26 posts tagged “palin”
Can the left be honest about this fruit fly thing with Sarah Palin?
Ever since Hitchens posted an article about it last week, the lefty blogs have gone to town about how Palin is anti-science.
Now first off, I admit, as Hitchens talks about, Palin isn't exactly pro-evolution or pro-climate change in terms of science. But I think it is a stretch to then say in a blanket statement that she is anti-science because in conjunction with her religious convictions she has made a "gaffe" about fruit flies.
But look at what Palin said about fruit fly research (note bolding is me):
In her speech, Palin said the federal government could finance the new investment by taking some of $18 billion it spends each year on earmarks, specific projects that are designated by members of Congress.
"That's more than the shortfall to fully fund the IDEA," she said. "And where does a lot of that earmark money end up? It goes to projects having little or nothing to do with the public good -- things like fruit fly research in Paris, France, or a public policy center named for the guy who got the earmark. In our administration, we're going to reform and refocus. We're going to get our federal priorities straight, and fulfill our country's commitment to give every child opportunity and hope in life."
I think her issue wasn't about the science, but about where our money was going: France -- as in overseas. Can't the French fund their researchers? What about funding fruit fly research here in the states? Note she didn't say: "things like fruit fly research in North Carolina."
Obama goes nuts about companies that ship jobs overseas and the left worships. Yet when Republicans criticize sending funding overseas it has the exact opposite reaction -- that the right is anti-science. Incredible.
So the left is going crazy over this statement making it sound as if Palin would slash science funding because she doesn't understand what fruit fly research did for basic genetics a half a century ago. Well... I sort of agree, but mostly disagree.
I agree that Palin probably doesn't know anything about fruit fly genetics... but why didn't she just say "things like fruit fly research" and just leave it at that? She was going for the fact that the funding was being sent abroad...
My issue here is from the perspective that the left is arguing that we need to fund this science and we may very well need to fund it. But just because it is labeled as "science" doesn't mean it should be funded by the taxpayer. There needs to be priorities in science funding just like there are priorities everywhere else in the budget. And I think that is the aim of the McCain/Palin rhetoric -- we as a budget have to set priorities.
In a perfect world, we would fund every science project out there. But guess what... this isn't a perfect world.
And my second issue here is what everybody isn't talking about. What would Obama do with the budget? He seems to have grand plans for healthcare, tax breaks, new energy infrastructure, etc. And he plans to do "pay as you go." Where for every dollar he spends for his new plans, he cuts a dollar to existing projects in the budget. To fund these grand ideas, my guess is that small projects will get the ax under an Obama administration. And he is coy about what is going to get cut...
So would fruit fly funding to Paris, France make the cut when we are talking about helping folks here in America if Obama is in charge? I don't know. But nobody is asking.
Note: This is coming from Mike Gravel (D) (L). Mike Gravel.
Wow...
I couldn't help but laugh out loud at the left-wing radio hosts thinking they were going to get an interview with Gravel where there would be a lot of agreement and then get an interview like that!
According to Newsweek anyway...
Palin seems to have lost some of her luster. Since Sept. 13, Palin's unfavorables have climbed from 30 percent to 36 percent. Meanwhile, her favorables have slipped from 52 percent to 48 percent. That's a three-day net swing of -10 points, and it leaves her in the Sept. 15 Diageo/Hotline tracking poll tied for the smallest favorability split (+12)** of any of the Final Four. Over the course of a single weekend, in other words, Palin went from being the most popular White House hopeful to the least.
Wow. The reporting here is top notch! Oh wait... there is fine print in the article...
*First, it's important to note that Palin's approval rating hasn't tanked. Far from it. And we should hold off on drawing any hard and fast conclusions until more polling comes out.*
So in the end, what was the purpose of this article again? No hard facts, just speculation? I guess they couldn't wait for a few more polls before writing this one? Normally you need multiple points to conclude a trend...
It is like the media just can't wait for her to fall...
But if the minor swing in the polls for Palin means she has gone from the most favorable to the least, then one must assume that everybody (everybody running for office) has issues.
UPDATE: I won't even come close to thinking that Palin's slip the other day is indicative of a long-term negative trend. The current poll is showing a minor rebound. Her unfavorable numbers are still lower than Obama's (35% vs. 40% unfav for Obama) and she is at 50% favorability on the 9-19-08. But let us not get ahead of ourselves... it is pretty obvious that the electorate is split (like 2000 and 2004) and we will see this bounce around within the margin of error from here to the election (unless something big happens).
If you think this ethics probe slash "Troopergate" is a fair investigation into Sarah Palin... think again...
Adam Brickley:
I can't believe I missed this column yesterday, but Townhall's Amanda Carpenter has unearthed some very disturbing audio regarding the legislative "investigation" of the "Troopergate" non-scandal. The tape was made during a Spetember 12 hearing of the state legislature's Joint Judiciary Committee, in which the committee is discussing the investigation with Investigator Steve Branchflower. The bombshell information is dropped by Branchflower when he reveals that he does not have control of the subpoena list for his own investigation. Instead, he has to defer questions to the Democratic State Senator Hollis French, who is supervising the investigation. This is the same Hollis French who is one of Barack Obama's leading Alaskan supporters, started using the term "impeachment" before the investigation even began, and is now vocally threatening the McCain-Palin campaign with an "October surprise". Such a partisan hack has no business even participating in this investigation, let alone holding final control over who Steve Branchflower can or cannot talk to.
Absolutely unbelievable.
UPDATE: I have a feeling this is going to hit the airwaves like a ton of bricks and is totally going to backfire on the Democrats. I mean big time...
Paul at Powerline on Palin.
Are we being attracted to the rocks? Is there a shipwreck ahead? I don't know.
I have always thought that for McCain to win he had to gamble. The allure of Palin is striking. Her buck the establishment mentality and her gender made me think she could win over independents.
Now that more information is coming out (her answers in interviews, etc.), does this mean I will taking a harder look? Yeah. I think it does. Does it mean I will not vote for McCain. Not necessarily. Foremost I am voting for President and I still think McCain is the best man for the job.
According to the NY Times, it could all be true. That the McCain campaign did not vet Palin enough and that her experience is severely lacking. And that this is a window into McCain's soul and his decision making ability.
This is a roll of the dice beyond even Bill Clinton’s imagination. “Often my haste is a mistake,” McCain conceded in his 2002 memoir, “but I live with the consequences without complaint.” Well, maybe it’s fine if he wants to live with the consequences, but what about his country? Should the unexamined Palin prove unfit to serve at the pinnacle of American power, it will be too late for the rest of us to complain.
So does this mean in the end that Palin is truly unfit to be Vice President? Only time will tell if the voters put them in office.
But one thing is for sure. Previous "experience" that other politicians had prior to serving in office has not stopped the media elite from criticism of mistakes those individuals made serving the people. If experience was the end all be all of political success -- then history must show us that career politicians just don't screw up? They must do everything right!?
Ask Richard Nixon or Harry Truman if their political experience prior to being President helped shield them from the objections they received over the mistakes they made? Or even George W. Bush?
As for McCain... How come when it is people like the Clintons, there is this awe from the media elite regarding their political prowess and instinct, yet with McCain it is this negativity about his political sixth sense? Oh yeah, it isn't about having instinct, it is about having instinct on the side of the political aisle you agree with... too bad that isn't something they will admit...
How about this for a political olfactory sensation? Hillary running in 2012.
Or how about this one... People like Obama because he represents fresh blood and a new generation in office. To me that says why they may like Palin as well and why this inexperience talk may just amount to why people want a fresh breeze in politics. Because, obviously, those career, experienced politicians in Washington are doing such a bang up job right now...
I wonder how the moderate left is going to sort through the legitimate questions voters will have about Palin when there is this mouth-foaming hatred of her and over-the-top rumors being espoused from the far left.
There will come a point (and I think that we have passed that point) where independents will not trust their criticism of her because it is drowned out in the slander that is being propagating in what seems to be hourly events. They will feel that the criticism is not just, but merely politically motivated.
This election is not going to be won by liberals voting for McCain/Palin or conservatives voting for Obama/Biden -- but folks in the middle who sway election to election. The independents will decide this election.
I keep hearing that the Palin pick was a sign of despair from the McCain camp and the pick was highly political. There is some truth to the pick being political to make his base happy. But the fit is good for McCain so I wouldn't call it a pick made to appease the base where McCain has to "put up" with the person for the next four years.
But one has to think that this endless barrage of everything (including the kitchen sink) the left is throwing (most highly inaccurate and misleading) in order to see if something sticks so they can sink S.S. Palin looks even more like a sign of desperation.
Update: Scio, Scio has a link to the rumor list.
Wow. Just wow.
Stunned.
I have no words.
A home run.
I think Biden is going to be the underdog in the VP debates.
The stops have been pulled. It is a fight now.
