1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Discuss politics - join our community by registering for free here! HOP - the political discussion forum

Sarah Palin..hypocrite

Discussion in 'U.S. Politics' started by Popeye, Mar 22, 2009.

  1. Popeye

    Popeye Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2007
    Messages:
    3,023
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Washington state
    Remember how, when running for VP, Palin claimed she would be an advocate for special needs children? In fact, her speech to the GOP convention made special mention of it:

    "And children with special needs inspire a special love.

    To the families of special-needs children all across this country, I have a message: For years, you sought to make America a more welcoming place for your sons and daughters.

    I pledge to you that if we are elected, you will have a friend and advocate in the White House."


    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/03/sarah-palin-rnc-conventio_n_123703.html


    However, now that's she's lost that race and is interested in 2012, Palin has gone and opted to reject some 30% in stimulus funds coming to Alaska..the biggest part of which would go to, you guessed it, special needs children.

    What hypocrisy..and at the expense of our most vulnerable.

    http://www.adn.com/palin/story/729504.html
     
  2. tarheelconservative

    tarheelconservative New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2009
    Messages:
    26
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Maybe you should take off your liberal tinted glasses, and read the entire article. I think that the reasoning for turning down the money is clearly stated. It is more of a slap against the expansion of programs that would dry up after federal funding is gone, and leave the state of Alaska holding the bag. Which all sounds very familiar....oh yeah, the Clinton administration.
     
  3. Popeye

    Popeye Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2007
    Messages:
    3,023
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Washington state
    This is all about playing politics, look at some of the GOP governors that have turned down at least part of the stimulus money...Sanford, Jindal, Palin..all expected to be players in 2012.

    I wouldn't call what they're doing "reasoning", I'd call it political calculation. Palin and the others are putting their presidential hopes before the good of their own state...they ought to be ashamed.

     
  4. Pandora

    Pandora Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2008
    Messages:
    11,790
    Likes Received:
    257
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The people's republic of Eugene
    At first I thought your thread was calling her a hypcrite because she did not get on Obama for making fun of people with special needs.... glad to see its just a money issue.

    The only money she is refusing is money with strings attached that would bloat her states spending after the one time charity from our pockets to obama.. then her..
     
  5. tarheelconservative

    tarheelconservative New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2009
    Messages:
    26
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yeah, playing politics by actually doing their job. That is a little different than showing up and voting present.


    It is absolutely reasoning. They don't want to be left with a mound of debt after the federal funding for these programs run out. They would rather handle these matters within their states. After all that is constitutional with this thing called "States Rights." That is the problem with Federal Stimulus, the federal gov. then wants to control the state. Although that does achieve Obama's ultimate goal of having the largest government nanny nation ever in history.
     
  6. Little-Acorn

    Little-Acorn Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2009
    Messages:
    2,444
    Likes Received:
    151
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    Another Palin-bashing thread from popeye?

    It's becomeing clear that the Left (or at least the clucking-chattering fanatics) are getting very worried about Palin. They attack her as vocally and stridently as they can, time and again, long after the election is over. She's not even running for anything.

    The more they scream, the better she looks, as they make it more and more apparent that she is the one they fear for future elections.
     
  7. tarheelconservative

    tarheelconservative New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2009
    Messages:
    26
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
  8. Popeye

    Popeye Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2007
    Messages:
    3,023
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Washington state
    Worried about Palin...hardly. A PPP Poll released last week showed that in a hypothetical match up with her, Obama wins by 20%....I'm just shaking in my boots.

    Try defending Palin's hypocritical actions, not attacking the messenger who points them out...
     
  9. tarheelconservative

    tarheelconservative New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2009
    Messages:
    26
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Wow....a PPP poll that is 3 years out from the possibility of that even being a possible Presidential show down. That sounds extremely solid!
     
  10. chestnut

    chestnut New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2008
    Messages:
    1,222
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    0
    So Popeye..

    I'll give you a thousand dollars... but you will have to do what I say when I say it. is that o.k.?

    that's how the stimulus is being handled.

    Not just that.. But when the govt quits paying, the state will have to keep up the program which means that state will have to raise taxes.

    Is it that hard for you to figure out. You did go to high school right?
     
  11. Bunz

    Bunz New Member

    Joined:
    May 28, 2007
    Messages:
    3,215
    Likes Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Alaska
    Oh there seems to be a fair amount of ignorance by the Palinistas on here. But that is fair enough, I will address them in later posts individually.
    I will say a few things from an Alaskan point of view here. Firstly, Sarah has drawn heavy criticism from a wide variety of Alaskans over this decision and even her supporters have said this is nothing but her making a shallow attempt at pandering to the lower 48 voters, all the while marginalizing Alaskans.
    As it sits right now, if a few other potential candidates for Governor play thier cards right, they could beat Palin in 2010.

    The thing that bothers me the most, is that she made this decision, which the Legislature will probably circumvent and still collect all the money anyways, but she did this without any consultation and at great surprise to all of those effected. She has put herself ahead of the good of not only the state government, but local governments and school districts especially.
     
  12. Bunz

    Bunz New Member

    Joined:
    May 28, 2007
    Messages:
    3,215
    Likes Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Alaska
    Not quite, plenty of it is for maintaining current programs, and a small expansion in some areas. But this is something that all governments are used to, programs and grants go away all the time, or if it is deemed worthy it is continued through other sources. This is common.

    As for Sarah, and not wanting to expand government, then this is something she has never done before. Sarah hasnt seen a larger budget she didnt like. From the local to the state level. She increased the size of government at every opportunity.
    Considering that Obama has shown some openess towards directional drilling in ANWR, this is much more than Clinton ever showed for the state, and now it might happen, unlike what Bush failed to deliver during his tenure on the subject.
     
  13. Bunz

    Bunz New Member

    Joined:
    May 28, 2007
    Messages:
    3,215
    Likes Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Alaska
    While Obama should not have made the comments he did, at least he is willing to fund the issue. Whereas Sarah showed virtually zero interest in the subject until she was personally effected.
    Yeah, that money that saves the burden of not only statewide spending, but also very strapped local governments. Also, as I said before, money goes away all the time, but this was designed to get communities and states some much needed help for the next 2 years.
     
  14. Bunz

    Bunz New Member

    Joined:
    May 28, 2007
    Messages:
    3,215
    Likes Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Alaska
    She has been hardly doing her job. She spent 3 months last year running around the country making a fool of herself and acting at times as an utter embarassment, and misrepresenting her state and her actual political actions. While claiming to be a "conservative" she has in fact been the most socialistic Governor the state has ever seen.
    Alaska has more than enough cash in the bank to cover any of these costs.
    Alaska has since the US "purchased" it, been beholden to DC in many ways. But utterly independant and potentially adversarial towards DC in others. But one thing is sure, and that is Sarah was quite buddy buddy with now convicted former Senator Stevens, the king of pork.

    She had no problem with federal spending in Alaska until it became personally prudent for her to appear conservative. Something she is simply not.
     
  15. Bunz

    Bunz New Member

    Joined:
    May 28, 2007
    Messages:
    3,215
    Likes Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Alaska
    Im worried about my state. I want a Governor who is here to govern, not to further her own personal agenda for higher office, at a time when state revenue is down. I want a Governor, who will actually be available during the legislative session that is currently ongoing rather than traveling around doing fund raisers.
    Obama isnt running for anything and you have zero problems lining up to take cheap shots at him.
    But I dont you are that naive to think that she isnt running for President in 2012. She already has SarahPAC.
    The better she looks? You appear to subscribe to conservative views, as a conservative, can you describe someone who raised taxes on the only signifigant source of revenue for the greater good of everyone else a conservative?
    How about using government money to directly compete with the oil companies she raised taxes on?
    How about taking the extra income made on raising taxes on the oil companies, and giving it out to every man woman and child who pay zero income taxes?
    Now those are the three biggest policy issues that Sarah has pushed since her time in office and they are about as socialistic as anyone in America has ever managed.
     
Loading...

Share This Page