Sara Palin

[Chris Ryser]

I just don't understand why she is his running mate.????

Poliitics................Power................Potential.............Press................

[MarcE]

And yet, I've heard from many women that are behind her even though they know nothing about her political history, her plan (not that it really matters) and are willing to vote for her simply because she's a mom.

Amazing. I hear that some people are voting for Obama just because he is black (12.5% to be precise).

[rinselberg]

Alaska has long been the recipient of astounding amounts of federal funding. While Palin slashed pork requests in half during her tenure, the state still requested $550 million in Palin's first year in office..

Somebody took an ugly stick to Alaska's federal "pork" diet. That's remarkable, to reduce it by 50 percent in just a single term.

[Spexvet]

Somebody took an ugly stick to Alaska's federal "pork" diet. That's remarkable, to reduce it by 50 percent in just a single term.

Cite, please.

Where did Rinselberg get his quote:p

[Steve Machol]

Amazing. I hear that some people are voting for Obama just because he is black (12.5% to be precise).

Since 80%+ percent of Afro-Americans vote reliably Democratic anyway, that is greatly exaggerated. It's probably an extra 2% at most, and most certainly behind the percent of people that would never vote for an African-American under any circumstances.

Anyone who thinks that being an African-American candidate for President is a plus is living in lala-land.

[Jana Lewis]

Since 80%+ percent of Afro-Americans vote reliably Democratic anyway, that is greatly exaggerated. It's probably an extra 2% at most, and most certainly behind the percent of people that would never vote for an African-American under any circumstances.

Anyone who thinks that being an African-American candidate for President is a plus is living in lala-land.

No kidding.

And really, there is no real way to know if people are voting based on skin color.

[Robert Martellaro]

Cite, please.

A quick look found this-

She also said in the News-Miner that she had slashed the state's earmark requests by nearly two-thirds, down from $550 million in 2007 to just under $200 million.

Palin's earmarks request came just days after President Bush promised in his State of the Union address to veto any spending bills from Congress unless lawmakers cut earmarks in half.

Yet documents Palin's office released to The Seattle Times on Tuesday show her cuts in earmarks were far more modest than she claimed. Last year, Palin requested $254 million in earmarks, not $550 million, so her cuts this year were only 22 percent, not the 63 percent she claimed.

Karen Rehfeld, Palin's Office of Management and Budget director, said she needed to look into the discrepancy between her boss's written remarks and the earmark tally provided by the staff. "We want to make sure we don't have a problem," Rehfeld said.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...4_palin03.html

and

For fiscal 2007, the administration of former Gov. Frank Murkowski submitted 63 earmark requests totaling $350 million, Palin's staff said.

That slid to 52 earmarks valued at $256 million in Palin's first year. This year, the governor's office asked the delegation to help it land 31 earmarks valued at $197 million.

Why the gradual move away from earmarks? Palin recognized that Alaska's coffers were overflowing with revenue from oil profits and felt it was almost unseemly for the state to press so aggressively for federal money, said John Katz, who heads the Alaska governor's Washington, D.C., office.

http://www.cleveland.com/election/pl...570.xml&coll=2

On the lighter side... http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=DPv8b-87-pw

This should work...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HA6aKXMTBsQ

[Spexvet]

That's earmarks, which is somewhat different than pork.

Earmark

The federal Office of Management and Budget defines earmarks as funds provided by the Congress for projects or programs where the congressional direction (in bill or report language) circumvents Executive Branch merit-based or competitive allocation processes, or specifies the location or recipient, or otherwise curtails the ability of the Executive Branch to manage critical aspects of the funds allocation process.

Pork barrel

The term pork barrel politics refers to spending that is intended to benefit constituents of a politician in return for their political support, either in the form of campaign contributions or votes. The term originated early in American history, when slaves were sometimes given a barrel of salt pork as a reward and had to compete among themselves to get their share of the handout
Typically, it involves funding for government programs whose economic or service benefits are concentrated in a particular area but whose costs are spread among all taxpayers. Public works projects and agricultural subsidies are the most commonly cited examples

I did find this

Arizona, the second fastest growing state in the nation, will receive just $18.70 per capita in federal earmarks this fiscal year. By comparison, Alaska — with roughly a tenth of Arizona's population — is set to receive $506.34 per capita, the highest in the nation, according to Taxpayers for Common Sense, a watchdog group which tracks earmarks.

[RT]

Last year, Palin requested $254 million in earmarks, not $550 million, so her cuts this year were only 22 percent, not the 63 percent she claimed.

I guess long division is a dying art.


(Hint: 254/550 = 46% = 54% reduction)

[MarcE]

Since 80%+ percent of Afro-Americans vote reliably Democratic anyway, that is greatly exaggerated. It's probably an extra 2% at most, and most certainly behind the percent of people that would never vote for an African-American under any circumstances.

Anyone who thinks that being an African-American candidate for President is a plus is living in lala-land.

My statement was pointing out that Obama was 1/8th black (12.5% or one-twelfth:bbg:). And it was a scarcastic stab at someone voting for Palin because she is a mom.
People vote for or against a canidate for stupid reasons. Mormonism was an issue in this last primary. Black, woman, old. Actually this sounds like the list of reasons you MAY NOT disqualify someone from employment, (i.e. Race, Religion, Sex, Age, Color, Creed, and Handicap). Ironic, isn't it.

[shanbaum]

I guess long division is a dying art.

(Hint: 254/550 = 46% = 54% reduction)

I think the relevant numbers were $254MM (earmarks sought during Palin's first year) and $197MM (earmarks sought during her second). That's the 22%. There appears to be a discrepancy in what Palin claimed Murkowski had sought in his last year ($550MM) and what Palin's staff said Murkowski sought in his last year ($350MM). The $550MM may have been a revelation visited only upon Palin.

[Spexvet]

New campaign button:

[Pete Hanlin]

When it became evident that it was going to be McCain vs. Obama in '08, I was firmly convinced Sen. Obama would walk away with a landslide (and I still believe he will win- he'll simply take the traditional liberal states plus too many Southern states for McCain to overcome).

All that said, McCain impressed me during the convention (and I've NEVER had warm fuzzies for McCain)- and his selection of running mates has Obama acting like the very thing he says he isn't (i.e., a typical politician). If this (sudden burst of mudslinging) is how Obama reacts to the tiniest bit of pressure (McCain closing in the polls), I'm not eager to see how he responds to an actual crisis.

This is the second time Obama has gone into mudslinging nasty mode- the first was during the Southern primaries when he started taking verbal swings at former President Clinton's attempts to campaign for Sen. Clinton. Sen. Obama is desperate to convince everyone Sen. McCain isn't a maverick (which, as a member of the GOP, I can assure you- he is). However, its becoming apparent Sen. Obama is the one who isn't what he portrays (this "fresh voice of the people" who isn't the typical politician). Look at the record- Sen. Obama has no qualms spending money we don't have- I don't call that "being on my side." Look at his VP selection- he picked one of the nastiest, most cynical, polarizing members of the Senate. Every time I hear him speak, it feels like he thinks I should be honored to vote for him- honored to help him realize his personal destiny to be the political savior of the country. I'm not buying it (and boy, I really wanted to when I first heard him speak months ago).

Just to make sure I understand, everyone here is "shocked" that Americans would vote for a fairly inexperienced VP candidate just because she's pretty (no prejudice there)- however, there doesn't seem to be any issue with voting for a fairly inexperienced Presidential candidate just because he's a powerful orator.

Guess '08 is shaping up to be just as ugly (and mystifying) as the '00 and '04 elections.

If I were McCain, I would promise to balance the budget by my 2nd year in office, and point out that it will be impossible to balance a budget that includes either a federally funded national healthcare plan or a continuing war in Iraq expenditure (which means we have to come up with self-funded healthcare solutions and an exit strategy from Iraq). Then, I would turn to Sen. Obama and ask "Assuming you will remain in the Senate, can I count on your support to balance the budget?"

[Steve Machol]

The problem with Palin is that we now virtually nothing about her. Unlike Obama who has been thoroughly vetted for over a year and a half by the media and a fierce nomination battle, Palin is being kept hidden from the media. We now almost nothing about her political views and thought processes except for what is being force-fed to us. If the McCain campaign is so confident that she is Presidential caliber, then why are they purposely (and admittedly) keeping her away from the media? It's possible that her off-the-cuff remarks about the Freddie and Fannie Mac situation are exactly why they don't want her to be vetted. At any rate, they are clearly afraid that she is not up to the task and that alone should give us pause.

In my opinion she too should be subjected to the same scrutiny and questioning that all the other candidates were subjected to - particularly since there is less than 60 days to the election and the fact that McCain's age and health history raise the very real prospect that he may not survive one or two terms in office. There may, in fact, be a depth of knowledge and wisdom in Governor Palin that is so far not evident in the stump speech written for her that she keeps repeating over and over again as if she has no real ideas or thoughts of her own. If there is such depth, then we should know it. And if not, then we should know that too.

I do find it rather revealing that the McCain campaign has said openly that they do not think she should be subjected to the same media scrutiny that McCain and Obama have had to face. That in itself speaks volumes and indicates to me that they know something we don't.

As for the 'balance the budget' issue - Puh-leeze! Recent history has shown the budget deficit grows far more under a Republican President than a Democratic one, even though they all mindlessly recite the fiscal responsibility mantra over and over again. There really is nothing in McCain's rhetoric or record that indicates he would be any different than Bush in fiscal matters. Cutting alleged 'earmarks' would barely make a dent.

[rep]

I think the relevant numbers were $254MM (earmarks sought during Palin's first year) and $197MM (earmarks sought during her second). That's the 22%. There appears to be a discrepancy in what Palin claimed Murkowski had sought in his last year ($550MM) and what Palin's staff said Murkowski sought in his last year ($350MM). The $550MM may have been a revelation visited only upon Palin.

Some numbers are more relevant than others.

Before Palin, the previous request were for 100 earmarks each year. Under Palin she slashed that number in half the first year, requesting only 54. The next year she cut that number down to 31 and 27 of those were for continued funding of previous earmarks. When she entered the office the request averaged $550 million. The request now average $200 million.

Her stated goal is for no more than 12 per year.

Obama's is averaging over 100 per year.

Rep

http://www.adn.com/politics/story/210308.html

http://www.juneauempire.com/stories/...58953362.shtml

In regards to the bridge to no where. No less than the Democratic party gave credit to Palin for killing it. That is before they pulled the post.

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/arti...dge_to_Nowhere

Rep

[Spexvet]

...
In regards to the bridge to no where. No less than the Democratic party gave credit to Palin for killing it. ...

After she supported it. :hammer: Sounds like a politically expendient, pandering waffle, to me.

[shanbaum]

Some numbers are more relevant than others.

Yes, and it's rather obvious that the absolute number of earmark requests would be the least meaningful of all; a state could make a single request for any amount.

The comparative dollar amounts given do have significance; the number of earmarks do not. For example, you point out that "Obama's is averaging over 100 per year." Because I know you'll trust your advanced mathematical skills more than mine, please tell me the dollar amount per capita obtained by Alaska during Palin's first year as governor, compared to the amount per capita obtained by Illinois during a similar period.

Or, please explain why that's not a relevant comparison.

[Spexvet]

...
All that said, McCain impressed me during the convention ...

What, specifically, impressed you about McCain?

... If this (sudden burst of mudslinging) is how Obama reacts to the tiniest bit of pressure (McCain closing in the polls), I'm not eager to see how he responds to an actual crisis.

Dude, McCain is the one with the reputation for being a hothead. Obama may sling mud under pressure, McCain may launch nukes. I'm sorry, that would be nuk-u-lar weapons, in the repubican vernacular.

... Sen. Obama is desperate to convince everyone Sen. McCain isn't a maverick

Because he isn't:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sa20q2s2BRs

I'm sure that makes you happy, but it should scare the bejesus out of swing voters.

... Look at the record- Sen. Obama has no qualms spending money we don't have- I don't call that "being on my side."

Look at the record - for the last eight years, the repubican controlled executive and both legislatives branches of the federal government, with McCain featured as a leader in the senate actually spent money we don't have, and didn't have a plan to pay the bill - I don't call that "being on my side, or the side of my kids, grandkids, etc." And what did we get for all the repubican spending? Better healthcare? Cheaper gas? Less reliance on foriegn oil? More jobs? No. The rich got richer, and a whole lot of folks got killed and injured in Iraq. And when the injured ones got back to the US, they got to stay in lovely, paint peeling, mold infested Walter Reed Hospital. There is nothing to indicate that the next repubican will do anything different.

Look at his VP selection- he picked one of the nastiest, most cynical, polarizing members of the Senate.

To you. He's no Newt Gingrich. Biden is a well-respected senator.

Just to make sure I understand, everyone here is "shocked" that Americans would vote for a fairly inexperienced VP candidate just because she's pretty

You don't understand. I'm shocked that Americans would vote for someone who espouses the same failed policies and practices of the last eight years, and who lied in her official capacity (I don't care if someone lies about their personal life).

Guess '08 is shaping up to be just as ugly (and mystifying) as the '00 and '04 elections.

Well, repubicans are involved, aren't they?

If I were McCain, I would promise to balance the budget by my 2nd year in office, and point out that it will be impossible to balance a budget that includes either a federally funded national healthcare plan or a continuing war in Iraq expenditure (which means we have to come up with self-funded healthcare solutions and an exit strategy from Iraq)...

AND raise taxes. He'll never say it.

[Robert Martellaro]

The $550MM may have been a revelation visited only upon Palin.

That's a polite way of calling her a liar. The Wall Street Journal is slightly less polite.

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

[shanbaum]

That's a polite way of calling her a liar. The Wall Street Journal is slightly less polite.

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

Can't get there, Robert; I let my WSJ subscription lapse when Rupert Murdoch bought it last year. I'm not going to support right-wing extremism, if I can avoid doing so.

As far as Palin being a liar is concerned, her brazen repetition of "theenks but no theenks" on the bridge to nowhere is indisputable evidence of that. The truth streches only so far before it ceases to be the truth.

[drk]

You guys crack me up.

Sarah Palin, for whatever reason she was chosen by McCain, is filling a unexpected role: she is a super-potent "political symbol" (she previously was and currently is a "sex symbol" as well).

The phenom is how resonant her political symbology is--very, very.

If McCain understands this (which we may give him the benefit of the doubt since he chose her, but I doubt he's this esoteric), he will preserve her as a conservative holy icon as long as possible, and protect her from becoming human. She's being compared to Reagan.

That is exactly what Barack O. was, but he has long-since grown pale from being in the klieg lights.

50 days. Don't expect this rookie to have too many plays in her playbook for now...survive a relatively friendly ABC news interview, get through the debate telegenically, affably, and gaffe-free, and keep her in friendly base territory and all should be fine. The media will be all over her for at least another several weeks.

This is power politics, boys and girls. All your moralizing and numbers crunching is silly.

Hillary is ashamed of you.

[shanbaum]

You guys crack me up.

Sarah Palin, for whatever reason she was chosen by McCain, is filling a unexpected role: she is a super-potent "political symbol" (she previously was and currently is a "sex symbol" as well).

The phenom is how resonant her political symbology is--very, very resonant.

If McCain understands this (which we may give him the benefit of the doubt since he chose her, but I doubt he's this esoteric), he will preserve her as a conservative holy icon as long as possible, and protect her from becoming human. She's being compared to Reagan.

That is exactly what Barack O. was, but he has long-since grown pale from being in the klieg lights.

50 days. Don't expect this rookie to have too many plays in her playbook for now...survive a relatively friendly ABC news interview, get through the debate telegenically, affably, and gaffe-free, and keep her in friendly base territory and all should be fine. The media will be all over her for at least another several weeks.

This is power politics, boys and girls. All your moralizing and numbers crunching is silly.

Hillary is ashamed of you.

Yes, drk, God forbid that people should discuss politics, since it's obviously pointless to do so.

I take issue with the comparison between Palin's stardom and Obama's. The difference is, simply, substance. Obama's smarter than I am; in addition to being able to deliver inspiring speeches, he's capable of writing them. He can make well-reasoned, substantive observations on a wide range of issues. Yes, he can be inspirational. That's great. But it's his intellect that appeals to me.

Sort of the opposite of Bush (oops, I said The Name). I mean, any intellect in the White House would be, not just refreshing, but potentially therapeutic.

Perhaps Palin can do the same, but so far, I haven't seen it. Maybe she's smart, too. I've seen her deliver one speech, which she did not write - and I've seen her deliver bits of it over and over (and OVER AND OVER) again. Surely the McCain campaign can afford a second, or even a third speech for her to give.

Apart from that, I've only seen some brief videos in which she makes either glib comments at a debate ("I don't want to stand in the way of progress", when she explained her support for the bridge to nowhere), or entangles religious belief with energy policy - as when she asked her fellow chuch members to pray for her pipeline proposal... that would be the one that's going to reduce our dependence on foreign oil by paying a Canadian company $500 million as an inducement to build a pipeline over which they will apparently exert complete control. Well, Canadians aren't Saudis, so I guess that's progress...

I couldn't really tell from your post, but perhaps you agree that she lacks substance, since you call her a "symbol."

[drk]

So far, in the politician category, while it's early, Palin is up on Obama. We'll see what Obama's got...he may counter.

As to the inspirational oratory and law school erudition, yes, Obama is the unchallenged king. But she's pretty entertaining in her own way.

I can envision you wanting an intellectual as a president, Shanbaum. Nothing wrong with that. It seems, though, (and you yourself as an intellectual may have found) being a leader is more a function of having people admire you than how smart you are. Leadership is a people skill, not an IQ test. Obama needs to do more, especially if the wishy-washy media-influenced sector of the anti-Bush-ites are not persuaded America is in the crapper.

It is also a mistake to equate knowledge and intellect with wisdom.

[shanbaum]

So far, in the politician category, while it's early, Palin is up on Obama. We'll see what Obama's got...he may counter.

As to the inspirational oratory and law school erudition, yes, Obama is the unchallenged king. But she's pretty entertaining in her own way.

I can envision you wanting an intellectual as a president, Shanbaum. Nothing wrong with that. It seems, though, (and you yourself as an intellectual may have found) being a leader is more a function of having people admire you than how smart you are. Leadership is a people skill, not an IQ test. Obama needs to do more, especially if the wishy-washy media-influenced sector of the anti-Bush-ites are not persuaded America is in the crapper.

It is also a mistake to equate knowledge and intellect with wisdom.

Sure, there are lots of geniuses who can't inspire, and dopes who can. But again, I'm not sure what you're trying to say. You characterize Obama as inspirational and intelligent, and then say that not all intelligent people can be inspiring... ok, but we were talking about Obama.

I also agree about wisdom. I do not doubt that there are many people (30% of Americans is still a large number) who think George Bush is admirable.

Those people are unwise.

[Robert Martellaro]

Can't get there, Robert; I let my WSJ subscription lapse when Rupert Murdoch bought it last year. I'm not going to support right-wing extremism, if I can avoid doing so.

As far as Palin being a liar is concerned, her brazen repetition of "theenks but no theenks" on the bridge to nowhere is indisputable evidence of that. The truth streches only so far before it ceases to be the truth.

The Journal nails her on this. Try the link again, it says it's free online content.