Vice-President Picks

Remove all ads!

Well that's not surprising.

 

... most of them are in Texas....


... and my in-laws.

 

The way I'm seeing it - correct me if I'm wrong - an earmark guarantees that a certain amount will be given for a particular project. Without it, the amount may still be given, but would have to be split as however the relevant departments/procedures dictate. Thus, if a governor or senator wants to prioritize a certain project - such as the Ted Stevens (he was the main proponent, right) wanted to prioritize the Alaskan bridges - s/he will push for an earmark.

However, canceling the earmark does not mean the state won't get the money. When the Congress scrapped the bridges project in 2005, the state of Alaska still got the money, it was just used for other infrastructural projects.

Which brings me to another point: decrying earmarks as pork barrel spending and wasting the taxpayers' money can be extremely misleading. Every dollar that goes into a (well-planned and executed) infrastructural project is a dollar well spent. Roads, bridges, runways, railroads - these are the lifelines of a country's transport and economy.

 

It would be bizarre for the Democrats to gun too hard for Palin's daughter because doing so would undermine some central elements in the Democratic worldview. That worldview includes the idea that there is absolutely nothing wrong with unwed pregnancy and that the old standards of behaviour and morality are outmoded.

The way they'd have to go about it would be to target not the pregnancy itself but the hypocrisy inherent in the Republican's worldview -- finding old soundbits from former key Republicans that trash unwed mothers and their parents and then pointing out that the Republicans don't practice what they preach would be effective and would not make the Democrats look too much like hypocrites themselves. However, the Dems don't want to play dirty, and to be honest I like that and it makes me lean toward their camp a tiny little bit.

 

Scalzi has produced the best--or at least most entertaining--response to the Palin hooplah I've come across.

 

I really don't think the entire unwed daughter thing is the most important problem Palin has. Personally, I'm more alarmed by how quite a few of her strong points are exaggerated or completely BS - such as the part about selling that "luxury plane" on a profit (it wasn't luxury, and it wasn't on a profit); the entire Bridge to Nowhere BS or, if you want to dig in deeper, whether she has more than a passing connection to Ted Stevens, that Canadian oil company that asked to be paid in advance to do what other companies were all too willing to do freely (or bribe for), etc, etc. Oh, and the laughable bit about being the governor of Alaska giving you foreign policy and military credentials.

Somehow, having her daughter get pregnant out of wedlock - something, by the way, Gov. Palin herself had little control over - just doesn't seem to measure. If the US actually did have liberal media, and Governor Palin were subjected to the same vitriol and scrutiny that, say, Hillary Clinton went through (I still wince when I watch, say, Olbermann's classic pieces on her), she would be field-dressed like a moose, daughter or no.

I find that it is supreme irony that many of McCain's attack towards Obama - inexperience, pseudo-change and the entire "celebrity" line seem perfectly applicable towards Palin - and thus, by extension, to his own campaign. To a point, that means that Democrats will find it harder than usual to attack him on these things as they themselves were attacked on them (though it appears Obama is taking aim at McCain/Palin's "change" goal), but it means that the Republican pair will have to find another reason to attack them for, and can be even more vulnerable to hypocricy charges. Considering McCain's (and Palin's) reputation as a maverick, this could be dangerous in itself. Perhaps McCain chose wisely, and the benefits of having her on the ticket - and possibly in office - will outweigh the costs. I hope he miscalculated on the first, and doesn't get to see the last, myself.

 

The Hunt for Sarah October

 

I found this one on Newsweek:

http://www.newsweek.com/id/157543

The irony (hypocrisy) of the Repulican Party is amazing.

 

This is news to me, LKD. The democratic worldview isn't about what is and isn't OK. It's about what should and shouldn't be legal. Democrats are just as likely to be religious as republicans and just as likely to adhere to those "old, outmoded standards of behaviour and morality" as republicans are. The difference lies in what they consider the role of law to be. And if you think democrats don't think teen pregnancy is a problem or that teens shouldn't be encouraged to abstain from sex, there's a thread over in the other alley you might want to read.

 

Drew makes a very good point, actually. It's a little like the "Democrats support abortion" angle: supporting abortion and not believing that it is the state's right to decide it for you are two different things.

In other news, here is something for the little Governor Palin fan in all of us: Sarah Palin dol... oops, action figures: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7607497.stm

 

I deliberately didn't use the term "teen pregnancy" and chose "unwed pregnancy" for a reason. However, given the Democrat's record on things like abortion rights, divorce law, family law, and other "feminist" issues (and I'll state up front that I agree with some of those positions!) they would be pretty hypocritical to gun for Palin's daughter. They could legitimately gun for Palin and accuse her of "flip-flopping" but as I said before it would appear they want to play nice when it comes to that. As I said, I respect that. I wish that both parties could be as chivalric on all the issues, and maybe talk some more about THEIR policies and plans rather than attacking the opposition.

 

Just to clear the air then - the Dems are not going after Palin's daughter. It was the McCain campaign itself who brought that up and the press who kept it going. Her repeating bullsh*t lies every five minutes and her dubious Gubernatorial record are better targets, anyway.

 

LMAO! You are a laugh riot! Barak Obamas mom was an unwed teen when she became pregnant with him! HAHAHAHAHAHA! Irony express! Was his mom a failure? Did he suffer from this failure? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ann_Dunham

The hypocrisy of the Democratic party (and liberal media) is so delicious, I'm giddy. Attacking a successful woman. Attacking a pregnant teen. What do they expect to gain from this? Votes? All they are doing is making here a sympathetic victim.

 

Well, I sent that link with the Palin action figures to a friend -- a friend who doesn't post here and who obviously doesn't share my opinions on politics. His response was so funny I can't resist posting it here:

 

LKD - Both Obama and Biden have stated that family, personal issues are "off-limits" for their campaigns. But the rest of us find it ironic that evangleicals, who have made teen pregnancy such a moral and parenting issue over the last decade are now back-tracking like hell on it....

Jack - Obama stated the very same thing on TV about his mom when the news about Palin's daughter broke. Till that time I had not known about his mom's situation. Obama spoke about how he was raised by his single mother and grandmother. Given that he became as successful as he has says a lot about the needless stigma attached to single moms, IMO.

 

Did you actually read my post Jack? Seems like you didn't and I still hold that if your child get pregnant at 16 then you have done a few mistakes as a parent but here is the kicker it is mistakes that I and most people on the "left" can understand while conservatives usually are all over them condemning people for their mistakes. Funny hearing someone who seems to be on the right speak about hypocrisy. For how long have conservatives been condemning teen pregnancy? For how long have they meddled in peoples family affairs telling people what is right and wrong and now that one of their own is part of a family mishap they don't see anything wrong with it at all. It is you who is full of it Jack.

 

I think Jack is right about the "liberal media" jumping all over the issue of Brsitol's pregnancy. They have. But who can resist the irony? In that sense it's politics as usual, and both sides are playing the same game. Nevertheless, I don't think the Obama campaign has been guilty of it.

Joac - You are certainly right about the "shotgun wedding." Why compound the situation by making a second mistake?

 

He quoted me not the "liberal media" and yes, if you have dug yourself a hole everyone knows the only way out is to dig deeper!

 

Not to , but I too must disagree with Jack. It is not Democrats that are accusing Palin of bad parenting because her daughter got knocked up while she was still in high school. It is the media that made a big deal out of it, and while I know everyone thinks it's a "liberal media", they do not speak for Obama. I have not heard Obama, Biden, a member of the campaign, or any prominent Democrat like the Clintons, Kennedy, Gore, Edwards, or any other Democratic politician levy an attack on Palin because her daughter is pregnant.