BorderWest
Sarah Palin: It’s Called Sassy
By Rebecca Powell, 9-03-08
At the end of Sarah Palin’s speech, the commentator on MSNBC searched for a word to describe it. He said that it wasn’t all sarcasm and it wasn’t bitter, it was. . . and his voice dropped off, searching for the word. I think we call it sassy.
Sarah Palin had to justify McCain’s choice and rouse the crowd. Did she do it?
Discuss away.
Like this story? Get more! Sign up for our free newsletters.
Next entry: Sarah Palin: It’s Called Sassy
Tags for this article
Tag cloud for all articles
missoula,
politics,
environment,
idaho,
colorado,
business and the new economy,
new west network topics,
montana,
development,
bozeman,
salt lake city,
travel & outdoors,
rockies,
utah,
western montana,
boise,
new west living,
land use & development,
new mexico,
outdoor recreation,
northern idaho,
idaho northern/panhandle,
bend,
boulder,
columbia gorge,
flathead valley,
wyoming,
idaho politics,
montana politics,
real estate,
snow blog,
community blogs,
music,
wildlife,
land & water,
parks & national forests,
jackson hole,
wildland fire,
colorado politics,
technology,
habitat,
arts, film & events,
oregon,
featured photo,
getaways,
utah politics,
news & author interviews,
abq / santa fe,
wild bill,
tourism,
washington,
bob wire blog,
outdoors (c426),
climate change,
transportation,
demographics,
reviews & essays,
diary of a mad voter,
front range,
new mexico politics,
Comments
Add your comment below
Don't take a 10% chance on change with McCain. I'll take the 90% chance with Obama thank you very much.
I'm still unsure where my vote will land, but last nights speech didn't turn me off. It was mostly what I expected, but I was surprised to feel as much of a connection to her as I do. I disagree on her abortion views and am concerned about the so called "trooper-gate". I'm waiting to see what if anything will happen with that story.
A powerful and articulate woman with guts and conviction, now wonder Democrats hate her so much; she is their worst nightmare. It is going to be entertaining to watch the incompetent liberal media try to articulate how their empty suit candidate, Obama, is more experienced and ready to lead.
1) The complete, childish mocking of "community organizer." Funny thing, no matter how you vote, "community organizers" do a lot of great work in this country and everyone knows it and appreciates it. Heck, isn't being on the PTA (where Palin got her start) really part of the "community organizer" family? How about delivering meals to the elderly? How about taking part in a big brothers/big sisters program? How about looking to clean up your neighborhood from crime, drugs, pollution? How about working as a tutor in your local school? Will the GOP faithful mock these examples of "community organizing?"
Last time I checked, "community organizers" (no matter how they vote) work day and night for little, if any, pay to make their communities better. So because Obama finished collage (it's my understanding that he earned scholarships) and instead of going to work for a big DC law firm he came back home to Chicago and helped working people who were down on their luck recover from steel plant closings and economic turmoil we should be mocking him and all "community organizers?" Seems pretty childish to me. I wonder how this played outside the walls of the GOP convention, especially with all those TV viewers who actually know the great and meaningful things that community organizers do for our communities and country.
2) The very general energy policy talk, by both Rudy and Gov Palin, (including mentioning how we can't drill our way out of the problem) was followed by the male-dominated chant, "Drill Baby Drill...Drill Baby Drill...." Enough said.
While these might have been the biggest energy moments of the night for those who attended the convention, I seriously doubt that these moments played nearly as well across the country.
"After college, he worked for Christian churches in Chicago, helping communities devastated when steel plants closed. Obama turned down lucrative job offers after law school to return to Chicago, leading a successful voter registration drive."
From the Obama Campaign Website
This is from Wikipedia:
Obama moved to Chicago to work as a community organizer for three years from June 1985 to May 1988 as director of the Developing Communities Project (DCP), a church-based community organization originally comprising eight Catholic parishes in Greater Roseland (Roseland, West Pullman, and Riverdale) on Chicago's far South Side.
During his three years as the DCP's director, its staff grew from 1 to 13 and its annual budget grew from $70,000 to $400,000, with accomplishments including helping set up a job training program, a college preparatory tutoring program, and a tenants' rights organization in Altgeld Gardens. Obama also worked as a consultant and instructor for the Gamaliel Foundation, a community organizing institute.
When I follow I want to know what I am following
If you do a google search for Annenberg project and read the final report, you will see that the program directed by Obama was a failure, it was not successful, etc. So, it appears his only claim to fame, did not succeed. Why would this experience recommend him to be president of the United States?
Is it not equally sad that Barack Obama and his family are facing the same destroying effects of the conservative media outlets? I hear so much about the liberal news media, and it's crap. For every liberal, there's a conservative. Give me a non-biased media, please!
Rebecca:
Seeing her speak hammered home your point about "knowing" this type. I think she could be someone I'd admire. My vote is not cast either, but I am leaning a little more heavily back to my D roots. Despite her rhetorical prowess, I still can't get behind her logos. The pathos and ethos swayed me as a mother and a patriot, but when she blundered in her list of "look at all the countries I've practiced in my discussion of energy," she lost me. I did appreciate her "difference between a pit bull and hockey mom" joke, and I think she means well, but she didn't hook me because I've read enough of the background to know that she's fudging it a bit when she talks of fiscal reform that she's implemented.
I have revised my "is McCain insane" stance. This woman is an inspired choice. If I weren't so well trained to spot the b.s. in rhetoric, I might have fallen under her spell last night.
Don't click on her link if you're not interested. There's no need to be an asshat.
When the media start picking apart Michelle and Barack's personal life, whether their children are actually their children, demand DNA etc., then we'll talk about media coverage.
I'm a 62 year old women who taught college history for many years. I have published two books about women, one about women in politics. In researching all that women have accomplished from equal right to suffrage, very few women have inspired other women as successfully as Sarah Palin. She demonstrates all that women can accomplished. I thought it was terrible what the Democrats did to Hillary, she should be the nominee of the Democratic party, not Obama. But, Hillary is your "typical" politician, doing everything the good ol boy way. That is what seems to be so exciting about Sarah, she truly is showing every women what is possible in our country. I'm not naive enough to think that Sarah doesn't know how to play the political game, she must if it is true how she reform government in Alaska. At the end of the day, I hope she has the strength to fight back against those who will try to destroy her. It may be that the Obama/Biden ticket will win in November, if it does, I hope it is because the American people see those two as more experienced and better able to lead this country. How disillusioning it will be if they win because of the dirt that is thrown at them, they know that if you throw enough dirt, it will eventually stick, meaning the American people believed the lies.
As for Obama, it is hard to find anything he has actually done, his stint as a community organizer tells us nothing, there are absolutely no specifics, including how much money he made. Yet he was able to pay well over a million dollars for a house in a very brief amount of time. Do we know exactly how long he did that? What exactly did he accomplish during that time....himself? We need to remember she is running for the number 2 spot, the same as Biden, not the number 1, the same as Obama.
Ah, Marion, did you actually read what's out there about his time as a community organizer?
Let's see. Director of the Developing Communities Project. As director Obama grew the staff from 1 to 13 and increased its annual budget nearly 6 fold. (oh my...careful now...that almost sounds like "executive" experience).
Let's see, accomplishments include: a job training program, a college preparatory tutoring program, and a tenants' rights organization in Altgeld Gardens (You know, Altgeld Gardens...one of those public housing projects...in fact, the first one in the nation...where all those rich, east coast elitists live).
Marion, if you have information that counters any of this, I'd love to see it...otherwise...
It seems you are the one who lacks insight, as you have nothing to bring to the table but your negative banter. Maybe you should step outside of your self-centered universe long enough to realize that maybe YOU are the uninteresting one! Better yet, maybe this is the only pathetic way you are able to get attention by downgrading the efforts of someone else.
"Jerry Kellman, a social activist who recruited Obama, recalls, "He was very bright, very articulate, very personable, and very idealistic," inspired by civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr.'s philosophy of nonviolence. Kellman offered Obama a job at the annual salary of $10,000, and he threw in $2,000 so Obama could buy a ramshackle car to get around."
Yeah, those liberals not only don't care about poor folk and improving communities, but on top of it they sooooooo clearly make a killing doing it. I mean, $10,000 annual salary plus a few grand for a car...who does this Obama think he is? Thurston Howell III?
could you please elaborate more the "Developing Communities Project?" What does that mean? Like I said in another post, the final reports from these projects are not encouraging, it appears, that the projects were not successful. I would also like to know where the money came from for these projects? They sound quite "loafty," when in reality they read like boondoggles.
BTW: U.S. unemployment rate hits a five-year high...
Jobless rate rose to 6.1 percent in August...employers cut 84,000 jobs @ http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26558445/. Shouldn't we be worrying more about this?
I worked as a professional for a good many years, but I could never qualify for a million dollar loan, and the houe was over a million when he bought it.
I will grant you that I am suspicious of Chicago politicians.
And I'll make the big assumption that your numbers are correct in the second part of your comment...ie that the Obamas' recent combined annual income is about $350,000. Given the fact that over the past few years mortgage companies were giving out home loans for hundreds of thousands of dollars to people with little income, I fail to see how a possible loan for a million dollar home to a family with an annual income of $350,000 is some big impropriety.
But again, Marion, why don't you put "country first" and try and help solve pressing issues that are actually affecting people, such as lost jobs, no health care for tens of millions, what to do about our $10 billion monthly bill for Bush's invasion/occupation of a sovereign nation (on top of the nearly $1 trillion spent), etc, etc.
You say - solve problems like lost jobs, no health care for tens of millions, what to do about our $10 billion monthly bill for Bush's invasion/occupation of a sovereign nation.
Pelosi, Obama and all the other "don't drill here" idiots are going to cause the economy to crash because they are inhibiting the oil supply (less oil = higher price), because of them the economy is getting worse. If you don’t have a job, kick out an alien. Want higher oil prices – don’t drill and elect a democrat.
Health care is unaffordable because we sue the crap out of the medical industry, and illegal aliens don't pay their annual 65 billion dollar bill. If you want to fix Health Care stop the lawsuits and kick out the aliens, don't give us that crappy socialized medicine, I have a chronic disease and I can't afford the free health care that will bankrupt the pharmaceutical companies until after they find my cure.
Thanks to the troop surge we are winning in Iraq, Obama copped to that last night on O’Reilly. Al Qaeda has one less base of operation - only forty more to go.
I was going to switch my 401k and the children's 529 College Savings Plan from stocks to CD's when the dems took over congress in 2006, I sure wish I had done so.
No one under forty has experienced a bad economy (we don't have one yet) and everyone is so fat dumb and happy that their minds dwell in idealistic hope instead of reality. The coming depression/recession will bring these kids back to earth and show them that an economy is nothing to mess with in a careless way and the coming crash will actually be good for America’s soul. Hard times hone wisdom.
For the foreseeable future oil will fuel this country not the hot wind out of Washington!
Gas prices will not go down whether we drill offshore or not. Get used to it. The economy is crashing not only due to high energy costs, but also to the lack of no free market in this country.
Aliens aren't charged annual bills.
Iran is a secular country and that is why Bin Laden and Saddam were mortal enemies. Al Quada was not in Iraq, oil was in Iraq.
And I didn't listen to enough Rush in 06 to even be familiar with that "talking point" What eva, did they deny a tax break or windfall tax credit to an oil company or something.
BTW you do realize that McCain considers a middle class person to make umm about 3 million dollars a year....Good on ya.
So you intend to lower price by producing less oil?
Illegal aliens get 65 billion in free health care because they don't pay their bill one bill at a time the annual total averages $65 Billion. Then the medical industry has to get out of us.
The age-old philosophy of "My enemy is your enemy so I am your friend" binds Sunni and shih alike, if Bin Laden asked to borrow a 55-gallon drum of anthrax, saddam would have been thrilled to provide it.
Environmental groups prevent drilling and they prevent the building of refineries, they prevent growing wheat by insisting that a mouse be protected in wheat fields, but who needs food right? They have prevented the building of 39 coal fired electrical plants and brag that they will keep filing and keep them from being built. This costs the indiviudal businesses millions to develop and bring the plans to the tabel. I am sure that the environmental judges awarded "expenses" to the enviro groups who had nothing invested and stopped them. So where are we going to get the electricity for the electric cars to make up for the fossil fuel we are not going to allow to be brought to the consumer?
It is really hard for me to believe that there are people who truly believe that we have not been attacked again just because the terrorists decided not to. We owe George Bush a huge debt and I am sure he will go back to Texas thankful that he did his best to protect an ungrateful country...and succeeded. History will marvel that anyone could have been so self centered and blind as to think it was all an accident that we were not attacked again....if we get past Monday unscathed.
Also, to put some context around your notion that "environmental judges" award money to environmental groups, everyone should know of a law called the Equal Access to Justice Act. When EAJA was enacted in the late 1970s it was done so at the request of business groups such as the Chamber of Commerce and pushed through by Republican members of Congress. They felt that businesses were subjected to arbitrary regulations by the federal government and that certain businesses don't have the resources to fully litigate issues against the mighty federal government. However, Congress also extended the benefits of the EAJA to nearly all citizens or entities contesting unreasonable - and illegal - exercises of the federal government. The basic premise is that small businesses and citizens or citizen-groups should not have to pay legal fees when they successfully sue the federal government...or said another way, when they successfully hold the federal government accountable by preventing illegal activities. The more the federal government breaks or bends the law (as we've seen a fair amount of on many issues under the Bush Administration) the more the federal government pays in EAJA fees. If the federal government follows the laws of this nation, there are no lawsuits and no EAJA fees. Not sure if you'll be interested in those facts or history of EAJA, but there they are. And remember, I look forward to reading your list the "judges that rule for environmental groups 100% of the time."
I've talked to a good number of white-haired upper Forest Service people who directly worked on the NFMA. They wanted to do the right thing, as public servants, but to a man (hey this was before Title Nine) when I ask them, did you ever imagine the situation would be as it is now, every single one pauses, says "no," pauses again and then gives a version of "never in my wildest dreams."
I doubt any judge could be said to rule for "your" side one hundred percent of the time. But when eighty bazillion allegations are thrown up in the air and one, just ONE sticks to the ceiling, EAJA kicks in and the lawyers get paid for the entire lawsuit. So if Judge Molloy has ten counts before him and just throws you a bone on one minor count, JACKPOT! The project is halted until it is "modified," putting a whole lot of good and necessary things aside. What a DEAL.
Finally, I think your collective opposition to the Middle East Fork project was shameful. I hope you have the guts to face the public when it burns.
I beleive that environmental groups filed all of the lawsuits trying to ban snowmobilers from Yellowstone Washington DC, rather than locally. Bet that increased their take for "expenses".
Now turn about is fair play, perhaps you could tell us what lawsuits your group has filed and what courts your have filed in, and how much money you got as a result. What group do you represent, or are you willing to tell us?
I started looking into this seriously when Judge Malloy reinstated protection of the wolves. We were supposed to have to raise 300 in the 3 states, we now have some 2000 or more, but there si no DNA to prove the wolves are breeding bak and forth adequately. More tax dollars please!!!!!
You're correct that there was "collective opposition" to the Middle East Fork project, the first "Healthy Forest" project in Montana. That opposition came from some local people who live up the East Fork, local fishing guide, hunters, former Forest Service rangers and biologists and a fair number of PhD faculty from the U of Montana's much respected School of Forestry and Conservation. This was in addition to opposition from our organization, WildWest Institute, and Friends of the Bitterroot.
Our concern with this project primarily centered around the fact that the FS was cutting large trees in designated old growth (much of it surrounded by clearcuts from the 1970s/80s) and much of the area was far below the standard concerning soil disturbance, compaction, etc. Also, much of the most egregious logging, in our view, was taking place far from homes, up to 4 miles away.
However, as I've pointed out to your many time in the NW comments section, the "collective opposition" favored a local plan to conduct fuel reduction on 1,600 acres through logging and burning. This plan would have employed about 50 local people and put nearly $1 million into the local economy.
Our lawsuit did not stop the project as you are incorrectly inferring in your comment. The logging has been on-going for nearly two years; however, because of the housing market collapse and low lumber prices the contractors have been delaying much of the work hoping for better economic conditions (that may never come, in my opinion).
If the East Fork of the Bitterroot burns, as it has for thousands of years, it will have nothing to do with me. However, you can bet I'll continue to hunt elk in the recently burned forests of the East Fork. And you lecturing me about guts? That's a good one Dave.
Marion: I'm going to enjoy the rest of my Saturday evening, but you're once again stating things as fact when you don't know what you're talking about. I'd estimate that Molloy has ruled against us 80-90% of the time over the last five years. He is routinely over-ruled; however. I'm not sure what the estimate would be for all environmental litigation, but it's certainly not 100% ruling in enviros favor as you state. Seriously, Marion, where do you get this stuff? I've posted in other NW comments sections a listing of WIldWest's current lawsuits. Search the achieves, I'm sure it's there and I'm going to eat dinner. As for EAJA, it only allows for recovery of fees (such as attorney fees, filing fees, copying fees). The notion that our organization makes money on lawsuits is incorrect, but that doesn't stop people from saying it.
Please explain how having less oil will help us.
We are in security trouble because we depend on people that hate us for our energy, we need to develop all the oil, gas, coal, wind, solar, nuclear, etc. so that we quit enriching.
T. Boon Pickins seems to be on the right track. Wall street has backed out of oil speculation since bush rescinded the executive order of Clintons barring off shore oil drilling and reluctantly Pelosi has said she will allow a vote (that will pass) to do the same in congress consequently the price of oil dropped because speculators anticipate that soon there will be more of it. OPEC, afraid they may loose their strangle hold on us if we develop our own resources is increasing production. OPEC crude oil production is expected to rise to 32.9 million barrels during the third quarter of 2008, up from 32.3 million barrels in the second quarter. The forecast assumes that Saudi Arabia will maintain its July 9.7 million bbl/d production level through the third quarter, representing a 400,000-barrel rise from second quarter levels.
Hey – there is more of it, and much to the chagrin of you Al Gore sycophants, we are threatening to develop more of our own resources so the price IS DROPPING, and can continue to do so as long as organizations like Mathew’s realize that our economy is more important than a tree.
Because of growing ethanol production, crude oil net imports are expected to fall by 240,000 barrels and petroleum product net imports by 400,000 barrels in 2008. Total net imports of crude oil and petroleum products, which peaked at 60.3 percent of total petroleum consumption in 2005, are expected to fall to 56.4 percent and 54.5 percent, respectively, of total consumption in 2008 and 2009.
Oats – speculators aren’t expecting for their to be less oil so it is no longer the speculation vehicle it was since the democrats took over congress, that is only because Americans are getting really pissed off every time they fill up.
Oats and Mathew – you see the corporate” double bottom line” is a business term used in socially responsible enterprise and investment. While all businesses have a conventional bottom line to measure their fiscal performance—financial profit or loss—enterprises which seek a second bottom line look to measure their performance in terms of positive social impact, a Social Return on Investment if you will, Todd Wilkins wrote an article and published here a couple of years ago about this. Well folks when we remove their profit by raising their expenses the first adjustment in the new operating procedure will be elimination of the luxury of the second bottom line.
Supply and Demand – you must start to understand! Oh I forgot I am addressing folks that probably have need less bumper stickers on their Prius.
BTW you should research the current administrations legislation regarding corporations and positive social impact. I think you just went to bat for the other team.
The price has dropped since President Bush announced his removal of the Executive order banning off shore drilling. The Dems are now on the horns of a dilemma, the enviros are steadfastly against any drilling to provide fuel for everyday Americans. However the American people are demanding drilling stronger and stronger every day. If they give in and drill, the environmentalists will retaliate big time, it is easier to watch the common people suffer rather than buck the enviros who keep them in power.
I think we saw how knowledgeable Pelosi is when she said we cannot have more fossil fuel, we have to switch to natural gas. Obviously she is not aware that natural gas comes out of the ground via drilling rigs too. Search for the Pinedale anti-cline and see.
I can tell you one thing that is not in dispute insisting on keeping more oil from being produced in this country will definitely NOT bring prices down.
Gee Matthew, did we lose you, I thought you'd be real anxious to post your 11 lawsuits in the 9th District Court and the 9 others and tell us the results including monetary awards.
The reason prices came down was the speculators were not going to anticipate ever climbing prices if there is a chance of increasing our supplies, so they quit bidding higher and higher. They anticipate increased supply which will force prices down. The democrats support the no drill policy of the enviros. I have no problems with those who ride bikes, drive cars getting high mileage etc, but as we all know, not all do that. And of course Mr. Gore is the poster child for conspicuous consumption, and I am well aware that you guys hate for me to mention that.
The reason speculators stopped anticipating prices is because the commodity market regulators are conducting an investigation into whether there has been false information injected into the market and what precisely is the number of leased oil tankers currently off shore harboring oil ( a known practice since the 70's ) to make it look like there is less oil available on the ground. Speculation became more conservative shortly after the congressional hearing questioning such practices was aired on CSPAN. More than likely the investigation is NOT being led by a non-environmental conservative Marion.
Oil consumption in the US is down approximately 800,000 barrels a day in the US in the past year alone. Less demand may also be bringing prices down.
Or I can play your way, the republicans announced to lift a ban on offshore drilling. Whew! Prices dropped, umm, this only goes to show that if prices can fall based on speculation of a simple announcement without additional drilling , we ARE being fooled by the oil companies. Kind of like it dropped right before the election in 2004 and oh, again in 2006. You don't say.
You environmentalists may understand this a little better. In November Marijuana is cheaper than it is in August. You see November is right after harvest and there is much more of it hence marijuana is cheaper. By August (one toke over the line) Al Gore, the earth firsters, George Norry listeners and the flat earth society have smoked up most of it hence there is less of it on the market therefore there are more smokers want the smaller amount of marijuana available so the price goes up. If there is a crop failure or like when the feds introduced helicopters into the interdiction process it also creates a shortage followed immediately by a price hike driven by supply and demand.
Environmentalists – do you now better understand the law of supply and demand?
Oats ~ I will gladly absorb the capitol expenditure of the price of offshore oil derricks, that is the way the free markets work. Somebody produces something then they mark it up a certain percentage then it goes on the market, then the consumers buys it or choose not to.
I guess that this is a tough concept for those that think socialized medicine is a good idea.
Now if he owns mutual funds that include oil companies I suppose you can make the case in a rather far stretched manner, but you can make the same case for millions of us that own mutual funds.
On the other hand Pelosi and her husband have invested in T. Boone Pickens natural gas companies. That is why she is in favor of natural gas....even though she isn't bright enough to realize that it is obtained by drilling rigs too.
Speaking of Marijuana did you know Palin smoked pot?
http://www.opec.org/opecna/commentaries/2008/Comm022008.htm
OPEC says: “The clear message from the 147th meeting of OPEC was that the world should not be concerned about the supply of oil. There is plenty available and OPEC Member Countries are also accelerating plans to bring on-stream new projects, so as to respond to future demand.”
Oats – I guess in February when the article was written oil was $103.00 per barrel, that was the perfect amount of oil on the market for them to make $103.00 per barrel, a good thing for OPEC. I don’t think that I like OPEC deciding how much oil the world should have. You see Oats OPEC was founded on the principle of controlling the price of oil by coordinating production between members to avoid flooding the market which could and has dropped the price.
In 1973, OPEC countries were able to completely wrest pricing controls away from Western companies, after an Arab oil embargo disrupted distribution and triggered panic buying. The resulting "Oil Shock" sent prices soaring, with the cost of a barrel quadrupling to $11.50 by 1974.
The second "Oil Shock" came during the 1979 revolution in Iran, which was then the number two oil seller after Saudi Arabia. Responding to fears that supplies may run out, Japanese buyers stocked up, sending the average price of a barrel to near $36. When Iraq invaded Iraq the next year, the price of a barrel hit $40 – a high mark that was not topped until the 1991 Gulf War.
Climbing prices in the early 1980s caused the West to produce more oil on its own, mainly in the North Sea. Fuel-saving concerns and a global recession sent demand way down and an oil glut resulted. By the mid-1980s oversupply grew to the breaking point and prices collapsed to less than $9 a barrel.
Since the unstable 1980s, OPEC has experimented with a variety of pricing structures and production quotas to help keep costs stable.
Oats – I am happy to hear that you aren’t an environmentalist ideologue and that you understand supply and demand. You alluded to the fact that I was stuck on page one of – supply and demand (101); maybe you can help me through page 2.
If oil prices go up dramatically does America’s corn, barley and oats growers reap more money per bushel because a higher demand for ethanol is created? If so, don’t you have a vested interest in an expedited oil shortage?
it is now 3.87 here in missoula. bush's friends don't just own the mutual funds- they own the the whole shootin match and they are not in business to see us get a great deal.they are in business to maximize their profits. and mccain has tagged along with bush every inch of the way. the only statements that look stupid to me are the ones parrotted by you and other right wing zealots too blind from GOP snow to see that you are being deceived into carrying the water for the wealthy elite 5% who now control over 85% of all assets. under clinton the top 5% controlled 55%. way to go bush. the rest of us split 15%. what a great deal huh, marion. just think if mccain succeeds in stealing the white house with more lies the top 5% will soon have it all.
by the way, mccain and his wife are in that category.
Personally I would rather be an environmentalist than a constitutionalist or a liberatarian. At least the environmentalist has big enough cajones to call BS on his or her own. The latter however are too easily fooled. They cast their default vote for the GOP which continues to strip their civil rights and liberties and then they are too ignorant to figure it out and blame everything on the enviros. In the meantime the GOP has a laugh riot because all they have to do to get their vote is make up a rumor that their opponent is going to take away their guns. Evidentially these types have no sense to realize this is a simple scare tactic. What a bunch of real men, huh. Maybe you should pick on them for a change.
Allow drilling and let us use our oil instead of competing with china et al, and watch prices drop.
The price of corn has gone sky high because we are trying to use it to replace oil, and there is now a shortage.
There is no doubt that the less we use the greater the supply to the market and the lower the prices. That will only last so long though before we see businesses closing down, & jobs declining, is that really what you guys want?
If you are proud to be an environmentalist, be proud enough to take responsibility for the results of the things you force on the rest of us.
Not in the morning though, I am going to run up on the mountain and look for a bull moose again. I have some shots of him shedding from the other day, but we are supposed to have that thing called sun tomorrow. We haven't seen it for awhile.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/otheranalysis/ongr.html
You may also find this interesting. Although is believed to be an even dirtier form of oil.
http://www.energyandcapital.com/aqx_p/7550?gclid=CIia7oLozZUCFRSO1QodlkSqig
Using your reasoning, why don't we open up ANWR because they won't drill there anyway.
Most people have never been there, I have, the northern plain of ANWR is such a miserable and ugly place it is only good for two things, energy production and prisons. If a prisoner spent very much time there at all they would never re-offend. We ought to put a dozen of them up there.
Marion- you are right - to reason with the unreasonable is a fools errand!
Who is more fool? The fool or the fool who follows the fool?
You said: a reasonably intelligent person who can judge for him/her self which candidate is likely to help the middle class and which candidate is likely to help the rich?
If you need free stuff Obama will give you some.
I'll go get my own stuff, but I better do it before Obama makes me pay for your stuff.
It is a shame that American's now believe that they need to be subsidized by the government. It is a shame that we know look at the successful as enemies. It depresses me to see half the country has its hand out. I drive a bus everyday as I try to become an entrepreneur at night, all I need is for the government to not tax away what little investment money I have.
I have a chronic disease and I don’t want a socialized medicine scheme bankrupting the medical research industry. Health care is for the reasons I stated on an earlier post on this thread, socialized medicine scheme will make things worse not better. The government doesn’t run anything right, i.e. social security, Medicare, the Veterans hospitals.
I qualify for s-chip for my children but I would rather keep them on the good employer provided group insurance that they are on now, but if my employer is paying for my s-chip government insurance he won’t want me on his plan. Good employer plans will go into the junk heap of history.
Fanny May and Freddy Mac sure helped us didn’t they – that’s what happens when the government gives you stuff.
Are the rich luckier than us? – Yes. Do most of us work for the rich guys? Yes.
When the economy is good rich guys make money then they build a second home and my community profits, they go on vacation and my community profits.
According to the Tax Foundation, the top 1% of wage-earners in this country pays nearly 40% of the burden (an 11% INCREASE over 1999, when WHO was President? Oh that's right...Bill Clinton). Not fair? Well, you may be saying, 'that's because they have ALL the wealth!' Wrong again. The top 1% of earners account for just 21% of the total adjusted gross income. Hmm. Come to think of it...you're RIGHT! That really isn't fair. They're paying DOUBLE what they should be. By the way, the top 10% of earners pay 70% of the load. When you get all the way down to the top 50% of earners, they account for 96.4% of the entire tax burden. The next 10% pays 3.6%. And the bottom 40% of wage earners...pay NOTHING. That's right, nothing. In fact, they pay nothing, and then often get a "refund" (handout) at years end.
It looks like they are paying their fair share to me but as a guy that grew up on welfare I take pride in being able to carry my own weight. All I want is a lean government that doesn’t cost to much.
how did he do this? by investing in the companies that he directed the military to use. i call that corruption of the highest order, mr hunter. this is only one particularly egregious example in thousands of similar cases. what about competitive bids for cheney's company halliburton? does this monopoly give you pause as you bend your knee kissing the ring finger of aristocracy that the GOP has become in the final days of their corrupt reign? if not then apparently nothing will and I pity you and yours.
Go Palin!
The story of Halliburton's ties to the White House dates back to the 1940s, when a Texas firm called Brown & Root (now Halliburton) constructed a massive damn project near Austin. The company's founders, Herman and George Brown, won the contract to build Mansfield Dam thanks to the efforts of Johnson, who was then a Texas congressman. Current criticism over Halliburton's lucrative Iraq contracts has some historians drawing parallels to a similar controversy involving the company during Lyndon B. Johnson's administration.
Nearly 40 years ago, Halliburton faced almost identical charges over its work for the U.S. government in Vietnam Back then; the company's close ties to President Johnson became a liability.
During Clinton Administration, Halliburton Received $2.2 Billion From US Government For Work In Kosovo. “Between 1995 and 2000, while Democrat Bill Clinton ran the country and Republican Dick Cheney ran Halliburton, there was no talk of favoritism or political ties as the Houston-based company billed the government $2.2 billion for its work in Kosovo.
Vice President Al Gore’s National Performance Review mentioned Halliburton’s performance in its Report on Reinventing the Department of Defense, issued in September 1996. In a section titled ‘Outsourcing of Logistics Allows Combat Troops to Stick to Basics.
Clinton Procurement Official Steven Kelman Calls Allegations Against Halliburton “Somewhere Between Highly Improbable And Utterly Absurd.” “One would be hard-pressed to discover anyone with a working knowledge of how federal contracts are awarded – whether a career civil servant working on procurement or an independent academic expert – who doesn’t regard these allegations as being somewhere between highly improbable and utterly absurd. … Many people are also under the impression that contractors take the government to the cleaners. In fact, government keeps a watchful eye on contractor profits – and government work has low profit margins compared with the commercial work the same companies perform. … As for the much-maligned Halliburton, a few days ago the company disclosed, as part of its third-quarter earnings report, operating income from its Iraq contracts of $34 million on revenue of $900 million – a return on sales of 3.7 percent, hardly the stuff of plunder.” (Steven Kelman, “No ‘Cronyism’ In Iraq,” The Washington Post, 11/6/03) – Problem bear- Newspapers hardly get more liberal and hate bush more than the Washington Post.
Halliburton has a well-deserved reputation for doing very good and difficult work under impossible circumstances.
THAT IS WHY ALL THE PRESIDENTS USE Halliburton for tough jobs!
Here is a hint:
"Russert: Before we take a break, now that we have determined there are probably not these stockpiles of weapons that we had thought, and the primary rationale for the war had been to disarm Saddam Hussein, Paul Wolfowitz, the Deputy Defense Secretary, said that you had settled on weapons of mass destruction as an issue we could agree on, but there were three. “One was the weapons of mass destruction, the second is the support for terrorism, and third is Saddam's criminal treatment of his Iraqi people.”
He said the “third one by itself is a reason to help Iraqis but it's not a reason to put American kids' lives at risk, certainly not on the scale we did.”
President Bush: Um-hmm."
Congress did not decide to go to war Marion, they were mislead into voting for someone elses decision.
"Congress did not decide to go to war Marion, they were mislead into voting for someone elses decision."
Maybe you should watch this.
http://www.bercasio.com/movies/dems-wmd-before-Iraq.wmv
1) This video misses an extraordinary amount of history between 1998 and 2003.
2) The information that was made available in 2003 that mislead congress was later denounced.
Noone here is denying that it was believed at the time, it has later come out that it was all a bunch of lies. That is why some of us are more inclined to see the bigger picture than follow these arrogant aristocratic leaders that falsified the information in the first place.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tSBgGXoNgrQ&feature=related
Your said: "Shame on you Daryl you go to work everyday, still qualify for subsidized health care, yet don't really give a shit that you are the working poor and want to make it worse than it already is?"
Sorry comrade, I guess I'm not a very good socialist!
:)
Are you saying that we need to get the corporations off welfare and make them stop taking advantage of the working class. Or are you confused by what I said, what I mean is people that go to work all day everyday should not be sudsidizing these corporations and getting paid at levels of pay that leave them in income brackets where they still qualify for welfare and if they are in that postion, they certainly shouldn't be voting republican ( at least not in the sense that this party has evolved into today ). Although it is a sad truth in America today that most wage earners earnings are around poverty level, it is always confounding to me that they would continue to support the candidates that create this situation.
You said: "what I mean is people that go to work all day everyday should not be subsidizing these corporations and getting paid at levels of pay that leave them in income brackets where they still qualify for welfare."
I don't qualify for welfare, nether do most that the libs are trying to make s-chip health care available to, but I will qualify for the new SCHIP if we are unfortunate enough for it to pass congress. It wants to insure all children up to twenty-five if their parents make under 2.5 times the poverty level, that would have extended federal health insurance coverage to children in families making as much as $82,600 per year. That is ignorant, yes help the poor; I am not poor, keep the s-chip health money in the pocket of the taxpayers. Insure those that are really in poverty to the age of eighteen then they should be on their own. I was in poverty when I grew up and I got good health care, when the government starts extending coverage to those that don’t need it the health care of the poor will go down as there will not be enough money to pay for the new entitlements
But SCHIP is part of the incremental creep of socialism as was social security and Medicare.
As a young idiot I didn't give retirement any thought so I don't have very much put away because SSI gave me a false sense of security - but that is my mistake, I own it.
This is a great country and I don't want to break it because I was irresponsible and reckless.
I am an expendable hunk of protoplasm and I don't think that bankrupting the country with our perceived entitlements on this piece of protoplasm or any of the other 300 million just like me is a very good idea.
Back in 1999 I did a little SSI study
http://www.greater-yellowstone.com/usa/ssi-trust-fund.htm
and a National Debt Study
http://www.greater-yellowstone.com/usa/national-debt.htm
It is all going to bankrupt us and we shouldn’t be piling on.
We don’t need health care reform we need tort reform (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tort_reform ) We need a temporary worker program that mandates visa workers to buy health insurance as a condition of granting the visa. We need to deport Illegal aliens after they are treated at the hospital.
If we do these things the price of health care will come down and we won’t be empowering the Nanny State.
Cradle to grave nanny state, why in the hell do you want that? I guess we are no longer men!
Oil has fallen about 30 percent from a record $147.27 a barrel on July 11 as high prices and slowing global economic growth reduced demand for fuels. Crude in New York yesterday reached its lowest level since April 2, while Brent oil traded in London fell as low as $99 a barrel.
Wow, OPEC concluded yesterday that a lower demand for oil is making their product cheaper so OPEC wants to decrease production to make the price go back up, – DON’T TELL OATS!
Oh how I love it when the Arabs control our economy.
Unfortuantely Daryl you are a person who is riddled with anger and hatrid. So much so that you cannot see the benefit of providing adequate health care over bailing out non-law abiding corporations. You would rather make sure that those better off than you are taken care of than the children of our country. I feel very sorry for you, but no president can help your mind set, only mental health counseling can.
Liberal derangement syndrome, the more I see people with their had out the madder I get. Who needs treatment for that, that's just commons sense.
I don't know, I don't seem to be as angry as those with "Sarah Palin derangement syndrome." That is where this Capitalist verses Marxist argument started.
Oats - I have a deadbeat brother on SSI could work, I had another deadbeat brother that was on SSI that died of an overdose of meth because the government allowed him to have to much time on his hands.
Their kids could work but they don't because the government does not make them. Are the poor, you bet they are, they all have poverty of the brain through osmosis it becomes poverty of the wallet.
In Russia they used to have a saying - They pretend to pay me, I pretend to work - not there is a recipe for success.
Let the children die and the new middle class really make at least 3 millon a year like McCain says.
Daryl, you are to be commended, and have my utmost admiration.
I can't help but wonder how in such a few generations we went from building a country from scratch to people sitting on their hind ends crying that they are entitled to more and more and more. How could this happen?
My parents married and I was born during the Great Depression, my Dad herded sheep, hunted and trapped, whatever was necessary to support her, then me too. But they survived without government handouts. I worked to put myself thru college, it never occured to me that everyone wasn't working and trying just as hard.
Once I read an article in Life magazine about a family who was so poor they had to wash the socks at night, etc etc, and they needed more financial help. They also included a picture of the washing machine, which was a wringer machine, about like the one we used. It was what was in the background that taught me about how the media slants their stories. There was a tv antenna on the roof and the interior of the house showed the tv. We did not have a tv, and did not think we were deprived....besides there was little tv to be had in this area in those days.
If I were in charge, every able bodied person would work for every bit of "help" they got.
Again, you are to be commended Daryl.
There are only a few Republican talking points. It doesn't really matter what you say or what question you ask the answer will be one of three variations.
If you reread my post I was pointing out how the government taught my family how they didn’t have to work, my brothers, sisters and their now adult non working children. I said nothing about your work ethic or Oats’s.
History has proven that the more you give people the more they want or need. You are waiting for government health care instead of fixing the problem that made health care cost so much. Welfare and social security has wrecked multiple generations of my family.
My inference is people that want to elect liberals do so because they want more entitlements like socialized medicine or to protect our existing Ponzi schemes FDR and LBJ already started. Or maybe to protect organized labor, I was a member of the Alaska teamsters and I never so much squandered time on a job site, there was so much to do, but I couldn’t pitch in because while I was waiting for a load I couldn’t help the operator. No wonder our jobs are going overseas.
Boy ain’t this a rotten country where the daughter of two schoolteachers can become vice president and president in 1012. Clinton came from humble beginnings, as did many of our presidents. Steve jobs and Bill Gates had good ideas and invested in their selves.
People rise from humble beginnings to riches everyday with no help from the government you feel is holding you down. But they know how to work smart instead of hard and they probably aren’t consumed by class envy. The government isn’t going to stop you from succeeding.
Jobs American’s won’t do, that is a new dilemma it didn’t exist not so many years ago, we have to put our poor on welfare so illegal aliens will do the jobs that they won’t.
Thanks Marion ~
It's time for me to take a few days off and go up to Yellowstone and photograph the elk rut.
Walking among the wildlife renews me after a long week of trying to straighten out the libs at election time. It is particularly fun this year because Sarah Palin has them all so apoplectic.
I realize that those I argue with are helplessly drowning in cool aid but hopefully the dialogue is helpful to readers.
Take a look at my flickr photo stream
http://www.flickr.com/photos/daryl-hunter
there is a story breaking on the scandals brewing over at W's interior department involving oil leases.
Mammoth really isn't my choice for elk photography because of all of the buildings.
very best time to get out into yellowstone though. can't wait. one more day at the salt mines then we get out and do what makes living in montana worthwhile. have a good time marion.