or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Why they hate her (Sarah Palin)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Why they hate her (Sarah Palin) - Page 6

post #201 of 626
The funny thing about this story is that everyone pretty much agrees that Pallin's brother in law was an asshole. That much is certain. And he probably would've deserved to get shafted.

The problem is that a good man who did absolutely nothing wrong was the one that got fired. And that's reprehensible. And now they're tarnishing his name even further in order to save face. Disgraceful. Truly.

I don't like this vindictive, vengeful, woman at all. She's very Cheney-like.
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
post #202 of 626
CNN:

Is Todd actually a shadow governor?


http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/19/todd.palin/

Got copies of official email
sat in on meetings
went of fact-finding missions
Wasn't he supposed to be taking care of the kids? He's on the campaign trail with her. not cooking and washing up. (CNN's last comment, paraphrased)

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #203 of 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northgate View Post

She's very Cheney-like.

Except she is a little better with guns; she shoots everybody except her friends, until they turn on her, that is.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #204 of 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northgate View Post

a good man who did absolutely nothing wrong

How do you know this? Someone who serves at the will of an elected official should expect to be fired when they cease to carry out the will of the person who appointed them. Absent the trooper issue... did this person not go against Palin's directives on budgetary issues?
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #205 of 626
From the look of things, I think it is dangerous to trust anything coming from Palin, and therefore any decision she has made needs to be scrutinized. This s a calculating player on a mission that seems primarily self-interested.

BTW, Sara's approval ratings dropped this past week like a waterfall:

http://politicalwire.com/archives/20...gs_tumble.html


http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/stump...to-falter.aspx

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #206 of 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

How do you know this? Someone who serves at the will of an elected official should expect to be fired when they cease to carry out the will of the person who appointed them. Absent the trooper issue... did this person not go against Palin's directives on budgetary issues?

That, truly, was a very scary statement you just made.
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
post #207 of 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northgate View Post

That, truly, was a very scary statement you just made.

This is how much of the executive branch works... at many levels of government.
Not sure why that scares you.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #208 of 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

This is how much of the executive branch works... at many levels of government.
Not sure why that scares you.

What scares me is your support for vendetta style leadership.
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
post #209 of 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northgate View Post

vendetta style leadership.

Not sure how I can "support it" when I don't know what exactly in the hell you are referring to. Please be more specific.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #210 of 626
My point is that while you are technically correct that Sarah Pallin can do whatever the hell she wants it doesn't make what she did "right".

Just be straightforward with me, though. You know why she fired him, right? I know all the political bullshit talking points. But we all "get it". She wanted to use her position as governor to destroy her brother-in-law. And when another government employee would not help her she fired him. In my book, that's wrong.
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
post #211 of 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northgate View Post

My point is that while you are technically correct that Sarah Pallin can do whatever the hell she wants it doesn't make what she did "right".

Whew. I can put off that Constitution lesson I was digging out.

Quote:
You know why she fired him, right? I know all the political bullshit talking points. But we all "get it". She wanted to use her position as governor to destroy her brother-in-law. And when another government employee would not help her she fired him. In my book, that's wrong.

I know that you believe that is the reason. I'm still looking into all the data. Which the hacks of Alaska are going to provide us an ironic, nee stunning FIVE days before the election.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #212 of 626
Yes, I agree that the timing is bad. And I understand why Republicans would want this to be put off until after the election. I would probably support the same thing if I were a Rebublican.

HOWEVER, I would be utterly pissed off at Team Obama for making such a cynical selection as Pallin. I believe McCain and his team should've considered this before picking her as their VP. Troopergate had already been a story for a while before she was even remotely considered as a potential candidate. So it's not like they weren't aware of this brewing "scandal".
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
post #213 of 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

How do you know this? Someone who serves at the will of an elected official should expect to be fired when they cease to carry out the will of the person who appointed them. Absent the trooper issue... did this person not go against Palin's directives on budgetary issues?

Apparently not.

Quote:
"The last straw," her lawyer argued, came when he planned a trip to Washington, D.C., to seek federal funds for an aggressive anti-sexual-violence program. The project, expected to cost from $10 million to $20 million a year for five years, would have been the first of its kind in Alaska, which leads the nation in reported forcible rape.

The McCain-Palin campaign echoed the charge in a press release it distributed Monday, concurrent with Palin's legal filing. "Mr. Monegan persisted in planning to make the unauthorized lobbying trip to D.C.," the release stated.

But the governor's staff authorized the trip, according to an internal travel document from the Department of Public Safety, released Friday in response to an open records request.

The document, a state travel authorization form, shows that Palin's chief of staff, Mike Nizich, approved Monegan's trip to Washington, D.C., "to attend meeting with Senator Murkowski." The date next to Nizich's signature reads June 18.
post #214 of 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

Whew. I can put off that Constitution lesson I was digging out.



I know that you believe that is the reason. I'm still looking into all the data. Which the hacks of Alaska are going to provide us an ironic, nee stunning FIVE days before the election.

That timetable- if I recall correctly - was decided upon before Palin became the VP nominee, so to make a fuss over it like Camp McCain has is just an attempt to divert attention from it.

The bigger issue is the one-time open Palin and the now standard-issue, GOP MO puppet Palin who is refusing to cooperate. It reeks, plain and simple. These are certainly people that I do not want anywhere near the WH.

Oh, and why oh why is Todd always with Sara? Methinks he was supposed to be taking care of the kids.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #215 of 626
Why they hate her:

Because of cynical PR calculations from supposedly straight-talk Johnny pathetic image mongering and just plain stupidity worse than even Bush:

"Small-town white-female mayor who bullies librarians and museum directors, lobbies Washington to obtain federal funds and claims that she is against "pork barrel politics," is elected governor of the state with one of the smallest populations in the country, so small that she can afford to work from home for most of the year and charge the taxpayers for working from home as a "duty-station," lives closer to the melting Arctic ice caps than any other governor in the country but does not believe in global warming, cracks the whip in dog-sled races and in retaliation towards state officials who she thinks have wronged her family, and turns otherwise right-wing fundamentalist social vices into Republican political virtues."
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
post #216 of 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

Whew. I can put off that Constitution lesson I was digging out.



I know that you believe that is the reason. I'm still looking into all the data. Which the hacks of Alaska are going to provide us an ironic, nee stunning FIVE days before the election.

Yeah. "Hacks" meaning, apparently, "any Democrat involved in any investigation of any Republican, for any reason, at any time." Seem to recall the "hack" rule being invoked a number of times during the Bush admin, don't you?

OTOH, we have Todd Palin et al simply refusing to respond to legal subpoenas, because he (by "he" I mean the RNC's lawyers, of course) dosn't think the investigation is "legitimate."

That's so cool. If I'm ever subpoenaed, I'm totally going with that. Because, you know, I'm a liberal and there are bound to be some conservatives somewhere in that court system. Ah, lawlessness! Hooray for thugs! It's so independent minded! Fuck you, United States and your so called "laws", we're all mavericks now!

So we have a new Republican law and order principle in play: subpoenas don't mean shit. Do what you want, and if you get investigated tell 'em to fuck off. Let them come and arrest you, if they dare. Then you can threaten civil war and send out your ditto heads to rough some people up. Because of the "outrageous witch-hunt."

Hey Jubelum, is this a principle you're totally behind now? Will you support Obama's right to use his Justice Department to fuck over conservative candidates and organizations, then blow off any subsequent investigation as "illegitimate"? Cause that ain't hackery, which you hate, that's straight up fascism, which........?
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #217 of 626
Following in Cheney's footsteps?

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS...uit/index.html

Judge orders him to keep records he doesn't want to leave on record... what could he possibly be hiding?


Palin wishes to cover her footsteps as well.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #218 of 626
According to the New York Times, the McCain Camp has basically admitted that Palin is not qualified for the job: they wanted a Q & A format for the VP debate because she lacks experience for a more free-form debate and such a format would put her on the defensive.


http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/21/us...rssnyt&emc=rss

If she can't handle a debate, then how can she handle the office of VP, not to mention POTUS?

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #219 of 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post

According to the New York Times, the McCain Camp has basically admitted that Palin is not qualified for the job: they wanted a Q & A format for the VP debate because she lacks experience for a more free-form debate and such a format would put her on the defensive.


http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/21/us...rssnyt&emc=rss

If she can't handle a debate, then how can she handle the office of VP, not to mention POTUS?

This is some bullshit. You can't change the format of the debate because Palin is inexperienced at debating. You don't get a handicap. This is a presidential election, not golf, the best player is supposed to win.
post #220 of 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by @_@ Artman View Post

This is some bullshit. You can't change the format of the debate because Palin is inexperienced at debating. You don't get a handicap. This is a presidential election, not golf, the best player is supposed to win.

Of course you can. The format of the debate is open to negotiation. Clinton is to Town Hall Meeting as Obama is to Lincon Douglass.
post #221 of 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by FloorJack View Post

Of course you can. The format of the debate is open to negotiation. Clinton is to Town Hall Meeting as Obama is to Lincon Douglass.

McCain's "town hall" meetings on the other hand are pure, grade A bullshit. What McCain holds are GOP party events, falsely billed as "town hall" meetings. Tickets are distributed to party members by county and city GOP organizers. Bullshit.
post #222 of 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

Hey Jubelum, is this a principle you're totally behind now?

No, this hyperbole you're re-labeling a "principle" has not met with the favour of the Jubelum. Next.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #223 of 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

No, this hyperbole you're re-labeling a "principle" has not met with the favour of the Jubelum. Next.

OT: Jubelum, did you see this? You'll get a kick out of it...

Quote:
Barack Obama aint taking my shotguns, so don't buy that malarkey, he said. If he tries to fool with my Beretta, he's got a problem.

Joe owns shotguns too. Joe Biden, a VP you can go "over and under" with.
post #224 of 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by @_@ Artman View Post

OT: Jubelum, did you see this? You'll get a kick out of it...

Joe owns shotguns too. Joe Biden, a VP you can go "over and under" with.

Simply stunning. Next he'll need to "get him a huntin' license."

Biden pretty much wrote the Senate version of the 94 Clinton gun ban. He's a known quantity against the RKBA. Gun owners know that.
The ones that don't... well, we're educating them as fast as we can.

And Obama... well... not even a question. He's the most anti-gun presidental candidate the Dems have ever put up.
He's a gun-hater on the level of Schumer, McCarthy, and Feinstein. Again, those of us who care about this issue are educating our fellow sportsmen as fast as we can.

You'd think that Democrats would know they need to stay away from the gun issue. It's a total loser among their "bitter" blue-collar types... the ones they are going to need in addition to "blacks" and "eggheads" to get their leftist vision into reality.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #225 of 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

No, this hyperbole you're re-labeling a "principle" has not met with the favour of the Jubelum. Next.

Hyperbole? You mean the fact that Bush Republicans don't think subpoenas have any merit, when it comes to them? Or describing it as such?

Glad to know it doesn't please you, but I would have thought that that kind of abuse of power would draw your attention before the particulars of the investigation that the abuse is designed to thwart.

I know you are going to tend to be suspicious of Democratic doings, I can't fault you for that, but, under the general heading of "governmental overreaching", which, if I have understood the general tenor of your posts you are really, really against, I'm thinking government officials ignoring subpoenas is somewhat more alarming than the political fallout of investigations involving subpoenas.

We can't just decide that any investigation that involves members of a different party than the entities being investigated are invalid, because then we don't have any mechanism, at all, for rooting out governmental corruption, short of allowing each party to clean its own house on the honor system.

Yeah? I mean, that's a bad thing, right?
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #226 of 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

Simply stunning. Next he'll need to "get him a huntin' license."

Biden pretty much wrote the Senate version of the 94 Clinton gun ban. He's a known quantity against the RKBA. Gun owners know that.
The ones that don't... well, we're educating them as fast as we can.

And Obama... well... not even a question. He's the most anti-gun presidental candidate the Dems have ever put up.
He's a gun-hater on the level of Schumer, McCarthy, and Feinstein. Again, those of us who care about this issue are educating our fellow sportsmen as fast as we can.

You'd think that Democrats would know they need to stay away from the gun issue. It's a total loser among their "bitter" blue-collar types... the ones they are going to need in addition to "blacks" and "eggheads" to get their leftist vision into reality.

I think the bitter horse died a few miles back. Maybe it's time to switch rides.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #227 of 626
Quote:
McCain: Energy. She knows more about energy than probably anyone else in the United States of America. She represe-- is a governor of the state that 20% of America's energy supply comes from there. And you all know that energy is a critical and vital national security issue.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fRjtAK66as

Pheeewww! For a moment there I thought McCain might've been lying yet again.

Quote:
Palin: Oil and coal? Of course, it's a fungible commodity and they don't flag, you know, the molecules, where it's going and where it's not. But in the sense of the Congress today, they know that there are very, very hungry domestic markets that need that oil first," Palin said. "So, I believe that what Congress is going to do, also, is not to allow the export bans to such a degree that it's Americans that get stuck to holding the bag without the energy source that is produced here, pumped here. It's got to flow into our domestic markets first."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hvUsdmqGYV8

WTFF? You really couldn't make this shit up if you tried.
post #228 of 626
adda... I am against corruption, period. As you know, I have not been happy one bit with Bush and company and their audacity WRT the rule of law. There are plenty of issues that I think people need to answer for.

The problem is that we are at an all time low... where partisan investigations are purely political tools. The entire process of investigation, and the corresponding demagoguery it creates, is a method of achieving political leverage... not seeking justice. Pelosi promised us the most ethical and transparent congress in history... and what do we have... more of the same shit that's been going on for years and years. The same earmarks. The same speaker-blocking of popular bills. The same protection and arm twisting with committee-ships. And chances are the Change mantra will get nowhere near Pelosi and crew... Obama's her man, but it will not matter.

Just look at the litany of hearings that the Democrat congress has either promised or held... in search of a headline. Were some of them justified? Sure. I agreed with some of them. Others were there simply for the grandstanding opportunity. Biden's out there talking about criminally prosecuting Bush & Co after the election for policy decisions. Unprecedented grandstanding for the KOSers.

It's been this way since Watergate... maybe even before. How else would an investigation start with a land deal and end up with a blue dress?
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #229 of 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

I think the bitter horse died a few miles back. Maybe it's time to switch rides.

I can assure you, the BITTER discussion is alive and well. And playing quite nicely in many circles. There's nothing quite like having people in their own words, ya know.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #230 of 626
Alaska's main newspaper is now discussing the apparent abdication of Governor Palin, and they are not happy with things being run by McCain's staff:

http://www.adn.com/opinion/story/531725.html


I hope the people of Alaska start a recall; such has been suggested in the comments posted on the paper's site.

This article shows a twist:

http://www.madison.com/tct/opinion/305805

Camp McCain is trying to stop Republicans in Alaska from investigating Palin (they approved it in the first place).

The LA Times also has a good piece:

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationwo...,2158301.story

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #231 of 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

I can assure you, the BITTER discussion is alive and well. And playing quite nicely in many circles. There's nothing quite like having people in their own words, ya know.


And now that we know this just isn't the case you're beating that dead horse.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #232 of 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

adda... I am against corruption, period. As you know, I have not been happy one bit with Bush and company and their audacity WRT the rule of law. There are plenty of issues that I think people need to answer for.

The problem is that we are at an all time low... where partisan investigations are purely political tools. The entire process of investigation, and the corresponding demagoguery it creates, is a method of achieving political leverage... not seeking justice. Pelosi promised us the most ethical and transparent congress in history... and what do we have... more of the same shit that's been going on for years and years. The same earmarks. The same speaker-blocking of popular bills. The same protection and arm twisting with committee-ships. And chances are the Change mantra will get nowhere near Pelosi and crew... Obama's her man, but it will not matter.

Just look at the litany of hearings that the Democrat congress has either promised or held... in search of a headline. Were some of them justified? Sure. I agreed with some of them. Others were there simply for the grandstanding opportunity. Biden's out there talking about criminally prosecuting Bush & Co after the election for policy decisions. Unprecedented grandstanding for the KOSers.

It's been this way since Watergate... maybe even before. How else would an investigation start with a land deal and end up with a blue dress?

Yeah. That's not what I asked you about. You're complaining about "corruption" while listing things like earmarks, bill-blocking and possible criminal prosecutions.

So I'm supposed to figure that ignoring subpoenas is kinda like all of that so it's all just a big mess and why get all picky about details?

Again: ignoring subpoenas is a far sight further down the road than earmarks, which, last time I checked, isn't actually, you know, illegal.

Are you saying that a lawless, unaccountable executive strikes you as pretty much the same thing as the party in power controlling which bills come to the floor?

Because, I have to say, that doesn't sound like being "against corruption" so much as a kind of feeble blame shifting.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #233 of 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

Because, I have to say, that doesn't sound like being "against corruption" so much as a kind of feeble blame shifting.

It's Clinton's fault.
post #234 of 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by screener View Post

It's Clinton's fault.

No - it's Nancy Pelosi's fault!
eye
bee
BEE
Reply
eye
bee
BEE
Reply
post #235 of 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilsch View Post

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fRjtAK66as

Pheeewww! For a moment there I thought McCain might've been lying yet again.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hvUsdmqGYV8

WTFF? You really couldn't make this shit up if you tried.

Let's see now. No Coal. Check. No Hydro. Check. No Nuclear. Check. No Natural Gas. Check. No Wind. Check. No Solar. Check. No Geothermal. Check. No Biofuels. Check.

Did I miss any? Oil you say?

OK you got me on that one.

So current production of oil from Alaska is like 20,000 thousand barrels/month, total domestic production is like 150,000 thousand barrels/month, and total domestic consumption is like 600,000 thousand barrels/month (EIA).

So the math is;

20,000/150,000 = 13.3% of domestic production currently comes from Alaska (not the 20% claimed).

20,000/600,000 = 3.3% of domestic consumption

Therefore, Alaska provides 3.3% of our total domestic oil consumption (at best).

By the time we add up all our energy needs (in say BTU's which is also available from the EIA), Alaska'a contribution and Palin's knowledge are a certified drop in the proverbial bucket.

McCain certified Worst Lier Ever.
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #236 of 626
Did any of you guys get a chance to read this?

How Palin Beat Alaska's Establishment

the WSJ article is $$$but that blog had the money quotes.

I'd imagine that Palin, being a politician, could very well have done the right thing for the most venal of reasons, but taken as a whole, that gets her ticket punched for one free VP slot.

WSJ link:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1220...ays_columnists

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #237 of 626
Does anyone doubt that I have a subscription? You all should subscribe.
How Palin Beat Alaska's Establishment

By KIMBERLEY A. STRASSEL
Quote:
If you've read the press coverage of Sarah Palin, chances are you've heard plenty about her religious views and private family matters. If you want to know what drives Gov. Palin's politics, and has intrigued America, read this.

Every state has its share of crony capitalism, but Big Oil and the GOP political machine have taken that term to new heights in Alaska. The oil industry, which provides 85% of state revenues, has strived to own the government. Alaska's politiciansin particular ruling Republicansroll in oil campaign money, lavish oil revenue on pet projects, then retire to lucrative oil jobs where they lobby for sweetheart oil deals. You can love the free market and not love this.

Alaskans have long resented this dysfunction, which has led to embarrassing corruption scandals. It has also led to a uniform belief that the political class, in hock to the oil class, fails to competently oversee Alaska's vast oil and gas wealth, the majority of which belongs to the stateor rather, Alaskan citizens.

And so it came as no surprise in 2004 when former Republican Gov. Frank Murkowski made clear he'd be working exclusively with three North Slope producersExxonMobil, ConocoPhillips and BPto build a $25 billion pipeline to move natural gas to the lower 48. The trio had informed their political vassals that they alone would build this project (they weren't selling their gas to outsiders) and that they expected the state to reward them. Mr. Murkowski disappeared into smoky backrooms to work out the details. He refused to release information on the negotiations. When Natural Resources Commissioner Tom Irwin suggested terms of the contract were illegal, he was fired.

What Mr. Murkowski did do publicly was instruct his statehouse to change the oil and gas tax structure (taxes being a primary way Alaskans realize their oil revenue). Later, citizens would discover this was groundwork for Mr. Murkowski's pipeline contractwhich would lock in that oil-requested tax package for up to 40 years, provide a $4 billion state investment, and relinquish most oversight.

Enter Mrs. Palin. The former mayor of Wasilla had been appointed by Mr. Murkowski in 2003 to the state oil and gas regulatory agency. She'd had the temerity to blow the whistle on fellow GOP Commissioner Randy Ruedrich for refusing to disclose energy dealings. Mr. Murkowski and GOP Attorney General Gregg Renkes closed ranks around Mr. Ruedrichwho also chaired the state GOP. Mrs. Palin resigned. Having thus offended the entire old boy network, she challenged the governor for his seat.

Mrs. Palin ran against the secret deal, and vowed to put the pipeline back out for competitive, transparent, bidding. She railed against cozy politics. Mr. Murkowski ran on his unpopular pipeline deal. The oil industry warned the state would never get its project without his leadership. Mrs. Palin walloped him in the primary and won office in late 2006. Around this time, news broke of a federal probe that would show oil executives had bribed lawmakers to support the Murkowski tax changes.

Among Mrs. Palin's first acts was to reinstate Mr. Irwin. By February 2007 she'd released her requirements for pipeline bidding. They were stricter, and included only a $500 million state incentive. By May a cowed state housereeling from scandalpassed her legislation.

The producers warned they would not bid, nor would anyone else. Five groups submitted proposals. A few months before the legislature awarded its license to TransCanada this July, Conoco and BP suddenly announced they'd be building their own pipeline with no state inducements whatsoever. They'd suddenly found the money.

Mrs. Palin has meanwhile passed an ethics law. She's tightened up oil oversight. She forced the legislature to rewrite the oil tax law. That new law raised taxes on the industry, for which Mrs. Palin is now taking some knocks, but the political background here is crucial.

The GOP machine has crumbled. Attorney General Renkes resigned. Mr. Ruedrich was fined $12,000. Jim ClarkMr. Murkowski's lead pipeline negotiatorpleaded guilty to conspiring with an oil firm. At least three legislators have been convicted. Sen. Ted Stevens is under indictment for oil entanglements, while Rep. Don Young is under investigation.

Throughout it all, Mrs. Palin has stood for reform, though not populism. She thanks oil companies and says executives who "seek maximum revenue" are "simply doing their job." She says her own job is to be a "savvy" negotiator on behalf of Alaska's citizens and to provide credible oversight. It is this combination that lets her aggressively promote new energy while retaining public trust.

Today's congressional Republicans could learn from this. The party has been plagued by earmarks, scandal and corruption. Most members have embraced the machine. That has diminished voters' trust, and in the process diminished good, conservative ideas. It is no wonder 37 million people tuned in to Mrs. Palin's convention speech. They are looking for something fresh.
post #238 of 626
All the more shocking in her hypocrisy.

In any discussion about ethics, how do you support her refusal to cooperate with troopergate investigators?
In any discussion about ethics, how do you defend the attempt to fire the librarian?
post #239 of 626
A Canadian company won the bid. Jobs and money go out of the country.

---

If she is so good as some would like us to believe, why does she lower herself to be played around like a puppet? Camp McCain completely controls her at the moment. If she were a true reformer, she wouldn't stand for it. She only wants to win, at any cost.

---

Yeah, what about Troopergate and all that talk about openness?
What about those two bridges, again?
How about the feeling in Alaska that she has basically abdicated?
Why was Todd involved like staff?

No, this girl doesn't cut it.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #240 of 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by FloorJack View Post

Does anyone doubt that I have a subscription? You all should subscribe.
How Palin Beat Alaska's Establishment

By KIMBERLEY A. STRASSEL

dmz already posted this, twice even, third time is the charm? I guess so.

So if we extrapolate this from Alaska's population to the total population of the USA, Palin has 436 times as much work to accomplish if elected?
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Why they hate her (Sarah Palin)