On a stage adorned with American flags and amid the glitter of Las Vegas, Donald Trump, who had been threatening a third party run for the presidency, revealed he is endorsing Mitt Romney for president of the United States. Earlier in the day it had been rumored that ‘The Donald’ would be endorsing New Gingrich but that turned out to be false. Whether ‘The Donald’s’ gurus in media attention planned the “mistake” we will probably never know. A more valid question is this. Why should we care who Donald Trump endorses for President?

To say that ‘The Donald’ has a penchant for attracting the white-hot lights of media attention would be to state the blatantly obvious. For months Mr. Trump advanced the idea that he might enter the race for the presidency but whenever pushed to declare “yea” or “ney” alluded to the ridiculous notion that his contract with NBC wouldn’t “allow” him to run…equal time restrictions, don’t you know. Right. And if you believe that…well, “you’re fired!”

Make no mistake; I am not taking issue with ‘The Donald’ for his unique ability to captivate the media. More power to him. I am taking issue with the mainstream media and those swayed by celebrity endorsements of political figures for even caring. We – as a voting public – should aspire to make our political choices based on our own research and experiences, not the declarations of those lucky enough to have achieved notoriety; famous or infamous.

(more…)

Cross-Posted: TobyToons.com (Conservative Political Cartoons

Barack Obama coasted to electoral victory in 2008 on the phrases “Hope and Change” and “Yes We Can!”, but it appears that in 2012, his winning campaign slogans could instead be “I like the ability to fire people” and “I’m not concerned about the very poor.”

Of course, these aren’t his words. They’re the words of his potential opponent in the general election, former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney. Romney’s seeming callousness toward poor and unemployed Americans has gone viral among left-wing pundits and social media users, and this is a major problem. As much as conservatives may quibble about context and Romney’s actual intentions, we must keep in mind that Romney will be facing the same electorate that voted Obama into office in 2008–the same electorate that believed Sarah Palin, not Tina Fey, said, “I can see Russia from my house.”

The voters of 2012 will, by and large, not choose a candidate based on proposed policies and governing records; they will choose based on a simple narrative, a log line that makes the case for one’s candidacy in as few words as possible. In 2008, Obama’s was “First Black President.” McCain’s was “Veteran Endured Torture, Served His Country With Honor,” and Palin’s was “Ordinary Mother Rose to Governorship.” By the same token, candidates craft counter-narratives about their opponents. The anti-Obama narrative, “Too Radical, Too Inexperienced,” did not stick, and the anti-Palin narrative, “Stupid,” did, thanks almost wholly to the shameless left-wing advocacy of the mainstream media.

It is an unfortunate fact that having the truth on our side is not enough. Not every voter is as informed as those of us who follow politics religiously; we are the exception to the rule. Nationwide elections such as this are decided not based on truth but the perception of truth, and while I do not say this to justify deception by the Republican Party’s eventual nominee, that individual must be able to withstand the deception and false impressions presented by Obama and his media proxies. (more…)

Newt Gingrich was a tour de force in tonight’s debate. He took a narrative the media hammered at al day, flipped it, and effectively killed it in the span of five minutes. He received another standing O for his rhetorical display thereby insulating himself from further attacks by the other candidates.

No candidate would repeat John King’s remarks after watching the audience’s reaction. He rode the wave for almost the entire debate. Gingrich has repented for his trangressions; as voters we are trying to decide whether he’s genuine. Some will decide that he is; some will decide he’s not.

Santorum bombed on the SOPA question. Internet piracy is a problem but SOPA is akin to shooting goldfish in a bucket with a shotgun. Santorum argues that there should be protections for IP holders on the Internet and says that SOPA goes too far, but I’m not convinced of his resolve. As my friend Derek Hunter notes, tell that to Napster.

(more…)

The White House is under fire for reportedly trying to downplay the role that two Hollywood stars played at a 2009 Halloween party, with press secretary Jay Carney today calling the media’s reporting on the incident “irresponsible” and denying reports of an attempted cover-up. But no record of the two stars, Johnny Depp and Tim Burton, appears in the official White House visitors logs.

An administration source said that entertainers are generally not recorded in the visitors logs. ”Entertainers and production crews who are working events are generally not WAVED in since they are not guests visiting the White House, they are working,” the official said.

(more…)

It seems like everyday I wake up and it’s the same old story with politics and politicians: If you vote for my bill, I’ll support yours; the Republicans hate this and the Democrats hate that; you scratch my earmark and I’ll scratch yours…

It’s frustrating.

If it’s not a disgraceful politician being exposed for illicit behavior, it’s somebody in some party being caught shoveling money to their friends or illegal back-door dealings, or charges being leveled. Then the other party thinks they have the moral high ground, even though it was their guy or gal that was caught the week before.

A massive cottage industry which produces nothing, builds nothing, and spends taxpayer money like it’s going out of style has grown up around Washington DC. It’s an establishment political class, grown fat and powerful on our backs which grows and grows…

… And regardless of the prevailing economic climate – it just keeps getting bigger.

What is the average American supposed to do?

(more…)

Sydney Volanski, a 15-year-old who left the Girl Scouts of the USA and spoke out over the group directing the young members to liberal media group Media Matters for America, appeared on Fox and Friends to talk about the ordeal.

Sydney says the organization also promoted Planned Parenthood and abortion advocacy. In response she started a website, Speak Now: Girl Scouts, with the goal of exposing liberal bias within the Girl Scouts.

“Media”, the book given to the young girls which encouraged them to visit MMFA, is a publication made for those in grades six through eight that shows how they should process and understand the media messages around them. (more…)

UPDATE (11/16 8:42 am EST): Savannah police have now clarified this morning to Big Government via telephone that the shooting of Occupy Savannah activist Jonathan Brazell is being investigated as an ordinary robbery, due partly to the fact that it occurred at a significant distance from the protest site itself.

***

Social media has been the principal vehicle of communication for the #Occupy movement. Through Facebook and Twitter, the loosely-knit band of anarchists, communists and leftist agitators have coordinated their actions and disseminated news to supporters around the world. There has also been a very dark side, but we’ll leave that aside for now. This afternoon, #OccupySavannah, through its Facebook page, announced the murder of an activist at the #Occupy camp:

The posting raises many obvious questions.

(more…)

Throughout the painful and paradoxical existence of Occupy Wall Street (OWS) we have been told by those in the mainstream media, as well as by sympathetic politicos, that at its root, at its genesis, the OWS Movement was both organic and legitimate. We were told that the movement was exclusively about a rebellion against high unemployment and crony Capitalism, even as those championing the cause disingenuously blurred the line between crony Capitalism and Capitalism. But, an honest examination of the underlying goal(s) of this movement – and who is serving to advance its agenda – exposes a nefarious, deceitful and dangerous reality.

The notion of “triangulation” is not new to American politics. Savvy politicians have triangulated messages and circumstances to their benefit ever since the creation of our country. One needs look no further than the debates that took place over the creation of the US Constitution to understand that even though our Framers and Founders were dedicated to their principles and positions, they were willing to employ rhetorical leverage to achieve their goals. Alexander Hamilton was a master at message triangulation.

Perhaps the most contemporary politician to masterfully employ the art of message triangulation was former Pres. Bill Clinton. In pursuit of re-election in 1996, Clinton senior advisor Dick Morris advocated for a set of statements, a set of policies, that differed from those of his fellow elected Democrats. These policies, which pandered to the ideological Middle and Right, included deregulation and balanced budgets, culminating in the false declaration, included in Mr. Clinton’s 1996 State of the Union Address, that the “era of big government is over.”

Triangulation, by way of definition, can be summarized as:

“…the name given to the act of a political candidate presenting his or her ideology as being ‘above’ and ‘between’ the Left and Right sides (or factions) of a traditional democratic political spectrum. It involves adopting for oneself some of the ideas of one’s political opponent (or apparent opponent). The logic behind it is that it both takes credit for the opponent’s ideas, and insulates the triangulator from attacks on that particular issue.”

The same triangulation tactics used by politicos to further their careers can also be used by organizations and movements. In the case of the OWS movement, the use of a triangulated message by Progressives serves to blur the line between crony Capitalism and Capitalism, luring the citizenry to focus on the word “Capitalism,” associating it with the idea of “unfairness,” while Progressives present the notion of redistribution of wealth – a Progressive, neo-Marxist tenet – as being “fair.”

(more…)

The Tea Party and Occupy Wall Street movements were both born out of the despair following the 2008 financial crisis, and both have tapped into the public’s anger over the unfairness of bank bailouts and huge bonuses for the risk takers while the rest of the country has struggled with unemployment, falling home prices and anemic economic growth.

Yet the elite media has constantly vilified the peaceful Tea Party as right-wing rabble for prodding politicians to do nothing more than reduce the bloat of government.

Meanwhile, politicians, the press — and now CEOs — have generally celebrated Occupy Wall Street as the second coming of the civil-rights movement — no matter how many times its followers have clashed with police in the name of Mao and Che Guevara.

And the worst part about these unfair depictions of the Tea Party and Occupy Wall Street?

There’s no end in sight.

I can’t remember a single instance in which the chief executive of a major bank or conglomerate has said something nice about the Tea Party’s goals of limited government, lower taxes and free markets — the very things upon which this country was founded.

But such business leaders as GE chief executive Jeffrey Immelt and Blackrock chief Larry Fink have been falling all over themselves trying to say nice things about the OWS protesters, their grievances and rants against capitalism — even while the unwashed mob is nearly rioting not far from their corporate headquarters.

(more…)

Who doesn’t love soap? Well, the obvious answer is the #OccupyWallStreet crowd, but put them aside for the moment. Everyone else loves soap. Or should. But not everyone does. It turns out that environmentalists don’t care much for soap either. Certain kinds of soap, anyway.

Learning that the “occupiers” and environmentalists have a mutual dislike of certain kinds of soap comes as no surprise to anyone who has ever sat next to them on a subway, but the why is different for each group. Where the protesters, presumably, haven’t used soap in a month out of the necessity of circumstance, the environmentalists shower but want to take your choice of soap away from you.

I’ve written about this before, twice in fact, and while it’s not the most exciting topic on the planet (that honor goes to a tie between the start of NHL season and release of the new iPhone), it’s every bit an affront to liberty as banning incandescent light bulb was. Only with soap, there’s still time to act to stop it.

The offending ingredient in soap is called Triclosan, it’s what makes anti-bacterial soap anti-bacterial and stops you from getting sick an untold number of times every year. But to environmentalists, benefits to humans is of little concern, nor are facts, it’s the agenda of control über alles.

Zealots like Congressman Ed Markey (D-MA) and Congresswoman Louise Slaughter (D-NY) are pushing Congress to ban antibacterial soap under the time-tested Washington favorite motivation “just in case.” Just in case it’s dangerous, just in case it causes problems, just in case…

Under the “just in case” model there is much that wouldn’t be banned, or never have come into being in the first place. That’s why we have science and why science studies things such as this. And science has weighed in.

(more…)

The Michigan Education Association announced this week that a public poll it funded reveals that Michigan residents agree with the union’s take on pending education reforms.

The EPIC/MRA survey results also show that respondents don’t think too much of Gov. Rick Snyder, state Republican lawmakers or their education agenda.

The MEA must think Michiganders are either really stupid or really gullible. Perhaps worse, the media fell for the ruse.

Michigan media fell for the poll equivalent of a whoopie cushion

Consider the lead in to a question posed to those surveyed by the union earlier this month:

“Opponents of legislation to allow local public school districts to outsource teaching services say teachers hired by private companies will not have the experience of those who work for local public school districts, nor the commitment or loyalty to the district or students. Also, they will probably be paid much less and have inferior health insurance and other benefits. That will only force longtime teachers to leave the profession or seek employment elsewhere, with private companies keeping the leftover profits. Knowing this, do you favor or oppose legislation to allow local public school districts to outsource instructional teaching services? [IF FAVOR/OPPOSE, ASK] Would that be strongly or somewhat?”

It’s no wonder the majority answered in opposition. Public opinion surveys with such leading questions are known as push-polls, and are designed to solicit specific responses. College freshman learn that in Political Science 101.

What baffles us is why any self-respecting journalist would buy into this ridiculously tainted survey. Unfortunately, several did.

(more…)

To quote someone we all know and love, let me be perfectly clear:  The mainstream media is the bought and paid for lapdog of the liberal Democrat elite.  It will not only never give conservatives a fair hearing but will actively distort, lie and slander in an effort to destroy any conservative it sees as a threat to its masters.  So why the hell do conservatives treat its members with anything other than contempt and allow it to set the agenda and exploit fault lines in the movement?

Easy – conservatives tend to be polite, reasonable people with a genuine interest in honest debate and a quaint belief in the efficacy of things like “facts” and “evidence” as a way to demonstrate the truth.  No wonder they get rolled.  The other side believes in none of those things – its only belief is that leftism must prevail and any other value is disposable if it turns into a liability.  The answer is conservative judo – understanding how the Left works and using its own weight and momentum against it.  We need to start being less like butt-kissing conservanerd David Brooks and more like butt-kicking conservastud Chuck Norris.

Conservative judo means going on the offense and keeping on the offense.  It’s not about reasoning with unreasonable people; it’s about using their own strengths against them to defeat them.  It has application to the GOP candidates for sure, but it also applies to those of us in the real world facing liberals every day.

The bizarre Rick Perry rock pseudo-scandal is a wonderful teachable moment for conservatives, mostly because the GOP candidates’ reactions allowed this contemptible lie to gain steam.  The Washington Post ran a story that some idiot wrote a racial slur on a rock at some ranch where Rick Perry hunted.  Now, one might observe that the facts and evidence show that about 30 years ago the Perry family got a hunting lease and promptly painted over the word.  One might also note that Perry was a Democrat at the time.  Moreover, the sources who disagree can’t agree on a different timeline and won’t give their names – inconsistent, anonymous hearsay is apparently acceptable when it comes to conservatives.

But none of this matters.  It’s not about “facts” or “evidence” or even “truth.”  It’s a calculated smear designed by a liberal rag to slander a leading GOP candidate.  Moreover, it is another example of a partisan political publication hiding behind the lie that it is an objective news source.  It is not.  The Washington Post, like the New York Times and the vast majority of mainstream media outlets, is an active collaborator with the liberal elite.  If it weren’t, Andrew Breitbart would not be the one breaking the story of Barak Obama’s game of patty cake with the expressly black supremacist New Black Panthers.

The question is, then, why the other GOP candidates tolerated this attack instead of coming to his defense – after all, this was an attack not just on Rick Perry but upon every conservative.  This was pure innuendo designed not just to trash one candidate but to feed a narrative that all conservatives are just one sheet away from an old fashioned cross burning of the kind dead Democratic icon Robert Byrd would have enjoyed in his pre-Senate capacity as a KKK Kleagle.

Herman Cain fell right into the trap.  A good man, it seems he did so here not in a short-sighted attempt to capitalize on the blow to Rick Perry but because he was genuinely disgusted with the idea that some nitwit would paint that sort of thing on a rock.  When asked about it (at the 3:42 mark) by Chris Wallace of Fox News, he responded that it was “insensitive.”  Well, “insensitive” is one word for it – Cain was being kind.  My saltier characterization would have included an adjective beginning with an “F.”  Cain later clarified that he was referring to the person who wrote it, and that he did not believe the Rock of Outrages represented Perry’s belief.  Too late.  The damage was done.

(more…)

There is a great discontent emanating from the Democrat and Progressive base regarding President Obama’s performance, a demographic he desperately needs if he is to succeed in his bid for re-election. Many in the traditional Republican circles, especially the so-called Republican strategists, argue that Republicans could run a teleprompter-reading “animatron” and win in 2012.

This is a foolish and dangerous position to espouse but one that should come as no surprise. Republicans, since their first days as a party, have honed the skill of shooting themselves in the foot to perfection. If Conservatives and Republicans don’t wake-up, evolve in their media tactics, get ahead of the message, frame their opponents and mandate the argument before the Progressives do, we could very well find Barack Obama taking the Oath of Office in 2013.

Steve Chapman, no stranger to the Chicago Progressive crowd, wrote in The Chicago Tribune:

“The vultures are starting to circle. Former White House spokesman Bill Burton said that unless Obama can rally the Democratic base, which is disillusioned with him, ‘it’s going to be impossible for the president to win.’ Democratic consultant James Carville had one word of advice for Obama: ‘Panic.’

“But there is good news for the president. I checked the Constitution, and he is under no compulsion to run for re-election. He can scrap the campaign, bag the fundraising calls and never watch another Republican debate as long as he’s willing to vacate the premises by Jan. 20, 2013.

“That might be the sensible thing to do….”

Chapman continues by submitting his choice to replace Mr. Obama for the Democrat nominee in 2012:

“The ideal candidate would be a figure of stature and ability who can’t be blamed for the economy. That person should not be a member of Congress, since it has an even lower approval rating than the president’s.

“It would also help to be conspicuously associated with prosperity. Given Obama’s reputation for being too quick to compromise, a reputation for toughness would be an asset.

“As it happens, there is someone at hand who fits this description: Hillary Clinton.”

Hillary Clinton.

Truth be told, there has been a softening among the moderate Conservatives and Republicans where Mrs. Clinton is concerned. Some feel sorry for her, and for myriad obvious personal and professional reasons. Others believe that she would have been a better choice for the nation as president than Barack Obama. Regardless of their reasons, the fact remains that there is a contingent on the Right side of the aisle who have forgotten that Mrs. Clinton is, herself, a Progressive, and by her own admission.

(more…)

Politicians and the media constantly ask “What’s the matter with the economy?” The answer was on glorious display this past weekend. Ironically, it is the politicians and media who are ruining it. “The storm of the century” turned out to be “the most hyped storm of the century,” along with one of the most hysterical, exaggerated, manipulated media events of all time. Irene was a…rainstorm. A big one, a bad one…but nonetheless, a rainstorm. But a large dangerous rainstorm didn’t fit the agenda of the power-hungry politicians, or their partners in the business of hysteria, the “if it bleeds, it leads” national media doom machine.

Media and politicians need big catastrophes and emergencies to burnish their images and make them seem important. They need to brandish words like “the worst ever” “the biggest ever” “the most deadly ever.” The media loves these bigger-than-life headlines because they are highly profitable. The bigger, the better- it’s all good for business. The more hysterical they can make the public, the higher the ratings. Catastrophes SELL!

Politicians also need catastrophes and emergencies- to show they are in charge, looking out for us helpless little people. Politicians desperately need high profile platforms to showcase their leadership skills, to shout “Get out now, or you’ll die. I’m saving your life. I’m the only thing that stands between you and annilihation.” Emergencies allow politicians to bully, intimidate and threaten citizens, and to prove how obviously more important and brilliant they are than the lowly citizens. And, of course, if the politician is right, and the worst happens, they’ve got a platform to shout about how much we need them and how indebted we should be to them

.But what if they’re wrong? Shouldn’t they be held accountable for pulling a false alarm? Shouldn’t they be called out for needlessly scaring citizens, shutting down entire cities, entire states, the entire Eastern Seaboard for…a big rainstorm? Shouldn’t they pay the consequences for threatening and intimidating their own citizens to abandon their homes and businesses…for a big rainstorm?

(more…)

If we are going to win this thing, this battle to retake our culture and our country, you are going to have to learn to love to fight.

This battle can’t be left to a few champions who do battle on the airwaves or on cable or on the Internet, or who just do their part tweeting and Facebooking.  While we Constitutional conservatives, Tea Partiers, or whatever we call ourselves have been punching above our weight – the merely crappy debt ceiling deal would have been an unholy abomination of a deal if not for the intransigence of our Congressional allies supported by our voices from outside the Beltway – the fact is that we need more warriors.  That’s you.

And to be a warrior you need to want to fight.  You need to need to fight.  I’m not talking about punching and kicking – though if someone wants to go there, hey, let’s rock.  This is spoken or written combat, whether the battlefield is a cocktail party or a Facebook page.  And it’s vital.  These are serious issues that are worth fighting over.   Our Founders didn’t think they were making a country for a bunch of simpering, goody-goody wimps who go all wobbly at a harsh word or a raised voice.  Democracy requires guts.  Nut up.

People whine about fighting, cry over “bickering,” stammer out clichés about “bipartisanship,” “compromise” and being “reasonable.”  Well, I reject bipartisanship, compromise and reasonability, and so must you.  I want to fight and to win; death or glory.  Compromise is for losers – half a turd is still 100% turd.  But enough about the debt ceiling bill.

(more…)

If you believe everything you read, Sarah Palin is the worst thing that has ever happened to America. She has proven that women aren’t, in fact, victimized by a male-dominated society to the extent that organizations such as N.O.W. and Planned Parenthood would have you believe.

[image via Dreams Time]

She has proven that you CAN, in fact, win a fight against the media. She has taken the best of their beatings while they have made it abundantly clear for nearly 3 years now that their number one goal has been to denigrate and destroy her (and drag her family through the mud for good measure). They have done everything in their collective power, to defame and discredit her no matter what she endeavors to do, and yet she keeps smiling and flipping them off at every opportune moment.

She has proven that you really CAN carve out a living for yourself, even in these economic times, by working hard and making the necessary sacrifices of long hours and sufficient effort (as well as putting up with the usually unfounded personal attacks) to put a meal on your family’s table (while being chastised with impunity for it by media and politicians -from both sides – alike).

And, she has proven to have more sack panache than most of the men I have ever met.

I love this woman, and whether she’s the right person to be our next President or not, she ought to be America’s SoulKeeper™ for what she endures and what she gives back in the abject lessons she’s helping us learn about how evil people really CAN be when someone comes along that doesn’t fit into their tidy little mold of how people should think and act. God bless her for that.

(more…)

From the UK’s Telegraph:

To an extent, the emails remind Americans of the person they saw take the state at the Republican National Convention in Minnesota nearly three years ago – refreshing, plain-speaking, open and uncomplicated.

Since then, her image has hardened into one of a brittle, even paranoid, politician who seethes with resentment, feels aggrieved and entitled and is intent on pursuing celebrity even at the expense of her family.

Mrs Palin as a person has become so remote that it is hard for to assess how much, if any, of that widely-held caricature has a basis in truth. The email release could mark the end of a chapter of what conservatives have termed “Palin Derangement Syndrome”. Her enemies in the media appear to have overplayed their hand.

(more…)

Andrew Breitbart’s recent epic battle with the forces of liberal tolerance is not the most important lesson he offers – not by a longshot.  There has got to be someone surprised by the way the Huffington Post fell to its figurative knees to kiss the figurative asses of Van Jones and his commie pals the second they started whining about how Breitbart was speaking his mind, but that someone likely believes in climate change and unicorn rodeos.  Liberals treat concepts like “freedom of speech” and “diversity” like lonely teenage boys treat Kleenex; their floor is littered with wadded-up, discarded principles like free expression that have out-lived their usefulness.  If you are shocked that the liberal media is anything more than a Ministry of Truth promoting the lamest collectivist clichés du jour, you either haven’t been paying attention, or you are really, really dumb.

No, Andrew Breitbart’s most important lesson – one he’ll happily tell you about and which his bestselling book will describes in depth – is that ten years ago, he was just some regular guy.  He wasn’t a Harvard grad or a congressman or a TV anchor.  He was just a normal American citizen who had had enough.  The only difference between him and everyone else is that he chose to get into the fight by leveraging his growing political maturity with the exploding phenomena that is the internet.  And that’s a decision you can make too.

At a superficial level, what my boring communications professors droned on about while my buddies and I took Bacardi hits off a flask in the last rows of the UCSD lecture halls, is true – the medium itself is the message.  Supported by talk radio, conservative think tanks and Fox News, the internet and the social media it has made possible – the Facebooks, the Twitters, the podcasting and the blogs – represent the destruction of the old order of political discourse.  And that creative destruction is what we represent – the new paradigm that has turned the once mighty New York Times into a pathetic brochure that today sets the agenda for no one but the Manhattan-bound, neo-Pauline Kael set whose members can’t believe those Tea Party barbarians prevailed last November because they don’t know any.

The issue is not whether you can be part of the fight.  You can.  You can organize, to the extent the Tea Party movement lends itself to organization (Chaos is its best defense against co-opting!).  You can start a blog, you can tweet, or you can Facebook (Is that a verb yet?).  The number of internet radio shows and podcasts like Jimmy Bise, Jr.’s “The Delivery” are exploding.  New radio hosts are coming out of the movement, like Larry “Stage Right” O’Connor, Dana Loesch and Tony Katz – and they are crossing into terrestrial radio.  Your opportunity is unlimited.

(more…)

UPDATE: Oh look, the MSM’s already making thing’s up. See here.

If Sarah Palin’s not running for president, what a terrible waste that would be of the single best stump speech I’ve heard since, well, Palin’s ’08 convention speech, which just happened to be the single most electrifying political moment of my adult life. A thrill didn’t just run up my leg that night, it ran up everything in me that’s American, and today in Madison, WI, it happened again. Surrounded by an obnoxiously hostile, astro-turfed, pro-union crowd that tried and failed to drown out her message with obnoxiously hostile astro-turfed noise, the former Alaskan Governor took the fight directly to the growing pile of Obama’s failures in the most effective way we’ve heard yet from a potential GOP challenger.

If you want to know why Obama’s Palace Guards in the MSM are determined to destroy this woman and all of popular culture has risen up to help, press PLAY. If you want to know why the GOP Establishment had better start looking over their collective shoulders, press PLAY.

—–

You see what else she did there? Exactly what she did as a reform-minded governor in Alaska. She called the GOP Establishment out for everything they’re doing wrong, appealed to reasonable rank-and-file union members disgusted by their leadership, and reaffirmed her own proud union credentials. Better yet, she also launched the kind of tight, sharp, and articulate attack on President Obama’s failed presidency that likely has the White House — and their media allies — loosening their ties, clearing their throats, and looking for any word she might have mispronounced as an excuse to drown out her appealing message with the furtherance of a cruel “stupid” narrative they’ve been failing at for two-plus years.

I’ll ask again: How can someone so “dumb” be so right about everything?

(more…)