Sarah Palin’s Open Letter to Incoming Members of Congress
Well written and right on target. A sample:
Tough decisions need to be made about reducing government spending. The longer we put them off, the worse it will get. We need to start by cutting non-essential spending. That includes stopping earmarks (because abuse of the earmark process created the “gateway-drug” that allowed backroom deals and bloated budgets), canceling all further spending on the failed Stimulus program, and rolling back non-discretionary spending to 2008 levels. You can do more, but this would be a good start.
In order to avert a fiscal disaster, we will also need to check the growth of spending on our entitlement programs. That will be a huge challenge, but it must be confronted head on.
Read it all. It really is quite good.
My suggestion, cut spending 15% across the board including the military then use that money for debit reduction.
BT (74cbec) — 11/13/2010 @ 12:39 pmRemember that some in the media will love you when you stray from the time-tested truths that built America into the most exceptional nation on earth. When the Left in the media pat you on the back, quickly reassess where you are and readjust, for the liberals’ praise is a warning bell you must heed…
Liked this part the best. It’s hard, esp when your intention is to do good, to be vilified and slandered or even just plain old ignored. Ed Morrissey at HotAir in a post on this compares Gov. Palin’s reaction re: this to SC Justice Clarence Thomas’ comments on public opinion vs. doing what’s right. (And delighted to have an excuse to quote this great man.) Also a good read IMO.
no one you know (72db9b) — 11/13/2010 @ 12:42 pmthis great man
Uh, meant Justice Thomas. (no offense meant to Ed, who I’m sure’s a wonderful guy)
no one you know (72db9b) — 11/13/2010 @ 12:44 pmYeah, she is real stupid.
Uber cool Mayor Bloomberg implied she can not even read or write.
Man, what a dumb chick. Not fit for dog catcher let alone President.
*sarc*
Torquemada (a8a9b2) — 11/13/2010 @ 1:09 pmAlaska Constitution- Article XII makes for better reading.
“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of Alaska, and that I will faithfully discharge my duties as . . . to the best of my ability.”
Sarah Palin’s best was to quit.
http://vlex.com/vid/oath-of-office-300664
DCSCA (9d1bb3) — 11/13/2010 @ 1:11 pm“Sarah Palin’s best was to quit”
Kinda like Barack “It doesn’t matter if I quit my job in the Senate, ’cause I did a lousy job there anyway” Obambi
Except Sarah was a good governor.
Dave Surls (5245d9) — 11/13/2010 @ 1:27 pmI can’t wait for O’Mamba to veto appropriations bills-apart from DOD, naturally. Shutdowns in those cases will be on Magic hisself.
gary gulrud (790d43) — 11/13/2010 @ 1:28 pmDCSCA,
I can’t decide if you fear Palin or hate her. Or is it both?
DRJ (d43dcd) — 11/13/2010 @ 1:46 pmIf only the President was subject to the same ethics laws and rules that the Governor of Alaska is!
DRJ…They have to hate her because they do fear her.
AD-RtR/OS! (747679) — 11/13/2010 @ 1:50 pmI think you’re right, especially after reading her letter to Congress’ incoming freshmen. It reads like a campaign platform to me.
DRJ (d43dcd) — 11/13/2010 @ 1:55 pmDRJ
Any letter of advice should actually contain some.
As always another junior high school debate team rhetorical screed without saying anything
Like – Cut all Social security payments 2% a year for ten years – or triple medicaid premiums over 10 years – or – eliminate departments
nothing but gee good luck guys
EricPWJohnson (719277) — 11/13/2010 @ 2:03 pmI still cannot believe that people take Palin even remotely seriously –
EricPWJohnson (719277) — 11/13/2010 @ 2:04 pmPot, meet Kettle!
AD-RtR/OS! (747679) — 11/13/2010 @ 2:06 pmI don’t get why she didn’t run against Murkowski if she wants to be a legislator so bad… she seems to like to run her mouth but isn’t so keen on accountability.
She reminds me a lot of our current president.
happyfeet (42fd61) — 11/13/2010 @ 2:15 pmIsn’t it “rein-in” rather than “rein in”? Oh wait, I was wrong, and Pain isn’t stupid.
/sarc off.
A great piece.
ParisParamus (1a9f48) — 11/13/2010 @ 2:20 pmYeah, sure, Paris. Hyphens are so important. More important than spelling “Palin” correctly.
Kevin M (298030) — 11/13/2010 @ 2:26 pmOTOH
…and rolling back non-discretionary spending to 2008 levels.
Umm, surely she means “discretionary spending” as “non-discretionary” spending isn’t subject to, well, discretion.
Kevin M (298030) — 11/13/2010 @ 2:27 pmTo the anti-Palinists here:
I’m curious how you compare Palin to other GOP governors like Pawlenty, Jindal, Perry, and even New Jersey’s Christie. I suspect all of you like these governors more than you like Palin, or at the very least you think they are more electable than Palin is. But what I’m interested in is why they are more qualified.
DRJ (d43dcd) — 11/13/2010 @ 2:30 pmDRJ
Have you looked at her sparse legislative record?
find a tax cut, see where she did anything but increase spending like every other politician except for three
Charlie Crist, Rick Perry and Sanford
They are the only politicians in the last 15 years to consistently cut, reduce, slow, the growth of spending in their state
Palin is a cutsy, vapid, patriotic cheerleader and thats all – thinking she is of any caliber is just wishful fullfillment
EricPWJohnson (719277) — 11/13/2010 @ 2:37 pmIt is a strong letter and this is what Palin excels at: encouraging and fortifying those entering or already in office, and bringing them back to the essentials. She rallies people almost like no other before her, including he who once walked on water.
With that, I really hope this is not a coy gambit toward her possible run. I believe there are others far more suited to be a viable nominee.
Dana (8ba2fb) — 11/13/2010 @ 2:37 pmDana
Strong letters have specifics – didnt find any – did you? I didnt see a concrete proposal other than something gleamed from Baracks 2008 debate speeches – he in essence said the same thing
Plus – this isnt her speaking style, she didnt write nor even dictate it
EricPWJohnson (719277) — 11/13/2010 @ 2:46 pmFor 3-separate reasons: 1. More intelligent; 2. More accomplished in both their public offices and careers; 3. Not quitters.
A President who quit being a Governor because of ethics complaints.
Really?
Christoph (8ec277) — 11/13/2010 @ 2:46 pmHow about we elect someone else as President, but give Palin the “bully pulpit.”
Kevin M (298030) — 11/13/2010 @ 2:47 pmDana
yeah she rallied them in Colo, Alaska, Conn, South Carolina (where what should have been a 20pt victory nearly was a loss)
The wheels on the Palin bus arent going round and round anymore
EricPWJohnson (719277) — 11/13/2010 @ 2:48 pmKevin,
Yeah she’s askin 6 figures every time she climbs into that pulpit – bully for her indeed!
EricPWJohnson (719277) — 11/13/2010 @ 2:49 pmI don’t think that not wishing to see Palin as the nominee equates to being anti-Palin. Part of assessing a politician who might possibly run is not only their viability as an electable candidate but also being qualified and with hands-on experience. Aside from that, there are plenty who respect and admire Palin and what she’s accomplished outside of Washington, and that’s what makes her so unique. She has established herself as a kingmaker of sorts, as a person who can rally and enthuse and re-fortify a party, and perhaps the WH is not the best use of her unique talents. I hope she is shrewd enough to not assume that the end goal for her must be the WH. She is extremely effective at what she is doing now. And also, the GOP could certainly benefit from her leadership.
As far as qualifications go, clearly experience adds to one’s practical repetoire: Pawlenty, governor for 8 years; Perry, governor for 10 years; Jindal, governor for 3 years. Even at the baci level, they have had more hands on experience than Palin in actual policy and decision making.
Dana (8ba2fb) — 11/13/2010 @ 2:49 pmEricPWJohnson, if your observation about other states is as accurate as your observation about Colorado, then Palin’s doing pretty good.
SPQR (26be8b) — 11/13/2010 @ 2:50 pmYou know, people think that I am a big Palin supporter, but I find that the people who think or say that have a bit of an agenda. Here is an example:
Hmmm. I wonder what that says, psychologically, about the person who wrote that. Especially the wonderful Freudian slip of “wishful fulfillment.” Also consider that people like this can make such sweeping generalizations, not just against the former governor, but about anyone who disagrees with them. Interesting.
Palin is a good motivational speaker. She has a lot to prove, if she expects to be a candidate in the future. But I doubt she will manage to get past this odd personal distaste people have.
It may not be sexism, but I don’t know how a sexist view of her would differ from what is being stated. Another interesting question.
Eric Blair (c8876d) — 11/13/2010 @ 2:51 pmPlus – this isnt her speaking style, she didnt write nor even dictate it
Comment by EricPWJohnson — 11/13/2010 @ 2:46 pm
…and you have a link to prove this?
I know several people who write horribly yet speak beautifully with perfect syntax, eloquence and grammer; I don’t see why the opposite wouldn’t be true as well.
Dana (8ba2fb) — 11/13/2010 @ 2:53 pmEric,
Are you sure Governor Crist consistently cut spending in Florida? And what about Crist’s support for Obama’s stimulus?
DRJ (d43dcd) — 11/13/2010 @ 2:58 pmEric #27 – just going by those who *really* dislike/fear her, she’s a very nice, very capable, honourable human being … by the ‘quality’ of her enemies, she is what this country needs …
And it’s not because she walks on water, or is The One … it’s because she is down-to-earth and doesn’t try to pretend to be anything more than she is …
Remember that modern-day Democrats aren’t progressives – they are Projectives – they project the flaws they dislike the most onto others, lest they have to examine themselves for any such flaws …
Alasdair (205079) — 11/13/2010 @ 3:00 pmPlus – this isnt her speaking style, she didnt write nor even dictate it
Comment by EricPWJohnson — 11/13/2010
It’s fine to criticize the letter for a lack of specifics. But the contention that she didn’t write or dictate it because it’s not “her speaking style”?
Maybe you should look at yourself before making snide remarks about “junior high debate rhetorical screeds,” Eric.
You hate Sarah Palin. That’s fine. Plenty of people have found reasons to do so. But please try not to present yourself as a serious commenter who’s concerned with actually determining mature solutions, when you have to resort to that level of rhetorical nonsense just so you can buck up your unwarranted sense of self-regard.
If you have the solutions that Palin lacks, perhaps you should be making more of an effort to increase your influence to the level that she commands, so those solutions will be taken seriously.
Another Chris (2d8013) — 11/13/2010 @ 3:01 pmAs for Perry and Sanford, Sanford isn’t a viable candidate and apparently Perry isn’t running either. Who does that leave you with?
DRJ (d43dcd) — 11/13/2010 @ 3:02 pmSPQR
We lost an EASY Senate race no? Oh delaware helped out too.
Eric B
As a scientist and a professor she is clinically vapid, she was a cheerleader and she is patriotic. She is cutsy, and so are many good motivational speakers – its a given in that profession – please point out a homely news anchor or speaker – they are extremely rare
Also, popularity contests for president havent worked out so well, we had huckabee, losing weight (and now regained it all back) and his status as a preacher (which he hadnt been for a long time and wasnt very successful when he was) crowding out people like Fred and Brownback and setting the stage for a tepid McCain candidacy which lead to a trillion a quarter economic disaster named Obama to be elected. Dont get me started on Bill, and we saw hippy brown getting elected
Sure keep on using a branch of science that you have no qualifications in to make off handed comments about other posters – its not our odd personal distaste – its her lack of a record of accomplishment, of concreteness and the shallowness of waving the flag instead of saying what she would do – specifically
You are not a tenured professor of Psychology or are you?
EricPWJohnson (719277) — 11/13/2010 @ 3:03 pmPalin is a good motivational speaker. She has a lot to prove, if she expects to be a candidate in the future. But I doubt she will manage to get past this odd personal distaste people have.
Eric Blair, I believe you hit the nail on the head here: It’s almost as if the die is cast re Palin – she is so polarizing and simultaneously distasteful to so many (including conservatives), that it would be very hard to win over the necessary potential voters. And I don’t see her changing to suit the masses as it is simply not in her character to compromise or change colors for others. While very admirable it may easily work against her.
Dana (8ba2fb) — 11/13/2010 @ 3:03 pmWhat? Did that sentence mean anything?
You aren’t helping how you look here, you know. But then, historically, you like to engage in this kind of battling.
Fine: I’m happy with you looking like a pithecan sexist. Because you do, you know.
Eric Blair (c8876d) — 11/13/2010 @ 3:04 pmWhy don’t people hate Jindal or Perry the way they hate Palin? Their positions are similar and so are their backgrounds. What makes her so different?
DRJ (d43dcd) — 11/13/2010 @ 3:06 pmUm, Mr. Kettle? Mr. Pot is on the telephone for you.
Here is a hint: what word is close to “hypotenuse” in the dictionary?
But as I say, you get nutty deluxe from time to time.
Eric Blair (c8876d) — 11/13/2010 @ 3:06 pmDRJ, remember how they went after both Jindal and Perry their own issues? This isn’t about a “good” candidate. This about destroying possible candidates.
Eric Blair (c8876d) — 11/13/2010 @ 3:07 pmEPWJ, we lost the state wide tickets in Colorado ( except for AG ) because the Colorado state GOP blew up – not because of Palin. You don’t have a clue what happened in Colorado – you weren’t on the ground here.
TEA Party enthusiasm took back several Congressional seats despite the collapse in the state GOP apparatus and made a Democrat held seat (CO 7) competitive to the point of absorbing large sums of Democrat money to defend against what had been thought to be a weak challenger earlier in the season.
Your habit of opining without any idea what you are talking about continues anon.
SPQR (26be8b) — 11/13/2010 @ 3:08 pmHow about Mitch Daniels, whose approval rating is around 70%?
Dana (8ba2fb) — 11/13/2010 @ 3:09 pmEric Blair,
The level of vitriol against Palin is much higher than it is against other GOP candidates. Maybe it’s just because she was on the national stage but like you I also wonder if it’s a gender issue.
DRJ (d43dcd) — 11/13/2010 @ 3:10 pmDaniels has some good points but I fear Democrats are right that he may be too nuanced to make it through the primary.
DRJ (d43dcd) — 11/13/2010 @ 3:16 pmDana, I like Mitch Daniels. Many other posters do.
DRJ, I do think it is sexism, straight up. I have a friend I have known for decades—he was my debate partner in high school, and is an attorney is the Bay Area of California now. He went from being a “piratical conservative” to being reliably leftist. That’s fine; it’s his own business. But though he calls himself a feminist, and decries how the Right (in his view) disrespects women, he thought it was hysterically funny to send out photoshops of Palin’s head on a hooker’s body. He cannot help himself.
He is a sexist pig. Disagree with someone’s policy, fine. But look at the language used, repeatedly, when referring to Palin. There is more than a whiff of sexism about this. I just wish dissenters would stick to policies. And they just can’t do it.
I think that they are reacting to her self-confidence, personally. She isn’t staying on the metaphorical plantation.
SPQR: I am reading the new Riordan fantasy to my sons. One of the new “demigods” has your nickname tattooed on his arm. So I got to explain what it meant—and push a bit of Roman history—on my young sons. Thought you would get a kick out of that.
Eric Blair (c8876d) — 11/13/2010 @ 3:16 pmDRJ
Its not a gender issue – Palin has no specifics – playing a gender card – sint going to advance her either
The Viterol is the constant campaigning for cash – for herself – and not really saying anything
EricPWJohnson (719277) — 11/13/2010 @ 3:20 pmEric Blair, which fantasy?
DRJ, possible, but I think its just because some think that the bile they generate continuously needs a target and they follow others like sheep.
SPQR (26be8b) — 11/13/2010 @ 3:23 pmI can’t agree with the Dems here re Daniels (at least as written at the link). Most I think he is unfamiliar to people. While Palin is certainly a magnet to the media/masses (can’t get enough of her), others who may be more viable and serious contenders will face an uphill battle getting the same air play. (Again, that has both helped and hindered Palin, hence I think part of her unelectability).
Dana (8ba2fb) — 11/13/2010 @ 3:23 pmComment by EricPWJohnson — 11/13/2010 @ 3:20 pm
Well, Eric, if she didn’t actually write the letter, as you contend, you can hardly criticize her for not being specific enough in the letter itself, correct?
Another Chris (2d8013) — 11/13/2010 @ 3:24 pmRead the letter before summarizing it. There are several specifics.
She’s a politician, so I don’t get the ‘raising cash’ nonsense. But then, you pretend hiring a spouse as an assistant is the same as giving a senate seat toy our kid. You pretend an online poll is the same as real corruption with a land deal.
You’re not being fair, and sometimes it looks like it’s based on someone’s affiliation with Palin. I agree, this is more than sexism… but I don’t really care what it is. You got the facts wrong so whatever you’re selling sounds corrupt.
Don’t be corrupt, or JD will get Anita Hill to ring up the FBI.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/13/2010 @ 3:25 pmThis women sure elicits hate.
I find her at times a bit much but in comparison to the Trent Lotts, Grahams, Obama, etc —- she is a breadth of fresh air.
Torquemada (a8a9b2) — 11/13/2010 @ 3:28 pmDustin, that was nice.
SPQR, here is the book (just came out last month):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lost_Hero
RR is moving toward Roman mythology now.
And it means I get to talk with my sons about the Latin roots in our language. Last night, we talked about “Caesar” versus “Kaiser.” And why. I’m not a historian, but I love history.
Eric Blair (c8876d) — 11/13/2010 @ 3:29 pmDear Brand New Congress-thing:
Stop taking money from successful people and businesses in order to provide free stuff to stupid people.
Stop giving money to other countries.
Stop it with the green jobs/windmills/solar bullshit. Instead, focus on making coal oil and gas cleaner and more efficient, and on finding more of each.
Stop telling me what to eat, what kind of lightbulbs to buy, when I can go to the doctor, and what kind of toilet I can have.
STOP LYING.
Jones (72b0ed) — 11/13/2010 @ 3:30 pmThanks Eric. History, especially military history, is a big hobby of mine. And I greatly enjoy Roman Republic era stuff. Try Adrian Goldworthy’s bios of Cicero and Caesar – I found them fascinating.
SPQR (26be8b) — 11/13/2010 @ 3:32 pmDavid Drake has written some great horror stories set during the Roman period.
Thanks for the recommendation.
Eric Blair (c8876d) — 11/13/2010 @ 3:33 pmI seriously got to wonder about the mental condition of people who aren’t on the same page as this.
Sure, Palin’s just flat out imperfect sometimes. Compared to the politicians we’ve been dealing with for ages, though, she’s awesome.
Unlike Murkowski, whose corruption EPWJ himself has pointed out (before dismissing as no big deal), Palin’s ethical. Every personal email in her account was sorted through by a hacker democrat and she was pristine. She suffered over 1000 FOIA requests and more than a dozens ethics suits that proved just how clean she is.
People resort to bashing her intelligence, which I think is a sign of mental breakdown. Palin didn’t get where she is by being an idiot. EPWJ sneers about her being a cheerleader, but I think he’s smart enough to know that isn’t fair at all.
If you disagree with her political aims, fine, and if you think she’s not qualified for the tremendous role of President, I think you’re quite reasonable. But be fair. This kind of letter is politics. She’s taking policy issues that need more attention and shining a bright light on them. She’s a leader and she’s doing some good.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/13/2010 @ 3:34 pmOh, and Caesar –> Kaiser –> Tsar / Czar. Fascinating how a term thought to mean either “hairy” or “curly hair” moved from a nickname in the Julian family to a family name to a title.
SPQR (26be8b) — 11/13/2010 @ 3:34 pmEric
The question simply is Are you a tenured professor or clinically licensed psychologist?
Because that was the total fundamental of your argument
EricPWJohnson (719277) — 11/13/2010 @ 3:34 pmDustin,
What Frank did was legal, was Miller did was pay himself a salary by employing his wife – which is illegal
EricPWJohnson (719277) — 11/13/2010 @ 3:37 pmWhy do you pose these questions, epwj?
What’s going wrong in your brain that you do this to everyone who disagrees with you?
You find some incredibly irrelevant question and then repeatedly demand it be answered, and all it does is deflect… at great cost to your credibility.
Unlike some of the other people I disagree with on here, you’re capable of making great arguments and communicating clearly. So I don’t see why you would opt for this. You did it to me for a while and it really ticked me off. I’m still waiting for an apology, crying into my dinner even as I type this. Well, no… it’s not that big a deal, but spare us, OK?
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/13/2010 @ 3:37 pm@#8 Hmmm. Can’t decide if you’re projecting your own inner fears, or just baiting, DRJ. Or is it both. Depends on if you’re comfortable wearing establishment, conservative blue or rebel grey most likely in the Republican Party of late. A GOP civil war makes for colorful political theatre. Amusing the terms ‘hypocrite’ or ‘laughable’ didn’t occur to you. Truly hope Palin gets the GOP nod. What a gift.
DCSCA (9d1bb3) — 11/13/2010 @ 3:39 pmEPWJ sneers about her being a cheerleader
Actually, there is a Dallas Cowboys Cheerleader who is an engineer at NASA, i.e., a rocket scientist. Last heard, she had trouble geeting dates. Those likely to be most impressed by her cheerleading were a bit intimidated by her job, those most impressed by her job were intimidated by her cheerleading. Maybe she should run for governor.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 11/13/2010 @ 3:41 pmEPWJ: you are simply playing the part of an argumentative troll. Pfft. Go away. You are no expert in anything, from what I have read, and yet you blather on—amusingly, about qualifications (and it is amusing, since you are not shy about your own weird statements from authority). Look at the history of your posts, and the responses you receive; people either ignore or laugh at you.
But please. Work yourself up to insulting people, as you have in the past so many times. That is something that Patterico moderates people for, and then we wouldn’t have to listen to your nonsense for a while.
SPQR, my favorite bit last night when I was reading the book out loud was the part where the daughter of Aphrodite choose an unusual dagger, called Katoptris. I got to explain about Helen of Troy to my sons!
Eric Blair (c8876d) — 11/13/2010 @ 3:42 pmDRJ, just remember DCSCA’s history. He makes things up, repeatedly, in grandiose form. Not to be taken seriously.
Eric Blair (c8876d) — 11/13/2010 @ 3:43 pmI don’t like blaming people’s decisions on racism or sexism, primarily because I think most people are far more complicated than to let one thing make up their minds. On the other hand, I think Hillary Clinton’s gender hurt her candidacy so it makes me wonder if it’s also a factor for Palin.
DRJ (d43dcd) — 11/13/2010 @ 3:43 pmThe reason I like Sarah Palin is because I think her policy (and political) instincts are generally spot-on. This is the trait that we most need in a President.
I don’t think that Sarah Palin is the vapid airhead that so many of her detractors claim, but let’s say for argument’s sake that she isn’t particularly bright. How important is sheer brainpower in terms of being an effective administrator? I submit to you a list of 20th Century Presidents who were supposed to be great intellects: William Howard Taft, Woodrow Wilson, Herbert Hoover, Richard Nixon, and Bill Clinton. Not exactly the sorts of people that we have been clamoring for, are they? Now here’s a list of 20th Century Presidents who were considered to be second-tier intellectually: Calvin Coolidge, Franklin Roosevelt, Harry Truman, Dwight Eisenhower, John F. Kennedy, and Ronald Reagan. Note a pattern here?
This isn’t necessarily to say that she would be my first choice as a Republican nominee in 2012, but as far as I am concerned her instincts make her far better than any Democrat alternative.
JVW (eccfd6) — 11/13/2010 @ 3:45 pmWhy is it so hard for you to answer a question, DCSCA?
DRJ (d43dcd) — 11/13/2010 @ 3:45 pmEric
Again, what qualifications do you have in the field of psychology – since you opened the floor with it in your reponse
You failure to provide an answer simply means – you dont have any
EricPWJohnson (719277) — 11/13/2010 @ 3:47 pmDRJ et al
Can anyone point to a specific tax cut of significance that as Governor or as Mayor Palin proposed?
any?
EricPWJohnson (719277) — 11/13/2010 @ 3:48 pmMD in Philly,
More smart and beautiful cheerleaders.
DRJ (d43dcd) — 11/13/2010 @ 3:49 pmHell, I’d date her. I used to make satellite assembly & test equipment, as well as telemetry monitoring software. I could be called a rocket scientist, albeit an erstwhile one. 🙂 And I would be intimidated by anything about her.
Some chump (e84e27) — 11/13/2010 @ 3:52 pmOoops. I meant “would not be intimidated”.
Sheesh, I am getting old.
Some chump (e84e27) — 11/13/2010 @ 3:52 pmThe level of vitriol against Palin is much higher than it is against other GOP candidates. Maybe it’s just because she was on the national stage but like you I also wonder if it’s a gender issue.
Comment by DRJ — 11/13/2010 @ 3:10 pm
Wonder that too, and certainly Hillary Clinton also got subjected to plenty of misogynist names (different than the ones on the Tshirts “honoring” Palin)when Clinton was running against Barack Obama.
I wonder though even more if it’s a “we can’t get her on corruption no matter how hard we try (as Dustin put so well above) so let’s attack her intelligence.” (Didn’t they send many, many journalists to Wasilla at the time while Obama went unvetted?)
Plus there is the “look at the Alaska hick/didn’t go to the right college” thing, kind of a Red Bull version of prejudice by those living in big cities in CA and NY against those in small towns in the middle.
Am still shaking my head over Katie Couric actually calling flyover country (itself a prejudiced term in its origins) “the great unwashed” when she said she loved visiting offcoast, as it were. Didn’t agree with the way Gov. Palin expressed in speeches her point about the “real America” – it was misunderstood as prejudice against larger cities or whatever when I thought it was more a reaction to this other prejudice long expressed by those who think the only colleges that really count [OK am exaggerating but not much] are Harvard and Yale — and that chillbilly went to like 5!.
no one you know (72db9b) — 11/13/2010 @ 3:53 pmHey EPWJ: you have done this before, remember? You need to move on. If you continue to repeat yourself, you will be tiresome, just as you have been several times.
Go away for a while, would you?
Eric Blair (c8876d) — 11/13/2010 @ 3:54 pmI think Palin as Mayor and Governor has a mixed record on taxes and spending, EricPWJohnson, but at least she talks the talk now. Most GOP politicians during the 1980’s and 1990’s had a spotty record on spending and fiscal matters until recently. At least Palin was in favor of small government in 2008 and 2009 instead of waiting for 2010 like the rest of the establishment GOP.
DRJ (d43dcd) — 11/13/2010 @ 3:55 pmDana–
==I don’t think that not wishing to see Palin as the nominee equates to being anti-Palin.==
Perfectly said. Our current president has proved beyond any doubt that having experience matters in the oval office and on the world stage. The US presidency is not the place for training wheels. Sarah comes with very similar “rockstar with scant experience” baggage, and IMO voters will not make that leap of faith a second time in 4 years. When she resigned as Governor of Alaska it clearly made her family’s life much better, but that action also made her opportunities for touting executive accomplishments much worse.
The die has already been cast with respect to Mrs. Palin. Some of it is her own doing and much of it is the media’s ongoing hatchet job. But she simply cannot be elected and I think she is smart enough to know that. That said, she is a bright, wonderful addition to the political stage. I admire much about her and I hope she is around for a long time to drive the left crazy and keep conservatives engaged and focused on what is important in life. She is a media magnet and can use her celebrity in so many positive ways to shape the political narrative, to fundraise, and to influence right leaning activists, lawmakers and candidates.
elissa (b417e1) — 11/13/2010 @ 3:55 pmThe question simply is Are you a tenured professor or clinically licensed psychologist?
EPWJ, you’ve already tried this shit once. Its already marked you as a clown.
SPQR (26be8b) — 11/13/2010 @ 3:55 pmOK
It was an awful letter from a quitter then.. so we can dismiss everything she wrote… if she indeed can write.
I was listening to the radio the other day and the host was explaining that earmarks only account for $15B and making them a big deal really won’t turn back the deficit. Which is true enough, but you’ve got to start somewhere.
You need to be above being bought off by political favors paid in pork.
Palin is right to stay after earmarks as the gateway drug to mainlinig spending… you don’t want to ever wake up from a binge owing your dealer.
I don’t mind criticisms of Palin, Angle, whomever… I just don’t like seeing conservatives who conduct their own form of purity tests and then carry the water for those who are tearing them down.
A few conservatives this season decided that since negatives were already out there on candidates, that is was OK to pile on… during the campaign.
I have questions about Christie that really can’t be answered until he gets more seasoning.
SteveG (cc5dc9) — 11/13/2010 @ 3:55 pmWill he be for cap and trade after some time to understand the costs?
Same goes for Obamacare….
During the primaries I’d be running some sort of test… maybe not for 99% purity, but something… if he makes it through the primary and runs against a democrat, he’s my guy and I won’t participate in tearing him down.
@#61 “I’m not sure she [Sarah Palin] would be the best choice for President, either.” – Comment by Eric Blair, 11/13/09 Not to be taken seriously, indeed.
DCSCA (9d1bb3) — 11/13/2010 @ 3:55 pmNOYK, they are just being snobs. I well remember hearing how darned smart Al Gore is, over and over again.
Until his SATs and grades were released. Whoops.
But, as always, this is different.
Folks on the Right don’t have to like or support Palin. But then the question is: who do they support? Because if folks spend their time talking about who is a bad candidate, and not who a good candidate might be…well, who does that benefit?
Why, the DNC!
Eric Blair (c8876d) — 11/13/2010 @ 3:57 pmDCSCA, are you off your meds again? I have seen you post politely, and here you are again, being weird. Seriously, dude.
Eric Blair (c8876d) — 11/13/2010 @ 3:58 pmI mean, do we have to go over your Hall of Fame Fables again? Really?
Eric Blair (c8876d) — 11/13/2010 @ 3:59 pmI particularly like the smear she did not write the letter ….. when was the last time a Congressmen or Senator or POTUS or anyone of importance wrote their own letter in an official context?
This, to me, if such a fundamentally dishonest critique as to make me think this is pure sexism with a mix of politics.
Torquemada (a8a9b2) — 11/13/2010 @ 3:59 pmEric
Again, what is your license number or PhD in Psych?
This statement sounds like an analysis:
Hmmm. I wonder what that says, psychologically, about the person who wrote that. Especially the wonderful Freudian slip of “wishful fulfillment.”
So, when did you manage to find the time get yet another PhD?
EricPWJohnson (719277) — 11/13/2010 @ 3:59 pmSigh. People unclear on the concept.
Eric Blair (c8876d) — 11/13/2010 @ 4:00 pmTorquemada
Point taken, however, where is the specifics and who the hell is she to lecture anyone on duty?
Period, when she only campaigns for cash – personal cash
EricPWJohnson (719277) — 11/13/2010 @ 4:01 pmAlthough I do find your twisted syntax funny quite often. You usually end up revealing more about yourself than you intend. But as I wrote before: how many times have you had this conversation before, with others?
You and DCSCA need be roommates or something.
Eric Blair (c8876d) — 11/13/2010 @ 4:02 pm“Can anyone point to a specific tax cut of significance that as Governor or as Mayor Palin proposed?
any?
Comment by EricPWJohnson ”
A) before the entire presidential election circus began, she had an approval rating of 90%. You cannot hope to challenge the fact she was a great governor. She simply was. People polarize about presidential tickets, but her work was excellent.
B) this kind of question is why people think you’re spouting off on things you aren’t informed on. I liked Palin a lot before most people ever heard of her, and looked psychic when I predicted Mccain would pick her for VP (I wasn’t even serious about it). She ran for Mayor on a property tax cut promise. A promise she kept.
She’s repeatedly specified specific tax cuts. Such as Alaska’s fuel tax and tire tax. She’s opposed income taxation for the state.
—
I take your asking this question as a sign you just aren’t well informed on Alaska politics aside from excuses for Murkowski’s corruption and her talking points on Joe Miller. Seriously… you didn’t know Palin cut taxes all the time?
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/13/2010 @ 4:03 pm#66 EricPW,
You really need to research….
Alaska has no State Taxes
Alaska has no Sales Taxes
0.08 per gallon on gas — lowest in the nation
Property Tax is discretion of local municipalities
WHAT FUCKING TAXES DO YOU WANT HER TO CUT AS GOV or MAYOR?
Torquemada (a8a9b2) — 11/13/2010 @ 4:04 pmBTW Millers lawyers are quitting and apparently a “ODonnelation” of the behind the scenes at the Miller camp maybe coming
Palin cannot win an election in alaska now, why would we think that she could do anything else.
I mean why not run Glenn Beck?
EricPWJohnson (719277) — 11/13/2010 @ 4:04 pmEric, your arguments from authority were tedious a year ago, and they have not become any more charming as the days go by.
The Departed (d027b8) — 11/13/2010 @ 4:04 pmDustin, you are a nice guy, but this fellow just likes to argue. You have nice to him, and I hope you aren’t sorry soon.
Eric Blair (c8876d) — 11/13/2010 @ 4:05 pm#66
ALASKA
Sales Taxes
State Sales Tax: The state currently does not have a sales and use tax. However, 62 municipalities impose local sales taxes that range up to 7%. Anchorage does not have a sales tax.
Gasoline Tax: 8 cents/gallon
Diesel Fuel Tax: 8 cents/gallon
Cigarette Tax: $2.00/pack of 20 (Anchorage – add $1.32)
Personal Income Taxes
No state income tax
Retirement Income: Not taxed.
Property Taxes
Alaska is the only state in the United States where a large part of the land mass is not subject to a property tax. Although property tax is the primary method of raising revenues for most of the larger municipalities in the state, smaller municipalities favor a sales tax. This is due primarily to the fact that the smaller incorporated areas lack a tax base large enough to support the property tax. The unincorporated areas of the state do not have the legal authority to levy a tax. Of the 18 Boroughs, only 14 levy a property tax. Only 11 Cities located outside of Boroughs levy a property tax. Therefore, only 25 municipalities in Alaska (either cities or boroughs) levy a property tax. These 25 municipalities can be found on the Directory of Taxing Jurisdictions.
Alaska taxes both real and personal property. there are several municipalities that have chosen to exempt some or all categories of personal property. For a listing of those municipalities and categories, see the Alaska Taxable information. Homeowners 65 and older (or surviving spouses 60 and older) are exempt from municipal taxes on the first $150,000 of the assessed value of their property. This also applies to disabled veterans. The average assessed value exempted from taxes for senior citizens and disabled veterans is $138,486 which equated to a tax exemption of $1,851 for 2009. In 2009, the total full value for all municipalities (over 750 in population) was $91.5 billion (including TAPS — Trans-Alaska Pipeline). With a statewide population of 679,720 the per capita full value was $140,292. Intangible personal property is exempt from taxation. Call 907-269-6620 (Anchorage) or 907-465-2320 (Juneau) for details.
Inheritance and Estate Taxes
Torquemada (a8a9b2) — 11/13/2010 @ 4:05 pmThere is no inheritance tax and the estate tax is limited to federal estate tax collection.
Tax Burden By State
If all other things are equal, a state with a lower burden is a more attractive place to retire than a state with a higher one. To get a true sense of which state is less expensive, you need to look at state and local tax burdens. Only then do the low tax states stand out.
It is estimated by the Tax Foundation that the nation as a whole will pay on average 9.7% of its income in state and local taxes in 2008, down from 9.9% in 2007 primarily because income grew faster than tax collections between 2007 and 2008. This is the latest report the Tax Foundation has issued.
New Jersey residents paid 11.8%, topping the charts. New Yorkers were close behind, paying 11.7%, and Connecticut was third at 11.1%. The top 10 were rounded out by Maryland (10.8%), Hawaii (10.6%), California (10.5%), Ohio (10.4%). Vermont (10.3%), Wisconsin (10.2%) and Rhode Island (10.2%).
Alaskans pay the least, 6.4 percent in 2008, but Nevada is close at 6.6 percent. In four states the residents pay between 7 and 8 percent of their income in state and local taxes: Wyoming (7.0%), Florida (7.4%), New Hampshire (7.6%) and South Dakota (7.9%). Four other states round out the bottom 10: Tennessee (8.3%), Texas (8.4%), Louisiana (8.4%) and Arizona (8.5%).
Torquemada (a8a9b2) — 11/13/2010 @ 4:06 pmNot to mention, Alaska’s taxes are not exactly stratospheric. Palin still cut those taxes, but it’s not like she could cut their income taxes if they didn’t have any.
She did increase taxes on the oil industry, which is party of Murkowski’s appeal I realize.
The democrats successfully sued Palin out of office, protecting the office for only the millionaires instead of normal people. Since Palin was actually not corrupt (Unlike Murkowski), the fact she was sued of office was nasty and unfair. Those who say she has no sense of duty, like EPWJ, are needlessly harsh. It’s a political liability for her political future, but it’s not like she has anything to be ashamed of.
She was clean, but didn’t have millions for legal defense. Who is she to lecture DC on cleaning up and governing well? She’s someone who governed well and cleaned up!
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/13/2010 @ 4:09 pm@#72 “…but at least she [Palin] talks the talk now.” <– Which is pretty easy for someone comfortably perched in the media peanut gallery to do be it from the right, left or center. Actually governing is another matter. And when it came to doing that as governor of Alaska, Ms. Palin quit.
DCSCA (9d1bb3) — 11/13/2010 @ 4:09 pmHe’s being ugly to you right now, but not long ago he was just as ugly to me.
I’m under no illusions, my friend.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/13/2010 @ 4:09 pmI’m in good company!
Eric Blair (c8876d) — 11/13/2010 @ 4:10 pmDCSCA never fails to make me laugh:
Lots of unintentional irony here.
Eric Blair (c8876d) — 11/13/2010 @ 4:12 pmThat was great info, man!
So EPWJ is demanding we answer his point on Palin’s taxation, strongly implying we’re ignorant and she has an awful record… but it turns out she has the very best record possible. Lowest taxes in the nation?
EPWJ: you should admit Palin’s got a great record on taxes. I suspect you’re in the oil industry if you disagree, but that’s exactly what I mean about corruption. Powerful lobbies get great deals from the powerful (who happen to get rich themselves). They make the laws, so I can’t show them breaking the law, but they are quite corrupt anyhow.
I don’t even like Palin that much… but man I sound like it when people are so unfair to her.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/13/2010 @ 4:13 pmDustin,
Okay, you’re bitter I understand it, Palins finshed, its a process, it will take time – in two years she will be a footnote.
Also, I looked at her record, she increased some taxes – increased spending, asked for more money from the Oil Companies, raised corporate taxes in the manner of fees and generally increased spending beyond inflation – this talk of fiscal restraint wasnt practiced by her
http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/Alaska_state_spending.html#usgs302a
EricPWJohnson (719277) — 11/13/2010 @ 4:14 pmEricPWJohnson,
These five Palin quotes are from Patterico’s link and they sound specific to me:
Palin also urges the new Congress to secure the border first before considering amnesty or illegal immigration policies. That may not meet your idea of specificity but I bet a lot of Democrats would object.
DRJ (d43dcd) — 11/13/2010 @ 4:15 pmWhen you say crazy crap like that it only helps Palin.
Miller isn’t Palin, even if they are allied.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/13/2010 @ 4:16 pmHave fun, DRJ! But regardless of the reason that you post, I enjoy reading them: you are polite and reasoned, regardless of what is written to you. I admire that.
Eric Blair (c8876d) — 11/13/2010 @ 4:16 pmIn other words, EPWJ, you take someone with the lowest taxes in the country and cheery pick examples of tax increases, among a bunch of tax cuts, to pretend she’s actually in favor of high taxes.
You’re irrational. Calling me bitter is not interesting.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/13/2010 @ 4:17 pmShe talked the talk as a Vice Presidential candidate, DCSCA.
DRJ (d43dcd) — 11/13/2010 @ 4:17 pmDRJ, are you suggesting EPWJ didn’t even read the letter before announcing there were no specifics?
I mean, surely he wouldn’t just overlook the truth.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/13/2010 @ 4:18 pmSo Palins response was different than the advice in her letter to the Republicans, she withdrew money from savings instead of cutting spending
There were no significant reductions
EricPWJohnson (719277) — 11/13/2010 @ 4:18 pmIt is fun for me, Eric Blair. Sometimes I like to talk to people who don’t agree with me. I enjoy it more when they speak sincerely but beggars can’t be choosers.
DRJ (d43dcd) — 11/13/2010 @ 4:19 pmDRJ
Defunding isnt a specific
None of those are specifics
Specifics in Government are like the letter of the law Miller’s be arguing
Raise the retirement age to 70
Or Reducing Medicaid payments 10% starting Jan 1st
Or Reducing all Social Security checks 2% a year each year for 10 years
Or how about specific tax rates like 20%
Specific means things to me like numbers,
Repealing Obama care is a given
EricPWJohnson (719277) — 11/13/2010 @ 4:23 pm–
#@102- Running is not governing and, of course, the ticket was rejected by the voters. Ms. Palin capacity to draw attention and crowds speaking from the sidelines of the private sector is undeniable. Do you blame the electorate for not seeing the wisdom of her vision or the top of the ticket for the rebuff at the polls. Or maybe it’s just easier to ‘blame George W. Bush.’
DCSCA (9d1bb3) — 11/13/2010 @ 4:26 pmSo long as they are polite, DRJ. But these days….
I also admire how well written your posts are; not simply because you clearly proofread (I could do better in that area), but the flow of your prose.
Eric Blair (c8876d) — 11/13/2010 @ 4:26 pmIt’s one thing to repeat Palin’s problems in a discussion relating to her. I could name a few.
But that’s not really what EPWJ is doing. He’s suggesting her letter is completely different than it is. He’s asking loaded questions that are extremely dishonest. There are these people out there who just can’t resist distorting Palin.
EPWJ asking about her tax cuts the way he did suggests she had something less than the best record in the country. His dismissal of her arguments amounts to simply insisting she didn’t make them.
That EPWJ also calls Palin unelectable and over is predictable. I suppose the lazy thing to do is pretend his 0% accurate record means she’s highly electable, but the truth is that I just don’t know for sure.
I do know that Palin’s so attractive to so many because the corrupt hate her so much.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/13/2010 @ 4:30 pmExcept the are specific. She could run down the entire defunding process, but you’d still find some excuse, like a lack of a hard deadline for this to happen or calling out by name who should do it.
Admit it: there is nothing Palin can do right in your book.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/13/2010 @ 4:31 pmDCSCA, I think the electorate made a mistake. I think they agree, too, since Obama’s doing so poorly in polls and would lose to W.
But that’s damning with faint praise.
I have to say, perhaps Patterico is wrong to some extent on this ‘tolerate losing elections sometimes’. We lost with Obama, but it pushed us to a clear and stark choice. We need to eventually have this discussion on entitlements… they are basically a ponzi scheme to keep the Murkowskis and Obamas in power while bankrupting our kids. It’s pure corruption in the most literal sense, but it’s been hard to force this issue to a stark decision.
The current deficit is a national disaster, but the silver lining is that it’s forcing the conversation that may save America. And Palin’s part of that conversation, which is, in fact, leadership.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/13/2010 @ 4:36 pmThis thread has turned into and epwj/IMP moronic convergence.
JÐ (85b089) — 11/13/2010 @ 4:36 pmSpending or Taxes EricPW?
Which Goal Post must I kick the FG thru?
Torquemada (a8a9b2) — 11/13/2010 @ 4:37 pm(Dana) I don’t think that not wishing to see Palin as the nominee equates to being anti-Palin.
Case in point. I like Palin. I like most of what she says. I just don’t believe that she’d be a good president, nor that she has what it takes to win the job. Her performance in the Veep debate was pathetic, given the lightweight opponent and the number of career-ending gaffes he made that she let slide by.
She has really good people skills and communicates wonderfully, but she hasn’t a lot of left-brain, and we need that about now.
Kevin M (298030) — 11/13/2010 @ 4:37 pmI don’t blame anyone for 2008 anymore than I blame them for 2010, DCSCA. Voters embraced Obama’s promises in 2008 and they rejected his government in 2010. But I suspect many of those voters wish they had voted for McCain-Palin.
DRJ (d43dcd) — 11/13/2010 @ 4:37 pmI’d still vote for her, of course.
Kevin M (298030) — 11/13/2010 @ 4:38 pmJD, all we need is Yelverton here for a true convergence…
Eric Blair (c8876d) — 11/13/2010 @ 4:40 pmTotal Expenditures $ 9,548.6(2009 $ 7,835.7 (2008)
Page 13 Palins fiscal restraint increasing spending a whopping 21.9%
http://fin.admin.state.ak.us/dof/financial_reports/resource/09cafr.pdf
EricPWJohnson (719277) — 11/13/2010 @ 4:43 pmYou were dead wrong on her taxes. I’m not even sure what you’re trying to say here, but maybe you’re afraid to put the argument together because you lost the tax level argument so badly. I mean, what are the odds Palin would have the lowest tax level, right (hint, everyone else knew this already)?
If you’ve got an argument, make it.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/13/2010 @ 4:45 pmVoters embraced Obama’s promises in 2008 and they rejected his government in 2010. But I suspect many of those voters wish they had voted for McCain-Palin.
Totally agreed, DRJ. I know lots of Republicans == including my entire staunch-team-R family — who voted for Obama, mostly on the promise of different leadership, as you said in another comment. Warned them what they were going to get but have been mum since the election, not wanting to say I told you so and wanting them to see the facts speaking for themselves.
But little comments they make about him and Obamacare etc — more frequent every month– (I just listen and don’t say much of anything) let me know they really regret their vote and wish they could do it over. Have good hopes they’ll be voting against Obama next time, if we have a good R candidate.
Don’t even know if I’d vote for her in an election but that Palin’s de facto leadership is making such an impact shows how important that factor is.
no one you know (72db9b) — 11/13/2010 @ 4:46 pmThat would be a Stupid Singularity, and might cause a wormhole in the apce/time continuum, Mister Blair.
Palin often says things that resonate with me, but my desire for her to even run for the Presidency is nonexistent.
JÐ (0d2ffc) — 11/13/2010 @ 4:47 pmDRJ
Have a good night, am looking forward into seeing what Sarah is finally going to be specific about or what taxes she would eliminate specifically because we dont pass generalities in the congress
If she was calling for a cross the board 25% spending cut – then she would not only have my support but my admiration
But she is not of good character, her state has rejected her and she is profiteering on the misery of people she is purporting to help but not really.
When people are not paid millions to do good things it becomes more sincere
EricPWJohnson (719277) — 11/13/2010 @ 4:51 pmEricPWJohnson,
I understand you want candidates to give you numbers but that isn’t the only definition of “specifics” to me. If a candidate tells me they would ban the use of embryonic stem cells, that’s specific and there are no numbers involved. If a candidate rejects DADT or endorses gay marriage, those are equally specific and there are no numbers involved.
I understand you don’t like Palin but I’d like to know why. Do you distrust Palin because you think she’s stupid? That was the knock against George W. Bush and there was some truth to it, but ultimately what mattered was he listened to a range of opinions and was willing to make a decision. (A lot of Presidents have problems making decisions but fortunately Bush 43 wasn’t one of them. I don’t think Palin would be, either, but we can’t really know for sure.) Or maybe it’s because you’re convinced Palin will lose and you can’t bear that thought. I remember feeling that way about Ronald Reagan when he first campaigned against Gerald Ford. The conventional wisdom was that an actor could never be taken seriously and at first I believed it. It’s funny how time changes things like that, isn’t it?
DRJ (d43dcd) — 11/13/2010 @ 4:54 pmDustin
Read the DATA! Note the comment about the oil companies strugling to make a profit in ALASKA!
Gee, and who bragged about sticking it to them?
The STATE SPENT 1.7 Billion more (21.9%) and this is fiscal restraint…
EricPWJohnson (719277) — 11/13/2010 @ 4:54 pmAnd stupidly increasing payments including more bonus’ to Alaskan citizens while requesting billions more than other states from the Feds (which is us) whats going to happen when oil slips? or Regulations just make them quit?
See if the people in Alaska think that oil revenue (paid for by the other 49 states) isnt their god given rights
I find it humerous when confronted with facts – personal attacks on the person pointing out the “bloody obvious” will probably only increase
But of course I’m a sexist for pointing out that she increased spending 21.9% in just one year
EricPWJohnson (719277) — 11/13/2010 @ 4:58 pmNOYK:
That worries me the most. Palin is so polarizing that it will be like more of the Bush years, but that’s probably true for any Republican so we might as well have someone with charisma for a change.
DRJ (d43dcd) — 11/13/2010 @ 4:59 pmAre you mad that Palin took on Big Oil in Alaska, Eric?
DRJ (d43dcd) — 11/13/2010 @ 5:01 pmI find it “”humerous” that a douchebag would rants for days about me going to the FBI for calling the establishment corrupt, then does not go do the exact thing it was wailing and gnashing teeth and rending garments over after declaring Miller to be involved in a criminal activity.
JÐ (6e25b4) — 11/13/2010 @ 5:02 pmDRJ
Those issues have fallen (unfortunately( far far far down the list of what people are concerned about today – we dont have the luxury of those issues when millions are losing their jobs and the dollar is in trouble – serious trouble.
We need tax reform, then social issues, spending reform, then social issues – our financial strength is our security
The wall didnt fall because of Reagan, it fell because the Commies couldnt financially keep up with Reagan
A difference – huge difference
EricPWJohnson (719277) — 11/13/2010 @ 5:02 pmJD
Miller did something illegal – if Lisa does something illegal – same for her
EricPWJohnson (719277) — 11/13/2010 @ 5:03 pmDRJ
Are you? Edwin Edwards brother MArion, tried that crap on us at Amoco in Louisiana, so we Texaco, Tenneco, Exxon (Mobil didnt join in, neither did Chevron)stopped most small well onshore production.
What they did is increased the token inspection fee from (remember we are already paying royalties, taxes and whatnot) per well head from a few hundred dollars to 10,000 dollars per annum.
We capped over 5,000 wells and went offshore.
EricPWJohnson (719277) — 11/13/2010 @ 5:07 pmI am going to resume silence. The idiot loudmouthed kwazy person and I do not mix well.
JÐ (109425) — 11/13/2010 @ 5:07 pmComment by DRJ — 11/13/2010 @ 4:59 pm
I think you’re right that it’d be true for any Republican, and Palin certainly is polarizing .
My political memory’s so bad I don’t remember if criticisms were as vociferous from liberals against, say, Bush 41 and Reagan as they are for Bush 43 and Palin. (Am sure the Internet, where for example one can see “Palin is a C***” T-shirts — which one wouldn’t see on the 11:00 news — referenced all over liberal blogs, is a factor as well.) What do people here remember about that with earlier Republicans?
no one you know (72db9b) — 11/13/2010 @ 5:10 pmI’m glad there are those that agree that if we do not wish to see Palin run does not mean we are anti-Palin.
I think it’s divisive to state that it is.
Eventually, when considering who would make the most viable candidate, and after all the pros and cons are weighed out, policy views examined, manic syntax is overlooked or choked on, and vetting (hopefully) gives us a notebook full of information to further analyze, it all boils down to gut instinct and a personal like or dislike.
Maybe there isn’t a specific thing Palin has done to garner a no-vote, maybe its just a gut-thing where all the pros about her still don’t add up to a yes-vote.
It isn’t that she is not formidable, powerful and politically conservative person, unafraid of an opposition always ready to demonize her – it is just that she simply isn’t the one for a lot of us.
Dana (8ba2fb) — 11/13/2010 @ 5:11 pmI think you’re right that it’d be true for any Republican, and Palin certainly is polarizing.
I agree that any Republican will face unfair harrassment but I think there are Republicans that the Dems actually have respect for.
I don’t think they have a shred of respect for Palin. Whether that is due to their jadedness and her saccherine delivery and corniness offends that much, or if they simply see her as an unserious person, I don’t see it as changing.
And while they may loathe the politics of Chris Christie or Rick Perry or Mitch Daniels, I don’t think there would be the ruthless attacks and scapegoating with them that there is/has been with Palin.
Perhaps we’re back to a gender issue again…
Dana (8ba2fb) — 11/13/2010 @ 5:18 pmDRJ,
Why I dont like Palin, at best she’s disengenuous. First she talks about drill baby drill, but then she talks about sticking it to the oil companies – the one’s that paid her family a generous salary and put a roof over her head. Thats just a start.
Imagine where they would be if the oil companies decided to expand in Mexico and in Brazil (and the Falkands) which have vast oil reserves much closer and cheaper to produce than Alaska
Palin’s lack of knowledge about an industry that she had significant control over, is further compounded by her total lack of realization tht as she clamors for less regulation – she herself was for even more of it in Alaska.
Examine her record and look at what the oil companies are doing – they are focusing on Brazil and giving up on Alaska and guess what, Sarah isnt totally to blame but she certainly did nothing to change their minds either and she did have the chance.
Lousiana is full FULL of oil, deeper onshore, near refineries pipelines – but look at the rig count,
Edwards killed the oil industry there offshore is the only thing keeping it going
With new technologies the world is full of undiscovered oil and people are going to learn – the hard way that taking the bus is going to be a reality for many people in the next decades to come based upon the killing of the golden goose
So Palin was listening to her husband rather than her constiuents when she decided to “Stick it” to the oil companies and well as soon as they can replace the production in Alaska they will
EricPWJohnson (719277) — 11/13/2010 @ 5:18 pm_____________________________________________
It’s hilarious that there are people who strongly dislike Palin and also, by contrast, get dreamy eyed about scroungy Hillary “sniper-fire” Clinton. A sleazoid if there ever was one — male or female — (and no better than her old man) in the history of American politics. The perfect recipe for a country well on its way to a Banana-Republic, Euro-Socialist/Euro-trash, Third-Worldish future.
Mark (411533) — 11/13/2010 @ 5:25 pmDana
Her record as governor isnt noteworthy – noticing the 21.9% increase in just one year in spendin gunder her watch
Her record with the oil companies contrasts for her generalizations about burdensome corporate regulation and job creation (sticking it to publically held corporations – does that increase jobs or decrease jobs? Does it redistribute wealth?)
Her campaigning for profit (something that Reagan and Hillary were BLASTED for) her tens of millions earned now is staggaring for a figure supposedly out for the greater good.
those are the reasons why not because she’s a woman
EricPWJohnson (719277) — 11/13/2010 @ 5:36 pmEric,
I, too, think fiscal issues are more important than social issues. That’s why I’m glad to see Palin and others focusing on that first and foremost. IMO that is the point of Palin’s letter.
As you know, much of the production in the Western states is owned or controlled by the federal and state governments. Their reliance on major oil companies was necessary, especially in Alaska where it was a monumental task to establish the oilfields. I appreciate what the major oil companies do — they are well run companies that accomplish amazing things, and most have high standards for business and engineering — but they aren’t the only players in the oilfield and preferring the majors also operates to decrease competition. I don’t blame the major oil companies for liking their dominance or for disliking that Palin upended the status quo. But independents have a role to play, too, and maybe it’s time to open Alaska up to more competition.
DRJ (d43dcd) — 11/13/2010 @ 5:37 pmDana:
Wasn’t that what they said about McCain … until he was the candidate?
I doubt any Republican will get a fair shot.
DRJ (d43dcd) — 11/13/2010 @ 5:40 pmDRJ
Texas and Oklahoma are vastly different than Alaska in their handling of oil companies – and Tulsa lost thousands of jobs to Texas and they still are not “sticking it” to the oil companies.
Alaska is totally open as is all of the USA to anyone who has the money to explore and produce oil – its not like the NFL there is no owners committee. Its been open – but no one is going to send a job there except the chinese or Venezualans – those are the only people expressing major interest in Alaska and onshore Louisiana.
If they opened Anwar up I sincerely doubt it would raise an eyebrow those Offshore Discoveries off Brazil are Production replaceable threats to Alaska, price is everything and “Sticking it” is expensive
EricPWJohnson (719277) — 11/13/2010 @ 5:46 pmI hope Palin keeps doing exactly what she’s doing for a very long time.
I actually am starting to believe her view that she doesn’t need to run for Prez if the right sort steps up. I think things could work out really well for those who appreciate Palin but realize it takes more experience to be President.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/13/2010 @ 5:49 pmEric,
Oil and gas exploration in Oklahoma and Texas occurs primarily on privately-held lands. That isn’t true in the Western states, especially in Alaska where the federal government owns 60% of the land and less than 1% of the land is owned privately (other than Indian lands).
DRJ (d43dcd) — 11/13/2010 @ 6:04 pmDRJ,
The original comment observed how polarizing Palin was. My point is, it’s impossible for me to see any other candidate nearly as polarizing. She’s taken polarizing to new levels.
Being polarizing is different than not getting a fair shot. Republicans by default rarely get a fair shot but they do at times get begrudging admiration and respect. I do not see that with Palin.
What I do see with Palin is no remote possibility of sanity eveidenced with regard to media perception and representation of her.
Other less polarizing and provocative figures would have a greater chance of getting something closer to a fair shake.
Dana (8ba2fb) — 11/13/2010 @ 6:04 pmSetting aside Palin, how mild does the GOP candidate have to be to be acceptable?
DRJ (d43dcd) — 11/13/2010 @ 6:11 pmUnfortunately, Lisa’s continued stay in office makes that much less likely, it’s not just a sentimental attachment, you all recall 4-4.50 a gallon gas, which this ‘de facto’moratorium will do little to prevent. Who has been on the forefront of not only that issue, when it seemed
a loser, but missile defense, (in part why she supported Raese), the Afghan engagement, the
ethical vaccuum that is Obamacare, the appeasement
typified by the GZ Mosque, the vacilation on the military commissions, et al ‘no Miranda rights for terrorists’
She served as a Casssandra for what we would be facing; that those too confused by Fey’s facile caricature of one of her goofy, Pennsylvania relatives, presented as a real portrayal, well that can’t be helped. ‘the community organizer
justin cord (82637e) — 11/13/2010 @ 6:14 pmwith less responsibilities’ than a small time mayor, who has no understanding of victory except for his own endeavours, who has stood more resolute against the Administration on all fronts.
Speaking for myself, I don’t want mild. I want fire-breathing.
But the more like that you are, the better you have to be at speaking on your feet because the media will savage you.
Chris Christie isn’t perfect on all issues, but man he’s serious about cutting the budget, and man he’s good at standing up to the media. I am about ready to walk through fire for someone who has those qualities.
Patterico (c218bd) — 11/13/2010 @ 6:17 pmPalin’s main problem is having quit. I just don’t see the American people overlooking that this time around.
Patterico (c218bd) — 11/13/2010 @ 6:18 pmHe jettisoned a far better man, in Schundler, upon first opportunity, instead of challenging those who
justin cord (82637e) — 11/13/2010 @ 6:21 pmprobably deliberately sabotaged the ‘Race to the Top’ application, since it involved data from the last year of the Corzine administration
I think Palin ought to drop the reality show route (does she really want to stoop to Ricky Hollywood’s level?) and cut down on the Fox punditry, and concentrate on leading the charge to deal with the deficit. She would have a huge impact there, if only by prodding the electorate and politicians to actually deal with it.
Some of the things she advocates in that letter I disagree with: to put it as simply as possible, she thinks defending America requires us to defend the freedom everywhere; I don’t; and I suspect much of what she would call necessary defense spending I would call totally unneeded. I don’t think Obama is nearly as anti-Israel as she makes him out to be–if you want an president who tried to coerce Israel into doing things against its own best interests, try George H W Bush after the Gulf War. There’s a reason a lot of Jews consider James Baker to be an anti-Semite.
But if she really put herself in the forefront of cutting government spending and getting the deficit under control, I would not mind seeing her as POTUS.
My own personal objections to her stem from the fact that I think the appearance of folksiness is, probably not faked, but at least exaggerated. I know plenty of “down home” types, and none of them would do some of the things she did. (For instance, adopt a folksy tone during the VP debate. In formal settings, they talk formally.)
Side note on Crist–he was responsible for adoption of an amendment to the state Constitution which was supposedly designed to reduce property taxes, or at least make them more equitable. It didn’t really work out that way (except to make things more complicated) but that in part was due to the collapse of the real estate bubble. So he has a slight claim to cutting taxes; but cutting government spending in Florida is better assigned to Jeb Bush’s tenure. His increased budget proposal for 2010 (which didn’t come near to being passed in the legislature, as I remember it) consisted mostly in making the state make up for lower property tax collections in connection with public schools and recognizing that because of the economy, a lot more people were eligible for Medicaid–in other words, defensible even from a conservative standpoint.
Supporting the stimulus can be blamed on pure political pandering, on the other hand, in a state where half the electorate is Democratic. Plus the fact that, yes, the state of Florida probably could use every bit of money it can get from the Feds.
kishnevi (b95938) — 11/13/2010 @ 6:23 pmTrue dat. I don’t think we should care who the Dems respect because they will trash anyone to win. Also we need not to *pander* to moderate voters but rather find someone well-spoken to sell our ideas to them.
Always remembering that the media will fight us every step of the way.
Patterico (c218bd) — 11/13/2010 @ 6:31 pmOkay, Patrick. Like you, I want someone who is strong on fiscal issues and who also has the ability to communicate — although, I submit, this is as much about charisma as it is verbal ability. Reagan had it, although it wasn’t as clear when he first broke onto the political scene. Remember, he ran against and lost to Gerald Ford, the bumbler President. Reagan seems so adept in retrospect because we have the benefit of seeing him as President in many memorable moments. That wasn’t the conventional wisdom at the time.
DRJ (d43dcd) — 11/13/2010 @ 6:41 pmDRJ
Texas owns the mineral rights so does Oklahoma, in most cases
EricPWJohnson (d84fb0) — 11/13/2010 @ 6:44 pmThe Cato piece is a case in point, in how narratives are shaped, You could come away from it, and not know that the debt came from a bond issue,
justin cord (82637e) — 11/13/2010 @ 7:03 pmnot through her single handed endeavors, and aftera dozen or so, years, I’d figure it’s been mostlypaid for, We have four stadiums in our recent proximity, including the new ziggurat under construction, just a few blocks from the other three monuments to hubris. The earmarks she did argue for, were a quantum decrease from the past two administrations
Eric,
Here is a map showing federal ownership of state lands. (Here is the source document at pages 20 and 21.) Only a small portion of Texas and Oklahoma are federal lands, and most of that is federal national parks. Look at how much of the Western state lands are federally owned.
Texas has approximately 172 million total acres of land which includes 20 national parks, forests and grasslands as well as numerous state parks. The Public University Fund owns 2 million acres of land dedicated to funding higher education, and the Texas General Land Office manages these and other state-owned lands totaling 13 million acres. The rest, and thus the vast majority, is privately owned land.
DRJ (d43dcd) — 11/13/2010 @ 7:09 pmYeah, and Sarah Palin does have that. I still remember being absolutely thrilled when McCain picked her, and I still remember the euphoria of watching her speech at the convention. She has been savaged by the media and assholes like Andrew Sullivan. And I used to be very impressed by how she seemed to withstand all that without complaint.
I still think she’s a pretty sharp politician. But I don’t think she has developed the skill of dealing with the media. If we could combine her looks and natural charisma with Christie’s ability to handle the media, we’d have something.
Of course, nobody’s perfect, and we’ll have to settle for imperfection in 2012.
Oh well. Rambling again. I don’t know that commenting on political horse races is my strong suit, and I have work to do, so I think I’ll leave the discussion for now.
Patterico (c218bd) — 11/13/2010 @ 7:11 pmThe Sierra Club explains the history that led to federal ownership of much of the Western state lands. Like other states and territories, Texas wanted the United States to buy its land and assume its debt but the U.S. government refused. It took Texas almost 10 years to convince the U.S. to annex it, which is why Texas was a Republic from 1836-1845/1846. Ultimately, Texas was annexed only on the condition that it kept both its lands and its public debt.
DRJ (d43dcd) — 11/13/2010 @ 7:17 pmUp until August 29, of 2008, she walked on water, in part because like McCain she relished taking on the establishment, One of her few faults was being
justin cord (82637e) — 11/13/2010 @ 7:22 pmso naive to write an ethics code, that could be so easily abused. Practically overnight, she became public enemy # 1, for not only the party bosses like Ruedrich, but the DNC specially the net roots contingent. She’s more facile than most, sometimes in her language, because let’s face she doesn’t think she has anything left to lose, what else can they do to her, she’s seen the Alinsky method and has adapted, the wonder is you don’t understand that it happening, Patrick, and this season, sad to say, you were an accomplice to it with O’Donnell, yes you pointed some of Coon’s imperfection, yip yip yahoo,
DRJ,
VOR2 (c1f4a2) — 11/13/2010 @ 7:23 pmAre you saying that given what she has done so far, you believe Palin is on the same level as Reagan?
Reagan got noticed by the GOP at large with his speech at the Goldwater convention.Then went on to two full terms as Gov of Ca. before losing to Ford in the primaries.
I think his charisma was evident long before he ran against Ford.
Palin has consciously chosen to avoid the media unless it is Foxnews, her employer. Certainly her right to pick what media strategy she deems most effective but I think it is a bad move if being elected President is really her goal.
The difference between Reagan and Palin as I see it is that he made it his responsibility to convince the voters he was the right person. In Palin’s case she seems to expect people to divine her meaning from twitter and facebook posts with a little help from her supporters ever ready to defend her against criticism. Legitimate criticisms get tossed aside as “sexist”, “unfair”, and “media bias”.
“The first step is, of course, to defund Obamacare.”
So would this include Cutting off payments to seniors in the medicare donut hole?
“The last thing our small businesses need is tax hikes. It falls to the current Democrat-controlled Congress to decide on the future of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts. If it does not permanently renew all of them, you should move quickly to do so in the new Congress.”
Deadly serious about the deficit.
imdw (02672e) — 11/13/2010 @ 7:32 pmI still think [Palin’s] a pretty sharp politician. But I don’t think she has developed the skill of dealing with the media. If we could combine her looks and natural charisma with Christie’s ability to handle the media, we’d have something.
Agreed. I wish we would see more of that Reagan Happy Warrior mentality. Remember how the Gipper would disarm even his most strident media critics with a well-timed (often self-deprecating) quip? I think Sarah Palin has that ability too, but she takes the criticism too personally. I don’t know if going the Christie route, which is often somewhat pointed and caustic, would suit Sarah Palin. It strikes me as something more suited to New Jersey than to the heartland, where her most committed followers probably reside.
Of course, not having undergone this sort of thing myself I admittedly have very little standing to criticize how she deals with it.
JVW (eccfd6) — 11/13/2010 @ 7:34 pmVOR2,
I think she has as much charisma as Reagan had. I think Christie has it, too, and both appear to be fiscal conservatives. That’s as far as I’ll go for now.
But, you know, charisma doesn’t come around that often. I hate to see us throw it away.
DRJ (d43dcd) — 11/13/2010 @ 7:36 pmSo would this include Cutting off payments to seniors in the medicare donut hole?
Yes indeed. The donut hole was placed there for a reason: It was supposed to prevent Medicare recipients and their doctors from over-prescribing various drugs in the belief that the Federal Government would subsidize them with no limits. ObamaCare’s removal of the donut hole has the potential to be disastrous to the budget. That is, of course, unless ObamaCare just indiscriminately wrecks the entire pharmaceutical industry and nobody gets miracle drugs any longer. If so, time to invest in placebo manufacturers.
JVW (eccfd6) — 11/13/2010 @ 7:40 pmOne thing I’ve observed from the Cali elections is the more that Meg Whitman attempted to please both strong consevatives and moderates, the more ground she lost. She wavered on illegal immigration in an attempt to bring in the Hispanic vote, which didn’t work, and cost her loyal conservative voters who saw her actions as nothing but cheap pandering.
Whoever our candidate is must not only be able to withstand media criticism – but expect it and remain smartly on offense while unwaveringly hammering conservative values and platforms.
The candidate has got to be deft with the media, charming and irresistably persuasive as well as a fearless shark.
This is not a place for emotionalism to cloud perspective and that brings me back to Palin because we cannot set her aside: She is absolutely a mama grizzly and while it’s admirable it can also cause her to lose perspective and footing as her family will once again be part a target of attack.
We’ve already seen it shamefully occur and why would this time around be any different?
Even now when one of her children are targeted, she migh appear to minimize it but there is that shrill tone that exposes the vulnerable underbelly.
For that reason alone (her children’s vulnerability, hence hers), I don’t want to see her run.
Dana (8ba2fb) — 11/13/2010 @ 7:52 pm“That is, of course, unless ObamaCare just indiscriminately wrecks the entire pharmaceutical industry and nobody gets miracle drugs any longer. ”
No it seems like it actually extends the corporate welfare part D.
imdw (0275b8) — 11/13/2010 @ 8:00 pmFor that reason alone (her children’s vulnerability, hence hers), I don’t want to see her run.
Comment by Dana — 11/13/2010 @ 7:52 pm
It’s interesting (and thought-provoking) to hear you put it that way because although am very much agreed that she has been waaayyy to sensitive to criticism, mostly of her children, the attacks involving her children have been by far the worst ones I can remember politically. And am not really sure why that is. (For example, far left liberals hate Chris Christie too but I don’t even know if Chris Christie has kids, let alone what any liberals would say about them.)
Is that a gender thing — the attacks? Or is it that she’s outspokenly prolife and therefore her children — esp the fifth one — are considered fair game? You already know how a few loathsome “feminists” and their DU and Kos acolytes trashed her for allowing a Down Syndrome baby to be born.
no one you know (72db9b) — 11/13/2010 @ 8:15 pm_________________________________________
One thing I’ve observed from the Cali elections is the more that Meg Whitman attempted to please both strong consevatives and moderates, the more ground she lost.
I’d say your point would have merit if the various statewide offices in California were split between Democrats and Republicans, or at least were less monolithically liberal. But the blue parts of the state — the coastal areas, mainly LA and SF — are so overwhelmingly like Greece/Mexico/Spain/France/Venezuela, that any sanity and common sense found in the inland areas or portions of Orange County and San Diego get lost in the shuffle.
The only way for a politician like Meg Whitman to have won in Greece/Mexico/Spain/France/Venezuela (aka California) is if she were a flat-out liberal with a big “D” pasted on her forehead.
Again, as Greece (or Mexico) goes, so goes California.
Mark (3e3a7c) — 11/13/2010 @ 8:17 pmWell what is too sensitive, I think Truman’s response to Paul Hume’s criticism of his daughter
justin cord (82637e) — 11/13/2010 @ 8:23 pmMargaret was probably the high water mark. I submit to you, this is why she doesn’t retreat, only reloads, this is more important than any mere electoral contest, or policy debate
NOYK, if she had a ‘D’ after her name, clearly her children would have been left alone. If she had an ‘R’ after her name and were pro-choice, her children would have been left alone. But she breaks the rules: Republican and pro-life. It doesn’t get any more unacceptable.
My question to Palin would be: Do you really believe the country needs you so much that it would be worth exposing your children to the nasty viciousness of the media and having their lives quite literally torn apart and laid bare before a merciless audience?
We’ve already seen what the media was capable of when she was the VP candidate, just imagine how much worse it would be if she were the presidential candidate. This is by no means just about Palin.
Dana (8ba2fb) — 11/13/2010 @ 8:26 pm________________________________________
I think Palin ought to drop the reality show route (does she really want to stoop to Ricky Hollywood’s level?) and cut down on the Fox punditry
Her decision on such matters hasn’t been or isn’t too good.
From a purely non-partisan matter, she also suffers from what I describe is her happy-newscaster persona. Or the type of personality that has been mocked for years and is the opposite of the demeanor of “Walter Cronkite.” IOW, a lot of superficial BS. However, like it or not, a lot of people are influenced by such BS.
So much so that they’d reserve respect for the leftwing fool that actually was hidden under Cronkite’s supposedly dignified, serious facade, while, in today’s era, sniping at Palin for looking like the happy-homemaker newscaster.
Mark (3e3a7c) — 11/13/2010 @ 8:29 pmSo now we want Republicans with young or vulnerable children to abstain from running, because of the hardship they might face? I’d hate to see us return to the days of Rockefeller Republicans.
DRJ (d43dcd) — 11/13/2010 @ 8:52 pmUnless I’m completely misreading you, I think you mischaracterize my concerns, and it seems disingenuous to put Palin in the same bracket as other Republicans with young children. To do that would be to ignore the entire viciousness directed toward her family during the campaign as well as the ongoing media laser-focus on Palins in general.
Does Palin herself believe she is that she alone is the one to fill the need, and is she willing to put her family through it all again – where the stakes are much higher?
Dana (8ba2fb) — 11/13/2010 @ 9:01 pmNYOK at 169:
I think part of it is Palin chose to make her children part of her narrative. We knew from the start about her Down’s syndrome baby, about her son enlisting in the armed forces, and (very quickly) the saga of Bristol and Levi. (Granted, the last one was not her choice!) If you choose to make part of your appeal the fact that you’ve been relatively successful at being a mother, then don’t be surprised if you’re attacked from that angle.
Compare that to most of the current GOP frontrunners. I remember that Romney has grown children; I think Huckabee does; the rest I have absolutely no idea. In part this is the result of geographical distance;; for instance, living in Florida, I’m not very exposed to the details of Christie’s life. But none of them has worked their family story into their campaigns the way Palin did, and none of them is trying to obtain the status of “Mama Grizzly” (or Papa Grizzly) the way Palin is.
kishnevi (b95938) — 11/13/2010 @ 9:14 pmDana,
Do you really believe only Palin will get targeted but other GOP candidates won’t? I don’t.
DRJ (d43dcd) — 11/13/2010 @ 9:20 pmKishnevi,
Everyone has vulnerabilities. Mitt Romney’s family is Mormon and Mormons won’t be popular in the Bible belt. Huckabee will get labeled an evangelical, and look at the way Bush’s college-age children were treated.
I don’t see why Palin is held to a different standard. Let her decide for herself.
DRJ (d43dcd) — 11/13/2010 @ 9:24 pmWell kish disliked her from the beginning, ‘it saves time’ pikachu took a little while longer
justin cord (82637e) — 11/13/2010 @ 9:29 pmI’ve never suggested that, DRJ. I stated upthread, Republicans by default rarely get a fair shot but they do at times get begrudging admiration and respect. I do not see that with Palin.
You seem to be missing my point, simply put: I believe Palin brings more distracting baggage into a campaign than any other potential nominee whose name has been mentioned.
As kish and others point out, I don’t even know how many kids Huckabee or Daniels or Christie have. I know Jindal has a few small kids from a 60 Minutes show I saw, but no clue to their names, ages, etc. Tim Pawlenty? Is he even married?
Why do we know so much intimate detail about Palin’s family? And why has she made them so front and center – and vulnerable?
Dana (8ba2fb) — 11/13/2010 @ 9:31 pmHey, I just noticed imdw is back! Did you see Patterico’s post about you? Seems he doesn’t believe your nonsense about someone else posting his address in your name either.
Yet here you are, champ. Why not own up to your misdeeds, unless you are just a troll.
Eric Blair (ad3ef3) — 11/13/2010 @ 9:34 pmDana,
I don’t mean to pile on you, but it’s not Palin’s fault how her children are treated. Let’s not put any blame on her, then.
See what I mean? I respect you very much, but I disagree with this particular argument of yours.
Patterico (c218bd) — 11/13/2010 @ 9:34 pmWell, of course he is.
Patterico (c218bd) — 11/13/2010 @ 9:35 pmBecause the media has made an issue out of them.
Because Andrew Sullivan has appointed himself Official Detective of her orifices.
Because the family’s decision to keep a child rather than abort it has been the subject of derision rather than respect.
Surely you agree that she has gotten a terribly raw deal.
Patterico (c218bd) — 11/13/2010 @ 9:37 pmWell with the first, which I came through to Bill Dyer, it showed he doesn’t just talk the talk, interesting though, how the Journolist, Andrew
Sullivan, and that creepy fellow up there, sought to rob her of that symbol of integrity, alleging her child wasn’t hers. On the second, similarly
her son also follows along and actually served his country, like her running mate’s sons, and her opposite, from the state which shall remain nameless. They chose to slander him about that too. The last was a subset of the first.
As to the latter point, because Bush is a committed Christian who disciplined himself enough
justin cord (82637e) — 11/13/2010 @ 9:42 pmto refuse alcohol at 40, earning him the title of ‘dry drunk; they attacked him for his daughter’s
occasional dalliances with the grape.
i don’t need to read the article or the comments here: i’ve been told repeatedly that Palin is a moron, bimbo, slut, dummy, fool, etc, so it must be true.
either that or the people who have said all these things are projecting.
redc1c4 (fb8750) — 11/13/2010 @ 9:45 pmPatterico,
I’m not arguing that it’s Palin’s fault that her children were treated as they were. What I am arguing is that they are already marked targets and by her again stepping into the ring would once again put them in the awful position of being further attacked and abused. Is it worth it? Do we as a country need her that badly and at that price?
I just don’t see any other candidate’s family taking the same sort of abuse. The candidate is fair game but I don’t think the kids should be.
And that’s why I believe there is a difference between Palin and other candidates that needs to be taken into consideration.
I do feel a bit piled on. I have respectfully attempted to argue a differing point (apparently not being clearly articulated) yet it somehow merits a scolding. I’m a bit surprised.
My question is, is it worth it to Palin to put her family through this again – and most likely even worse than before?
Dana (8ba2fb) — 11/13/2010 @ 9:48 pmThe one thing that does concern me, is last time over a policy argument, persons unknown were prompted to hang her in effigy in W. Hollywood, and
justin cord (82637e) — 11/13/2010 @ 9:53 pmothers set fire to her Church, while there were parishioners conducting services. That part almost
never get referenced
Dana,
I think I understand what you’re saying but pls correct if I don’t: you seem to be saying that the attacking of her kids isn’t fair at all but because of the viciousness of the attacks, added to other issues that are a problem for some Republicans (like the way she chooses to communicate), the campaign can get distracted or derailed and so there are other candidates that are more electable.
And you’re right about the level of vicious being directed. I want to think about this more because it seems like the one thing Patterico (IMO correctly) mentioned that she did that’ll be the most problem — her quitting due to attacks, albeit of a different nature — is being seen by some as inevitable because all the far left liberals have to do is get vicious enough and people will give up because “it’s not worth it.”
I liked hearing that she was doing a lot of work trying to steel her kids privately against these attacks, though they’re always going to hurt. And IMO she was doing a really good job for a while staying on political message, but then started to focus on the more vicious attacks and became hair trigger about it. And it was distracting.
Would I have been able to take those kinds of attacks on my kids? Am quite sure not. It just seems like someone has to stand up to these bullies and she seemed to be the one with the guts to do it.
no one you know (72db9b) — 11/13/2010 @ 9:56 pmDana, Sorry about cross posting your # 187. Didn’t intend to make you feel more piled on.
no one you know (72db9b) — 11/13/2010 @ 9:57 pmDana,
I definitely do not want to make you feel piled upon. I know that feeling. Few have defended me as consistently as you have when I have felt that way.
I mean nothing but respect when I respond to you on this.
I just feel this way: yes, her children are targeted. Yes, they should not be fair game. I totally agree.
I just place the fault on the people attacking the children and not on her.
Again, by saying this, I don’t mean to denigrate you or the stand you are taking on behalf of her children. I have nothing but respect for you.
Patterico (c218bd) — 11/13/2010 @ 10:03 pmThank you for your well articulated summation, NOYK. I appreciate it.
Dana (8ba2fb) — 11/13/2010 @ 10:06 pmI agree with this.
Standing up to bullies is important.
It is difficult for people with families.
Look at Andrew Breitbart. My God, has he been unfairly vilified! Every time I want to feel sorry for myself I have to think of him.
That cannot be easy for his family.
Yet he does what he thinks is right. I hope his family supports him. I hope his children learn a lesson about standing up for what’s right.
I feel the same about Sarah’s children. Hopefully they will learn a good character lesson from her courage.
Patterico (c218bd) — 11/13/2010 @ 10:07 pmIn a much smaller way, nothing like what Sarah Palin or Andrew Breitbart face, I hope the same for my children.
There are people out there who hate hate hate me. I have seen a lot of evidence of it today.
Yet, like Andrew and Sarah, I have never done anything but try to tell the truth.
I hope my children take a positive lesson from this. Even if I am vilified on the Internet.
If I think that about my children, I have to have the greatest respect for people who take so much more crap than I do.
Patterico (c218bd) — 11/13/2010 @ 10:10 pmThank you, Patterico. Again, I am not blaming Palin for the attacks on her children. I am however questioning the wisdom of her putting them in a position where, because the stakes would be even that much higher, face an even more vicious onslaught – and subsequently be a distraction from the issues. I think the media is collectively licking their vicious lips in anticipation and hopes of her running. Cocked and loaded and ready for attack. Is it worth it to her and is this in the best interest of the party? I don’t know.
Dana (8ba2fb) — 11/13/2010 @ 10:12 pmDidn’t we see this with Niki Haley, there wasn’t a scintilla of evidence, but a shameless Denebian slime devil like Folks, encouraged by the good ole
justin cord (82637e) — 11/13/2010 @ 10:28 pmboys in the Leg, repeated the same line,
DRJ
Infrastructure and royalties fall under different categories, Texas, Oklahoma, Louisiana handle them all differently. In Louisiana state fees for inspections, renewals of permits etc is how the state raised fees, same for Texas and Oklahoma.
Focusing on Royalties is one picture, but not a complete picture on how Oil Companies thrive in state taxation environments.
EricPWJohnson (d84fb0) — 11/13/2010 @ 10:33 pmDana,
John McCain can identify with your concerns because his family was attacked — sadly by a Republican — but it didn’t keep him from running in 2000 or in 2008. I don’t see why it should stop Palin either, unless she and her family decide it’s not worth it.
DRJ (d43dcd) — 11/13/2010 @ 10:39 pmActually that’s one of those apochryphal bits that
justin cord (82637e) — 11/13/2010 @ 10:42 pmare ‘too good to check’ the flier existed but as to who put in motion
Eric,
I don’t know about Louisiana but the Texas Railroad Commission is in charge of fees and rules for Texas oil and gas operators. Whether you’re an independent oil operator or a major oil company, you’re subject to the same rules and fees. My past experience suggests the Oklahoma Corporation Commission is very similar.
DRJ (d43dcd) — 11/13/2010 @ 10:45 pmjustin,
It’s true that Rove denied being the source of the rumor.
DRJ (d43dcd) — 11/13/2010 @ 10:47 pmDRJ, I’m going to bow put out on this now. I can’t any more clearly explain myself. Suffice it to say, even in this small corner of the blogosphere, Palin is polarizing.
Dana (8ba2fb) — 11/13/2010 @ 10:51 pmDRJ
Why are you pushing Palin so hard? Was it because her kids were attacked in the press? Was it because she has been vilified as stupid?
Her record – her actual record shows wide inconsistencies with her statements (even now if they even are hers as press agents, handlers are plenty)?
Be careful what you are wishing for, someone will run, probably Perry, and he will be reluctant – he’s got the charisma of a pancake, people have flirted that he is gay, etc. He has had as much if not more personal attacks over his 16 years as Gov and LT Gov as anyone alive in Texas. His appeal is – he is blunt, brutally blunt without the Jersey boy fire of a christie. He just ignores them (the press) and moves on. Much to their wailing and screeching
EricPWJohnson (d84fb0) — 11/13/2010 @ 10:51 pmDRJ
Thats my point, you can set predatory fees like Edwards in Louisiana did (and NEw York and New Jersey did as well as Florida) or you can appreciate and attract the jobs to your state.
Dana
I am sorry people have attacked you for mentioning her children – you have been nothing but EXTREMELY fair to the Palins.
EricPWJohnson (d84fb0) — 11/13/2010 @ 10:54 pmEric — I’d like people to keep an open mind about many candidates. The big field will shrink and we want as many people to choose from as possible. Sometimes the early contenders don’t turn out the way we expect … take Mark Sanford, for example.
Dana — I don’t think people have to come to an agreement on everything, nor do I feel like someone has to “win.” My guess is you wouldn’t put your family through the things Palin’s family has experienced and I probably wouldn’t either. But I’d like to think I might if I thought it would make a difference, and I admire Palin and her family for not backing down.
DRJ (d43dcd) — 11/13/2010 @ 10:58 pmI don’t think anyone really “attacked” Dana, Eric.
As always, I want us to be able to disagree amicably.
Patterico (c218bd) — 11/13/2010 @ 11:02 pmSorry for the mischaracterization then.
DRJ
Oh, I have run for office in Texas, blogging at a Texas blog my children were treated much worse than Jeff’s death threats were called into my clients at one point a blogger wished that my girls were beheaded knowing my oldest was applying to the academy.
This still went on for months, they changed my posts including adding links to sites that mocked the profit and then hoping CID could pick me or my children and wife up for that special treatment.
Yeah, these were all fine christian people who didnt like Perry and I was just posting pieces of the Ramos and Compean transcripts.
EricPWJohnson (d84fb0) — 11/13/2010 @ 11:09 pmYeah they were all just idiots, cant take em seriously.
EricPWJohnson (d84fb0) — 11/13/2010 @ 11:11 pmThe fact that EricPWJohnson and happyfeet agree on this issue should tell you all that you ever need to know about both of them.
Icy Texan (2c6fc5) — 11/14/2010 @ 2:49 am“at best she’s disengenuous. First she talks about drill baby drill, but then she talks about sticking it to the oil companies”
— Okay, EPWJ. Prove that Sarah Palin has EVER talked about “sticking it to the oil companies”. Go!
Icy Texan (2c6fc5) — 11/14/2010 @ 3:09 amIn light of the state’s current deficit Palin reduced spending by $268.6 million and planned to draw $1.36 billion from the state’s $7 billion reserve. Palin also proposed roughly $17 million in reductions to departments and implemented a salary freeze for state employees in January 2009. However, Gov. Palin emphasized that massive cuts to the state government and services could do more harm than good. “We were really trying very hard to minimize the impact on public services, those types of things. Because I think that with the current economic conditions there’s sensitivity. If there were some massive reductions, or massive layoffs, that would have an unintended consequence of putting Alaska further into a recession,” she said. However, in anticipation of a looming $1.25 billion deficit, due to a sudden drop in oil revenue, Gov. Palin again proposed withdrawing funds from the state’s reserves. The Governor’s FY 2010 budget recommendation includes an operating budget reduced by $382.3 million in general funds.
Icy Texan (2c6fc5) — 11/14/2010 @ 3:32 amIcy
See DRJ’s comments
and here
http://www.andrewhalcro.com/palin_requests_talks_with_oil_executives
EricPWJohnson (8a4ca7) — 11/14/2010 @ 3:32 amhey and get some sleep! me I’m back at the lakehouse Horribly jet lagged
EricPWJohnson (8a4ca7) — 11/14/2010 @ 3:33 amIcy.
She spent 1.7 billion more a 21.9% increase – in just one year
EricPWJohnson (8a4ca7) — 11/14/2010 @ 3:35 amThat is be the Sarah we’re being love! She’s be what that our contry it need! Palin 2012! Get the upity boy out off of the White Houze! Drill, Baby, drill!
The Anonymous Tea-Partier (0692b1) — 11/14/2010 @ 4:25 am“Did you see Patterico’s post about you? ”
Nope.
imdw (b3cd6c) — 11/14/2010 @ 4:46 am“Look at Andrew Breitbart. My God, has he been unfairly vilified! Every time I want to feel sorry for myself I have to think of him.”
He was in full tilt mode during the Sherrod debacle. At one point he demanded that a media person asking him about the video being a tale of something that happened in the past provide proof that the event happened in the past. This when simply paying attention to the video got you that information. Great work. This is someone who’s learned the drill: yell louder.
imdw (b3cd6c) — 11/14/2010 @ 4:49 amReally you should know Halcro, is as bad a source on Palin, as say you seem to think Levin is for everybody else, he garnered 9% in the previous gov’s race, and seems to have a strong chip on his
justin cord (82637e) — 11/14/2010 @ 4:59 amshoulder about it
Neither does someone like Reagan, which is the biggest turn off that I get with people who are very attached to the idea of a President Palin. Even Palin is “sort of” comparing herself as she did with recent comments about Reagan’s movie career. Reagan proved himself, SP seems to be saying “take a chance on me and I’ll be the next Reagan”. You may say that is not what she really was saying or meant but you can bet the rent that if she runs that is what the press will say.
I think her charisma is limited to a more narrow set of voters and not much is going to change that would bring left of center dems or independents around to vote for her.
VOR2 (c1f4a2) — 11/14/2010 @ 5:08 amShould I say “Go” again? Keep trying.b
Icy Texan (2c6fc5) — 11/14/2010 @ 5:13 amIs there a calculator at the lake house? Alaska budget numbers:
2008: $12.5 billion; 36.8% of the state’s GDP
2009: $13.4 billion; 35.4% of the state’s GDP
No $1.7 billion increase; no 21.9% increase (it would require a $2.7 billion increase to equal 21.9%, not $1.7B), and in reality the expenditure fell by 1.4% of GDP.
Maybe you should just stick to trying to prove that she said she was gonna “stick it to the oil companies”.
Icy Texan (2c6fc5) — 11/14/2010 @ 5:35 am“36.8% of the state’s GDP”
That’s a really big government.
imdw (c982ed) — 11/14/2010 @ 6:10 amI’m nobody to this whole debate (only been reading this blog a few months), but Dana’s #137 sums up my feelings almost perfectly about Palin.
I sincerely think she was given a raw deal and vilified needlessly during the election. I did think she was qualified to be VP then, based on what I learned of her (through the various media filters, left and right, of course) during the campaign. But since then, her resignation and subsequent re-emergence, although it has shown some positive characteristics that she was not permitted or able to show during the campaign (because the campaign mismanaged her, or because the anti-Palin left story was so overwhelmingly loud), does tend to weight on my mind as adding to a “please don’t run”. I understand the stated reasons for resigning. But somehow it just seemed a little too glib and facile.
I think she’s been a valuable contributor to the debate from the right since the campaign…in some ways because she’s already a target she can make statements others would mealy-mouth around, and at least open the door to the truth (e.g. “Death Panels”, where the ‘truth’ does seem to be tending far more in that direction than in the endlessly repeated “you can keep your healthcare”/”no rationing”/”won’t cost more…” litany from the Annointed One).
I don’t see her as a candidate I can take seriously, however. It’s difficult to articulate further than that.
Does that make me anti-Palin? Sexist? Brainwashed by the MSM? A RINO? I certainly don’t think so, but judging from the flow of debate in this subject I suspect to many it would.
rtrski (c58688) — 11/14/2010 @ 6:13 amIcy,
Wrong years however you just proved my point as her spending spiraled out of control
Looking only at the State revenues (its unfair to compare the Federal dollars as most states have little control over that)
I linked the official reports from the state of Alaska
EricPWJohnson (c5f1fc) — 11/14/2010 @ 6:20 amrtrski
She has been unfairly vilified but then also she has been paid over 20 million dollars compensation for her troubles as well so – I’m not so in the hand wringing staqe anymore
And she has interfered in lelctions helping nothing candidates vault over real people to lose en mass to democrats
Hoffman, Odonnell, Buck, Angle, Miller (Murkowski who knows who she will caucus with) Rossi, to name just a few
What a glorious train wreck of tattered patriotic kmart quilts, stained dont tread on me t-shirts, and buckets of chicken wings across this great land
EricPWJohnson (c5f1fc) — 11/14/2010 @ 6:26 amEric:
Please don’t “agree” with me with rhetoric like
I’m trying to make a point that not desiring Palin as a Presidential candidate doesn’t mean I hate her. You are making an entirely different point, one which I’m trying to remain distinct from. Or was that just frothing at the mouth?
rtrski (c58688) — 11/14/2010 @ 6:38 amrtrski,
It wasn’t frothing, just snobbery. Don’t be surprised if EPWJ starts ranting about the “great unwashed.”
I’m becoming steadily more impressed with similarity with the dismissive attitude toward Palin now and Reagan before he was nominated.
While my first choice is Daniels, I’d have no trouble voting for Palin against Obama.
Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (fb9e90) — 11/14/2010 @ 6:57 amWhat a glorious train wreck of tattered patriotic kmart quilts, stained dont tread on me t-shirts, and buckets of chicken wings across this great land
Comment by EricPWJohnson — 11/14/2010 @ 6:26 am
This is kind of what I meant when I was speaking above about anti “flyover country” rhetoric and Katie Couric’s “great unwashed” recent comment. (And I live on the East Coast.) Thanks for proving my point.
Haven’t even made up my mind yet if I think her qualifications are enough to run for President (I thought they were, coupled with her intelligence and learning curve, enough to run for Vice President). and perhaps many other people in this country are too. IMO you’re not helping your side with rhetoric like this. But am glad you’re making your prejudices clear, and I hope statements like this (and I see many famous people making them) continue to get a megaphone on the national stage.
no one you know (72db9b) — 11/14/2010 @ 7:00 ammany other people in this country are
no one you know (72db9b) — 11/14/2010 @ 7:00 amtoo.still making up their minds too.#94. She did increase taxes on the oil industry
That isn’t actually so, though it’s a common talking point among her opponents. What she raised was the royalty that miners pay to extract resources from state land. That payment may be technically called a “tax”, but it isn’t what people generally mean by that word.
Milhouse (ea66e3) — 11/14/2010 @ 7:24 am#107, what do you suppose those reserves were for? The difference is that the fedgov has no reserves; instead it’s got an ever-growing debt.
Milhouse (ea66e3) — 11/14/2010 @ 7:29 am#109, how is defunding not a specific? How much more specific can you get? Or is the word “defund” just not in your vocabulary?
Milhouse (ea66e3) — 11/14/2010 @ 7:30 amHey, imdw. Look in the #183 area of this thread.
I’m pretty sure you were the one posting addresses, and so is Patterico.
Since you don’t own what you do and write, why should anyone take you seriously.
Troll. And a dishonest one at that.
Eric Blair (ad3ef3) — 11/14/2010 @ 7:30 am#117, Her performance in the Veep debate was pathetic
Why would you say that? I thought she did extremely well; she got everything exactly right, while Biden, as you acknowledge, was bullshitting his way through. He just sounded more confident of his nonsense than she did of her facts, because he’s had so many decades of practise at bullshitting; and when you stick to fact you’re always vulnerable to doubt, whereas when you know you’re making it up as you go along there’s nothing to doubt.
Milhouse (ea66e3) — 11/14/2010 @ 7:37 am#125, the defense budget can’t be cut 25% without losing the war. It can probably stand a tiny symbolic cut, but any president who cut it 25%, and thereby lost the war, would deserve to be impeached.
Milhouse (ea66e3) — 11/14/2010 @ 7:45 am#134. “We”. OK, so you’re speaking for the big oil companies. Nice to know. Puts everything you say in an appropriate light.
Milhouse (ea66e3) — 11/14/2010 @ 7:50 amMy personal feelings for Sarah Palin aside, the tenor of this letter and the two paragraphs opening this post in particular are right on.
For two long we have not had any satisfaction in how our elected, and so called representative, officials are representing us. Spending is out of control on both sides of the aisle and ‘working together’ is a sentiment that was left behind in kindergarten. We Americans deserve better than what our politicians are giving us.
Greg (aee500) — 11/14/2010 @ 7:56 am_____________________________________________
Even Palin is “sort of” comparing herself as she did with recent comments about Reagan’s movie career.
Complaining about the media piling onto Palin and her family — negatively — is not without reason. However, I think of them and then I recall the differences between the spouses of Reagan and Kennedy. I know the wife of the latter (who eventually got remarried to a tycoon named Onassis) was obsessive about avoiding interviews and, post-1963, the public spotlight in general. The only time she ever was photographed throughout much of her life was by paparazzi spying on her.
By contrast, Nancy Reagan did several interviews during and after her time in the White House. So she followed more of a Hollywood strategy in dealing with the MSM.
Compare those two approaches with Palin’s daughter agreeing to do a photograph for the cover of People magazine. Beyond that, I won’t mention the goofball judgment of the daughter hooking up with an opportunist (hey, the dude posed nude for some other magazine!) and having an out-of-wedlock baby (wow, that phrase sounds so prudish in today’s era!) with him.
And now her mother, Sarah, is doing a reality TV show?
Well, anyway, our current Secretary of State is a big-time dishonest flake, and way too many Americans don’t seem to mind her and her even scroungier old man.
The US is well on its way to becoming one, big reality TV show. Name it “Banana Republic, Here We Come!”
Mark (3e3a7c) — 11/14/2010 @ 7:59 amI like Sarah Palin and I respect her ability to get to the point…but not all of these new people are there because of anything Palin did for them. They are not children, they don’t need her direction.
I feel bad saying this and I know that a lot of people consider Palin to be the most wonderful person in the world, but the truth is Sarah Palin could have run for that seat instead of Miller and she did not. She could have finished her term in office and she did not. I am sure she had good reasons for the decisions she made, but there is something sort of condescending about directing new people in Congress from on high.
The truth is these folks have their work cut out for them, and I am sure there will be all sorts of people out there ready and waiting to criticize them. There always are.
As for the budget, across the board cuts of about 5% would do a lot to ease the deficit.
Terrye (9d8507) — 11/14/2010 @ 8:04 am#151, I truly don’t get this. Why is it OK for a governor to resign in order to become a congressman, a cabinet secretary, a president/VP, a judge, but not for any other reason?
The reasons she gave for her resignation seem good and sufficient to justify it. I’d like to know what you’d’ve done in her position, faced with so many ethics complaints that not only are you and your staff facing financial ruin, but none of you have any time left for governing.
But even if these reasons weren’t sufficient, there are other obvious reasons she didn’t list, because it wouldn’t have played well:
* By resigning when she did, she installed Parnell as the incumbent, so that by the time primary season came around nobody felt like challenging him. Had she finished out her term, the Murkowski machine would certainly have challenged Parnell, and may have defeated him, taking back the state government and access to the state treasury.
* Without resigning she wouldn’t have been able to campaign for candidates as she did this year; that doesn’t seem to be a problem for any other politician, but we’ve seen that every time she set foot outside Alaska to campaign — even during her vice-presidential run! — the Ds filed another ethics complaint against her. And that year of campaigning is what gives her the option of running for president.
Milhouse (1448a4) — 11/14/2010 @ 8:35 am#164 Remember how the Gipper would disarm even his most strident media critics with a well-timed (often self-deprecating) quip? I think Sarah Palin has that ability too, but she takes the criticism too personally.
That’s because it is personal. Reporters looked down their noses at Reagan, and thought him their intellectual inferior, but they didn’t hate him. They hate Palin with a passion not seen since at least Nixon. They deliberately lied about her, not once but dozens of times. What was the web site that counted 80 separate smears against Palin? Not even Nixon suffered that; not even FDR or Jefferson. I’m not aware of a smear campaign to compare it to, in all of US political history. So how else can she take it?
Milhouse (ea66e3) — 11/14/2010 @ 8:50 amA small difference between Reagan and Palin
Reagan didnt cut and run to the cash
EricPWJohnson (c5f1fc) — 11/14/2010 @ 8:54 amAmerica deserves better than this opportunistic lightweight.
We let Team Opportunistic Lightweight give this presidency thing a whirl already and it’s proving to be a pitiful trainwreck I think. Simply swapping in a new lightweight isn’t a Good Plan.
happyfeet (42fd61) — 11/14/2010 @ 8:57 amThose looking to equate Palin and Reagan might wish to read or re-read the book “When Character Was King”. Not only had RR been governor of California but also President of the Screen Actor’s Guild (Union), and during the years he hosted the GE Theater he also roved the country as their ambassador giving speeches, and addressing meetings from coast to coast. So he knew this country backwards and forwrds and understood its people very well. Also, the fact that he had been a Democrat before he saw the light and became a Republican gave him insights both into the narratives and language of politics that few have.
Here is link to a video that GE put out about him that helps explain how his time at GE laid the groundwork for his political career. He was not just an actor.
http://www.ge.com/reagan/
elissa (8da2b6) — 11/14/2010 @ 9:06 am#198, as far as I know there is no evidence that the Bush campaign had anything to do with that.
Milhouse (ea66e3) — 11/14/2010 @ 9:18 amMilhouse,
Not only did Bush not have anything to do with it – it was more of a rumor spread by the MSM to try to disrupt the 2000 republican primary
EricPWJohnson (c5f1fc) — 11/14/2010 @ 9:27 amI can’t imagine he ever worked for Connick, for Garrison the rogue prosecutor, Terrye back ‘ages’
justin cord (82637e) — 11/14/2010 @ 9:31 amago when you commented on the JOM blog, you used
to be more informed. She didn’t intend to challenge Lisa, she was trying to mend fences, even kicking in the the full contribution from
her PAC, ultimately though, the Rubicon came when
the latter proved her uselessness, among the common interests, both Murkowski and Halcro voted
to impose an income tax on the state
“I linked the official reports from the state of Alaska”
EricPW – Did you get the years right this time?
daleyrocks (940075) — 11/14/2010 @ 9:50 am#225, Palin had nothing whatsoever to do with Buck or Rossi, and she actually opposed Angle’s nomination. I supported all three, but Palin didn’t, so blaming her for their losses is a lie.
Milhouse (ea66e3) — 11/14/2010 @ 10:03 amDaley
You’re right – The report must have been signed by the other Governor Sarah Palin – you know the one who didnt quit to go cash in
EricPWJohnson (c5f1fc) — 11/14/2010 @ 10:08 amMilhouse
Oh dragging the accidentalwitch over the finish line finsihed off other candidates as the dems used it as a bellweather to divert attention from their misdeads to gawk at the palin express train wreck du jour
EricPWJohnson (c5f1fc) — 11/14/2010 @ 10:10 amTrue, in fact she backed Didier, when Rossi was still deciding what to do, her family was split between Lowden and Tarkanian, that’s why she didn’t endorse, The fact that Tommy Smother’s character from Casino survives is still a testament to something, don’t ask me what
justin cord (82637e) — 11/14/2010 @ 10:13 amEPWJ the Incompetence Tour.
SPQR (26be8b) — 11/14/2010 @ 10:13 amOn the contrary, O’Donnell drew fire that would have gone to other candidates had she not been there.
And I don’t get this obsession with her having once dabbled in Wicca in college. Who here doesn’t know any Wiccans, let alone doesn’t know anyone who was Wiccan in college?
Milhouse (ea66e3) — 11/14/2010 @ 10:14 amSeriously, the voted against the erstwhile witch, and kept the real one, from California
justin cord (82637e) — 11/14/2010 @ 10:20 amMilhouse,
I could have said the serial liar, the ungraduate, the unemployable but the accidentalwitch seemed to flow better
Now craps coming to roost in the Nikki Haley saga, reports unverified that somehow income taxes were late every year, a 300,000 dollar house was purchased on no income and that she never owned a business claiming to be a small business owner and “pictures?” Of course these are all lies by the establishment
Of course its all untrue all of it, everyone is out to get her they made her file her taxes late every year, despite her success as a small business person (didnt own one though) so now we have another person living off of her campaign expenses now squatting in a governors mansion ala Mike Huckabee
EricPWJohnson (c5f1fc) — 11/14/2010 @ 10:31 amJustin
I still cant believe Fiorno was passed over, she is an example of an outstanding person who can make the tough decisions – who also just happens to be a woman
California will regret leaving that major league talent outside of the chamber
EricPWJohnson (c5f1fc) — 11/14/2010 @ 10:36 amHoly Jeebus, the bloviating assclown can ruin a thread.
JÐ (b98cae) — 11/14/2010 @ 11:00 amEWPJ, I’m still waiting for your apology regarding lying about me.
Just thought I’d throw that out there.
BTW, Murkowski was corrupt as a lawmaker.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/14/2010 @ 11:17 amIt’s sparking up at the lake house, JD.
Eric Blair (ad3ef3) — 11/14/2010 @ 11:17 amMilhouse, I think Palin had good reason to quit and I understand why she did it…but it would be naive to think that will not effect her ability to get elected POTUS. After all, whatever the pressures may have been as Governor of Alaska they will be much greater as President of the United States.
This is not about liking or disliking Palin, it is just a fact that can not be ignored.
Terrye (9d8507) — 11/14/2010 @ 11:57 am224.Icy,
Wrong years
— What “wrong years”? Please explain yourself.
however you just proved my point as her spending spiraled out of control
— Actually, I proved that her spending did not spiral out of control AT ALL. Now, either prove your assertion or retract it.
Looking only at the State revenues (its unfair to compare the Federal dollars as most states have little control over that)
— Yes. So why don’t YOU do that? as I already did above.
Come on, EPWJ. It’s time to move beyond ad hominem and into the realm of reality.
Icy Texan (2c6fc5) — 11/14/2010 @ 12:30 pmI think I have been unfair to Dana, although not intentionally so.
More than once I said to her that I didn’t think that we should be putting the blame on Palin for how her children have been treated. I didn’t mean to imply that Dana was doing that, but I see how the wording of my comment looks like I did.
I also see, going back, that she specifically noted that she was not doing this — and yet I again made the same argument without taking account of her statement.
It should be clear that Dana does not put the blame on Palin for how her children have been treated. I should have made this clear and I failed to.
What I was trying to say, imperfectly, was this. Palin’s children have been the victims of unfair attacks. This is a tactic that people use to try to drive people out of public life. It is my belief that, if a parent refuses to bend to that tactic, the parent is not necessarily doing that child a disservice in the long run. If the cause is important, and the parent’s actions are honorable, the parent can serve as a role model for the child.
I have heard many adults of fine character speak about their parents in that manner. I feel the same about my dad and some things that he did that were difficult — that may have put our family into a worse financial situation, but that demonstrated an example of integrity that stuck with his children for all our lives.
That is my point. I apologize to Dana for making it poorly, in a way that inadvertently implied things about her position that were not true.
Patterico (c218bd) — 11/14/2010 @ 12:33 pmjustin cord, I mean ian cormac, I mean narciso:
Why don’t you pick a name and stick with it?
Are you trying to create the impression that there is more than one person who holds your views?
Or is there something else going on?
Honest question.
Patterico (c218bd) — 11/14/2010 @ 12:54 pm#261, as president Palin wouldn’t be vulnerable to the same tactic. There is no special prosecutor law any more, and frivolous complaints to the DOJ will be dismissed without any need for the president to hire a lawyer, let alone spend any time on it herself. And if she does need a lawyer, not only is she now rich enough to afford one, she can also accept donations for her defense. And her staffers would also be able to accept donations for their defense, should any complaints be made against them, that the DOJ decided were not too frivolous to be worth pursuing.
Milhouse (ea66e3) — 11/14/2010 @ 12:58 pmMilhouse:
I disagree. As President she can be threatened with everything from impeachment to partisan investigation to war crimes trials. Look at the amount of pressure Bush was under. I think it is wishful thinking to believe that being the Governor of Alaska carries less risk of partisan attack than the position of President does. I realize that Palin was under great personal and financial pressure, but there will be pressures in the White House too and she can’t just quit that job.
I know you think she would never do that, and you might be right..but a lot of people are going to wonder. I think that as time passes it will be easier for her to move beyond this, but right now it is still an issue.
Terrye (9d8507) — 11/14/2010 @ 1:05 pmMilhouse is right.
Palin is no longer as vulnerable as she was when she was a middle class governor.
It’s a shame that tactic worked in Alaska, where only the extremely wealthy can remain in office. I don’t think even the greatest leaders in our history, without millions in personal wealth, could have handled it any better than Palin can.
Doesn’t mean her resignation isn’t a massive, albeit unfair, liability for her general election hopes. It’s just too easy to communicate.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/14/2010 @ 1:11 pmMilhouse didn’t say otherwise. He noted a distinction in that Palin would not be financially overwhelmed by such a future attack.
She held on, as Governor, until the debts were tremendous. She is not actually a quitter. She wouldn’t resign as President under drastically less pressure, and I believe it’s impossible for the pressure to pile up like it did when she was Governor.
No one could have handled her persecution (a fair term) better. Name any of our best leaders, and they just couldn’t beat this either.
Realistically, it’s a huge political albatross anyway.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/14/2010 @ 1:17 pmIcy
For pete’s sake she spent from 7.8 to 9.5 bees in one year
Now did it go down? no, give it up – if she had done what you were asserting it would be on Beck 24/7 and Foxythenews – it isnt – and she doesnt really mention it either
EricPWJohnson (e83e82) — 11/14/2010 @ 1:27 pmEPWJ, she ran that state very well.
You’re picking nits and not being fair.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/14/2010 @ 1:29 pmDustin
Its over, dude
EricPWJohnson (e83e82) — 11/14/2010 @ 1:30 pmDustin
Sure on the backs of the consumers of the other 49 states
EricPWJohnson (e83e82) — 11/14/2010 @ 1:33 pmOver? EPWJ was not over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor!
SPQR (26be8b) — 11/14/2010 @ 1:34 pmWhat’s over?
And why did you lie about me so many times, even as I proved you wrong so many times? What about me motivated you to attempt character assassination? Granted, you eventually had to back off because I simply linked proof every time you commented.
Why do you do that to people instead of just engage in debate?
I think you’re here to confuse people, and that you have some silly agenda. The way you ask questions and characterize issues is always in a very dishonest manner. I don’t really think this effort is of any consequence, but you’re obsessed. Palin won a couple of weeks ago. Since then, a lot of kooks have been striving to prove that she did not.
Only thing over is Obama’s agenda, courtesy of a lot of people who worked together, Palin large among them. I don’t think you actually like Scozzafava or Murkowski one bit, btw.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/14/2010 @ 1:34 pmDustin
Its called a binky
EricPWJohnson (e83e82) — 11/14/2010 @ 1:36 pmAre you complaining about her taxes on the oil industry? Do you work for an oil company? In what capacity? Is your real name Eric Johnson, or did you just take that name because it implies you’re non anonymous (you’re attempting to deceive, if this is the case).
I am happy with how Palin negotiated with oil companies. I understand those who oppose her see the entire issue as very intimidating and are very scared of her. You, of course, do not act like you think it’s over. Dude.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/14/2010 @ 1:37 pmSee what I mean, Dustin?
Eric Blair (c8876d) — 11/14/2010 @ 1:38 pm#266. A president can be threatened with anything you like, but there’s nothing her opponents can do to make it impossible for her to continue in office, even if they control Congress. (I can’t imagine a scenario in which Palin is elected in 2012, and yet the Ds retain the Senate, let alone win back the House; still, it’s possible that they could make a comeback in 2014.) They can’t compel her or her non-confirmable advisers and staffers to appear before their committee hearings, they certainly can’t compel anyone in her administration to devote so much time to their investigations as to leave him no time to do his job, and they can’t prevent anyone in the administration from establishing a legal fund to pay for lawyers.
As for the prospect of Palin resigning mid-term, I can certainly imagine her doing so in, say, 2019, in order to give VP Jindal a leg up in the primaries. So what? Why should this prospect bother anyone? There’s nothing unconstitutional about it, and I just don’t buy the claim that being elected to office carries with it a moral obligation to serve the entire term.
If there were anything to that claim, then people would be upset every time someone resigned in order to take up another position. The majority of the current cabinet, including Obama and Biden, resigned from offices to which they had been elected; and the same would have been true in a McCain administration, as it was in probably every administration in living memory.
Milhouse (ea66e3) — 11/14/2010 @ 1:40 pmThere is no real compensation is there, they went after W’s kids, because as teenagers and young adults they liked to party, whereas Chelsea was regarded as the Dauphin princess, notice how little notice she was marrying into a family of embezzlers and tax cheats, those are the breaks, they pursued W back to his grandfather’s investments in pre War Germany, to cast light on his current character,they made the Natl Guard garbage, in this last round they thought to stigmatize what was an imminently good thing, Track’s desire to join the service, and his mother’s good name, they have continued to do this, when she is out of office, because theycount on the gullibility of a good portion of the American people, including not a few people here. In August 2008, her approval was stratospheric in her state, mostly by lies, innuendos, redactions, they brought it down to where it was in the mid 50s, by the time she chose
narciso (82637e) — 11/14/2010 @ 1:41 pma different course
I’m not trying to pick on the author of this comment or anyone else who feels this way, but it’s a good example of something that troubles me. When you can’t say why you oppose a candidate then you leave yourself open to people believing that your opposition is based on something other than reason.
I could articulate why I was concerned about the 2008 candidates — Obama, Hillary and even McCain — and I can articulate concerns about the 2012 candidates, including Palin. Saying you just don’t like someone may prove you have good intuition but it’s not a reason. More important, it could be wrong.
DRJ (d43dcd) — 11/14/2010 @ 2:05 pmDustin
Yaaaawn,
EricPWJohnson (e83e82) — 11/14/2010 @ 2:15 pm“On the contrary, O’Donnell drew fire that would have gone to other candidates had she not been there.”
This is why I’m sad the RNC didn’t support her enough.
imdw (ce700c) — 11/14/2010 @ 3:23 pmWait, so now that I point out you’re acting like it’s not ‘over’, you say yawn as though you really aren’t freaking out… except in the next thread?
Pretty pathetic. I manage to argue with you without lying… you can’t say as much.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/14/2010 @ 3:40 pmNot to mention trolling in the other thread about the topic of this one, just for attention. Sheesh, its getting more pathetic.
SPQR (26be8b) — 11/14/2010 @ 3:44 pmI have trollblocker, killfile and one that seemingly
was dedicated for me, the narcisolator, still a good dose of ‘beetlejuice, beetlejuice’ is in order.
One is struck by the paucity of actual facts, about someone one would think people would have a good understanding of, Stephen Mansfield probably has the
narciso (82637e) — 11/14/2010 @ 3:48 pmmost fair and comprehensive understanding of the subject
Re DRJ, #280:
No insult taken at all; it troubles me that I can’t articulate it better, too. Part of it kind of feels like a chicken or egg problem: I can’t articulate it because all the ways I’ve tried have already been “exposed” as just Palin-hate (just like the MSM has told us for months that any criticism of the Big O, or any concern about the immigration issue, is just “sublimated racism”). Part of it might not BE reason…I just get a bad feeling about her. What’s the old Tolkein line when the hobbits decide to trust Strider…”I think if he was evil he’d look fairer but feel fouler”, or something to that nature? Now of course someone’s going to say I’m calling her evil, but that kind of articulates how I feel. There’s something I just don’t feel comfortable about going on there. Something perhaps a bit narcissistic about her that’s similar to O, but clothed in a little more humility and every-woman guise (too much populist rhetoric?). She sure hasn’t avoided the spotlight, lately. Maybe it’s the sense that despite her much more studied approach lately there’s still a bit of naivety there that would be used against her.
The resignation is certainly part of it…quitting in the face of adversity – even patently unfair adversity – isn’t a strong point. And I don’t see it as equal to ‘quitting in place to run for higher office’, although to be honest I hate that too, and the Big O’s basic inability to serve thru a term of much of anything without grabbing for the next brass ring made me just as queasy about him (but with him there was so much more to be queasy about in terms of his policies, his glib promises, his associations and huge holes in his history. I know…cue the “racist!” posts )
Part of my feeling might also be that no matter how able, intelligent, honest, and genuine she really is (i.e. my impressions are completely wrong) the well has still been poisoned in terms of her ever getting the slightest bit of credit from foreign leaders. I could give a rat’s arse whether they like her (in fact, I prefer that foriegn countries — even friendly ones — have a sense of wariness in the face of our leadership) … but they’d certainly test her the same way O has gotten tested (and found grievously wanting).
It’s kind of a Catch-22. A big part of my huge misgivings about O were how much of the media blatantly idolized him…and now a big part of my misigivings about Palin are how much of the media has already vilified her. Not because I believe what I hear, but because of how many others will – and how divided as a country we’d remain if she got elected.
rtrski (c58688) — 11/14/2010 @ 5:31 pmMy misgiving were because I knew exactly what he was, at least by that fall, and yet people were willing to take that gamble; the problem lies more
with the press than anything else. On a near infinity of subjects, they misinform, and pride themselves on the disinformation they have sowed.
It’s the”ant farm” problem from the movie Barcelona,which one character uses to explain how foreign perspectives of this country, are so skewed.
Rutten’s typically pathetic review of Decision Points, which surfaced in my local paper is a case in point
narciso (82637e) — 11/14/2010 @ 5:40 pmAny day, EPWJ.
Any day now.
Icy Texan (065f21) — 11/15/2010 @ 3:27 amrtrski @ 286,
I think you’ve articulated your misgivings very well. Rather than make me doubt your concerns about Palin as lacking reason or being a knee-jerk reaction to the Palin brand, your comment leaves me appreciating all of the thought you clearly have given this issue as well as your listed misgivings.
I hope you continue to comment at Patterico’s.
Dana (8ba2fb) — 11/15/2010 @ 1:08 pmDana:
Thanks for the invite, and the feedback. In response, you did say one thing that tweaked my misgivings a hair more…”the Palin Brand” (indicated capitalization added by me…and one can just imagine a (C) symbol next to the name). I guess I don’t trust anything too packaged whether the packaging appeals to my core beliefs or not.
Maybe the reality show, daughter on Dancing with the Stars, etc are all just ways of making inroads in the ‘new media world’. But it sure smacks of a concerted effort to rehabilitate – or create – an image or a “brand name”. A good product only needs so much marketing to get the word out.
Somewhat off topic, and the book isn’t 100% great although it’s extremely funny in places, anyone here ever read “Interface” by Stephen Bury (later identified as a pseudonym of better known author Neil Stephenson, cowriting with someone else who’s name I’ve forgotten)? It’s billed as sociopolitical science fiction and hits every conspiracy-theorist-note possible (a secret cabal pulling strings in the background creates the perfect Presidential candidate whom they can manipulate with a chip in his brain, implanted to correct damage from a stroke)…but in between the wicked political satire there is a lot of exposition on the creation of political “brands” and movements…and I found those parts rather chilling in memory, watching the 2008 election of the empty suit. The tagline of the book’s back cover is particularly apt … “He’s not just a candidate…he’s a special effect.”
I don’t want another special effect. I’m looking for a good, character-based drama this time around.
rtrski (336865) — 11/15/2010 @ 2:36 pmTick-Tock, EPWJ.
Tick-tock.
Icy Texan (065f21) — 11/16/2010 @ 1:46 amI remember that novel, Rtski, it is interesting that it is set after an economic crisis not unlike
narciso (82637e) — 11/16/2010 @ 5:31 amwhat we went through in 2008. I disagree stronglythough, unlike Obama who was allartifice, I compare him more to the John Saxon, in the Dr. Who episode ‘Sound of Drums”,who came to power, through trickery,
Palin, is the real deal, this endeavour she is undertaking, is in keeping with the promise
she made a year and a half ago, to promote Alaska, along with candidates and criteria, that she set forward at that time
Sarah Palin is a joker. Not only can she not state the views of her party, she can’t even articulate her own political philosophy, if she has one. http://tinyurl.com/39zvpdw
ititiiti (9d1bb3) — 11/28/2010 @ 8:07 pmThat might be one of the most idiotic links that a drive by troll has ever posted. It is commercial grade idiocy, Yelverton levels.
JD (eb5afc) — 11/28/2010 @ 8:13 pm