Yes, it does seem just when you think she can't possibly further beyond the rational pale, she's doesn't another giant leap frog further into the abyss.
Tonight on Hannity, Alaska's favorite half-term Governor Reality Star says that David Gregory's questioning of Gingrich calling Obama the greatest "Food Stamp President" of all time, was a Racist with the suggestion.
This apparently a new Refudiational use of the term "Racism" to me.
First she of course blames the "Lame Stream Media for it's Gotcha Question", before turning to defend Ryan and his plan as being fiscally "responsible" and save "over $1 Billion a day" compared to the Obama plan.
Of course she ignores that the Ryan plan would cut taxes for the Rich from 36 to 25%, while removing tax loopholes for the poor and middle class that would essentially raise their taxes, it would increase the out-of-pocket spending for Medicare by thousands of dollars per year, and force states to make dramatic cuts in services for Medicaid, all the while it wouldn't reach anything like balance until 2050.
But that's all besides the point.
Hannity think's the media didn't ask Barack Obama tough questions. You mean like "Where's your Birth Certificate"?
Now it's in the second part that they get to Gregory and his question.
Palin: Well, talk about Racism. That was a racism-tinged question from David Gregory. He made it sound like if you're black - you're on Food Stamps
and the President is saying you're on Food Stamps. Enough of this, obviously it's done to end the conversation and divert attention from what the real substance is.
Why do we let the press, or the media personalities get away with this. Let's call 'em out on 'em and start concentrating on what the real issue is. The issue is we have 47 Million Americans on Food Stamps, y'know why? Because we don't have a robust economy allowing the private sector to grow and have jobs provided, via the private sector, because government has overreached, overtaxed, overspent and got us in debt and there isn't enough private sector money out their creating jobs
There's so much wrong with that I'm not even sure where to start. First of all Gregory asked the question because it was Gingrich who brought up the subject and accused President Obama "of being proud that more Americans being on food stamps" which to a complete and total LIE. Second if it's unfair for Gregory to ask Newt whether he was talking about Race or Not - how exactly is it fair to them immediately turn around and accuse Gregory of Racism?
Also, it wasn't any attempt to "shutdown the conversation" it was an attempt to get an answer to a question, that was actually before he went on to talk about the Paul Ryan Medicare Plan because if they conversation had stopped, they wouldn't have gotten to it.
Hannity tries to yet again play the GOP-Victim card by saying nobody in the mainstream media asked Barack Obama his associates with dread attempted mass-murderer Siriius Black -er - Bill Ayers. Maybe that's because people in the mass mainstream media know that Bill Ayers was never tried or convicted of anything -and that even after 40 years Free People have the RIGHT TO ASSOCIATE with whoever they damn well please.
I think that's in one of those Amendment thingees.
Yes, there are more people needing these types of services because of the weakened economy and job situation - but government and Barack Obama Didn't Create That Situation the PRIVATE SECTOR AND WALL STREET DID with fraudulent mortgage practices as the recent Bi-Partisan Senate Report has outlined.
A new report compiled by lawmakers on the financial crisis leaves no stone unturned and blatantly criticizes the Office of Thrift Supervision for its "reluctance to interfere with unsound lending and securitization practices."
Senators Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) released the "Wall Street and the Financial Crisis: Anatomy of a Financial Collapse" report on Wednesday, which is based on a two-year study led by the U.S. Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations.
The report concluded "the crisis was not a natural disaster, but the result of high, risk complex financial products, undisclosed conflicts of interest,and the failure of regulators, the credit rating agencies and the market itself to rein in the excesses of Wall Street."
If you're going to talk about "Overspending" you have to talk about George W. Bush as this chart from the CBO on the most recent Obama budget proposal showing both Revenues and Spending as a percent of GDP displays.
When Clinton raise taxes and cut government waste without reducing quality of service the economy surged and the budget came into balance. That changed when Bush implement his tax cuts in 2001 & 2003. The next spike in 2008 - was also during George Bushes term and shows revenues dive-bombing while outlays for services like Unemployment, Food Stamps HAD to go up. It's not like anyone, lest of all Barack Obama, likes it.
Meanwhlie Taxes are actually at their lowest level in 60 years. We are NOT "Overtaxed". In fact, the dotted-line showing and decrease in revenues and increase in spending in the future is a direct result of extending the Bush Tax Cuts during the Lame-Duck Budget deal, not any actually increase in spending.
As to the issue of their "Not being enough money in the private sector" - that argument is bogus as U.S. Corporations have had record breaking profits 3 Quarters in a Row.
The nation’s workers may be struggling, but American companies just had their best quarter ever.
American businesses earned profits at an annual rate of $1.659 trillion in the third quarter, according to a Commerce Department report released Tuesday. That is the highest figure recorded since the government began keeping track over 60 years ago, at least in nominal or noninflation-adjusted terms.
But they're doing it be taking it out of their workforce budgets
The profits of U.S. corporations are growing much faster than their revenues. S&P's Howard Silverblatt estimated that corporate profits in 2010's third quarter would rise 18% from 2009, while sales would be up a mere 5.5%. And The Wall Street Journal reported that "Overseas growth is clearly a driving factor for much of the profit gains."
Big companies are naturally focused on selling their products in overseas markets where demand growth is greater than it is at home. They're also hiring workers in many of those countries, and pushing their U.S. workers to work harder for less money. As long as there are workers outside the U.S. willing to do similar jobs for lower pay, there is nothing to stop this trend from continuing.
See full article from DailyFinance: http://srph.it/...
And the Food Stamp point you have to be completely ignorant not to realize that that phrase has long been used a "code" for poor black freeloaders.
Here's a Video showing a so-called "Black Welfare Queen, more concerned about her Food Stamps than her Dead Cousins".
Not surprisingly, it's from a Fox News report.
And then you have the wing-nut philosophy of the lazy, entitled "Welfare Queen".
Just for the record, most people on welfare and food stamps are White.
Lastly in this report David Cay Johnston points out how the policies of the Reagan Administration, and his race-baiting over "Welfare Queens" while handing the management of public resources over to private entities has vacuumed up the our nation's equity out of the middle class and handed it over to an smaller and smaller pack of the rich and super rich.
Newt would clearly continue to implement Reagan's Reverse Robin Hood policies, even if he does have a minor disagrement with Ryan's Plan, and continue to drain this country and the middle-class of resources to the benefit of multi-national corporations all the while falsely waiving the flag of "American Exceptionalism".
VyanUpdated by Vyan at Wed May 18, 2011 at 09:46 PM PDT
The Conservative Press seem to be picking up mostly on the accusations by Palin at the end of this interview of "corruption" in the implementation of Health Care Reform in relation to waivers granted in Nancy Pelosi's district, except that Pelosi has nothing to do with that
In actuality, Aitken explained, the high percentage of waivers is the byproduct of local law rubbing against the new national legislation. In April 2008, San Francisco passed an ordinance requiring employers to spend a minimum amount per hour on health care for their employees who work in the city. In response, a number of eateries chose to set up Health Reimbursement Arrangements, which are essentially pools of funds set aside by employers to reimburse medical expenses paid by employees.
...
Like many self-insurance policies and union organizations, employers using HRAs have been applying for a waiver from this provision, arguing that application of the requirements would “completely eliminate the benefit” of setting up the HRA in the first place, Flex-Plan Services said. When they do so, they turn not to lawmakers like Pelosi or to the employers themselves, but to third-party administers like Aitken’s company. (And, as she hinted, political donations by Flex-Plan have leaned Republican, according to data collected by the Center for Responsive Politics.)
Most of the waivers are going out simply for companies who claim they can't expand coverage requirements, and they've been granted because the Exchanges that Rep. Ryan's plan would repeal haven't gone online yet to offer a better priced option to current choices.
But why actually accept a valid answer when a politically convenient lie is available to both flog the opposition and bash the regularly media as being a) lazy, b) biased, or c) lame-stream for considering the question not worth pursuing?
Death Panels Jr, Anyone?