Krauthammer was on Fox the other day, I happened to see it. He said that Sarah Palin still doesn't cut it for him. She's got good instincts but she's just not properly schooled. And he said I don't mean schooled in the right places. She's just not learned. She's had two and a half years to school herself on matters of policy. She hasn't done it. She can't demonstrate it. She's just not properly schooled. And Tom Rowan, "Analyzing the Analyst" in the American Thinker, says why in the world do we sit here and bow down at the opinion of somebody that used to write speeches for Walter Mondale.The segment at the link begins and ends with thoughts on Weinergate, by the way. Read the whole thing if you want to see how he weaves these themes together.
Now, Rowan's theory is that people's pasts matter. So here you have Dr. Krauthammer, who was a speechwriter for Mondale who obviously at a point in his life thought Ronald Reagan was a total idiot, you know, probably not schooled. So Rowan's theory is, analyzing the analysts, that Krauthammer sees Reagan in Palin. Wasn't particularly enamored of Reagan. George Will was not an early Reaganite, for example, became a good friend and associate later on. But this got me to thinking about this whole notion of who earns respect and why. And Mr. Rowan, the American Thinker, said, why is it that everybody stops what they're doing and when Krauthammer issues an opinion that's it?...
Now, Krauthammer in many ways has acquired this respect because in many of the venues he appears he's the only conservative....
June 2, 2011
Rush Limbaugh goes after Krauthammer.
On the occasion of Krauthammer's disrespect for Sarah Palin:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
206 comments:
1 – 200 of 206 Newer› Newest»Krauthammer is part of the club. Like George Will. And Dick Morris who was pissing on Palin on O'Reilly last night.
Screw these douchenozzles. Storm the Bastille. No taxation without representation. Free Willie and text him to coeds with big tits.
God bless America and the MILF's that make them wave.
Very interesting. I have admired Krauthammer, but he was apparently still an idiot when I, much younger than he, was already delivered from that. (New Republic? Mondale? Carter?!)
Krauthammer says what he thinks, though, and does it well.
Krauthammer is letting his ego get in the way of analysis.
Message to Dr. X, it is okay to say "I am supporting some other candidate." It is even okay to say "Sarah Palin is not my cup of tea." But he should not piss all over her. Because that is wrong.
Wait a minute.
Think about that image for a minute.
Pissing all over Sarah Palin.
Excuse me I will be back in a few minutes.
I like how Palin's language can skew the entire works in half a phrase. Why is it she is able to do this? Schooling might settle people down into ruts. Palin and Trump were at least fresh. The only pol who's fresh is Huckabee. He can make actual jokes. He's the only one in the entire field who can do that.
If the Kraut only believes in "Schooled" politicians , that's fine with me. But tell me how the hell this country ever fell for Benjamin Franklin, Abraham Lincoln, and Andrew Jackson? Those three combined had less schooling than Palin.
I thought Rush's take on Weiner was great, because it posed the fundamental question for small-government advocates to put to big-government advocates: Who the fuck are you to tell me how to live my life?
Weiner's shown that he's not up to any such task, and neither are the rest of 'em. Again to paraphrase Rush, this story ain't about dick, it's about the smallness of the people who want to dick us over.
Krauthammer's criticism of Palin is mild. If Palin has been studying the issues, she hasn't shown it. Maybe she's just not interested in policy issues, other than energy.
Glad to give you inspiration Trooper, although I doubt Dr. X can get the necessary arc from his chair.
It's fine to disagree with Krauthammer about Palin, but this analysis is garbage. Krauthammer is no fool and writes some of the most incisive conservative commentary written today. It's quite a reach to take his opinion of Palin and analyze it in the context of a job he had thirty years ago.
Look at all the assumptions:
(1) Thought Reagan was an idiot. Evidence? Writing speeches for Mondale isn't evidence of that specificity.
(2) Thought Reagan wasn't schooled. Again, evidence?
(3) Sees Reagan in Palin. Evidence?!
(4) Still sees things the way he did 30 years ago? EVIDENCE?!
All of that based on the fact that he wrote speeches for Mondale? Please.
He's saying that so far she hasn't talked about policy the way, say, Paul Ryan does. Maybe she can do that. Maybe not. Krauthammer says he hasn't seen it yet, and suddenly he's accused of being some elitist simpleton.
No.
There is only one issue for the 2012 election IMO: Just how big do you want the federal government to be? We're stuck in this bullshit "recovery" because nobody knows if we're gonna go full-European or we're gonna get back on track. So this time, it ain't just "the economy, stupid"; it's the socialism.
Tradguy, he's not talking about traditional schooling. He's talking about self-education.
Has anyone seen her talk policy recently?
What Freeman said.
Krauthammer is an awesome name. It sounds like a professional wrestling move, like maybe a standing elbow drop to the chest.
Chip nails it.
Freeman Hunt, Did you actually read the whole transcript?
Maybe she's just not interested in policy issues, other than energy.
Energy policy is basic and profound. Mismanagement (meddling) leads to economic friction. Economic friction leads to social unrest. Of course, some people in charge want things that way so that everything will get rearranged (to their advantage).
The best energy policy is to stand out of the way of suppliers, and also to curtail subsidies to suppliers. The alternative, more control, is seen in Chavez and to a lesser extent in Europe.
Palin just has her priorities right.
Chip, no, I'm analyzing the posted portion and responding to Rowan's theory as described there.
Well, I think you ought to click through. The rest of it is much better than the excerpt.
Krauthammer only said that Palin in order to be taken more seriously as a candidate needs to bone up of foreign and other policy matters. A fair observation.
He said he she is intelligent, underrated, has the right instincts and only needs some catchup to do. He was pointing out that in the last 2 years she has had the time to study up and should have which is again a fair and reasonable comment.
"He's saying that so far she hasn't talked about policy the way, say, Paul Ryan does. Maybe she can do that. Maybe not. Krauthammer says he hasn't seen it yet, and suddenly he's accused of being some elitist simpleton"
Policy smolicy!
He is not an elitist simpleton. He is a very smart elitist.
He is Charley Rose.
Sarah Palin is Jimmy Kimmel.
Freeman Hunt said inter alia: Thought Reagan was an idiot. Evidence? Writing speeches for Mondale isn't evidence of that specificity.
30 years ago I thought Reagan was an idiot and I voted for Mondale.
I think the Limbaugh notion quoted here is anecdotal, but credible.
Krauthammer refuses to take anyone who isn't a RINO seriously.
And, as El Rushbo suggested, it would be interesting to take Dr K in the Way-Bac Machine to 1980 have him analyze how "serious" a candidate Reagan was.
Trooper York said...
Krauthammer is part of the club. Like George Will. And Dick Morris who was pissing on Palin on O'Reilly last night.
More than that, Morris, along with Pat Caddell and Doug Schoen, are trying to present themselves as born again Conservatives, when they're not.
They may be smart enough to see that, when Little Zero drives the country off a cliff, they'll go with everyone else, but they're still Democrats and would rather see the Hildabeast (with Huma Weiner as First Lady) take the nomination from Zero than have a Republican win.
mccullough said...
Krauthammer's criticism of Palin is mild. If Palin has been studying the issues, she hasn't shown it. Maybe she's just not interested in policy issues, other than energy.
Bull.
Whether anyone likes it or not, she's the only one to take on QE2 and did more to arouse opposition to ZeroCare than all the "serious" candidates combined.
Here's what Charley said:
"The problem with her, I think, is that she is not schooled. I don't mean she didn't go to the right schools. I mean when you get into policy, beyond instincts -- I like her political instincts, I like her political overall view of the world -- but when it comes to policy, she had two-and-a-half years to school herself and she hasn't and that's a problem. ... It's not only the lack of schooling; it's the lack of effort to school herself and the lack of insight to see that she needs it"
So in other words she has to go to school to learn all the things that all the elitist douchenozzles know. Because he doesn't feel she has studied enough...well not enough for his exacting standards. You know like you do in Harvard and Yale and all the other fuckin' places that the incompetent scumbags that are running this country into the ground did.
Maybe it’s time we did something a little different. Maybe it’s time for a regular American and not an elite product of the same fuckin finishing schools that produced the Jug Eared Jesus.
Rush Limbaugh goes after Krauthammer
I don't think Limbaugh is throwing Krauthammer under the bus--he's just testing him--to see how he'll respond. And Krauthammer will have to respond to Limbaugh about this and not Palin (unless she steps in it). That alone will be a test of sorts. If Krauthammer ignores Limbaugh and gets hostile to Palin over this--well, I guess that's part of the test.
Rush Limbaugh (and Dr. X) should go after Obama's Columbia records.
Check out this link too.
Charles Krauthammer is oysters and champagne at the Pierre Hotel.
Sarah Palin is pizza and soda in Times Square laughing at Donald Trumps hairdo.
Both Rush and Krauthammer get paid to shoot their mouth's off. The market thinks Rush is better at it, a lot better. I do, too. Krauthammer's good, but he's parochial. He's your beltway conservative. He's been schooled, and that's not all good.
Palin is being schooled as we speak, and the media hate her for it. What's the hillbilly bitch think she's doing leading us around by the nose in that damned flag draped bus anyway?
Krauthammer wants book smarts, and that's not bad. Rush sees street smarts and competence, and success. He thinks like an entrepreneur.
Obama and his crowd are afraid of Sarah Palin. They should be. She may not be electable, but she's better than them, and they know it.
I like Sarah Palin.
But I don't see Ronald Reagan in her like Rush does.
First, which Reagan? The mythical hero that tore down the Berlin Wall with his own hands? Or the one who demonized gays and drug users and pornography, heading full-force down the road of destruction of civil liberties?
Neither makes sense. The epic line "Mr. Gorbachev... Tear down this wall!" doesn't sound so good in Palin's hick twangy "you-betcha" voice. And I believe, perhaps naively, that Palin will be much more respectful of civil liberties than Reagan was.
Why does Rush make such a nonsensical comparison?
Well, like he says, people's pasts matter. Rush was drug addict. And he likes Palin, he wants his Palin. Krauthammer steps between Rush and his drug, like a doctor who has concerns about writing another unnecessary Oxycontin prescription for his desperate patient. And the addict Rush can't allow that...
Both men are at fault. Krauthammer has been viciously harsh to Palin for months, for whatever reason. You can criticize without twisting the knife. Rush has no idea why Krauthammer acts the way he does, and should refrain from abscribing motives out of thin air.
In short; Rush should stop the psychoanalyzing and Krauthammer should cut the crap.
Charles Krauthammer is PBS.
Sarah Palin is PBR.
Not schooled = Not brainwashed. To be schooled is to see the emperor dressed in magnificent raiment at all times, never in his birthday suit. Likewise his court and all his courtiers.
Krauthammer wants book smarts, and that's not bad. Rush sees street smarts and competence, and success. He thinks like an entrepreneur.
Right now we've got three nobel laureates running the show. How's that working out? link
edutcher,
Is every Republican not named Sarah Palin a RINO?
Also, the effects of monetary policy lag FOMC purchases of securities, so no one can really say with any confidence the effects of QE2. A big part of Bernanke's reason for instituting it, which he said before it was instituted, was to push up the value of equities. So far that's been successful.
I'm interested in Palin's views on the interaction of current monetary policy with current fiscal policy. A "serious candidate" would be able to discuss that.
Also, a "serious candidate" who thought the government was too big would have done something as governor to help shrink the size of the state government.
Dead Julius,
Dang, man, you've got a raging hard on for Rush.
Who do you think did more drugs--Rush or Oabama?
Charles Krauthammer is summer at the Hamptons sipping cocktails and laughing with in crowd as they make snide comments about the help.
Sarah Palin is taking her kids to the Statue of Liberty and Gettysburg and the Liberty Bell as they ride the bus singing songs and stopping at Mickey D’s on the way.
I don't quite understand what Krauthammer is talking about when he says Sarah Palin does not talk "policy."
As far as I can hear, she talks policy all the time.
Maybe it is that she does not talk about his "policy," or that she does not talk about in his vocabulary that he can understand?
Did I miss something? I didn't hear Rush give an opinion on Sarah. We don't know if he agrees with Krauthammer or not.
Like Rush, I happened to see the segment live. Because I listen to Krauthammer once a week on Washington Week, I was struck by the CHANGE in Krauthammer's views about Palin. For me it was more about the credit he gave her for her intellect and her political accumen, than it was about her lack of policy experience and historical grounding. Maybe Krauthammer is coming around on Palin?
To my mind, there is no better visible, conservative analyst out there than Krauthammer, and for the Palinistas who hang out here, it makes more sense to build up the positive than to go off on a rant about "elitism". That is as worn out as the "racism" tag.
Again, you members of the Cult of Palin are taking reasonable criticism of Palin as some personal insult against Palin and yourselves. Why?
Further, do you ever notice how Palin has your policy positions -- all of your policy positions? Isn't that weird? Do you really think? Especially when Palin has been quite vague in terms of policy...
As for Reagan, he had an economics degree. He led a union. He was governor of California. No one questioned his credentials. I question Palin's credentials. She reminds me very, very much of that other messiah, the one who won the presidency in 2008.
I'm finding Rowan's analysis a little exaggerated. Krauthammer seems incapable of "vitriol." He speaks in a metered, austere tone that only rarely verges on the sardonic. Never the vitriolic. By Rowan's telling I'd expect to see Krauthammer frothing at the mouth.
The reaction to Krauthammer's notion that Palin's running negates the argument of Obama not being qualified is precious--precious in the same way a four year old girl dressed as Barbie throwing a temper-tantrum because her Shirley Temple only had two cherries while Billy Foster's Roy Rogers had THREE cherries is precious.
Now, "Rowan's theory...that people's pasts matter" is otherwise known as ad hominem, critiquing the man instead of his words. In all Rowan's article, I didn't see a single attempt at defending Palin, only questioning why Krauthammer is being critical of Palin. How dare he! And invoking his not-conservative past. A ruse, surely! Oh, wait. Rowan offered this: "She displayed more knowledge of the Constitution than Joe Biden did during their debate." That's like calling pickle juice perfume because it smells better than shit.
I largely agree with Krauthammer. Palin is charismatic, sharp, knows how to play the media, is an excellent salesman for conservative principles, but she is simply unschooled in policy. She can make a conservative case for medicare reform but she would be stumped to make an economic case in the way Ryan did. She apparently doesn't have a network of wonks to consult with. I don't think the American public is going to trust her when every policy prescription begins and ends with, "promoting liberty and individual freedom."
So in other words she has to go to school to learn all the things that all the elitist douchenozzles know. Because he doesn't feel she has studied enough...well not enough for his exacting standards. You know like you do in Harvard and Yale and all the other fuckin' places that the incompetent scumbags that are running this country into the ground did.
You nailed it. The self-proclaimed "elites" have the right schooling and think the right thoughts. They believe that in order to be taken seriously, a candidate has to think the same way they do. In the meantime, these so-called "elites" have ran up $14 trillion in debt, enriching themselves and their cronies while bankrupting everyone else. They deserve to be horsewhipped then have salt poured in their wounds, be tarred and feathered, then ran out of town on a rail. Or strung up from lampposts around the country.
I listened to Krauthammer talk about space issues last year. I've worked in the industry for over 20 years and Krauthammer was talking garbage. If he's taking stupidly about things I know about, why should I listen to him on other subjects? He's just another pompus windbag.
The problem with Dr. Krauthammer's statement is that Gov. Palin really has learned a lot over the last couple of years. Time and time again, she has shown more insight into what is going on in the world and in this country by our government than practically anyone else, including some times, the good Doctor.
This is the woman who publicly called the inflation problems with QE2 last fall. That isn't indicia of someone who hasn't been studying. She has also seen and cut through all the PC BS on the uprisings throughout the Muslim world, and pointed out how poorly the Obama Administration has done and how they have been sucked in by their multinational theology. Plus, why Obama's approach to the Israeli/Palestinian problem is so dangerous.
Rather, I would suggest that his real problem with her is similar to that of so many of the elite - she does not belong to their club. She doesn't want to join. She doesn't see its value. And, she thinks that their group-think is often wrong headed.
Hagar, Palin is all about principles. Living them and talking about them. That isn't the same as policy. Policy people want to talk about specific solutions to the problems at hand, as well as a process to getting there given the make up of our political process.
Like Rush, I happened to see the segment live. Because I listen to Krauthammer once a week on Washington Week, I was struck by the CHANGE in Krauthammer's views about Palin. For me it was more about the credit he gave her for her intellect and her political accumen, than it was about her lack of policy experience and historical grounding. Maybe Krauthammer is coming around on Palin?
I noticed the same thing. This is about the nicest Krauthammer has been to Palin in over a year. It is the condescenssion that kills him, but that segment was an improvement over recent history.
I've been saying for a while, if she enters the race, I don't see how she fails to get the nomination. It's GOP poison to criticize her.
I think the only acceptable way to offer less than enthusiastic support for a potential Palin candidacy is to say something like, "I'd love to see her as President, but I'm afraid the liberal media is going to be so vicious, and I think they are going to be able to sway the undecided voters against her."
mccullough said...
edutcher,
Is every Republican not named Sarah Palin a RINO?
Cain, Bachmann, West, Rand Paul, DeMint, Coburn, McCotter...
Also, the effects of monetary policy lag FOMC purchases of securities, so no one can really say with any confidence the effects of QE2. A big part of Bernanke's reason for instituting it, which he said before it was instituted, was to push up the value of equities. So far that's been successful.
And, of course, Bernanke is going to diss his own policy. It also requires one to consider inflation and devaluation of the dollar as success. It also begs the question that, if QE2 was such a success, why is QE3 apparently just around the corner?
I'm interested in Palin's views on the interaction of current monetary policy with current fiscal policy. A "serious candidate" would be able to discuss that.
Also, a "serious candidate" who thought the government was too big would have done something as governor to help shrink the size of the state government.
In his last outing, mccullough made a big show of wanting facts, yet said Mrs. Palin had cut no money from the AK budget, unlike his wet dream, Daniels.
In fact, she cut 1/2 trillion over 2 years from a budget in surplus, doing so while in conflict not only with the Democrats, but the corrupt Establishment of her own Party.
mccullough needs to get over the fact the Republicans are actually going to nominate a fighter next year. Much to his chagrin.
I don't want it to be Sarah Palin, it's not her time.
But her time will come.
I saw Krauthammer when he said it and I agreed with him. There is much to like about Sarah Palin. There are many things I like about her. But she had a unique two year hiatus from career responsibility, and she could have used it to really engross herself in learning foreign policy or monetary policy. Things that had been seen as a weakness. Things that probably were/are a weakness.
She chose not to. That doesn't make her unfit for the presidency, but it is valid to notice her choice.
I largely agree with Krauthammer. Palin is charismatic, sharp, knows how to play the media, is an excellent salesman for conservative principles, but she is simply unschooled in policy. She can make a conservative case for medicare reform but she would be stumped to make an economic case in the way Ryan did. She apparently doesn't have a network of wonks to consult with. I don't think the American public is going to trust her when every policy prescription begins and ends with, "promoting liberty and individual freedom."
Let's see if I understand your point. President Obama has shown that he doesn't have a clue in many of these areas, has all the wrong ideas, and has driven the economy into a much deeper recession than if he had done nothing. Plus, thanks to his foreign policy naivete, the world is a more dangerous place now than when he took office.
Despite that, you think that a majority of American voters are going to vote to reelect him, esp. despite her having much better innate understanding of these issues?
Palin is all about principles. Living them and talking about them.
Why didn't she reject the massive amounts of federal aid received as compared to taxes paid when she was Alaska's governor?
States Receiving Most in Federal Spending Per Dollar of Federal Taxes Paid:
1. D.C. ($6.17)
2. North Dakota ($2.03)
3. New Mexico ($1.89)
4. Mississippi ($1.84)
5. Alaska ($1.82)
6. West Virginia ($1.74)
Charles Krauthammer is looking at both sides of the issue and kowtowing to the conventional wisdom of the elitist train of thought. He stays well within the lines.
Sarah Palin is saying this is right or this is wrong. In simple words. In language you can understand. She isn’t worried about going outside the lines.
But she had a unique two year hiatus from career responsibility, and she could have used it to really engross herself in learning foreign policy or monetary policy.
Keep in mind who she would be running against, if she got the nomination.
Are you going to seriously argue that Obama understands monetary policy, given that inflation is rearing its head for the first time since Reagan was elected? Or, do you believe that he is an innocent bystander, and those trillions in additional debt, and all the money the Fed has printed during his term in office have had no effect there?
As to foreign policy, do you really believe that the world is a safer place than when Obama took office? That backing the revolution in Egypt, while ignoring them in Iran and Syria, was good policy? That Israel can trust Hamas when it comes to giving the Palestinians their own (non-Jordanian) country? Indeed, what do you think was really masterful in his foreign policy?
Someone we know, an editor, who went to a local NYC RC college (not that there's anything wrong with that, since my wife did also!) keeps telling us that that Palin is déclassé.
I keep telling her that she should bite her tongue.
I also asked her why Hil needs a valet, but she ignored me.
I sent the the following to her also:
A Frenchman, an Egyptian, & a NYC Congressman come into The Water Club in NYC & ask for a glass of NYC water….
She replied that I, no longer a NYC resident, was dissing NYC, proving my theory that intellectualoid Liberals have no sense of humor.
This all started when I sent our editor the picture of One Ascan in Forest Hills (the apartment where Anthony apparently resides for election purposes) with Anthony holding the hand of his wife, a/k/a Hil's valet (editor lives in FH) & said that I was much impressed with the renovation. She replied simply that FH is much used in TV & movies. I told her that she was irony impaired. That got her. TY is right. One can say anything to these people until you hit them where they live. My next reply to her will involve Anthony's use of the gerund.
I would guess that Krauthammer, whom I have admired for years, is, along with Dick Morris, most concerned with Palin's use of gerunds.
BTW, said editor was much upset at me a while ago when I sent her samples of The Hon Sotomayor's use of basic English, nevermind gerunds.
Charles Krauthammer is Henry Kissinger on wheels.
Sarah Palin is Ronald Reagan with tits.
7M, Surely you understand that those figures are driven largely by the presence or absence of military installations, plus the relative proportion of social-security and medicare recipients in the state.
Except for WV, of course; aka Byrdland.
Are you going to seriously argue that Obama understands monetary policy, given that inflation is rearing its head for the first time since Reagan was elected?
No.
That's what has made me particularly sensitive to wanting a president who can demonstrate an interest and deep understanding of such things.
She had the perfect time to learn enough really go deep and blast him out of the water.
Bruce -- Just so you know, we've spent a lot of money seeding revolution in Egypt -- much of it quite openly, during Republican and Democratic administrations alike. It would have been morally wrong to let those people down. The problem is what the power structure is going forward, not that a ruthless, failed dictator was ousted.
To follow ricpic, schooled means always having to say "I love you" over dessert to China even as they slaughter Tibetans, prop up N. Korea, shut down Google, and break the legs of Christians on Christmas morning.
Why didn't she reject the massive amounts of federal aid received as compared to taxes paid when she was Alaska's governor?
Is that federal aid? Or federal spending? Are you sure that you are distinguishing the two?
Yes, there is a lot of federal spending in Alaska. The feds own more land in Alaska then there is in the state of Texas, which, up until 1959, was the biggest state. That land has to be managed. The state also has a huge coastline, maybe 1/3 of our total. That coast line has to be patrolled and protected. That means the Coast Guard. Then, there is the fact that it is the closest state to an unfriendly nuclear power, which translates into Defense spending.
What was she supposed to turn down? BLM? Forest Service? Coast Guard? Air Force?
MayBee -- Here is the argument as I understand it:
1. Obama is a failed president.
2. Obama is unqualified.
3. Obama doesn't understand many things.
Therefore, it doesn't matter that Palin is also unqualified and has in no way demonstrated any understanding.
7M, Surely you understand that those figures are driven largely by the presence or absence of military installations, plus the relative proportion of social-security and medicare recipients in the state.
Who knows. But it was a nice weapon with which to bludgeon Palin, so what does it matter whether it is also a tired leftist talking point? Anything to stop the cult of Palin.
What was she supposed to turn down? BLM? Forest Service? Coast Guard? Air Force?
What's anybody supposed to turn down? After all, free money is free money.
On my post above, it's billion, not trillion.
I suppose that leads to the proposition that billion is the new million.
Or something.
Charles Krauthammer is more of the same served with disdain.
Sarah Palin is something new served with a brew .
a tired leftist talking point
The source is TaxProf Blog -- not exactly a leftist rag. His source is the Tax Foundation.
The problem is what the power structure is going forward, not that a ruthless, failed dictator was ousted.
And, you think that the Moslem Brotherhood is a good alternative? For one thing, do you really believe that an organization that has avowed the destruction of Israel is going to continue to support trying to keep weapons out of Gaza?
And, it isn't as if we haven't walked away from commitments before. Think Bay of Pigs, South Vietnam, and both the southern Iraqi Shi'a and the Kurds after the 1st Gulf War.
What's anybody supposed to turn down? After all, free money is free money.
The problem there is that she wouldn't have been the one setting funding levels there. That is set back in Washington, D.C., esp. for the areas that I noted. And, note, that we are talking national interests here, far more than state ones. Maintaining federal lands. Defending the nation. Patrolling our coastlines.
7M @ 8:01:Why didn't she reject the massive amounts of federal aid received as compared to taxes paid when she was Alaska's governor?
7M @ 8:17:What's anybody supposed to turn down? After all, free money is free money.
Is this what's known as "call and response?"
Charles Krauthammer would have been aborted by the liberals he makes nice with in every talking heads segment on Sunday morning.
Sarah Palin would have brought him to term and loved him like she does her own little boy.
Bruce -- It's not a bad thing that there was a revolution in Egypt unless the next government is worse.
Moreover, your flawed assumption is that the United States was some sort of puppet master. That's not true. There were massive protests. To its credit, the military stood down.
Your other flawed assumption is that the United States gets to pick governments that foreign countries have. Not usually the case, without costly occupation.
Finally, you aren't really using those national embarrassments as examples of how we should conduct foreign policy. That's silly.
Freeman Hunt, I admire your defense of Dr. K, but the "he was young and stupid" argument fails. Mondale was a nice guy, but a terrible public servant, and Carter was a disaster. I admire people who admit past mistakes, and I try to do the same myself, but come on. Mondale? Carter?
It was difficult sticking to conservative values back in the early 1980s, especially in liberal academic environments. Many of us did it nonetheless. The stench of supporting Carter et al. does not wash off just because 30 years go by.
Make no mistake. That is ultimately why they hate her so much. It’s that simple.
Chip -- It's what's known as sarcasm. If I have to spell it out for you, it's no longer witty.
Is it?
Except for Seven Macho's of course.
He is just being contrarian.
The source is TaxProf Blog -- not exactly a leftist rag. His source is the Tax Foundation.
The belief that "Red" states leech off "Blue" states has been a leftist talking point for at least a decade. Since it is a talking point, there is no reason to analyze why that is the case; age of the population (both younger and older receive more transfers), number of single moms (TANF), land owned by the Federal Government, which states have military bases, and so on.
But hey, according to your standard, Palin should have committed political suicide in the name of political purity. Awesome standard.
Back at ya, 7.
Palin is all about principles. Living them and talking about them. That isn't the same as policy. Policy people want to talk about specific solutions to the problems at hand, as well as a process to getting there given the make up of our political process.
Well, Penny, you left out doing something about them, unless that is what you meant by "living" them. The Sarahcuda in her past career have been mostly about actually doing something about about problems, not just talking about them.
And she has been pretty pragmatic about getting things done and heading in the right direction even if less than perfect. She is nowhere near to being the hardcore conservative or libertarian that some folks imagine her.
Ruy -- Please review the list. Is the District of Columbia a red state? Fascinating.
Are New Mexico and West Virginia what you would classify as red states?
Have you had an eye exam lately? Perhaps it's color blindness.
Therefore, it doesn't matter that Palin is also unqualified and has in no way demonstrated any understanding.
To be clear, I don't think she is unqualified nor do I think she has not demonstrated understanding.
I do think there were
a) some holes in her knowledge bank and
b) perceptions of a lot of holes in her knowledge bank
To be elected, I think it would have really decimated those perceptions if she had taken the past two years to demonstrate a thirst for knowledge and a deep understanding of the issues
I think filling the real holes would have helped her as both a candidate and as a president. She could have spent more time in Hong Kong, talking to business people in that very interesting economy. More time in India, talking to business and government leaders about outsourcing, visas, education, nukes. Maybe meet with Lebanese leaders about what is going on there, and Iranian Americans to get their take on what's happening.
She could have reached out to Polish leaders or business people. Had meetings with US business leaders. Reached out to conservative economists.
Oh, and by the way, I agree with Krauthammer's criticism: Palin would have been better served by self-schooling. She could have reached out to some awesome teachers too. Oh, well. That's not the end of the world, and no reason to reject her out of hand.
I like Palin, people. She is a conservative tour de force not seen since...ever. But I don't think she can beat Obama. So I don't think she should be the nominee.
"Why didn't she reject the massive amounts of federal aid received as compared to taxes paid when she was Alaska's governor?"
Her job as state governor was quite different than the role of persuasive populist.
Ruy -- Please review the list. Is the District of Columbia a red state? Fascinating.
Are New Mexico and West Virginia what you would classify as red states?
I don't know, what is there in DC that may cause the Federal Government to spend a lot of money in it? What could it be? No idea. It is a head scratcher.
WV: Poor state, and the Byrd effect explain a lot of it.
NM: Purple state. Don't know the demographics.
At any rate, don't go blaming me. It is a leftist talking point. It doesn't have to make sense.
the role of persuasive populist
This is the role Palin should take, and wail with vigorously. However, the president is not a persuasive populist. The president is merely the chief executive of the American nation.
I happened to catch this today--
Rush engaged KHammer on his home court-psychology.
Cleaned his clock, and did it as respectfully as he could.
Kraut has the (paper) credentials, but apparently Rush stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night.
Seven said:
I like Palin, people. She is a conservative tour de force not seen since...ever. But I don't think she can beat Obama. So I don't think she should be the nominee.
I agreed with that sediment for a long time. I no longer do.
I'd like to hear the reasons why you still believe that, if you're so inclined.
Ruy,
Mississippi and West Virginia are very poor states with generally very senior representatives in Congress.
Alaska, New Mexico, and North Dakota are sparsely populated states with very large Federal presence on military reservations, Indian reservations, national parks, wild life refuges, etc.
(In the case of NM, also some creative accounting. A lot of the money appropriated for the national laboratories here actually is spent for subcontractors and subsidiaries elsewhere.)
"However, the president is not a persuasive populist. The president is merely the chief executive of the American nation."
What?! SevenM! As Obama has shown us, the President is a FUCKING ROCK STAR, MAN!!! Like DAVID FUCKING BOWIE! Well, except that even at the zenith of David Bowie's drug use, when his every breath was at least a 50% mixture of cocaine, he could give an entire concert without a teleprompter. BUT STILL! ROCK STAR, MAN!
Did anyone catch Sarah's reference the other day to an essay by
Thomas Sowell? In that essay he argues that we cannot hope to get out of the mess that we are in unless we regain a knowledge of our history and an understanding of the fundamental principles behind the founding of our Nation. She said the purpose of her bus tour to focus attention on exactly those things that Sowell says needs attention.
Does this illustrate her ignorance and lack of "schooling" or a sophisticated awareness of our predicament?
Trooper York said...
Charles Krauthammer is Henry Kissinger on wheels.
Sarah Palin is Ronald Reagan with tits.
6/2/11 8:09 PM
You are a great man Trooper.
Krauthammer has the frightening vision of handing our nuclear codes over to this moron, and rightfully thinks "Oh, fuck. No way"
Of course, using Limbaugh's standard - that a person's past tells us about his present and is therefore, what? disqualifying? - Ronald Wilson Reagan would be tossed aside. After all, Reagan was a FDR Democrat for several decades of his life.
Krauthammer is right: Palin comes across as having a superficial knowledge on many critical issues, especially foreign policy.
So does about 90% of the people running the government.
Freeman Hunt...I was using the term "schooled" to mean a learning experience imparted by known mentors. My implication is that happened or the Kraut has NO KNOWLEDGE of what schooling Sarah Palin has been through since August 2008. Therefore he took the cheapest of cheap shots appealing to the false meme that Katie Couric had Sarah Palin nailed as a simple country dumb hillbilly who never reads. It is known that Sarah's parents were two school teachers who to this day are still amazed by the mind and the determination that their daughter has displayed since she was a child. That makes the Kraut into another mean low life bully, since he could have easily figured that out for himself if he had bothered to get some schooling the last two years.
Basically, Dog, Palin will be criticized as an inexperienced quitter. Quite reasonably, voters will conclude that it was stupid to elect Obama with such little experience. But why elect the inexperienced Palin to replace the now relatively seasoned Obama? Plus this messianic Cult of Palin looks eerily like the Cult of Obama. Nobody wants that shit again.
Rush is reacting to the "Cult of Krauthammer" who's thought by some to be the conservative "super-smart guy" who's always right.
As Limbaugh notes, he's usually the only "reasonable" conservative on a TV panel. Even on the Fox panel you have some Libs to bring down the IQ average. So he comes off as more smart, and conservative, then he really is.
He's basically a "Scoop Jackson Democrat" and a DC-insider. His main concern is Foreign policy otherwise he's pro-Business and socially liberal/moderate.
Palin rarely says anything remarkable about foreign policy because all the Republicans more or less agree on it. Nor is she a policy wonk and she's definitely not from Harvard or Yale. IOW, not someone the Kraut would like much.
An obvious conclusion. Not so obvious is why Conservatives love the Kraut so much.
Krauthammer was once a good swimmer. Then, he jumped into the pool and broke his neck.
I saw his jabs at Palin. And, I thought he was just a talking head, who earned his living saying the most stupid stuff.
Does it work because there's an MD after his name? Have psychiatrists lost the respect they once held?
I know what Mort Sahl said. Mort Sahl, when he was 55, was asked if that "back in the 1960's, when it was so popular to be "analyzed," if he had done so.
"No," said Sahl. And, if he had gone to a shrink, now, he'd ask for a refund."
That's how I feel about Krauthammer's "advice." Which I saw replayed on the Internet.
You know, the fear of Palin by the elites in both camps runs very high.
Palin is a "honey beaver who don't give a shit." (For this one, see the National Geographic video.)
Seven...Relax. The Messiah is not a married woman. Her display of a charismatic personality only shows that she loves life enough to protect it from the schemers we are up against in DC and the UN.
FWIW, at this point, with an economy very much in flux, who looks like they can beat Little Zero now probably is irrelevant.
The landscape in a year will almost certainly be extremely different, and probably look much worse.
When Charles Krauthammer was 30, he wrote speeches for then VP Walter Mondale.
When Ronald Reagan was 20 - and 30 - and 40, he was an active and vocal supporter of FDR and called himself a liberal Democrat.
Krauthammer was quicker to discover the errors of his ways than Reagan.
It's silly - I think - to hold people accountable for views that they abandoned 30 years ago.
Late to the party again (was car shopping for a car we can't afford to get to work to pay for the car payment we can't afford)...
Anywho...
How does Krauthammer determine that Palin has had two years to school herself and hasn't done it?
Seven Machos said...
I can't argue with your reasoning.
However, my feeling is that it has gone way beyond that now.
As far as criticism, whoever the GOP nominates will become Satan, so the point is moot.
"Also, a "serious candidate" who thought the government was too big would have done something as governor to help shrink the size of the state government."
Not necessarily.
Quite obviously, in fact, state and local governments are a different kettle of fish than the federal government. I'd put money on a sure bet that the Alaskan government is far less intrusive than most other state governments. But even if it weren't, Alaska, like many Western states, has a particular dislike of the grasping nature of the Feds.
I can think of three distinct conceptual reasons that State vs. Federal government would lend themselves to supporting State government as it exists and opposing Federal government as it exists that begin with "you're not the boss of me" and pretty much end with "you're not the boss of me."
Or, if that's not convincing enough... just compare your State income taxes paid to the Federal income taxes paid and get back to me.
Trad -- During the time of Jesus, the word messiah simply meant some person who was going to come and massively alter the course of history for the Jews. It had very political overtones.
Seven...As you must know, the Messiah is directly translated into Greek as the Christ. The Christ-ians are those who are waiting for the Second Coming of the Messiah to Jerusalem, and that will be as political as it gets. Why do you thing the Muslims are so antsy all of a sudden? Does that disturb you?
Trad -- You are simply wrong. The word messiah means a political leader who will bring about massive change. The word messiah existed before Jesus Christ and was used by people who did not profess to believe in the divinity of Jesus Christ, or believe in Jesus Christ at all. There were many other people who claimed to be or were claimed to be messiahs and, actually, a careful reading of the New Testament makes this obvious.
It was when Christianity became the de facto (and very often de jure) religion of the West that the word messiah became wrapped up in the framework of Jesus Christ.
Seven Machos said...
Basically, Dog, Palin will be criticized as an inexperienced quitter. Quite reasonably, voters will conclude that it was stupid to elect Obama with such little experience. But why elect the inexperienced Palin to replace the now relatively seasoned Obama? Plus this messianic Cult of Palin looks eerily like the Cult of Obama. Nobody wants that shit again.
Apparently, a lot of people, at least at this point, are prepared to re-elect Little Zero.
As for the "quitter" thing, that's a Kos talking point that comes off like flop sweat. Her reasons for resignation are perfectly acceptable.
The Messiah business is mostly in Seven's head; the Lefties seem to be more out of their gourds WRT her - in a Spanish Inquisition way. Most Conservatives are bemused by her ability to mess with the Lefty mind (as such), but nobody has come anywhere close to getting school kids to do chants to her a la Dear Leader (or der Fuhrer, for that matter) or painting pictures of her walking on water.
garage mahal said...
Krauthammer has the frightening vision of handing our nuclear codes over to this moron, and rightfully thinks "Oh, fuck. No way"
As opposed to the moron who has them now?
Ed -- So what if it's "a Daily Kos talking point." It will stick, and it will give voters substantial pause.
If the Daily Kos says something, is it wrong?
Is Rush is even really going after Krauthammmer? From the transcript, it looks more like he's going after "schooling." Krauthammer, as elevated he is on the right, still buys into the idea of the intellectual meritocracy. That's something Palin hasn't bought into. I think Krauthammer expected her to do so, to self educate (as Freeman pointed out), and is disappointed and critical of Palin for not doing so when she is capable of doing so.
Contrast that to Rush's comments about Weiner--someone who is "schooled" but is not someone we should look up to and elevate as our leader. Neither Krauthammer or Weiner have any inkling that American leaders should be people of superior morals than by people with superior intellect. And Krauthammer, intellectual that he is, ought to know better. If he was able to smart himself into working for Mondale, then he of all people should see how fallible it is--how one can be too smart.
Krauthammer and the Beltway arguing about whether Palin does or could meet their standards. Palin has her own standard. Rush is thinking about why their standard is the one that we should worry about. After all, what good has it done Krauthammer? Weiner?
Seven...We are agreeing and you don't see it. The promise of a Jewish King descended from King David is a totally political promise. The claims of Jesus that he is that Messiah means he claims to be the Jewish King come to take the government upon His shoulders. Christians believe that He will return and finish that job description. Read Jesus's favorite Psalm #110 that He said was about His rule as Messiah. As for the long wait since the Christ's ascension, what's a couple of thousand years between friends.
Trad -- Well, in the words of Emily Litella: alright then. Never mind.
Edutcher,
Palin jacked up spending while governor of Alaka. 31 percent in 2 years. She did run a surplus by jacking up taxes on oil companies and then giving each Alaskan an extra $1,200 a year, on top of the $2,000 a year the state already gives them for living there. So she did a great job of redistributing the wealth.
Look up the numbers. As usual, you don't know what you are talking about. Also, why does a state with 650,000 residents have 30,000 state workers?
Palin did a good job of helping to reform some of the corruption in Alaska.
Her record as governor is not good enough to be
President. Government needs to cut spending and stop redistributing the wealth.
I was just wondering why Krauthammer figured that Palin needed to conspicuously school herself and send him her papers with the smiley faces and gold stars on them and her report card to sign at the end of each quarter.
Lets imagine what would happen... lessee... I think that Bush took a "heavy" book on vacation once and more than once mentioned what he was reading and... drumroll... people said he was lying about what he was reading.
So Palin, lets suppose, wants to assure Krauthammer that she's being appropriately diligent and is schooling herself on policy issues and world events.
How does she do that in a way that does not open herself to the charge that she's simply displaying the right sort of coffee table books and artfully leaves the Wall Street Journal in the loo?
Quite seriously I was accused of having Scientific American magazines lying about my college apartment as props. In order for someone to conceive of such a ridiculous thing, they have to first assume that you are motivated to portray yourself as learned or intelligent. Seeing as Krauthammer specifically and utterly explicitly said that Sarah Palin ought to be concerned with this and criticized her for not being concerned with communicating whatever extent of her "schooling", the only possible result is to assume that whatever she's done was a perception game.
NO-WIN for Palin.
And as far as I can tell, she refuses to play no-win games.
We'll know how she does once there are presidential debates, so long as our journalistic betters actually bother to ask policy related questions.
Please God let's not pick our president based on how candidates do in these caged dances of silliness we call debates.
I heard it live.
Sarah won the Hot Air poll - again.
Krauthammer, and all the rest, better get used to the new reality.
As if on cue, Byron York helpfully explains that Palin has been discussing policy with anyone who asks, and has been posting substantive policy discussions on her Facebook page. Dr. K probably doesn't take Facebook too seriously, but 3 million followers is nothing to sneeze at, and Palin has been able to influence the national conversation via FB at least a few times (death panels, anyone?).
Therefore he took the cheapest of cheap shots appealing to the false meme that Katie Couric had Sarah Palin nailed as a simple country dumb hillbilly who never reads
Oh, a cheap shot.
Like saying that a woman who doesn't think Palin will run must have some sort of psychological block against believing that attractive women can be authentic. Perhaps saying that in a total absence of supporting evidence and plenty of evidence to the contrary?
That kind of cheap shot?
Just wondering.
I expected better back there.
Not much hope of that, Seven.
I would have liked to have Fred for President, but what can you do? If it's not doing crappy in the debate then it's not having the right sort of frenetic campaign, being too fatherly, or not fatherly enough, or too attractive, or not attractive enough, or whatever else reason we're told that someone or other can't win. He dressed in drag for a promo or his great-great's were polygamists or he's just too dull or he's not dull enough... well, it never ends.
Debates is actually the best that we've got.
Chuck is such a nuanced individual. I take everything I read, that he writes, and file it in the "another douchenozzle spouting off again" category.
http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=19960408&slug=2323082
WV: cladroi:
I apply cladroi to my chuck bumps whenever they get inflamed.
WV: frague:
Oh, and fraque, Chuck.
Shucks Freeman Hunt, I can't read further after your first comment.
My view of the interview, having just read it, is that Rush compares Palin's college record to Reagan's. They both went to small schools. Palin went to numerous small schools as a matter of fact.
Charles Krauthammer, along with Ann Coulter, give immense credulity to the admission's boards of Ivy league schools and base much of their estimation of ability on those people who choose whom attends Ivy league schools.
Perhaps if you listened to Rush make his point (and his money) versus reading him making it (I assume with no evidence) you would better comprehend his points, were you in fact to choose to do so.
Synova,
The DC elite wrote Palin off as a bumpkin 3 years ago. She correctly understood, as did Reagan, that she could never win that crowd over, and moved on.
If Palin runs, and if she is nominated, the DC elite will come around, just as they did with Reagan.
George Will suddenly discovered how smart Reagan was when he won the nomination.
Freeman...Help me out here. Two days ago I honestly gave my impressions from talks with several highly educated women of my generation. You are from another generation that has another perspective. You were probably schooled by more intelligent parents than the Depression and WWII survivor parents we were schooled by. So why does a knee jerk Palin rejection come from many women. School me, please.
MayBee,
She chose not to. That doesn't make her unfit for the presidency, but it is valid to notice her choice.
What makes you believe you know this as a fact?
Trad -- I don't know how old you are. I'm pretty sure Freeman is part of my generation (80s/90s cultural influences) and I think the main thing to take away here is that there is a lot less generalization among people of my age bracket.
This is especially so in intellectual matters and serious endeavors in general. You don't think of men or women (or different ethnic backgrounds, or whatever), you think of people and assume rationality.
So, for example, if I've got a male or female judge or I am dealing with a male or female attorney (one of my lines of work), I really don't think anything of it. I expect them to act and react like rational humans.
What makes you believe you know this as a fact?
What makes you believe you know differently as any sort of fact?
Crack, Gingrich did not do so well in that Hot Air poll.
What's anybody supposed to turn down? After all, free money is free money.
Well, Palin gave herself salary cuts in Alaska...
RE: schooling. Synova nailed it.
Krauthammer hasn't seen me cleaning my house. Does that mean I haven't done it? His opinions are usually based in sound logic, but he seems to be off this time. Perhaps Palin is being shrewd and waiting until she's actually in the race before she pulls out her biggest guns.
I'm a big fan of Krauthammer but don't understand how he would know what Palin has (or has not) learned since 2008. Maybe Krauthammer is fishing, trying to provoke Palin into responding.
Rush attacking Krauthammer for 30 year old beliefs that Krauthammer no longer believes, doesn't make sense. It is very common for people to be lefty when they are young and then move to the right as they get older, more experienced, more knowledgeable, and wiser.
Churchill said something to the effect that anybody who isn't a lefty when young, has no heart and that anybody who is still lefty in their later years has no brain.
Some of you know less about Sarah Palin and her policies than you do about the Casey Anthony trial.
Krauthammer is an elitist. Palin is not.
You don't think of men or women (or different ethnic backgrounds, or whatever), you think of people and assume rationality.
Bwaaa-haaa-haaaa-haaa!!! [pointing] haaaa-haaaa!!!!
Dude, anytime I encounter rationality it shocks the FUCK out of me. Like your take on Palin, it totally ignores the obvious - NOBODY BUT YOU GIVES A SHIT ABOUT POLICY NOW. This election will not be won on it. Hot Air is the #1 news analysis site for conservatives - they, and their readers, know policy inside and out - and Palin has won every poll they've had. I'll say it again:
Every poll they've had.
I'm starting to think that 80's/90s outlook is your weakness - you aren't old enough to have seen, and/or to understand elections, the zeitgeist, history.
Insisting we accept wonkiness as the end-all is over - we know what that's gotten us - now conservatives are going for what we want, and we want authenticity. We want someone we understand, and who understands us.
All the pencil-necked geeks in Washington, combined, can't summon that - and Palin can.
Get used to it.
Crack -- If only a poll at Hot Air was a poll of voters, not a poll of a distinct minority of voters.
I like Palin. I don't think she's going to win the general election. I've stated very sound reasons why.
You have stated sound reasons why not, and I appreciate that. You are also arguing quite a bit on emotion, which I find a little shocking given your hatred of NewAge, touchy-feelie bullshit.
One of us is right. We'll just have to continue to argue until we find out which one it is.
Is every Republican not named Sarah Palin a RINO?
Yes.
Cain, Bachmann, West, Rand Paul, DeMint, Coburn, McCotter...
They mean nothing to me. Cain is the only one who has made even *a bit* of a dent and I still can't see voting for him.
You guys are coming with me or we lose.
And that's all there is to it.
Seven...Thanks. Those were helpful points.
7,
The last election was won on emotion. It's the zeitgeist.
Don't blow it trying to smart - that's the stupid play this time around.
Life is like that.
You need a thick skin to go into politics. And, I don't think it matters what "Kraphanger" says.
I learned from watching Reagan it is best if these jackasses just swing at the air. Even when Reagan was called an idiot, he never fought back! He even said, "it doesn't matter how things get done, as long as you can accept you won't get the credit." Let others take that.
Sarah Palin just met with Donald Trump. And, so many underpants went into a twist. Why? He has money. She's gonna want donations. And, he can even offer his brand new 757. For her to ride.
I think if Sarah decides to run ... it will look like the Stooges out there, throwing pies.
How many Americans who vote actually want to be "schooled in policy?"
Didn't "policy" just drop down Congressman Weiner's drawers? He's hard at work now, in his office. Do you believe that?
What makes you believe you know this as a fact?
Her schedule has been fairly well covered, as have her movements. Most of the things I wanted to see involve travel to other countries and discussions with people there. I remember her making a speech in Hong Kong and one in India. I would have liked to have seen lengthy travel with lots of exposure to other countries.
Of course, I don't know if she met here with conservative economists or monetary experts.
However, part of what I think would (would have?) helped her is to do it quite conspicuously, because she has a perception problem.
Coming out and doing well at a debate wouldn't necessarily do enough to clear that up, because it's easy to just assume debate prep. Written words are too easy to assume the hand of an editor. It will eventually have to show up in debates, interviews, and casual conversations.
Demonstrating a thirst for knowledge and a fulfillment of that thirst would have been a good strategy, imho.
I think Palin would have time for most people. Even us.
I don't think Krauthammer would have any time for any of us.
Huckabee would like us, too.
Romney wouldn't.
Full disclosure:
The only thing that gives me pause is Greta Van Sustern (a Scientologist) being on that bus.
but, unlike the rest of you, I'm watching to things happening at once - Sarah's rise and the dismantling of the "church". (They've had more high-level defections, now, than in ever the history of the cult.) And if you think, even for a second, that my desire for a Palin presidency interferes with my hatred for NewAge then you don't know me very well.
I'm not going into this blind, but the country comes first, and Palin is it for the country.
"Her schedule has been fairly well covered, as have her movements. Most of the things I wanted to see involve travel to other countries and discussions with people there. I remember her making a speech in Hong Kong and one in India. I would have liked to have seen lengthy travel with lots of exposure to other countries."
Of course you will tell us of the extensive overseas trips, speeches, etc., of the other candidates. Especially the ones you favor, right?
I started out this election cycle favoring Romney but my impression now is that he is a bit out of touch with the average Republican. For example, he endorsed subsidies for ethanol. Bad decision politically, ethically, and economically.
Palin recently proposed eliminating all energy subsidies. Excellent move because it makes Romney's endorsement of ethanol subsidies look like a traditional short-sighted corrupt political move. It also cuts off the Greens at the knees WRT subsidies for wind and solar power. It also distances Palin from big oil. It is compatible with a smaller, cheaper, less intrusive, less corrupt central government and is quite elegant and easy to communicate and justify to the average voter. It sounds fair and principled and is philosophically consistent with conservatism.
Neither Pawlenty nor Romney nor Obama have advocated eliminating all federal government energy subsidies so Palin's position differentiates her in a good way from the other candidates.
Another example of Romney not connecting with Republicans is that he has not embraced the Tea Party. This is perplexing. Palin established a great connection with the Tea Party before the 2010 election.
Palin seems to communicate more effectively than Romney. Romney has not done a good job of explaining/rejecting RomneyCare via a short, simple, clear message that the average Republican buys. My guess is that Romney does not wanted to be accused of flopping. Sometimes you have to switch positions in politics and healthcare is one of those issues for Romney.
OTOH, Palin quitting is still a liability for her. The advantage for Palin is that she can use the bogus Dem lawsuits as an example of the horrors of big government/Dems and attack the Dems on that basis. Saracuda naturally attacks and that usually works in politics and may help her on the quitting problem.
The biggest issue that Palin has is her unfavorable rating with independents. She needs to understand why she is so unpopular with independents and fix the problem.
I saw the Krauty piece on O'Reilly the other night, I dont see what the big deal is here. He gave his opinion of Palin that was mostly positive and his only criticism was that she's not a policy wonk, am i missing something here?
I started out this election cycle favoring Romney but my impression now is that he is a bit out of touch with the average Republican. For example, he endorsed subsidies for ethanol. Bad decision politically, ethically, and economically.
Palin recently proposed eliminating all energy subsidies. Excellent move because it makes Romney's endorsement of ethanol subsidies look like a traditional short-sighted corrupt political move. It also cuts off the Greens at the knees WRT subsidies for wind and solar power. It also distances Palin from big oil. It is compatible with a smaller, cheaper, less intrusive, less corrupt central government and is quite elegant and easy to communicate and justify to the average voter. It sounds fair and principled and is philosophically consistent with conservatism.
Neither Pawlenty nor Romney nor Obama have advocated eliminating all federal government energy subsidies so Palin's position differentiates her in a good way from the other candidates.
Another example of Romney not connecting with Republicans is that he has not embraced the Tea Party. This is perplexing. Palin established a great connection with the Tea Party before the 2010 election.
Palin seems to communicate more effectively than Romney. Romney has not done a good job of explaining/rejecting RomneyCare via a short, simple, clear message that the average Republican buys. My guess is that Romney does not wanted to be accused of flopping. Sometimes you have to switch positions in politics and healthcare is one of those issues for Romney.
OTOH, Palin quitting is still a liability for her. The advantage for Palin is that she can use the bogus Dem lawsuits as an example of the horrors of big government/Dems and attack the Dems on that basis. Saracuda naturally attacks and that usually works in politics and may help her on the quitting problem.
The biggest issue that Palin has is her unfavorable rating with independents. She needs to understand why she is so unpopular with independents and fix the problem.
Greta Van Sustern (a Scientologist)
Didn't want to know that. Glad I do know.
Sigh.
She isn’t worried about going outside the lines.
Nor is Krauthammer.
Those two have some things in common.
And not just that.
What I see in the anti-Palinists is that they want Palin to give a measured dissertation on the economic theory of conservatism and the rest of the other items on the agenda. What I see in her is the ability to pull the right anser from the options handed her, which is definitely something that Obama cannot do. What we need in a president is someone who can take the various positions to study and then make the right decision, to be the decider. She has that ability. That does not mean she has to be a Nobel Laureate in all the various facets of the office.
Trad guy - "If the Kraut only believes in "Schooled" politicians , that's fine with me. But tell me how the hell this country ever fell for Benjamin Franklin, Abraham Lincoln, and Andrew Jackson? Those three combined had less schooling than Palin."
This reminds me of the Jesse Jackson effect of my youth. Where JESSE!!! may not have had no book-larning and fancy-schmancy degrees but he was all "street smart". And that meant JESSE!!! did not need to know no stinkin details about some prime rate reserves or how many missiles the Soviets deployed on E Europe when he could juss kill a debate with one rhyming sound bite!!
Same deal, different Party. Same JESSE!! mindset in Palin supporters.
As for trad guys claim Goddess Palin is "like" Franklin, Jackson, and Lincoln who didn't have "elite" degrees - well - that is true if you ignore the 3 were extremely intelligent men that were very well read. One a polymath - Franklin. The other two, massively successful self-taught lawyers who rose to the position of best lawyer in their regions. Jackson a Solicitor and Tennessee Supreme Court Justice - Lincoln - the railroads "go to guy" that rode a private train around the midwest hammering out deals between the rail firms, banks, landowners and legislatures.
All three were voracious readers and strategists.
Jesse got a degree in sociology centering on
"sports communications and culture".
Sarah Palin her degree in sports comminications.
Jesse took 4 years to get his degree, Sarah Palin, 7 years.
Krauthammer's position is like Jesse, Palin is a fundamentally ignorant person that focuses more on delivering droll soundbites on matters than seeking to understand those matters or form solutions.
John Stewart said, before the lib kicked in, "George Bush" referring to "if Bush had" with regards to Anthony Wiener.
As much as I grow bored of the stale, kinda trite "if" scenarios, I was shocked and gladdened to hear Stewart use the phrase (or something damn close to it) "if Bush had" and then use a Don F'ing Rickles devil doll to help make the point, until the point was shown (via simplistic graphics) to be:
Evil Republicans, from Hell, represent the point of view that Anthony Weiner shouldn't be allowed to be Anthony Weiner without people knowing.
Of course you will tell us of the extensive overseas trips, speeches, etc., of the other candidates. Especially the ones you favor, right?
Are you interested?
I don't think they all have the same weaknesses.
They also don't all have the same perceived weaknesses.
Mitt will have to deal with Romneycare and flipfloppery.
Pawlenty will have to prove he isn't too boring.
Paul will have to prove he isn't too wacky.
Cain will have to prove he can govern.
Bachmann will have to fight the stupid label.
Palin has her own things to prove to the unconvinced. They are different than what others have to prove.
There's no need to pretend they are all seen to have the same weaknesses, or would benefit from the same actions.
As some like to say, oh my:
BYRON YORK: Amid media circus, Palin lays out policy positions. “One thing many viewers have probably missed in all the horse-race speculation is that Palin is perfectly willing to discuss her positions on key issues, if anyone wants to ask. In fact, in recent days, weeks, and months, we’ve seen a lot of policy commentary from the former Alaska governor.”
And as I like to say, fucking hilarious.
"The last election was won on emotion. It's the zeitgeist."
Can I "fisk" (screw capitolizing the term) a sentence while also claiming it is useless, meaningless emotionalism?
I was thinking I could attempt it, because of some (now) hidden Irony or some such notion, yet all I can think to write now is John McCain sucks worse than Bush sucked.
All elections are based on emotion, as they always have been and always will be.
Crack, logic would dictate a much more constitutionally-based form of government than currently exists now in America were elections decided, based, and lost (as well as won) on other than mainly human emotion, though of course not emotion alone.
Or, at least, that's what I write.
Emotion
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaJump to: navigation, search
Emotion is the complex psychophysiological experience of an individual's state of mind as interacting with biochemical (internal) and environmental (external) influences. In humans, emotion fundamentally involves "physiological arousal, expressive behaviors, and conscious experience."[1] Emotion is associated with mood, temperament, personality and disposition, and motivation. Motivations direct and energize behavior, while emotions provide the affective component to motivation, positive or negative.[2]
As usual, Cedarford, you look like a fool.
Timing, man, timing,...
There's no need to pretend they are all seen to have the same weaknesses, or would benefit from the same actions.
This, absolutely, full stop: Truth.
Also, stop and think about what MayBee said and why she said it. It's important: what she said, why she said it, and why you folks should stop and think about it.
FWIW, IMO.
"As usual, Cedarford, you look like a fool."
No "look like" required, Crack.
http://washingtonexaminer.com/politics/2011/06/amid-media-circus-palin-lays-out-policy-positions
Here is an Examiner article talking about how Palin is laying out her policy positions. She has been for months. People like Freeman Hunt just are not listening.
Five years ago, this very month, on this very blog, Seven Machos was being accused of being the fringe right. Now, he's accused of being a RINO, at best.
Althou.se: Ain't we got fun?
I mean, ain't we got fun.
Carol, that was the Honey Badger video, or were you making a dirty joke (Sarah as Honey Beaver)?
funny video, if you haven't seen it.
I respect Krauthammer's opinions because even when I disagree with them, I understand the reasoning behind them.
He's right about Palin not demonstrating understanding of the issues, though. Her speeches are still pure fluff, no substantive policy proposals.
If the Kraut only believes in "Schooled" politicians , that's fine with me. But tell me how the hell this country ever fell for Benjamin Franklin, Abraham Lincoln, and Andrew Jackson?
Krauthammer was careful to explain that he was talking about self-education, not formal schooling.
Franklin, Lincoln, and Jackson definitely showed they had a good grasp of the problems facing their nation (or facing the colonies, in Franklin's case).
Palin has shown that she can give pretty speeches. She's shown no understand of (for example) the looming financial catastrophe facing the government -- her view, apparently, is that we should cut taxes and not cut Medicare, Social Security, or defense, which is another way of saying "we should bankrupt the nation". I'm not sure if she's pandering or just ignorant -- but we remember Franklin and Lincoln's names because they were willing to make tough choices, not because they told Americans everything was going to be fine if they voted the right way.
But tell me how the hell this country ever fell for Benjamin Franklin, Abraham Lincoln, and Andrew Jackson?
Honestly, do you need to be told?
Those three combined had less schooling than Palin.
No. They were well-schooled enough, if both largely home-schooled and life-schooled earlier on and later additionally self-schooled, with all the discipline and determination that required.
They WEREN'T less educated, in critical terms, much less did they not embrace self schooling. This is not to say that Palin's not capable. Manifestly (at least IMO), she is, and Krauthammer specifically said so. He did. However, Krauthammer has a point in pushing her to school herself--to embrace the very idea of schooling herself--in particular areas. What the hell is wrong with that? Our Founding Fathers would get that, not to mention a whole number of other patriot leaders in tandem and thereafter. That's what they had to do; that's what they did.
Some of you seem to be determined to believe that just because Krauthammer went to Harvard, he doesn't believe in the primacy of self-education (that is, that education which does not require formal institutions to impart it, but rather only the desire of the individual to do it for himself or herself). I question the premise of your belief (that he doesn't believe in that). I think those who embrace that premise are wrong. I believe he fundamentally believes and thinks otherwise. I ALSO believe that Sarah Palin fundamentally believes and thinks otherwise. (This would be yet another way in which those two agree.)
In that context, there's absolutely nothing wrong with--much less disrespectful about--Krauthammer calling out Palin in terms of self-schooling in certain areas. NOTHING. It seems to me that, specifically in recent times, his intent is not to cut her down, but rather to push her to achieve up in the very terms of what she herself believes is essential. What's so awful about that? Heck, it bears a strong resemblance to what Sarah Palin herself says is so essential--the very thing that makes her so attractive to so many people.
That's not elitism. That's not disrespect. Going further: I'd argue that, looked at from a different point of view, what Krauthammer was saying is more likely than not quite the opposite of both of those things.
People like Freeman Hunt just are not listening.
John: People like Freeman Hunt just are not listening? That's complete bullshit. Full stop.
Check thyself.
To decide if Obama is a failed president or not, we would have to actually identify what it is he is trying to accomplish. Personally, I think he is doing quite well in that area. It's killing our nation, and dividing its citizens more on a daily basis. And anyway, if you don't like Obamacare, you can always quit your engineering gig, and work behind the counter at 7-11.
Why, in the name of whatever, do people who say they're so pro-Palin absolutely insist that everyone not 100% like themselves cannot and must not take Palin seriously? What is it that compels them to argue that people not 100% percent like themselves shouldn't take her seriously?
They're certainly not doing any favor for the person who they say is their preferred candidate. What's up with that?
How weird.
Do you actually want Sarah Palin to go for the proverbial brass ring? Or is it that you just want to keep her for yourself and continue to nurture your little grudges?
Why, in the name of whatever, do people who say they're so pro-Palin absolutely insist that everyone not 100% like themselves cannot and must not take Palin seriously? What is it that compels them to argue that people not 100% percent like themselves shouldn't take her seriously?
I believe you got lost in your double negatives, but I've been up all night.
If and when Palin takes detailed policy positions, will the MSM report it? They want to make her look lightweight (see Couric).
wv - swelibro - lingering effects of a taser.
This conservative loves so much about Sarah Palin, particularly the rise she gets out of liberals and the irrational hatred she draws out from America's "elites" in academia, politics, and the media. Delicious!
That said, I do not want Sarah Palin as the Republican Candidate. Choosing a Presidential candidate is not only about someone believing the right things, or even wanting someone who makes your opponents look bad. It is also about experience and resume. While I may agree with much of Palin's politics, this country is currently enduring the extreme mistake of having elected President a politician of very thin resume, much less wrong political views. Replacing him with someone else of very thin resume though opposite views would be a continuation of immaturity in the White House, with a long and wasteful learning curve that America cannot continue to afford.
And stop comparing Sarah Palin to Ronald Reagan, as though she is similar in any degree beyond personal beliefs. I loved Ronald Reagan. He stands among the greatest of American Presidents, certainly in my mind in the top 5. I believed that about him when he was President, not just now in the afterglow. But even the first time Ronald Reagan ran for President, he had a resume of experience and accomplishment that Sarah Palin cannot possibly begin to emulate for another 20 years.
Stop wasting time on defending Palin - she can defend herself just fine. It's so much more important to get real about defeating Obama and finding the best candidate who can actually do that.
Ralph L: I understand the issues of timing, but ... no, I did not get caught up in my double-negatives.
Nor need you. Just pour yourself a cup of strong coffee and wade in again. ; )
: )
Stop wasting time on defending Palin - she can defend herself just fine.
You fail to see the significance of my taking time to do that (while defending Krauthammer at the same time).
Oh, well. Anyway. Good morning!
wv: logis
I'm not better off than I was two years ago. It don't look better for the months ahead, either.
...to me, or anyone else. (Not "anyone else I know", I mean anyone else).
That's why Obama will lose.
As for Governor Palin: she runs, she wins. Easily. Handily.
And they all know it. (All the crap that's been thrown at her ...what the hell's left, that's supposed to cut the ground out from under her? Oh yeah. They all know: she runs, she wins. Done.)
There's your variables.
1. Obama will lose.
2. Sarah Palin will win the GOP nomination if she runs.
QED, she will be the next president of the United States.
...and if she does half as well by us as she did for Alaskans, that will be about ...well, good 'nuff, I'd say.
Indeed.
...I put my trust in her gumption way more than I trust a Newt or Geithner -level "schoolin'". LOL.
...I would've voted for Andrew Jackson too, I suspect.
Chew on that one.
Seven Machos said...
Ed -- So what if it's "a Daily Kos talking point." It will stick, and it will give voters substantial pause.
If the Daily Kos says something, is it wrong?
Usually.
It certainly doesn't seem to have resonated and is just another Uncle Saul gambit.
mccullough said...
Edutcher,
Palin jacked up spending while governor of Alaka. 31 percent in 2 years. She did run a surplus by jacking up taxes on oil companies and then giving each Alaskan an extra $1,200 a year, on top of the $2,000 a year the state already gives them for living there. So she did a great job of redistributing the wealth.
Again, he lies.
She asked for a one-time tax to help create a rebate so Alaskans could heat their homes (something of a necessity up there). She also got rid of the state fuel tax.
She also proposed a spending cut of 1/2 billion for 2010 and cut earmarks by 80%.
Look up the numbers. As usual, you don't know what you are talking about. Also, why does a state with 650,000 residents have 30,000 state workers?
mccullough/PB&J implies Mrs Palin personally authorized each job in the state work force. Perhaps he can tell us why those jobs are there, instead of just leaving the question hanging. Maybe some of those jobs are unique to AK's specific nature.
Palin did a good job of helping to reform some of the corruption in Alaska.
Her record as governor is not good enough to be
President. Government needs to cut spending and stop redistributing the wealth.
Daniels' record isn't, either. What he got passed was done with a Republican Senate and over a small Demo plurality in the House (arm-twisting 2 or 3 Demos at the Speaker level does not a profile in courage make). If he hasn't got the stomach to fight, he won't stand for a second against Little Zero. mccullough/PB&J, moby that he is, glosses over with half truths and implication, as always.
PS davis, that means you'd be signing on for the Indian Removal Act and the Spoils System. Don't think you want to be associated with those.
And, no, I don't think she's running.
"Chew on that one."
I don't want to. It's so terribly unappetizing.
David Mamet, Pulitzer Prize winner, playwright, director, has some thoughts on that:
"Part of the Left's savage animus against Sarah Palin is attributable to her status not as a woman, neither as a Conservative, but as a Worker.
The intellectual elite which is the Left can preserve neither its hegemony not its pretensions in the light of facts, for the fact is that Government cannot create wealth. Wealth, and property, is creatable only by workers, which is to say, by those who are going to employ their gifts, their time, and their energy and intelligence to create something others might want. Every worker knows this: work hard, and get ahead. (May the hard-worker be overlooked, or gulled from his just reward? Of course; but the potential reward for his application is completely denied to his brother who will not work.)
Sarah Palin was a commercial fisherman. She actually worked with her hands, and, so, she like Harry Truman, was, to the Left, an object not only to be dismissed, but to be mocked. For the Left loves "the workers" only in the abstract; to find that they not only exist as individuals, but are willing to bet their subsistence upon their principles of hard work and thrift - this to the Left, is an unanswerable indictment of Socialism, Globalism and Statism. The enemy of the Intellectual is not the Capitalist, but the individual, which is to say the Worker."
David Mamet
from his new book just published, "The Secret Knowledge, On the Dismantling of American Culture"
I think Rush is talking about himself -- the everyone has demons and no one is worthy of respect in this day-and-age where every mistake is made public.
I recommend everyone take a moment to watch some of the many videos of Palin on her trip through the NE whether you like her or not. Watch how she and all "the people" around her interact at her many stops. As someone wrote people love her. Boston loved her. In my almost seventy years I have only seen a handful of politicians who could make that instant genuine empathetic connection with people. Bill Clinton was a master at it, she might even be better.
The problem is that Snouthammer's like smart. Nerdy. Ivy League. So is Romney. Gingrich to an extent (and he's a stinkin' marian to boot). Limblow and Princess Palin aren't troubled by the eggheady BS. They know how to appeal to the American herd--just rely on old fashioned idiocy. The Larry the Cable Guy meme.
Maybe Krauthammer and some of the commentators here should go to school. How about Sarah Palin's school? Here is Palin's school:
Sarah Palin policy
Don't be fooled by the TV part although there is a lot of video. There are also hundreds of pages of speeches, commentaries, interviews, Facebook posts and other material. Much of it is transcribed. It is rich with hotlinks, sources and references. It contains links to material Palin has read or thinks important.
Edutcher,
Palin cut some pork barrrell projects and jacked up spending by 31 percent. As for 2010, she wasn't governor no more.
Don't compare Daniels more than 6 year (and running) restaint in Indiana, a state with 10 times population of Alaska, with Palin's 2 years of high spending and 50 percent increase wealth transfers from the oil companies to the residents. What's unique about Alaska is they have a huge percent of state employees, a huge percent of people on welfare, and people get paid to live there, more by Palin than anyone. Palin is not and never has been a fiscal conservative. She's a W type big government conservative. Fiscal issues are the biggest problems facing the government, all three levels, in this country. Palin's record on these issues is terrible. But Palin is awesome!
McCullough...Why can't you convince Daniels to take the GOP nomination that was gift wrapped and left on his doorstep. Did he and Cherie hear the ticking bomb inside called the Bush Family's Eliminate Palin with a Loser Shuffle? Maybe you are the back up team sent to stop Palin' runaway train when your Daniels gambit failed. You are a very glib man, and there is no hint of a progressive's dementia in your writing. So who sent you... Barbara Bush?
I agree with Hagar - if you're not hearing Sarah Palin talk policy, it's because you're not listening. Go listen to her on-the-bus interview with Greta, for example, and the whole darn thing is policy. Good, sensible policy.
Meh. Krauthammer has earned the right to be woefully wrong once a year.
But I'm really tired of establishment conservatives.
Traditionalguy,
I'd like to see a fiscal conservative become President. Daniels was the best at this. I'll settle for the second, third or fourth best fiscal conservative. Palin's not a fiscal conservative so I'm not willing to settle for her.
You, edutcher, and the other social cons don't care about fiscal issues. So I can see why you like Palin so much.
But we had W already. Big government social conservatism doesn't work, as W showed.
And if glib means informed and not swayed by slogans and charisma, like Obama and Palin's followers, then I'm happy to be called glib.
Trooper it seems you like your politicians in drag.
Neither Pawlenty nor Romney nor Obama have advocated eliminating all federal government energy subsidies so Palin's position differentiates her in a good way from the other candidates.
Actually Pawlenty came out for eliminating all federal energy and industry subsidies when he campaigned in Iowa:
“As part of a larger reform, we need to phase out subsidies across all sources of energy and all industries, including ethanol. We simply can’t afford them anymore.”
- Tim Pawlenty
whoa....Crack's an Amazing Randi fan--super skeptic.
Maybe run that by Palin hdqtrs.
You'd be refudiated, not to say cast into the Lake of Fiery flame
hydraph
OK... Wait.
Now, Rowan's theory is that people's pasts matter. So here you have Dr. Krauthammer, who was a speechwriter for Mondale who obviously at a point in his life thought Ronald Reagan was a total idiot, you know, probably not schooled.
You know, there is an archive of young Krauthammer's writings. And didn't Kh come on board to the Reagan side soon after he won? This seems a little lazy to me.
mccullough said...
Edutcher,
Palin cut some pork barrrell projects and jacked up spending by 31 percent. As for 2010, she wasn't governor no more.
Not when she made the proposal.
Basically mccullough/PB&J is making excuses. AK was still running a surplus when she was governor, so the state could afford the spending unlike IN run by his Lefty pals for years, and her proposals for a one-time tax increase was in answer to high fuel prices. As he chooses to ignore, she also eliminated the 8 cents a gallon fuel tax, cut earmarks by 80%, and vetoed 1/2 billion in other proposals.
He doesn't want to talk about Daniels' run as Dubya's OMB director.
I don't blame him.
Don't compare Daniels more than 6 year (and running) restaint in Indiana, a state with 10 times population of Alaska, with Palin's 2 years of high spending and 50 percent increase wealth transfers from the oil companies to the residents. What's unique about Alaska is they have a huge percent of state employees, a huge percent of people on welfare, and people get paid to live there, more by Palin than anyone. Palin is not and never has been a fiscal conservative. She's a W type big government conservative. Fiscal issues are the biggest problems facing the government, all three levels, in this country. Palin's record on these issues is terrible. But Palin is awesome
More FUD. mccullough/PB&J trots out the Lefty meme of the welfare percentage knowing that even a small number in AK will look big in proportion due to a small overall population.
As for state workers, until mccullough/PB&J, and whoever is feeding him his talking points, can break down that work force, it just may be that because of it's size, harsh climate, and far-flung population, AK may be able to justify that force.
I'm with Freeman Hunt on this. Krauthammer still rocks. Does that mean he's always right? No. And we can be annoyed with him if he's unfairly undermining a woman who has way more guts/courage that most of the Republican candidates out there. That doesn't obviate Krauthammer's otherwise exceptional record as a brilliant, insightful commentator.
Thorley:
Thanks for the correction. Good on Pawlenty.
Edutcher,
You're doing an awful job defending Palin's fiscal record.
A 31% increase in spending in two years is ridiculous. That is overall spending. I'm glad she cut some unnecessary projects. Good for her. But the 31% increase is spending after cutting pet projects. This is a huge net spending increase.
Palin ran a surplus because she jacked up taxes on oil companies. They are private enterprises. She took their money and gave it to Alaskans for just living there.
That is wealth redistribution.
Again, that is ridiculous fiscal policy.
You are right that her 2010 budget proposed an actual cut of 13.4% to the 2009 budget. Of course, that is after she actually increased spending 31% from the baseline budget before she took office. Since the price of oil dropped, the state's fleecing of private enterprise wasn't paying off so well. So the wealth redistribution was a bit less.
As for welfare, you know what per capita means, right? You can compare a small-population state like Alaska with a medium state like Indiana and a large state like California. Take the amount of federal welfare money and divide by total population. Alaska was second (behind Wyoming).
As for state workers, my guess is that they need so many to process checks they cut to residents for living there.
But Sarah Palin is awesome!
Maybe you are the back up team sent to stop Palin' runaway train when your Daniels gambit failed.
A Runaway Train
"Krauthammer's criticism of Palin is mild. If Palin has been studying the issues, she hasn't shown it. Maybe she's just not interested in policy issues, other than energy"
She has commented on multiple policy issues over the last year and each time received more press than any other political commentator...not sure what you are reading if you missed this? Perky Katie told me to ask that question. Krautie has no idea regarding what time or how she has schooled herself...he is not in contact or ever even sat down to talk with Palin. Krautie is not above human failings...being a psychotherapist he knows Freud is tapping him on the shoulder with his Palin/Trump trashing.
Sorry reader, your paragraph at 4:50 still doesn't make sense. Is English your native language?
What exactly is your complaint about Palin fans' complaint about non-fans?
Fresh dose of heresy: IQ is not all.
Is it more important to be smart or to be good?
Is it more important to be smart or to be wise?
Is it more important to be smart or to be right?
McCullough...Your last answer was a glib negative-pregnant followed by a chang of the subject from you to an evaluation of Sarah Palin, Edutcher and myself as social conservatives who ignorantly overlook fiscal conservatism. That was a smooth reversal move. In fact none of the named three are social conservatives, and all three are fiscal conservatives who support Sarah Palin's run for the nomination and an the 8 year term. She will use her 8 years to serve fiscal conservatism by putting oil and gas development on steroids, repealing ObamaCare, and removing Obama's layers of Environmental death panels strangling American industry. I enjoy reading your analyses. You use high level verbal skills. But my question remains, who do you work for?
"However, part of what I think would (would have?) helped her is to do it quite conspicuously, because she has a perception problem."
I don't think it would have helped her at all because the charge that it was all for show would be obvious.
"Coming out and doing well at a debate wouldn't necessarily do enough to clear that up, because it's easy to just assume debate prep. Written words are too easy to assume the hand of an editor."
Which is no different at all than a conspicuous meeting.
"It will eventually have to show up in debates, interviews, and casual conversations.
Demonstrating a thirst for knowledge and a fulfillment of that thirst would have been a good strategy, imho."
How?
I perceive her as someone who is interested in everything. She quotes great thinkers and Historical sorts of sources, she sometimes "drops names" after a fashion when she makes an off-hand reference to something (like the date of the Tea Party) without explaining because she expects people to catch it themselves.
What more could she really do? She could be conspicuous about the quotes and obvious about the reference dropping. She could make a media event of meeting with the right sorts of educated people. She could leave a dog eared copy of the Federalist Papers on her bus and a copy or two of whatever magazine or journal foreign policy wonks prefer.
And in the end what she would demonstrate wasn't interest in learning about anything, but an interest in managing her image.
And people would rightly scorn and rightly assume that none of it meant squat.
Traditionalguy,
I'm self-employed. I don't work for consult/etc for any politician/candidate/whoever. Just giving my opinions here like everybody else.
Palin's got no financial conservatism credentials; maybe she's seen the light. I don't know. She was a big spender in Alaska, and we don't need anymore big spenders. As soon as she admits that her high-spending policies in Alaska were a mistake, then I'll start to listen to her on fiscal issues. I'll give her credit that she at least didn't run deficits, so she has fiscal discipline. But she raised the taxes on oil companies to give the money to residents. I have a huge problem with that, both as a fiscal matter and from a social standpoint. It's wealth redistribution to take money from a person or company and give that to someone else. She needs to acknowledge this mistake as well.
I agree that oil/gas exploration, etc. needs to be kicked into gear big time in the U.S., both as an economic boost and as sound energy policy. The President certainly has the power to increase/resume/etc. offshore drilling, but realistically Congress needs to get involved and change some of the environmental laws and EPA regulations. Otherwise, you'll get a bunch of lawsuits blocking the President's actions. You'll also need the President and Congress to repeal Obamacare.
Both these moves would definitely help economic growth, which would lower the deficits.
I'd also like to see Medicare Part D repealed, Medicare and Social Security means tested, and Medicaid and other welfare programs given a time-limit duration like TANF.
Once Palin does a mea culpa on her fiscal policies as Alaska's governor, then I'll be happy to support her.
"...we don't need anymore big spenders."
Okay.
So who are you going to vote for?
It's all fine and lofty to say "no", but it's also the easiest thing in the world.
Post a Comment