|
Post by jlseagull on Sept 14, 2008 23:23:12 GMT
I think it is appropriate to be talking about Sarah Palin on this forum. She is not weather, but a true climate change. Go Sarah! You're kidding, right? Sarah lied about being an earmark queen. She's a BIG GOVERNMENT anti-Republican. No Republican worth his/her salt would vote for such a BIG GOVERNMENT person. As a true Republican, I despise liars who avoid personal responsibility and suck at the government trough. Truly horrid that my party has selected someone who is against all of the true Republican values -- Honor, personal responsibility, and integrity. That's what Republicans are supposed to be for, and what Palin is the opposite of. McCain, of course, is not Palin. He's got a good heart and deserves respect. His only flaw is supporting big government military spending. Other than that, he's cool.
|
|
|
Post by kaidaw on Sept 15, 2008 0:13:49 GMT
Surely you jest, jlseagull. Only the desperate vilify the opposition with the epithet "liaroso". You cannot hide your stripes. ;D
|
|
|
Post by stranger on Sept 15, 2008 16:22:24 GMT
Poor Jonathan Livingston Seagull has been sadly deceived by the media. Governor Palin is remarkably tightfisted, and on the basis of her record as City Councilwoman, Mayor, and Governor, the lady is very much a small government person.
And one who is becoming increasingly divorced from the free spending "Old GOP" people in the Alaskan Republican Party. The "Bridge to Nowhere" was a Murkowski project, one she rejected as soon as she found the primary beneficiary would be the Murkowski family. And it was not the largest such project by any means. Look up the "Railroad to Nowhere" for a similar slice of pork.
On the other hand, the Senators on the Democratic Presidential ticket have been remarkably free with public money. Google "Pig Book" for the Citizens Against Government Waste's take on all three of the Senators in the race's history.
The Sarah Palin in the media story is pretty simple. 86 percent of Alaskans like her. 75% of Alaskan Democrats like her. The New York Times and the Washington Post combined could not find a single Alaskan who likes her.
Remember, if you see it in the media it's probably a lie. And the probability doubles if you see it on one of the Alphabet Networks, or in the New York Times, the Washington Post, or any of their subsidiary outlets.
|
|
|
Post by Belushi TD on Sept 16, 2008 0:05:44 GMT
Mr. Seagull -
What the heck are you talking about???
How, exactly, did Palin lie about being an earmark queen? In her tenure as governor, the Alaskan earmarks have dropped precipicously. IIRC, it was 386 (approximately) left over from the revious administration when she took office. The next year it wsa in the low 200's. This year, I think its around 150 plus minus 30 (can't remember the exact number.) Thats a reduction of more than half...
Big government anti republican??? Ummm... How is she big government? Yes, the Alaska state budget is up a great deal over the last two years. Mainly due to the HUGE influx of oil taxes. Guess what... The VAST majority of the increase in spending is for the CAPITAL budget. That means for building projects, like schools and roads. Stuff that's been needed for up to a decade, but hasn't been affordable due to a lack of oil tax money. As far as actually increasing the number of people on the government payroll? Very small, and the majority of those jobs are needed, according to Alaskans.
How is she anti republican? Honor, personal responsibilty and integrity... She's lived up to her morals. No abortion for the Downs Syndrom baby - goes to all three. As far as integrity, rooting out corruption in politics, cancelling earmarks, stuff like that. Wait. She's DONE what she said she would do (most, if not all of it) in her campaign promises.
WAIT!!! You're RIGHT!!! NO politician would actually FOLLOW THROUGH on campaign promises. We obviously CAN'T have THIS person 2nd in command of the country. What a tragety if she actually got the republicans to follow through on their promises.
<Sarcasm mode off>
I suspect you've been listening FAR too much to the mainstream media who have spent the last ... two weeks or so trying to demonize her, and failing dismally.
Belushi TD
|
|
|
Post by stranger on Sept 16, 2008 1:02:10 GMT
I made my first response during a break from a meeting and was rather hasty. Let me add that governors have much less to do with earmarks than the MSM would have you believe.
For clarity, governors can request earmarks through their Congressional delegation, but earmarks begin in Congress. See
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earmark_(politics)
Most governors do use a lobbyist for various purposes, including increasing mineral royalties, water issues, highway construction, and other legislative matters. If a governor feels strongly enough about a project they may ask the state's lobbyist to do his thing.
Governor Palin took office with nearly a half billion dollars in existing earmarks. She has drastically trimmed Alaska's requests for funding, and apparently has confined those requests to legitimate public works projects.
On the other hand, I am sure Mr. Seagull will be heartbroken to hear the other side of the Presidential race has been handing out earmark money quite freely. There is no such thing as something for nothing, and the quid pro quo on those earmarks may well be seen here:
patterico.com/2008/09/15/obama-friendly-lehman-bros-to-file-chapter-11-bankruptcy/
|
|
|
Post by Ole Doc Sief on Mar 19, 2009 17:45:04 GMT
Well, well. How the mighty have fallen.
Our agent of change has screwed us all, and the Democ-Rats are trashing our constitution and lying about it while Rome is burning. So much for 5 days of Sunlight on a bill before signing and the end of Earmarks.
Making special laws to deprive a small population of Bonuses guaranteed by contract before receiving a bail out may not be smart but AIG would have suffered serious legal risk not paying contracted bonuses.
Sarah Pallin looking pretty good about now.
|
|
|
Post by ron on Mar 19, 2009 18:28:28 GMT
She was such a lightweight and a charicature of a person. How could anyone who was politically aware of the world not know what the "Bush Doctrine" was about? It was like someone in the 1976 election not knowing what Watergate was all about. I could never have voted to put her a heartbeat of an 72 year old away from the presidency.
I also would not vote for Richard Simmons...
|
|
|
Post by sunnydave on Mar 19, 2009 19:25:09 GMT
She is so hot, SHE is is the cause of global warming! ;D
Which I hereby dub PGW, Palenogenic Global Warming.
Sunny Dave
|
|
|
Post by Ole Doc Sief on Mar 22, 2009 5:10:17 GMT
She was such a lightweight and a charicature of a person. How could anyone who was politically aware of the world not know what the "Bush Doctrine" was about? It was like someone in the 1976 election not knowing what Watergate was all about. I could never have voted to put her a heartbeat of an 72 year old away from the presidency. I also would not vote for Richard Simmons... The Bush doctrine is not a single statement but a series of thoughts and plans. The question was not specific, and the answer is not as simple as a preemptive strike at those who threaten you. Meet her in person and you'll find she's not a lightweight like Obama. Man can't put 10 words together without his TelePrompTer telling him what to say next. The way Obama smokes McCain will probably be a healthier man in 4 years. Don't fall for the news template, the template said Palin was trouble so bury her quickly before people start to listen to her. Remember how they laughed at Reagan's prediction of the fall of the Soviet Union, only to watch it happen. Well, these news organizations were the same bozos who felt Saddam would not invade Kuwait when all he did for about a year was say he was and ready his troops for it. News organizations and the idiots leading them seem to have forgotten about some absolutes in the world such as good and evil and right and wrong, and they can't stand it when some one stands up for principles as such. Learn history, listen carefully, judge the motivation behind obvious smear campaigns, that will guide you on a more pleasant life. ;D
|
|
|
Post by ron on Mar 22, 2009 13:16:03 GMT
Please.
|
|
|
Post by trbixler on Mar 22, 2009 14:38:51 GMT
Ron Great rebuttal, but to what were you elegantly responding.
|
|
|
Post by oloflind on Mar 22, 2009 19:15:42 GMT
Why not discuss global warming/cooling instead of the characteristics of an Alaska politician?
|
|
|
Post by ron on Mar 22, 2009 19:32:03 GMT
Ron Great rebuttal, but to what were you elegantly responding. It was that I really didn't want to get into it. But since you ask... I think I'm an intelligent guy, my eyes are open to smear campaigns and tactics and manipulation of the populace. I also have eyes and ears and saw the way she answered the question(s), and the way she comported herself during her brief time in the campaign. I also know that President Obama has a brain between his temples, and although I disagree with him on a whole lotta issues he's a very bright guy, leagues ahead of Governor Palin. Whether or not he can govern and if he is as politically savvy as some remains to be seen, but then again he is The President... hard to argue with success.
|
|
|
Post by stranger on Mar 23, 2009 0:52:55 GMT
While Barack Obama almost certainly has at least some gray matter between those spectacular ears, the quality is in serious question. So serious that even some of his most devout disciples are beginning to whisper the "i" word. No, not Impeach - incompetent. From the New York Daily News: tinyurl.com/a9pc99From Camille Paglia, via Salon: tinyurl.com/d4933zFrom the Wall Street Journal: tinyurl.com/9qpowuTo make matters worse, one of my closest friends is a shrink - who brought this to my attention: tinyurl.com/69hkwfThe bottom line? Obama ic currently PRINTING a trillion dollars a week, and spending a billion dollars an hour, a trillion dollars every six weeks, 8.7 trillion a year, almost entirely to expand the size of the government. China and most of the rest of the world say no more "loans" until the US gets its financial house in order. Last week's dollar drop was the steepest in 25 years, next week's is likely to be worse, because Obama's "toxic asset plan" will probably cost at least another trillion the Treasury does not have to implement. Economists I know say the CBO is all wet and the Federal deficit will be at least $9 trillion a year by 2012. And we get to pay a couple of trillion a year for a cockamamie carbon cap and trade scheme to combat non-existent Anthropogenic Global Warming. And it's very doubtful that Obama's teleprompter can rescue the situation. But watching Obama's many gaffes when he's winging it, I cannot help but wonder if there is anything at all in there. Stranger
|
|
|
Post by trbixler on Mar 23, 2009 2:53:25 GMT
Ron Success for whom, certainly not for me and maybe for you if you work for the government. So far passing and signing a bill that no one has read. Then complaining about details included in the bill that he just signed. Then raising actions against the AIG monies that were authorized by the stimulus and signed by the president. Ron this is about temporary power by a group of people that want to take your money and feel that they have done you a favor because you were not competent to spend the money anyway.
|
|