Sarah Palin, the Christian Right and Fascism in America

[webglider]

Sarah Palin Discussion - Deep Level Punctuator?

Note to moderator: I thought I was posting this in the "Sarah Palin thread" I don't know how to move it. Opps.

Alaskan women rally to protest Palin. Reported by the Daily Kos September 14.

http://dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/9/14/103042/902/965/597033

"Alaska Women Reject Palin" Rally: UPDATED 4x Pics coming back up
by frsbdg
Sun Sep 14, 2008 at 07:30:42 AM PDT
We begin in Anchorage, Alaska, where a group of average women decided to hold a small rally to let it be known that their Governor, Sarah Palin, does not represent their views on many of the issues that are important in their lives.

They put together a press release and sent it to the Anchorage media outlets. ]A local right-wing talk show host broadcast the names and phone numbers of the two organizers over the air. They began receiving a series of harassing phone calls for the remainder of that afternoon. The leading TV station picked up the story on Thursday. Alaska Public Radio Network put up some audio.

[/b]An anonymous caller contacted the local media on Friday afternoon and told them they were one of the organizers, and the rally had been cancelled. Someone even faxed forged a document saying the Secret Service had cancelled the permit for the rally, even though no permit is required. Some people were putting an awful lot of effort in to making sure no dissent would be heard from Alaska.[/b]

frsbdg's diary :: ::
Well, it didn't work. Despite overcast skies and a forecast for rain, there was a rally here today. Oh man, was there! In fact, it was by most accounts the largest protest rally in the history of Alaska. The Anchorage Daily News wrote that the rally drew an "estimated" 1500 people. Let me be clear: the organizers used a hand-clicker and counted at least 1,483 Alaskans, mostly women, who showed up to say that Sarah Palin does not speak for them. They also counted 93 McCain/Palin supporters. The national media loves to say that Sarah Palin enjoys an "80% popularity rating" in Alaska. Do the math on todays rally, and you'd need a faith-based calculator to get 80%. This was grassroots activism at its best - Alaskans coming out to speak their minds on a host of issues. Here are some still pics, I'll update with video later today.

UPDATE 4:All the pics should be back up now.

UPDATE 3: Just finished a music video. Hope you like it.


reminiscent of Bush and his "Free Speech Zones" only worse.

Moderator: As you can see, i moved your post.

 

[webglider]

Re: Sarah Palin Discussion - Deep Level Punctuator?

Here is a really disturbing article from the Sunday New York Times September 14, 2008:

September 14, 2008
Once Elected, Palin Hired Friends and Lashed Foes
By JO BECKER, PETER S. GOODMAN and MICHAEL POWELL
This article is by Jo Becker, Peter S. Goodman and Michael Powell.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/14/us/politics/14palin.html?sq=once%20elected,%20palin%20hired%20friends%20and%20lashed%20foes&st=cse&scp=1&pagewanted=print


WASILLA, Alaska — Gov. Sarah Palin lives by the maxim that all politics is local, not to mention personal.

So when there was a vacancy at the top of the State Division of Agriculture, she appointed a high school classmate, Franci Havemeister, to the $95,000-a-year directorship. A former real estate agent, Ms. Havemeister cited her childhood love of cows as a qualification for running the roughly $2 million agency.

Ms. Havemeister was one of at least five schoolmates Ms. Palin hired, often at salaries far exceeding their private sector wages.

When Ms. Palin had to cut her first state budget, she avoided the legion of frustrated legislators and mayors. Instead, she huddled with her budget director and her husband, Todd, an oil field worker who is not a state employee, and vetoed millions of dollars of legislative projects.

And four months ago, a Wasilla blogger, Sherry Whitstine, who chronicles the governor’s career with an astringent eye, answered her phone to hear an assistant to the governor on the line, she said.

“You should be ashamed!” Ivy Frye, the assistant, told her. “Stop blogging. Stop blogging right now!”

Ms. Palin walks the national stage as a small-town foe of “good old boy” politics and a champion of ethics reform. The charismatic 44-year-old governor draws enthusiastic audiences and high approval ratings. And as the Republican vice-presidential nominee, she points to her management experience while deriding her Democratic rivals, Senators Barack Obama and Joseph R. Biden Jr., as speechmakers who never have run anything.

But an examination of her swift rise and record as mayor of Wasilla and then governor finds that her visceral style and penchant for attacking critics — she sometimes calls local opponents “haters” — contrasts with her carefully crafted public image.

Throughout her political career, she has pursued vendettas, fired officials who crossed her and sometimes blurred the line between government and personal grievance, according to a review of public records and interviews with 60 Republican and Democratic legislators and local officials.

Still, Ms. Palin has many supporters. As a two-term mayor she paved roads and built an ice rink, and as governor she has pushed through higher taxes on the oil companies that dominate one-third of the state’s economy. She stirs deep emotions. In Wasilla, many residents display unflagging affection, cheering “our Sarah” and hissing at her critics.

“She is bright and has unfailing political instincts,” said Steve Haycox, a history professor at the University of Alaska. “She taps very directly into anxieties about the economic future.”

“But,” he added, “her governing style raises a lot of hard questions.”

Ms. Palin declined to grant an interview for this article. The McCain-Palin campaign responded to some questions on her behalf and that of her husband, while referring others to the governor’s spokespeople, who did not respond.

Lt. Gov. Sean Parnell said Ms. Palin had conducted an accessible and effective administration in the public’s interest. “Everything she does is for the ordinary working people of Alaska,” he said.

In Wasilla, a builder said he complained to Mayor Palin when the city attorney put a stop-work order on his housing project. She responded, he said, by engineering the attorney’s firing.

Interviews show that Ms. Palin runs an administration that puts a premium on loyalty and secrecy. The governor and her top officials sometimes use personal e-mail accounts for state business; dozens of e-mail messages obtained by The New York Times show that her staff members studied whether that could allow them to circumvent subpoenas seeking public records.

Rick Steiner, a University of Alaska professor, sought the e-mail messages of state scientists who had examined the effect of global warming on polar bears. (Ms. Palin said the scientists had found no ill effects, and she has sued the federal government to block the listing of the bears as endangered.) An administration official told Mr. Steiner that his request would cost $468,784 to process.

When Mr. Steiner finally obtained the e-mail messages — through a federal records request — he discovered that state scientists had in fact agreed that the bears were in danger, records show.

“Their secrecy is off the charts,” Mr. Steiner said.

State legislators are investigating accusations that Ms. Palin and her husband pressured officials to fire a state trooper who had gone through a messy divorce with her sister, charges that she denies. But interviews make clear that the Palins draw few distinctions between the personal and the political.

Last summer State Representative John Harris, the Republican speaker of the House, picked up his phone and heard Mr. Palin’s voice. The governor’s husband sounded edgy. He said he was unhappy that Mr. Harris had hired John Bitney as his chief of staff, the speaker recalled. Mr. Bitney was a high school classmate of the Palins and had worked for Ms. Palin. But she fired Mr. Bitney after learning that he had fallen in love with another longtime friend.

“I understood from the call that Todd wasn’t happy with me hiring John and he’d like to see him not there,” Mr. Harris said.

“The Palin family gets upset at personal issues,” he added. “And at our level, they want to strike back.”

Through a campaign spokesman, Mr. Palin said he “did not recall” referring to Mr. Bitney in the conversation.

Hometown Mayor

Laura Chase, the campaign manager during Ms. Palin’s first run for mayor in 1996, recalled the night the two women chatted about her ambitions.

“I said, ‘You know, Sarah, within 10 years you could be governor,’ ” Ms. Chase recalled. “She replied, ‘I want to be president.’ ”

Ms. Palin grew up in Wasilla, an old fur trader’s outpost and now a fast-growing exurb of Anchorage. The town sits in the Matanuska-Susitna Valley, edged by jagged mountains and birch forests. In the 1930s, the Roosevelt administration took farmers from the Dust Bowl area and resettled them here; their Democratic allegiances defined the valley for half a century.

In the past three decades, socially conservative Oklahomans and Texans have flocked north to the oil fields of Alaska. They filled evangelical churches around Wasilla and revived the Republican Party. Many of these working-class residents formed the electoral backbone for Ms. Palin, who ran for mayor on a platform of gun rights, opposition to abortion and the ouster of the “complacent” old guard.

After winning the mayoral election in 1996, Ms. Palin presided over a city rapidly outgrowing itself. Septic tanks had begun to pollute lakes, and residential lots were carved willy-nilly out of the woods. She passed road and sewer bonds, cut property taxes but raised the sales tax.

And, her supporters say, she cleaned out the municipal closet, firing veteran officials to make way for her own team. “She had an agenda for change and for doing things differently,” said Judy Patrick, a City Council member at the time.

But careers were turned upside down. The mayor quickly fired the town’s museum director, John Cooper. Later, she sent an aide to the museum to talk to the three remaining employees. “He told us they only wanted two,” recalled Esther West, one of the three, “and we had to pick who was going to be laid off.” The three quit as one.

Ms. Palin cited budget difficulties for the museum cuts. Mr. Cooper thought differently, saying the museum had become a microcosm of class and cultural conflicts in town. “It represented that the town was becoming more progressive, and they didn’t want that,” he said.

Days later, Mr. Cooper recalled, a vocal conservative, Steve Stoll, sidled up to him. Mr. Stoll had supported Ms. Palin and had a long-running feud with Mr. Cooper. “He said: ‘Gotcha, Cooper,’ ” Mr. Cooper said.

Mr. Stoll did not recall that conversation, although he said he supported Ms. Palin’s campaign and was pleased when she fired Mr. Cooper.

In 1997, Ms. Palin fired the longtime city attorney, Richard Deuser, after he issued the stop-work order on a home being built by Don Showers, another of her campaign supporters.

Your attorney, Mr. Showers told Ms. Palin, is costing me lots of money.

“She told me she’d like to see him fired,” Mr. Showers recalled. “But she couldn’t do it herself because the City Council hires the city attorney.” Ms. Palin told him to write the council members to complain.

Meanwhile, Ms. Palin pushed the issue from the inside. “She started the ball rolling,” said Ms. Patrick, who also favored the firing. Mr. Deuser was soon replaced by Ken Jacobus, then the State Republican Party’s general counsel.

“Professionals were either forced out or fired,” Mr. Deuser said.

Ms. Palin ordered city employees not to talk to the press. And she used city money to buy a white Suburban for the mayor’s use — employees sarcastically called it the mayor-mobile.

The new mayor also tended carefully to her evangelical base. She appointed a pastor to the town planning board. And she began to eye the library. For years, social conservatives had pressed the library director to remove books they considered immoral.

“People would bring books back censored,” recalled former Mayor John Stein, Ms. Palin’s predecessor. “Pages would get marked up or torn out.”

Witnesses and contemporary news accounts say Ms. Palin asked the librarian about removing books from the shelves. The McCain-Palin presidential campaign says Ms. Palin never advocated censorship.

But in 1995, Ms. Palin, then a city councilwoman, told colleagues that she had noticed the book “Daddy’s Roommate” on the shelves and that it did not belong there, according to Ms. Chase and Mr. Stein. Ms. Chase read the book, which helps children understand homosexuality, and said it was inoffensive; she suggested that Ms. Palin read it.

“Sarah said she didn’t need to read that stuff,” Ms. Chase said. “It was disturbing that someone would be willing to remove a book from the library and she didn’t even read it.”

“I’m still proud of Sarah,” she added, “but she scares the bejeebers out of me.”

Reform Crucible

Restless ambition defined Ms. Palin in the early years of this decade. She raised money for Senator Ted Stevens, a Republican from the state; finished second in the 2002 Republican primary for lieutenant governor; and sought to fill the seat of Senator Frank H. Murkowski when he ran for governor.

Mr. Murkowski appointed his daughter to the seat, but as a consolation prize, he gave Ms. Palin the $125,000-a-year chairmanship of a state commission overseeing oil and gas drilling.

Ms. Palin discovered that the state Republican leader, Randy Ruedrich, a commission member, was conducting party business on state time and favoring regulated companies. When Mr. Murkowski failed to act on her complaints, she quit and went public.

The Republican establishment shunned her. But her break with the gentlemen’s club of oil producers and political power catapulted her into the public eye.

“She was honest and forthright,” said Jay Kerttula, a former Democratic state senator from Palmer.

Ms. Palin entered the 2006 primary for governor as a formidable candidate.

In the middle of the primary, a conservative columnist in the state, Paul Jenkins, unearthed e-mail messages showing that Ms. Palin had conducted campaign business from the mayor’s office. Ms. Palin handled the crisis with a street fighter’s guile.

“I told her it looks like she did the same thing that Randy Ruedrich did,” Mr. Jenkins recalled. “And she said, ‘Yeah, what I did was wrong.’ ”

Mr. Jenkins hung up and decided to forgo writing about it. His phone rang soon after.

Mr. Jenkins said a reporter from Fairbanks, reading from a Palin news release, demanded to know why he was “smearing” her. “Now I look at her and think: ‘Man, you’re slick,’ ” he said.

Ms. Palin won the primary, and in the general election she faced Tony Knowles, the former two-term Democratic governor, and Andrew Halcro, an independent.

Not deeply versed in policy, Ms. Palin skipped some candidate forums; at others, she flipped through hand-written, color-coded index cards strategically placed behind her nameplate.

Before one forum, Mr. Halcro said he saw aides shovel reports at Ms. Palin as she crammed. Her showman’s instincts rarely failed. She put the pile of reports on the lectern. Asked what she would do about health care policy, she patted the stack and said she would find an answer in the pile of solutions.[/b

“She was fresh, and she was tomorrow,” said Michael Carey, a former editorial page editor for The Anchorage Daily News. “She just floated along like Mary Poppins.”

Government

Half a century after Alaska became a state, Ms. Palin was inaugurated as governor in Fairbanks and took up the reformer’s sword.

As she assembled her cabinet and made other state appointments, those with insider credentials were now on the outs. But a new pattern became clear. She surrounded herself with people she has known since grade school and members of her church.

Mr. Parnell, the lieutenant governor, praised Ms. Palin’s appointments. “The people she hires are competent, qualified, top-notch people,” he said.

Ms. Palin chose Talis Colberg, a borough assemblyman from the Matanuska valley, as her attorney general, provoking a bewildered question from the legal community: “Who?” Mr. Colberg, who did not return calls, moved from a one-room building in the valley to one of the most powerful offices in the state, supervising some 500 people.

“I called him and asked, ‘Do you know how to supervise people?’ ” said a family friend, Kathy Wells. “He said, ‘No, but I think I’ll get some help.’ ”

The Wasilla High School yearbook archive now doubles as a veritable directory of state government. Ms. Palin appointed Mr. Bitney, her former junior high school band-mate, as her legislative director and chose another classmate, Joe Austerman, to manage the economic development office for $82,908 a year. Mr. Austerman had established an Alaska franchise for Mailboxes Etc.

To her supporters — and with an 80 percent approval rating, she has plenty — Ms. Palin has lifted Alaska out of a mire of corruption. She gained the passage of a bill that tightens the rules covering lobbyists. And she rewrote the tax code to capture a greater share of oil and gas sale proceeds.

“Does anybody doubt that she’s a tough negotiator?” said State Representative Carl Gatto, Republican of Palmer.

Yet recent controversy has marred Ms. Palin’s reform credentials. In addition to the trooper investigation, lawmakers in April accused her of improperly culling thousands of e-mail addresses from a state database for a mass mailing to rally support for a policy initiative.

While Ms. Palin took office promising a more open government, her administration has battled to keep information secret. Her inner circle discussed the benefit of using private e-mail addresses. An assistant told her it appeared that such e-mail messages sent to a private address on a “personal device” like a BlackBerry “would be confidential and not subject to subpoena.”

Ms. Palin and aides use their private e-mail addresses for state business. A campaign spokesman said the governor copied e-mail messages to her state account “when there was significant state business.”

On Feb. 7, Frank Bailey, a high-level aide, wrote to Ms. Palin’s state e-mail address to discuss appointments. Another aide fired back: “Frank, this is not the governor’s personal account.”

Mr. Bailey responded: “Whoops~!”

Mr. Bailey, a former midlevel manager at Alaska Airlines who worked on Ms. Palin’s campaign, has been placed on paid leave; he has emerged as a central figure in the trooper investigation.

Another confidante of Ms. Palin’s is Ms. Frye, 27. She worked as a receptionist for State Senator Lyda Green before she joined Ms. Palin’s campaign for governor. Now Ms. Frye earns $68,664 as a special assistant to the governor. Her frequent interactions with Ms. Palin’s children have prompted some lawmakers to refer to her as “the babysitter,” a title that Ms. Frye disavows.

Like Mr. Bailey, she is an effusive cheerleader for her boss.

“YOU ARE SO AWESOME!” Ms. Frye typed in an e-mail message to Ms. Palin in March.

Many lawmakers contend that Ms. Palin is overly reliant on a small inner circle that leaves her isolated. Democrats and Republicans alike describe her as often missing in action. Since taking office in 2007, Ms. Palin has spent 312 nights at her Wasilla home, some 600 miles to the north of the governor’s mansion in Juneau, records show.

During the last legislative session, some lawmakers became so frustrated with her absences that they took to wearing “Where’s Sarah?” pins.

Many politicians say they typically learn of her initiatives — and vetoes — from news releases.

Mayors across the state, from the larger cities to tiny municipalities along the southeastern fiords, are even more frustrated. Often, their letters go unanswered and their pleas ignored, records and interviews show.

Last summer, Mayor Mark Begich of Anchorage, a Democrat, pressed Ms. Palin to meet with him because the state had failed to deliver money needed to operate city traffic lights. At one point, records show, state officials told him to just turn off a dozen of them. Ms. Palin agreed to meet with Mr. Begich when he threatened to go public with his anger, according to city officials.

At an Alaska Municipal League gathering in Juneau in January, mayors across the political spectrum swapped stories of the governor’s remoteness. How many of you, someone asked, have tried to meet with her? Every hand went up, recalled Mayor Fred Shields of Haines Borough. And how many met with her? Just a few hands rose. Ms. Palin soon walked in, delivered a few remarks and left for an anti-abortion rally.

The administration’s e-mail correspondence reveals a siege-like atmosphere. Top aides keep score, demean enemies and gloat over successes. Even some who helped engineer her rise have felt her wrath.

Dan Fagan, a prominent conservative radio host and longtime friend of Ms. Palin, urged his listeners to vote for her in 2006. But when he took her to task for raising taxes on oil companies, he said, he found himself branded a “hater.”

It is part of a pattern, Mr. Fagan said, in which Ms. Palin characterizes critics as “bad people who are anti-Alaska.”

As Ms. Palin’s star ascends, the McCain campaign, as often happens in national races, is controlling the words of those who know her well. Her mother-in-law, Faye Palin, has been asked not to speak to reporters, and aides sit in on interviews with old friends.

At a recent lunch gathering, an official with the Wasilla Chamber of Commerce asked its members to refer all calls from reporters to the governor’s office. Dianne Woodruff, a city councilwoman, shook her head.

“I was thinking, I don’t remember giving up my First Amendment rights,” Ms. Woodruff said. “Just because you’re not going gaga over Sarah doesn’t mean you can’t speak your mind.”

 

[Laura]

Re: Sarah Palin Discussion - Deep Level Punctuator?

Just by scanning the sott.net page lately, one can see that Palin is really taking some hits even if she does have her supporters.

Now, ordinarily, that much vituperation aimed at an individual - assuming the individual was a normal human and not a pathological deviant - would have some effect on the person. Normal people are generally somewhat neurotic on the best of days and tend to blame themselves for about everything because that is what our socio-cultural system does to a person.

But, not so for the pathological types who are so narcissistic that nothing from outside penetrates.

There are, of course, individuals with narcissistic traits that are not really certifiable Narcissists (which we suspect is really a high-functioning psychopath). Such individuals can often be "artsy" in some way because they have certain illusions/delusions about themselves and have been narcissistically wounded and need a lot of attention to overcome their neuroses.

So, when considering Palin's selection, I thought of another "beauty queen" who was recently placed on display in the political arena: Carla Bruni. One might even suspect that McCain and his handlers noticed the effect Bruni had on France and how Sarkozy used her to distract the people from his agenda. France has a beauty queen, so let's get one for the good ole US of A. But there is a difference between Bruni and Palin.

We notice that Bruni also came under fire from the press and took some serious hits to the mid-section. She was so upset that she even lashed out and made some politically incorrect comments that she had to apologize for. And this is where we come to a very odd thing that she said in response to how she was treated as opposed to how Palin has responded thus far.

When Bruni's album came out in late June/early July, it was harshly criticized. I'm sure that Bruni never expected that and was profoundly distressed by it. After all, when you are in the music/arts industry, it DOES matter what your fans think of you. If they don't like you, you don't sell your music/art and don't make money or get kudos and lots of attention.

So, what did Carla say?

"Of course it hurts me, but I also find it quite natural," Bruni said in an interview on RTL radio Friday.

"It's understandable that people can't help mixing up my work as an artist and my function. Maybe they feel offended by the fact the head of state's wife should make a record," she said.

But the 40-year-old Bruni, who married Sarkozy in February after a whirlwind three-month romance, said she was in a "privileged enough position to be able to handle violent reactions."

She told Europe 1 radio her husband - who she thanks on the record cover "for his unwavering support" - had been a major help. LINK

Now, did you notice that little thing that Carla let slip??? That she was in a "privileged enough position to be able to handle violent reactions."

It's pretty obvious that someone sat her down and told her the facts of life about politics: that it doesn't matter what THE PEOPLE think!

I don't know if people reading this article really realized that right here, Carla Bruni let the mask slip and gave us an inside peek into how our "leaders" think of us - the people they are supposed to serve. She let it slip because, I think, she is not truly "one of them." Oh, sure, she's a materialistic air-head but that's not a crime. She's shallow and ambitious and manipulative and catty, but that's neither a crime nor evidence of serious pathology.

Palin, on the other hand, shows all the signs of being a psychopath:

Sarah Palin's war against information

John McCain's running mate might be avoiding the press, but Sarah Palin is everywhere - on the covers of Time and Newsweek, not to mention People and Us Weekly. You'd be forgiven if you thought that the woman was running for president herself. A good fraction of the coverage has been harsh, yes. But it has also been frustratingly distracted. The idiotic rumours that her (now pregnant) daughter is the true mother of child No 5 were unworthy of a telenovela, but that didn't stop the New York Times from putting four different reporters on the case. Her string of alleged abuses of power, her rejection of the realities of climate change, her apparent ignorance of the basics of the mortgage market: these are stories worth covering, and they've got a bit of play. But they've been drowned out by the dumber stories about her hair or her family, and by the Republican chorus that the media have it in for her.

"Shame on you!" they shouted in unison, like Puritans around a ducking stool, as Palin scolded the media during her speech last Wednesday in St Paul. It's ironic, to say the least, that the GOP has decided to hit the press in order to win an election for McCain, a man who has enjoyed the media's adulation for 25 years and who used to call reporters "my base". But the stratagem is plain: discredit the messenger, and reports on Palin's serious ethics problems or shoddy record can be written off as baseless (and sexist) attacks by a group with a vendetta, hell-bent on destroying an unimpeachable hockey mom who shares your values. Unlike that other guy. (...)

For despite the hysteria of a few lefties who seem never to have heard of a convention bounce, Palin has not instantly won the hearts of millions of undecided voters in Pennsylvania, Ohio and Michigan. On the contrary, outside the base she hasn't played very well - and she has nowhere to go but down. The McCain campaign understands that inevitability. Palin's sequestration is testament to the fact that she cannot withstand the scrutiny that the press (though not, apparently, McCain's vetting process) demands. And the campaign's legal actions in Alaska, where it's doing its best to block any embarrassing new revelations surrounding her firing of her public safety commissioner, bespeak a real fear of an October surprise. (...)

It's a war against information. The McCain team knows that if the media do their job and give Palin the same scrutiny that any candidate for high office must endure, she will collapse. (...)

Here's hoping that Gibson asks Palin a few questions about her record - and also a few about instability in Pakistan or how to increase liquidity in credit markets. But don't get your hopes up. Bizarrely, Gibson will interview Palin over the course of a few days, meaning that if the questioning turns in a direction the campaign doesn't like, later sessions can be cancelled. If he fluffs it, we may have to wait all the way until the vice-presidential debate on October 8 to put real questions to the woman who might one day be president.

So, what does Palin say, knowing all the while that the masses are roiling with fury at her selection, knowing, as she surely must, that the "religious right" is still a minority and that she is certainly not wanted by the vast majority of Americans. Has she lashed out and shown a single scintilla of emotion?

Nope.

One particular remark she has made is chilling in its implications when taken in conjunction with the little inside view of how those at the top really think about themselves - that they are in a privileged enough position that they don't have to worry about violent reactions:

In the interview, Palin said "I'm ready" when asked whether she had sufficient experience to serve as vice president. She added that she did not hesitate when McCain offered her the No. 2 spot on the ticket.

"I answered yes because I have the confidence in that readiness and knowing that you can't blink, you have to be wired in a way of being so committed to the mission, the mission that we're on, reform of this country and victory in the war, you can't blink," she told Gibson.

 

[Johnno]

Re: Sarah Palin Discussion - Deep Level Punctuator?

Just by scanning the sott.net page lately, one can see that Palin is really taking some hits even if she does have her supporters.

Now, ordinarily, that much vituperation aimed at an individual - assuming the individual was a normal human and not a pathological deviant - would have some effect on the person. Normal people are generally somewhat neurotic on the best of days and tend to blame themselves for about everything because that is what our socio-cultural system does to a person.

But, not so for the pathological types who are so narcissistic that nothing from outside penetrates.

Not sure if it was an article about one of the current bunch of politicians (perhaps Australian) and a search is of no help.

However I do remember that this particular politician regarded one aspect of "success" being based on how many enemies he made.

 

[Laura]

Re: Sarah Palin Discussion - Deep Level Punctuator?

Some recent articles about Palin worth checking out:

Matt Damon terrified by the possibility of a President Palin

"The fact that we've gotten this far, and we're that close to this being a reality, is crazy...I need to know if she really thinks dinosaurs were here 4,000 years ago. That's an important--I want to to know that, I really do, because she's going to have the nuclear codes."

Palin leaves open option of war with Russia

Questioned about whether she felt ready to step in as vice president or perhaps even president if something happened to the 72-year-old McCain, Palin said: "I do, Charlie, and on January 20, when John McCain and I are sworn in, if we are so privileged to be elected to serve this country, we'll be ready. I'm ready."

Gibson also read Palin a comment she made in her former church - "Our national leaders are sending U.S. soldiers on a task that is from God" - and asked whether she thought the United States was fighting a holy war.

Palin said she was recalling Abraham Lincoln's words when she made the comment and said: "I would never presume to know God's will or to speak God's words."

She said she didn't know if her son Track who is headed to Iraq was on a mission from God.

"What I know is that my son has made a decision. I am so proud of his independent and strong decision he has made, what he decided to do and serving for the right reasons and serving something greater than himself and not choosing a real easy path where he could be more comfortable and certainly safer," Palin said.

Palin Showing a Confidence, in Prepared Answers

"I got lost in a blizzard of words there," Charles Gibson of ABC said to Gov. Sarah Palin, with a trace of irritation in his voice. "Is that a yes?"

Ms. Palin didn't look rattled or lose her cool in her first interview with Mr. Gibson, the network anchor, on Thursday night, but she sailed through with general answers, sticking to talking points that flowed out quickly and spiritedly - but a little too much by rote to satisfy her interviewer that she was giving his questions serious consideration.

When Ms. Palin seemed not to know exactly what the Bush doctrine is, Mr. Gibson made a point of explaining it - pre-emptive self-defense - and demanded that she tell him whether she agreed with it.

ABC News delivered the first glimpse of Ms. Palin without a script or a cheering audience, and it was a strained and illuminating conversation. Ms. Palin, who kept inserting Mr. Gibson's nickname, "Charlie," into her answers, as if to convey an old hand's conviviality, tried to project self-confidence, poise and even expertise: She let Mr. Gibson know that she had personally reassured the Georgian president and correctly pronounced his last name, Saakashvili. At times, her eyes looked uncertain and her voice hesitated, and she looked like a student trying to bend prepared answers to fit unexpected questions.

Mr. Gibson, who sat back in his chair and wriggled his foot impatiently, had the skeptical, annoyed tone of a university president who agrees to interview the daughter of a trustee, but doesn't believe she merits admission.

When he asked her, slowly and solemnly to "look the country in the eye" and say whether she truly felt qualified to be vice president and possibly commander in chief, Mr. Gibson seemed to expect Ms. Palin to express at least a moment of humility and self-doubt. Ms. Palin said she had no doubts whatsoever when asked to be Senator John McCain's running mate. ("I answered him yes because I have the confidence in that readiness and knowing that you can't blink. You have to be wired in a way of being so committed to the mission, the mission that we're on, reform of this country and victory in the war, you can't blink.") Mr. Gibson suggested that her brash, unwavering confidence sounded like "hubris."

Expert: Palin Didn't Look Confident

... How did she do in her talk with ABC News anchor Charles Gibson? ...

On The Early Show Friday, body language expert Jo-Ellan Dimitrius said Palin rated about a five on a scale of ten during the interview. As Dimitirius put it, "There were some aspects that could have been better and some that could have been worse."

Dimitrius, who with Wendy Patrick Mazzarella co-wrote the new book, Reading People: How to Understand People and Predict Their Behavior -- Anytime, Anyplace, told co-anchor Maggie Rodriguez Palin was slouching a bit in the chair. "She's not erect. Most people look at body posture as being a sign of credibility, or professionalism. The way she's hunched over, it also shows a bit of insecurity and a lack of confidence."

Palin didn't come off as being as confident sitting there as she seemed during her speech to the Republican convention, Dimitrius added.

Also, accoridng to Dimitrius, Palin isn't a good listener -- she hurried the conversation.

And she had clenched hands at many points. That, says Dimitrius, is a fighting, defensive stance, also revealing a lack of confidence. It's one of insecurity. She was being protective.

What's more, at times, when Plain was saying "no," she was shaking her head "yes." That, says Dimitirus, indicates she wanted Gibson's approval.

Improvements Dimitrius suggests for Palin include correcting her posture, gesturing more freely and with her hands open, being careful about the verbal messages she is sending, and being a better listener.

Sarah Palin's Interview - She Can Memorize the Talking Points, but Does She Understand Them?

Last night the governor of Alaska sounded less like the Palin-ator (an implacable political force sent to save the Republican Party) than a robot struggling to handle inputs for which it was not programmed. And that illustrates a critical aspect of the "experience" issue - being prepared to assume the presidency involves in part thinking through how to be president in a manner the goes beyond crammed talking points. (...)

The first parts of the Gibson interviews gave no indication that she has given serious thought to how to run the country. Instead we got talking points about how she's "wired." (I don't need experience, I have leadership pre-programmed!)


There were a few genuinely painful (and perhaps scary) moments.

The Bush Doctrine flub has been widely discussed, though as I wrote earlier (and James Fallows also notes), the media reports understate the depths of her ignorance on the issue.

Less noted was Gibson's asking about her comment that, as governor of Alaska, she hadn't been focused on Iraq. Palin responded:

Of course I've been focused on the war, of course I've been, as every American has been, since 9/11.

Ummm, one problem there, governor: We haven't been at war with Iraq since 9/11. (...)

Then there was the exchange about Russia. McCain has argued that Alaska's proximity to Russia qualifies as foreign-policy experience for Palin.

PALIN: ... And, Charlie, you're in Alaska. We have that very narrow maritime border between the United States, and the 49th state, Alaska, and Russia. They are our next door neighbors. We need to have a good relationship with them. They're very, very important to us and they are our next door neighbor.

GIBSON: What insight into Russian actions, particularly in the last couple of weeks, does the proximity of the state give you?

PALIN: They're our next door neighbors and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska.

GIBSON: What insight does that give you into what they're doing in Georgia?

PALIN: Well, I'm giving you that perspective of how small our world is and how important it is that we work with our allies to keep good relation with all of these countries, especially Russia. We will not repeat a Cold War. We must have good relationship with our allies, pressuring, also, helping us to remind Russia that it's in their benefit, also, a mutually beneficial relationship for us all to be getting along. (...)

GIBSON: What if Israel decided it felt threatened and needed to take out the Iranian nuclear facilities?

PALIN: Well, first, we are friends with Israel and I don't think that we should second guess the measures that Israel has to take to defend themselves and for their security.

GIBSON: So if we wouldn't second guess it and they decided they needed to do it because Iran was an existential threat, we would cooperative or agree with that.

PALIN: I don't think we can second guess what Israel has to do to secure its nation.

GIBSON: So if it felt necessary, if it felt the need to defend itself by taking out Iranian nuclear facilities, that would be all right.

PALIN: We cannot second guess the steps that Israel has to take to defend itself.

Now we know why they've kept her away from the press for two weeks.

Women Against Sarah Palin Speak Out

With recent polls suggesting that women are flocking to the McCain/Palin ticket, there is a growing chorus of female voices who want to put a stop to this trend, and fast.

Two women in New York felt so strongly that Palin was the wrong choice they created a blog called "Women Against Sarah Palin" and are using the site to post emails from women who write in from all over the country about why they think Palin is the wrong choice as for Vice President and the wrong choice for American women.

"We felt as though McCain's choice was this kind of way to automatically grab female voters and we found that assumption was very insulting to our intelligence as female voters in America," said Lyra Kilston, a 31 year old art magazine editor in New York who helped create the blog.

Shortly after Palin's selection, Kilston and her co-worker Quinn Latimer, citing what they saw as 'mounting disbelief, fury and dread' among their female friends over the selection of Sarah Palin, sent out an email to forty of their friends soliciting reaction the Alaska Governor's nomination for their blog. The women also asked the recipients to forward the email to everyone they knew so that others could do the same.

Within a week they received up to 80,000 responses from women from Alaska to Florida, and now estimate they are receiving response emails at a rate of three per second.

"I don't think either of us thought it would get this large or it would reach this many people," said Latimer. (...)

"Palin's political views are in every way a slap in the face to the accomplishments that our mothers and grandmothers and great-grandmothers have fiercely fought for," they wrote in their email. ... They hope voters, the media, and contributors to their website focus on Sarah Palin's record rather than her biography. Latimer thinks that the election discourse has taken an ugly turn since Palin's selection.

"I think it has changed the election from something that was rigorous and intellectual and demanding on the people who were following it, said Latimer. "McCain has changed that by bringing [Palin] on board. Suddenly its 'Us Weekly. Suddenly its 'People Magazine' as opposed to a serious election on serious issues."

Palin Links Iraq to 9/11, A View Discarded by Bush

Gov. Sarah Palin linked the war in Iraq with the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks , telling an Iraq-bound brigade of soldiers that included her son that they would "defend the innocent from the enemies who planned and carried out and rejoiced in the death of thousands of Americans."

The idea that Iraq shared responsibility with al-Qaeda for the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, once promoted by Bush administration officials, has since been rejected even by the president himself. On any other day, Palin's statement would almost certainly have drawn a sharp rebuke from Democrats, but both parties had declared a halt to partisan activities to mark Thursday's anniversary. (...)

As she has been since McCain plucked her from relative obscurity two weeks ago, Palin continues to be surrounded by senior McCain advisers even here; the senator's top strategist, Steve Schmidt, and several others accompanied her to Alaska. The group is guiding Palin through a crash course on policy issues and is revising the campaign's original plan to send her on fundraising missions separately from McCain.

Instead, seeking to seize on the outpouring of enthusiasm for Palin, McCain advisers are "seriously considering" having McCain and Palin campaign together on the road. It would be an unusual arrangement -- running mates traditionally split up to cover as much ground as possible -- but aides believe it would help brand McCain and Palin as a single unit. It would also prevent Palin from having to contend with her own dedicated press contingent as she works to become more comfortable with an array of national and international issues. The campaign is also cognizant of the fact that McCain has consistently drawn bigger crowds since adding Palin to the ticket.

In other words, they don't think she should be turned loose on her own. She's too ignorant. She's a loose cannon.

Sarah Palin and the Good Book

Being well schooled in scripture, Sarah Palin is certainly familiar with the Book of Kings, Chapter 1, verses 1-4 and I'm sure they have crossed her mind in recent days:

Now king David was old and stricken in years; and they covered him with clothes, but he gat no heat.

Wherefore his servants said unto him, Let there be sought for my lord the king a young virgin: and let her stand before the king, and let her cherish him, and let her lie in thy bosom, that my lord the king may get heat.

So they sought for a fair damsel throughout all the coasts of Israel, and found Abishag a Shunammite, and brought her to the king.

And the damsel was very fair, and cherished the king, and ministered to him: but the king knew her not.

On Thursday night John McCain certainly looked stricken in years, tottering through his interminable speech, and whatever heat now nourishes him in political terms comes from Sarah, not Cindy whose inner thoughts may perhaps be more directed towards the yoga instructor in San Diego reckoned by some in the yoga community in that city to be a source of consolation to the Hensley beer heiress. (...)

Listening to the speeches preceding Palin's one could see the depths of the Republican dilemma and why John McCain made his long-odds gambler's pick of Palin in the immediate aftermath of Obama's triumphant final evening in Denver. Up to the microphone stepped McCain's erstwhile rivals - Romney, Huckabee and Giuliani - and aside from ritual homage to the heroism of John McCain, found nothing better to do with their time than flail away at Big Government and the liberals in the national press corps. (...)

A week ago McCain made the assessment that the Republican Party's Christian base didn't trust him and the Undecideds saw him as just the sort of Washington insider Romney and others were scheduled to deride in St Paul. On the spur of the moment he bet on Palin and tossed a new soap opera into the fall schedule. (...)

Sarah Palin is part of a frontier myth that goes back to the earliest years of the Republic: the beautiful, intrepid frontierswoman, shoulder to shoulder with her man, firing at the redskins circling the wagon and dispatching the roaring grizzly with a steady aim as it towers over her infant's cradle.

Tie this to the equally potent myth of the ordinary PTA mom taking on the corrupt good old boys running City Hall and the allure becomes irresistible. Throw in her manly husband Todd, equally at home on his snowmobile, in his fishing boat or dandling Trig the baby with Down syndrome, top off with Palin's Pentecostal faith and 100 per cent No to abortion for any reason and you can see why McCain thought Palin worth the throw. Her task: to energize the Republican base and - as a working class woman - to capture some crucial undecided votes in such battlegrounds as Ohio and Pennsylvania.

Europeans awed that a woman wedded to creationism and a big fan of shooting wolves and polar bears from helicopters might be one step away from the Oval Office should remember that the very popular Ronald Reagan - another western governor inexperienced in international affairs -- sat inside the Oval Office for eight years, having publicly affirmed on more than one occasion that he believed the Final Judgement would occur in his life time, probably in Megiddo.

Like Reagan, Palin has a very good sense of political timing. She outmaneuvered the most powerful politicians in Alaska in four short years and has won the esteem of Alaskans by hitting the oil companies with a higher profits tax and distributing some of the take to the citizenry.

Like most soap operas, albeit a good deal faster, the story line developed several complexities. There's the custody feud with Palin's former brother-in-law cop which prompted governor Palin to try to get the man bounced from his job. Getting cops bounced from their jobs is usually fine in my book. There's the pregnant elder daughter Bristol and her boyfriend Levi Johnson, a lad who looked, at the Convention, like a deer caught in the headlights of Todd and Sarah's Ford 350 Pick-up.

Just like Obama, Sarah has a pastor problem. In her case it's Larry Kroon, pastor of the Wasilla Bible Church, which is where the Palin family heads on Sunday. Three weeks ago Kroon made his pulpit available to David Brickner, executive director of Jews for Jesus and a man who has said terrorist attacks on Israelis are God's "judgment of unbelief" on Jews who haven't embraced Christianity. Kroon says that Sarah Palin was in church that day. Palin is pressed to distance herself from Kroon, same way though far less urgently, as Obama was forced to toss his pastor, Jeremiah Wright, over the side. It's one thing to say, as Palin has publicly, that both the Iraq war and the natural gas pipeline she's pressing for (as is Obama) are both God's will, another to urge all Jews to become Christians or court damnation. (...)

In St Paul the usual ceremonial innoculation took place: an agreeble session with representatives of AIPAC and Senator Joe Lieberman, where Paln presumably made all the usual protestations, whereupon AIPAC tied a "Inspected and Passed as Fit for Public Consumption" label to her wrist. (...)

I'm sure we'd survive a Palin presidency, perhaps more surely than a McCain one, given his uncontrollable temper. Here at CounterPunch we've had plenty of emails from progressive types worrying that Palin represents the footfall of fascism, as though the fascist instinct thrives with especial vigor on a diet of mooseburger and faith in the verities of the Holy Bible. (...)

Liberals and progressives flood our inbox with vitriol about the comely Alaskan, but they sure like looking at her photo, most particularly the photoshopped one of her in a patriotic bikini toting a long gun.

Palin should be laughingstock to all feminists

Sarah Palin makes me sick. I hate that she was able to steal Barack Obama's mojo just by showing up wearing rimless glasses and a skirt.

I hate that she makes Joe Biden look like John McCain and John McCain look like the maverick he is not.

I hate that Palin reminds me of Susan Sarandon's feisty character in "Thelma & Louise." I loved Sarandon in that movie, yet I couldn't stand Palin's feistiness at the Republican National Convention.

Sarah Palin makes me sick - not because she may speak in tongues - but because she is a fast talker.

Not even ABC's Charlie Gibson can slow Palin's mouth.

I disagree with the people who claim Gibson caught her off guard during her interview when he asked her whether she agreed with the "Bush Doctrine."

"In what respect?" Palin fired back without so much as a stutter.

In fact, it was Gibson doing the sputtering as he pressed Palin to answer a question that he didn't seem to know the answer to himself.

It irks me that Palin is being painted as some kind of "New Age Feminist" by the so-called "elite" media.

She isn't. (...)

Frankly, Sarah Palin scares me.

How did Cindy McCain put it during her speech at the Republican convention?

"John has picked a reform-minded ... hockey-mommin' ... basketball-shootin' ... moose-huntin' ... fly-fishin' ... pistol-packing ... mother of five for vice president."

The basketball-shootin', moose-huntin', fly-fishin' and pistol-packing might hold up.

But we know that the "reform-minded" is a bit of a stretch. Palin is under investigation for allegedly abusing her power by trying to have her ex-brother-in-law fired.

On Friday, the legislative panel investigating the charges announced it would subpoena Palin's husband, Todd, and a dozen other witnesses.

During the last two weeks, media reports have raised other questions, including:

Palin's practice of billing the state for expenses incurred while staying in her own home.

Revelations that as mayor of Wasilla, she hired a Washington lobbyist to help her bring $27 million in earmarks to the small town.

And according to a profile of Palin that appeared in the Sept. 13 issue of Newsweek, Palin has given her friends jobs and appointed lobbyists to oversee industries they used to represent.

"Her record shows her to be, in many ways, a typical politician who rewards her friends and punishes her enemies," the article said. (...)

Even with a supportive husband, I doubt seriously that Palin has time to be a hockey mom unless she is making a personal appearance on a campaign trail.

And while 7-year-old Piper Palin gave the world a fuzzy moment on stage at the convention when she licked her hand and smoothed her baby brother's hair, and when Bristol, 17 and pregnant, held Trig against her chest while her mother shook the hands of adoring fans, I couldn't help but wonder what it's really like for these kids.

After all, there's no such thing as a superwoman, and children of driven moms make their own sacrifices.

Sarah Palin makes me sick because although black Democrats have been responsible for giving white candidates the boost they needed to beat their Republican opponents in tight races, these voters are now being insulted by feminists who say they will cross over into the McCain camp because of her.

How can that be?

Palin's extreme views on abortion (she once said she would be against her daughter having an abortion even in the case of incest or rape) and her support of abstinence-only programs should make her a laughingstock to feminists.

Instead, she's a star.

That ought to be enough to make any true feminist sick.

Sarah Palin or Ann Coulter?

To begin with, have you noticed that Sarah Palin has in a very real sense BECOME the Republican Party? John McCain has been reduced to her ogling lapdog.

The Ann Coulter thing is terribly interesting, since her values closely mirror the values (or lack thereof) of Palin.

To begin with, Palin's record of environmental protection is obscene. This woman simply loves to kill. Alaska's animal population was in constant danger not only from her guns, but also from the guns (often in airplanes) of her animal hating soul mates.

However, the politically probable reason she was picked may well blow up in the face of the entire Republican structure. She was picked most of all, not because of her "appearance", but because she's a fundamentalist religious fanatic (a fundie).

Naturally, the fundies are delighted, but fanatics have a way of losing their cool and acting like public jackasses, and Palin, like Couler, just can't keep her mouth shut. She's SO out of her political depth, she still hasn't got it that she can't shoot from the hip about religion.

So please stay very, very alert about this. She's already made some innuendoes about Catholics and some, let's just say, ambiguous remarks about the Jewish faith.

Remember, she thinks she has an absolute hot line to God and therefore ALL "other religions" are at best comic books of the righteous path, if not openly in league with the Devil. (...)

The "appearance" thing is a puzzle and must be neutralized. If ANY correlation existed between statesmanship and "good looks", Abraham Lincoln could never have been the standard of American conscience, rationality, and grace.

The best way to deal with this foolishness is to totally ignore it and focus on issues, issues, and nothing BUT issues, because Palin basically doesn't even exist when it comes to the literal life and death challenges and responsibilities to Human Civilization and the planet Earth.

The grade school decisions she has made about such things define her as virulently destructive to all forms of Mother Nature.

She has to be morally and rationally dragged out into the political sunlight so it will be increasingly obvious that she is indeed a clone of Ann Coulter.

The more that association sticks, is the more everyone will have increasing (albeit indirect) insight into the soul of this woman. Ann Coulter/Palin, Sarah Palin/Coulter -- Earth and Democracy haters at their worst. (...)

Look, we're fighting for the life of our country and planet. It's time to take the bark off this fancy lady, and the more you do is the more you see (God forbid) Ann Coulter. She's a desecration of the Goddess and hypocrisy incarnate. How could you live with yourself if you had her track record of voting against children, animals, and women -- much less her mindless contempt for our one and only human environment?

Of course, why would she care about Mother Nature, since she's a psycho religious nut case who thinks the Earth is simply a motel she's just "passing through"?

:O

 

[Laura]

Re: Sarah Palin Discussion - Deep Level Punctuator?

It's as bad as we have been suspecting - maybe even worse:

Christian Fundamentalism Permeates the Republican Party: Sarah Palin’s links to the Christian Right

by F. William Engdahl

Global Research, September 13, 2008

Some days ago, most Americans had never heard of Alaska Governor Sarah Palin. Now, following her Vice Presidential acceptance speech, viewed live by more than 40 million people, Palin is viewed favorably by 58% of American voters according to the latest Rasmussen Reports survey. The self-described ‘hockey mom’’s poll ratings, if they are to be believed, are that of a rock superstar who is rated now higher than either McCain or Democrat Obama. The same Bush-Cheney propaganda apparatus that made the nation believe that Saddam Hussein was the new Hitler and that Georgia was a helpless victim of ruthless Russian aggression after 8.8.08 in Georgia is clearly behind one of the most impressive media propaganda efforts in recent history—the effort to package Republican Vice Presidential candidate, Sarah Palin, Governor of Alaska for less than 19 months, to be the American dream candidate.

Her religious roots are something she has been deliberately vague about. It’s worth a closer look.

As I discuss in some detail in my soon-to-be-released book, Full Spectrum Dominance: Totalitarian Democracy in the New World Order, one of the most significant transformations of American domestic politics over the past three decades since the early 1970’s, when George H.W. Bush was head of the CIA, has been the deliberate manipulation of significant segments of the population, most of them undoubtedly sincere believing people, around the ideology of ‘born-again’ evangelical Christian Fundamentalism to create something known as the Christian Right. Within the broad spectrum of fundamentalist denominations there are some currents which are particularly alarming. Sarah Palin comes out of such a milieu.

The phenomenon of the rapid spread within the United States since the 1980’s of evangelical Pentecostalism is a political phenomenon which has become so influential that the two elections of George W. Bush as well as countless races for Senate or Congress often depend on the backing or lack of it from the organized Religious Right.

The spawning of some Christian Right sects also creates an ideology to drive the shock troops willing to literally ‘die for Christ’ in places such as Iraq or Afghanistan, Iran or elsewhere that the Pentagon needs their services. That ideology has been used to build a fanatical activist base within the Republican Party which backs a right-wing domestic agenda and a military foreign policy that sees Islam or other suitable opponents of the US power elite as Satanism incarnate.

How does Sarah Palin fit into this?

The CNP: manipulating religion to political ends

Many of the religious evangelical groups in America are coordinated top-down by a secretive organization called the Committee on National Policy. Former close Bush adviser, Rev. Ted Haggard, was a member of the Committee on National Policy until a sex and drugs scandal forced him out in late 2006.

Haggard was Pastor of the New Life Church in Colorado Springs described as the ‘evangelical Vatican,’ and was head of the National Association of Evangelicals. Ted Haggard was also a member of a highly significant and little-understood sect known as Joel’s Army or the Manifest Sons of God, the same circles which spawned Sarah Palin.


Another noteworthy member of the CNP as was Grover Nyquist, the man once described as the ‘Field Marshall of the Bush Plan.’

The CNP, created in the early 1980’s during the Reagan era, is the nexus for several odd and quite powerful organizations. It was described by ABC's Marc J. Ambinder as ‘the conservative version of the Council on Foreign Relations.’ CNP Members include names such as General John Singlaub, shipping magnate J. Peter Grace, Texas billionaire Nelson Bunker Hunt, Edwin J. Feulner Jr of the right-wing Heritage Foundation, Rev. Pat Robertson of the Christian Broadcasting Network, Jerry Falwell, Tim LaHaye and most of the prominent names in the Christian Right around Bush. It has included prominent politicians including Senator Trent Lott, Senator Don Nickles, former Attorney General Ed Meese, Col. Oliver North of Iran-Contra fame, and Right-wing philanthropist Else Prince, mother of Erik Prince, the founder of Blackwater the controversial private security firm.1

CNP members have also included not only the Rev. Sun Myung Moon Unification Church, definitely a bizarre formation whose founder openly states that he is superior to Christ. The CNP as well reportedly includes the Church of Scientology.2

CNP member and GOP strategist, Gary Bauer, links both. Bauer’s Family Research Council was a signatory of the Scientology Pledge to remove psychology from California schools and replace it with L. Ron Hubbard's Dianetics. Bauer was also a speaker at Sun Myung Moon's Family Federation for World Peace and Unification Conference in 1996.

Religious researchers Paul and Phillip Collins describe the CNP as follows: ‘The CNP appears to be a creation of factions of the power elite designed to mobilize well-meaning Christians to unwittingly support elite initiatives. The CNP could also be considered a project in religious engineering that empties Christianity of its metaphysical substance and re-conceptualizes many of its principles and concepts according to the socially and politically expedient designs of the elite. These contentions are supported by the fact that many CNP members are also members of other organizations and/or criminal enterprises that are tied directly to the power elite.’3

In order to shape public debate over the course of national military and foreign as well as domestic policy, the US establishment had to create mass-based organizations to manipulate public opinion in ways contrary to the self-interest of the majority of the American people. The Committee on National Policy was formed to be a central part of this mass manipulation.

The Committee on National Policy is a vital link between multi-billion dollar defense contractors, Washington lobbyists like the convicted felon and Republican fundraiser, Jack Abramoff, and the Christian Right. It’s at the heart of a new axis between right-wing military politics, support for the Pentagon war agenda globally and the neo-conservative political control of much of US foreign and defense policy.

The CNP has been at the center of Karl Rove’s carefully-constructed Bush political machine. Tom Delay and dozens of top Bush Administration Republicans are or had been members of the CNP. Few details about the organization are leaked to the public. As secretive as the Bilderberg Group if not more so, the CNP releases no press statements, meets in secret and never reveals names of its members willingly.

The elite circles behind the Bush Presidency have crafted an extremely powerful political machine using the forces and energies of the Christian Right and millions of American Christians unaware of the darker manipulations. Is Sarah Palin a part of such darker manipulations?

Sarah Palin and Dominionism

Sarah Palin it appears now, was chosen very carefully as she comes out of the very fundamentalist evangelical circles that the CNP uses to mobilize and shape America’s political agenda.

Palin reportedly drew early attention from state GOP leadership when, during her first mayoral campaign, she ran on an anti-abortion platform. Normally, political parties do not get involved in Alaskan municipal elections because they are nonpartisan. But once word of her evangelical views made its way to Juneau, the state capitol, state Republicans put money behind her campaign. According to researcher, Charley James, "Once in office, Palin set out to build a machine that chewed up anyone who got in her way. The good, Godly Christian turns out to be anything but."

The religious background of Sarah Palin is not unrelated to her bid to take the nation’s second highest office. She herself has been extremely vague about that background. Given the details, it becomes clearer perhaps why.

Sarah Palin has spent more than two and a half decades of her life as a member of an Alaska church which is part of a fanatical Christian-named cult project that is sweeping across America. Palin comes out of the most radical stream of US Born-Again Evangelism known as ‘Joel’s Army,’ an offshoot of what is called Dominionism and sometimes also called the Latter Rain cult or Manifest Sons of God. The movement deliberately attempts to remain below the radar screen.

A Dominionist soldier in McCain’s Army

Sarah Palin is a product of an extreme fringe of the American Evangelical movement known variously as the Third Wave Movement, also known as the New Apostolic Reformation, or as Joel's Army, a part of what is called Dominionism. Until 2002 according to their own website, Palin was a member of Wasilla Assembly of God with Senior Pastor Ed Kalnins. Online video clips of Palin speaking from the pulpit of this church are revealing. Curiously, between the time this article was begun on September 9th and the 11th, the video was removed without explanation:

(http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article20712.htm.).

As one researcher familiar with the history of the Third Wave Movement or Dominionism describes, ‘The Third Wave is a revival of the theology of the Latter Rain tent revivals of the 1950s and 1960s led by William Branham and others. It is based on the idea that in the end times there will be an outpouring of supernatural powers on a group of Christians that will take authority over the existing church and the world. The believing Christians of the world will be reorganized under the Fivefold Ministry and the church restructured under the authority of Prophets and Apostles and others anointed by God. The young generation will form ‘Joel’s Army’ to rise up and battle evil and retake the earth for God.’4

The excesses of this movement were declared a heresy in 1949 by the General Council of the Assemblies of God, and again condemned through Resolution 16 in 2000.

Sarah H. Leslie, a former Christian Right leader, describes the ideology of Dominionism:

‘The Gospel of Salvation is achieved by setting up the ‘Kingdom of God’ as a literal and physical kingdom to be ‘advanced’ on Earth in the present age. Some dominionists liken the New Testament Kingdom to the Old Testament Israel in ways that justify taking up the sword, or other methods of punitive judgment, to war against enemies of their kingdom.

‘Dominionists teach that men can be coerced or compelled to enter the kingdom. They assign to the Church duties and rights that belong Scripturally only to Jesus Christ. This includes the esoteric belief that believers can ‘incarnate’ Christ and function as His body on Earth to establish His kingdom rule. An inordinate emphasis is placed on man’s efforts; the doctrine of the sovereignty of God is diminished.’5

Leslie quotes from Al Dager’s Vengeance Is Ours: The Church In Dominion: ‘Dominion theology is predicated upon three basic beliefs: 1) Satan usurped man’s dominion over the earth through the temptation of Adam and Eve; 2) The Church is God’s instrument to take dominion back from Satan; 3) Jesus cannot or will not return until the Church has taken dominion by gaining control of the earth’s governmental and social institutions.’6

Sarah Leslie pinpoints to the central deception behind the current spread of Dominionism among various Protestant denominations across America today:

‘Dominion theology is a heresy. As such it is rarely presented as openly as the definitions above may indicate. Outside of the Reconstructionist camp, evangelical dominionism has wrapped itself in slick packages – one piece at a time – for mass-media consumption. This has been a slow process, taking several decades. Few evangelicals would recognize the word ‘dominionism’ or know what it means. This is because other terminologies have been developed which soft-sell dominionism, concealing the full scope of the agenda. Many evangelicals (and even their more conservative counterparts, the fundamentalists) may adhere to tidbits of dominionism without recognizing the error…

‘To most effectively propagate their agenda, dominionist leaders first developed new ecclesiologies, eschatologies and soteriologies for targeted audiences along the major denominational fault lines of evangelical Christianity. Then the 1990s Promise Keepers men’s movement was used as a vehicle to ‘break down the walls’, i.e., cross denominational barriers for the purpose of exporting dominionism to the wider evangelical subculture. This strategy was so effective that it reached into the mainline Protestant denominations. Dominionists have carefully selected leaders to be trained as ‘change agents’ for ‘transformation’ (dominion) in an erudite manner that belies the media stereotype of southern-talking, Bible-thumping, fundamentalist half-wits.’7

Wasilla Assembly of God

Sarah Palin comes out of the circles of such Dominionist networks. Sarah Palin was reportedly re-baptized at age twelve at the Wasilla Assembly of God church. Palin attended the church from the time she was ten until 2002, over twenty-eight years. Palin's association with the Wasilla Assembly of God has continued nearly up to the day she was picked by Senator John McCain as running mate.

Palin is now under investigation for possible improper use of state travel funds for a trip she made on June 8 to Wasilla. Her trip in turns out was to attend a Wasilla Assembly of God ‘Masters Commission’ graduation ceremony, and a multi-church Wasilla event known as ‘One Lord Sunday.’ At the latter, Palin and Alaska LT Governor Scott Parnell were publicly blessed, onstage before an estimated crowd of 6,000, through the "laying on of hands" by Wasilla Assembly of God's Head Pastor Ed Kalnins, her former pastor.

The pastor, Ed Kalnins, and Masters Commission students have traveled to South Carolina to participate in a ‘prophetic conference’ at Morningstar Ministries, one of the major ministries of the Third Wave movement. The head of prophecy at Morningstar, Steve Thompson, is currently scheduled to do a prophecy seminar at the Wasilla Assembly of God. Other major leaders in the movement have also traveled to Wasilla to visit and speak at the church.

In his sermons, Kalnins promotes such exotic theological concepts as the possession of geographic territories by demonic spirits and the inter-generational transmission of family ‘curses.’ Palin has also been ‘anointed,’ by an African cleric, Bishop Thomas Muthee, prominent in the Joel’s Army movement, who has repeatedly visited the Wasilla Assembly of God and claims to have effected positive, dramatic social change in a Kenyan town by driving out a ‘spirit of witchcraft.’ 8

As Governor in Juneau, six hundred miles from Wasilla, Palin attends the Juneau Christian Church of Pastor Mike Rose, an Assembly of God Third Wave church.

Sarah Leslie describes the movement which has supported Sarah Palin for most of her life:

‘New Apostolic Reformation. This dominionist sect is a direct offshoot of the Latter Rain cult (also known as Joel’s Army or Manifest Sons of God). Chief architect of this movement for the past two decades is C. Peter Wagner, President of Global Harvest Ministries and Chancellor of the Wagner Leadership Institute. His spiritual warfare teachings have been widely disseminated through mission networks such as AD 2000, which was closely associated with the Lausanne Movement. A prominent individual connected to this sect is Ted Haggard, current head of the National Association of Evangelicals.’9

C. Peter Wagner is quoted by Leslie defining his view of what he calls ‘The New Apostolic Reformation,’:

‘Since 2001, the body of Christ has been in the Second Apostolic Age. The apostolic/prophetic government of the church is now in place. . . . We began to build our base by locating and identifying with the intercessory prayer movements. This time, however, we feel that God wants us to start governmentally, connecting with the apostles of the region. God has already raised up for us a key apostle in one of the strategic nations of the Middle East and other apostles are already coming on board. Once we have the apostles in place, we will then bring the intercessors and the prophets into the inner circle, and we will end up with the spiritual core we need to move ahead for retaking the dominion that is rightfully ours.’-- C. Peter Wagner

Wagner, who took over Haggard’s Colorado Springs center when the latter was forced to resign in disgrace, claims that there are as many New Apostolic Reformation churches in the US as Southern Baptist churches. The movement worldwide is estimated as high as 100 million people. And yet its impact is completely under the radar of most researchers outside of those in the movement itself.

An ‘end-time soldier in God’s army’?

All evidence suggests Palin was carefully selected by the leadership of the Bush-Cheney-McCain Republican party to galvanize the Party’s activist Evangelical base, something McCain had been unable to do.

Some theological and political background to the Joel’s Army or Third Wave movement as it is also known, is instructive. It teaches a radical fundamentalist creed that its adherents must actively engage in politics, to become what they term, ‘soldiers in God’s Army.’

The Joel’s Army movement focuses on recruiting young people to sessions of writhing on the floor in uncontrollable ecstasy, calling it a sign of the ‘Holy Spirit.’ Children as young as five speak of having ‘gotten saved.’ The movement is extremely authoritarian according to those conservative Christian churches who have studied and openly oppose the sect as heretical. It teaches a dogma that echoes the infamous Manichean line of George Bush following the shock of September 11, 2001: ‘There are two kinds of people in the World: Those who love Jesus, and those who don’t.’

Until recently a ‘general’ in Joel’s Army was a 32-year old Canadian, Todd Bentley. In one case, on YouTube, clips of his most dramatic healings have been condensed into a three-minute highlight reel. Bentley describes God ordering him to kick an elderly lady in the face. A report published by the Southern Poverty Law Center, a watchdog group, describes the Joel’s Army mass recruiting techniques of Bentley:

‘Todd Bentley has a long night ahead of him, resurrecting the dead, healing the blind, and exploding cancerous tumors. Since April 3, the 32-year-old, heavily tattooed, body-pierced, shaved-head Canadian preacher has been leading a continuous "supernatural healing revival" in central Florida. To contain the 10,000-plus crowds flocking from around the globe, Bentley has rented baseball stadiums, arenas and airport hangars at a cost of up to $15,000 a day. Many in attendance are church pastors themselves who believe Bentley to be a prophet and don't bat an eye when he tells them he's seen King David and spoken with the Apostle Paul in heaven...Tattooed across his sternum are military dog tags that read "Joel's Army." They're evidence of Bentley's generalship in a rapidly growing apocalyptic movement that's gone largely unnoticed by watchdogs of the theocratic right. According to Bentley and a handful of other "hyper-charismatic" preachers advancing the same agenda, Joel's Army is prophesied to become an Armageddon-ready military force of young people with a divine mandate to physically impose Christian "dominion" on non-believers.’ 10

Their name comes from their special focus on the Old Testament Book of Joel, Chapter Two. On his website, Bentley declares,

‘An end-time army has one common purpose -- to aggressively take ground for the kingdom of God under the authority of Jesus Christ, the Dread Champion…The trumpet is sounding, calling on-fire, revolutionary believers to enlist in Joel's Army. ... Many are now ready to be mobilized to establish and advance God's kingdom on earth.’

This past March, at a ‘Passion for Jesus’ conference in Kansas City sponsored by the International House of Prayer, or IHOP, a ministry for teenagers from the heavy metal, punk and goth scenes, one Joel’s Army pastor, Lou Engle, called on his audience for vengeance:

‘I believe we're headed to an Elijah/Jezebel showdown on the Earth, not just in America but all over the globe, and the main warriors will be the prophets of Baal versus the prophets of God, and there will be no middle ground," said Engle. He was referring to the Baal of the Old Testament, a pagan idol whose followers were slaughtered under orders from the prophet Elijah.

‘There's an Elijah generation that's going to be the forerunners for the coming of Jesus, a generation marked not by their niceness but by the intensity of their passion," Engle continued. ‘The kingdom of heaven suffers violence and the violent take it by force. Such force demands an equal response, and Jesus is going to make war on everything that hinders love, with his eyes blazing fire.’

Joel's Army believers are hard-core Christian ‘dominionists,’ meaning they believe that America, along with the rest of the world, should be governed by conservative Christians and a conservative Christian interpretation of biblical law. There is no room in their doctrine for democracy or pluralism. To paraphrase George W. Bush, ‘You’re either with us or you are against us.’

Joel's Army followers are most often labile teenagers and young adults. They are taught to believe they're members of the final generation to come of age before the end of the world. Sarah Palin was twelve when she first came into these circles.

Palin recently told interviewer Charles Gibson of ABC News that Georgia should be granted membership of NATO. When pressed on whether this would mean that the US would be obliged to defend Georgia if Russian troops went into the country again, she replied, ‘Perhaps so. I mean, that is the agreement when you are a NATO ally, is if another country is attacked, you're going to be expected to be called upon and help…We have got to show the support, in this case, for Georgia.’ Is this Sarah Palin a stateswoman with foreign policy experience, or is it Sarah Palin the Dominionist who sees a potential war with Russia as part of an ‘Elijah/Jezebel showdown on the Earth’?

This is the background of the woman who might well become Vice President to a 72-year old President John McCain, a man reported to have severe skin cancer and other major health problems. According to the US Constitutional succession, should McCain be incapacitated or die in office, she would become President.

F. William Engdahl is author of A Century of War: Anglo-American Oil Politics and the New World Order (Pluto Press), and Seeds of Destruction: The Hidden Agenda of Genetic Manipulation (www.globalresearch.ca ). His newest book, Full Spectrum Dominance: Totalitarian Democracy in the New World Order , is due out later this fall. He may be reached through his website, www.engdahl.oilgeopolitics.net .

Notes

1 Selected CNP Member Biographies in
http://www.seekgod.ca/topiccnp.htm.

2 Paul Collins & Phillip Collins, The Deep Politics of God: The CNP, Dominionism, and the Ted Haggard Scandal , Feb. 19th, 2007.

3 Ibid.

4 Bruce Wilson, Sarah Palin’s Churches and the New Wave Apostolic Reformation, in
http://endtimespropheticwords.wordpress.com/2008/09/09/sarah-palins-churches-and-the-third-wave/.

5 Sarah H. Leslie, Dominionism and the Rise of Christian Imperialism, accessed in
http://www.discernment-ministries.org/ChristianImperialism.htm.

6 Ibid.

7 Ibid.

8 Bruce Wilson, Ibid.

9 Sarah H. Leslie, Op. Cit.

10 Casey Sanchez, Theocratic Sect Prays for Real Armageddon, Southern Poverty Law Center.August 30, 2008, accessed in
http://www.alternet.org/story/96945/theocratic_sect_prays_for_real_armageddon/?page=entire.

My question is: why are the Zionists behind this woman?

Well, we know the answer to that - because it's not Zionism that's important, it's a war of psychopaths against normal people. They are training their army of Organic Portals to do the job for them, and then to become their slaves.

 

[Laura]

Re: Sarah Palin Discussion - Deep Level Punctuator?


Diagnosing Sarah Barracuda; Borderline? Bipolar?

by Rob Kall

I'd like to see the complete medical and psychiatric history of Sarah Palin, including medications taken. Could be interesting.

I'm particularly interested in her psychiatric background. You have to ask, what diagnosis would you give to a student nicknamed, "Sarah Barracuda."

There are at least four or five possiblities. Or, she could be normal, vendettas, aerial hunting, book banning and all-- just another right wingnut. But let's look at some of these and se if they fit. At the end, please vote in the poll I've created to express your opinion of where she fits in.

Borderline personality;
Many psychologists refuse to work with Borderlines. These folks will be sweet and nice to get you to like them and then, they bite your head off and stab you in the back.

Wikipedia offers this profile:

is a psychiatric diagnosis, a diagnostic category in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (published by the American Psychiatric Association) that describes a long-term disturbance of personality function characterized by depth and variability of moods.[2] It is one of four related diagnoses classified as cluster B ("dramatic-erratic") personality disorders typified by disturbances in impulse control and emotional dysregulation, the others being narcissistic, histrionic, and antisocial personality disorders.

Disturbances suffered by those with borderline personality disorder are wide-ranging. The general profile of the disorder typically includes a pervasive instability in mood; extreme "black and white" thinking, or "splitting"; chaotic and unstable interpersonal relationships, self-image, identity, and behavior; as well as a disturbance in the individual's sense of self. In extreme cases, this disturbance in the sense of self can lead to periods of dissociation.[3] These disturbances have a pervasive negative impact on many or all of the psychosocial facets of life. This includes the inability to maintain relationships in work, home, and social settings.

Numerous studies have shown a strong correlation between child abuse, especially child sexual abuse, and development of BPD.[6][52][dead link][53][54][55] Many individuals with BPD report having had a history of abuse, neglect, or separation as young children.[56] Patients with BPD have been found to be significantly more likely to report having been verbally, emotionally, physically, and sexually abused by caregivers of either gender.

Bi-polar Disorder
Mood swings, highs, grandiosity, and terrible lows. When in the up, manic or hypomanic mode, bipolars can be very engaging, even charismatic.

Wikipedia says:

Bipolar disorder is not a single disorder, but a category of mood disorders defined by the presence of one or more episodes of abnormally elevated mood, clinically referred to as mania or, if milder, hypomania. Individuals who experience manic episodes also commonly experience depressive episodes or symptoms, or mixed episodes in which features of both mania and depression are present at the same time. These episodes are normally separated by periods of normal mood, but in some patients, depression and mania may rapidly alternate, known as rapid cycling. Extreme manic episodes can sometimes lead to psychotic symptoms such as delusions and hallucinations.

Agitated Depression

This, according to Wikipedia, is one kind of "mixed state" that might fit:

In the context of mental illness, a mixed state (also known as dysphoric mania, agitated depression, or a mixed episode) is a condition during which symptoms of mania and depression occur simultaneously (e.g., agitation, anxiety, fatigue, guilt, impulsiveness, irritability, morbid or suicidal ideation, panic, paranoia, pressured speech and rage). Typical examples include tearfulness during a manic episode or racing thoughts during a depressive episode. One may also feel incredibly frustrated in this state, since one may feel like a failure and at the same time have a flight of ideas. Mixed states can be the most dangerous period of mood disorders, during which substance abuse, panic disorder, suicide attempts, and other complications increase greatly.

Sociopath also known as Psychopath

WIkipedia says:

Lack of a conscience in conjunction with a weak ability to defer gratification in criminal, sexual and aggressive desires, leads to the psychopath to constantly engage in antisocial behaviors. Psychopathy (in its extreme form) does not necessarily lead itself to criminal and violent behavior (although such tendencies are likely). Instead, psychopaths high in social cognition may be able to redirect their antisocial desires in a more positive manner.

Narcissistic Personality Disorder

Wikipedia says:

A pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for admiration, and lack of empathy, beginning by early adulthood and present in a variety of contexts, as indicated by five (or more) of the following:[1]

1. has a grandiose sense of self-importance
2. is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love
3. believes that he or she is "special" and unique
4. requires excessive admiration
5. has a sense of entitlement
6. is interpersonally exploitative
7. lacks empathy
8. is often envious of others or believes others are envious of him or her
9. shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes

Now, I'm not a psychologist. I do have a masters in counseling psych and spent eight years working in psychiatric settings and later, 15 years running conferences for psychologists and psychiatrists. But I'm not licensed and don't have the formal training.

BUT..... something's going on with Sarah. I lean toward seeing her as borderline personality. She gets close to people then screws them. That's what she did with the mayor who brought her in to the Wasilla City council. That's what she did to the governor who gave her a plum job working for the state, before she ran against him.

And her mean, shrill speeches show the kind of meanness that borderlines lapse into so easily.

But the other diagnoses I've listed are possibilities.

I haven't been able to Google up a single article or blog that actually discusses her mental health, though a handful have raised the idea that the question should be asked. So I'm asking the question.

Any thoughts? And here's the poll:

 

[Mark7]

Re: Sarah Palin Discussion - Deep Level Punctuator?

It was not without a bit of glee that I heard earlier today on a NPR radio station that NOW, The National Organization for Women will NOT be endorsing the McCain/Palin ticket. NOW will be endorsing the Obama/Biden ticket because they claim Obama has been standing strong for issues important to the majority of NOW members; NOW's webpage...

STATEMENT OF KIM GANDY
Chair, National Organization for Women Political Action Committee (NOW PAC)

September 16, 2008

It is with great enthusiasm that I announce today, on behalf of the nation's oldest and largest women's rights organization, that the National Organization for Women Political Action Committee (NOW PAC) proudly endorses Sen. Barack Obama for President of the United States.

It is no coincidence that I am joined in this announcement by so many allied organizations that collectively represent a broad and diverse cross-section of U.S. women. From teachers to social workers, from business owners to college students, women in this country are lining up behind the candidate who is out there every day standing up -- clearly and consistently -- for women. Women of all ages, races and ethnicities are coming together in support of Sen. Obama and his pledge to fulfill this country's promise of equal opportunity for our daughters as well as all our sons.

Although it is very unusual for us to endorse in a presidential election, this is an unprecedented candidate and an unprecedented time for our country. The NOW PAC reviewed Sen. Obama's record and public statements on issues that disproportionately affect the women of this nation, and I spoke with him at length about his commitment to women's equality. For example:

On pay equity. Sen. Obama is a co-sponsor of the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act and the Paycheck Fairness Act, legislation to end wage discrimination against women.

On reproductive rights. Sen. Obama is a co-sponsor of the Prevention First Act, to strengthen access to contraception and reproductive health care, and prevent unwanted pregnancies. He strongly supports Roe v. Wade and will oppose any efforts to overturn it.

On violence against women. Sen. Obama supports the continued reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act -- of which Sen. Joe Biden is the chief sponsor -- as well as the Security and Financial Empowerment (SAFE) Act, which is legislation to provide legal, medical and financial support to victims of domestic violence.

On the Supreme Court. Sen. Obama opposed the nominations of George Bush's extreme right-wing nominees to the Supreme Court, who have consistently ruled against women's rights,

For more than a decade, Barack Obama has said "yes" to women's rights, while John McCain has consistently said "no" - NO to pay equity, NO to contraceptive access and reproductive rights, NO to appointing Supreme Court judges who will uphold women's rights and civil rights, NO to funding shelters and other anti-violence programs, and NO to supporting working moms and dads with policies that support work/life balance.

NOW supported Sen. Hillary Clinton in the primary, and now we join with her in saying "NO" -- No Way, No How, No McCain! And we proudly stand arm-in-arm with her in putting our hopes and our dreams, our hard work and our hard-earned money, behind the next President of the United States -- Barack Obama, and his running mate, longtime friend and ally of women, Sen. Joe Biden.

Link: _http://www.now.org/press/09-08/09-16.html


My quess... on the scale of willing minion/useful idiot; Palin falls out on the useful idiot side. Borderline, psychopath, characterpath, narcissist are good possibilities. Maybe all of the above

 

[Laura]

Re: Sarah Palin Discussion - Deep Level Punctuator?

My quess... on the scale of willing minion/useful idiot; Palin falls out on the useful idiot side. Borderline, psychopath, characterpath, narcissist are good possibilities. Maybe all of the above

Well, I think that is how the PTB that put Hitler in power thought of him, also - a useful idiot - but it didn't turn out that way, at least not to 60 million people, give or take five million. In another thread, there was a discussion of who financed Hitler:

Did somebody here read "Who Financed Hitler?", by James & Suzanne POOL.

It shows that big time Jewish financiers supported elements of the Nazi party that were opposed to Adolf Hitler.

Looks like Sutton was wrong !

_http://www.amazon.com/Who-Financed-Hitler-Suzanne-Pool/dp/0803789416
_http://www.wingtv.net/whofinancedhitler.html

Actually, considering the question "cui bono", it had occurred to me some time back that the "big time Jewish financiers" backing Zionism probably financed Hitler himself. I felt so sure of this that I went looking for any possible evidence for it. I came across "Red Symphony."

Since then, there has been a discussion about this here in the forum: http://www.cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=7014.0

R. - I shall tell you that only in the case of the non-recognition of "Them" and their aims you would be right ..., but you must not forget about their existence and aims, and also the fact that in the USSR power is in the hands of Stalin.

G. - I do not see the connexion here....

R. - Because you do not want to: you have more than sufficient deductive talents and capabilities of reasoning. I repeat again: for us Stalin is not a Communist, but a bonapartist.

G. - So what?

R. - We do not wish that the great preconditions which we had created at Versailles for the triumph of the Communist revolution in the world, which, as you see, have become a gigantic reality, would serve the purpose of bringing victory to Stalin's bonapartism ... Is that sufficiently clear for you? Everything would have been different if in this case Trotzky had been the dictator of the USSR; that would have meant that "They" would have been the chiefs of International Communism.

G. - But surely fascism is totally anti-Communist, as in relation to the Trotzkyist and the Stalinist Communism ... and if the power which you ascribe to "Them" is so great, how is it that they were unable to avoid this?

R. - Because it were precisely "They" who gave Hitler the possibility of triumphing.

G. - You exceed all the boundaries of absurdity.

R. - The absurd and the miraculous become mixed as the result of a lack of culture.

Listen to me. I have already admitted the defeat of the opposition. "They" saw in the end that Stalin cannot be overthrown by a coup d'etat and their historical experience suggested to them the decision of a repetition (repris) with Stalin of that which had been done with the Tsar. There was here one difficulty, which seemed to us insuperable. In the whole of Europe there was not a single aggressor-State. Not one of them was geographically well placed and had an army sufficient for an attack on Russia.

If there was no such country, then "They" had to create it. Only Germany had the corresponding population and positions suitable for an attack on the USSR, and it was capable of defeating Stalin; you can understand that the Weimar republic had not been invented as an aggressor either politically or economically; on the contrary, it was suited to an invasion.

On the horizon of a hungry Germany there sparkled the meteor of Hitler. A pair of penetrating eyes fixed their attention on it.

The world was the witness to his lightning rise. I shall not say that all of it was the work of our hands, no. His rise, uninterruptedly increasing in extent, took place as the result of the Revolutionary-Communist economy of Versailles.

Versailles had had in mind not the creation of preconditions for the triumph of Hitler [549], but for the proletarization of Germany, for unemployment and hunger, as the result of which there should have triumphed the Communist revolution.

But insofar as, thanks to the existence of Stalin at the head of the USSR and the International, the latter did not succeed, and as a result of an unwillingness to give up Germany to bonapartism, these preconditions were somewhat abated in the Davis and Young Plans, in expectation that meanwhile the opposition would come to power in Russia ..., but that, too, did not happen; but the existence of revolutionary preconditions had to produce its results. The economic predetermination of Germany would have forced the proletariat into revolutionary actions. Through the fault of Stalin the Social-International revolution had to be held up and the German proletariat sought inclusion in the National-Socialist revolution. This was dialectical, but given all the preconditions and according to common sense the National-Socialist revolution could never have triumphed there. That was not yet all.

It was necessary that the Trotzkyists and Socialists should divide the masses with an already awakened and whole class consciousness - in accordance with instructions. With this business we concerned ourselves. But even more was needed: In 1929, when the National-Socialist Party began to experience a crisis of growth and it had insufficient financial recources, "They" sent their ambassador there. I even know his name: it was one of the Warburgs. In direct negotiations with Hitler they agreed as to the financing of the National-Socialist Party, and the latter received in a couple of years millions of Dollars, sent to it from Wall Street, and millions of Marks from German financiers through Schacht; the upkeep of the S.A. and S.S. and also the financing of the elections which took place, which gave Hitler power, are done on the Dollars and Marks sent by "Them."

G. - Those who, according to you, want to achieve full Communism, arm Hitler, who swears that he will uproot the first Communist nation. This, if one is to believe you, is something very logical for the financiers?

R. - You again forget the Stalinist bonapartism. Remember that against Napoleon, the strangler of the French revolution, who stole its strength, there stood the objective revolutionaries - Louis XVIII, Wellington, Metternich and right up to the Tsar-Autocrat ... This is 22 carat, according to the strict Stalinist doctrine. You must know by heart his theses about colonies with regard to imperialistic countries. Yes, according to him the Kings of Afghanistan and Egypt are objectively Communists owing to their struggle against His Britannic Majesty; why cannot Hitler be objectively Communist since he is fighting against the autocratic "Tsar Koba I"? (Meaning Stalin - Transl.)

After all there is Hitler with his growing military power, and he already extends the boundaries of the Third Reich, and in future will do more ... to such an extent as to have enough strength and possibilities to attack and fully destroy Stalin ... Do you not observe the general sympathy of the Versailles wolves, who limit themselves only to a weak growl? Is this yet another chance, accident?

Hitler will invade the USSR and as in [550] 1917, when defeat suffered by the Tsar then gave us the opportunity of overthrowing him, so the defeat of Stalin will help us to remove him ... Again the hour of the world revolution will strike. Since the democratic states, at present put to sleep, will help to bring about the general change at that moment, when Trotzky will take power into his hands, as during the Civil War. Hitler will attack from the West, his generals will rise and liquidate him ... Now tell me, was not Hitler objectively a Communist? Yes or no?

G. - I do not believe in fairy tales or miracles ...

R. - Well if you do not want to believe that "They" are able to achieve that which they had already achieved, then prepare to observe an invasion of the USSR and the liquidation of Stalin within a year. You think this is a miracle or an accident, well then prepare to see and experience that ... But are you really able to refuse to believe that of which I have spoken, though this is still only a hypothesis? You will begin to act in this direction only at that moment when you will begin to see the proofs in the light of my talk.

(...)

G. - If, as you confirm, it were "They" who made him Fuhrer, then they have power over him and he must obey them.

R. - Owing to the fact that I was in a hurry I did not express myself quite correctly and you did not understand me well. If it is true that "They" financed Hitler, then that does not mean that they disclosed to him their existence and their aims. The ambassador Warburg presented himself under a false name and Hitler did not even guess his race, he also lied regarding whose representative he was. He told him that he had been sent by the financial circles of Wall Street who were interested in financing the National-Socialist movement with the aim of creating a threat to France, whose governments pursue a financial policy which provokes a crisis in the USA.

G. - And Hitler believed it?

R. - We do not know. That was not so important, whether he did or did not believe our explanations; our aim was to provoke a war ..., and Hitler was war. Do you now understand?

(...)

G. - That is the most important thing and for that reason it is important to establish this beforehand. By the way, I would also like to know on what you base yourself in your confidence that "They" approve this.

R. If I had the time in order to explain their full scheme, then you would already know about the reasons for their approval. At the present moment I shall condense them to three:

G. - Just which?

R. - One is that which I had already mentioned. Hitler, this uneducated and elementary man, has restored thanks to his natural intuition and even against the technical opinion of Schacht, an economic system of a very dangerous kind. Being illiterate in all economic theories and being guided only by necessity he removed, as we had done it in the USSR, the private and international capital. That means that he took over for himself the privilege of manufacturing money, and not only physical moneys, but also financial ones; he took over the untouched machinery of falsification and put it to work for the benefit of the State. He exceeded us, as we, having abolished it in Russia, replaced it merely by this crude apparatus called State Capitalism; this was a very expensive triumph in view of the necessities of pre-revolutionary demagogy ... Here I give you two real facts for comparison. I shall even say that Hitler had been lucky; he had almost no gold and for that reason he was not tempted to create a gold reserve. Insofar as he only possessed a full monetary guarantee of technical equipment and colossal working capacity of the Germans, his "gold reserve" was technical capacity and work ..., something so completely counter-revolutionary that, as you already see, he has by means of magic, as it were, radically eliminated unemployment among more than seven million technicians and workers.

G. - Thanks to increased re-armament.

R. - What does your re-armament give? If Hitler reached this despite all the bourgeois economists who surround him, then he was quite capable, in the absence of the danger of war, of applying his system also to peaceful production ... Are you capable of imagining what would have come of this system if it had infected a number of other States and brought about the creation of a period of autarky ...

For example the Commonwealth. If you can, then imagine its counter-revolutionary functions ... The danger is not yet inevitable, as we have had luck in that Hitler restored his system not according to some previous theory, but empirically, and he did not make any formulation of a scientific kind. This means that insofar as he did not think in the light of a deductive process based on intelligence, he has no scientific terms [553] or a formulated doctrine; yet there is a hidden danger as at any moment there can appear, as the consequence of deduction, a formula. This is very serious. Much more so that all the external and cruel factors in National-Socialism. We do not attack it in our propaganda as it could happen that through theoretical polemics we would ourselves provoke a formulation and systematization of this so decisive economic doctrine. There is only one solution - war.

R. - If the Termidor triumphed in the Soviet revolution then this happened as the result of the existence of the former Russian nationalism. Without such a nationalism bonapartism would have been impossible. And if that happened in Russia, where nationalism was only embryonic in the person of the Tsar, then what obstacles must Marxism meet in the fully developed nationalism of Western Europe? Marx was wrong with respect to the advantages for the success of the revolution. Marxism won not in the most industrialized country, but in Russia, where the proletariat was small. Apart from other reasons our victory here is explained by the fact that in Russia there was no real nationalism, and in other countries it was in its full apogee. You see how it is reborn under this extraordinary power of fascism, and how infectious it is. You can understand that apart from that it can benefit Stalin, the need for the destruction of nationalism is alone worth a war in Europe.

G. - In sum you have set out, Rakovsky, one economic and one political reason. Which is the third?

R. - That is easy to guess. We have yet another reason, a religious one. Communism cannot be the victor if it will not have suppressed the still living Christianity. History speaks very clearly about this: the permanent revolution required seventeen centuries in order to achieve its first partial victory - by means of the creation of the first split in Christendom. In reality Christianity is our only real enemy, since all the political and economic phenomena in the bourgeois States are only its consequences. Christianity, controlling the individual, is capable of annulling the revolutionary projection of the neutral Soviet or atheistic State by choking it and, as we see it in Russia, things have reached the point of the creation of that spiritual nihilism which is dominant in the ruling masses, which have, nevertheless, remained Christian: this obstacle has not yet been removed during twenty years of Marxism. Let us admit in relation to Stalin that towards religion he was not bonapartistic. We would not have done more than he and would have acted in the same way. And if Stalin had dared, like Napoleon, to cross the Rubikon of Christianity, then his nationalism and counter-revolutionary power would have been increased a thousandfold. In addition, if this had happened then so radical a difference would have made quite impossible any collaboration in anything between us and him, even if this were to be only temporary and objective ... like the one you can see becoming apparent to us.

G. - And so I personally consider that you have given a definition of three fundamental points, on the basis of which [554] a plan can be made. That is what I am in agreement about with you for the present. But I confirm to you my mental reservations, i.e. my suspicion in relation to all that which you have said concerning people, organizations and facts. Now continue to follow the general lines of your plan.

R. - Yes, now this moment has arrived. But only a preliminary qualification: I shall speak on my own responsibility. I am responsible for the interpretation of those preceding points in the sense in which "They" understand them, but I admit that "They" may consider another plan to be more effective for the attainment of the three aims, and one quite unlike that which I shall now set out. Bear that in mind.

Of course, the origin of Sinfonia en Rojo Mayor is contentious... but still... It clearly states something that seems to be so obvious that it is a wonder that no one else talks about it: that Hitler was financed by the Jews. After all, even Hannah Arendt writes at great length about how Jews became the bankers of the world and that any and all "rulers" of the world were only thus because they had the backing of Jewish money. So, in the midst of this condition that was prevalent, one has to ask HOW could someone like Hitler make it to the top as fast as he did?

It is clear from both Arendt and Douglas Reed that the Jews controlled the money and MOST of the media. And "controlling" doesn't necessarily mean "owning," either. So, with control of the money and most of the media, even inside Germany, it is impossible that anyone could come to power other than one who was favored by this controlling faction.

Being that it would have been impossible for anyone to come to power in Germany without Jewish/Zionist support, then we have to conclude that the highest probability points to Zionist support of Hitler. And that means Zionist support of the Holocaust which Hannah Arendt also puzzles over, noting again and again that the Holocaust could never have happened without Jewish support.

WHO were the victims of the Holocaust? Please re-read my post here to notice that it was the vast rank and file of ordinary people of the Jewish faith, NOT the pathological types. In short, the Holocaust seems to have been designed to "cull the herd," to create a "bottleneck" of pathological types. In short, in a backward sort of way, Hitler did prepare the ground for the creation of the "Master Race," only it wasn't quite what he thought.

The conclusion is this: indeed, the Holocaust happened; indeed, Hitler and the Nazis mainly targeted the Jews; and very likely, MORE than 6 million innocent Jews were sacrificed to create the nation of Israel.

Notice also that extraordinary remark from Red Symphony:

We do not attack it in our propaganda as it could happen that through theoretical polemics we would ourselves provoke a formulation and systematization of this... doctrine.

Now, perhaps, you begin to understand why Holocaust Revisionism is a "third rank" operation right out of Protocol 12.

I would say that what is wanted is WAR, and it is certain that Sarah Palin will give the world war. That is because she is a psychopath. Not only does she have no conscience, she has no capacity to conceive of consequences. All of the clues are right here in this discussion.

Is she a useful idiot? Maybe. But so was Hitler.

 

[anart]

Re: Sarah Palin Discussion - Deep Level Punctuator?

Well, I think that is how the PTB that put Hitler in power thought of him, also - a useful idiot - but it didn't turn out that way, at least not to 60 million people, give or take five million.

This really is the main point. Perhaps, Palin in and of herself seems like a useful idiot, or even 'is' - however, this statement should bring pause to anyone paying attention:

I answered him yes because I have the confidence in that readiness and knowing that you can't blink, you have to be wired in a way of being so committed to the mission, the mission that we're on, reform of this country and victory in the war, you can't blink. So I didn't blink then even when asked to run as his running mate.

So - the question, and the danger, is WHO WIRED HER?

She's wired, make no mistake about it - and this being planet Earth in the year 2008 - how much question remains on 'who' wired her and for what purpose... Seems to me that clues abound on this one and none of them point in a direction that most of humanity will survive.

If - on the other hand (and there is always another hand) she is a major distraction, then from what is she distracting?

 

[Laura]

Re: Sarah Palin Discussion - Deep Level Punctuator?

For more on Dominionism (and it'll scare you to death) see this thread:
http://www.cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=8449.

Gives a better picture of why the Cs said on September 3rd that the USA was doomed and that the rest of the world would turn against it and destroy it.

Oddly, though, it gives credibility to the New Testament prophecy of the "Apostasy" - the "great falling away" of Christians from true Christianity.

2:1 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, 2:2 That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.
2:3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; 2:4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.
2:5 Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things? 2:6 And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time.
2:7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.
2:8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming: 2:9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, 2:10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
2:11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: 2:12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

Sounds like the coming of Jesus is a comet...

Bizarre and ironic.

 

[Aaron r]

Re: Sarah Palin Discussion - Deep Level Punctuator?

Yes Laura your post on Domionism was incredibly scary and to tell you the truth I'd never even heard of it.

I just want to say that Sarah Palin really scares me in a way that no one has before. I am really spooked by her. I feel like she is a conduit for some really powerful forces (and she hasn't even been elected yet!).

 

[go2]

Re: Sarah Palin Discussion - Deep Level Punctuator?

So - the question, and the danger, is WHO WIRED HER?

She's wired, make no mistake about it - and this being planet Earth in the year 2008 - how much question remains on 'who' wired her and for what purpose... Seems to me that clues abound on this one and none of them point in a direction that most of humanity will survive.

If - on the other hand (and there is always another hand) she is a major distraction, then from what is she distracting?

The answers are probably deeper or more complex than "a financial elite" or "psychopaths".....the next question is WHO WIRED THEM AND WHY? It seems the simplest explanation is not always correct or complete, so I don't want to imply a conclusion, but to assemble a few thoughts and clues. Learning is fun, even when frightening.

Leonid Ivashov states that approximately 360 families out of a population of 6,000,000,000, control 40 percent of the worlds wealth,. The concentration of hereditary wealth in the hands of a few thousand human beings, if they are such, gives them the power to control media and elect governments, thereby plunge mankind into world war to destroy governments they cannot corrupt or control. Possibly Russia is such a government. Perhaps Barbie Doll Palin is the useful tool to wage war against the those who refuse to submit to the rule of the psychopaths.

http://www.cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=9657.15

What is the shadow world financial system when there are 360, families which supervise up to 40 percent, and today it is considered even more, of world’s finances?

What passes for money is loaned to you by the above mentioned predatory families who own the Central Banks which create the fiat paper or digital loans you have in your pocket or the bank. Thereby, they siphon the energy and creativity of 6,000,000,000 human beings into the coffers of their families. Humanity is organized by this pyramidal scheme of slavery. The chains are the fiat money system, instead of the ancient imperial chains of iron. When the fiat money system fails, as it mathematically must, war is used to maintain control until the next fiat money system is put into place. The knowledge of the operation of this fiat money system and the identities of the perpetrators is largely unknown, as the predators know invisibility and mankind’s ignorance provide safety and continuity for their majestic hubris.

http://www.webofdebt.com/

Our money system is not what we have been led to believe. The creation of money has been "privatized," or taken over by a private money cartel. Except for coins, all of our money is now created as loans advanced by private banking institutions — including the private Federal Reserve. Banks create the principal but not the interest to service their loans. To find the interest, new loans must continually be taken out, expanding the money supply, inflating prices — and robbing you of the value of your money.
Not only is virtually the entire money supply created privately by banks, but a mere handful of very big banks is responsible for a massive investment scheme known as "derivatives," which now tallies in at hundreds of trillions of dollars. The banking system has been contrived so that these big banks always get bailed out by the taxpayers from their risky ventures, but the scheme has reached its mathematical limits. There isn't enough money in the entire global economy to bail out the banks from a massive derivatives default today. When the investors realize that the "insurance" against catastrophe that they have purchased in the form of derivatives is worthless, they are liable to jump ship and bring the whole shaky edifice crashing down.

Now, from Rakovsky, we find a clue for war.

Being illiterate in all economic theories and being guided only by necessity he removed, as we had done it in the USSR, the private and international capital. That means that he took over for himself the privilege of manufacturing money, and not only physical moneys, but also financial ones; he took over the untouched machinery of falsification and put it to work for the benefit of the State. He exceeded us, as we, having abolished it in Russia, replaced it merely by this crude apparatus called State Capitalism; this was a very expensive triumph in view of the necessities of pre-revolutionary demagogy

The great fear of the predators, who apparently enslave mankind from behind the curtain of the Central Bank Cartel with its power to create money from nothing, is that a government will arise and return this power to the benefit of the people of a sovereign nation. A sovereign and aware nation of normal men is an existential threat to the psychopaths who would enslave mankind at the risk of total war and the destruction of mankind. These predators wage war by deception.

That is easy to guess. We have yet another reason, a religious one. Communism cannot be the victor if it will not have suppressed the still living Christianity. History speaks very clearly about this: the permanent revolution required seventeen centuries in order to achieve its first partial victory - by means of the creation of the first split in Christendom. In reality Christianity is our only real enemy, since all the political and economic phenomena in the bourgeois States are only its consequences. Christianity, controlling the individual, is capable of annulling the revolutionary projection of the neutral Soviet or atheistic State by choking it and, as we see it in Russia, things have reached the point of the creation of that spiritual nihilism which is dominant in the ruling masses, which have, nevertheless, remained Christian:

http://www.cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=9612.15

Think now of the Russia that Prime Minister Vladimir Putin and President Dmitri Medvedev are shaping. The Russian Orthodox Church is undergoing a massive resurgence, the market is submitting to the state, free expression is being tempered and so on. We doubt Putin was reading Solzhenitsyn when reshaping Russia. But we do believe that Solzhenitsyn had an understanding of Russia that towered over most of his contemporaries. And we believe that the traditional Russia that Solzhenitsyn celebrated is emerging, more from its own force than by political decisions.

Is Sarah Palin the instrument choosen to wage war against Russia?

Palin recently told interviewer Charles Gibson of ABC News that Georgia should be granted membership of NATO. When pressed on whether this would mean that the US would be obliged to defend Georgia if Russian troops went into the country again, she replied, ‘Perhaps so. I mean, that is the agreement when you are a NATO ally, is if another country is attacked, you're going to be expected to be called upon and help…We have got to show the support, in this case, for Georgia.’ Is this Sarah Palin a stateswoman with foreign policy experience, or is it Sarah Palin the Dominionist who sees a potential war with Russia as part of an ‘Elijah/Jezebel showdown on the Earth’?

I would say that what is wanted is WAR, and it is certain that Sarah Palin will give the world war. That is because she is a psychopath. Not only does she have no conscience, she has no capacity to conceive of consequences. All of the clues are right here in this discussion.

Is she a useful idiot? Maybe. But so was Hitler.

Could the war god looming on the horizon of the United States be wrapped in a flag, carrying a cross, and a woman?

The Christian Dominionists are described by Andrew M. Lobaczewski in Political Ponerology.

The religious association succumbs to destruction from within, its organism becomes subordinated to goals completely different from the original idea, and its theosophic and moral values fall prey to characteristic deformation, thereupon serving as a disguise for domination by pathological individuals. The religious idea then becomes both a justification for using force and sadism against nonbelievers, heretics, ad sorcerers, and a conscience drug for people who put such inspirations into effect.

Anyone criticizing such a state of affairs is condemned with paramoral indignation, allegedly in the name of the original idea and faith in God, but actually because he feels and thinks within the categories of normal people. Such a system retains the name of the original religion and many other specific names, swearing on the prophet’s beard while using this for its doubletalk. Something which was to be originally an aid in the comprehension of God’s truth now scourges nations with the sword of imperialism..

 

[webglider]

Re: Sarah Palin Discussion - Deep Level Punctuator?

From the Charles Gibson interview:

"I answered yes because I have the confidence in that readiness and knowing that you can't blink, you have to be wired in a way of being so committed to the mission, the mission that we're on, reform of this country and victory in the war, you can't blink," she told Gibson.

And anart's query:

[So - the question, and the danger, is WHO WIRED HER?

In addition to anart's "who" question, I'd like to add the other three "w" questions of news reporting: "what" "where"
when and "why", and the "h" question "how"?

In the Palin response quoted above there are, I think, words that supply, if not total, but at least partial answers to these questions:

Who: ?
What Victory. Mission. Reform of this country.
When Beginning after the election.
Where: The United States
Why: Reform of this country. (To a Dominionist Christian State?)
How? Being "...committed to the mission", "...confidence in the readiness", "...knowing that you can't blink" which
I interpret as knowing that you can't think or feel remorse, ...you have to be wired in a way to being committed to the mission", "...victory in the war" which war, the one in Iraq or the possibility of one in Iraq,or perhaps the implied war that will be waged in efforts that will lead to "...reform in this country."

Notice that she said "Reform in this country" before she said "victory in the war" as though reform is the greater priority.

Okay, so this leaves the final question: How?

McCainchose her very soon before the election which injected as a major shock into the election process. I'm thinking "The Shock Doctrine" by Naomi Klein.

The Palin/McCain campaign is so rife with lies that are so easily discredited it's as though it doesn't even care enough to feign the pretense of conducting a credible campaign because it is so sure of the outcome.

It offers a great distraction in the midst of the financial meltdown happening in the United States. Was this the reason her nomination as vice president was announced so late?

It offers a taste of that which is to come: slaughter, (moose and wolves for now), vengeance, (opponents, critics). There is nothing that appeals in this country more than the combination of sex and violence. We have that and more in Ms. Palin.

Here is a link connecting Palin directly to the Dominionist Movement.
http://www.sott.net/articles/show/165864-The-Most-Dangerous-Cult-in-the-World-Sarah-Palin-s-links-to-the-Christian-Right

Yikes!!!!!!

 

[Al Today]

The-Most-Dangerous-Cult-in-the-World-Sarah-Palin-s-links-to-the-Christian-Right


Please note all quotes are from the SotT article:
http://www.sott.net/articles/show/165864-The-Most-Dangerous-Cult-in-the-World-Sarah-Palin-s-links-to-the-Christian-Right


(highlights mine):

The beginnings?

… tent revivals of the 1950s and 1960s …

Just what is this Committee on National Policy (CNP) .?.?.?

… one of the most significant transformations of American domestic politics over the past three decades since the early 1970's, when George H.W. Bush was head of the CIA, has been the deliberate manipulation of significant segments of the population, … the US establishment had to create mass-based organizations to manipulate public opinion in ways contrary to the self-interest of the majority of the American people. … Few details about the organization are leaked to the public. As secretive as the Bilderberg Group if not more so, the CNP releases no press statements, meets in secret and never reveals names of its members willingly. … and millions of American Christians unaware of the darker manipulations.

This has been a slow process, taking several decades. Few evangelicals would recognize the word 'dominionism' or know what it means. This is because other terminologies have been developed which soft-sell dominionism, concealing the full scope of the agenda. Many evangelicals (and even their more conservative counterparts, the fundamentalists) may adhere to tidbits of dominionism without recognizing the error...

And unbelievably (tome) the ignorant masses are told and apparantly remain ignorant (by choice?):

According to Bentley and a handful of other "hyper-charismatic" preachers advancing the same agenda, Joel's Army is prophesied to become an Armageddon-ready military force of young people with a divine mandate to physically impose Christian "dominion" on non-believers.'

It teaches a dogma that echoes the infamous Manichean line of George Bush following the shock of September 11, 2001: 'There are two kinds of people in the World: Those who love Jesus, and those who don't.'

And I wonder exactly what is the “punishment” for those ‘who don’t’?

The movement worldwide is estimated as high as 100 million people. … All evidence suggests Palin was carefully selected by the leadership of the Bush-Cheney-McCain Republican party to galvanize the Party's activist Evangelical base, something McCain had been unable to do. … It teaches a radical fundamentalist creed that its adherents must actively engage in politics, to become what they term, 'soldiers in God's Army.'

I cannot help but think about the movie ‘Poltergeist’, where the boy, sitting on the floor, watching television that displays snow/interference with accompanying white noise , then turns around and says – ‘They’re here’ …



When are those dang comets coming anyway.?.?.?