Sarah Palin: 10 things you may not know

The snarky Palin list Mark Silva links to, starts out with a lie (no surprise--this IS the Swamp) about Palin--alleging that as a kid, she was taken across the border to Canada for Canada's socialized health care.
As has been exposed repeatedly, even in Politico.com, that part of Canada didn't have socialized medicine in those years.
Palin hatred among "journalists". It's not attractive.

For a Canadian debunking of Mark Jacobs' insinuations, see http://network.nationalpost.com/NP/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2010/03/10/kevin-libin-sarah-palin-knows-her-canadian-health-care.aspx

Maybe it's time to exile Palin to Canada - so that the rest of us can stop threatening to move there:

Video link: The Last Straw

(satire)

Nice dog in the picture.

The one on the right.

Run, Sarah, Run and please, don't quit, this time !!
SUPPORT OUR TROOPS, BRING THEM HOME, ALIVE AND WHOLE. NOW.

Bondwooley: While I understand your wanting to unload this piece of work, but what did Canada ever do to deserve such a punishment though?

How about Barak Obama;
A lot of things you may not know...

Like:
His grades in college. His medical records. His long form birth certificate. What make of teleprompter does he prefer. Why did he think we had 57 states....

Paulo

$arah tells a Canadian crowd her brother burned his leg and went to Whitehorse, $arah tells an Alaskan audience her brother burned his leg and went to Juneau....typical lying, pandering Palin.

* * * * *
Posted by: bondwooley | March 13, 2010 11:42 AM
.
I agree that those of you who threaten to go to Canada should stop the threats. Just go.

Too bad that you aren't obsessed with the details of our mysterious president's background and history, nicknames, aliases, and associates.

Notice how Mark Jacob includes every Leftist insult of Palin--while blaming Palin for the insults (!) by saying Palin "inspired" these "nicknames"?
Since when does the Swamp/Trib think that cheap insults (excuse me, "nicknames") are proper journalism?

The real question is which dog is smarter? The smart money is on the one on the right...

It would seem that the loony liberals are still scared of her.

Hey, " Paolo " get rid of that LP and find another record, with which you can denigrate our President. Are you wearing your Uncle Sam suit, to the rally, today !!??
SUPPORT OUR TROOPS, BRING THEM HOME, ALIVE AND WHOLE. NOW.

Posted by: Bruce | March 13, 2010 10:02 AM

Ok Brucie, so are we to assume Palin was lying when she said this:

“We used to hustle over the border for health care we received in Canada,” she said. “And I think now, isn't that ironic?”

In her first Canadian appearance since quitting as governor of Alaska last summer, Ms. Palin's trademark folksy charm was on full display...

The vocal opponent of health-care reform in the U.S. steered largely clear of the topic except to reveal a tidbit about her life growing up not far from Whitehorse, Canada.

What's more ironic is the moronic people who defend her!

Bruce - how can it be a lie that Sarah went into Canada for health care when Sarah Palin HERSELF has said this on the record?
*
Bruce, are YOU accusing Sarah Palin of LYING?

I love you loons and your "dog" remarks. If this is based on looks, which democrat are putting up against her? Hillary Clinton? Nancy Pelosi? Michelle Obama? You guys could open a kennel.

I love you loons and your "dog" remarks. If this is based on looks, which democrat are putting up against her? Hillary Clinton? Nancy Pelosi? Michelle Obama? You guys could open a kennel.

Posted by: Terry | March 14, 2010 2:14 PM

Those three woman have more class than Palin could ever achieve in her lifetime.
I have just one more thing to say: BARBARA BUSH leads in the kennel category!

Tara Reid (not as smart as the model),

Just for you.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xIOLgnnwbw

It's amazing!!! The most rabid, lefty, Palin haters who felt that she was not qualified for vice-president are also the ones who slobbered all over themselves and felt Kerry made an excellent choice for running mate when he picked John Edwards. I think that says it all.

Teabagger Terri,
You left out Barbara Bush and Nancy Reagan. They should also open a kennel. Or maybe they enjoy riding horses more. I say you should take out your checkbook and write Palin a large and generous check. Put your money where your mouth is.

One thing I DO KNOW is that Palin is more capable and trustworthy than the current idiot in chief sitting in the white house.
I also thinks she knows how to pronounce corpsman, unlike obama!
Still demonizing Palin and blaming Bush, don't you guys have any new material?

she knows how to pronounce corpsman, unlike obama!
Still demonizing Palin and blaming Bush, don't you guys have any new material?

Posted by: worsethanbefore | March 15, 2010 1:35 PM

And what about you typical dumb right wing nut. Dont you have anything new to talk about? I regress back to the good old days of nuculer and other bumbling fool me once fool me again isms from your hero Bush.

And Terry, as usual nothing to come back with except childish you tube videos. Seems they left out all the ugly ones which goes without saying, typical of your bigotry. Cant comeup with legitimate arguments so lets make a video of all the hot republican chicks. Cool!

worsethanbefore....Palin is the dumbest thing to hit politics since....well....ever. Keep voting for the likes of her, and you will be worsethanbefore. It took the pugs 30 years of control to get us here, and I'm not sure if the country can get out of the hole that the pugs made. Check out these sad pug facts, for your day's enamacation. http://www.editgrid.com/user/xcellentform/Debt_history_for_congress_and_presidents_2_%281%29

Tim Green, Fairfield CT

BC

You may want to check your facts because at that time in Canada there was no socialized medical care. We are talking about the 1960s.

Xcellentform

Funny how you forgot a few years when the Democrats were in control but you have it down as Republicans. You're not biased at all are you? And by the way who had control of the House of Representatives before Obama took over?

Crook, if you want to do something productive in your life, please detail the supposed error that you are refering to (Democrat control/ Republican control vagueness)

Doogie,

What does my checkbook have to do with Gov Palin's looks? If you are saying I should contribute to her - first I would say, she isn't running for anything and second she's not at the top of my list.

Horrible Form.

I'll put Gov Palin up against Speaker Nancy Dimwit any day of the week.

Tara Reid (not as smart as the model),

I think that was pretty legimate video about the homliness of the leading democratic woman in the country.

You may want to check your facts because at that time in Canada there was no socialized medical care. We are talking about the 1960s.

Posted by: Crooks_In_DC | March 15, 2010 4:23 PM

Where in my post do I mention free health care moron? My facts are accurate in that Palin said:
“We used to hustle over the border for health care we received in Canada,” she said. “And I think now, isn't that ironic?”

What this suggests is either
1) her family preferred Canadian health care over the US
or
2) She lied. So which is it?

Xcellentform

Fix the years 2006 to 2009. And one thing that jumps out as a big mistake is stating that the president is responsible for the budget. All he does in reality is submits the budget but it's and always has been the responsibility of the Congress to approve the budget. Sorry but that is just the way the Constitution is written. And if you go back and check you will find that after Congress gets the budget it's all ways returned to the White House larger than what it was sent to them. That is the reason that under Clinton we had a balance budget was because the Republican controlled Congress forced it upon him. I remember that time very well and at that time I was more liberal than I am today.

Xcellentform

Fix the years 2006 to 2009. And the president submits a budget draft not a budget. It is the responsibility of the Congress to authorize a budget. And if you go back and check you will see the final budget is always bigger than the draft. All appropriations including the budget is actually the responsibility and always has been of the Congress.

Crooks, I did indeed chase out some errors (compliments of the reference material) of both the era you mentioned, as well as some older data. After chasing it out though, it did not help the pugs, and might have even hurt them some more.

Are you trying to say that the R congress submitted a bill to Clinton that was lower than what was presented to them? Is that the "forcing" that you are talking about? I'll fact check it if I have to, but I doubt that was the case.

Crooks and Xcellent : Doenst matter at all who's running Congress or not, it's the President who signs the bills. So while a republican congress presented a budget, if Clinton didnt like he he wouldnt have signed it. Same for Bush, he didnt have to sign anything he didnt like either! So in the end, all that matters to the majority of Americans, is which president signed what. Clinton gets the credit for the best economy in over 60 years while Bush gets the credit for the largest deficit and government in history (prior to Obama of course). Those are the facts live with them and move on already.

Tara Reid (not the model)

Xcellentform

Did you forget that under Clinton his budget was held up by the Republican Congress and until it was balance. Did you forget the feds having to shut down for five days until Clinton gave in. And most economists will point out it was the Republicans that kept the budget in line when Clinton was president. Or how we were lucky that Bush one and Clinton basically kept their hands off of the economy that President Ronald Reagan gave us. Ronald Reagan gave us one of the biggest tax cuts followed by the biggest spending spree by a Democratic Congress. It's all a matter of American history and economics 102. The economist will also show how after the tax cuts under Reagan money was coming into the treasury at a level not seen since Kennedy. They will also tell you how once the Democrats took control of Congress the money was flowing out of the treasury faster than it was going in. That is one of the things I did not agree with Reagan on. He should have stood his ground on the budget. But, it is all really mute now seeing how we will have a new record deficit each year until the perceivable future thanks to Obama and the liberal goons in the Congress.

Posted by: Crooks_In_DC | March 16, 2010 4:49 PM

Ya ya whatever you want to believe. The US has run a deficit for the past 40 years with the exception of 4 years '98,99.00.and 01. Guess who was president when that started and guess who was president when it ended?
28 out of those 40 years a republican was president buddy. So dont even try to tell me who runs a fiscally better government! And as Tara pointed out, its the President who signs the bills not the Congress and if memory serves me right, those government shut downs is what lost you the elections.

Another thing that Horrible Form and Tara Reid (not as smart as the model) forget is that in early 1995, right after the GOP took control of Congress, Clinton presented a budget with $200 billion deficits for as far as the eye could see. It ws Newt and the GOP said the budget would be balanced in 5 years.

http://www.nytimes.com/1995/02/05/us/clinton-decides-to-control-but-not-cut-the-deficit.html?pagewanted=all

Another thing that Horrible Form and Tara Reid (not as smart as the model) forget is that ...bla bla bla

Posted by: Terry | March 16, 2010 7:59 PM

Same as you forgetting the republican controlled congress that allowed Bush to increase the deficit and government spending right?

crooks and teri, we all remember that it was Clinton in 1993 that passed the Deficit Reduction Act (with not a single R vote on it) and it is also common knowledge that BOTH parties wanted balanced budgets. I seem to remember that it was th pug congress who were obstructing federal government with their demands for tax-cuts for the rich (again). Furthermore, if it was, indeed, the pug congress, why didn't they do a repeat just 7 years later when it was substantially the same pug congressmen and the pug bush for POTUS? Lower taxes for the rish just don't work. http://www.forbes.com/2009/02/26/obama-budget-reagan-clinton-bush-opinions-columnists_higher_taxes.html

Timmeeee,

One of the reasons the GOP lost Congress in 2006. I was never in favor of the spending Bush and the GOP did. However, that pales in comparison to what the democrats are doing.

Horrible Form,

The Deficit Reduction Act passed in 1993 and yet in 1995 Clinton still was showing $200 billion deficits for as far as the eye could see. Why would that be if the largest tax increase in American history was going to balance the budget as he proclaimed?

The lower tax rates grow the economy which increases tax revenues to the gov't. See the Laffer Curve. Tax revenues went up during the Bush years, the problem was the spending.