Fox News Opinion Piece by Dr. Gina and Dr. Paterno

September 22nd, 2011 | By admin

Media Prattling About Political Candidates’ IQs Is Utter Nonesense  
By Dr. Dathan Paterno and Dr. Gina Loudon

Published September 23, 2011 :: FoxNews.com

A raging debate in recent years about the intelligence—or lack thereof—of politicians makes one think that IQ scores are doled out like Social Security numbers and with greater transparency.Historian Michael Beschloss claimed about Obama: “This is a guy whose IQ is off the charts. … He’s probably the smartest guy ever to become president.” Our nation’s foremost authority on intelligence, George Clooney, recently stated, “Look, there’s a guy in office right now who is smarter than almost anyone you know.”

One online blogger reasoned, “Since MENSA accepts various IQ tests as well as other cognitive tests to qualify for MENSA membership … Obama’s IQ Score could range anywhere from a low IQ score of 130…to a high IQ score of 148.”

Another, less-fawning author correlated SAT scores and the supposed IQ scores of several public figures: “Thus, giving Obama the benefit of the doubt drops his score to 1104, which is equivalent to an IQ of 116. That’s not bad, but it is significantly less intelligent than Hillary’s 140 IQ, as well as being lower than George W. Bush’s 125 IQ (1206 SAT).”
Rick Perry has been the latest recipient of amateur cognitive assessment. Liberal gadfly Paul Begala opined: “Even among state representatives, even among Texas Aggies (graduates of this cute remedial school we have in Texas), Perry stood out for his modest intellectual gifts…but lack of brains has never been a hindrance in politics.”

Of course, Sarah Palin has been the whipping girl of elites since September 2008. From Tina Fey’s portrayal of her as a bumbling fool who can’t find Russia on a map to U.S. News and World Report contributing editor Bonnie Erbe quoting a woman who had been an acquaintance of Palin (she was two years Palin’s junior at the same high school): “She doesn’t know a lot about politics, it’s more important to the American public that she looks like she does than what she has to say. We’re not holding her accountable the way we hold male politicians accountable. She’s unable to articulate much about her policy on oil or name a Supreme Court decision she disagrees with besides Roe. vs. Wade.”

Blogs are full of amateur psychologists, estimating the IQ of every candidate. All of them sound foolish.
Administering, scoring, and interpreting IQ tests makes up a healthy portion of a psychologist’s practice. Having given hundreds of these tests every year, we can say with authority that most of the media’s prattling about IQ scores of political candidates is unadulterated nonsense.

Very few people take reliable, valid, intelligence tests. It is doubtful that Palin, Obama, Romney, or Perry have taken a standardized IQ test in the past 20 years. Common reasons for taking IQ tests are entrance into a gifted academic program, evaluating for learning disabilities, and admission to Mensa. Even if these scores existed, it would be illegal for the psychologist to publish them. I certainly would get sued if I published confidential patient information. If someone wants to claim they know Rick Perry’s IQ score, that person had better have a good defense attorney. The only people who would likely make their own scores public are Mensa members, and these could easily be conflated (the ego seems to do powerful things to IQ scores).

Ultimately, intelligence is a construct, heavily debated over the decades since formalized intelligence testing began. Popular intelligence measures readily admit that the tests do not evaluate a person’s broader, overall intelligence. Rather, the tests are designed primarily to predict academic achievement. Wechsler chose the four most critical cognitive skills that he believed lead to academic success: verbal comprehension, visual-spatial processing, working memory and overall processing speed. While these certainly comprise the foundation for academic success, a single IQ score cannot do justice to the multidimensional nature of overall or practical intelligence, especially those skills that are required in politics.

Social skills, synthesizing concrete and abstract realities, deductive reasoning, emotional intelligence, flexibility of thought and creativity are just a few examples of cognitive abilities that are surely part of practical intelligence not evaluated on most intelligence tests.Is it altogether meaningless to suggest that a particular person is brilliant, dim-witted or moronic? Notwithstanding the ethical risks inherent in assessing another person’s intelligence—which inevitably speaks volumes about that person’s overall value as a human being—we think that formal, standardized tests cannot possibly assess a public figure’s practical intelligence.

We have developed a list of real world traits by which politicians can and should be judged regarding their intelligence. We call it Practical/Political Intelligence, or PPI for short. In Part II, which will run next week in Fox News Opinion, we will describe the traits of Practical/Political Intelligence, giving examples of public figures who exhibit these traits, some to a greater degree than others.

Dathan A. Paterno, Psy.D., is a Licensed Clinical Psychologist and Clinical Director of Park Ridge Psychological Services, outside of Chicago. Working with children and families for twenty years, his expertise is equipping parents to reclaim their families using scientifically sound and proven methods. His parenting book, Desperately Seeking Parents, includes his parenting philosophy and a wealth of practical advice for modern parents. He also maintains the parenting blog found at www.desperatelyseekingparents.com.

Dr. Gina Loudon is the host of the “Dr. Gina Show” which airs in the Midwest and the South daily from 4 to 7 p.m CT. She is a national speaker analyst and writer on topics ranging from adoption to immigration and is credited as one of the “100 Founding Members” of the Tea Party movement.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/09/23/new-study-political-pundits-iq-lower-than-chop-suey/#ixzz1Ytf11RtI

REAGAN/PALIN APPRECIATION MONTH

January 24th, 2011 | By admin

REAGAN/PALIN APPRECIATION MONTH

WHEREAS, February is the birth month of four past and one future Presidents (Washington, Harrison, Lincoln, Reagan, and Palin), and

WHEREAS, February 6 this year is the 100th anniversary of President Ronald Reagan’s birth, and

WHEREAS, February 11 this year is the 47th anniversary of future President Sarah Heath Palin’s birth, and

WHEREAS, February is a very good month for the announcement of a candidacy for a Presidential run,

We ask our readers to join us in celebrating by signing this Proclamation of February 2011 as Reagan/Palin Appreciation Month.

This proclamation is partly in response to the liberal media’s proposing to make February a Palin-free month. That is fine with us, because that means our voices will be more clearly heard. So during the month of February, all of our sponsor blogs will be posting articles about Governor Sarah Palin on a daily basis. We will also be celebrating Ronald Reagan’s legacy during this month.

Governor Palin is a runner, and we see her as a torch-bearer for Reagan conservatism. As a “runner,” Sarah Palin is doing what most runners do before a race. She is stretching and warming up. She’s getting her organization together. She’s checking out the important primary states to see where she will need to spend most of her energy. And she’s fine tuning her message in preparation for hitting the campaign trail.

While we don’t necessarily expect an announcement on her intentions to run in February, we recognize February as a month when Governor Palin prepares herself to make that decision.

While the liberal media chooses to remain silent, we choose to get louder. We all recognize this as “Stretch and Warm Up” time for Sarah Palin. But while she stretches and warms up, the voices from the stands grow louder and louder. Run, Sarah, run! Run, Sarah, run!! Run, Sarah, run!!!

CLICK HERE TO SIGN THE PROCLAMATION

Dr. Gina on the BBC about Sarah Palin

January 15th, 2011 | By admin

Listen to the audio here

The Wilding of Sarah Palin

January 15th, 2011 | By admin

By Robin of Berkeley
see the original article here

When I was in college, I read a book that changed my life. It was Susan Brownmiller’s tome, Against Our Will: Men, Women, and Rape, which explained rape as an act of power instead of just lust. What I found particularly chilling was the chapter on war — how rape is used to terrorize a population and destroy the enemy’s spirit.

While edifying, the book magnified the vulnerability I already felt as a female. Fear of rape became a constant dread, and I sought a solution that would help shield me from danger.

The answer: seek safe harbor within the Democratic Party. I even became an activist for feminist causes, including violence against women. Liberalism would protect me from the big, bad conservatives who wished me harm.

Like for most feminists, it was a no-brainer for me to become a Democrat. Liberal men, not conservatives, were the ones devoted to women’s issues. They marched at my side in support of abortion rights. They were enthusiastic about women succeeding in the workplace.

As time went on, I had many experiences that should have made me rethink my certainty. But I remained nestled in cognitive dissonance — therapy jargon for not wanting to see what I didn’t want to see.

One clue: the miscreants who were brutalizing me didn’t exactly look Reagan-esque. In middle and high schools, they were minority kids enraged about forced busing. On the streets of New York City and Berkeley, they were derelicts and hoodlums.

Another red flag: while liberal men did indeed hold up those picket signs, they didn’t do anything else to protect me. In fact, their social programs enabled bad behavior and bred chaos in urban America. And when I was accosted by thugs, those leftist men were missing in action.

What else should have tipped me off? Perhaps the fact that so many men in ultra-left Berkeley are sleazebags. Rarely a week goes by that I don’t hear stories from my young female clients about middle-aged men preying on them. With the rationale of moral relativism, these creeps feel they can do anything they please.

What finally woke me up were the utterances of “bitch,” “witch,” and “monster” toward Hillary Clinton and her supporters early last year. I was shocked into reality: the trash-talk wasn’t coming from conservatives, but from male and female liberals.

I finally beheld what my eyes had refused to see: that leftists are Mr. and Ms. Misogyny. Neither the males nor the females care a whit about women.

Women are continually sacrificed on the altar of political correctness. If under radical Islam women are enshrouded and stoned and beheaded, so be it.

My other epiphanies: those ponytailed guys were marching for abortion rights not because they cherished women’s reproductive freedom, but to keep women available for free and easy sex.

And the eagerness for women to make good money? If women work hard, leftist men don’t have to.

Then along came Sarah, and the attacks became particularly heinous. And I realized something even more chilling about the Left. Leftists not only sacrifice and disrespect women, but it’s far worse: many are perpetuators.

The Left’s behavior towards Palin is not politics as usual. By their laser-focus on her body and her sexuality, leftists are defiling her.

They are wilding her. And they do this with the full knowledge and complicity of the White House.

The Left has declared war on Palin because she threatens their existence. Liberals need women dependent and scared so that women, like blacks, will vote Democrat.

A strong, self-sufficient woman, Palin eschews liberal protection. Drop her off in the Alaskan bush and she’ll survive just fine, thank you very much. Palin doesn’t need or want anything from liberals — not hate crimes legislation that coddles her, and not abortion, which she abhors.

Palin is a woman of deep and abiding faith. She takes no marching orders from messiah-like wannabes like Obama.

And so the Left must try to destroy her. And they are doing this in the most malicious of ways: by symbolically raping her.

Just like a perpetuator, they dehumanize her by objectifying her body. They undress her with their eyes.

They turn her into a piece of ass.

Liberals do this by calling her a c__t, ogling her legs, demeaning her with names like “slutty flight attendant” and “Trailer Park Barbie,” and exposing her flesh on the cover of Newsweek.

Nothing is off-limits, not actress Sandra Bernhard’s wish that Palin be gang-raped or the sexualization of Palin’s daughters.

As every woman knows, leering looks, lurid words, and veiled threats are intended to evoke terror. Sexual violence is a form of terrorism.

The American Left has a long history of defiling people to control and break them. The hard core ’60s leftists were masters of guerrilla warfare, like the Symbionese Liberation Army repeatedly raping Patty Hearst. Huey P. Newton sent a male Black Panther to the hospital, bloodied and damaged from a punishment of sodomy.

The extreme Left still consider themselves warriors, righteous soldiers for their Marxist cause. With Palin, they use sexual violence as part of their military arsenal.

Palin is not the only intended victim. As Against Our Will described, the brutality is also aimed at men. By forcing men to witness Palin’s violation, the Left tries to emasculate conservative men and render them powerless.

The wilding of any woman is reprehensible. But defiling a mother of five with a babe in her arms, and a grandmother to boot, is particularly obscene. It is, of course, Palin’s unapologetic motherhood that fuels the leftist fire.

Because as a mother and a fertile woman, Palin is as close to the sacred as a person gets. She is not just politically pro-life. Her whole being emanates life, which is a stark contrast to the darkness of the Left, the life-despoilers.

These “progressives” are so alienated from the sacred that they perceive nothing as sacred. And they will destroy anyone whose goodness shines a mirror on their pathology. The spiritually barren must annihilate the vital and the fertile.

It has been almost two years since I woke up and broke up with liberalism. During these many months, I’ve discovered that everything I believed was wrong.

But the biggest shock of all has been realizing that the Democratic Party is hardly an oasis for women. Now that it has been infiltrated by the hard Left, it’s a dangerous place for women, children, and other living things.

In the wilding of Sarah Palin, the Left shows its true colors. Rather than sheild the vulnerable, leftists will mow down any man, woman, or child who gets in their way. Instead of a movement of hope and change, it is a cauldron of hate.

From Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

Hatred paralyzes life; love releases it. Hatred confuses life; love harmonizes it. Hatred darkens life; love illuminates it.

In these dark times, with spiritually bankrupt people at the helm, thank God we have bright lights like Sarah Palin to illuminate the darkness.

A frequent AT contributor, Robin is a psychotherapist and a recovering liberal in Berkeley.

Star Power: Palin Takes Hollywood … And the Culture

December 27th, 2010 | By Gina Loudon

The article is featured here at Big Hollywood

The liberal media relentlessly criticizes Sarah Palin for her ubiquitous media appearances from hard news punditry to pop culture appearances. The Fox News analyst is “going Hollywood” with her latest stint in reality TV, attendance at Bristol’s Dancing with the Stars events. Palin is everywhere. More than any other political figure in modern history, the ever-present Palin has shown a phenomenal ability to remain relevant. Her savvy has left her progressives hand-wringing, potential presidential opponents sniping, and everyone else in America abuzz over what she will and should do next.

Depending on your point of view, she is either a genius or opportunist. Should a politician go anywhere near reality TV? If you are a crusty, wing tip wearing beltway boy, the answer is obvious. If you are in Hollywood, you are jealously wondering which agent she engaged. If you are in flyover land, you are withholding judgment.

What is clear is that Palin has tapped a connection with “real America” in a Reaganesque manner that makes any politician jealous. She understands the culture, and she knows what it takes to keep ones name at the center of conversations. She engenders just the right amount of criticism to keep her fans rabidly defensive. Her detractors wind up looking like yipping, hysterical Chihuahuas with pink, spiky collars in pathetic attempts to appear menacing. Meanwhile, poli-star wannabe’s from Michael Moore to Meghan McCain are salivating as their pathetic attempts to pedal their way to relevance falls far short of what only comes naturally to Sarah Palin—Poli Super Stardom.

She has it. They want it. They can’t get it. It is that simple.

The “It” is the Hollywood and new media age super stardom that tees up political success. Reagan started the tactic. Schwarzenegger leveraged it before he dropped the baby (California) on its head. But only Sarah Palin has perfected it.

When liberals hate her, conservatives become more intrigued. When they call her names, conservatives jump in the ring to defend her. When they call for her murder, conservatives turn all guns on her protection, her promotion, and yes, her presidency.

This has Hollywood scratching their heads. Who is her agent? How could she do all of this without proper media training? Why no voice coach, they wonder. Surely she needs some polishing that only folks in the business can provide if ever she is to make something of herself.

Politicians are watching too, wondering as they comb their hair in the rear view mirror why they aren’t the fairest of them all. The reason? They might be dynamic, good looking, smart, savvy, but they represent none of the cultural change that Sarah Palin embodies for conservatives. They think that their smart wonkishness, or their strong soundbites will win the hearts of conservatives, but it won’t. Conservatives intuitively know that politics is merely one front in the war on our culture. Hollywood is another. Palin has shrewdly tapped both and in so doing has unprecedented ability to leverage the media to move the culture, or vice versa. Politicians might not like the fact that Sarah Palin is the only one who gets it, but it is an undeniable truth they cannot overcome.

Those who would oppose her should be very afraid.

Palin knows that culture is predictive of politics and Hollywood moves culture. Therefore, as the country revolted against Obama Progressives and shifted dramatically rightward, the one remaining liberal stronghold standing in the way of a pure conservative revolution is the puppet master of culture — Hollywood. Sarah brought scissors to the theatre and she is challenging the master. Snip, snip, snip and it is done. Palin just took a leading place on the stage, reaching both red and blue state America with her unpretentious authenticity on her way to reclaiming our culture. The culture will be restored and the socialist folly will be buried in the tombs of bad scripts where it belongs. John Wayne style Hollywood is resurging, and America is poised to once again be Reagan’s “Shining City on the Hill”—a beacon for the rest of the world.

So that is why the liberals are so concerned that Sarah is taking Hollywood. It is not President Palin they fear, but a God-fearing, family oriented, crackerjack smart, female “Puppet Master Palin” that has them trembling. If she and her conservative, apple pie eating, patriotic cohorts held the strings, libs could no longer rule the world stage from the rafters.

Somebody get Sarah some sunglasses!

Breaking News Please CALL!

December 17th, 2010 | By Gina Loudon

Dr. Gina Listeners: Please encourage your Senators to vote NOT to repeal “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” that protects our Military from discrimination, bullying, and other forms of harassment and distraction. *See article above this for more information, but use #’s below for your calls.

From Illinois Tea Party:

FYI – To give you timeframe for most of the votes that will happen in the next 48 hours. Please distribute! We stopped the Omnibus due to nonstop phone calls. If you can’t through to DC, absolutely call Congressional offices! PHONE NUMBERS & FAX LISTED BELOW

Today In Washington – It’s Laundry List Time

THE HOUSE: Convened at 9. Action is almost certain on a defense policy bill stripped of many controversial provisions, such as a repeal of “don’t ask, don’t tell.” And with the Senate having given up on its omnibus spending bill, the House could vote on a short-term measure to keep the government running until February. The timing is up in the air, but it’s expected that the Senate would vote first on such a bill.

THE SENATE: Convened at 9:30 to continue debate on the New Start arms agreement with Russia. Democratic leaders are waiting for Republicans to offer amendments. The GOP says it merely wants a full debate on the accord; Democrats say Republicans are trying to sink it by running out the clock.
Reid has the power to switch from the treaty to regular legislation, and he might do that to take up a stopgap spending bill. The Senate could also work on the defense bill today if the House finishes with it.

THE WHITE HOUSE: The president will sign the tax cut bill shortly before 4. Prior to that, he’ll spend the afternoon talking to labor leaders including the AFL-CIO’s Richard Trumka, the American Federation of Teachers’ Randi Weingarten, AFSCME’s Gerald McEntee, SEIU’s Mary Kay Henry and the United Auto Workers’ Bob King.

MOVING ALONG: Senate Democrats can still push some legislative buttons while Republicans essentially slow-walk the New Start treaty. Reid filed for cloture yesterday on a stand-alone repeal of “don’t ask, don’t tell” as well as the so-called Dream Act, which would provide a path to citizenship for hundreds of thousands of adult children of illegal immigrants.

Votes on those two motions are set for Saturday. “The path is clear to finishing our work relatively soon,” Reid said this morning. But he offered a caveat: “We will work every day until our work is done.”

A repeal of “don’t ask, don’t tell” was hitched to the annual defense policy bill, but that measure was pared this week to its core. It would authorize $725 billion in Pentagon spending for the coming year. One controversial item did stick around: a provision that would allow the U.S. government to pay reparations to the families of Guam residents subjected to atrocities during the Japanese occupation in World War II.

Also in the Senate mix is a bill to boost health services for Sept. 11 first-responders. A few Republicans have hinted that they might support the measure once the tax and spending bills are wrapped up — and a few would be enough for passage.

OMNIBUS DOWN: Beyond all the noise about Republicans rebuffing the $1.1 trillion omnibus spending bill, Congress still has to think about funding the government in the short term. The money runs out by Monday, and the Democratic leadership is scrambling to put a stopgap funding measure in place. It’ll probably be something that runs into early next year — when the GOP will have more power to tinker with fiscal decisions.

Potential speed bumps for a short-term spending bill, or CR, include the pressure to adorn it with non-appropriations legislation, such as a food safety bill that is a priority of many Democrats. Most CRs continue to fund programs at current levels, but Congress will write in exceptions, including some pitched by the White House. Obama could ask, for example, for more money for Defense Department programs. And if any of those exceptions include Democratic spending priorities, Republicans could balk.

CALL LIST:
Name
Telephone
Fax
Baucus, Max
202-224-2651
202-224-9412
Bingaman, Jeff
202-224-5521
202-224-2852
Brown, Sherrod
202-224-2315
202-228-6321
Brownback, Sam
202-224-6521
202-228-1265
Cantwell, Maria
202-224-3441
202-228-0514
Collins, Susan
202-224-2523
202-224-2693
Conrad, Kent
202-224-2043
202-224-7776
Dorgan, Byron
202-224-2551
202-224-1193
Durbin, Dick
202-224-2152
202-228-0400
Gregg, Judd
202-224-3324
202-224-4952
Hagan, Kay
202-224-6342
202-224-1100
Hutchison, Kay Baily
202-224-5922
202-224-0776
Kirk, Mark
202-224-2854
202-228-4611
Klobuchar, Amy
202-224-3244
202-228-2186
Kohl, Herb
202-224-5653
202-224-9787
Landrieu, Mary
202-224-5824
202-224-9735
LeMieux, George
202-224-3041
202-228-5171
Lieberman, Joe
202-224-4041
202-224-9750
Manchin, Joe
202-224-3954

McCaskill, Claire
202-24-6154
202-228-6326
Murkowski, Lisa
202-224-6665
202-224-5301
Nelson, Bill
202-224-5274
202-228-2183
Reid, Harry
202-224-3542
202-224-7327
Snowe, Olympia
202-224-5344
202-224-1946
Stabenow, Debbie
202-224-4822
202-228-0325
Tester, Jon
202-224-2644
202-224-8594
Voinovich, George
202-224-3353
202-224-6008
Webb, Jim
202-224-5653
202-228-6363

Vote is expected Saturday morning

Make or Break DREAM Act

http://immigrationactionreport.blogspot.com/2010/12/make-or-break-dream-act.html

MAKE OR BREAK
The next 24 hours will be the most important opportunity for grassroots activists to STOP the DREAM Act amnesty from passing in Congress. The DREAM Act is an amnesty for 2.1 million undocumented young adults in this country. Vote is set for 10am in the Senate on Saturday, December 18, 2010. We only have one chance to stop this!
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) has filed a cloture motion (to start/stop debate) on the House amendment to the Senate amendments to H.R. 5281, the DREAM Act, setting up a cloture vote on the measure for Saturday morning, December 18, 2010. There will be 2 possible votes, but the first vote is the most important!
60 votes are needed to pass first vote – then only 51 votes to pass second vote and if it wins, the DREAM Act will go to the President to become law.
STEP 1
First things first! Let’s follow the lead of our friends at ALIPAC.
Everyone call Senator Mitch McConnell (R-KY). McConnell is the minority leader of the Senate. Call and explain your version of…
“I’m calling to tell Senator McConnell that every single Republican in the Senate had better vote NO ON CLOTURE for the Dream Amnesty tomorrow. We need all 42 GOP to vote NO. I am going to hold Senator McConnell, as minority leader, personally responsible for keeping Republicans together in opposition to this terrible Dream Act AMNESTY bill that would allow Obama and Homeland Security to give Amnesty to any and all illegal aliens according to the ‘waiver’ on page 5 line 21. Please let Senator McConnell know that Americans are counting on him to assure all GOP Senators vote NO on DREAM Act AMNESTY CLOTURE”
Call his DC office (202) 224-2541 and his Louisville office (502) 582-6304
Email Senator McConnell at http://www.mcconnell.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=ContactForm
STEP 2
After calling the minority leader’s office, let’s all fall in formation behind the targets chosen by our friends at NumbersUSA. Please select from our suggested talking points and then call each and every Senator listed below. If you call through the list once, start at the beginning and call again! By calling using these suggestions from NumbersUSA we can concentrate our impact.

Call to say / or leave a message
“Vote NO on Cloture for the DREAM Act. Please vote NO tomorrow on the DREAM Act.”
“Please ask Senator _______ to vote NO ON CLOTURE ON THE DREAM AMNESTY BILL and tell Harry Reid that America wants Congress to come home for Christmas and end the lame duck!”
“Please ask Senator _____ to vote NO ON DREAM AMNESTY CLOTURE because HR5281 on page 5 line 21 allows Obama and Homeland Security to waive all requirements and grant amnesty to almost all illegal aliens in America.”

“Please vote NO ON CLOTURE FOR 5281 AMNESTY BILL because this bill will displace and replace millions of innocent American workers, students, and voters.”

From NumbersUSA for Lower Immigration Levels.

TOP PRIORITY

Encourage These 12 Senators To Stick With Leanings or Pledges To Vote NO

This is the group that we HAVE to win. Fortunately, they are all leaning toward voting NO and their staff may even be saying they probably will vote NO. But our allies in the Senate don’t feel absolutely sure of these votes. The dozen Senators are under enormous lobbying pressure intended to make them feel inhumane if they vote NO.

Give them quick phone calls to thank them for their intention to vote NO on the DREAM Act amnesty. And note that a key reason they are right is that DREAM provides zero enforcement to stop future millions of illegal workers from coming and taking jobs from hard-pressed Americans.

Florida
George LeMieux (R)
Washington, DC ph: 202-224-3041 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 205100001
Tampa, FL ph: 813-977-6450 adr: 3802 Spectrum Boulevard, Tampa, FL 33612

Kansas
Sam Brownback (R)
Washington, DC ph: 202-224-6521 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 205100001
Topeka, KS ph: 785-233-2503 adr: 612 S. Kansas Ave., Topeka, KS 66603

MAINE
Susan Collins (R)
Washington, DC: ph: 202-224-2523 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510
Bangor: ph: 207-945-0417 adr: 202 Harlow Street – Room 204, Bangor, ME 04401
Portland: ph: 207-780-3575 adr: 1 City Center, Portland, ME 04101

Olympia Snowe (R)
Washington, DC: ph: 202-224-5344 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510
Bangor: ph: 207-945-0432 adr: 1 Cumberland Place, Bangor, ME 04401
Portland: ph: 207-874-0883 adr: 3 Canal Plaza – Suite 601, Portland, ME 04112
MONTANA
Max Baucus (D)
Washington, DC ph: 202-224-2651 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510
Missoula: ph: 406-329-3123 adr: 211 North Higgins – Room 102, Missoula, MT 59802

Jon Tester (D)
Washington, DC: ph: 202-224-2644 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 205100001
Missoula, MT ph: 406-728-3003 adr: 116 West Front Street, Missoula, MT 59802

NORTH CAROLINA
Kay Hagan (D)
Washington, DC: ph: 202-224-6342 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510
Raleigh: ph: 919-856-4630 adr: 310 New Bern Avenue, Raleigh, NC 27601

NORTH DAKOTA
Kent Conrad (D)
Washington, DC: ph: 202-224-2043 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510
Bismarck: ph: 701-258-4648 adr: Federal Building, Bismarck, ND 58501

OHIO
George Voinovich (R)
Washington, DC ph: 202-224-3353 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 205100001
Columbus, OH ph: 614-469-6697 adr: 37 West Broad Street – Room 310, Columbus, OH 43215

Texas
Kay Bailey Hutchison (R)
Washington, DC ph: 202-224-5922 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 205100001
Austin, TX ph: 512-916-5834 adr: Federal Building, Austin, TX 78701

West Virginia
Joe Manchin (D)
Washington, DC
ph: 202-224-3954 adr: 311 Hart Office Bldg., Washington, DC 20510

Vermont
Judd Gregg (R)
Washington, DC ph: 202-224-3324 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 205100001
Portsmouth, NH ph: 603-431-2171 adr: 16 Pease Blvd., Portsmouth, NH 03801

2nd PRIORITY
Pound These 3 Senators Up For Re-Election in 2012 Who Are Leaning YES on Amnesty

There is no logical political reason for these Senators to vote YES on amnesty . . . if the people of their states know what they are doing. All three of these have good tendencies in our direction on amnesty in the past. But they are acting like this amnesty is somehow different.

Your job with these Senators is to persuade their staffs that voting for an amnesty without any enforcement will definitely be a key issue in the 2012 elections during what all experts predict will be continuing high unemployment for U.S. workers.

All three of these are Democrats in states that swung heavily Republican in last month’s elections. A vote for amnesty might look like political suicide.

MICHIGAN
Debbie Stabenow (D)
Washington, DC: ph: 202-224-4822 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510
Detroit: ph: 313-961-4330 adr: 243 West Congress, Detroit, MI 48226

MISSOURI
Claire McCaskill (D)
Washington, DC: ph: 202-224-6154 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510
Springfield: ph: 417-868-8745 adr: 324 Park Central West, Springfield, MO 65806

VIRGINIA
Jim Webb (D)
Washington, DC: ph: 202-224-4024 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510
Richmond: ph: 804-771-2221 adr: 507 East Franklin Street, Richmond, VA 23219

3rd PRIORITY
These 3 Senators Do NOT Face 2012 Re-Election But Are On The Fence And Leaning YES

All three of these have voted with us against amnesty in the past.

Tell their staffs that you don’t understand how the Senator could oppose “comprehensive immigration reform” in the past when amnesty and enforcement were wrapped together, but now they are willing to pass an amnesty with NO enforcement.

ALASKA
Lisa Murkowski (R)
Washington, DC: ph: 202-224-6665 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510
Anchorage: ph: 877-829-6030 adr: 510 L Street, Anchorage, AK 99501
Fairbanks: ph: 907-456-0233 adr: 101 12th Avenue, Fairbanks, AK 99701
Juneau: ph: 907-586-7400 adr: 709 West 9th Street, Juneau, AK 99802
Kenai: ph: 907-283-5808 adr: 130 Trading Bay Road, Kenai, AK 99611
Ketchikan: ph: 907-283-5208 adr: 540 Water Street, Ketchikan, AK 99901
Wasilla: ph: 907-376-7665 adr: 851 East Westpoint Drive, Wasilla, AK 99654

LOUISIANA
Mary Landrieu (D)
Washington, DC: ph: 202-224-5824 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510
Baton Rouge: ph: 225-389-0395 adr: U.S. Postal Building, Baton Rouge, LA 70801

NORTH DAKOTA
Byron Dorgan (D and retiring)
Washington, DC: ph: 202-224-2551 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510
Bismarck: ph: 701-250-4618 adr: Federal Building, Bismarck, ND 58501

4th PRIORITY
These 6 Senators Lean Strongly YES On Amnesty But Will Have To Face Voters In 2012

Most of these Democrats have had very little interest in hearing from us in the past.

But after last month’s cataclysmic results, these Senators find themselves in states where they could have a really competitive race in 2012. Thanks to all of you who phoned them today. Now, we need another round of calls telling them how much an amnesty vote Saturday will be like an albatross around their necks during the 2012 campaigns.

CONNECTICUT
Joseph Lieberman (D)
Washington, DC: ph: 202-224-4041 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510
Hartford: ph: 860-549-8463 adr: One Constitution Plaza, Hartford, CT 06103

FLORIDA
Bill Nelson (D)
Washington, DC: ph: 202-224-5274 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510
Orlando: ph: 407-872-7161 adr: 225 East Robinson Street, Orlando, FL 32801

MINNESOTA
Amy Klobuchar (D)
Washington, DC: ph: 202-224-3244 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510
Minneapolis: ph: 612-727-5220 adr: 1200 Washington Ave S, Minneapolis, MN 55415

NEW MEXICO
Jeff Bingaman (D)
Washington, DC ph: 202-224-5521 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510
Albuquerque: ph: 505-346-6601 adr: 625 Silver Ave SW, #130, Albuquerque, NM 87102

OHIO
Sherrod Brown (D)
Washington, DC: ph: 202-224-2315 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510
Cleveland: ph: 216-522-7272 adr: 1301 East Ninth St., Cleveland, OH 44114

WASHINGTON
Maria Cantwell (D)
Washington, DC: ph: 202-224-3441 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510
Seattle: ph: 206-220-6400 adr: 915 Second Avenue, Seattle, WA 98174

WISCONSIN
Herb Kohl (D)
Washington, DC: ph: 202-224-5653 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510
Madison: ph: 608-264-5338 adr: 14 West Muffin Street – Suite 312, Madison, WI 53703

Denise Cattoni
Illinois Tea Party
www.illinoistea.org
Illinois State Coordinator
www.teapartypatriots.org
630.290.2130

Fear Factor: Sarah Palin and 2012

November 20th, 2010 | By Gina Loudon

Recently, I attended the Conservatives for Palin, and I gained some insight I think conservatives want to consider moving forward. The group was not like any I have ever known. There were all kinds of people there—Christians, Jews, Hindus, women, men, black, white, Asian, and even Nordic! They were gay, straight, old, young, republican, democrat, libertarian, and independent, and they all had one thing in common…they believe the stringent adherence to the US Constitution is the answer to the problems we have today.

Even if they are quiet, there are those conservatives who struggle with a female president. Dr. Dathan Paterno, noted psychologist and author says the reality is, that there WILL be a woman president in the near future—that it is in the American psyche. What happens if conservatives choose NOT to nominate Sarah Palin? Certainly the liberals will nominate a woman soon, and then they continue the whining about sexism that has worked for them for so long.

Liberals and establishment politicians of all parties seem to have a special venom for the former Governor of Alaska. If she is really so “unelectable” then why all the fuss? “Thou doth protest…”. If she is really so laughable, then why do the jokes about her keep falling flat? Could it be that they obsess about her for the psychological reason that they can’t stand the threat she poses to them? Could it be because they see her as the greatest threat in recent history to their personal goals, and the establishment media and messaging they have used to control politics in this country for a generation? Could it be that the nomination of Sarah Palin for President is a revolution?

Her nomination presents a real conundrum for liberals and establishment parties of all stripes. If the Republicans nominate Sarah Palin, how will the liberals continue to accuse the right of being sexist? Where will the feminists go to find their beloved glass ceiling victim status? If she has outspoken gay supporters who don’t disagree with her stance that this is a Judeo Christian republic with a founding document that matters more than someone’s sexual preference, then how will the militant gays continue to relegate Christians to radical, homophobic, hating extremists? If a family woman, a mom, can (based on her Christian principle) in fact love someone that the liberals say she hates, then what do liberals do with that? If the constitutional conservatives progress this nation to nominate the first female nominee for president, then how do liberals continue to abuse labels like “progressive” and “tolerant”?

Conservatives have their own issues. First, from a GOP perspective, consultants use their experience with the apparatus to be hired by candidates to run their campaigns. How will they do that if someone climbed to the top on a different tree? Some conservatives may struggle with her rebuke of legalistic philosophy in lieu of one that favors real liberty, and Christ-like love, even for those who live or believe differently than you. Perhaps most difficult for some conservatives to admit–When a woman like Sarah Palin is President, how to we reconcile our own sideline behavior without tremendous guilt? I wish I had a good answer to that last one.

The militant liberals don’t like her, but interestingly she has attracted a broad group of people who do like her. Their loyalty has resulted in an organization that is so talented and proficient, it is difficult to comprehend, even to a seasoned campaign veteran. Her supporters are constitution loving, focused and very, very serious about supporting her (or whomever she taps with her magic winning wand)! Not everyone at the Conservatives for Palin were certain she would run, or that she should, but almost all that I talked to agreed that if she did run, the Country would be shocked at her savvy and self deprecating ability to do so. They all agreed that she is far stronger, far more capable than any of her opponents even know. She is certainly well vetted, beyond that of any other candidate. Most people would agree that no other candidate has endured the ridicule and jabs that Sarah has overcome.

Her critics say she does all she does for money, but with two books and a television show, that argument doesn’t hold any more water than the fame argument, or the power hound. She just won 71%+ of the elections she touched, and many were considered “unwinnable.” She has become a culture icon of sorts. She could take her lipstick, shoes, glasses, mama grizzly, and even barracuda labels, and she could probably start a fashion line and retire to an Alaskan island with a lovely view of Russia.

The liberals have always underestimated Governor Palin and she has continued to shock them as she seamlessly wins elections like a political Houdini of sorts.

All of the accusations about her motives tend to leave the listening public with one logical conclusion: She must be in this because she believes in what she is doing, and genuinely cares about this Country. That is not a half bad motive by most peoples’ standards, and it is hard to argue otherwise and sound rational.

If Sarah Palin runs and wins, it will certainly be a political analyst’s dream to observe. Fear is not a factor for the Palins, and they seem to enjoy the challenge of overcoming all the predictions about their family. They might just shock us again in the weeks to come–and the ones after that.

Join the Mama Grizzlies in Chicago Nov. 12th to 14th

November 3rd, 2010 | By Gina Loudon

We welcome you to the 2nd Conservatives4Palin Meet-Up! We hope that this event serves as a good opportunity to meet and network with other Palin supporters and for all of us to show our support for Governor Palin. We feel very blessed that five “Mama Grizzlies” have joined us for this weekend and will be speaking with us.

Think Obama and Palin Are a Lot Alike? Think Again

September 27th, 2010 | By Gina Loudon

As seen on Big Journalism

In a recent article by Robert Schmul on AOL Politics, he has hit conservatives below the belt in a way that he hopes will stick. If you can’t get the American population to get behind your socialist President, then just try to paint the conservative leaders as suspiciously similar to him.

Uh, not so much.

He claims that Sarah Palin is a lot like Barack Obama. He points to similarities that are encapsulated at sarahpalinblog.com.

* Both emerged quickly on the national scene and used their charisma to become media-magnified political celebrities.
* Both were tapped to deliver major speeches at national party conventions.
* Both followed up their initial national exposure with well-publicized books.
* Both became nationally recognized as Washington outsiders with limited governmental experience.
* Both share somewhat exotic backgrounds far removed from the continental United States.
* Both have positioned themselves in opposition to the existing establishments.
* Both created followers who are closely connected and willing to work on behalf of emerging and engaging personalities.

But I see major differences.

Obama is a socialist, Sarah Palin is a capitalist. That is basic and definitive, and makes any comparison rhetorical. Those observations are no more relevant than their sharing a preference in breakfast cereal.

Obama is the most pro-abortion president in history. Abortion is an act that places self-interest first. Sarah Palin gave birth, at a most inconvenient time, to a beautiful little boy who has Down Syndrome. That is an act of selflessness, compassion, and love.

Obama holds a European socialist view that America should apologize to the world for being a super power for so long. Sarah thinks America is still Reagan’s “shining city on the hill” and should continue to lead the world into a bright future for all who understand the precious concept of freedom and individual liberty.

Obama looks most comfortable at a U.N. meeting with all his like minded friends who long for one-world government. Sarah looks most comfortable at home, making moose stew dinner for her family after a good hunt.

Obama leaves God out of the Christmas address, the Thanksgiving address, the Preamble to the Declaration of Independence, and the Jewish Proclamation, all while arrogantly asking him to bless our Nation.

Sarah takes a prayer team with her to hold her accountable everywhere she goes. She literally doesn’t make a political move without joining her prayer team and asking for direction from God—not one.

Obama depends on a teleprompter, because he wants to be sure his words are packaged and perfect. Sarah Palin wrote on her hand, because that’s what chicks do, and she is real.

Here is an observation Mr. Schmul: While Republican candidates clamor for the Palin endorsement in primaries, it is difficult to find a Democrat who wants to even be seen campaigning with Obama.

No one knows if Sarah will ever run for office again. She is a private citizen who is one of the most effective voices speaking for the American people today. She does not even need an office to do that. Obama is elected, running, and so out of touch with America that he still clings to notion that the only reason for the unpopularity of his health care plan is that Americans just don’t get it.

Using Robert Schmul’s approach, one could find “commonalities” between Hitler and Mother Teresa, but the reality is there is no comparison when it comes to their hearts, their goals, and their legacy—the things that really count.

I think the MSM will continue to attempt to cast erroneous aspersions upon Sarah Palin and other conservatives, such as comparing them to Barack Obama, in an effort to dismay Sarah’s base, and frighten conservatives. There are only two problems with that:

1. Sarah doesn’t need a base because she isn’t running for anything so far.
2. Patriots don’t scare easy.

Despite His Denials, Still Plenty of Problems with that Michael Joseph Gross Vanity Fair Story

September 9th, 2010 | By Gina Loudon

Article courtesy of Big Journalism

Michael Joseph Gross, the author of the recent Vanity Fair hit piece on Sarah Palin, does not seem to be able to tell the truth. In a new attempt to “shoot the messenger” (me) rather than admit that his story is concocted, he tries to turn the tables and call my credibility into question. The problem–there are witnesses and logistical impossibilities that expose further problems with his story. He says:

I could not have spoken to her in Independence, because I was not allowed backstage on the floor of the arena, where Loudon was; that was a restricted space, and, as far as I am aware, all reporters were barred from the area.

Quoting from the first words of his article:

Backstage in the arena, a little girl in Mary Janes pushes her brother in a baby carriage, stopping a few yards shy of a heavy, 100-foot-long black curtain. The curtain splits the arena in two, shielding the children from an audience of 4,000 people clapping their hands in time to “The Battle Hymn of the Republic.” The music accompanies a video “Salute to Military Heroes” that plays above the stage where, in a few moments, the children’s mother will appear.

When the girl, Piper Palin, turns around, she sees her parents thronged by admirers, and the crowd rolling toward her and the baby, her brother Trig, born with Down syndrome in 2008. Sarah Palin and her husband, Todd, bend down and give a moment to the children; a woman, perhaps a nanny, [this is the part he already admitted was an "error" after we exposed it on Big Journalism] whisks the boy away; and Todd hands Sarah her speech and walks her to the stage. He pokes the air with one finger. She mimes the gesture, whips around, strides on four-inch heels to stage center, and turns it on.

His next statement in his defense:

(I was sitting several rows up, in a place where I was able to observe what was happening both in front of and behind the curtain.)

Alas for Mr. Gross, that is simply not possible. To quote from a just-released statement from the organizers of the Independence, Mo., rally:

From a logistical standpoint, if an individual was able to report about activities going on behind the curtain they could not have done so from solely sitting in the audience but would have had to knowingly gone behind the curtain and into the backstage area.

He continues with his story:

Let me state this as unequivocally as possible: Loudon’s accounts have no basis in reality. I do not mean simply that the facts are wrong—I mean that the episode did not occur.

This doesn’t make any sense: he has admitted that he mistakenly identified my child for Sarah’s child at this precise event, in this precise location. Why would he admit that, and then later say that the whole episode never occurred? If the events “never occurred” then why did he write a retraction?

Okay then, how was it that Mr. Gross was, in his words, “backstage at the Arena” writing about an incident that he later retracted, if the following is true, according to organizers of the event in a statement:

This event was open press but like a lot of other events we discouraged press backstage unless a member of the press had prior approval from our speakers.

Here is the full statement from the organizers of the event in question:

On May 1, 2010, Preserving American Liberty’s Winning America Back conference in Independence, Missouri was an open press event. We distributed approximately 100 press credentials to local and national media who covered the one day event. This grassroots program featured remarks from prominent national conservative leaders such as Fred Thompson, J.C. Watts, and Sarah Palin. In addition to these speakers we hosted two panel discussions. The first discussion was on the economy and focused on how best to create jobs for the millions of Americans who are unemployed, how we should approach our growing national deficit, and the effect the stimulus bill has had on our economy. Panel participants included Dr. Gina Loudon, BUYcott Founder and Conservative Talk Show Host who announced her BUYcott of Arizona and Ken Hoagland, Chairman, Online Tax Revolt. The second panel featured leaders in the African American and Hispanic communities on the importance for conservatives to reach out to minorities. Panel participants included Pastor Stephen Broden who is a Republican candidate for Congress in the 30th Congressional in Texas and Mario Lopez, President, Hispanic Leadership Fund.

This program was put on to have a dialogue about real solutions to the problems our country is facing. Preserving American Liberty is solely comprised of unpaid volunteers who have come together to provide educational forums for the Kansas City metropolitan area. This event was open press but like a lot of other events we discouraged press backstage unless a member of the press had prior approval from our speakers. However, some members of the press and general public were able to make their way behind the curtain throughout the day. During those times we kindly asked members of the press and general public to leave the backstage area because this area was solely for our volunteers, productions teams, and an area for our off-stage announcement of our speakers. To help alleviate the distractions going on behind the stage the venue was setup with a curtain backdrop that ran the length of the arena. This curtain didn’t allow audience members (including the press) to see behind the stage. Again, since this was not a professional event but put on by volunteers some members of the press and the audience were able to purposely sneak to the backstage area throughout the day long event. From a logistical standpoint, if an individual was able to report about activities going on behind the curtain they could not have done so from solely sitting in the audience but would have had to knowingly gone behind the curtain and into the backstage area. In order to keep our program running on time and efficiently as possible whenever a member of the press or general public were seen backstage we kindly asked the individual(s) to return to their seats in the arena.

Dr. Karladine Graves

President, Preserving American Liberty

Tags: dr. gina loudon, Gina Loudon, Michael Joseph Gross, Palin, Piper Palin, Sarah Palin, Trig, Vanity Fair
Posted in General
Comments: No Comments »