Did Rahmbo bring down Blago?

Tuesday, Dec. 9, 2008 14:20 EST

Think Progress notes that at least one Chicago reporter thinks that future White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel might have had something to do with the arrest of his fellow Democrat, Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich. And no, not because he's been caught up in the investigation, but because he may have gone to the feds and told them about the governor's alleged attempts to sell President-elect Barack Obama's Senate seat.

The reporter, Jack Conaty, said Tuesday:

We did receive a tip this morning that perhaps all of this came together so quickly because the Governor may have reached out to Rahm Emanuel, the president-elect's chief of staff, in attempting to leverage filling the Senate seat. And it may have been Rahm Emanuel who tipped the scale and made this move as quickly as it did.





http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2008/12/09/rahm_blago/index.html


Click here to view all recent Sarah Palin in 2012 posts

View All Recent Meet the Real Sarah Palin Blog Posts:

Palin Deserves Our Respect cont.

Cont.from:
http://www.sarah-palin-2008.blogspot.com/

But the really big attack on women occurred when John McCain selected only the second woman in history to be on a major-party ticket. He chose a governor of a state critical to our energy crisis. She is a very popular governor with an 80-percent approval rate. She was elected on her own merit without previous political ties. She is her own political creation, not the wife, daughter, sister or mistress of a politician.

I thought Americans would be proud of her nomination, whether we agreed or disagreed with her on the issues. Was I in for a shock.

The sexism that I believed had been eradicated was lurking, like some creature from the black lagoon, just below the surface. Suddenly it erupted and in some unexpected places.

Instead of engaging Palin on the issues, critics attacked attributes that are specifically female. It is Hillary's pantsuit drama to the power of 10. Palin's hair, her voice, her motherhood, and her personal hygiene were substituted for substance. That's when it was nice.

The hatred escalated to performers advocating Palin be "gang raped," to suggestions that her husband had had sex with their young daughters, and reports that her Down syndrome child really was that of her teenage daughter. One columnist even called for her to submit to DNA testing to prove her virtue. Smells a little like Salem to me. I was present at an Obama rally at which the mention of Palin's name drew shouts of "stone her."

"Stone her"? How biblical.

All this is at a time when women are regularly being raped as they try to cross the border into the United States; bloody, broken women haunt the emergency rooms of hospitals; and abuse and disrespect for women and girls is rising faster than bank bailouts. That is the atmosphere in which people, including women, choose to attempt to destroy a woman who is a legitimate political leader.

Agreement on issues is not required, but Palin merits respect.

It is dismaying that misogyny and sexism are so excessively marbleized into our daily interactions that some of us cannot even recognize their existence when confronted with it or when staring at it directly in the mirror.

It is my fervent hope that those who purport to be intellectuals begin to engage in argument and not resort to their baser selves or the easy exercise of personal and biology-based attacks.

Mockery and vilification of women such as Palin should become just as taboo as race-based slams. Until then, women are the real losers.

http://www.philly.com/inquirer/currents/20081026_Palin_deserves_our_respect.html

Repeating History

by David Limbaugh

In certain unscripted moments, Barack Obama has given us a glimpse of his socialist inclinations, but I wonder what percentage would vote for him if they truly understood the extent of his radicalism.

Yet the financial crisis has created a climate of fear and uncertainty and unleashed an unprecedented tolerance for large-scale government intervention, which is playing perfectly into Obama's hands. People are blaming this largely Democratic-spawned mess on Republicans because Bush is still president.

Maybe I'm being too much of an alarmist, but I'm worried for the first time in my life that the election of a presidential candidate could lead to a fundamental change in our system of government. Just listen to the comments of post-debate focus group members expressing a knowing willingness to accept Obama's socialism, such is their angst at the subprime mortgage mess.

Already some 38 percent of Americans do not pay income taxes, and Barack Obama wants to increase that percentage dramatically. How ironic that he and other Democrats pretend to be targeting their message to "working-class" people when many of their constituents aren't working. But such is class warfare that the upper-middle class and wealthy are demonized as not earning an honest living.

Do you suppose it has registered with class warfare-receptive Obama voters that Obama is deliberately turning the American dream on its head? Could it be any clearer that his message to the middle class is: Don't aspire to achievement, success and wealth because a) it is immoral to have more than others, b) the government will take your wealth away from you and give it to others, and c) why bother to bust your rear end to make more when you can vote yourselves money from the public trough?

Obama let slip his socialist proclivities to Joe the plumber when he denied he wanted to punish wealth and insisted he just wanted to spread the wealth around. Joe was justifiably repulsed by Obama's cavalier attitude toward the American dream.

Democratic commentator Bob Beckel was dismissive of the significance of Obama's outright nod to socialism, saying we've had a progressive tax system since the income tax was initiated. Yes, Bob, and we've had socialists in America since then, too.

But what Beckel did not explain is that at least in those days, the stated purpose of the income tax system was to fund government services, not to redistribute wealth.

It's one thing to say that higher income earners should pay a higher percentage for government services. But Obama makes no pretense of stopping there. He told Joe that he wants to use the tax code to confiscate money from higher income earners and give it to others. But he hasn't been so open about that in the presentation of his fraudulent tax plan.

When Obama says he will cut income taxes for 95 percent of Americans, he is dissembling. If 38 percent are already not paying, his tax credits to them amount to transfer payments from higher income earners, which are actually spending increases, not tax cuts, as The Wall Street Journal editors have noted.



Socialism and communism have failed everywhere they've been tried in the world, yet die-hard socialists, such as William Ayers, still smarter than God, insist on cramming them down our throats in the name of "fairness."
Unreconstructed radicals always say that true socialism hasn't been given a real chance.

Well, if Obama is elected, we may get that chance.

Full Article Here:

http://www.onenewsnow.com/Blog/Default.aspx?id=290462

The Speech that Never Was

The Speech that Never Was; Sarah Palin's speech intended to be delivered on September 22, 2008 at a rally in Dag Hammarskjold Plaza to protest the appearance there of President Ahmadinejad of Iran. Her appearance was canceled by rally organizers who sought a nonpolitical event. Following are the remarks Mrs. Palin would have given:

I am honored to be with you and with leaders from across this great country — leaders from different faiths and political parties united in a single voice of outrage.

Tomorrow, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad will come to New York — to the heart of what he calls the Great Satan — and speak freely in this, a country whose demise he has called for.

Ahmadinejad may choose his words carefully, but underneath all of the rhetoric is an agenda that threatens all who seek a safer and freer world. We gather here today to highlight the Iranian dictator's intentions and to call for action to thwart him.

He must be stopped.

The world must awake to the threat this man poses to all of us. Ahmadinejad denies that the Holocaust ever took place. He dreams of being an agent in a "Final Solution" — the elimination of the Jewish people. He has called Israel a "stinking corpse" that is "on its way to annihilation." Such talk cannot be dismissed as the ravings of a madman — not when Iran just this summer tested long-range Shahab-3 missiles capable of striking Tel Aviv, not when the Iranian nuclear program is nearing completion, and not when Iran sponsors terrorists that threaten and kill innocent people around the world.

The Iranian government wants nuclear weapons. The International Atomic Energy Agency reports that Iran is running at least 3,800 centrifuges and that its uranium enrichment capacity is rapidly improving. According to news reports, U.S. intelligence agencies believe the Iranians may have enough nuclear material to produce a bomb within a year.

The world has condemned these activities. The United Nations Security Council has demanded that Iran suspend its illegal nuclear enrichment activities. It has levied three rounds of sanctions. How has Ahmadinejad responded? With the declaration that the "Iranian nation would not retreat one iota" from its nuclear program.

So, what should we do about this growing threat? First, we must succeed in Iraq. If we fail there, it will jeopardize the democracy the Iraqis have worked so hard to build, and empower the extremists in neighboring Iran. Iran has armed and trained terrorists who have killed our soldiers in Iraq, and it is Iran that would benefit from an American defeat in Iraq.

If we retreat without leaving a stable Iraq, Iran's nuclear ambitions will be bolstered. If Iran acquires nuclear weapons — they could share them tomorrow with the terrorists they finance, arm, and train today. Iranian nuclear weapons would set off a dangerous regional nuclear arms race that would make all of us less safe.
But Iran is not only a regional threat; it threatens the entire world. It is the no. 1 state sponsor of terrorism. It sponsors the world's most vicious terrorist groups, Hamas and Hezbollah. Together, Iran and its terrorists are responsible for the deaths of Americans in Lebanon in the 1980s, in Saudi Arabia in the 1990s, and in Iraq today. They have murdered Iraqis, Lebanese, Palestinians, and other Muslims who have resisted Iran's desire to dominate the region. They have persecuted countless people simply because they are Jewish.

Iran is responsible for attacks not only on Israelis, but on Jews living as far away as Argentina. Anti-Semitism and Holocaust denial are part of Iran's official ideology and murder is part of its official policy. Not even Iranian citizens are safe from their government's threat to those who want to live, work, and worship in peace. Politically-motivated abductions, torture, death by stoning, flogging, and amputations are just some of its state-sanctioned punishments.
It is said that the measure of a country is the treatment of its most vulnerable citizens. By that standard, the Iranian government is both oppressive and barbaric. Under Ahmadinejad's rule, Iranian women are some of the most vulnerable citizens.

If an Iranian woman shows too much hair in public, she risks being beaten or killed.

If she walks down a public street in clothing that violates the state dress code, she could be arrested.

But in the face of this harsh regime, the Iranian women have shown courage. Despite threats to their lives and their families, Iranian women have sought better treatment through the "One Million Signatures Campaign Demanding Changes to Discriminatory Laws." The authorities have reacted with predictable barbarism. Last year, women's rights activist Delaram Ali was sentenced to 20 lashes and 10 months in prison for committing the crime of "propaganda against the system." After international protests, the judiciary reduced her sentence to "only" 10 lashes and 36 months in prison and then temporarily suspended her sentence. She still faces the threat of imprisonment.

Earlier this year, Senator Clinton said that "Iran is seeking nuclear weapons, and the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps is in the forefront of that" effort. Senator Clinton argued that part of our response must include stronger sanctions, including the designation of the IRGC as a terrorist organization. John McCain and I could not agree more.

Senator Clinton understands the nature of this threat and what we must do to confront it. This is an issue that should unite all Americans. Iran should not be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons. Period. And in a single voice, we must be loud enough for the whole world to hear: Stop Iran!

Only by working together, across national, religious, and political differences, can we alter this regime's dangerous behavior. Iran has many vulnerabilities, including a regime weakened by sanctions and a population eager to embrace opportunities with the West. We must increase economic pressure to change Iran's behavior.

Tomorrow, Ahmadinejad will come to New York. On our soil, he will exercise the right of freedom of speech — a right he denies his own people. He will share his hateful agenda with the world. Our task is to focus the world on what can be done to stop him.

We must rally the world to press for truly tough sanctions at the U.N. or with our allies if Iran's allies continue to block action in the U.N. We must start with restrictions on Iran's refined petroleum imports.

We must reduce our dependency on foreign oil to weaken Iran's economic influence.

We must target the regime's assets abroad; bank accounts, investments, and trading partners.

President Ahmadinejad should be held accountable for inciting genocide, a crime under international law.

We must sanction Iran's Central Bank and the Revolutionary Guard Corps — which no one should doubt is a terrorist organization.

Together, we can stop Iran's nuclear program.

Senator McCain has made a solemn commitment that I strongly endorse: Never again will we risk another Holocaust. And this is not a wish, a request, or a plea to Israel's enemies. This is a promise that the United States and Israel will honor, against any enemy who cares to test us. It is John McCain's promise and it is my promise.

Thank you

Plantagenet Ancestry of Edward Rainsford (1609-1680) of Boston, Massachusetts

The Plantagenet Ancestry of Edward Rainsford (1609-1680) of Boston, Massachusetts (ancestor of Sarah Heath Palin)

1. Henry III, King of England († 1272) ∞ Eleanor of Provence († 1291)
2. Edmund, Earl of Lancaster († 1296) ∞ Blanche of Artois († 1302), niece of Saint Louis
3. Henry, Earl of Lancaster († 1345) ∞ Maud de Chaworth († 1322)
4. Eleanor of Lancaster († 1372) ∞ John de Beaumont, 2d Baron Beaumont, Earl of Buchan († 1342)
5. Henry de Beaumont, 3d Baron Beaumont († 1369) ∞ Margaret de Vere († 1398)
6. John de Beaumont, 4th Baron Beaumont († 1396) ∞ Katherine Everingham († 1426)
7. Elizabeth Beaumont († 1488) ∞ William Botreaux, 3d Baron Botreaux († 1462)
8. Margaret Botreaux († 1467) ∞ Robert Hungerford, 2d Baron Hungerford († 1459)
9. Eleanor Hungerford ∞ John White, gent., of Farnham, Surrey (†1469)
10. Robert White (1456-1512) ∞ Margaret Gainsford
11. Margaret White ∞ John Kirton, Esq. († 1529), of Edmonton, Middlesex
12. Stephen Kirton († 1553) ∞ Margaret Offley (†1573)
13. Thomas Kirton (†1601) ∞ Mary Sadler
14. Mary Kirton ∞ Robert Raynsford, Esq. (1567-1629), of Staverton, Northants. 15. Edward Raynsford of Boston (1609-80) ∞ Elizabeth ( - )

Sources:First published in 1934 by Frank Allaben, this line was impugned as unsubstantiated by James A. Rasmussen,"Edward Raynsford of Boston: English Ancestry and American Descendants," NEHGR 139 (1985), 225-38, 296-315 (at 228); but it has subsequently been fleshed out and defended by Douglas Richardson, "Plantagenet Ancestry of Edward Rainsford (1609-1680) of Boston, Massachusetts," NEHGR 154 (2000), 219-26, and appears in Faris, Plantagenet Ancestry of Seventeenth-Century Colonists, 2d ed. (Boston, 1999). Alternate but problematic royal ancestry through earlier connections of the Raynsford family appears in the first edition of Roberts, Royal Descents (1993).