maverick


By SARAH PALIN

Writing in the New York Times last month, President Barack Obama asked that Americans “talk with one another, and not over one another” as our health-care debate moves forward.

I couldn’t agree more. Let’s engage the other side’s arguments, and let’s allow Americans to decide for themselves whether the Democrats’ health-care proposals should become governing law.

Some 45 years ago Ronald Reagan said that “no one in this country should be denied medical care because of a lack of funds.” Each of us knows that we have an obligation to care for the old, the young and the sick. We stand strongest when we stand with the weakest among us.

We also know that our current health-care system too often burdens individuals and businesses—particularly small businesses—with crippling expenses. And we know that allowing government health-care spending to continue at current rates will only add to our ever-expanding deficit.

How can we ensure that those who need medical care receive it while also reducing health-care costs? The answers offered by Democrats in Washington all rest on one principle: that increased government involvement can solve the problem. I fundamentally disagree.

View Full Image

Associated Press .

Common sense tells us that the government’s attempts to solve large problems more often create new ones. Common sense also tells us that a top-down, one-size-fits-all plan will not improve the workings of a nationwide health-care system that accounts for one-sixth of our economy. And common sense tells us to be skeptical when President Obama promises that the Democrats’ proposals “will provide more stability and security to every American.”

With all due respect, Americans are used to this kind of sweeping promise from Washington. And we know from long experience that it’s a promise Washington can’t keep.

Let’s talk about specifics. In his Times op-ed, the president argues that the Democrats’ proposals “will finally bring skyrocketing health-care costs under control” by “cutting . . . waste and inefficiency in federal health programs like Medicare and Medicaid and in unwarranted subsidies to insurance companies . . . .”

First, ask yourself whether the government that brought us such “waste and inefficiency” and “unwarranted subsidies” in the first place can be believed when it says that this time it will get things right. The nonpartistan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) doesn’t think so: Its director, Douglas Elmendorf, told the Senate Budget Committee in July that “in the legislation that has been reported we do not see the sort of fundamental changes that would be necessary to reduce the trajectory of federal health spending by a significant amount.”

Now look at one way Mr. Obama wants to eliminate inefficiency and waste: He’s asked Congress to create an Independent Medicare Advisory Council—an unelected, largely unaccountable group of experts charged with containing Medicare costs. In an interview with the New York Times in April, the president suggested that such a group, working outside of “normal political channels,” should guide decisions regarding that “huge driver of cost . . . the chronically ill and those toward the end of their lives . . . .”

Given such statements, is it any wonder that many of the sick and elderly are concerned that the Democrats’ proposals will ultimately lead to rationing of their health care by—dare I say it—death panels? Establishment voices dismissed that phrase, but it rang true for many Americans. Working through “normal political channels,” they made themselves heard, and as a result Congress will likely reject a wrong-headed proposal to authorize end-of-life counseling in this cost-cutting context. But the fact remains that the Democrats’ proposals would still empower unelected bureaucrats to make decisions affecting life or death health-care matters. Such government overreaching is what we’ve come to expect from this administration.

Speaking of government overreaching, how will the Democrats’ proposals affect the deficit? The CBO estimates that the current House proposal not only won’t reduce the deficit but will actually increase it by $239 billion over 10 years. Only in Washington could a plan that adds hundreds of billions to the deficit be hailed as a cost-cutting measure.

The economic effects won’t be limited to abstract deficit numbers; they’ll reach the wallets of everyday Americans. Should the Democrats’ proposals expand health-care coverage while failing to curb health-care inflation rates, smaller paychecks will result. A new study for Watson Wyatt Worldwide by Steven Nyce and Syl Schieber concludes that if the government expands health-care coverage while health-care inflation continues to rise “the higher costs would drive disposable wages downward across most of the earnings spectrum, although the declines would be steepest for lower-earning workers.” Lower wages are the last thing Americans need in these difficult economic times.

Finally, President Obama argues in his op-ed that Democrats’ proposals “will provide every American with some basic consumer protections that will finally hold insurance companies accountable.” Of course consumer protection sounds like a good idea. And it’s true that insurance companies can be unaccountable and unresponsive institutions—much like the federal government. That similarity makes this shift in focus seem like nothing more than an attempt to deflect attention away from the details of the Democrats’ proposals—proposals that will increase our deficit, decrease our paychecks, and increase the power of unaccountable government technocrats.

Instead of poll-driven “solutions,” let’s talk about real health-care reform: market-oriented, patient-centered, and result-driven. As the Cato Institute’s Michael Cannon and others have argued, such policies include giving all individuals the same tax benefits received by those who get coverage through their employers; providing Medicare recipients with vouchers that allow them to purchase their own coverage; reforming tort laws to potentially save billions each year in wasteful spending; and changing costly state regulations to allow people to buy insurance across state lines. Rather than another top-down government plan, let’s give Americans control over their own health care.

Democrats have never seriously considered such ideas, instead rushing through their own controversial proposals. After all, they don’t need Republicans to sign on: Democrats control the House, the Senate and the presidency. But if passed, the Democrats’ proposals will significantly alter a large sector of our economy. They will not improve our health care. They will not save us money. And, despite what the president says, they will not “provide more stability and security to every American.”

We often hear such overblown promises from Washington. With first principles in mind and with the facts in hand, tell them that this time we’re not buying it.

Ms. Palin, Sen. John McCain’s running mate in the 2008 presidential election, was governor of Alaska from December 2006 to July 2009.

Source

Advertisements

August 23, 2009

Sarah Palin for President campaign begins

By Neil Brian Goldberg

Confucius say: “It is often following crowd who push leader forward.”

…and so the Sarah Palin for President campaign begins, but there are some issues which must be addressed right off.

Why does there appear to be so much animosity toward Sarah Palin?

Well, there’s no denying that Sarah fought and defeated the powerful, corrupt, and deeply entrenched “old boy” establishment, bringing decency and benevolence into the state government. Who does she think she is?

…then Sarah Palin twisted the arms of the struggling oil companies, forcing them to pay thousands of dollars to each Alaskan family — how dare she rock the boat.

She ran a clean administration, and despite every sinister and desperate attempt, via contrived ethics charges by pathetic political wannabes, to create a false appearance of impropriety, Sarah’s record remains clean. (All the more reason to be suspicious of her…)

She also gave birth to a down-syndrome baby. Realizing what an extra burden such a child would be, she could have so easily disposed of the problem, what with her political career and the rest of the family’s needs to consider, it certainly would have been understandable, but this does highlight one of Sarah’s major flaws — she has a true heart, not very PC.

Sarah lacks experience. This is true. She has no idea how to work those sleazy back-room deals for suitcases full of dirty money.

She will not be skilled at slipping those secret daggers in the backs of those who count on her to save the country. Not good at lying, she cannot be bribed, not selfish enough; even so naïve as to believe in goodness … and … God — oh no — no no, absolutely a big problem.

It must also be admitted, and there is no way round it, that her detractors on TV have indeed made some incontrovertible points. No matter what your thoughts on this campaign, you cannot deny the absolute facts they have established about Sarah Palin, and these are:

No matter how you dress up a lewd, vulgar, tasteless pig; even with a stunning red suit, a sharp hairdo, and attractive glasses — even if you put perfect lipstick on her — it will not be Sarah Palin — it will still just be Tina Fay, selling herself. There is no getting around this particular point of truth.

The honest, courageous, intelligent, noble, and able Sarah Palin remains unchangingly our Sarah, God’s offering to America, perhaps our last chance for a true incorruptible leader, with angel fire in her eyes, and Divine lightning in her fists.

…and the pathetic dressed up pig remains, exactly and only what it is, lewd, vulgar, bought and sold, and as far removed from Sarah Palin, as the West is from the East.

So how do we begin this campaign — “Sarah Palin for President”?

The first thing to realize is that all of our problems originate from some form of corruption — we will not have that problem with Sarah.

There are plenty of righteous geniuses to hire for advice. All that is needed is someone who reveres and cherishes the real America, based on the Constitution, with the ultimate purpose of freedom, prosperity, and security, making the best choices after honestly considering such advice.

Next, being sure of what we want, we simply begin this “Sarah for President” campaign.

We know that money is necessary, so, as a show of faith and solid intention, take ten or twenty dollars — today — and stash it away for the “Money Bomb” moment which is on its way. On that Money Bomb day — faithfully pull that bill out and send it in! By placing that money aside now — we have begun our campaign.

Next, begin to spread the word. The Sarah Palin Campaign for President has begun. Set aside your donations, spread the word, form local groups ready to work for her in the near future, defend her good name at every turn, shun the likes of David Litterman, his sponsors, and the network which collaborate with the verbal rape of young women (Sarah’s daughters).

Start making signs, get your bumper sticker, start raising potential donors, start working as if the election were in three months, and don’t let up.

There is talk that Sarah will run on a third party — what shall it be called — why of course — THE TEA PARTY.

Work, talk, donate time money and materials. Realize what is actually at stake and fight. Fight as if freedom itself depended on it.

Most of all, become a prayer warrior, and beg God for the future of America.

Re-ignite your angry voice of moral outrage, and stop talking about “Taking Back Your Country.”

Talk about “Keeping Your Country,” it is already yours. Saying you “want it back” is a subtle admission of surrender — that you have lost, that your country has been taken. We do not want to “Take America Back,” we, and Sarah, intend to keep our Country — it is already ours, and it will remain ours.

Every desk, every computer, every building, vehicle, government plane, desk, chair, the pens they write with and the paper they write on, all are the property of the people of these United States. The government owns nothing. It produces nothing, and has no claim whatsoever to anything. It rules only with our permission, and derives all that it uses from the labors and donations of the American people. All else is illegal, all else it treason against the people who fund and build everything in and of this nation.

Sarah Palin knows this, that is why she is our President-to-be, and that is why we the people who still have eyes to see and ears to hear, do now, with a great passion for freedom, and with unbounded faith, gratitude and reverence for the original Constitution of the United States of America — we the people do hereby declare the beginning of the unstoppable, victorious, and blessed by God…

SARAH PALIN FOR PRESIDENT CAMPAIGN

© Neil Brian Goldberg

Source

I have not seen anything on this directly from Sarah Palin, but hope the writer is correct. Now is the time to start. We need a breath of fresh air not Chicago dirty politics in our nation’s capitol.

Governor Palin talks about food drop in Rural Alaska

We need to get behind and get Governor Palin’s message out. Let’s have President Sarah Palin in 2012. Certainly the MSM will not get behind her. They are to in bed with Barak Hussein Obama.

top-banner-sarah-pac1 Visit the site

Posted

Like an NFL receiver who makes a difficult catch and then gets hit high and low simultaneously, Sarah Palin wins the Republican Party’s game ball.

Although accomplishing what no other Republican candidate for national office has in modern times, the Alaska governor was snarled at, mocked, condescended and socially snubbed by pretentious Manhattan and Washington Beltway insiders for not being one of them, for getting too close to the common herd of regular Americans.Read this fine article here.
Thanks to our friend at Goodtime Politics for making us aware of this article.

Bob, I lived in Anchorage from ‘75 -’95, we fought tooth and claw to get the capitol moved to the population center so the people could access it, Sarah has done that by example. she has ‘availed’ herself, something that previous governors refused to do. Most of the government building are leased – from former politicians like Walter Hickle, Ted Stevens, etc. who own blocks of property in both Juneau and Anchorage. Chicago has it’s corrupt, Alaska got their carpetbaggers. – Jack

Alaska government migrates to the north

Capital shift?

Alaskans have argued for generations over the location of the state capital, about access and power and the weather in Juneau. But in just two years, and with hardly any debate, Gov. Sarah Palin has shifted the center of state government to Anchorage. Read the story here.

Thanks to our friend Jack for bringing this to us. Thanks Jack, Bob A.

Once again Governor Palin shows that she does not follow the establishment, does not follow the pack. This is the person we need leading this country. Not Obama who is only transferring the dirty Chicago style politics to Washington DC only increasing the stench of unsavory politicians. Get behind Sarah Palin for president in 2012.