Sarah Palin vs Joe Biden, Reloaded
[Guest post by DRJ]
Red meat for Sarah Palin lovers and haters. Appearing at a (reportedly sparsely attended) NY 23 rally for Democrat Bill Owens, VP Joe Biden brought up … Sarah Palin:
“The fact of the matter is, Sarah Palin thinks the answer to energy is ‘drill, baby, drill,’ ” said Biden. “It’s a lot more complicated, Sarah!”
Sarah Palin responded on her Facebook page:
“As the vice president knows, I have always advocated an all-of-the-above approach to American energy independence. Among other things, my alternative energy goal for Alaska sits at 50 percent because Alaska reached more than 20 percent during my term in office. The Obama-Biden administration, on the other hand, recently announced a renewable goal of only 25 percent. However, domestic drilling should remain a top priority in order to meet America’s consumption and security needs.
The vice president’s extreme opposition to domestic energy development goes all the way back to 1973 when he opposed the Alaska pipeline bill. As Ann Coulter pointed out, “Biden cast one of only five votes against the pipeline that has produced more than 15 billion barrels of oil, supplied nearly 20 percent of this nation’s oil, created tens of thousands of jobs, added hundreds of billions of dollars to the U.S. economy and reduced money transfers to the nation’s enemies by about the same amount.”
This nonsensical opposition to American domestic energy development continues to this day. Apparently the Obama-Biden administration only approves of offshore drilling in Brazil, where it will provide security and jobs for Brazilians. This election is about American security and American jobs.
There’s one way to tell Vice President Biden that we’re tired of folks in Washington distorting our message and hampering our nation’s progress: Hoffman, Baby, Hoffman!”
Quick response by Palin.
— DRJ
The SarahCuda has teeth!
AD - RtR/OS! (83414c) — 11/2/2009 @ 2:32 pmYou know, when she first quit as governor, i said, “stick a fork in her, she is done.” now, not so clear. i have to say she has done a brilliant job playing the hand she has been dealt.
A.W. (e7d72e) — 11/2/2009 @ 2:38 pmThey are getting panicky about her. They know that the tea party/ libertarian movement that is building sees her as a leader. They don’t see anybody in Washington that way. Amazing that Biden would bring her up; that is really poor tactics. Of course, Joe never could keep his mouth shut.
Mike K (2cf494) — 11/2/2009 @ 2:44 pmSarah’s been punching above her weight for over a year now. She can probably cuff around a fool like Biden while applying her lipstick.
TakeFive (7c6fd5) — 11/2/2009 @ 2:46 pmYah gotta love Multi-tasking!
AD - RtR/OS! (83414c) — 11/2/2009 @ 2:47 pmTo send Biden, out there and focus on her signature issue is much that line by Inigo Montoya, in the Princess Bride “never go against a Sicilian when honor’s on the line,” or the quip about a land warin Asia, not a smart move at all
bishop (4e0dda) — 11/2/2009 @ 3:00 pmHey, they don’t call him “Sloe-Joe” for nuthing.
AD - RtR/OS! (83414c) — 11/2/2009 @ 3:01 pmMike K
> Amazing that Biden would bring her up
I have stopped being even surprised at the stuff coming out of his mouth years ago. You know in the Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, the president’s job was to distract away form power–i think that in reality, it is our vice president charged with that job these days.
And, btw, why does Biden have Gretta Van Susterin’s eyes? (sp?)
A.W. (e7d72e) — 11/2/2009 @ 3:08 pmI’ve had reservations about Palin ever since her awkward and strange resignation. that having been said her views on energy policy are common sense based and completely in line with my own.
So, there’s that.
BJTexs (a2cb5a) — 11/2/2009 @ 3:08 pm“The fact of the matter is, Joe Biden thinks the answer to energy is ‘drink, baby, drink,’ ” said Mrs. Biden. “It’s a lot more complicated, Joe!”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NmRXH7RkCZQ
HatlessHessian (cca288) — 11/2/2009 @ 3:09 pmThe Obama administration claims to have an energy policy to address so-called climate change, but it does nothing to increase the number of nuclear power plants in the US by addressing the problems in licensing and permitting nukes. That alone shows that the Obama administration’s energy policy is a joke. A joke that is not as funny as Biden’s attempt at talking about issues he has no comprehension of.
SPQR (26be8b) — 11/2/2009 @ 3:17 pmOh my. Biden was actually sauced up at a campaign stop too.
carlitos (481eaf) — 11/2/2009 @ 3:20 pmSarah P is right about oil being in the ground to where you need a drill to get it and also it’s good to review about what our goof-ass president is doing with respect to Brazil.
After canceling job-creating economy-growing oil drilling here in our little country, the little president man wants to use at least $2 BILLION of our tax dollar monies to drill in Brazil. Dirty socialist wanker. At some point you just sort of have to conclude that he’s kicking our little country in the nads on purpose.
happyfeet (71f55e) — 11/2/2009 @ 3:20 pmPalin wins on detail, but Biden scores a KO on the soundbite. It doesn’t matter that she cleans up with Biden on her facebook page, all that matters is that, courtesy of the oh-so-unbiased media, millions of people are going to hear only of the shot Biden took at her, reinforcing impressions that she is in over her head.
steve sturm (369bc6) — 11/2/2009 @ 3:24 pmThe last sentence –
“There’s one way to tell Vice President Biden that we’re tired of folks in Washington distorting our message and hampering our nation’s progress: Hoffman, Baby, Hoffman!”
– that’s a fence mender for Newt.
papertiger (127d58) — 11/2/2009 @ 3:32 pmThis lady is smart on the fly. Smarter then Obama. Way, way smarter then O’Biden.
Steve
Let’s not forget that a facebook page stopped the health care monstrosity, at least for a while. And anyone paying attention to biden knows not to take anything he says too seriously.
Carlitos
He was drunk, really? maybe the title of this post should be Sarah Palin v. Joe Biden, loaded.
A.W. (e7d72e) — 11/2/2009 @ 3:32 pmAW: c’mon, you can’t give her the credit for that, at least not all of it, there were a lot of upset people long before she ever coined ‘death panels’. and btw, that was a mirror of sorts to this, where she had the snappy soundbite and it didn’t matter that the democrats had rebuttal after rebuttal, it was the sound bite that stuck.
steve sturm (369bc6) — 11/2/2009 @ 3:35 pmThe fact of the matter is, Joey thinks the answer to 9/11 was “hey, let’s send, no strings attached, a check for $200 million to Iran”.
Dave (in MA) (037445) — 11/2/2009 @ 3:41 pmIt’s a lot more complicated, Plughead. And a lot less craAaZy.
The lack of any sensible energy policy by these fools is going to really bite if the economy ever does start to recover. We will have blackouts and gas will go to $5 a gallon. I cannot understand why Obama lives in this fantasyland without someone to tell him the truth. If we are recovering by 2012, and I have my doubts, energy will be a huge issue. If Israel attacks Iran and the middle east blows up, it will be the ONLY issue. They are actually trying to prevent us from buying gas and oil from tar sands in Canada. The Canadians will be supporting her. There is just no understanding Obama.
Mike K (2cf494) — 11/2/2009 @ 4:23 pmsteve sturm – Rebuttal after rebuttal to death panels? I don’t think so, except for taking clauses out of bills perhaps. There was no getting around massive cuts to medicare and the threat of rationing. Even if the exact words weren’t in the bills – the “best” rebuttal they came up with, the concept stuck.
daleyrocks (718861) — 11/2/2009 @ 4:34 pmGame, Set & Match to Sarah. The money-line “Hoffman, baby, Hoffman” is classic.
sybilll (6e5f0a) — 11/2/2009 @ 4:48 pmBut, But President O’Dumbo and company approve of China drilling for oil 100 miles or less off the
Scrapiron (4e0dda) — 11/2/2009 @ 4:53 pmFl coast. With a little slant drilling they can bleed the gulf dry. We now have the most stupid gang in history running the government at all levels. O’Dumbo is as described, a man child. A man’s body and a retardeed childs mind.
You know, if Slow Joe got into a Twitter debate with Sarah, it would be even more entertaining than the thrashing he received at her hands last year.
driver (29b6de) — 11/2/2009 @ 5:18 pmNo, they would have to shut-down Twitter to prevent a charge of Cruelty to Dumb Politicians.
AD - RtR/OS! (83414c) — 11/2/2009 @ 5:34 pmShe’s relevant and has a future, on the simple basis of the fact that the Obama administration keeps treating her as its opponent. They have elevated her to their level now, and they can’t very well say she’s beneath the national stage now.
I feel like I don’t know Sarah’s views well enough, even though she’s been out there for a while. I guess I assume her positions were not advertised, so that Mccain’s would rule that campaign in 2008. I hope Palin keeps this up. If she wins the primary, then she’s pretty smart and a pretty good leader, and has that horrible ‘it’ factor that our culture demands. If she loses the primary, that’s ok too… whoever beat her will probably know they were in a fight.
I am putting way too much faith in the GOP’s proven horrible primary process. I’m sure the dems don’t have anything better (in fact, Obama’s victory over Clinton was so crooked it should have drawn outrage), but those guys are the party of the fat cat. The GOP should be better, and it’s not.
Dustin (bb61e3) — 11/2/2009 @ 5:53 pmOh gosh, poor Joe, he just can’t help himself. Speaking of him debating Sarah on Twitter, I just perused his Twitter page and came across this. Just priceless,
The campaign is ready to shock the world. No deals, just the strength of Joe Biden.2:12 PM Jan 3rd, 2008 from web
He’s like his own national treasure. While he overestimates himself, the public seriously underestimates Palin. It’s a great position for her to be in.
Dana (e9ba20) — 11/2/2009 @ 5:58 pmShe doesn’t generally let her personal views get in the way of policy, the recent appointee of a Planned parenthood member to the state supreme court, and the vetoing of a anti domestic partnership petition are two examples. She restructured the state’s tax structure, on a sliding scale, she’s pro defense, pro energy expansion, pro free trade; closer to a classical
bishop (4e0dda) — 11/2/2009 @ 6:14 pmliberal in many ways
Yet I remain aggressively ambivalent about her …
JD (6dce29) — 11/2/2009 @ 6:17 pmIn contrast to your usual passive enthusiasm?
AD - RtR/OS! (83414c) — 11/2/2009 @ 6:33 pmExactly. I could not have said it better myself.
JD (6dce29) — 11/2/2009 @ 6:04 pmHmm… is Sarah Palin a Quayle or a Nixon?
Don’t misunderstand. I don’t mean to compare Sarah in terms of political philosophy or character. I’m wondering whether Sarah’s future in American politics mimics the course of Quayle or of Nixon.
The enemies of Sarah, meaning the Liberal/Democratic Party/Big Media axis, have tried to demonize Sarah and declare her forever poisoned. Just another Dan Quayle, who never recovered after the savaging he was subjected to.
But Nixon, ah Nixon! The Nixon haters were legion all during his career and at one point even thought they had destroyed Nixon forever, only to see Nixon eventually come roaring back years later and take the Presidency.
Brad (9d40d9) — 11/2/2009 @ 6:09 pmWhat I like about Sarah Palin is that she is a confirmed conservative without being a pawn of big business or a toady to the Republican establishment. It doesn’t hurt that she terrifies and enrages Liberal/Democrat/Media power elite.
Brad (9d40d9) — 11/2/2009 @ 6:14 pmThat is one aspect about her that I do enjoy.
JD (6dce29) — 11/2/2009 @ 6:16 pmWell, we know how the media, in particular, has enhanced its’ reputation on almost a daily basis since they began their campaign of personal-destruction against Sarah Palin.
AD - RtR/OS! (83414c) — 11/2/2009 @ 6:19 pmWith their pre-emminent position in society, and lacking any meaningful counter, they will do to the SarahCuda exactly what they did to Richard Milhouse Nixon when they forced him from public life, and into political irrelevance, following his defeat by “Pat” Brown in 1962.
The Quayle comparison, is inexact, he was a good guy, a decent administrator at Cerberus, in retirement. Nixon was always ill at ease, he almost forced himself into politics, against his own nature. That is not an aspect that really applies, either, But I see where aspects might fit, as shorthand.
bishop (996c34) — 11/2/2009 @ 6:41 pmEver see the movie “Romancing the Stone”?
There is a bar scene early in the flick, where two women are assesing the man-scene. The dialogue goes something like this:
“Wimp. Wimp. Loser. Loser. Major loser. Too angry. Too desperate. Too vague. God! Too happy!”
I tell you, that last guy (“God! Too happy!”) is a dead ringer for:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Joe_Biden_official_portrait_crop.jpg
jim2 (6faaf7) — 11/2/2009 @ 6:46 pmWait – Sarah Palin still gets to set alternative energy goals for Alaska? I thought she gave up that privilege when she, you know, ditched her constituents to cash in on her fifteen minutes of fame.
Not unlike her elder daughter’s stupid-ass boyfriend, actually (not that he had any constituents to ditch).
Leviticus (30ac20) — 11/2/2009 @ 7:57 pmex-boyfriend, that is.
Leviticus (30ac20) — 11/2/2009 @ 7:57 pmI would be very surprised if those in Alaska with DMA don’t at least listen to the ex-Gov on issues vital to the State.
AD - RtR/OS! (83414c) — 11/2/2009 @ 8:01 pm“ditched her constituents to cash in on her fifteen minutes of fame”
Leviticus – That’s not exactly the way I would describe it. How many bogus lawsuits or ethics complaints have been filed against her since she became a private citizen?
daleyrocks (718861) — 11/2/2009 @ 8:28 pmLeviticus suffers a congenital case of rectalcranial inversion.
papertiger (b56000) — 11/2/2009 @ 8:43 pmAs a public servant, it’s a bit more difficult to pull in the quid necessary to fight unethical lawsuits and unethical ethics complaints. As a private citizen, it’s a bit easier to come up with the scratch to fight them off. Face it, all those leftist nutjob liars who were filing all those lawsuits and complaints are very scared of Sarah Palin.
John Hitchcock (3fd153) — 11/2/2009 @ 9:10 pmI like that the death panels thing was brought up again. Palin doesn’t lose on that issue. Citizens WANT their leaders to be a bit paranoid and proactive in preventing dumb bureaucrats from rationing away whatever government controlled issue they are dealing with.
Fewer and fewer people trust Pelosi or Obama not to try the kind of death panel system Europeans suffer from and many democrats and US magazines openly advocate.
And if we ever actually do get some kind of heatlh care bill, somewhere in those thousands of pages will be something that goes wrong and takes someone’s life. It’s sad, but that’s what’s going to happen. Government plain ain’t the solution… that’s the bet Palin has made.
Dustin (bb61e3) — 11/2/2009 @ 9:19 pmAbout Palin quitting: she deserves some of the flack for that… yes, Obama’s people happily abused a system to destroy her ability to administer Alaska, practically daring her to let Alaska suffer greatly, but this system was something Palin helped erect to fight corruption (much of it within a GOP Palin cleaned up). She created the system that was abused…
Maybe that’s OK… maybe the corruption was so bad and there was no better way to resolve it. I doubt that. I think Palin fought corruption more aggressively than necessary, and eventually it bit her when those reforms were abused and made it impossible for her to do her job.
So she gets a bit of blame. 5% maybe.
But we have to decide if we are going to let this democrat terrorism work. They have used bogus lawsuits for decades. Obama did it to banks to force bad loans, that director who just quit planned parenthood faces completely bogus lawsuits. There’s no end in sight of this, and if Palin’s to be blamed to cutting her losses, to the point where she can’t be trusted with power again, then I think we will see this tactic used everywhere.
Vote against Palin for better reasons than that, is all I ask. The best one would be that you’ve found a candidate that is actually better at something.
Dustin (bb61e3) — 11/2/2009 @ 9:32 pmWhat is she running for?
JD (6dce29) — 11/2/2009 @ 9:33 pmTrust me, she’ll be running. But, even given the stupidly early and short primary/caucus season, 2009 is too early to announce a 2012 candidacy.
John Hitchcock (3fd153) — 11/2/2009 @ 9:35 pmJD, good point.
I agree with John that she appears to be running, but I honestly have no idea. I hope she runs. If any of the rest of the field beat her, good for them, but they need to answer to her supporters somehow.
I fear that John’s complaint about our stupid primary system is a huge problem for the GOP. That it has not yet been addressed is proof enough for me that Steele is not up to the task.
Dustin (bb61e3) — 11/2/2009 @ 9:42 pm“What is she running for?”
Right now she’s doing a great job as liberal bugaboo.
daleyrocks (718861) — 11/2/2009 @ 10:52 pmLeviticus – Old Testament Purity in a New Testament age … he’s just SO last millennium …
Alasdair (205079) — 11/3/2009 @ 12:10 amNo, she gets to claim credit for setting it when she was in office because it has not been changed since.
As for the rest of your comment, pretty shitty, toadyass toe-the-line ‘progressive’ crap.
You have certainly disabused me of any notion that you might be an honest commenter.
EW1(SG) (edc268) — 11/3/2009 @ 5:50 amThere is one problem being in an argument with VP Biden. Anybody taking Biden’s side doesn’t listen to reason, no matter what is said, and those who can think independently have no regard for what he says to begin with; so there is no way to actually “win” a debate with him.
That said, if one can take the opportunity to speak fact in a concise manner that people who don’t have time to pay much attention can easily understand, then it can be a winner.
It’s a shame that freedom of the press is so wasted on partisan drivel in this country. They could move to many other countries and do that (like Venezuela).
MD in Philly (8b02c7) — 11/3/2009 @ 6:47 amI don’t think we can predict what the 2012 election will be like. The political class has damaged itself badly the past few years, both parties. The Republicans got too comfortable in power and imitated the Democrats they drove out in 1994. The Democrats are self destructing so quickly it is terrifying. They are doing nothing about the huge problems we have and acting as though they were trying to enact laws too quickly for people to figure out what is in them. I could live with a retreat from Afghanistan. Obama will f**k it up anyway. I simply do not understand their energy and climate policies. They don’t make sense.
Barney Frank and Maxine Waters are pushing ACORN into banking. They want to double down on the lunatic policy of selling homes to people who can’t pay for them. That way lies bankruptcy.
The UAW is going to strike Ford for higher wages and they are the owners of Ford’s two rivals, GM and Chrysler. That makes no sense. If GM and Chrysler had been allowed to go into bankruptcy, the union would have been taught some realism.
We should be building nuclear power plants. I suggested 100 but others are talking about 500. The Obama people are living in a fantasy world of solar and wind.
The health care bill they are pushing makes no sense. We can’t afford Medicare so they will put everyone into it. The death panels are already in the present Medicare law. They were in the stimulus bill.
People who read this blog and others like it are tuned into this stuff. Out in the country, people are starting to catch on. The tea party rallies (10,000 in Houston this week) are part of it. Sarah Palin is another part of it. People listen to her. The Democrats are terrified of her because she is as good a communicator as Obama. She needs to work on policy positions for a couple of years and I hope she is doing that. I don’t know if she will be a candidate but she can communicate.
The Republicans may have the chance to do something after 2010 and they had better make the most of it. They won’t get a second chance and neither will the Democrats.
Mike K (2cf494) — 11/3/2009 @ 7:30 amDr. K. you write:
Yes you do understand. First, it is all about environmentalism as religion (look at how they treat dissent), folded with knee-jerk partisanship. Second, it is about raw power and control over economics and people.
These people are just aching to tell everyone else what to do. While tooling around in their SUVs, consuming like crazy, having their own separate health care, getting their own huge salaries (while carping about “rich people”), and so forth.
The New Aristocracy.
Eric Blair (dd11cc) — 11/3/2009 @ 7:37 am“The New Aristocracy”- EB
Yes, they are the “important people”, not like the rest of us, so they not only “get to” but need to use those SUV’s (their lives are worth saving from a car accident), private planes (they are so important they can’t waste any time), etc. etc.
MD in Philly (8b02c7) — 11/3/2009 @ 7:50 amI don’t know if she will be a candidate but she can communicate.
She’s a great speaker, but I’d much prefer someone who’s been on the front lines of national legislation for years, yet still possesses the requisite sharpness and passion that can ingnite the party and independents. That person actually exists, but the MSM and the GOP give him scant mention (so far) – his name is Rep. Paul Ryan from Wisconsin, and if you go to C – Span and watch him debate his fellow Dem. Counterparts on the Congressional Budget Cmmt., you’ll see a whip – smart mind and an excellent communicator.
Dmac (a964d5) — 11/3/2009 @ 7:51 am