From Talking Points Memo:
Finally, the GOP narrative about Sarah Palin, which the media had originally taken at face value, is unraveling as we speak. Yes, they will blame the media, but really, some of those speechwriters should have been less sloppy with the facts. Or maybe not? Maybe this is all part of the strategy- lie and say what the base wants to hear, then when the media uncovers the truth, claim they are being sexist and biased.
If I didn’t know better, I’d think Karl Rove was behind the strategy. Oh, wait, maybe he really is.
Stumble It!
1 response so far ↓
1 tehehehe // Sep 10, 2008 at 9:45 am
I don’t see in the referenced links any “unraveling” or any of the press taking anything “at face value”.
The cost of living in Alaska is high. Wages, for many, are high, and so taxes per resident (revenues collected) are high. (they are high in NY, Mass., and California as well, since income levels are high). Palin has reduced taxes. They may still be high, but they are lower than when she took office (both as a mayor and as a governor). How is her “narrative” unraveling?
Yes, Alaska gets loads of money from Oil revenues. And she passed some of the revenue back to residents. How is that a negative? Gas prices went up for the resident’s of her state as well as for the lower 48. What story is “unraveling”? The government of Alaska doesn’t set world oil prices, nor US gas prices. Their production is less than 1% of the world’s supply. Oil prices are determined by market forces, not by Alaska.
When oil is drilled offshore, the states that have those wells offshore will be able to benefit from some of the revenue collected, just like Alaska. Is there something wrong or evil about that? Is Palin evil for driving a hard bargain with Big Oil and making them cough up more reveneue for the residents of Alaska? That sounds like Palin is taking care of her people to me. Helping the “little guy” by squeezing Big Oil. Don’t you Dems advocate for “windfall profits taxes” on big oil? I thought you did. Palin is doing it. And she gave the money to the people, not to “special interests”. What is “unraveling” in this tapestry?
If you can enlighten me, please do. I saw nothing inaccurate with what Palin said, nor what she is saying, but maybe I missed something. Are you blaming her because taxes are high in Alaska? Or blaming her because the Senators from Alaska have gotten “earmarks” that benefitted Alaska?
Just for edification. even the Democratic party of Alaska credit Palin with opposing, and killing, the “bridge to nowhere”. She may have been late to the opposition, but she did oppose it when it counted. We can contrast that with the votes of Obama and Biden. They both voted for the bridge. And when an ammendment was offered to shift the funds from the bridge to go to rebuilding in New Orleans, both Obama and Biden ooposed the ammendment thus keeping the funding going to Alaska for teh bridge.
Palin, after a flip flop, opposed the bridge. Obama and Biden’s support for the bridge to nowhere has never waivered. Should we congradulate them on their steadfastness and refusal to “flip-flop”? Just asking.
Leave a Comment