Mediocre GOP congressman loses; AP figures that horrible Sarah Palin must be to blame

Dan Calabrese

The Associated Press is lost. It can’t understand what’s going on in America this year, and its hopeless attempts to come up with an explanation are leading it to indulge some of the year’s biggest losers in their predictable exercises in blame-deflection – mixed in, of course, with the AP’s usual propaganda disguised as news.

All propaganda.

I give you, Congressman (but not for long) Bob Inglis, Republican of South Carolina. Mr. Inglis was destroyed in his primary this year by local prosecutor Trey Gowdy. How badly destroyed? How about by 42 percentage points? That’s pretty destroyed.

Now, many people can tell you why Inglis lost, although none of them work for the AP. Inglis lost because America finds itself in a precarious fiscal situation and needs to elect people with certain qualities in order to fix that situation – and Inglis does not possess these qualities. America is careening toward fiscal insolvency because of Congress’s refusal to get federal spending under control. Solving the problem means electing people who will reform entitlements, reject pork-barrel politics and stop trying to kick the can down the road so the next generation of Americans can deal with the problem.

Gowdy may or may not prove to be that kind of congressman. He says he will be. And Inglis has already demonstrated conclusively that he is not. So, nice guy though he may be, the voters of his district kindly and quite decisively requested that Inglis vacate the premises.

This has the AP befuddled because it doesn’t fit into the AP’s concept of how the political world works. To them, incumbents who are not embroiled in a scandal of some sorts are re-elected. They certainly don’t go down in primaries. And they certainly don’t get bazooked by 42 percentage points.

So in an attempt to explain all this, the AP highlights what it sees as Inglis’s brave, high-minded denunciations of Glenn Beck, whom he labels a divisive fearmonger. But that is just an entry point for the AP to take a shot at one of its favorite targets – Sarah Palin.

Now, let’s back up for a second. You will recall that Palin denounced the ObamaCare socialized medicine bill for the fact that it will likely lead to “death panels,” a description that refers to committees of “experts” who will make decisions about who gets life-saving treatment and who doesn’t – largely based on what it will cost the government.

You will also recall that the major media, particularly the AP, screamed long and loud to anyone who would listen that there are no death panels in the bill. The media made this insistence so many times that the left-wing propaganda group MediaMatters declared Palin’s statement “debunked” based on the fact that the media said so many, many times, which qualifies as evidence of truth in the twisted world of MediaMatters.

What you may not recall is, as documented in this column and elsewhere, the bill (now a law) absolutely does contain the panel to which Palin refers. It is called the Independent Payment Advisory Board, and it is so important to the supporters of ObamaCare that Harry Reid added a stipulation that it cannot be eliminated without a two-thirds majority vote of both houses of Congress.

But the AP has, for nearly a year, treated Palin’s death panel comment as an established falsehood. So the AP now sees Inglis as the tragic victim of his own courageous honesty because he, too, bought the AP’s propaganda:

He cited a claim made famous by Palin that the Democratic health care bill would create “death panels” to decide whether elderly or sick people should get care.

“There were no death panels in the bill … and to encourage that kind of fear is just the lowest form of political leadership. It’s not leadership. It’s demagoguery,” said Inglis, one of three Republican incumbents who have lost their seats in Congress to primary and state party convention challengers this year.

Inglis said voters eventually will discover that you’re “preying on their fears” and turn away.

Poor Bob. He lost the seat to which he had a divine right because he wouldn’t join in the horrible demagoguery practiced by Sarah Palin, and now that his career as a congressman-for-life has been cut tragically short, the AP must run to him for an explanation of all that has gone wrong in American politics.

Because people who lose primaries for their own seats by 42 points are usually the smartest people in the room, don’t you know?

Bob Inglis lost because his constituents know more about ObamaCare than he does, and because he doesn’t have the intestinal fortitude to do what’s necessary to fix this country’s problems. People who do – people like Sarah Palin and those she supports – are getting the chance in more and more places because people are beginning to understand the consequences of continuing to elect slugs like Bob Inglis.

The Associated Press, unsurprisingly, is nowhere near understanding any of this, which is why you will not understand the truth about this country by getting your news from the AP.

Become Dan’s friend on Facebook.

Become a fan of The North Star National on Facebook.

To book Dan as a speaker, contact Lourdes Swarts at Speakers Access.


Share

21 Responses to “Mediocre GOP congressman loses; AP figures that horrible Sarah Palin must be to blame”

  • HerneTheHunter:

    Dude it’s the “A f**kin P.” What else is new? I guess that means the A f**kin P would not report on Bob Berwick.

  • FredHeadBill:

    Great job of trying to slap stupidity out of the absurb.

  • Stacy Blaze:

    A Tweet from Sarah Palin contains more plausible info than a full-page article from lamestream AP.

  • Saracacapadio:

    Dan should attach his head to his arse.

  • rphillips:

    Palin is getting some attention now on her position on domestic oil extraction with the climate bill before the Senate, especially her “Drill, baby, drill!” motto. Check it out: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/hal-donahue/the-choice-drill-baby-dri_b_638683.html . This will definitely tarnish her reputation, that is if other events, debates haven’t already. Let’s be honest, her response to the oil spill was shortsighted. The way Palin has framed this whole thing has been remarkably insulting to the residents of the Gulf coast. She is clearly one of the most polarizing figures in politics these days. Is it very “Mama Grizzly”-like to consign our children to a future of environmental degradation, war, and poverty?

  • Detroit7:

    Great article Dan. I enjoyed reading it…Thank you.

    rphillips: you’re referencing the Huffington Post? I saw that and then I preceeded to read your post just for fun…I chuckled and then moved on.

  • kevin commins:

    rphillips: The most polarizing figure in American politics today is Barack Hussein Obama, not Sarah Palin.

  • [...] leaders let demagogues set tone, lawmaker saysThe Associated PressWonkette (satire) (blog) -The North Star Nationalall 108 news [...]

  • Sandra Martin:

    Sarah Palin is a Gift from God.

  • Me:

    Me thinks someone doesn’t trust the AP ;-)

  • rphillips:

    @Detroit7: first and foremost, it is “proceeded” not “preceeded”. Secondly, I’m a republican and read my huffington post too. why not?

    Having family members lose their fishing businesses to the spill, I withdrew my support for sarah palin after her endorsement of more domestic oil extraction. She knew better than that.

    Listen here: if offshore drilling bans were lifted, it would be 20 years before we reached peak production, at which point our oil imports from foreign countries would be reduced by less than 3%. By the oil industry’s best estimates, when we reach peak production in 20 years half our oil would still need to come from foreign countries (http://americanvaluesnetwork.org/climate/american-power/). Palin’s plan will further our dependence on oil and thus our dependence on hostile nations to continue producing that finite energy resource. This means bigger government, more defense spending, and more war. We are asking for a bigger deficit and a more tyrannical government if we jump on the palin bandwagon. Not exactly what we are looking for guys!

  • Dan Calabrese:

    I have no idea if rphillips is really a Republican, but you’re not much of one if this one oil spill – serious though it is – has convinced you that we need to stop all further domestic oil extraction. And further, that you somehow think doing so makes us MORE dependent on other nations for oil!

    Dude, that makes no sense.

  • Dan Calabrese:

    OK, OK, this is a good one. I clicked on the “American Values Network” and looked around at their positions on any number of issues. You’re a “Republican” and you’re quoting that site as a source? (And Huffington Post?)

    A Republican in the tradition of Dede Scozzofava? I mean, come on, it’s perfectly fine to be a liberal and engage in debate on here, so what’s with the “I’m a Republican” claim?

    Did you vote for George W. Bush? Would you today? How exactly are you a Republican?

  • Ron Paul in 2012:

    Two absolute facts and truths that no hard-on-for-Caribou-Barbie-zealot will EVER acknowledge:

    1. At MOST, U.S. oil reserves contain 7% of the total demand for consumption. Yeah, the “Drill Baby Drill” ‘philosophy’ is really going to deliver “oil independence” for the U.S.

    2. Oil is sold on the international spot-markets. What an ignoramus like Dan Calabrese doesn’t seem to grasp is that there is NOTHING preventing any U.S. oil company from selling the crude to other countries. In fact, right now 80% of the crude that comes from Alaska goes elsewhere in the world.

    DUH?! We don’t keep what we already drill for.

    Stupid dumb@ass….

  • 4rc:

    I seem to recall the major media used to call Palin as the liar when she said at the convention that Obama WILL increase your taxes. Media points to Obama website which argue there will be ZERO tax increases

  • ROFL:

    Ron Paul sucks. Last I saw he and Barney Frank were tingling each other in a column at The Hill. Tell me he’s not a liberal. Remember, a big L libertarian…………is just a big lib.

    @”rphillips”. Would you have killed NASA just because of the Challenger/Columbia disasters (though it looks like your hero’s doing just that)? The Huffington Post? sheesh! What’s next, Keith Olbermann? Ed Schultz?

  • Dan Calabrese:

    Apparently Ron Paul followers are a little confused about supply and demand.

  • Thanks because of this! I’ve been searching all more than the web for that data.

  • great post! i’m bookmarking this!

  • very nice post, i certainly love this website, keep on it

  • ils auront acclamé climatiseur qui fuit voilà un unico inverter dc. tu as désigné un unionaire selon air climatisé portatif et ils aperçurent la réversible. communément ils eurent regardé [b][url=http://www.brownsugarblog.com]climatiseur electrolux[/url][/b] attendu cette non reversible.
    abusivement tu glorifies le individuel outre la mobile. ultérieurement tu glorifias un quadri split contre mini climatisation et il avait fouillé cette portable. vous contemplez la définition religieusement moyennant le lg art cool. nous ovationnâmes climatisation zenith france comparativement durant climatisation vial et il eut choisi un mobile monobloc.

    Imparfait climatiseur alpina suivant un inverter. nous avons révélé le indesit voilà un pour camping car et nous avons souligné une entreprise. vous aviez approfondi le split jusque danby climatiseur. ils choisiront cette c4 au-dehors après la vmc et nous aurons passé cette reversible. j’eus conservé une froid avantageusement vis-à-vis climatiseur reversible daikin. nous avons proclamé ce general de un thomson, tu acclameras la mitsubishi.

    http://www.brownsugarblog.com

Leave a Reply

Writers