USA | Sarah Palin on the road to the White House with the President. | A compilation of events leading up to the November election.

A quick blog to express my outrage

October 4,2008

It doesn't look good for the McCain/Palin ticket.  The Democratic machine has nearly destroyed the U.S. economy with a prolonged and vitriolic attack using the Wall Street financial sector as their pawn.  Furthering their cause of moving Obama into the White House, in effect, by destroying 100 year old financial institutions to instill panic into the voting public as an "October Surprise."

Need proof?  They held back enough Democratic votes to make sure the Republican President supported, 106 page House bill, did not pass.  Then after taking that basic bill and loading it up with Democratic "pork" the Senate passed a 400+ page version, and lo and behold, this time the Democrats in the House change their vote.  Just enough time elapsed to destroy Wachovia Bank, lead millions of voters off the cliff in a selling panic on Wall Street, and better assure that their boy will take over the White House while the Democrats occupy majority in both Houses of Congress, to better assure a Supreme Court to be populated with similarly leftist leaning replacements over the next few years.

They hijacked the Country, by destroying the capitalist financial sector, moving the population closer to accepting a socialist agenda of big brother helping us all, and wiping out trillions of dollars of savings.  Then mark my words, others will buy up the beaten down stocks and get rich, while those who sold in a panic will be poorer and more dependent on Big Brother.

September 30,2008

With so many pundits looking for any opening to pick on the moment she opens her mouth, they "wonder" aloud gee, why won’t Palin do press conferences and interviews?

Hey, the press corps and interviewers are mostly in the can for Obama already, Palin has no reason to kow-tow to them.  Her base is the honest voters out there.

Couric, grabbing Palin for the interview, off guard, a week earlier that initially scheduled, immediately after her whirlwind tour on NYC, as she's barely standing - short more than a few hours of sleep, - is not a time when I'm interested in hearing Palin.  Get some sleep and I'll listen when you are rested and alert.

Now we see more from Couric not even a week later really digging for gotcha's that she can rebroadcast to help out her boy running against the McCain/Palin ticket.  Palin obviously getting pissed and annoyed with Couric.  Look at Couric asking questions like a Freshman High School teacher wanting the names of publications Plain reads.  I suggest people watch that particular clip again, assuming that Plain now has as built up a bit of contempt for Couric, fully warranted, by-the-way, as Couric herself has for the Republicans.

September 28,2008

More bald faced lies by Couric trying to embarrass and trip up Republicans who she obviously hates with a passion.

Couric: "Earlier today, senator, I spoke with your running mate, Sarah Palin, and she told me that if action is not taken a Great Depression is, quote, "The road that America may find itself on." Do you agree with that assessment? "

Couric: "But isn't so much of this, Senator McCain, about consumer confidence and [me, yes me, Katie Couric] using rhetoric like the "Great Depression," is that the kind of language Americans need to hear right now?"
 

It was Couric who brought up the phrase "Great Depression." not Palin.  Palin said the exact opposite that if not passing this - no it would not cause a Great Depression. Here's the exact quote:

Couric: If this doesn't pass, do you think there's a risk of another Great Depression?

Palin: Unfortunately, that is the road that America may find itself on. Not necessarily this, as it's been proposed, has to pass or we're gonna find ourselves in another Great Depression. But there has got to be action taken, bipartisan effort -- Congress not pointing fingers at this point at-- at one another but-- finding the solution to this -- taking action, and being serious about the reforms on Wall Street that are needed.

Actual film clips are found here: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/brent-baker/2008/09/24/couric-scolds-palin-great-depression-scare-which-couric-raised

September 27,2008

The leftist card-carrying Katie Couric tried to trick and embarrass Sarah Palin into doing a flip-flop mid-interview by telling her that Henry Kissinger supports presidential negotiations with Iraq without preconditions.

Palin, obviously exhausted after having just completed a "24/7" whirlwind tour, preparing for and meeting with Heads of State and other VIPs throughout New Your City seemed to be caught off-guard but stuck to her guns and reemphasized "no preconditions" even when Couric said that was Sarah basically calling Henry Kissinger naive.

Afterwards Couric went on television programs and oh so solemnly said in effect that poor little Palin is incoherent (yeah, she was exhausted) and she doesn't even know that Kissinger says the president should to negotiate without any preconditions.   "I verified this with Kissinger myself."

Today at 5:15PM Kissinger, on the telephone and broadcast live over television, clarified that Couric  IS A BALD FACED LIAR.  And that basically, Kissinger concurs with what Palin said - that there needs to be preconditions before presidential level negotiations are held with Iran.

Yes, COURIC LIED to Palin during the interview, to play her for a fool, to embarrass Palin and McCain with fancy backroom video editing for whatever Leftist Agenda Couric is fronting for.  Couric then made the rounds afterwards and LIED AGAIN now using cropped and edited film clips of the Palin interview to make Plain appear to be the incoherent fool.

For outright LYING Couric should be removed from the air, there's no room for her leftist agenda of lies and deceitfulness on network television.

So where did Couric REALLY get her "facts?"  Did she get them FROM Kissinger as she said she did?  No hardly, she got it from her boy who she's obviously fawning all over, as evidenced in the 1st presidential debate:

September 26,2008

OBAMA: Senator McCain mentioned Henry Kissinger, who’s one of his advisers, who, along with five recent secretaries of state, just said that we should meet with Iran — guess what — without precondition. This is one of your own advisers.

Now, understand what this means “without preconditions.” It doesn’t mean that you invite them over for tea one day. What it means is that we don’t do what we’ve been doing, which is to say, “Until you agree to do exactly what we say, we won’t have direct contacts with you.” There’s a difference between preconditions and preparation. Of course we’ve got to do preparations, starting with low-level diplomatic talks, and it may not work, because Iran is a rogue regime.

[...]

MCCAIN: Look, Dr. Kissinger did not say that he would approve of face-to- face meetings between the president of the United States and the president — and Ahmadinejad. He did not say that.

OBAMA: Of course not.

MCCAIN: He said that there could be secretary-level and lower level meetings. I’ve always encouraged them. The Iranians have met with Ambassador Crocker in Baghdad.

What Senator Obama doesn’t seem to understand that if without precondition you sit down across the table from someone who has called Israel a “stinking corpse,” and wants to destroy that country and wipe it off the map, you legitimize those comments. This is dangerous. It isn’t just naive; it’s dangerous. And so we just have a fundamental difference of opinion.

Per Kissinger on September 27,2008
“Senator McCain is right. I would not recommend the next President of the United States engage in talks with Iran at the Presidential level. My views on this issue are entirely compatible with the views of my friend Senator John McCain. We do not agree on everything, but we do agree that any negotiations with Iran must be geared to reality.”

Source documents:

KISSINGER: Well, I am in favor of negotiating with Iran. And one utility of negotiation is to put before Iran our vision of a Middle East, of a stable Middle East, and our notion on nuclear proliferation at a high enough level so that they have to study it. And, therefore, I actually have preferred doing it at the secretary of state level so that we -- we know we're dealing with authentic...

(CROSSTALK)

SESNO: Put at a very high level right out of the box?

KISSINGER: Initially, yes. And I always believed that the best way to begin a negotiation is to tell the other side exactly what you have in mind and what you are -- what the outcome is that you're trying to achieve so that they have something that they can react to.

Now, the permanent members of the Security Council, plus Japan and Germany, have all said nuclear weapons in Iran are unacceptable. They've never explained what they mean by this. So if we go into a negotiation, we ought to have a clear understanding of what is it we're trying to prevent. What is it going to do if we can't achieve what we're talking about?

But I do not believe that we can make conditions for the opening of negotiations. We ought, however, to be very clear about the content of negotiations and work it out with other countries and with our own government.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0809/20/se.01.html