Showing posts with label Governor Palin Record. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Governor Palin Record. Show all posts

Wednesday, June 22, 2011

Debating Governor Palin's Fiscal Record

An odd thing happened to me on Wednesday... A left-winger tried to debate me on Governor Palin's actual record. Considering this is not the normal sort of behavior I am accustomed to as a Palin supporter (usually things that don't exist are the topic of my debates with the left) it shocked me.

The person who attempted to play gotcha with Governor Palin's record, is an obscure individual on Twitter who goes by the name "Uncle Fetus." At this point, you may be asking yourself why I would bother posting on a debate with an anonymous lefty who only has 15 followers... The reason for that is because he was civil, he wanted to argue substance, and if someone else tries to use his false argument, C4P readers will be equipped to answer them.

He shifted an earlier debate about whether or not Governor Palin is running for president in 2012, to the governor's fiscal record in Alaska. He sent me the following two tweets:

Here
Under Palin, AK Total State Debt increased from $8.3 billion in FY2005-06 to $9.3 billion in FY 2009-10. http://www.revenue.state.ak.us/treasury/programs/programs/other/debt/index.aspx
And here
For FY2005-06, Total State Supported debt was $972.9million, in FY2009-10 it rose to $1.349billion. http://www.revenue.state.ak.us/treasury/programs/programs/other/debt/index.aspx
Now, I am very familiar with Governor Palin's record, but I'm also the sort of person who you put a bunch on numbers in front of, and my eyes glaze over. Math was never my best subject. So, in order to answer Uncle Fetus' claims thoroughly, I thought I would message Whitney, who is more familiar with Governor Palin's record than roughly 99.9% of the planet. She's also pretty good with numbers. Whitney sent me the following in response (emphasis):
First off, he's looking at the wrong set of data for Murkowski's final year and Palin's final year. He's a year off. Murkowski's final FY is actually FY2006-2007 with his budget passed in the summer of 2006. In addition to a budget, some of the other policies that might affect the debt would be in place from the Murkowski administration to some degree for that year's debt info. This information is found here in the following year's report: http://www.dor.alaska.gov/treasury/programs/documentviewer/viewer.aspx?428f where it says "as of June 30, 2007, the ____debt is". While Governor Palin was in office then, it was Murkowski's budgeting term that ended in June 2007. With this, the debt then was $9.2 billion with state supported at $1.085+ billion. Governor Palin's final year was the FY20092010 budget passed in the summer of 2009. These numbers show a state debt of $9.0 billion and a state supported debt of $1.256 billion in the report from the following year: http://www.dor.alaska.gov/treasury/programs/documentviewer/viewer.aspx?811f. The overall debt was reduced by $200 million.

Fiscal year things are confusing, then there is a delay between the Fiscal Year and the reporting with this stuff. I had to look at it a few times to make sure I understood right. There may be some influence from Palin's policies (though not budget) in Murkowski's final year, and the same kind of thing for Palin/Parnell. However, the debt numbers are from each person's final fiscal year in office.

Yes, the state supported debt went up from the Murkowski to Palin administration, but it seems that they include pensions, which are always a mess. Governor Palin reformed pensions and used the surplus to help pay it down. Gov. Palin' s second to last year (the number's he is showing), the state supported debt is $1.349 billion--higher than in her final year. She reduced it as her tenure went on.

Regarding the surplus vs. debt thing, I think they can have a revenue surplus, but the aspect of debt also deals with pensions and bonds. It would be outside of an operating or capital budget. Also, this info seems to include municipal debt, which would be at the local level, largely outside of the influence of a governor.
It was a nice try by Uncle Fetus, but he failed to make a valid point at then end of the day. Sarah Palin was a responsible governor, a proven reformer, and she has spoken many times about respecting taxpayer dollars considering where they come from.

This might also be a good time to point out that the left's most famous politician, Barack Obama, has "plunged" this nation into frightening debt. So much so, that congress is in the middle of debating whether or not to raise the $14.3 trillion debt-ceiling at this time. While it's great that some on the the left want to argue substance, it may be wise for them to steer clear of fiscal policy debates.


(All credit to Whitney Pitcher)

Saturday, June 18, 2011

Author of Palin Hit-Piece Claims to Speak for All Conservative Women

Once again, Governor Palin is taking on some friendly fire from a conservative commentator. I did not add quotation marks to the word "conservative" because I have no doubt that this latest attack was delivered by an actual conservative. I don't believe there is a difference in ideology between said commentator and the governor, but rather, this person is just uninformed.

I'm talking about Lisa Fritsch, who posted this long piece over at American Thinker. She starts her article by praising Governor Palin for staying relevant over the course of the last three years, but then states that the governor has yet to win over conservative women as part of her support base. Needless to say, I find that to be a ridiculous statement.

Fritsch then goes on to say that conservative women "adore" that:
... Palin is a wife and mother (including of a special needs child); she hunts, fishes, and does things even men cannot do; she plays several sports; and, as if to put the ribbon on top of it all, she is beautiful.

But:
As much as conservative women admire and respect Sarah Palin, Palin's intellect and intellectual stamina stops short at her own base and platform. The brilliance does not translate beyond her (and our own) comfort zone. She lacks the ability to cross over and present herself in the wider social and political strata. Just as love isn't enough to sustain a marriage, Tea Party-speak isn't enough to win the presidency. The depth required of a president and commander in chief is missing.

It is ludicrous and somewhat narcissistic for anyone to speak for an entire group, such as "conservative women." I know plenty of conservative women who support Governor Palin strongly, and I know some who don't. We are not a monolithic bunch. Next time Lisa should try adding the word(s) "some," "a few," or perhaps "I" for a more honest assessment. And yes, we do admire the governor's family, but to say that conservative women "adore" Governor Palin because of her recreational choices and her looks is shallow and just plain wrong. Why would we care what Governor Palin looks like, or use that as a basis by which to judge her at all? And yeah, the hunting is cool, but it isn't the reason we support her.

Then, to say that Governor Palin's "intellect and intellectual stamina stops short at her own base and platform," is a statement only someone who isn't familiar with the governor's record could make. It is a narrow and hallow critique, not rooted in any sort of understanding of how Governor Palin operates as an executive. And based on the feedback, there is no doubt that most who attended the RightOnline screening of The Undefeated last night in Minneapolis would disagree. Lisa Fritsch is a victim of overexposure to LSM narratives, and not someone who has studied Governor Palin in any depth.

Fritsch continues her 'I am all conservative women and we don't think Palin is up to the job,' post by bringing up the Katie Couric interview from 2008 and Sarah Palin's Alaska on TLC as proof. So, if I have this correct, that means anyone who has ever had a bad moment during an interview, or anyone who used their voice to promote the state they love, is disqualified to run for high office... Well, why is Barack Obama sitting in the White House then?

Next, Fritsch states that Governor Palin is being "coddled" by FOX News. There are two problems with this statement. First, while a few people at FOX have been fair with the governor, their DC based political commentators for the most part, have not. Secondly, Governor Palin is currently under contract with FOX News, so to insinuate that she is avoiding doing interviews with other networks for any other reason, is just dishonest. The governor isn't afraid to step outside of FOX to speak with journalists, and anyone who kept tabs on her recent bus tour knows that.

Fritsch then goes on to compare Governor Palin with the 2008 version of Barack Obama. She wrote:
Because Americans have already taken a chance on the outsider who promised that charm and wit could make up for lack of experience in the line of fire and depth and expertise in foreign affairs, the conservative voter is especially turned off to this strategy of going with a candidate who lacks a serious résumé. In the game that is the presidential election, you must not only be the able to show us the how, what, and why, but you must also be able to explain all of them convincingly and without defect.

Lisa, with all due respect, please educate yourself about Governor Palin's "serious résumé" before you waste your time writing the next lengthy Palin hit-piece. It would save you (and me) the trouble, considering your point has no basis in reality. It is insulting to ignore Governor Palin's record of executive leadership and then claim it is the equivalent of a Junior Senator with a short history of voting "present." Again, this section says more about what Lisa Fritsch doesn't know about Governor Palin, than it does about Governor Palin herself.

Fritsch ends her piece by stating that she has "questions" regarding Governor Palin, then adds this insulting line:
These questions lean toward the juvenile context which that Rush caller suggested; they cast Palin as a candidate for high school prom queen, not president of the United States.

Perhaps those questions could be answered by doing some actual research. But instead, Lisa Fritsch would rather rely on played out narratives as the basis from which to judge Governor Palin. This is exactly what I was talking about the day when I wrote how it "drives me nuts" when conservatives fall for bogus media-driven memes. This woman took the effort to write paragraph after paragraph repeating garbage she picked up from the press to discredit and diminish Governor Palin. She never cites any portion of Palin's governing record to make her case, but instead recycles attack lines that were mainly created by the left. All while purporting to speak for every conservative woman, no less.

Well Mrs. Fritsch, you do not speak for me. I know Governor Palin's record and I understand her character well. She is a responsible leader and a proven reformer, unlike Barack Obama or any current GOP candidate for that matter. She stands for commonsense conservative principles, and YES, has the record to prove it... Look it up!

Tuesday, June 14, 2011

My Review of 'The Undefeated'

I had the honor last weekend to preview Steve Bannon's new documentary "The Undefeated," based primarily on Governor Palin's political life. When Mr. Bannon was asked recently by Kathryn Jean Lopez, why he "was keen on telling her story," he replied:
This woman is one of the most covered individuals in our media-saturated “global village,” yet I felt that she was totally unknown. The real person was hiding in plain sight.
As a C4P contributor, and supporter of Governor Palin's since first learning about her in late 2007, I can say that he is absolutely correct about that. It is why I have used the word "distortion" so often in my writings. The media has covered Governor Palin virtually every day since the presidential election in 2008, yet only now are Americans starting to learn about her actual record. It's a shame that it took so long, and it's amazing how it all came about, but at least the truth is finally up for discussion, in more places than just pro-Palin comment boards.

The film starts off with a shocking display of hatred in various forms, directed towards Governor Palin by the left. It was nothing I hadn't seen before, but I'm sure most Americans are unaware of the actual level of vitriol that Governor Palin and her family have been subjected to. By putting this segment at the very beginning of the movie, Bannon grabs the attention of the viewer, letting them know all about it by giving them a taste.

The movie describes why and how Governor Palin got involved in politics in the first place. It touches on her years in the city council, and goes into great detail about her time as Wasilla Mayor, chair and ethics officer of the of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, and Governor of Alaska. They interview many familiar (to C4P readers) faces who worked with Governor Palin, and were a big part of her administration.

During the portion of the film that covers Alaska, viewers get to see Governor Palin's courage and ethical principles on full display. Those who have no knowledge about the governor (other than moronic Tina Fey skits) will get to see the reformer we know. They will learn how she rose to power on her own accord, without being backed by the Alaska GOP establishment, then how she took them on to clean up her state's government. They will learn about her enormous approval ratings, and learn why. The film goes into great detail about her policy accomplishments, and viewers will no doubt have a better understanding of energy, it's relationship to Alaska, and the importance of domestic production after seeing the film.

The movie briefly covers the 2008 presidential campaign, and highlights Governor Palin's significance to the Republican ticket. They touched on the country's economic collapse during that time, and the subsequent loss for McCain-Palin. The more important part of the film follows, as some Americans will learn for the first time what happened to Governor Palin when she returned to Alaska following the election.

Viewers get to see the litany of attacks she faced, the avalanche of frivolous claims, the costs to her family and state, and a legislature more interested in playing partisan games against her than working for the people, after she returned from the campaign trail. People who see this movie will have little doubt that the reason Governor Palin resigned from the governorship was for the sake of Alaska, even if it cost her political career.

The movie goes on to tell the story of Governor Palin and the conservative movement since her resignation. They make the obvious comparison with the Reagan Revolution, and note how the governor has encouraged so many to get involved in the process. Showing her leading the charge in many instances taking on the left, while simultaneously keeping the national GOP on notice.

The movie is two hours long, which is considered lengthy for the subject matter. But I can tell you that it doesn't feel like two hours after you've watched it. Due to the structure and content, the movie holds your attention the entire time. It also has some great original footage most have never witnessed. I appreciated this film to no end, and like Dan Riehl, I even teared up at one point when Andrew Breitbart was speaking.

The Undefeated is a story about a courageous, modern-day political reformer but more importantly, it is a story about a survivor. It is the true story of Governor Palin and what she represents as most Americans have never seen before. I strongly recommend that they do when the film comes out on July 15.

Sunday, December 19, 2010

David Jenkins: Obama vs. Palin; Polar opposite visions of what leadership should be

Pajamas Media ran a piece today, written by David Jenkins today titled, "Tale of the Tape: Obama vs. Palin; Polar opposite visions of what leadership should be." Jenkins highlights the clear contrast between Barack Obama ans Governor Palin in both character and leadership:

On December 4, 2009, pollster Matt Towery predicted that President Barack Obama’s approval ratings would drop to somewhere in the mid-40s by mid-2010. To his surprise, it took only a few days. By the second week of December, Obama’s approval had faded to 47 percent in a Gallup poll. The number of Americans who approve of the president’s job performance has gone as low as 41 percent, and he fares even worse among independent voters. All of this despite incessant drum-beating on his behalf by the MSM.

At the same time, Sarah Palin — whose favorability rating in some polls went as low as 39 percent in July when she resigned as Alaska’s governor — is currently at 46 percent in a recent AP-GfK poll, even though the MSM has treated her to a barrage of disparagement perhaps unequaled in American political history. Yet among Republicans and Republican-leaning independents, Palin is viewed favorably by 80 percent — a higher rating than any other potential GOP presidential candidate. And 63 percent of everyday Americans say their views are more like Palin’s than Obama’s.

At first glance, Mrs. Palin and President Obama have many things in common. They are both physically attractive, mid-40s young, and have attractive spouses and families to which they are openly devoted. Both have strong leadership qualities and are dynamic speakers, arguably the two best on the political scene in recent years. In addition, they share to some degree an outsider’s perspective on American politics, hailing as they do from the states most recently added to the union, the only states which are not part of the continental U.S. Scratch beneath their personable surfaces, though, and they represent polar opposite visions of what leadership in this country should look like.

Obama presents as a victim; Palin a victor.

Dragged from pillar to post by an unstable mother and finally dumped on his grandparents, the young Barry Obama seems to have formed the habit of feeling sorry for himself early on. By the age of 12 or 13, as he tells us in his book, he ” … found solace in a sense of grievance and animosity against my [white] mother’s race.” He was mentored by Communist and sexual deviant Frank Marshall Davis through his teen years, and in college consistently chose to associate with radicals and Marxists. As a disciple of Saul Alinsky, he worked as a community organizer nurturing a sense of victimhood among the poor and disadvantaged. For 20 years he was a member of a church which taught black liberation theology, a cult which portrays black people as downtrodden and oppressed. He has built his career on appealing to those who prefer to consider themselves victims in this life.

Sarah Heath Palin, on the other hand, grew up in a lower-middle-class family in the demanding, near-frontier environment of Alaska, where she learned a can-do attitude early in life. She led her high-school basketball team to a state championship while playing on a broken ankle. As a young wife and mother she worked with her husband on his salmon-fishing boat in all kinds of weather. Since being selected as the 2008 Republican vice-presidential candidate, she has endured personal attacks and vilification unprecedented in living memory. Far from being a victim, she chooses to display courage, grace, optimism, and what can only be described as a joyous spirit

[...]

Obama has campaigning ability, Palin has executive ability.

Getting himself elected to the nation’s highest office on a wave of nebulous “hope and change” was no small accomplishment. Though after nearly two years as “chief executive” he is still campaigning, which is not surprising — it’s the only thing he knows how to do. He had zero executive experience before entering the oval office, and has continued to pass the buck on governing. Which is not necessarily a bad thing, since the voters soundly rejected his agenda in the 2010 mid-term elections. (However, he continues to protest that the voters did not reject his agenda – they just failed to understand it.)

Certainly no slouch as a campaigner herself, Governor Palin has also proven to be an effective administrator, establishing a stellar record all the way from her home town mayor’s office to the Alaska governor’s office, where she earned an incredible 80-plus percent approval rating from her fellow citizens.

[...]

Palin is spotless, Obama is corrupt.

Since entering the national scene as John McCain’s vice-presidential pick in 2008, Sarah Palin has been the object of intense, hostile scrutiny by hordes of leftists. Nothing has been spared. Not her public life, not her private life, not her family. Droves of Democrats have gone to Alaska to examine the public records, talk to her neighbors and townspeople, and file frivolous ethics complaints against her. Legal defense against these complaints has cost her family a great deal of money and required so much of her time and attention that it became impossible for her to continue as governor of the state.

Yet, to the chagrin of the ankle-biters, nothing has stuck.

The Associated Press even assigned 11 writers to “fact-check” her memoir Going Rogue. They were able to find six “errors,” all of which upon examination turn out to be nothing more than differences in interpretation. Beyond her personal spotlessness, there is probably no politician in the country who has anything close to her record of fighting corruption in government, even when the “corrupt bastards” were members of her own party.

Meanwhile, Barack Obama, who gave as his qualification to be president his experience as a community organizer for the thoroughly corrupt ACORN organization, is presiding over what is easily one of the most corrupt administrations in U.S. history while enjoying almost total immunity from scrutiny by the MSM. He has expressed scant regard for the Constitution, which he swore to uphold, calling it a flawed document, and which he has repeatedly violated by his efforts to extend the government’s domination over the lives of the citizens of this country. He has appointed numerous “czars” to positions of great authority without the advice and consent of Congress, another violation of the Constitution.

As for those “czars,” one resigned when it came to light that he was a self-avowed communist. Another czar who has not yet resigned but should is Obama’s hand-picked Safe Schools Czar Kevin Jennings, who has advocated teaching school children the finer details of “fisting.”

The White House communications director resigned after revealing that she is a fan of Chairman Mao. The director of communications for the National Endowment for the Arts stepped down after he was caught in the act of trying to convert the foundation into a propaganda machine for Obama.

And the Democrats in “the most honest, the most open, the most ethical Congress in history”? Jefferson, Schumer, Rangel, Dodds, Waters, the late John Murtha …

Palin loves America, Obama apologizes for America.

Sarah Palin knows and constantly affirms that America is objectively the most free, generous, and altruistic nation in history, a beacon to the world. A country where minorities find their rights respected and enjoy more acceptance and opportunity than anywhere else. These are the values of a great majority of her fellow citizens, and they respond to her because they recognize that she is one of them.

As for Obama, one of his first official acts as president was to apologize to the Arab world, granting his first sit-down interview to Arab television station Al-Arabiya. He took the opportunity to confirm the Arab view that the problem is America, not the jihadists who have murdered more than 3000 of our citizens. He soon followed up that performance by apologizing to Europe for America’s having been “arrogant, dismissive, and derisive.”

Palin is polarizing, Obama is radioactive.

The MSM’s current buzzword is that Sarah Palin is “polarizing.” This is an attempt to marginalize her by implying that her views are somehow extremist, rather than mainstream. As noted above, 63 percent of everyday Americans say their views are more like Palin’s than Obama’s.

Actually, the one who is polarizing is Mr. Obama himself, whose views are far out of the mainstream. As a senator, he was considered the most liberal member of the Senate. That would place him to the left of Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, an avowed socialist.

But worse than being polarizing, Obama is radioactive. In the 2010 mid-term elections, Democrats did not run on their records of voting for Obama’s agenda; most ran from their records, and some even ran against the Obama agenda. Very few were even willing to have him campaign for them. By comparison, two-thirds of Palin-endorsed candidates for the House and Senate won their races.

You can read the entire piece here.