Yeah She’s Hot, But Not So Smart

30 08 2008

VP nominee Sarah Palin believes we should teach creationism in science class.


What the hell is wrong with people?




18 responses

30 08 2008

Another bright note in republican politics. 馃檪

30 08 2008
D L Ennis

She really is smart! However I agree that there is no place for creationism in science class! Mythology perhaps…

30 08 2008

Wow, she’s brilliant. Last night I watched and interview where she was god blessing her state, and talking about the god given resources that she wants to give away. Though I can see exactly why McCain picked her. She is beating a path to Washington to open up those new pipeliines and use “god” to do it. I guess she want’s to secure her financial future while she’s there as did Bush/Cheney. At least she just want’s to destroy the environment, not start another war.

31 08 2008
Lobster Johnson

..and she’s not even really all that hot. I guess if you live in the frozen North maybe.

2 09 2008

PALIN: The Good, The Bad and The Ugly:

路 In October 1996, she asked the police chief, librarian, public works director, and finance director to resign. She wasn鈥檛 about to retain political appointees whose ethical and moral standards did not meet her high requirements.
路 As mayor, she reduced the mayoral salary, reduced property taxes by 40 percent, and increased the city sales tax to pay for a new indoor ice rink and sports complex. She ran for re-election against Stein in 1999 and was returned to office, getting over three times as many votes as Stein. She was elected president of the Alaska Conference of Mayors.
路 Her political opponent, Gov. Murkowski, appointed her to the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, where she chaired the Commission from 2003 to 2004, and also served as Ethics Supervisor. Palin resigned in January 2004 in protest over what she called the “lack of ethics” of fellow Republican members.
路 In 2006, running on a clean-government platform, Palin defeated then-Governor Murkowski in the Republican gubernatorial primary. She went on to beat a popular Democrat by a plurality of more than eighteen percent. She is Alaska鈥檚 first woman governor, and also its youngest.
路 She is NOT a business-as-usual Republican. For example, she endorsed Parnell’s bid to unseat the state’s longtime at-large U.S. Congressman, Don Young. Palin also publicly challenged Senator Ted Stevens to come clean about the ongoing federal investigation into his financial dealings.
路 Shortly after taking office, Palin rescinded 35 appointments made by Murkowski in the last hours of his administration, including that of his former chief of staff James “Jim” Clark to the Alaska Natural Gas Development Authority. Clark later pleaded guilty to conspiring with a defunct oil-field-services company to channel money into Frank Murkowski’s re-election campaign.
路 In March 2007, Palin presented the Alaska Gasline Inducement Act (AGIA) as the new legal vehicle for building a natural gas pipeline from the state’s North Slope.[60] This negated a deal by the previous governor to grant the contract to a coalition including BP (her husband’s former employer). Only one legislator voted against the proposal.
路 Shortly after becoming governor, Palin canceled a contract for the construction of an 11-mile (18 km) gravel road outside Juneau to a mine. This reversed a decision made in the closing days of the Murkowski Administration.
路 Palin made national news when she stopped work on the 鈥淏ridge to Nowhere.鈥

And as to controversy?

On July 11, 2008 Palin dismissed Public Safety Commissioner Walter Monegan, citing performance-related issues. Initially, Palin denied that there had been any pressure on Monegan to fire Wooten, either from her or from anyone else in her administration. Then, after she had her Attorney General’s office conduct an internal investigation, Palin stated that her staff had contacted Monegan or his staff about two dozen times regarding Wooten, including many contacts from her chief of staff, and Palin also stated that most of those calls were made without her knowledge. Palin’s power to fire him is not in dispute, but Monegan has alleged that his dismissal was connected to his failure to fire Palin鈥檚 former brother-in-law, Alaska State Trooper Mike Wooten. Wooten had been officially reprimanded and disciplined in 2006 for misconduct including making a death threat against Palin’s father and being drunk while operating both private and official vehicles.The Alaska Legislature subsequently hired an independent investigator to review “the circumstances and events surrounding the termination of former Public Safety Commissioner Monegan, and potential abuses of power and/or improper actions by members of the executive branch.” The investigation will be completed in October 2008.

[Legislative] Council members on [July 28, 2008], confirmed Sen. Kim Elton, D-Juneau, as the new chairman, and he said he’ll be the one who signs the contract with the person hired to do the Monegan investigation. The council tapped Anchorage Democratic Sen. Hollis French, a former state prosecutor, for the task of managing the contractor conducting the investigation. Elton and other lawmakers said they knew of several good candidates — inside and outside Alaska — who could do the job. “I can think of at least two people who would be great,” said Elton, declining to name names. From the Anchorage Daily news, July 29, 2008.

It is just really GREAT to see the Political Independence of the Investigation鈥檚 Overseers!!


2 09 2008

Regarding that massive win over Stein for the prestigious job of Mayor of Wasilla the final tally was…616-413. Check my math but it looks like she had a whopping 203 more votes. I’ll admit though that the way your talking point phrased it sounded much more impressive, even though “getting over three times as many votes as Stein” is entirely inaccurate and pretty silly (dare I say misleading) when you see the real numbers involved.

Now to be fair, I’ve read that Palin’s anti-corruption bonafides are fairly solid (she sold off the gubenatorial jet upon taking office, for one), but her claim to opposing the “Bridge to Nowhere” is completely true so long as you ignore all the time before that where she supported it and tried to get it funded. If you don’t ignore all that time then her claim looks like a blatant lie. I’m not one to judge so I’ll leave that decision up to the readers. Here’s a link to the story so you can read it for yourself at your leisure. Basically it shows how she was fine with the bridge in principle, never had a problem with the earmarks, bristled at all the national mockery of the project, and only gave up on it when it was clear that federal support wasn’t forthcoming. To paint her as some renegade who’s against earmarks is just not accurate as a paper in her own state reported in March of this year.

As for Wooten, maybe he is a grade-A ass and probably deserved to be canned, but that point is irrelevant. There is a method for having people removed, and I’m guessing having his wife’s sister the Governor pressuring staff to do so isn’t in the documented process. We shall see if her pressuring and subsequent firing were justified, but it sure doesn’t smell right.

At the very least you have to admit that all these easily discovered issues raise questions about McCain’s vetting process and his lauded judgment in picking someone so thin in experience when he’s spent so much time driving that specific point home about Obama.

4 09 2008

Dude, do your homework! Palin’s plurality in (the race I discussed) her SECOND race for mayor:

Palin ran for re-election against Stein in 1999, and was returned to office by a margin of 909 to 292 votes. This is a plurality of 3.113*

As to the “bridge to nowhere, “the following is from the Wikipedia website:

“In 2006, Ketchikan’s Gravina Island Bridge, better known outside the state as the “Bridge to Nowhere”, became an issue in the gubernatorial campaign. Palin initially expressed support for the bridge and ran on a “build-the-bridge” platform, arguing that it was essential for local prosperity. After the bridge became a political issue Congress replaced the earmark for the bridge with an infrastructure grant to Alaska to use at its discretion; Palin’s subsequent policy was to continue construction on the road originally intended to link to the bridge while exploring less-expensive transportation between Ketchikan and Gravina Island.

“Palin made national news when she stopped work on the bridge. Reuters said the move was responsible for “earning her admirers from earmark critics and budget hawks from around the nation. The move also thrust her into the spotlight as a reform-minded newcomer.” In an article titled, “Bridge leads McCain to running mate Palin”, the Associated Press said canceling the bridge was “the first identifiable link connecting Palin and McCain,” soon followed by “whispers of Palin being an ideal GOP running mate.”**

*October 5, 1999 Regular Election; Official Results” City of Wasilla (2005-10-11).

**^ name=’bridge-mccain-palin’>Quinn, Steve (August 29, 2008). “Bridge leads McCain to running mate Palin”, Associated Press.
^ Kirkpatrick, David; Larry Rohter (September 1, 2008). “Opposing Alaska bridge endeared Palin to McCain”, International Herald Tribune.

Finally, as Rudi said this evening, “This is no time for on-the-job training!”


4 09 2008

Sorry about the omission of the following in my above post. The procedure for firing someone who serves at your pleasure is to simply utter to them the words, “You’re fired.”

Those who are “investigating” the Governor are all Democrats. the person who is controlling the investigation is a Democrat. The person who holds the investigator’s purse-strings is a Democrat.

Yup. something smells, all right. But it isn’t Sarah’s behavior.


4 09 2008

Referencing two republican placement articles and a freshly scrubbed wiki page, great choice of sources there. You should use better sources because it is also commonly known that the state legislative council, which ordered the probe to investigate the claims that Palin abused her office to get the Alaska public safety commissioner Walt Monegan fired, is a bipartisan panel made up of members of both bodies. I’m glad I could clear that up for you.

And I’m sorry that I was mistaken about which election you were referring to. Wow, 1101 votes in that entire election eh? Gee, I guess I have to take back everything I said about her mayoral experience being inconsequential and I must concede that she is completely prepared to assume the role of commander in chief. No I don’t.

Oh yeah, I forgot to mention that I heard about the firing of the librarian librarian quitting in protest after receiving pressure to ban certain books that Mayor Palin found morally or socially objectionable. I had no idea you would support someone who actively advocates censorship and banning books for their objectionable content. I’ve known for some time that Republicans have an aversion to science and facts but I didn’t realize they were getting back to the old practice of book burning. You guys never cease to amaze me.

4 09 2008

Easy, now, Super-J. You’ll notice the references are not just Wiki, though they are listed there. I turned over the rock under the rock. As to the number of votes cast, it is fractional compared to the size of the town. Maybe they were all out fishing that day — I mean, a fisherman (or, er excuse me, fisherperson!) hasta make a living, eh?

Also, I am aware that the panel ordering the investigation of Palin is bipartisan. I am also aware that it is chaired by a Democrat, and that the person designated to appoint the investigator is also a Democrat, which is what I actually said. And finally, even you gotta admit that releasing the findings just before the election smells like the halibut somebody left on the pewp-deck.

And finally, I am aware that Palin doesn’t think that books with lewd scenes and trash language are appropriate for young children. Still, I hardly equate this to book-burning by people with an aversion to reality.

(As an aside, it used to be that “Banned in Boston” was a highly sought-after badge of honor in the naughty-book business. And, even in those days, Baahhstaahhn was already becoming an arch-liberal town . . . my, how times change!)

4 09 2008

Perhaps the date was selected to allow this important ruling (guilty or innocent) to be available before the election so that voters could make an informed decision. Your innuendo assumes she’s guilty, if the verdict shows she’s innocent wouldn’t she want that information available before the citizens voted? Would you prefer sh goes to the election with the cloud of an unresolved ethics investigation hanging over “the ethics” governor? What exactly would make you happy Chuck?

It’s one thing to request a book be moved to a more mature section of a library and something else to have it banned. Who would you nominate to censor and control what you’re allowed to read Chuck? From our conversation it seems like you’re capable of tolerating other ideas and points of view (although it remains to be seen if you can absorb any of it) but maybe I’m wrong about that. Do you have someone in mind that you would want to decide what information is safe for you to view? Really?

4 09 2008

First, let me be perfectly clear on one thing; I absolutely do NOT believe Palin to be guilty of anything illegal or unethical in her firing of Monegan. Monegan, as are all those reporting to a governor, was an “at will” employee, who served — and could be terminated at any time, for any reason — at the governor’s pleasure. He undoubtedly had his own reasons for disagreeing with Palin over whether to fire an allegedly drunk-on-the-job, wife-beating and child-abusing state trooper, against whom there was more than circumstantial evidence.

He was not fired for disagreeing with her, he was fired for not following orders to fire the alleged miscreant. Or maybe because Palin just didn’t like the sonofabitch. Or whatever; he didn’t internalize that there was a new sheriff in town who was cleaning house of the Business-As-Usual crowd. His bad.

If you disagree with your boss, and you’re an at-will employee, you do so at your peril. Trust me, I know from experience; I was fired once — as an at-will employee — by someone I thought had the ethics and moral scruples of an alley cat, and said so. His firing me did not change my mnd or his behavior, nor was it more than a temporary inconvenience, as his competition hired me two days later, but I never questioned his right to fire me. (As a rather funny aside, a few years later, he called me, looking for a job. And no, I didn’t hire him!)

But Democraats have a recently-re-established tradition of reacting with indignation when a Republican fires an at-will employee. The Bush firing of several US attorneys comes to mind. Bush exercised a perogative of the Chief Executive when he did so, and the ensuing media circus and righteous indignation of the Democrats would have everybody believing him to be a criminal for having done it.

But travel with me back in time, if you will, to the Year of Our (Other) Lord 1978, when Jimmy Cahtah fired the US attorney for (I think) Southern New Jersey, who was investigating a US Congressman for corruption, which Congressman was subsequently indicted, tried and imprisoned. Where was the Democrats’ righteous indignation then?

Or how about Hillbillarybob and her husband, firing all 430-plus US Attorneys, and replacing them with hand-picked folks who, it is alleged, tacitly agreed not to investigate them or prosecute them for anything related to Whitewater?

I don’t believe the committee investigating Palin to be on anything less than a witch-hunt. Such are the vagaries of Old-School Alaska Politics. Now, that said, just why would they want to do that? Well, for one thing, as I have said elsewhere, Palin has made it a quite evident point to piss in a lot of OSAP rice bowls. She’s kicked over a lot of shit-cans since taking the governor’s mansion (do they have one?), and a lot of things some pols, both Dem and Republican would rather keep covered have come to light, much to the embarrassment of OSAP’s.

You can bet that when the ‘investigation’ is complete, there will be a lot of breast-beating and righteous indignation by OSAP’s, particularly the Dem OSAP’s, and the whole idea of at-will employment will be as covered up with shit as the OSAP’s cam make it. That practice is called obfuscation, and. IMHO, the Dems are pretty good at it.

And while style does not equal substance, the real reason for the timing of the ‘investigation’ after-action report has more to do with political obfuscation than any real ethical or moral miscerancy on Palin’s part.


4 09 2008

Sorry about the misspelled words above, I do edit before I post, but the cataracts are getting worse!

Best I can do,

4 09 2008

If she’s innocent then you have nothing to fear since all her actions will be found to be perfectly legal and ethical. You should be delighted that the inquiry will be done before the election so the truth will be known and she cannot be smeared with the “still under investigation for abuse of power” brush as people enter the polls.

You would think given her certain innocence she would be anxious to have her day in court. Alas, instead she is dragging her feet and even trying to have the bi-partisan commission removed from reviewing her case and instead giving the authority to a panel she herself has selected. Nah, you’re right, I’m sure she’s completely ethical.

C’mon Chuck, what else would have to happen do to raise your suspicion that she might not be everything the GOP is selling her as? What else could it possibly take?

4 09 2008

Never trust a politician or a used-car salesman! 馃檪

I’m not taking anything on faith until and unless I see it sit up and beg. The proof, etc.

But what I find in Obama is less in which to put my faith than I do in McCain. Same for Biden and Palin. Sorry about that, but that’s why we have horse races, isn’t it?

Little known factoid of the day: For Joe’s information, you could put Deleware into an Alaska COUNTY, seventy-five times over, and still have a thousand square miles left over for snowmobile racing . . .


4 09 2008

Once again Chuck you ignore the real issue. Thanks for playing.

5 09 2008

The comment was in jest, Super-J. But here are a couple along the line of this dialogue that are not.

If we want honesty, let’s have it all around, shall we? For instance, the media have elected to sort of sweep Obama’s Muslim upbringing under the rug, hoping the Republicans will get distracted by something else.

Well, that’s really no big deal. BUT, Obama has been in complete denial regarding his Muslim past, as if it were some sort of a crime. (If it is, it about the same calibre of crime as firing an at-will employee.) In fact, he has gone so far as to deny he ever prayed in a mosque.

(, and follow the Rabbit Trail. I find the picture of his half-brother showing a twenty-four-year-old Obama in Muslim garb and regalia, and his perfect recall of the Muslim call to prayer a little odd, in light of his denial.)

It is rather unlikely that this honesty issue is NOT going to surface during this campaign. Frankly, I don’t give a rats’ ass if the guy worships his toilet seat, but I DO give a rats’ ass about his lack of scrupulous honesty regarding his Muslim past. Probably, so do a lot of American Muslims, who, I understand, vote.

What’s good for the goose, Mon Ami, is likewise good for the gander.

And now, a word of thanks. After a week of giving you large quantities of poop, I genuinely appreciate the decent welcome a staunch conservative has been given on your blog. I hope we can continue to have what I believe to be a useful dialogue. Stay loose. I may even buy you a cup of coffee . . . 馃檪


6 09 2008

C’mon Chuck, you’re not seriously digging up the already discredited Republican smear that Obama is a Muslim. Please, you disappoint me.

I know I got suckered into a tangent thread talking about Palin and Troopergate but if I check…oh yeah, this thread started out talking about Palin wanting to teach creationism as a scientific “theory” in public schools.

Once again you have not addressed the question raised in the original thread OR my subsequent point about the reasonable upside to having Palin’s investigation completed before the election but instead you bring up yet another irrelevant debunked lie from Karl Rove. I appreciate the time you put into your posts but these diversionary tactics only serve to prove that you have no good arguments and you effectively concede defeat in this debate.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: