Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • http://www.crosscut.com/politics-government/17341 [crosscut.com]

    Despite talking about cutting taxes, fiscal responsibility, small government and fighting corruption, her career has been exactly the opposite of that.

    • Despite talking about cutting taxes, fiscal responsibility, small government and fighting corruption, her career has been exactly the opposite of that.

      Incorrect on all counts.

      • There is a content free assertion. Which of the following statements are wrong?

        1. When she became mayor of Wasilla, the budget was balanced.
        2. When she left, the city was in debt. (Fiscally responsible?)
        3. One of her first actions as mayor was to fire various people (eg the police chief and library director) and hire her own friends. The reason she gave wasn't competence, it was because they were "not fully supporting her efforts to govern". ie not endorsing her as mayor. (This kind of political manipulation s
        • There is a content free assertion.

          Yes, exactly. You gave a content-free assertion, so I responded in kind.

          When she left, the city was in debt. (Fiscally responsible?)

          All the debt was for specific infrastructure purposes, was favored by the people, and was budgeted for in advance. This is quite responsible, yes.

          One of her first actions as mayor was to fire various people (eg the police chief and library director) and hire her own friends. The reason she gave wasn't competence, it was because they were "not fully supporting her efforts to govern". ie not endorsing her as mayor. (This kind of political manipulation should be abhorrent exactly because it leads to corruption.)

          Utter tripe. If she can't work with them effectively to accomplish her goals, hell yes, she should fire them, and the sooner the better.

          Under her, Wasilla hired a lobbyist to try to get more in federal earmarks. It received them to the tune of $23 million. (She says she's against earmarks?)

          Earmarks are not a problem at all. I couldn't care less. What matters is WHAT is being earmarked.

          This was despite raising taxes substantially. (Didn't she say she was for cutting taxes?)

          You already addressed this exact point above: taxes were

          • Do you believe she is qualified to be Vice President?

            If so, please can you give *specific* examples of where her experience as governor and mayor would be relevant to handling facets of this country's foreign policy.

            One quick note: I absolutely couldn't care less about Barack Obama or Joe Biden. I'm not interested in their record in the slightest. I'm asking specifically what you think qualifies Palin to represent this country on the world stage.

            • So, apology done, I'll answer your question now.

              Do you believe she is qualified to be Vice President?

              Absolutely.

              If so, please can you give *specific* examples of where her experience as governor and mayor would be relevant to handling facets of this country's foreign policy.

              Well, of course, she is commander-in-chief of the Alaska National Guard, and lives right next to Russia, which means she's well aware of some of our serious national security concerns, whether it's Russia's claim of the North Pole, or her National Guard being involved with turning back a Russian military aircraft, or guarding our national missile defense (which, yes, are not under her command, as they are federalized in that role, but it's something she's aware of, and knowledgable of the issues involved).

              I personally don't care much about experience, and I don't use this against candidates, except in contrast when my candidate's experience is attacked. What matters more to me is what you think and how you think, than what specific experience you've had. If you've been a general, or been involved with foreign affairs for many years as with McCain and Biden, we know you know a lot, because we have heard you talk AND we know you have a ton of experience. If you're Obama or Palin, we know you do NOT have much experience, so we can really only listen to what you say.

              One quick note: I absolutely couldn't care less about Barack Obama or Joe Biden. I'm not interested in their record in the slightest. I'm asking specifically what you think qualifies Palin to represent this country on the world stage.

              I reject the question in part, I don't think broad experience is a qualification in itself. There are lots of people with experience who I think are unqualified, and people without it who are qualified, like Obama; yes, I do think he is qualified, just not very good (Hillary has spoken to his problems in judgment as well as I could).

              Experience does not qualify you, it only gives us a framework from which to judge what you actually say and do. So when McCain says something, we can see whether he's followed that over his long career, and how good he has been on that issue. We can't do that with Obama and Palin to nearly the same degree.

              We've heard Obama talk, and we'll hear him more, and we're making our judgments, because he has very little experience to judge him by. We'll do the same with Palin.