The two year preoccupation of the liberal media in trashing Sarah Palin leaves little room for ouside opinions on her from people not interested in protecting the Democrartic majority in America but it is refreshing to see that not eveone in the world thinks she is bad. In fact some unlikely people also think the Palin coverage has misled the American electorate like the story below.
Why I support Sarah Palin
Ted Belman. I was half way through writing Sarah Palin is electable when I came across this fabulous well researched ode to Sarah Palin. I have left out the attacks on her particularly by the GOP trying to shut her out and focused on her outstanding qualities. Don’t miss the part on Israel and Iran at the end.
Vetting Sarah Palin—The Assignment of a Lifetime
By Christopher Massie, Canada Free Press
There is a wave now clearly rising. There is a movement very definable now fully exposing itself to America. The Tea Party now has more successful wins to its credit within a condensed timeframe than any other American political movement can rightfully claim. This movement is alive, palpable, real, not to be ignored and poised to return America to its position as that Shining City Upon the Hill. And one individual is responsible for this momentum.
That person is Sarah Louise Palin—and this is her vetting.
SARAH PALIN—THE EARLY YEARS:
Sarah Palin, a 46 year old, self-described “Bible-believing Christian”, born in Sandpoint, Idaho, the United States of America, has represented Conservative Constitutionalism, small business entrepreneurs, lower taxes, fiscal responsibility, non-partisanship, pro-life advocacy, the Amendments (as a staunch Constitutionalist), but in particular the 2nd, and political term limits (among her most prominent platforms) her entire political career. She abhors wasteful government spending—a cause Palin is so deeply passionate towards it would launch her Mayoral career in 1995—and Palin considers the current administration the bane of current as well as future generations to come.
Governmental corruption goes against every core belief inherent to Palin’s persona—her programs to vet those within her administration are well documented. Inter-departmental deceit and immorality have been dealt with through patience and diplomacy, but dealt with they have been. In Palin’s nearly 20 year political career, she has positioned herself as a fresh and rejuvenating force for positive upward mobility in the Republican Party, and her current influence is instantly perceptible.
At the age of 18, when most American teenagers were deciding on far less important issues, Sarah Palin officially registered as a Republican, a decision no doubt based on values deeply entrenched within Palin throughout her upbringing. By the age of 28, that decision would prompt Sarah to enter politics for the first time, pitting her against a local telephone company worker. That election would mirror many in Palin’s future political career; voters in Wasilla questioned her ability to defeat a man, much less her ability to have a serious affect on the City Council.
She would win that election to the City Council of Wasilla, Alaska—an election she was encouraged to enter by fellow classmates of hers at a local step aerobics center. Also members of this class were two gentlemen who would later play a central role in Palin’s advancing career. Three years later, after shocking voters by not allowing her personal religious convictions to interfere with her role on the Council—as it related to small business owner’s rights—she would be elected again; this time by an overwhelming majority.
Upon completion of her first term on the City Council, midway through satisfying her second, Palin would set her sights on higher office, electing to run for Mayor of Wasilla. Her bold decision to seek the office of Mayor was based on her fears that the local government was wastefully spending revenues generated by a new sales tax increase. The city’s coffers were expanding, the then-current administration had drawn up plans requiring unnecessary, frivolous spending, and Palin—reflecting her classic Conservative ideals—announced her campaign.
This would be the first real test of Sarah Palin’s mettle as a Conservative politician—and as a woman running against the good old boys. That race would match Palin against her one time aerobics class partner—one of the men pivotal to her ascension into politics—then-Mayor of Wasilla John Stein.
Then-Mayor Stein never knew what hit him. Then 32 year old Sarah Palin was a formidable foe. Exposing Stein’s proposed spending and record of high taxes, as well as sharing her other campaign platforms with the voters of Wasilla—a voting majority comprised, by the time of Palin’s rise, of Conservative Christians—that included her pro-life and pro gun-rights stances, Sarah defeated Mayor Stein handily. Her platforms, campaign strategies and overall ideology caught the attention of the state GOP as well. The Party would endorse Palin over the three-term incumbent Stein, running television ads on her behalf—cementing a political relationship for better or worse. By the conclusion of the campaign, Palin’s political reputation had begun to take shape.
MAYOR PALIN:
Once in office, Palin’s inaugural actions included the lowering of her personal salary by 10%—a move most voters (while appreciating the gesture) probably doubted would come to fruition. From there, the internal vetting of the previous administration would begin. Palin required updated resumes from every official, going so far as to demand resignation letters from particular department leaders most loyal to the former Mayor. Her moves, while unconventional, proved beneficial towards ferreting out true team players from those whose personal goals and biases would prove to undermine the role of government—that role, for Palin, being a small unified body working to effectively service the voting community. Palin’s successful process to unify or dismiss resulted in a first term staff turnover of nearly 100%—but the voters remained quite pleased. Palin listened to her constituency; and the voters elected her again—by a landslide!
Palin’s second term would witness her contributions to this once sleepy little town of Wasilla resulting in an expansion that brought business revenue and improvements to the city as never before. And while growth most certainly has the potential to come at a price (Wasilla’s long term debt would increase to $25 million as a result of expansion under Palin, leading her to secure the first of $10 million in earmarks for the government before her term would expire), today, Wasilla is a thriving community.
The current mayor attributes Wasilla’s 50,000 daily shoppers directly to Palin’s 75% reduction in property taxes and infrastructure improvements. “This is no longer a little strip town you can blow through in a heartbeat”. Wasilla, strong, proud, and now home to more than 6,000 people, remembers well the ways in which Sarah Palin heard their voice, listened to their demands, and bettered their lives. The old boys’ club was forever changed in Wasilla, and the GOP took notice.
SARAH PALIN GETS A TASTE OF THE WHITE HOUSE EXPERIENCE:
Sarah Palin’s next move, at the age of 38 (in 2002), was a bid for Lieutenant Governor of Alaska—running against 4 other Republicans in a primary in which she came in second. This loss would expose Sarah to what was possibly the most extreme case of political nepotism she had yet witnessed in her career. After her defeat for Lieutenant Governor of Alaska, Palin campaigned intensely throughout the state of Alaska for Frank Murkowski and Loren Leman—the team running for Governor-Lieutenant Governor of Alaska. Sarah Palin would spend countless hours rallying for Frank Murkowski, befriending the man, cheering him on—hoping his win would secure for her his vacated seat in the Senate. Murkowski won. Palin was on the short list for his vacated Senate seat—everyone said she was a shoe in.
In what continues to this day to be called one of the most flagrant displays of unwarranted nepotism, Frank Murkowski—in typical old boys’ school demeanor—selected his daughter, State Representative Lisa Murkowski, to be his successor in the Senate. Palin would instead be offered and accept an appointment to the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, where she would expose myriad ethics violations. The old boys’ networks would continue to be served notice, and Murkowski and Palin would be set on an inevitable collision course that would collide just a few years later.
In 2006, at the age of 42, against all odds, first facing down Murkowski’s formidable war chest of funds, and later defeating Democrat Knowles by a margin of 48 to 40 percent, Sarah Palin became the youngest Governor of Alaska in history—as well as the State’s first female to ever hold the position.
Understanding the voice of the voters, she ran on a platform of education first, followed by public safety and transportation. Her long-standing role as a pro-life proponent gained her the endorsement of the Alaska Right to Life group while her concerns with the environment combined with her continued advocacy for Alaska’s oil industry garnered her support from former Alaska Governor Walker Hickel. An additional endorsement, based on Palin’s recognized position on second amendment rights, would come from the Alaska Correctional Officers Association; indeed, through endorsements, Palin would succeed in winning the Governorship even while being outspent throughout the campaign.
Naturally, as with any position of such great importance and responsibility, attacks upon the one in office are inevitable—and Sarah Palin was no exception. For the record, Troopergate was finally concluded in 2008 with a final report from Tim Petumenos: “There is no probable cause to believe that the governor, or any other state official, violated the Alaska Executive Ethics Act in connection with these matters.”
While ethics issues certainly weigh heavy in every politician’s career, other more important issues have been, and continue to be, placed center stage by Palin’s opponents. Since her days as Governor, Sarah Palin has strongly pleaded the case for America’s independence from its reliance on foreign oil suppliers. To that end, Palin supports drilling for oil and natural gas in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR). And while this controversy has been one of deep concern that continues to provide contentious discourse between conservationists and economists, Palin remains firmly planted on the side of job creation, revenue procurement, and American energy independence.
Palin remains a committed environmentalist, as evidenced by her establishing of the gubernatorial executive order number 238 which, among several other key provisions, calls for “developing recommendations on the opportunities to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from Alaska sources, including the expanded use of alternative fuels, energy conservation, energy efficiency, renewable energy, land use management, and transportation planning.” Palin’s ANWR stance, combined with this order, clearly demonstrates Palin’s ability to balance a fiscal need for energy independence against a respect for “green” initiatives—truly a rare trait in today’s old boys’ networks.
PALIN THE GALVANIZER:
Throughout her career, Sarah Palin has witnessed and battled cronyism, nepotism, old boys’ networks, corruption, and political deceit of every size, shape and description. Her wars raged have been born from Conservative ideals, Christian values, the fundamentals found in the words of America’s Founding Fathers as written in the Constitution, and a plain old sense of knowing right from wrong. These ideals, shockingly—not surprisingly—have rendered her the target of great condemnation from socialists, Liberals, Democrats and even certain members from within the GOP—that party once so eager to embrace her in the days of Wasilla.
As the GOP has ungraciously turned its back on Sarah Palin—as particularly evidenced through the actions of one of the most glaring examples of the old boys’ network, John McCain—she has continued along the path of adhering to the voters; ever cognizant of the true Conservatives requiring support. She has been the driving force unifying the Tea Party movement in America—a once loose knit group of a few hundred people that now counts hundreds of thousands of well organized members in practically every state of the union. This movement draws inspiration from a unified mission: lower taxes; smaller government that interferes less with the population’s private lives; state’s rights; and an overall belief in American Exceptionalism. These are core, fundamental issues Sarah Palin has stood for her entire career.
Sarah Palin—through her support of and involvement with the Tea Party in general—has in one way or another had a positive effect on the campaigns of several Tea Party-backed Conservatives this election cycle. Some of the candidates who have included Palin in their projects or discussed her influence as having a positive upshot on their drives this year include Pat Toomey, Marco Rubio, Mike Lee, and others. And those candidates who have succeeded in their bids for office as a direct result of Palin’s endorsements include Rand Paul, Sharron Angle, Joe Miller, and, of course, Christine O’Donnell. Sarah Palin’s clout is more than influential—for many in the truly Conservative camp, it is the most powerful weapon in politics since that witnessed by Ronald Reagan’s allies in the days of the Gipper’s reign.
The ability to galvanize on Palin’s part—the ability to bring together the voice of the voters and the electable candidates proven to answer the call of those voters—is a powerful magnet in a politician. It is also a fantastically rare commodity. One truly believes Palin’s honesty; her words—humble and forever unassuming—consistently come from the heart. When she speaks to a crowd, it’s as if she is talking to her family; never scripted, oft-times with a slip or a twist of the tongue, and genuinely caring.
Remembering speeches given by Ronald Reagan—when he would pause, almost coming to tears contemplating the severity of his words—one cannot help but catch glimpses of these mannerisms in moments of Palin on stage. She is captivating in her simplicity, powerful in her convictions, Reagan-esque in her Conservatism, Constitutionalism and belief in American Exceptionalism.
THE GOP TAKES A PAGE FROM THE DEMS PLAYBOOK:
As this nation heads towards November, a crucial turning point in American history, Palin’s foes are making hay. Political strategists the likes of Karl Rove and Charles Krauthammer have emerged from the old boys’ network closet. The most infamous, nepotistically-influenced, former Palin competitor Lisa Murkowski has announced she will run again this November—as a write in. In these days, it is wise to recall the actions of Harry Reid in 2006 when he summoned then-Senator Obama, instructing Barack it was the Party’s intentions to have him run for the Presidency (even though it would not be until the summer of 2008 that Reid would publicly endorse the Senator from Illinois).
The Democrats (led by Reid) would have done anything to defeat Hillary—and they did it stealthily. The GOP is taking a page from that book. There is an all too familiar episode re-playing itself for voters to witness this season. The GOP loathes Sarah Palin. And the Party is now setting about to deeply unsettle those successful candidates she has promoted. The evidence is glaringly obvious. Murkowski has been unleashed; Rove and Krauthammer are doing their bidding. The events unfolding are towards one goal: the destruction of Palin’s bid for the Presidency.
Beginning with Sarah Palin’s first mayoral bid in Wasilla, and her refusal to kowtow to the GOP in the aftermath of her ascension to city office—a position she rightly earned regardless of Party politics being played out on the local airwaves—to her days as Governor of Alaska and her patriotic decision to place more emphasis on the needs of the voters of her state than the bureaucratic strong-arming of the Bush administration and its political blackmail as it related to the Alaska pipeline contracts, Palin has steadfastly remained a true person of character—and a life-long politician representing “We the People”. Now, in what has become America’s deadliest fight against tyranny since its founding, this nation’s leader in waiting listens for her constituency’s demands once more.
PALIN—THE VITAL POINTS:
There can be no doubting Sarah Palin’s longstanding, steadfast commitment to a strong, stable, secure and Exceptional America at home. Also without question is the importance of America’s safety abroad and its allegiance to our allies. Since the days of this nation’s founding, freedom has come at great costs; never has security from tyranny been free.
Allowing for the rise of injustice, murder, torture, attack or any other form of degradation to another nation, be that persecution in the name of political gain, religious dominance and expansion, or sheer bigotry and ideology, it is the moral responsibility of the nation of the United States to stand up for the rights of the less fortunate and oppressed. Never in the history of man has the allowed suffering of another nation, creed, race or religion resulted in anything other than millions of deaths and suffering; likewise neither has the ignored spread of hatred, socialism, Marxism, Nazism, Trotskyism or other form of sociopathic ideology or sociological theory left any positive remains in its wake.
Sarah Palin has vowed, in her own words, that there will be: “no doubt: I will always keep the threat of military action on the table to defend our security and our ally Israel,” further swearing, “Israel is our strongest and best ally in the Middle East. We have got to assure them that we will never allow a second Holocaust, despite, again, warnings from Iran and any other country that would seek to destroy Israel that that is what they would like to see. We will support Israel. A two-state solution, building our embassy, also, in Jerusalem, those things that we look forward to being able to accomplish, with this peace-seeking nation, and they have a track record of being able to forge these peace agreements.” Palin will immediately look to mend the relations so quickly crushed and thrown to the wind by the current administration.
Palin also will not allow for an unchecked, nuclear Iran. Considering the flaccidity of the current administration as it pertains to the Bushehr reactor debacle, in fact, Palin should have been in control of that issue from the beginning: “A leader like Ahmadinejad, who is not sane or stable when he says things like that, is not one whom we can allow to acquire nuclear energy, nuclear weapons… is downright dangerous because leaders like , who would seek to acquire nuclear weapons and wipe off the face of the Earth an ally like we have in Israel, should not be met with without preconditions and diplomatic efforts being undertaken first.” (WIKIPEDIA)
In closing it is fantastically imperative to reiterate one fundamental element of Sarah Palin’s political and personal persona: she is first and foremost a Christian. Second, and equally as important, she is a Constitutionalist. Defining those terms in the context of how she will lead a country requires one simple review of the Founding Fathers. She has never allowed religion to interfere with her duties as a servant to the people—ever. She has forever listened to the voice of the people—always. She has in all public duties eschewed obfuscation—consistently. She is the one true voice of the people—and so too have her soldiers, her armies, always been.
This city on the hill has grown dim. Sarah Louise Palin is the lantern to light that torch for the world to once again turn towards.
From someone who knew someone who worked with her over the years:
CO. Hoosier, I’m not even sure that I can be classified as a “Palin fan”, but I am kind of an observer. An old school buddy of mine has worked within the Alaska legislature for the last twenty years or so. He’s a registered Democrat and has worked on projects that allowed him to cross paths with her going back when she was a city commissioner, as the mayor, and as the governor.
He told me that the picture painted of her as a mindless ideologue is about 180 degrees off base. He said that over the years, he’d probably dealt with her a couple of dozen times and that her input and/or decisions were always supported by law and not by personal beliefs.
The thing he told me about her that really peaked my interest of her was her ability to process information and then to quickly forge a plan with the information she was given. He said she was a living, breathing CPM chart. He said he had seen her on multiple occasions on a variety of subjects instantly absorb input from others and then respond with cogent solutions to problems. He said if you put her in a room with a bunch of people, the chances would be great that she’d be the smartest one in the room.
He told me that when he saw her debacle with Katie Couric, his first thought was, “who is that Sarah Palin imposter?” He said that was not the Sarah Palin he had worked with for years. He was sure that the interview was highly edited. It came out later that there was almost six hours of the interview that people didn’t see.
He told me that if I really wanted to get a feel of who she is and how she dealt with powerful people, I should read the book, “Sarah Takes On Big Oil”. It was released in October, 2008 and written by two of the state’s top oil & gas editors. The lady they described had no fear to stand toe-to-toe with heavyweights and leave them slinking away with their tales between their legs. She told them that she was the advocate of the citizens of Alaska and there would be no deal making that would adversely affect them. The big boys at Exxon-Mobile and BP folded like a cheap suit.
One other thing he told me that still amazes him was how she managed to get people to work together. According to him, she could take two people with opposing opinions, sit down with them, listen to them, offer her solutions, and both guys would leave happy and not feeling that they had compromised their position at all.
He laughed at the “she doesn’t read” meme. He said it is well known in the capitol that she was a voracious reader. She truly did read most of the national mags and newspapers, mostly on line, as well as a dozen or so energy trade magazines. According to him, there were stories about how she would take home stacks of papers and reports to prepare for a next-morning meeting and it was as if every word of those reports were stamped into her brain when she sat down at the meeting.
He told me not to be fooled by her syntax or her colloquialisms because they were not a fair barometer of her smarts. He said if people would just listen and not try to read between the lines, she was easy to understand. He said he’d love to see her and Obama in a debate about energy or even healthcare. He said she’d clean his clock. He even said that if she were given a day or two to prepare for a debate on foreign affairs, his money would still be on her.
He said she was the epitome of a leader. She assembled her staff, listened to their advice, allowed opposing ideas to be heard, and then acted accordingly. As a manager, she advocated making a plan based on the best info available, budgeting the plan, working the plan, measuring results, and quickly adjusting the plan if it was determined it wasn’t working as expected. She believed in the First Law of Holes.
He thought her biggest struggles in the 2008 campaign were the product of trying to endorse McCain’s positions on issues. She was able to voice her dissenting opinion on ANWR because her views were known, but on everything else she was expected to toe the McCain line. He said that she lacked the ability to shovel crap and sell it as perfume.
He reminded me that anyone who denies the accuracy of her “death panel” metaphor should go back and read her exact words, both her initial FB post and her rebuttal of Obama’s attack on her words. He said “read what she wrote, not what someone wrote or said what she wrote”. Her words in those posts have already been proven to be true.
He said that “divisive” is not a word that should be used to describe her. He said that was just a simple use of Alinsky’s rule #13. He said, “look at all the issues. Her position is in line with the majority on virtually all of them”.
He told me she wasn’t perfect, but if I read something or heard something that was negative, I should check it out a little closer. He shared a lot more, but I’m afraid I’ve already rambled on for too long.
Should she run in 2012? I really don’t know. Would I vote for her? It depends who she’s running against. Will she drive the agenda if she doesn’t run? Yes, for a long time.
The headline said it all as President Carter again showed that fellow Democrats are a president's worst friends. Once again, as Obama was getting preferential treatment from NBC and MSNBC with a special televised economic town hall to demonstrate his concern for the horrible economic conditions leading into the Midterm elections yet another Democrat knocked him off the front pages and this time it was Carter declaring he was a "superior" ex-president to all the other ex-presidents.
After 40 years he still can't get over being walloped by Reagan in the 1980 campaign so in order to hype his new book proving he is a legend in his own eyes the loyal liberal network gave him a break and he took it and completely undermined Obama's effort to focus attention on the economy for the struggling Democratic candidates trying to get re-elected in a time of excessive inertia.
Of course if I had been the victim of the man-eating rabbit attack when I was president and had to fight off the rabbit with a boat oar, I guess I would want to focus on accomplishments after I was president. Still, the highlight of his one term was the infamous rabbit attack as reported at the time.
Between fighting off the rabbit, attacking Ted Kennedy for blocking Carter healthh care, and trashing the ex-presidents Democrat and Republican alike, Carter has truly established his place in huistory. At least he knocked Christine O'onnell off the front pages for a day.
In their continuing effort to prop up the favorite son of NBC the CNBC financial affiliate had a special town hall for President Obama today with 200 invited guests to give him a chance to reassure the American business community that he really loves private enterprise.
Unfortunately, it was more of the same in terms of his distancing from the business community, his failure to offer any new hope for business initiatives, his detemination to raise taxes on the wealthy even if they could create more jobs, his uncompromising attitude toward the Republicans and his failure to connect with the 15 million out of work in America.
To his credit he didn't bash Bush by name, didn't mention John Boehnerr by name, he didn't trash Christrine O'Donnell for winning the Delaware GOP Senate race, and didn't use a telepromptor. Those in the business community expecting to hear any new policies for getting us out of the economic quagmire were ignored as well as anyone expecting him to take the opportuity to give us hope for the future.
In the end the election outlook didn't change. The Democrats are still on track to get pounded.
Liberals Careful to Show Bad side of 'Donnell
The liberal media cannot resist the chance to make Christine O'Donnell look bad and badder even using the worst photos possible to show her. These are the two favorite photos used by MSNBC and other liberal media outlets.
These are photos they could have shown us. Notice any difference?
As for the story lines, they have shifted from O'Donnell high school appearances talking about sexual abstinence to more than decades old interviews talking about witchcraft. Now one might ask what 10-15 year old interviews with a kid have to do with that same person running for the Senate today?
MSNBC and their Morning Joes show is particularly adept at trying to make what happened years ago relevant to today but if they were fair they might tell us about the relevance of Clinton and Monica Lewinsky to today or what the unfortunate death of a congressional aide in Joe Scarborough's office about the same time he resigned from Congress had to do with today. Stop playing games and promoting smear campaigns lest you find yourself on the receiving end yourselves.
Another week of college football and a couple of more teams are solidifying their place in the college polls and this one was a little hard to handle. You see, I was born and raised in Iowa City, Iowa, home of the University of Iowa from the Big Ten. Though I moved away before high school both my parents attended Iowa and I spent lots of time visiting grandparents and family there long after I moved away.
I was at many Iowa football games throughout the glory years of the Rose Bowl teams of the late 1950's and into the 1960's and when it came time to go to college Iowa was on my short list along with Yale, the University of Missouri and a few schools far away. In the end I opted to go far away to get a fresh start on life and I chose the University of Arizona in Tucson where I played on the basketball team and was to get a shot at baseball.
Late last Saturday night Iowa played Arizona at Tucson and I had somewhat mixed loyalties since both were in the top 25. Just the year before the two teams met and Iowa won 27-17 at Iowa City as both teams went on to great years with Arizona only tumbling bad when they faced Nebraska in the Holiday Bowl. It was a great learning experience for the Wildcats as they were humbled 34-0. But it left them understanding what it would take to be among the elite football teams in America.
Now I also had mixed loyalties in that game since I lived in Nebraska for 12 years, got to know the coaches and Husker players, and both my kids graduated from Nebraska. In fact I was in Nebraska during the years they rise to the top of the NCAA football ladder and won a slew of national championships. Ironically, the Big Red of Nebraska are joining the Big Ten next year and will be in the same division as Iowa.
Now living on the east coast I had to stay up until almost 2 am to watch the Iowa - Arizona classic and was stunned as Arizona roared to a 27-7 lead before the Hawkeyes starting clawing their way back into the game. In hindsight I knew that anyone from the Midwest playing in the southwest desert was in for a shock as Iowa football was not played in 100 degree nighttime temperatures.
But I also knew these two programs, along with Nebraska this year, all have young coaches among the best in the nation and one should never count them out. Iowa roared back and tied the game with just a few minutes left. When they missed the extra point on their last touchdown it looked like the game might go into overtime.
But the Wildcats held their poise and marched right back down the field to score. When Iowa got the ball for a last minute drive the Arizona defense rose to the occasion stopping the Hawkeyes 3 times in a row for losses and holding on for a 33-27 victory which resulted in Arizona jumping 10 spots in the national polls.
Iowa still has a great shot at the Big Ten title and high national ranking while Arizona is a valid contender for the PAC Ten title. Nebraska, who pounded Washington at Washington 56-21,could easily take the Big 12 title and national title. Someone has to win and someone has to lose but only in NCAA football can both teams walk away with their heads held high as we were treated to what college football is all about.
A new feature of the Coltons Point Times is to recognize those artists now departed whose contributions to music and life made them giants among people and Harry Chapin is the first of the series. This greatest of all storytellers quietly left a mark on society that stands alone. Twice I got to see Harry in concert and it was an honor to experience the joy and love he gave to the audience and the world. Following is a video of his last recorded performance in Canada 30 years ago that took place just 11 months before his fatal car crash in NYC.
Harry Chapin (December 7, 1942 – July 16, 1981) was an American singer-songwriter best known in particular for his folk rock songs including "Taxi", "W*O*L*D", and the number-one hit "Cat's in the Cradle"; as well as his folk musical based on the biblical book of John, "Cotton Patch Gospel". Chapin was also a dedicated humanitarian who fought to end world hunger, his work a key player in the creation of the Presidential Commission on World Hunger in 1977. In 1987, Chapin was posthumously awarded the Congressional Gold Medal for his humanitarian work.
Chapin was resolved to leave his imprint on Long Island. He envisioned a Long Island where the arts flourished and universities expanded and humane discourse was the norm. "He thought Long Island represented a remarkable opportunity," said Chapin's widow, Sandy.
Chapin served on the boards of the Eglevsky Ballet, the Long Island Philharmonic, Hofstra University. He energized the now-defunct Performing Arts Foundation (PAF) of Huntington.
In the mid-1970s, Chapin focused on his social activism, including raising money to combat hunger in the United States. His daughter Jen said: "He saw hunger and poverty as an insult to America". He co-founded the organization World Hunger Year with legendary radio DJ Bill Ayres, before returning to music with On the Road to Kingdom Come. He also released a book of poetry, Looking...Seeing, in 1977. Many of Chapin's concerts were benefit performances (for example, a concert to help save the Landmark Theatre in Syracuse, New York), and sales of his concert merchandise were used to support World Hunger Year.
Chapin's social causes at times caused friction among his band members and then-manager Fred Kewley. Chapin donated an estimated third of his paid concerts to charitable causes, often performing alone with his guitar to reduce costs. Mike Rendine played Bass during the years of 1979.
One report quotes his widow saying soon after his death — "only with slight exaggeration" — that "Harry was supporting 17 relatives, 14 associations, seven foundations and 82 charities. Harry wasn't interested in saving money. He always said, 'Money is for people,' so he gave it away." Despite his success as a musician, he left little money and it was difficult to maintain the causes for which he raised more than $3 million in the last six years of his life. The Harry Chapin Foundation was the result.
It is starting to look like the Obama Pelosi plan to smear the GOP over tax cuts for the wealthy is being undermined by Democratic candidates who are jumping ship to join the GOP block in support of NO TAX INCREASE.
Today, the same day those nasty Republicans helped Obama get the Small Business assistance bill passed in the Senate, thus proving once again Obama was wrong in attacking the GOP for fighting against small business, the GOP seems to be winning the public opinion battle again.
Right now the best Pelosi can do is to delay any vote until after the November election but that means one must trust that Obama and Pelosi will be honest if they promise to bring up the bill after the election and before they expire at year end. To date campaign promises from the president and Speaker of the House have often been forgotten.
As for fact checking the Lame Street media on this bill, the liberals say the Obama bill will only increase taxes on the millionaires and billionaires, yet admit that just 2% of small businesses may also get a tax increase. Of course they fail to mention that since small business is the backbone of America "just 2%" equals 894,000 small businesses that face a tax increase.
They also conveniently forget to mention that the Bush Tax Cuts are not just income taxes like Obama and Pelosi would like us to believe. Here are the real taxes included in the Bush Tax Cuts:
What is scheduled to expire at the end of this year, unless Congress acts?
•The 10, 25, 28, 33, and 35 percent rates would all rise. The new tax rates would be 15, 28, 31, 36, and 39.6 percent. This would cost taxpayers about $157 billion per year.
•The indexing of the alternative minimum tax for inflation would end. The AMT, which provides $66 billion in annual relief for taxpayers, attempts to ensure that individuals who benefit from itemized deductions or credits pay a separately calculated minimum tax.
•Taxes on capital gains and dividends would rise, meaning that investors could potentially pay about $35 billion more.
•Married couples would go back to paying higher rates than today, at a cost to them of $32 billion per year.
•Expanded tax credits – such as the child tax credit, which went from $500 to $1,000 – would end. This would cost families $26 billion per year. Some taxpayers would also pay an additional cumulative $1.5 billion in education costs.
•The estate tax, which has already expired, would go back to its 2009 level, costing heirs at least $26 billion.
•Higher-income households would see the dollar value of their personal exemptions phased out and would have a lower value for certain itemized deductions. This would cost those people – most of whom make well over $170,000 a year – about $21 billion.
As you can see, millions more Americans will be hurt by Obama Pelosi TAX INCREASES other than just the personal income rates. This is something that the president and liberal media do not want you to know.
Stunning upset winner Christine O'Donnell continues to be the focus of the liberal media firestorm as they attack her for just about everything just as they did Sarah Palin two years ago. It didn't seem to destroy Sarah and O'Donnell has already raised over $1 million since the attacks started.
In her first debate last night she held her own and was clearly the crowd favorite if you watched the debate. It was held at the Wilmington Jewish Community Center and if audience reaction means anything the vicious attacks and character smears underway are helping O'Donnell.
Her answers were greeted by robust applause that was edited out of the MSNBC video clips, more Lame Street Media dirty tricks. Also the press seems to have forgotten that the people of Delaware elected her, not the Republican or Tea party.
Speaking of the election, what the media is not telling you is that Delaware may be a Democrat state, with 293,000 Democrats and 183,000 Republicans, but just 12% of the Democrats voted in the primry while 32% of the Republicans voted. That means 58,394 Republicans voted compared to 35,128 Democrats.
They also forgot to mention that 146,212 registered Independents in Delaware did not vote in the primary which means there are 329,008 Republican and Independent voters compared to the 292,000 Democrats. Those who shot off their mouths before the dust settled could eat their words if their doomsday predictions for her are proven false. .
We thought you might find the following information of interest as we approach our 4th anniversary of publishing the Coltons Point Times next month. Over the past four years we have grown to over 250,000 readers in 119 foreign countries and all 50 states and the District of Columbia.
This month the CPT becomes syndicated nationwide and worldwide and we are looking forward to bringing the story of America to the world. For the last quarter of this year here are the top 25 countries and states in terms of CPT readers.
While you browse through the lists click and enjoy the following video from YouTube. As always, we thank you for being part of the CPT family as you are our reason for being.
Top 25 Countries
1. United States 2. Canada 3. United Kingdom 4. Australia 5. Philippines 6. Germany 7. France 8. Netherlands 9. New Zealand
10. Israel 11. India 12. Italy 13. Romania 14. Singapore 15. Poland 16. Brazil 17. Ireland 18. Malaysia 19. Spain 20. Slovakia
Since California is the first state to vote on legalizing marijuana in the Midterm election I thought I would outline the truth about drugs in America and give you an overview of what is beig debated. The subject is marijuana use in America and the facts are this; over 100 million Americans have tried marijuana and 14.8 million use it monthly. Over 40% of all high school age kids have tried it.
Now for comparison purposes, there are three recreational drugs in America, alcohol, tobacco and illegal drugs including marijuana.
The most recent studies have shown a continued increase in the use of all type of drugs in America with marijuana use up about 9% the past year. Results from the most recent comprehensive study, the 2007 National Survey on Drug Use and Health, tells the following story.
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) Office of Applied Studies (OAS)
Alcohol
Slightly more than half of Americans aged 12 or older reported being current drinkers of alcohol in the 2007 survey (51.1 percent). This translates to an estimated 126.8 million people, which was similar to the 2006 estimate of 125.3 million people (50.9 percent).
More than one fifth (23.3 percent) of persons aged 12 or older participated in binge drinking (having five or more drinks on the same occasion on at least 1 day in the 30 days prior to the survey) in 2007. This translates to about 57.8 million people, similar to the estimate in 2006.
In 2007, heavy drinking was reported by 6.9 percent of the population aged 12 or older, or 17.0 million people. This rate was the same as the rate of heavy drinking in 2006. Heavy drinking is defined as binge drinking on at least 5 days in the past 30 days.
In 2007, among young adults aged 18 to 25, the rate of binge drinking was 41.8 percent, and the rate of heavy drinking was 14.7 percent. These rates were similar to the rates in 2006.
The rate of current alcohol use among youths aged 12 to 17 was 15.9 percent in 2007. Youth binge and heavy drinking rates were 9.7 and 2.3 percent, respectively. These rates were essentially the same as the 2006 rates.
Tobacco
In 2007, an estimated 70.9 million Americans aged 12 or older were current (past month) users of a tobacco product. This represents 28.6 percent of the population in that age range. In addition, 60.1 million persons (24.2 percent of the population) were current cigarette smokers; 13.3 million (5.4 percent) smoked cigars; 8.1 million (3.2 percent) used smokeless tobacco; and 2.0 million (0.8 percent) smoked tobacco in pipes.
The rate of current use of any tobacco product among persons aged 12 or older decreased from 29.6 percent in 2006 to 28.6 percent in 2007, but the rates of current use of cigarettes, smokeless tobacco, cigars, and pipe tobacco did not change significantly over that period.
Between 2002 and 2007, past month use of any tobacco product decreased from 30.4 to 28.6 percent, and past month cigarette use declined from 26.0 to 24.2 percent. Rates of past month use of cigars, smokeless tobacco, and pipe tobacco were similar in 2002 and 2007.
The rate of past month cigarette use among 12 to 17 year olds declined from 13.0 percent in 2002 to 9.8 percent in 2007. However, past month smokeless tobacco use was higher in 2007 (2.4 percent) than in 2002 (2.0 percent).
Illegal Drugs
In 2007, an estimated 19.9 million Americans aged 12 or older were current (past month) illicit drug users, meaning they had used an illicit drug during the month prior to the survey interview. This estimate represents 8.0 percent of the population aged 12 years old or older. Illicit drugs include marijuana/hashish, cocaine (including crack), heroin, hallucinogens, inhalants, or prescription-type psychotherapeutics used nonmedically.
The rate of current illicit drug use among persons aged 12 or older in 2007 (8.0 percent) was similar to the rate in 2006 (8.3 percent).
Marijuana was the most commonly used illicit drug (14.4 million past month users). Among persons aged 12 or older, the rate of past month marijuana use in 2007 (5.8 percent) was similar to the rate in 2006 (6.0 percent).
In 2007, there were 2.1 million current cocaine users aged 12 or older, comprising 0.8 percent of the population. These estimates were similar to the number and rate in 2006 (2.4 million or 1.0 percent).
Hallucinogens were used in the past month by 1.0 million persons (0.4 percent) aged 12 or older in 2007, including 503,000 (0.2 percent) who had used Ecstasy. These estimates were similar to the corresponding estimates for 2006.
There were 6.9 million (2.8 percent) persons aged 12 or older who used prescription-type psychotherapeutic drugs nonmedically in the past month. Of these, 5.2 million used pain relievers, the same as the number in 2006.
In 2007, there were an estimated 529,000 current users of methamphetamine aged 12 or older (0.2 percent of the population). These estimates were not significantly different from the estimates for 2006 (731,000 or 0.3 percent).
Among youths aged 12 to 17, the current illicit drug use rate remained stable from 2006 (9.8 percent) to 2007 (9.5 percent). Between 2002 and 2007, youth rates declined significantly for illicit drugs in general (from 11.6 to 9.5 percent) and for marijuana, cocaine, hallucinogens, LSD, Ecstasy, prescription-type drugs used nonmedically, pain relievers, stimulants, methamphetamine, and the use of illicit drugs other than marijuana.
Did you really check out the statistics? Alcohol was used by 126.8 million people 12 and over, tobacco was used by 70.9 million people 12 and over, and illegal drugs were used by 19.9 million Americans 12 and over. Of the latter 14.4 million used marijuana. Over time 100 million people have used marijuana.
The cost of illegal marijuana is staggering with a study by Jon Gettman, Ph.D. indicating that Americans spend nearly $113 billion annually on the drug. We also spend $10.7 billion in law enforcement to control the drug before the stimulus and new drug enforcements efforts by the Obama Administration. In other words our government loses nearly $31.1 billion in lost tax revenue to illegal marijuana and spends $10.7 billion trying to stop it, about $42 billion a year.
That is only the beginning of the cost however. The majority of the drug is grown in South America and Asia and smuggled into the states. Along the Mexican border over 6,000 Mexicans have been murdered in drug wars in the past year alone. Tens of thousands of people in other countries have been murdered over the years supplying the US with pot.
Yet the effects of marijuana are nearly insignificant compared to the physical and psychological damage inflicted on us from legal drugs sanctioned in America, alcohol and tobacco. If you threw in the abuses in the prescription drug use here you would find billions more in wasted money. We know all these legal drugs kill and cost us billions of dollars in medical costs.
So why not legalize marijuana? The benefits now substantially outweigh the risk. Marijuana is the only natural drug of the three recreational categories. Where it has been legalized in places like the Netherlands, the use by the public has dropped significantly below the rate in America. In fact in Columbia where it is grown the drug use is a fraction of the American use.
Not only would legalization eliminate the $10.7 billion in law enforcement costs, money that could be better used chasing the criminals in suits whose actions cost us trillions of dollars in losses, but the $31.1 billion in lost tax revenues could pay for a lot of deficits in states and a lot of new initiatives nationally.
Marijuana could be grown in America putting tens of thousands of acres into productive, tax generating use, land currently sitting idle and generating no property tax revenue. States that lost significant property taxes with the loss of tobacco crops would have a way to recover the losses. Thousands of lives in Mexico would be saved every year by eliminating the drug smuggling and drug wars involved in distribution.
Note these three most recent US Presidents have all admitted to using marijuana.
When we tried to prohibit the sale of alcohol in America it backfired and we should have learned our lesson. We allow the sale of tobacco which has hundreds of chemicals added to it to make us addicted to it and the government still can't stop 126.8 million people from using it. The last three presidents of the United States have all admitted to using marijuana and all three attended Ivy League schools. There would be a great sigh of relief from all the countries trying to stop the flow of marijuana into America and we would be saving thousands of lives a year. How about we use common sense and finally legalize it and put billions of dollars to work for us?
.
In the past two years a fascinating phenomena has quietly taken place that could change the future of politics in America. Just 18 months ago for the first time the number of people claiming to be Independents has surpassed the total number of members of either the Democrat or Republican parties. If the political bosses of the two parties are paying attention then they better be preparing for an early retirement, their stranglehold on the political system and the government may be coming to an end.
So what if the Independents outnumber the Elephants and Donkeys? Well in simple words it means that nearly 40% of our voters have rejected the policies, programs and candidates of the two party system. It also means this huge voting block reflects the disenfranchised voters of America, the one group of our citizens subject to taxation without representation.
You see just 32 states allow registered Independents to vote in the primary election for federal offices, meaning for those of you who slept during American History class that means 18 states do not allow Independents to vote in the primary. Several are rather large states banning the Independent vote.
Now some enterprising Independents have formed a bunch of Independent political parties in order to get on the ballot but the states, thanks to the pressure from the two reigning political parties, have made the rules so difficult it is hard to accomplish. Even with his millions of dollars Ross Perot, without a doubt the most successful Independent candidate in the 20th century, still was not on all ballots.
Ross did what he had to do and in spite of the efforts of the two parties to crush him he still got 19% of the vote and cost Bush senior the election. Clinton won by far less than the 19% Perot took away from both party candidates. More on Mr. Perot later as I intend to report on my years as a media advisor to Ross Perot and the things he was doing for people behind the scenes.
Why are states forcing Independents to set up their own political party when they are Independents because they are fed up with the political parties that exist? They don't want their own party, there is all ready to much politics in America. They just want the right to vote for candidates from either party or any of the many minor parties like the Green Movement, etc. in the primary and general elections.
Who gave the Democrats and Republicans the right to dictate who we can choose from on the ballot? In many cases the parties are protecting the worst candidates and the parties have demonstrated that their primary purpose is to protect the political system that is corrupt to the bone. If America is the land of the free then why do the political parties get to screen and virtually dictate who we can vote for in the elections?
As America has matured and both parties have demonstrated an equal zeal to promote greed and corruption the difference between the Democrats and Republicans has vanished. Oh it may be that most liberals are Democrats and most conservatives are Republicans but there are liberals, conservatives and moderates in both parties.
It may be that the party and presidential candidate have a platform to run on but as every winner the past century including the most recent candidate of change Barack Obama have demonstrated, once they win nothing really changes. Both parties are addicted to campaign money, both try to control government policy and in the end the rich still get richer while the middle class is left holding the bag. There will never be effective and honest campaign reform as long as the two parties control the candidates for president, the House and the Senate.
It is time someone sensible in our nation's capitol step up and give all the voters rights. It is time we recognize that control of the government is not the right of the political parties but the people. It is time we pay attention to what got us into this mess in the first place, taxation without representation, greed and a healthy dose of corruption.
I don't remember reading anything about the power or role of the Democrat or Republican parties in our Declaration of Independence or Constitution. There were no guarantees that they should be allowed to control our national policy nor pick our candidates. Fact is they weren't even in existence when our Founding Fathers were debating our future.
I believe both parties should have a voice in national politics, along with the Independents. Then the voice of the people will be heard. Right now only the political machines are heard. Someone in Washington should clean up the mess. For the first 100 years third parties were essential to our success as our forefathers knew there was an inherent danger in allowing political control to be concentrated in a couple of parties.
It was a system that worked quite well. Then came the party bosses who tapped the money and found out how financially rewarding control could become if only they could force the public to pick between two stooges. Occasionally we get good presidents. But there are a lot more good people that could be helping out the country but they will never get the chance because they do not have the backing of the political parties, unions, Wall Street or the money managers, all who conspire to preserve the status quo.
Mr. Obama, you promised changes. Actually you promised a whole lot of things but we know you were just kidding on most of them. You knew you could never deliver. But we understand little political lies, we have been conditioned over the years. Maybe you would like to champion the one change that will benefit us for all time, get rid of the two party control of the American political system. The time is now!
