In 2008 McCain's campaign was sagging and to bolster it he sought out a bright and attractive running mate, but he got more than he bargained for as he had invited someone aboard who was not only attractive but quite capable of thinking for herself and inspiring America's conservative base. To this day I have but one criticism of Sarah Palin and that is the fact that she endorsed John McCain's Senate reelection bid in 2010, after what he and his Progressive allies did to her in 2008.
She tried to speak up for America and her own party slapped her down. She tried to warn us that Obama was planning to turn this nation into a socialist state. McCain assured our people that Obama is not a socialist and that he loves this country. McCain's political advisers insisted on spending one hundred and fifty thousand dollars on her wardrobe and then leaked that information to the media, making her look like a big spender, but that media today chooses to ignore the millions spent on Obama's vacations. In the name of 'promoting' her image she was fed to the wolves of the MSM and sacrificed to the gods of Saturday Night Live. She, like none other in history, was set up by those she believed to be allies, and as she was being set up for a fall, so too was the America she had begun to inspire.
The latest flap on the internet has to do with a two bit article in the New York Times that is still blaming the Benghazi event on that second rate video that few Muslims ever saw. If I did not understand the radical tactics of Saul Alinsky and his left wing followers I would be asking myself why, after all this time and all that we have learned about Benghazi, would any reporter once again rehash an old lie about that video when we all know it had nothing to do with the attack.
However, I do understand the Alinsky methodology. If you have not yet read Part One of this series you should. Alinsky's rule number six states "A good tactic is one your people enjoy." His book 'Rules For Radicals' was written for the benefit of radical leaders, i.e.: community organizers, who would follow in his footsteps. His advice to them was never to adopt a rigid framework but to allow their followers to be creative and stir up trouble on their own.
Now it may not seem overly creative to once again tell a lie that everyone now knows is a lie. However, it is creative, if you grasp Alinsky's tactics. Just look what it has done. In all honesty I have not read the latest tripe from that NYT reporter and don't intend to. What he wrote is irrelevant. The only thing that matters is Alinsky's goal of a 'means to an end'. I think of that NYT piece of trash as but an afternoon of fishing. When you bait a hook and throw it in the water you are never quite sure what kind of fish is going to take the bait.
In this case it was Sarah Palin, barracuda, and suddenly the whole paradigm changes. Now the original article is a non-story and the new story is Sarah Palin's use of the term 'shuck and jive'. Now, I know what she meant, and she knows what she meant, but her actual meaning matters not at all, for the left wing smear masters have suddenly lit up the media and the internet referring to this shuck and jive comment as a racial slur against Hussein Obama, and once again she is in the cross hairs.
It really is not her fault as they will find ways to twist the meaning of anything that woman says. If she were to post on her site that she would never again mention Obama's name or anything about his policies you can be certain that the following day's headline would read. 'Palin Claims The President Is Not Worth Her Time'. It matters not what she says or does, they will twist it into another bout of Hate Palin.
If I were to give her one bit of advice, it would be to never be photographed eating a chocolate ice cream cone. It would be twisted and racial overtones added, and a new topic of rage would be born for the left, and conservatives would rush to the nearest store buying chocolate ice cream by the ton to show their support for Sarah.
Oddly enough, the Progressives need Sarah Palin and if that sounds
Think about it. If tomorrow Ms. Palin and family were to move to Australia, none could replace her in the eyes of our liberals and Progressives. She is the person they all love to hate. The bulk of the GOP has already abandoned us and the few left are also being attacked. Allen West, Ted Cruz, Michelle Bachman and a few others are constantly under the gun but not to the degree that Sarah Palin is. She is the favorite focal point of the left. Many of the lesser players in Alinsky's game plan would rejoice to see her break, but not the true masters of the agenda. They, and they alone, realize what a valuable asset she is to them, at least until they seize total control.
And what makes her such a special prize to the left? The answer to that is quite simple. We love her. If she is under attack, conservatives rally to her defense; all part of the culture wars that are being foisted on an unsuspecting public. Nothing better illustrates that than this latest SNAFU from NYT. Many might think that the author of that ridiculous piece about Benghazi and the video is either an idiot, foolish enough to believe that someone would believe him, or that he hasn't watched the news in the last year. None of the above are true.
As mentioned above, he was simply fishing, seeing who would make a comment about his absurd article. Sadly, Sarah Palin did, and we are now making news again, a new rage has set in, we embark on the latest battle in the culture war, and like a fish, we are being played by the ghost of Saul Alinsky as we disregard important events and concentrate on the shuck and jive agenda.
That reporter probably got a hefty bonus.
Sarah Palin, The New York Times, And Benghazi Part One