Friday, March 05, 2010

Jon Stewart gives props to Sarah Palin on her appearance on The Tonight Show..

Just when I think I have Jon Stewart finally figured out, he manages to throw a change up and I'm right back to square one. When I saw the segment he did about Sarah Palin on the Tonight Show, I couldn't believe that Jon said some nice things about Sarah and then joked on of all people "Mitt Romney" when he appeared on Letterman. One would think that Sarah's comedy debut would have been red meat for the Palin hating left, but they couldn't find anything. She was so good that the kooks over at the Daily Kos are now trying to float a conspiracy that a "laugh track" was placed in the audience when she appeared. The thought that people in the audience actually liked Sarah is beyond belief to the tin foil hat brigade. In a funny way, Jon brought up something interesting. People in the political chattering class have been saying that if Sarah Palin runs, her toughest competition will be from Mitt Romney. They have been saying this, because Mitt is very charming and has a lot of charisma. Jon noted Romney was "boring" while Palin was energetic and more personable. In other words, she wasn't a dead fish like Romney was on Letterman. I can't say that this was Romney's fault. It is usually the responsibility of the host to bring out the best in their guests. So really I don't fault Romney, because I've seen Romney in charm mode before, and he can work a crowd and camera when he wants to. The blame for how Romney came off rests with David Letterman. This is a reason why Leno has been the king of late night comedy for 17 years and counting.

The Daily Show With Jon StewartMon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Leno-Palin vs. Letterman-Romney
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show
Full Episodes
Political HumorHealth Care Reform

12 Comments:

Blogger p. anthony allen said...

If this is true, Sarah Palin has to be the "dumbest" conservative ever to walk upright on two feet!

3:53 PM  
Blogger conservative brother said...

Sorry to burst your gleeful bubble there allen, but it's not true as with all Sarah Palin rumors to date.

http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/did_sarah_palin_partake_of_socialized_canadian_health_care_not_really/

http://hotair.com/archives/2010/03/08/new-palin-scandal-she-supports-canadian-socialized-medicine-or-something/

2:43 AM  
Blogger p. anthony allen said...

CB;"Sorry to burst your gleeful bubble there allen, but it's not true as with all Sarah Palin rumors to date".

How many times have I told you that I find no "glee" in citing Palin's ineptitude? Actually, it is her that I feel "sorry" for...

The question is; did Palin's family use a Canadian Hospital's health care services? As was noted in the "Hotair" article, she did in fact state her family obtained health care in Canada's Yukon province. Is she telling the truth? I don't know...

Sarah Palin's bio sates she was born in 1964. Which is four years after The Yukon Territory started a "HOSPITAL" insurance plan with federal cost sharing, this according to the Canadian Governments website.

Furthermore, the linked bio states that the Palin family moved to Skagway, Alaska when she [Sarah] was three months old. <a href="http://www.southernlakesyukon.com/maps.html>As this map shows</a>, Skagway (lower left corner) is just south of the Yukon and the town of Whitehorse. So, why did her family "hustle on over the border for health care?"

Thus, for Palin to say such a thing, particularly while the country is in the midst of a heated health care debate, is just PALIN (oooppss, I mean PLAIN) STUPID!!

I mean, what was she thinking? Was she attempting to appease the Canadians by implying that they have better health care services than in America? And, if so....WHY?? This woman is as dumb as a bag of rocks!!!

4:11 PM  
Blogger conservative brother said...

p allen "How many times have I told you that I find no "glee" in citing Palin's ineptitude? Actually, it is her that I feel "sorry" for..."

Why do you feel sorry for a person who is more successful and wealthy then you probably will ever be allen?

p allen "The question is; did Palin's family use a Canadian Hospital's health care services? As was noted in the "Hotair" article, she did in fact state her family obtained health care in Canada's Yukon province. Is she telling the truth? I don't know..."

Correction allen, it wasn't the "Palin family". It was the "Heath" family. This is what I am talking about allen, you Palin haters can't even get your facts straight on a story you hope will bring her down, geez!

1.Sarah Heath was only 6 years old and she wasn't the one who was treated.
Those are key facts you conveniently overlooked allen.

2.The Heath's weren't residents of Yukon,

3.The Yukon Health Insurance Service was created in July of 1961 to provide hospital insurance for all residents of the Yukon Territory. Once again, the Heath's WEREN'T RESIDENTS.

Regardless of what her parents or family did or didn't do. Once again, Sarah Heath was only 6 years old. So this wild eyed conspiracy has run into yet another dead end allen. :-(

4:48 PM  
Blogger conservative brother said...

It's amazing how this woman can live in the minds of people like you allen for free and drive you all nuts. It's a fascinating thing to watch actually and very amusing at that.

4:50 PM  
Blogger Frank A. Dupree said...

So Allen, are you implying that Sarah Palin is the "dumbest" conservative ever to walk upright on two feet because as a minor her parents decided to cross the nearby border into Canada to get health care for her brother?

7:48 PM  
Blogger p. anthony allen said...

Frank;"So Allen, are you implying that Sarah Palin is the "dumbest" conservative ever to walk upright on two feet because as a minor her parents decided to cross the nearby border into Canada to get health care for her brother?".

Allow me to repeat;

The question is; did Palin's (or "Sarah Heath's") family use a Canadian Hospital's health care services? As was noted in the "Hotair" article, she did in fact state her family obtained health care in Canada's Yukon province. Is she telling the truth? I don't know...

Thus, for Palin to say such a thing, particularly while the country is in the midst of a heated health care debate, is just PALIN (oooppss, I mean PLAIN) STUPID!!
.

The point is, there was no need for her to tell anyone that her family used Canadian health care. Why? What could she possibly gain from making such a statement?

This is the same woman that claimed "socialized health care" would breed death panels. This is the same woman (at a book signing) that told a Canadian reporter, Canada Should Reform Health System To Let The Private Sector Take Over.

CB;"1.Sarah Heath was only 6 years old and she wasn't the one who was treated.
Those are key facts you conveniently overlooked allen"
.

Palin said this; “We used to hustle over the border for health care we received in Canada”. She said "WE"! We, meaning "herself and her family." Something that you "conveniently overlooked"!!!!

CB;"2.The Heath's weren't residents of Yukon".

I never said they were! However, she did state that they used Canadian health care services. Is she telling the truth?? I don't know...

CB;"3.The Yukon Health Insurance Service was created in July of 1961 to provide hospital insurance for all residents of the Yukon Territory".

I showed you that...so what's your point?

CB;"Once again, Sarah Heath was only 6 years old. So this wild eyed conspiracy has run into yet another dead end allen".

What "wild eyed conspiracy?" Who conspired to cause Palin malice or harm? Who contrived a plot to berate Palin's seemingly admission that her family had used Canadian health care? Tyrone, Palin made the statement herself! It came out of her own stupid mouth! How in the hell is that a "conspiracy????"

If you get sick, good health care is a need, and a necessity. The same as if you get thirsty, good clean water is a necessity. The "Heath's" (Palins parents) needed medical attention (good health care service) for their kids. If the health care debate was about clean drinking water, Palin would have admitted that as a child, her, and her family drank clean Canadian water, for free! But, now she believes Canadians should pay for their clean drinking water...just like we do in the United States!

I guess it takes stupidity to defend stupidity!

12:35 AM  
Blogger Sojournerlove said...

The Whole Palin hatred is getting played out. I mean first it's the rabid foaming at the mouth hatred for Bush. I get the feeling you libtards are calling Sarah Palin dumb to deflect the fact that you guys elected an incompetent boob!

1:28 PM  
Blogger JMK said...

"If this is true, Sarah Palin has to be the "dumbest" conservative ever to walk upright on two feet!" (PAA)

WHY?

She didn't claim SHE used any Canadian medical services, only that her family once took a younger brother to get a burned foot looked at...AND there are at least two versions of this story; in one version she says her parents crossed the border for care in Whitehorse and another version, that Sarah Palin told to a 2007 audience, had her family traveling south by ferry to Juneau from Skagway for treatment of her brother’s burned foot.

It's really immaterial which version is true.

And DUMB? Quite the contrary, it would be extremely wise of people to "sneak across a border to get something another country is giving away free," so long as it's not one of the many things rationed in such "free systems."

What's far more telling is Danny Williams (the Premier of Newfoundland and Labrador) apparently needing surgery on a leaky heart valve, chose to have the surgery done in Florida.

Mr. Williams is said to have explained his decision simply: "This was my heart, my choice and my health."

"I did not sign away my right to get the best possible health care for myself when I entered politics," Williams said.

That's not much of an endorsement for Canada's vaunted public health system, is it?

And for the record, I SUPPORT a public option that would deliver a very basic and highly rationed and restricted healthcare program to all, with a strict limit of no more than 3 or 4 visits per year per patient and no more than $10,000 or so in care to any patient in any given calendar year...so as to; (1) remove the burden of providing employee healthcare from businesses and Municipalities (that would make American businesses even more competitive in the global marketplace and it would save many Municipalities tens of MILLIONS and some BILLIONS of dollars), (2) create a huge demand for the much needed "gap insurance" that would have to be purchased by the individual from the private health insurers, free to compete across state lines, (3) it would make the American worker far more productive and cost-effective in the global market, drawing more foreign businesses and job opportunities here, (4) it would incentivize every American to be on the lookout for the fraud, waste and abuse that is rife in both Medicare and Medicaid today and (5) it would shift the burden of providing all but the most basic healthcare (those 3 or 4 yearly visits and that preset amount of care) to the individual.

Such a strictly rationed and restricted program would be cost-effective from the start and it would indeed cut healthcare costs and ultimately bring down the Deficit.

THIS is very much what most American businesses really want and it's almost certainly what the initial Pelosi-care plan (the one WITH the "public option") would've quickly morphed into.

Any government-managed system MUST be run as cost-effectively as possible and must unfortunately be subject to extremely invasive government oversight to protect that system from "the tragedy of the commons."

9:10 PM  
Blogger JMK said...

"...there was no need for her to tell anyone that her family used Canadian health care. Why? What could she possibly gain from making such a statement?" (PAA)


Saying something that doesn't help you, nor deliver you any personal "gain" isn't at all STUPID!

In fact, YOUR statement exudes a cynicism and a hypocrisy (long suggesting politicians should "do the right thing regardless of ideology," and now espousing that ALL political actions should be designed explicitly for personal gain) that is at the least "interesting," coming from you.

9:16 PM  
Blogger p. anthony allen said...

JMK;It's really immaterial which version is true".

Perhaps so, because many politicians "make up" stories for the sake of conversation.

JMK;"Saying something that doesn't help you, nor deliver you any personal "gain" isn't at all STUPID!".

Yeah...right.. One way to for a politician "not" to get elected, is to say as many stupid things as possible! Believe me, with the press hanging on every word a politician says, I assure that saying stupid things won't "deliver" too many gains!!!

Why would she even "make up" a story about recieving free health care, when the country is smack dab in the middle of a "free health care debate?" And, a debate over free health care, of which, she herself is against!

4:32 PM  
Blogger JMK said...

"Yeah...right.. One way to for a politician "not" to get elected, is to say as many stupid things as possible!" (PAA)


I believe you're defining "stupid" in the wrong way.

In reality, stupid is promising things that can't be delivered.

Stupid is telling people what they want to hear.

Fact is, I'm certain that telling people about the stark realities we currently face and explaining that things will only get more difficult as we dig out of the current economic morass would be a winning strategy, so long as all solutions were "incentive driven."

That means those driven and as Naomi Klein (what a whack-job) might call "sociopathically ambitious," or I would term "the high-achievers" would be incentivized (by a HUGE personal financial gains) to solve the most problems we face.

I'm positive that this "reality-based" campaigning would work, because our current "fantasy-campaigning" has failed so miserably.

Of course, it's linked to the fact that market models WORK and government-driven ones DON't.

One of the reasons that the market-model works is the same reason that the government-model or "Command economy model) doesn't and that reason can be put into a single word - INCENTIVES.

Incentives not only spur innovation and move society forward, but they motivate those who less innovative, less ambitious, etc., to become more so.

An incetivizer might ask, "Why transfer wealth to the reckless and irresponsible (the chronically poor) when they aren't going to solve any of our problems? Isn't it better that the wealth be used as the incentive that it is to spur advancement?

In fact, BOTH Sarah Palin's "memory" of her family sneaking across the border to get free care for her brother and Danny Williams sneaking across the border to pay out of pocket (which ANYONE in America is and always HAS BEEN free to do) for specialized heart surgery are examples of "wise personal decisions."

If my neighbor is giving away food for free, it would be foolish, yes, even stupid not to take advantage of it. But it would be, in my estimation, just as stupid for me to try and convince Americans that our government giving away free food to all would be a good idea.

In my estimation, and I'm virtually certain of this, less than 10% of the voting public (perhaps even less than 3%!) here would support government controlling the food supply and its distribution.

2:31 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home