Monday, January 11, 2010

Sarah Palin Signs On With Fox News!

I just returned home from an overnight stay with my daughter. The first thing I read on the blogs is great news! Nice Deb is reporting: Sarah Palin Signs On With Fox News!

This is great news! Sarah will be out in the public eye where people will once again be able to see her real, genuine persona. They will not be influenced anymore by the liberal liars in the Media of Mass Deception whose only goal was (and continues to be) to try and destroy her. I’m reading her book. She can handle these jerks and she will do it in a dignified manner that will irritate them all the more! Ha! I’m looking forward to hearing what she has to say on a regular basis. She will be able to rip apart the Dems deceptive policies and share her own conservative, Constitution-abiding ones to solve many of the problems here in America. She can still run for office (if she so chooses) in the future. There are still three more years until the 2012 election.

Hat Tip: Nice Deb

P.S. I loved what Sarah wrote on page 38 of her book "Going Rogue" where she describes what her husband Todd had gone through while making tough decisions on his own at a young age:

Because of that, principles like honesty, justice, and accountability became crucial to his life perspective, and he understood intuitively that you get to choose how to respond to circumstances around you--even those out of your control. You get to decide what's really important and what your attitude will be.

No wonder the guy was a rock solid help throughout all of the attacks that he, Sarah, and their children endured since Sarah was first introduced as John McCain's running mate for the 2008 presidential election! Sarah exhibits the same type of traits and that is why the Lamestream media's continual attacks on her and her family won't stop her from sharing what she instinctively knows is best for our beloved America.


GMpilot said...

Congratulations, FOX; you've guaranteed Saturday Night Live, Jay Leno and The Daily Show are doomed. How can their writers possibly compete with what she'll say?

Kevin said...

Hi Christine,
Does Sarah Palin address the fact that her husband belonged to a group that was calling for Alaska to break away from the U.S.? That sounds so anti-patriotic to me. I can't believe that the Republican party would pick a woman with a husband who is so anti-American.

Gary Baker said...


"That sounds so anti-patriotic to me."

I'll say it again: Context. When the US decided to break away from England, the Englanders thought that was unpatriotic.
There are all kinds of reasons why someone might want to break away from the union. Do you happen to know the man's reasons, or are you just being arbitrarily snarky?


I guess SNL and the rest will just have to feed off Reid, Biden, and Pelosi. Oh, wait...good humor needs to be based in truth. Scratch those three.

Kevin said...

Hi Gary,
So you are saying that the context of Mr. Palin is that it was ok for Alaska to break away from the U.S.? I am just saying: here on this blog there are lots of complainst about President Obama and his so-called patriotism. Now you have a woman who could possibly be the next president and her husband was active in trying to tear a state away from the Union. That is not patriotic--whatever the reason. What reason do you think that would be acceptable? And in your words, I am more interested in current history (rather than what happened in the 1770s). Imagine the howl if Obama had written years ago that Hawaii should break away or if his wife was active in a group that wanted Illinois to break away from the Union! The howl would never end. That isn't being snarky. I was just asking.

Gary Baker said...

Hi Kevin,

"So you are saying that the context of Mr. Palin is that it was ok for Alaska to break away from the U.S.?"

According to the research that I have done, the party does not necessarily appear to be demanding succession, but rather a referendum. They seem to be under the impression that the induction of Alaska into the union was not properly handled. Though my research was limited, I have not read anything that indicates the party has used or supported illegal methods in the pursuit of this task, which definitely puts them ahead of SEIU, ACORN, Planned Parenthood, etc.

To answer the broader question - Under what conditions would I consider a plan to break away from the union patriotic, I would say under conditions similar to those which prompted the colonies to break away from England. This would include unfair taxation, federal intrusion to intolerable levels on state sovereignty, and persistent imposition of unconstitutional laws on the people. All of these standards have been met to one extent or another, and the effects are accelerating.

"Imagine the howl if Obama had written years ago that Hawaii should break away or if his wife was active in a group that wanted Illinois to break away from the Union! The howl would never end. That isn't being snarky. I was just asking."

Actually I find it quite easy to imagine Mr. and Mrs. Obama writing something like that. Come to think of it, if I wanted to read most anything they wrote earlier, I would have to imagine. It's all been mysteriously lost or taken out of circulation. Hardly the action of an open and straightforward man in my experience.

You and I define "snarky" differently I guess. To my way of thinking, before you declared a man unpatriotic, you would investigate what his intentions and context were before making a judgment. You know - Informed opinions. They were all the rage before modern liberalism came about.

"here on this blog there are lots of complaints about President Obama and his so-called patriotism."

With a good deal more support than anything you've offered against Mr. Palin. For example, over a decade in a Black Liberation Theology church, good friends with radical Marxist Ayers (who some believe really wrote Obama's memoirs), supportive of a Haitian President attempting to override elective process in Haiti, etc.

Kevin said...

Hi Gary,
You wrote "Come to think of it, if I wanted to read most anything they wrote earlier, I would have to imagine." Really? I've read "Dreams from My Father." Written by Obama. In 1995, 14 years before he became president. That isn't imaginary. I'm sure you can find it in your local library.
About Mr. Palin--what exactly was the referendum about that he was supporting? The founder of the Alaskan Independent Party wanted to create "an Independent Nation of Alaska" (according to its official website). And if Mrs. Palin gets to be our next President, will you support her husband's bid to free Alaska (and possibly other states) from the Union?
There should not be traitors in the White House--even if they are the First Husbands.

Christinewjc said...

Hey GMPilot,

Did you hear about Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin's offer to NBC? They have offered to co-host on SNL! They bet a steak dinner on who is right. Sarah thinks they will get turned down and Glenn thinks they will offer them the co-host stint. Ha ha! If they take them up on the offer, it could be very interesting...

Christinewjc said...


I have only started reading Sarah Palin's book. From what I can gather, though, as a native Alaskan Todd Palin is very dedicated to the roots of the state. When government becomes intrusive, that could make anyone want to secede from the union.

Many state legislatures have written legislation to declare their own sovereignty because of Obama's Marxist policies. If you recall, the Declaration of Independence has this to say about tyrannical governments:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security..--Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

Declaring sovereignty is one step that can lead towards secession - isn't it?

According to word origin and history, "secession" is:

Originally in a Roman historical context, "temporary migration of plebeians from the city to compel patricians to address their grievances;"

I heard that Texas would do it in a heartbeat if necessary - especially in the face of our current slide towards tyranny that is in the obvious workings of the ObamaMAO Administration.

Christinewjc said...

Hope you guys don't mind if I jump in here.

Kevin wrote:

Hi Gary,
You wrote "Come to think of it, if I wanted to read most anything they wrote earlier, I would have to imagine."

I'm sure that Gary can fill you in on the details about why he wrote that, but I must point some things out to you Kevin and ask you if you think it is dishonest, creepy, or both.

According to The Obama File there has been a lot of scrubbing of Obama information and some records from the Internet

Doesn't that bother you?

Christinewjc said...

I clicked on just one of the links and came to this page.

Here's a copy (but go to original link for additional links):

No Records -- None -- Nada -- Zilch
Obama has lived for almost 50 years without leaving any footprints -- none! There is no Obama documentation -- no bona fides -- no paper trail -- nothing.

Original, vault copy birth certificate -- Not released (lawyers' fees = $2,000,000 ~ birth certificate = $15)
Certification of Live Birth -- Released -- Counterfeit
Obama/Dunham marriage license -- Not released (if one exists)
Obama/Dunham divorce -- Released (by independent investigators)

Kindergarten records -- Records lost (this is a big one -- read two frames)
Soetoro/Dunham marriage license -- Not released
Soetoro adoption records -- Not released

Fransiskus Assisi School School application -- Released (by independent investigators)
Punahou School records -- Not released
Soetoro/Dunham divorce -- Released (by independent investigators)

Selective Service Registration -- Released -- Under suspicion

Social Security Number -- Under suspicion
Occidental College records -- Not released
Passport -- Not released and records scrubbed clean by Obama's terrorism and intelligence adviser
Columbia College records -- Not released
Columbia thesis -- "Soviet Nuclear Disarmament" -- Not released
Harvard College records -- Not released
Harvard Law Review articles -- None

Illinois Bar Records -- Not released
Baptism certificate -- None
Medical records -- Not released
Illinois State Senate records -- None
Illinois State Senate schedule -- Lost
Law practice client list -- Not released
University of Chicago scholarly articles -- None

(con't next comment)

Christinewjc said...

The Illinois State Archives told Judicial Watch that they never received any request from Senator Obama to archive any records in his possession. In 2007, Obama told Tim Russert that his records were "not kept."

And there's less on the web every day. In time, the entire Obama body of knowledge will consist of 3 documents -- "Dreams From My Father" -- "The Audacity of Hope" -- and the latest -- "Change We Can Believe In" -- all written by Barack Hussein Obama or his "ghost-writers."

Just an accident? I don't think so.

On the Internet, there is an organized, systematic cleansing of Obama-related content.

Every couple of days I get an email telling me this link, or that link, connects to a "Page not found -- 404 error." The extensive body of Obama web-knowledge, that has evolved over the last 20 years, is shrinking. Stuff that's considered an Obama smear or unflattering is sent to the Obama '08 cyber shredding machine. And the campaign is getting help from some really big web service providers.

A good example is Kristof's famous New York Times article, in which Kristof quotes Obama saying that the Muslim call to prayer is "one of the prettiest sounds on Earth" and in which Obama recited the Muslim call to prayer, the Adhan, "with a first-class [Arabic] accent" -- that's gone -- from The New York Times (It's here though).

And, the Trinity UCC website has completely changed. Now, it's all sweetness and light. Gone are all those great Rev. Wright "God damn America" videos and anti-Israeli Trumpet magazine excerpts.

The Obama File author had a link to the article that quotes Obama saying that the Muslim call to prayer is "one of the prettiest sounds on earth" and in which Obama recited the Muslim call to prayer, the Adhan, "with a first-class [Arabic] accent." --that's gone--from the New York Times (It's here though).

What do you get today?


The webpage cannot be found
HTTP 404
Most likely causes:
There might be a typing error in the address.
If you clicked on a link, it may be out of date.

What you can try:
Retype the address.

Go back to the previous page.

Go to and look for the information you want.

More information

This error (HTTP 404 Not Found) means that Internet Explorer was able to connect to the website, but the page you wanted was not found. It's possible that the webpage is temporarily unavailable. Alternatively, the website might have changed or removed the webpage.

For more information about HTTP errors, see Help.

So...why was this scrubbed??

Gary Baker said...

Hi Kevin,

"Really? I've read "Dreams from My Father." Written by"

Recent analysis indicates that it was at least co-written by Bill Ayers, unrepentant terrorist at large. You know, the man Obama said he hardly knew or associated with lately. So, this may or may not be Obama, and much of his other writings have been "scrubbed" as Christine put it. So the point remains - based on his associates and their attitudes (America hating clergy, unrepentant terrorist, etc.) I wouldn't have much trouble imagining most anything that he would write that might be hateful to American Constitutional values.

"There should not be traitors in the White House--even if they are the First Husbands."

I quite agree, and such words and accusations should not be bandied about lightly. I am quite certain that it takes more than support of a particular referendum through legal means to qualify.

It is instructive to note what the people developing the various oaths of office for the US thought important. The casual reader might think that defense of the US is paramount, and they would be wrong. The President swears not to defend the United States, but the Constitution of the United States from all enemies. I took a similar oath in the military. Just from what I have observed in operations so far, President Obama has been a far greater enemy to that document that Todd Palin. In fact, from the sound of things, the party Todd was linked to has a firmer idea of the intent of the document then our nominal constitutional lawyer. That's probably because he actually works while observing the laws instead of simply imposing them on lesser mortals.

Kevin said...

Hi Christine,
I've said this before, but I am not a big fan of conspiracy theories, and I think the whole idea that Obama is not a citizen is a conspiracy theory. There is no reason for a college or for a president to release his/her transcipts. He was the president of the Harvard Law Review--do you think that if that weren't the case, people who were with him in Harvard would have spoken up? Where are those people who say he was never at Harvard or Columbia? Until they show up, I can't honestly believe he didn't go there.
So do you also think that he was never, ever an Illinois State Senator? If that were the case, don't you think at least one person from the Illinois State Senate would have said that Obama is lying when he said he was a state senator and that he wasn't? These things are something that are easily, easily proved. When I hear an Illinois State Senator say that Obama was never with them, then I will have something more to say about it. So do you think he never went to Harvard, or Columbia, or was never a state senator?
I also don't believe that there is a conspiracy to erase websites. Web links change all the time (I know--I used to assign readings off the internet and don't do it anymore because places change their weblinks all the time!).

About the NYT article: you can read it here (

Hi Gary, It looks as though the recent analysis is done primarily by conservatives. Fair enough. It is what I would expect.

Gary Baker said...


"Hi Gary, It looks as though the recent analysis is done primarily by conservatives. Fair enough. It is what I would expect."

Does it matter who did it? Unless you can come up with some kind of reasoned rebuttal (other than that you don't like conservatives) then simply to say that it was what you would expect from conservatives does nothing to discredit the analysis. The president does his own credibility no favors when most anything that he has personally written in the past has been locked away so that no comparisons are possible. And the policies that he has adopted since in office can certainly be seen to be as coming from someone who disfavors the market system that has made America the most prosperous country in the world for over a century.