Fox News question of the day: Can Palin save her political career?
posted at 8:00 pm on April 10, 2009 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
At first I was surprised the Foxies would dare to ask, but then I remembered which network it was that went gaga over the anonymous sniping at her by Team Maverick.
Are we sure her career’s in trouble? Judging by the response to her appearance at that pro-life event in Indiana, the market for her has yet to soften:
Right to Life officials announced Thursday that, in addition to speaking to a sold-out crowd of 2,180 during the 6 p.m. banquet in The Centre’s Bill Brooks Exhibition Hall, Palin will appear before people paying $16 per ticket to watch a live broadcast feed in the building’s auditorium.
Right to Life officials had been working for weeks to confirm Palin’s appearance in the auditorium with theater seating, where 564 of an available 2,500 tickets have been sold.
Palin, the Republican Party’s 2008 nominee for vice president and a possible 2012 presidential candidate, will be accompanied by her husband, Todd Palin, and the couple’s baby son, Trig…
The organization announced the extra gathering when they learned Palin would join keynote speaker Michael Steele, chairman of the Republican National Committee, at the sold-out banquet.
The peg for the FNC item is the ongoing freakification of her that I wrote about in the context of that Eminem video. The more tabloid nonsense washes in with the news tide, the more it erodes her credibility. (Latest chapter in the Levi/Palin feud: Sarahcuda insists that “over my dead body” would Johnston have been allowed to live with Bristol in their home.) Let’s try a patented Hot Air poll on this slow news night to see where you’re at on the question of career-saving. Option three is there mainly for our three lefty trolls. I’m more curious to see the split between options one and two. If you choose the latter, feel free to explain in the comments what you have in mind.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
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: « Previous 1 ... 9 10 11 12 Next »
Carrying Gold and guns 24 hours a day, LOL. That gave me a chuckle. Sure they didn’t have a 5 year stock of MRE’s with them too?
Hey, Gold an Guns would make a good name for a band! Essentially what you are describing had parallels to what a Rock star has; there are Roadies (the professionals), Fans (supoorters) and groupies (the fanatics).
Originally I thought Ron Paul was a quack, but I kept an open mind and listened to what he was saying as the primary went on (ironically, the fervor of his supporters peaed my interest). I did like how he brought some issues other Candidates dismissed outright, such as International courts and Natonal Sovereignty but he completely lost me when he said he was against American involvement in every war except the American Revolution. This man studied at Ghettysburg, yet seemed to oblivious to the reasons we got into that war. He calimed the Union should have bought off the slaves from the confederacy and worked out a deal of compensation. The thing is, Lincoln tried that and the Confederares rejected it outright, surely Paul should have known this?
And the people who followed him with such fervor, also ended up repelling me in the end. They would threaten reporters outside the N.H. primary I heard it while watching live TV. Hey don’t get me wrong, most reporters need a good beatdown, but I don’t mean in actuality. Then there were the anti-semitic undertones to the supporters which weren’t so subtle on some pro-Ron Paul sites. There is just no need for that.
But he did bring up some important issues regarding our National Sovereignty that are now looking like serious concerns under Obama, and he was the most consistant candidate out of all of them. I don’t recall him wavering on a single issue and if he slightly tweaked his stance in some ways to appeal to a broader audience, he probably could have beat Huckabee. He got his message out though, I suppose that was his ultimate goal.
Daemonocracy on April 12, 2009 at 4:46 PM
I see, now it’s pragmatic for her to accept all the stimulus funds. So all her talk about these funds adding to the federal debt and creating future burdens to the state of Alaska was just that, nothing more then talk.
lowandslow on April 12, 2009 at 4:58 PM
Yeah I can’t have a serious discussion or debate with that man Poptech. I got in a little deeper than I would have liked considering I’m not an ardent Palin supporter. He just ignored anything which doesn’t fit his negative image of her and twisted my words and I don’t think he even read my posts all the way through. Some of his responses made Straw Men and Red Herrings look relevant. When it comes to words, I prefer rationality over unchecked(note the emphasis, some emotion is good) emotion. Emotion is for television and entertainment.
So hopefully fair minded people actually read my posts in between the food fight and got some information out of them.
oh and Shelby, my god, I already explained the importance of the Alfalfa Club. Please Read my responses to you.
Happy Easter Everyone!
Daemonocracy on April 12, 2009 at 4:58 PM
heh
Rode Werk on April 12, 2009 at 5:00 PM
damned if she does, damned if she doesn’t.
Daemonocracy on April 12, 2009 at 5:01 PM
No, it’s about leadership and consistency. If she felt that strongly about this as her initial comments suggested she would stand them and act accordingly.
lowandslow on April 12, 2009 at 5:07 PM
Sure whatever. I am against the bailouts on principle, but she has a state to run. 2012 is a long way off and she needs to attend to her job at hand. This is why these bailouts are so idiotic, of course a state will take them, but they shouldn’t be there to begin with.
so as I said, damned if she does, damned if she doesn’t (especially with her critics). This basically applies to all Governors, including Jindal and Sanford.
Daemonocracy on April 12, 2009 at 5:23 PM
The legislature in Alaska has the final say regarding stimulus funds, and it cannot be vetoed by the governor.
rlwo2008 on April 12, 2009 at 6:07 PM
Baloney, she can veto it.
lowandslow on April 12, 2009 at 6:32 PM
ever hear of a veto override?
Daemonocracy on April 12, 2009 at 7:25 PM
I think what Paul would tell you is that if the South rejected it outright, it wasn’t a stand on principle; it was a negotiation. You up the price high enough, you would have reached a critical mass of Southerners to make such a plan happen. I think he looks at Lincoln essentially as using their initial refusal as a chance at a power grab.
The problem I had with Dr. Paul’s stance on this was I think he really discounts how high passions were running at that point. There were very serious questions aside from slavery that had to be settled, and I’m not sure anything short of Civil War would have settled them. But his point on buying the slaves still stands. If you assume that the war was about slavery, you could have bought all 3 million slaves, and no matter what the price ended up being, it still would have been cheaper than the war. I just disagree that it was about slavery.
What I found funny was the guy in charge of our local operation was Jewish. He was a 2nd Amendment guy who would tell you he needed his guns to ensure his safety against the anti-Semites.
And that was one of the problems with RP as a candidate, and is inherent in any libertarian (note the small “l”) campaign. He was unable, unwilling, or both to lay the wood down to bring the grassroots to heel. We had similar problems organizing field ops, but we could overcome it because that was handled locally, so we could, one by one, bring loose cannons into the fold. To do it on a national scale, esp. where there was no strong campaign presence, was a nightmare.
He knew, as most of the pros knew, that him getting the nod was a longshot, at best. We worked to get him the nod, and we never said it was impossible, but as a gambler, I know how to read the odds. The fact is he was 72 years old, not a very dynamic speaker, and never held a post higher than the HOR. Those are big hurdles to overcome.
But I’m very proud of the work we did. We gave a more impressive showing overall than Giuliani or Thompson, not to mention a number of governors that by all rights should have had a better shot. We raised a lot of money and built an organization that is still capable of affecting the future course of GOP politics. And we raised issues that, agree or disagree with them, need airing within the GOP.
JohnGalt23 on April 12, 2009 at 7:45 PM
You want a President Machiavelli?
Yeah, the guy waited until it was politically safe to say something, anything, while one of his own citizens was being held hostage in international waters, in the first such attack in over 200 years. What a stunning victory for your hero.
I hope this past week hasn’t set a precedent, but I think it will.
Jim Treacher on April 12, 2009 at 8:22 PM
Both the AK House and Senate have already passed resolutions saying they want all of the stimulus money.
Palin will likely veto
and they will likely override
Palin again warned about the stimulus in her most recent press conference. She only occupies one branch of the AK government. She wants to use the money to replace state spending.
Tell us about Matt Blunt lowandslow…
joey24007 on April 12, 2009 at 8:29 PM
Palin 2012…:)
dec5 on April 12, 2009 at 9:39 PM
Cause when rlwo2008 said “and it cannot be vetoed by the governor.” that’s what he was talking about right?
Here’s what she said joey at her press conference.
“I think that the worst thing that a governor can do is be part of this problem of growing national debt and not doing all that they can to eliminate that problem,”
So explain to me how using it to replace state spending is doing all she can to not add to the growing national debt? How does that work?
She’s not going to veto any of it, she never planned on it.
lowandslow on April 12, 2009 at 9:57 PM
The words of a genius…
“President Obama was awfully vague about some of his plans, but I think I heard him say that government is responsible for educating a child from birth—from birth—to its first job. Universal pre-school and universal college. And there were hints as well of universal healthcare and a universal service corps. It all sounds very appealing, until you realize that these plans mean universal government. That model has never worked anywhere in the world. America is great because our society is free and the power of government is limited by the Constitution.
For the last several years, we’ve heard liberals moaning about the 700 billion dollars that have been spent over six years to win freedom in Iraq. They have now spent more than that in 30 days. And with a government almost 12 trillion dollars in debt, any unnecessary spending puts at risk the creditworthiness of the United States. If the world loses confidence in our currency, that could cause a run on the dollar, or hyperinflation that would wipe out savings and devastate the Middle Class. President Obama says he hopes to cut the deficit in half after four years—does that mean a deficit in 2012 of 600 billion dollars? No president should accept such a staggering deficit, much less hold it up as a national goal. This is the time to pare back government spending. It is not the time to fulfill every liberal dream and spend America into catastrophe.
Congressional Democrats are gearing up to take over the health care system. We need to advance a conservative plan – one based on free choice, personal responsibility, and private medicine; one that doesn’t add massive new federal spending. I like what I proposed in Massachusetts when I was governor. And even though the final bill and its implementation aren’t exactly the way I wanted, the plan is a good model. Today, almost every Massachusetts citizen who had been uninsured now has private, free-market coverage, and we didn’t have to raise taxes or borrow money to make it happen. We may find even better ideas in other states. But let’s make certain that conservative principles are front and center. A big-government takeover of health care is the next thing liberals are going to try, and it’s the last thing America needs.”
Contrast that to:
Moderator: So, you believe in capping carbon emissions?
Sarah Palin: I DO! I DO!!
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
The Wall on April 12, 2009 at 10:22 PM
Like I said, she has a State to run. Damned if she does, damned if she doesn’t. it’s so easy to criticize from a position void of any responsiblity such as yours.
I would prefer she does not take the money. Hell I didn’t want ANY of this money to be out there to bail out any State, but it is. If it doesn’t go to Alaska then it will be spent on something else. Besides, Obama is trying to force funds into these states through a backdoor by appealing to the legislature and local districts directly. Just look at what is going on in South Carolina with Sanford. That money will work it’s way into the states one way or another.
and how the hell do you know she never planned to veto? are you a psychic? Do you know what people think now? All you know is what they say, if you don’t believe it, then say that. Don’t act as if you know how people think inside their heads, because you can’t.
Daemonocracy on April 12, 2009 at 10:24 PM
Are you really this naive when it comes to politics? I said from her very first statement she was going to accept the stimulus funds, all her statements are is political posturing and pandering. You don’t have to be a mind reader to figure that out. Yet her loyal followers lap it up as gospel.
lowandslow on April 12, 2009 at 10:41 PM
I saw a Palin 2012 bumper sticker the other day and I live in CA, not exactly a red state. I almost got into an accident trying to catch up to the driver to give him/her a thumbs up!!
Callie C. on April 12, 2009 at 11:01 PM
I am helping a conservative run for Congress in Arizona’s 8th District and I know that we would have her help or endorse us in a heartbeat!
azcop on April 12, 2009 at 11:06 PM
tell us about Matt Blunt
joey24007 on April 12, 2009 at 11:08 PM
No, you’re the one with the uni fetish. I’m saying that it doesn’t really matter all that much. If someone went to a prestigious school, fine. Congrats to them. But it doesn’t in itself make them more qualified for anything. There have been plenty of third-rate products of first-rate schools, and plenty of first-rate products of third-rate schools.
I love that sort of thing. Bush wins in 2004 with 50% of the vote, and it’s the last gasp of a dying party. Obama wins in 2009 with 53% of the vote, and it’s a blue, blue future.
The election was pretty close, considering Obama had everything going for him. Plus, the Republicans have won, what, 7 of the past 11 presidential elections? You’ve got 4 more to go to catch up.
ddrintn on April 12, 2009 at 11:08 PM
*2008, rather.
ddrintn on April 12, 2009 at 11:09 PM
Don’t you dare question my knowledge you twit. There is a difference between pandering and compromising so you can work with your legislature. You said she NEVER planned, how do you presume to know what her original thoughts were? You don’t. You never know what someone “thinks”, you either believe them or you don’t.
Simply sitting there screaming “she’s a hypocrite! she’s a hypocrite” does not appreciate the complexity of this whole situation. She could have been pandering when she said she wouldn’t accept or the money, or she could have been speaking from her heart and did not want to take the money until the fiscal and political reality of her state hit her.
Her taking the money may hurt her come 2012 when it comes to arguing against bailouts, but at the same time not taking the money could hurt her as governor well as her state, which is her main priority right now.
We’ll see what happens. I am no Palin lap dog and I never intended to get so deep into this thread about her, but the irate hatred for her by a vocal few is mind numbing. I don’t understand why people other conservatives can’t just BACK OFF until 2011 when the real challenge begins.
Daemonocracy on April 12, 2009 at 11:14 PM
Highly debatable.
BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!
ddrintn on April 12, 2009 at 11:16 PM
By the way, from the same article:
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
ddrintn on April 12, 2009 at 11:19 PM
**damn no edit button. Edited spelling and grammatical errors.**
Don’t you dare question my knowledge you twit. There is a difference between pandering and compromising so you can work with your legislature. You said she NEVER planned, how do you presume to know what her original thoughts were? You don’t. You never know what someone “thinks”, you either believe them or you don’t.
Simply sitting there screaming “she’s a hypocrite! she’s a hypocrite” does not appreciate the complexity of this whole situation. She could have been pandering when she said she wouldn’t accept the money, or she could have been speaking from her heart and did not want to take the money until the fiscal and political realities of her state hit her.
Her taking the money may hurt her come 2012 when it comes to arguing against bailouts, but at the same time not taking the money could hurt her as governor as well as her state, which is her main priority right now.
We’ll see what happens. I am no “Palin lap dog” and I never intended to get so deep into this thread about her, but the irate hatred for her by a vocal few is mind numbing. I don’t understand why people, other conservatives, can’t just BACK OFF until 2011 when the real challenge begins.
Daemonocracy on April 12, 2009 at 11:20 PM
They’re unhinged. They’re like lefties in their projection. They think Palin supporters worship the ground she walks on with the same irrational intensity with which they hate her.
ddrintn on April 12, 2009 at 11:22 PM
I like Romney, I like him a lot. But I have a trust issue with him. He flip flopped on every major issue just before he announced his Presidential bid and this concerns me. As a politician in MASS he was staunchly pro-choice, “more to the left of Ted Kennedy on Gay rights” (his quote), pro Universal Healthcare, against the surge in Iraq, soft on illegal Immigration and raised taxes (though he called them “fees”). That is one long list. His private sector accomplishments, slick talk and great hair don’t distract me from his many flip flops on major issues.
I still like the guy though and he has been a good team player. His speech at the Republican convention was surprisingly bland though.
Daemonocracy on April 12, 2009 at 11:26 PM
If this Iowandslow person thinks Palin is such a loser and has no future in politics, why would he/she spend the entire weekend on this thread trying to prove how weak Palin supposedly is?? This poster can’t get his head around the fact that some conservatives, like me, support Palin for her genuiness and strong conservative principles.
Callie C. on April 12, 2009 at 11:27 PM
Is that the best you got? This from someone while defending AGIA thought it was a oil pipeline and that Canada had rights to oil on Alaska’s land? You really are impressed with yourself aren’t you?
That’s called political posturing and pandering, showing she doesn’t care about the affects and consequences of the stimulus any further then her political career. And don’t give me this “I’m no political lapdog” horseshit, it’s the only reason you’re on this thread, to defend Palin and her crappy politics.
lowandslow on April 12, 2009 at 11:30 PM
I agree. Romney is a good, smart, accomplished guy with whom I would disagree on a number of things. He just doesn’t have a chance to win nationally, mainly for the reasons you stated.
ddrintn on April 12, 2009 at 11:31 PM
Oh, good grief. We’re here mainly to defend her against unfair, monomaniacal (PIPELINE!!!!11!!!!!11111!!!!) attacks. That doesn’t make one a lapdog.
ddrintn on April 12, 2009 at 11:33 PM
There I fix your comment for you.
docdave on April 12, 2009 at 11:35 PM
The problem with rabidly anti-Palin types is that they expect her to be as perfect as they think the “Palintologists” imagine her to be. So, she’s a politican. Tremendous insight there. Show me a politician who isn’t a politician.
ddrintn on April 12, 2009 at 11:37 PM
Spare me the disingenuous crap that it’s Palin critics that expect her to be perfect. It’s guys like you ddrintn and the nutcases at c4P that are living in the fantasy world where Palin can do no wrong. Don’t turn it on me, I know she’s far from perfect, hell she’s not even close.
lowandslow on April 12, 2009 at 11:44 PM
Oh, I know she’s not perfect, and I definitely think she can do wrong. You maybe have a perfect candidate in mind? The problem is, lowandslow, you’ve been caught a few too many times misrepresenting her record either through malice or ignorance to have much credibilty. Apply some of that “anti” energy toward lauding a candidate you DO like. That would make a little more sense.
ddrintn on April 12, 2009 at 11:48 PM
Like, Matt Blunt, as I remember.
ddrintn on April 12, 2009 at 11:49 PM
LowandSlow,
tell us the heroic tales of fiscal conservatism of Matt Blunt, who you spent years researching!
joey24007 on April 12, 2009 at 11:59 PM
Absolute bullshit, I’ve never misrepresented her record, guys like you are just incapable to accept it as it is. You try to pretend her ACES isn’t a windfall profit tax, you pretend that AGIA will result in a pipeline instead of just a crappy piece of legislation designed to show how tough she is on big oil you pretend that the way government expanded under her watch,more then any other time in the history of the state is perfectly legitimate, you pretend she was actually refuse stimulus funds, etc. etc.. Go back and find where I misrepresented her record, ever. It’s bullshit and you know it.
lowandslow on April 12, 2009 at 11:59 PM
Tell us about PPT and ELF
and then Matt Blunt
joey24007 on April 13, 2009 at 12:10 AM
ROFLMAO! Dumb Palintologists. Um, maybe Conservatives4Palin could learn something from Hot Air…
HotAir – 7 day avg 8,600 (Alexa)
Conservatives4Palin – 7 day avg 244,146 (Alexa)
ROFLMAO!!! HotAir spanks the Palin site like the joke that it is.
Poptech on April 13, 2009 at 12:31 AM
Why don’t you explain what your problem with Blunt was? Do you think you’re proving some point by disparaging him? What point is that?
lowandslow on April 13, 2009 at 12:34 AM
Please, tell us about ELF and PPT
and then Matt Blunt
joey24007 on April 13, 2009 at 12:40 AM
Typical of your kind. I typed oil instead of gas, pretty obvious mistake. It’s a gas line, that happens to go through CANADA, so of course they have a say about it. And I believe one of the main companies who they are dealing with is also from Canada; TransCanada or something. But I suppose in your world, a gas line that goes from the Northern slope of Alaska and into Canada…has nothing to do with the Canadians.
In your cynical mind, that’s all it can mean. But in reality it could mean that, or it could mean she is just trying to do what is beneficial for the State. I don’t see how this makes her only concerned with her political career (as in her presidential run) because her career gets hurt either way. If she takes the money, her national image takes a hit. If she does not, her state image takes a hit.
And once again you try and read minds. No shit I am defending Palin, from idiotic one sided attacks from people like you. But I have not made up my mind
about whether I would vote for her or not. She needs to read up on her foreign policy and get more experience before I give her a serious look. I, unlike you, am keeping my mind open about her. But if you wish to label me because it simplifies things into small easy to chew bite size portions, then so be it. It fits you.
Daemonocracy on April 13, 2009 at 12:41 AM
You cannot have a serious discussion because you base all your arguments on emotion positions. “ethics” is an emotional (moral and religious) position. You also repeat ALL the excuses and to the dumb Palintologists excuses sell. To everyone else with a brain the facts don’t change.
Fact – She campaigned for Governor to build the Bridge to Nowhere, campaigned as VP as the slayer of the Bridge and kept the money anyway.
Palin hung on to ‘bridge to nowhere’ funds (United Press International)
Not to mention I source everything I have, you state unverified positions or link to Palintologist sites. You have no credibility.
None of my posts include any strawmen or red herrings, all facts. I read all your excuse filled posts all the way through. I know your type, the one that thinks piling on excuses that are unverified works with the dumb and they do but I am not here for them.
Please explain what sort of information I am supposed to get out of your irrelevant posts here at Hot Air? You are not a source of anything. This how sad Palintologists are and how stupid there supporters are, they believe anything another supporter says with evidence. I have the sources to back up everything I say.
Mean Girl (Salon)
Poptech on April 13, 2009 at 12:51 AM
Palintologists support Skyrocketing Energy Costs!
Obama: “Cap & Trade Will Cause Electricity Rates to Skyrocket” (Video) (3min)
MODERATOR: “…do you support capping carbon emissions?”
PALIN: “I do. I do.”
Poptech on April 13, 2009 at 12:54 AM
Um, no I have went over this many times, it is the Palintologists who keep claiming that. I have never once said that someone is not qualified because they went to Harvard or Yale. But I will repeat there is a difference in the MBA program at Harvard than a state school. I understand you don’t want to accept that reality but that is the truth. Your obsession with it show your jealousy and populist positions.
Poptech on April 13, 2009 at 1:00 AM
Ethics is not an emotional issue, it is a moral absolute. Corruption, is wrong. There is no gray area.
and the only person repeating or selling anything is you, with your contant copy and pasting of the same old crap from the same the old left wing blogs, in every Palin thread you see. I find it particularly curious how you consistantly copy and paste where she went to school, and then claim you don’t care about the universities. Then you copy and paste her resume, yet refuse to recognize that the next 3 years will give her plenty of on paper executive experience and that challenges she faces now and in the near future will be much more relevant than what you post now. Putting everything in the context of 2011/2012, you are hopelessly out of date.
And I don’t expect you to get anything out of my posts, because you are close minded and rabidly anti-palin. I want others with open minds to see the contrast to what I write and what you paste. So back to Salon.com and read about the new dirt they dig up on Bristol.
Everyone can sit back and watch the job Palin does over the next few years and judge her by that, while you remain stuck in 2008.
Daemonocracy on April 13, 2009 at 1:04 AM
You don’t have any knowledge to question just emotional rhetoric.
Compromising? What is she John McCain now? Of that’s right I bet it is his fault for her accepting the stimulus too. Boo Hoo. MASSIVE HYPOCRISY!!!
You mean the reality that she is economically illiterate? “Speaking from the heart”? What a bunch of emotional bullshit. No one cares how they “think” she is speaking. Obama supporters think he is speaking “from the heart”. Time to become objective (impossible for Palintologists) and look at ACTIONS not rhetoric.
If she knew how to run a state she wouldn’t have to take ANY money but her massive economic ignorance is on full display for the world to see. She doesn’t have any remote understanding of how to run the state. It is a laughing stock of epic proportions.
Poptech on April 13, 2009 at 1:08 AM
Are you brain dead? Who defines the ethics? You? Me? The one accused? Who defines the morals? Which religious group? What a bunch of bullshit.
I don’t post anything from left wing blogs, they are all relevant sources in the media.
There is nothing to get out of your excuse filled posts, no facts, nothing to learn just a bunch of excuses blaming everyone of her actions on someone else. None of my positions or facts have changed because you posted a bunch of excuses. Time to get educated and I am here to educate you.
Poptech on April 13, 2009 at 1:11 AM
Yes I do to educate people who do not know this information…
Sarah Palin
Age: 45
Religion:
- Pentecostal
Education:
- Attended, University of Hawaii at Hilo, 1982
- Attended, Hawaii Pacific University, 1982
- Attended, North Idaho Community College, 1983
- Attended, University of Idaho, 1984-1985
- Attended, Matanuska-Susitna Community College, 1985
- B.S. Journalism, University of Idaho, 1987
Political Experience:
- Former Council Member, Wasilla City Council, Alaska, 1992-1996
- Former Mayor, Wasilla City, Alaska, 1996-2002 (pop: 7,028) (Votes: 909)
- Failed Candidate, Lieutenant Governor, Alaska, 2002
- Resigned, Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, 2003-2004
- Governor, Alaska, 2006-present (2 years) (pop: 670,053) (4th Smallest State) (0.002% of the U.S. population)
Professional Experience:
- First Place, Miss Wasilla Beauty Contest, 1984
- Second Place, Miss Alaska Pageant, 1984
- Television Sports Reporter, 1987-1989
- Director, Ted Stevens Excellence in Public Service, Inc., 2003-2007
Accomplishments:
- Spent more than $50,000 in city funds to redecorate her office as Mayor of Wasilla
- Increased Spending by 55% as Mayor of Wasilla
- Secured $27 million in Federal Earmarks as Mayor of Wasilla
- Raised the Sales Tax by 25% as Mayor of Wasilla
- Racked up $20 Million in Long Term Debt as Mayor of Wasilla
- Supported building the ‘Bridge to Nowhere’ as Governor of Alaska
- Kept $223 Million in Federal Earmarks for the ‘Bridge to Nowhere’ as Governor of Alaska
- Increased Spending by 31% as Governor of Alaska
- Requested $456 Million in Federal Earmarks as Governor of Alaska
- Alaska’s State Economic Freedom Ranking Dropped from 33 to 45 as Governor of Alaska
- Alaska Ranked 48 out of 50 as one of The Worst States for Business as Governor of Alaska
- Raised Taxes on Oil Profits to 25% as Governor of Alaska
- Requested $642 Million of Federal Stimulus Money as Governor of Alaska
Poptech on April 13, 2009 at 1:13 AM
More disingenuous horseshit.
You didn’t mistake writing oil for gas, you just didn’t know what the hell you were talking about and still don’t. The Canadians don’t have any rights to any gas or oil on U.S. land or offshore unless Canada holds some leases I’m not aware of. And the issue isn’t complicated at all, a pipeline will be built only when the economics of it are favorable to those that actual produce the gas. You can’t hold a gun to their head and force them to pay for one that isn’t economically viable, no matter what Palin may think.
lowandslow on April 13, 2009 at 1:23 AM
Exactly and if the land was privately owned and the market allowed to operate we would have more energy not less. The market is the most powerful force in getting us the energy we need not government. So long as people think the opposite energy prices will only increase.
Poptech on April 13, 2009 at 1:37 AM
Hope you people don’t miss this editorial in sarah’s hometown newspaper.
benny shakar on April 13, 2009 at 1:41 AM
Just to put it in more Context about that “I do, I do” cap and trade quote:
And another article from a pro Cap an Trade site:
http://www.worldwatch.org/node/5879
I do not support a cap and trade policy like Obama and Biden and the nuts at the UN do. I am not clear where Palin is on this issue exactly, but she has no record of being a global warming nut. Not that I can find.
If she does talk up Cap and Trade in the Republican primary years from now, then I won’t vote for her.
Daemonocracy on April 13, 2009 at 1:49 AM
I called it an oil line instead of a gas line, oops!
And did you completely miss the part about the gas line going through Canada and a Canadian involved with the project? Or did you just ignore it?
Daemonocracy on April 13, 2009 at 1:54 AM
Yes, you “fix” ignorance with misinformation. The so-called resume you post is a dishonest smear job from start to finish. Worse, you insult the reader by assuming they can’t see though such obvious B.S.
For starters, who puts religion on a resume?
And who lists each college attended rather than just the college that awards a degree? You list all these to cast doubts on her education, but way back in the 80’s it was accepted that more and more students were graduating after attending multiple colleges, rather than a single one. So this thing you try to inflate to a matter of great importance has been rejected as important by the very universities that award degrees.
If anything, it’s a mark of how little substantive criticism you have that you have to throw out such lame attacks as this one.
Then we start in on the political experience. But you can’t even say, City Council, Mayor, etc. No, it has to be “Former City Council, Former Mayor.” Anything, no matter how lame, to diminish her a little further. As if she could be anything but a former mayor while she’s a sitting governor.
On top of which, you actually list the one election she lost, for lieutenant governor, as “failed.” If she didn’t win it, why list it? Unless it’s your contention that anytime a politician loses an election, it’s a sign of failure and disgrace. If that’s the case, Ron Paul, Bob Barr, and Mitt Romney are all highly disgraced politicians.
You do manage to list her time as head of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission. But strangely, you don’t mention that she was the head of it, or what she did. All you say is that she resigned.
Right. Well, we all know competing in a beauty contest is considered professional experience.
In bizarro world.
For accomplishments, you list every negative news story, many based on hearsay, ever printed about her. How original. Not exactly a good faith listing of actual accomplishments.
Because this is not a resume. It’s just a cheap excuse to collect all your attacks on her into one piece.
Of course, I don’t write this to convince you. I know it would require a jackhammer and nitro to squeeze a new thought into your head. I’m just reminding you that you’re really not fooling anybody with this nonsense.
But hey, go ahead and call me a “Palintologist,” and a cultist. After all, it’s traditional and expected from you.
Just don’t be surprised if I’m ROFLMAO, to borrow a phrase.
ThereGoesTheNeighborhood on April 13, 2009 at 1:56 AM
Who defines ethics? There are certain moral absolutes in this world that are not defined by any particular group, they are just wrong. This is basic Objectivism. Murder is wrong. Rape is wrong. Theft is wrong. Corruption is wrong. If you do not believe that there are certain moral absolutes that don’t rely on culture to say if they’re wrong, then you are drifting into the realm of moral relativism, also known as liberalism. Do you believe in inalienable rights? Anything that violates these, is wrong.
You’re not here to educate anyone because you are stuck on stupid. You refuse to acknowledge the accomplishments she does have, and obsess over her Resume which will read 6 years as Governor by the time 2012 rolls around. Alot can happen from now until 2012 but you and your tunnel vision fail to recognize this. There are people who support Palin because they appreciate her values and there are people who are keeping an open mind about her and seeing if she can prove herself, you are the only fire breathing maniac who can’t tolerate that.
and Salon is Left Wing.
Daemonocracy on April 13, 2009 at 2:15 AM
Are you stupid? What context? Either you support Capping Carbon Emissions or Not! I don’t care if she believes it is man-made, Al Gore a Scientist and the his Movie oscar worthy. I care what she is going to do!!!!
MODERATOR: “…do you support capping carbon emissions?”
PALIN: “I do. I do.”
There is no “context” – how massively STUPID are you? What so when your electrical bill goes through the roof you will “feel” better knowing Palin doesn’t think global warming is all caused by man? This is frickin unbelievable!!!!
Obama: “Cap & Trade Will Cause Electricity Rates to Skyrocket” (Video) (3min)
Rudy Guiliani says he believes Global Warming is caused by man but does not want to cap carbon emissions via ANY government regulations. This is the problem with Palintologists they are unbelievably STUPID.
Poptech on April 13, 2009 at 2:25 AM
I do or we can drop Barry’s middle name from discussion too.
I do when they have this much of a joke as a college career. All factual and all relevant don’t be afraid of the facts.
She is a former mayor of a town with a small population and was elected by only 909 votes. She did lose when running for lieutenant governor. I like facts.
She did resign. Go look it up. Again educating you on the facts.
She doesn’t have any relevant professional or private sector experience = fact.
I list everything that proves my point she is NOT a fiscal conservative. These are all factual and fully sourced not hearsay. You cannot spin the facts and I am going to be here to make you eat them.
Poptech on April 13, 2009 at 2:35 AM
Context as in, instead of posting “I do, I do” followed by Bolded “haha’s”, people can see more of what was actually said in that exchange and see her other positions on environmental to try and give more meaning to what “I do, I do” means. By reading her other statements, and the following quoted article, I really don’t think she’s at the same level as Obama and Schwarzenegger on this issue. But we’ll see in a few years.
And she still hasn’t made any move to cap anything in Alaska. So I am thinking she was just following the McCain line on this one so she didn’t look too different than the guy on the top of the ticket. Happens with every VP in every election.
I love how angry and defensive you got and had to bring in Giulianni and the Obama tape. I’m glad you brought up the Obama tape because Palin sounded off the loudest against Obama for that tape. That doesn’t sound like a cap and trade fanatic to me. Giulianni buys into the man made global warming hysteria, yet does not support any cap and trade? I wonder how long that would last.
But unlike you, I am going to wait until 2011 and see what she says about this issue over the next couple years. If she supports it, I won’t vote for her, but other than the “I do, I do” she has made no moves what so ever to implement or promote any form of Cap and trade. None.
Daemonocracy on April 13, 2009 at 2:52 AM
I’m sure you know this already but I’ll just say for it, it’s another one of his smears lifted from left wing sites. Instead of being subtle about it, he should have just wrote what he really meant…”Snake charming hillbilly”. That is what the Left is saying about her Pentecostal religion and what he is trying to say.
Daemonocracy on April 13, 2009 at 2:56 AM
LOL, poptechs name is linked to a thread which is all about how man made global warming is a hoax. Yet he defends the politician who believe in man made globabl warming over sarah Palin who calls it a hoax. Classic.
Daemonocracy on April 13, 2009 at 3:00 AM
I’m a Pentecostal but they are a lot better in Australia than the examples you’ll find in the United States.
In Australia outward displays of religion are generally looked down on so things are more restrained.
Crux Australis on April 13, 2009 at 3:02 AM
How long are you going to keep this bullshit up? What does the pipeline running through Canada have to do with the viability of it or your contention Canada has any rights to oil or gas? You just don’t know what the hell you’re talking about. Before you start posting about something maybe you should try to have a basic understanding of it.
lowandslow on April 13, 2009 at 3:06 AM
All of which is irrelevant to the fact that she said “I DO” to capping carbon emissions. What part of this do you not understand? So if some guy walks up to you and says “I thinking stealing is bad, I do not believe in stealing and anyone who steals should go to jail, now give me your money” and holds you up with a gun, that is ok because they don’t believe in stealing? ARE YOU MENTALLY INSANE?
How STUPID are you seriously? Do you even understand what this is about? Global Warming’s end game is socialist control over carbon emissions. That means complete government control over energy production and usage. This isn’t a game. I know about 10,000 times more about this subject than you do. Click on my name you will find over 10,000 sources.
What does it matter if she doesn’t believe in it but still wants to cap carbon emissions? WTF? ARE YOU MENTALLY RETARDED? Did someone drop you on your head when you were a child?
MODERATOR: “…do you support capping carbon emissions?”
PALIN: “I do. I do.”
Cap-and-Trade Could Cost the Average Family $10,800 in Lost Income (US Newswire)
There is more to her than just “I do, I do”…
STATE OF ALASKA OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR: ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO. 238
“I, Sarah Palin, Governor of the State of Alaska, under the authority of art. III, secs. 1 and 24 of the Alaska Constitution establish the Alaska Climate Change Sub-Cabinet to advise the Office of the Governor on the preparation and implementation of an Alaska climate change strategy.
10. the opportunities to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from Alaska sources.
12. the opportunities to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from the operations of Alaska state government;
13. the opportunities for Alaska to participate in carbon-trading markets, including the offering of carbon sequestration.”
Poptech on April 13, 2009 at 3:24 AM
Her Religion should be known just like Barry.
Sarah Palin’s Pentecostal church (Video)
Does Sarah Palin Have a Pentecostal Problem? (Time Magazine)
It is not a smear, it is her religion. I personally know Pentecostals (family and friends) and they are viciously Anti-Catholic.
Poptech on April 13, 2009 at 3:28 AM
You might find this interesting…
Alaska lawmakers question gas line’s economics (USA Today)
“The Canadian company won an exclusive state license to build the pipeline under the Alaska Gasline Inducement Act, and with it up to $500 million in state incentives. Another company, formed by ConocoPhillips and BP PLC, is proposing its own pipeline without the incentives.
The global recession, combined with the new sources of natural gas, are creating surpluses in the Lower 48 that could depress prices for years to come, and possibly stall the Alaska project.
“Only a government is capable of going on autopilot and staying put. In the private sector, we revisit,” Ramras said.
Natural gas was trading around $7 per 1,000 cubic feet when the Legislature passed the inducement act in 2007 and briefly soared to more than $10 in 2008, making the project more enticing.
But on Wednesday, prices settled at $3.68 per 1,000 cubic feet, and that’s not the only thing dropping. The state budget is facing $1.3 billion shortfalls this year and next.
Still, the gas pipeline will not be in service until 2019 at best and state officials say lawmakers need to focus on a long-term prize that could be the state’s next economic lifeline.
Natural gas is plentiful in the Lower 48 and becoming ever more so thanks to new sources like shale to bolster dwindling supplies of conventional gas.
In just the last 10 years, more than 20,000 miles of new natural gas pipeline have been built and brought online and another 10,100 miles are planned by 2010, according to the Energy Information Administration. If completed, the nation’s natural gas capacity would jump by more than 38 percent, the EIA said.
Still, no matter how rosy a picture the energy analysts and state officials paint, it’s the big oil companies that hold the leases to Alaska’s gas.
And while the two pipeline competitors said they are moving toward a 2010 open season — where it’s hoped that producers will bid on space in the line to ship the gas — it’s not at all certain that will happen.
The oil and gas companies have complained that the state’s tax structure and fiscal terms are too uncertain for them to make that 25- to 30-year bet.”
Poptech on April 13, 2009 at 3:34 AM
So government should now regulate morality? Are you insane? “Morality” is religious based and the government should have nothing to do with religion. Thus “ethics” is a subjective argument pushed by populists and social conservatives.
Poptech on April 13, 2009 at 3:42 AM
I don’t know the Pentecostals you “personally know,” but the Anti-Catholicism you reference may be a personal thing, related to their individual church, or a symptom of the broader movement. There are clearly differences between many Pentecostals and Catholics. However, there is a “charismatic Catholic” movement which has some similarities to Pentecostalism.
Oh, and the Catholic church has been having ecumenical dialogue with Pentecostals since 1972. Here’s a Catholic link:
cs89 on April 13, 2009 at 8:55 AM
Face it pop-a-vessel-tech, you’re a one-trick pony! Your rants are legend and have only proven your derangement. So long as you continue, I’m confident that Palin will do well, given that you only ever vote for abject losers! Your failed voting pattern helped give us Obama, and I have no doubt you will compulsively continue this lunatic pattern until you are committed to a proper facility. So, rant on, poppy, rant on!
littleguy on April 13, 2009 at 9:23 AM
Palin will do well if YouTube ceases to exist!
Fox News: Palin didn’t know Africa was a continent (Video)
Poptech on April 13, 2009 at 10:24 AM
The truth is more resilient than either you or YouTube, poppy:
Fox News: The Africa thing “never happened” (its a lie)
Fox News: McCain’s campaign manager refutes Africa charges (its a lie)
Liar, liar, pants on fire! Rant on, poppy! Rant on!
littleguy on April 13, 2009 at 10:40 AM
littleguy on April 13, 2009 at 10:40 AM
Only the “Fox News” links that support Poptech’s spin are allowed.
In the interest of “educating” everyone, here’s Poptech’s resume.
Poptech:
Computer Business:
Maintains professional website consisting of AGW links.
Proficient in spamming slanted resumes via extensive cut-and-paste skills.
Very experienced in use of boldface type and cool acronyms (ROFL, LMAO).
Mask identity by using photo of hunky hasbeen (Fabio).
Religion:
Palin-denier of the Anti-Pentecostal persuasion.
Hobbies:
Spending hours on Newsbusters, HotAir etc. making repetitive posts.
cs89 on April 13, 2009 at 10:50 AM
You forgot “labors under the delusion that endless repetition equals credibility” and “believes that dismissal of the intelligence of those with whom he disagrees enhances the validity of what he says”.
You know, just trying to help, let’s call a spade a spade, etc.
Snowed In on April 13, 2009 at 10:56 AM
Greta: “Leak or Lie? A statement is that Governor Palin was confused or did know whether Africa was a country or or continent”
Rick Davis: “I don’t know I wasn’t in those debate sessions”
OWNED!!!!!
Poptech on April 13, 2009 at 12:31 PM
Yes, you OWN the lie!
You are a liar, AND an insufferable windbag! You know its a lie, yet you continue to post it. You are very ill.
littleguy on April 13, 2009 at 12:54 PM
littleguy, looks like you just gave me more ammo. THANK YOU!!!!
Rick Davis: “I don’t know I wasn’t in those debate sessions. …my view is not being in the room, you know. I had absolutely no idea what transpired during that period of time.”
ROFLMAO!!!!! Palintologists are soooooooo dumb.
Poptech on April 13, 2009 at 1:03 PM
Sorry Carl, let me get it straight. Say it flat out and speak clearly, now.
Thanks, Carl. I’m sure poppy will admit now that he is, in fact, a liar, AND an insufferable windbag! Rant on poppy! Rant on!
littleguy on April 13, 2009 at 1:05 PM
As always, clinging to a fragment and ignoring the relevant information. I presume its part of your psychosis. Let me repeat, “It never happened!” Its a lie and you know its a lie. Please feel free to continue laughing like a hyena while they pack you off to the funny farm for delusional, rapatiously lying, windbags! BTW, voting for BARR and then attemting to criticize someone else for a rational choice is not just “dumb” its craaaaaazzzyyyyyyy! Har!
littleguy on April 13, 2009 at 1:13 PM
Hey, pop-a-vessel-tech, here’s another one for you, you lying windbag:
Ready to admit you’re a lying, dingbat, hyterical, deranged, nutjob yet? NO!!! Didn’t think so — rant on poppy! Rant on!
littleguy on April 13, 2009 at 1:27 PM
It is not a lie, Cameron does not deny he was told those things from primary sources and Rick Davis has no first hand knowledge of them.
Rick Davis: “I don’t know I wasn’t in those debate sessions. …my view is not being in the room, you know. I had absolutely no idea what transpired during that period of time.”
YOU HAVE NOTHING!
Poptech on April 13, 2009 at 1:27 PM
She’s mostly fine as is, but she clearly needs to manage her image better. The left will always attack anyone who threatens them by (a) digging up dirt, (b) making the conservative out to be stupid, and (c) making the conservative out to be crazy. They did it to both Reagan and Bush, they did it very effectively to Palin.
I’m not sure what the solution is, but she has to be able to come across like she did in her acceptance speech all the time, not just some of the time, and she has to never again do a repeat of what happened on Couric.
Gaunilon on April 13, 2009 at 1:29 PM
Typical of the deranged! You ignore all relevant passages that challenge your delusion! Both Lowry and Van Susteren have personally interviewed the actual folks in the room, including Palin and they all agree — “absurd”, “never happened”! You know this. You know its a lie. You are a deranged liar.
littleguy on April 13, 2009 at 1:33 PM
Nope they never interviewed those that made the claims. All true baby, Palin just doesn’t want anyone to know how little she really does!!! ROFLMAO!!
Poptech on April 13, 2009 at 1:42 PM
Just so we can verify your completely insane uttering, baby, who exactly were “those who made the claims”? Names, please. I don’t suppose you want us to know how little YOU “really does”, right?
littleguy on April 13, 2009 at 1:47 PM
Poptech on April 13, 2009 at 1:42 PM
Weren’t they “anonymous sources?”
You don’t know if they’ve been interviewed or not.
Bottom line, though, Rick Davis has a lot more credibilit assessing the intelligence of Sarah Palin than anonymous sources do.
He has more credibility on this issue than you as well, but I guess that goes without saying.
cs89 on April 13, 2009 at 1:49 PM
Lets see what Rick Davis has to say…
Rick Davis: “I don’t know I wasn’t in those debate sessions. …my view is not being in the room, you know. I had absolutely no idea what transpired during that period of time.”
Hum, fascinating.
Poptech on April 13, 2009 at 1:50 PM
Poptech on April 13, 2009 at 1:50 PM
cs89 on April 13, 2009 at 2:04 PM
More comments not from the source. Owned again.
Poptech on April 13, 2009 at 2:14 PM
What source? It was an anonymously sourced article. Then you picked one line from Rick Davis to say he didn’t know. The RCP article cites an interview with Rick Davis which flatly contradicts your picture of him having “no idea” of Palin’s knowledge of Africa.
Whether you acknowledge it or not, you are wrong. As usual.
cs89 on April 13, 2009 at 2:21 PM
That line, I will repeat…
Rick Davis: “I don’t know I wasn’t in those debate sessions. …my view is not being in the room, you know. I had absolutely no idea what transpired during that period of time.”
Means he was not in those sessions where the claims were made. His comments on a situation that he was not in are irrelevant.
Poptech on April 13, 2009 at 2:24 PM
Sweet! Those who did the actual debate prep — those who were in the room with Palin the entire time, those who would know the truth are quoted below — summary: “absurd”, “never happened”, “messed up”. Davis, McCain’s campaign manager knows Palin, and the parties, he agrees in the absurdity of the lies (see quote below).
Repeat the lies as many times as you wish — they’ll still be lies. The only thing you “own” are your lies and your delusions. Even Cameron is man enough to admit he screwed it up! Rant on poppy! Rant on!
littleguy on April 13, 2009 at 2:30 PM
None of your quotes are from people in the room.
Rick Davis: “I don’t know I wasn’t in those debate sessions. …my view is not being in the room, you know. I had absolutely no idea what transpired during that period of time.”
You cannot spin it baby, buy a new turntable because yours is broke.
Poptech on April 13, 2009 at 2:34 PM
The folks in the room who were there all the time, who would know the truth — they are probably not the liars who wouldn’t be in a position to know anyway — told this to the interviewers:
So, here’s how it works: the folks who were there all the time and who know the truth declare it to be a lie! Cameron admits he “messed up”. Your lies are the only “spin” here pop-a-vessel-tech. Go ahead tell some more delusional, deranged lies!
littleguy on April 13, 2009 at 2:47 PM
Cameron said something to Greta on the phone. He in no way refuted his story. You have nothing.
Poptech on April 13, 2009 at 2:49 PM
Poptech on April 13, 2009 at 2:34 PM
By your own standard:
cs89 on April 13, 2009 at 2:51 PM
So, because its on the phone it doesn’t count? The others who were in the room all the time, who actually did the debate prep — not the reporter who admits he messed it up, nor the liars who wouldn’t know anyway — do refute the story. In fact, they agree — “never happened”, “absurd”. Its a lie. I know to you that’s nothing, but to any normal person, it being a lie would be very significant indeed. Any more lies for us?
littleguy on April 13, 2009 at 2:54 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 ... 9 10 11 12 Next »