cjbreisch's blog

Cross-posted at Chris of Rights

Forgive the “all Sarah, all the time” coverage for the moment. I think this will be the last post. Please also forgive me repeating myself from a few of my other posts. But I was going to write this as a comment on a few different blogs, and to save time and energy, I’m just putting it all down here.

Many people have called her resignation crazy.  Others have called it brilliant. The links are just two examples. I’m sure you can find plenty more. But both camps are wrong. It’s neither the brilliant choice, nor the crazy choice. It was her only choice.

First, two assumptions. Neither of which are guaranteed by any means.

1. There is no “other shoe about to drop”. She’s not stepping aside because of a scandal.
2. She’s not stepping aside because she’s just “sick of the whole thing”.

I guess there’s a third implicit assumption as well, that she has designs upon higher office.

If we take these as a given, then how could Governor Sarah Palin (R-AK) achieve her goals? Let’s look at the obstacles first.

First, her term ends in December 2010. That may be too late to be starting to ramp up a campaign for the White House in 2012. In her case, it’s almost certainly too late. That’s sad, but it’s true. Especially given that she will have a harder time finding quality staff than some would. There’s a lot of resentment towards her from the party elite. And, given that the ankle-biters in AK have made it apparent that they will dog her every move and try to slap an “ethics violation” on it, she can’t really campaign before her term ends. Particularly when any trip she makes to the “lower 48” is guaranteed to be at least an overnight stay. One only needs to look at some of the 15 dismissed “ethics charges” to know that they will seize upon anything, no matter how small, to attempt to bring her down.

Second, and another reason why end of 2010 is too late for her to start, is that currently she is being defined by the likes of Maureen Dowd and David Letterman. As Governor of AK, there’s little she can do to define herself. Once again, she can’t go around the country making speeches. The wonderful people in AK aren’t going to let her.  Any political consultant will tell you that when you’re being defined by your enemies, you’re going to lose. Every time.

Third, she really does care for the initiatives she’s set in motion in AK. And she really does loathe the “good ole boys” network there. She ran against and has actively worked against the corruption of the Murkowskis and their accomplices. Lt. Governor Sean Parnell (R-AK) seems like he will continue her work and continue to move her agenda forward, but he can’t do that if he’s not in office. Running as an incumbent gives him a big leg up in the near certain Republican AK primary, and a leg up in the general election as well.

Given these points, her options were severely limited. The first point makes it a given that at the very least, she should not seek re-election. The second point tells us that even leaving office early would be a good idea. The third point tells us that she should leave early enough to give Parnell time to have a legislative session under his belt which will allow him to actually be seen as an incumbent. Given that, she pretty much has to step down by this fall at the latest. And, once you’ve gone though all this thought process, and reached that conclusion, the next logical conclusion is “why wait any longer?”

Is it unconventional? Certainly. That doesn’t make it either crazy or brilliant though. The situation makes it necessity. But then, “necessity is the mother of invention” (Plato—wow,. I always thought it was Ben Franklin).

Is it high risk? Certainly. That doesn’t mean it’s crazy, though. As Admiral Adama says, “sometimes you have to roll the hard six".

Cross-posted at Chris of Rights

First, it’s worthwhile pointing out that the let-wing blogs are abuzz with speculation that there’s an embezzlement scandal brewing related to Governor Sarah Plain’s (R-AK) time as Wasilla’s Mayor and a company called Spenard Building Supplies.

There’s very little information on this and quite a bit of uninformed speculation, but there’s some information here. At this point in time, there’s nothing about this on any reliable news source. There’s not even anything on the talk page on her Wikipedia entry. So, we’ll classify this as RUMOR for now.

Second, the last election cycle showed us (unfortunately) that the Presidential election cycle is no longer just one year.  It’s two. Or more. Now, the office turnover in AK is in December, so if she stayed through her term, she’d be there through the end of 2010. But, given the way she likes to do things, it’s apparent that she wouldn’t even start the political machinery moving until then. That may be too late to start in the next election cycle. Particularly if you’re way out in the middle of nowhere in Juneau, AK, and disliked by the party elite.

She may have well seen this as the best way to begin her campaign for higher office. She mentioned “unconventional” and “no politics as usual” several times in her speech.  Politics as usual and convention is to continue holding and not doing the job you’re holding while running for your next job.

And that’s the easy and simple response to anyone who calls her a “quitter”.

If, running for higher office is, in fact, what she’s doing, and not resigning due to a scandal.

Cross-posted at Chris Of Rights

Since this blog has been unabashed in its support for Governor Palin (R-AK), it seems necessary to comment upon her surprise announcement yesterday that not only is she not seeking re-election as Alaska’s Governor next year, she is in fact, stepping down at the end of the month.

Her press conference gave few clues as to the reason.  So, what does this mean?

Well, if it were any other politician, I would say one of the following (in descending order of probability):

1. There’s a big scandal that’s about to make headlines, and she knows it.
2. There’s a problem with the family, i.e. someone is very sick, someone’s been severely wounded, someone’s pregnant, someone has marital issues.
3. She’s had enough.

But, Mrs. Palin is not “any other politician”, so we need to at least consider other possibilities.

First, let’s look at what little she did say in her announcement:

Once I decided not to run for re-election, I also felt that to embrace the conventional Lame Duck status in this particular climate would just be another dose of politics as usual, something I campaigned against and will always oppose

Well, that is certainly true. she has always fought “politics as usual”, something the current occupant of the White House campaigned on, but has embraced enthusiastically.

In fact, Adam Brickley takes a look at taking her at her word. He thinks she’s trying to save her pipeline project and other reforms from the Alaaska Republican Party.

However, by resigning now, Palin installs Sean Parnell as an incumbent before the 2010 primary. So, instead of fighting off a strong "CBC" (Corrupt Bastards Club, or “Good Ole Boy Network”) challenger, Parnell will have a much clearer shot at keeping the office in Palinite hands for another four (or possibly eight) years. Sarah Palin did not give up on her reforms today - she institutionalized them, Now, they will not leave office with her, but rather continue under Gov. Parnell.

Well, that also fits what we know about her. She loathes the Good Ole Boys Networks, and will do whatever she can to hurt them. She doesn’t care whether it’s Republican or Democrat. She wants no part of it. She’s also extremely passionate about the pipeline, and the CBC hates it. This does allow Parnell to campaign next year as the incumbent, and not just as her “hand picked successor” (which he most certainly would have been).

Some people say that she’s setting herself for a Presidential run, but not in 2012, but 2016 or 2020. Supposedly Charles Krauthammer is in this group, but I can’t find a link to support that.  Well, apologies to Mr. Geraghty and Mr. Krauthammer, but you’re being stupid. If she’s setting up for something long-term, there’s no need to resign.

Her brother was interviewed on FNC yesterday (sorry, no link), and said that Palin and her staff have been spending almost 80% of their time fending off frivolous ethics complaints, and he implied that she stepped aside so the government of Alaska could go back to governing Alaskans, instead of deciding whether bringing Trig along on a trip makes it a “persona'” trip, not a “business” one.

Some say she is going to run for President in 2012, and this is the first step. Of course, many of those say that this is the dumbest first step possible.  Nate Silver, for example:

But can someone who may forever be branded as a "quitter" become Commander in Chief? There's almost no way. I can't think of someone who has done something comparable to what Palin did today running for national office, let alone winning it. In her critics' imaginations, she's gone from being Dan Quayle to some permutation of Thomas Eagleton.

and even more stupidly:

A fourth theory, I guess, is that she's running for Senate, but that doesn't make any sense at all. Why would she need to leave office to do that? And could she really beat Lisa Murkowski? My guess is that, after today, Palin would not only lose the primary to Murkowski but might do so by an embarrassing margin.

Nate’s an ok guy, I guess, although his political views are obscene. But he really should stick to what he does best, number crunching.  When he starts attempting political analysis, he makes himself look like a fool.

Regardless of the events of yesterday, if there’s no scandal attached, Sarah Palin can win whatever political office in Alaska she desires. Easily.

There will be those that will attempt to brand her as a “quitter”, but let’s face it, those people would’ve never voted for her in the first place, and, if she’d been campaigning while Governor, would’ve been complaining about her ignoring her state, or wondering if the Alaskan taxpayers are paying for her campaign junkets, etc.

In fact, she has a ready-made response to the “quitter” claim, that has great soundbite potential and works well as a zinger in a debate.

“Once I decided to explore my options for higher office, I knew I’d be doing a disservice to Alaskans unless I stepped aside. They deserve my full time attention, not whatever attention I can spare from the campaign.  How many votes have you missed this year, Senator?”

(Then Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) missed 80% of Senate votes during his campaign—how well were his constituents served?)

In fact, she is now free to go on her book tour, make political speeches, even expand her grassroots support, find other candidates of like mind and support them for Congress in 2010. In fact, Bill Quick makes that very suggestion.

Set out to remake the GOP in her image. This means identifying strong conservative candidates for both the House and the Senate, then supporting them with fundraisers, public appearances, the expertise of her team, and clout with the party itself in both the primaries and the general election

I’m not sure how doable that is without completely exhausting oneself, but it’s a possibility, certainly.  It’s evident that she has felt for some time that she couldn’t participate on the national stage and be Alaska’s Governor. Remember the big NRSC/NRCC fundraiser in June for which she was giong to be the keynote speaker? And then wasn’t going to be? And then was? And then wasn’t? She informed the Congressional Republicans that she needed to attend to her Alaskan duties and could not commit to being there until after the legislative session was over (it ended in mid-April). Properly, she was committed to her state, but obviously wanted to have a national voice.

So, what’s the total list now?

Mickey Kaus has 14 possibilities as of this moment:

I can see 5  6  7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Palin theories ... and counting: 1) She's running for president; 2) She's undergoing fame withdrawal and plans to get more attention in the lower 48; 3) She wants to cash in ($); 4) There's another shoe about to drop; 5) She'll now run against Murkowski for Senate. 6) She needs to tend to her family. 7) She's bonkers. 8) She's preggers. 9) She wants to "effect positive change outside government at this point in time on another scale and actually make a difference for our priorities." 10) Actually being a governor in a recession is no fun. Gives you ulcers. 11) She worried she wasn't giving "Alaska's issues" the attention they deserve, and was being criticized for that; 12) She's "fed up with politics ... the personal garbage" etc.. 13) She wants to fight back without one hand tied behind her back. 14) The Alaska legislature now hates her; ... These theories are not necessarily mutually exclusive.

I have no idea which one it is. Because she’s a politician, typical or not, smart money is on scandal or family issue (but after 15 dismissed ethics charges, what new scandal could there be?). Next best bet is this is the first step in forming an exploratory committee to run for President in 2012.

Whatever it is, this blog definitely offers its prayers and hopes for her and her family. Would i vote for her in 2012? Wow, that’s a long way off. I can’t answer that. Unless something changes dramatically, I won’t vote for Mitt Romney though. I’m tired of voting for pseudo-conservatives. John McCain was my last.

Cross-posted at Chris of Rights

The mainstream media has been telling us that Governor Sarah Palin (R-AK) was not vetted properly by Senator John McCain's (R-AZ) campaign. There's a term in psychology for this. It's called projection.

the attribution of one's own ideas, feelings, or attitudes to other people or to objects; especially : the externalization of blame, guilt, or responsibility as a defense against anxiety

Make no mistake, the mainstream media (I prefer "old media" actually) was snookered by John McCain and even though Palin's name has been mentioned several times during the VP search, they didn't do their homework on her. Now they see that this pick may turn the election around and they're feeling guilty about it and in a state of panic.

As I write this, it's been about 144 hours since we first learned that Palin was McCain's choice.  And in those 144 hours every lefty in America with an internet connection or a phone has been trying to get the dirt on Palin. Let's see how they've done.

• She lied about the “bridge to nowhere”. FALSE. The worst you can say is that she was for it before she was against it.

  She changed her mind, he said, when "she saw that Alaska was being perceived as taking from the country and not giving, and that impression bothered her and she wants to change it. … I think that Sarah Palin is someone who has the courage to reevaluate situations as they developed."

• She lied about Trig. He isn’t really her baby! FALSE. 
• She was a member of a secessionist party. FALSE.  And unsourced. Good job here, old media. And now retracted.
• Troopergate. DEAD END. To be fair here, this is only news to mainstream America. Most bloggers and the media, left and right, knew about this "mini-scandal".
• She hired a lawyer to help her with Troopergate. FALSE.  This is a legal proceeding, and typically the Governor would be represented by the Attorney General. He felt he had a conflict of interest, so directed the state to hire a lawyer for her.  All perfectly reasonable and above board.
  

  The state has hired a private lawyer to represent Gov. Sarah Palin's office in the Legislature's investigation into the firing of former Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan. The lawyer already has challenged whether lawmakers even have authority to oversee the inquiry.

  The state Department of Law hired Thomas Van Flein, an Anchorage attorney with expertise in employment law and professional liability, because Attorney General Talis Colberg has a potential conflict of interest and shouldn't represent the governor, Van Flein said Monday.

• She has refused to testify in Troopergate and is blocking the investigation. FALSE. The only investigation she has refused to cooperate with is the one that has no legal jurisdiction. She has made it quite plain that she is more than willing to follow AK's laws in this matter. So, the left is criticizing her for obeying the law. This whole "investigation" is a witch hunt and is based upon a crime without a victim. The supposed victim is required by law to file a formal complaint if he feels he has been the victim of of an ethics violation. He has not done so. In fact, he has repeatedly stated that no one pressured him to fire the trooper. This really should be the end of the story. The fact that it isn't shows that this is all about politics and not about reality.
• Archives of her newspaper aren’t available online and haven’t been accessed by anyone locally. FALSE.
• She is a supporter of "Nazi Sympathizer" Buchanan and anti-Israel. FALSE. And FALSE.  It's worth pointing out that this smear comes directly from the organization of Mr. FightTheSmears himself.  Classy.
• She is tight with corrupt and indicted Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK). FALSE. And FALSE. Yes, I know she directed a 527 for him in 2003. But that was before she got fed up with corruption and ran for Governor against Stevens' pal Frank Murkowski. Stevens has never forgiven her for that. He endorsed her a mere 3 weeks before the general election, long after Murkowski had been defeated in the primaries, and frankly, when it was obvious she was going to win.
• She's in the pocket of "Big Oil". FALSE.
• She wasn’t vetted. PROJECTION, and FALSE. Old media has an ego problem. They honestly believe that if they didn't report on it, it didn't happen.
• She cut funding for teen mothers. FALSE.
• She pushed to have creationism taught in schools. FALSE.
• Peggy Noonan said that the campaign is over and that McCain has lost. FALSE.
  

  But, I argued, that's over, those assumptions are yesterday, the party can no longer assume that its base is utterly in line with the thinking of the American people. And when I said, "It's over!" — and I said it more than once — that is what I was referring to.

  Now, it's true that Noonan thinks that Kay Bailey Hutchinson (R-TX) would be a better choice, and she's entitled to her opinion. But, as she has said already about Palin:

  [H]er candidacy will be either dramatically successful or a dramatically not; it won't be something in between.

• She claimed that the Iraq war is 'a task that is from God'. FALSE. 
• She cut the budget for Alaska's special needs children by 62%. FALSE. 
• As Mayor of Wasilla, she tried to get this list of books banned, and then attempted to fire the librarian for not doing so. FALSE. It's TRUE that she did ask the librarian about censoring some books, and I admit that's not one of Palin's better moments, but it's not the list shown, as some of those weren't even published at the time. I'm unable to find a real list.  Some time later she did ask the librarian to resign, along with other holdovers from the previous administration, so it's hard to the "censorship question" as the cause here. She later relented and no books were ever banned. As I said, this is not one of Palin's better moments, but it's not nearly as bad as the left makes it out to be.
• Sarah Palin is being hidden from the media. FALSE.
• She's Pentecostal! MAYBE. But, so what? Is there something wrong with that, particularly when compared to the Trinity United Church?  The New York Times says she's definitely NOT a religious extremist. (Pentecostals aren't, anyway, just in case you were wondering).
• She should stay home with her family in this time of need. SEXIST.
• Her daughter getting pregnant reflects poorly on her. Oh God…if this is what you have to settle for, then you’re in deep trouble. There’s not a family in America that hasn’t had similar issues. Somehow I don’t remember Gore’s son being treated this way when it was discovered he had some drug issues. What the H***, I’ll go with SEXIST.
• The mayor of a town with only 9,000 people doesn't have the experience for the Presidency. Somehow forgetting that she is currently the Governor of AK. Even Community Organizer Barack Obama (D-IL) has gotten into the act:
  

  Well, you know, my understanding is that, uh, Governor Palin’s town of Wasilly [sic] has, uh, 50 employees, uh, uh, we’ve got 2500, uh, in this campaign. I think their budget is maybe $12 million a year. Uh, uh, we have a budget of about three times that just for the month. Uh, so I think that, uh, our ability to manage large systems, uh, and to, uh, execute, uh, I think has been made clear over the last couple of years.

  If that’s your tactic, I’m going to call Obama a “community organizer” from now on and forget all about his Senate job that he doesn’t do anyway. It's worth mentioning here that there was a lot of talk about Governor Tim Kaine (D-VA) as Obama's running-mate. He has no more experience than Palin, and yet I don't recall hearing these kinds of complaints about him. I'm going to have to go with SEXIST again.

  BTW, someone please remind Obama that he's not running against Palin. He's running against McCain. And while you're at it, let him know that when he compares her experience to his all that does is remind us that he doesn't have any.

• Her husband got a DUI 20 years ago. TRUE. SO?  If we're going to start eliminating politicians because of substance abuse problems with them and their families, the halls of Congress would be empty. I checked for similar things in the past of some prominent Democrats, but Mary Jo Kopechne was unavailable for comment.
• She got federal money for her city as a mayor. TRUE, but isn’t that what mayors are supposed to do?
• She laughed on a radio show when another woman, a cancer survivor, was called a bitch. TRUE. But there's much more to the story than just that, and in fact, she does appear to be a bitch.
  

  A radio interview with Palin surfaced in which she discussed a petty, last-minute attempt by Lyda Green — the Republican state Senate leader and Palin’s political enemy — to change the time of this year’s state of the state address. The schedule had been set well in advance, but Green cited a transparently bogus scheduling conflict in an attempt to force the speech to a time that would have prevented Palin from attending her son’s graduation. In that context, Palin let loose a small giggle when the radio host called Green a “bitch.”

• Her daughter is pregnant. TRUE. Oh, but the media didn't find that one, the Palins released that information in response to the trash I've noted above. It's worth noting that Palin apparently feels that the child is a "blessed event" and doesn't feel that her daughter is being "punished with a baby".
• She should drop out, or McCain should kick her out.  This one has been really picking up steam the last couple of days.  My question: WHY?  The implicit answer is "because we're going to keep making up stuff about her for as long as it takes." Certainly there's no other reason.  Nothing that's TRUE that's been brought up so far even rises to the level of a gnat bite. I'm not sure if this is SEXIST or just SLEAZY, but it's certainly BIASED.
• The NATIONAL ENQUIRER is reporting that she had an affair with a businessman in AK. The status of this is UNKNOWN. I don't discount it automatically because it came from the ENQUIRER.  Sometimes they get things right.  John Edwards is a recent example.  On the other hand, how many times have they reported that Dr. Phil's marriage is on the rocks?  The Bush's marriage is on the rocks?  Here's what the story says:
  

  Another incredible allegation emerging from the family war is that Palin, a mother of five, had an affair with a former business associate of her fisherman husband, Todd.
  “Todd discovered the affair and quickly dissolved his friendship and his business associations with the guy,” charges an enemy. “Many people in Alaska are talking about the rumor and say Todd swept it under the rug.”

  Seems pretty thin, even by ENQUIRER standards. But, it is possible that this is the only TRUE and relevant story out there. We'll see. The Smoking Gun has more info on this, and at least the main reason behind this speculation is FALSE. The status of the entire story is still UNKNOWN.

Ok, so after probably tens of thousands of man-hours of research what have our best and brightest on the left come up with that's relevant and TRUE?

Nothing. Nada. Zilch. Zippo. Also, this seems to belie the statement that she wasn't vetted properly.

Now, if only the press was so interested in vetting Obama. But I’ve given up on that.

This post will continue to be updated as long as more "vetting" occurs.

No, Digg isn't censoring us.  Not as far as I can tell, anyway.

But we're not using Digg very well to help get our message out.  My most Dugg post ever is this one, which currently has been Dugg 128 times. Generally, I feel like I'm doing pretty well when I break the 10 Diggs barrier.

In contrast, I'm looking at the "Popular" Digg page for 2008 U.S. Elections. I went through all 14 pages of it.  Fewest number of Diggs was around 400, and every single post on every single page was anti-McCain/Palin or pro-Obama/Biden. There were several posts that had over 3000 Diggs that at very best fall into the "smear" category, and at worst are downright lies.

But still, it shows that the left is far better at using Digg than the right. Which means they're better at controlling the messages that are seen by the average joe.

Even if you go to the "Digg the Candidates" page, you see three stories on each candidate.

Right now there are three positive stories about Obama, and three negative ones about McCain.

I'm not proposing a solution, other than working better together. I'm just pointing out the problem.

Cross-posted at Chris of Rights

I said previously that I thought Governor Sarah Palin (R-AK) was a great pick.  Here's a little of why.

PROS:

Based on the reactions of the conservative punditocracy, she has accomplished Senator John McCain's (R-AZ) #1 goal. She has energized the base.

Look who's on board:

• Rush Limbaugh
• Dr. James Dobson
• Michelle Malkin
• Laura Ingraham
• Sean Hannity (no link, but he was very complimentary on last night's H&C. Of course, he's been carrying water for McCain for some time, so this one is less of a surprise.
• Glenn Beck
• Mike Huckabee
• The Club For Growth
• Mark Levin
• Look at some of these e-mails at NRO

These are people that were at best, ambivalent about supporting McCain. Now they're excited. And these are the people that follow the campaigns. The rest of America doesn't know her yet. But when they find out about her from Rush and Dobson and Beck and the rest, they're going to like her too.

She was the pick I was hoping for as well. I know I didn't mention her in my earlier post on McCain's VP Options, but that's because she wasn't being mentioned at the time. I only heard her name in reference to McCain about a week or so later, and I decided not to revisit my post because I tried very hard to stay away from the hype from both camps. I put out one and only one post for each.

More than that, the pick has accomplished one of McCain's unstated secondary goals as well. Many people derided his choice of naming his VP on the day after the Democratic National Convention, saying that Obama would be getting all the news coverage. Instead it was Palin who got all the news coverage. Forget about a bounce from Obama's speech. It's already forgotten.

She's a true conservative and a reformer. She's also been a maverick, but in a good way. She's bucked hard against the GOP machine in AK, and brought down some significant people with serious ethics challenges, including a Governor, an Attorney General,and the head of the state GOP. Obama claims to have stood up to his party, although there's no evidence to support it.  She is someone who has and has the evidence to back it up.

She has a great story to tell. One of the themes of the DNC was the "rags-to-riches" stories.  Her story blows every one of them out of the water. Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) has been compared by numerous people to Abraham Lincoln, but it's her past that compares more favorably to Lincoln's.

She was a businesswoman and mom and a member of the PTA who got fed up and ran for mayor. She then ran for Governor but was defeated. The Governor thought he'd shut her up by giving her a post in his administration. When she discovered just how much corruption there was there and that she wasn't going to be allowed to do anything about it, she publicly resigned and made sure everyone knew why. She ran against the corrupt Republican Governor again and defeated him in the primaries, then defeated the former Democratic Governor in the General Election. While doing all this she's raised five kids and has home-schooled them.  her oldest joined the army on September 11, 2007 and will be deploying to Iraq soon. Her most recent child has Down's Syndrome and she was counseled by her doctors to abort. She said no and told them not to run any more tests. And all this with a "meager" degree from the University of Idaho. She didn't go to Harvard.

This is the real "rags-to-riches" story. There's no doubt that she's self-made. She has more in common with Lincoln than Obama could ever hope to have.

She's ardently pro-life. She's a member of the NRA and a hunter. She knows more about oil and energy than the other three men on the ballot combined. She strongly supports drilling in ANWR.  She's a supply-sider. She supports small government and defense.

CONS:

Yes, she has some downsides.

She doesn't have much experience. She has none on a national scale. Republicans will be quick to point out that she's the only person on either ticket with executive office experience and that given that Obama has been campaigning for the last 18 months, she easily can match his experience level. While technically true, it's a weak argument and they know it. She's going to have to prove herself worthy of this position, and it's going to be an uphill climb for her. The press will be ready to pounce on her first mistake, and they will lay traps for her to try to catch her in one.

She's also embroiled in a little bit of her own ethics scandal. It doesn't sound like it's a big deal, and the McCain people are obviously not worried about it, but Democrats will attempt to make it bigger than it is.

DEMOGRAPHICS:

I said in my previous post that she appeals to two key demographics. The first is the one that the MSM has been all over.

Can she help with women?  Obviously, yes.  Is she going to help with true-blue hardcore pro-choice feminists? No. She might help McCain pick off a few of those that are still mad at Obama on how they feel Senator Hillary Clinton (D-NY) was treated, but this is going to be a tiny number. But she'll help with conservative democrats and independents. Soccer Moms. This is a demographic that the Republicans have been going after more and more over the last twenty years, with improving success. Palin will help further this. Will women vote for her automatically because she's a woman?  No. But she gives women a reason to look at the ticket.  A reason they didn't have before. Some of those women will look at the ticket and decide they like what they see.

In my mind the second demographic is even more important, and has been totally ignored by the mainstream media. She hits right at the core of Obama's key demographic, 18-34 year olds. I mentioned earlier that the choice of Biden could cause some of that group to stray from Obama.  Now McCain has given them a place to stray. This may turn out to be the key piece of McCain's electoral puzzle.

SUMMARY:

Is Sarah Palin perfect?  No, not even close. And we don't know nearly enough about her.  There may be some big skeletons in her closet. She may be awful on the stump. She may be terrible in the debate. Despite that, she's probably the best pick McCain could've made. All of his other choices were uninspiring. Palin, whatever else she may be, is hardly uninspiring.

Cross-posted at Chris of Rights

Senator John McCain (R-AZ) and the GOP have recently had a field day chuckling over recent comments by Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) regarding tire pressure. Here's what Obama originally had to say:

There are things you can do individually, though, to save energy. ... Making sure your tires are properly inflated - simple thing. But we could save all the oil that they're talking about getting off drilling - if everybody was just inflating their tires? And getting regular tune-ups? You'd actually save just as much.

And McCain has chuckled about this and his campaign has even handed out tire gauges marked "Obama's Energy Plan". He's had this to say:

We need oil drilling and we need it now offshore and we need it now. He has consistently opposed it. He has opposed nuclear power. He has opposed reprocessing. He has opposed storage. And the only thing I’ve heard him say is that we should inflate our tires. So he has no plan for addressing the energy challenges that we face.

Today, Obama decided he'd had enough and fired back, making the left-wing blogosphere incredibly happy.

Two points: One, they know they are lying about what my energy plan is, but the other thing is they are making fun of a step that every expert says would absolutely reduce our oil consumption by 3 to 4 percent.

It’s like these guys take pride in being ignorant.

Two points:

One, they're not lying, but mocking you.  This is the way big league campaigns work.  If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.

Two, sorry Senator, but the numbers just don't add up, and continuing to assert that they do, makes it look like you're the one taking pride in being ignorant.

Jim Geraghty has done the math. 

This article from U.S. News and World Report says the average worker commutes 33 miles between work and home each day and that the average car gets about 24 miles per gallon. Thus, the average worker is using 1.375 gallons per day.

Let’s be generous and say a properly inflated tire gives a full extra three miles per gallon. So a commuter who had previously insufficiently inflated tires starts using 1.22 gallons per day. They’re saving .153 gallons per day.

This 2003 press release puts the number of commuters in America at a little over 129 million. So we have one third of those commuters – 43 million – saving .153 gallons per day, or almost 6.58 million gallons.

6.58 million gallons per day.  That's a lot.  No doubt about it, Obama.  We definitely need to check our tire pressure, but even McCain has admitted that's a good idea. But, let's look at what you keep saying:

But we could save all the oil that they're talking about getting off drilling - if everybody was just inflating their tires? And getting regular tune-ups? You'd actually save just as much.

So, 6.58 million gallons per day is all we can expect to get from all that drilling?

Nope.

But this 2006 report from the federal Minerals Management Service puts the recoverable oil from the Outer Continental Shelf at just under 86 billion barrels of oil; one barrel of crude oil yields approximately 19.6 gallons of finished motor gasoline.

So it would indeed be nice if Americans pumped up their tires sufficiently, and we started seeing some of that 4.9 million to 6.5 million gallons saved per day. But why it has to be an either/or in regards to the 1.6 trillion gallons of gasoline in the OCS (not even getting into ANWR), as Obama insists, is not clear.

Let's pause a moment and let that number sink in.  1.6 trillion gallons of gasoline. But, how much could we retrieve per day?  Maybe he's right after all. Well, even this article on Slate says 3 million barrels per day.  And I've seen estimates much higher.  That equates to 58.8 million gallons per day.  I have a degree in mathematics, true, but I don't think you have to have one to see that 58.8 million is much greater than 6.58 million.

Sorry, Barack, you lose.  Would you like a copy of our home game?

Cross-posted from Chris of Rights

By now, you've no doubt read that Republicans staged a little "guerilla Congress" event on Friday, refusing to leave the floor after Democrats voted to adjourn for a five week vacation. Ostensibly this is to encourage President George W. Bush (R-USA) or House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA-06) to call the House back into a special session to do something about the high cost of energy.

The GOP talk-a-thon started before noon and stretched on for five hours and 45 minutes. For awhile, the Republicans got the bright lights turned back on and got the sound system operating. They dragged big flip charts to make their points about energy.

At 4:30 p.m., the visitors gallery closed on schedule. But the GOP lawmakers continued talking to an audience of members, staffers, interns and some visitors brought on the floor by members.

Apparently, Republicans plan on continuing this today.

"In an urgent memo sent to GOP Members and staff Saturday (“A Call to Action on American Energy”), Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH-08) and Whip Roy Blunt (R-MO-07) hailed Friday’s action, and encouraged House Republicans to return to the Capitol beginning Monday morning to help keep the historic effort going," said a press release just released by Minority Leader Boehner's office. “It’s not a request we make lightly. But the American people are suffering,” Boehner and Blunt said in the memo. “The consequences of continued congressional inaction on gas prices are unacceptable. We’ve called on the Speaker to call Congress back into an emergency session this month and schedule a vote on the American Energy Act. We must continue to make a stand until the Speaker complies.”

I applaud the Republicans for doing this. It's a great way to remind voters who feel that "It's the price of gas, stupid" to know who's on the right side on this issue.

But, let's make no mistake. This is a campaign event, nothing more. They know that Pelosi isn't going to call the House into a special session, and that Bush is extremely unlikely to do so, as a lame duck in his final months of office.

They've had some issues making their point widely known though.

A small band of Republicans, protesting the decision to adjourn without an oil vote, started to speak from the well — even though the lights weren’t on, the microphones were turned off and most of their colleagues were scrambling to catch flights out of town. An empty floor is one thing when TV cameras are there, but C-SPAN’s cameras, which typically broadcast every word uttered on the floors of both chambers, were not allowed to broadcast the revolt since the chamber was officially closed for business.

That's not completely true. C-SPAN broadcasts all the time when the chamber is closed for business.  Maybe there's more here than meets the eyes.  C-SPAN has issued a press release on the subject.

A number of media organizations have incorrectly referred to “C-SPAN cameras” being turned off and not providing televised coverage of the GOP House members’ post-adjournment protest on energy policy being held on the House floor on Friday afternoon.  Please note that cameras in the House chamber are under the control of the Speaker of the House and that all media organizations, including C-SPAN, wishing to cover events in the chamber must use the official House TV feed.  No private media cameras are permitted in the House (or Senate) chambers.

And here are a couple other quotes that help show the point I'm about to make.

Democratic aides were furious at the GOP stunt, and reporters were kicked out of the Speaker's Lobby, the space next to the House floor where they normally interview lawmakers.

"You're not covering this, are you?" complained one senior Democratic aide.

And:

The Capitol Police are now trying to kick reporters out of the press gallery above the floor, meaning we can't watch the Republicans anymore. But Minority Whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) is now in the gallery talking to reporters, so the cops have held off for a minute. Clearly, Democrats don't want Republicans getting any press for this episode.

This makes it sound like the Democratic leadership is trying to keep you from seeing and hearing what the Republicans have to say.  But that's impossible.  Speaker Pelosi supports the "Fairness Doctrine" and free speech, doesn't she?  I know I read that somewhere.

But Speaker Pelosi doesn't support free speech.  She supports the "Fairness Doctrine" as a method for controlling it. She wants to have the same control over the airwaves that she does over the cameras and microphones in the House, so you can see and hear what she wants you to see and hear.

Speaker Pelosi turned out the lights.  And if you give her a chance, she'll turn out the lights on talk radio too.

Cross-posted from Chris of Rights

Democrats want to see if they can lose Congress in '08 after all.

Mark Hemingway quotes a GOP Press Release:

Do-Nothing Democrats Vote to Adjourn House of Representatives Without Taking Action to Lower Gas Prices

Putnam: "It's Time Democrats Put Their Boarding Passes Back in Their Pockets"

WASHINGTON – Rep. Adam Putnam (R-FL), Chairman of the House Republican Conference, issued the following statement shortly after the House of Representatives voted 213-212 – with no Republicans voting in the affirmative – to adjourn for five weeks in August and September without taking action to lower gas prices and break our dependence on foreign oil:

Of course, I'd say that it's not time to take their boarding passes away, but to give them new ones.  For one way tickets out of Washington, DC.

As Mark puts it:

Not taking action on this is a gift to Republicans up for election. They can now spend the next five weeks on the campaign trail railing against their opponents for not doing anything about gas prices.

Hopefully they will do just that.  As I keep saying, "It's the price of gas, stupid."

Cross-posted at Chris of Rights

There's been a lot of buzz recently that Senator John McCain (R-AZ) will make his VP announcement in the coming days (perhaps as early as today).  So, I wanted to take a look at some of the names being thrown around and give my opinion on them. Unfortunately, my news is nearly universally bad.

Leading Contenders

Mitt Romney, former governor of MA. Let me be blunt.  Romney would be a horrible choice. While "Christian Conservatives" like him because he wears his faith on his sleeve, when you look up his past, there's little doubt that he's much more than a RINO. Which is unsurprising, frankly.  The only way a Republican wins the governorship in MA is if he's a RINO.  Now, I'm not one to loathe RINO's as some do. I'm glad they've joined the Republican party and are part of the conservative ideal in at least some areas. And I'm realistic enough to look at the political map and know that if I want someone with an (R) by his name and that person comes from MA, or PA, or CA, or NYC, then they're probably going to be more centrist than I would typically prefer. Anyway, my original point here is that McCain's biggest weakness is support of the base. Adding another RINO/centrist to the ticket doesn't help him at all.

Tom Ridge, current Director Homeland Security, former Senator from PA.  See Mitt Romney, above.

Charlie Crist, Governor FL.  Crist is more of a true conservative, so would be a good choice based on that, but many want him on the ticket to "secure FL".  Once again, I'll be blunt.  If McCain needs Crist to "secure FL", then the election is already lost. FL can't be a battleground state for McCain to win. With all the retirees and Jews there, he should be looking at a +5 margin here, minimum. So, if that's your reason for putting Crist on the ticket, look elsewhere.  Also, I don't like someone from FL on the ticket because I think it reminds centrists and right leaning Democrats of 2000. I know Crist wasn't involved in that, but I don't think McCain wants to associate himself with the 2000 election in any way shape or form.

Bobby Jindal, Governor LA. He's a young conservative, and dynamic. People like Jindal are definitely the future of the Republican party, if it has a future. However, once again, he has the potential to remind voters of something McCain would rather not mention: Katrina.  The other problem with Jindal is risk. He's the governor of the state more noted for corruption in politics than any other. This has been true for close to a century or so. Now, Jindal may be (and probably is) completely clean. However, there's so much political corruption in the state, the likelihood that he can be tied (if only by innuendo and speculation) to someone known to be corrupt is high. The only area that I can think of that's as bad as LA is Chicago, IL.  I'd never nominate someone for national office from LA, just as I would not for Chicago.

Joe Lieberman, Independent Democrat Senator from CT. See Mitt Romney. He can't even claim to be a RINO.  He's a true blue Democrat that only agrees with Republicans on one issue: Iraq. Now, there is a place for Lieberman on the campaign trail and in the administration, if McCain is bold enough to do it. I've felt for some time now that McCain should name Joe Lieberman as his Secretary of State, and do it before the convention.  Lieberman as SoS doesn't hurt McCain with the base like he would as VP, and he still manages to hit Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) where it hurts. Obama may be the first Democratic Presidential candidate to lose the Jewish vote in the last 50 years. Adding Lieberman on as SoS would make that climb even steeper for Obama. It's a win position for Lieberman too, because no matter what, he's serving his last term in the U.S. Senate. Come 2012, the Democrats will work harder than ever to defeat him, and they won't have to defeat him twice like they did in 2006. Also, the Republicans will likely nominate someone who's capable of obtaining more than a couple hundred votes, unlike 2006.

Tim Pawlenty, Governor MN. Pawlenty has his ups and downs. He also comes from a very blue state, and that's obvious in his politics, as for the most part they're fairly centrist. He gets high marks from Republicans on taxes and illegal immigration though. He would appeal to "Christian Conservatives". He won't be able to get MN for McCain, but he might be able to at least bring the state into play and require Obama to spend some time there. He's young an energetic and would add charisma to the ticket, but I'm not sure if he's the man to energize the base. The best thing you can say about Pawlenty is that he appears to have fewer negatives than most of his competition, but he also has few positives.

Personally, I still like Condolezza Rice, but McCain doesn't and she doesn't appear to be interested in the job. Yes, she brings more criticism of McCain being McSame and Bush III, but there's no doubt that she's as smart as a whip, and that she has loads of foreign policy experience. And, it definitely wouldn't hurt to have a black and a woman on the ticket. However, McCain's weak domestically and she doesn't help there.  I still think this ticket would be close to unbeatable, but I appear to be in the minority.