She's Gone; You're Not Happy.
I remember Senator Barack Obama’s speech at the Democratic National Convention in 2004. The new Illinois senator sparkled and glowed with an aura of pleasantry and affability; a certain spark of gentility and humbleness was ignited with each word. I remember thinking, “We’re going to see that man again,” when his speech was finished.
Sure enough, we saw him again, in the middle of his first term as an Illinois United States Senator, tackling Democratic politics and delivering a message of hope and optimism. We saw him take on Democratic strongholds such as the Clintons, rise up and represent an unrepresented demographic in the country, and listened to young people and older Americans alike. His respect for international perspective and the welfare of the average American was stunningly different from those of other leaders and politicians that had come before us. His wife was a beautiful demonstration of what a successful American woman with a true story of hardship coming up the ranks on her own valor and talent ought to be. He asked the media to leave his two little girls alone, out of the spotlight—and the press were so kind, and truly listened to him and treated the girls with the utmost respect.
And he was running for the office of President of the United States, too. Boy, weren’t we lucky!
It was when he defeated Hillary Clinton for the nomination for election to the nation’s highest office that we saw the Obama promise roll faster and gain more momentum. He united the country and really sent tremors through the instituted stronghold of tyranny and brazen disregard for humanity—a precedent set by the evil, ruthless Bush administration. He shattered barriers and rallied the disenchanted Americans who had suffered through eight years of atrocity, full of corruption that had never occurred in any other administration America had ever seen. Except for the Reagan presidency, of course.
Then came along Sarah Palin, the twit Governor of Alaska. She was defeated by Barack Obama’s strong speaking skills and preternatural wisdom. She was an awful person. I feel sorry that a great American like John McCain, who’s always been a symbol of American values and has never hurt a fly in his life, had to run with a dummy like her.
Here are some of the differences between Barack Obama and Sarah Palin:
.- Sarah Palin was regarded with controversy in her home state. Barack Obama never did anything wrong while holding offce. She’s a real bitch, you know. Barack Obama has never made a decision that didn’t settle well with anyone.
.- Sarah Palin has five children, and couldn’t be expected to do her job as Vice President. Barack Obama has two daughters, and since he is a man, he can do his job. After all, his wife stayed at home to take care of the children. This proves that no woman with children in her right mind can seek public office.
.- Sarah Palin didn’t have an abortion when she found out she would be having a special-needs child. Barack Obama certainly would have told his wife Michelle to do the right thing and abort a fetus with problems. After all, being pro-choice means that abortion is your first option at all times.
.- Sarah Palin has poor parenting skills, and her daughter got pregnant at 16. It’s all Sarah’s fault, because only bad 16-year olds have sex. Right? Barack Obama’s daughters will never make a mistake in their entire lives. Why? Because Barack Obama is a perfect parent.
.- Sarah Palin’s daughter and little boy deserved attacking and parodying. They are not as good children as the Obama girls.
.- Sarah Palin’s experience as an American is not as important as that of Barack Obama’s. Alaska is a dot on the map compared to his rich Chicago experiences. This proves that Alaskans are not suitable for national office.
.- Sarah Palin doesn’t have feelings. Barack Obama does. But if she did, his are more important, anyway.
.- Sarah Palin ditched her first term as Governor of Alaska. Barack Obama resigned his first term as a United States Senator. But he became President. She’s just a loser.
.- Sarah Palin is awful with the press. Barack Obama’s administration has a great relationship with media today, and is honest and forthcoming in all they do.
.- Sarah Palin makes poor hiring decisions. Barack Obama was totally in his right to bring such a talented man like Tom Daschle to his administration!
.- The list goes on and on. Sarah Palin is just not as valuable a human being as Barack Obama is.
# # #
In all seriousness, Barack Obama deserved to have human treatment from the media. His daughters deserved the media hands-off approach that they were treated with—no children should be subjected to being ripped to shreds by strangers, much less publicly. I’m sure President Obama is a man of good character, despite how much I severely disagree with a majority of his policymaking.
The problem is—I feel as though whoever would have stepped up to the plate of the Republican ticket vacancy next to John McCain would have been destroyed, whether or not it was Palin. Since President George W. Bush is out of office and has retreated to Texas, liberals need a new punching bag.
Ego and past policy aside (and there is so much bad blood that obviously existed prior to the nomination), I think Governor Palin was not treated equitably by the media. Past controversies of hers were dug up and studied, whereas… Obama’s? Not so much. Obama asked the media to respect his family’s privacy—as well they should have. The Palins were not afforded the same respect. Not only that, but Sarah Palin was criticized for getting angry at the media for attacks on her family. Barack Obama would have been in his right to get angry, too, if the media went after his children.
Question: if it had not been Sarah Palin on the VP nomination, how would she be viewed these days?
Governor Palin’s focus on Alaska has certainly been questionable since the election ended. Her approach has been, too. I, as a Palin voter in the 2006 election and an ardent supporter of hers, have been scratching my head and trying to think of what her logic must be. The Office of the Governor was hell to deal with this session, I will admit. The Legislature and the Governor’s Office butted heads and wouldn’t budge. But it’s the nature of the game. That’s the professional side of things. I’m sure she has a tough personality to work with.
However, the intrusion into the personal life was hard to watch. It was borderline obsessive and people seemed to have fun doing it. I think there were a million better things to talk about than Sarah Palin's personal life. Really.
I don’t think she’s got a presidential run in her sights at this point. After the high numbers of ethical complaints brought against her, the fiscal conservative in her is enraged over the amount of money being spent to investigate each claim. We all should be enraged. It doesn’t cost the person filing the complaint a cent to do so, but it costs the state—us—money. Who can blame her for having a book deal? Her family is deep into legal debt from the ethics violations complaints that have thus far turned out to be bogus. How else do you expect her to pay for it? She has children to take care of!
By the way, who makes a porno about political figures? If it was done about Obama, the offense flag would have been raised. I also heard that defeated Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican Condi Rice have body doubles in the “feature.” It’s so easy to pick on “loser women.” Oh, and by the way, violence against women or the fantasy thereof isn’t funny at all. But apparently lots of people do think it’s funny, including Terry Tate. Seen the video? If you’re laughing, I want you to imagine Michelle Obama, Laura Bush, or your own mother or sister in Palin’s place. Are you laughing now?
Let me state right now that I’m not as much of a Palin supporter as I was in the past. But the idea of kicking someone when they’re down is not classy at all. And this woman is down, and her family is, too. They’ve been through enough, especially with having their drama played out on the national screen, no matter who started it or said what first.
No matter what she does, someone’s going to have something nasty to say about it, whether it's deserved or not.
Let me also state that I think the press conference was a strange performance. Usually press conferences answer questions; this one happened to raise more. Maybe the answers will come down the line sometime soon. I, for one, hope they do.
As far as I’m concerned, I think she did the right thing. So many people have been criticizing her, and publicly saying she’s unfit to be governor. Now she’s stepping down, and still taking heat. This is what her opponents wanted, and she’s giving it to them. And apparently no one’s happy with that, either.
I think critics should be thrilled and comfortable with this. You got what you wanted. Move along, now. The show’s over.
Although, I have to say—watch out, Republicans. Any one of you could be next. First it was Stevens, now it’s Palin. Next up… who?
China Online Shop Buy Wholesale Products China Distributor Electronic Components Solar Gadgets USB Gadgets Buy Ipod Buy Toys Naughty Toys Face Makeup Eye Makeup Jewelry Shop Home Decor Shop Kitchen Gadgets Buy Shells Lifestyle Gadgets Scarves Shop
Dani I think you're being very nice about the whole issue. Can't say I agree on many points.
First, and I'm not an Obama fan. But he was very clear that everyone's family should be hands off. Most especially Palin's.
Second, Palin put her family out there. Selling her daughters pregnancy story to US Magazine, I mean talk about throwing your daughter under the bus.
Third, She charged the citizens of Alaska for her children's presence, like they were employees. She can't be surprised when they then come under scrutiny.
Fourth, Politics is hell. Everyone knows that. Bush took some major hits, but as with Palin, he said a lot of stupid CRAP. Clinton took some major hits too, he, like Palin, did some stupid CRAP. His daughter was called "horse face" and she was parodied as a face with nothing but a giant gummy grin. I'm not saying this is okay, I'm just saying you can't be surprised by it, or act as if you are the only one. But as a certain Governor once said, "If you can't take the heat get out of the kitchen".
Fifth, filing ethics complaints is our right as free citizens of this country. If we see a problem, we as citizens, are expected to act upon it. Many of these complaints were not even investigated they were deemed MOOT. But,If she was not doing anything wrong, then what's the problem. Her pushing the investigation into Troopergate, when there was already one going on, was her abusing the system, not the people. She is the one choosing to legally fight every rumor, every complaint, every person questioning her, no one else. She has to take some responsibility. She had the option of ignoring them and not lending them any credence. Plus she has SarahPAC to pay for her crap, at least for a few more weeks.
I think you are right about the Porno. That's always wrong, about ANY woman, not just political ones. I also agree she made the right choice. She needed to get out, she took it all too personal. Couldn't let anything alone, she had to make a federal case about everything. That is why she keeps getting the heat. Because she won't just shut and go away already. She has to keep playing the Martyr. The poor me. You didn't hear Clinton or Bush, whining about how hard everyone was on them. You didn't see Clinton or Bush quit when it got uncomfortable, even if they should have. If she would stay off the Today show and quit saying completely idiotic crap, like, "I can see Russia from my window" and "keep your eye on the basket" no "keep your eye on the ball"(which is it, now???), people would forget about her and her family. But every time we turn around she is tootin' her own flute, or whining about how mean everyone is to her, or attacking someone about something they might have said. Well, whatever happened to, "Sticks and STones"?? As I said before she has to take some responsibility for what's going on. To say she didn't ask for this would at the very least be a joke. She had every opportunity to back away and take care of her family from the beginning. I respected her for keeping her pregnancy quiet and having the baby, regardless of his condition. But when she chose to run for a national office, instead of being there for her special needs child, her pregnant teenager, her pubescent teenager, her new school age child, AND her son fighting a war; well I realized then she was not a FAMILY FIRST person. Though she billed herself that way. It's the absolute Hypocrisy that people take issue with and get up in arms about. Well that and the multitude of other things she did.
Your points are quite valid.
The comment that "... the idea of kicking someone when they're down is not classy at all. And this woman is down." Sorry, but Palin has a way of asking to be kicked ... mainly because she can never, ever admit any wrong doing, can evidently never say 'I'm sorry.' Can never let even the slightest thing that annoys or offends her fall by the wayside.
She DID abuse the system when she filed an ethics complaint against herself for Troopergate ... because the independent board's decision wasn't going in her favor. She abused the system even before that, when she allowed her husband to sit in on closed meetings, which is pretty much a no-no in the world of governing, and when she and Todd continued to fight that particular battle. She abused the system when she used her personal e-mail to conduct state business ... knowing full well that it was at the least unethical. She abused the system by going to Kososvo, when she knew that was she was considering quitting her job ... as she admitted, she'd been thinking about doing it for a month or more. She is abusing the system by taking trips to sign bills that could be signed in her office. She abused the system by taking per diem ... obviously with the thought that she could take care of her family AND her political responsibilities at home ... and at the taxpayers' expense. She abused the system when she billed the state for her children's travel and lodging expenses, to go to functions they had not been invited to or had no part in. Again, with the thought that she could be with her family AND take care of the responsibilities of her governorship.
She is still abusing the system ... by quitting, but giving herself time to make some important appointments before she leaves, that probably should be made by the incoming governor.
I feel rather sorry for her ... and I doubt she'd be offended by that sympathy as she seems to sympathy ... because she is evidently torn. She WANTS to be a mother who is taking care of her family, and at the same time she needs to be important in the 'outside world,' and she needs to be a tough gun-toting, one-of-the-guys woman. These things must be pulling her in many different directions. It would be so good for her if she could just choose ONE thing she wants to be, put her efforts into doing that one thing well ... and if she could ever realize that it isn't the media, it isn't the liberals, it isn't the bloggers who are causing so many of her problems ... it's her.
Filing ethics complaints is indeed our right as free citizens but filing numerous, frivolous ethics complaints or lawsuits for that matter clogs our system of government and begs the question of what's the point? Troopergate was most likely helped by Sarah to show that she was being cooperative and had nothing to hide. A good move considering the office she was running for when the media brought the Troopergate issue to national attention. I think you're statement is a little overblown calling her pushing the investigation into Troopergate an abuse of the system. She should have picked her battles more cautiously and focused on the bigger ones but after a while it got ridiculous.
Also, the fact that Palin's family is growing up and starting to take different directions other than her own says nothing about where she puts her family versus career. What kind of reasoning went into that statement about family first? Again, a little over the top and poorly reasoned.
To go on a wild and wacky tangent, it seems like there is an element of liberal bs running in our state media. The Anchorage Daily News has certainly taken a nosedive since I've been away in college and Juneau-ites are not too happy about Sarah's apparent desire to move the capital (her swearing in ceremony, special session held in Anchorage). As far as out-of-state adversity, well, there are always wonderful media outlets such as NPR and the New York Times to make conjectures about her motives and so-called hypocrisy. That's just part of life and the hell of politics. Granted.
What I take issue with is how the media, in-state and out-of-state, had such a momentus buildup to Obama's election that they cast him as the savior. For example, the ADN put Obama's picture on the front page several consecutive times leading up to the election. I'd like to believe in hope but that doesn't turn on the lights. I'd like to have the audacity to think change is possible, and it is, but it's such a nebulous platform, you could call it whatever you wanted at the end and say you fulfilled your campaign promises. Basically what the media has done is written a check that Obama and his administration can't cash. I guess he could fuel his dreams of hope and change at the expense of every industry that makes a profit ie natural resource development, while propping up industries that are stifled by unions and unrealistic demands but we're in a recession and people need jobs.
Now contrast that with the media's wonderful coverage of the ethics complaints against Palin that turned up bupkiss and you've got a rag of a newspaper, ADN, trying its best to add value to news in order to influence popular opinion. Look at how the media whipped up attention on Ted Stevens at an opportune moment before the senatorial election and out of roughly 270,000 votes, excess baggage won by what, 3000 I think. Now that the election is over and charges against Stevens have been dropped because of prosecutorial misconduct, democrats feel entitled to their senate seat like they earned it fair and square.
The point is that the media has a lot of responsibility in portraying candidates, and their selection of coverage says a lot about how they view the world. The liberal media abuse that power daily and give kooks like Bill O'Reilly and Anne Coulter an audience, which is a shame. Is it too much to ask for some objective, fact-based reporting without all the value-added, thinly-veiled propaganda, and liberal bs?
... because in filing that ethics complaint 'against herself,' she cost her state over $100,000 ... and she 'cooperated' so well with the independent board on that, didn't she ... seeing nothing wrong with people not obeying the subpoenas that were issued to them.
She never picks her battles wisely, nkalgar ... any and every single thing or person that doesn't agree with her becomes a major, personal battle. That is just not an adult attitude, let alone one suitable for a politician at any level of government.
Oddly enough, we in the 'Lower 48' received very little substantial news about Palin during the presidential campaign, so it's really difficult to believe that the national media was very unfair to her. Actually, if anything, they were unfair to the majority of voters, in that most didn't think to read Alaskan newspapers in order to obtain information about the governor. Most knew nothing substantial whatsoever about even Troopergate, let alone her mayorship of Wasilla, her 'co-governor' husband, her per diems, children's travel, the Canadian gas line, supporting Pebble Mine's anticipated pollution as well as the proximity to an earthquake fault. Heck, many didn't even know that she actually WAS for 'The Bridge to Nowhere,' and even fewer knew that the money was kept and a 'Road to Nowhere' was built with part of it.
I'm really sorry ... I am a registered Republican who would have, somewhat reluctantly, voted for McCain. However, as a woman, I was insulted at his (or the party's) choice for VP candidate, which was so obviously meant to bring in more women's votes, along with the mesmerized men's votes. Then I researched and found so many negatives regarding Palin (which probably are only a drop in the bucket) ... Yes, I voted for Obama. And yes, I'm disappointed. However, the idea of Sarah Palin being that 'one heartbeat away' from the presidency was, and is, an even scarier thought.
We don't seem to expect much of our politicians ... but Palin has shown us, again and again, from how she handles dissension to her sniping on Twitter, that she is not really cut out for the 'political world.' I only follow the news about her just in case she actually does decide to run for president in 1012. Remember the old saying, "Forewarned is forearmed?"
I do wish her well! She appears to be a very unhappy person inside, and that really is just sad. Until ... when or if ... she manages to look into herself ... and figure out that not everyone or everything is always going to go her way ... then perhaps she will be able to find some peace. I wish I could personally advise her to put a copy of the Serenity Prayer where she can see and read it at least every day.
I apologize for coming across as snide and insensitive but this is too good of an opportunity to pass up. The question of ethics complaints against Sarah Palin needs to be answered here and now with a coherent statement so I'll give it my best shot. There are three known violations that have stuck. The state board of personnel investigated or sanctioned an investigation into the Troopergate incident twice, first finding Sarah Palin abused her power and then in the second investigation found that she was totally within her right, so depending on which investigation you choose to believe determines whether she was right or wrong:
http://www.adn.com/palin/story/577323.html
Next we have the ethics violations that stuck. One was for charging the state for her family's travel expenses during the presidential campaign and the other for charging the state per diem for working and living at home in Wasilla. On the first of the two, she paid back roughly 8000 of the 24000 that she charged the state. There was no widely published breakdown of the costs but the media ran with it anyway and few outlets if any trumpeted the fact that she made amdends and paid the state back for the portions of her travel that were not supposed to be covered. On the second of the two charges that stuck, it was a true infraction and that pay should be docked from her salary. No excuses.
Lastly, we come to my favorite. This is the one that makes me giggle. The 19th ethics violation complaint brought against Sarah was because her supporters raised money for her to use as a legal defense fund. Funny how her critics will say that all the negative media attention is the price she pays for being a public figure but when she uses her supporters to raise funds to combat frivolous complaints by ethically limiting contributions to 150 apiece, they lambaste her for ethics violations. The state board of personnel dismissed this one almost imediately but when her detractors didn't get satisfaction they hired an independent investigator who said she may have violated ethics laws:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090721/ap_on_re_us/us_palin_ethics_complaint
So I guess Simon and Garfunkel got it right when they said a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest. Your imagination is the only reality you'll ever know anyway so I can't really blame you for following only parts of the story that suit your political tastes. For being someone out of state who is so highly opinionated about Sarah Palin, you would do well to read more and consider all of the facts before shooting your mouth off. Just for future reference here's a link to Alaska's most widely read and liberally biased paper I might add:
adn.com
That was hard. Oh and in case you missed the New York Time's Bestseller that came out well before the election you might want to take a look at this:
http://www.amazon.com/Sarah-Hockey-Turned-Political-Establishment/dp/141...
I am good family friends with the author of the book, Kaylene Johnson, and before people discredit the book as a puff piece there are some things they ought to know. First is that Kaylene is a flaming liberal. I love her death, she is a good family friend but a flaming liberal that is better suited for fundraising for PETA or NPR, and to write the book she interviewed an Alaskan woman that exercises her right and freedom to hunt, fish, and harvest from the land. Two diametrically opposed viewpoints in my opinion. Second is that the book is based largely on research through Sarah's parents and family archives and only four hours total of the book research went into face time with Sarah. Still you need to know the quality of the information available to the public.
So barring living in a hole in the ground, I think you need to wake up and stay informed on people that are politically salient to this country's future. That you weren't spoon fed this information by the news is no excuse for ignorance and it is a symptom of just how biased our country's, yes, national media outlets are. Do a bit more than follow the news and you might just be using your noodle.
Lastly, a question for you since you infer quite a bit in your post concerning your political choice in the last election, did you not vote at all or did you vote for Obama? I have loaded answers for each side so be careful how you respond but I just want to see if you're griping without reason or if you're mentally bankrupt by voting for a particular candidate because they're not someone else. Either way you're putting an awful lot of yourself out there and you are hypercritical of a woman who is God-fearing, homegrown, principled, and who represents the true character of our state, when you apparently know bupkiss about her. Please understand that I'm attacking your lack of thought process and not you as a person. I try to stick to the issues and the behaviors of people and leave their character alone. You'd be wise to do the same.
Thank you, Marjtoo! I think your comments well thought out and spot on.
Re: Nkalgar-It's funny you should ask what the point is? Well she's been found to have breaches of ethics now hasn't she. That is the point and there was already a bipartisan investigation going on, so spending 2/3 of the total cost of ethics complaint, on a redundant investigation, is kind of shooting yourself & Alaskans in the foot, wouldn't you say?? How was Troopergate helped by a REDUNDANT expense? you don't see it as an abuse of the system?? Apparently you are drinking the kool-aid.
It is MORE than an understatement to say her family was "growing up and starting to take different directions" wouldn't you say?? You don't think ALL of those things together warrant her being their for her kids around the clock, maybe you don't. And that tells me you don't have kids (especially special needs kids) they need you at those important times in their lives. And surprisingly infant's lives don't run on a government schedule. In fact, babies w/ DS tend to have severe health issues, heart and otherwise. How are you going to address an emergency hospital visit from Kosovo or elsewhere?? She and McCain said they were family first, then country first which is it????? obviously not the former!!
You are definitely on a "wild and wacky tangent". I think that's putting it nicely. Alaska is a Republican state, not LIberal. And for you to assume a liberal is talking, tells me one of two things. You are NOT an Alaskan, or you are a talking head, drank the kool-aid and was bought and paid for while you were out of state, lower 48 Republican, that thinks they can come back into our state spewing their crap and spam the local blogs. I'm betting the latter. As you repeat that "liberal bs" crap repeatedly. Talk about not well thought out. Obama's pic being on the front of the newpaper is because he was a candidate, the first black candidate. It's called news!! Not republican Opinion paper. Tho I'd buy it if it were. I believe I said I am not an Obama fan. But you have to open your eyes!!! Palin is a snake. She sold out our state and definitely violated ethics. Call the personnel board they will clarify for you that 3 ethics complaints out of 16 were found valid. Surprise, you are not only uninformed, but you are WRONG.
I will agree that the media has a lot of responsibility, but it does not trump personal responsibility. You have to take some for believing the kool aid crap you obviously like the taste of and Palin has to take some for her idiotic statements, her unethical behavior, and her choosing to litigate every single thing said to her.
Ted Stevens was a sad loss for Alaska, but the feds have to take responsibility as THEY were pushing an UNETHICAL/illegal suit. And Sarah Palin has red lined 95% of the money Ted brought into this great state. Anne Coulter is on Fox News and even a BLIND person could see they are far from Liberal. Or maybe not.
And to answer your final question. it obviously is too much to ask, since you can't provide it in your comment.
While I thoroughly enjoy watching you and marjtoo mutually stroke each other's egos, I can clearly see an intellectual incest going on here. To business...
The Troopergate business was handled by two different investigative bodies, both of which were sanctioned by the state board of personnel which reversed its findings:
http://www.adn.com/palin/story/577323.html
So pick which side of the story you want to believe on that one but unless you can qualitatively compare the two investigations other than their final verdicts, it's a wash and neither you nor I can say definitively that Sarah violated ethics, regardless of how the board reversed its previous finding of abuse of power. Do us all a favor and call the personnel board to get your own education on what the findings actually were.
The way Sarah Palin chooses to run her family life does not dictate her executive philosophy or how she runs the State of Alaska. It's nice window dressing to see that she is a God-fearing, homegrown, family-oriented woman but those are not central to her ability to govern. That women have been tied to a double standard of caring for their family while performing their jobs is a known fact and one that you so astutely point out here. Granted she ran on a platform of being a family-oriented person however, her family has not fallen apart. One guy knocked up her daughter and she gave birth to a special needs child. Sounds pretty commonplace to me. In fact it sounds a lot like Bill Clinton getting a blowjob from an intern. How did that incident detract from Bill's ability as an internationally recognized public speaker, a Rhode's Scholar, and the leader of the free world? I rest my case.
Yes, I repeat the liberal bs crap repeatedly, as you so eloquently put it, because it is true about the majority of our nation's media outlets. As far as the Anchorage Daily News is concerned they took a dive sometime about three or four years ago. My brother is essentially a western marxist liberal who voted for Obama but he has a brain and chooses to exercise it by reading much better and much more respected media outlets such as the Wall Street Journal, The Christian Science Monitor (sounds hokey but it is actually quite well respected in academic circles), and the Economist.
What I mean to say when I accuse ADN of being a liberal rag is that their editors choose various photos and pieces of journalism from their staff writers and outside sources to socially engineer what they think Anchorage and the broader audience of Alaska should perceive their state and their beloved city to be. The fact that Obama was on the front page once would have been sufficient to cover the news that yes indeed, the man happens to be half-black, and is running for President, however six times they chose to give him favorable media coverage while Palin and McCain were relegated to inside pages. Furthermore, what you call news really isn't news at all. Perhaps you and marjtoo need to read some African American history together and you'd find out that there have been several other prominent black people nominated for our country's highest office and the vice presidency:
Frederick Douglass 1872 Nominated for VP
Mississippi Senatre Blanch Bruce 1880 Republican Presidential Nominee
Shirley Chisholm 1972
Lenora B Fulani 1988 on ballot in all 50 states
So hiding behind the notion that Obama was the first half-black guy to make his name known in the race for Presidential office as justification for blatantly favoring one candidate over another barely holds any water.
Here's a sterling example of how ADN is indirectly supporting the President by choices made in terms of layout and editing. Yesterday, Aug. 4th, there was a little blurb inserted below the obituaries and just above the community datebook titled "Senate Denies Obama bid to cut grants for rural energy." Since before the election, Obama has touted his stance on energy issues, particularly green energy. I work for a company that manages this type of government grant money for infrastructure projects in rural Alaska and lemmie tell you, Obama screwed up royally by supporting that bid and thankfully, the Senate stopped him from making that cut. The article goes on to explain how the grant money was a line item vetoe, one of 75, that the President personally made to congress. This money will be used for diesel and wind power generation projects that would help alleviate high energy prices in bush Alaska. The article is clearly damaging to the President because it exposes him to be double-talking on his commitment to energy independence and his concern for advancing green energy initiatives. Now I don't know what your priorities are and I'm not going to presume to know but I'm guessing you'll agree with me that the way congress votes on things like energy initiatives is a heck of a lot more important than human interest pieces on bodies washing up on shore, forest fires that happen every year, and scientists going out to take a look at floating trash. The layout, the editorial section, and the articles they select from the Associated Press are all choices where editors at ADN have huge leeway. They abuse their responsibility to accurately look at all sides of issues by allowing staff writers to interject their slant in articles and by burying inconvenient pieces like the one I just described in the back, somewhere obscure. We've read the paper for years as a family and nobody wants to read it anymore so we're cancelling our subscription. We'll use the rest to insulate our attic and save a buck.
As far as my kool-aid comments are concerned, Obama has been pretty vocal about his intent to create a public option for health care and cram energy reform through congress. Sounds like a great agenda if we weren't in the middle of a recession. He has said that he wants to create a public option to inject some competition into the health care system. Sounds good to me because I believe in competition as a capitalist and a registered Republican. The government is there to check abuses by private industry. Now here's the kool-aid part where people drink; the President would like the American people to think that the reason health care costs are increasing is because the system lacks competition, so I investigated on Wikipedia just how few health care providers there are in the US:
AETNA
American Association of Retired Persons
American Family Insurance
American National Insurance Company
Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association
CIGNA
FORTIS
Golden Rule Insurance Company
Group Health Cooperative
Health Net
Health Markets
Humana Inc.
Intermountain Health Care
Kaiser Permanente
LifeWise Health Plan of Oregon
Premera
Principal Financial Group
Shelter Insurance Companies
Thrivent Financial for Lutherans
United Health Group
Unitrin
Wellpoint
Clearly there is no lack of competition. Although some of these health care providers are regionally based and can not possibly serve the whole of the US, there are several options available in each state. After knowing how many companies provide health care, how then does the President make his case for a public option based on "competition" when the public option, in order to provide any benefit to John Q Public has to be artificially subidized to be the cheaper option. This in turn makes Health Care reform a joke the way Obama has presented it because the competition will be sucked out of the system when people switch to the cheaper government plan. This is indeed kool-aid and a bait and switch of the highest degree that is supported continuously by media outlets NPR and New York Times. The outlets will switch their slant once they figure out Americans are not buying the kool-aid any more on health care especially.
Now back to Palin, I'm curious since you obviously consider yourself a person with their eyes open, in what ways has Sarah Palin sold out our state? I think AGIA is a good example of how she stood firm for our state's interests with regard to oil companies by promoting competition for a gas line however, I'm willing to listen to how she has done our state a disservice.
Lastly, please learn how to read with a modicum of comprehension. By saying that liberal bs in the media gives Ann Coulter and Bill O'Reilly an audience does not in any way reflect that I think they are liberal. The liberal bs in the media is what drives people to watch them and that is a sad thing. Capiche? Don't get excited over my snobby remarks on your lack of thought. I took my time and waited a while to get my ducks in a row and responded to your wild conjectures about the character of the media, the state of Alaska, and the woman that helped put Alaska on the map. Notice I didn't attack your character, just your thought process and the issues involved so please, stick to those things when writing a response. It'll make you sound a lot smarter.
I was going to let you have the last word since it seemed so important to you and I will if you respond to this, but I had to explain to you since you obviously don't get it, that Palin did not put Alaska on the map. That would have been god. You attribute far too much to a very small woman. She is not god anymore than Obama is the anti-christ. They are just VERY flawed people.
I read a well written piece that pretty much summed it up. And so from mostly memory I will lay out for you HOW sarah palin screwed over Alaska:
1.Gov. Sarah Palin was sensitive to any criticism and quick to respond. She has yet to understand that the Governor's reputation and station are above petty nonsense and that she should not have drug the Office of the Governor down into the dirt to express her ire at every little perceived slight. The Governor’s only focus should have been the people of Alaska and Alaska.
2.With Administrative Order 238, Sarah created the Climate Change Sub-Cabinet. Climate Change Strategies, the managing entity, is funded by anti-development, pro-abortion advocates. This Climate Change Sub-Cabinet espouses the position that global warming is firm science. Alaska is now an observer to the Western Climate Initiative. WCI’s goals have definitely cost Alaskans money.
3.Gov. Palin should have worked with Conoco, and BP, and other oil companies to get a natural gas pipeline built. It certainly doesn't look like Trans Canada can get any further any faster than Exxon was telling the State it would take to start construction back when Frank Murkowski was governor. All the while Palin was DENYING competition by not letting BP, Conoco, or other oil companies to enter into the AGIA process.
The Conoco-Phillips Denali Natural Gas Pipeline project is more than competition to AGIA. And it's further along than Trans Canada has even thought of being, even tho' she gave them half a billion dollars, in exchange for NOTHING. Now Exxon, who Royally screwed Alaskans, is in bed w/ Trans Canada, and is able to receive 1/2 of that half a billion dollars!!
4.In her first year in office, trying to be everything to all people, Palin did a George Bush and submitted the largest budget in the State's history, thereby growing government. Her lack of fiscal restraint was exactly opposite to her campaign stance of being fiscally conservative and her espousing a “smaller government is better” philosophy. Neither of which were true.
The State was running a $1.65 billion deficit last year due to the drop in oil prices, and Palin handing out "energy rebates". The Palin Administration couldn't cope with that fact and submitted a budget reflecting that reality.
Those of you, wishing her to run for national office should first reflect on her lack of budgetary discipline as governor.
5.Under Palin, Alaska did not have any clear economic direction, other than the pipeline. Resource development is still rape and run. Palin was not able to focus on trying to change a resource extraction economy to a value added resource development economy, something she campaigned on.
Myself and many other Alaskans who supported Sarah Palin were still awaiting the Sarah Palin elected to office, right up to the last day: fiscal conservative, small government, Alaska First!, transparency and open government. As Sarah PAC demonstrates, Sarah Palin has other ambitions.
Being just Governor Sarah Palin was not enough.
Too bad.
We were worth her time and effort.
6.Palin red-lined 95% of the money Ted Stevens brought in. Screwing Alaskans statewide.
7.She quit on all of us, cuz people were mean. Yeah, well get over it!!! People are mean, look at nkalgar here. We aren't running from it!
That doesn't quite cover it, but it's a start. i could go on but it's a waste of time, I can see that from your final paragragh. You don't want to look at facts, you want to see the pretty "homegrown, god-fearing" face of Palin. Of whom you don't obviously know. Oh and it's quite obvious that you have no children, most especially a child w/ D.S., if you think that her not being able to both, be their for that child AND help run a country, makes it a double standard for women. If Todd was running I would have said the same thing. If you are Family First, that family must come first. Period. And it becomes even more obvious when you think that having a child "knocked-up", a "special needs child", not to mention a boy at war, a pubescent teenager, and a child starting school, all at the same time is commonplace. Nor that it sounds ANYTHING like Bill Clinton receiving oral sex. Your history lesson, tho' most enjoyable, does nothing to take away from the facts. Obama was a prominent black man moving towards the highest office in the U.S., that is newsworthy, regardless of how YOU feel about it. And the ADN is owned by The McClatchy Company. The McClatchy's are all registered Republicans. A liberal agenda is YOUR perception. A crappy newspaper is most peoples opinion. The Christian Science Monitor is THE most unbiased news I can find, on that we can agree. I won't comment on Obama, I think he brings himself down nicely. And I seriously dislike the healthcare plan. it is a STINKER. We can agree on that also.
But, it seems just childish to think that by insulting my intelligence, my ability to read, and my political views you are not insulting my character. Perhaps you might consider this, when you are trying to make yourself sound smarter.
consider backing up your claims with links to articles, biased or otherwise, where someone working for a media outlet lays out evidence of your claims.
The first claim needs no support as it was clearly evident that she defended herself against all imbeciles hiding behind the shield of trying to keep the government transparent with the exception of the per diem ethics violation.
In what ways and what is your estimate for how much money WCI has cost Alaska money? Making the statement doesn't make it true. If you can at least better explain that one, I might be tempted to buy it.
Your third claim is bogus on the grounds that BP and Conoco chose not to participate under the terms of AGIA that Sarah Palin set up. She did nothing to block them only they did not like the terms presented which gave a deal on gas alone and did not account for the subsequent drop in oil production that would accompany extracting gas as a result of decreased downhole pressure. The companies were also asking for a higher long term rate for gas to account for the unstable fluxuations often observed in natural gas markets relative to oil markets and Sarah Palin and people much smarter than you or I involved in the regulating and negotiating thought that keeping the terms set forth in AGIA were better for the State's interests. The half a billion is still sitting in our coffers but Transcanada will start pulling on it soon and that is a shame because it was a misuse of state resources but it has not bankrupt our state or sold us down the river. We are by and large a very fiscally conservative state and we oppose tax hikes at every turn.
Palin was elected in 2006, an economic high time. As far as I know this increase in spending paralleled an increase in revenue from resource development and market growth. People would expect the government to grow in proportion to fit the state's needs, and during high times is the period when the government should grow, not in recessions. When the recession loomed she took steps to control state spending and avoided federal government largesse that came with strings attached. The notion that strings were not attached is absurd. Making local governments responsible for conducting energy audits by necessity requires standards that cover the entire state otherwise the system is prone to rampant abuse, inefficiencies, and waste. My argument is that energy money was intended to grow our government at the wrong time and in the wrong area. How people choose to build their homes is their own business.
How is resource development rape and run? Do you have any idea as to what the ultimate source of a nation's wealth is? It's resource devlopment. Econ 101. Land is the ultimate source of wealth. Our state is incredibly well regulated and those that are responsible for abuses such as Exxon and BP have finally paid up or chosen to do so of their own volition to make things right. For simple reasons of logistics and distance to market, Alaska can not and will not be an added value resource development economy. We ship most of our oil, coal, and lumber to foreign countries and the lower 48, that's how we do things. Deal with it or provide a solution that isn't readily apparent. We have one of the largest deposits of the cleanest burning coal in the country, we can take a sustained yield from our forests with proper management, and the only two companies that refine in AK are Tesoro and Flint Hills (BP if you count the crude oil topping unit up on the slope) so we have to rely on outside refineries and their ridiculous premiums.
What money did Sarah Palin red-line 95% of? What was the money intended for, who authorized that action, was it voted on in the state legislature? If that did occur obviously Ted sent it our way but what were the circumstances that surrounded this so-called attrocity?
She quit because pinheads kept levelling their complaints against her for everything from her travel to what she wore at the start of the iron dog competition and wants the media bonanza to speak for itself. You bet your ass she's running for President. The media's biased coverage coupled with pinheads in our state legislature that thought they were going to be handed a bone when Sarah came to Juneau but were disappointed when they didn't get those coveted jobs, are the reason she is quitting.
Back up those main questions I asked on your charges against her and I'd be interested in hearing more. I do look at facts, how about you? You failed to answer me on the question of the Troopergate incident being reversed and people's apparent ignorance of that fact. How silly do you look believing only half of what is printed. The point is a lot of this stuff is a wash because investigations on both sides get started out of a lack of trust in those doing the finding. Both sides are guilty and heavily biased, however, it's no coincidence that most of the bogus charges against her came after her nomination for VP.
I'm saying I care about her family life as much as I do Bill Clinton getting a blowjob. It really doesn't matter. But using the charge of family first making her a poor governor is completely unrelated and how she chooses to live her life is her own business. I simply identify with her because she is all of those things and she does represent the majority of Alaskans in many ways. Making conjectures about her character and ability to govern based on her apparent family crises is a complete logical fallacy. The media certainly didn't make her out to be a darling like they did Obama and guess what, they wrote checks for him that he can't possibly cash without breaking his own word.
I don't suppose you've ever worked at a Newspaper because if you had, you'd know there is a huge difference between editors and owners of papers. Simply because the McClatchy company are registered Republicans does not dictate how the papers are run, how the stories are run, and what stories are chosen.
I let your posts speak for themselves and while I agree with you on several things, you're picking and choosing on what's important about Sarah Palin and her ability to govern is way off base. I understand your disgust with both people and perhaps you simply want to be left alone but alas, someone has to lead this country and it certainly isn't coming from the left.
... about nkalgar's statement saying: "The liberal media abuse that power daily and give kooks like Bill O'Reilly and Anne Coulter an audience, which is a shame. Is it too much to ask for some objective, fact-based reporting without all the value-added, thinly-veiled propaganda, and liberal bs?"
Wow! Surely I misunderstand that comment ... which appears to say O'Reilly and Coulter are liberal? Not in this world! Do agree, though, that it would be really great to have some news media sources which report the facts ... ALL of the facts ... not just pick and choose the ones they want to present in order to sway someone's thinking.
That reminds me of Sarah Palin's continual rant about 'ethics complaints' costing Alaska a million dollars. Never, as far as I've found, has she mentioned that: 1) The amount she mentions includes FOIA requests; 2) That the money allegedly spent on those requests is money that would have been paid to the hourly employees who worked on gathering the information, let alone the fact that the number even includes things like their 'perks;' 3) She has never to my knowledge admitted what her own ethics complaint cost the taxpayers of the state. The absence of those three things alone should indicate ... well, a certain basic lack of honesty. I have only read a few news articles (none here in the Lower 48) which have mentioned those three things.
I hope you don't think less of me because I'm not an Alaskan! ~smiling~
No I don't think less of you. In fact, I think more of you for having a very informed well rounded opinion and you aren't right here in the mix, to see the mess Palin has made in our state. The only people I have a problem w/ are the ones who profess to "know" what's going on and then vomit out some crap that is WAY off the mark. And then blanket everyone w/ "the liberal" label. There has recently been a wave of people blanketing the blog spots w/ koolaid spam.
I agree it would be nice to just once have a news agency that reports "just the facts" but that is too much to ask, because they would have to report the whacko side also. Which is really prevalent these days. They have turned our beloved republicanism into gun totin', death threat screaming, money spending, talking heads. It used to be an institution, no longer. Can't really be proud to be part of a party that counts G-Dog Bush as one of their greatest members.
Your points regarding Palin's lack of honesty is spot on, to say the least. I enjoy your thought process and I enjoy having a political dialog w/ an intelligent person. Unlike that kool aid drinker nkalgar. i'm blown away that a person would think having Obama on the cover of a newspaper would make that paper liberal. Or that O'reilly and Coulter are liberal. That would make Rush Limbo, what, a leftist hippy??
((grin))
... "Rush 'Limbo' ... a leftist hippy' Too funny. Odd you should mention Rush ... I live 30 miles from Cape Girardeau, MO, where he is almost regarded as The God of Republicanism! The new Federal Courthouse bears his father's name.
I've definitely seen just what you're referring to ... "There has recently been a wave of people blanketing the blog spots w/ koolaid spam." I read quite a few blogs/forums, both Dem & Rep ... and it's almost unbelievable some of the crazy stuff that's being written (and believed!). Boggles my mind. And much of all of it just isn't ... well ... true or factual.
This past couple of years, I've been rather baffled ... Perhaps I just wasn't as aware ... but always thought of 'us Republicans' as less 'radical' in our thought processes than the average Democrats ... more civil (well, except maybe for Rush), more informed, less critical of others ... conducting ourselves with a little more decorum ... Now, I might visit the C4P site, or read some of Palin's 'tweets,' and just find all the hate and animosity and foul language so hard to believe. Well, maybe after all we're all just human?
nkalgar is rather funny! You know, Palin was on a recent Time magazine cover ... Does that mean it's a conservative publication now? ~winking~
I never realized before last September that AK has so many really poor people ... that many villages have no running water or sewer facilities in their homes. Hard for me to comprehend such a thing. I cried when I saw some of the pictures, and when I read about the seniors' deaths. It hurt my heart that a state's leaders would have put so little effort into resolving such matters ... but at the same time paying its governor to live in her own home and paying for her children's travel ... or setting up PACS and a 'fund trust' to benefit just one person or one political party. Perhaps I am 'liberal' enough to believe that there really are some American citizens who need and perhaps deserve more help from at least their states' governments ... People who seem to be hard-working and would view a little 'help' as a way to improve their lives rather than viewing it (as is so common in our rather depressed area) as a continual way of life.
Think I'm off on a tangent here ... Sorry! I have really enjoyed your comments! It is a definite pleasure to be able to share thoughts with someone who, even if they don't always agree, is mature and intelligent enough to consider them for what they are ... opinions. I learn a lot from people like yourself. But then ... I think that you are a little like I am ... we search for facts, make our own decisions ... and once in a while we're even able to change our minds if presented with legitimate reasons to do so.
This is, of course, a 'red' state. I cannot admit to my neighbors and friends that I didn't vote for 'Palin,' although before the election I tried to tell some of them the things I had learned about her. That all went over about as well as a lead balloon! ~laughing~ Still, I had to try.
Thank you, mvajdos, for an interesting and intelligent conversation! And hey! Good luck with your new governor!
Thank you Marjtoo! We definitely seem to be kindred spirits and tho' it hurts those that think hate is the answer, to see folks having a rational discourse about one of their politicians, I will continue to do so. Once again you are spot on about the rabid hatemongering going on out their. Apparently nkalgar is not only one of them, she's a last word needer too. So I am letting her have it. Unlike her, I actually know and have worked with Palin, during her disaster of a term as Wasilla's mayor. She took a perfectly salient city and put it more than 20 million in the hole.So i can speak from experience and say she is completely incapable of being in national office and frankly if her quitting didn't put that in perspective for nkalgar, nothing will. I have no idea where she get's the "god-fearing, homegrown, family-oriented crap, but it's obviously NOT from knowing her. It seems they just project their wants and desires on her, because she's pseudo-pretty, as none of those saying that have met her. She is from Idaho not Alaska(we don't talk like that here). God-fearing is not something I want my politicians to be or tell me about anyway(I like my politics ala carte). And is hard for that person to attest to since she doesn't know her. And well it's obvious she isn't family oriented. Hence the kool-aid consumption. Oh well, we can't expect these kids today to really get it. They think this world is a two party world and it's always us against them. Instead of recognizing that we are in this world together and have to make it work as such.
They watch far too much tv and think it must all be facts, if they shined a camera on it. It's amazing when you can hear them churn out the same "talking points" all the time. "Palin is a god-fearing, family woman, and the media is mean" "Obama is going to steal our guns, kill off the old people, and turn us all socialists," on any site, or any blog, regardless of the subject. The guy is not what I had hoped for, but it's not my job to tear him down, he'll do that for himself, just as Palin did. The problem with these people is they refuse to see or hear anything except agreement to their "talking points". They care not for the true tenets of Republicanism. They only know you don't nod your head in agreement w/ every little thing and then they attack those in their own party for not lock stepping. It started w/ Bush and only got more rabid. It's what makes it hard to call myself a Republican anymore.
Too bad we can't make a common sense party, Marjtoo!! We'd be quite lonely w/ only a few thousand members. Common sense is not something fostered in this country. Now a-hole's that's something this country can get behind! We could have 3/5 of the country joining that group.
I personally will keep on truckin' tryin' to keep those that represent ME, as fiscally responsible as possible. And if they are not doing what they say they are doing, I'm gonna complain, regardless of their party OR their looks.
As far as how those in the bush are fairing, that's a hard one to peg. People here have options. They can choose to live in the bush or in the cities. Either way they have hard choices to make. The native corps were created to provide for and represent these different native groups and villages, but like most Corporations, they have forgetten their little guys and only go after the big dollars. They get shareholder checks, but they don't really provide for the people. It's a rock and a hard place really. We pretty much only have 5 highways and over 7 million square miles of state. So people have to choose whether they want to live off the land or the gov't dole. It's a sad choice, especially for those that have to make it. But the other option is to move to a town or city w/ more access to jobs and amenities. They have access to the same options as nkalgar and I. I personally wish the governor had made more of a production of what was going on in those villages, so those folks had more aid available. But she was busy, taking care of her own needs, y'know people were really being mean to her. She had to respond to all that. But again, it's a hard row to hoe.
We have a lot of lead balloons going over in this country, it's sad isn't it? Oh well. Enjoy your day!!