Video: Palin tells Obama to veto bill he dragged out of Congress

posted at 12:20 pm on February 17, 2009 by Ed Morrissey

Sarah Palin’s advice on Porkulus will evoke laughter in the White House that pushed it through Congress, but perhaps someone there has begun listening to her on energy. Palin says Barack Obama has started coming around on the natural-gas pipeline, but may need a little more convincing on enabling increased production on the clean-burning fuel. Palin doesn’t wait for Greta to ask before getting in an argument against the Fairness Doctrine, near the end (via Conservatives for Palin):

PALIN: Hey, Greta, another thing though that I would add too is that it’s not just the stimulus package that we need to keep our eyes and ears open about right now in America. But it’s this Fairness Doctrine — it’s these attempts in Congress that are being discussed at this point to shut down voices that are asking the tough questions. … If there’s any attempt to quash any of these voices, that’s a scary thing for our country and our democracy.

The challenge to Obama to veto his own economic policy is a little silly, even though it deserves to be vetoed, burnt, pulverized, and flushed. Obama got exactly what he wanted and has no reason at all to veto it. Had he been displeased with the product, Obama would have held a much different press conference a week ago. Opposing the bill on its merits is good, but demanding a veto doesn’t do much for Palin’s credibility.

Palin does much better on the Fairness Doctrine. She put it in exactly the right terms, which the American public will understand as not “fair” at all but an attempt to silence criticism.

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4

He really should, you know. He promised the public a review period before the passage of any bill, and Congress didn’t give it to them. Veto the bill, send it back to Congress, tell them to vote again in a couple of weeks.

Never happen.

kc8ukw on February 17, 2009 at 12:22 PM

Bless ‘er for speaking up about the unFairness Doctrine.

OmahaConservative on February 17, 2009 at 12:23 PM

My girl.

ExTex on February 17, 2009 at 12:23 PM

she knows a veto wont happen. she just realizes how bad the bill really is.

ousoonerfan15 on February 17, 2009 at 12:23 PM

Palin and pork and fairness doctrine. Guaranteed hit monster.

Vashta.Nerada on February 17, 2009 at 12:23 PM

Greta just loves her Palin…

meh…She’s a good woman, good governor…but there’s no way she’s gonna position herself to become the POTUS nominee. Please.

JetBoy on February 17, 2009 at 12:24 PM

Obama threatened this legislation himself over the protectionist measures.

rob verdi on February 17, 2009 at 12:24 PM

credibility with who? the people who watch msnbc or republican primary voters.

rob verdi on February 17, 2009 at 12:26 PM

haha jet that is exactly what she is doing in this interview. Guess you didnt watch it

ousoonerfan15 on February 17, 2009 at 12:26 PM

She suggested that it be vetoed so that it could go back and actually be read by the lawmakers… not a bad suggestion.

otherkid on February 17, 2009 at 12:26 PM

what is she suppose to say? Sign the Stimulus?

jp on February 17, 2009 at 12:27 PM

Palin didn’t “demand” a veto. She wants it sent back to lawmakers so they would actually read the darn thing and discover what a disaster it is.

Good for her!

NebCon on February 17, 2009 at 12:27 PM

She’s just reminding everyone that Obama is violating his promises and principles. Obama said “no pork”, this bill is pure Porkzilla. Obama said “transparency”, this bill fails that test in every regard. Obama said he’d “take a scalpel” to useless government programs, he’s not.

Palin is essentially saying that she would veto in Obama’s place, and this is a woman who knows how to veto.

Jim62sch on February 17, 2009 at 12:28 PM

she’s making sure there aren’t any more confusing post on HotAir claiming she supports the Stimulus, now she is on record asking for a Veto of it ;)

jp on February 17, 2009 at 12:28 PM

Palin Rocks!

Firebird on February 17, 2009 at 12:29 PM

Opposing the bill on its merits is good, but demanding a veto doesn’t do much for Palin’s credibility.

Ed, I think she knows exactly what shes doing. If inflation skyrockets and the economy still stinks 2 1/2 years from now don’t think you won’t see that clip in a campaign ad for her. Not only will it say she opposed the bill but can have that “I told ya so” moment as well.

TheConservativeComeback on February 17, 2009 at 12:29 PM

Calling for a veto gets attention. It highlights the naked hypocrisy of this opaque process compared to Obama’s lofty campaign and transition rhetoric about transparency. She basically threw down a gauntlet to Obama to live up to his own words even if it means vetoing a bill he wanted. That’s what a REAL leader with integrity would do.

She just told America that our new Emperor is naked.

rockmom on February 17, 2009 at 12:29 PM

Palin understands perfectly well that PBO ain’t gunna veto the Stimulus-Response Bill. She does believe that a serious chief executive should and would, and wants people to know that. It’s also a good simple sound-bite for people who aren’t following this fight line by line, reminding them that PBO isn’t an innocent bystander, and had and has it fully within his power to shape a better outcome than we’re getting. In this way, she’s taking advantage of her position to turn the attention on PBO rather than following the tactic up until now of focusing exclusively on Pelosi and Reid (whom less than half of the electorate probably could pick out of a lineup).

CK MacLeod on February 17, 2009 at 12:29 PM

Sarah works the speed bag. Wam! Bam! Kapow!
Take that, BHO, and all you Obamulans too.

Sarah Palin – Chuck Norris Presidential Campain 2012!!!

RadioFreeUSA on February 17, 2009 at 12:30 PM

The challenge to Obama to veto his own economic policy is a little silly, even though it deserves to be vetoed, burnt, pulverized, and flushed.

Only after I wipe my butt with it.

Obama threatened this legislation himself over the protectionist measures.

rob verdi on February 17, 2009 at 12:24 PM

Yeah, and then he kept pushing it and has plans to sign it in a ceremony tonight. He gave mouth service to those rightfully opposed to the protectionist measures.

amerpundit on February 17, 2009 at 12:30 PM

She just told America that our new Emperor is naked.

rockmom on February 17, 2009 at 12:29 PM

The problem being, of course, that the part of America that hasn’t realized that by now isn’t paying attention anyway.

amerpundit on February 17, 2009 at 12:31 PM

The challenge to Obama to veto his own economic policy is a little silly

Methinks you missed the point. Suggesting he veto it is hardly likely to be taken literally, but it does make a statement about where the ‘battle lines’ lie.

LimeyGeek on February 17, 2009 at 12:31 PM

rockmom on February 17, 2009 at 12:29 PM

said it more succinctly!

Except, it’s THE CLOTHES HAVE NO EMPEROR!

CK MacLeod on February 17, 2009 at 12:31 PM

she’s making sure there aren’t any more confusing post on HotAir claiming she supports the Stimulus, now she is on record asking for a Veto of it ;)

jp on February 17, 2009 at 12:28 PM

Ha! My first thought, too.

mikeyboss on February 17, 2009 at 12:31 PM

I can’t wait until she is our president…. C’mon 2012!

IntheNet on February 17, 2009 at 12:31 PM

“Sarah Palin’s advice on Porkulus will evoke laughter”

Today yes , in the future , not so much .

Love her dress code.

the_nile on February 17, 2009 at 12:32 PM

You know, not trying to toot my own horn, but I thought the same thing a few days ago. That the only way to stop it, is for someone to convince The One that he was wrong and should veto this bill. Now, did I think there was a chance in hell that would happen? Of course not.

Kudos to Palin though for speaking truth to liars.

OwlorNothing on February 17, 2009 at 12:32 PM

If Obama wanted to appear strong and demonstrate an ounce of leadership, he should have kicked that bill back and told Pelosi and Reid to clean-up their acts! Of course, that would never happen, but I get Palin’s point loud and clear.

What is the DOW telling us today about Porkulus and the impending TARP II?

joedoe on February 17, 2009 at 12:33 PM

JetBoy on February 17, 2009 at 12:24 PM

Agree.

Those who are and have been pushing for her as a POTUS nominee should maybe put the brakes on and see what happens over the next coupla years.

I like Palin, but I don’t like the idea of a President Palin…yet.

catmman on February 17, 2009 at 12:34 PM

The problem being, of course, that the part of America that hasn’t realized that by now isn’t paying attention anyway.

amerpundit on February 17, 2009 at 12:31 PM

Many Obama supporters were picturing Obama naked the whole time sadly.

jp on February 17, 2009 at 12:34 PM

I don’t know that demanding/strongly suggesting a veto hurts her credibility. She’s putting to words what a lot of people are thinking.

Yeah, it probably won’t happen, but that doesn’t mean that it shouldn’t happen.

I’m with ExTex on this. I’m proud of that little exchange. You go girl!!!

ExSubNuke on February 17, 2009 at 12:34 PM

Palin – “I know President Obama hears the public outcry about this bill. I can see his ears from here.”

marklmail on February 17, 2009 at 12:35 PM

I think it’s fine to challenge him to veto. It should have never been voted in that quickly, and it should be vetoed on the grounds that we don’t know what’s in that bill.

For her to say that…well, she’s just standing up for her principals.

funsutton on February 17, 2009 at 12:35 PM

Why not call on Obama to veto the thing? Why not ask a president to act, well, like an executive? My understanding is that we still have three branches of government. Maybe he cleared his head this past weekend playing hoops.

My only criticism, much as I love her, is that the noun impact is not made plural by adding an -s. I’m still getting my mind around using impact as a verb (affect works very nicely, thank you), but impacts as a noun is a bridge too far for me.

That aside, I liked the digs at the Fairness Doctrine.

BuckeyeSam on February 17, 2009 at 12:35 PM

Better yet Mr President…Don’t.

Your actions speak louder than the double-talk you sold to a majority of the voting populace. It makes it that much easier to use in campaign ads, come 2010 and 2012.

Talismen on February 17, 2009 at 12:35 PM

Now THIS is the video that should have been posted first! Not the Bristol video. The more Gov. Palin speaks, the better. She is dead on about the porkulus, energy policy, and government sponsored censorship. Alaska is so damned lucky to have her!

Babino on February 17, 2009 at 12:36 PM

But she has a retarded baby!!!! And she wants to ban science!!!!!

(please note the sarcasm.)

patriette on February 17, 2009 at 12:36 PM

The markets certainly don’t believe that Barackito will veto Porkosaurus Rex.

NYSE down 4.67%
Gold up 5.27%

MB4 on February 17, 2009 at 12:36 PM

Doesn’t do much for her credibility? What the heck does that mean? She thinks the bill stinks and should be vetoed. I do, too. She’s made it clear she thinks this bill is bad legislation and as an executive with her own veto pen, she said exactly what I would expect her to say. Of course it won’t happen but it’s still nice to see her take a definitive stand.

Redneck Woman on February 17, 2009 at 12:37 PM

should’ve bought Gold when it hit 700/ounce….Silver is still relatively cheap historically

jp on February 17, 2009 at 12:39 PM

Palin – “I know President Obama hears the public outcry about this bill. I can see his ears from here.”

marklmail on February 17, 2009 at 12:35 PM

LoL.

the_nile on February 17, 2009 at 12:40 PM

MB4 on February 17, 2009 at 12:36 PM

It’s only down 3.3%.

Bright side: each 3% drop is a little less each time, in real dollars.

lorien1973 on February 17, 2009 at 12:40 PM

I still love Sarah, but I agree that her brand has been too severely damaged to ever believe that she can win the nomination.

Before the election, I told my daughter that I truly hoped that Bobby Jindal would not be the VP nominee. I didn’t want him to be tainted with McCain’s loss.

With her as his pick, I thought he might stand a chance, but the destruction was swift and deadly and I don’t think she can recover. She will always be held in high regard by the true conservatives in the Republican party, but the bulk have thrown her under the bus.

Jvette on February 17, 2009 at 12:40 PM

Love Palin. Her call for a veto was her way of saying, if I was President. I’ll be interested to seeing her in front of not-so accommodating journalist.

She got years to set herself as the down-home, anti-elitist, populist candidate, ie the anti-Obama. Between the stimulus and Fairness Doctrine, she’s framing herself. The Presidential campaign just started, folks.

ignorantapathy on February 17, 2009 at 12:40 PM

Opposing the bill on its merits is good, but demanding a veto doesn’t do much for Palin’s credibility.

No, it doesn’t harm her credibility at all, Ed. She knows it’s not going to be vetoed. She’s emphasizing her opposition to it in a way she can use in the future, when the house of cards starts to collapse. She is right and clever. She’s learning. You should try it. It’s an exhillarating experience.

SKYFOX on February 17, 2009 at 12:40 PM

The challenge to Obama to veto his own economic policy is a little silly, even though it deserves to be vetoed, burnt, pulverized, and flushed. Obama got exactly what he wanted and has no reason at all to veto it. Had he been displeased with the product, Obama would have held a much different press conference a week ago. Opposing the bill on its merits is good, but demanding a veto doesn’t do much for Palin’s credibility.

It’s not silly because she knows full well that he won’t veto it. It’s not ignorance. It’s about putting it on the record. And she says it in a way that is common sense (which it is) that he should veto it. It’s just a way of saying, “I told you so” before this monstrosity is signed.

She’s probably hoping this clip will come back to haunt him in 4 years during his re-election time. Let’s hope so.

latinchic on February 17, 2009 at 12:41 PM

Palin’s just sharpening her skills on “fieldressing a President”

Rovin on February 17, 2009 at 12:42 PM

“Sarah Palin’s advice on Porkulus will evoke laughter” Today yes , in the future , not so much .
the_nile on February 17, 2009 at 12:32 PM

Well, du-uh. Obama hasn’t signed the bill yet. What in the Hell is she supposed to say?

AFTER he ignores her sage advice, THEN she can attack him for it. It’d be kinda stupid to do it now.

logis on February 17, 2009 at 12:43 PM

“Obama got exactly what he wanted.”

No, he got what Pelosi and Reid wanted.

Bic on February 17, 2009 at 12:43 PM

I think she is just speaking her mind and pretty much saying what she would do, were she in Obama’s shoes. I don’t think its silly at all. However, time will tell all.

victoria330 on February 17, 2009 at 12:43 PM

The challenge to Obama to veto his own economic policy is a little silly, even though it deserves to be vetoed, burnt, pulverized, and flushed.

Except she didn’t challenge him.

“I wish he would veto it and send it back until all the lawmakers can read it.”

It wasn’t a “silly” challenge at all in my opinion. More like voicing an opinion. An opinion I share by the way. She did agree with Greta about a “call for a veto” but I don’t see that as any more demanding than any other “call” to consider legislature.

Opposing the bill on its merits is good, but demanding a veto doesn’t do much for Palin’s credibility.

Where did she do this? That isn’t my take on it at all.

Guardian on February 17, 2009 at 12:45 PM

The challenge to Obama to veto his own economic policy is a little silly,

Not if, in the future, Chairman ObaMao is trying to get a little distance from this stinkbomb.

Good job by Sarah, as usual.

james23 on February 17, 2009 at 12:45 PM

Palin’s just sharpening her skills on “fieldressing a President”

Rovin on February 17, 2009 at 12:42 PM

After that, she just has to decide if he’ll be cubed or ground into sausage.

AubieJon on February 17, 2009 at 12:46 PM

Thanks, I was craving a Palin fix of late.

catholicdude on February 17, 2009 at 12:46 PM

Obama got EXACTLY what he wanted; a trojan horse to gain more control of the US. It also sets up another MASSIVE stimulus bill which will include much more in the way of tax cuts. That one will be easier to pass, and will save his ass.

marklmail on February 17, 2009 at 12:47 PM

Didn’t the press dismiss Reagan, during the ’76 primaries, as just an actor? Funny thing happened four years later, after one of the worst liberal administrations in American history.

He became known as a man from simple roots that had an understanding of the common man. Ya just never know….

joedoe on February 17, 2009 at 12:47 PM

Still the Palin supporter here. I have to believe that she is aware of needs to be done if she is to tackle the opportunity of 2012.

Time will tell.

itzWicks on February 17, 2009 at 12:48 PM

I love it!!
“Stimulus bill?? Yeah,, I think Obama needs to veto his own bill!!”
Love it!! She’s right!! I needs vetoed!
When this woman speaks,, you cannot help but feel encouraged!!

JellyToast on February 17, 2009 at 12:48 PM

“Obama got exactly what he wanted.”

No, he got what Pelosi and Reid wanted, and Reid just grabbed her skirt like a good lapdog.

Bic on February 17, 2009 at 12:43 PM

Rov-edit

Rovin on February 17, 2009 at 12:48 PM

Everyone is right, Palin knows that Obama will continue to push through the “stimulus” package that he wanted and coerced from Pelosi and Reid, but, she is on record and, more importantly, watch and listen to the crowd behind her as she speaks about this. They are with her as she speaks as clearly as we’ve seen her about a hot button issue. She is not speaking to the President here, she is talking to the crowd around her and those watching Greta’s program. And We Are Listening.

illininan on February 17, 2009 at 12:49 PM

Abstaining from posting this thread isn’t realistic.

Christien on February 17, 2009 at 12:49 PM

hehehehehe ” veto “… I bet Obambi never uses his veto power during his whole time in office. He wont need to be cause he will go along with anything the liberals want including attempts to ban every last gun in existence.

tx2654 on February 17, 2009 at 12:50 PM

latinchic on February 17, 2009 at 12:43 PM

That’s like FDR saying to Hitler in a news release that he should not invade Western Europe during the period called the ‘Phony War’. Hitler was going to do what he was going to do whether FDR liked it or not. As for Obama, he will do what he going to do whether Sarah likes it or not.

But like FDR, Sarah Palin wanted to get her views on the record for future consumption. There is nothing wrong with doing this. It’s called standing on principle and leadership.

technopeasant on February 17, 2009 at 12:50 PM

CUUUUUUUUDDDDDDDDAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!

BPD on February 17, 2009 at 12:51 PM

boondoggle: one of its senses is “a wasteful activity, esp one funded by government as a political reward.” This sense became popular in 1935 when New Deal projects to make work were often criticized as boondoggles.

Any shot taken at Obama’s stimulus bill is a shot worth taking because it’s full of boondoggles.

BuckeyeSam on February 17, 2009 at 12:51 PM

Why is it “silly” that Palin asks Obama to VETO the bill? People should try to persuade this doofus-in-chief to not commit to the generational theft.
I applaud Sarah for this. This bill is full of crap. More politicians should push for him to do what she said.
Also I love how she defended free speech and against this “fairness” doctrine.
She is so running in 2012! PALIN/SANTORUM 2012!!

jencab on February 17, 2009 at 12:51 PM

Ed,

You are a smart and sensible guy, and I almost always find myself agreeing with you, but on this one, I think it was just fine for Palin to say Obama should veto the bill.

Meanwhile, how about a celebration of the fact that The One, wanting to take some victory laps on the “emergency” Porkulus Spendulus, waits until today to sign, and gets to see the market swooning to 10-year lows?

Lovely! It really screws up the lead news story for NPR.

JudetheFossil on February 17, 2009 at 12:51 PM

There is nothing wrong with calling for a veto. It is similar to calling for a resignation. You know it won’t happen; you do it to call attention and demonstrate the actions of the target.

ashleymatt on February 17, 2009 at 12:52 PM

Abstaining from posting this thread isn’t realistic.

Christien on February 17, 2009 at 12:49 PM

Ed’s hormones got the best of him, and not even Pelosi’s family-planning provisions could prevent him from posting it.

BuckeyeSam on February 17, 2009 at 12:53 PM

LUV THE GUV!!!!!

It is so clear how closely she is paying attention to the entire nation now….i do believe it is safe to say she is moving from “what is best for AK” to…

“What is best for the Nation”

she has officially taken the position as leader of the opposition…

and how much did you LOVE that she cut Piper off to bring up the Fairness Doc…LMAO!!!

alexraye on February 17, 2009 at 12:54 PM

Think I will go send a few more bucks to SarahPAC!

joedoe on February 17, 2009 at 12:54 PM

“Obama got exactly what he wanted.”

No, he got what Pelosi and Reid wanted.

Bic on February 17, 2009 at 12:43 PM

Obama doesn’t give a rat’s ass about the details.

Read “Rules For Radicals.” The only goal at this point is to gain power at all costs, and then destroy the system from the inside. The REAL re-structuring can’t even start until what we have now is fully demolished.

For now, all Obama wants to do is throw as many monkey wrenches as possible into America’s works, as rapidly as possible. And that’s the one thing that moonbats like Reid and Pelosi can actually be trusted to accomplish without direct supervision.

logis on February 17, 2009 at 12:54 PM

Exercise in futility.

Entelechy on February 17, 2009 at 12:54 PM

Sarah’s HOT!!

DamnYankee on February 17, 2009 at 12:54 PM

Bright side: each 3% drop is a little less each time, in real dollars.

lorien1973 on February 17, 2009 at 12:40 PM

Are there any real dollars left?

MarkTheGreat on February 17, 2009 at 12:54 PM

On an interesting note…

If P BO did this…what she so greatly suggested….he would win back his favor with the American people…just food for thought….

but i think we all know that everyone in DC is choosing party over country….basically
CHANGE YOU CAN BELIEVE IN

alexraye on February 17, 2009 at 12:54 PM

Frankly, I would have far more respect for B.O. if just when he was about to pick up that pen, he suddenly said that he thinks this Spendulus Bill is stupid, that it was ramrodded through Congress instead of being carefully looked over and he then breaks out that VETO stamp of his and employs it for the first time in his Presidency.

Then he orders Congress back to the drawing board.

Sure Nancy Pelosi would throw a full blown Grand Mal hissy fit the size of Godzilla for having her dream vacation cut short, but one would be very hard pressed at that point to find anyone who would give a damn how she feels.

pilamaye on February 17, 2009 at 12:56 PM

Obama had a real opportunity with this spending bill. He could have shaped it into something a whole lot less embarrassingly filled with no earmark earmarks.

He would have set the stage for his entire administration. Now he just looks like the front man many of us always suspected him to be.

joedoe on February 17, 2009 at 12:57 PM

Why is it that every time teh One or his administration say stimulus the markets tank? Of course the headline always spins the drop as related to some other economic news, but there is almost always some big stimulus headline that day too. Methinks that business has voted NO CONFIDENCE in ‘The Office of the President in Training’.

Fighton03 on February 17, 2009 at 12:58 PM

Yes! Yes! More conservative voices! Get everyones voices out there. Why isn’t there a camera in Jindals face? Where is Romney? Post some Sanford vids. Where is Michael Steele?

Why do reporters have to travel all the way to Alaska to get someone to demand accountability from Obahmbo?

Good job Palin!!

portlandon on February 17, 2009 at 1:01 PM

Ed shows once again how he and Allah miss the boat when it comes to “the conservative message” time and time again. I think it is probably a lack of strong intellect on their part, because to take Palin’s suggestion of vetoing the bill as a harm to her credibility is just another example of their weak acceptance of Democrat’s negative ways of labeling conservatives. I think also Ed just often uses words for lack of a better word in his somewhat limited vocabulary. Sorry Ed, I like you guys’ blog, but there is room for improvement and principles.

ktsmith05 on February 17, 2009 at 1:01 PM

Opposing the bill on its merits is good, but demanding a veto doesn’t do much for Palin’s credibility.

Not yet, anyway.

BobMbx on February 17, 2009 at 1:02 PM

She’s a country girl – she’s planting seeds…….

callingallcomets on February 17, 2009 at 1:03 PM

…which the American public will understand as not “fair” at all but an attempt to silence criticism.

You really have a much higher opinion of the intelligence of the American public than I do.

What the American public will see is Sarah Palin is against the Fairness Doctrine and B.O. is for it, therefore the Fairness Doctrine is a good thing.

Michael in MI on February 17, 2009 at 1:04 PM

Ed, I think you are having a bad day. First Bristol Palin, now her mother. We all stray, myself included, once in a while.

I pray that you get back to form ASAP.

technopeasant on February 17, 2009 at 1:04 PM

Obama had a real opportunity with this spending bill. He could have shaped it into something a whole lot less embarrassingly filled with no earmark earmarks.

He would have set the stage for his entire administration. Now he just looks like the front man many of us always suspected him to be.

joedoe on February 17, 2009 at 12:57 PM

Agreed.

latinchic on February 17, 2009 at 1:05 PM

The challenge to Obama to veto his own economic policy is a little silly, even though it deserves to be vetoed, burnt, pulverized, and flushed. Obama got exactly what he wanted and has no reason at all to veto it. Had he been displeased with the product, Obama would have held a much different press conference a week ago. Opposing the bill on its merits is good, but demanding a veto doesn’t do much for Palin’s credibility.

I think that’s just her way of underscoring just what a POS this bill is, that it stinks SO bad that surely even the guy who ordered it up would send it back. Anyway, it’s not REALLY his bill, is it? It’s Nancy Pelosi’s baby. If he were any kind of leader at all, he would have drafted his own piece of legislation, or at least weighed in on the porkfest these clowns came up with. The fact that he hasn’t, and that he thinks he has to hit the campaign trail to convince the American people of the bill’s merits — as if we have anything at all to say on the matter — is certainly no less “silly” than Palin saying he should veto it. She’s just fighting stupid with stupid — it’s the only language the Democrats seem to understand these days.

NoLeftTurn on February 17, 2009 at 1:06 PM

Man oh man – the woman speaks ENGLISH on issues.

The future is good for her – whether it’s national politics, state politics – or just with her family.

Nice woman – great American.

jake-the-goose on February 17, 2009 at 1:06 PM

***
BRING IT ON SARAHCUDA!
***
I plan to vote for her in 2012. It will be possible for her to win then. She is the real conservative deal.
***
John Bibb
***

rocketman on February 17, 2009 at 1:07 PM

Obama has no executive experience. He probably thinks “Veto” is a union boss in Chicago.

Mr. Wednesday Night on February 17, 2009 at 1:08 PM

FYI, Alaska doesn’t need the Stim bill…. Palin has said it all along.

And the one who voted for it (Begich) in Alaska got a earful on Monday from a crap load of people. I have a feeling he won’t be back after his 6 yrs are up.

upinak on February 17, 2009 at 1:09 PM

but there’s no way she’s gonna position herself to become the POTUS nominee. Please.

You know, Murkowski probably said something very similar at the start of the Republican gubernatorial primary race a couple of years ago.

irishspy on February 17, 2009 at 1:10 PM

Sarah said more in a 5 minute interview than Obama did in his one-hour love in (press conference)a week ago.

technopeasant on February 17, 2009 at 1:10 PM

She’s planting seeds and she is directly stinging the BO in that absolutely wonderful way she has.

shomegirl on February 17, 2009 at 1:11 PM

If Obama did veto this bill, and told Congress to present him with something better, he would set himself up as a real bipartisan leader and would probably be unbeatable in 2012. He’d be able to grab up a whole bunch of Blue Dogs and Moderate Republicans for any of his future endeavors.

He won’t, though.

Jim62sch on February 17, 2009 at 1:13 PM

I believe this firmly places the Generational theft act of 2009 in the hands of the President and his minions in Congress.

UNREPENTANT CONSERVATIVE CAPITOLIST on February 17, 2009 at 1:14 PM

Palin said what the rest of the GOP should be saying: Veto this bill. Ownership of the porkulus needs to be kept squarely on Obama. That Obama’s not going to veto it is more reason to demand it, not less.

petefrt on February 17, 2009 at 1:16 PM

Because Obama wouldn’t veto it. Brilliant move Sarah. Isn’t it interesting that no other Republican thought of this strategy? It’s called savvy, shrewdness, mettle and ultimately called leadership borne of guts.

technopeasant on February 17, 2009 at 1:18 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4