Archive for Sarah Palin


Posted in BREITBART, DIANE VALENCEN OPINIONS, SARAH PALIN with tags , , on 16/02/2015 by Diane Valencen, D.S.V.J., O.Q.H [Journ.], ArF J., M.F.


I am certain that conservatives and those who believe, actually believe that Sarah Palin would be an excellent President of the United States will swear that this image is photoshopped.

Palin Sharpton SNL 40

Qu’ul cuda praedex nihil!

Diane Valencen, D.S.V.J., CS, O.Q.H [Journ.], ArF J., M.F.
Editorial Page Editor
The Dis Brimstone Daily Pitchfork
128 Melnar 3 AS


Posted in 2012 ELECTION GOP AUTOPSY, 2016 ELECTIONS, 2016 US ELECTION, SARAH BLOCH OPINIONS with tags , on 03/02/2015 by sarahbloch

blochadvocate_7“No man needs anything more than his own knowledge that his way is best to destroy him.”– Paaclu Obeleth, Liberty and Peace

That quote comes from one of my favorite account of the war for our independence here in Hell, written by the leader of the partisans on Rham. It allows you, the Living to see for a moment into the minds of those people you see on television called politicians. It is very easy to look back at history and see where an American political party has gone wrong. Fred Schwartz points to 1968 and the Democratic Party’s awful convention in Chicago. That event was a perfect storm for failure. The Tet Offensive emboldened the anti-war movement, Daley’s obsession with crushing the protesters and the lack a a strong Democratic candidate with a vision poured gallons of fuel on the party’s pyre. And, of course, there was television to bring it all to the comfortable living rooms of the American people.

So that brings us to the 2016 GOP nomination process and the massive field of potential candidates. The primaries begin in less than twelve months with an event that isn’t a primary at all the Iowa Caucus. Eight days later New Hampshire has its primary and the process likely will end in late June with the Utah primary. The GOP has shortened their schedule for a wide variety of reasons. Foremost, they want to limit the amount of time their candidates are before the cameras. Less exposure less time for errors that Democrats can use against them. So much energy has been poured into this and taken away from the suggestions of the 2012 Election Autopsy that this becomes the first gust of the storm to come.

As recently as February 2014 a poll, this one from McClatchy, has Sarah Palin as high as 8% among GOP likely voters. No other poll has even offered her name since. Today there is a buzz that Palin is considering a run. This would be the first bolt of lightning, albeit offshore, of foul weather building. Palin entering the contest would be huge for TEA Party conservatives and would create nausea in the bellies of Establishment members of the GOP. Her presence would divide the party in ways that can only be measured on a Richter like scale. Reince Priebus’ grand plan to trim down the primary schedule and limit debates as the ultimate troubleshooting effort to “degaffe” the GOP candidates will have been torched by a single decision.

Bush and his name recognition and immigration problems would see his support being chipped away by not only Palin. but by moderates like Christie and unknowns like Ben Carson. So by the time the GOP comes to Cleveland, in a race that will likely still have a minimum of five candidates still in the field with broad support. Those candidates would be, Palin, Paul, Bush, Walker and Christie; with Paul and Palin each having as much as 30% of the delegates they’d need to be the nominee. I feel that Palin if she has a lead over Paul might offer the VP nod to Paul for his delegates and that would be that if the Kentucky Senator could see beyond the right now. Paul is only 52 now and four, or eight years in Blair House would make him the de facto front runner in 2024. If Paul wants the right now moment he would find help, in a brokered convention, from a most unlikely source to balk at such a deal–The GOP Establishment.

The so called moneybags and kingmakers within the GOP don’t want Rand Paul or Sarah Palin but they do want, in a brokered convention, time. Time to change minds by making deals in the cigar smoke filled rooms in Cleveland’s most posh hotels. These deals might bring a Scott Walker or a Chris Christie out of the ashes and onto the podium arms raised and declaring proudly that they accept the nomination amid boo and harsh criticism from the membership of the convention floor. Such an event might be enough to anger Palin into casting her lot as a third party candidate. The outcome of that event would be the final fracturing of the GOP. The hurricane would be ashore then with no place safe to run.

Qu’ul cuda praedex nihil!

Sarah Bloch, D.S.V.J., J.F., O.Q.H [Jur.]
Amici Bax Demvolu Comnu
Politics & Culture Wars Managing Editor
The Dis Brimstone-Daily Pitchfork
118 Melnar 3 AS


Posted in CONSERVATIVE NEWS with tags , on 25/07/2014 by consigliereciucava


A roundup of news that self professed conservative Americans are reading this morning . . .


TMZ “freaks out” on Sarah Palin


Obama’s motorcade blocks woman in labor from crossing street to hospital.

american taliban

Jihadists in Iraq order genital mutilation for women.


Ann Coulter almost makes sense. Almost.

Qu’ul cuda praedex nihil!

Ciu Cava daelth Nixhot, J.F.. D.S.V.J.
The Dis Brimstone Daily Pitchfork
30 Ashtaq 3 AS


Posted in FRED SCHWARTZ OPINIONS, GOP, GOP AS A MINORITY PARTY, IN HINDSIGHT with tags , , , on 14/07/2014 by Fredrick Schwartz, D.S.V.J., O.Q.H. [Journ.]


I’m unfortunately not for hire to the GOP to do their dirty work, but if the folks who work for Reince Priebus at the RNC have any sense they will spend some of their millions on finding the nugget of embarrassment on Sarah Palin or anyone else who wants to take 35% of the GOP with it to the Christian Freedom Party or the TEA Party or whatever homespun, folksy moniker they decide to call the plague they will inject into the major political representative party on the Right. Political parties don’t fall from favor in an instant. It is a slow process and can be precipitated in any number of ways.

What is happening to the GOP is a curious combination of demographic shrinkage and negative messaging. This is detailed by Ana Marie Cox in her most recent article for the UK Guardian. The poll taken by Rupe-Reason of 2,000 millennials shows a significant shift toward Progressive political tendencies that in a potential voting bloc of 80 million could sink the conservatives albeit slowly. I’ve written before about Texas turning blue by 2024 and this is because of the singular thing that millennials can agree on–they hate drama.

The eyeopener from the report:

The Reason-Rupe report finds this skepticism of government has millennials favoring general reductions to government spending and regulations:

73 percent of millennials favor allowing private accounts for Social Security; 51 percent favor private accounts even it means cutting Social Security benefits for current and future retirees because 53 percent of millennials say Social Security is unlikely to exist when they retire
64 percent of millennials say cutting government spending by 5 percent would help the economy
59 percent say cutting taxes would help the economy
57 percent prefer a smaller government providing fewer services with low taxes, while 41 percent prefer a larger government providing more services with high taxes
57 percent want a society where wealth is distributed according to achievement
55 percent say reducing regulations would help the economy
53 percent say reducing the size of government would help the economy
74 percent of millennials say government has a responsibility to guarantee every citizen has a place to sleep and enough to eat
However, millennials also support more government action and higher spending in a number of key areas:

71 percent favor raising the federal minimum wage to $10.10 an hour
69 percent say it is government’s responsibility to guarantee everyone access to health care and 51 percent have a favorable view of the Affordable Care Act
68 percent say government should ensure everyone makes a living wage
66 percent say raising taxes on the wealthy would help the economy
63 percent say spending more on job training would help the economy
58 percent say the government should spend more on assistance to the poor even it means higher taxes
57 percent favor spending more money on infrastructure
54 percent favor a larger government that provides more services, when taxes are not mentioned
54 percent want government to guarantee everyone a college education

And the message that should be clear to the GOP in the shadow of the 2014 midterm elections and two years before the 2016 presidential:

Of those registered to vote, 76 percent of millennials say they plan to vote in the 2014 midterm elections. Fifty-three percent of registered millennials tell Reason-Rupe they plan to vote for the Democratic congressional candidate in their district this November, while 29 percent intend to vote for the Republican. For Democrats that’s a sharp decline from the 64 percent of millennials who say they voted for President Barack Obama in 2012.

Things look better for Democrats in 2016, however. When asked to select their top choice for president in 2016, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was the top choice of 39 percent of registered millennial voters, followed by Sen. Elizabeth Warren (8 percent), Vice President Joe Biden (6 percent) and the top Republican, Rep. Paul Ryan (6 percent). Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee and Sen. Rand Paul were each the top choice of 5 percent of registered millennial voters.

A majority of millennials, 52 percent, identify themselves as independents when first asked. Just 16 percent self-identify as Republicans, while 32 percent say they’re Democrats. Including those leaning towards a party, 43 percent of millennials identify as Democrats, 35 percent as independents, and only 23 percent classify themselves as Republicans.

Millennials don’t identify with the political parties and don’t have much confidence in them. When asked who they trust most to handle a series of policy issues, young Americans say they trust “neither” party to handle 12 of 15 issues surveyed. Millennials do trust Democrats the most on gay marriage, the environment, and poverty, while only trusting Republicans the most on promoting entrepreneurship.

That last paragraph should make the leadership of the Establishment GOP run screaming from their country clubs and to the nearest television studio to denounce Palin and Akin every chance they get.

hindsight 2271

In Hindsight
The GOP would be well served to do all it can to counter the attacks coming from their right flank and try to come to the center. There’s very little they can do to fight the demographic shift as the base of the GOP is dying by the day. As Cox points out in her article the best thing for the GOP to do is try to find a way to mute the faux outrage pouring forth from the mouths of people like Sarah Palin and pray, yes pray, they can find a moderate centrist candidate before the eulogy for the Grand Old Party is written.

Pax Terra!

Fredrick Schwartz, D.S.V.J., CS, O.Q.H [Journ.]
Managing Editor—Research
The Dis Brimstone-Daily Pitchfork
20 Ashtaq 3 AS


Posted in SARAH BLOCH OPINIONS, SARAH PALIN with tags , , on 09/07/2014 by sarahbloch


I can’t add anything to this video save for a simple question. Is there anyone in their right mind who really thinks that Sarah Palin is fit to be the President of the United States and Leader of the free World? Watch the video:

It would be a very sick joke to play on the Human Beings of Terra to have this pandering person become the Chief Executive of the nation of my birth. A cynical part of me would love to see the two years of gaffes that would result in a Palin presidency. I would also have an infinite amount of content to comment on and discuss to the angry outrage of the Right. But the damage to the American people would be a horror that would make the Great Recession look like a quiet summer evening garden party. That would not be fair. So my advice to Ms Palin: keep talking and riling up your folksy homespun base for the purpose of your own enrichment because wealth on Terra is all you’ll ever have. The more you talk the better things become for Progressives, the GOP knows this, I know this and I am sure you know this too. But Sarah Palin doesn’t care because to her she can say what she wants and dance to sound of her growing bank accounts.

Qu’ul cuda praedex nihil!

Sarah Bloch, D.S.V.J., J.F., O.Q.H [Jur.]
Amici Bax Demvolu Comnu
Politics & Culture Wars Managing Editor
The Dis Brimstone-Daily Pitchfork
15 Ashtaq 3 AS


Posted in SARAH BLOCH OPINIONS, SARAH PALIN, THE VIEW with tags , , , , , on 08/07/2014 by sarahbloch


The never ending story of Sarah Palin’s lust for popularity and limelight continues as she hints at a desire to join the cast of the ABC morning talk show “The View.” In an article written in The Hollywood Reporter about the renewal of her Sportsman Channel reality show “Amazing America,” Palin offers her opinion of what the multiple Daytime Emmy Award winning show needs to revitalize itself after the departure of 75% of its cast:

THR:Any interest in doing a political talk show, either on TV, radio or the Internet?

Palin:Maybe. But the politics would have to be interspersed with a whole lot of fun and real life and inspiration showcasing American work ethic, because those topics are all pretty much the antithesis of today’s politics, which I find incorrigibly disastrous! It’d be so much fun to shake it up taking on issues that make audiences objectively consider all sides, and I’d do it with my own real-life groundedness, candor and commonsense that I’m known for. Media needs that today, versus the condescension that oozes from TV and radio. I hear everyone recently got canned from The View, maybe a show like that needs a punch of reality and a voice of reason from America’s heartland to knock some humble sense into their scripts. You know, someone willing to go rogue.

The American work ethic? Today’s politics are incorrigibly disastrous? Real-life groundedness? So what is Palin saying here exactly other than “the View” needs a conservative white woman to be folsky and home spun and of course represent conservatism for a larger audience? I fell on the floor nearly laughing at the thought that Palin could be a greater “voice of reason” than Barbara Walters has been for 17 season on “The View.”

There would be a part of me that would take a perverse pleasure in seeing Whoopi Goldberg paired with Rachel Maddow on one side of the table and Ann Coulter and Sarah Palin on the other. Can you imagine the debates? ABC can you imagine the ratings?!

Qu’ul cuda praedex nihil!

Sarah Bloch, D.S.V.J., J.F., O.Q.H [Jur.]
Amici Bax Demvolu Comnu
Politics & Culture Wars Managing Editor
The Dis Brimstone-Daily Pitchfork
14 Ashtaq 3 AS




In my travels I hear quite a bit about low information voters. There seem to be quite a bit of people who become low information voters because once the boxes that appeal to them have been ticked, they cease to listen to anything that deviates from their beliefs. This can happen on both sides of the political divide in America today. I have seen this recently, meaning over the past six years more on the Right than the Left.


A recent post at can act as a clear illustration of this premise. Sarah Palin’s facebook post about celebrating Freedom and not Government was met with harsh criticism from the Left which provoked harsh responses from the Right. As much as this was expected, I was surprised when a commenter tried to compare and contrast the stands that Palin takes vice what he feels as a conservative what Obama/Clinton stand for politically:

2016 Presidential Election

Gov. Sarah Palin:
1. conservative
2. loving God
3. loving founding fathers
4. saving unborn babies
5. supporting traditional marriage, morality, responsibility
6. defender of U.S. Constitution
7. less government control and regulations and more individual’s freedom/liberty
8. low taxes/letting people keep more of what they earned
9. energy INDEPENDENT/drilling and fracking for more gas and oil to create jobs
10. reducing debts for future generations
11. cutting irresponsible spendings
12. free market capitalism/
no crony capitalism
13. no coporate welfare/foodstamps/bailouts
14. helping the helpless, not the clueless
15. no rewarding bad behaviors
16. SAVING America from bankruptcy
17. RESTORING America’s greatness

Obama/Clinton (2 faces of the same coin):
1. liberal/progressive
2. hating God
3. hating founding fathers
4. agreeing with China on killing unborn babies
5. supporting gay/lesbian (i.e. uncle/aunt and nephew/niece, 2 brothers,
2 sisters, …), immorality, irresponsiblity
5. supporting immorality, irresponsiblity, gay/lesbian marriage between 2
individuals (i.e. a man and a woman, 2 men, 2 women, uncle/aunt and nephew/niece,
2 brothers, 2 sisters, …)
6. attacker of U.S. Constitution
7. more government control/regulations and less individual’s freedom/liberty
8. high taxes/ripping off people
9. energy dependent/man caused global warming or climate chaos
10. more debts for future generations
11. more irresponsible spendings
12. socialism/
crony capitalism
13. more coporate welfare/foodstamps/bailouts
14. getting the clueless/useful idiots become addicted to free stuffs/entitlement programs
15. rewarding bad behaviors/illegal immigrants (undocumented democrats),
DESERTER/TRAITOR Bowe Bergdahl, … etc.
17. TRANSFORMING America into some socialist utopia

For the purpose of clarity I feel it is my duty to point out the fallacies and misinformation in this list. The poster has clearly placed his/her own beliefs into what he feels a proper candidate for President should hold as values when in fact none of these are true factors in what makes someone suitable to hold the highest elected office in America. Once again, a conservative is trying to use “shaming” and the fear of ostracism by not being accepted by a group he feels is the majority to elevate an unqualified person to a state of qualification.

1. Conservative v Liberal/Progressive

Ms Palin is a conservative but in opinion she is more of TEA Party conservative than an establishment one. Ms Clinton is a pragmatist who has a more centrist political view that most political scientists would call “progressive.”

2. loving God v. hating God

I would begin with the question which God? Or even better whose God? The commenter being a conservative clearly means the Christian God as to the bulk of American conservatives this is one true god. Unfortunately for conservatives, there is no religious test for being President of the United States. Having a president that shares their religious beliefs and values might give those voters on the right a warm fuzzy but it isn’t a constitutional requirement. Equally, I see no proof from Ms Clinton’s actions as Secretary of State that she hates the Christian God or that President Obama hates the Christian God. These people are politicians not students at a theological school running for recording secretary. Religion does not matter in this debate because people can have no religion and be ethical moral people and people who wear their religion on their chests can act in terribly immoral and unethical ways.

3. Loving the founding fathers v hating the founding fathers.

I have a very big problem with the use of the word hate here but it does serve a purpose. The reference to the founding fathers of America is a dog whistle of code of white male conservatives. It means Hillary is bringing feminine power that will make white conservative men obeisant to her authority; an authority that terrifies men who have had it their way since the signing of the Declaration of Independence. Second it is more code to the disrespect white conservative men feel at having to acknowledge a person of color as their Chief Executive. As much as it causes eye rolling on the Right the bigotry on the Right regarding America’s first black president has been a torrent of disrespect as has never been seen in American politics. Of course, to say this it becomes clear that Palin as a candidate will bow to male hegemony and respect and protect white male conservative unearned privilege.

4. saving unborn babies v agreeing with China on killing unborn babies

As I have written many times the abortion debate is less about sex and more about demographics. For decades the fear that their would become a balance between the majority white American population and the minority population has fueled the anti-abortion movement. Sure there are a small percentage of people from the minority camp that see this as a moral issue but the bulk of the anti-abortion power brokers are in this fight not for God but for votes. If the numbers of white women in the south and Midwest having abortions dwindled to near zero many of the people who pour billions into the anti-abortion crusade would spent their political capital elsewhere. It really doesn’t matter what a President palin thinks about unborn babies what really matters is that Roe v Wade is settled case law.

5. Supporting traditional marriage, morality and responsibility v supporting gay/lesbian (i.e. uncle/aunt and nephew/niece, 2 brothers,
2 sisters, …), immorality, irresponsiblity [sic] supporting immorality, irresponsiblity [sic], gay/lesbian marriage between 2 individuals (i.e. a man and a woman, 2 men, 2 women, uncle/aunt and nephew/niece, 2 brothers, 2 sisters, …)

Since I don’t have the time nor the desire to write a multichapter several hundred page work of non fiction on this topic I will distill my comments to a few sentences. Traditional marriage one hundred years ago, in 1914, meant in several states that only a man and a woman of the same race could marry and that the woman had no property rights within that marriage. Just over fifty years later traditional marriage had changed to allow men and women of different races to marry, something that would have caused a firestorm of controversy in 1914 much like the controversy in America surrounding same sex marriage in 2014. The comment attempts, poorly, to conflate two men or two women marrying with incest which is illegal in every state in the Union. Despite a federal ruling, 12 states still have anti-sodomy laws on the books making sex between those of the same gender illegal and oral and anal sex among married couples illegal as well. I don’t know of a single advocate for same sex marriage who wants siblings to be able to marry each other or parents to be able to marry children. This line of thinking is horribly fallacious.

6. Defender of the Constitution v attacker of the COnstitution

Yet another code word canard for “in support of white privilege v attacker of white privilege.”

7. less government control and regulations and more individual’s freedom/liberty v more government control/regulations and less individual’s freedom/liberty

There is little Sarah Palin can do to make America more individually free. In reality one of the things conservatives understand the least is that of the rules one has to follow on a daily basis in America local and state laws come into play far more than federal regulations. I believe this commenter is making an appeal here against ObamaCare, poorly, and a veiled reference to Progressives wanting to take guns away from the American people.

8. low taxes/letting people keep more of what they earned v high taxes/ripping off people

I have always liked the argument of allowing people who want to pay no taxes to have to put a coin in their toilet to flush it each time and then see how they feel about taxation. None of these conservatives seem to be able to twig to the notion that it isn’t the taxes it’s the wages. Raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour and one would see a renaissance in the American economy that might hold until the early decades of the 22nd century according to our lead economist Carlton Pryor. The only people being ripped off in America are those who have lost middle class status, the truly disabled and those working 40 hours a week for minimum wage being called “moochers” by the Right.

9. energy INDEPENDENT/drilling and fracking for more gas and oil to create jobs v energy dependent/man caused global warming or climate chaos

There is a cancer in the minds of conservatives that America would be energy independent if they could just control two branches of the government. That is one of the greatest economic and political lies ever told. Conservatives like the commenter still believe that if America drills for its own oil they could produce the 22 million bbl a day they need to keep the freedom of cars and personal transportation which is at the heart of their belief about freedom. Many petroleum scientists feel that close to half of the oil in the ground on Terra has been removed. The Rham Institute for Resource Studies estimates that by 2020 45% of the oil will have been pumped and by 2050 that number will be 55%. It would seem prident that in the coming decades America would want to keep some of its own oil in the ground. However, the drilling on government land, in Alasaka’s ANWR would not result in lower prices because the market sets the price based on supply. Over supply by America would be met with reduced production by OPEC. According to an April 2014 report of American oil resources 43% of oil was locked in federal lands and the total oil reserves on and offshore were 67.41 billion bbl. At current usage rates this would last 8.7 years. I’m agnostic on global warming or climate change; I’ll leave that debate to climate scientists.

10. reducing debts for future generations v more debts for future generations

Where were these cries during the Reagan and Bush II years?

11. cutting irresponsible spendings [sic] v more irresponsible spendings [sic]

I don’t know what irresponsible spending Obama has done that has harmed the US economy. Palin has had no experience since resigning as Alaska Governor so she doesn’t have any federal budgetary experience. Per Carlton Pryor, Lead Economist TED-OG, “[She] was a supporter of the war in Iraq which was a waste of $3 trillion which would have nearly fully reversed the Great Recession by paying $32,000 to every working American over the age of 16. This would have been a more prudent measure had the Great Recession been properly foreseen.”

12. free market capitalism/no crony capitalism v socialism

This is another red herring. America is a curious economic admixture of socialism [Social Security, Medicaid] and capitalism [tax breaks for oil companies and off shore accounts for corporate persons]. I can only imagine this is a feaful swipe at Obama/Clinton and knowing that if HRC is elected single payer will come to pass by the end of her first term.

13. no coporate [sic] welfare/foodstamps/bailouts v more coporate [sic] welfare/foodstamps/bailouts

Where do I begin? This seems to go against the religious ethic of helping the poor, but that would be a facile digression. Once again, Carlton Pryor, “The bank bailout, done during the Bush II administration was a necessary first step toward pushing back from the precipice of Depression. Had this and the Stimulus not been done we would not be having this conversation but rather a conversation about whether America would recover economically in time to save itself as a nation. Now with the American economy finally healing a 2016 election of Ms Palin and retrograde economists that would advise her would be to run headlong toward that cliff and leap, on faith, to demise.”

14. helping the helpless, not the clueless v getting the clueless/useful idiots become addicted to free stuffs/entitlement programs

Well I would imagine this commenter want President Palin to do away with Social Security, which is an entitlement program and allow millions of Baby Boomers to be reduced to eating pet food or starving to death in the streets. This isn’t hyperbole, this is what would happen under this sort of draconian economic policy.

15. no rewarding bad behaviors v rewarding bad behaviors/illegal immigrants (undocumented democrats), DESERTER/TRAITOR Bowe Bergdahl, … etc.

Bad behaviors are most often not rewarded in America. Counties, cities and states all have laws to punish criminals. On the immigration front I stand on the fact that what made America great were the immigrants who to this day provide the diversity needed to maintain a powerful democracy. Bergdahl? I’ll leave that to the Judge Advocate General to investigate his status and whether a Court Martial is required.

16. Saving America from bankruptcy v Bankrupting America

I honestly don’ t know what Palin can do, without a cooperative Congress, from 2017 until 2021 to save America from bankruptcy. If anything her administration’s potential policies will send America into that abyss.

17. Restoring America’s greatness v TRANSFORMING America into some socialist utopia

Did you hear the dog whistle? More need for male white privilege to keep “the Other” from taking their share of the American Dream.

Qu’ul cuda praedex nihil!

Ciu Cava daelth Nixhot, J.F.. D.S.V.J.
The Dis Brimstone Daily Pitchfork
12 Ashtaq 3 AS

%d bloggers like this: