Red State editor: Gee, some of Palin’s fans are awfully quick to attack critics
posted at 8:11 pm on January 14, 2010 by Allahpundit
Really? I hadn’t noticed. Do go on.
I understand that a great many of Palin’s supporters, myself included, have felt on the defensive for a while. The media genuinely hates this woman. The left is more revolted by Palin than they ever were by Bush.
I get that.
But I also get that there are Republicans who like — even love — Sarah Palin who think some of her handlers might not give her the best of advice or think she should or should not do one thing or another. And i’m finding, both from personal experience and the experience of friends, that when those points are brought up, the person raising the point is often inappropriately attacked as a Palin hater…
If the people who love Sarah Palin and lack the discernment to distinguish between real attacks and honest criticism or suggestions fly off the handle at everything other than unwavering support, they are going to have a hard time being advocates for Governor Palin in the future. With all the attacks against her by the media and the left, she is going to need all of us defending her.
Attacking me or any other Palin supporter for saying something in public we think needs to be said is fair from the love and war standpoint, but when the rest of team can’t have a rational conversation because everything other than hagiography is viewed as an attack, why even be on the team?
The punchline: Someone posted the link on Free Republic with the subhead, “Whose side is Red State on, anyway?” I’m actually shocked that this piece didn’t get wider play in the media today considering who wrote it. It’s Erick Erickson, who was on Colbert last week, is regularly treated as a spokesman in the media for tea partiers and other grassroots conservatives, and is given to saying things like, “The top priority right now is beating the Republican Establishment.” Not a guy who’s known for carrying water for Beltway GOPers. Yet even his conservative cred is suspect for uttering an occasional discouraging word about Sarahcuda.
Exit question: How did she get to this rare, exalted, and enviable position? Erickson’s surely right that part of it comes from an instinct of wanting to defend her after the relentless media nastiness towards her, but obviously it’s more than that. Is it cultural identification, that she’s blue-collar and familiar in a way that most cookie-cutter pols aren’t, which makes the slings and arrows of liberal “elites” sting twice as much? Is it a function of the leadership vacuum in the GOP, with the emergence of someone young and charismatic such a precious thing that some supporters will do battle with anyone who risks upsetting that? Is it just that she really is more unshakably conservative in her policies than anyone else? (If so, how come she went along with the McCain campaign’s stance on having a path to legalization for illegals?) I’m not quite as supportive of her as Erickson seems to be, but I do like her personally — and yet of course I get all the “Palin-hater” stuff thrown at me too when I dare to post, say, a poll that shows her numbers sinking. Here’s a better exit question, in fact: If even a guy as pro-Palin and pro-grassroots as Erickson is getting tired of this, why are Palin’s fiercest supporters so confident that it’s not going to create a wider backlash against her even among conservatives who might otherwise be well disposed towards her? Isn’t that a pretty good pro-Palin argument to mellow out?
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 … 4 5 6 7 Next »
Nat Hound on January 14, 2010 at 10:45 PM
Great Points! I thought the same things…
Karmi on January 14, 2010 at 10:48 PM
If Palin doesn’t run, after the initial tsunami, the hottest threads on the blogosphere will be like this:
Poster 1: “I like Mitt.” “I’m going to vote for him.”
Poster 2: “I don’t care for him too much, but yeah, I’m going to vote for him.”
*crickets chirping*
Poster 3: “Well, time for bed.” “Goodnight everybody.”
Goodnight, everybody.
justltl on January 14, 2010 at 10:49 PM
Does she? The best she can pull for her favorite founding father is that “He didn’t want to be a king. He returned power to the people. Then he went back to Mount Vernon. He went back to his farm.” I mean don’t worry, history professor she is NOT. Sorry that I am young enough to remember my fourth grade essay on George Washington, and I am ashamed at how much more eloquent it was than that.
thphilli on January 14, 2010 at 10:50 PM
ddrintn:
I don’t think open primaries had anything to do with it, most of them were not open anyway.
Terrye on January 14, 2010 at 10:51 PM
Someone pointed out here yesterday that Erickson has more the welfare of the GOP at heart, and come to think of it, that’s true. Palin is perceived to be electoral poison, and the best thing (in their view) for the GOP would be for her to disappear, or at least be nothing more politically than a cheerleader for a “real” candidate they can support.
ddrintn on January 14, 2010 at 10:52 PM
Oh, one more thing:
Send some dough to help Haiti.
And send some dough to Brown in Massachusettesess.
Night night.
justltl on January 14, 2010 at 10:52 PM
Palin was giving an interview, not a viva voce. Learn the difference. I’ll henceforth expect every candidate’s interviews to be sort of like condensed history and PoliSci texts. And if they fall short of my expectiations, I’ll be sure to bitch and moan and call them stooooopid.
If one state has open primaries it’s one state too many.
ddrintn on January 14, 2010 at 10:55 PM
Best thing you and April could do is cral back under your DU/Moveon rock b*tch
bill30097 on January 14, 2010 at 10:56 PM
Exactly. That’s part of the problem. Elitism.
“Present a problem to a ploughman (plowman) and a professor; the former will likely solve it as well and often better than the latter because he has not been led astray by artificial rules” – Thomas Jefferson
I want someone who can do, not someone who can just talk.
atheling on January 14, 2010 at 10:58 PM
They utter hypocrisy of Erick. He and Moe booted me from Redstate for doing the exact same thing – this:
Only difference? I offered up some mild constructive criticism of the idol that they worship – Rush Limbaugh. Well after that Moe was lying in wait, as they always do, and when he found a hair to split, I was gone. These people live by a double standard over there at Redstate. They need to stop doing that. The Conservative Movement needs to advance to the next higher plateau and restricting free discussion will slow the progress. So, Erick, how does it feel to be on the receiving end of a swift kick? Oh, Erick, I agree with you on this one, by the way. DD
Darvin Dowdy on January 14, 2010 at 10:58 PM
But isn’t that the point? Politics is a competitive game and there are precious few that get out as winners. Reagan was one of the exceptions. But even he had some scars to show for the effort.
They have their view and their guy, the other side has their view and their girl, and game on. It’s nothing personal.
Nat Hound on January 14, 2010 at 10:58 PM
Why do you assume he is Pro-Palin? Because he says so? And, because he claims he is pro-Palin Erickson himself is beyond criticism?
Sounds like it is less about Palin and her supporters and is instead is about thin skin pundits.
Blake on January 14, 2010 at 11:00 PM
Right, well then Erickson shouldn’t whine.
It was an interview, not a viva voce. No other candidate is expected to speak like a PoliSci textbook, don’t know why Palin should be expected to do so.
ddrintn on January 14, 2010 at 11:01 PM
You are creepy, troll.
bill30097 on January 14, 2010 at 11:03 PM
Agreed. Good line on the PoliSci text book.
Nat Hound on January 14, 2010 at 11:03 PM
Let’s hear it.
tdau1997 on January 14, 2010 at 11:03 PM
Send money to Brown.
Send Erik to Haiti
bill30097 on January 14, 2010 at 11:04 PM
Sarah Palin: talks conservative, acted populist-progressive as governor.
Press the button. Go ahead.
AshleyTKing on January 14, 2010 at 10:43 PM
LOL….she cut the spending, returned money to citizens instead of allowing the state to spend it, set up rainy day funds. The list goes on. She governed as a people’s governor. Progressive? I do not think you know what the word means
unseen on January 14, 2010 at 11:05 PM
So, people DEFENDING Sarah Palin from unjust ATTACKS from Allah and the rest of the left wing are the ones who are a little too obsessive?
Yeah, right. 1400 Palin bashing posts by Allah seem to outweigh a few defenses of her from supporters.
It’s called a REACTION, MoronPundit. Don’t feel obligated to smear the woman and her supporters won’t feel obligated to defend her.
LOL at Allah crying over Palin supporters hitting BACK!
Mr Purple on January 14, 2010 at 11:08 PM
Does she? The best she can pull for her favorite founding father is that “He didn’t want to be a king. He returned power to the people. Then he went back to Mount Vernon. He went back to his farm.” I mean don’t worry, history professor she is NOT. Sorry that I am young enough to remember my fourth grade essay on George Washington, and I am ashamed at how much more eloquent it was than that.thphilli on January 14, 2010 at 10:50 PM
that’s all you got?
Know wonder Palin scares the crap out of the left. That is really all you have? your upset that she respects George Washington’s servant’s heart? his humble soul? his Honorable character? That is what you are upset about? that’s it?
come on stop joking around…..give it your best shot….I know there must be more….
unseen on January 14, 2010 at 11:09 PM
Allah you shameless traffic whore :P
ReformedAndDangerous on January 14, 2010 at 11:12 PM
Someone pointed out here yesterday that Erickson has more the welfare of the GOP at heart, and come to think of it, that’s true. Palin is perceived to be electoral poison, and the best thing (in their view) for the GOP would be for her to disappear, or at least be nothing more politically than a cheerleader for a “real” candidate they can support.
ddrintn on January 14, 2010 at 10:52 PM
But isn’t that the point? Politics is a competitive game and there are precious few that get out as winners. Reagan was one of the exceptions. But even he had some scars to show for the effort.
They have their view and their guy, the other side has their view and their girl, and game on. It’s nothing personal.
Nat Hound on January 14, 2010 at 10:58 PM
If they want to make it non-personal then they need to stop attacking her character. Attack her issues. they can’t because they know the majority of America agree with her. Therefore they have to make the messenger into a dimwitted monster that will eat your children.
and for some reason the people that care about those commonsense conservative issues, the ideas that the nation were founded on get upset at those personal attacks? go figure.
Maybe the Mittbots,huckledingleberries et all need to change their attack plan. It isn’t working folks.
unseen on January 14, 2010 at 11:14 PM
It’s really getting tiring seeing people throw out the “troll” mantra at anyone wh dares disagree with them. It’s old.
And for the record, terryannonline is no troll. So grow up.
JetBoy on January 14, 2010 at 11:15 PM
bill30097
Palin must be proud to have a douchenozzle like you on her side.
packsoldier on January 14, 2010 at 11:16 PM
These two posts say it all:
Truely nothing else needs to be said. No one worships Palin, but we all LOVE her. Most would stop a bullet for her. (more to this than most will ever know)
We really don’t give a damn who attacks her, left, right, middle. You attack Palin, you attack US, you attack America.
We understand that Sarah isn’t perfect, that she makes mistakes. Well goddamn, she’s human. BUT, even so, she is by far the best leader this nation has seen in decades.
We have absolutely no problem understanding where she stands on any issue, and we, for the most part agree with her.
Frankly, I have disagreed more on her strategery post governor, and yet, she’s proven she knows exactly what she is doing, so I’m just STFU’ing!
As for you nimrods that don’t get the saturation on Fox….It’s obvious you’d starve to death in sales!
Sarah is the hottest thing on the planet, she’s ratings GOLD. Fox has her and they want to promote the hell out of her. They are in the ratings business. They are in business to sell advertising. Their product is news, their customers are the advertisers. Sarah will get them a lot more customers, customers they can charge a premium.
BTW, they did the same thing with Glenn Beck and Stossel, just to a lessor extent. But frankly, neither Beck nor Stossel come close to the star power Sarah has. Absolutely no one in the country does.
How much you want to bet that Loren Michaels doesn’t have a whole team trying to figure out how to get Palin/Beck on SNL ASAP?
Who else in America could suggest what she and Beck did (because of her) and be taken seriously?
BTW II: Sarah is going to be on Teh Oprah tomorrow.
In short for ANYONE who wants to dis Sarah, the very best advice I can give is: DON’T START NONE, THERE WON’T BE NONE!
That goes for everyone.
gary4205 on January 14, 2010 at 11:19 PM
Here’s a simple request for the “Palin is unelectable” crowd–name a Republican with better political instincts than Palin has.
pugwriter on January 14, 2010 at 11:23 PM
Ahh the HA Clueless Cougar weigns in with one of her silly thoughts to defend Janos, who has some serious desires for me as much as he talks about my body.
Janos is Mr. Sting I take it? Now it makes sense.
Bradky on January 14, 2010 at 11:25 PM
Sorry, but that is moronic. Family is family, and suckers are suckers.
Please don’t mix the sanctity of family with a politician.
toliver on January 14, 2010 at 11:26 PM
Criticism of Palin is like an attack on Mom. A lot of her hardcore supporters see her as a family member, and you don’t attack someone’s family member without getting an emotionally driven response. This is especially true of an attractive family member everyone else in the family likes.
ray on January 14, 2010 at 11:27 PM
Perfect example of the point Erickson is making. Legitimate criticism about her staying in office met with Kos like responses over and over.
Palin is teh one for one group and Obama is teh one for the other. Pot meet kettle.
Bradky on January 14, 2010 at 11:28 PM
Indeed. I was looking at it from the reverse perspective. The Palin folks aren’t “attacking” or trying to run anyone out of the conservative movement. They just aren’t.
On the other hand, isn’t it a supporter’s job to take up for their “candidate” when she is constantly getting run? (Using the term loosely since Palin isn’t running for anything at the moment.)
Nat Hound on January 14, 2010 at 11:29 PM
The reason people are so protective of Sarah Palin is simple… she has been attacked so much from the left that anyone, and I mean anyone, who says anything negative about her is going to get shit on and hard.
Is that good or bad…. who knows. it is simply a gut reaction of protectiveness for a conservative warrior attacked from all sides by the all the liberals and even some so-called Republican conservatives and in need of some back up every once in a while.
Yes, I agree with that she is not perfect, and hopefully we do not expect her to be since she will surely make some mistakes along the way, and also because as she has said before, man (or woman) has fallen and is imperfect and the goal in life is to strive.
But, and here is the big but, for the moment, until she builds up her arsenal and also eliminates some of those questions that still linger out there in some people in America, I think we supporters will probably still over react and defend her simply out of habit.
Eric has explained his position and I tend to agree with most of it. I think his problem and some others is simply out of concern that she might get tainted if the characters at this first convention do turn out to be dolts. I agree… but then, who else is doing a convention? you know there have to be these sort of gatherings fo the Tea Party prior to the elections… there has to be some sort of co-ordination, otherwise it doesn’t mean anything if you can’t have an effect. Here is my solution… how about a bunch of other Tea Party groups also holding “conventions” during the year and I am sure she would be happy to attend and speak at those too. At the moment there is only one… lets have more set up.
PhilipJames on January 14, 2010 at 11:34 PM
AK State Budget Total Authorized to Spend 2006: 7.48 Billion.
AK State Budget Total Authorized to Spend 2010: 10.1 Billion.
AshleyTKing on January 14, 2010 at 11:38 PM
Support Sarah Palin, or support someone else. It’s going to be a looooooooooong stretch between now and 2012.
Only the primaries will settle this Palin vs. Insider bloodbath. Whoever is left standing will get the spoils.
portlandon on January 14, 2010 at 11:38 PM
Sorry, but that is moronic. Family is family, and suckers are suckers.
Please don’t mix the sanctity of family with a politician.
toliver on January 14, 2010 at 11:26 PM
What is a family? What is a tribe? what is a nation? seems like you have a closed mind.
I guess you have no knowledge of the concept of nation/tribes/family units and how they are interrelated. Take a class in human anthropology and maybe you will understand the concept better.
unseen on January 14, 2010 at 11:39 PM
Did she personally ask you for backup?
If President would she cower in front of the Mullahs when they were not impressed with blog comments or facebook friends?
Whether someone merits it or not they will get shit on. That is what passes for principled conservatism now?
Gee color me surprised!
Bradky on January 14, 2010 at 11:39 PM
Bradky, you are not a nice person. I can’t put it more plainly than that.
portlandon on January 14, 2010 at 11:39 PM
On the other hand, we have Kos Kiddie-like unending criticism of every aspect of Sarah Palin EXCEPT the issues . If her leaving office early was a terrible decision (I’ve never been too thrilled with it), and she chooses to run, we’ll see if it indeed was a terrible decision.
ddrintn on January 14, 2010 at 11:39 PM
When I see you scold the two posters in question for their comments I’ll take you seriously.
Bradky on January 14, 2010 at 11:41 PM
Actually, “principled conservatism” would criticize Palin for her stands on the issues, rather than “she’s stoooooopid” or “she’s unelectable” or “I don’t like her glasses” or “her followers creep me out”.
ddrintn on January 14, 2010 at 11:42 PM
Sarah Palin is like a little puppy someone found on the street cold and hungry and with 3 legs and 1 ear. For some reason Republicans want to take care of her. Deep down they know that she is not capable of high office of any type. That does not stop them from keeping the puppy.
Decider on January 14, 2010 at 11:42 PM
+1. Word.
Sigh. Is calling opponents “trolls” a corollary to Godwin’s Law?
darii on January 14, 2010 at 11:42 PM
AshleyTKing on January 14, 2010 at 11:38 PM
In the dizziness of constant political attacks against Governor Palin, many issues of great importance to every Alaskan and every American are lost.
Somehow, the truth needs to break free and be part of the conversation.
Here are some true facts that the liberals in Alaska and America do not want you to know.
Governor Murkowski’s last budget FY2007: $11,697,400,000
Governor Palin’s latest budget FY2010: $10,570,000,000
Total reduction in spending between 2007 and 2010: a whopping 9.5% or $1,127,400,000
A general rule of thumb for both liberal and conservative administrations is to claim that they may reasonably increase spending every year at a rate of 2% to 3% because of inflation and that should not count against them as increased spending. Even if we use the low end of inflation at 2%, Governor Palin’s budget could have been (without calling it a spending increase): $12,413,374,459.20
Of course, the budget is not $12.4 billion; it is actually $10.57 billion. In other words, she cut spending.
Still many in the Lower 48 complain about federal spending in Alaska. Alaska has, for a number of years, benefited greatly from earmarked dollars paid by ever single American.
This is a tall task for any governor. Governor Palin committed to requesting fewer federal dollars from the average American taxpayer, but how does one go about doing that?
Earmarks are requested from a number of different sources in each state. Governors, state legislators, lobbyists, local governments and federal legislators all make their own priority lists and send that list to a number of different federal agencies in an attempt to bring more money into their state. The elected representatives from each state then proceed to use their power of appropriations to insert each priority into different bills to get the money.
This has become a real point of contention among many Americans, both liberal and conservative. This process has created massive amounts of federal and state overspending. I included the states in the massive overspending because most of the earmarks require some sort of matching state funds before the federal government will send the money.
For example, if a state is looking to build a $1 billion highway project, the federal government may tell that state that they are willing to pay 80% or $800 million for the project, only if the state will front the remaining 20% or $200 million. What if the state cannot afford the $200 million? Normally the state will go out and bond (borrow) for the project. This is a common practice for receiving federal dollars. There are always strings attached. States end up borrowing and spending money they do not have, along with the federal government borrowing and spending money they do not have.
Earmarks have created a massive program that encourages borrowing and spending money at every level of government. All federal agencies, every state, and many local governments have all developed this habit which is difficult to break.
This is a massive challenge that Governor Palin undertook. How was it possible to begin to wean her own state off of the massive problem of borrowing and spending federal dollars?
It appears that Governor Palin has taken a very aggressive and offensive line of attack. She did the one thing that truly made sense, she decided to lead by example.
I will be honest, I don’t think I’ve ever seen anything like this. When Governor Palin set out to cut Alaska’s dependence on government funds, she was serious!
Check out these numbers:
FFY07- Murkowski’s federal requests total: 63 projects @ $349,497,000
FFY10- Governor Palin’s federal requests total: 8 projects @ $69,100,000
That was a gigantic 80% drop in federal requests by the Alaska governor’s office.
See what I mean about leading by example? Not only has Governor Palin dropped the federal requests for money by 80%, she has also been slowly chipping away at these numbers since the beginning of her administration.
FFY2007- Gov. Murkowski 63 projects at $349,497,000
FFY08- Gov. Palin 52 projects at $256,037,000
FFY09- Gov. Palin 31 projects at $195,094,900
FFY10- Gov. Palin: 8 projects @ $69,100,000
As you can clearly see, there has been a noticeable drop in federal requests year after year during Governor Palin’s administration.
Now, before anybody misunderstands me, remember that Governor Palin’s office is not the only office to request federal funds. Plenty of people do the best they can to work around her, and they do manage to create additional headaches for the state.
Also keep in mind that not all of these requests are approved by the federal government.
Governor Palin had to start somewhere, and she chose to get her own adminstration under control first.
Pretty impressive in my book.
http://www.conservatives4palin.com/2009/06/governor-palins-budgets-pointing-out.html
Nice try.
unseen on January 14, 2010 at 11:43 PM
Progressive: blame business for failures of regulation.
Progressive: heavily tax wealthy and corporations.
Progressive: believe government can run the economy better than private enterprise, government can pick winners and losers.
Well, that was the breeze blowing through the 49th state from 2007 to 2009.
Press the button.
AshleyTKing on January 14, 2010 at 11:44 PM
The problem is she has no view on the issues or any ideas at all. She is a walking bundle of GOP talking points. blah, blah, support the troops…blah, blah, lower taxes…blah, blah, Obama is a Socialist…blah, blah, Ronald Reagan.
Decider on January 14, 2010 at 11:44 PM
Oooooh, that O-bot buyer’s remorse strikes deep.
ddrintn on January 14, 2010 at 11:45 PM
Left office after half a term – legitimate criticism.
Foreign policy experience extremely limited – legitimate criticism
Never ran on her own for presidential primary so no way to know whether she has the skill to mount a national campaign – legitimate observation
Directed a state study in which pursuit of advantages cap and trade would bring Alaska while governor. Critical of global warming, cap and trade after – contradiction not adequately explained, especially in light of the visceral reaction global warming brings out with conservatives
ddrintn – will never criticize anything about Palin.
Bradky on January 14, 2010 at 11:46 PM
ddrintn on January 14, 2010 at 11:48 PM
Palin makes Sean Hannity look smart. That is a very hard thing to do.
Decider on January 14, 2010 at 11:49 PM
Pardon me,
AK Budget Total Authorized to Spend 2007: 7.3 Billion.
I checked. And I ain’t no liberal.
AshleyTKing on January 14, 2010 at 11:51 PM
AshleyTKing on January 14, 2010 at 11:44 PM
Hmmm AK has no sales tax and no income tax. I.e non-progressive. A progressive would have tried to install one.
Palin did not.
The greed and courruption of special interests intersecting with the government is causing most of the problems in this country as big money buys votes to secure their piece of the taxpayer funds, buys votes to get special tax cuts, extensions, loopholes, etc.
I have no idea what you are talking about. Palin’s gasline bill requires 100% private investment.
You entire post shows you have no idea what your talking about.
unseen on January 14, 2010 at 11:51 PM
There is alot of labeling & name calling that is getting old Jetboy, like PALINISTA, PALINBOT, PALIN WORSHIPPERS, etc. It’s ridiculous for you to whine about labeling while doing it yourself. Most here understand who the trolls are and who they are not.
These Palin posts are beyond tolerable anymore. There are plenty posters on HotAir that ONLY show up in Palin threads. Its an unhealthy fixation. Don’t these people have any other outlet than to dwell on a 46 year old mother of 5 from Alaska? What makes it so necessary to follow her every move and trash her in every post?
There are plenty of questions about Palin’s capabilities to run for office of President, but it is the personal attacks that really are below nasty.
portlandon on January 14, 2010 at 11:52 PM
So let’s recap:
2007 Murkowski’s last budget: 7.3 billion.
2009 Palin’s last budget: 10.1 billion.
AshleyTKing on January 14, 2010 at 11:53 PM
Why don’t you make a positive argument? Name one compelling, original or inventive policy position Palin has taken. No mentioning Obama, or Romney. The topic of the thread is Palin.
She just has her finger on the pulse of morons like you, and then she regurgitates talking points she knows you’ll lap up.
crr6 on January 14, 2010 at 11:53 PM
Atheling, you are the poster child for what Eric Erickson is talking about.
Buy Danish on January 14, 2010 at 11:53 PM
It is. It’s also been done to death.
So your candidate is Rice. None of the others could measure up. Pawlenty? Romney? Huck? Nope.
Yep.
It’s what governors do.
If Romney can flip-flop without your stinging condemnation, you might be able to cut Palin some slack too.
Sure I will. She needs to do better in interviews. She needs to educate herself more on international affairs. She needs to never again complain about media treatment — let others do it. She’s going to have to deal head-on with the “hostile” media sooner or later. Her interviews during the campaign were bad.
What’s that you were saying, now?
ddrintn on January 14, 2010 at 11:54 PM
500 Billion for a gas pipeline, anyone?
AshleyTKing on January 14, 2010 at 11:54 PM
Those are coaching tips not criticisms – try again.
Bradky on January 14, 2010 at 11:55 PM
You said your opinion. Nobody said you couldn’t. So move on.
Your opinion is known. You do not like Palin for higher office. You do not like Palin as a person.
Your vote of No Confidence has been noted.
Hey everyone, Bradky will not support Sarah Palin! Did you all hear?
Bradky WILL NOT support Sarah Palin for higher office!!!
portlandon on January 14, 2010 at 11:55 PM
AshleyTKing on January 14, 2010 at 11:51 PM
nice link….you got there…..oh wait…i’ll just take your word for it….
unseen on January 14, 2010 at 11:55 PM
Honest question: what differentiates “personal attack” from legitimate questions re capabilities? Is bringing up bad press showings legit? The left grabs ‘em and yells “Stoopid!”, “Retard!”, etc. This is what riles up conservatives, but I do think when she screws up, we ought to acknowledge it. But without the names or stupid leftist bile of course.
darii on January 14, 2010 at 11:56 PM
Hmmmm.
@ AllahPundit
About Palin:
I think it is less about Palin herself than as a reaction -against- the Establishment Republicans.
For the past 20 years or more conservatives have been going along with the Republican party in the hopes of implementing a more conservative platform and instituting more conservative ideals into government. And in the interim the idea was to promote more conservatism in general.
The reality is that we got suckered. The Establishment Republicans, like McCain, basically despise conservatives and used the mantra of “If you don’t vote for the RINO liberal-jackass Republican instead of the conservative candidate we won’t have a majority”. Remember Specter vs Toomey?
*shrug* now there is at least one, and perhaps -only- one, conservative politician that we can trust to be conservative and importantly remain conservative. And every single time somebody attacks her it unleashes Hell because, in a Gollum sort of way, she is our “Precious”. The one conservative that, so far, hasn’t stabbed us all in the back or “crossed the aisle” in some sort of liberal bi-partisan schmuck-cake.
Note: Nobody bothers to defend Newt Gingrich. Which tells you everything about his chances in 2012.
memomachine on January 14, 2010 at 11:57 PM
What have I said that makes you say I don’t like her as a person. I like the Mailman but that doesn’t mean I think he should be president.
Bradky on January 14, 2010 at 11:57 PM
“Cut taxes”. “Pro-growth policies”. “Get the hell out of the way”. I’m tired to death of “original inventive policy positions” like cap-and-tax and ObamaCare. And if it’s not Palin to implement those proven policies, another candidate will do.
Morons like you just keep thinking that you can grow an economy using your messiah’s magic pixie dust.
ddrintn on January 14, 2010 at 11:58 PM
No. Credit where credit’s due. They were criticisms. He displayed a surprising level of independent thought in that post.
Do it more often ddrintn. You come off as a defensive little gnat a great deal of the time.
crr6 on January 14, 2010 at 11:59 PM
Attention. Attention.
Contrary to the 2,147 previous posts that crr6 has made regarding his hatred of Sarah Palin, I think it needs to be officially said:
Crr6 will not support Sarah Palin for higher office.
Again:
Crr6 WILL NOT support Sarah Palin for higher office.
That is all.
portlandon on January 14, 2010 at 11:59 PM
Oh, you mean “She’s stooooopid!!!” OK, there ya go.
ddrintn on January 14, 2010 at 11:59 PM
Not quite as often as you come off as a snot-nosed poseur.
ddrintn on January 15, 2010 at 12:00 AM
Or it could be that the people who like Gingrich and hope that he might run are not afraid of how he would do in the primaries. Nor are they saying they won’t vote for the GOP candidate if Newt is not the one.
Some might call the different reactions a matter of maturity.
Bradky on January 15, 2010 at 12:01 AM
500 Billion for a gas pipeline, anyone?
AshleyTKing on January 14, 2010 at 11:54 PM
First off its $500 million not billion. your wrong by a couple factors there.
and here is what is called a link to the facts of the matter:
http://www.gov.alaska.gov/agia/
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF AGIA
March 5, 2007
PURPOSE: To encourage expedited development of Alaska’s gas resources by offering incentives to companies that produce the state’s gas resources and companies that can build a pipeline.
INCENTIVES FOR PIPELINE CONSTRUCTION: The state offers to match up to $500 million of the costs that the licensee will incur to obtain a certificate from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission or Regulatory Commission of Alaska. The state will appoint a state pipeline coordinator who will be empowered to coordinate amongst the state regulatory agencies with permitting responsibilities. The state will develop its qualified labor force to support project construction and operations.
INCENTIVES FOR GAS COMMITMENT: The state will adopt regulations to provide predictability in the determination of royalty value and its exercise of its right to take its royalty share in kind as gas or in value as money. The state also offers a production tax exemption for gas committed to the pipeline equal to the difference between the taxpayer’s tax obligation defined in the tax law at “open season” (i.e., on the day the first solicitation of gas commitments ends), and any higher obligation that becomes effective for ten years after pipeline start-up.
LICENSE REQUIREMENTS: In order for applications to be evaluated, they must commit to tthe sixteen requirements in AGIA; including, in particular:
1. a commitment to solicit firm commitments to ship gas on the pipeline within 3 years of getting the license (the open season),
2. a firm date by which the applicant will apply to Federal Energy Regulatory Commission or Regulatory Commission of Alaska for a certificate authorizing the pipeline
3. a commitment to certain financial provisions that will keep tariff rates low
4. a commitment to solicit demand for pipeline expansion at least every two years, to expand when there is sufficient need, and to collect the cost of any expansions through “rolled-in” rates that pass expansion costs onto all shippers so long as rates do not increase more than a fixed amount above initial rates,
5. a description of how cost overrun risks will be managed
6. a commitment to have at least five delivery points in Alaska
7. a commitment to hire qualified Alaskans for construction and operation of the gas pipeline
APPLICATION REVIEW CRITERIA: The Commissioners evaluate the applications under the seven criteria in AGIA:
1. proposedproject timeline
2. proposed method to manage cost overruns
3. proposed tariff rate structure
4. the ability of the project design to accommodate expansion
5. how much of the state matching fund will be used and the timing of the state’s payments
6. whether the project is feasible
7. the applicant’s ability to perform
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF AGIA
March 5, 2007
PROJECT PROCESS: The project begins when the Commissioners issue a request for applications no more than three months after AGIA passes. The application deadline will be established by the Commissioners in the notice. The Commissioners will publicly release complete applications and take comments for 60 days. Applicants can apply to protect proprietary information or trade secrets included in their applications. The Commissioners forward a written decision recommending award. The legislature will then have 30 days after that notice to disapprove the Commissioners’ proposed action.
After a license is awarded, the licensee must complete an application to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission or Regulatory Commission of Alaska. The licensee must sanction the project within a year of receiving a certificate from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission if it has adequate financing. If necessary, the licensee has an additional four years to obtain financing or transfer the certificate, and all associated work product, to another licensee designated by the state.
If the project becomes uneconomic after the license is awarded, AGIA describes a process for relinquishing the license that will enable the state to recover the benefit of its investment in the project by issuing another licensee. To encourage the licensee to commit to spend funds building the pipeline, the state agrees that if it provides financial benefits to another group to encourage the construction of a competing pipeline project after the license is issued, the licensee is entitled to recover three times the amount it spent on the project from the state.
unseen on January 15, 2010 at 12:02 AM
Wasn’t Newt a quitter too, though?
ddrintn on January 15, 2010 at 12:02 AM
Your ability to discuss things in an adult manner is seriously limited.
Bradky on January 15, 2010 at 12:03 AM
Not as limited as your ability to distinguish “criticism” from “shop-worn ad hominem”.
ddrintn on January 15, 2010 at 12:04 AM
What have I said that makes you say I don’t like her as a person. I like the Mailman but that doesn’t mean I think he should be president.
Bradky on January 14, 2010 at 11:57 PM
portlandon on January 15, 2010 at 12:04 AM
Its her abortion viewpoint and subsequent birth of Trig. If she was pro-choice or aborted him, she would not be this beloved. I understand it because even the most pro-life spokespeople would abort kids with Downs Syndrome. But that doesn’t make her a great Republican candidate, just a great person.
Speedwagon82 on January 15, 2010 at 12:04 AM
2007 Murkowski’s last budget: 7.3 billion.
2009 Palin’s last budget: 10.1 billion.
AshleyTKing on January 14, 2010 at 11:53 PM
hey let’s just make numbers up….and call it a recap even when you have been shown you are incorrect keep on using the bogus numbers…because you know it makes your point so much better.
and let’s also leave out the fact that in 2008 AK had record revs from oil prices above $100/bl and how most progressives would have spent all of it and grew the budget instead of cutting it.
unseen on January 15, 2010 at 12:06 AM
Hmm after 20 years of experience and delivering the house to the GOP after forty years in the wildnerness he quit.
Ten times the experience of Palin and accomplishments far more weighty than what she accomplished in her half term.
So which quitter is more qualified?
Bradky on January 15, 2010 at 12:06 AM
The fact that you respond to every insult with an identical “not as…” retort is pretty lame. Yet hilarious.
*waits for the inevitable “not as lame as your…” rejoinder”*
crr6 on January 15, 2010 at 12:06 AM
Simplistic. It’s great that she has principles and stands by them, but I don’t vote only on a “pro-choice/pro-life” basis.
ddrintn on January 15, 2010 at 12:07 AM
Is the school library still open this late?
ddrintn on January 15, 2010 at 12:08 AM
But that doesn’t make her a great Republican candidate, just a great person.
Speedwagon82 on January 15, 2010 at 12:04 AM
i don’t know it might be a good idea to have a great person in that chair once again its been decades since the last great person sat in it.
unseen on January 15, 2010 at 12:08 AM
Ops, I meant 500 million. Principle of government trying to pick winners: still there.
Link for budgets is easy, it’s: http://gov.state.ak.us/omb/
pick budget archives, then executive summary, then take out Permanent Fund Dividends for a total.
AshleyTKing on January 15, 2010 at 12:09 AM
But he quit nevertheless. So it might not be a wise plan of attack to go after Palin on that basis. At least she quit an executive position.
ddrintn on January 15, 2010 at 12:09 AM
You know so little. If she makes it as the nominee for the GOP I would support her. Unlike the many posters here who say “No Sarah no vote for the GOP”
Bradky on January 15, 2010 at 12:10 AM
I’ve never said that. I’d support Newt, or Romney, just about anyone but Huckabee. But then I don’t haunt Romney or Pawlenty threads to get a little sliming in, either.
ddrintn on January 15, 2010 at 12:11 AM
I’d love to see the two of them debate. I think it might be rather heartbreaking for you and her loyalists. He can articulate the issue, break it into components and offer detailed solutions. To date Palin has never done that. Just tired one liners we’ve heard before.
Bradky on January 15, 2010 at 12:12 AM
Not as late as your…ahhhh what’s the point?
crr6 on January 15, 2010 at 12:14 AM
Yeah, he really convinced me that Scozzafava was da grrrreatest. The mighty power of his logic shone brightly on that occasion.
ddrintn on January 15, 2010 at 12:14 AM
Awwwww…well maybe you can get that poseur brain cell to come up with something.
ddrintn on January 15, 2010 at 12:15 AM
Time for me to get some sleep. One thing you should keep in mind – I am not emotionally attached to any politician.
You most definitely come across as emotionally attached to the idea of a Palin candidacy. If she had actually declared herself as a candidate and we were in 2012 I could understand the enthusiasm and attachment. But two years out and she has not even declared but many of the more hard core Palinites act as if the world will stop if she doesn’t become president.
Bradky on January 15, 2010 at 12:17 AM
I’m not as emotionally attached to a Palin candidacy as much as the visceral disgust of some at the very thought of it. Personally, I don’t think she’ll run.
ddrintn on January 15, 2010 at 12:22 AM
I’ll believe that if it happens Bradky. You show a distinct trait that most Palintrolls do. However I am willing to give you the benefit of the doubt.
I to am willing to support other candidates if they were to win the RNC nomination. My dream ticket of Palin/Romney would be great. To me, it reflective of the Reagan/Bush ticket of ’80. It united the heartland & the Elite sided of the Republican party.
This will be settled in the primaries of ’12. Until than, the voyeurism by the media of Sarah Palin will be both a blessing and a curse.
The other candidates are hiding out, while Palin takes the flack. By ’12, Palin might just be the martyr that allowed another great candidate to make it through to destroy Obama.
Only time will tell.
portlandon on January 15, 2010 at 12:26 AM
Litmus test?
darii on January 15, 2010 at 12:32 AM
I’d like to see her get some decent competition, just to watch her slice and dice.
But if you think she won’t absolutely destroy Obama in a debate, well then you are just as dumb as I think you are.
Go back and look at her debates back in 2006 for Governor.
She took on the sitting Governor (who had been a Senator) as well as one more tough opponent for the GOP nomination. She destroyed them completely in the debates. Won the primary in a landslide.
Sarah then took on a very popular former democrat Governor, she destroyed him in the debates as well. Never broke a sweat! Won by a landslide.
These were three hard core highly experienced politicians from a state that rivaled Chicago in dirty, machine politics, and corruption.
Now yeah, Obama is corrupt, but hard core politician he ain’t. Hell, she’s been beating this guy with a friggin’ laptop and a Facebook page! You think she won’t destroy him?
They’ll probably have to stop the debates out of mercy, for Obama, just throw in the towel!
gary4205 on January 15, 2010 at 12:36 AM
CUDA
Metro on January 15, 2010 at 1:11 AM
Actually, Palin is just collateral damage for him. His attacks are actually against the Tea Party movement people. In particular, giving credibility to accusations of wrongdoing at TPM. An attack strategy of innuendo and slander based on no evidence other than the lack of evidence. That is what is pissing me off on this whole issue. He is trying to make it into a Palin issue, she drives ratings, and thus must be the top spot on the agenda, even when the real target ends up being the Tea Party group she is going to be talking at. The reason for the attacks is because she dissed CPAC, apparently some arm of the establishment that he is now a part of.
They are upset that they are not part of the movement. From Dan Riehl “And that grassroots is who people like Eric Erickson, Mellissa Clouthier and me are. So, the Palin fanatics can take their DC insider crap and shove it right back up where it came from in the first place. I couldn’t care less in that regard.” Apparently they are establishment grassroots, anyone got some AstroTurf? Let the turf wars continue.
astonerii on January 15, 2010 at 1:17 AM
Sarah Palin will need to articulate herself better if she wants to be taken seriously. She occasionally becomes incoherent. At least with Bush you knew what he was trying to say. With SP, there’s a sense of where she’s coming from, but she has not demonstrated a firm grasp of national issues.
Fox News is a good move for her. She’s oh so sharp. She’ll get better, oh so much better. 2020.
exdeadhead on January 15, 2010 at 2:12 AM
I would expect Red State to issue just this sort of thing. They are sort of the online vanguard of the Republican establishment. Palin is about a rebirth and a kicking of the party establishments to the curb. Palin represents a threat to Red State’s very reason for existence.
So I pretty much see this as unsurprising … even expected.
crosspatch on January 15, 2010 at 2:15 AM
In more important news:Poll shocker: Scott Brown surges ahead in Senate racehttp://news.bostonherald.com/news/politics/view.bg?articleid=1225720&srvc=home&position=ratedAlso, this is a bad ass video that needs to go viral! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nEoW-P81-0
gary4205 on January 15, 2010 at 2:16 AM
Dumbest thing written here yet.
She articulates fine. You ever think the reason you don’t get it is you?
gary4205 on January 15, 2010 at 2:20 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 … 4 5 6 7 Next »