionate number of Democrats vs. Republicans. The Democrats, who are greater in number, receive softball opinion questions which is interrupted with lots of "Uh huh's" "right's" and "yeah's". The Republicans generally receive tougher questions, less rebuttal time, less speaking time altogether, and impolite interruptions from the host and guest Democrats.

This morning,  as in the last couple of weeks, Bob Scheiffer, host of CBS's Face The Nation, questioned Democratic pundits as to what strategy Obama can use against his future Republican opponent. The analysts discussed the weaknesses amongst the current Republican candidates which they felt Obama could best exploit, such as Romney's flip flopping.

Hey Bob Scheiffer; Have you given a thought as to what the Republicans can throw against Obama? Why haven't you found it necessary to question those political pundits about which strategy might be best for the Republicans to use against Obama? Have you chosen to ignore the flip side of your question because you're quaking in your boots since there's an endless stack to use against him?  Or are you still living in Obamaland dreamland, inebriated with the cool-aid, and thus see nothing negative whatsoever that can be played against Obama, save for the race card of course?

Whether majority of the left is oblivious or pretending to be so, they will be in for a rude surprise to see just how deep the anti-Obama sentiments run in the rest of the country.

Wednesday, October 12, 2011

Editor's Note:

As a religious Jew I'll be celebrating the holiday of Succos which starts tonight.

I therefore won't be posting anything for the next couple of days.

Wishing everyone a great day and a great weekend!

The Remarkable Difference Every Individual Can Make

I’m a 23 year old concerned citizen who opened a blog several months ago. Although English isn’t my first language, I’ve decided to do plunge ahead since this is a country where opportunity and success isn’t limited to a specific group and we’re not ready to let this country be radically transformed. I sent in submissions regularly to C4P which somewhat increased traffic to my blog, and eventually became an official contributor to C4P.

Palin’s decision not to run last Wednesday hit me by surprise during what was a particularly hectic time in my personal life, leaving me with no time to jot down my thoughts. As a religious Jew, her announcement came two days before Yom Kippur and a week before Succos. Although it’s now almost a week later, I decided it isn’t too late to share some of my thoughts.

In the three years since Governor Palin has stepped onto the national scene after having been chosen McCain’s running mate, the country has undergone many changes, both for the worse and the better. Although the focus is largely at the damage and destruction the Obama administration has wrought, one mustn’t forget the millions of Americans of every stripe and color who have become involved in and passionate about the political situation in this country. Tea Party groups have sprung up in every corner across the country, with voters demanding of their representatives to truly represent them and not the special interests or their own interests. No longer are the people indifferent and apathetic to the actions of the politicians.

Until now, the bullies and hotshots from the left as well as those within the conservative movement media had dominated the scene with no one daring to stand up against them or in defense of their victims. That is no longer the case. Millions of individuals have challenged these egoists time and again, and defended those smeared with lies and nonsense. Individuals across the country have recognized the power each individual possesses and have singlehandedly undertaken to fight the left, the establishment, and the know-it-all Republican elitists who peer down in disdain at us pesky little people. Twitter users with only a handful of followers have effectively challenged some of the big boys who have tens of thousands of followers. Ordinary citizens concerned for the future of their country have managed to confront the hoity toity class holding them accountable for their actions. No longer could these elitists go on interviews and write articles loaded with lies and distortions without receiving heavy backlash from thousands of people.

I have personally experienced the power of each individual. Shortly after I’ve joined C4P, Erick Erickson upped his snarky attitude against Palin. Since many Palin supporters including called him out on his despicable behavior, he expanded his attacks to include the Palin supporters. After I wrote a lengthy and factual article he felt compelled to respond, so he nitpicked one out of hundreds of comments on the article and focused on that. Of course his actions weren’t a very effective method in increasing respect for him or his site. Labeling Palin supporters as idiots, cultists, and many additional flattering names likewise hasn’t done much except turn people away from his site. Erickson isn’t accustomed to being challenged when wrong, and the fact that regular Americans have dared do so has been a blow to his ego. We must continue to remember our powers and fight those who are ready to give up principles for personal or other gains.

Many are wary of challenging others or taking an active role in spreading conservatism due to feelings of inadequacy. One might think that it is necessary to have training in debating in order to effectively challenge and educate those ignorant of conservative ideology, a journalistic degree in order to write letters or articles, or a certain charisma in order to run for office. Although the qualities listed above are certainly helpful, one can do all the above and even more without any of it. All that is truly necessary is an honest desire to educate and reach out to others, lots of determination, and of course first educating yourself about the topic on hand. When Sarah said one doesn’t need a title to make a difference, she didn’t only speak of herself. She spoke directly to all of us, encouraging us to get as heavily involved as we can. Not always will our actions meet success, but we cannot afford to give up, and can also never know when we’ll strike gold.

This too, I’ve personally experienced. I am fully aware of my weaknesses which include a lack of eloquent expressions and grammatical flaws since, as mentioned earlier, English isn’t my first language. However, I believe that if one has worthy ideas then one should share them with others even though the final piece won’t be as polished or perfect as that of others. I’ve always appreciated those that have here and elsewhere brought my errors to my attention, thus giving me the opportunity to correct them. When faced with taunting and mockery, I just shake it off for it is proof that the mocker can’t argue with the stated ideas and facts, so he resorts to name-calling and spell-checking

Last week, the day before Palin’s announcement, another diarist chose to comb through one of my diaries at Red State and highlight all of its grammatical and careless errors, for which I thanked him. Erickson and his cronies pounced upon it and recommended it, in an obvious effort to spite me, surely slapping each other on the backs and exchanging high-fives in their victory against Abie Rubin. Little did they realize how belittling their action was, for it clearly illustrated how deeply they’ve been hurt and angered by the truth exposed by a single 23 year old individual, and that the only thing they could hold against him was his grammatical errors. If they thought it would cause me to become embarrassed by my mistakes and therefore shut up, boy were they wrong! Such an approach would be antithetical to what my parents and elders have taught me, and also contrary to the lessons I’ve learned from Governor Palin’s actions. One doesn’t have to be perfect and flawless in order to undertake a task. One simply needs the will and the perseverance to stick to one’s task despite distractions and stumbling blocks. If getting the message across requires one to be mocked by some because of some misspells and errors, then so be it.

Governor Palin has repeatedly stressed that you don’t need a title or a prestigious position to make a difference. Her concern for her children’s education led her to join the PTA group in her local school. From becoming a PTA mom she then went a step further and ran for the city council before eventually becoming the mayor of her town, the oil and gas commissioner, the governor of her state, and then the vice presidential candidate of a national ticket. She didn’t enter the political scene with the intentions to run for the presidency or even the governor in ten or so years down the line, as others have. She entered with the intention to clean up the place, influence positive change, and lead with the people’s needs in mind.

Alaska is pretty much disconnected from the lower 48 states, and their previous Governors were unknown individuals. The only Alaska figure to make some news was Ted Stevens because of his insatiable lust for earmarks, the corruption charges against him which were mostly proven as untrue after his death, and the bridge to nowhere. Palin ran for the governorship in order to serve the people of Alaska, and her focus as Governor was clearly on the state of Alaska. Her respect for he constituents was evidenced in many manners including her attendance at the funerals of fallen soldiers. Only after the 2008 campaign when she could no longer govern effectively did she resign. Aware of her ability to be effective on the national scene, she involved herself and influenced the direction of many primaries in congressional districts in 2010. Throughout her public career she has proven that with enough grit and true determination one can effectively influence change even in the face of entrenched habits.

Immediately after Palin has declared she won’t be seeking the presidential nomination in 2012 many Palin supporters, although respectful of her decision, have felt shellacked by her announcement due to the effort they’d invested in advance of what was thought to be a presidential run. Whether having spent time debating with family and friends, spreading information, hosting “Undefeated parties,” educating others online or otherwise, they were stunned and disappointed while being forced to respond to the scorn and mockery without being privy to all the details. I know just how many have felt immediately after the announcement since I too had constantly stood up for her and had actually written an article titled “There are Times for Words and Times for Silence” discussing various reasons which indicated that she’s running –the very morning before she announced she isn’t. The only thing missing was claiming to know her thoughts.

I’ve already mentioned Red State several times and will do it once more. First let me inform you that I’ve originally had only respect for Erickson. However, after he has donned his kingmaker attitude and treated Palin in an inappropriate manner, I felt it necessary to point out their hypocrisy and double standard and have done so in several articles. After his hourly posts in which he repeated that Palin hadn’t announced her decision despite it being the end of September, ignoring the fact that she said no decision would be forthcoming in the next twenty four hours, I decided to retaliate. I began to post one Pro Palin diary after the other, which irked them to no end. Last Wednesday, I cross-posted at Red State the above mentioned article “A Time for Silence, and a Time for Words” and renamed it “Palin’s Running… Here’s Why.” I did this in order for it to be noticed amongst the many other diaries, for which it surely served its purpose. At the end of the day and many comments later, after Palin announced her intentions not to run, Erickson and his cronies ran to recommend, tweet, and mock the article as though his own predictions have never been proven wrong.

Erickson’s childish behavior isn’t the purpose or motive for this article. It is simply the easiest example I could think of to illustrate that all of us end up dealing with others and their nasty behavior throughout life. Some, though, are treated to considerably larger amounts of vitriol than most others. Sarah Palin as a wife, mother, daughter, and sibling has had to deal with an abnormal quantity of utterly false allegations. Multiplying by a million all barbs Palin supporters have received because of their support for a Palin presidency wouldn’t come close to what she and her family have undergone during the last three years.

The attacks weren’t limited to her record or at least to her own person. The hate-filled lies were hurled against her parents, siblings, husband, and children. No one and nothing was off limits. Without the slightest shred of evidence, those who’ve undertaken the task to destroy her have spread false rumors about her marriage and more. To top it off, although Joe McGinniss released a book chock full of lies which were proven to be lies and quietly admitted as such by the very author via an email Breitbart had gotten hold of and released, very few in the Conservative media felt it necessary to come to the truth’s aide. Some, such as Red State remained silent despite the outrageous lies which were being written about an innocent family. Worse still, The Daily Caller amongst others found it necessary in the name of journalism to repeat the lies, while disregarding their duty as journalists to inform their readers that the lies they’d just repeated are part of a great hoax and that the author is a despicable untrustworthy individual. Several days later, the Daily Caller once again in the name of journalism, found it necessary to repeat vile language said against Palin by a known rapist, without any added context or explanation nearby. After Greta called out Tucker Carlson for his downright disturbing behavior, Erickson defended and congratulated him on twitter. The behavior of these two “conservatives” although awful, is barely a drop in the bucket compared to what the left has thrown at her. Just think of Tucson.

Although she isn’t running for the presidency in 2012 she has made it clear that she will not remain silent nor disappear from the political scene. The haters haven’t stopped her in the past, and it doesn’t seem as though they will stop her in the future. During the last several months, many in the media including Republicans and Conservatives have hammered and demanded from Palin to reach a decision. Now that the reply was a no, many have questioned why she waited so long with her decision. Deciding not to run is an equally weighty decision and Palin has clearly regarded it as such. It was something she heavily weighed and debated, and ultimately she chose not to run.

So to those who’ve been busy whining the last several months, I ask you this. Which states have already held their primaries thus making her response come too late? What was so late about her announcement in terms of its effect on the other candidates? Do they not have plenty of time to continue campaigning? Do the voters not have several months to continue to vet the candidates, question them on their conservatism, and then make a decision? This holds true even if her decision would’ve been positive.

Rasmussen released a poll yesterday saying that 72% of the voters feel that the presidential campaign starts way too early and is far too drawn out. Yes, enough time to properly vet the candidates is a must, but several months before the primary is plenty of time. Although things aren’t likely to change in that regard since the media has to ensure they’ve got what to talk and write about, the nonsense that an October announcement is too late was and still is pure nonsense. It’s not too late in regard to states’ deadlines, not too late in regard to when majority of the voters begin to tune into the election process, not too late to be vetted, and not that late so as to guarantee failure.

I’ll end with this conspiracy although it may appear wild, dangerous, and improbable. The latest GOP debate proved to be a disaster as Romney clearly sailed and starred through it. Since it sorely lacked a single other candidate who was capable of challenging him or promoting conservative values with a record to prove their words, perhaps Palin might, might, might reconsider. Romney’s momentum has been growing considerably lately, and he was on the receiving end of Christie’s endorsement today. Cain, who is the only non-crony capitalist not because he proved to withstand the temptation but because he’s never been a part of politics before, has failed to deliver on his promise to take on Romney head-first. Although the establishment has labeled a Palin campaign as the guarantee for a Romney nominee, it now seems as though she’s the only one who can prevent Romney from being the nominee.

Additionally, now that she has declared that she isn’t running those who have feared a Palin campaign and thus focused on the petty triviality and ignored her content have made an about-face and began to sing her praises. No longer worried she’d take the candidate of their dreams and flush him/her down the toilet, they suddenly remembered their closeness and fondness of Governor Palin. More positive coverage was given to Palin in one week via the LSM and others, than those very same places have given her in the last year.

Conspiracy aside, according to her words at face value she isn’t running in 2012 and isn’t changing her mind on it. Earthquakes measuring 10.3 don’t happen too often, nor are they caused by humans. It is impossible to foretell the 2012 elections so it’s doubly impossible to foretell 2016 or 2020, but perhaps she will choose to run at a later date. Of course it will depend on many unknown variables such as who will be in the oval office, how the individual has governed, who else is running, what has Palin done in the four years, and so on and so forth.

If we want it to be a possibility, it is important to continue to educate others and spread the truth about her and her record. Now that she isn’t running, supporters of other candidates may feel less threatened and more agreeable to watch The Undefeated or hear about a former Governor in Alaska. Favorable impression need to be implanted in the hearts of millions so that when people will hear “Sarah Palin” they will think not of “I can see Russia from my house” but “that’s the governor who stood up against corruption in both parties and wasn’t scared to do what’s best for the people.” We must remember the power of every single individual and continue to promote constitution-loving candidates in every level of politics. We must remember that the future of this country may depend on the upcoming congress, so personal considerations should be set aside for the greater cause.

We can and must all continue to make differences via twitter, internet, local meetings, here at C4P and millions of other ways. It is impossible to know what the future holds, but that doesn’t mean one shouldn’t do their utmost to influence the future. In the months after the 2008 election, when the McCain team unjustly blamed her for their loss and later when she was forced to resign from her governorship, the future seemed bleak. It was difficult to envision that she would open a new twitter account which currently has over half a million followers, a Facebook page with over 3.2 million friends, and millions more ready to volunteer. The base has grown considerably with the passage of time and can continue to dramatically increase its growth if we help facilitate it.

Thursday, October 6, 2011

A Variety of Thoughts to Ponder regarding Palin's Decision

In the wake of Governor Palin's decision some of her supporters have lifted their hands in despair and given up hope for any effective change to take place.


To these individuals here's a great piece from Palin4America which reminds us all who Governor Palin is and what she stands for, and that it isn't about one person but about the ideas she put forth.
I know many people are disappointed with Governor Palin’s decision, people are in disbelief, in shock and some even feel betrayed after all the work they have put in for Governor Palin.

For me it wasn’t just about supporting a potential candidate, it was also about supporting a mother, wife, grandmother who was trashed and taken to the woodsheds for no other reason than existing. No one deserves that and no one should have to go through that. EVER!

As for her decision, while I am disappointed, I am not shocked. In a way I saw it coming and I had prepared myself for the possibility. Her signals were becoming increasingly obvious.

I think it came down to Palin wanting her life back. She had enough of the crap and she simply didn’t want to put her family through the whole process again. It wouldn’t be fair to them and frankly it wouldn’t be fair to her supporters. Even thick skin if you hammer it long enough cracks and I don’t think she wanted her or her families skin shattered .

It’s going to take some time for the dust to settle. But we’ll get through it and we’ll all be OK. Governor Palin would have made a great president, but you know, there have been many great people who have moved on and the world survived. The Graveyard is full of indispensable people. I don’t mean that in a negative way, my point is, that the world will continue and we’ll be just fine.

I’ve been hearing from people who are saying that by making this decision the left and the media have won. I beg to differ.

No, they haven’t won and we will continue to stand strong and prove it. They will only win if we lose, does anyone here plan on losing? I didn’t think so.

It’s all about how you look at things. If you want to convince yourself that they won and you lost you’ll only be miserable and it wont get you anywhere.

Think positively: think about how the Palin’s won’t have to deal with the crap anymore, think about how Track, Bristol, Willow, Piper and Trig will now have their mother around without the fear of them being trashed everyday, think of the things the family can now do without worrying that a camera lens is pointing in their direction.

The world doesn’t stop when a great solider dies, while it’s sad, we move on. Battle’s are not planned and won with just one general, battle’s are won with an entire army of dedicated troops. The general of our choice may have stepped aside, but the war continues and the army is still standing strong. We will continue to fight, we will not surrender and if we pull ourselves together we will win.
You can read the entire thing over here.

Another great piece worth reading is from Adam Brickley, contributor to C4P and to the Daily Caller.

He reminds the establishment that although she isn't running, her base hasn't disappeared. It is as strong as ever, and is a force to be reckoned with.

Here's the link to his article, which is aptly titled "The Palin Movement isn't Retreating; it's Reloading."

Here are some additional articles on the topic, each highlighting additional points to ponder.

Josh Painter from Texans for Sarah Palin essentially focuses on the family part of the decision which seemingly, and rightfully so, played a major role in her decision. According to Josh it was the deciding factor.

Nicole Coulter at
C4P focused on "we are all Sarah's" and that we can continue to make a difference.

Although there are probably many great pieces out there, I'll end with the words of Professor Jacobson of
Legal Insurrection.

It disgusts me that a candidate of such quality cannot run as a practical matter, and that we are left with second and third choices. But reality is reality, and it would have been a tough road to overcome the past three years.

Palin had the opportunity to be a game-changer in the direction of this country; someone who really understood at a gut level how far down the road we are on the path to a country we will not recognize; someone who understands that the political class holds the country by the throat, and that removing the grip is necessary not just changing who holds the grip.

I do not begrudge her the time she took at all. I respect that she took the time, and in the end made a sound decision, even if it is a decision which leaves me profoundly disappointed in the coming year.


If you want to know how disgusting our own party is, and what types of creeps have influence, witness Erick Erickson crowing:

At a moment when Erickson could have shown himself to be a mensch he showed himself to be a schmuck. And of course, managed to make it about him. As pointed out in the comments, he is asking “Can we all be friends now?” The answer is no.

I couldn't have said it better myself so all I will say is that I second that.
Follow me on Twitter