Meta-Blog

SEARCH QandO

Email:
Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock
MichaelW

BLOGROLL QandO

 
 
Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
 
 
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News
Politics
Business
Science
Technology
Health
Entertainment
Sports
Opinion/Editorial

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict

Blogging

Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links

Regional

Regional News

Publications

News Publications

 
Stupid Journalist Tricks
Posted by: MichaelW on Tuesday, September 09, 2008

For your next regularly scheduled Palin smear ("RSPS"), Michael Kinsley takes on the Governor's home state of Alaska in order to show that she is an elitist [HT: HAHL]. As with other RSPS, this one also falls flat on its face. The biggest difference is the unofficial world record time that Kinsley took to prove what a fool he is:
Sarah Palin thinks she is a better American than you because she comes from a small town, and a superior human being because she isn't a journalist and never lived in Washington and likes to watch her kids play hockey. Although Palin praised John McCain in her acceptance speech as a man who puts the good of his country ahead of partisan politics, McCain pretty much proved the opposite with his selection of a running mate whose main asset is her ability to reignite the culture wars. So maybe Governor Palin does represent everything that is good and fine about America, as she herself maintains. But spare us, please, any talk about how she is a tough fiscal conservative.
Staggeringly efficient isn't he? With his first sentence, Kinsley ensures that he will persuade exactly no one that he has any point whatsoever. Only those whom have already cemented their opinion of Sarah Palin firmly in the sidewalk of loathing will find anything of value after that sentence. Meanwhile, the 40 odd million people who watched Palin's address to the RNC will know immediately that Kinsley has it exactly backwards — she thinks she's better than people like Kinsley and the Washington-insider clique because she actually has a clue what most of us do with our lives. But you must hand it to the Time journalist for so effortlessly dividing the readers into those who know he's a fool, and those who don't want to judge (but may strongly suspect he is one). Well played, Sir.
Palin has continued to repeat the already exposed lie that she said, "No, thanks," to the famous "bridge to nowhere" (McCain's favorite example of wasteful federal spending). In fact, she said, "Yes, please," until this project became a symbol and political albatross.
Wait! What's this? An actual point after that brilliant lead-in? What's Kinsley up to here?
Back to reality.

Sadly, we on the definitely-a-fool side of the room knew it couldn't last.
Of the 50 states, Alaska ranks No. 1 in taxes per resident and No. 1 in spending per resident. Its tax burden per resident is 21/2 times the national average; its spending, more than double. The trick is that Alaska's government spends money on its own citizens and taxes the rest of us to pay for it. Although Palin, like McCain, talks about liberating ourselves from dependence on foreign oil, there is no evidence that being dependent on Alaskan oil would be any more pleasant to the pocketbook.
If you listen closely, you can hear the muted shuffle of the don't-judge crowd sneaking over to my side of the room.

Contrary to what Kinsley calls "reality," Alaska is not No.1 in per capita taxes, nor in the top ten. Heck it's not even in the 25 states for that category. In fact, Alaska's residents are the least taxed in the nation:
Since 1990, Alaska's state and local tax burden has consistently been the nation's lowest. Estimated now at 6.4% of income, Alaska's state/local tax burden is well below the national average of 9.7%. Alaskans pay $2,871 per capita in state and local taxes.

Before the Trans-Alaska pipeline was finished in1977, taxpayers in Alaska bore the second-highest tax burden in the country. By 1980, with oil tax revenue a certified bonanza, Alaska repealed its personal income tax and started sending out checks instead. The tax burden plummeted, and now Alaskans are the least taxed.
Wow. You have to admire someone who can bravely make a claim that is not just demonstrably false at the present time, but going back every year for the last 18 years. That takes talent.

Okay, we are now almost to capacity on this side the room, but there are a few stragglers left, so let's see if Kinsley can convince them to join the definitely-a-fool crowd:
As if it couldn't support itself, Alaska also ranks No. 1, year after year, in money it sucks in from Washington. In 2005 (the most recent figures), according to the Tax Foundation, Alaska ranked 18th in federal taxes paid per resident ($5,434) but first in federal spending received per resident ($13,950). Its ratio of federal spending received to federal taxes paid ranks third among the 50 states, and in the absolute amount it receives from Washington over and above the amount it sends to Washington, Alaska ranks No. 1.
Everybody on this side of the room, in one loud voice: what year did Palin become Governor?

"2006!"

What does Alaska's tax policy prior to that year have to do with Palin?

"NOTHING"

What say you other side of the room?

... *chirp*

I could go on with Kinsley's masterpiece of illusion by, for example, pointing out that Alaska has never been lower than No. 4 in federal dollars received per capita since 1981, ranking No. 1 in eighteen of those twenty-five years, including every year since 1999, and No. 2 three more times. But I think the point has been made.

Stay tuned for your next RSPS ...
 
TrackBacks
Return to Main Blog Page
 
 

Previous Comments to this Post 

Comments
What we have here, is someone on the other side of the culture war recognizing that Americans being exposed to actual small town folks will be counter-productive to their goals, and exposing heir contempt for such people as a knee-jerk reaction.

As to the rest, when you get desperate, you can make any claim you like,a nd as long as it sounds good, it’ll sell among the base and keep them fired up. And, maybe sway some non-thinking indipendants over as well.

The left continues to clearly show the level of desperation they’re feeling. The tide is turning, and they know it.



 
Written By: Bithead
URL: http://bitsblog.florack.us
I think by taxes per resident, he meant not what the average Alaskan paid, but the total revenue recieved by government divided by the total residents. That is he is treating oil royalties as taxes on citizens. Which is not as outlandish as it would seem, but not the point I think he was trying to make.

As for spending more than double, that’s possible, but one notes that Alaska has a very small population base, while still needing plenty of infrastructure and the like. Also I would guess everything in Alaska is likely more expensive than in say Michigan, since all the concrete and steel would have to be shipped up to the frozen wasteland. Also most of those spending commitments would have been made by previous administrations, and as well all know it’s devilshly hard to actually get spending cuts through a legislature.

As for energy independence being cheaper, well oil is still bought from a pool. Increasing world oil supply will decrease prices, but there is no reason to think that getting Alaskan oil would be cheaper than getting Saudi oil, since you pay the same per barrel regardless of the source, and I don’t think anyone has made that argument.
 
Written By: Joe Canadian
URL: http://
Of the 50 states, Alaska ranks No. 1 in taxes per resident and No. 1 in spending per resident. Its tax burden per resident is 21/2 times the national average; its spending, more than double.

Wait: is he trying to pitch Sarah Palin as the next democrat nominee or the replacement for Obama when the party dumps him in another month or so? Because he’s making AK sound like the liberal version of heaven on earth (well, next to Red China and Cuba, that is) thanks to Sarah Palin.

/ sarc

Sarah Palin thinks she is a better American than you because she comes from a small town, and a superior human being because she isn’t a journalist and never lived in Washington and likes to watch her kids play hockey.

Um, no. WE think she’s a better American and better human being than YOU, Mr. Kinsley, for a host of reasons. However, the fact that she isn’t a bottom-feeding journalist and never lived in DC provide a great start to the list.

Tip for Mr. Kinsley and the the other (ahem) people who practice his shabby trade: Americans don’t generally like or trust journalists very much. Many Americans find them biased, pompous, and often not especially well-informed (but what can you expect from people whose greatest educational achievement consists of learning how to write, something most people can do by the time they make it to high school). Sneering at "small town" and "hockey mom" Sarah Palin isn’t something calculated to endear Kinsley and other journos to that sizable number of Americans who, like Palin, are from small towns and take their kids to hockey, basketball, football, soccer, or any of the other sports that parents enjoy watching their kids play. Journos told us that Michelle Obama was "genuine" because she takes her kids to piano lessons. Yet, we’re supposed to think less of Sarah Palin because her kids play hockey?

What a jerk.
 
Written By: docjim505
URL: http://
Sarah Palin thinks she is a better American than you because she comes from a small town, and a superior human being because she isn’t a journalist and never lived in Washington and likes to watch her kids play hockey
That does make her a better human being than most Journos, yes.

 
Written By: shark
URL: http://
I think I can explain why the Federal Government sends so much money to Alaska. The easiest explanation is that it owns 60% of it. It’s explained more here. Since Alaska is almost three times the size of Texas, that is a lot of land to maintain.

If you include non-states, Washington DC runs away with #1. No one in the media seems worried way too much federal spending goes on there.
 
Written By: S.K.
URL: http://areyoudesign.com/blog
If they keep making the election about her, McCain cruises to an easy victory
 
Written By: shark
URL: http://
It’s no surprise, then, that Democrats have airdropped a mini-army of 30 lawyers, investigators and opposition researchers into Anchorage, the state capital Juneau and Mrs. Palin’s hometown of Wasilla to dig into her record and background. My sources report the first wave arrived in Anchorage less than 24 hours after John McCain selected her on August 29.
Issues, now exactly which issues are they going to find out ?

Somebody tell me this doesn’t smack of the "politics of personal destruction"
 
Written By: Neo
URL: http://
I think by taxes per resident, he meant not what the average Alaskan paid, but the total revenue recieved by government divided by the total residents. That is he is treating oil royalties as taxes on citizens. Which is not as outlandish as it would seem, but not the point I think he was trying to make.
Even if your extremely charitable take on Kinsley is correct, Joe, that still wouldn’t vault Alaska all the way from 50th to 1st, especially given the following:
Alaska ranks 4th in the Tax Foundation’s State Business Tax Climate Index. The Index compares the states in five areas of taxation that impact business: corporate taxes; individual income taxes; sales taxes; unemployment insurance taxes; and taxes on property, including residential and commercial property.
For that index, a rank of 1 is the best.
 
Written By: MichaelW
URL: http://qando.net
Neo - Somebody tell me this [sending dozens of lawyers and other "investigators" to AK to dig into Sarah Palin’s past] doesn’t smack of the "politics of personal destruction".

But... but... but... The Annointed One said that he was going to change all of that! He was going to make American politics civil again! He wasn’t going to try to divide us because he (should I write "He"?) understands and embraces all Americans!

That is, as soon as he gets elected.
 
Written By: docjim505
URL: http://
Sarah Palin thinks she is a better American than you because she comes from a small town,

Sorry - I must have missed that. This guys a mind reader?
 
Written By: Bandit
URL: http://
wow alot of whining in this post
 
Written By: slntax
URL: http://
If you lived in Wasilla, wouldn’t it be a fun pastime to come up with crazy off-the-wall rumors of Palin’s doings — I mean, just make up the most oddball things; not like "she had an affair" but more on the lines of "she was known in high school to do the entire men’s basketball team" — just to see which ones the media and Obama’s people run with? Meanwhile, you could be blogging the stories you told each of them, in enough detail that you could track who picked up their stupid rumors without fact-checking them from which sources. I don’t think that the existence of an easily-googled web page laying this all out in detail would be enough to keep journalists from reporting it, but it would be fun to see them goggle when exposed.

 
Written By: Jeff Medcalf
URL: http://www.caerdroia.org/blog
wow alot of whining in this post
Then one would think you’d be able to point something out and make a substantive comment on it. Obviously that was too much trouble for you.
 
Written By: MichaelW
URL: http://qando.net
Once again - you chumps forget that busy coast based people, in their hurly burly cool metro lives, are waaaaay to busy to do things like check when Palin became Governer, or what a story actually says below the headline.

They have important things to do, causes to promote, dumb@ss red state morons to save from themselves.

 
Written By: looker
URL: http://
Sarah Palin thinks she is a better American than you because she comes from a small town, and a superior human being because she isn’t a journalist and never lived in Washington and likes to watch her kids play hockey.
Wait, wasn’t one of the original slams that she was just some bubble-headed TV sports journalist?
 
Written By: Phelps
URL: http://phelps.donotremove.net
Mike, it’s a clever little song and dance you’ve done here that manages to completely obscure Sarah Palin’s clear as day actual record:

Everybody on this side of the room, in one loud voice: what year did Palin become Governor?

"2006!"

What does Alaska’s tax policy prior to that year have to do with Palin?

"NOTHING"

What say you other side of the room?

... *chirp*


Actually, the other side of the room would say that Kinsley was stupid to use a 2005 number, but the 2007 numbers are equally damning. We already know they’ll come in first in federal spending per resident under Sarah Palin’s watch - the $750 million in earmarks she requested for her state will see to that.

So you pointed out a logical error in Kinsley’s point but failed to note that by selecting a year two years later, his point remained absolutely correct. It’s about as mature as claiming the following statement is a lie, "Adolfs Hitler is a bad man", because Adolfs Hitler was not the Nazi dictator of Germany. There’s a bigger point here, and you ducked it.

 
Written By: glasnost
URL: http://
"We already know they’ll come in first in federal spending per resident under Sarah Palin’s watch - the $750 million in earmarks she requested for her state will see to that."
So what?



 
Written By: Grimshaw
URL: http://
Mike, it’s a clever little song and dance you’ve done here that manages to completely obscure Sarah Palin’s clear as day actual record
I’m not making any case here about her record, but instead exposing a very foolish man for what he is.
Actually, the other side of the room would say that Kinsley was stupid to use a 2005 number, but the 2007 numbers are equally damning.
Did you miss this part?
In 2005 (the most recent figures) ...
Guess so.
We already know they’ll come in first in federal spending per resident under Sarah Palin’s watch - the $750 million in earmarks she requested for her state will see to that.
Even if true, you’re missing two important facts. The first I made clear in the post:
I could go on with Kinsley’s masterpiece of illusion by, for example, pointing out that Alaska has never been lower than No. 4 in federal dollars received per capita since 1981, ranking No. 1 in eighteen of those twenty-five years, including every year since 1999, and No. 2 three more times.
IOW, Alaska has been at the top of spending per resident for over 25 years, so why would we expect a drastic difference otherwise, especially (as Democrats are fond of pointing out) since Palin has only been in office for 20 months?

The second as that she requested $750 in earmarks during that time. That’s incorrect on at least one, and maybe two, levels: (a) Governors don’t request earmarks, congressmen do; and (b) IIRC, the $750 is over the life of her political career (to include the time she was Mayor). Either way, every Governor makes requests for federal funds, because that’s unfortunately how this system has evolved since the turn of the 20th Century, which system was greatly accelerated under FDR. That Palin worked within that system says nothing about the reforms she put into place.
So you pointed out a logical error in Kinsley’s point ...
It’s OK. You can say "obliterated his point entirely." We all know it’s true.
... but failed to note that by selecting a year two years later, his point remained absolutely correct.

Actually, as I pointed out above, no it doesn’t.
It’s about as mature as claiming the following statement is a lie, "Adolfs Hitler is a bad man", because Adolfs Hitler was not the Nazi dictator of Germany. There’s a bigger point here, and you ducked it.
Yeah. It’s just like that. Next.
 
Written By: MichaelW
URL: http://qando.net
Adolfs Hitler
And what does that have to do with the price of tea in Obamaland, there Glaz. As much as bringing 2006 into the equation when the article reads 2005. By the way, could you show me the earmarks Palin placed in the Senate or House bills in 2006 or later? You know, the ones she personally wrote into the bills.

We’ll wait.
 
Written By: SShiell
URL: http://
We already know they’ll come in first in federal spending per resident under Sarah Palin’s watch
Emphasis on per resident. Of course, forget the fact that Alaska is the fourth least populous state. Also, don’t consider that Alaska consists of 424.5 million acres (663,000 sq mi) of land of which 240 million acres (375,000 sq mi)(i.e. MORE THAN HALF) is FEDERAL land that the federal government has put itself on the hook to maintain. I guess citizens of Alaska should pay out of pocket to maintain federal land and infrastructure. Don’t mention the federal military spending in a state 3 miles away from Asia. I guess the federal government should place their bases in Alaska and demand the state pay for the infrastructure, equipment, and wages of all federal equipment and personnel. By the way, Medicaid is the largest federal grant program in Alaska. Who proposed that program? It was Sarah Palin in 2006, right?
 
Written By: Is
URL: http://
Adolfs Hitler is a bad man
Well, it is a leftie arguing, so you know that in any argument, that topic is sure to be raised.

Is PDS more virulent than BDS? In it’s acute stage, definitely.
 
Written By: capt joe
URL: http://
Kinsley of course has retired the cup for moronic self-parody years ago. He is a card-carrying phony of the phar-lepht phonyhood of Traveling Phonies. Also innumerate, as his article demonstrates.

Of course, at the same time the supercilious dismissive elitists in the MSM ponder how Sarah can fulfill her onerous ["pitcher of warm spit"] VP duties while a mother of five, they also screech & howl that she took per diem on the days off from Juneau to visit her family hundreds of miles away in Anchorage.

Do they ever reflect on how the American people judge them to be hypocritical imbeciles?

And nobody has vetted Obama or Biden, giving Obama ginormous access-passes on Rezko, Ayers, & Rev [God Damn America] Wright—-while overlooking Obama’s "scheduling conflicts" that prevented him from visiting his mom’s deathbed in ’96!
 
Written By: daveinboca
URL: http://
Federal per capita spending in Alaska ($6,272.62) is far lower than in the District of Columbia ($34,665.63) - that democrat infested basket case.
 
Written By: arch
URL: http://
He is a card-carrying phony of the phar-lepht phonyhood of Traveling Phonies.
that’s just funny!
 
Written By: kyleN
URL: http://impudent.blognation.us/blog
What Kinsley means when he says "Sarah Palin thinks she is a better American than you", is that she thinks she’s a better American than him, and people just like him.

He’s not talking to anybody else. He probably knows that other kinds of people exist, but he is not capable of imagining that they might matter.
 
Written By: Midget Launcher
URL: http://stfuretard.blogspot.com
IOW, Alaska has been at the top of spending per resident for over 25 years, so why would we expect a drastic difference otherwise, especially (as Democrats are fond of pointing out) since Palin has only been in office for 20 months?

I can answer this one, Mike. The answer is: because Sarah Palin is a Republican, rhetorical foe of government spending in all its forms, being praised by a libertarian website, foe of government spending in all its forms. Because Sarah Palin is running with a presidential candidate whose prime policy promise is to ’eliminate wasteful spending’ and ’reform earmarks’. Tell me, do libertarians who hate government spending like Governors who request and endorse giant hunks of federal spending, merely because that Governor didn’t do any worse than the previous governor, who also made a mockery of libertarian beliefs? If Barack Obama promises to keep government spending at the same GDP percentage as George Bush, will that make libertarians like you suddenly begin to defend him? Do you, in short, actually judge people by these things you sometimes judge liberals, specifically, by? Or is it all suddenly okay if the person before the current person also spent lots of ’wasteful’ government spending?

As for this one:

That’s incorrect on at least one, and maybe two, levels: (a) Governors don’t request earmarks, congressmen do; and

How do we square that with this:

This year she submitted to Congress a list of Alaska projects worth $197.8 million, including $2 million to research crab productivity in the Bering Sea and $7.4 million to improve runway lighting at eight Alaska airports. A spokesman said she cut the original list of 54 projects to 31.


http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-earmarks3-2008sep03,0,2482434.story

I’m no expert, but to me this sort of implies that before the congressmen request the earmarks, they might have state political folks - like, i dunno, the governor, suggest what those earmarks should be. What do you think, Mike?

The fact that Kinsley makes these junior high mistakes doesn’t mean he’s actually wrong, just that he made dippy mistakes. You know it as well as I do, and you’ve gone out of your way to obscure it. If the Hitler metaphor grates on your nerves, it’s like using the mathematical errors in a sloppy high school physics lesson to imply that the dude is wrong about gravity being what makes people fall towards the earth.
 
Written By: glasnost
URL: http://
$2 million to research crab productivity in the Bearing Sea. That’s a made-for-John-McCain laugh line.

My personal take on this is that it actually exemplifies how surreal the anti-government-spending crusades have become in certain circles. Sarah Palin’s highly liberal record on government spending is a carbon copy of the folks on Q & O run around making fun of all the time. The only solution: selective attention, flexible standards, and borderline hypocrisy. You’ve actually run a post criticizing Palin on her spending record, Mike, so you personally might clear that third bar. Barely. But you should be more open about the fact that you’re endorsing someone whose governing philosophy on the issues seems to be utterly unlike what you claim to believe in.. maybe because ’the liberals are worse’, or something.
 
Written By: glasnost
URL: http://
IOW, Alaska has been at the top of spending per resident for over 25 years, so why would we expect a drastic difference otherwise, especially (as Democrats are fond of pointing out) since Palin has only been in office for 20 months?
I can answer this one, Mike. The answer is: because Sarah Palin is a Republican, rhetorical foe of government spending in all its forms, being praised by a libertarian website, foe of government spending in all its forms. Because Sarah Palin is running with a presidential candidate whose prime policy promise is to ’eliminate wasteful spending’ and ’reform earmarks’.
How does any of that answer the question? In fact, if you’d done any homework at all, then you’d know Palin has eliminated a great deal of wasteful spending.
Tell me, do libertarians who hate government spending like Governors who request and endorse giant hunks of federal spending, merely because that Governor didn’t do any worse than the previous governor, who also made a mockery of libertarian beliefs? If Barack Obama promises to keep government spending at the same GDP percentage as George Bush, will that make libertarians like you suddenly begin to defend him? Do you, in short, actually judge people by these things you sometimes judge liberals, specifically, by? Or is it all suddenly okay if the person before the current person also spent lots of ’wasteful’ government spending?
Frankly I’d answer this if it had anything to do with the post or my points. It doesn’t, so I won’t.
I’m no expert, but to me this sort of implies that before the congressmen request the earmarks, they might have state political folks - like, i dunno, the governor, suggest what those earmarks should be. What do you think, Mike?
I think you’re embarrassing yourself in this discussion by making it quite obvious that you have no idea what an earmark is. Let me help:
OMB defines earmarks as funds provided by the Congress for projects or programs where the congressional direction (in bill or report language) circumvents Executive Branch merit-based or competitive allocation processes, or specifies the location or recipient, or otherwise curtails the ability of the Executive Branch to manage critical aspects of the funds allocation process.
In short form, earmarks are the funding for pork projects slipped into bills that have nothing to do with the projects themselves, usually entitled something helpful like the "I Love America Act" so that nobody can vote against them. Then the Executive can only vote up or down on them because there is no line-item veto, so in signing the "I Love America Act" into law, the earmarks simultaneously get sent to their prospective recipients who often happen to be friends of the Congressmen who put them in the bill in the first place.

Now that Civics 101 is over, you want to explain where a Governor’s or Mayor’s role is in the federal appropriations process, or shall we leave it at that?
 
Written By: MichaelW
URL: http://qando.net
Obama gets personal .. now it’s gonna get ugly.
"You can put lipstick on a pig, it’s still a pig."
 
Written By: Neo
URL: http://
Don’t let it get ugly. Everybody take a deep breath while Obama destroys himself.
 
Written By: Neo
URL: http://
I can answer this one, Mike. The answer is: because Sarah Palin is a Republican, rhetorical foe of government spending in all its forms, being praised by a libertarian website, foe of government spending in all its forms. Because Sarah Palin is running with a presidential candidate whose prime policy promise is to ’eliminate wasteful spending’ and ’reform earmarks’. Tell me, do libertarians who hate government spending like Governors who request and endorse giant hunks of federal spending, merely because that Governor didn’t do any worse than the previous governor, who also made a mockery of libertarian beliefs?
Simple, glasnost.

One person doesn’t just step into government and fix it instantly. It has to be done one step at a time. That’s why I’m going to vote for McCain/Palin and against Obama (well, that and the fact I won’t vote for someone who is friends with a terrorist).

My hope for McCain is that he does OK with respect to domestic policy and continues with success in Iraq. I hope that Palin can then continue, and in the future kick the sh*t out of the left on domestic issues.

Glasnost is upset that we support Palin even though she didn’t magically turn AK into the perfect libertarian state in 20 months with her magic wand. Which tells us something: his side is going to loose, and they got nothing.

 
Written By: Don
URL: http://
Is this the new lefty meme on Sarah Palin?
Sarah Palin is a politician... just like Hitler!
Hey, they tried it with Schwarzenegger.
 
Written By: docjim505
URL: http://
Now that Civics 101 is over, you want to explain where a Governor’s or Mayor’s role is in the federal appropriations process, or shall we leave it at that?
Wait, are you suggesting that governors or mayors or anyone else involved in state government does not or cannot make requests for earmarks from their congressional delegations?
 
Written By: PogueMahone
URL: http://
Pogue:

Why would a governor or mayor (a) care how the money was appropriated, or (b) ask for the most politically divisive way of getting the money, or (c) put any conditions on how the money they request is funded at all?
 
Written By: MichaelW
URL: http://qando.net
Wait, are you suggesting that governors or mayors or anyone else involved in state government does not or cannot make requests for earmarks from their congressional delegations?
Heck Pogue, apparently anyone can make requests for earmarks - even the wives of Senators.

But the bottom line is the only people who can stuff pork in a bill are Congresspeople.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.QandO.net
Heck Pogue, apparently anyone can make requests for earmarks - even the wives of Senators.
Was that the ’Glass Houses’ earmark?

 
Written By: Bithead
URL: http://bitsblog.florack.us
Michael, governors and mayors ask for earmarks from their congressional delegation all the time. So apparently they do consider a, b, and c.

McQ, it’s true that congresspeople are the ones who stuff bills full of pork. But I don’t consider someone to be anti-earmarks when that someone often asks for earmarks. Maybe you do.

Maybe Palin asked for fewer earmarks, but she still asked for them. There’s just no way of scrubbing that off of her bona fides.

Cheers.
 
Written By: PogueMahone
URL: http://
McQ, it’s true that congresspeople are the ones who stuff bills full of pork. But I don’t consider someone to be anti-earmarks when that someone often asks for earmarks. Maybe you do.
Never said I did - but then I also know who are responsible for them as well.

Earmarks don’t become pork until a Congressperson puts them in a bill and votes "yes" on it. Most likely any earmark that ended up in Alaska had an Obama (and probably a Biden) OK.

It’s kind of like the bridge to nowhere flap. Palin has been credited by the Democratic Party of Alaska (on their website) for stopping the bridge whereas Obama voted "yes" for the bridge - twice.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.QandO.net
Michael, governors and mayors ask for earmarks from their congressional delegation all the time. So apparently they do consider a, b, and c.
OK. Prove it. Show me one time where a state official said "I’d like x dollars for y project and please make sure that’s in an earmark, not any other kind of funding vehicle." I’m willing to be proven wrong this (facts do speak for themselves), but I’m more than a little bit skeptical that one would limit their chances of funding this way.

More to the point, earmarks are a sideshow for the McCain/Palin ticket. At least when it comes to Palin herself. I’m pretty sure that’s why she keeps pushing the lie that she said "thanks, but no thanks to that Bridge to Nowhere." The campaign knows what a rise they get out of the opposition when she says that, and it preoccupies the attention of the Obama campaign on something that very few voters actually care about.

What the McCain Campaign really wants to hammer is the idea of cleaning up Washington (i.e. lobbying, earmarks, special interests, party favors, etc.), which both Palin and McCain have a track record of. The more time Obama and his supporters spend targeting the capillary ("She’s lying about that bridge!!!!!1!"), the more time McCain has to broaden his message of reform. The fact is, McCain is playing the Obama strategists like a fiddle, and they have been for the past couple of months or so.

The best analogy that I can think of is a fight I saw involving HOF pitcher Nolan Ryan in his waning days as a Major Leaguer. Ryan was pitching some rookie really closely because the batter was crowding the plate. Ryan knew exactly what he was doing in provoking the kid, and eventually he beaned the rookie. Well this young upstart charges the mound, Ryan throws his glove off and and squares the attacker. The kid charges straight at the pitcher, yelling obscenities, veins popping out of his neck, hands waving menacingly, and generally frothing at the mouth. Ryan just stands there like a toreador waiting for a bull. The kid gets to mound, fists flying, and the next thing he knows he’s in a headlock get his face turned into hamburger.

Of course what followed was general chaos, but when Ryan was interviewed about it later all he said was "Just like roping a steer."

Obama’s been roped like a steer, and he doesn’t seem to have any means of getting loose. And I say that as someone who was absolutely positive that Obama would win this election. I’m not saying he won’t, but he’s been taking a licking for the past several weeks, and he’s not reacting well. He may pull it out in the end, but it’ going to take a lot more than charging the mound with fists of fury. That’ll just get him beat like a red-headed step-child.
 
Written By: MichaelW
URL: http://qando.net
Heck Pogue, apparently anyone can make requests for earmarks - even the wives of Senators.
For the hard of hearing or those refusing to comprehend (i.e. anyone on the left). Obama gave his own wife an big honking earmark.
 
Written By: capt joe
URL: http://
because she actually has a clue what most of us do with our lives I always get a chuckle when some politician claims that he is concerned about the issues that regular Americans discuss at the kitchen table. Huh? The only discussions around our table are "quit making faces at your sister", "why are there toys on the dinner table?", "did you finish your homework?", "finish your dinner and it’s time for bed", and so on.
 
Written By: The Old Man
URL: http://
OK. Prove it. Show me one time where a state official said "I’d like x dollars for y project and please make sure that’s in an earmark, not any other kind of funding vehicle." I’m willing to be proven wrong this (facts do speak for themselves), but I’m more than a little bit skeptical that one would limit their chances of funding this way.
Who said anything about “limiting” their chances for funding? Your criteria for being proven wrong is ridiculous. “Please make sure it’s an earmark”… what a joke.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/politics/2004064752_alaskaearmarks11m.html
Gov. Sarah Palin’s administration plans to ask Alaska’s congressional delegation for far fewer earmarks in the coming year.
Officials cited a need to improve the state’s credibility.
"We really want to skinny it down," said Karen Rehfeld, Palin’s budget chief.
Rehfeld recently wrote a memo to state commissioners telling them that to "enhance the state’s credibility," federal earmark requests for funding should be only for the most compelling needs.
The Palin administration itself admitted to “asking” for earmarks. Granted, they said they were going to ask for fewer, and that’s a good thing, but “asking” nevertheless.

I’m sure if a governor found a flock of geese that laid golden eggs, I’m sure that they would fund their pet projects that way. But the truth is… and you know it, that governors – including Sarah Palin – ask their congressional delegations for federal funding, in the manner of earmarks or whatever.

If you wanna claim the Obama campaign is getting schooled… then be my guest. I’m not arguing against that. But you cannot claim that Palin, or any other governor for that matter, does not ask their congressional delegations for federal funding, including funds procured through earmarks.

Why anyone would deny that governors ask for earmarks is just ridiculous.

Cheers.
 
Written By: PogueMahone
URL: http://
I’ll give you some credit there Pogue, but I don’t see any proof that the Palin Administration requested actual earmarks. I only seeing some reporter’s paraphrasing of the what will be reduced.

And I still don’t see any reason why they, or any other governor/state official would request earmarks. "Earmarks" are a particular method of federal appropriation, and it doesn’t make a lick of sense that someone would limit their chances at getting money by requesting funding in such a manner ("SEN: Well I’ve got a grant here for $100 Million. GOV: Ewww! I wanted an earmark. Send it back!").
... governors – including Sarah Palin – ask their congressional delegations for federal funding, in the manner of earmarks or whatever.
This is exactly my point.
But you cannot claim that Palin, or any other governor for that matter, does not ask their congressional delegations for federal funding, including funds procured through earmarks.
I’m not suggesting that state officials eschew earmarks, but instead that they don’t place such qualifiers on the money they request. Either way, it’s Congressmen that decide whether it will be an earmark or not, and they are the only ones capable of actually requesting one. That’s the point that McQ has been driving home.
 
Written By: MichaelW
URL: http://qando.net
In fact, if you’d done any homework at all, then you’d know Palin has eliminated a great deal of wasteful spending.

Horsefeathers. I’ve seen what you’re probably reffering to. Again, by the weak standard of what you’re giving her credit for - trimming state legislature requests down to a smaller-than-original package, liberal governors across the country would qualify as ’wasteful spending crusaders’.

If you’ve got something better than that, deal it.
 
Written By: glasnost
URL: http://
There is an old saying that you never want to interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake. You guys (Obama, Biden, DNC, Glaz, Retief, et al) are spending so much of your time and energy trying to get anything to stick to Sarah Palin that you ignoring the elephant in the room - John McCain. McCain is still out there throwing barbs at "The One" while everybody on the left is frozen in time and place trying to combat Palinomania. And in that fight they are attacking a single symptom while dying from the disease. And that disease is the unnatural stink of fear the emanates from the Left while their "One" shot at glory sinks into the pesthole he has dug for himself.

Keep up the good work!
 
Written By: SShiell
URL: http://
Michael, this email from UC-San Diego Professor of economics, Garey Ramey, is described in a post by Jeff G explains what the Bridge to Nowhere rejection really meant.
 
Written By: capt joe
URL: http://
What a crock of sh!t! As governor, Palin didn’t successfully deny each and every earmark received by the state of Alaska in a federal government process. Therefore, her success in turning back a $250 Million earmark supposedly means nothing and is the same as actually putting the pork into federal legislation. What was done in Alaska IS more than just trimming down requests. The bridge was actually approved. Correct? It wasn’t cut out of some state legislature request (because this is how the process works, right?... state legislatures send earmark requests to federal representatives for placement in unrelated legislation... yet I digress). Obama needs for America to believe that serving as a US Senator and exercising actual authority to pack legislation with earmarks is equivalent to serving as governor and not stopping each and every earmark approved under federal legislation from reaching the state. I suppose Obama believes each state’s governors are given a line item veto on bills from Congress before they go to the President.
 
Written By: Is
URL: http://
The bridge was actually approved. Correct?
Yes, Obama and Biden voted for it twice and in fact instead of using the funds for Katrina. Why do they hate black people ;)
 
Written By: capt joe
URL: http://
As governor, Palin didn’t successfully deny each and every earmark received by the state of Alaska in a federal government process.
Most earmarks require matching funds from the state. Sarah Palin did not vetoe the earmark. She vetoed the state’s required matching funding for this particular earmark, eliminating the earmark altogether.
Therefore, her success in turning back a $250 Million earmark supposedly means nothing and is the same as actually putting the pork into federal legislation.
No, her veto killed the earmark because without the State’s matching funds, the earmark dies.
Obama needs for America to believe that serving as a US Senator and exercising actual authority to pack legislation with earmarks is equivalent to serving as governor and not stopping each and every earmark approved under federal legislation from reaching the state.
No, because Obama’s vote is only one of 100. The executive power here is the President signs/vetoes the bill and the Governor signs/vetoes the funding. In this case, the executive priviledge was the Governors. Obama wishes he had the priviledge/power.
I suppose Obama believes each state’s governors are given a line item veto on bills from Congress before they go to the President.
I do not know what Obama believes. And that is the real question of this election. Thank you bringing it to the forefront of the debate.
What a crock of sh!t!
The only crock here is in your fevered mind.
 
Written By: SShiell
URL: http://
Horsefeathers. I’ve seen what you’re probably reffering to. Again, by the weak standard of what you’re giving her credit for - trimming state legislature requests down to a smaller-than-original package, liberal governors across the country would qualify as ’wasteful spending crusaders’.
And yet, when Palin increased spending on un-wed teen mothers my only 1/2 as much as the Democrats wanted, she’s accused of cutting funding.

What is this?

A double-standard?????

No, it can not be.

The FACT is the Obama/Biden ticket has the career record for earmarks over the McCain/Palin ticket.

Take that to the bank and suck on it.
 
Written By: Keith_Indy
URL: http://asecondhandconjecture.com
If you’ve got something better than that, deal it.
We have something better than Obama/Biden, and we have dealt it. And we will win in November.

 
Written By: Don
URL: http://
portolan gleba untempering sieger dramaturge sphenography exasperate reseda droqy losxiumg
http://aiwowxem.com
ltaqiau uqjzz
http://hieklyrlc.com
fzkrqaj jqaqx
http://vlfssvnbygtn.com
oysmr oiyjnoy
http://rvwslyeww.com
 
Written By: Abel Harding
URL: http://jskihrtnni.com
portolan gleba untempering sieger dramaturge sphenography exasperate reseda fgcfz uhqkqu
http://okrzcirmum.com
qzdxi sbrrve
http://tbyxhjpracq.com
byydgqw oeflxkir
http://nwdmxupnz.com
zcxrxih bsaxffl
http://ssnokjiod.com
 
Written By: Penni Ortiz
URL: http://iniybptrjzvz.com
portolan gleba untempering sieger dramaturge sphenography exasperate reseda jrrom eiacnlro
http://qlytkqzxr.com
fneamx fukg
http://jyikebfvstnj.com
htgezl vudpz
http://clnjtuaoz.com
efpfuqo ipmon
http://jxeslco.com
 
Written By: Roxanne Soto
URL: http://lgmpbho.com
Stupid journalists...lying all the time...just like in Bosnia...and Iraq...and Afghanistan...and in local papers...
 
Written By: ’Not Really’ Jones
URL: http://wgsb.sch

 
Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
Name:
Email:
URL:
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Comment:
   
 
Vicious Capitalism

Divider

Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks

Divider

Divider