Not sure why there hasn’t been a thread about this yet, but here it is. Sarah Palin appointed a former Planned Parenthood member, Morgan Christen, to the Alaska Supreme Court.
Here’s an article with the relevant facts, which are:
* A list of nominees from which to choose is given to the governor by an independent panel — in other words, Palin did not pluck this woman out of nowhere.
* The list Palin was handed basically boiled down to someone who is staunchly environmentalist — that is, someone who opposes her energy agenda — and Christen, who was once a member of Planned Parenthood.
* Palin ultimately chose Christen, against the wishes of Christian Right groups in Alaska.
* Palin clearly put her energy agenda above abortion in this case.
Not that we do this here at Race42012, but viewing this decision purely through the lens of what the implications are for the presidential race would mean that Palin is (1) Counting on her socially conservative base to stick with her no matter what, and (2) Planning a makeover to attempt to capture the center by embracing pragmatism. She is not dumb; she knows that the Alaska Supreme Court has little say in matters of abortion. Religious conservatives tend not to like any sort of compromise on “the life issue,” though. Can she hold them if she continues to do things like this? Hmm…
March 7th, 2009 at 8:54 am
First of all, SoCons are not exactly a monolithic group. To one degree or another, they will be split among various candidate camps. Yes, Mrs. Palin will lose a few over this, but they always was a Centrist in the sense that she was both a SoCon and a FiCon. Yes, the pick did not come out of nowhere and as such, she is not abandoning her SoCon principles per se. This may be a good move, it may be a bad move; we will see how the cookie crumbles.
March 7th, 2009 at 9:06 am
How does being both a so-con and a fi-con make you a centrist?
March 7th, 2009 at 9:19 am
“Palin clearly put her energy agenda above abortion in this case.”
Maybe she just picked the person who she thought would make the best judge.
March 7th, 2009 at 9:25 am
And the best judge would be a former Planned Parenthood member? The Alaskan Religious Right was very disappointed with her.
March 7th, 2009 at 9:28 am
I’ve been waiting for a thread on this for days. Assumed that Sarah was a protected species now. Imagine the outcry if this was Romney’s pick!
March 7th, 2009 at 9:35 am
Read the full article on Conservatives4Palin.com you will get the complete article and the reason.
Gov. Palin also posted on her Facebook her decision and her that she is pro-life.
Not to mention in even the Alaska Christian group agreed she had very little choice do to Alaska Law and with the choices she was presented.
It is interesting that this half-story is reported; but that she has pipeline projects being worked on for the L-48, one for the people of Alaska, working on electrical energy project to provide less expensive electricity to Alaskan, has an energy plan to do renewable energy in Alaska by 2025 of 50%, has savings in the state funds of 7.5 billions when other governos that are giving speaches have a deficit, foward funding education, is working to serve her people in Alaska and even delivers food w/Samaritan Purse and its CEO (Graham)and skips out time DC to do that. That you don’t post info on.
Let’s get it right! Gov. Palin is extremely bright and a great visionary leader. She knows she was hired to SERVE not elected to exercise power by producing unmandated policies.
She also knows that as a woman she has to be better than any man to be considered equal. She knows she is smart and if anyone would take the time to really check all the things she has done in Alaska and how she has been an effective CEO of her state they would know not to underestimate her. The elites can get past their ivy league schools to see the real world; but the real Americans knows a true visonary and bright leader when we see it.
She is just like her heroe – Pres. Reagan. If only we really would take the time to hear her and see what she does.
Special Note: during the election in this blue state and the blue city I live in something never seen in my life time there was that there were a sea of McCain signs and even more interesting a great deal of PALIN signs on display. I frankly couldn’t believe it; SHE SPOKE TO US…and we are waiting for HER.
thank you for this forum.
March 7th, 2009 at 9:48 am
Could Palin have requested another list of candidate judges? If not, it is hard to lay too much blame on her for this choice. If she could have gotten more choices she should have. I am really disgusted to ever see a planned parenthood person as a judge, but I would also be disgusted by a big enviro-nut-job on the bench. This may have been a no win situation for her.
March 7th, 2009 at 9:50 am
It doesn’t make any difference. Palin is “one of us”. Don’t you know?
There is no objective standard that hardcore Palin boosters will ever use to say “I have had enough. This is where i get off”.
It’s cultural. She has nice legs and shoots moose. She likes guns. She actually followed through with a pregnancy knowing she would have an impaired child.
That’s it. She can do no wrong. No matter what.
March 7th, 2009 at 10:02 am
She also knows that as a woman she has to be better than any man to be considered equal.
What are we now, whiny victim feminists?
The irony of this statement is that, because she is both female and attractive, she only had to put in half of the work to be selected as McCain’s VP and become a frontrunner for 2012.
March 7th, 2009 at 10:12 am
Alex,
1/3 the work at most.
March 7th, 2009 at 10:35 am
SoCons who know support Palin then criticize Romney for far less are just hypocritical.
March 7th, 2009 at 10:36 am
We have a similar system in Kansas in which the governor has no choice but to choose one of three candidates chosen by a group of lawyers (like choosing your favorite fox to guard the hen house), and submitted to her for selection. I think she made the right choice.
I am a registered Republican and have a pro-life blog, and I am angry at some of the more legalistic fellow Republicans that want all other Republicans to think like they do. To me they are as self-righteous as are most of the far left. They do more to hurt the party than to help it. We need to put our energy on winning back the white house and both houses of congress before we lose our county.
March 7th, 2009 at 10:39 am
Reply to Rick: Then why is she defending the pick on national TV. She isn’t saying I had no choice. There is always the choice of choosing none of the above. This just an excuse. I would expect this out of a Liberal Democrat but not out of a so called Conservative Republican.
March 7th, 2009 at 10:43 am
If it were you, would you defend your pick? Or would you let the naysayers continue to pick at you? Are you one of her critics?
March 7th, 2009 at 10:49 am
Reply to Rick: Absolutely, I am one of her critics. And I wouldn’t make the pick in the same time. I would tell them to go back, and try again.
“Let’s hope Governor Palin stands her ground and spends some of her political capital to fight for a conservative on the Alaska Supreme Court. She must demand more names from the Judicial Council. The liberals running the mainstream media will throw a hissy fit, but she’s lost them for good once she took on their lord and savior, Barack Obama.”
http://www.thealaskastandard.com/?q=node/422
instead she wimped out.
March 7th, 2009 at 11:13 am
Knepper,
1) Interesting to see another Rombot cite to Dan Fagan’s Alaska Standard, a publication pretty much dedicated to pushing anti-Palin commentary. The Rombots have got their tallking points down and seem to be scoping the Anchorage Daily News or Alaska Standard for any negative stories about Palin.
2) To say that Palin “clearly” put her energy agenda over her abortion agenda is a little strong, don’t you think considering that one representative of the one Christian family group did not provide any evidence that the guy she passed over was pro-life? How many pro-life environmental freaks do you know?
3) According to the AP writeup, “[t]he group did not explain why they thought Smith was more conservative and did not respond to calls from The Associated Press.” Legal Newsline says Palin actually picked the moderate: “The Alaska Judicial Council selects the nominees from which the governor can then make an appointment. A total of six judges applied, but only two were elected by the Judicial Council, Eric Smith, considered very liberal, and Morgan Christen, who is viewed as more of a moderate.” For all we know, this woman she picked is Kirsten Gillibrand before she became a United State Senator, a moderate on most issues except for abortion.
4) Via Lifenews, the representative who made the comments has backed off in his criticism of Palin, if you interpret his initial comments as criticism of Palin: “Minnery says he is not upset with Palin and says the fault lies with the Judicial Council for sending her no candidates that his group could really get behind. He says Palin should have had the option of selecting the best person for the job rather than being limited to the choices the Council sent her.”
5) You admitted that Palin isn’t dumb…
March 7th, 2009 at 11:22 am
Tommy Boy, my man, you are an intrepid defender of your girl.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:01 pm
I have appeared before Judge Christen plenty of times (yes, I am an attorney). She is a good judge. A fair and smart one. She is also a parent of a special needs child (her daughter is autistic), which may have helped her chances. Remember that Sarah’s sister has an autistic child.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:16 pm
Okay Tommy Boy, So you have the hots for Palin, some of us are objective and those who are claiming to be social conservatives (or conservative at all) and defend Palin on this issue are just wimping out. And name calling is a straw man’s argument. She shouldn’t have done it, but she did it anyways. These are the types of excuses I expect from Liberal Democrats, not Conservative Republicans.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:28 pm
19
I think the question of why she chose Judge Christen versus her other choice has been answered by Tommy Boy and HMR, but I would like to know why Palin didn’t use her influence to expand the field.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:34 pm
16 Tommy, Smith was not a former board member of Planned Parenthood. It goes behind merely being pro-choice.
What is interesting is that Romney was criticized for his judges, and he was also limited in choices – only he was in liberal Mass, and Palin is in strong GOP country. He said he chose them based on their record of being tough on crime. Isn’t that fair enough? No, sorry. The religious right used the excuse of his supreme court picks to label him a fake.
Will they do the same thing to Palin? Not a snowballs chance in you know where.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:36 pm
Oops, I meant beyond, not behind in my previous comment.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:38 pm
BTW – the other day I posted this news of Palin’s pick. All I did was report, but many of you said I was spinning. I didn’t say anything different than Alex, but no one is accusing him of spinning. In fact, if I had posted any of the previous comments here today, everyone would have gone nuts and said I was trashing her. I’ve never trashed her once. I’ve just said that I think she’s not qualified based on the facts.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:39 pm
#20 Mac, I couldn’t agree more. If your choice is between real bad, a really really bad, then you choose non of the above. Better to leave the seat empty than make a bad choice. She should have pushed back and asked for more choices. There is no record that she even tried.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:40 pm
“How does being both a so-con and a fi-con make you a centrist?” Of course of the over scale, being a SoCon and a FiCon is not being a centrists, but within our party it is being a centrist because it appeals to both factions in the party, not just one.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:44 pm
Martha,
Go re-check your comment…you only said that Palin appointed a former board member of Planned Parenthood to the Alaska Supreme Court without providing all the facts that Knepper has just listed. Big difference.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:47 pm
Tommy Boy: While I agree she should have supplied more facts, but I don’t think your fingers are broken and a quick google search would have given you the same information. I know before I rip into someone I do my own research.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:49 pm
Tommy, all I did was say the truth, and I did not spin it one bit. It’s still true – she appointed a former board member of PP.
My main point with even mentioning it was to point out the hypocrisy of the religious right concerning Romney and Palin. Apparently they were in the same boat on available choices. She’ll get a pass, Romney didn’t.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:49 pm
“I didn’t say anything different than Alex” Not exactly Martha, you and Alex may have reported the same news, but often Fox and CNN report the same news.
Thunder, with respect, I am beginning to think that you are a professor who is good at teaching theory, but putting things into practice is a slightly different story. Yeah, it would be nice to leave the seat open, I for one wish it were possible, but how practical is that? If you owned a restaurant and were desperate for a waitress, would you just clown around and let your customers starve until you find the perfect waitress? Politics does not work that way.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:51 pm
BTW – Tommy, you’re the one telling us her strategy is moving left. You should be happy she did this, not trying to make excuses for it.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:52 pm
Go back and read my comments, OHIO. I did not spin anything. Just because I didn’t write a lengthy post detailing all of the factors, does not mean I tried to spin it.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:52 pm
24
Thunder,
Yep, if she’s the leader that many think she is, she probably should have pushed back.
Martha makes a good point, too, Palin should be held to the same standard as everyone else, especially given the fact that she owes her prominence to her gender and her looks.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:53 pm
OHIO – #29 – Now THAT’S spinning.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:53 pm
Martha, if Mr. Romney was associated with PP even after his Pro-Life conversion, it would not be the first such time. Not all of us who are not in the Romney camp have made a big deal about that. Are you looking to get into a contest?
March 7th, 2009 at 12:55 pm
“OHIO – #29 – Now THAT’S spinning.” OK, I’ll remember that in the event you try to compare Fox and CNN.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:56 pm
“especially given the fact that she owes her prominence to her gender and her looks.” Are you suggesting that Mrs. Palin is the only good looking member of her gender, Mac?
March 7th, 2009 at 12:59 pm
“Go back and read my comments, OHIO. I did not spin anything. Just because I didn’t write a lengthy post detailing all of the factors, does not mean I tried to spin it.” No, you did not spin the story per se, but do not give me half the facts and expect me to make an objective opinion. Give me only half the fact if you want, but don’t complain when we scratch our heads wondering what the rest of the story is.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:00 pm
Martha,
Because I posted more quotes from news sources and presented a counterargument, I’m making excuses for Palin? How does posting quotes and more facts constitute me making excuses?
By the way, I was the one who put forward the reasonable argument against her that she should have used her political capital to fight it and ask for more choices and only after a fight should she have given in and appointed Christen.
As for her going “left,” what I think she’s trying to do is create the McCain-like independent persona by going against powerful constituency groups to appeal to those McCain Republicans/indies who value political bravery over political idealogy.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:00 pm
Reply to 29 Ohio Joe: Funny you should say that, I use to own a restaurant, and I would not hire an incompetent waitress. I had to fire a waitress for constantly leaving the mayo out of the fridge (Sub shop). So, yes, I would close the shop (which I eventually did) rather than take the risk of giving food poison to my customers. Same with a supreme court justice. In this case, she is the swing vote, move the court from Right to left. At a minimum, she should have tried to get a better list. She should let liberal lawyers make her pick for her.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:02 pm
36
OH Joe,
Dude, I think it’s fairly obvious that I’m saying she owes her current national political standing almost exclusively to her looks and her gender.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:04 pm
Reply to 38 Tommy Boy.
‘As for her going “left,” what I think she’s trying to do is create the McCain-like independent persona by going against powerful constituency groups to appeal to those McCain Republicans/indies who value political bravery over political ideology.’
Then she should expect the same results as McCain, at that is the Conservatives should abandon her if they are truely conservative. When you take a calculated Risks, you shouldn’t be surprised at the results.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:09 pm
OK, fair enough Thunder, I certainly would not want your customers to get food poisoning or have you face any number of unacceptable scenarios, but while their may be other sub shops to serve customers, Alaska has only one Supreme Court. Yes in theory it would be nice to get a better list, but it does not appear that such was possible. Under the Alaskan Constitution, she holds very few cards in the matter.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:11 pm
Whose whining?…not me…just stating a fact…from the “real world” I don’t hate man, I love my husband very much; but I understand that the reality of the perseptions in the working environment.
I said woman have to better than man, well, this is how I know:
I used to work for a large corporation which was relocating and in order for my family to relocate I requested an increase in my salary well I was told that would be impossible so I just was let go, no compensation…nothing; but I didn’t say anything. A month later I received a phone call from the directors’ secretary in which they required my assistance in training the person who took my job. But I knew they had hired man and were paying him 3X what I asked. So I politely, told the secretary that the new person will not have to load the program himself as I did; but he would have learned it himself.
3 months after that he was fired…he had lost a 2.5 million account I had secured before I left. As for me I don’t take handouts…I started my own company. I tell my daughter to be best you can. You have to…you are a woman, minority, conservative and Republican. No choice but to exceed all expectations.
That is why I know Gov. Palin is looked at by a different standard and she has to be excel continually. And she does.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:14 pm
“Then she should expect the same results as McCain, at that is the Conservatives should abandon her if they are truely conservative. When you take a calculated Risks, you shouldn’t be surprised at the results.” That is certainly true if she were to go to far to the Left. However, it is funny that we Palinites are often told that we are too pure and too extreme and we should move slightly towards the center for pragmatic reasons. Now that Mrs. Palin appears to have done so, the @#$% hits the fan. I guess it truly is difficult to win for losing.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:27 pm
Reply to 44 Ohio Joe: Its called Politics. Sometimes you choose your poison. I did some further research, a previous Governor rejected the list he was given (but the board recent the same list), but at least he tried. Had I been the Governor, I would have continuously rejected the list until I got someone exceptable. You can’t let a bunch of political hacks force your hand. Of course, I am more idealistic, but I wouldn’t have chosen either and had would had a show down with the committee, even try to replace members of the committees since they are political appointees.
Even if she had tried and failed, at least she would have been given credit for trying, but bending to the will of the Liberals does not give much trust in me that she would stand up against them in the future.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:33 pm
McCain wasn’t conservative enough Thunder? Let’s see….
1) Voted against the expansion of Medicare Part D
Voted against Bush/Cheney energy bill in 2006
2) Voted against the expansion of SCHIP to 300% above the poverty level
3) Voted against the Lilly Ledbetter Act
4) Created the surge strategy that will provide us with a victory in Iraq unless Obama screws up
5) Voted for a ban on lawsuits against gun manufacturers and against the Brady Bill and assualt weapons ban
6) No earmarks, baby, no earmarks
7) Opposed ethanol subsidies in Iowa
I’d have no problem in Palin followed in Mac’s footsteps…the man should be president today.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:40 pm
Reply 46: Tommy Boy
Your list is someone short, you left out.
Gange of 14
McCain Fengold
Considered becoming a democrat.
He didn’t become know as a Maverick by being a consistent Conservative, and many in the Conservative movement where against him including Rush Limbaugh.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:45 pm
“Even if she had tried and failed, at least she would have been given credit for trying, but bending to the will of the Liberals does not give much trust in me that she would stand up against them in the future.” Partially true, but we saw what happened when she did stand up to the liberals in the media?
March 7th, 2009 at 1:47 pm
Ana,
Your anecdotal account notwithstanding, women have dramatically closed the wage gap. In fact, in some lines of work, television news for one, women have it easier finding a job. Like. Much easier.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:52 pm
Yes women have indeed closed the wage gap, (and making more $ in some case) but for what ever reason, good or bad, women are not taken seriously in politics. I guess that is democracy.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:53 pm
38 – True, my apologies.
The thing is, Palin has never been the true conservative that social cons think she is. McCain chose her because he saw himself in her – maverick, cross the aisle, pro-amnesty, rail against Wall Street, etc.
The very first thing she did as VP was ditch a pro-life event where she was to receive an award – the Friday after she was chosen. She was scheduled to speak and accept the award, but she bailed. Schlafly was angry. Was it the McCain campaign, no one knows, but Palin ditched. She doesn’t really even talk about socially conservative issues much, and as gov, she certainly hasn’t emphasized them. This pick is totally in line with who she is. Social cons think because she didn’t abort her baby, that she’s their gal.
(I would venture to guess that no GOP candidates have chosen the abortion route, so she shouldn’t be getting that gold star on her forehead for it.)
Palin is happy to let social cons think she’s a real conservative.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:54 pm
Ana: I hold Palin up to the same standard as I do anyone else. Her Gender shouldn’t not be held against her nor should it be an excuse. My wife who has her own successful career in a man’s world is paid the same as any other male and is doing quite fine. If your story is true (and I have no reason to doubt it), the the person who hired your replacement should also be fired for incompetence. As a business owner, you need to always look at the bottom line.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:54 pm
I meant VP nominee, not VP.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:57 pm
I don’t think anyone can make the argument that Palin’s looks and gender are half the battle for her in politics. She got a huge pass from conservatives on her lack of knowledge, lack of articulation, etc. I mean, come on – winks and kisses passed for real answers in the debate.
I’ve said it before, if she looked like Harriet Miers, we would not be talking about her.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:59 pm
Oops, sorry again. I meant to say that her looks and gender ARE half the battle for Palin. She knows it and uses it to her advantage. Yeah, I read the story this week that claims otherwise, but I don’t buy it.
March 7th, 2009 at 2:14 pm
“Social cons think because she didn’t abort her baby, that she’s their gal.” That is not the whole story. She is certainly not the only woman in the country who refused to have an abortion.
March 7th, 2009 at 2:31 pm
I think this is actually a smart move by Governor Sarah – it shows she isn’t beholden to the fanatical religious right.
March 7th, 2009 at 3:11 pm
ColoGuy: You may be right, but I think the more important fact is that Palin has never governed in the manner the mainstream media tried to paint her. She was always a pragmatist in her governing, and it appears that here she was presented with two poor options and made a pragmatic choice that one was less bad than the other. This is the sort of things politicians (at least those who do not have the option of voting “present”) do regularly.
March 7th, 2009 at 3:18 pm
Mercy, mercy, from the looks of these posts, we are going to have a very difficult time getting unified enough to select a viable candidate to run against Obama in ‘12. Colorado Guy is right. There are too many in the fanatical religious right in the party. I’m a conservative assoc. pastor and I think the religious legalists on the far right need to rethink their self-righteousness positions if we want to win in four years.
March 7th, 2009 at 3:20 pm
‘That is certainly true if she were to go to far to the Left. However, it is funny that we Palinites are often told that we are too pure and too extreme and we should move slightly towards the center for pragmatic reasons”
Not by conservatives you’re not told that! Its really, really sad to see her getting a pass on this. She is obviously believing she can hold her constituents on the right while moving way left. Its a calculated risk for her, and I hope the conservatives give her what she deserves. It is extremely obvious that a strong conservative Governor would have told them to send suitable candidates. She didn’t, and she should pay the price.
Ana, that’s just plain bull crap about being disadvantaged as a woman. I worked for a large company and for the last 40 years, it has been extremely advantageous to be a woman, and everybody, including the women, knows it. They even had an advantage over the African Americans. Many times I heard the African Americans complain about how the women got all the benefits of affirmative action. And if any of the men ever complained about the policy, they would never be looked at again for promotion, so, everybody knew to keep their mouth shut. So, maybe your company treated you badly, but don’t try to apply that to Sarah Palin. She is being given a pass on her experience, her education, her intelligence, and now she is being given a pass by some on her judge appointments. If she were not a pretty woman, none of us would know her name. Pretty sad!
March 7th, 2009 at 3:21 pm
“but I think the more important fact is that Palin has never governed in the manner the mainstream media tried to paint her.” This point has been missed even by a variety of brilliant educated FPPs.
March 7th, 2009 at 3:27 pm
“They even had an advantage over the African Americans.” Among other things, I have no doubt that this is true in many companies, but this is not universally the case.
March 7th, 2009 at 3:39 pm
“but I think the more important fact is that Palin has never governed in the manner the mainstream media tried to paint her.” This point has been missed even by a variety of brilliant educated FPPs.
I’m sure you’re referring to me, and you could only believe that I think such a thing if you don’t actually read what I write.
My chief complaints with Palin are that she doesn’t know anything about foreign policy and that she embraces a toxic brand of identity politics.
March 7th, 2009 at 4:28 pm
There is something strange about people who join the Palin camp. It seems as if once they are there they feel that they should never leave. People go from camp to camp but for some reason the Palin people never move. That’s why she feels free to court the moderates, and in this case the liberals.
March 7th, 2009 at 4:29 pm
Given those two choices, she made the right one. Hard to imagine she couldn’t find a pro-lifer that was not an enviro-wacko.
March 7th, 2009 at 4:35 pm
Illinois, maybe Palin’s plan is to pull a McCain – let Romney and Huck fight for the conservative vote, and she’ll get the moderates and her faithful-or-die social cons. Remember that sphere diagram from last week? I think they got Palin on the wrong side of the circle. In fact, I won’t be a bit surprised if this is what she intends to do. Tommy boy has been telling us for a few weeks now, but it just didn’t compute. Now it’s begining to.
Trouble is, it gave us Obama.
March 7th, 2009 at 5:01 pm
So, just out of curiousity…this pro-abortion woman is good on energy?
March 7th, 2009 at 5:01 pm
(to clear up any confusion, I was referring to the judge, not trying to say Palin is pro-abortion, she’s clearly not.)
March 7th, 2009 at 5:05 pm
“she had no choice”. Bull pucky (or moose pucky, as the case may be). She should have told the AJC to go back and find someone who fit her parameters for judges. but she did not. And all the excuses in the world won’t make this one right.
March 7th, 2009 at 5:07 pm
That was the arugument you made when Romney had to find a way around same sex marriage in Mass. Some here said he needed to just buck the system, and do what is right.
Hello? She should have bucked the system. Be that maverick everyone tells us she is, and do what is right, and not what was politically expeident.
March 7th, 2009 at 5:39 pm
“I’m sure you’re referring to me, and you could only believe that I think such a thing if you don’t actually read what I write.
My chief complaints with Palin are that she doesn’t know anything about foreign policy and that she embraces a toxic brand of identity politics.”
Hey, if you want to wear the shoe, that is fine, perhaps, I should not have used the term FFP because it is much deeper than that. I was actually referring to a whole host of people who share such a sentiment, not just singling you Alex. As for her not knowing anything on foreign policy in particular, let’s just say that I am in disagreement.
“That was the argument you made when Romney had to find a way around same sex marriage in Mass. Some here said he needed to just buck the system, and do what is right.” Yes, some anti-Romneyites did over-play such issues. While I for one may have mentioned this issue or a similar one, it was certainly not a deal-breaker per se.
You have a fair point GetReal, If this Pro-Abortion character turns out to be poor on energy, then it will be a bigger problem for Mrs. Palin.
Without getting into a nasty contest, Mrs. Palin is not the first Pro-Life politician to appoint a Pro-Abortion person to something. If this becomes a pattern instead of a one off, then I am sure many of us Palin sympathizers and or Palinites will look at other camps, but for one appointment? With respect, a few people may be getting riled up prematurely.
March 7th, 2009 at 6:13 pm
How about Palin changing the line of succession in her state to include a high school chum of hers, that enjoys a no confidence vote from those at the dept of corrections, which he is over?
Eyebrow raising? You betcha. But heck, This woman is a ‘maverick’.
March 7th, 2009 at 6:36 pm
Thunder: I clearly said this was my experience. A fact. (You are free to doubt.)
Adam: Yes, there have been great improvement in salary for women and frankly I haven’t seen it; but I remedy that by being the CEO.
March 7th, 2009 at 6:51 pm
Ana,
Alaska’s benefited from high energy profits the past couple of years, making their budget shortfall less painful than it would otherwise be. Palin is not responsible for that. She did soak the oil companies to pass out more checks. Yes, energy is her “baby” as she likes to say. Whoo-hoo, she does photo op food deliveries. I read the Alaska papers occasionally, she is not quite the superstar you describe.
She also hasn’t done much to show she’s a visionary or very bright. We saw her in the campaign – the botched interviews and the debate. It’s a tough sell. Most informed Americans could answer the questions better than she did. Yet, she signed on and said she was prepared. No, sorry – she wasn’t. Perhaps she should have blinked. (Her ego writes checks her brain can’t cash.)
But what really irks me to the core is when people insist she is like Reagan. She’s no such thing. The fundamental difference between them which cannot be bridged is that Reagan was a THINKER. Palin is anything but.
March 7th, 2009 at 7:18 pm
Martha: Perhaps you would love to live in my state where our taxes for energy are going to be increasing so elected officials can boast of creating jobs.
As a free thinker I will let you underestimate her. have fun.
March 7th, 2009 at 7:41 pm
Alaska is going to have a shortfall for the current fiscal year, even though, crude oil prices were the highest in history for a good portion of the year. If they stay low, it will be very interesting how she handles the huge shortfall for the next fiscal year.
March 7th, 2009 at 8:22 pm
We are underwhelmed by Palin. We don’t understand her ‘draw’. She screws up – big time, and all some can do is make excuses that she was ‘forced’ to do it. Forced? The mavericky Palin? I thought she was her own woman? She’s not?
March 7th, 2009 at 8:44 pm
69. Bull puckey my arse. Before anyone makes one more complaint about Palin choosing Morgan Christen or not demanding other choices, read the following links. Then ST_U.
http://www.conservatives4palin.com/2009/03/governor-palins-judicial-appointments.html
http://www.conservatives4palin.com/2009/03/gov-palins-facebook-statement-on-her.html
March 8th, 2009 at 1:00 am
let me see if i understand this.
she avoids her position and gets support?
honestly, she and us moving the wide middle because she knows she cannot win with just the right.
it worries me in terms of her being ‘right’ right.
March 8th, 2009 at 9:58 am
I attended college at a very pro-life school. Its stance was well-known.
One day President Ford came and spoke to the student body. After his address, he opened up the floor for questions.
One of the questions was where did he stand on abortion. Without so much as a blink of an eye, he stated “I believe a woman should be able to have an abortion anytime and anywhere she wants.”
I thought, “Wow! That took courage. I would vote for that man in a heartbeat.” I certainly do no agree with him on abortion, but the man proved he had integrity.
I am opposed to single-issue litmus tests. To me the most important quality for a judge is their determination to apply the law as it is written and not attempt to make new ones from the bench. If they have a firm understanding of the proper role of the Judicial branch, and accept the fact that they are not part of the Executive or Legislative branches, I’m good.
The next most important quality is their knowledge and understanding of the law.
Those are the two most important qualities as a judge. If, after careful consideration you find two equally qualified candidates who satisfy those two qualifications equally, then and only then should their stands on individual issues be considered to break the tie.
From the facts presented, it sounds like the judge Sarah Palin picked was the best one in relationship to the two main qualifications. Until someone makes a convincing argument otherwise, I say good for Governor Palin.
March 8th, 2009 at 11:09 am
Then mark, don’t run on that platform. You either are or you are not. Palin’s big draw is that she gave birth and did not abort her last child. Big whoopie. MOST women don’t abort their child. Her minions think that she is pro life. Apparently she is not. She puts her self out to be just that, and then whammo! Slams you all up side the head and now your spinning around trying to find a viabable excuse. I admire folks that can run and not fake the pass. She faked the pass.
March 8th, 2009 at 12:42 pm
81. You don’t know what you’re talking about. She had no choice but to select one of the two names presented by the Judicial Counsel. Read the links I provided above, or remain IGNORANT.
March 8th, 2009 at 1:29 pm
“Palin’s big draw is that she gave birth and did not abort her last child.” No that is not exactly the case at all. Her minions whatever that means, have no reason to doubt her with regards to her Pro-Life stand. HearMeRoar is correct.
March 8th, 2009 at 1:36 pm
Bull oney, Ohio! You can’t be as two faced as she seems to be!
Hear me roar. How about sending them back saying “these are my prameters. Meet them, or we’ll just go in circles”. Instead, she caved. Most likely to gleen the middle, where we are on to her.
March 8th, 2009 at 2:26 pm
84. Our Supreme Court will be missing a Supreme Court judge by April 5th if Palin doesn’t appoint one. The Alaska Constitution sets forth how our judges are selected:
The State of Alaska operates under this plan, as clearly stated in the Alaska Constitution:
§ 5. Nomination and Appointment
The governor shall fill any vacancy in an office of supreme court justice or superior court judge by appointing one of two or more persons nominated by the judicial council.
§ 6. Approval or Rejection
Each supreme court justice and superior court judge shall, in the manner provided by law, be subject to approval or rejection on a nonpartisan ballot at the first general election held more than three years after his appointment. Thereafter, each supreme court justice shall be subject to approval or rejection in a like manner every tenth year, and each superior court judge, every sixth year.
***
There is no way in hell that anyone can get our constitution changed in less than a month. If you had scrolled through the links I posted above, you would have known this fact. It will take you less than 5 minutes to get up to speed on this issue by skimming those links, but no, you would rather remain IGNORANT.
March 8th, 2009 at 3:18 pm
You can call anybody you want two faced, but that is not (unfortunately) going to change the Alaska’s constitution. I continue to be amazed how otherwise educated people how little clue about Alaska.
March 8th, 2009 at 4:00 pm
While I recognize it’s a reach, I would encourage Justice Warren Matthews, 69, who previously supported parental consent legislation, to challenge the constitutionality of his forced retirement on the grounds of age discrimination. After all, he’s apt to get a more sympathetic ear, considering he’s younger than five of our nine Supreme Court justices (Stevens turns 89 in April. Ginsburg will be 76 next Sunday. Both Scalia and Kennedy will celebrate their 73rd birthdays this year; Scalia, on Wednesday; Kennedy, in July. Breyer turns 71 in August. And a sixth justice, Souter, turns 70, himself, in September.)
House bill on judge age limit amended
http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2008/Mar/14/ln/hawaii803140374.html
Policy review after judge forced to retire wins age bias case
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2008/jan/23/workandcareers.law/print
March 9th, 2009 at 12:39 am
So, we’ll not be hearing about Mitt’s gay marriage thing every again either, right? I mean, his hands were also tied.
You might also want to take a look how folks feel about the photo op food drop she made with the very humble Franklin Graham. pity he’s nothing like his dad. ADN.com in the opinion section has a great letter about it, and how it was only for the cameras.
the Ice Princess is starting to thaw.
And no, I don’t belive that she had her flipping hands tied. She bragged about bucking her own party (for what, we still don’t know) and getting things done. Well….. she got it done alright. She also got it wrong. When you stick your wet finger in the wind in Alaska, you’ll get frostbite.
March 9th, 2009 at 4:36 am
“And no, I don’t belive that she had her flipping hands tied.” In that case, I question whether Mr. Romney. Mr. Huckabee and Mr. Giuliani ever had their hands tied. We can debate what Mrs. Palin should have done, but the fact of the matter was, she certainly did not hold all the cards in her hands. There does in deed seem to be a double standard.