Ron Paul on Sarah Palin

[DAFTEK]

Sunday, August 31, 2008

Open Letter To Sarah Palin From A Constitutionalist

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Dwzk3g-lB0

Gov. Palin,
Not long ago on CNBC's Kudlow & Co., you expressed uncertainty over the purpose of the office of the U.S. Vice Presidency. Before you embark on this history-making endeavor, please take care that you do know what it is the job of the Vice Presidency is for.
When you are inaugurated, you will take on oath that goes as follows:

I, Sarah Palin, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.
​

So many of our Vice Presidents in the past century--most notably Mr. Cheney, Mr. Nixon, and Mr. Truman--have forgotten this oath of office, almost as soon as it came out of their mouth. Recent history has seen a dramatic increase in the power of the office, quite contrary to the intentions of the Founders and the mandates of the very Constitution which gives life and authority to the office in the first place. This massive assumption of power and influence has even convinced our current Vice President that he is a "fourth branch" of government, allowing him to accrue a huge staff and budget that he feels is not accountable to the public.
The media is calling you the "anti-Cheney," because of your humble roots, energetic and likeable personality, and proven disdain for corruption and secrecy. As someone who has fought hard for reform and accountability in government in the great state of Alaska, as someone who has spoken out for integrity and liberty, and as someone who has in the past spoken highly of such sensible-policied fellows as Pat Buchanan and Ron Paul, I urge you, Gov. Palin, to truly become the "anti-Cheney" you have been dubbed as.
Please, turn to the Constitution and restore the prudent and modest office to what is was meant to do. The Founders did not intend for the Vice Presidency to be of great weight. Indeed, the first Vice President, John Adams, called it "the most insignificant office that ever the invention of man contrived or his imagination conceived." Thomas Marshall, the 28th Vice President, joked: "Once there were two brothers. One went away to sea; the other was elected vice president. And nothing was heard of either of them again." Even Harry Truman, who as Vice President assumed much more power and control than any of his predecessors, remarked that the job of the Vice Presidency is to "go to weddings and funerals."
And actually, they were quite right. The office of the Vice Presidency is accorded only one power by the Constitution: to cast a tie-breaking vote in the Senate (Article I §3). The Vice President is also to assume the office of the Presidency if the President leaves office, dies, or is unable to discharge the powers of the Presidency for some reason (Article II §1; Amendment XXV).
In 1788, James Monroe stated that the Vice President "presides in the Senate, but has no vote except when they are divided. This is the only power incident to his office whilst he continues Vice-President; and he is obviously introduced into the government to prevent the ill-consequences which might otherwise happen from the death or removal of the President."
For an ambitious and hard-working person like yourself, this may seem rather boring, but there is a key role that you can play. Firstly, you can return the scope of power of the Vice Presidency to its constitutional limits, and return the liberty and tax money that the Vice Presidents of the past century have wrongly usurped. But secondly, and more important, you have the ear of the potential President, John McCain, and you can use your influence to convince him to attack the size, spending, powers, and tax demands of the federal government, and to return to a more prudent and humble foreign policy of armed neutrality, like the kind that George W. Bush campaigned on in 2000, and like the kind that our forefathers advised ("Peace, commerce and honest friendship with all nations--entangling alliances with none" ~ Thomas Jefferson).
We seem to have been sidetracked by "pork barrel" spending and "earmarks," but that is a problem that only makes up less than 1% of the entire federal budget, and few realize that when Congress adds earmarks to legislation, it does not increase the level of federal spending. Earmarks merely divert the taxpayers' money to the taxpayers--"pork" money simply comes out of money that would otherwise go straight to the already-bloated executive branch anyway. Cutting earmarks will not cut federal spending by one penny. So, we must go after not just "bridges to nowhere," but every single cent of federal spending that is not authorized by the Constitution.
The Founders advocated that we have a federal government with "few and defined" powers, as James Madison put it in Federalist Paper No. 45. This was codified in the oft-ignored 10th Amendment, which states that any powers not expressly delegated to the federal government by the Constitution, shall be denied to the federal government:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. Amendment X.
​

As Vice President, Gov. Palin, you can help ensure that a McCain administration doesn't just nibble around the edges of the budget, but quickly phases out any federal program that is not authorized by the Constitution, and returns the money that had been employed for such unsanctioned purposes to the people from whence it was stolen. You can also use your powers of suasion to help ensure that the people's money is not wasted on international welfare handouts (such as foreign aid and the subsidization of foreign militaries) or on needless and destructive wars. You can use your sway in the White House to make sure we aren't meddling in the internal affairs of or antagonizing other countries, and putting American lives and tax dollars at risk.
Gov. Palin, you have many policy stances to stake out and many views to define and refine in the coming months of your campaign with Mr. McCain. Please read, take to heart, and help advocate the Constitution, and not the ever-growing barnacles of unauthorized power that the offices you two are running for have become so encrusted with.
The "reform" and "change" that the American people really need, is a dramatically smaller and less intrusive federal government, lower taxes, and a foreign policy that allows for diplomacy and free trade with other countries, but doesn't surround them with military installments or subsidize corrupt regimes. The Constitution is the best guide for ensuring that Americans get this kind of a government.
The ball is in your court now, Gov. Palin. Please, don't let us down.

 

[rockandrollsouls]

Does "not comprimising on ideals" mean that folks shouldn't reach out to try and educate Ms. Palin about the message of freedom and liberty? If that is so, then I'd say "not compromising" may hurt this movement grow to where it needs to be in order to become successful in transforming this party and this country. If "not compromising on ideals" means not pulling the lever for the Rethugs based on Palin as a VP pick, well then, I agree with that.

If you took the time to read my post I said I will not compromise my values and ideals by voting for a ticket like that. I have no problem with educating.

 

[0zzy]

If you took the time to read my post I said I will not compromise my values and ideals by voting for a ticket like that. I have no problem with educating.

I am not voting for her, but I still like her even with the laundry list you posted. And to say she had the largest budget in Alaskan history is a bit unfair considering the rate of inflation, I'd like to see specifics on what was raised and what not before I judge it fully though.

She's no Ron Paul, I don't think there are any Ron Pauls other than Paul in office atm, but she's better then a lot of others. Sure, she is a social conservative, but she concedes with the court rulings to give benefits, she's not telling homosexuals they are going to burn in hell, etc. etc.

But ya... can someone tell Menthol to stop posting the fake picture. It's a bit ridiculous after the first 10 times of posting it.

 

[rockandrollsouls]

I am not voting for her, but I still like her even with the laundry list you posted. And to say she had the largest budget in Alaskan history is a bit unfair considering the rate of inflation, I'd like to see specifics on what was raised and what not before I judge it fully though.

She's no Ron Paul, I don't think there are any Ron Pauls other than Paul in office atm, but she's better then a lot of others. Sure, she is a social conservative, but she concedes with the court rulings to give benefits, she's not telling homosexuals they are going to burn in hell, etc. etc.

But ya... can someone tell Menthol to stop posting the fake picture. It's a bit ridiculous after the first 10 times of posting it.

So you won't be commenting on the laundry list I posted of her faults? It seems like everyone in favor of her just brushed it off.

 

[0zzy]

So you won't be commenting on the laundry list I posted of her faults? It seems like everyone in favor of her just brushed it off.

- Helped pass a tax increase on oil company profits.
I don't think raising taxes on oil is the biggest issue for me. It is true, a real free market capitalist wouldn't raise taxes, but she cut a lot of taxes too. She is not Obama or a democrat when it comes to taxes, I'd be concerned.

- Created a new sub-cabinet group of advisers to address climate change and reduce greenhouse gas emissions within Alaska.
So? She has a group to investigate an important issue, something she claims isn't man made? What is wrong with this?

- Proposed providing grants to electrical utilities so that they would reduce customers' rates.
A true free market capitalist wouldn't do this, but she had a surplus and used this money for a good use. She also gave the surplus to the citizens. She didn't raise taxes or borrow to do this action.

- Proposed government handouts in the form of "Energy Cards."
But she didn't, she gave each citizen $1,200 instead because, again the surplus.

- Signed into law largest operating budget in Alaskan history
Again, I'd like to investigate this further. Details on what was raised, what was inflation, etc. She also vetoed hundreds of millions in construction, second largest cut in Alaskan history.

- Left her town with large long term debt. ( That works about as well as Freddie Mac's instant gratification with risky mortgages )
This is bad, and I'd like, again, to investigate more into it. I assume the sports complex was the reason, and I'm not for socialized entertainment places, but in America it is nothing new. They didn't expect it to cost that much and now it won't be paid of til 2011.

- Initially supported "Bridge to Nowhere."
And then blocked it.

- Kept federal funding from above.
As opposed to giving it to the Iraq war?

- Interfered with Matanuska Maid Dairy. Similar to a small scale attempted bail-out.
A true free market capitalist wouldn't support socialized dairy farms, but she did in the end sell it.

- Supports government regulation in health care to "lower costs."
Free market doesn't support this, more information on it? There should be government deregulation as Paul suggest.

- Opposes Same Sex Marriage
So does Paul, at the state level. I don't think a piece of paper by the government saying that two people are married is an issue with me when the homosexual couples already get the same benefits as heterosexuals. Marriage shouldn't be socialized, as you point out with the sports complex.

- Supported a non-binding referendum for a constitutional amendment to deny benefits to same-sex couples.
And then signed into law those same exact benefits via supreme court ruling.

- Supported the 1998 constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage.
Paul did the same with the Defense of Marriage Act, again marriage shouldn't be a government socialized thing.

- Does not support Marijuana legalization.
I haven't read on either/or, but I'd like to know her position on medical marijuana prior to her going on the McCain campaign.

- Supported a controversial (government sponsored) predator-control program involving aerial hunting of wolves.
She shouldn't have, no man (or woman) is perfect.

- Supports unconstitutional Iraq war and foreign policy.
This is what I have faults with her, though I do appreciate the fact that she was worried about an exit strategy way before any one else (and especially against those NeoCons).

- Supports death penalty legislation.
Paul is against federal, didn't say anything about State. I am on the fence of the issue myself.

- Moderate on education issues
What's that mean?

- Supports providing stability in regulations for developers.
??

- Supports funding the Seniors Longevity Bonus Program.
Is that like SS?


There, I responded, point by point. Now are you going to ignore my list of virtues? You don't have to, just saying.

 

[JosephTheLibertarian]

- Helped pass a tax increase on oil company profits.
I don't think raising taxes on oil is the biggest issue for me. It is true, a real free market capitalist wouldn't raise taxes, but she cut a lot of taxes too. She is not Obama or a democrat when it comes to taxes, I'd be concerned.

Do you know what happens when you raise taxes on the oil companies? They pass it on to consumers. It's retarded.

- Created a new sub-cabinet group of advisers to address climate change and reduce greenhouse gas emissions within Alaska.
So? She has a group to investigate an important issue, something she claims isn't man made? What is wrong with this?

It's nota government issue. All of her buddies are now receving tax payer money.

- Proposed providing grants to electrical utilities so that they would reduce customers' rates.
A true free market capitalist wouldn't do this, but she had a surplus and used this money for a good use. She also gave the surplus to the citizens. She didn't raise taxes or borrow to do this action.

When you have a surplus, you cut taxes, you don't involve yourself in the economy. Government need not involve itself in the economy. One cannot emphasis this ENOUGH!

- Proposed government handouts in the form of "Energy Cards."
But she didn't, she gave each citizen $1,200 instead because, again the surplus.

But we are in a debt. A surplus in budget doesn't mean the state or country isn't in debt, it just mean that you spent less than what was allocated to your state. CUT TAXES. Wealth distribution = socialism.

- Left her town with large long term debt. ( That works about as well as Freddie Mac's instant gratification with risky mortgages )
This is bad, and I'd like, again, to investigate more into it. I assume the sports complex was the reason, and I'm not for socialized entertainment places, but in America it is nothing new. They didn't expect it to cost that much and now it won't be paid of til 2011.

Ah. She approved tax payer money to build a sports complex? This is highway robbery! She reminds me of Michael Bloomberg!

- Initially supported "Bridge to Nowhere."
And then blocked it.

Nice political maneuvering. She still supported it when it came up.

- Interfered with Matanuska Maid Dairy. Similar to a small scale attempted bail-out.
A true free market capitalist wouldn't support socialized dairy farms, but she did in the end sell it.

Sold it to one of her corporate buddies?

- Opposes Same Sex Marriage
So does Paul, at the state level. I don't think a piece of paper by the government saying that two people are married is an issue with me when the homosexual couples already get the same benefits as heterosexuals. Marriage shouldn't be socialized, as you point out with the sports complex.

Still proves she's not libertarian

- Supports unconstitutional Iraq war and foreign policy.
This is what I have faults with her, though I do appreciate the fact that she was worried about an exit strategy way before any one else (and especially against those NeoCons).

Way before Ron Paul? hm

- Supports death penalty legislation.
Paul is against federal, didn't say anything about State. I am on the fence of the issue myself.

Death penalty is institutional murder!

- Moderate on education issues
What's that mean?

Wants to expand public education.

 

[0zzy]

I stick by liking her, as does Ron Paul when he says "Sarah Palin sounds like a very good person and has a lot of good conservative credentials."

Her buddies are receiving tax payer money? Who did she hire and how long did she know them before hiring them? And a state government can not be involved in something like this, especially if Alaska is being severaly effected? What exactly did she do after this meeting with this group?

Don't be involved in a economy, check.

It is socialist to give everyone the same amount of money? It may be true, but it's not distributing unequally is it? Cutting taxes is indeed smarter, though. Good point.

Most cities are involved in sports complexes, it's nothing new. Doesn't mean I would approve it, but it's not equate to her being Michael Bloomberg.

And she still stopped the bridge to nowhere. That's like saying, Paul still supported the federal death penalty in 88!

Then Ron Paul is not a libertarian. In fact, it is not libertarian to have state marriages. You rail against other government involvement, what's the difference here?

Way before the general consensus among government officials and Americans, not like those of Ron Paul.

And the government prisons are institutional imprisonment? Maybe we should let the citizens decided the punishment.

Wish she would support tax cuts for private schools, but no one is perfect.

 

[rockandrollsouls]

Do you know what happens when you raise taxes on the oil companies? They pass it on to consumers. It's retarded.



It's nota government issue. All of her buddies are now receving tax payer money.



When you have a surplus, you cut taxes, you don't involve yourself in the economy. Government need not involve itself in the economy. One cannot emphasis this ENOUGH!



But we are in a debt. A surplus in budget doesn't mean the state or country isn't in debt, it just mean that you spent less than what was allocated to your state. CUT TAXES. Wealth distribution = socialism.



Ah. She approved tax payer money to build a sports complex? This is highway robbery! She reminds me of Michael Bloomberg!



Nice political maneuvering. She still supported it when it came up.



Sold it to one of her corporate buddies?



Still proves she's not libertarian



Way before Ron Paul? hm



Death penalty is institutional murder!



Wants to expand public education.

Thanks for answering that for me...you basically hit on everything I would have. Even though we just shot her down and proved she's a big government moderate Ozzy and others still support her. Might as well go support Obama or someone like Mitt Romney then Ozzy, you might want to refresh yourself on Ron's positions. Then again, you're still young and your demographic never admits they are wrong.

Aye...what a joke. At least some of us aren't blind.

 

[DAFTEK]

Aye...what a joke. At least some of us aren't blind.

QFT!

It's the other way around The minute Ron Paul says Paulin is a neocon bitch thats when I'll throw my vote away.....The fact that he is reserved when confronted now by MSM about Paulin shows he knows we need her on owr side....

Too many RP fakes on this forum now a day's, nothing like it was 10 months ago and it's clear that a new bunch of members with different agendas are using RonPaulForums for their own views....

 

[0zzy]

Thanks for answering that for me...you basically hit on everything I would have. Even though we just shot her down and proved she's a big government moderate Ozzy and others still support her. Might as well go support Obama or someone like Mitt Romney then Ozzy, you might want to refresh yourself on Ron's positions. Then again, you're still young and your demographic never admits they are wrong.

Aye...what a joke. At least some of us aren't blind.

Your ignorance is astounding. I never said she was perfect, but she is no Mitt Romney or Obama. Stop exaggerating to prove a point, an apparently much wiser man (or woman?) like yourself should learn how to properly explain yourself without connecting two unlike things together.

Did I say she was Ron Paul? I never said such a thing. I said I liked her, she is a decent person with a pretty good record (especially compared to other governors). Did I say I would vote for her? I never said such a thing.

Now, please, you should stop getting angry at the world. If you are looking for the perfect person you will forever be miserable. There are few and those who are elected have little say in government activities. To praise a person for their virtues does not mean I approve of their vices. I believe that her virtues outweigh her vices and as Governor she has been doing an excellent job.

But go ahead, exaggerate more and call me a Neocon big government McCain lover. You've been fun debating with, but you honestly are too cynical and condescending to appreciate this continuous debate.

The last thing I would ask you is to list all of the perfect elected officials there are in government today. Of course there is Ron Paul, but who else?

 

[JosephTheLibertarian]

- Helped pass a tax increase on oil company profits.
I don't think raising taxes on oil is the biggest issue for me. It is true, a real free market capitalist wouldn't raise taxes, but she cut a lot of taxes too. She is not Obama or a democrat when it comes to taxes, I'd be concerned.

- Created a new sub-cabinet group of advisers to address climate change and reduce greenhouse gas emissions within Alaska.
So? She has a group to investigate an important issue, something she claims isn't man made? What is wrong with this?

- Proposed providing grants to electrical utilities so that they would reduce customers' rates.
A true free market capitalist wouldn't do this, but she had a surplus and used this money for a good use. She also gave the surplus to the citizens. She didn't raise taxes or borrow to do this action.

- Proposed government handouts in the form of "Energy Cards."
But she didn't, she gave each citizen $1,200 instead because, again the surplus.

- Signed into law largest operating budget in Alaskan history
Again, I'd like to investigate this further. Details on what was raised, what was inflation, etc. She also vetoed hundreds of millions in construction, second largest cut in Alaskan history.

- Left her town with large long term debt. ( That works about as well as Freddie Mac's instant gratification with risky mortgages )
This is bad, and I'd like, again, to investigate more into it. I assume the sports complex was the reason, and I'm not for socialized entertainment places, but in America it is nothing new. They didn't expect it to cost that much and now it won't be paid of til 2011.

- Initially supported "Bridge to Nowhere."
And then blocked it.

- Kept federal funding from above.
As opposed to giving it to the Iraq war?

- Interfered with Matanuska Maid Dairy. Similar to a small scale attempted bail-out.
A true free market capitalist wouldn't support socialized dairy farms, but she did in the end sell it.

- Supports government regulation in health care to "lower costs."
Free market doesn't support this, more information on it? There should be government deregulation as Paul suggest.

- Opposes Same Sex Marriage
So does Paul, at the state level. I don't think a piece of paper by the government saying that two people are married is an issue with me when the homosexual couples already get the same benefits as heterosexuals. Marriage shouldn't be socialized, as you point out with the sports complex.

- Supported a non-binding referendum for a constitutional amendment to deny benefits to same-sex couples.
And then signed into law those same exact benefits via supreme court ruling.

- Supported the 1998 constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage.
Paul did the same with the Defense of Marriage Act, again marriage shouldn't be a government socialized thing.

- Does not support Marijuana legalization.
I haven't read on either/or, but I'd like to know her position on medical marijuana prior to her going on the McCain campaign.

- Supported a controversial (government sponsored) predator-control program involving aerial hunting of wolves.
She shouldn't have, no man (or woman) is perfect.

- Supports unconstitutional Iraq war and foreign policy.
This is what I have faults with her, though I do appreciate the fact that she was worried about an exit strategy way before any one else (and especially against those NeoCons).

- Supports death penalty legislation.
Paul is against federal, didn't say anything about State. I am on the fence of the issue myself.

- Moderate on education issues
What's that mean?

- Supports providing stability in regulations for developers.
??

- Supports funding the Seniors Longevity Bonus Program.
Is that like SS?


There, I responded, point by point. Now are you going to ignore my list of virtues? You don't have to, just saying.

QFT!

It's the other way around The minute Ron Paul says Paulin is a neocon bitch thats when I'll throw my vote away.....The fact that he is reserved when confronted now by MSM about Paulin shows he knows we need her on owr side....

Too many RP fakes on this forum now a day's, nothing like it was 10 months ago and it's clear that a new bunch of members with different agendas are using RonPaulForums for their own views....

You support her and you can't even spell her name. lol

It's Palin not "Paulin"

 

[0zzy]

You support her and you can't even spell her name. lol

It's Palin not "Paulin"

I spelled her name right I spelled her name right!

 

[rockandrollsouls]

Your ignorance is astounding. I never said she was perfect, but she is no Mitt Romney or Obama. Stop exaggerating to prove a point, an apparently much wiser man (or woman?) like yourself should learn how to properly explain yourself without connecting two unlike things together.

Did I say she was Ron Paul? I never said such a thing. I said I liked her, she is a decent person with a pretty good record (especially compared to other governors). Did I say I would vote for her? I never said such a thing.

Now, please, you should stop getting angry at the world. If you are looking for the perfect person you will forever be miserable. There are few and those who are elected have little say in government activities. To praise a person for their virtues does not mean I approve of their vices. I believe that her virtues outweigh her vices and as Governor she has been doing an excellent job.

But go ahead, exaggerate more and call me a Neocon big government McCain lover. You've been fun debating with, but you honestly are too cynical and condescending to appreciate this continuous debate.

The last thing I would ask you is to list all of the perfect elected officials there are in government today. Of course there is Ron Paul, but who else?

You're the only one that is ignorant here. Hell, she's more in line with Bill Clinton in the 90s than any real conservative! Is that what you want? Are you telling us you support someone who is closer to a Clinton's ideals than a Ron Paul's ideals? That's what I'm picking up. Yea, you still like her though she supports unconstitutional foreign policy, expanded public education, more cabinet positions, interference in the market, government subsidies, and tax increases on corporations. Sounds like another moderate democrat to me.

 

[georgiaboy]

FWIW,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gehe-I9WPeE
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=152610

Transcript, Ron Paul on Fox News 8/31/08:
Fox: 20 seconds, What about this McCain/Palin ticket?
RP: Well...it still hasn't made a lot of my supporters all that happy. I have to say that Palin sounds like a very good person and has a lot of good conservative credentials, but nonetheless things won't change. We still know what the foreign policy is going to be like and the monetary policy, so we can't get too excited.

 

[heavenlyboy34]

lol! Nice photoshop job! Needs some blending and light source adjustment though, plus a perspective adjustment on the head.

 

[0zzy]

You're the only one that is ignorant here. Hell, she's more in line with Bill Clinton in the 90s than any real conservative! Is that what you want? Are you telling us you support someone who is closer to a Clinton's ideals than a Ron Paul's ideals? That's what I'm picking up. Yea, you still like her though she supports unconstitutional foreign policy, expanded public education, more cabinet positions, interference in the market, government subsidies, and tax increases on corporations. Sounds like another moderate democrat to me.

Again, exaggerating again.

I'm saying she's good not perfect. And is there a list of elected officials who fit your view or do they not exist?

Take everything you said and times it by a thousandfold and I'd understand it would be more Clintonian, but it's not.

I like her for the things I listed. I would continue to debate you but I think it is moot at this point considering you will not change and anyone who is an inch away from the perfect line is a Democrat not worth liking.

 

[rockandrollsouls]

Again, exaggerating again.

I'm saying she's good not perfect. And is there a list of elected officials who fit your view or do they not exist?

Take everything you said and times it by a thousandfold and I'd understand it would be more Clintonian, but it's not.

I like her for the things I listed. I would continue to debate you but I think it is moot at this point considering you will not change and anyone who is an inch away from the perfect line is a Democrat not worth liking.

She's not even good. Since when are the things me and Joe detailed even GOOD. Can you answer that? Why is she good? Because she spent a little less than she proposed?

And she is Clintonian. Interventionist foreign policy? Check. Public education? Check. Expanded government? Check. Intervention in the marketplace? Check.

Ozzy, if you weren't so ignorant you'd see there are a few politicians that I think are great that aren't 100 percent in line with Ron, and I will be voting for the one I like most. But, there is a clear, mile long divide between these candidates that differ only slightly and a moderate like Palin.

And, Ron said recently he didn't know enough about Palin. But, I'm sure if he was shown what we've detailed and is informed of her stance on the war she would not be someone he'd endorse.

 

[american.swan]

You have yet to have facts to back up what you are saying. Stop with your ageism and debate properly. You want reasons why I find her appealing to me? I will list them.

Why I like Palin:

Mayor:
-Reduced property taxes by 40%-60%
-Cut her own salary

Governor
-Stopped the Bridge to Nowhere
-Wanted Alaska to rely less on federal dollars
-Wants to drill for oil
-Investigates climate change, but not man-made or socialize problem
-Allowed for a natural gas pipeline to be built
-Because of the surplus she gave Alaskans $1,200 back
-Sued to get the polar bears of the endangered species list
-Uses veto power to make cuts in construction budget by $237 million. (#2 in AK history)
-Sold a state owned diary for $1.5 million
-Prohibited the implementation of the REAL ID Act
-Allowed for homosexuals to have the same benefits as heterosexuals via Supreme Court (Alaskan) ruling

Frankly, I like that she supported Buchanan in 1996 and (some say) 2000.

I like that she resigned from the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission (where she was a Ethics Supervisor) because of the corruption she saw. She made two corrupt officials resign for their office and one pay a $12,000 fine.

I like that, even though she's a creationist, she doesn't want to force schools to teach it. She would like both evolution and creationism to be taught, but she wasn't going to enforce it.

I like that she is very pro-life and pro-2nd amendment. I think these are two very important issues.

She has admitted to smoking marijuana, now hopefully she's not a drug warrior, but at least she admitted that she has done it before. (Unusual for Republicans) Though it wasn't illegal when she did it.

I like that, even though she supported Bush for the war in Iraq, she was one of the few to be concerned about an exit strategy. She's been one to question the long-term strategy in Iraq.

Now, I don't like that she's with McCain. Hopefully they don't mold her, hopefully they don't change her. If she is in office and McCain dies or leaves, I hope she becomes president and changes things. Maybe it's too much to ask, but I can believe a woman could of bypassed the Neocons. And I'm relieved she's not Lieberman. Is that so bad?

But this doesn't mean I'm voting for McCain. It just means that I like her. You continue to criticize me over and over and over again. Now, I want facts why you think she is a neocon. I want you to concede that Menthol Patch is either a parody or delusional when s/he keeps posting the same fake magazine cover over and over again as a negative, when it's clearly fake in the first place.

Can you do that? Or do you want to call me a kid again? Debate me, don't condescend me.

GREAT!!! POST!!! I like Palin too in many ways. Your post is fantastic. And I also agree that I would never vote for McCain/Palin.

GREAT POST.

 

[0zzy]

She's not even good. Since when are the things me and Joe detailed even GOOD. Can you answer that? Why is she good? Because she spent a little less than she proposed?

And she is Clintonian. Interventionist foreign policy? Check. Public education? Check. Expanded government? Check. Intervention in the marketplace? Check.

Ozzy, if you weren't so ignorant you'd see there are a few politicians that I think are great that aren't 100 percent in line with Ron, and I will be voting for the one I like most. But, there is a clear, mile long divide between these candidates that differ only slightly and a moderate like Palin.

And, Ron said recently he didn't know enough about Palin. But, I'm sure if he was shown what we've detailed and is informed of her stance on the war she would not be someone he'd endorse.

I posted why I liked her, you could re-read it.

I was simply challenging you if you knew of any other politician besides Ron Paul who were so great in your view, but I assumed correctly there are none. I am not ignorant for asking such a question.

I don't understand your last sentence. A mile long divide between Obama/Biden/McCain and a moderate like Palin?

And again, I never said Palin is 100%, I said she was good (again for the listed reasons I put). Hell, I think Dennis Kucinich is good because of his foreign policy and civil libertarian views. Doesn't mean I like his economic policies. Murray Rothbard, an anarcho-capitalist, voted and worked for Adlai Stevenson in 1956 strictly because his foreign policy. He thought, even though he disagreed heavily with his domestic policies, he was good enough to work and vote for because of his foreign policy.

I believe Palin is good because of the things I listed, I believe she has been doing a good job as Governor. If she was running with Pat Buchanan instead of McCain I'd even vote for her (which isn't too barbaric because she did vote for him in 96 and 00, a candidate in 92 who Ron Paul, Murray Rothbard, and Lew Rockwell worked and voted for instead of Paul running for president again).

 

[NMCB3]

Not likely. the VP is ALWAYS establishment. Noone clean gets the vp nod. no way

Although Palin is not the VP yet, she was the Mayor of my town and now my Governor. All I can say is that she is very anti-establishment when it comes to Alaska politics and the Alaskan good old boy republican party in particular. She is sort of a conservative/ populist hybrid if that makes any sense. I dont like her socialistic policy's but I can say that she believes she is doing the right thing for Alaska. I also realize that concentration camp guards in Nazi Germany felt they were doing what was right for the fatherland, and we all know how that worked out. Needless to say she does not have my vote, but as far as being some establishment puppet..no way. Could she be corrupted over time,,,maybe.