Quotes of the day

posted at 10:35 pm on April 29, 2011 by Allahpundit

“A growing number of Democrats are threatening to defy the White House over the national debt, joining Republican calls for deficit cuts as a requirement for consenting to lift the country’s borrowing limit…

“The push-back has come in recent days from Sens. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.), chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, and Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), a freshman who is running for reelection next year. Sen. Mark Pryor (D-Ark.) told constituents during the Easter recess that he would not vote to lift the debt limit without a ‘real and meaningful commitment to debt reduction.’…

“‘As catastrophic as it would be to fail to raise our debt ceiling, it’s even more irresponsible to not take this opportunity to own up to our unsustainable spending path,’ Sen. Mark Udall (Colo.), another Democrat challenging the White House, said in a statement his office released this week. ‘If we don’t take action to reduce our deficit spending, Congress will be facing this same debt ceiling vote in the near term – still with no end to our deficits in sight.’”

***
“It’s a message that’s catching on: More and more Republicans are calling for hard caps on spending and moderate Democrats — desperate for a palatable way to vote to increase the debt limit — are starting to buck White House officials who are lobbying Democratic senators to oppose Corker’s bill…

“Like many Republicans, Corker realizes the vote to increase the debt ceiling will come under fire from the tea party wing – even if they win serious concessions from Democrats. And Corker is already receiving some political blowback for his effort to lure Democrats — some Republican officials worry he’s giving bipartisan cover to vulnerable incumbents, like Claire McCaskill of Missouri and Joe Manchin of West Virginia…

“The Corker plan would put in place a 10-year path to cap federal expenditures, bringing down spending to 20.6 percentage of the country’s economic output. If Congress failed to meet the annual cap, the White House’s Office of Management and Budget would make cuts throughout the federal budget – and only a two-thirds vote of Congress could override its decisions. Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid – the expensive entitlement programs Democrats have vowed to protect – would be on the chopping block, too. Corker projects that the plan would save the country $7.6 trillion.”

***
Via Reason TV.

***
“‘Hells no. I would not vote to increase that debt ceiling,’ she said during an interview on Fox News, where she is a paid contributor…

“‘It turns my stomach to hear this assumption articulated that we have to, despite the fact that we are raking in the federal government $6 billion a day,’ she said. ‘Take that money and service our debt first and pay down some of that debt. Make sure that we are showing the international financial markets and our lenders that we’re serious about getting our debt and our deficit problems under control.’”



Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

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

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4

She doesn’t answer the questions that are asked of her. She goes on
tangents. Not a good interview.

terryannonline on April 30, 2011 at 1:52 AM

To the Palinistas, this is a feature, not a bug. They somehow think her bad interviewing skills wouldn’t be front and center if she did became the candidate. Like she could avoid going on the Sunday shows for 8 months with no bad press.

Speedwagon82 on April 30, 2011 at 9:43 AM

GOP needs someone that will FIGHT for America…..not apologize for it and kowtow to foreign heads of state!!!

I hope she runs or we are just ……….

PappyD61 on April 30, 2011 at 9:43 AM

I hope this post comes back to bite you in the ass. Hard. And if it does, I’ll be right here to remind you how totally and deliciously WRONG you were.

gryphon202 on April 30, 2011 at 9:39 AM

Maybe he should read the SF Chronicle headline comments. Lots of Barry buyer remorse there. In SF??!!

katy the mean old lady on April 30, 2011 at 9:44 AM

IowaWoman on April 30, 2011 at 8:58 AM

My latest hobby horse, and I am beating it like a rented mule, is what would happen if he just put the Gulf back to work? The infrastructure is there and employees ready and willing to go back, it would be almost instant gratification. So why isn’t he doing it? Why does he think he is immune to the high prices at the pump? Curious.

Cindy Munford on April 30, 2011 at 9:46 AM

That’s not going to happen until we get comprehensive tax reform, top to bottom.

What Obama is doing is trying to “community organize” by picking out an enemy for his “community” to target, then only eliminate that industry’s tax incentives, while increasing the government help for the stupid “green energy” crap that never makes a profit.

I think it’s more political than anything.

He has proven that the oil industry in other countries does not bother him, it’s only American oil that bothers him. That may be because American oil companies are typically more favorable to Republican campaigns in their contributions.

Petrobras and Gazprom aren’t hq’d in Houston and donating to Republicans for office.

Tell me I’m wrong.

Brian1972 on April 29, 2011 at 11:32 PM

^This.

In an ideal world there would be no subsidies of any kind to anyone — from the energy companies and their subsidies right on down to the homeowner and their mortgage interest deduction. In an ideal world we’d have one flat tax or fair tax and the 1040 form would be the size of a postcard.

We don’t live in that world. Hopefully someday we will, but for now, so long as subsidies and credits exist, I would prefer to see them utilized wisely. So no corporate welfare for ExxonMobil, but yes to the average enterprising Joe down the street with just some basic equipment and a handful of employees trying to do the hard work of exploration.

NoLeftTurn on April 30, 2011 at 9:48 AM

Why does he think he is immune to the high prices at the pump? Curious.

Cindy Munford on April 30, 2011 at 9:46 AM

He is. We’re picking up the tab for the partier-in-chief.
Until 2012.Then he gets one last freebie Christmas.

katy the mean old lady on April 30, 2011 at 9:50 AM

Cindy Munford on April 30, 2011 at 9:46 AM

Beat that horse. We are all sick of gasoline prices and the outrageous grocery prices associated with them.
I don’t know how single parents can manage to put food on the table and gas up the car.

OmahaConservative on April 30, 2011 at 9:53 AM

So end subsidies and add taxes to the oil companies…..who is going to pay for that?

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2011/04/028887.php

Cindy Munford on April 30, 2011 at 9:55 AM

Like she could avoid going on the Sunday shows for 8 months with no bad press.

Speedwagon82 on April 30, 2011 at 9:43 AM

And she would be on Sunday shows because………? Maybe as part of a panel but why would a pundit be a Sunday guest?

Cindy Munford on April 30, 2011 at 9:58 AM

To the Palinistas, this is a feature, not a bug. They somehow think her bad interviewing skills wouldn’t be front and center if she did became the candidate. Like she could avoid going on the Sunday shows for 8 months with no bad press.

Speedwagon82 on April 30, 2011 at 9:43 AM

And to the Palin detractors, when they see a chopped-up 15 minutes of a 120 minute interview, they automatically believe the picture that the media paints for them. You worthless worms deserve another four years of Obama.

gryphon202 on April 30, 2011 at 10:01 AM

Cindy Munford on April 30, 2011 at 9:46 AM

Isn’t there a brand new refinery in the Dakotas just waiting to start refining?
Drill, baby drill!

OmahaConservative on April 30, 2011 at 10:03 AM

Subsidies via the tax code are a form of regulation. This is the government rewarding certain behaviors, not the marketplace, thus when government decides it will subsidize something because it is ‘good’ (and I don’t care if it is a mortgage deduction or oil exploration write-off) it then is seeking to encourage those things via the tax code. The more you do of these activities, the larger the write-off can be, thus large companies doing the same proportion of activity get a larger write-off as they are doing more of it in comparison to a smaller company.

Regulations that are placed across an entire market of large and small players hit the small players harder as the larger ones have size to help absorb the cost of them. Between the negative regulations and the positive regulations, a system of rewards falling disproportionately to larger companies over smaller ones, and costs being distributed to a lower end-sales cost for large companies versus small ones means that large companies do disproportionately better than small ones with any sort of regulatory environment.

Any regulations added in to big businesses only then puts a burden of barrier to entry to becoming a big business by putting in a cost that a small business must pay to grow into a large one. Asking big businesses to ‘carry the burden’ means that they are also protected by regulation from getting more competitors over time. Again big business is helped by regulations from government, and small businesses are limited.

With interference in the marketplace it is big businesses that can wield more money, per business, to get heard in government. Smaller businesses, as a whole in any area, will be a larger part of the economic activity, but their distributed overhead means that they have less money per business to spend on lobbying. The result is that big businesses work with government on regulations that make it more difficult for small businesses to compete with them.

Ending the regulatory State is the goal: government help via taxes and regulations is not the answer. Every Leftist who says they hate big business then have to be asked whey they support a type of government that yields great benefits for big businesses, reduces the capacity of small businesses and, in general, makes the economy less efficient and more wasteful as big businesses cannot be as nimble or cost effective as small ones are without the protection of the regulatory State. Regulations protect big business, it doesn’t matter if it is in the tax code, EPA, FTC, FDA… you name it, and big businesses approve of it as it gives them the ability to tilt the market to their interests and away from an open competition one that would have them compete evenly with smaller businesses. By limiting the size, growth, income, and capping the rate of expansion for small businesses the economy becomes brittle and is unable to take shocks from either natural disasters or from such things as new technology.

IBM went from acting like a Nation during the mainframe era to having to shed and reform itself hard against new competition from Microsoft, the clone makers, and Apple. Now regulations make it hard to start up such companies… to the benefit of Microsoft, IBM and Apple…

Big businesses do not deserve our protection.

Small businesses deserve an even playing field not tilted against them.

If you want a better Nation, get the government out of the carrot and stick business. The best we can ever expect is law drawn up for all citizens, applied without favor nor fervor, administered equally without regard to any form of race, color, religious affiliation or size. That means clearly defining what wrong doing is, then defining the punishment and saying that whoever does wrong gets the punishment. That is a rain of happiness upon free people…. carrots and sticks are reserved for animals and I do not like being seen nor treated as an animal by my government.

ajacksonian on April 30, 2011 at 10:04 AM

Like she could avoid going on the Sunday shows for 8 months with no bad press.

Speedwagon82 on April 30, 2011 at 9:43 AM

Right. As if she’s ever going to get good press (or favorable opinions from the anal-retentive cannibals in the GOP). If she gives a strong interview, it’s “well she said nothing new here”. If she splits an infinitive or leaves a participle dangling it’s “Oh my God! The woman can NOT speak! How can you Palinistas take her seriously??!!??”

pseudoforce on April 30, 2011 at 10:04 AM

Yeah, I like her pro-Israel stance and all— just seems kind of odd for a strong Christian to wear the Jewish religious symbol instead of a cross.

OmahaConservative on April 30, 2011 at 9:42 AM

She’s been wearing it for a few weeks, and I pointed out that while it looks lovely on her, Magen Davids should only be worn by JEWS. Even though I was born Jewish-I did leave the faith…so I don’t get to wear one anymore. A Chai is lovely-it means ‘life’- and would be totally appropriate for Gov. Palin to wear.

annoyinglittletwerp on April 30, 2011 at 10:07 AM

Isn’t there a brand new refinery in the Dakotas just waiting to start refining?
Drill, baby drill!

OmahaConservative on April 30, 2011 at 10:03 AM

South Dakota. I believe it’s still in the permitting process down in Union County. Some of the local residents threw a holy sh!tfit at first, but it seems to have died down after they realized how much money and how many jobs it would bring.

gryphon202 on April 30, 2011 at 10:08 AM

OmahaConservative on April 30, 2011 at 10:03 AM

Okay…just read an article from last september. Between pressure from environmentalists and economic malaise, it looks like the refinery won’t get built.

gryphon202 on April 30, 2011 at 10:10 AM

OmahaConservative on April 30, 2011 at 10:03 AM

I believe there is a state that is enjoying the luxury of an oil profit cushion to our current fiscal situation. I’m not sure which one it is. I hope they are taking advantage of the prices and giving themselves a good rainy day fund. Wouldn’t you think it might be used as an example? If only fossil fuels weren’t evil.

Cindy Munford on April 30, 2011 at 10:11 AM

gryphon202 on April 30, 2011 at 10:08 AM

Git ‘er up and running ASAP and let’s start drilling for all that oil under us.
Screw ethanol and let’s eat the corn…

OmahaConservative on April 30, 2011 at 10:12 AM

She’s been wearing it for a few weeks, and I pointed out that while it looks lovely on her, Magen Davids should only be worn by JEWS. Even though I was born Jewish-I did leave the faith…so I don’t get to wear one anymore. A Chai is lovely-it means ‘life’- and would be totally appropriate for Gov. Palin to wear.

annoyinglittletwerp on April 30, 2011 at 10:07 AM

While I respect your opinion on the matter, I feel obligated (as a lifelong gentile) to point out that it is not universally held.

gryphon202 on April 30, 2011 at 10:13 AM

Git ‘er up and running ASAP and let’s start drilling for all that oil under us.
Screw ethanol and let’s eat the corn…

OmahaConservative on April 30, 2011 at 10:12 AM

Eh, you do realize that the Hyperion refinery would probably refine crude from Canadian tar sands, right? I’m not against that, but it has little to do with drilling for domestic reserves, which I think should also be done.

gryphon202 on April 30, 2011 at 10:14 AM

Speedwagon82 on April 30, 2011 at 9:43 AM

You see, the carnivorous cannibalistic sheep that make up so much of the GOP are dying for Palin to “go on the Sunday shows” in the fervent hope that she is demolished. If she isn’t demolished, then their Narrative will be that Palin said nothing new, blahblahblah.

pseudoforce on April 30, 2011 at 10:14 AM

A Chai is lovely-it means ‘life’- and would be totally appropriate for Gov. Palin to wear.

annoyinglittletwerp on April 30, 2011 at 10:07 AM

This?

OmahaConservative on April 30, 2011 at 10:17 AM

You should take this psychic thing on the road,

Cindy Munford on April 30, 2011 at 9:41 AM

Psychic? No, not at all. I have more confidence in here intellect than do those who think that she may run. I know that she knows that she would only damage her brand needlessly by running and I credit her with having the good sense not to.

MJBrutus on April 30, 2011 at 10:18 AM

This?

OmahaConservative on April 30, 2011 at 10:17 AM

That’s it. “Chai” is actually the Hebrew word for “living,” and is the root of the related work “Chaim,” which is a fairly common Jewish male name, and means “life.”

O/T: Chaim Witz was the given name of the Israeli gentleman who would grow up to sport the demon makeup in KISS, Gene Simmons.

gryphon202 on April 30, 2011 at 10:20 AM

gryphon202 on April 30, 2011 at 10:14 AM

Agreed.
.
.
I’m pretty annoyed that Sen. Judas Nelson (D) NE put me on his eUpdate just because I sent scathing emails to him denouncing his votes.
.
.
Sen. Ma’am (D-Commie)CA did the same to me when I was a CA voter.

OmahaConservative on April 30, 2011 at 10:21 AM

here her intellect

fixed

MJBrutus on April 30, 2011 at 10:21 AM

I know that she knows that she would only damage her brand needlessly by running and I credit her with having the good sense not to.

MJBrutus on April 30, 2011 at 10:18 AM

Your concern is noted.

gryphon202 on April 30, 2011 at 10:21 AM

I know that she knows that she would only damage her brand needlessly by running and I credit her with having the good sense not to.

MJBrutus on April 30, 2011 at 10:18 AM

She hasn’t said so definitively. But yet Pawlenty’s going to win it all anyway, so why bother. LOL

pseudoforce on April 30, 2011 at 10:28 AM

A message to those who think that Sarah Palin would be “damaging her brand” by running for president, or that somehow, as Andrew Breitbart says, the presidency would be “beneath her:”

You ought to be glad that we have a president willing to sacrifice, for a change. She’d be the first president since Ike, in my estimation, to take a step down by running. To me, that’s a feature, not a bug.

gryphon202 on April 30, 2011 at 10:28 AM

Psychic? No, not at all. I have more confidence in here intellect than do those who think that she may run. I know that she knows that she would only damage her brand needlessly by running and I credit her with having the good sense not to.

MJBrutus on April 30, 2011 at 10:18 AM

That’s the lamest attempt at spin I’ve seen posted here….LOL

idesign on April 30, 2011 at 10:29 AM

gryphon202 on April 30, 2011 at 10:28 AM

Are you saying that you think that she is stupid enough to get in the race? And you call me a “hater,” sheesh.

MJBrutus on April 30, 2011 at 10:34 AM

Are you saying that you think that she is stupid enough to get in the race? And you call me a “hater,” sheesh.

MJBrutus on April 30, 2011 at 10:34 AM

I’m saying that I don’t think getting into the race would be stupid for her. And if that makes me stupid, then so be it. I’m a little tired of watching men and women with ambition roll over the constitution without any regard whatsoever for me or my rights.

That, and I think you are at best a disingenuous troll, at worst a gutless spineless worm.

gryphon202 on April 30, 2011 at 10:36 AM

MJBrutus on April 30, 2011 at 10:18 AM

Her brand? This idea of pundit kingmakers is overwrought. Even Rush isn’t a kingmaker and he is very politically savvy. Political being the operative word. I don’t want or need another politician. I need a servant to the nation, someone who doesn’t think all of this is some big f**king game. Please excuse my language but the lack of honor and duty is getting just too depressing.

Cindy Munford on April 30, 2011 at 10:37 AM

Cindy Munford on April 30, 2011 at 9:46 AM

Cindy, I am very close to some folks who do oil exploration in the Gulf. They all tell me, in hushed tones, that there is a SHOCKING amount of oil in the Gulf – much more than anyone realizes.

The reason no one’s talking about it is because every oil company wants an “edge” on which leases to go after if, and when, the government ever starts opening up those areas.

The oil is there – enough to last us for decades until we get alternate energy technologies up to speed. The people of the Gulf Coast are willing to get it – to expand drilling and refining – we’re willing to do this – even if California isn’t.

I’ll tell you another thing I’m hearing – Chevron is about to abandon California completely because they are tired of the backstabbing from the local and state governments.

HondaV65 on April 30, 2011 at 10:38 AM

Are you saying that you think that she is stupid enough to get in the race? And you call me a “hater,” sheesh.

MJBrutus on April 30, 2011 at 10:34 AM

You’re fear sustains me…..

idesign on April 30, 2011 at 10:39 AM

I know that she knows that she would only damage her brand needlessly by running and I credit her with having the good sense not to.

MJBrutus on April 30, 2011 at 10:18 AM

Really? I see it this way:

If she runs, gets the nomination, and beats Øbama, she is the new Reagan.

If she runs, gets the nomination, and loses to Øbama, she is the first woman to run for president and is the new Barry Goldwater in conservatives’ eyes.

If she runs but fails to get the nomination, she can be a kingmaker and can run again in 2016 or 2020, making her Ronald Reagan in 1976.

If she does not run at all, she is the new Geraldine Ferraro and can expect the same spectacular level of influence over Republicans that Ferraro has had on the Democratic party (i.e. None).

Given those choices, I say she’d be a fool not to run.

Kafir on April 30, 2011 at 10:39 AM

annoyinglittletwerp on April 30, 2011 at 10:07 AM OmahaConservative on April 30, 2011 at 10:21 AM

Is is possible that the necklace was a gift from her recent trip of Israel and she is showing the giver, the only way she can, how much she values it? Imagine how proud they must be to see her wearing it for the world to see.

Cindy Munford on April 30, 2011 at 10:40 AM

Are you saying that you think that she is stupid enough to get in the race? And you call me a “hater,” sheesh.

MJBrutus on April 30, 2011 at 10:34 AM

You’re fear sustains me…..

idesign on April 30, 2011 at 10:39 AM

And when that day of reckoning is upon you, I shall drink of your sweet tears like a roaring spring of youth.

gryphon202 on April 30, 2011 at 10:40 AM

Are you saying that you think that she is stupid enough to get in the race? And you call me a “hater,” sheesh.

MJBrutus on April 30, 2011 at 10:34 AM

Just like GW was stupid enough to resign instead of letting the military crown him king. What a f*king retard.

Pattosensei on April 30, 2011 at 10:40 AM

Cindy Munford on April 30, 2011 at 10:37 AM

No sweat on your choice of language :-) The fact is that you are invariably civil and I respect your opinions even when I disagree with them.

I don’t see her as “kingmaker” at all. I do see her as a personality/celebrity much I see Rush or Ann Coulter. She can can make a darned good living by throwing bombs from the sidelines without the responsibility of governing or the slings and arrows of campaigning. She has a large and loyal fan base among the converted, so its a good gig.

MJBrutus on April 30, 2011 at 10:42 AM

This?

OmahaConservative on April 30, 2011 at 10:17 AM

Looks kinda like a polar bear

Fallon on April 30, 2011 at 10:43 AM

Are you saying that you think that she is stupid enough to get in the race? And you call me a “hater,” sheesh.

MJBrutus on April 30, 2011 at 10:34 AM

I think your thought processes are skewed. Firstly, she is not stupid and has proven that consistently. Second, rather than thinking her to be foolish for considering a run, I think she is smart enough to recognize that her perceived power and influence is connected directly to whether or not she’s running.

She has nothing to lose by running. If she runs and loses, she will have still built up more supporters during her campaign and will have been able to forward the agenda she wants for America. Then she’d push her supporters to back the one closest to her ideals.

But not running, I think, would equate to her as letting the Lame Stream Media and the establishment GOPers get the best of her. I think she’d rather eat broken glass than retreat and walk away. It’s just not in her nature.

powerpro on April 30, 2011 at 10:43 AM

Or, a Grizzly…

Fallon on April 30, 2011 at 10:43 AM

Cindy Munford on April 30, 2011 at 10:40 AM

I suppose that could make some sense as to why she is wearing it.

OmahaConservative on April 30, 2011 at 10:44 AM

I know that she knows that she would only damage her brand needlessly by running and I credit her with having the good sense not to.

MJBrutus on April 30, 2011 at 10:18 AM

Kind of like how you damage your brand needlessly by posting?

bw222 on April 30, 2011 at 10:46 AM

Or, a Grizzly…

Fallon on April 30, 2011 at 10:43 AM

Kewl…

OmahaConservative on April 30, 2011 at 10:47 AM

bw222 on April 30, 2011 at 10:46 AM

I have a brand? Who knew :-)

MJBrutus on April 30, 2011 at 10:47 AM

HondaV65 on April 30, 2011 at 10:38 AM

Doesn’t The Won strike you as the kind of person who would cede the opportunity of energy independence so that the Cubans, through China, could share the wealth?

Cindy Munford on April 30, 2011 at 10:48 AM

She’s been wearing it for a few weeks, and I pointed out that while it looks lovely on her, Magen Davids should only be worn by JEWS. Even though I was born Jewish-I did leave the faith…so I don’t get to wear one anymore. A Chai is lovely-it means ‘life’- and would be totally appropriate for Gov. Palin to wear.

annoyinglittletwerp on April 30, 2011 at 10:07 AM

When an Israeli high government official presents one to you as a gift…that’s a better endorsement of wearing it than that of an American ex-Hebrew telling you not to. If it wasn’t meant to be worn, I’m sure they could have found one without a pin to give to her.

James on April 30, 2011 at 10:49 AM

She has a large and loyal fan base among the converted, so its a good gig.

MJBrutus on April 30, 2011 at 10:42 AM

You assume that I care if she damages “her brand” in ways that you can’t even explain to me. You assume that I care what the results of Sarah Palin’s campaign would be for Sarah Palin. You are sadly mistaken. Since I’ve apparently never said it on a thread in which you participated (after all, how could you be so obtuse as to ignore it if I had), I’ll say it here again:

I believe that Sarah Palin is the best for the job based on the principles which she has demonstrated throughout her almost 20 years in various levels of Alaskan state government. No one has more credibility than she does as an energy advocate and as a pro-lifer. No one can possibly have more credibility than she does as an energy advocate and as a pro-lifer.

I’m not so blind as think that couldn’t possibly change. But the only person in the world that could change my opinion of Sarah Palin at this point, for better or worse, is Sarah Louise Heath-Palin. The whole “damaging her brand” meme is awfully weak tea compared to everything she has managed to accomplish, and unlike The Donald, she managed to do it all without being mercenary.

So you can take your “branding” meme and shove it firmly up your anal crevasse, douchebag. I’ve had it up to about here with all your posturing.

gryphon202 on April 30, 2011 at 10:50 AM

MJBrutus on April 30, 2011 at 10:42 AM

Off of a failed vice presidential run? I don’t see that having legs but for so long.

Cindy Munford on April 30, 2011 at 10:51 AM

Or a chain, for that matter.

James on April 30, 2011 at 10:51 AM

James on April 30, 2011 at 10:49 AM

I have to agree. I’m an atheist but I still identify with my Jewish heritage. I see no problem with a goy expressing respect or solidarity with the Jewish people by wearing one. In fact, I think it’s rather nice of her to do so.

MJBrutus on April 30, 2011 at 10:53 AM

She doesn’t answer the questions that are asked of her. She goes on
tangents. Not a good interview.

terryannonline on April 30, 2011 at 1:52 AM

She didn’t answer the questions about the 2012 folks and who really would.

The issue questions she gave very good answers.

We are not fooled by the new meme being that she doesn’t answer the questions.

She gave better answers than the crew that was just in NH. All they needed was one person to show-up there because they all said the samething over and over. What a freckin joke on display except for Cain.

oldyeller on April 30, 2011 at 10:53 AM

When an Israeli high government official presents one to you as a gift…that’s a better endorsement of wearing it than that of an American ex-Hebrew telling you not to. If it wasn’t meant to be worn, I’m sure they could have found one without a pin to give to her.

James on April 30, 2011 at 10:49 AM

As I alluded to in an earlier post, opinions vary in the Jewish community as to the appropriateness of displaying the Star. Some believe it should only be displayed by ethnic Jews, regardless of their respective religious persuasion. Others believe it should only be worn by practicing Jews, regardless of ethnic background. It seems that most Israeli Jews consider it an honor when a Star of David pendant is displayed after being given as a gift.

The point in all this is simply that whether Sarah Palin is being proper or not, in this particular instance, probably depends on who you ask.

gryphon202 on April 30, 2011 at 10:58 AM

You assume that I care if she damages “her brand”

gryphon202 on April 30, 2011 at 10:50 AM

Just how irrational are you prepared to get? No really. I know that it’s all about you and the universe is here to cater to your petty wants and all, but really, where does this narcissism end? Nobody is “assuming” a thing about you or your impotent desires, needs or demands. SP isn’t going to decide to give up her good life for herself and her family in a futile and brutal political contest just to please you. But keep on dreaming those impossible dreams if that floats your boat.

MJBrutus on April 30, 2011 at 11:00 AM

MJBrutus on April 30, 2011 at 10:42 AM

I appreciate you letting me off on the Trump mouth but there is no excuse. It’s hard when you don’t see anyone out there to save the day and that the person who’s beliefs are most closely aligned with your own is the object of a successful mission to destroy. To watch the pundits, especially the ones you admire, talk about winners and loser parties and individuals, when in fact those very subjects are almost completely insulated from their own shenanigans is hard to take.

Cindy Munford on April 30, 2011 at 11:00 AM

But keep on dreaming those impossible dreams if that floats your boat.

MJBrutus on April 30, 2011 at 11:00 AM

What about “I believe she best represents my beliefs” is an impossible dream? Why point out that she’s damaging her brand if you don’t think that would discourage people from voting for her? And if caring about my freedom is “irrational,” then you deserve another four years of Obama, a$$hole.

gryphon202 on April 30, 2011 at 11:03 AM

Cindy Munford on April 30, 2011 at 11:00 AM

You let pundits bother you? You honor them far above their station. Not quite but almost as bad as allowing obnoxious and anonymous H/A posters such as myself affect you.

Here’s the deal, pundits get paid to say things that people find interesting. Not wise, perceptive or true unless by some accident those qualities coincide with being interesting. Successful ones like Rush, Ann, Beck and yes Palin say things that people find interesting and that’s why they’re successful. What they say may or not have any other virtues, but that is beside the point. It’s nice when they do, but it’s not what their job is about.

MJBrutus on April 30, 2011 at 11:10 AM

MJBrutus on April 30, 2011 at 11:10 AM

Rush and Coulter have no inclination to run for higher office. Palin does. Rush and Coulter have never served in elected office of any kind. Palin has. Can you please stop lumping Sarah Palin in with all the paper-pushing opinionators, please?

gryphon202 on April 30, 2011 at 11:12 AM

In an ideal world there would be no subsidies of any kind to anyone — from the energy companies and their subsidies right on down to the homeowner and their mortgage interest deduction. In an ideal world we’d have one flat tax or fair tax and the 1040 form would be the size of a postcard.

We don’t live in that world. Hopefully someday we will, but for now, so long as subsidies and credits exist, I would prefer to see them utilized wisely. So no corporate welfare for ExxonMobil, but yes to the average enterprising Joe down the street with just some basic equipment and a handful of employees trying to do the hard work of exploration.

NoLeftTurn on April 30, 2011 at 9:48 AM

In Obamaspeak, any regular deduction allowed by the IRS is ‘spending’, thus also called a subsidy. Little Bammie himself received a big subsidy on his income taxes due to charitable donations.

The progs are purposely destroying the language. I’ve not seen a decent accounting yet of these ‘subsidies’ for ‘oil companies’ as to their true nature, and we sure won’t get one from the progs or this lying jackass of a president.

slickwillie2001 on April 30, 2011 at 11:12 AM

gryphon202 on April 30, 2011 at 11:12 AM

No I won’t. Whatever she was, she is now one of them.

MJBrutus on April 30, 2011 at 11:14 AM

No I won’t. Whatever she was, she is now one of them.

MJBrutus on April 30, 2011 at 11:14 AM

She’s a pundit to be sure, but she’s not just a pundit. To compare her to Rush, God bless him, is to imply that she hasn’t accomplished anything more important than punditry, or that she ever will.

gryphon202 on April 30, 2011 at 11:15 AM

MJBrutus on April 30, 2011 at 11:10 AM

Gov. Palin remaining a pundit is a sad waste of talent and experience. But if that is her choice, so be it. I can’t say that I blame her.

Cindy Munford on April 30, 2011 at 11:18 AM

Gov. Palin remaining a pundit is a sad waste of talent and experience. But if that is her choice, so be it. I can’t say that I blame her.

Cindy Munford on April 30, 2011 at 11:18 AM

Whether she runs or not, with a Republican president she would be a natural for several cabinet positions. DOE would be the obvious, renamed Department of Cheap Energy.

slickwillie2001 on April 30, 2011 at 11:24 AM

slickwillie2001 on April 30, 2011 at 11:24 AM

Whatever her qualifications that is never, ever going to happen. What President is going to want to invite the kind of political (rhymes with wit)-storm that her confirmation hearing would invite?

MJBrutus on April 30, 2011 at 11:33 AM

slickwillie2001 on April 30, 2011 at 11:24 AM

That’s a good thought. Will the Democrats and establishment Republicans allow her to get through the confirmation process?

Cindy Munford on April 30, 2011 at 11:34 AM

She doesn’t answer the questions that are asked of her. She goes on
tangents. Not a good interview.

terryannonline on April 30, 2011 at 1:52 AM

That’s what politicians do – who says they have to answer the dumbass questions the media asks? They can answer
however they want.

By the way, she did answer the questions.

Amjean on April 30, 2011 at 11:59 AM

What Obama considers “subsidies” for oil companies is mainly the expensing of the costs of drilling infrastructure. Drilling for oil has benefited from technological advances, but is still very much a very capital-intensive risk: it costs an awful lot of money to find out if a well is going to be very productive, and much is spent trying. This tax break encourages oil exploration and drilling, since the costs may offset income in the current year instead of having to be “depreciated” over time on tax returns.

Eliminating the break would be just one more way of discouraging drilling for oil and gas. That’s Obama’s goal – he couldn’t care less about deficits, obviously.

It is unfair, though – but the way to address it is to allow ALL companies and individuals to expense their capital outlays in the current year, and carry over any remaining losses to offset future income, too. You want “stimulus” for investment? Look no farther . . .

Adjoran on April 30, 2011 at 12:00 PM

No I won’t. Whatever she was, she is now one of them.

MJBrutus on April 30, 2011 at 11:14 AM

Just how irrational are you prepared to get? No really. I know that it’s all about you and the universe is here to cater to your petty wants and all, but really, where does this narcissism end?

SP isn’t going to transform herself into a full-time conservative pundit like Rush or Ann Coulter just to please you. But keep on dreaming those impossible dreams if that floats your boat.

powerpro on April 30, 2011 at 12:04 PM

Whatever her qualifications that is never, ever going to happen. What President is going to want to invite the kind of political (rhymes with wit)-storm that her confirmation hearing would invite?

MJBrutus on April 30, 2011 at 11:33 AM

Herein lies the reason it is futile to argue with MJB on this. MJB has no interest in principle or desire to see Palin run. He hopes she will quietly disappear and become irrelevant because he’s too afraid of the “shit-storm” that Palin would create. She stirs up the pot too much and would force people to make a solid choice. She is not wishy-washy…she’s dangerous. Politics to MJB is not about running the country, it’s about the political game, avoiding controversy and staying right on that fence. Palin makes that impossible.

Pattosensei on April 30, 2011 at 12:04 PM

That’s what politicians do – who says they have to answer the dumbass questions the media asks? They can answer
however they want.

By the way, she did answer the questions.

Amjean on April 30, 2011 at 11:59 AM

Bret asked her a good question. It wasn’t stupid.

terryannonline on April 30, 2011 at 12:07 PM

Yeah, I like her pro-Israel stance and all— just seems kind of odd for a strong Christian to wear the Jewish religious symbol instead of a cross.

OmahaConservative on April 30, 2011 at 9:42 AM

She is showing her solidarity with Israel as opposed to
our current government and president.

Amjean on April 30, 2011 at 12:09 PM

terryannonline on April 30, 2011 at 12:07 PM

While I am in favor of the federal government getting out of the business of picking winners and losers by ending all subsidies, the question isn’t as black and white as it appears. Obama wants to get rid of oil subsidies, fraud and abuse and redundancy but all of those are just words. To want to know specifics before answering a question is not wrong and it also is the sign of an executive instead of a politician. Something we are sadly short of in D.C..

Cindy Munford on April 30, 2011 at 12:25 PM

powerpro on April 30, 2011 at 12:04 PM

Imitation as flattery. Thank you, thank you very much and welcome to my fan club. I think I’ll post my Paypal address for you and all the others to send me your tips.

MJBrutus on April 30, 2011 at 12:37 PM

Imitation as flattery. Thank you, thank you very much and welcome to my fan club. I think I’ll post my Paypal address for you and all the others to send me your tips.

MJBrutus on April 30, 2011 at 12:37 PM

More like imitation as mockery. Using absurdity to highlight the absurd.

I’m not surprised you misread the context and intent. You seem to miss quite a bit.

powerpro on April 30, 2011 at 12:41 PM

Bret asked her a good question. It wasn’t stupid.

terryannonline on April 30, 2011 at 12:07 PM

And regardless of what you have tried to claim, she gave an excellent answer. (See all the above comments to answer your assertion).

NoNails on April 30, 2011 at 12:43 PM

gryphon202 on April 30, 2011 at 10:58 AM

Exactly. Her star is bigger than the one my late father started wearing when I left the faith.

annoyinglittletwerp on April 30, 2011 at 12:50 PM

Please stop following along with the lies of Obummer King of lies. There are NO subsidies being paid to Oil companies. The present tax code allows for amortization and depletion allowances which is essential for nearly all companies that need to write off massive machinery or depletion of assets over time. THAT is NOT a subsidy. ALL businesses are allowed depreciation amortization and write off’s over time of huge expenses for equipment. Why single out Oil??? Exxon Mobile just reported earnings for Q1 and in spite of the lies of Obummer the bottom line income repoorted was TWO CENTS per gallon sold. TWO CENTS. Now then, in California for example, Obummer the liar takes out over 60 cents in federal taxes. He is a consummate liar and fills the non-attentive with his typical campaign false facts. Please pay attention… TWO CENTS per gallon was ALL that was taken in by ExxonMobile. And the president needing someone to blame goes to the jugular of oil which will totally ruin them if it is allowed to happen. ALL businesses are allowed depletion and/or amortization of equipment and that is depreciation NOT subsidy. Shut up Obummer.

highninside on April 30, 2011 at 12:56 PM

I’m not surprised you misread the context and intent. You seem to miss quite a bit.

powerpro on April 30, 2011 at 12:41 PM

LOL! Now there’s some comedy gold coming from one who professes not to have seen that the “context” of the fan boy post was sarcasm. If stupid had a smell, you could knock a buzzard off a sh-t wagon a mile away with your stink.

MJBrutus on April 30, 2011 at 1:05 PM

LOL! Now there’s some comedy gold coming from one who professes not to have seen that the “context” of the fan boy post was sarcasm. If stupid had a smell, you could knock a buzzard off a sh-t wagon a mile away with your stink.

MJBrutus on April 30, 2011 at 1:05 PM

I professed no such thing. Perhaps you’re thinking about another person.

Of course, you’re more of a reactionary than a thinker…so maybe not.

powerpro on April 30, 2011 at 1:14 PM

Awwww…I see Bruti’s still winning friends and influencing people.

kingsjester on April 30, 2011 at 1:19 PM

Gawd, I’m tired of seeing Sarah Palin show up trying to sound like an authority, with one of her golf club looking backdrops.

She isn’t running, and be glad she isn’t.

Moesart on April 30, 2011 at 1:26 PM

Gawd, I’m tired of seeing Sarah Palin show up trying to sound like an authority, with one of her golf club looking backdrops.

She isn’t running, and be glad she isn’t.

Moesart on April 30, 2011 at 1:26 PM

If she does, I am going bathe in your tears and drive golf balls into your huge gaping maw after your jaw drops clear to the floor.

gryphon202 on April 30, 2011 at 1:29 PM

Sarah Palin comments on debt, higher commodity prices, price of gold, and energy independence.

BTW, this is from Oct. 2009. Not only does she always seem to be right about important issues, she gets it right earlier than most. This woman is prescient.

H/T to Whitney Pitcher.

NoNails on April 30, 2011 at 1:52 PM

That woman is so irrelevant.

http://www.politico.com/click/stories/1104/sarah_palin_attends_haddads_brunch.html

The former vice presidential candidate was immediately enveloped by a large crowd on a patio after making her entrance with Fox News anchor Greta Van Susteren. Palin spent some time posing for pictures with both Dems and R’s alike.

NoNails on April 30, 2011 at 2:00 PM

Isn’t anyone bothered that Sarah couldn’t control herself enough not to swear on national TV?

Wasn’t it just yesterday that people were up in arms over Trump swearing?

Yeah a little slip versus a huge taboo… but there is a lack of self-control involved.

At very least it is poor form.

petunia on April 30, 2011 at 2:00 PM

petunia on April 30, 2011 at 2:00 PM

There’s a huge difference between Hell and the f-word.

NoNails on April 30, 2011 at 2:05 PM

kingsjester on April 30, 2011 at 1:19 PM

Apparently unctuous smarm does smell Scrote, because a dozen buzzards dropped dead the moment you showed up.

MJBrutus on April 30, 2011 at 2:18 PM

Isn’t anyone bothered that Sarah couldn’t control herself enough not to swear on national TV?

Wasn’t it just yesterday that people were up in arms over Trump swearing?

Yeah a little slip versus a huge taboo… but there is a lack of self-control involved.

At very least it is poor form.

petunia on April 30, 2011 at 2:00 PM

I wasn’t bothered by this anymore than I was bothered by her saying during the Obamacare debate… “Not just no, but HELL no.”

It accurately encapsulated the fighting mood of the country without devolving into f***in’ crassness, like m*****f****in’ Trump did.

powerpro on April 30, 2011 at 2:23 PM

MJBrutus on April 30, 2011 at 2:18 PM

Wow. Awesome anatomical vulgarity. **Golf clap**

kingsjester on April 30, 2011 at 2:24 PM

kingsjester on April 30, 2011 at 2:24 PM

You’re called Scrote because you just live to hug all the nuts around here. Find another leg to hump, Scrote.

MJBrutus on April 30, 2011 at 2:27 PM

Wow. Awesome anatomical vulgarity. **Golf clap**

kingsjester on April 30, 2011 at 2:24 PM

He got his Thesaurus out so he could use big words and look super smarty.

powerpro on April 30, 2011 at 2:27 PM

MJBrutus on April 30, 2011 at 2:27 PM

You’re completely oblivious to the fact that you are perceived as a Troll on this site, aren’t you?

kingsjester on April 30, 2011 at 2:29 PM

You’re called Scrote because you just live to hug all the nuts around here.

MJBrutus on April 30, 2011 at 2:27 PM

I doubt that he’d spend one second hugging you or Petunia.

NoNails on April 30, 2011 at 2:30 PM

kingsjester on April 30, 2011 at 2:29 PM

To the contrary. I just don’t have a need, like you, to be popular with the human garbage that most of the posters here happen to be. Present company included. Enjoy your the fruits of your ass-kissing, credible, sheep-like, reflexive yes-saying, Scrote.

MJBrutus on April 30, 2011 at 2:36 PM

MJBrutus on April 30, 2011 at 2:36 PM

Keep digging that hole.

kingsjester on April 30, 2011 at 2:39 PM

To the contrary. I just don’t have a need, like you, to be popular with the human garbage that most of the posters here happen to be. Present company included. Enjoy your the fruits of your ass-kissing, credible, sheep-like, reflexive yes-saying, Scrote.

MJBrutus on April 30, 2011 at 2:36 PM

Hey AP, is calling fellow posters “human garbage” ban-worthy? If not, what is?

NoNails on April 30, 2011 at 2:41 PM

She doesn’t answer the questions that are asked of her. She goes on
tangents. Not a good interview.

terryannonline on April 30, 2011 at 1:52 AM

Since this can be said of every politician in every interview, you must be very frustrated if you pay much attention to politics.

I never blame politicians for not answering questions directly. The real questions are always asked tendentiously. If they answered “tough” questions directly, they’d spend 95% of their time explaining that not only do they no longer beat their wives, but they never did.

Softball straight-man questions to Democrats from the left-wing media are a separate issue. Republicans never get those questions. Any Democrat can profit from responding directly to a question that goes basically like this:

“Aren’t the rich white Republicans responsible for every bad thing that has ever happened? What response do you have to that, Senator?”

or:

“Isn’t your plan designed to promote freedom, equality, and dignity for the poor non-white minorities, women, people of gender and color, and others who have been harmed by the policies of the rich white Republicans? How do you respond to that, Congresswoman?”

Directly — that’s how they respond. As would we all.

J.E. Dyer on April 30, 2011 at 2:42 PM

petunia on April 30, 2011 at 2:00 PM

There’s a huge difference between Hell and the f-word.

NoNails on April 30, 2011 at 2:05 PM

I noted the difference.

But you ignore the double standard.

This is one of those style issues that makes me hesitate about Palin. She is just not held to as high a standard as others.

If any other candidate used a swear word, however mild, that would be at least part of the story. And this was so gratuitous. She easily could have chosen her words more carefully.

I don’t understand that. Is it that she really is not to be taken seriously? Or is she so above everyone else that different rules apply?

It’s like spelling or grammar errors… I make them all the time, and sometimes people mention them.

But if I were writing for the New York Times and had those same errors I would never be allowed to submit stories. I would be held to a higher standard.

It is a signal not to take someone seriously if they are lazy in those ways when they are on national TV. It’s like she is still on the blogger level of seriousness.

petunia on April 30, 2011 at 2:47 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4