Palin's picture appears next to one of Margaret Thatcher with the heading: “Our Iron Lady of the North Will End The Culture of Corruption in Washington DC.”
As a political junkie I spend a lot of time each day listening to the radio. With the conventions drawing near there has been an increase in discussion of who McCain will pick as his running mate. The usual suspects consisting primarily of Mitt Romney, Mike Huckabee and Tim Pawlenty, generally make the rounds, with an occasional splash of the one candidate no one should consider seriously; Joe Lieberman. Strangely, there has been little discussion of the one candidate whom I believe should have the inside track; Sarah Palin. It was with some surprise that I learned that Rush Limbaugh had come out in favor of Governor Palin. I rarely listen to Limbaugh largely because his show is always too much about him, and not about more interesting subjects so I had to learn about it second hand.
I must admit that I have no real information on Limbaugh’s rationale for backing Palin however, before I learned of it I was intending to write my own piece promoting her as vice-presidential timber. I should note that my first choice, Bobby Jindal has, I am informed, taken himself out of the running. In the absence of Jindal I believe Sara Palin would be the best running mate for John McCain.
We are all probably quite aware of the animosity that came out of the Republican primaries this year. A lot of it was directed at Mitt Romney who, I believe, was unfairly targeted, but the same can be said about Huckabee. It appears likely that the Democrat party would do everything in its power to make use of these past problems, so McCain would be wise to steer clear of his former opponents, despite Romney’s obvious financial skills. In any event, Romney might be better situated as Treasury Secretary. This reasoning leaves us with “outsiders” in the sense that they did not run in the primaries, and have few current negatives to be used against them. Of these, Pawlenty, and Lieberman have been the most discussed by many pundits on the radio and on line. I will deal with Lieberman first.
Joe Lieberman is the Connecticut Democrat outcast who is listed as an independent but still caucuses with the Democrats, despite their ill-treatment of him. He is strong on defense priorities, but is a social liberal, and has already been cast as a deal killer by the conservative base of the Republican Party. Many analysts are convinced that McCain’s showing at the Saddleback Church “Town Hall” solidified his position with social conservatives. These same conservatives are now expecting McCain to follow through on what he delivered and would see Lieberman as a step away from that direction. I agree. Lieberman is a good man, and would be an asset in the right location. However, he presents a liability when conservative voters are already concerned that McCain would be a risky president. When some of them seriously suggest that it would be better to endure 4 years of Obama as a Carter redux than to elect McCain, you have to take their reasoning and potential reaction seriously; particularly when some conservatives have tended to sit on their hands of late, when the elections roll around.
This leads us to Pawlenty. Tim Pawlenty is the current governor of Minnesota, succeeding the maverick Jesse Ventura. He began his political career in city government, and moved from there to the state House of Representatives where he was re-elected 5 times and gained a reputation as a tax cutter. He was elected state Governor in 2002. His campaign pledges were to not raise taxes while eliminating the state's budget deficit, promoting a 24-hour waiting period on abortions, implementing a conceal-carry law, and improving the state's education standards. He was re-elected in 2006, despite conservative criticism of his supporting government funding to two sports stadiums.
The son of a truck driver, with degrees in political science and law, he is known for promoting the idea that the Republicans must be the party of Sam’s Club, rather than the country club. In this, he might be styled a populist, yet he lacks some of the populist image that was attached to Mike Huckabee during the primary season. He could be a very strong choice, being young (born in 1960) good looking, and having the basic credentials that would fit with the conservative base. However he is also described as less than conservative by some and as a global warming Kool-Aid drinker by others. His remaining downside is that, he might be “more of the same, only younger.” He could seriously lack the ability to bring something to the race that is not there already. That is where Governor Palin comes in.
Sarah Palin is originally from Idaho, but moved to Alaska in her youth. In high school she played basketball for a championship team, after which she competed for the Miss Alaska title, and earned a degree in journalism. Like Pawlenty she began her political career in city government. She became governor by defeating a Republican incumbent in the primaries and a former Democrat governor in the general election. She is the youngest person to be elected governor of the state.
Her administration has a record of budget control, elimination of waste and exposing corruption. She has her own measure of populist leanings, and can certainly be considered in touch with the average working person because her husband is an oil rig worker and commercial fisherman. Her conservative credentials are essentially impeccable; perhaps better than Pawlenty’s, although she is 4 years his junior. Her approval rating among state voters is, at last report in the 80% range, after having been at 90% or above for some time. One web site, www.palinforvp.com promotes her thusly: “Our Iron Lady of the North Will End The Culture of Corruption in Washington DC.” The fact that they place her picture next to one of Margaret Thatcher should probably be taken seriously.
So what makes Palin special that she should be selected ahead of anyone else? There isn’t any single qualification. It is the combination of things that makes Palin an excellent choice. She is young, dynamic, a cost cutter, and she has populist roots, as well. She is likely to help cement the Middle American hunting and fishing generally blue collar vote through her ties to a similar community in Alaska. She is a pro-life Christian, which will strengthen McCain’s hand with the evangelical community. While we haven’t seen it yet on the national scene, she may be a tougher woman than Hilary Clinton. She made her way into the governor’s office on her own, rather than on her husband’s coattails. At the same time, she can be a diplomat. She was named Miss Congeniality in the Miss Alaska pageant. In short, she as all the credentials to be a strong running mate, who can help strengthen the foundation that McCain needs to win this year.
But wait, there’s more.
There is a large block of former Hilary Clinton supporters who are justifiably upset over the Democrat super-delegates deserting her for Senator Obama, and they have a point. It is likely that Senator Clinton’s status as the early favorite for the Democrat nomination was partly predicated on her being a woman. What happened, may have been that to the Party leadership, having a darker skin trumps having two X chromosomes. The woman was “out-minoritied” by the African-American, even if he is only half African. This makes the Democrat ticket vulnerable to desertion by woman voters; particularly after the snub of Senator Clinton for the vice-presidential slot.
Nancy Pelosi, just before the opening of the Democrat party convention, stated that women have the most to win by electing Obama and the most to lose by electing McCain. The Republican Party and McCain can turn this on its head by selecting Palin and making Pelosi look like a fool in the process. They can put feminists in a quandary, forcing them to vote for either a Republican ticket with a woman on it, or for the Democrat party that pushed a woman aside in favor of a man. And consider that since Geraldine Ferraro was nominated for VP, the Democrat party has ignored women for that slot. It is very likely that Senator Clinton was only able to contend for the presidential nomination out of personal desire for the job. The Party dumped her as soon as they had the chance. Feminists should take this seriously.
John McCain likes to be known as a maverick. Selecting Sarah Palin could show that streak once again, and significantly shake up the political landscape. Compared with Obama’s selection of Joe Biden, a retread who really offers nothing to the Democrat ticket and who has even said that Obama is not qualified for the office, Palin would be new, exciting, and show that the Republican Party is interested in qualifications first. Obama’s hands were tied. He is a prima donna who cannot allow anyone else to share the spotlight. McCain has no such problem and can pick anyone. The combination of Palin’s youth and energy with McCain’s age and experience should be a winner come November.
slaib@intellectualconservative.com
http://intellectualconservative.com
Read more articles by Steven D. Laib
Mr. Laib, I am in complete agreement. She is hands down the best choice. She also brings more to the ticket. She has had more executive government experience then the other three combined.
She is a life member of the NRA. Unlike Olympia Snow, and Susan Collins she is a proud conservative. She will give women in the US something they have never had to date. A solid, unabashed, proud, conservative role model to emulate and attract to the GOP.
My daughter asks all the time why aren't there conservative women role models. The greatest two that women have are Margaret Thatcher and Golda Meir two foreigners.
When women voters out number men the GOP has to get over their male only routine and think of the future. Palin I believe will make this election a slam dunk for McCain.
Comment by jfking | August 25, 2008
Palin is the right choice in every respect, so does McCain see it too or has over-analysis set in?
Comment by sd | August 26, 2008
Palin is such a perfect pick that it hurts having to wait for McCain's announcement.
P.S. If Palin is picked, she will win the next Presidential election where McCain is not running (sorry Hillary). Bottom line, 12 to 16 years with a Republican President guaranteed.
Comment by wildair1 | August 26, 2008
[…] is from a blog called Intellectual Conservative, I skipped most of the post and just focused on Governor Palin because frankly none of the other VP […]
Pingback by Political Party Poop | August 26, 2008
This is a difficult year where neither party has a candidate that is qualified to be president. Palin improves the Republican ticket but I still have the problem that the candidate for president is one I cannot support.
Comment by Mickey G | August 27, 2008
[…] Launches VP Website Posted on August 27, 2008 by VA Patriot Sarah Palin's site is […]
Pingback by Palin Launches VP Website « Virginia Virtucon | August 27, 2008
[…] Sarah Palin's site is Here. […]
Pingback by Palin Launches VP Website | | August 27, 2008
I just finished watching the McCain & Palin speeches and I went to Daily Kos to see what they were saying. One stupid article already has 971 even dumber comments. I couldn’t read them all, but they seem to center on her lack of experience. That takes a lot of balls, considering Obama’s experience as a community organizer. It’s almost as if they didn’t see this coming and they haven’t thought of anything else to say. I know one vote that changed from Democrat to Republican today and that’s my Ma.
I thought she had a good speaking voice. A little high pitched, but not that valley girl thing and not the Shrillary thing either.
Comment by Ivan Ivanovich | August 29, 2008
Congrats, Mr. Laib, on getting it right about Sarah Quayle, er, Palin. Let's look more closely at those qualifications. Hmm. She advocates teaching creationism alongside evolution, and she is under an ethics investigation. Yes, she should have great appeal to that large block of conservative Christian Americans who support the abuse of political power!
Comment by Dr Kilovolt | August 29, 2008
And she sits down when she pees, which meets the criteria of a lot of liberals [the PUMA's] who focus on things like the sex of a person as the most important consideration in nominating a person for vice president.
Comment by Phillip Ellis Jackson | August 29, 2008
Despite the press coverage of the alleged PUMAs, I think they supported Hillary for more than her genitals, and are unlikely to find Mrs. Palin's ultra-conservativism palatable. While locking up that ultra-right vote, she may cost McCain moderates of both genders.
Comment by Dr Kilovolt | August 29, 2008
I watched the DNC gavel to gavel (I'm a masochist). All I heard was "Hillary" or "some other woman"). The PUMAs wanted Hillary, but the overarching issue was to pick a "woman". Obama picked an old white guy. McCain picked a "woman".
I watched my old buddy Bob Beckel on TV this morning. I was with him in 1994 when he learned the Dems would lose control of Congress in 1994. He had the same look this morning, and in fact said that Palin would seriously hurt Obama.
She hunts, eats what she kills, won't abort her baby even though it has a disability, has actually governed something (instead of "legislating"), has a kid in the Army going to Iraq — as does McCain (thus taking away the "why won't you send your own kids to war" argument the Dems like to use), has a husband who's a union member and stays home to care for the kids (the ultimate feminist dream), and sits when she pees — which is important to people who look at a candidate's sex as an important issue.
In short, she's the Democrat's worst nightmare. The more they run her down as they did in the snarky press release from Obama's camp today, the more it will offend women. The more they claim she's inexperienced, the lower the bar they set for her debate with blohard Joe Biden (another character I know from my days in Washington). If the Dem's keep about her "inexperience", it only accents Obama's lack of credentials.
Obama is toast.
Comment by Phillip Ellis Jackson | August 29, 2008
Did we watch the same convention? The message was loud and clear: respect where it is due, now let's go elect Barack!
Comment by Dr Kilovolt | August 29, 2008
Oh man, this is getting really bad for Obama. I turned to CNN for a while. First, they did a balanced report on her, only throwing in a couple of obligatory "problems" at the very end. The two female reporters spoke about Palin as a "reformer", an "executive", spoke about her accomplishments, etc. Only Jack Kafferty dissed her. But Wolf Blitzer kept introducing positive comments when Jack tried to go negative.
It does make sense, though. CNN is a backer of the Clintons. If Obama loses in 2008, Hillary can run again in 2012. But if Obama wins, she has to wait until 2016.
Comment by Phillip Ellis Jackson | August 29, 2008
Palin looks good on many levels. But not all. If she tries to force HER decision to keep a baby that she knew going in had a disability on all women, that will be bad for the country. But otherwise, so far I like this woman. McCain made a smart move. At least now there'll be a real race.
Comment by AMAI | August 30, 2008
AMAI,
Palin made a choice to keep her baby. Wasn't it the pro-choice position it is her right to make that choice and no one else may interfere in that choice? Yet, the pro-choice movement repeatedly and increasingly seems to be about making only what they deem 'correct' choices; which to them is to abort. They have fused with the euthanasia crowd who would have us terminate those severely ill or defective. They are also fused at the hip with some in the limits-to-growth movement to whom more children are just a drain on resources. A woman, today, who is not in a stable marriage situation or who faces raising a less than perfect child is put under enormous pressure from this death-cult to abort her child and bury her sensibilities. Palin is not alone in her disgust with radical feminism dictating the terms of abortion, including many women on the left who feel there is too little choice left to them. If Sarah Palin has stood up to these people publicly and challenges their assumptions, I see her as a focal point around whom millions of women increasingly dissatisified and angry with the feminist straight-jacket may rally. Whether they will or not may turn out a miscalculation. However, the alternative is to risk a VP candidate who, as a man, merely mirrors these feelings but cannot ignite them. Even feminists will be forced to choose between their loyalty to ideology and a growing conviction something in feminism has gone seriously amiss when their choice in the matter is even less than it was before Roe.
Palin, as VP (or even as President), cannot overturn Roe. All they, together, can do is appoint more judges who would be disinclined to tamper further with the Constitution. Overturning Roe has its own dangers to the Constitution as it would open up every major decision since the 14th Amendment (maybe further). Even should Roe be miraculously overturned eventually, it would still not reverse the trend toward abortion. That means, at most, Palin can be a lightening rod for protest, and a great many women presently questioning the wisdom of abortion recognize that strawdog for what it is.
Let's assume McCain had chosen Romney instead. That would have brought some disaffected fiscal conservatives back to the fold. Lieberman would have drawn some liberals and independents, but would have disaffected even more social conservatives. Pawlenty, as Steven points out, is too much like McCain to matter. Of these three, only Romney has much potential to excite voters, yet that pales alongside the stir we've already seen from the Palin announcement. Taken together, Palin seems the most likely to draw large numbers and draw significantly more than she disaffects. The only possible downside I see is that her inexperience, if not botched by Obama-Biden, can be used to neutralize her assets. But, my biggest hope is Biden. Can we trust him to speak one of those monumental slurs of his, preferably directed at Palin. The die is cast, now we await the outcome.
Comment by Bob Stapler | August 30, 2008
The John McBush / Miss Alaska (runner up) Ticket is HILLARIOUS.
she is more qualified than
Kay Baily Hutchison
Libby Dole
the CEO from Google and the fired one from HP
then there are
Mitt
Ridge
Huckabee
Lieberman
Guliani
etc..etc..etc..
Can you say HARRIET MYERS ??? LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL
Comment by Taguba | August 30, 2008
Miss Alaska (runner up) is one rogue blood clot away from the football ?? COuld you imagine her in charge on week 7 after McBush strokes out ?? you must think america is full of morons.
Seriously, i think the GOP has given up on the election and Mitt, Rudy, Mike, Joe, etc probaly said they dont want their name on that turd of a ticket. I guess the GOP is just praying ( like they did for rain) the Dems screw up for 4 years so they have a chance in 2012.
Comment by Taguba | August 30, 2008
Taguba,
That was petty and vile. Your language, hyperventilation, sloppiness, crudity, feeding habits, and discourtesy says a great deal more about you than it can possibly say about conservatives and conservatism. So far, you have objected entirely on the basis of a hate-filled bias that does you no credit. I have seen you do better than this, so I will give you the benefit of the doubt. Purhaps, you'd like to rephrase that, this time giving it a little actual forethought. Otherwise, no one here is going to take you the least serious or waste any further ink on you.
Comment by Bob Stapler | August 30, 2008
For those of you unfamiliar with Taguba, who was the SUBJECT of SOME OF my OBSERVATIONS in “Has the Left Become Completely Deranged?”, his comments contain a lot of CAPITALIZED WORDS and multiple exclamation points to show that the author of these remarks is a SERIOUS GUY!!!! He can’t understand why all the guys won’t take him seriously when he tries to “debate”.
A few additional pearls of wisdom from his comments after I submitted my article on why Obama won’t win the 2008 election:
*** Tag: ”is the pope "gullible" ?? he believes in Global Warming and that we should be good stewards of Gods creation. You and your ilk can keep pizzing on it, if you like, i choose to help the POPE. … You can find your big oil paid weather men and faux news paid "climate shills" to claim different, but the scientific communtiy says otherwise. So does that LIAR (as you call him) the Pope.”
Translation: The pope … I mean POPE … must be accepted as a scientific authority on the matter of global warming, or else you’re calling him a LIAR (no hyperbole here!!). However, when it comes to defining human life at the moment of conception and therefore abortion as murder, well, reasonable people can certainly disagree because, after all, the POPE is no scientific authority.
*** Tag: “ALL the peer reviewed studies on climate change Agree that People DO CONTRIBUTE to it. Not half or three quarters of all peer reviewed studies, ALL OF THEM. 100% agree.”
Translation: Taguba said ALL OF THEM (he even capitalized the words to show he's serious — SERIOUSLY!!) ALL OF THEM agree 100%. EVERY peer reviewed article, EVERY ONE!! NO EXCEPTIONS!! And yet some of us may still doubt the piercing analysis and evidence he’s offered?? This is SERIOUS!! SERIOUSLY!! What would the POPE say now that you’ve called him a LIAR?? What?? You didn’t read his peer-reviewed article?? SERIOUSLY!!
*** Tag: “People DO CONTRIBUTE to [global warming]. … Do you really think all the factories, all the cars, all the ships, trains, and trucks ont he planet dont contribute ?? seriously ??”
Translation. This is really serious. Just try not to think about the fact that "cause" and "contribute to" are two different concepts. People contribute to lots of things without necessarily "causing" something, or even being the primary contributor. One good Mexican meal won't hold a candle to your average bovine flatulence, in terms of carbon-based natural methane production. And you don’t even need a 100% peer reviewed article to understand this. Well, most of us understand this, anyway. Only a complete idiot could view something like cyclical climate change from the perspective where people are the constant, and nature is the independent variable, when looking at the notion of causality. Seriously!!
If none of this fails to convince you of the wisdom of tagboy’s analysis, then he has only one thing left for. You’re nothing but a “douchbag stinking retarded vermin with a nose full of coke,” or something like that (see “Why John Edwards’ Affair Matters”). And he says this because he’s SERIOUS. Really!! SERIOUSLY!
There are more tag-isms just as funny, and just as sad, but you get the idea. Don't waste any time treating him seriously.
Doh!!
Comment by Phillip Ellis Jackson | August 30, 2008
With praise like this…
Alaska Republicans quoted in 8/29 Anchorage Daily News:
The reaction wasn't so rosy elsewhere. State Senate President Lyda Green said she thought it was a joke when someone called her at 6 a.m. to give her the news.
"She's not prepared to be governor. How can she be prepared to be vice president or president?" said Green, a Republican from Palin's hometown of Wasilla. "Look at what she's done to this state. What would she do to the nation?"
…
State House Speaker John Harris, a Republican from Valdez, was astonished at the news. He didn't want to get into the issue of her qualifications.
"She's old enough," Harris said. "She's a U.S. citizen."
…
Conservative host Rick Rydell said there are some benefits to the state, but it's a gamble for McCain to pick an unknown with what he considered "questionable vetting."
"It seems almost like a Hail Mary pass at the end of a football game," Rydell said in an interview after his show Friday.
Comment by Dr Kilovolt | August 30, 2008
"Let's look more closely at those qualifications. Hmm. She advocates teaching creationism alongside evolution, and she is under an ethics investigation. Yes, she should have great appeal to that large block of conservative Christian Americans who support the abuse of political power!"
Oh my! She also investigated members of her own party as chairman of an ethics committee and won her election for governor against a Republican incumbent whom she ran against on a platform of anti-corruption. Oh, and she sold the private jet that came with her job as governor, and canceled the bridge to nowhere project. Yeah, she's one to watch out for alright. What an egregious abuser of the office! I mean seriously, how can we trust a woman who's never even purchased property from a convicted felon?
If you have to have a candidate with limited experience, it's a hell of a lot better to make it your VP choice than your main man. Biden has spent 30 years as a legislator (very presidential!), and he's right on deck if 46 year old Obama dies or becomes incapacitated. So he's a non-issue - his experience as a committee member who spends weeks and months deciding whether bills should be allowed to have a vote on the floor of the Senate is very unlikely to become necessary. So let's look at the political experience of the standard bearer of the Democrat party: "Community organizer" > State legislature > United States Senate. If we need somebody to sign up fraudulent voters or sponsor legislation drafted by other people, he's the go to guy. Stack that up against the PTA, the city council, the mayor, and then the governor, and suddenly the Republican vice presidential candidate - who is only on deck if the 72 year old guy who's been doing the same job as the Messiah for 30 years - doesn't look so bad. She's actually vetoed legislation, drafted budgets, been in charge of people and resources - trivial little stuff that's totally irrelevant to what the president does.
So away, Sarah Palin. Come back when you've learned how to give a nice speech and make empty political promises. When you've been a United States senator for 3 years, and absent for half of your term running for president. When you've worked for a "community organization" group proven to have committed voter fraud. Silly girl - you don't have the experience to be the vice president!
Comment by Patrick Mulligan | August 31, 2008
Let's see, we have an apostate muslim with no executive experience and minimal legislative experience, serious ethical issues (check his contributors and helper on his house purchase), and the media and our two strange posters kilvolt and taguba believe him to be "highly qualified" to be president.
On the other hand we have a ticket with a former military officer with actual leadership experience and a state governor with actual leadership experience (as long as a governor as Omessiah has been a senator but even with a maternity leave she has attended more days at work).
Then the attacks on qualifications for the VP slot. Lets see a career legislator with no executive experience against a sitting governor with previous executive experience as mayor of a small city and a fishing business. In a debate she will blow the legislator away.
Very strange that Democmarxists take the approach of attacking the experience of someone that dwarfs their candidate's zero experience. Amazing but they have never let themselves be distracted by facts only feelings.
This makes for great comedy as the campaigns move toward judgement day in November.
Comment by Mickey G | August 31, 2008
DK,
Lyda Green may not have been the best argument you could have made against Palin. It is no secret (at least in Alaska) Green has no love for Palin. Palin kept her campaign promise to fight corruption in Alaska, and that came very close to tainting Green. They have been at odds over proposed pipeline contracts in which Green has been seen not only as having been in the wrong, but also having favored VECO – the oil company now charged with bribing a number of state legislators. Palin opened up the bidding to outsiders, including the Canadian company that submitted the winning bid. Green filibustered against Governor Palin’s pipeline plan which is important to the Alaskan economy, rather than see it go to an outsider. There is no argument between them or Green’s coalition-Democrats the pipeline is good for Alaska, the fight is only over who gets to build it. Green has now dropped out of her re-election bid ostensibly because of low poll numbers, but there remains a suspicion among voters regarding possible links to VECO. This is because one of those indicted was former state Rep. Vic Kohring (now serving time), said to have taken money from VECO to not run against Green (twice). VECO may well have bribed Kohring without her knowledge, but it seems unlikely she was completely ignorant of it. Because of this Green is no longer much liked or respected in Alaska, even within her own party. Green is clearly mad at Palin and has made remarks suggesting she is to blame for her fall. So this may well be a case of sour grapes and having made enemies.
Making enemies among the corrupt and tainted ain’t exactly to Palin’s discredit, and I would think liberals, who constantly whine about corrupt Republicans, would appreciate what she did rather than find in it cause for fault. But, of course, you did not realize that what was what you were doing because you never bothered to check into the substance of Green’s complaint. No, you were too busy slapping Palin with anything you could find, no matter how flimsy.
It is no great trick finding a few conservatives critical of Palin. We are not so moronically monolithic we must approve everything our leaders say or do; and we don’t respond to dissent in our ranks by silencing the dissenter. But, we are savvy enough that when someone like Green makes vague criticisms against her party’s choice to find out more before drinking from her cup (you drank the Kool-aid, not us). We don’t elect candidates because they are perfect in every regard (heck, we’re not all that keen about McCain); we elect the candidates most qualified and least corrupt who advance our values and preserve our freedoms. Some of us feel Romney or another is better suited to the role of VP, but that is not to say McCain-Palin is not an acceptable choice better than anything the left has offered, because so far no one has shown us they aren’t. You are going to have to do a lot better than that to convince people McCain-Palin aren't a whole lot better and safer than Obama-Biden.
(http://alaskareport.com/news/z49999_corrupt_bastards.htm)
(http://www.alaskareport.com/blog/?s=lyda+green)
(http://www.alaskareport.com/blog/2008/06/14/lyda-green-goes-down-in-flames-bs-and-all.htm)
(http://www.adn.com/legislature/story/436198.html)
Comment by Bob Stapler | August 31, 2008
Patrick,
Under investigation is not under indictment nor convicted. Again, look at all the facts in evidence before jumping to conclusions. What is it Palin is being investigated for, how much of it is due to her and how much due to people connected with her, what is the probability this is political sparring used to damage her, how does it disqualify Palin as candidate for higher office (not all investigations are criminal). MSNBC reports this as an ethical, not a criminal issue; and there is a good deal in their report to make me believe the ethics in question were not hers but are, in some measure, her responsibility (if she knew of it). She says she only found out later that an aide of hers pressured an official in what began as a private dispute with the Department of Public Safety. There are grounds for her complaint the state trooper (her brother-in-law, alleged to have abused her nephew and threatened to shoot her father; plus assorted misbehaviors) at the center of the matter ought to have been dismissed rather than just suspended; explaining why she persisted in the matter. Palin has done some appropriate damage-control and has supported the investigation she expects will clear her. If not, she’ll be subject to a reprimand that, alone, does not disqualify her from high office.
I doubt you can find more than a handful of politicians who haven’t faced an ethics review, allegations of corruption, or an indictment. Politicians have their personal and professional lives turned inside out by every passing busybody (including us) looking for dirt. And, if the busybody has a political axe to grind, it is even worse. Being a politician, thus, means swimming with sharks. Little wonder most of us would rather talk politics than become politicians. Don’t get too excited she’s got some dirt in her closet. Which of us doesn’t? And, if not us, the foibles of close relation serve almost as well. If she’s guilty of more than improper handling, that will be revealed. If not, don’t let this be a distraction.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26458400
Comment by Bob Stapler | August 31, 2008
Bob: I think Patrick's comments were satire. He did a good job of imitating the Looney Left, but the dead giveaway was his lack of EXCESSIVE CAPITALIZATION or multiple exclamation points !!!! (And no LOLs or Duh's). Seriously.
Comment by Phillip Ellis Jackson | August 31, 2008
I gave it a shot Phil, but I have a hard time handicapping my brain enough to make it believable.
Indeed my comments were intended to be humorous. The opening paragraph was a quotation from Dr. Kivolt earlier in the discussion.
Comment by Patrick Mulligan | August 31, 2008
Doh! Seriously!!!!
Comment by Phillip Ellis Jackson | August 31, 2008
Dr Kilovolt:
By the way, it's noticeable to all the way you've put your views across forcefully, but respectfully, in this comment thread as compared to others on the Left like Taguba. Disagreement doesn't require slander, unless of course the intent is simply to get a reaction from people you disagree with, not actually discuss/debate an issue.
As you and I discussed in an earlier posting, there seems to be a tendency on the part of the present day Left to treat every discussion like the Daily Kos or Huffington Post. It's clear they don't know how to have a real exchange of ideas, so they substitute invective for analysis. It doesn't even matter if they're consistent (in one case the pope is an infallible authority on man made global warming, in another he’s just one of “the clowns wearing the robes” on the subject of abortion [see Comment 21 above, and Comment 1 in “American Papists” — both made by the same person.])
Like I said before, on the Right we confront and condemn our extremists who would say things like “race matters”, or suggest that there is a “natural hierarchical social order.” But I’ve yet to see anyone on the Left condemn the excesses of a person who calls conservatives “Retardlicans douchbags stinking retarded vermin”.
Comment by Phillip Ellis Jackson | August 31, 2008
Patrick: Do you now see why your Comment 23 was not believable? Your comments had linear thought, normal punctuation, coherent expressions, internal consistency (i.e. things like an alleged respect for the Pope would also suggest a willingness to capitalize "God" or "He"), etc. were a dead give-away.
Comment by Phillip Ellis Jackson | August 31, 2008
Looks like some of Tagboys recent truly vile comments have been deleted.
Comment by Phillip Ellis Jackson | September 1, 2008
Patrick,
I should know you well enough by now to have realized you were doing parody. My bad!
Comment by Bob Stapler | September 1, 2008