Posted on 01/28/2011 10:56:23 AM PST by Islander7
Please read this article by the Hoover Institution’s Research Fellow Peter Schweizer. Schweizer, who has written extensively on the subject of the decline and fall of the Soviet Union, offers a Washington Post writer an important refresher on the real history of Sputnik, since many critics are engaged in misreporting:
"...Palin’s other point is that Sputnik was the sort of government bureaucratic program that got the Soviet Union in trouble; it’s an example of what eventually did them in. Citing Wikipedia (what journalistic ingenuity!), Stromberg argues that actually the Soviet Union didn’t have a debt problem until some “thirty years after” Sputnik. Perhaps instead of relying on Wikipedia, Stromberg might have consulted Robert Gates’ book From the Shadows which chronicles, in part, his career as a Soviet analyst at the CIA. (Just in case they are unaware at the Post, this is the same Robert Gates who is now the Secretary of Defense.) On page 173, he accurately points out that the CIA knew early on of the “Soviet economic crisis. From the late 1950s, CIA had clearly described the chronic weaknesses as well as the formidable military power of the Soviet Union.”
Now, in a recent interview I mentioned analogies that could relate to solutions to our economic challenges, including the difference between a communist government’s “Sputnik” and the private sector’s “Spudnut.” The analogies I mentioned obviously aren’t comparable in size, but highlight a clear difference in economic focus: big government command and control economies vs. America’s small businesses.
If you’re near Richland, WA, you should stop by The Spudnut Shop, where you’ll find an all-American success story of a family owned small business that for over 60 years has been serving up a product that people want to buy. Businesses like this coffee shop don’t receive big government bailouts. They produce something with their own ingenuity and hard work. And here we see the former communist Soviet Union’s advancement (before its government debt-ridden demise) vs. America’s small businesses that are the backbone of our economy.
We’d be well off if we had a greater appreciation for the free market ingenuity of ordinary American entrepreneurs, both great and small – whether they make high-tech gadgets or potato donuts. And this goes for all our small business owners – whether they run a family farm, a commercial salmon fishing business, an auto shop, a print shop, a consulting firm, a restaurant, you name it. Our government should show them more respect by not punishing their success and limiting their ability to hire more people by over-taxing and over-reaching into their businesses. Don’t stifle their growth with burdensome regulations like Obamacare and cap-and-tax. Government should be on their side, not in their way.
I believe and trust in the strength of America’s private sector. But I sometimes fear that the current administration in Washington distrusts or discounts the individuals who have built this country; hence their belief that only a distant bureaucratic elite in D.C. can make decisions for our small businesses that will provide American opportunity. This administration’s thinking is wrong. We don’t need a command and control economy that “invests” our money in their half-baked ideas. We need freedom, reward for hard work, and a re-invigorated sense of personal responsibility and work ethic, especially among our young people.
We need to be as motivated and optimistic as our parents, grandparents, and great-grandparents, many of whom started out with nothing but a dream as they built a life for themselves by the sweat of their brow. They didn’t ask for bailouts. They didn’t expect anything from anyone. They wanted the freedom and opportunity to work hard and prosper by their own merits. If at first they failed, they took their lumps, dusted themselves off, got back up, and tried again until they succeeded. They didn’t retreat. They built this country and they passed on to us more prosperity and opportunity than has ever been bestowed on any generation in human history. We must not squander that inheritance. Let’s get back to their common sense values.
- Sarah Palin
Herman won 26% of the vote in the Senate primary in Georgia in 2004.
Wake up.
“What a joke.”
______
Yes, you are.
- JP
Any woman who can make a speech like that ought to run for President.
i like herman... you stick with your “mcCain”
I like Herman too. He’s a fine talk-show host.
Ping me when Palin releases her tweet or facebookie clarifying her retweet of Tammy Bruce and imploring Congress to re-instate DADT, will ya?
Thanks
Wikipedia is where reporters go when they want to use liberal lies to back up their own stupid opinions.
Oh be still my beating heart.
What I would give to see that debate.
The fact that no one in the media or politics ever, and I mean ever, truly challenges the inanity of the left drives me crazy.
Sarah does, she is fearless.
Do us a favor an quote the "retweet" and where it mentions DADT at all. From what I remember, the echoed comment was something to the effect of people who protest the most being the ones who are guilt, and said nothing about DADT.
You know, like how you protest so much about Palin... is it because you're secretly guilt about your man-crushes on Huckabee-supporting Hunter or Romney-supporting DeMint?
Just as you take the "retweet" out of context and twist it to you own ends, your so-called other "examples" of Palin's "misdeeds" are similarly warped. You predetermine that Palin is pro-amnesty, so you interpret her comments as pro-amnesty, which proves that she's pro-amnesty. Kind of like how liberals accuse conservatives of being racist and therefore "prove" it to themselves using similar spurious logic.
While you think of some snarky, dismissive reply or rush off to post out-of-context and misinterpreted quotes, also explain to me how you can possibly defend DADT in the first place. I want it gone. I want the field commanders making these decisions based on the UCMJ, and without interference from DC politicians.
Alas, Tammy’s tweet was about the oppostion to DADT. DOn’t be an idiot.
No quote, then? I know exactly what the quote is, and there's no mention of DADT in there.
Yes, the statement was made in a discussion regarding DADT, but the quote itself is not directly about it.
DOn’t be an idiot.
That position is reserved for you.
Don’t fall for it Somebody’s trying to hijack a thread.
I know, but I’m feeling feisty today. ;)
Besides, I think we’ve seen the effects of what happens when falsehoods are allowed to stand unchallenged.
:)
# But this hypocrisy is just truly too much. Enuf already—the more someone complains about the homos the more we should look under their bed Monday, January 03, 2011 7:12:46 PM via web
# I’m focused on economic issues, and you may have noticed I was being quiet about DADT because that’s not our most pressing issue... Monday, January 03, 2011 7:11:49 PM via web
The point is, you, AS USUAL, twist a statement to match your preconceived notions without even considering the option that it might mean something else.
Bye-bye!
“People in the Soviet Union waited in line for toilet paper...”
Is there any proof that they don’t STILL have to do that?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.