Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
100 words for 100 days: submit your 100 word essay and get published on AlterNet
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Palin's Self-Reliant Image of Alaska Is Bogus

By David Morris, AlterNet. Posted September 15, 2008.


Palin is trying to appeal to the self-reliant, anti-government voters while her state is the most dependent on government pork.

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

More stories by David Morris

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

In her latest comment on the "Bridge to Nowhere" controversy, Sarah Palin appealed to the self-reliant, individualist, rugged, anti-government image most Americans have of Alaska. "If we wanted a bridge," she declared, "we would build it ourselves."

Actually, much of Alaska long ago lost the tradition of self-help. Palin might be campaigning on an anti-government, do-it-yourself platform, but her state is the most dependent on the federal government of all 50 states. Washington sends Alaska more money per capita than any other state. Alaskans receive back from the federal government almost $2 for every $1 they send to Washington. It's a sweet deal.

And when it comes to government pork, Alaska is king. As USA Today noted back in March, Palin's state ranks number one -- no other state is even close. In 2007 Alaska received some 2.5 times as much as runner-up Hawaii and 15 times more than the national average.

Alaska has by far the most state government employees per capita as any other state and about five times as many as Obama's Illinois.

The part of Alaska not dependent on federal government largesse is dependent on big oil. Almost 90 percent of Alaska's general budget comes from royalties and taxes on oil, which explains how the state can be number one in state government spending while ranking far down the list in taxes its residents pay. Alaska has no income tax or sales tax. Recently, its legislature suspended the gasoline tax.

Up to a quarter of an Alaskan's family income comes directly from the profits of oil companies. This may need a bit of explaining.

Back in the 1970s, when liberal Republicans still roamed the earth, former Alaskan governors Walter Hickel and Jay Hammond led a movement to create a state trust fund to bank part of the revenue derived from a nonrenewable resource to be used later to ensure that Alaska would survive its inevitable disappearance.

In part to ensure the continued political support of the Alaska Permanent Fund, the legislature voted to use a portion of the fund's investment income to mail each Alaskan an annual dividend check.

Hickel and Hammond hoped the fund would be used to prepare Alaska for the day of reckoning. The day of reckoning is rapidly arriving, but contemporary Alaskan leaders like Palin aren't doing much preparing. Alaskan oil production peaked in 1988 at about 750 million barrels. In 2007 it was down to 250 million barrels, and it continues to fall. The exhaustion of its oil resources has not yet shown up in the economy or government coffers because of the fivefold increase in the price of oil since 1988 and by the relatively high returns the fund, now with more than $35 billion in assets, has earned.

Alaska has the most unbalanced and least diversified economy of all 50 states. Yet politicians like Palin do not appear to have the courage to change that imbalance. About 95 percent of the Permanent Fund is invested outside the state. Exxon Mobil Corporation is the fund's single highest valued stock holding. The state legislature has appropriated little money to diversify the economy and prepare for a new age of renewable energy.

This year Alaskans will receive a dividend check of some $2,000 for every man, woman and child. Palin requested that the legislature add another $1,200 to offset rising energy prices. Most legislators agreed. The check, to go out in a couple of weeks, will certainly boost her popularity before the presidential electioin, and Alaskan households are definitely hurting because of their high energy prices. But assuming that households use the money to pay energy bills, Alaska is sending part of the oil revenue it is receiving back to the oil companies to pay their customers' bills. That may be a short-term palliative. But Palin quickly quashed legislative proposals that money be spent in a way that might help reduce a household's reliance on oil.

Palin is the chief executive of a very unusual state. Alaska is almost completely dependent on federal government handouts and oil company profits. Of course its political leaders should try to maximize the revenue they can wring out of Washington and Exxon. But they shouldn't call that self-help.

AlterNet is a nonprofit organization and does not make political endorsements. The opinions expressed by its writers are their own.

Digg!

See more stories tagged with: election08, alaska, sarah palin, palin

David Morris is co-founder and vice president of the Institute for Local Self-Reliance in Minneapolis, Minnn., and director of its New Rules project.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Andrew Sullivan said it best
Posted by: NoMcCainPalin on Sep 20, 2008 1:01 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Last night on Bill Maher's HBO "Real Time" show, Sullivan, an ultraconservative pundit, charged that Sarah Palin was a "farce" and should never be allowed near the White House.

It's hard to top that.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Six weeks to the election and all we hear about is Sarah Palin. Talk about Obama!
Posted by: bottom-line on Sep 20, 2008 3:29 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When do you turn the spotlight on to Barack Obama and John McCain? After all, it is THEY who are actually running for president, NOT Sarah Palin.

Is Alternet starting to turn into a Fox News Diversionary Entertainment Outlet?

The controlled media (aka MSM) has hyped Obama and refuses to cover the murders of three homosexual black men in Obama's church, all killed execution style within 40 days of each other. Victor Thorn and Rev. Manning (a black minister in Chicago who knows Obama and Rev. Wright) say Obama is bisexual and the men were murdered because they knew things about Obama. It is up to the alternative media to investigate this. Alternet has the means to do it. Will it?

Is Obama going to be slid in the back door while the voters are distracted with talk about Sarah Palin? Then after he gets in and his handlers start a purge and initiate war with Russia and Pakistan -- THEN we get to find out the truth about the candidate that's been sold by Oprah Winfrey and the Main Stram Controlled Media as being the next thing to the Messiah.

If Obama is going to get in and turn America and overturn all morals and customs in favor of a Brave New World where there are no families, no religion, no possessions, with everybody "living for today," as John Lennon sang in Imagine -- should not the American people get a chance to discuss and decide if that's what we want?

Do we hve no other choice but Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace? If not, can we talk about that at least, and not Sarah Palin only?

Go ahead and talk abouat Sarah, but at least one article on the real candidates, instead of three or four just about Sarah?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Have you not taken your meds? Posted by: Parcival01
» WTF Posted by: bobtr900
Election direction is boring and empty
Posted by: hankhawk on Sep 20, 2008 4:49 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I don't know who's responsible for the research
and speech writing for Obama and Biden, but
it stinks.
There's so much information that could be
thrown at McCain and Palin, that it could
drop their ratings 10-15 pts. below he Dem's
level, but so far it's been next to worthless
and effective.
This election will turn out to be one of
the worse in my voting years.
What this country needs in the White House
is an asute businessman, who has shown years
of strong, profitbable leadership of a great
company or organization --somebody who knows
that government and politicians don't know
how to conduct national business -- they
just know how to "spend, spend, spend," our
tax money.
While our present housing/credit/financial
crisis can be somewhat blamed on businessmen,
the majority of the crisis falls on a
poorly handled control of a specific
segment of our economy and I put much blame
on Greenspan's poor leadership in the early
years of this growing crisis. The Fed. Reserve
is a powerful tool for handling financial
problems -- which it didn't do well in the
past decade.
I am an independent and probably will vote
for Ron Paul or one of the other lesser
parties -- nobody else impresses me with
confidence.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: lection direction is boring and empty Posted by: Kitty Lady Oregon
It's great to finally read a compilation of what Palin's financial Alaska is really like.
Posted by: Beck on Sep 20, 2008 5:08 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Formerly, I only saw these numbers piecemeal. Read them en masse and you see what a parasitic state Alaska is and the poor financial leadership Palin provided. And did the article even mention the 24 million in debt she left her small city with, after starting office with none?

I'm seeing no evidence that Palin was fit to run her little city, let alone a state, let alone using the office of governor of a state with less population than the city of Detroit to justify letting her get her hands on this country. Enough is enough.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Boomtown Sarah Palin
Posted by: Last Chance on Sep 20, 2008 6:08 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
promotes unregulated exploitation of the Alaska wilderness and U.S. domination of the World.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Boomtown Sarah Palin Posted by: donl51
Everything about conservatives seems bogus
Posted by: Beck on Sep 20, 2008 6:32 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Palin/McCain (isn't that how she's putting it?) are endorsed by southern baptists. Here is an excerpt from a CBS News interview with Richard Land on August 8 of this year:

"CBSNews.com: As head of the public policy arm of the Southern Baptists, which is the biggest Protestant denomination in this country, do you think McCain has opened up enough about his personal faith?

"Richard Land: Look it's obvious that McCain is not as comfortable talking about these issues about President Bush was, or as Barack Obama is. But that is not the prime concern of the Southern Baptists that I know.

"They're more concerned about where he is on the issues that matter most to them, issues like the sanctity of human life, the traditional family, and religious freedom. And there was a poll done by our research arm in June, and eighty percent of Southern Baptist pastors said they were planning on voting on John McCain. One percent were planning on voting for Obama. And the rest were undecided.

"CBSNews.com: A number of evangelicals and leaders of what used to be called the religious right have said that what they're really looking for--to determine whether they hold they nose when they vote for McCain, or whether they go in enthusiastically and bring their friends--is the person he chooses to be his running mate. What are you and the people you represent looking for in that running mate?

"Richard Land: First of all, I agree with that assessment. I think that the vice presidential choice that John McCain makes is probably the most important choice he's going to make in this entire campaign. Because he has no room for error, no margin for doubt. If he picks a pro-choice running mate, it will confirm the unease and the mistrust that some evangelicals--and don't forget this, social conservative Catholics--feel about McCain.

"If he picks a pro-life running mate, it will help to ease their concerns and confirm to them that, while he may not have been their first choice, he may not have been their second choice, that it's better to vote for a third class fireman than it is to allow a first class arsonist to become president. "


Okay, Southern Baptists have as one of their biggest concerns "the traditional family?" Yet they're okay with Palin. "Religious freedom?" I guess THEY will still feel free even if they manage to impose their religion upon the rest of us.

Southern Baptists don't end the cognitive dissonance there, though. They officially oppose, through resolution, "total opposition to the manufacturing, advertising, distributing, and consuming of alcoholic beverages", yet support a candidate who didn't win an election until he had a beer fortune, acquired through marriage.



But strangest to me is this:

"That we urge that no one be elected to serve as a trustee or member of any entity or committee of the Southern Baptist Convention that is a user of alcoholic beverages."

They won't elect an official of their convention who uses alcohol, yet they WILL vote for a candidate who has a fortune made through the "manufacturing, advertising, distributing, and consuming of alcoholic beverages"

No wonder all this is seeming crazy. It IS crazy.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It's easy to be against big government in Alaska...
Posted by: sausage on Sep 20, 2008 6:36 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...when big government subsidizes everything.

Perhaps the greatest irony of American culture is that the citizens of the states which rely the most on federal programs, federal employment and out and out federal handouts vote Republican.

Just look at that big, red swath running from the Canadian border to the Gulf of Mexico, west of the Missouri River, up to the borders of Washington, Oregon and California. The dummies living there, however, just hate big guv'munt because they're all rugged individualists.

Yet without big guv'munt these same rugged individualists would have next to nothing.

So my advice to Alaskans and the rest of the Red States: keep voting Republican, chumps, and maybe some day you'll all get your wish, the federal guv'munt will get off your back and turn off the funding spigot.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Would you vote for Palin as President?
Posted by: fcvoigt on Sep 20, 2008 7:14 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ms Palin is running as VP. The statistical chances of her taking over during the next four years are - if you like her style - good.

What if the leading man she is understudying drops out BEFORE November 4th?
Will she then be their Presidential Candidate?

Remember we have no idea how the doctors are keeping him on his feet, nor how much longer their efforts will succeed. Athletes have doping tests. JMcC's volumes of medical records are conspicuously unavailable.

Seriously - if the Republican Party would nominate her as President, does that make them the party you want to have in charge of running the country? (and, by interference, the world?)

Here we pay three times as much as you do for petrol.
That means $4 a gallon for you is TWELVE DOLLARS EACH AND EVERY GALLON for me.

I am not allowed to vote. Which, when you consider how much negative influence GWB has on my daily life seems undemocratic to me.

But hey, I know so many wonderful Americans - I just hope you don't let the vote get stolen again. Think orange revolution and revote on paper ballots with indelible ink!

It's been a busy day, love you guys -
fcv

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Chart/graphic requested
Posted by: stevehamlin on Sep 20, 2008 8:03 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'd sure like to see a red state/blue state type chart that depicts which states are net "givers" and which are "takers" when it comes to federal dollars.

Additionally, it might be very interesting to correlate that to the political red state/blue state map.

Could prove very informative. . .

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

SOUTHERN BAPTISTS
Posted by: shd1230 on Sep 20, 2008 8:19 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A denomination founded when slavery was abolished in the Southern US, this group broke with the Baptist Church and became "Southern." Later they became a fairly liberal Protestant group with some positive attributes: (1) Priesthood of the believer (i.e., Christians do not need an intercedor to get to God) (2) Local church autonomy (each congregation selects its own pastor and leaders; there is no governing body involved. Stated and national conventions were for the purpose of uniting believers and setting goals, fostering charities such as orphanages, etc.

With the end of legal segregation, division again took over the national convention with the so-called liberal viewpoint winning out, but in recent years all that has changed. The conservative element staged a takeover/comeback with the likes of Page Patterson and Richard Land rising to power. They dismissed summarily any teacher in the seminaries who voiced liberal views; they insulted women, who do 98 percent of the real work in their churches, by passing a resolution against female deacons and pastors serving in churches; some advocated women only be allowed to teach other women in Bible study. Most of the more liberal churches separated themselves from the convention at that time. Since then the Southern Bapstists have functioned more as a political entity than a relgious one. Many churches and many church members have broken with the denomination. Gone are the tenets of priesthood of the believer and local church autonomy--now they have Richard Land as their Pope.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Bogus
Posted by: GreyFoxThree on Sep 20, 2008 9:19 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
LOL, Anything McSame / Failin is BOGUS. They are both proven LIARS and nothing they say can be taken seriously. I mean really, enough recent outright LIES have been documented by both of them right on this very forum.

Jeff
Ultimate Anonymity

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Obama/Biden need to expose this kind of "conservative" hypcrisy out there on Mccain/Palin
Posted by: maxpayne on Sep 20, 2008 9:24 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Palin isn't the only Republican doing it. Mccain himself has relied on plenty of pork barrel money for his state and it was Mccain who went out of his way to go open borders for the sole purpose of allowing illegal labor to set up infighting between the working class Americans and working class immigrants.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Neo Nazi Connections?
Posted by: fbear0143 on Sep 20, 2008 9:56 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Sarah Palin's ideas smack less of Alaska than they do of her hometown, SAND POINT, IDAHO. This little burg is home to a whole lot of those neo-nazi groups, and white supremicists, and modern KKK. Why has no one explored the connection that is so strongly reflected in Palin's attitudes. Surely her parents' move had something to do with moving farther away from government "intrusion" than one might imagine. Time to explore these connections completely.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Get ready for a second American Revolution
Posted by: NoMcCainPalin on Sep 20, 2008 10:29 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The following news report was repeated by AOL today.

WASHINGTON (Sept. 20) - Deep-seated racial misgivings could cost Barack Obama the White House if the election is close, according to an AP-Yahoo News poll that found one-third of white Democrats harbor negative views toward blacks — many calling them "lazy," "violent" or responsible for their own troubles.

The poll, conducted with Stanford University, suggests that the percentage of voters who may turn away from Obama because of his race could easily be larger than the final difference between the candidates in 2004 — about two and one-half percentage points.

------------------------------------------------------------

If you think the last eight years under Bumbling Bush were bad, what until McKKKain gets into the Oval Office. There will be, I predict, blood in the streets.

Literally.

The GOP cannot not steal another election, this time with the help of bipartisan bigots, without there being severe repercussions -- from black, brown, yellow and white people who REALLY love America, including yours truly.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» If only that were true! Posted by: donl51
Sarah's foreign affairs experience.
Posted by: NoMcCainPalin on Sep 20, 2008 11:22 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The only time Failin' Palin expressed interest in the world outside Alaska is when she applied for her FIRST passport last year.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

McCain's choice of Failin' Palin for vice president shows he's unfit for command.
Posted by: NoMcCainPalin on Sep 20, 2008 11:55 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
John McCain has a history of making poor choices.

In high school, he had a choice of getting along with other students or antagonizing them. He chose the latter and was nicknamed "McNasty."

At the U.S. Naval Academy, facing a choice of following regulations or not, he violated them. Said Academy graduate Phillip Butler, ex-Navy pilot and former POW who spent eight years in North Vietnamese captivity: "John was intent on breaking every regulation (at the Academy)...and I believe he must have come close to his goal. I could tell many other midshipman stories about John that year and he unbelievably managed to graduate though he spent the majority of his first class year on restriction for the stuff he got caught doing. In fact he barely managed to graduate, standing 5th from the bottom of his 800-man class."

As a stateside Navy pilot before going to Southeast Asia, McCain could have flown recklessly or professionally. McCain chose to fly recklessly, crashing five airplanes before deploying overseas.

In 1970, while a POW and no longer being physically abused by his captors, he agreed to be interviewed by Cuban journalist Fernando Barral. McCain could have refused. Instead, not only did he meet with Barral who exploited the occasion for propaganda purposes, McCain voluntarily conversed in Spanish and accepted special favors from the enemy -- hot coffee and cigarettes -- all blatant violations of the Code of Conduct for U.S. prisoners of war.

Afterwards, the Hanoi Hilton's U.S. commander, SRO Jeremiah Denton, issued an order forbidding POWs to be interviewed by visitors. Said McCain on page 305 of Faith of My Fathers, “[Denton's] decision was a sound one, even though it deprived me of further opportunities to demonstrate my psychic equilibrium… not to mention the [loss of] extra cigarettes and coffee."

After returning home to freedom and his faithful wife who'd spent nearly every waking hour trying to make life easier for him in Hanoi, he chose to commit adultery and then divorce her to marry the "other" woman.

As a senator, McCain chose to involve himself in the 1989 S&L scandal known as the "Keating Five." Despite the adverse publicity, he continued to be chummy with lobbyists and special interest groups for the rest of his political career.

In 1992, while serving on the Senate Select Committee for POW/MIAs affairs, McCain chose to ignore evidence that some U.S. airmen captured by the North Vietnamese were still being held prisoner when he came home in 1973.

Also during the Senate hearings, McCain chose to ignore a letter signed by 50 former POWs asking that the investigation be continued. Instead, he halted the hearings and had the DOD records of all MIAs and POWs sealed, including his own.

In 1994, McCain chose to become president of the New Citizenship Project (NCP), chief funding arm for the Project for the New American Century (PNAC), a rightwing extremist organization founded in 1997.

In 1998, McCain agreed to co-sponsor the Iraq Liberation Act, which was drafted by PNAC.

In 2002, McCain chose to co-chair with Sen. Joe Lieberman the White House-based Committee for the Liberation of Iraq, established that year by PNAC.

In 2004, McCain officially became a PNAC member by signing a letter from the organization that hypocritically condemned Russian President Putin’s foreign policy for its return to the “rhetoric of militarism and empire.”

But John McCain's worst choice of all was picking Failin' Palin for his running mate -- a decision based on winning votes instead of what was good for America. Because he put his political career ahead of national security, McCain is unfit to serve as president of the United States and its commander-in-chief.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Who is Palin?
Posted by: carolann on Sep 20, 2008 12:12 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I don't mind articles written about Alaska. However, I do not want to waste my time reading about the Palin girl. She has nothing to offer. To me, she is a non-entity and doesn't care if McCain uses her as a boy toy. Shame on her, shame on him.

Please. No more on Palin. I don't care.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Who is Palin? Posted by: Lilly
» RE: Who is Biden?? Posted by: gellero1
» RE: Who is Palin? Posted by: VZEQICVA
Once more today, McCain played his shop-worn patriot card -- in the most pandering way possible.
Posted by: NoMcCainPalin on Sep 20, 2008 12:26 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Today, September 20, 2008, at a GOP pep rally, McCain said he would do everything possible to make sure the deaths of our soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan were not in vain.

If McCain really feels that way, why did he behave so disgracefully while participating in the 1992 Senate Select Committee hearings on POW/MIA affairs?

During the hearings, he was presented with a letter signed by 50 fellow POWs that asked the congressional investigation into missing American servicemen in Southeast Asia be continued.

McCain, who had threatened to terminate the hearings prematurely, ignored the letter.

His conduct toward MIA families was even more reprehensible. Consider the following narrative published on a Web site maintained by the nonpartisan organization, U.S. Veterans Dispatch:

In 1996, John McCain encountered a group of
POW/MIA family members outside a Senate
hearing room. The family members were some
of the same who worked tirelessly during the
Vietnam War to make sure Hanoi released all
U.S. POWs, including McCain.

He immediately began quarreling with the
POW/MIA family members, who were eager to
question him on the issue of what happened to
their loved ones.

Instead showing courtesy and appropriate
compassion by answering their questions, the
Arizona senator pushed through the group,
shoving them out of his way, nearly toppling
the wheelchair of POW/MIA mother Jane Duke
Gaylor. Her son, Charles Duke, a civilian
worker in Vietnam, is among 2,300 American
POWs and MIAs still unaccounted for by the
communists.

The POW/MIA families, shocked at McCain’s
overly aggressive behavior toward Mrs. Gaylor,
registered complaints with Senate officials.


Only John McCain knows why he ended the Senate hearings early, sealed the DOD records of MIAs and POWs, including his own, and disrespected their families.

Some critics charge he was blackmailed by Vietnamese officials, to force his endorsement of a pending U.S. trade agreement favorable to the communist nation. Whether or not the allegation is true, a man with John McCain’s fiery temperament and callous indifference to missing American war veterans should not occupy the White House.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Good point, Beck. Posted by: NoMcCainPalin
Fast Learners, Not
Posted by: Lilly on Sep 20, 2008 12:49 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
One of my favorite bits of all this was the other day when a McCain handler agreed that neither McCain nor Palin has a background in economics but said that "they are both very fast learners" who, after being elected, would quickly be brought up to speed. Not only is this guy saying that the jobs of President and Vice-President of the United States can be handled with on-the-job training, he is ignoring the educational history of both JMcC and SP. McCain graduated #894 in his Annapolis class of 899. Sarah Palin attended five colleges (all minimal) over a period of six years, doing so poorly at the University of Idaho that she was re-admitted only after making up some courses at a community college. Doesn't sound to me as if either of them was much of a learner, at all. Why start now? (Meanwhile stands Obama with his Harvard JD, Magna Cum Laude, President of Harvard Law Review, and the other day Rush Limbaugh called Obama "a street thug". Of course, that isn't a racist remark....)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Fast Learners, Not Posted by: VZEQICVA
» AS IF........ Posted by: gellero1
dalton
Posted by: lenox on Sep 20, 2008 1:25 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Imagine if Louisiana, a major source of oil, sent out $2-3 thousand $ checks to every man, woman and child in the state. Alaska does because it's a source of oil.
Poverty in New Orleans, criminally neglected infrastructure, poor people left to die in their flooded attics. . and zero progress rebuilding what was a vibrant, unique city. These people don't receive annual gifts of thousands of dollars.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: dalton Posted by: gellero1
Not Palin's Image of Alaska--Palin is Bogus
Posted by: dayahka on Sep 20, 2008 2:43 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Palin is the bogus product. Given to us by that eternal youth, the narcissist McCain, as a reformer, a good Christian, and a law and order type of person, it turns out that what we were given was in reality a major pork spender, a bogus Christian who was pregnant when married and now has a 16 year old daughter who's pregnant outside of marriage, and who resorts to lies, abuse of power, stonewalling, bearing false witness against others, arrogance, and is plain old too-big-for-her-britches--and ignorant as sin.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Gov.Pallin
Posted by: gellero1 on Sep 21, 2008 3:14 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Can't youse guys think o' anything more interesting.??????

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

How Obama can defeat McCain without attacking Palin
Posted by: NoMcCainPalin on Sep 21, 2008 6:12 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Sarah Palin is not McCain's Achilles heel. His weakness is old age.

In article published in June 2008 by Military.com, former POW Phillip Butler, a Navy pilot and U.S. Naval Academy graduate who spent more than eight years in North Vietnam as a prisoner of war, explained why he would not support McCain for the presidency.

"Most of us who survived that experience [being a POW] are now in our late 60’s and 70’s. Sadly, we have died and are dying off at a greater rate than our non-POW contemporaries. We experienced injuries and malnutrition that are coming home to roost. So I believe John’s age (71) and survival expectation are not good for being elected to serve as our President for four or more years."

There are many Republicans who share Butler's concerns, as do the 30% of white Democrats who won't vote for Obama because he's black (according to a recent Yahoo poll). But no matter how well he argues his case, those people will NEVER support him. So Barack must get them to vote AGAINST McCain or not vote at all.

That goal can be accomplished with a simple slogan: "John McCain -- OLD Ideas, OLD Solutions."

Notice I never mentioned his age (72), but the message comes through loud and clear. And should the GOP complain about the inference, it will only bolster suspicions that McCain's best days are behind him.

If you agree with my assessment, tell your friends and family members while there's still time to defeat McCain -- a pandering politician who truly has old ideas, old solutions.

John McCain --OLD Ideas, OLD Solutions

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

X-POLYGAMIST WIFE in ARIZONA
Posted by: X-POLYGAMIST WIFE on Sep 21, 2008 6:48 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'd like to know what qualifies McShame to be president when he can't even clean up the polygamist thugs in Colorado City, Arizona, headquarters to the infamous FLDS profit Warren Jeffs and his pedophile cronies.

http://www.bankingonheaven.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» DUH>>>>>>> Posted by: gellero1
Palin and McCain are both bogus
Posted by: Beck on Sep 21, 2008 7:12 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
the party that previously blathered on that character counts now seems to think, Not so much? McCain was once a married, middled-aged man visiting Hawaii who met a young, rich woman traveling with her parents. His own words:

"She was lovely, intelligent, and charming. I monopolized her attention the entire time [and he was married; wonder if he brought that up.] I persuaded her to join me for drinks at the Royal Hawaiian Hotel [he was, I presume, still married]. By the evening's end, I was in love." From his book, "Worth the Fighting For", a title which apparently has more than one meaning.

He married this woman, who, at a later date, not only became a drug addict, but did so with illegal prescriptions. Would any of you care to speculate on the media attention if Obama had married in this tawdry fashion, and if Michelle openly admitted to using illegal prescriptions to feed a drug addiction?

McCain needed a running mate with a worse past than his. He got it. The only thing that bothers me about the attention is that McCain himself should be receiving more of it. If character does matter, McCain should never even have been voted senator.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]