Palinomics: no conservative she

[sylvar]

This article from Time Magazine is a pretty good outline of how Alaska is the ultimate welfare state: it receives more federal tax dollars than any other state in the union. It gives its residents handouts, thanks to a windfall profits tax on oil (a tax supported by Obama and opposed by McCain!).

And Sarah Palin has been at the forefront of making all of this happen:

Sarah Palin's Alaskanomics
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1839724-2,00.html

I've compiled a list of a few other things not mentioned in the article... with links to sources backing it all up.

- She was in favor of the "bridge to nowhere" before it become a national embarrassment; then she turned against it. But guess what? She kept the money, and spent it on other road projects (including the "road to the bridge to nowhere", which currently leads up to an empty beach).
Wall Street Journal
http://online.wsj.com/public/article_print/SB122090791901411709.html
Boston Herald
http://news.bostonherald.com/news/2008/view.bg?articleid=1116208&srvc=2008campaign&posit ion=12

- She didn't sell the previous governor's plane on eBay. It was posted a few times, but no one bought it. Ultimately, state officials sold it at a $600,000 loss.
Washington Post
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/09/05/plane_not_sold_on_ebay.html

- She didn't even fire the governor's personal chef! She just transferred her to another department in state government (where she is still a chef).
Voice of the Times - "A Conservative Voice For Alaskans"
http://www.voiceofthetimes.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=96&editoria l=1
Anchorage Daily News
http://www.adn.com/news/alaska/story/288561.html

- She billed the state for a "per diem" travel allowance, for nights spent at her own home.
Washington Post
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/08/AR2008090803088.html?hpid=topnew s

- She talks about being opposed to federal pork-barrel spending. But as mayor of Wasilla, she hired a lobbyist who raked in $27 million in federal dollars for the town of 6,700 residents. (That's $4029 of our taxes given to each Wasillan.)
The Political Chase
http://politicalchase.com/2008/09/02/palin-hired-lobbyist-to-get-millions-in-earmarks/

- When she started as mayor of Wasilla, the town was debt-free. When she left, the town had $20 million in debt.
Politico.com
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0808/12987.html

Almost her entire record as a "reformer" and a "fiscal conservative" is sheer fiction. No wonder they are not letting her do any press interviews...

(via)

Comments

[mariness.livejournal.com]

And, in the midst of a housing crisis, she was under the impression that Fannie and Freddie Mae were government entities.

Receiving a freakishly huge federal bailout, sure. Actual government entities, not so much.

Mind you, I have no issues with most people not knowing this -- but a governor should be vaguely aware of the difference.

[danasdream.livejournal.com]

Actually, it's Fannie Mae (FNMA) and Freddie Mac (FHLMC), and both were governmentally created entities. FNMA stands for Federal National Mortgage Association, and FHLMC for Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation. They are both GSEs (government supported enterprises) who would never have been created without government action and are backed by the US Government, implicitly. That's why they are getting a bailout. Their products have always gotten higher yields because of the perception that they are backed by the government. Fannie and Freddie have also spent millions on lobbying and have received strong support from Democrats.

So, she may know more about that than you think.

[mariness.livejournal.com]

I was aware that they were governmentally created entities. But there's a difference between "governmentally created" and "actual government entity." Fannie Mae and Freddie Mae are private organizations with private stock and stockholders, which is not true, by definition, of government entities. Banks and savings and loans are also backed by the federal government to a certain degree. Perhaps you forgot the federal bailouts of savings and loans, or the federal money heading over to Bear Stearn, and probably heading over to Washington Mutual soon? And banks and savings and loans have also spent millions on lobbying and have received strong support from Democrats and Republicans, or did you miss that very pro-bank anti consumer bankruptcy bill passed not so long ago?

I'd be delighted to find out that Sarah Palin knows more about mortgages than I think she does, but so far, I've seen no evidence of this. I do think that she knows considerably more about environmental issues (she's actually pretty well informed on ecology) Native American issues, oil and drilling safety standards than she's been given credit for, but to counter that, she's showing vast ignorance on several issues, has been caught in multiple lies (and more lies have been told on her behalf by the McCain campaign), and clearly has had no real interest in foreign policy issues for years.

And you know, that's fine. The governor of Alaska doesn't need to have an interest in foreign policy. (Don't bother to repeat the Russia bit.) What isn't fine is for McCain and other Republicans to raise concerns about Obama's experience and denigrate many of his potential VP choices because they weren't experienced enough -- and then give us a Sarah Palin. Hell, last year McCain was saying that Guiliani wasn't experienced enough.

And this sort of thing is exactly why I don't want to vote for either major party in November, although the more I see of Sarah Palin, and given McCain's age, the more I'm inclined to vote Obama.

[danasdream.livejournal.com]

The thing about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac that many people don't understand, though, is that they were created by the government and the government feels they were created for a useful purpose. As such, from the time of their creation, they have been seen as government-backed, and it has been assumed (rightly, as it turns out) that if they failed or were in dire straits they would be "saved" by the government. So while it is a government-created private enterprise, it has always been assumed that the government was behind those entities. This is a different situation than the FDIC which is a depositor protection agency (similar to SIPC which protects securities investors). Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac both had serious accounting irregulaties in the last decade, and were fiercely defended by leading Democrats. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12923225/

http://www.usatoday.com/money/companies/regulation/2005-04-26-fannie-mae-problems_x.htm

Governor Palin shares a land border with Canada, and has negotiated with them for a natural gas pipeline running to Canada (perhaps as far as the continental US).

Dana

[mariness.livejournal.com]

It's also been assumed, rightly, as it turns out, that if banks failed or were in dire straits they would be "saved" by the government. To a large extent, the same thing can be said for the airline industry. In any case, this is all beside the point. As is any perception of Fannie Mae/Freddie Mae -- and by the way, in you "it has been assumed" who precisely, other than Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac's top executives, was assuming this? Markets and economists were panicked that the government might NOT save the two.

But back to the main point:

Whether or not they are backed by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are private entities, as you yourself are admitting. Do I expect everyone to know this? No. Do I expect someone running for the Vice Presidency in the middle of a housing crisis to know this? Yes.

I'll agree with you that Democrats were defending Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. And add that Republicans, not Democrats, pushed for the deregulations that got us into this mess.

I'm honestly not sure if you're trying to joke with the Canada border or not, but since the rest of your comment was serious, I'll take this one seriously as well, and note:

1. Wow, are you reaching here.
2. A lot of states share a border with Canada. So what?
3. A lot of states negotiate with Canada -- New York, when I lived there, was constantly negotiating with Canada over water and power issues and roadblocks and pipelines and how to keep college students from running into Montreal to get drunk or conversely how to get college students to run into Montreal to get drunk, whatever. I assume they still are. Illinois negotiated with Canada over water issues. This hardly distinguishes Palin in the slightest. But even if it did --
4. Are you seriously suggesting that negotiating with democratic, stable, friendly Canada is even remotely related to negotiating with China, an unfriendly Iran, a dangerously unstable Pakistan, and so on? And hell, if we're taking that as foreign experience, then let's nominate Crist, who's negotiated and chatted with the Bahamas about tourism, fishing and drug dealing -- and who not incidentally has considerably more experience than Palin.

By the way, were you under the impression that I'm a Democrat? (I'm asking because you keep attacking Democrats in your replies to me.) I'm not, and never have been. I'm registered as unaffiliated, and I have voted for candidates from both major parties and third parties.

But I'll also say that just a few weeks ago Republicans were noting -- fairly, I thought -- that Obama lacked experience, that Governor Kaine (mayor of Richmond and governor of Virginia) lacked experience and his lack of experience disqualified him for the VP slot, and that the key need in a VP was for someone experienced and ready to tackle foreign affairs. I would have been delighted to see McCain choose any of the highly qualified Republican women -- yes, there are many -- who fit these qualifications. Instead, he chose a woman who less than two years ago was a small town mayor, and who clearly has never had any interest in international affairs. And who, as sylvar has documented, does not have a record of fiscal conversatism, and who has been caught in numerous lies.