Book Review – Going Rogue by Sarah Palin

Sarah Palin spends a lot of time setting the record straight in her book Going Rogue. If you followed the campaign in 2008, you will recall that there were times when Palin seemed to be stymied by the fear of saying the wrong thing. Palin owns up to the deficiencies of her campaign performance, and does a fine job explaining the behind-the-scenes reasons why the campaign proceeded as it did. Palin sheds light on some of her mistakes, staff mistakes, as well as reinforces some of the actions she believes were handled well during the campaign.

In a format that’s pretty standard for a memoir, the book starts by recounting Sarah Palin’s early years. She explains the upbringing that contributed so much to her present beliefs. The book then gets into the meat of the story, revisiting the 2008 US presidential campaign. The book concludes with Palin’s vision for the future.

Palin does not present herself as having all the answers. She does not present herself as being always right, nor does she believe that everyone should agree with her. She states her beliefs, the reasons for her beliefs, and lets them stand on their own.

During the campaign, liberals liked to take shots at Palin’s intellect and worldliness. The book demonstrated that Palin is well educated, well informed, well intentioned, and a woman of action. She gets things done. She believes in common sense and integrity over party loyalty.
Regardless of the perceived intellect of any candidate, one does not have to be a genius to be a good leader, or in this case, president. One only needs to have a sound foundation and commitment to the core principles of the founding documents of the United States. As is said in the oath of office, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. The recipe has been created by the great leaders of the past. Men like Washington, Jefferson, Franklin, Adams, and the many other unmentioned founding fathers created the recipe with the US Constitution and Declaration of Independence. Despite the wishes of the left, these documents are the law of the land. Subsequent leaders have a much less difficult task. The path has been cut. Subsequent leaders don’t have to blaze new trails (in fact, they are legally forbidden to it unless by amendment); they only need to follow the existing path. If someone asked me to create a cake from scratch, I would not be able to do it. However, give me a recipe to follow, and I can make a cake just as well as Betty Crocker. If the public can come to understand that “change” in the United States is limited by to the constraints set in the US Constitution, leaders will fall in line, and freedom will reign. Any deviation from the recipe represents a reduction in freedom. Freedom (not equality, success, fairness, or any other idea) should be the driving principle of any action the government takes. Does anybody remember freedom?

Anthem Blue Cross Owes You NOTHING President Obama

http://www.dailynews.com/ci_14357792?source=most_emailed

By Erica Werner, Associated Press
Updated: 02/08/2010 10:45:44 AM PST

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration on Monday asked California's largest for-profit health insurer to justify plans to hike customers' premiums by as much as 39 percent, a move that could affect some 800,000 customers.

===============================================================

Question: Who is the President to tell a business in the private sector how much to charge for their services? What’s next? Is Obama going to go to Costco and tell them they are charging too much for paper towels? How about going to Yankee Stadium and telling them that the $8.75 beers are over priced? Where does it end?

This kind of stuff from the White House is the stuff of dictators.

This is Hugo Chavez in Venezuela.

Wouldn’t it be wonderful if the CEO of Anthem Blue Cross were able to call a press conference and tell President Obama straight up that Anthem Blue Cross does not have to justify ANYTHING to him? The CEO and his staff can run their company how they want to run it. They are accountable only to customers and shareholders, not to a despotic wannabe. Despite the best efforts of President Obama, the United States is still a land of laws – Laws that do not allow the president to bark orders. The last I checked this was still a representative republic, and not a monarchy, dictatorship, or empire.

President Obama – Keep your nose OUT of the private sector and worry about governing, not ruling.  Who am I to tell the president what to do?  I'm a citizen and voter, and that's enough.

Massachusetts Delivered Us in 1775 and Massachusetts May Have Delivered Us in 2010

Hope is not lost!

I'm speaking of Scott Brown's Senate race win in Massachusetts. 

This past year plus has been a depressing time for lovers-of-liberty.  How refreshing to learn that even in uber-progressive Massachusetts, there's still that undercurrent of liberty that was not able to be held down.

Some thoughts about the events in Massachusetts:

• Is this win actually a positive in the long run for the Democrats?  It seemed like there were a lot of sighs of relief from many Democrats (especially those known as the "Blue Dogs").  This Republican victory means the Democrats now have an excuse not to have to vote for a health care reform bill the American people don't want.  If the Democrats retain this Senate seat in Massachusetts, the Democrats would be saddled with approving this fiasco of a bill, and would pay even more dearly in 2010 and 2012.
• Scott Brown is not exactly a conservative Republican.  It remains to be seen if he can stay true to his campaign promises and avoid a progressive agenda.
• Does this loss cause any soul searching among Democrats, or will they still continue to be a party courting fringe groups of society (unions, minorities, wealthy urbanites) while ignoring "middle America"?
• In an ironic twist, was the Barack Obama win in 2008 exactly what this country needed to wake up and appreciate liberty?  Barack Obama may have been the best thing that could have happened for the liberty-movement.  Think of how events would have progressed had John McCain won.  Things would be mostly business as-usual.  There would be no Tea Party movement.  No awakening throughout the country.  Progressive statists likely would have won in Massachusetts and New Jersey.  Perhaps Obama was the shock the country needed to finally be able to identify the anti-American statist progressive agenda.

             
Yes we can!

What Liberal Political Correctness Got Us

Liberal political correctness is to blame, not for the shootings at Fort Hood, but for not being able to prevent it. The shooter is to blame. There are multiple reasons for the shooting, but the blame starts and ends with the shooter. However, liberal political correctness is to blame for creating a culture of fear that prevented anyone from acting to prevent the shooting. Army officials were so scared of saying the politically incorrect thing that they did nothing.

Liberals have pussified the United States. People can't say what they really mean without being personally attacked (think Joe the Plumber). Men go to day spas. No one keeps score and all kids get trophies. Nanny-state regulations protect us from ourselves. TV personalities lose their jobs for speaking the uncomfortable truth. We no longer fight wars to win. Pussified.

Liberal political correctness has gone beyond an annoyance. It is now costing lives. Check my previous post regarding the book Lone Survivor explaining how liberal political correctness cost the lives of US soldiers in Afghanistan. Add that to the 13 innocent people just killed at Ford Hood.

It's time for everyday Americans to do what they know in their hearts, and stand up to political correctness that has moved in these times from ridiculous to dangerous.

Petit Family Foundation Food and Wine Event November 15th 2009

The Petit Family Foundation cordially invites you to a Food & Wine Event to benefit the foundation and to honor the memories of Jennifer-Hawke Petit, Hayley Elizabeth Petit and Michaela Rose Petit on Sunday Nov. 15th 2009 5:30-8:30p.m. at Carmen Anthony Fishhouse, 1770 Berlin Turnpike, Wethersfield, Ct.
The foundation’s funds are given to help foster the education of young people, especially women in the sciences; to improve the lives of those affected by chronic illnesses; and to support efforts to protect and help those affected by violence.
Please call Beth Tracey for reservations at 1-860-677-1223 Ext. 23

Here’s a sneak preview:
"Wines To Be Paired With All Food Courses"

Reception:
Fruit & Vegetable Crudités
1st Course:
Campagna Salad
Mixed field greens with gorgonzola cheese, red onions and tomatoes,
with our house vinaigrette
2nd Course:
Capellini Piedmontese
Capellini pasta tossed in a creamy pink sauce with Prosciutto, peas & Parmesan cheese
Served Family Style
3rd Course:
Petite Filet Mignon Trio
A filet trio cooked to perfection accompanied by sauces of blackberry bordelaise,
green peppercorn au poivre and béarnaise served with baby vegetables
Dessert:
Chocolate Torte
Coffee or Tea

We look forward to seeing you at our first Wine/Dinner Event!!
Petit Family Foundation~http://www.petitfamilyfoundation.org/Use GoodSearch for The Petit Family Foundation http://www.goodsearch.com/?charityid=863000%7E

Conservative Internet Radio

AM talk radio is one form of media dominated by conservative commentators. Many radio shows also simul-cast over the internet.

I've written before about some local Connecticut shows available on WTIC 1080 in Hartford.

I stumbled upon a station that plays all the big national shows back-to-back-to-back and is available over the internet. "The Big Talker" AM 1210 out of Philadelphia broadcasts Glenn Beck at 9 AM Eastern, followed by Rush Limbaugh at noon, followed by Sean Hannity at 3 PM. They also have local personalities before and after these national shows. I'm able to fire up AM 1210 over the internet starting around 9 AM, and leave it on for rest of the work day.

If you're looking for a one-stop-shop for conservative talk, check out AM 1210. I've included the link below.

http://www.thebigtalker1210.com/

Please let Liberty Alert know if you have other favorite radio shows available over the internet.

USA Today Vote on Second Amendment

I had this message emailed to me today:

USA TODAY IS TAKING A POLL ON 2ND AMENDMENT - GUN CONTROL

Obama's new Attorney General, Eric Holder, has already said this is one of his major issues. This takes literally 2 clicks to complete. Please vote on this gun issue question with U S A Today. It will only take a few seconds of your time. Then pass the link on to all the interested friends you know. Hopefully these results will be published later this month. This upcoming year will become critical for gun owners with the Supreme Court accepting the District of Columbia case against the right for individuals to bear arms. Here's what you need to do:

VOTE

The Question is: " Does the Second Amendment give individuals the right to bear arms?"
Answer choices are: Yes or No or Undecided then click on V OT E now white tab!

Boycott The Book (The Cheshire Home Invasion)

For those of you not familiar with this story, below is a letter regarding the rape, torture, and murder of 2 daughters and the wife of Dr. William Petit of Cheshire, CT. This letter is attributed to Dr. Bill Petit. I can not verify for sure that this is from Dr. Petit, but I have reason to believe that this letter is authentic. Regardless of the source of this letter, the message remains the same. No criminal should benefit from a crime, especially a crime as hideous as this one. It seems like an easy decision to stay away from this book. You'll have to make up your own mind, but see Dr. Petit's words below before you make your decision.

===========================================================
Please Help Boycott This Book
Share
This is the illegally obtained book written by one the defendants who killed Hayley and Michaela. He illegally met with the author in jail before he was stopped by the DOC and released it prior to the trial in Contempt of of the gag order, that has been in place over a year. The book was common knowledge but Donovan, his defense attorney has reacted like a moron as if he had no knowledge of this. Judge Fasano had a hearing yesterday and ignored the entire topic-of course the session was in chambers so it is hard to know exactly what was said-our justice system is far less than transparent. This allows this animal to give his side of the story without cross-examination or forensics and then causes the other side of the defense to whine that they cannot get a fair trial. Amazon The author, Brian McDonald, acts like he did nothing wrong-it was only his job to write a book no matter who it hurts. St. martin Press is the division of McMillan that published the book and it is out at Amazon, Barnes and Noble etc. None of them care that an 11 year old was terrorized, raped and burned alive and that a 17 yr old was beaten and burned alive while a 48 year old mother with MS was strangled while she tried to save her children. They are all the epitome of the American blood lust for money and publicity at all costs. Shame on them. they will get their final rewards in their afterlife of hell. Now 26 months later there is no thought of starting the trial and the judicial system wants me to cheer because this is faster than most trials come to court. Yes I am angry, and suspect I will get angrier, but if you have a minute send an email or call or boycott. Thank you for caring about Jennifer, Hayley, and Michaela.
Bill Petit

Book Review: Outliers by Malcolm Gladwell

Outliers – The Story of Success is an international best seller. There are scores of articles and reviews by “professional” book reviewers available for this book, but I'll still add my take to the pile of information available on this book.

Outliers explores the role circumstances have in the creating success. The basic thesis is that although talent and hard work are certainly necessary for success, they are a bit over rated when reviewing what creates success. As the thesis goes, circumstances and even luck can have just as important a role in creating great success, or outliers.

Besides what I gleaned from this book, I know little about Malcolm Gladwell. I have not read any of his other best sellers. However, based on what I learned from this book, I would say that Gladwell is a statistician and a sociologist. He uses data to make correlations, then draws conclusions about the cause and effect of these correlations.

Outliers was quite interesting, and somewhat eye opening. It was fascinating to see the pieces that had to all fall in just the right place to create a great success like a Bill Gates or even a Malcolm Gladwell.
The tone of the book was tough to pinpoint. One of the messages of the book was that there are other factors out of your control that determine your success. Regardless of how hard you work, or how talented you are, you will have a difficult time becoming a true success outlier without good fortune. For example, if you are a young kid starting hockey in Canada, even if you have great natural talent, you will likely not get anywhere unless you were born in one of the first 4 months of the year (You’ll have to read the book to see the reason for this.). At the same time, there is some message of hope in the book. Gladwell contends that talent is overrated. He believes that in many cases, people viewed as great talents were really of average talent but through hard work and lucky circumstances, were able to become successful. Therefore, there is some hope in believing that although you may not be born with great talent, you can still become a success outlier. However, I believe this hope message is drowned out by the fact that Gladwell puts such a large emphasis on luck as a key factor. It’s a little disconcerting to become aware of the fact that regardless of your hard word and talent, whether or not you become successful is in large part due to luck. Even if it is likely true to some degree, it’s still a tough message to face into. I think we all internally know that circumstances are a big factor in life, but to have it laid out in black and white with supporting data can be a bit depressing, unless of course you are one of those on the good side of the luck equation (which is all relative)!

One point that is critical to understanding Outliers is that Gladwell makes generalizations based on data. He does a good job pointing out that he deals in just generalizations, not hard rules. For example, it may be easier to become a hockey star in Canada if you were to be born in February, but not impossible if born in November. One always needs to be careful when making generalizations about people. Gladwell points this out.

One criticism of Gladwell is that he does not discuss any data contradicting his conclusions. This is an understandable criticism, but it’s also understandable why Gladwell leaves most contradictory data out. His intention is to write a book in everyday terms, not create an academic research paper.

There’s a good reason why Outliers is a best seller. I highly recommend this book.

Getting to the Heart of the Healthcare Debate

Millions of protesters at “tea parties” and town hall debates are an obvious indicator that there are clearly differing views throughout the American population regarding government provided healthcare.

Polls have indicated for quite some time now that more people are opposed to government provided healthcare than support it.

Whether against the present Obama-supported healthcare plan due to fear of high costs, poor performance, government intervention, or any number of reasons, in the end all these reasons really funnel down to one central idea – mistrust of government.

The debate over government provided healthcare in the United States is in essence a debate between people who generally trust government, and people who generally mistrust government.
The words “generally” in the statements above are crucial words. Few people always trust or always mistrust government. It is a general perspective of trust versus mistrust that is at the heart of this debate.

To the chagrin of big government supporters, the United States was founded under a purposeful mistrust of government. The United States Constitution was set up to give people maximum liberty precisely because the founders did not trust government. The second amendment to the US Constitution is a direct descendant of the founders mistrust.

The left may not like this built-in mistrust of the US Constitution, but unfortunately for them (and fortunately for the rest of us), the Constitution is the law of the land.

This idea of governmental mistrust is something that most liberals don't understand. The US Constitution is meant to err on the side of too little government, not too much. It is why the left is wrong in the healthcare debate.
Keep in mind that just because the left is wrong in this debate, does not mean that they will not prevail. For this reason, liberty-loving Americans need to continue to stand up to the anti-Constitutional socialization of America.