Jump to content
Mr.Topicality

Palin to step down as governor of Alaska

Recommended Posts

In the same way, you could say Sarah Palin is simply responding to cultural and political influences.

 

Some of these things are not ideological, cultural, or political. Its not a cultural phenomenon that the earth is billions of years old. Its not a cultural phenomenon that birth control works. These are fact based things.

 

I don't care that she makes a culture, an ideology, a politics, based on her denial of facts.

 

That is secondary. Whats primary is she stupid. She can't speak or write with any level of competency. The things she does value are factually wrong.

 

P.S. Oil companies are big business.

 

P.P.S. A public option would allow american small business to compete with the rest of the industrialized world.

 

Its not public health care, its industrialized health care.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The instance that made me shudder with horror about Palin came a few weeks before the election; Palin was being asked (relatively informal venue) about what she would do as VP, and her answer clearly indicated that she thought she would be in the US Senate on a daily basis, running its sessions and guiding its agenda.
In fairness, the VP does have that power. And a few Veeps in history (who were bored out of their minds) did preside over the Senate regularly.
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think what Ian meant was that teh VP has the right to preside over the senate. Which means he doesnt tell them what to do or set policy, but basically act like a PO in Student Congress.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think what Ian meant was that teh VP has the right to preside over the senate. Which means he doesnt tell them what to do or set policy, but basically act like a PO in Student Congress.

 

On reflection, I read it that way too. But with Senate rules as they are, a PO in StuCo seems to have way more power than the VP does. The Majority & Minority Leaders and Whips pretty well run the floor debate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know that I am really angry with her resigning, and I am a registered Republican (although a moderate - I did vote for Obama).

 

She reminds me a lot of Dan Quayle. This GOP notion that we have to have someone that is stupid (or at least sounds stupid) to represent middle America is an insult to our collective intelligences.

 

If she really is backing off permanently, I can kind of understand it. Perhaps she feels that she does not have the educational or professional background to be a governor (which she doesn't). If this really is a ploy on the part of the Republicans to start in on 2012, I will truly be aghast.

 

By the way, I don't think it is. If you look at how her popularity has plummeted, I really do think she is jumping out of politics for good - I could be wrong; I hope I'm not.

Edited by Hephaestus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, not that Rush.

touche.

 

Edit: Plate of shrimp alert...right after this exchange, I got in my car and the radio started off right at the beginning of Tom Sawyer. Good driving music.

Edited by brorlob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A SHAKY STORY STARTS TO LOOK WORSE.... The rationale for Sarah Palin's resignation has never made sense, but it seems even less clear now.

One of the few specific points the governor has raised deals with "frivolous" ethics violations filed by her political enemies. Here's what she said in her announcement speech on Friday:

"Political operatives descended on Alaska last August, digging for dirt. The ethics law I championed became their weapon of choice. Over the past nine months I've been accused of all sorts of frivolous ethics violations....

"The state has wasted thousands of hours of your time and shelled out some two million of your dollars to respond to 'opposition research' -- that's money not going to fund teachers or troopers or safer roads.... Todd and I are looking at more than half a million dollars in legal bills in order to set the record straight. And what about the people who offer up these silly accusations? It doesn't cost them a dime so they're not going to stop draining public resources -- spending other peoples' money in their game.

"It's pretty insane -- my staff and I spend most of our day dealing with this instead of progressing our state now."

Some of this may sound vaguely plausible. A constant stream of ethics charges may very well prove to be distracting and cumbersome. It's not a compelling reason to quit and walk away from one's responsibilities to a state, but it's not inconceivable.

But there's new evidence to suggest the argument is just factually wrong. Greg Sargent reported that the governor's own office conceded yesterday that money used to respond to the ethics charges are part of fixed costs that would have gone to the same lawyers, whether the charges were filed or not. The funds wouldn't have gone to schools, police, or transportation, as Palin claimed. The $1.9 million "was arrived at by adding up attorney hours spent on fending off complaints -- based on the fixed salaries of lawyers in the governor's office and the Department of Law. The money would have gone to the lawyers no matter what they were doing."

What's more, Palin is currently only facing three pending complaints -- hardly the kind of burden that should take up "most" of a governor's staff's time.

And there's something else that's been bugging me about the official explanation. For years, the Alaska Republican establishment was deeply involved in widespread corruption. According to Palin's version of events, when she took office, she championed a major overhaul of the state's ethics laws. To hear Palin tell it, her opponents are now using her own achievement against her -- exploiting the law to waste taxpayer money, bankrupt the state's governor, and paralyze state government.

Doesn't that suggest there's something wrong with the new ethics laws? If the measures were written in such a way as to make it easy and cost-free for anyone to cripple the state's political process, then don't the reform laws need reforming? Indeed, even putting Palin aside, won't all future Alaskan governors have to deal with the same problem?

It sounds like Palin has firsthand experience in identifying the flaws in her own law. If she weren't quitting, and letting her own flawed ethics rules force her from office, maybe she could work on improving the system and helping the state.

Steve Benen 8:00 AM Permalink

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/heather-robinson/the-savaging-of-sarah-pal_b_227416.html

 

Sarah Palin didn't quit because of the ethics charges. She quit because she is an emotional wreck due to the bashing she has received from a number of different places - Letterman, the Porno, etc. etc.

 

I think the state trooper thing is a lot bigger deal that the media even realizes, and I also think that she is way underqualified for the national spotlight.

 

Sarah Palin. Dan Quayle. Harriet Miers. Why does the GOP send up these cuddly/unqualified candidates that are supposed to represent Middle America/the American Dream? It's backfiring big-time.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Steve:

 

Please read the first post in this thread, and then read basic Constitutional law regarding the First Amendment.

 

I (and everyone else responding to this thread - including you) was asked what I thought about Governor Palin's announcement; in other words, I was asked for my opinion.

 

I do not have to"explain" and/or "justify" my opinion [either as to why I think Governor Palin is a "quasi-fascist," (a negative opinion) OR why I think she's "kinda hot" (a definitely positive opinion)].

 

Nor do you have to "explain" and/or "justify" your opinions about Governor Palin, and neither does anyone else. That's what the First Amendment is all about... especially with respect to public officials.

 

 

This response is just ridiculous. It looks like this:

 

You: The world is going to explode in 2012.

Steve: That's a bold claim. Why is it going to explode?

You: The First Amendment says that I am allowed to say whatever I want so you don't have to make me give any justification.

 

No one was ever denying your legal right to say that Palin is "quasi-fascist." The point was that within debate's intellectual circle, individuals prefer a warrant to back a claim, especially an extreme claim. Someone who champions the First Amendment ought to understand the value of an open forum with regards to the search for truth. I would hope that your opinion is not so tenuous that it cannot withstand the criticism of others.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I met an alaskan resident who supported her.

I thought it was hilarious, he was like "the last guy we had was kind of a tyrant, then we got sarah palin who was a big improvement, shee pretty much doesnt do anything."

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think if Huckabee doesn't run and split the evangelical vote Palin has a good chance of being the 2012 nominee. She could probably win Iowa the same way Huckabee did in 2008, by heavily winning evangelicals, and then beating whoever wins NH (probably won't be her) in South Carolina. We'll have to see what the 2012 primary calendar looks like of course, but if Palin wins Iowa she will probably be pretty well positioned if she can lock up the evangelical vote and the non-evangelical vote is split.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think if Huckabee doesn't run and split the evangelical vote Palin has a good chance of being the 2012 nominee. She could probably win Iowa the same way Huckabee did in 2008, by heavily winning evangelicals, and then beating whoever wins NH (probably won't be her) in South Carolina. We'll have to see what the 2012 primary calendar looks like of course, but if Palin wins Iowa she will probably be pretty well positioned if she can lock up the evangelical vote and the non-evangelical vote is split.

I hope this is true, but doubt it. I think enough republicans have learned the lessons of 2006 and 2008 that following the lead of evangelicals isn't a good general election strategy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I hope this is true, but doubt it. I think enough republicans have learned the lessons of 2006 and 2008 that following the lead of evangelicals isn't a good general election strategy.

Yes, but they also learned in 1992 and 1996, as regards to not bowing to the religious right. And even in 2008, McCain was hardly the motivator for the religious crowd that was George W Bush in 2000. (They also didn't have the Clinton backlash vote)

 

On a related note: Can't they get a Zombie Barry Goldwater to run? It'd be nice to have a real conservative somewhere on the ballot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On a related note: Can't they get a Zombie Barry Goldwater to run? It'd be nice to have a real conservative somewhere on the ballot.
I'm predicting that'll be Gary Johnson's role.

 

If he doesn't have any major skeletons, and does well early in the campaign (debates, interviews, etc.) he could be a factor. He could scoop up the Ronulans without having such a low ceiling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mike:

I hadn't heard of Gary Johnson (yes, I live in a box somewhere in the dark), but I read the attached article.

 

I would have to do a lot more thinking and research before making any political decision, but I really liked his "Seven Principles of Good Government."

 

1. Become reality driven. Don’t kid yourself or others. Find out what’s what and base your decisions and actions on that.

 

2. Always be honest and tell the truth. It’s extremely difficult to do any damage to anybody when you are willing to tell the truth–regardless of the consequences.

 

3. Always do what’s right and fair. Remember, the more you actually accomplish, the louder your critics become. You’ve got to learn to ignore your critics. You’ve got to continue to do what you think is right. You’ve got to maintain your integrity.

 

4. Determine your goal, develop a plan to reach that goal, and then act. Don’t procrastinate.

 

5. Make sure everybody who ought to know what you’re doing knows what you’re doing. Communicate.

 

6. Don’t hesitate to deliver bad news. There is always time to salvage things. There is always time to fix things. Henry Kissinger said that anything that can be revealed eventually should be revealed immediately.

 

7. Last, be willing to do whatever it takes to get your job done. If you’ve got a job that you don’t love enough to do what it takes to get your job done, then quit and get one that you do love, and then make a difference.

 

This is good advice for most anyone. Thank you for posting this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Fast & Danger

It'd be cool if Palin went all R. Budd Dwyer on our asses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...