Saturday, 11 October 2008

The Pursued and the Protected

“Oh my! What a surprise (not)” the much spun report into whether Republican Vice Presidential hopeful Sarah Palin abused her power as State governor of Alaska when she fired Walter. C. Monegan, the vengeful pen pusher who had refused to fire Palin's State Trooper brother in law, (the one who used a taser on his 11 year old sepson) has found that ...... wait for it .... she did well .. sort of. To quote: “Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan's refusal to fire State Trooper Mike Wooten from the state police force was "likely a contributing factor" to Monegan's July dismissal” but the report goes on to say that Palin “had the authority to fire him” anyway.

The fact that a report, deliberately timed to reach its findings weeks before the election, has found against her (or as much as it could) is hardly surprising, in fact it would probably have more credibility had it been report conducted by Robert Mugabe into Morgan Tsvangirai. Do the people behind this really believe that the US public will really fall for it?, and those who were planning to vote Republican will say “Ah shucks! I really liked that Palin broad, but after that I guess I should vote for that nice Mr Obama, after all there ain't ever anything nasty about him on the news!”?

The American electorate can occasionally be gullible, bur even they are not that dumb (I hope).

Of course one part of such an analysis would be correct there never is anything nasty about Obama in the press. The media treat the man whom Louis Farrakhan apparently calls “The Messiah” as if he is some delicate Spring flower who should never be forced to deal with anything so taxing as a serious question.

On the other hand, as far as the media is concerned, it is open season on Sarah Palin, and it is a credit to her that she has stood up to the onslaught quite as well as she has.

The attack has been relentless, in the lead up to the US elections in November the US TV channels are falling over themselves to provide non-stop daily satire featuring Sarah Palin, day after day the satirical skits and impersonations are only exceeded by by carefully edited news stories accusing Mrs Palin of “gaffes”, inexperience, negative campaigning or just being an all round Religious “nut”.

I know there are a number of reasons to feel a bit concerned about Sarah Palin, and she has certain characteristics which are a gift to comedians and impersonators however, the same applies to her Democratic opponent Joe Biden and even so to Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama. Yet Joe Biden troubling characteristics are all but ignored, and, as for Obama, he is treated with a manner not that far removed from how the North Koreans treat their “Dear Leader”.

The lack of balance in the treatment of the two is outrageous, but only to be expected, given the deep bias of the US media.

If challenged, the funny people on Saturday Night Live and the Daily Show will probably claim that Mrs Palin is subject to excessive parody, because she is a “Religious nut”. However, that is the image they have chosen to present of her, but how close is it to the truth? Certainly there are a lot of leaders across the world who are far more deserving of the title "Religious nut" than she is, however, the politically correct conformists in the media would never think of mocking them in the same way as they do Palin.

Furthermore, is she really that much of a “nut” and are her views really that unusual?

She is allegedly a creationist, which is unusual in the Godless country which Britain has become, but actually not so unusual in America, where large sections of the population have deep Religious faith. Odd as it may sound to a Brit, versed as we are in secular certainties, whilst the origin of man remains unproven Creationism is one of a number of legitimate view points. Darwin's theory is compelling but remains a theory, Whatever Professor Dawkins may tell you, science has not yet proven conclusively how the universe was created, and many, many people across the planet believe in a creator, why is that okay if they are Arabs, Africans or Mexicans but not okay if they are Europeans or Americans?.

If we believe in a creator, then we believe in things beyond out understanding, and if that disqualifies someone from running a country then most world nations will be looking for new leaders, including secular Britain. Furthermore, how exactly does her belief in a God as the creator, which she shares with the vast majority of the inhabitants of our planet, and certainly with the founding fathers of America, effect her ability to be an effective vice president?

Another stick which is used to beat her with is that she is opposed to abortion. Well frankly I think she has a point. Don't misunderstand me, I accept that there are times when abortion is necessary, indeed vital, but they are in the minority of cases. A significant number of all abortions in America and Europe are carried out for the sake of convenience, and it is there that I part company with the advocates of choice.

She is also pro-gun ownership, I disagree with her, as I do with most Americans and half of the population of Finland on the issue, but she is entitled to that view, and it certainly does not disqualify from standing for high office.

She is opposed to gay marriage, I think she is wrong on the grounds that a law which declares some citizens less equal than others is a bad law and devalues all citizens. However, I would guess that most of you who are reading this agree more with her than with me, and I respect your right to do so. In any event she shares that view with the leaders of Turkey, Russia. Poland, most of Africa and South America and all of Asia, and the current incumbent of the White House, are they all Religious wackjobs?

Her soon to be son in law, Levi Johnson, declared “I'm a fucking Redneck” who “Can't keep my Johnson in my pants” and “I don't want kids” .... er... well no he didn't actually, but the media never bothered to correct the story when Levi's alleged facebook page turned to be a fake.

Of course a lot is made of Palin's lack of experience, but exactly the same applies to Obama, after all, having a Kenyan Daddy no more amounts to a knowledge of foreign affairs than being able to see Russia from your porch. As to experience of leadership, Palin has run a state, Obama was a "community leader" in Illinois how does that make him so much more experienced than her?

Obama's main claim to fame is that, he voted against the war in Iraq, which with the benefit of retrospect can be made to appear a wise and intelligent position. However, that ignores the fact that, at the time he actually voted, most politicians and every intelligence agency in the West, including the French, Russians and Germans believed that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction ready to use against her neighbours, and possibly against Europe, which puts a slightly different perspective on his vote. At the very least it leaves his motives open to question. Of course, when it comes to Obama the questions are never asked.

There are other questions, including:

Why won't he publish a full sized copy of his birth certificate?

What was his connection with convicted fraudster Tony Rezko, who allegedly helped him and his wife purchase their home?

How close was he really to Bill Ayres co founder of the 1960's left wing radical group The Weather Underground?

Is it true that, until it sanitised it's website nine month ago, the church he had belonged to for twenty years declared that its first loyalty was to Africa?

Barack Obama may have perfectly good answers to those questions, however the press never ask them, and the satirists hardly ever touch on them except to mock those who do. I have a lot of contempt for so called Comedians, who are happy to mock one side but not the other, or like Sarah Bernhard, say that Palin "should be gang raped by black brothers" but would not dare say anything disrespectful about Obama.

Of course these tactics are nothing new to the Obama loving pundits, during the Democratic primaries, Jon Stewart on the Daily Show, relentlessly mocked Hillary Clinton, but treated Obama as if he was untouchable.

It seems that to question or criticise Obama is to risk accusations of "racism" which is a risk no Western media personality will take. As we see across the world, leaders who can not be criticised or questioned are the most dangerous, and if this politically correct politeness follows Obama into the Oval Office then the world is in danger.


10 comments: said...

Minister Farrakhan speaks. I prefer him to the Mad Bomber and the Messiah.


Anonymous said...

Mrs. Palin is white. That is why she is being victimized by the leftist American media. P.S. Americans in favour of gun control are those who have never been victimized personally by the rapidly exploding population of non-white criminals.

Sarah Maid of Albion said...

I expressed my views on gun ownership in an earlier post however, I guess I am looking it from a European perspective where there are fewer guns actually in circulation.

If I lived in America or South Africa where there are already huge numbers of guns already on the streets, mostly in the hands of criminals, and with no reasonable prospect of them being handed in, I might think differently.

However, nobody has yet shown me credible proof that easy access to guns does not lead to higher numbers of gun crimes and far higher numbers of fatalities.

All the figures I have read suggest otherwise.

alanorei said...

American Baptist Dr Sam Gipp has an interesting analysis of why he will vote for Sarah Palin. He seems to have come to this conclusion in the last few months.

Re: firearms, it isn't simply the gun-toting criminals (who in the UK now know that they can invade any law-abiding home-owner's premises with impunity, because, being law-abiding, he will not have a firearm with which to protect his family and himself from the intruders).

To clarify, I set much store on the old adage that says "When guns are outlawed, only the outlaws will have the guns."

That goes for outlaws in power, as this Lethal Laws site demonstrates, i.e. ""Gun Control" is the key to Genocide."

As the 57,000,000 victims in the 20th century testify. No doubt more will follow as the 21st unfolds and are already doing so.

Merge Divide said...

I agree. Let's fight media bias together. There's been a lot of talk in the corporate media about a Obama/Ayers "association". Some claim that it's been a long time coming.

But I'm still waiting for John McCain to denounce his unwholesome relationship with G. Gordon Liddy. Where is the moral outrage, and who hears cries of conspiracy from the Right regarding mainstream media's suppression of this story?

Read the nasty details in THIS LINK to an article from May.

Here are some highlights:

“How close are McCain and Liddy? At least as close as Obama and Ayers appear to be. In 1998, Liddy's home was the site of a McCain fundraiser. Over the years, he has made at least four contributions totaling $5,000 to the senator's campaigns -- including $1,000 this year.

Last November, McCain went on his radio show. Liddy greeted him as "an old friend," and McCain sounded like one. "I'm proud of you, I'm proud of your family," he gushed. "It's always a pleasure for me to come on your program, Gordon, and congratulations on your continued success and adherence to the principles and philosophies that keep our nation great.
Which principles would those be? The ones that told Liddy it was fine to break into the office of the Democratic National Committee to plant bugs and photograph documents? The ones that made him propose to kidnap anti-war activists so they couldn't disrupt the 1972 Republican National Convention? The ones that inspired him to plan the murder (never carried out) of an unfriendly newspaper columnist?

Liddy was in the thick of the biggest political scandal in American history -- and one of the greatest threats to the rule of law. He has said he has no regrets about what he did, insisting that he went to jail as "a prisoner of war."

All this may sound like ancient history. But it's from the same era as the bombings Ayers helped carry out as a member of the Weather Underground. And Liddy's penchant for extreme solutions has not abated.

In 1994, after the disastrous federal raid on the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas, he gave some advice to his listeners: "Now if the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms comes to disarm you and they are bearing arms, resist them with arms. Go for a head shot; they're going to be wearing bulletproof vests. ... Kill the sons of bitches."

He later backed off, saying he meant merely that people should defend themselves if federal agents came with guns blazing. But his amended guidance was not exactly conciliatory: Liddy also said he should have recommended shots to the groin instead of the head. If that wasn't enough to inflame any nut cases, he mentioned labeling targets "Bill" and "Hillary" when he practiced shooting.”


Unrepentant British Nationalist said...

Great blog, Sarah. Can you add the gadget that allows me to follow your blog, please? It ensures I am informed when your blog is updated.

Sarah Maid of Albion said...

Hi Unrepentant British Nationalist

Thanks, I am pleased you like it, I hope I have added the right gadget to enable you to follow the blog.

It is flattering that you would want to


Anonymous said...

Please let Obama win, it will be the fastest way for the world to get rid of this multicultural myth.
Rest assured his African roots "genes" will show all african countries have proven themselves.

Jeff ( Va. Rebel ) said...

Doesn't look like that gang trash in yer other article had guns , but they had machetes and sticks .
Would you rather face them armed as such or with a firearm ?

Firearms - the great equalizer .

Violent criminals are repulsed ONLY by greater force .

The Blond Girl said...

Hi Sarah,

I enjoy reading your blog and I have even put up a link to yours once in a post on my own blog.

I am a South African girl.

There has been a lot of mud slinging from both parties in the USA.
The Americans I have met, tend to lean very strongly to the McCain/Palin side and I have seen many people trashing Obama and spreading false rumours about him.

I love reading your posts, and it's never hard to see where your loyalty lies. After all, you are very outspoken! :)
Personally I am an Obama supporter and would keep my fingers crossed for him to win this race.

But in the end, politics are politics, and therefore are seldom accompanied by rational thoughts... It's mostly about passion and ego, and therefore would always evoke strong feelings in people.

~Hilana Pieterse