Going Rogue

[pilotbob]

Originally Posted by Nate the great

And how does this set her apart from most politicians (on the national level, at least)?

True... at least she resigned from office to campain... rather than just neglect her duties.

Still... why wasn't she honest about it.

BOb

[pshrynk]

Because we are in that stage where politicians are coy about stating their actual intentions. Mitt Romney spend months avoiding saying he was actually going to run, mostly to avoid getting tagged with the early front runner status, which can be deadly.

I feel that Gov Palin's mistake was in handling it too bluntly and too obviously. If she had stated that she was resigning because she wanted to make an impact on the national level and doing that and running Alaska, which is geographically isolated from the lower 48, without actually saying she was starting her 2012 run, she would have come across as the maverick she wants everyone to see her as.

[Madam Broshkina]

One of her reasons in her resignation address was that she cannot govern effectively while responding to ethics charges that had been leveled against her. I cannot see resigning from a state governorship would be a good career move for anyone seeking higher office. Now I am not saying that she did not resign in order to make a killing on a book deal and tour but her resigning a governorship to run for higher office does not make much sense to me.

Political operatives descended on Alaska last August, digging for dirt. The ethics law I championed became their weapon of choice. Over the past nine months I've been accused of all sorts of frivolous ethics violations - such as holding a fish in a photograph, wearing a jacket with a logo on it, and answering reporters' questions.

Every one - all 15 of the ethics complaints have been dismissed. We've won! But it hasn't been cheap - the State has wasted THOUSANDS of hours of YOUR time and shelled out some two million of YOUR dollars to respond to "opposition research" - that's money NOT going to fund teachers or troopers - or safer roads. And this political absurdity, the "politics of personal destruction" ... Todd and I are looking at more than half a million dollars in legal bills in order to set the record straight. And what about the people who offer up these silly accusations? It doesn't cost them a dime so they're not going to stop draining public resources - spending other peoples' money in their game.

It's pretty insane - my staff and I spend most of our day dealing with THIS instead of progressing our state now. I know I promised no more "politics as usual," but THIS isn't what anyone had in mind for ALASKA.

[rhadin]

Originally Posted by pshrynk

At one point everyone made fun of Ronald Reagan as being a lightweight and a joke. He went on to serve as President for eight years. There are wildly differing opinions on his legacy. I'm just saying that it would behoove those of us who feel that Ms Palin is a joke to understand what she endorses as politcal reality, since her views will serve as the veneer of the administration she leads, should the unthinkable happen.

I lived in California while Reagan was governor. I think he was in many ways a lightweight but he had certain things in his favor. First, he spoke English, something Sarah has yet to master. Second, he smartly chose his advisers who were generally not lightweights. Sarah has yet to demonstrate that capability. Third, RR was widely read and although not considered an intellectual giant, he at least read more than that day's equivalent of People. RR also was noted for reading the major newspapers. Sarah still hasn't disclosed what newspapers and magazines she reads, assuming she reads at all.

But more importantly than any of the above, RR actually fulfilled his obligations to the electorate. He didn't quit in the midst of his first term so he could get a $5 million advance on a book and to pursue other interests.

Was RR a great president? History will eventually decide. I have my own opinion. But hopefully history will not have to judge Sarah's presidency.

[rhadin]

Originally Posted by Nate the great

So he's actually going to do something? When, exactly?

Everyone keeps comparing Obama to Roosevelt, but so far he's been as effective as Herbert Hoover.

Roosevelt had a Congress that wanted to get things done. Obama is faced with both Republican refusal to do anything other than say no and the blue dog democrats who are more worried about women's reproductive rights than about getting America going again.

It is darn hard to get something accomplished when you want to cut out military hardware that even the military doesn't want but ceertain congresspersons do want.

It's equally hard to get things going when you can't get your nominees in office because partisan politics puts a hold on them.

And it's very hard to get things going when the very first thing you need to is plug the leaks in the dike that the previous administration so gallantly opened (after all, Cheney's buddies such as Halliburton and KKR did great under Bush and so weathered the downturn with ease).

One year is insufficient time to turnaround the colossus we call home. Even Roosevelt needed a few years.

[Daithi]

I have to admit that I am with pilotbob's first take in regards to Palin quiting as Governor. One of her biggest flaws was that she didn't have the experience to be President, and quiting before you have even served a single term doesn't help in my mind.

I suppose one way to look at it is, as pilotbob also pointed out, that she resigned instead of neglecting her duties. But, when you need experience and you quit the job that would provide that experience then I'm at a loss.

[desertgrandma]

That may be tru, rhadin, but perhaps if he stayed home more?

And quit shoving a health care bill that changes constantly, and that no one has read in its entirety, AND that no one has yet to show how it will be paid for, nor what exactly will be covered?

Not to mention the so called economic stimulus bill which doesn't seem to have helped many except the banks and car companies.

Billions and billions of dollars which we don't have as a country being spent and still no answers.

[Nate the great]

Originally Posted by rhadin

Roosevelt had a Congress that wanted to get things done. Obama is faced with both Republican refusal to do anything other than say no and the blue dog democrats who are more worried about women's reproductive rights than about getting America going again.

It is darn hard to get something accomplished when you want to cut out military hardware that even the military doesn't want but ceertain congresspersons do want.

It's equally hard to get things going when you can't get your nominees in office because partisan politics puts a hold on them.

And it's very hard to get things going when the very first thing you need to is plug the leaks in the dike that the previous administration so gallantly opened (after all, Cheney's buddies such as Halliburton and KKR did great under Bush and so weathered the downturn with ease).

One year is insufficient time to turnaround the colossus we call home. Even Roosevelt needed a few years.

I disagree. He's been in office long enough to pass a stimulus bill that doesn't stimulate. Maybe if he didn't travel so much he could get more done.

[Nate the great]

Originally Posted by desertgrandma

Not to mention the so called economic stimulus bill which doesn't seem to have helped many except the banks and car companies.

Billions and billions of money which we don't have as a country being spent and still no answers.

Yes, between the money spent overseas, the money spent on already funded construction projects, and cash for clunkers, that bill was a wonderful collection of bad ideas.

Did you know that upwards of 80% of the buyers in that program were going to buy a car soon anyway? All CforC did was cram the purchases into a shorter period. Also, it probably created a drought of car sales. I wonder how many car dealerships will fail because of it.

[kennyc]

I'm going to disagree with you guys about the stimulus, yes even you DGM. I think the economy it's tremendously more healthy than it was 6 months and a year ago. The remaining issue is jobs which have not come back but I think they will because the businesses are coming back. Certainly there are still many weak spots (including the costs of the federal government) that need things changed.

[desertgrandma]

Originally Posted by kennyc

I'm going to disagree with you guys about the stimulus, yes even you DGM. I think the economy it's tremendously more healthy than it was 6 months and a year ago. The remaining issue is jobs which have not come back but I think they will because the businesses are coming back. Certainly there are still many weak spots (including the costs of the federal government) that need things changed.

Contrary to what you may think you are allowed to disagree with me. I get my stick out only when necessary.

That being said...........I stand by my post.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by desertgrandma

Contrary to what you may think you are allowed to disagree with me. I get my stick out only when necessary.

That being said...........I stand by my post.

Whew! I was worried!

[WT Sharpe]

Originally Posted by desertgrandma

... And quit shoving a health care bill that changes constantly, and that no one has read in its entirety, AND that no one has yet to show how it will be paid for, nor what exactly will be covered? ...

I know what isn't covered under the current system: many members of my own family, including my eight-year old grandson.

[Moejoe]

You Americans have a democracy now? When did that happen? I thought you just tossed a coin - Heads/Democrat - Tails/Republican (In the UK the Queen plays pin-the-tail on the candidate and that's how we decide )


And so it goes....

[Nate the great]

Originally Posted by WT Sharpe

I know what isn't covered under the current system: many members of my own family, including my eight-year old grandson.

I'm not covered under the current system (and I like it that way).