John McCain on The View - Is he really ready to be president?

We will never be 'given' choices until we decide enough is enough and take them for ourselves.

 

Get YOUR facts straight. As Governor Palin got more earmarks for Alaska per person than any other state in the nation.

RE: "The Bridge To Nowhere" that she was for (before she was against it) well guess what, even though that project was killed she still took the over 200 million dollars for Alaska.

The idea that she is anti earmarks is patently ridiculous. It's a LIE.

 

Thank you, that's exactly my point. He was assuming that I was a Republican because of my Obama comments!

 

Vote for whomever you want. if mccain wins then we have to listen to him lie for the next four years. just like bush

 

I think the point that you are missing here is that, as a citizen of a small town, I would want my mayor working very hard for federal pork. I fully expect my Governor to do the same. I would expect my Representatives and Senators to gain federal funds for my state.

Now we have to define "pork". I think highways, bridges, law enforcement, hospitals and infrastructures that serve the greater population would be acceptable expenditures. I think you are painting with a pretty wide brush by labeling all federal expenditures as bad.

What were the projects that she implemented? These projects should be weighed on a case by case basis before you make such statements.

What robjones says is true. You are asking me to gamble with my vote based upon a dream of a three party system. I agree with what you say as well, but we each only get one vote. I can't spend mine on a wish and a prayer.

 

Actually since taking office she has reduced federal earmarks for Alaska over those of the prior administrations.

Does somebody really need to explain why PER CAPITA spending on infrastructure needs might be high in a state with the largest landmass (twice the size of Texas) and the 2nd smallest population? If so it isn't really worth getting into, that's a remedial math issue.

 

Jazz, a few things.

1. Your statement alone, prima facie, completely contradicts what Palin said in her RNC speech: "I told congress, thanks but no thanks." Going with your POV, she would have done better to say, "I told congress - thanks! We used it on some great projects!" But that's not what the ticket is running on. It is running on the ending of federal earmarks, as a working concept, period.

This also ignores the fact she simply, cynically lied to the RNC, and to the American people. She did no such thing, telling congress, "thanks, but no thanks." She was elected, in fact, having pushed hard for the over $200 million for the Bridge. Then kept the money.

2. Secondly, going with what she used the $4200 per head while Mayor, having hired a consulting firm to get the federal earmarks, I think it''s pretty important to keep in mind that it was McCain himself who hammered her for the grossly out-of-proportion requests and funding, for things like a half-million dollar transportation system, $1M for a communications center (criticized by local law enforcement as "redundant." and "creating confusion"), and other projects. While Mayor, in columns and statements, Palin herself defended the use of earmarks, until she is now, magically, in sync with McCain on the notion.

Some cut and pastes, admittedly, but I think they're informative:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=94203271

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2008154664_palin03.html

3. Finally, ignoring the fact it isn't "poor Alaska" that's being argued by the McCain ticket (and convert Palin), but earmarks generally - and on principle, she has no business both decrying them, while pushing for them. No, it is also impossible for me to conceive of a justification along the lines of "poor Alaska requires federal earmarks."

Alaska is a commodities-rich state, swimming in cash. As only one example, why on earth would a town of 6500, in oil-rich Alaska, need the same as a city about 30x its size, and in a state relatively resource-poorer?

 

Just imagine the infrastructure coast of building roads, sewers, and bridges in a State the size of Alaska compared to a State the size of Rhode Island. Big difference.

 

flexible standard is what makes a good republican.

 

What do you mean by flexible standards? Willing to negotiate for the greater good of all citizens regardless of the party affiliation or state.

 

Doesn't that usually have more to do with population? A state like Alaska is going to have many remote houses that do not even use sewers, where most in a state like Rhode Island are going to use those sewers. Roads, just because a state is bigger does not necessarily equate to more roads or more expensive roads. Up north Wisconsin where it's pretty remote there is far less roads than in the populated areas. The stretches might be longer, they however usually from my experience are narrower, not kept up nearly as much as they don't have the traffic of the populated areas, not to forget many of the houses have their own private roads to their remote locations.

Bridges, well that depends of course entirely on the geographical makeup of the state.

There are other items that a higher population state brings to the table for 'pork' above what you listed above though.

---
BTW comparing Alaska to only the smallest state really isn't fair now is it in any event, how about comparing it to other larger states with low populations?

How about the next smallest state when you compare population density?

In 04
http://www.swivel.com/data_columns/spreadsheet/3448821

Alaska per capita 1,053.7108942916
Wyoming per capita 62.448546874907

Next spin?

--BTW how much of Alaska's land mass is actually used and fully populated for 'infrastructure' expenses?

I thought the same way last time. Both candidates absolutely blow this time, both sides arguing their candidate is better than the other are using primarily lies and not much more.

Thinking like this will only keep us more in the same cycle. We will only get out of the cycle when more people grow a set, start to think independently and realize there is a choice, stop selling out your principles along party lines already people.

 

Here is what I think. The good and the bad. Both campaigns are full of liars. I hate the fact that SP is lying also. There is no reason for it. She should just 'fess up and clearly state that acquiring federal pork falls under the job description of mayors AND governors. I think it is good that she stopped work on the bridge AND that she found a better place to spend the money.

But now she has a problem. While I think that it was her job to get federal funds for state projects, now she is running for VP and pork is frowned upon.

As for the "poor Alaska" quotes, didn't she enact taxes on the oil companies that have now increased revenues that have helped her balance the budget in Alaska? That happened under her administration and her citizens love her for it.

Go ahead and rail on the lies, but unless you can show that your candidate does not lie, it appears to be "just politics". It is our job to try to stay informed and look at both sides.

You also point out that it was McCain that voted against her pork. You fail to mention that Obama and Biden both voted for her pork.

 

While I actually to an extent did like much of your post, I do differ on simply saying 'ohwell both lie'

Anyways the above, where this makes no sense and is simply spin is simple. Are either Biden or Obama running on the fact of not voting for it, or for it on any level?

Sarah Palin is being put on an artificial pedestal on lies that she told Washington no, that is the fundamental difference.

Both sides suck, in this instance however only one appears to be lying and people are like politicians to the trough, only this time it's citizens to the trough of lies eating it up.

 

nope try again.

 

Hey Grim,

Well sure, that's because we are only talking about one lie. There are plenty of lies out there from both sides and it seems to get worse with each election.

Edit:

I thought that I was referring to this when I said:

No spin from me. I think we agree, but I've been wrong before.

 

But i think that this is the first time that VP is hiding from reporters maybe second time if you count Chaney.
funny that the republicans do not trust her to answer a couple of hard questions, but they have no problem with her being VP.

 

Of course both lie, but the issue at hand is the bridge, to try to put it onto others who are not campaigning on that issue, based on lies does not make any sense.

----
Noticed your edit.

Is where I was coming from.

 

Are you saying that the final four lie?

 

Both sides are liars, both sides suck, said it before will say it again.

 

Cindy McCain Blasts 'The View' for 'Picking Their Bones Clean'
Isn't this rich. A seventy year old man complaining about hard questions. He wants to be the president. And people are worried about Obama being ready.
can i call him mcsame now?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,423261,00.html