Walter Campbell Dissects Sen Murkowski's RINO Record

Following is a letter from Walter Cambpell to Dan Fagan in which Campbell delineates Lisa Murkowski's record as a Republican in Name Only (RINO), and provides evidence of how she has acted in direct contravention to her purported conservative views:

Dan,

Joe Miller still has my support. I've followed this a lot more closely than you. I've actually done my homework. I've talked with her in person where she told me one thing, and then listened in town halls and in more liberal venues where she said something entirely different. She's made comments at town halls saying the "mandate for insurance wasn't the problem", and that she believed the "government did have a role in providing healthcare to it's citizens".

The comments Joe made to Human Events (btw it's both an Online and a print publication...most real conservatives are familiar with that fact) were obviously in reference to her refusal, much to the chagrin of her conservative colleagues like Mike Pence and Jim DeMint, to sign on to the DeMint repeal bill for over two months.

Joe was saying essentially that she didn't sign on, and he would. At the time of his interview, (the 22nd of July) she hadn't signed on. Pressure brought to bare on her by a more conservative rival forced her to take a harder position on Obamacare, and she did sign the bill on the 29th of July, a week after Miller's interview. For you to paint her as strong in her opposition to socialized government run healthcare is a flat out lie. The reason she voted against it was because she would be trailing significantly in the polls right now had she voted for it.

She is a career pol; nothing she does is on principle...it's all about political survival. She is everything that is wrong with our system.She had stated before that repealing the bill was not the answer. Clearly the distinction here is that she favors some form of nationalized healthcare, (perhaps not the Obama version) just like she favors some form of cap and trade just like she favors some form of amnesty. Joe does not..under any circumstance, believe it's the government's role to provide healthcare, tell doctors how to treat, set carbon taxes, or reward illegal immigration. She does. She clearly did NOT support the repeal of Obamacare until just recently, because she said so on KTUU, and she withheld her signature from the repeal bill for two months. It's obvious she was testing the waters to see how moderate she could be for various political gain in Washington and within the state.

Miller enters the race, challenges her on the right, is consistent, and she has to retrace her steps and pull back to a stronger position on Obamacare.

She also told a national publication she didn't know Joe Miller...another lie...her sister worked on a steering committee with him and they had met several times. You've never pointed out that blatant lie on her part..an obvious attempt to smear for political gain; she did this to dismiss his candidacy because she knew their were plenty of folks across the country and in the state ready to support a more conservative candidate, if they were viable. You see, it's not just us here in Alaska who are fed up with her...Now, if there's something else you are leaving out...if you have a personal score to settle with Paul Bauer, or Sarah Palin, perhaps you should let your listeners know - but to call this man a liar, a man with 8 kids, spotless military record of heroic service, a man who stands not to gain a thing by his run, and would lose money if elected, versus someone who was a failure as a lawyer, who's only accomplishment thus far, was to be appointed by her dad and then become notorious nationally among the likes of Arlen Specter, Susan Collins, and Olympia Snowe as a turncoat progressive RINO. That's beyond the pale. On it's face it's seems you have either been duped by your friends (and let's be honest here, you have MANY leftist and progressive right friends and lobbyists who are very loyal to Lisa...I would imagine the pressure to support her has been pretty intense for you...) or you have not done your homework, or YOU are the one being purposefully dishonest...for whatever reason...personal vendetta...financial gain...etc.

This man represents everything you say you believe on your show - and Lisa represents the exact opposite - and yet you've always antagonized this man, and pitched softballs to Murkowski. Your in studio interview with her was a sickening display of pandering on your part. I never expected you to be a "journalist", but I must say I wasn't expecting you to be a phony or a sell-out. I heard both that day, and it was sad.

From her deal with Bob Penny, to her being involved in meetings when her father had planned to appoint her (a clear conflict if interest) to her lying about her record, to her covering up how many times she tried to pass the bar and failed...clearly there is one dishonest party here - and now that's YOUR candidate.

This man has a family, has devoted his life to the service of our country as a warrior, tank commander, and judge. Your slander and insults yesterday were shameful and belie ulterior motives...not too mention they were wrong, and you mis-quoted her (a lie) favorably, and him (a lie) negatively twice yesterday. In the middle of spitting out your hate, the names you called Miller better represented you yourself.

For the record, there has never been a vote to repeal Obamacare. The votes you were duped into referencing by the Murkowski camp were votes to table. The only repeal measure out there, was the one DeMint initiated, and Murkowski purposefully held off for signing for two months..a bill Joe said he would not hesitate to put his name on..a clear difference between him and the senator, and one worth mentioning in a national publication, given it's national consequences.

Miller's comments were correct, only a fool or a paid hack wouldn't know the difference, and beyond that, he is the only conservative in this race, and those of us who support him and wish to see constitutional conservatives elected to office and corrupt RINOs sent packing, are NOT going away. We will take back our country, and our party, and you can help, get out of the way, or make us go through you and your corrupt allies, it makes no difference to me.

-Walter Campbell

PS: I was at the GOP picnic yesterday. Didn't see you or your candidate. Could it be she was looking for where they were holding the DNC picnic?

Sarah Palin: Hey Democrats, What's The Plan, Man?

By Gary P Jackson

One of the reasons we absolutely love Sarah Palin, and support her so strongly, is the fact she simply doesn't suffer fools well. She also doesn't take crap from anyone. Sarah is a street fighter who loves the sting of battle, and when she is on a mission, the last thing anyone with a lick of sense would want to do, is try and stop her from completing that mission.

Sarah has been hammering the Obama regime and his Congress over the upcoming $3.8 TRILLION tax increase, the largest in history. She was attacked by the far left, "Journolist approved" PolitiFact, an outfit known for carrying the water for Obama and the Marxist-progressives. They claimed she was "pants on fire lying." Sarah took PolitiFact to school, showing them what real fact checking looked like, as you can read here.

Obviously undetered by attacks from the left, Sarah took time from her commercial fishing gig to again ask Obama and his crew: "What’s the plan, man?"

Pants on Fire, Still

A $3.8 trillion tax increase is coming down the pike, folks. America’s tax cuts which can incentivize small businesses to expand and hire more people (thus fulfilling the mission to grow more private sector jobs), or even just to keep our doors open, will expire in four months. That expiration equates to an increase on your tax bill, starting at midnight, December 31.

I’ll keep calling out President Obama and the Democrats until they tell the American people what the plan is to save the incentives – to not allow the mom and pops’ tax cuts to expire. Granted, liberals (including stubborn “fact-checkers” who claim I’m lying about the soon-to-be tax cut expiration) are trying to clobber me for holding them accountable and prodding them toward revealing their intentions (because they’ve had 18 months to publicly propose a plan to stave off the $3.8 trillion tax increase that will soon slam us, but have revealed no plan). If they have a bill to extend the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, let’s see it. Time for them to put up or shut up.

But you don’t have to take my word for it. Take the word of the “fact-checkers” at PolitiFact, who, before moving the goal posts in their second dissembling “fact-check” on the Democrats’ tax hikes, wrote in their original “fact-check”:

There are no formal congressional proposals yet to keep the Bush tax cuts in place, so we don’t have precise estimates from official sources like the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. Still, there’s a good bit of consensus on what the tax increases would look like, both if lower rates expired only for high earners and also for all incomes.

As Ed Morrissey noted:

And there’s a big problem with this argument, which is that “consensus” means nothing without passing a bill, and especially not without proposing one first. Thanks to Democrats in 2001 and 2003, those bills cutting the tax rates have hard-and-fast sunset provisions that create an expiration date absent of any other action.

We are now less than four months away from that expiration date after seven years of seeing it coming, after more than 3 years of Democratic control of Congress, and after eighteen months of the Obama administration. Democrats don’t even have a proposal on the table yet, and the legislative calendar is rapidly shrinking to take action before the expiration date hits. Without action, we will see a $3.8 trillion tax hike across the entire spectrum of earners.

So much for “consensus” without action. PolitiFact is curiously stating that in his 2011 budget, the President mentioned some “plan” to do something about not raising taxes on all Americans. Um, don’t know about you, but I don’t find this general, vague promise of some “plan” all that reassuring.

The Left also “plans” to do something about our out of control deficits and high unemployment, and the President “planned” for his nearly trillion dollar stimulus to keep unemployment under 8%. We’ve seen how successful that “plan” worked out.

The President’s budget “plan” hasn’t worked out so well either. As the economist Bruce Bartlett explained at the time, the President’s budget – including the tax promise – was never much more than a vague statement of intent. Practically speaking, it was dead on arrival. Even Bartlett couldn’t have known how dead, though, because in the end Congress didn’t even succeed in passing a budget, let alone in taking a decision on the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts.

Bottom line: until we see a formal proposal – an actual bill before Congress – then get ready for that $3.8 trillion hit.

(By the way, the Left sure gets wee-wee’d up when they’re called on something like this, eh? And here I am, thousands of miles away from DC out on a commercial fishing boat, working my butt off for my own business, merely asking the Democrat politicos and their liberal friends in the media: “What’s the plan, man?”, and they seem to feel threatened by my question. So, I’ll go back to setting my hooks and watching the halibut take the bait, and when I come back into the boat’s cabin in a few hours, I’ll log back on here to read their reply. I’ll have succeeded if they’re forced to finally reveal to Americans how they plan to increase taxes, and what they intend to do with our money. In the meantime, I’m catching fish.)

- Sarah Palin, in Homer, Alaska

As Sarah points out, while these idiot "fact checkers" as talking noise and claiming she is wrong, their position is unsustainable, because there is NO PLAN. Nothing is written down, and most certainly nothing is waiting in Congress for passage.

Much like Obama did regularly as a Senator in both the Illinois Senate, as well as the U.S. Senate, Congress voted "present" when it came time to pass a budget, thus there is no mechanism to stop this $3.8 TRILLION monster tax increase coming your way. Nothing to stop it at all. The Obama regime was hoping you wouldn't notice.

Just like the so-called "fact checkers", Obama and his party are just making it up as they go!

The radical left wants you to just trust them. They say it will all be OK. We all kinda know what happens to those who trust the Marxist-democrats, don't we! These are people who will lie to you when the truth would work better!

On a side note, one wonders where all of the GOP show ponies are. You know, those "profiles in courage" like Mitt Romney. They've all been quite conspicuous by their absence on this, and many other serious issues.

All I can tell you for sure is Victory in November is essential if our Republic is to survive. This is no time to sit around and fret. This is a time to stand up and be counted. Time to get off the couch and into the game!

Sarah Palin is the one who is standing up for us, so in turn, I am standing with Sarah Palin and asking Obama and his Congress: What's the plan, man?

Sarah Palin: Pants on Fire, Still

By Adrienne Ross - www.motivationtruth.com


Governor Palin issues another Facebook note calling out President Obama and his non-plan:

A $3.8 trillion tax increase is coming down the pike, folks. America’s tax cuts which can incentivize small businesses to expand and hire more people (thus fulfilling the mission to grow more private sector jobs), or even just to keep our doors open, will expire in four months. That expiration equates to an increase on your tax bill, starting at midnight, December 31.

I’ll keep calling out President Obama and the Democrats until they tell the American people what the plan is to save the incentives – to not allow the mom and pops’ tax cuts to expire. Granted, liberals (including stubborn “fact-checkers” who claim I’m lying about the soon-to-be tax cut expiration) are trying to clobber me for holding them accountable and prodding them toward revealing their intentions (because they’ve had 18 months to publicly propose a plan to stave off the $3.8 trillion tax increase that will soon slam us, but have revealed no plan). If they have a bill to extend the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, let’s see it. Time for them to put up or shut up.

But you don’t have to take my word for it. Take the word of the “fact-checkers” at PolitiFact, who, before moving the goal posts in their second dissembling “fact-check” on the Democrats’ tax hikes, wrote in their original “fact-check”:

There are no formal congressional proposals yet to keep the Bush tax cuts in place, so we don’t have precise estimates from official sources like the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. Still, there’s a good bit of consensus on what the tax increases would look like, both if lower rates expired only for high earners and also for all incomes.

As Ed Morrissey noted:

And there’s a big problem with this argument, which is that “consensus” means nothing without passing a bill, and especially not without proposing one first. Thanks to Democrats in 2001 and 2003, those bills cutting the tax rates have hard-and-fast sunset provisions that create an expiration date absent of any other action. We are now less than four months away from that expiration date after seven years of seeing it coming, after more than 3 years of Democratic control of Congress, and after eighteen months of the Obama administration. Democrats don’t even have a proposal on the table yet, and the legislative calendar is rapidly shrinking to take action before the expiration date hits. Without action, we will see a $3.8 trillion tax hike across the entire spectrum of earners.

So much for “consensus” without action. PolitiFact is curiously stating that in his 2011 budget, the President mentioned some “plan” to do something about not raising taxes on all Americans. Um, don’t know about you, but I don’t find this general, vague promise of some “plan” all that reassuring. The Left also “plans” to do something about our out of control deficits and high unemployment, and the President “planned” for his nearly trillion dollar stimulus to keep unemployment under 8%. We’ve seen how successful that “plan” worked out. The President’s budget “plan” hasn’t worked out so well either. As the economist Bruce Bartlett explained at the time, the President’s budget – including the tax promise – was never much more than a vague statement of intent. Practically speaking, it was dead on arrival. Even Bartlett couldn’t have known how dead, though, because in the end Congress didn’t even succeed in passing a budget, let alone in taking a decision on the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts.

Bottom line: until we see a formal proposal – an actual bill before Congress – then get ready for that $3.8 trillion hit.

(By the way, the Left sure gets wee-wee’d up when they’re called on something like this, eh? And here I am, thousands of miles away from DC out on a commercial fishing boat, working my butt off for my own business, merely asking the Democrat politicos and their liberal friends in the media: “What’s the plan, man?”, and they seem to feel threatened by my question. So, I’ll go back to setting my hooks and watching the halibut take the bait, and when I come back into the boat’s cabin in a few hours, I’ll log back on here to read their reply. I’ll have succeeded if they’re forced to finally reveal to Americans how they plan to increase taxes, and what they intend to do with our money. In the meantime, I’m catching fish.)

- Sarah Palin, in Homer, Alaska