On Sputnik and the fall of the USSR she has a huge timeline problem. Sputnik was 1957. The USSR didnt collapse until 1989 and that was Reagan that did it, not Sputnik. The Soviet’s went broke on the military because Reagan stood up to them. Just a few years earlier under Carter they were rolling into country after country hardly broke from Sputnik in 1957. Read Ann Coulters book Treason.
Ann Coulter writes some good stuff, but I don’t recall seeing her labeled a “Soviet Space Expert”.
And there is no conflict between Coulter and Palin on the major issue here. It’s simply a contrivance of the other poster.
Palin’s point is that the precedent for the Soviets losing an arms race (or a tech race) was foretold in the space race. If you mark the launch of Sputnik as the END of a race, the Soviets won. But if you mark it as the beginning of a race...
When decades later the Sovs were hanging by a thread under the challenge of Reagan, the loss of the space race in the 1960s simply gave them less faith they could win and thus less reason to hang on.
An argument FOR that might have been available to hard-liners in Moscow was gone. An argument AGAINST was rooted in history. History had already recorded that they LOST tech races with us. “Back then it was Reagan, and he understood.”
Today it is Sarah, and she does too.
(And the citation of Treason by the other poster is errant.)
I fully agree with that.
“Back then it was Reagan, and he understood.”
Today it is Sarah, and she does too.
I fully agree again. Sarah Palin is the anti-Obama. Unless and until others on the right step forward and assume that role, as forcefully and as consistently as she has, then I'll continue to insist that attacks against Sarah Palin are from pro-Obama elements or from the equally destructive liberal Republicans. Any half-measure adjustments envisioned by the "moderate" establishment Republicans will not stave off the economic disaster that the USA is facing.
There are many people and some campaigns pretending to be on the "right" who have no qualms about employing the Alinsky tactics developed and practiced by the "left".
For instance, why are these discussions about the SOTU address being redirected so strongly against those who issued rebuttals against Obama's communist propaganda in the SOTU? Obama is, hypothecally, the president, and even when we had legitimate presidents, their public speeches were subject to much analysis, rebuttals, and outright disagreement, point-by-point and on their overall themes.
This goober warrants much closer scrutiny, and such is long overdue.