The race gets further into the Twilight Zone:
According to his spokesman, U.S. Rep. Lynn Westmoreland, a Southerner born and bred, had no idea on earth that the word “uppity” had racial connotations when he used it to describe Barack and Michelle Obama. — No idea at all.
Could have knocked him over with a feather when someone told him.
Ah, the sad truth about so many in the GOP today: bigots wrapped in self-evident lies.
It’s increasingly clear that yet another myth that the McCain campaign concocted about Sarah Palin’s record in Alaska is now evaporating into thin air. Here’s CATO’s Chris Edwards’ report on her tax record (hat tip: Jeff):
Palin supported and signed into law a $1.5 billion tax increase on oil companies in the form of higher severance taxes. One rule of thumb is that higher taxes cause less investment. Sure enough, State Tax Notes reported (January 7): “After ACES was passed, ConocoPhillips, Alaska’s most active oil exploration company and one of the top three producers, announced it was canceling plans to build a diesel fuel refinery at the Kuparuk oil field. ConocoPhillips blamed the cancellation on passage of ACES [the new tax]. The refinery would have allowed the company to produce low-sulfur diesel fuel onsite for its vehicles and other uses on the North Slope, rather than haul the fuel there from existing refineries.”
There are good reasons for an oil-rich state to tax oil production, but a fiscal conservative would usually use any tax increase to reduce taxes elsewhere. Perhaps I’m missing something, but I see no evidence that Palin offered any major tax cuts. She did propose sending $1.2 billion of state oil revenues to individuals and utility companies in the form of monthly payments to reduce energy bills, but that sounds like welfare to me, not tax cuts.
Palin has offered a few narrow or minor tax breaks, including:
- A tax credit for film production in the state, offering about $20 million per year in breaks.
- A cut in an annual business license fee from $100 to $25 (the legislature went half way to $50).
- A one-year suspension of the state fuel tax to save taxpayers about $40 million.
- A repeal of tire taxes to save taxpayers $2 million.
- A tax credit for commercial salmon harvesting to save taxpayers about $2 million.
That’s about it.
The selling of Sarah Palin has been about as reliable as the vetting.
Larison makes an essential point:
The other objection this Paul supporter makes is more important, because it reflects how readily Palin recites the lines she has been given on major issues:
There was one line at the end that really twisted things for me. “Al Qaeda terrorists still plot to inflict catastrophic harm on America … he’s worried that someone won’t read them their rights?”
This is a fundamentally misleading framing of the issue of providing detainees with the ability to challenge the charges against them through a judicial process.
There is no one proposing that Miranda warnings be given to members of Al Qaeda, and it is an insult to the audience’s intelligence to claim that this is the issue. The question is whether the government has the right to seize someone, whether a foreigner or a U.S. citizen, accuse him of conspiring with terrorists, strip him of all legal protections and keep him detained indefinitely without access to due process. The McCain/Palin position is apparently that the government can and should do this–remember that McCain regards Boumediene as one of the worst Supreme Court rulings in history–and meanwhile it is going to be the practice of the GOP to misrepresent the opposing view in the most absurd way. Unlike this Iowa Paul supporter, these things do not inspire me to vote for Obama, much less to send him money or change my registration, since Obama has shown elsewhere that he has equally little respect for constitutional protections, but they do confirm me in my view that McCain/Palin represents nothing but continuity with the policies of the Bush administration. I think it is clear for these and other reasons that dissident conservatives have no business lending this ticket any support.
This news kills any small hopes – which I harbored initially myself – that Sarah Palin does not represent a triumph of the most hardcore Christianist elements in her party:
Gov. Sarah Palin’s church is promoting a conference that promises to convert gays into heterosexuals through the power of prayer. “You’ll be encouraged by the power of God’s love and His desire to transform the lives of those impacted by homosexuality,” according to the insert in the bulletin of the Wasilla Bible Church, where Palin has worshipped for about six years.
Palin’s conservative Christian views have energized that part of the GOP electorate, which was lukewarm to John McCain’s candidacy before he named her as his vice presidential choice. She is staunchly anti-abortion, even in cases of rape and incest, and opposes gay marriage and spousal rights for gay couples. Focus on the Family, a national Christian fundamentalist organization, is conducting the “Love Won Out” Conference in Anchorage, about 30 miles from Wasilla.
If Log Cabin is endorsing a candidate who is a supporter of the pray-the-gay-away movement, they need to reassess. And those many gay men who loved Hillary Clinton surely cannot back a candidate who favors the reparative therapy movement. I’d say that’s non-negotiable. Of course, they could always try to ask Palin what her position is on this – but no one is allowed near her except Schlafly and AIPAC, it seems.
A reader writes:
I am compelled to write as nothing has made me sadder than watching Greta’s "documentary" on Sarah Palin last night. I am the working mother of two small children (1 and 3). The sight of a kitchen counter with a blackberry and a child’s dinner side by side is one that takes place in our house every day. I would love to know how she does it – and that is because on the question of ‘balance’ between family and work, Sarah Palin has lessons for all of us.
What made me sad, however, and deeply disturbed was the COMPLETE ABSENCE of any discussion of what Governor Palin plans to do if elected Vice President. She is not running to be "balancing mother of the year" – she would win that hand’s down. She is running for Vice President.
John Schwenkler objects to my characterization of Palin’s religious world-view.
A reader writes:
As an American citizen in a critical time, do I have the right to know as much as possible about a possible President of the US? (Let’s face it, there is a high probability she will rise to that office given McCain’s age and health.) Of course, I do. Since her nomination, I have been barraged with emotions and enticed by strange theories about her past. Now, with the calm of over a week’s worth of reflection (an eternity, apparently, for the American collective attention span), I see the salient issue arising from this mess as a need for knowledge.
I have a right to know who she is with as little filtering as possible.
I have a right to hear her views without the polish of the teleprompter or the marketing of Fox or the safe harbor of fluff pieces. Through the democratizing medium of the internet, voices can be heard. The people are the marketplace, and a deafening demand from the marketplace will be heard. I understand that my requests do not mean Palin fails, but it means that I at least have more information. Knowledge is power after all.
Keep up your good work.
I will. Steve Schmidt does not impress me in the slightest. He is guilty of professional malpractice. And some of us can’t be bullied by spitballs from National Review. I will keep asking questions – in order to provide as much information to my readership as possible. We don’t live in a totalitarian society. We can talk about whatever the hell we want. And if the First Amendment does not apply to asking important questions of someone who could be president next January, then it’s meaningless.
And what does it tell you that in the week since they introduced their new nominee, the Republican machine has been able to do nothing but attack those who want to know more about her?
This is the Internet’s moment, when it will flush the truth out against some of the creepiest power brokers this country has had to deal with since Nixon.
New polls show the race tightening. Gallup has McCain by three.
The AP is reporting:
A McCain-Palin adviser says an interview was offered to ABC’s Charlie Gibson several days ago and that they expect it to happen in the latter part of the week in Alaska.
Ah, a campaign that still can’t get its story straight. Here’s McCain’s response this morning on when Palin will be ready to meet the press:
"Within the next few days and I’m strongly recommending that she come on ‘Face the Nation’ with Bob Schieffer," McCain said in an interview that was taped on Saturday.
Here’s Rick "Not About The Issues" Davis:
"She’ll agree to an interview when we think it’s time and when she feels comfortable doing it," David said on "Fox News Sunday."
Has anyone yet briefed McCain about his vice-presidential pick? How out of it is he?
The Dish 