This is in response to a rather rabid attack on the Sarah piece: The original comments are in italics and my responses are not. I'll keep responses short as I can:
No Experience…
At least you have the honesty to ADMIT she has NONE. But making the argument that this is a good thing?? Breathtakingly irresponsible.
Keep in mind, she's running as Vice President, but since she is 'a heart beat away' from the presidency, let's look at what we have. Sarah Palin was elected twice to the Wasilla, AK city counsel in 1992 and 1995. She then ran for Mayor in 1996, winning that contest and the subsequent re-election. She served 2 terms as Mayor of Wassila, AK (1996-2002) and part of a term as Governor of Alaska (2006-present), spanning a brief 16 years of public life. Her education is in Journalism, (which is well accepted expert testimony on all subjects to many folks....ok, sort of tongue-in-cheek). It is true that of past presidential candidates, she is one of the youngest and inexperienced (public office held 16 of her 44 years). According to Article One of the Constitution, the only legal prerequisites for president are to be 35 years old, American born and to have had the US as a permenant residence for at least 14 years. No prerequisites about years as being a lawyer, senator or even governer....in fact, anyone could become president if they recieve majority of the electoral vote, which makes America very unique in world governments. The lack of experience in Washington, D.C. has, ironically, been one of her biggest criticisms and also one of her biggest virtues among her supporters.
In short, she does have experience and much of it executive. In addition, the voters of Alaska seem to have approved of her performance as both Mayor and Governor, prior to being chosen as McCain's running mate. Her performance at the Republican Convention and the Vice Presidential debate in Saint Louis has also shown her ability to perform well under extreme pressure. With regards to foreign affairs, it is fair to say that not many presidents have experience with foreign affairs prior to becoming president. Lastly, experience in things such as foreign affairs or in politics in general, is not necessarily or even sufficiently a virtue.
Won’t address the media…
Good plan here. Don’t like tough questions – just don’t talk.. If the questions are really to be as stupid as you suggest, then her going out and taking them head on would be to her credit. But maybe her handlers have gotten to know her better than any of us have had the chance to and think better of it. Maybe she is awesome and want to wait to play this card as their “October Surprise”. We will see..
The period of supposed sequestration from the media was between the last Couric interview and the debate in St. Louis, which spanned 7 days (September 24 thru October 2). The speculation about her 'handlers' is inventive, but doesn't seem to match either the period of 'silence' nor the results of her performance at the debate, even by democratic pundits (never said she did great--but 'held her own'). I think this was purposefully overblown to begin with. But keep in mind, before Couric and Gibson cut out all the hours of interview to arrive at the 30 minute bits they broadcast, they were clamoring for anything, from the real mother of her infant son, her husband rumored to being a pedaphile, to her firing her ex brother in law in Wasilla....not much at all. They needed a weakness....anything. Getting an all day interview with anyone, let alone her, with hours of footage to work with, is wonderful for you, if you are looking to place someone in a bad light. Another journalist could have taken the same footage and come out with something vastly different.
Lacking in Economics…
Although she has a short track record, she speaks often about cutting spending, lowering taxes and gives plenty of lip service to the other Regan era economic philosophies. But her actions tell another story, and by cutting taxes AND doubling spending she has left the small town of Wasilla with a 20 Million dollar deficit. Let’s see, can we think of another President that talks about Regan Economic principles but actually dramatically INCREASES the size of government AND the national deficit? I can think of one ..:)
Actually, this is incorrect. A deficit is like a net loss for a business. Dustin is refering to bond debt for city projects, rather than tax deficits. Approximately $14.5 million was to build a sports complex for Wasilla. The complex contains an ice rink, indoor track and soccer field, in addition to office and conference room space. Another $5.5 million was for improvement of roads (probably more expensive and frequent in Alaska than the lower 48) and $1 million to build a park. That is considered debt, not a deficit, and is normal for growing cities. Palin cut property taxes, raised sales taxes and created city improvements during her term. Based on the 2007 Independent Auditor's Report, the City of Wasilla cleared $7.4 million, after debt interest, in surplus and the $22 million dollars in business bond debt has been reduced to $13 million.
It goes to support her qualifications, rather than her lack of it. It will amaze you to see just how much revenue has increased from the tax cuts she made. Historically, tax cuts increase revenue, rather than decrease revenue. That's because the more money we keep, we spend and produce more tax revenue than we would have otherwise. Obama doesn't understand this basic fundamental. Sarah does...and has implemented a great case study in her home town. This charge you make is a perfect example of drinking far too much media Kool-Aid and not checking it out for yourself. There wasn't any response to her dealing with oil companies and the resulting surplus, so I guess you agree.
To be fair, I kind of like her to. She is probably a good person and her success is a good story. I also like the idea of electing a woman to a high office. But making her the Vice Presidential choice behind the oldest first time Presidential nominee in history is scary. Not just scary, but IRRRESPONSIBLE. For the record although I will vote for Obama, I am not in love with him. I believe he has the potential to be one of the all time great ones, but like most propositions that have a big upsides – the risk is equally as big.
I'm not sure your first sentence has much power of persuasion. It seems clear you are not fond of her. The comments also do not suggest you think she is a good person nor her 'success story' very succesful. Her position as second behind McCain is only irresponsible if you can show her as totally unqualified, which you haven't.
With regards to Obama, based on his economic plan, especially in light of our current delimna, he probably will go down as one of the greats, along with Jimmy Carter and Martin Van Buren. Increasing income and payroll taxes when cash is tight is a disasterous and irresponsible economic position. You can't tax losses and if there are any profits, increased taxes mean less cash to hire more staff or service debt for new projects, which are usually referred to by politicians as "jobs". I think his popularity is mainly due to the war in Iraq and the media's constant favorable publicity as well as people without hating people who have. People who have never seen battle are tired of hearing about others in battle and want to focus on more happier things. There's also a feeling of vengence against the super wealthy. The abuses reported have fueled an already existing tension between those living under tight budgets from those with several homes. And with nose diving real estate values, forclosed loans and tight lending policies, it is intensified. However, Obama's policies have had little investigation from the media and the general public is 'generally' ignorant of them. I concede that he will probably win and time will tell how our positions bear out.
I gave in and swam in the peas and carrots, which I vowed to myself I would not do. My apologies. I just felt very frustrated at the sheepish way people have formed opinions and anger at the bastians of media who control those opinions. We place far too much trust in the media, let alone congressmen and women. We consider a sound bite or video bite as an adequate replacement for knowledge gained through personal investigation into a matter, like a remote control. If there is anything to my comments in this blog about Sarah, it is not as much about her or the race, as it is our need to stop placing so much trust in institutions that have proved themselves questionable....and to ask questions, don't be afraid to sound stupid to others and think for yourself....critically, but for yourself. We have bills to pay, soccer games to attend and job functions to perform....but these things are still important and can bleed over into the bills, family events and the job.
No Experience…
At least you have the honesty to ADMIT she has NONE. But making the argument that this is a good thing?? Breathtakingly irresponsible.
Keep in mind, she's running as Vice President, but since she is 'a heart beat away' from the presidency, let's look at what we have. Sarah Palin was elected twice to the Wasilla, AK city counsel in 1992 and 1995. She then ran for Mayor in 1996, winning that contest and the subsequent re-election. She served 2 terms as Mayor of Wassila, AK (1996-2002) and part of a term as Governor of Alaska (2006-present), spanning a brief 16 years of public life. Her education is in Journalism, (which is well accepted expert testimony on all subjects to many folks....ok, sort of tongue-in-cheek). It is true that of past presidential candidates, she is one of the youngest and inexperienced (public office held 16 of her 44 years). According to Article One of the Constitution, the only legal prerequisites for president are to be 35 years old, American born and to have had the US as a permenant residence for at least 14 years. No prerequisites about years as being a lawyer, senator or even governer....in fact, anyone could become president if they recieve majority of the electoral vote, which makes America very unique in world governments. The lack of experience in Washington, D.C. has, ironically, been one of her biggest criticisms and also one of her biggest virtues among her supporters.
In short, she does have experience and much of it executive. In addition, the voters of Alaska seem to have approved of her performance as both Mayor and Governor, prior to being chosen as McCain's running mate. Her performance at the Republican Convention and the Vice Presidential debate in Saint Louis has also shown her ability to perform well under extreme pressure. With regards to foreign affairs, it is fair to say that not many presidents have experience with foreign affairs prior to becoming president. Lastly, experience in things such as foreign affairs or in politics in general, is not necessarily or even sufficiently a virtue.
Won’t address the media…
Good plan here. Don’t like tough questions – just don’t talk.. If the questions are really to be as stupid as you suggest, then her going out and taking them head on would be to her credit. But maybe her handlers have gotten to know her better than any of us have had the chance to and think better of it. Maybe she is awesome and want to wait to play this card as their “October Surprise”. We will see..
The period of supposed sequestration from the media was between the last Couric interview and the debate in St. Louis, which spanned 7 days (September 24 thru October 2). The speculation about her 'handlers' is inventive, but doesn't seem to match either the period of 'silence' nor the results of her performance at the debate, even by democratic pundits (never said she did great--but 'held her own'). I think this was purposefully overblown to begin with. But keep in mind, before Couric and Gibson cut out all the hours of interview to arrive at the 30 minute bits they broadcast, they were clamoring for anything, from the real mother of her infant son, her husband rumored to being a pedaphile, to her firing her ex brother in law in Wasilla....not much at all. They needed a weakness....anything. Getting an all day interview with anyone, let alone her, with hours of footage to work with, is wonderful for you, if you are looking to place someone in a bad light. Another journalist could have taken the same footage and come out with something vastly different.
Lacking in Economics…
Although she has a short track record, she speaks often about cutting spending, lowering taxes and gives plenty of lip service to the other Regan era economic philosophies. But her actions tell another story, and by cutting taxes AND doubling spending she has left the small town of Wasilla with a 20 Million dollar deficit. Let’s see, can we think of another President that talks about Regan Economic principles but actually dramatically INCREASES the size of government AND the national deficit? I can think of one ..:)
Actually, this is incorrect. A deficit is like a net loss for a business. Dustin is refering to bond debt for city projects, rather than tax deficits. Approximately $14.5 million was to build a sports complex for Wasilla. The complex contains an ice rink, indoor track and soccer field, in addition to office and conference room space. Another $5.5 million was for improvement of roads (probably more expensive and frequent in Alaska than the lower 48) and $1 million to build a park. That is considered debt, not a deficit, and is normal for growing cities. Palin cut property taxes, raised sales taxes and created city improvements during her term. Based on the 2007 Independent Auditor's Report, the City of Wasilla cleared $7.4 million, after debt interest, in surplus and the $22 million dollars in business bond debt has been reduced to $13 million.
It goes to support her qualifications, rather than her lack of it. It will amaze you to see just how much revenue has increased from the tax cuts she made. Historically, tax cuts increase revenue, rather than decrease revenue. That's because the more money we keep, we spend and produce more tax revenue than we would have otherwise. Obama doesn't understand this basic fundamental. Sarah does...and has implemented a great case study in her home town. This charge you make is a perfect example of drinking far too much media Kool-Aid and not checking it out for yourself. There wasn't any response to her dealing with oil companies and the resulting surplus, so I guess you agree.
To be fair, I kind of like her to. She is probably a good person and her success is a good story. I also like the idea of electing a woman to a high office. But making her the Vice Presidential choice behind the oldest first time Presidential nominee in history is scary. Not just scary, but IRRRESPONSIBLE. For the record although I will vote for Obama, I am not in love with him. I believe he has the potential to be one of the all time great ones, but like most propositions that have a big upsides – the risk is equally as big.
I'm not sure your first sentence has much power of persuasion. It seems clear you are not fond of her. The comments also do not suggest you think she is a good person nor her 'success story' very succesful. Her position as second behind McCain is only irresponsible if you can show her as totally unqualified, which you haven't.
With regards to Obama, based on his economic plan, especially in light of our current delimna, he probably will go down as one of the greats, along with Jimmy Carter and Martin Van Buren. Increasing income and payroll taxes when cash is tight is a disasterous and irresponsible economic position. You can't tax losses and if there are any profits, increased taxes mean less cash to hire more staff or service debt for new projects, which are usually referred to by politicians as "jobs". I think his popularity is mainly due to the war in Iraq and the media's constant favorable publicity as well as people without hating people who have. People who have never seen battle are tired of hearing about others in battle and want to focus on more happier things. There's also a feeling of vengence against the super wealthy. The abuses reported have fueled an already existing tension between those living under tight budgets from those with several homes. And with nose diving real estate values, forclosed loans and tight lending policies, it is intensified. However, Obama's policies have had little investigation from the media and the general public is 'generally' ignorant of them. I concede that he will probably win and time will tell how our positions bear out.
I gave in and swam in the peas and carrots, which I vowed to myself I would not do. My apologies. I just felt very frustrated at the sheepish way people have formed opinions and anger at the bastians of media who control those opinions. We place far too much trust in the media, let alone congressmen and women. We consider a sound bite or video bite as an adequate replacement for knowledge gained through personal investigation into a matter, like a remote control. If there is anything to my comments in this blog about Sarah, it is not as much about her or the race, as it is our need to stop placing so much trust in institutions that have proved themselves questionable....and to ask questions, don't be afraid to sound stupid to others and think for yourself....critically, but for yourself. We have bills to pay, soccer games to attend and job functions to perform....but these things are still important and can bleed over into the bills, family events and the job.
3 comments:
I am not fond of writing about political issues, and so I will not infect your blog with any more of my “rabid attacks” with the exception of this last one…
I will endeavor to be brief. Reader be warned, many of my endeavors are failures however..
• Let us agree that if you put together a list of the 10 most qualified Republicans for the job - she would not even be close. The Republican Party has some heavyweight intellects among its members, many of whom I admire. She was chosen as a political gambit. Period. This doesn’t have to be negative, but it is true.
• Since I wrote this, she performed decently in the debate – no major faux pas. I believe I left open the option that her handlers could be playing the “lowered expectations” game, as I believe they have been doing. I don’t see “the media” as quite the evil conspiracy you do, so my point was simply if you choose a little known candidate – let’s see her. Not just Charlie and Katie, but also CSPAN, CNN, Sesame Street, Judge Judy, or even Bill O’Reilly (OK, I admit to having an unhealthy hatred of that guy,) – or whoever. She just needs to get out there often so we can get a REAL feel for her.
• Our National Debt is a SERIOUS issue. Our refusal to deal with it is one of the reasons we find ourselves in the current financial pickle. If you want to call it “bond debt” instead – that would be technically correct as well. The Republicans have run under the flag of financial conservatism for a generation but have been responsible for more “bond debt” than anyone has. My tie-in to Palin’s running of Wasilla was an attempt to point out this similarity.
• Your assertion that one of my sentences lacks persuasion is true. Rhetoric is an art that is not a strength of mine. Your doubt of my sincerity about liking her is unfounded; some might even say “rabid”. I never made any remark that was negative personally at all. To say that she is not qualified to be President is not much of a slam – very few are in my opinion. I made no bad remarks about her moral fiber and her success story is encouraging (perhaps even I, after a bout as mayor of Choctaw Oklahoma could be elected Governor of Oklahoma and then after a few short months be on a major Presidential ticket. The American Dream lives on..)
• I think in my original post, I conceded Obama’s risk and his supporter’s would be better off acknowledging it too. The road ahead looks tough and if you pick the side of someone with the “revolutionary” tag your risks won’t go down – they tend to multiply. And so it is with any “new” idea or big proposition. But I think anyone truly being subjective would agree that Obama has a real upside potential that we haven’t seen in a couple of generations. This much I hope we all agree on - whoever wins in November has a crappy job and will need the prayers of us all. Anyone rooting for the failure of the President in these times (regardless of who wins) is truly rooting against themselves.
To finish up – I like your last paragraph, other than the implication that I consider sound bites an adequate replacement for knowledge or that my only tool of learning is a remote control (be careful getting off that high horse you are on - the fall may kill you). Unless you weren’t referring to me but others, in which case I agree.. :)
Furthermore, I agree with your comments about blind trust in institutions and the importance of individuals engaging in the process proactively. We are in for bad days ahead and find ourselves in the disastrous situation of relying on the same folks to get us out of it that got us in. A nasty scene. No one to trust. No one to turn to. Blame’s stock price is in steep decline as there appears to be a serious surplus supply being produced in Washington, and it seems spread evenly between parties.
Whew.. Now that is over – no more from me. I do hope I have not offended anyone and want all to know that none has been taken. Civil and respectful disagreement between people with whom I genuinely love and respect. My very wise Great Grandfather always refused to discuss politics or religion in public – I bet Charlie understands his sentiments and wishes I was as wise.
It's fine. It's actually very strange for me to be this political and am having a hard time dealing with it. Ever since she got involved in the race, I've been more invested than any other. Go figure.
You misunderstood my comment about remote controls....I was suggesting that all of us, including me, are relying more and more on technical shortcuts to the point that I think we are probably the most lax society in world history. It seems science and technical innovation haven't done much but serve our need to do and think less.
But don't confuse my disagreement with my love for you as my family. You know how my family works and you are married to one of the feistiest fighters in the family unit :-)
I love you and never want you to believe differently. I just really, realy, really, really disagree with you about Mrs. Palin.
I think Obama has had a huge pass on details. Part of it is his charisma. A great part of it is the media's exposure of him (there are actually 24 hour Obama channels on satellite now). And he's really not that in tune with his own programs or how they work economically or fiscally. Clinton is far brighter on these topics.
But, aside that, I believe Obama will win...you can tell me "I told you so" and I can lick my wounds.
I guess I need to apologize for going 'nucular'. I am sorry about that.
Post a Comment