Month: September 2008

Trick or Treat

by digby

Not that anyone cares about this but October is just over the horizon and surprises are always possible.

Pakistan: Uproar grows over first ground assault by US troops

Pakistani military officials fear American intervention in the tribal areas could spark a rebellion, derailing counterterrorism operations.

United States forces conducted their first ground assaults into Pakistani territory from bases in Afghanistan early Wednesday morning in a raid on a suspected Taliban stronghold in South Waziristan, one of Pakistan’s lawless tribal areas. The attack has caused an uproar in Pakistan and raised concerns of a new period of tension between the US and its valuable, nuclear-armed ally in the war on terror, which has entered a period of political uncertainty after the resignation of long-serving president Pervez Musharraf last month.

The US has not officially commented on the raid, and leaders of the US-led NATO peacekeeping force in Afghanistan deny any knowledge of the attack, reports Reuters. But one US official, speaking to CNN on the condition of anonymity, confirmed that the attack had occurred.

The Pentagon has refused to comment officially on the attack, but several defense officials acknowledged that U.S. military activity had taken place inside Pakistan.

The senior U.S. official said a small number of U.S. helicopters landed troops in the village near Angoor Adda in South Waziristan, where Taliban and al Qaeda fighters have hunkered down over the years.

Local media reports said the troops came out of a chopper and fired on civilians. The U.S. official said there may have been a small number of women and children in the immediate vicinity, but when the mission began “everybody came out firing” from the compound.

He said the U.S. troops specifically attacked three buildings in the compound. They were believed to contain individuals responsible for training and equipping insurgents who have been crossing the border into Afghanistan in increasing numbers in recent months and staging large-scale, high-profile attacks against U.S. and coalition forces.

There has been no indication that the US troops were targeting Osama bin Laden or his deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri.

Outraged at the violation of sovereignty, the Pakistani government summoned the US ambassador to protest the raid, reports the BBC.

Some officials and analysts say that the raid into Angoor Adda may signal a more aggressive American strategy towards militants in Pakistan’s tribal areas and their cross-border raids into Afghanistan, reports The New York Times.

The commando raid by the American forces signaled what top American officials said could be the opening salvo in a much broader campaign by Special Operations forces against the Taliban and Al Qaeda inside Pakistan, a secret plan that Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates has been advocating for months within President Bush’s war council.

It also seemed likely to complicate relations with Pakistan, where the already unstable political situation worsened after the resignation last month of President Pervez Musharraf, a longtime American ally.

“What you’re seeing is perhaps a stepping up of activity against militants in sanctuaries in the tribal areas that pose a direct threat to United States forces and Afghan forces in Afghanistan,” said one senior American official, who had been briefed on the attack and spoke on condition of anonymity because of the mission’s political sensitivity. “There’s potential to see more.”

But with political uncertainty and the rising tide of violence, some fear that an aggressive American posture could do more harm than good. Speaking to the Associated Press (AP), Pakistani Gen. Athar Abbas said he feared American attacks could provoke a tribal rebellion against Islamabad, which would completely derail counterterrorism operations in the region.

He said the attack would undermine Pakistan’s efforts to isolate Islamic extremists and could threaten NATO’s major supply lines, which snake from Pakistan’s Indian Ocean port of Karachi through the tribal region into Afghanistan.

“We cannot afford a huge uprising at the level of tribe,” Abbas told AP. “That would be completely counterproductive and doesn’t help the cause of fighting terrorism in the area.”

Now back to our regularly scheduled fruitless flailing. Sorry to disturb.

.

Palin The Extremist

by tristero

“The problem with you John Birchers’ is that you are too damn liberal!”

~ Joseph Vogler, Founder Alaskan Independence Party

As we all know, Palin flirted with the secessionist Alaska Independence Party and even sent them a video of support. While Palin apparently wasn’t, Palin’s husband was a member of this extremist group for from 1995 to 2002 (except for a few months). Digby discussed the party and their founder here and I added a little bit more here. (btw, imagine the uproar if Michelle Obama had been in Farrakhan’s group for seven years.)

The AIP have direct ties to Christian Dominionists. What does that mean? Read Chip Berlet’s report. Berlet, in case you don’t know, is one of the leading experts in this country on extremist organizations. Here’s his introduction:

Given Sarah Palin’s rather doctrinaire approach to conservative libertarian Christian evangelicalism, her political flirtation with the secessionist Alaska Independence Party (AIP) is hardly surprising, but the AIP’s ties to the U.S. Constitution Party raise some creepy issues. It is not fair to suggest that Palin agrees with all of the political positions of the AIP or Constitution Party. It is fair to ask with what policies she does or does not agree. It is already clear that on the issue of the “Sanctity of Life,” Palin and the theocratic Consititution Party are on the same Dominionist page.

The AIP has placed the candidate of the U.S. Constitution Party on the Presidential ballot in Alaska in the 2008 race. Let’s be clear, the U.S. Constitution Party would impose a form of theocratic neofascism in the United States. And I am not a person who tosses the term fascism around lightly.

In short, Palin has ties to people so far to the “Religious” right they make Jerry Falwell look like a liberal.

Special Note for Republicans and others with cognitive impairments: Obama has consistently denounced Ayers who perpetrated his crimes in the 60’s. What Berlet quotes is from the current Constitution Party platform, a group allied with the Alaska Independence Party. Furthermore, there is no indication that Sarah Palin has any intention of denouncing the extremist party which was a political home for her husband for seven years and which she once flirted with and praised.

Updated with opening quote from Vogler.

Exactly Right

by tristero

Glenn Greenwald:

The Republicans are well aware that they can’t possibly win the election if it is even partially decided based on issues. They need and intend to win despite the fact that Americans hate their positions on the issues, and to do that, they want to ensure that a majority of Americans love and respect the strong, honorable, principled, culturally familiar all-American mavericks John McCain and Sarah Palin (even if they don’t agree with them on everything) while strongly disliking that wishy-washy, snooty, foreign, exotic, self-absorbed Eastern elitist Barack Obama (even if he says the right things on issues).

Democrats have clearly decided (yet again) to cede that lowly playing field to the GOP and are hoping (yet again) that those personality and cultural issues are not enough to outweigh the country’s dislike of Republican policies. This year is indeed different — dissatisfaction with the Government is higher than ever before, the GOP is as discredited as a party can be, and Obama is a more effective candidate than those who preceded him — but the attacks last night were only the beginning, not the end. If John McCain remains — even from the mouths of Democrats — the Honored, Honorable, Principled, Heroic Maverick, the GOP chances will be as high as they can be.

More Anti-Democratic Bias

by tristero

This kind of slanted garbage from the media is so ubiquitous that we tend to ignore it.We do so at our Peril.

Democrats officially warned Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (I-Conn.) on Wednesday that he could face repercussions for delivering a speech at the Republican National Convention in which he called Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama an “eloquent young man” who lacked the experience to be in the White House.

What could possibly be wrong with Lieberman saying that? The impression is that Dems are overreacting.But that wasn’t the problem.

Lieberman lied. He lied about a fellow Senator’s record. That’s the problem. But we don’t get to hear about it ’til the 3rd paragraph. And no specifics are given:

“Senator Reid was very disappointed in Senator Lieberman’s speech, especially when he appeared to go out of his way to distort Senator Obama’s record of bipartisan achievements in the Senate,” said Reid’s spokesman, Jim Manley. “The Democratic caucus will likely revisit the situation with Senator Lieberman after the elections in November.”

So Lieberman’s lies have been rhetorically reduced to a potential “he said/she said.” And we still haven’t heard any details.

Let’s go on. It’s not ’til paragraph six that we hear what Lieberman’s lie was:

[Lieberman] pointedly said Obama “has not reached across party lines to get anything significant done, nor has he been willing to take on powerful interest groups in the Democratic Party.”

And remember I said the article was structured to be a “potential ‘he said/she said?” Well, that kind of article wasn’t considered biased enough in Lieberman’s favor. Therefore, no one was given a chance to refute this blatant lie in the article by citing the relevant facts about Obama’s record.

People, let there be no mistake: Lieberman lied through his teeth.

Liberal media, my patooties.

Teen Marriages

by tristero

from the Times:

Studies show that today teenage marriages are two to three times more likely to end in divorce than are marriages between people 25 years of age and older. The most comprehensive study on marriage and age that sociologists cite was published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in 2001, from 1995 data, and it found that 48 percent of those who marry before 18 are likely to divorce within 10 years, compared with 24 percent of those who marry after age 25.

“Most young women don’t fare very well when it comes to raising a family as a teenager, and those precious few who get married, the marriages are very short-lived,” said Bill Albert, chief program officer for the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy. “I know and respect a lot of 17-year-olds, but I don’t think any of them are ready to be married and begin the lifelong task of raising a child.”

Census data on teenage marriage, from 1998, showed that only 1 percent of 15- to 17-year-olds had ever been married. But the rates were higher among 18- and 19-year-olds — 6.5 percent for white women, 13.4 percent for Hispanic women — and they vary by region, with higher rates in the South and lower rates in the Northeast. Experts say that teenage marriage tends to be more common in religious and immigrant families, particularly among Hispanics, and more common in so-called red states like Alaska.

Sociologists say that what drives the failure of teenage marriages — and some also say the postwar young marriage boom may have contributed to the divorce explosion of the 1970s — is the complex condition of being an unformed adult.

“They may not know quite what they want in a lifetime partner,” Dr. Popenoe said. “They still often have years of education to complete, as well as getting settled in the work world, and those two things may change their outlook on life considerably.”

The point is this: Teenage marriages are far more likely to fail than marriages between more mature individuals. Usually, education is delayed or terminated as the parents find and hold jobs, especially true when they have children. Therefore, many young women choose to terminate the unwanted pregnancy and continue their education; they defer marriage and children and preserve the potential for a far more productive life for themselves and their family.

Of course, there is no shame attached to choosing to have a baby when you’re young. Nor is there any shame for choosing not to.

McCain, like Bush, wants to eliminate our opportunity to have that choice. But that’s not all. Despite all evidence that it doesn’t work, McCain, in lockstep with Bush and Palin, wants to continue the ludicrous notion of funding sex education that doesn’t educate, but only preaches. The three not only want to cut funding for indigent unwed mothers, they actually have cut such funding.

They are ignorant, nasty prigs, ever so eager to preach their divine virtue to the rest of us sinners. Worse, they are greedy, sadistic, ignorant, nasty prigs, ever so eager to make the less advantaged suffer so that they may prosper. If McCain and Palin are permitted to continue the odious Bush legacy, both the number and burdens of poor young mothers will dramatically increase and their options will shrink. Innocent children will die so that Sarah Palin can call herself a pitbull with lipstick* and wealthy white supporters can snort and snuffle their approval.

I have posted many times about the War on Fucking, and have made the point more than once that it really is a class war, a war on the poor and the blue collar workers by elite, rightwing Republicans. Wealthy, well-connected families will always have access to safe reproductive choices including accurate information, effective contraception, and several abortion choices. If McCain is elected, the poor and lower middle class will not. Wealthy, well-connected families will always have ways to support a child who becomes pregnant and chooses to take the pregnancy the term. The poor and lower middle class often do not.

A vote to continue the repellent ideology of Bushism, a vote cast for McCain to extend the hateful policies of the current administration is a vote to repeal Roe and eviscerate necessary social services. A vote for McCain is a vote to continue the class war against the poor and blue collar workers.

The dreadful effects of the class war McCain wishes to continue will be felt primarily by the poor, but it will affect all of us. Except for McCain and his pals, holed up in their multiple homes, safely ensconced behind their gated communities, sneering at the suckers who further enriched them.

*The phrase “pitbull with lipstick” means only one thing. So remember: Palin compared herself to a violent bitch, not Democrats, liberals, or progressives.

Compare And Contrast

by tristero

Here’s how the NY Times covered Biden’s speech:

Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr. of Delaware accepted the Democratic vice-presidential nomination on Wednesday night with an ode to his middle-class upbringing and a blistering attack on Senator John McCain.

“Again and again,” he said, “on the most important national security issues of our time, John McCain was wrong, and Barack Obama was proven right.”

He said Mr. McCain had supported President Bush’s policies that Mr. Biden said had driven the American economy into a ditch and backed Mr. Bush on a war that is costing American taxpayers $12 billion a month.

As Democrats often do, he paid tribute to Mr. McCain’s military service and his more than five years as a prisoner of war in Vietnam. That is not sufficient qualification for the presidency, Mr. Biden said in as direct a way as any Democrat this year has.

Hello? Anyone awake? Well with prose like that – stately, plump, and boring – I wouldn’t blame you if you nodded off.

Now, here’s how they covered Palin’s:

Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska introduced herself to America before a roaring crowd at the Republican National Convention on Wednesday night as “just your average hockey mom” who was as qualified as the Democratic nominee, Senator Barack Obama, to be president of the United States.

An hour later Senator John McCain, a scrappy, rebellious former prisoner of war in Vietnam whose campaign was resurrected from near-death a year ago, was nominated by the Republican Party to be the 44th president of the United States after asking the cheering delegates, “Do you think we made the right choice” in picking Ms. Palin as the vice-presidential nominee.

Questions, boys and girls? Ok. Let’s merely list the emotion-laden adjectives:

The Biden article – first four paragraphs:

Middle-class
Blistering

The Palin article – first two paragraphs:

roaring
scrappy
rebellious
cheering

Still don’t get it? Then let me give you the straight talk. In his opening paragraphs, John Broder wrote a nearly completely objective report of Biden’s speech. Bumiller and Cooper used almost every possible rhetorical device they could pack in to two grafs to signal their support not only for Palin but also for the “scrappy, rebellious former prisoner of war in Vietnam whose campaign was resurrected from near-death a year ago.”

Liberal media, my patooties.

The Speech

by digby

I expect that a lot of people on both sides of the aisle were surprised that Palin didn’t run out on stage dressed like Ellie May Clampett, chomping on a wad of tobacco and talking like Roseann Barr. Instead, she gave a successful political speech in the style of a female political icon like Ann Richards (if she had a Fargo accent.) She was confident and poised and she is obviously not going to embarrass the GOP with amateur, provincial incompetence. I don’t think anyone’s as sure she’ll be dumped from the ticket tomorrow morning as they were today.

But the bottom line is that while she may not sink this ticket (at least immediately) she can’t save it either. They’ll get out their base, which until now was a questionable proposition. But that won’t be enough. Their base has shrunk. They have to win over a chunk of independents and I just don’t know if they can successfully separate themselves from the disaster of the past eight years, even if Maverick decides to move the White House to Point Barrow.

They are Republicans. Both of them. And that should be enough to sink them if the Democrats actually run against them.

.

Small Town Boy

by digby

Uhm, did I just hear New York mayor Rudy Giuliani do an impression of one of the “Queer Eye for the Straight Guys” drawling, ” Does Barack Obama not think her home town is cosmoaahlitan enough? I’m soorrrry Barack that it’s not flaaashy enough?”

At the Republican convention? To great cheers?

Man, the times they are a-changin’

.

American Idol

by digby

From Mojoblog:

Why the American Dream Is Bigger than Palin or McCain

Below is a guest blog entry by economist and MoJo author Nomi Prins:

At some point today, (around the time I noticed Lindsay Lohan weighing in), I got hit with Sarah Palin overload.

Then, I realized that Palin’s omnipresence isn’t about John McCain or Barack Obama, or even this week’s RNC. It’s not about her experience or stance on issues. It’s about the “Pop” American Dream.

The old American Dream is dying. Rampant economic inequality makes the cost of working hard to achieve prohibitive. In a culture where more people vote for the next American Idol than for the next president, no wonder Sarah Palin is the top story: She defines the new American Dream, where leaping to the top against all odds is the end goal in itself. Of course there are voters appalled that someone ‘like her’ can be a ‘heartbeat away from the presidency.’ But there are also plenty of voters delighted that someone ‘like her’ has a shot at the ultimate American Dream—a spot in the White House.

read on…

I wrote about Palin as a ‘reality show” winner yesterday and I think this captures it even better.

Prins goes on to point out that in reality the mortgage meltdown and health care crisis are far more relevant to the American dream for the vast majority of citizens.
But we live in an American Idol culture where the American dream is defined simply as “winning the contest.” Project White House. Top Politician. Survivor.

.

Low Blow Libs

by digby

It seems liberals are circulating some chain emails of their own these days. It contains no claims of Palin being a Druid or a terrorist. Her family issues aren’t mentioned. It’s just a local Wasilla woman’s view of Palin the politician:

A note to all:

Dear friends,

So many people have asked me about what I know about Sarah Palin in the
last 2 days that I decided to write something up . . .

Basically, Sarah Palin and Hillary Clinton have only 2 things in
common: their gender and their good looks. 🙂

You have my permission to forward this to your friends/email contacts
with my name and email address attached, but please do not post it on
any websites, as there are too many kooks out there . . .

[I’ve redacted all the personal information about the author]

ABOUT SARAH PALIN

I am a resident of Wasilla, Alaska. I have known Sarah since 1992.
Everyone here knows Sarah, so it is nothing special to say we are on a
first-name basis. Our children have attended the same schools. Her
father was my child’s favorite substitute teacher. I also am on a
first name basis with her parents and mother-in-law. I attended more
City Council meetings during her administration than about 99% of the
residents of the city.

She is enormously popular; in every way she’s like the most popular
girl in middle school. Even men who think she is a poor choice and
won’t vote for her can’t quit smiling when talking about her because
she is a “babe”.

It is astonishing and almost scary how well she can keep a secret. She
kept her most recent pregnancy a secret from her children and parents
for seven months.

She is “pro-life”. She recently gave birth to a Down’s syndrome baby.
There is no cover-up involved, here; Trig is her baby.

She is energetic and hardworking. She regularly worked out at the gym.

She is savvy. She doesn’t take positions; she just “puts things out
there” and if they prove to be popular, then she takes credit.

Her husband works a union job on the North Slope for BP and is a
champion snowmobile racer. Todd Palin’s kind of job is highly
sought-after because of the schedule and high pay. He arranges his
work schedule so he can fish for salmon in Bristol Bay for a month or
so in summer, but by no stretch of the imagination is fishing their
major source of income. Nor has her life-style ever been anything
like that of native Alaskans.

Sarah and her whole family are avid hunters.

She’s smart.

Her experience is as mayor of a city with a population of about 5,000
(at the time), and less than 2 years as governor of a state with about
670,000 residents.

During her mayoral administration most of the actual work of running
this small city was turned over to an administrator. She had been
pushed to hire this administrator by party power-brokers after she had
gotten herself into some trouble over precipitous firings which had
given rise to a recall campaign.

Sarah campaigned in Wasilla as a “fiscal conservative”. During her 6
years as Mayor, she increased general government expenditures by over
33%. During those same 6 years the amount of taxes collected by the
City increased by 38%. This was during a period of low inflation
(1996-2002). She reduced progressive property taxes and increased a
regressive sales tax which taxed even food. The tax cuts that she
promoted benefited large corporate property owners way more than they
benefited residents.

The huge increases in tax revenues during her mayoral administration
weren’t enough to fund everything on her wish list though, borrowed
money was needed, too. She inherited a city with zero debt, but left it
with indebtedness of over $22 million. What did Mayor Palin encourage
the voters to borrow money for? Was it the infrastructure that she said
she supported? The sewage treatment plant that the city lacked? or a
new library? No. $1m for a park. $15m-plus for construction of a
multi-use sports complex which she rushed through to build on a piece
of property that the City didn’t even have clear title to, that was
still in litigation 7 yrs later–to the delight of the lawyers
involved! The sports complex itself is a nice addition to the
community but a huge money pit, not the profit-generator she claimed it
would be. She also supported bonds for $5.5m for road projects that
could have been done in 5-7 yrs without any borrowing.

While Mayor, City Hall was extensively remodeled and her office
redecorated more than once.

These are small numbers, but Wasilla is a very small city.

As an oil producer, the high price of oil has created a budget surplus
in Alaska. Rather than invest this surplus in technology that will
make us energy independent and increase efficiency, as Governor she
proposed distribution of this surplus to every individual in the state.

In this time of record state revenues and budget surpluses, she
recommended that the state borrow/bond for road projects, even while
she proposed distribution of surplus state revenues: spend today’s
surplus, borrow for needs.

She’s not very tolerant of divergent opinions or open to outside ideas
or compromise. As Mayor, she fought ideas that weren’t generated by
her or her staff. Ideas weren’t evaluated on their merits, but on the
basis of who proposed them.

While Sarah was Mayor of Wasilla she tried to fire our highly respected
City Librarian because the Librarian refused to consider removing from
the library some books that Sarah wanted removed. City residents
rallied to the defense of the City Librarian and against Palin’s
attempt at out-and-out censorship, so Palin backed down and withdrew
her termination letter. People who fought her attempt to oust the
Librarian are on her enemies list to this day.

Sarah complained about the “old boy’s club” when she first ran for
Mayor, so what did she bring Wasilla? A new set of “old boys”. Palin
fired most of the experienced staff she inherited. At the City and as
Governor she hired or elevated new, inexperienced, obscure people,
creating a staff totally dependent on her for their jobs and eternally
grateful and fiercely loyal–loyal to the point of abusing their power
to further her personal agenda, as she has acknowledged happened in the
case of pressuring the State’s top cop (see below).

As Mayor, Sarah fired Wasilla’s Police Chief because he “intimidated”
her, she told the press. As Governor, her recent firing of Alaska’s top
cop has the ring of familiarity about it. He served at her pleasure
and she had every legal right to fire him, but it’s pretty clear that
an important factor in her decision to fire him was because he wouldn’t
fire her sister’s ex-husband, a State Trooper. Under investigation
for abuse of power, she has had to admit that more than 2 dozen
contacts were made between her staff and family to the person that she
later fired, pressuring him to fire her ex-brother-in-law. She tried to
replace the man she fired with a man who she knew had been reprimanded
for sexual harassment; when this caused a public furor, she withdrew
her support.

She has bitten the hand of every person who extended theirs to her in
help. The City Council person who personally escorted her around town
introducing her to voters when she first ran for Wasilla City Council
became one of her first targets when she was later elected Mayor. She
abruptly fired her loyal City Administrator; even people who didn’t
like the guy were stunned by this ruthlessness.

Fear of retribution has kept all of these people from saying anything
publicly about her.

When then-Governor Murkowski was handing out political plums, Sarah got
the best, Chair of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission: one
of the few jobs not in Juneau and one of the best paid. She had no
background in oil & gas issues. Within months of scoring this great
job which paid $122,400/yr, she was complaining in the press about the
high salary. I was told that she hated that job: the commute, the
structured hours, the work. Sarah became aware that a member of this
Commission (who was also the State Chair of the Republican Party)
engaged in unethical behavior on the job. In a gutsy move which some
undoubtedly cautioned her could be political suicide, Sarah solved all
her problems in one fell swoop: got out of the job she hated and
garnered gobs of media attention as the patron saint of ethics and as a
gutsy fighter against the “old boys’ club” when she dramatically quit,
exposing this man’s ethics violations (for which he was fined).

As Mayor, she had her hand stuck out as far as anyone for pork from
Senator Ted Stevens. Lately, she has castigated his pork-barrel
politics and publicly humiliated him. She only opposed the “bridge to
nowhere” after it became clear that it would be unwise not to.

As Governor, she gave the Legislature no direction and budget
guidelines, then made a big grandstand display of line-item vetoing
projects, calling them pork. Public outcry and further legislative
action restored most of these projects–which had been vetoed simply
because she was not aware of their importance–but with the unobservant
she had gained a reputation as “anti-pork”.

She is solidly Republican: no political maverick. The State party
leaders hate her because she has bit them in the back and humiliated
them. Other members of the party object to her self-description as a
fiscal conservative.

Around Wasilla there are people who went to high school with Sarah.
They call her “Sarah Barracuda” because of her unbridled ambition and
predatory ruthlessness. Before she became so powerful, very ugly
stories circulated around town about shenanigans she pulled to be made
point guard on the high school basketball team. When Sarah’s
mother-in-law, a highly respected member of the community and
experienced manager, ran for Mayor, Sarah refused to endorse her.

As Governor, she stepped outside of the box and put together of package
of legislation known as “AGIA” that forced the oil companies to march
to the beat of her drum.

Like most Alaskans, she favors drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife
Refuge. She has questioned if the loss of sea ice is linked to
global warming. She campaigned “as a private citizen” against a state
initiaitive that would have either a) protected salmon streams from
pollution from mines, or b) tied up in the courts all mining in the
state (depending on who you listen to). She has pushed the State’s
lawsuit against the Dept. of the Interior’s decision to list polar
bears as threatened species.

McCain is the oldest person to ever run for President; Sarah will be a
heartbeat away from being President.

There has to be literally millions of Americans who are more
knowledgeable and experienced than she.

However, there’s a lot of people who have underestimated her and are
regretting it.

CLAIM VS FACT
•”Hockey mom”: true for a few years
•”PTA mom”: true years ago when her first-born was in elementary
school, not since
•”NRA supporter”: absolutely true
•social conservative: mixed. Opposes gay marriage, BUT vetoed a bill
that would have denied benefits to employees in same-sex relationships
(said she did this because it was unconsitutional).
•pro-creationism: mixed. Supports it, BUT did nothing as Governor to
promote it.
•”Pro-life”: mixed. Knowingly gave birth to a Down’s syndrome baby
BUT declined to call a special legislative session on some pro-life
legislation
•”Experienced”: Some high schools have more students than Wasilla has
residents. Many cities have more residents than the state of Alaska.
No legislative experience other than City Council. Little hands-on
supervisory or managerial experience; needed help of a city
administrator to run town of about 5,000.
•political maverick: not at all
•gutsy: absolutely!
•open & transparent: ??? Good at keeping secrets. Not good at
explaining actions.
•has a developed philosophy of public policy: no
•”a Greenie”: no. Turned Wasilla into a wasteland of big box stores
and disconnected parking lots. Is pro-drilling off-shore and in ANWR.
•fiscal conservative: not by my definition!
•pro-infrastructure: No. Promoted a sports complex and park in a city
without a sewage treatment plant or storm drainage system. Built
streets to early 20th century standards.
•pro-tax relief: Lowered taxes for businesses, increased tax burden on
residents
•pro-small government: No. Oversaw greatest expansion of city
government in Wasilla’s history.
•pro-labor/pro-union. No. Just because her husband works union
doesn’t make her pro-labor. I have seen nothing to support any claim
that she is pro-labor/pro-union.

WHY AM I WRITING THIS?

First, I have long believed in the importance of being an informed
voter. I am a voter registrar. For 10 years I put on student voting
programs in the schools. If you google my name, you will find references to my participation in local government, education, and PTA/parent organizations.

Secondly, I’ve always operated in the belief that “Bad things happen
when good people stay silent”. Few people know as much as I do because
few have gone to as many City Council meetings.

Third, I am just a housewife. I don’t have a job she can bump me out
of. I don’t belong to any organization that she can hurt. But, I am no
fool; she is immensely popular here, and it is likely that this will
cost me somehow in the future: that’s life.

Fourth, she has hated me since back in 1996, when I was one of the 100
or so people who rallied to support the City Librarian against Sarah’s
attempt at censorship.

Fifth, I looked around and realized that everybody else was afraid to
say anything because they were somehow vulnerable.

CAVEATS

I am not a statistician. I developed the numbers for the increase in
spending & taxation 2 years ago (when Palin was running for Governor)
from information supplied to me by the Finance Director of the City of
Wasilla, and I can’t recall exactly what I adjusted for: did I adjust
for inflation? for population increases? Right now, it is impossible
for a private person to get any info out of City Hall–they are
swamped. So I can’t verify my numbers.

You may have noticed that there are various numbers circulating for the
population of Wasilla, ranging from my “about 5,000”, up to 9,000. The
day Palin’s selection was announced a city official told me that the
current population is about 7,000. The official 2000 census count was
5,460. I have used about 5,000 because Palin was Mayor from 1996 to
2002, and the city was growing rapidly in the mid-90’s.

Shocking low blows, I know.

I don’t know if the facts are true, although I did a spot check on a handful of her claims and they all checked out. Take this with a grain of salt, I don’t know if the woman who wrote it is real or whether everything she relates happened. But I do think it’s a pretty good example of the differences between the left and the right’s idea of a chain email.

If you want to see the scurrilous emails that have resulted in over 13 percent of the nation believing that Obama is a Muslim traitor, you can see one here.

.