- The Washington Times - Tuesday, August 3, 2010


She’s got breast implants. Her eye color was altered. She’s airbrushed. Look at that tacky flag pin. Her political endorsement is the kiss of death, she’s illiterate - and so on, and so forth. The bashing just gets more petty, as evidenced by the shrill outpouring after publisher Harper/Collins offered a sneak peek at the cover of Sarah Palin’s upcoming book, “America By Heart: Reflections on Family, Faith and Flag.”

Wait a minute. Mrs. Palin’s portrait is not provocative. She wears a gray sweater, and is tastefully made up. She’s friendly, and yes, there’s evidence of - OMG - shocking patriotic jewelry. The book won’t be out until Nov. 23. Still, she remains a target for churlish criticism. Why?

“Oh, that’s easy enough. We basically like people who are similar to us. And to her critics, Sarah Palin is not similar. She is not Ivy League, she is not an intellectual, she is not a product of Northeastern establishment schools, she is everything that her critics are not, and as a result, they attack,” says Manhattan marketing analyst John Tantillo.

“And Palin’s critics don’t understand that her appeal is to the general public. Not to them, not to the elite. And they are not trustful of that, they are not comfortable with that. They want someone who can write 10,000 weighty words on global warming, rather than give five terse and pithy talking points on why we should drill in ANWR,” Mr. Tantillo adds.


Note to White House: 67 percent of American voters say that the release of classified military documents at the Wikileaks website will harm national security, according to a Rasmussen Reports survey of 1,000 likely voters conducted July 30 and 31. Only 19 percent say that news organizations that publish this content are doing a “public service.” Advice to White House: Act accordingly.


The era of good feeling has not quite descended upon Manhattan, now that the $100 million “ground zero mosque” has gotten the unanimous blessing of the New York City Landmarks Preservations Committee, which essentially cleared the way for its construction. Republican gubernatorial hopeful Rick Lazio is calling for an investigation into the project’s funding, asking New Yorkers to defend “our sacred ground.” The Anti-Defamation League suggests an “alternative” site be found. Legal minds are also at work.

“The actions taken by the city of New York represent a blatant disregard for the city’s own procedures, while ignoring the fact that this is a historic and hallowed site that should not be destroyed to build an Islamic mosque,” says Jay Sekulow, chief counsel of the American Center for Law and Justice, which will file an Article 78 petition in state court on Wednesday to challenge the action, alleging an “abuse of discretion” in the commission’s decision.

“The city has engaged in a rush to push this project through - ignoring proper procedure and ignoring a growing number of New Yorkers and Americans who don’t believe this site is the place to build a mosque,” Mr. Sekulow adds.


“Theres something entirely believable about the Newsweek sale. A left-winger pretending to be centrist sold it to another left-winger pretending to be centrist. Newsweek is a dying magazine because no one wants to read their left-wing propaganda masquerading as ‘news.’ The $1 price tag, then, is probably just about right.”

- Media Research Center director Brent Bozell, regarding The Washington Post Co. sale of Newsweek magazine to philanthropist Sidney Harman.


They definitely did not Tweet it. The American Bird Conservancy, Center for Biological Diversity, Association of Avian Veterinarians and other groups have petitioned the Environmental Protection Agency to ban lead in hunting ammunition and fishing tackle, claiming that 20 million birds and animals die of lead poisoning each year - justifying their demands through the 1976 Toxic Substances Control Act.

Nonsense, counters the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), a trade association.

“There is simply no scientific evidence that the use of traditional ammunition is having an adverse impact on wildlife populations that would require restricting or banning the use of traditional ammunition beyond current limitations,” says NSSF President Steve Sanetti, who points out U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service data shows that breeding pairs of bald eagles have increased 724 percent in recent years.

Mr. Sanetti also draws attention to the federal excise tax ammunition manufacturers - 11 percent - is a primary source of wildlife conservation funding.

“Hunters and their ammunition have done more for wildlife than the Center for Biological Diversity ever will,” observes NSSF General Counsel Lawrence G. Keane.


62 percent of Americans say things are going “very/moderately badly” for the U.S. in Afghanistan.

55 percent of Democrats and 24 percent of Republicans approve of the way President Obama is handling the situation in Afghanistan.

36 percent of Americans overall approve of Mr. Obama’s handling of Afghanistan.

52 percent say the U.S. was right to send troops to Afghanistan.

43 percent say it was a mistake.

Source: A USA Today/Gallup Poll of 1,208 adults conducted July 27 to Aug. 1.

Tip line always open at [email protected]

Sign up for Daily Newsletters

Copyright © 2019 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

The Washington Times Comment Policy

The Washington Times welcomes your comments on Spot.im, our third-party provider. Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.


Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide