Google
 
Web Osi Speaks!

Wednesday, January 12, 2011

Why Sarah Palin's Use Of The Words "Blood Libel" Offends Jews And Speech Plays Victimhood.


Sarah Palin's video statement on the Tucson shootings is an interesting example of how meanings can change over time and can be ripped from their original context. This was obviously a well-crafted statement, not something said off the cuff, so Palin and her advisors certainly thought carefully about whether to include these elements. In the new Fact Checker, from time to time we will provide context for the terms that politicians use without awarding any Pinocchios.


Blood Libel

"If you don't like their ideas, you're free to propose better ideas. But, especially within hours of a tragedy unfolding, journalists and pundits should not manufacture a blood libel that serves only to incite the very hatred and violence they purport to condemn. That is reprehensible."
--Sarah Palin

The term "blood libel" has a very distinct history. It refers to the false accusation, dating back centuries, that Jews would sacrifice Christian children for various nefarious or even religious purposes -- such as using their blood as an ingredient in the unleavened bread in Passover ceremonies. It was a core tenet of anti-Semitism, widely believed in medieval times and beyond, and often resulted in persecution, murders and other actions against Jews. A pro-Israel website lists more than two dozen examples of blood libel against Jews over the centuries, including as recently as 2005 in Russia.

Palin's use of the term has sparked controversy, in part because she is not Jewish and has often spoken of the United States as a Christian nation -- and because the target of the alleged shooter, Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, is Jewish. The liberal pro-Israel group J Street tweeted, "We hope @SarahPalinUSA will recog that Jews are pained by, take offense at use of 'blood libel'"

Read more here.

Labels:

Saturday, December 11, 2010

Haven't Hatians Suffered Enough? Yea, I Know Sarah Palin Can See Haiti From Her Backyard Too!


Sarah Palin Arrives in Haiti With Mercy Mission

PORT-AU-PRINCE, Haiti (Dec. 11) -- Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin has arrived in Haiti, an impoverished nation struggling to overcome post-election violence and a cholera epidemic.

Palin arrived Saturday with the Rev. Franklin Graham as part of a humanitarian mission by his Samaritan's Purse relief organization.

Group spokeswoman Roseann Dennery says details about Palin's itinerary are not being released for security reasons.

The potential U.S. presidential candidate is expected to visit the Haitian capital and stop by cholera-treatment centers and other projects of Graham's charity group.

Labels:

Friday, December 03, 2010

Betty Winston Bayé : Is Sarah Palin's Goal More About Money Than Power? I Say: Well, YES!

Is Sarah Palin's goal more about money than power?
By Betty Winston Bayé

Run Sarah Run. That's what some people want, though for different reasons. Some because they actually believe that Palin is qualified to be president, and others because they imagine that she'll get creamed because Americans can't be that stupid.

I'm betting Palin won't run, although I believe she will persist in dangling that possibility because doing so pays so well. If Palin really wanted political duties, she wouldn't have abruptly skipped out on her job as the elected governor of Alaska in order to pursue more lucrative ventures with no responsibility and little need for transparency. You see, what Palin figured out soon after John McCain plucked her from virtual obscurity is that biting the hand that feeds you pays big dividends if you're a good-looking woman who is astute at playing victim while simultaneously bragging of being one mean mama grizzly bear.

The Cult of Palin allows nothing — not ignorance, meanness, banality or Grand Canyon-sized contradictions — to get in the way of what they're feeling. And what they are feeling is love. It must be love that would get elderly folks in wheelchairs, on canes and walkers lining up in freezing cold just to shake Palin's hand and to get her to scribble just “Sarah” in their copies of her new book. Two sisters, both of them nurses who lined up at a Sam's Club book signing, gushed that what they love about Palin are her “values and what she stands for and what she has done for this country.”

It's debatable what Palin has done for the country, but there's no debating what she's done for herself. Her first year out after abruptly resigning her post in Alaska in July 2009, Palin raked in an estimated $12 million, much of that money pouring in from personal appearances. And so far this year, Palin's political action committee has raised more than $3 million, mostly from online contributions and direct appeals. A reported $244,000 of the $3 million-plus went to support Palin's 81 picks in the mid-term elections.

Palin fever is so strong that a Courier-Journal letter-writer opined that Palin and former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice are “equally capable” candidates for president — though, unlike Palin, Rice assuredly does know the difference between North and South Korea, and which of the two governments is U.S.-backed. It's breathtaking to think that a black woman who grew up in segregation, and spent years educating herself, earning a doctoral degree, traveling the world and becoming proficient in several languages and diplomacy, can be thought of by some as merely as qualified as Palin, who can't even answer a simple question about her reading habits. (It was a “trick question,” complained Palin enthusiasts who slammed the reporter for asking.)

The real trick to me is how Palin keeps duping so many Americans.

For example, here we are a country in the throes of an educational and a childhood obesity crisis and so what does Palin do? She shows up at a Christian school bearing cookies for the kids in response to a news report, subsequently retracted because it wasn't true, that Pennsylvania's state board of education was debating “whether public schools were going to ban sweets.”

It's the “nanny state run amok,” Palin intoned to an adoring crowd, and she said that the purpose of her cookie stunt was intended “to shake things up.” The kids got the cookies, and Palin got the applause and the brownie points. Her stunt was also a thinly veiled dig at one of her frequent targets, first lady Michelle Obama, who has adopted America's fitness and childhood obesity problems as among her special causes.

Looking back at the mid-term elections and seeing who won and who almost won and on what kinds of platforms, it is not impossible that enough Americans would be foolish enough to elect Sarah Palin president. In fact, Palin told Barbara Walters that she believes that she can beat President Obama in 2012. For his part, Obama told Walters, “I don't think about Sarah Palin.”

That's apparently a luxury that the President has, but which, unfortunately, the rest of us don't.

Betty Winston Bayé's column appears Thursdays in the Community Forum and online at www.courier-journal.com/opinion. Her e-mail address is bbaye@courier-journal.com.

Editor's comment: Sweetie: it's the money, and she is scooping it all up as fast as she can. Nothing wrong with that, except she needs to be reminded that the Good Book is right about falling in love with stuff Bob Marley would like to remind us all, is machine made! ;-)

Labels:

Wednesday, November 24, 2010

Sarah Palin Hits Back At Barbara Bush As One Of The "Blue Bloods"; Disses FLOTUS Michele Obama. Watch.

Labels:

Tuesday, November 23, 2010

Barbara Bush Wishes Sarah Palin Goes Back To Alaska. OK, She's Not Alone. Watch Video.

Labels:

Wednesday, November 17, 2010

Sarah Palin Hints At Presidential Run In 2012, Says She Can Beat Barack Obama. Read My Comments.

Watch and follow the story.

Editor's comment: Please I am reminding my readers not to laugh about what Sarah Palin said, and to keep a straight face. Yes, I know: she is DELUSIONAL!

Labels: ,

Monday, November 08, 2010

So How Well Did Sarah Palin (And The Tea Party) Do? Pretty Darn WELL, I Might Add. I'm Proud Of Her Success.


How Palin's Endorsement Fared

SENATE

11 endorsements - 50% of her candidates were successful

6 won - Boozman (AR), McCain (AZ), Rubio (FL), Paul (KY), Ayotte (NH), Toomey (PA)

4 lost - Fiorina (CA), O'Donnell (DE), Angle (NV), Raese (WV)

1 undecided – Miller (AL)

GUBERNATORIAL

8 endorsements - 88% of her candidates were successful

7 won - Scott (FL), Branstad (IA), Otter (ID), Martinez (NM), Fallin (OK), Haley (SC), Perry (TX)

1 undecided – Emmer (MN)

*If Emmer wins, Palin would be 100% correct with her support of candidates for governor*

HOUSE

40 endorsements – 48% of her candidates were successful


19 won – Roby (AL-2), Gosar (AZ-1), West (FL-22), Southerland (FL-2), Adams (FL-24), Hultgren (IL-14), Benishek (MI-1), Bachmann (MN-6), Hartzler (MO-4), Nunnelee (MS-1), Ellmers (NC-2), Pearce (NM-2), Grimm (NY-13), Scott (SC-1), Fincher (TN-8), Flores (TX-17), Canseco (TX-23),

McMorris Rodgers (WA-5), Duffy (WI-7)

15 lost – Contreras (AZ-4), Wilkerson (CA-30), Parker (CA-37), McKinney (GA-12), Willoughby (HI-2), Walorski (IN-2), Bielat (MA-4), Steele (MI-15), Marcy (MS-2), Pantano (NC-7), Gomez (NY-2), Burns (PA-12), Campbell (TX-25), Broden (TX-30), Philpot (UT-2)

6 undecided – McClung (AZ-7), Buerkle (NY-25), Farenthold (TX-27), Fimian (VA-11), Koster (WA-2), Muri (WA-9)

Labels:

Sunday, November 02, 2008

John McCain Retaliates, HITS Barack Obama With Rev. Wright Ad. OK, It Was The Republican Trust Org. Which Did, But Is The Ad NOT Old STALE News NOW?

John McCalin (And SILLY SARAH PALIN) And Cindy McCain Reveal Themselves.

Thursday, October 30, 2008

SILLY SARAH Palin Is John McCain's "WHACK JOB". Who Called Her That, You Ask? A John McCain Adviser, And I AGREE. Read More From Politico.Com.


Here's the link from Politico, and below's an excerpt:
John McCain's campaign is looking for a scapegoat. It is looking for someone to blame if McCain loses on Tuesday.

And it has decided on Sarah Palin.

In recent days, a McCain “adviser” told Dana Bash of CNN: “She is a diva. She takes no advice from anyone.”

Imagine not taking advice from the geniuses at the McCain campaign. What could Palin be thinking?

Also, a “top McCain adviser” told Mike Allen of Politico that Palin is “a whack job.”

Maybe she is. But who chose to put this “whack job” on the ticket? Wasn’t it John McCain? And wasn’t it his first presidential-level decision?

And if you are a 72-year-old presidential candidate, wouldn’t you expect that your running mate’s fitness for high office would come under a little extra scrutiny? And, therefore, wouldn’t you make your selection with care? (To say nothing about caring about the future of the nation?)

McCain didn’t seem to care that much. McCain admitted recently on national TV that he “didn’t know her well at all” before he chose Palin.

But why not? Why didn’t he get to know her better before he made his choice?

It’s not like he was rushed. McCain wrapped up the Republican nomination in early March. He didn’t announce his choice for a running mate until late August.

Wasn’t that enough time for McCain to get to know Palin? Wasn’t that enough time for his crackerjack “vetters” to investigate Palin’s strengths and weaknesses, check through records and published accounts, talk to a few people, and learn that she was not only a diva but a whack job diva?

But McCain picked her anyway. He wanted to close the “enthusiasm gap” between himself and Barack Obama. He wanted to inject a little adrenaline into the Republican National Convention. He wanted to goose up the Republican base.

And so he chose Palin. Is she really a diva and a whack job? Could be. There are quite a few in politics. (And a few in journalism, too, though in journalism they are called “columnists.”)

As proof that she is, McCain aides now say Palin is “going rogue” and straying from their script. Wow. What a condemnation. McCain sticks to the script. How well is he doing?

In truth, Palin’s real problem is not her personality or whether she takes orders well. Her real problem is that neither she nor McCain can make a credible case that Palin is ready to assume the presidency should she need to.

And that undercuts McCain’s entire campaign.

This was the deal McCain made with the devil. In exchange for energizing his base by picking Palin, he surrendered his chief selling point: that he was better prepared to run the nation in time of crisis, whether it be economic, an attack by terrorists or, as he has been talking about in recent days, fending off a nuclear war.

“The next president won’t have time to get used to the office,” McCain told a crowd in Miami on Wednesday. “I’ve been tested, my friends, I’ve been tested.”

But has Sarah Palin?

I don’t believe running mates win or lose elections, though some believe they can be a drag on the ticket. Lee Atwater, who was George H.W. Bush’s campaign manager in 1988, told me that Dan Quayle cost the ticket 2 to 3 percentage points. But Bush won the election by 7.8 percentage points.

So, in Atwater’s opinion, Bush survived his bad choice by winning the election on his own.

McCain could do the same thing. But his campaign’s bad decisions have not stopped with Sarah Palin. It has made a series of questionable calls, including making Joe the Plumber the embodiment of the campaign.

Are voters really expected to warmly embrace an (unlicensed) plumber who owes back taxes and complains about the possibility of making a quarter million dollars a year?


And did McCain’s aides really believe so little in John McCain’s own likability that they thought Joe the Plumber would be more likable?

Apparently so. Which is sad.

We in the press make too much of running mates and staff and talking points and all the rest of the hubbub that accompanies a campaign.

In the end, it comes down to two candidates slugging it out.

Either McCain pulls off a victory in the last round or he doesn’t.

And if he doesn’t, he has nobody to blame but himself.

Editor's comment: WHACK JOB, indeed.

Labels: ,

What An Embarrassment. At Rally, John McCain Calls For "FAKE" Plumber Joe And Joe Did NOT Show. Even "Joe The Plumber" Is Abandoning John McCain.

Monday, October 27, 2008

"How Would Obama Or McCain Govern As president?"

How would Obama or McCain govern as president?
By Steven Thomma

WASHINGTON — Americans will know in a little more than a week who'll be the country's 44th president, but despite all the promises and the campaign bluster, they won't know until Jan. 20 and beyond how Barack Obama or John McCain would govern.

A landslide win for Obama, now suggested by the polls, could sweep more Democrats into Congress and give him a relatively free hand to change course at home and abroad on issues from taxes to Iraq.

A sinking economy, however, could force Obama to shift priorities, perhaps even delaying his promised tax increase on the wealthy or his expansion of health care to the uninsured. A resurgence of violence in Iraq could compel him to rethink his plan to withdraw U.S. troops.

On the other side of the crystal ball, a narrow win for McCain, the best possible outcome for him now suggested by polls, would set him up for a titanic fight with a Congress that seems sure to remain in Democratic hands.

McCain has a history of working with Democrats in Congress, but they'd be none too happy about watching the presidency slip from their grasp. It's all but impossible, for example, to see how McCain could get them to ratify his proposal to extend President Bush's tax cuts for the wealthy.

"He has very poor prospects," said George Edwards, a scholar of the presidency and a political scientist at Texas A&M University. "The Democrats would be extremely shocked and irritated if he won. His notions of tax cuts are likely to not go anywhere. His approach to health care probably would not be the one the Democrats would pick up on."

Ironically, though, McCain might be able to strike a bargain with congressional Democrats to extend the expiring tax cuts for those who make less than $200,000 a year, much as Obama wants to do.

A President McCain, like all presidents, would have more leeway on foreign policy than he would on domestic matters. Even there, however, he'd find Congress fighting him at every step and appropriations bill.

"After eight years of the Bush administration, there is an awful lot of animus on Capitol Hill toward the Republican agenda," said former Rep. Tim Penny of Minnesota, a Democrat who's turned independent and supports McCain. "It would be a tricky situation for McCain."

While either candidate could still win, polls this week pointed toward a big win for Obama, who now leads in every state that Democrat John Kerry carried four years ago and in many states that Bush won, including Colorado, Florida, Indiana, Iowa, Ohio and Virginia.

"If these numbers hold up, he could win the biggest Democratic landslide since Lyndon Johnson in 1964," said Peter Brown, the assistant director of the Polling Institute at Quinnipiac University.

Independent analysts such as Charles Cook of the Cook Political Report and Larry Sabato of the University of Virginia say the Democrats also could win a filibuster-proof 60 seats in the Senate and add as many as 30 seats to their majority in the House of Representatives.

What would that mean? If you like Obama, it means that you could be very happy. If you don't like him, you could be very scared.

"If he wins big, there will be some sense of a mandate. And if he's got a lot of Democrats in Congress, they would be inclined to go along with him," Edwards said.

Domestically, Obama's biggest push could be to overhaul the tax code, cutting taxes for individuals who make less than $200,000 a year and raising them on those who make more than $250,000.

Though the government's deficits are likely to soar thanks to the $700 billion upfront cost of the financial system bailout and probable recession-driven drops in tax revenues, Obama says the tax cuts are needed even more now as an economic stimulus.

Whether he can push through the tax increases on the wealthy, as many Democrats want to do, is another question, however.

When ABC's George Stephanopoulos pressed him on whether he'd push the tax increases if the economy were in recession early next year, Obama said, "No, no, no, no, no. . . . I think we've got to take a look and see where the economy is. . . . We're going to have to re-evaluate at the beginning of the year to see what kind of hole we're in."

Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., the chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, also said that concerns about the deficit should take a back seat to using government spending or tax cuts to stimulate the economy. Tax increases on the wealthy can come "later on," he said. "There are a lot of very rich people out there whom we can tax at a point down the road and recover some of this money."

Yet if Obama put off tapping that source of revenue, it would rob the government of the money he says he'd use to expand health care for the uninsured.

Obama's vow to pay for all his new programs could suffer another blow — or force another look at priorities — if he can't withdraw troops from Iraq and use that $10 billion a month elsewhere.

Across the changing chessboard, keeping one big promise could require breaking another.

In style as well, Obama could find himself at odds with congressional Democrats or his broader constituency for change.

That happened to Democrats Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton, though both were more conservative than the congressional wing of their party, while Obama is at home with the liberal wing of the party that dominates on Capitol Hill.

"The challenge for Obama is how he can manage Congress," former representative Penny said. "Maybe he has that ability. But it's a big unknown. He's so new and has such a skinny legislative record."

One key test: If Obama could muster enough Democratic votes to pass legislation, would he still reach out for Republican votes, too?

"There's a lot of pent-up emotion and legislation waiting on Capitol Hill," Penny said. "If Obama allows the Democratic majorities on the Hill to set the agenda and call the shots, I think he could find himself disappointing a lot of voters who are looking to him to be a more conciliatory, bipartisan leader."

Neither party probably could get everything it wanted. Republicans likely could block Obama's plan of "refundable" tax credits to the working poor that would show up as checks; Democrats could block McCain's extension of tax reductions for the wealthy.

Labels: , , ,

Thursday, October 23, 2008

Sarah Palin: John McCain's PAIN. Watch News Video From Reuters.

Talking About Sarah Palin, Moveon.org "Moves On Her". Watch The Ad. It Is Funny.


Are you laughing yet?

Labels: ,

"Sarah Palin NOT Ready To Be President". Says Who You Ask? Her Supporter. Watch.

Wednesday, October 22, 2008

"SILLY" Sarah Palin Says Vice President "Is In Charge Of The Senate". That Is News To Our Founding Fathers. Watch And Laugh.



Are you wondering if she is right?

Well, wonder NO more.

Below is what the U. S. Constitution (Article 1, Section 3) says about the role of the Vice President:

The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be equally divided.

So much for the Vice President being in charge of the Senate.

SILLY SARAH continues to embarrass.

Labels: ,

Saturday, October 18, 2008

"Nailin' Palin?"

Nailin' Palin?

There's a feeling among her vocal supporters that a huge disconnect exists between Sarah Palin and the Lower 48, especially the news media down here.
Advertisement

So, far be it from us to excite their passions with what they would consider an illegitimate attack on the Alaskan governor's abuse of power and violation of government ethics rules in her administration's tireless efforts to sack her former brother-in-law from his state job.

It's a complicated and unseemly stew of family and state politics known as Troopergate.

Last week, the bipartisan Alaska Legislative Council released a voluminous report whose bottom line was this: She abused her power and she violated the state's ethics law.

Naturally, none of this put a break in the Republican vice-presidential nominee's jaunty stride. Nor did it change her insistence that she's an ethical reformer.

Indeed, Palin confidently declared herself vindicated -- no abuse of power, she said; no unlawful actions on her part, she asserted.

We won't bother with Lower 48 media responses to this startling reaction.

What we will share is comment from the editorial page of the Anchorage Daily News, which knows Gov. Palin better than most. It affirmed she was within her right to fire her public safety commissioner, but the violation came in the vendetta against her brother-in-law. The newspaper wrote:

"Her response is either astoundingly ignorant or downright Orwellian.

"Page 8, Finding Number One of the report says: 'I find that Governor Sarah Palin abused her power by violating Alaska Statute 39.52.110(a) of the Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act.'

"In plain English, she did something 'unlawful.' She broke the state ethics law …

"Palin's response is the kind of political 'big lie' that George Orwell warned against. War is peace. Black is white. Up is down …"

More investigation under way.

Editor's comment: As one who has had enough of Dick Cheney, and as one who was JOYFUL when Sarah Palin was chosen but is NOW HUGELY DISAPPOINTED -- especially about her penchant for lying at will, not to talk about her "Dan Quayle" concerns -- can ANYONE convince me that I should TRUST her to be that close to the Presidency (I'm glad I do NOT have to vote today)?

ANYONE?

Hello?

Anyone?

Stay tuned.

Labels:

Thursday, October 16, 2008

Palin's Orwellian World.

Palin's Orwellian world

Sarah Palin's reaction to the Legislature's Troopergate report is an embarrassment to Alaskans and the nation.

She claims the report "vindicates" her. She said that the investigation found "no unlawful or unethical activity on my part."

Her response is either astoundingly ignorant or downright Orwellian.

Page 8, Finding Number One of the report says: "I find that Governor Sarah Palin abused her power by violating Alaska Statute 39.52.110(a) of the Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act."

In plain English, she did something "unlawful." She broke the state ethics law.

Perhaps Palin has been too busy to actually read the Troopergate report. Perhaps she is relying on briefings from McCain campaign spinmeisters.

That's the charitable interpretation. Because if she had actually read it, she couldn't claim "vindication" with a straight face.

Palin asserted that the report found that "there was no abuse of authority at all in trying to get Officer Wooten fired."

In fact, the report concluded that "impermissible pressure was placed on several subordinates in order to advance a personal agenda, to wit: to get Trooper Michael Wooten fired."

Palin's response is the kind of political "big lie" that George Orwell warned against. War is peace. Black is white. Up is down.

Palin and her camp trumpeted the report's second finding: that she was within her legal authority to fire Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan. But the report also said it's likely one of the reasons she fired him was his failure to get rid of her ex-brother-in-law trooper.

That's not "vindication," and surely Palin knows it.

Has Palin committed an impeachable offense? Hardly.

Is what she did indictable? No.

But it wasn't appropriate, especially for someone elected as an ethical reformer. And her Orwellian claims of "vindication" make this blemish on her record look even worse.

anchorage daily news

Labels: ,

Did You Miss The Presidential Debate? Well, Watch It Now.



Oh, BTW, if you wonder who Joe Plumber is, Watch below:

Labels: , , ,

Sunday, October 12, 2008

Does ANYONE Dare Utter The "L" Word?