Sarah Palin to Speak in Santa Barbara for Reagan 100 Festivities

» old timer on 01.28.11 @ 04:08 PM

Let us welcome Sarah Palin as a politician who became a celebrity.

May she announce her candidacy for President.  The GOP would be fractionalized with her in the 2012 race, yes?

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

» GeeWillikersWally on 01.28.11 @ 06:16 PM

Nobody needs to worry about voting for Palin as there is no chance of her even being nominated .

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

» Daniel Petry on 01.29.11 @ 05:48 AM

rajid…you won’t be voting conservative anyway so don’t tax your brain about it.

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

» Daniel Petry on 01.29.11 @ 11:17 AM

Ya see now old timer that’s were we come from different universes. You believe that all expended funds are somehow connected to your masters in gov’t. Me I believe that a private business/foundation can spend their money anyway they want. That said. See my comments above. Now go outside. It’s a beautiful day. Ciao.

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

» publius on 01.29.11 @ 05:18 PM

Which is more embarrassing?

Westmont College, a “Christian” school, inviting war starter Condoleeza {where are those WMDs?] Rice, or the Young Americans Foundation, inviting Sarah Palin to keynote Ronald Reagan’s 100th birthday tribute?

Reagan was NOT a quitter, a whiner, a wedge politician. Palin appears to be all of those.

Reagan and his team melded charm and polished word-smithing on everything
he said. Palin shoots from the hip.

Reagan would try to work with anyone to make California, then America, better,
stronger, safer, more prosperous. With Palin, it’s always Them vs. Us.

Reagan would modify his personal beliefs if it meant solving problems, and
effectively addressing real issues. Palin tries to impose her ever-changing beliefs to gain ideological ground, even if it means not solving problems or
effectively addressing issues.

Palin has demonstrated, repeatedly, by her utterances that she neither knows,
nor appreciates, the real-life Ronald Reagan, what he believed in, or how he
worked.

Will the Young Americans event draw a big-money crowd? Probably.

But if this is the best they think they can do to “honor” Reagan’s memory, then
Shame!

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

» Overtaxed Taxpayer on 01.29.11 @ 11:06 PM

The Girly men of Santa Barbara are intimidated by Sarah, and the weak tax and spend liberal women hate her also..

The rest of us welcome you!

You have already flagged this entry.

» noleta res on 01.30.11 @ 07:55 AM

If the YAF (ahh, to be young and stupid again!) wants to waste their money on the ignorant and the evil (dark Cheney matter will also speak), let them. The sooner they dry up and blow away the better, and I hope they take Dr Laura with them. I take that back, they have every right to honor President Reagan, but publius’ comments are well placed re the incongruity of using Palin to do it. Reagan would have never called a SOTU speech “a WTF moment” (and I’m pretty sure she didn’t mean “Win The Future”). I disagreed with a lot of Reagan’s policies at the time, but he never lacked for class and eloquence. Palin has never even been in the same room as those. Reagan deserves better.

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

» Daniel Petry on 01.30.11 @ 09:22 AM

Wow.  So witty and succinct.  You are truly an amazing progressive.  Let’s see, she is beautiful, she has raised some cool kids, her husband actually works for a living, she has run a state and negotiated with oil companies and beaten them at their own game…and she is a best selling author.  And what can GeeWillikersWally claim to fame be?  Hmmmm…still thinking….still thinking…golly gee Gee I can’t think of anything.  Oh yea!  Wait.  You can claim to have a lonely republican wife.  Yea, that’s it.

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

» Alex Quinn on 01.31.11 @ 07:44 AM

Nobody is threatened by Palin. At best, her antics are purely entertaining. Let her come and let all the proto-fascist tea partiers fawn all over her. Reagan was an empty shell, she’s an empty shell, it all fits.

Daniel Petry—your white supremacist leanings are showing in your comments about Obama. You might want to focus on the policies (the actual policies, not the imagined ones) and tone down the attacks on the man…Unless you’re proud of being a bigot.

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

» publius on 01.31.11 @ 03:18 PM

Mr. Petry is more than entitled to his opinions, as long as he doesn’t conflate
them with facts and history, to mangle truth.

There are many people in this area who knew/worked with Ronald Reagan, the
real person, who served 2 terms as governor, then 2 as president. Petry wasn’t one of them, however.

Lou Cannon created a whole second career as Reagan’s most active biographer.
The Wall Street Journal’s Peggy Noonan was his principal speech-writer, and
often references their private conversations in her books and articles.

Reagan’s own Diaries were published not long ago, in a pretty hefty volume. Much was mundane musing on life’s quotidian activities. But many nuggets reflect Reagan’s thinking on “big issues” in ways Mr. Petry seems unable to grasp. Fine. He can choose his own reading list.

Condy Rice was National Security Adviser when we invaded Iraq, and when bin
Laden escaped encirclement in the Tora Bora mountain region. Obviously, hers
was a key voice in what President Bush presented to Congress.

No WMDs were ever found in Iraq. No evidence that Iraq had any involvement in 9/11 has ever been produced.

No credible reason why U.S. forces were re-deployed from the original Afghan front to prep for Iraq has ever been offered by Rice, even though it let alQaeda’s leadership, and mullah Omar’s Taliban leaders, escape.

Thousands of Americans were killed, or seriously disabled, by our Iraq adventure
and over one-hundred thousand Iraqis died in the process.

The buffer between Iran and the rest of the Middle East that Reagan favored in Iraq has been shredded by Rice’s failed policies.

The escape and reconstruction of alQaeda and the Taliban have helped seriously de-stabilize Pakistan. During Rice’s watch, both Iran and North Korea [not Iraq] went “nuclear”, a mess she left for others to clean up.

That is a pretty heavy burden for anyone to shoulder, even with Mr. Petry on her side.

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

» Daniel Petry on 01.31.11 @ 04:37 PM

I can ignore the ramblings of such a mental giant and strategist who says things like there are 57 States, or has the realpolitik experience to lose Egypt, Pakistan, Yemen, Turkey, Lebanon, and alienates our two strongest allies, all while he destroys our economy, a man that on one hand says we need to stop the spending that he himself has pushed through and then gets up and says he wants to spend more under the guise of “investment”, or even those that say the Guam will tip over with more Marines placed on it, or that there are three branches of the government – the Senate, the House, and the President, or someone that says the the Constitution guarantees life, liberty, and the pursuit of health.  But I find it fortuitous, for our freedom, that such mental giants did not take the time to read their tome of a bill that was written for them by the Tides Foundation (Soros). As a result something that any first year lawyer, or politician, knows that you have to establish severibility was not written into this abortion of a bill.  And remember that this fool supported health care reform that did not include an individual mandate because he was at that time (2008) strongly opposed to the idea, stating that ‘if a mandate was the solution, we can try that to solve homelessness by mandating everybody to buy a house,’” Wow - and you guys are freaking out about Sarah Palin and how to blame Condoleza Rice for starting the Iraq war?  Can you share the name of the doctor that is prescribing your drugs? I’d really like to experience your Wizard of Oz reality for just a day.  BTW I do like the re-branding effort you progs are attempting with RR.

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

» GeeWillikersWally on 01.31.11 @ 05:27 PM

Alex , you don’t have to look very hard to see the real Petry . He shows us in his own words. In the Noozhawk archive you can find an article by Mona Charen titled “Has Obama moved center on nuclear power” . In the first comment on this article , Petry calls Obama ” boy” , minus the qualifier of “man boy” or “man child” that he frequently also has used.  Now to him that term is o.k., yet he has yet to take the challenge of using that word while addressing passerby at Normandy and Manchester.
  Don’t forget that his “good friend”  THURSTON has also told us that Petry has an African American girlfriend. The more you read Petry’s stuff , the more you will see him tangle himself up . If you don’t take him too seriously it can be a source of good entertainment . Now duck and cover cause here comes the avalanche of ricocheting insults .

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

» Cindy Rivers on 01.31.11 @ 06:24 PM

Good grief Gee, you really do have a man crush on Petry. And here comes the avalanche of ricocheting insults. I have been watching this thread and finally had to comment. I like Petry because he never backs down, obviously is very intelligent, has a vast handle on history, and definitely wipes the mat with you guys at every turn. He has a great sense of humor and uses it like a knife to cut you libs to pieces. He has been literally stalked by a number of you yet he still puts his name out there as well as his picture, and seeing how libs have a tendency to try to shoot people they don’t like that could be dangerous. Especially when someone is as obsessed as you. Who knows what could send you over the edge. It’s obvious that he enjoys playing with you. He “beat” one poster down so bad that he ran over to that beacon of even handed journalism – the independent. His friend Thurston is definitely loyal and that says a lot to me when someone will not just read an article but will fight for his friend. I doubt you can claim the same. And Gee we have seen your posts. You try very hard to deflect discussions, and disparage the posters, but it always rings hollow and weak. You never address an issue. You only have the limited capability to flail and whine. So I’d have to say you can’t hold a candle to Mr. Petry. But that is not what this article was about. How’s that for an avalanche of ricocheting insults?

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

» passing-by on 02.01.11 @ 08:14 AM

I agree with Lou @ Reagan’s emotional tenor and the confidence that he engendered in Americans, especially during his first term.
Still, he was the first president to see a $100 billion increase in the national debt, and the first to see a $200 billion increase as well… and the national debt increased by more than 20% (from about 1/3rd of GDP to more than half of GDP) during his two administrations.

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

» Overtaxed Taxpayer on 02.01.11 @ 09:06 AM

The liberals are the most angry people in the U.S—

Just read all the posts—I think its funny..

Most have that hollywood elitist attitude, Rich trying to fit in because of guilt, but most dont work hard for a living—God forbid they get their hands dirty.

They love to talk, and tell the rest of us how to live..

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

» lou segal on 02.01.11 @ 10:49 AM

Passing-by, Reagan would have agreed with you. In his farewell address, he said that his greatest regret was the deficit. In his defense, he had to deal with a Congress led by the opposing Party that never passed any of his budgets. He tried to cut spending, but was thwarted repeatedly. Interestingly, although he drastically reduced taxes during his Administration, govt revenues increased dramatically. Yes, he increased defense spending, but you need to remember that at the time of his inauguration, the Soviet Union had recently invaded Afghanistan, were financially and militarily supporting Communist rebellions in Africa and Asia, and actively exporting their totalitarian agenda throughout the world. They were also threatening Europe with short-range nuclear missiles.  Our military capabilities had been allowed to degrade by prior Administrations, and he knew that it was imperative to counteract the Soviet Union’s aggression. You may not agree, but I believe the downfall of the Soviet Union was partially attributable to our military build-up.

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

» surfsb on 02.01.11 @ 12:44 PM

The cult of Reagan worship as some prophetic Republican demigod is hilarious.  Despite being re-elected in a landslide (so was Nixon lol), he wasn’t that liked and by the end of his second term the country felt an enormous fatigue from his economic policies.  Had it not been for the tactics of Atwater and co, there would have been a strong rebuking of his time in office, much like 08 with two terms of W.  I guess in 36 years when W is 100 there will be some giant smooze fest about his career going on somewhere in hickville texas.

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

» grundss on 02.01.11 @ 01:23 PM

Mr Petry, in referring to Obama, do you use the words ‘boy’ and ‘nappy’ on purpose?

Its hard to regard your posts respectfully when you use these terms with such disregard. And to echo another poster, you are intelligent so I believe you know exactly what you are saying.

Amazing in this day and age.

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

» Daniel Petry on 02.01.11 @ 01:58 PM

You hyper-sensitive progs are to easy to tweak. As a leader you have to earn my repect for me to call you a man, till then you’re a boy. Clinton is a man, Obama is a boy.  Show Mrs. Plain respect for raising a beautiful family, having a loyal relationship with her husband, leading a community and a state and having the guts to put up with hyper-sensitive two tone closed minded racist misogynists, then you can deride her philosophy all you want. Till then you and your leader are a “boy.”

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

» grundss on 02.01.11 @ 03:25 PM

i’m a conservative. i just don’t like the racial overtones of your posts. ‘nappy’. its too bad the GOP has to not only try to make its point amongst all the cacophony that accompanies Ms Palin, but when you use barely disguised racially offensive terms, it dilutes our message.

i understand you enjoy the fencing, but you really come across as another bigot. Its easy to slam Obama, but leave race out of it. keep your personal racial feelings out of it please.

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

» Charlene Davis on 02.01.11 @ 04:14 PM

Allowing a liberal to be able to define you and control discussion down to the words you use is nothing other than ceding ground to an enemy. And grunss these people are your enemy.  They detest you, your nation and will say anything and do anything to eviscerate it. Being a moderate “conservative” does nothing other than play into their hands.  Wait and see the reaction your comment gets. I think Dan refuses to be defined, he is defending Sarah’s right to give her speech and is pointing out the mindless viciousness her name and presence brings to those that say she means nothing.  All the while screaming and caterwauling.  So I say go to it Dan and to hell with weak kneed political correctness and politically correct moderates.

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

» Charlene Davis on 02.01.11 @ 05:11 PM

I rest my case grunss. Just throw it back grunss.  By the way Obama’s father was Nigerian. But perhaps we can finally put the question of his birth to bed when that new governor finds his birth certificate. Now grunss watch this.

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

» Charlene Davis on 02.01.11 @ 06:34 PM

God, no wonder you guys get your butts kicked in elections.  You remind of the weakling that was always kicked out of the sand box and went crying to the nearest adult or as Dan says just another REMF.  So I guess Obama’s dad is not Nigerian? Wow I did not know that.  So who what nationality was his dad Passing by?

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

» Daniel Petry on 02.01.11 @ 08:24 PM

Alex you need to learn to play chess.  You were totally set up.  Not surprising having an inkling of your education level.  I bet you don’t even realize how you were set up and exposed do you?  Live and learn boy.

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

» Daniel Petry on 02.01.11 @ 08:56 PM

Charlene that was pretty sharp. Getting these things to admit that Obama’s father was not native born. They are easy yes?  We play poker every Thursday you are more than welcome to join us. You know how to reach me.  A couple of these guys go all the way back to Bugsy Seagal. Love to have you there, they hate Dems and you’ll have fun.  And yes, passing by, RT & Charlene called you right.

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

» GeeWillikersWally on 02.02.11 @ 01:28 AM

Remember guys , your intelligence and reasoning are being insulted by a group of Einsteins who exhibited their analytical skills by choosing W ..... twice! Petry has yet to realize that blunder. Furthermore, he likes to tell us how he maintains a “relationship” with Dick Cheney. Just one more of his little fairy tales that his delusional followers swallow hook , line & sinker. Does that sound like someone who has learned anything from that dark period ?
  Now , you could forgive them their little 8 year loss of judgement if only they had learned something , anything, from it . A little humility , introspect perhaps? But noooooo… here they are loudly trying to shove their ideology down our throats again, never taking a look back at the mayhem they helped foist upon the country and accepting their fair share of the blame(not all, just a fair share).  Personally ,I consider the source and wear their derision as a badge of honor.

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

» AN50 on 02.02.11 @ 09:16 AM

Blah, blah, blah, Rome burns while Nero fiddles.

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

» swest on 02.02.11 @ 08:58 PM

Let me get this straight . . . .
We’re going to be “gifted” with a health care plan we are forced to purchase and
fined if we don’t, which purportedly covers at least ten million more people,
without adding a single new doctor, but provides for 16,000 new IRS agents,
written by a committee whose chairman says he doesn’t understand it, passed by a Congress that didn’t read it but exempted themselves from it, and signed by a President who smokes, with funding administered by a treasury chief who didn’t pay his taxes, for which we’ll be taxed for four years before any benefits take effect, by a government which has already bankrupted Social Security and Medicare, all to be overseen by a surgeon general who is obese, and financed by a country that’s broke!!!!!  ‘What the hell could possibly go wrong?’

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

» Daniel Petry on 02.03.11 @ 07:12 AM

So true. Here’s Ben’s, comment, ““Fathom the odd hypocrisy that the government wants every citizen to prove that they are insured, but people don’t have to prove they are citizens.”

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

» swest on 02.03.11 @ 08:05 AM

“What is to be the consequence, in case the Congress shall misconstrue this part [the necessary and proper clause] of the Constitution and exercise powers not warranted by its true meaning, I answer the same as if they should misconstrue or enlarge any other power vested in them…the success of the usurpation will depend on the executive and judiciary departments, which are to expound and give effect to the legislative acts; and in a last resort a remedy must be obtained from the people, who can by the elections of more faithful representatives, annul the acts of the usurpers.”—James Madison, Federalist No. 44

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

» BUFF on 02.03.11 @ 08:34 AM

DP- three skills huh? Typing, creative expense reports, and playing with yourself to pics of Palin? did I get them all?

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

» AN50 on 02.03.11 @ 12:15 PM

Ditto on Swest comment. Dan great follow up quote! Too bad those who hate Palin can’t comment on the substantive material here and instead waste themselves on a severe man crush on Danno. Get over it little boys.

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

» Bloggulator on 02.04.11 @ 10:41 PM

So Cheney’s in town. Mr. 9/11 is going to pay us a visit, then?

Cheney: the chicken-hawk *coward* who deferred military service on 4 separate occasions because he had “other priorities”.

Cheney: the man who co-signed the notorious PNAC document on September 10, 2000 (Rebuilding America’s Defenses), that called for all-out war in the middle east, tripling the “defense” budget, putting weapons in space, and developing genetically engineered biological agents specifically targeting mid eastern (Arab) “ethnic genotypes”.

Cheney: the man who organized no less than 20 simultaneous military drills and exercises on the morning of 9/11 that effective kept our air force interception jets away from the area which was under attack.

Cheney: the man who lied to the 9/11 Commission regarding his whereabouts on the morning of 9/11, as witnessed by former Transportation Sec. Norman Mineta and many others.

Cheney: the man who ordered the plane that hit the Pentagon not to be intercepted, when there was ample warning in advance.

Cheney: the man who changed the rules regarding the protocol for plane interceptions in July 2001, which required that the default scramble procedure be authorized by the then Defense Sec. Rumsfeld. (The original working protocol was restored September 12, 2001).

Cheney: The man who held Dubya’s hand to shield him from any awkward questions posed by the 9/11 Commission.

Cheney: the man who lied about linking Iraq and the 9/11 attacks.

Cheney: the man who lied about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

Cheney: the man who authorized and supporting the detention and torture of people without charge.

One would have thought that Cheney would have *loved* those 19 rookie kids who disabled the entire US military/security/intelligence apparatus that morning… they earned him, alongside Chjeney’s buddyboys in the war and oil sectors, vast fortunes from the programs and events that resulted from the 9/11 attacks.

But hey, those who have digested only the corporate “weasel” media may knee-jerk about “conspiracy theories”. (Yawn). Such infantile responses can only come from the mouths of those who cannot handle having their comfort zones ruffled, or those who acknowledge that the laws of physics can be violated when it comes to blaming the “evil Muslims”. Such, since the end of WWII, has been a national sport, and since the fall of organized communism, has become a national obsession.

How about we send that evil traitor to Guantanamo Bay… and yes, it would be fascinating to see if he likes being water boarded…..

You don't have permission to flag this entry.