1 Oil companies don't need tax incentives to go find oil and make money on it, that crap needs to end. That much I agree with Obama on; subsidies for huge, profitable companies are a waste of money and unconstitutional.

2 Republican theme for 2012: Democrat's insane policies are making shit more expensive for YOU

3

the question of who in the GOP can beat Obama may soon be irrelevant if energy prices continue to climb.

Obama will beat himself.

4 She's been making policy statements like this for two years. What's changed?

5
The U.S. must be the only country on earth to have non-development of its fuel sources as national policy.

6 The thing about listening to Palin speak isn't about what she says, its that damned voice.  She should take up whiskey and cigars for a while and deepen that voice a little. 

7 Wouldn't "You Lie!" get to the point faster?

8

Obama will beat himself.

Posted by: booter at March 16, 2011 01:51 PM

I'm sure he beats himself daily. In front of a mirror.

9 If the current Golf trend continues, Obama won't even bother showing up to campaign. 

10

>>> Republican theme for 2012: Democrat's insane policies are making shit more expensive for YOU

Good stuff but I think it's still just too complicated for the 52% to fully understand.

 

 

11 this is exactly the sort of thing I'd like to hear her saying on TV

No.

It's the kind of thing you want to see her on TV get interrupted while saying, and not be allowed to finish, so you can say she's a weak idiot.

12 Even if we completely discount Alaska, the Gulf, and both coasts, we have enough shale oil and natural gas in the midwest to completely pwn Saudi Arabia for the next 50 years.  Why don't we drill there?

13
She's been making policy statements like this for two years. What's changed?
Posted by: Velociman at March 16, 2011 01:52 PM

Nothing, except that (running around tearing hair out) SHE'S UNELECTABLE! SHE'S UNELECTABLE! SHE'S UNELECTABLE!

14 Since I have an uncanny ability post just as a new thread is going up I'll repeat this question here:

Re recalling the fleebaggers...anyone know of anywhere to donate to the cause?

15 Confirmation on one of your thoughts: Palin isn't talking about ANWR in Exhibit C. There's a big-ass pile of resources above the Arctic Circle (and not just oil) that no one could get to before. Because of arctic warming, the ice cap recedes enough that Shell could rush in and pump oil before the ice returns. That sort of thing didn't make sense before, but between the price of oil and the longer drilling season, there's enough money to be made.

Because of the stupid bureaucratic rules, Shell can't get approval before the ice returns, and the agency keeps making them re-apply every year.

16 I'm sure he beats himself daily. In front of a mirror.

There are so many ways that statement can be interpreted as, from the innocent to the decadent.

12 Even if we completely discount Alaska, the Gulf, and both coasts, we have enough shale oil and natural gas in the midwest to completely pwn Saudi Arabia for the next 50 years.  Why don't we drill there?

That'll mean no more investments for High Speed Rail! 

17 Really good FaceBook argument on one of the top three issues of the day.

The other two?  NCAA picks and the greenside bunker on the 14th hole at Congressional.

18 You know, when I say that Palin needs to sound smarter, this is exactly the sort of thing I'd like to hear her saying on TV.

This is precisely the kind of thing you refuse to hear when she says it on TV.

And haven't we gotten over the adolescent idiocy of believing that good speech delivery is a necessary component of leadership?! I have. I don't know what's up with the rest of you.

19 Why don't we drill there?

Ecotard legal obstacles.  Shell is bogged down with the same sort of shit going on at their Canadian tar sands projects.

20 We need a high speed rail and Washington DC ... along with lots of synthetic grease.

21

Even if we completely discount Alaska, the Gulf, and both coasts, we have enough shale oil and natural gas in the midwest to completely pwn Saudi Arabia for the next 50 years.  Why don't we drill there?

Shale oil is quite a bit more expensive and dirtier to extract.

Not saying that we shouldn't, but we should focus getting the oil that's relatively easy to access by drilling before shifting to shale oil.

22

Ace,

The incentives she is talking about are research incentives. In other words if the oil company drills a dry well they can write that off as a cost of doing business.

It's the same as if Apple built a bunch of I phones they couldn't sell they can write off the cost of buidling those I phones.

Companies use money for research that they have already paid taxes on, if they lose it in a dry hole or an unsuccessfull product they write off that cost against future tax liabilities. If you take that away then they will increase the cost of oil they do find or products that are successful to cover the costs of their losers.

This results in a tax increase to the public with the corporations collecting the tax for the government.

23 >>>Republican theme for 2012: Democrat's insane policies are making shit more expensive for YOU Sounds good. Because contrary to what the Democrats always claim, their policies do not create jobs, do not reduce costs, and do not make us safer.

24 Related -
I think it was Mitch McConnell who stumbled Sunday when confronted with Barry claiming that our oil output is up. Of course it is up, the price of fuel has doubled.  Producers are maximizing marginal wells in response to higher prices. That is how a market works. It would work even better if they could drill new wells.

25 Wow. Another Ace 5000 word essay on Palin. This would be about essay # 137 or so. One might get the impression there might be a certain obsession there. Or am I full of shit?

26

As a river of oil flows into this country, a river of money flows out.

Ace:

To the leftists who hate the United States (but I repeat myself), that's not a bug but a feature:  if you have a world-view that sees America as too powerful and has looted the world, you want to send that money back to the "exploited indigenous peoples."

Things are going to get much worse while President Golfsalot and his merry band of Marxists and union thugs are in charge.  Even if he gets tossed out in two years, he and the idiots in DC (of both parties) have created terrible damage to the U.S. economy and finances.  I'm particularly optimistic that the damage can be reversed.

27 10 If the current Golf trend continues, Obama won't even bother showing up to campaign. 

Posted by: Purple Avenger at March 16, 2011 01:53 PM (nzRBj)

No way! Barky LOVES to campaign!

That's what he does! That's ALL he does!

28 Ace, your main dig (along with a whole bunch of others) is that she doesn't say these things on the fly.  I look at it this way.  She's got good handlers, if it's not her coming up with this.  I would take her and her current handlers over Jugears McFuckstick and his handlers, McCain, Huckabee, Romney, and a whole host of others.  What politician says what they think without it being vetted by their handlers anyway?  Hardly any, I would guess.

Just my $.02, anyway.....

29

@26

oops - that should be "...NOT optimistic..."

30 The coastal marshes of ANWR are the very definition of God Forsaken Wasteland.  Goldberg did an on-scene report from there once.

31 Liberals suck, they just fucking suck. I swear, they are the destroyers of civilization. They fucking infest a civilization and choke it. We got toilets that don't work, light bulbs that need to warm up, gas that eats away fuel systems....nothing fucking works as it should anymore.

The country better fucking wake up.

32 I'd rather 'subsidize' oil production (which works) than wind-and-solar-based fantasies (that don't).

At least with oil production you're getting something worthwhile.

33 Anybody see anything on the horizon that points to substantially lower fuel prices?
Me either.

34 I'm sure he beats himself daily. In front of a mirror.

Posted by: arhooley at March 16, 2011 01:53 PM (KWk5E)

Wouldn't you if you were married to a wookie?  Not being a wookie yourself, I guess.

35 Tax breaks (or: incentives) are not subsidies. Subsidies are gifts; subsidies are government largesses. Planned Parenthood is subsidized. ExxonMobil is not subsidized.

36 This was on the sidebar, but it should be reposted.  I hope the Israelis follow through:

How Israel could revolutionize the global energy sector

37 I'm interested in how fast Israel will get all that natural gas out of it's shore. Bet they put us to shame.

38 A Palin thread! Woot. I'm in serious trouble here, folks.

39

Wow. Another Ace 5000 word essay on Palin. This would be about essay # 137 or so. One might get the impression there might be a certain obsession there. Or am I full of shit?

That last part I suspect.

Every time she says or does something the Palinistas like, they clamor for a post about it... then complain about having another Palin post when one goes up.

Even a favorable post gets twisted into "why do you hate Palin so much?".

40 It doesn't matter.  She took three extra shots to drop a caribou, so she doesn't have the leadership qualities to be President.

41 I knock Palin a lot but when she's on, she's on.

ooooh shiny Palin thread. Like I said last time; It's not her intelligence that gives me pause. I think she is smart enough and good enough to do a good if not great, and needed job of executing the executive office. But her resignation from governorship is an awful hard impossible hill to defend. Love her as I might, until O drops below 30%, I'm not going to pull for her.

But on topic, her economic analysis of energy in relation to everything else is dead on. In other countries which are still based on manual labor, it wouldn't be such a big deal. But America competes internationally as the worlds top manufacturer not because of cheap labor but because of efficiency, efficiency that comes from industrialization and automation of manual tasks. That industrialization and automation depending on readily available inexpensive energy. As energy prices rise it makes us less competitive as a manufacturer of all goods, including food (Tractors and airplanes and farm equipmend that do the job of 100 people with one person in less time, run on *gasp* fuel!)

In the end, this plan by the administration to jack up energy prices to make green energy competitive, is exactly what we say it is. A purposeful destruction of America's economic might.

42 @39, has your chosen candidate made news you'd like a thread about?
No?
So I figured.

43 The center cannot hold.

44 I WANT TO HAVE BARACK HUSSIEN OBAMA"S BABY.......HMMMMMM........HMMMMM....... HMMMMM !!!!!!

45 Quick, pour water on it.

46 Look we're all centerist moderate squishes!

47 The country better fucking wake up.

Posted by: Berserker at March 16, 2011 02:00 PM (gWHrG)

They never will.  They've become so lazy, they're just waiting for the next one to come along and give them their free shit.  Those damn rich people have held them down for way too long.

48 If the current Golf trend continues, Obama won't even bother showing up to campaign.
Posted by: Purple Avenger at March 16, 2011 01:53 PM


He'll show up to campaign, but (cue broken record), he'll refuse to debate. You heard it here second.

49 It's just a jump to the Left...

50 Let's shout from the rooftops. CORPORATIONS DO NOT PAY TAXES....The consumers of their products pay them. They just add them to the cost of doing business and the paperwork required to tell the government how much they owe.

51 My understanding on these are that they are NOT tax incentives like they have incentives for solar et al. These are simply writing down exploration and drilling as a legitimate expense.

In other words it cost your company 1 mil to find oil and 1 mil to drill the hole. You make 10 mil in cash sales but you subtract the 2 mil from that and pay taxes on the difference.

52 I'm deeply concerned by this blogs rapid shift to the center.  Ace, are you practicing triangulation?

53 50 It's just a jump to the Left...

Posted by: The Narrator at March 16, 2011 02:06 PM (MMC8r)

LOL! +100

54 Things seem more centrist today.

55

Ace--You know, when I say that Palin needs to sound smarter, this is exactly the sort of thing I'd like to hear her saying on TV.

You'll have that chance soon enough. She's running.

2012 Can't Come Soon Enough.

56

 >>> he'll refuse to debate.

 

Agreed.  When that rolls around he will be sooooo busy that well.........it's just not possible at this time.

I can hear it now.  I will be shocked if he agrees to a debate.

57

 @39, has your chosen candidate made news you'd like a thread about?
No?
So I figured.

I haven't yet chosen a favorite candidate yet.  I'll let everyone know when I do (hint, it won't be someone who has no chance of winning in the general).

However, I'm not sure a Facebook posting qualifies as "news".  She makes a pretty strong argument here, but let's face it- few politicians write all their own material.

58 Ace, dude, she talks about this stuff on TV all the time, which is why Couric, Gingrich, Cristie, Obama, Meghan McCain, etc., constantly try to change the subject to personal and personality issues. SP is rock solid on every issue I know of that she has spoken or written on. Facebook posting after Facebook posting, interview after interview, speech after speech.

And she has balls of steel.

My only question: is she too much more of a flake than the typical politician? Anybody know what is the PFMSD (Politican Flake Magnitude Standard Deviation) is?

Perhaps big balls lend one a certain flakiness? Churchill was definitely known as a political flake in his day, at least 2.0 PFMSDs from the mean I'd say.

59 Ace lurching to the center again?

60 It seems the only decisions odipstick is able to make are the traditional liberal arguments and ideology that has been stated millions of times before, however, any new situation just seems to boggle his mind.

Examples include no oil, no coal, no nukes, green energy, keynesism, all of these he follows the party line.  On the other side he runs into something like Gitmo, Mid-East revolutions, budgeting, inflation etc and he is at a complete and total loss at what to do or even to make a decision.

Then of course, when events go against him, he lies..."we have done more of this or that than anybody in the universe has ever done".

61 RON PAUL - BECAUSE HE'S NOT A CENTRIST

62 She's (obviously) right, and public opinion backs her on this. But the Dems are more interested in blaming the oil companies for lack of drilling and in tapping the SPR. The BP oil spill just gave them an excuse to limit the oil industry in favor of going to an alternative energy system.

63 But, but, that voice...
But, but, she resigned...

My fucking balls...


She is coming and she is going to kick ass.

64 Then of course, when events go against him, he lies..."we have done more of this or that than anybody in the universe has ever done".
Posted by: Guy Fawkes at March 16, 2011 02:10 PM

That's exactly what I expect to hear during the 2012 campaign. Our economy is bigger, better, and more uncut now than it was in 2008.

65 Sure she can say all of this on TV, then Saturday Night Live brings Tina Fey covered in Oil with some stupid joke about how she can see oil from her house. Following that we will all start talking about how she's unelectable because liberals made fun of her too much. In all seriousness though, energy was one of her strong points, if gas prices continue to rise and energy costs do what Obama wants them to do (necessarily skyrocket), she's going to start becoming a stronger voice, especially if she gets a camera up to ANWR so people can see what it really looks like.

66 You have any YouTube links where she has delivered something similar to this on any issue? That would defenitely bolster you argument with ace.

67 Ace,

If your real knock against Palin is that she doesn't "say this stuff on TV" I think you need to read that out loud.  How long did it take?  More than a soundbite?  More than a reasonable answer to a standard segment question?  I think the answer is "yes" on both counts.

To make that kind of statement on TV she would have to a) have her own show, b) call a press conference, or c) be in a debate where lengthy answers were acceptable.  A is kind of beyond her control, B would be so gauche as to be indefensible, and C would require her to be an announced candidate in an actual debate.

If this is what you're looking for, you need to look at her print statements and speeches- where she's been saying this stuff for 2 years.

The only reason Mittens, or Huckster, or MitchD, or T-Paw have this kind of thing "on TV" was because they were or are State Governors and Presidential Candidates.  That said, their TV Statements on this kind of thing are either a) just as short and "sound bite" as Sarah's or b) just as stale.  I'm sure footage could be dug up of her saying almost exactly the same things as Governor.

68 You know who this helps?

69 58

 @39, has your chosen candidate made news you'd like a thread about?
No?
So I figured.

I haven't yet chosen a favorite candidate yet.  I'll let everyone know when I do (hint, it won't be someone who has no chance of winning in the general).

However, I'm not sure a Facebook posting qualifies as "news".  She makes a pretty strong argument here, but let's face it- few politicians write all their own material.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at March 16, 2011 02:09 PM (SY2Kh)

HOOOEEE H.P. I just saved that comment for later reference. Good luck with your choice of "electable" candidate. PS, isn't that what they called McCaine?

70 Here's comes a 500+ comment Palin extravaganza...

71 Tire inflation, high-speed rail, wind and solar.

Oh, and fucking ethanol.

72 This thread is de ja vu all over again.

73 And we can add her critique of QE 2, months ago, which the Journal denied even though she cited their own report. Or New START, which the Russian Defense Minister glowingly approves off,  or the no fly zone over Libya, which the French signed on to, although without leadership, floundered.

74 It wouldn't hurt for her to videotape these statements and Youtube them, that's for sure.  Why not hit the widest possible audience?  She has a studio at her house, so there's no reason why she couldn't produce a nicely polished speech segment every so often.

75 To whom do I submit my whiplash claim?

76

Thank you for picking up on this, Ace.  I linked it on one of the earlier opens.  She's a fucking buzz saw and she's gonna be our next president or decide who our next president will be.

Also:  I want to have sex with her brain.

77

I can hear it now.  I will be shocked if he agrees to a debate.

Posted by: Roadking at March 16, 2011 02:09 PM

Side two of my broken record: "I've got a lot of other more important stuff to do, because a whole bunch of folks are counting on me to do the important work I've been doing for the last four years of fixing the mistakes of my predecessor. Everyone knows where I stand on the issues anyway, and this divisive nit-picking doesn't solve any of the hard problems my predecessor left me that I go to bed every night trying to solve."

78 And for the record, she has some seriously great legs Oh yeah

79 WINNING (again)! 

80 @82 - another good reason for Youtubing these statements.

81

Higher energy costs equals lower standard of living.

High enough and  you actually shorten lives.

82 especially if she gets a camera up to ANWR so people can see what it really looks like.

The episode of her Alaska show where she shot the caribou was filmed in ANWR. She said she picked that as an activity specifically to show people what the place is like.

83 47 The country better fucking wake up.

Posted by: Berserker at March 16, 2011 02:00 PM (gWHrG)

it won't, we have our esteemed others as in WI deciding our states being broke doesn't matter a bit when it comes to throwing in  for their own health care and pensions.

84 >>>Ace, your main dig (along with a whole bunch of others) is that she doesn't say these things on the fly. I look at it this way. She's got good handlers, if it's not her coming up with this. I would take her and her current handlers over Jugears McFuckstick and his handlers, McCain, Huckabee, Romney, and a whole host of others. I would too but I don't think you can get elected without convincing the public that you yourself, not you plus your handlers feeding you lines, can speak authoritatively on these issues. The main complaint from people like oblig. and rob crawford seems to be that Palin should be excused from this duty. Well, there's no "should" in this. I don't think you can get elected unless you do this. I do not think people are going to say "I don't know if Palin's up to it but she has good advisors, so I'll vote for her advisors." Palin got Quayle-ized. She needs to overcome that, as Dan Quayle *tried* to, but failed to. You can keep saying that Palin can win even being Quaylized and not overcoming that. And I will keep saying the same thing: No, she can't, so stop telling people to spin for her, and start telling her that this can only happen if she overcomes that. Can it be overcome? yes, I think it could be, which is why it frustrates me so much that she doesn't. As if doing so would be "playing the media's game" or something. It's not playing the media's game to come across in interviews as informed. That's not something the media just came up with in 2008.

85 Good on you Ace. But, you were already convinced, right? So, anyway, check this one. It has been pointed out to you before: http://tinyurl.com/4mwmea4 Note this is on mydd and the author is either a liberal version of a moby, or is actually persuaded.

86 Can someone photoshop that bear at a gas station along with the crying indian and the UN green-helmet guy, please?

87 Do you think Steve Jobs can get an edible iPad out before the closing bell?

88
I don't think this last part can be emphasized enough: Higher energy costs equal higher costs for everything -- everything runs on energy



One of my favorite arguments to ask a lefty here in SoCal is "what's the main ingredient in a loaf of bread". They get all flustered when I tell 'em that grain or yeast is the wrong answer, and oil/diesel fuel is correct.

I've NEVER seen a wheat field in SoCal. I think the nearest one is over 1000 miles away.

89 Yes, you she did Youtube something recently, recall what you reaction was,

90

And haven't we gotten over the adolescent idiocy of believing that good speech delivery is a necessary component of leadership?!

I'd say it's pretty necessary, but of course not the the biggest factor. A lot of leadership is about instilling confidence, and the easiest way to do that is with good speeches (confident, encouraging, direct, open). I can't think of a good leader (which is different than a manager) who always gave bad speeches. For example, could you imagine if Reagan and Carter had their speech-making abilities reversed? Reagan going on about malaise and Carter making grand speeches about the evils of regulation in transportation...different world.

91 >>>If your real knock against Palin is that she doesn't "say this stuff on TV" I think you need to read that out loud. How long did it take? More than a soundbite? More than a reasonable answer to a standard segment question? I think the answer is "yes" on both counts. >>>To make that kind of statement on TV she would have to a) have her own show, b) call a press conference, or c) be in a debate where lengthy answers were acceptable. A is kind of beyond her control, B would be so gauche as to be indefensible, and C would require her to be an announced candidate in an actual debate. I'm really tired of the spin. Spin is not the answer to everything. I don't want a candidate where I constantly have to engage in the implausible spin I keep seeing here. If she's that good it doesn't have to be spun so furiously.

92 I think that Fox deal is hamstringing her right now.  She should have signed an "ala-carte" contributor agreement.

Could that be why she doesn't Youtube?  People would much rather watch than read, and Facebook is popular, but Youtube makes much more sense. 

93 HOOOEEE H.P. I just saved that comment for later reference. Good luck with your choice of "electable" candidate. PS, isn't that what they called McCaine?

I doubt any of the contenders in 2008 would've won, considering the political environment at the time.  That doesn't imply that we should've given up and nominated an unelectable fringe candidate 2008, nor does it suggest that we should in 2012.

94 Ace @ 89 Is correct. She was Quaylized, and it should be the focus of her every utterance. Failing at this, fails at candidacy.

95 Okay, here are many of her interviews, speeches, Facebook postings, etc, on a variety of issues, for those who are interweb-search challenged:

http://palintv.com/category/policy

This stuff sends tingles up my leg. So, is she too much of a flake? Did US Grant drink too much?

96 If she's that good it doesn't have to be spun so furiously.

Conversely, if she's that bad, you wouldn't need to post so incessantly about her...

97

They get all flustered when I tell 'em that grain or yeast is the wrong answer, and oil/diesel fuel is correct.

It's organic!

98 Or at least an iPad that breaks down radiation?....good thing I held onto that Lifebuoy stock. 

99 I'm in agreement with Dear Leader not debating anyone during the campaign.  I'm also still not convinced that he'll be the nominee.  His actions aren't pointing in that direction.  I mean, come on, even Alvin Greene would have enough sense to appear at least a little bit engaged in governing.

100 allowing Royal Dutch Shell to tap these reserves in AlaskaÂ’s Chukchi and Beaufort seas would create an annual average of 54,700 jobs nationwide with a $145 billion total payroll and generate an additional $193 billion a year in total revenues to local, state, and federal governments for 50 years.

$193 billion a year in tax revenue for 50 years? Does this sound even remotely plausible?

101 Funny that it's okay for Palin supporters to have derogatory nics for other potential candidates. What is the nic for Palin that her republican critics use for her? That's what I thought.

102

Want to make your head hurt?

How many people does Interior employ to sit around and not approve things?

103 Re: no (R) could've won in '08 This is a bit simplistic but only half of the McCain/Palin was trying to win -- the other half seemed like he was forfeiting the election.

104 Posted by: ace at March 16, 2011 02:22 PM (nj1bB)

I'm honored for the direct response, sir.  Thank you.

That said, I think that when the primaries come, she'll be engaged and fine on these fronts, but time will tell.  She can do YouTube vids and all, but it's still scripted.  When she interviews, she's asked dumbass questions like, What Magazines do you Read!?! and  the like.  She's not really been given the opportunity to speak on such levels, but I thought she did a pretty darn good job against Plugs during the VP debates.

I think time will tell, but, not that I'm a Palinista or anything, I think she'll be fine when the time comes to prove her mettle.

105 What is the nic for Palin that her republican critics use for her? That's what I thought.
Posted by: polynikes at March 16, 2011 02:26 PM (yKP4s)

Unelectable

106

Conversely, if she's that bad, you wouldn't need to post so incessantly about her...

Ace should never have to post about Obama then...

107

$193 billion a year in tax revenue for 50 years? Does this sound even remotely plausible?

Counting the second and third order effects, yes.

108 It's not playing the media's game to come across in interviews as informed. That's not something the media just came up with in 2008.

In a way it is, they just hid it quite well.

Never before 2008 did they just make up that someone was dumb.  Even the Dan Quayle "potatoe" thing was kind of a here-and-gone story.  He actually got his rear-end handed to him in debates and things to make himself seem less than smart.

They tried with GWB, but it really didn't take: he had too much "evidence" to counter their lies and a stale potato chip could show up Al Gore in a debate.

The only thing Palin really has against her in that arena is the Couric interview, and then Tina Fey.  Basically, they took a couple of "gotcha" questions (for which her then handlers should share some (not accept all, but share) of the blame) and a Saturday Night Lame skit and used it to defame her to millions of Americans.

To your more central point, however, you're right.  The damage is done and needs to be undone.  Where I tend to disagree with you is timing: I'm willing to trust her sense of timing until it proves untenable- at which point she'll lose the nomination and we can move on.

109

Posted by: Soothsayer at March 16, 2011 02:27 PM (uFokq)

Hell, he wasn't the only one. It seems Fred Thompson needed to nap between questions during his debates. I thought he had sleeping sickness.

110 A series of videos a la Bill Whittle might do her a world of good.

111 116 A series of videos a la Bill Whittle might do her a world of good.

Posted by: nickless at March 16, 2011 02:30 PM (MMC8r)

Yep, some serious wonkery.  I suspect that Fox contract prevents her from striking out on her own in video commentary, though.

112 Ace,  your caption to that photo cost me ~2oz of beer.  Vented through my nose.  I now hate you.  You do know how much that hurts, right?

113

Counting the second and third order effects, yes.

And real vs nominal is in play and with Obama inflation and tax hikes? Fugaddabouit

114 Gee, if only it were possible to make constraining these projects through regulation and lawfare more difficult. If only there were somebody in, say, the House who could address this issue, which would make it possible to exploit vast untapped energy resources. Hmmmmmmmmm.

115 Sorry grognard but I think that's been taken by every candidate except the one the name caller is supporting.

116 107. Hot legs

117 $193 billion a year in tax revenue for 50 years? Does this sound even remotely plausible?

No, and neither does the 54,700 jobs and $145 billion in payroll. That's $2.6 million per job.

118 What is the nic for Palin that her republican critics use for her? That's what I thought.

Posted by: polynikes at March 16, 2011 02:26 PM (yKP4s)

Tits McGee....

119 >>>Where I tend to disagree with you is timing: I'm willing to trust her sense of timing until it proves untenable- at which point she'll lose the nomination and we can move on. Um, as I've asked a dozen plus times: What conceivable advantage is there in waiting? What strategic advantage? According to you and her spinners, apparently there is some *advantage* to being perceived as dim (or at least scattered and not up to the job) for as long as possible, but then, at the last minute, reversing all of that quickly in dramatic fashion. This is not reversible quickly. If it is reversible at all it will take months -- at least half a year, probably a full year -- of people re-thinking Palin and abandoning old conclusions. *PEOPLE DO NOT LIKE CHANGING CONCLUSIONS THEY'VE DRAWN.* This is for a variety of reasons, but one of them is people don't like ever admitting they were wrong, and they also don't like spending additional thinking at all on something they feel has been decided and thus requires no further thinking. Thus, Palin's overcoming of this will have to be long in the making, because she'll have to overcome this natural tendency of people to pick a Narrative and go with it. And yet I keep hearing this bullshit about "timing" as if she's got a master plan where suddenly she reverses everything and it's just a matter of when she *chooses* to do so.

120 To your more central point, however, you're right.  The damage is done and needs to be undone.  Where I tend to disagree with you is timing: I'm willing to trust her sense of timing until it proves untenable- at which point she'll lose the nomination and we can move on.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) at March 16, 2011 02:29 PM (8y9MW)

 

Let her throw her hat in the ring and see how she does.  You can't win if you don't play.  I think we might see a two or three more "quality" candidates (including Palin) declare this summer.  A lot of people are seeing how weak the current crop of declared candidates are.

121 I am SO tired of the "She resigned the governor" attack. Tell me do you honestly feel like Parnell --Sarah's Lt Gov, was not able to do a better job then Sarah hamstrung by a bunch of leftist lawsuits? Do you feel that it was harder for him to win in 2010 as the incumbent governor then it would have been for him to win as the Lt Gov to a lawsuit besieged Sarah? I honestly feel that Sarah made the best choice for Alaska by resigning. It hurts Sarah a bit but I doubt if it hurts her much more than the general trashing the MarxSpewMedia has been allowed to get away with. I am NOT sure I want her to run for President. I don't have a great deal of confidence that people realize even yet that we have a MBM rather than real semi-objective or at even honest about their leanings media. Plus the one SP's Alaska episode I saw just didn't make me go "She should be president" Another thing she did that is good for AK but in my mind is less good for her IF she wants to run for President.

122 Because of the stupid bureaucratic rules, Shell can't get approval before the ice returns, and the agency keeps making them re-apply every year. Posted by: Meiczyslaw at March 16, 2011 01:55 PM (bjRNS) That's infuriating. It's so depressing. It doesn't even matter if Obama and company can get the laws they want or not. They just do whatever the hell they want either way. If they can't get something done through congress, or they don't want the public to know about it, they'll just make it happen with all this behind the scenes stupid bullshit like this. If they don't want you doing something they can just hold you up forever with bureaucratic, permits, paperwork nonsense until you just give up.

123 121 Sorry grognard but I think that's been taken by every candidate except the one the name caller is supporting.

Posted by: polynikes at March 16, 2011 02:33 PM (yKP4s)

Sorry. That's the first one that came to mind.

I do think her supporters are called more names than she is, at least here.  I have to say, "Palinista" is pretty damned inflammatory.

124 DJIA = -254.94 at 11,600.48. So, yes, wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!

125 What is the nic for Palin that her republican critics use for her? That's what I thought.

Al Sharpton?

126 Four NYT journalists disappear in Libya...I hope they didn't abduct the crossword puzzle guy.  Maybe "lib rag" doesn't translate well into Arabic. 

127 Guided by politics and pure emotion following the Gulf spill instead of peer-reviewed science ...

I must protest this assertion! My plans and actions were peer-reviewed by Luddite scientists, the finest and most perspicacious scientists there are (they have feelings)!

128 A palin nickname? How 'bout Governor Milf?

129

$193 billion a year in tax revenue for 50 years? Does this sound even remotely plausible?

I heard somewhere that all those numbers were not per year but for the total 50.

130 Counting the second and third order effects, yes.

You can't use second and third order effects to make a case for this specific project, those would be effects generated by any oil sold. How in the hell can anyone predict a specific number like $193 billion/year for 50 years, without knowing what the specific price of oil will be for 50 years? They can't. Just because she is on our side doesn't mean these numbers are any more accurate than long term high speed rail projections or the cost of the Big Dig.

131 ace, how do you overcome being Quayle-ized in your eyes? You have already opined that she is not smart, so she's not gonna be able to whip out some smartness to overcome it. So, how do you get "respect" from the press when you are on the right? You do what McCain did, and stab conservatives in the back at every chance. So she can take a page out of David Brook's book and go for that, which might win her a chance to be on TV with Eliot Spitzer, but the people who admire her now for NOT being that person are gonna turn on her. And if she did win strange new respect, if she runs, they'll do the same thing to her that they did to McCain. You and Megan McCain and others say well what she really needs to do is go home and study up and then come out and answer a bunch of unscripted questions really well, and then she will meet my expectations. Okay, sure, take that at face value. But I don't think that leadership is the result of, or is evinced by, a bunch of fancy book larnin' - I am not saying that innate intelligence is not important, or the ability to communicate a message solidly is not important, but if she can spout off ten point plans about how to phase out 10% of the spending for NPR, well, that might meet your expectations, but it doesn't do anything. Not for her, not for us. Would George Will think, okay now, that's a person from a party of ideas! Does Will think the GOP is right now a Party of Ideas? Really? What is he smoking? Always remember, Reagan was too extreme, and he was stupid, and worse yet he was going to get us into wars. I am not saying Palin is Reagan. I am saying that every candidate is electable until they aren't, and unelectable until they are.

132 $193 billion a year in tax revenue for 50 years? Does this sound even remotely plausible?

Posted by: Ted Kennedy's Gristle Encased Head at March 16, 2011 02:26 PM (+lsX1

Yes, she is talking about Trillions of cubic feet of natural gas and over 100 Billion barrels of oil. Fed tax alone on gas is 15 cents a gallon plus Alaska has a seperate royalty paid to the state and distributed to the residents over and above the federal royalty that oil companies pay.

133 Is this a palin bashing thread or a odumbass bashing thread? cause I prefer the latter.

Oh, and those NYT reporters missing, if they were kidnapped, maybe the captors heard the story of the payment for the guy in pakistan.

134 Posted by: ace at March 16, 2011 02:24 PM (nj1bB)

What spin?  I made factual points about YOUR argument.  Others have also pointed out that she's saying these things as publicly as she can- and has been for 2 years.

If there is any spin, its from your camp that "she's not doing enough."

Come on, ace, I'm not saying she's perfect, and I've already agreed that she's the one who has to change the perception- no one else can do it for her.  All I'm asking is that you consider the actual facts on the ground.  The kind of statement you can put in a Blog, or a recorded address, or a speech is not something you can say on TV.  It just isn't.

If you print out her statement in MS Word and convert to Double Space (I'm relatively certain other word processors would be the same, but I don't have any others) you get 3 + pages of statement.  A rough estimate when reading a script (TV, Movies, Theater) is that 1 page = 1 minute.  And that includes things that take up room like scene descriptions, entrance/exit instructions, and other notes.  Even using that we're talking a full 3 minutes.

Now, she might get that in a debate.  She would definitely get it in a monologue if she had her own show.  Where else would she get 3 uninterrupted minutes of airtime?

What will get airtime is a statement of less than a minute- usually 45 seconds or less, and you can only really count on about a 10 - 15 second sound bite.   You can't put forth a persuasive argument in 45 seconds.  Not without using a lot of short-hand phrases and insider knowledge that would be lost on most of the people you're actually trying to convince.

You want her to sound smarter- we say she does, but you have to pay attention.  Then you complain that we're spinning.  I'm just really not sure how to respond to that, Ace, other than to say your definition of spin then includes any description of why, for example, global warming is a scam.

135 I heard somewhere that all those numbers were not per year but for the total 50.

That would make more sense.

136

I can't read the Cuda without having shameful thoughts...

I'm sorry, its just the way it is. I don't know what I will do if Pam Bondi runs for higher office or becomes more prevelant on the national stage.

I need to say a prayer, but first...

 

 

 

137 We got toilets that don't work, light bulbs that need to warm up, gas that eats away fuel systems....nothing fucking works as it should anymore. Posted by: Berserker at March 16, 2011 02:00 PM (gWHrG) Dishwasher soap that doesn't clean any dishes anymore.

138 So, Ace, you are her Campaign Manager for the candidacy that she's 'not' mounting.  What would you have her do?  The Today Show?  Oprah?  Just random press conferences called by the current private citizen she is?  She's on Fox quite often and seems to do well there, but does she need to spend time with Chrissy or Joe S?

I know it's a love or hate situation with Palin most of the time with pundits, but what does she have to do to convince the Ace's of the world?

139 98 I think that Fox deal is hamstringing her right now.  She should have signed an "ala-carte" contributor agreement.
Posted by: grognard at March 16, 2011 02:24 PM (NS2Mo)

Yeah, I hope she parts ways with Fox soon. If she never does another interview with Hannity or that ignorant blowhard O'Reilly again it will be too soon. Ace is partly right, she needs to get on the networks and get her message out to a wider audience. It's a winning message, but that doesn't matter if more people don't hear it. And she could still do interviews with Fox. They'd be unpaid, but on the upside, she could tell O'Reilly to go fuck himself sideways with a pineapple next time he wants her on.

140 Increasing drilling will hurt the economy and increase unemployment by discouraging investment in Green Jobs.

141

'Higher energy costs equal higher costs for everything -- everything runs on energy "

 

 THIS  Why can't the Republicans scream this from the rooftops?Jesus I hate fucking politicians.

 

  One of the quickest ways to get this country back on track is to secure a steady supply of CHEAP energy.Energy is this countries lifesblood.Cheap energy will propel our economy despite the outright fucking retards we have in Washington.

 When are we gonna tell the enviroweenies to fuck off and die already?

142 Palin got Quayle-ized. She needs to overcome that, as Dan Quayle *tried* to, but failed to.

I never understood why the DNC/MFM decided to geld Quayle.  He never struck me as particularly presidential; kind of like a Repub Evan Bayhe.  He definitely didn't deserve the shit those salad tossers threw at him (and the NPR fucksticks were particularly rabid about that; I don't know how many of my lib acquaintances wasted my fucking time by "informing" me that he was *really* that dumb, which they were mindlessly repeating from garbage like "Morning Sedition") but I never really understood the point.  He certainly didn't energize Poppy Bush's campaign the way Teh Sarah did for "My Friends" death march.

143

Looking back, I read it as the total tax revenue for fifty years.

$195 billion would be quite a hall.

144

haul

 

Sigh.

145 Posted by: ace at March 16, 2011 02:35 PM (nj1bB)

The point, here, Ace, is that just because you can't see any advantage doesn't mean she and her advisers can't.  Or that she's not seeing something else that makes a big push right now a net disadvantage (or, at least, something she'd perceive as a disadvantage).

I don't know that.  What I do know is that I'm willing to- based on the fact I know there's a brain in that skull because I've been reading her posts and articles on a variety of topics for the last couple of years- let her do what she thinks best and give her the benefit of the doubt.

I'm not saying its some master strategy that would have awed Sun Tzu or Tacticus, but I am saying that she's been victorious in several elections- and the one where she wasn't, she wasn't running the show.

So let's label perception problems as perception problems- and not conflate them with actual problems of capability, which you occasionally seem to do.

146 I heard somewhere that all those numbers were not per year but for the total 50.

Then how do you explain this quote?

LetÂ’s stop and think about this for a moment. Right now Beltway politicos are quibbling over cutting $61 billion from our dangerously bloated $3.7 trillion budget. Allowing drilling in the Chukchi and Beaufort seas will enrich federal coffers by $167 billion a year without raising our taxes.

147 Looking back, I read it as the total tax revenue for fifty years.

The study she links says it's over fifty years, she's saying it's annually. That's horribly sloppy.

148 When the subject is  Palin or the Japanese reactors or or global warming the chatter all sounds the same to me...hysteria.

149 If she's serious about running for President I would recommend she double down and do another interview with Couric, of course with control of editing approval. It's an all or nothing stategy but I think it's the only one that can de-qualilize her.

150 193 billion in revenues per year to state, local, federal from development of Chuckchi and Beaufort ... sounds high.  I'm sure the industry source is using very optimistic assumptions of recoverable reserves and pricing.  But don't forget the state of Alaska owns the resources and they skim a gigantic royalty off the top, plus severance tax. 

151

I can't figure out all the handwringing on Palin not addressing issues that face the country today.

She was out in front on the health care debate and led the charge against it.

She's been talking about more domestic energy production for 4 years now.

She predicted the food inflation before anyone else and was criticized for it in the WSJ and NYT who said it wasn't happening.

She has let us know her opinion on the middle east crisis whether or not you agree with it.

She was out in front of Obama on the Gulf Oil spill.

The only thing she had kept us in the dark on is her NCAA Picks and golf handicap.

 

If she runs she will either win the primary or not. Until then I will listen to what she has to say.

152 It's not just sloppy, it's also a bad sign - my bullshit meter immediately pegged on that number. You'd figure Palin, having been involved with energy projects in Alaska, would have some sense of the scale of the numbers involved.

153 Assuming she actually wrote the post, I guess.

154 The Left did Quayle because they felt they had to. The guy was smart, young, good looking - an up and comer who got picked up to the big leagues early. Why did GHWB's team say, hey, we need this guy on our ticket in the first place? Name picked out of a hat? I was on a trip with Quayle in Africa and he was a polished speaker who was actually pretty smart. So the Left had to ruin him. The problem was he did not have an established rep which people could balance the attacks with. Sound familiar? There is no coming back from it. You have to go over it or around it, but the press/Left (same damn thing I know) isn't going to turn around and say we were wrong, they will keep it up forever and ever. I come back to Reagan on that - they didn't decide he was okay until he was dead.

155 I will only say one more thing on this thread; If Palin decides to run, she will be the most scrutinized, observed, picked apart, demonized, vetted, candidate in my lifetime. In some ways that's OK, in others I find it shameful and disgusting.

156

"over 50 years"

Yup..Poppy is a little sloppy here.

157 It's over 50 years. She needs to edit the post and fire her researcher (or else read closer). More fodder for the critics who call her an airhead.

158

Reading some of these comments makes me believe that many people are basing their opinion of a candidate's electability on 2008 mentality and the screwy notion that the MFM will change their ways and give fair reporting to that "special someone" running against a dem. 

Trust me folks.  Whoever the repub candidate is (especially of they're conservative), will be trashed just as badly and meanly as Sarah was.  Will all of you give up and start trashing the repub candidate too?  From what I've seen from some of you, I'm afraid the answer would be yes.

There's a whole different election enviroment building up for 2012.  It's going to be nasty, but I think enough Americans are awake this time around to see through much of it. 

159 Poppy is a little sloppy here.

Heh.

160 >>>You have already opined that she is not smart, so she's not gonna be able to whip out some smartness to overcome it. So, how do you get "respect" from the press when you are on the right? You do what McCain did, and stab conservatives in the back at every chance. So she can take a page out of David Brook's book and go for that, which might win her a chance to be on TV with Eliot Spitzer, but the people who admire her now for NOT being that person are gonna turn on her. And if she did win strange new respect, if she runs, they'll do the same thing to her that they did to McCain. ... Insane. I keep hearing variations on this: People like her because she's NOT perceived as smart and somehow that's an advantage so any work she does to seem smart loses her support. Crazy. Let me posit something that's going to rock your world: The people who like her will STILL like her if she appears smart, but the people who don't like her won't support her if she doesn't appear smart. And I'm not talking about respect from the press. I'm talking about the minimum level threshold of comfort voters have in mind when they deem someone presidential material. The press has little to do with this -- she's never going to have the respect of the press. But she needs the respect of the voters. You don't seem willing to accept the basic fact of the matter: In any poll, 65% of the public says she's "unqualified" (sometimes I've seen it as high as 70%). Instead of giving the public what they expect as far as conventional, seems-smart-and-informed qualification, you keep insisting you're going to "change the game" or something and convince people they don't need that sort of conventional superficial confidence. Well, good luck to you, sir. Let me just say that I believe my plan -- giving the public what they expect in a president -- seems to me to much more likely to work than your idea of changing a public's expectations as what is presidential-level competency. You can talk up change-the-game and unconventional-appeal all you like. I don't buy it. I think it's a pile of dumb spin. What is maddening is that Palin fans assert she COULD do all this, she just CHOOSES not to. Well, if that's true, I'd say that is one of the worst political judgments I've heard in my entire life and it doesn't make me eager to hear what her second and third big political judgments might be.

161 I met a lot of flakey people who were pretty brilliant in their thoughts, but not really tactical. Palin seems to be one of these. If I had the media do to me what palin had done to her, I would make it a point to beat them at their own game at every turn. You KNOW what their fucking playbook is, you KNOW the the shit they're gonna try and trap you with. Palin has to wage war with these people, and take control of the debate, and stay a few steps ahead of them. SHE should be laying the traps for the media to step in, not the other way around.

162 Obama's Not Drilling Here And Ain't Drilling NowOh he's drilling here and now. And we are the ones getting drilled.

163

A question many have asked but which bears repeating:

If Obama were not trying to fuck up America, what would he be doing differently?

164 Are you sure it's over 50 years? Or did she write 'billions' instead of 'millions?'

165 When's T-Paw going to chime in?
Romney?
Huck?
All hidin' like little bitches.

166 Are you sure it's over 50 years?

Positive. Click on the study she links in the post. It says over 50 years.

167 Why did GHWB's team say, hey, we need this guy on our ticket in the first place? Name picked out of a hat?

I was on a trip with Quayle in Africa and he was a polished speaker who was actually pretty smart.

Thanks for the response, blaster.  To your first question, I'm sure he was a midwestern choice to aid in electoral politics.  To the rest, I'm sure you're correct with how smart he was and it was done to damage his future and ergo the future of the Repub party.  But he did kind of wade into that trap by Lloyd Bentson, who is hopefully currently dangling from the end of the barbed cock of Satan for that gotcha bit of dogshit.  But he didn't deserve most of the ridicule he caught throughout his career.

168 Up here, that's what we call, "Methadone Bear jonesin' the Mainline."

169 >>>The point, here, Ace, is that just because you can't see any advantage doesn't mean she and her advisers can't. Please. The argument from ignorance strikes again. Yes, I suppose that her team is so super-smart and so playing sixth dimensional chess that I can't even conceive of the brilliance here. Or, alternately, I can suppose that as a reasonably intelligent man I *CAN* in fact guess at likely strategies and that if I see no good strategy at work, maybe I can conclude there isn't one. But let's go with your take. By the way, given you have trouble convincing natural allies of these dubious propositions, what do you think the likelihood of a sale in the general political market will be?

170

Little crap like that will come back to haunt her. You can be damn sure if she was running and in the limelight this would be front page news on every form of media. Is it a big deal to me? Maybe a little but not a deal breaker. If she does this often then yes. You can bet that the fence sitters that voted Obama in will get this drilled into their mush brain 24/7 though. She better tighten this kind of crap up quick if she is going to run.

171 A question or those of you the think Palin is just a ventriloquist's dummy. How does her question and answer performance at the Long Island Association fit in?

172 Yep, the article she links to in her Facebook post says:

Development of resources in the Chukchi and Beaufort seas off AlaskaÂ’s Arctic coast would create an average 54,700 jobs/year nationwide with a $145 billion total payroll and generate $193 billion in federal, state, and local revenue over 50 years, according to a study by Northern Economics Inc., AlaskaÂ’s largest private economic consulting firm, and the University of Alaska at AnchorageÂ’s Institute of Social and Economic Research.

Her mistake is more than a typo, she's making an argument for how obviously stupid the opposition is based on her own misreading of the article.

173

Trust me folks.  Whoever the repub candidate is (especially of they're conservative), will be trashed just as badly and meanly as Sarah was. 

True.  I have long said that attempts by those of the McCain ilk to cozy up to the press are naive at best and suicidal at worst.  They are not our friends--they are not impartial--they are actively on the other side.  If anything, given the administration's treatment of the WH press corps, it's a relationship akin to that with an abused womn who continually runs back to her abuser.

 

174

I am SO tired of the "She resigned the governor" attack. Tell me do you honestly feel like Parnell --Sarah's Lt Gov, was not able to do a better job then Sarah hamstrung by a bunch of leftist lawsuits? Do you feel that it was harder for him to win in 2010 as the incumbent governor then it would have been for him to win as the Lt Gov to a lawsuit besieged Sarah?

I honestly feel that Sarah made the best choice for Alaska by resigning. It hurts Sarah a bit but I doubt if it hurts her much more than the general trashing the MarxSpewMedia has been allowed to get away with.

It's not a question of whether her resignation was the right thing to do for herself and/or Alaska.  Right or wrong, the result is that she'll never be president until she wins elective office elsewhere.

The Palinistas don't want to believe that her resignation would cost her much at all, but outside of their home state of Fantasyland it's a big deal to resign from your first term in response to ethics charges.  There's just no effective way to spin it that the general public would buy into.

 

175 Also, although I like Sarah Palin a great deal.  She cannot win.

176 Yeah, that per year/over 50 years thing is a pretty big mistake. I hope she corrects it.

177 Not often that the first commenter on a thread steps on his crank so thoroughly.  Congratulations, Chris.    

I don't know which is worse:

1.  ace re-enacting Hamlet in 5,000 word essays every time he ponders Palin.  This one was good, though.  Probably helps that he had something decent and substantive to work with.

2. Those Palinistas who take offense when anyone does not doff their caps and bow at the very mention of her name.  Lighten up.

3.  Those Non-Palinistas who feel compelled to nail themselves up on the cross and lament their martyrdom every time a Palin thread goes up.  Poor you.



A round of enemas for all.  On the house.  Primary season is really gonna be hosed if this shit keeps up.

178 Right or wrong, the result is that she'll never be president until she wins elective office elsewhere.
Posted by: Hollowpoint at March 16, 2011 03:02 PM (SY2Kh)

Says who? some rulebook somewhere?

She cannot win.

Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at March 16, 2011 03:03 PM (B+qrE)

Only one way to find out.

179 FoxNews is claiming that a new powerline to get off site power to the damaged Fukushima Dai-Ichi nuclear plant is about completed.  This would eliminate many of the problems involved with cooling the four nuclear reactors that were in operation at the time of the earthquake.

180 Didn't Captain CumStain state the other day we are pumpimg more oil from Gulf today then we did two years ago? If so, why are gas prices rising Captain CumStain ???? This thing we call the POTUS is worse than having Bin Laden has POTUS. At least with Bin Laden we would know what we are getting, not with this thing we have now. When it is gone can Congress vote to retract all the benefits it is entitled as an Ex-President??

181 What matters is getting rid of Bambi and electing lots of conservatives, because our country can't stand much more of this. Can Sarah unseat Bambi and pull along lots of Repubs? I don't believe so, as much as I like her. That's all that matters now. That's all that SHOULD matter. We can't take much more of this before we're a socialist hole forever.

182 it's a big deal to resign from your first term in response to ethics charges.

She did not resign in response to ethics charges.

183 Only one way to find out.

Posted by: Tom at March 16, 2011 03:07 PM (MWXXs)

 

I don't think I'll wager the future of the country in 2012 on a crapshoot.  Newt can't win, either, by the way.  Ditto Hucky. 

184 She linked the article in question, which likely no one would have read before hand,
to any large extent, Nitpicking garbage while they are severing our carotid artery,
this administration has gone to the extent of falsifying research findings to impose the moratorium, shoveled money, left and right to QE 2, sold out an allies nuclear position, to curry favor with the Russians, good god, man,

185 Newt, Huck, Huntsmann (WTF?), Roemer (double WTF), none of these clowns have a prayer. Mitt, Daniels, and T-Paw might have a chance. I wish Da Big Guy would run and make this easier for us.

186

Trust me folks. Whoever the repub candidate is (especially of they're conservative), will be trashed just as badly and meanly as Sarah was. Will all of you give up and start trashing the repub candidate too? From what I've seen from some of you, I'm afraid the answer would be yes.

I'm starting to think of right-wing pundits as the "al-Republica Martyr's Brigade, Crack Suicide Squad." I know competition improves the breed, but there's a line somewhere between competition and WWI-style trench warfare.

Unfortunately, as I've noted before, as a center-right country, *most* of he time it's the Republicans election to lose, and they're getting pretty practiced at it.

I'm certainly not saying we should eschew criticism, of course not, it's right and proper. But we probably ought to spend more time fighting our enemies than our allies... some days we do, and some days we don't.

There's a whole different election enviroment building up for 2012. It's going to be nasty, but I think enough Americans are awake this time around to see through much of it.

Posted by: Soona at March 16, 2011 02:54 PM (6RbV1)

Nah. We're boned.

187 Didn't Captain CumStain state the other day we are pump___ more oil from Gulf today then we did two years ago?

Posted by: George Bearfell at March 16, 2011 03:09 PM (SZy+Y)

 

Yes in fact he was in full lecture mode about it. Of course there was no evidence to support this. Just Barry's usual BS.

188 Didn't Captain CumStain state the other day we are pump___ more oil from Gulf today then we did two years ago?

Posted by: George Bearfell at March 16, 2011 03:09 PM (SZy+Y)

 

Yes in fact he was in full lecture mode about it. Of course there was no evidence to support this. Just Barry's usual BS. and the MFM echoing their master's every word

189 190 She linked the article in question, which likely no one would have read before hand, to any large extent, Nitpicking garbage while they are severing our carotid artery, this administration has gone to the extent of falsifying research findings to impose the moratorium, shoveled money, left and right to QE 2, sold out an allies nuclear position, to curry favor with the Russians, good god, man, Posted by: justin cord at March 16, 2011 03:12 PM (6UTk5) It's not too much to ask her to either get a proper research assistant or bother to read an article before linking to it. We would give Ace shit if he made such a fundamental error, why wouldn't we take a presidential contender to task for it?

190

Only one way to find out.

It's worth a shot...or five or six.

191 Only one way to find out.

Posted by: Tom at March 16, 2011 03:07 PM (MWXXs)

 

Yup.  The questions will start being answered in a few months.  It's senseless to prognosticate on any one candidate right now.  All I know is that whoever the repub candidate is will get the same vitriolic high colonic that Sarah got in 2008.

192

Says who? some rulebook somewhere?

Says the public who overwhelmingly disapproves of her and has repeatedly made clear via polling that they'd much prefer Obama over Palin.

193 Let me posit something that's going to rock your world: The people who like her will STILL like her if she appears smart, but the people who don't like her won't support her if she doesn't appear smart. Ace, most of your post, you are arguing with someone other than me, and this is a key place where you and I, and I think a lot of the pro-Palin people and you, are talking past each other. I don't think there is anyone arguing well she looks dumb because she is playing dumb and that's really smart. I am arguing (and a lot, but certainly not all pro-Palin folks) that she is NOT dumb, and I don't really see why someone would presume that she is. She's a pretty decent speaker, better and more confident than President Bush (either of them) was. John Kerry uses and awful lot of big words and subordinate clauses and the subjunctive case and all of that, but I think he's a bloviating dumbass. I think she's pretty smart, and I don't know what she could do that would convince you that she is - we aren't seeing the same things. And I am not the only one saying to you, when you say, hey, she needs to say more smart things, that hey, she is saying more, you just aren't acknowledging them. A lot of Lefties said the "death panels" were prima facie evidence that she was stupid. STOOOPID! But you know what, she was right, and it changed the course of the debate. So, was it that stupid? If it was that stupid, why did htey have such a cow? I know, we can't project into someone else's heads their argument, but I believe that if Sarah Palin was making the argument that Obamacare meant black helicopters were coming in the middle of the night to spirit away your grandmother, they wouldn't have bothered, because it is a self-refudiating argument. But the death panels stuck, not because it was all funded by the Koch Brothers, but because it neatly packaged the problem in a way that people understood - I don't want the government to ration my health care. If you want to cover more people for less money, that's the only way to get there. Now, it didn't stop Obamacare from becoming a law, and nobody's facebook page is going to stop corrupt politicians from doing what they do. But it showed an understanding of the debate and of the policy and how people react. I thought her analysis was spot on, and no, she didn't convince me - but it convinced some people. So again I ask, how does she convince you that she is smart? By not being on FB and twitter and Fox News? Does she have to pop out some statistic you didn't know? Provide a laundry list of policies? You tell me, you are the one setting the criteria.

194

I don't think I'll wager the future of the country in 2012 on a crapshoot.  Newt can't win, either, by the way.  Ditto Hucky. 

Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at March 16, 2011 03:10 PM (B+qrE) 

Who can win? Anyone?

195

^{Posted by: Hollowpoint at March 16, 2011 03:18 PM (SY2Kh)}

"Insanity is sometimes defined as performing the same actions over and over again but expecting different results each time..."

Insanity shouldn't be a strategy or a platform.

196

She did not resign in response to ethics charges.

Explain?

197 We will see, we will see.  He he.

198 She linked the article in question, which likely no one would have read before hand

No one would have read it because reality is far less interesting than the number she made up.

199

Explain?

 

She did to save Alaska- AHOY!

200

For as long as there's been a hole in my ass, the Tastycrats have held an unfair advantage over the Fingerlicans in the media. I give props to Palin for her guerilla tactics. She's fighting on her own terms; she's choosing the battlefield and avoiding the kill boxes in the <insert generic media pseudomym here>.

I think part of the reaction of the Palin-hater is they don't get this at all. They want to look good on Meet the Press, and be liked by reporters- just like McCain was before he became "the candidate". If you can't win the game, why play? The only way to save the Kobayashi Maru, is to change the rules.

201 Hey!  Now I know where Coke Bear has been all these months!

202 ""Dishwasher soap that doesn't clean any dishes anymore.""


yeah that too, plus washing machines that don't work. Don't even get me started on these POS high efficiency machines.

203 "I know, we can't project into someone else's heads their argument, . . . " I can. Any time a lefty argues anything, the sonofabitch is working an angle to steal from me what's mine and enslave me to his worthless, thieving ass.

204 The only electable candidate is Schrodinger's Candidate.

Of course, once you take a look, they are unelectable.

205 ""For as long as there's been a hole in my ass""


Never heard that one before. lol

206 She says stuff like this on Fox all the freakin time. Why do you say she only does it on Facebook?

207 208 Hey!  Now I know where Coke Bear has been all these months!

Posted by: Tim the Enchanter at March 16, 2011 03:22 PM (izA2D)

Nope. That's ManBearPig!

208

Something that seems like it may have been missed here is that the reason Palin sounds so great regarding oil is that this is something she is especially expert in, due to her various experiences up in Alaska.

When I heard her speak during the Gulf oil spill, there was an unmistakable stark contrast between what she was saying should be done vs. what was actually happening. It was just blatantly obvious that if she had been involved there would have been some real leadership, and a lot of good things would have been happening (instead of just watching the oil advance, and figuring out how to make the crisis as big as possible, so as not to "waste it").

Another thing missed is that while there's a lot of oil to be had in the northern regions of Alaska, the Alaska Pipeline is in danger of being permanently shut down, due to lack of oil to pump through it.

The bottom line is that not only is Obama restricting oil production up there, but some of that restriction is illegal, and it is leading to the loss of an expensive and critical national asset.

209 She just fixed it. "generate an additional $193 billion a year in total revenues to local, state, and federal governments for 50 years."

210 Oh, and so if ther's a God in Heaven and a Republican wins in 2012, the next president should put Palin in charge of Energy.

211

She did not resign in response to ethics charges.

Explain?

Posted by: Hollowpoint at March 16, 2011 03:21 PM (SY2Kh)

What's to explain? She wasn't hired by the people of Alaska to defend herself.

212 She just fixed it. "generate an additional $193 billion a year in total revenues to local, state, and federal governments for 50 years."

No, that's the original statement, and it's wrong.

213 "Says the public who overwhelmingly disapproves of her and has repeatedly made clear via polling that they'd much prefer Obama over Palin. Posted by: Hollowpoint at March 16, 2011 03:18 PM (SY2Kh)" Well, if the 2011 polls say Zero will win reelection why bother even having an election in 2012? We should just give up now.

214

For as long as there's been a hole in my ass, the Tastycrats have held an unfair advantage over the Fingerlicans in the media. I give props to Palin for her guerilla tactics. She's fighting on her own terms; she's choosing the battlefield and avoiding the kill boxes in the <insert generic media pseudomym here>.

Sure, she's fighting on her own terms... and "won" a 60% disapproval rating.

The MSM won, Palin lost- and all too often Palin willingly provided them the ammo with which to do it.

Every Republican candidate is going to get savaged by the MSM.  The deciding factor is how that candidate handles it, and in the context of runing for president, she's not handled them well.

215 "No, that's the original statement, and it's wrong. Posted by: Waterhouse at March 16, 2011 03:29 PM (EDSBe)" It matches the article. How is it wrong?

216 What's to explain? She wasn't hired by the people of Alaska to defend herself.

Reasonable or not, voters want a president that they believe won't buckle under pressure, under any circumstance. Resigning in response to ethics complaints (bogus or not) doesn't inspire confidence in that regard.

There's just no compelling way to spin it to the electorate at large.

217 221

For as long as there's been a hole in my ass, the Tastycrats have held an unfair advantage over the Fingerlicans in the media. I give props to Palin for her guerilla tactics. She's fighting on her own terms; she's choosing the battlefield and avoiding the kill boxes in the <insert generic media pseudomym here>.

Sure, she's fighting on her own terms... and "won" a 60% disapproval rating.

The MSM won, Palin lost- and all too often Palin willingly provided them the ammo with which to do it.

Every Republican candidate is going to get savaged by the MSM.  The deciding factor is how that candidate handles it, and in the context of runing for president, she's not handled them well.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at March 16, 2011 03:30 PM (SY2Kh)

Psst: The war's not over, Buckwheat. You sound like Dingy Harry.

218 Anyone picking on Romney? Huck? Newt?
Anyone defending them?
Anyone care?

219 nm, I found "a year for 50 years". That's not right.

220

Well, if the 2011 polls say Zero will win reelection why bother even having an election in 2012? We should just give up now.

No, we nominate a candidate that wouldn't require divine intervention to succeed.

221 Continuing on from #69's message to Ace:

d. Watch her interviews on Fox Business with Eric Bolling or David Asman.
http://tinyurl.com/6hjckt5

e. Watch her Q&A with a Democrat interviewer on Long Island in February 2011.
http://tinyurl.com/6btdaq5

222

76; Justin the Journal reporter denied her statement about food costs rising to which she responded by highlighting their own article of the previous week.  The Journal editorial page was in agreement with her take on the QE 2 issue and very complimentary of her grasp of it in comparison to other Republicans this side of Paul Ryan.  see:   http://tinyurl.com/33y3tth

223 There's just no compelling way to spin it to the electorate at large. Posted by: Hollowpoint at March 16, 2011 03:34 PM (SY2Kh) Let her try. If she fails she loses.

224 No, we nominate a candidate that wouldn't require divine intervention to succeed. Posted by: Hollowpoint at March 16, 2011 03:36 PM (SY2Kh) No, we ignore the polls trusting that the greatness of our candidate will prevail even if polls show them down.

225

Psst: The war's not over, Buckwheat. You sound like Dingy Harry.

She's had almost three years to achieve victory, but instead has given up ground almost every step of the way. 

If nearly three years of book sales, reality TV shows, Facebook postings, TV interviews, speaking engagements and very high public exposure hasn't managed to turn her fortunes around, another 18 months is unlikely to affect a dramatic change in the voters perception of her.

226 Re how Palin "speaks on TV" -- she speaks just fine. We can hear her and understand her. No waffling, wavering, ummming, errrring, ahhhhing. No "hoity-toity" fancy phrasery. Simple, plain, crisp, clear.

227

Let her try. If she fails she loses.

If she were to get the nomination and fail, we all lose.

Sarah Palin isn't the hill I want my country to die on.

228 From ACE---
"Um, as I've asked a dozen plus times: What conceivable advantage is there in waiting? What strategic advantage?"

She'll either fly or fall in the debates. There will be a record viewership.

BTW do you think that a cartel of oil rich billionaires would negotiate with a dimwit over the terms of a (seeded at) $40billion public/private works project? If you think Palin is "scattered" then could you provide me the resume of someone that's "together".

229 Lets not forget there is a nice juicy clip of our current President proclaiming, proudly that under his administration "energy costs would necessarily go up". Somehow, I bet Sarah Palin is the only one amongst the crop with the balls to use it. And Ace, she's been saying this kind of stuff forever.

230

Dear Jeezus,

Please let the Palin Bashers and the Palin Worshippers get over themselves and stick to discussing the thread topic (which is her take on how we should be drilling a lot more). Just this once. Please.

Amen

231 "very high public exposure hasn't managed to turn her fortunes around Posted by: Hollowpoint at March 16, 2011 03:43 PM (SY2Kh)" What most people have seen of Palin so far (not you or I) has nearly all been negative and apolitical up to this point. They have not seen coverage of speeches. They have not watched interviews. They have heard of (but did not see) Palin's reality show. They hear of all her misstatements and family dramas because that's what pop media covers. Political polling is useless until people are paying attention, meaning much, much closer to the election date.

232 No "strategic advantage". It's just not possible to do what you want her to do until the country is focused on the debates

233

 Re how Palin "speaks on TV" -- she speaks just fine. We can hear her and understand her. No waffling, wavering, ummming, errrring, ahhhhing. No "hoity-toity" fancy phrasery. Simple, plain, crisp, clear.

That would be fine if she were making compelling, intelligent arguments in the process.  From what I've seen, she hasn't been.

234

Dear Jeezus,

Please let the Palin Bashers and the Palin Worshippers get over themselves and stick to discussing the thread topic (which is her take on how we should be drilling a lot more). Just this once. Please.

Amen

Umm, OK. 

We should be drilling a lot more, and the Obama administration is intentionally hindering our ability to do so.

Now what else would you like to talk about?

235 The political establishment--in both parties--dislikes Palin because she's not playing by their rules. "Harrumph, harrumph! This little lady isn't doing things the way we've established! How dare she! She should just run back home to her caribou. Harrumph." If you don't listen to the smart crowd, they don't like you. I could be wrong. But it seems like Palin's going to do this her own way, right or wrong. Win or lose. It's one of her best qualities, IMO. "I don't like your rules, so I'm changing the game." Might fail spectacularly. Or it might work.

236 Hey Ace, put up a thread about T-Paw, and see how many comments you get.
For such a bad candidate, folks can't quit her.

237 She needs to replace the word "for" with the word "over" to correct her paraphrasing of the study in her essay.  Ok, fine.

238 hollow point
"That would be fine if she were making compelling, intelligent arguments in the process."

What argument has she not been expressing in a clear way for you? What subject are you confused about her position on?

239 232  Psst: The war's not over, Buckwheat. You sound like Dingy Harry.

She's had almost three years to achieve victory, but instead has given up ground almost every step of the way. 

If nearly three years of book sales, reality TV shows, Facebook postings, TV interviews, speaking engagements and very high public exposure hasn't managed to turn her fortunes around, another 18 months is unlikely to affect a dramatic change in the voters perception of her.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at March 16, 2011 03:43 PM (SY2Kh)

I stand corrected. You sound like Ace. It's be just like that whiny bitch to use different handles to try to support his lame-assed positions.

240

Hey Ace, put up a thread about T-Paw, and see how many comments you get.
For such a bad candidate, folks can't quit her.

Such a thread would largely consist of the Palinistas swarming in to tell us how much Pawlenty (or any other candidate not having the initials "SP") sucks in comparison to the Only Woman Who Can Save America (pbuh).

Happens every time, and a lot of us are fucking tired of it.

241 I get the argument about public perception of her, delivered from the "it's not my opinion, it's the PUBLIC" angle.  I get that.

But when those making it trip themselves up with:

245 hollow point
"That would be fine if she were making compelling, intelligent arguments in the process."

...it stops being the perception of the public at large that's the problem, and rather the perception of those who refuse to pay attention when proof is offered that they are ridiculous.

242 Be Smart.  Play Dumb!

243 Her eyebrows look uneven from certain angles. So if we can't nominate Gingrich, we better stick with Obama. Now that's a man qualified to be president!

244 Don't Quit.  Retreat!

245 hollowpont "Such a thread would largely consist of the Palinistas swarming in to tell us how much Pawlenty...sucks"

No, no. I'll get more specific then that -Cap and Trade switch.

Also, didn't he bomb out at those Iowa debates or something? I didn't watch and I don't no anyone who did.

246 She needs to replace the word "for" with the word "over" to correct her paraphrasing of the study in her essay

She also has to amend this claim:

 Allowing drilling in the Chukchi and Beaufort seas will enrich federal coffers by $167 billion a year without raising our taxes.

247 253 She needs to replace the word "for" with the word "over" to correct her paraphrasing of the study in her essay

She also has to amend this claim:

 Allowing drilling in the Chukchi and Beaufort seas will enrich federal coffers by $167 billion a year without raising our taxes.

Posted by: Waterhouse at March 16, 2011 04:01 PM (EDSBe)

Agreed. It's obvious she read "over" as "for" and paraphrased accordingly.

248 She needs to replace the word "for" with the word "over" to correct her paraphrasing of the study in her essay

And actually, just replacing "for" with "over" doesn't correct it. There's still that pesky "a year" in there. It also dramatically reduces the force of her argument the second time she brings it up, since in context of $3.7 trillion budget, and even the $61 billion in spending cuts, the extra $3.3 billion in tax revenue drilling brings in seems pointless to mention.

249

>> it stops being the perception of the public at large that's the problem, and rather the perception of those who refuse to pay attention when proof is offered that they are ridiculous.

Then 65% of the electorate apparently aren't paying attention.

Which does not surprise me, by the way.  The question that begs to be asked is "what can she do differently to change that?"

Reality TV didn't seem to help in this regard.

Now if you'll excuse me, me and my dick have another session with the trunk lid.

250

Now if you'll excuse me, me and my dick have another session with the trunk lid.

Posted by: Dave in Texas at March 16, 2011 04:07 PM (WvXvd)

Daddy?

251

What argument has she not been expressing in a clear way for you? What subject are you confused about her position on?

It's not a matter of making her positions clear- I generally know what they are, and agree with them.

The problem is that she presents them in a Hannity-style manner of banal talking points that have almost no chance of convincing anyone who doesn't already agree 100%.  Preaching to the choir with simple policy positions isn't good enough.

The last interview I saw was on Hannity (of course) talking about NPR.  Her entire arguement was that the O'Keefe tape showed that they were biased, and we should cut their funding because of our high national debt.  There was just no "there" there.

Did I agree with her position?  Sure, but I agreed beforehand.  Would anyone who was undecided about funding NPR have been persuaded by her argument?  No.

252 She implied that this single project would add ~$26 billion/year in state tax revenue for Alaska for 50 years. Last year, total oil & gas tax revenues for Alaska were ~$4 billion. You would think, as a former governor, the claim that this project would single-handedly increase annual tax revenue by a factor of six would have sparked enough skepticism to read the actual article she linked to (or maybe even the study that the article was reporting on). It did for me and I don't even live there.

253 247
Such a thread would largely consist of the Palinistas swarming in to tell us how much Pawlenty (or any other candidate not having the initials "SP") sucks in comparison to the Only Woman Who Can Save America (pbuh).

Happens every time, and a lot of us are fucking tired of it.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at March 16, 2011 03:56 PM (SY2Kh)

Then refute with why "X" is better than Palin. It's not hard to do if you believe in this person.

Who is this mythical candidate you keep hoping for anyway?

254 "the extra $3.3 billion in tax revenue drilling brings in seems pointless to mention. Posted by: Waterhouse at March 16, 2011 04:06 PM (EDSBe) Not disagreeing, but it's sad that $3.3 billion in new revenue is too small an amount to mention.

255 #240 You haven't been looking nor listening.

256

 You would think, as a former governor, the claim that this project would single-handedly increase annual tax revenue by a factor of six would have sparked enough skepticism to read the actual article she linked to (or maybe even the study that the article was reporting on). It did for me and I don't even live there.

What do you know about Alaska Math?

Nothing! 

Leave Sarah alone...Just Leave Her ALONE!!!

257 "The problem is that she presents them in a Hannity-style manner of banal talking points that have almost no chance of convincing anyone who doesn't already agree 100%. Preaching to the choir with simple policy positions isn't good enough. Posted by: Hollowpoint at March 16, 2011 04:10 PM (SY2Kh)" If she's on Hannity, then she's already preaching to the choir. Might as well give 'em what they want. In a real campaign she would not be limited to Hannity and Fox etc.

258 Alaska math?

Our current President thinks there are 57 states.

259 That bear is upset because there is nothing good on television these days. Sure Justified is on tonight, but we're already half way through the series. All the other good shows like Breaking Bad don't start until summer. Who comes up with these lousy schedules?

260

...it stops being the perception of the public at large that's the problem, and rather the perception of those who refuse to pay attention when proof is offered that they are ridiculous.

Except she's also failed to impress a lot of us who have been paying attention.

There seems to be a bit of projection amongst the Palinista set.  What I've been seeing is the belief that "If only people knew Palin like I know Palin, they'd love her too!"

Problem is, most people aren't going to form the emotional attachment to a political candidate that the Palinistas have.

261

Hollow point -258

OK, so you agree with her , almost always, on policy. You just don't like the way she says it. You think she can't convince enough people to have the same rational, sensible opinions as she does. Though you concede that she is almost always right and there are many (even republicans) who are wrong on crucial issues, she has not driven the debate. OK. It's not an endorsement but it's not so bad.

262 Why did it all italicize?

263 "Problem is, most people aren't going to form the emotional attachment to a political candidate that the Palinistas have. Posted by: Hollowpoint at March 16, 2011 04:19 PM (SY2Kh) Like the Obamabots?

264

If she's on Hannity, then she's already preaching to the choir. Might as well give 'em what they want. In a real campaign she would not be limited to Hannity and Fox etc.

This goes back to what Ace was saying- if she's capable of doing so much better in a "real campaign", why would she be holding back now?  Why not make compelling arguments now in order to change the negative perception so many people have of her?

Are you suggesting that she's intentionally dumbing down her interviews and appearances now because she's saving her full brilliance for later?  That she just doesn't want to expend the energy?

Why not prove the critics (like myself) who don't believe she's especially bright to be wrong now if she's so capable of doing so?

265

Like the Obamabots?

Same cut, different cloth.

266

Get aboard The Palin Express folks!

Why?

*She has The Steel-Spine to apply the 'spending brake' to this bus that is headed for a cliff.

*She has the CAJONES to reform Entitlements. (ONLY one to endorse Paul Ryan's plan as a START in the discussion)

*She understands that ENERGY POLICY is the maneuvre that will do the '180deg turn' and head the bus AWAY from the cliff.

*She knows WHAT is required and HOW it is to be accomplished re: Energy policy

You have heard of "Government - OF The People, BY The People, FOR The People?"

Well, get ready for ....

ENERGY -

OF America

BY America

FOR America!

CUDA 2012!!!

 

 

 

267 Ace yesterday declared himself to be a Pawlenty fanboy

Pawlenista?

268 Are you suggesting that she's intentionally dumbing down her interviews and appearances now because she's saving her full brilliance for later? That she just doesn't want to expend the energy? Preaching to the choir =/= "dumbing down". Speaking in soundbites does not mean "dumb" either. Why not prove the critics (like myself) who don't believe she's especially bright to be wrong now if she's so capable of doing so? Posted by: Hollowpoint at March 16, 2011 04:26 PM (SY2Kh) That you don't think she's bright is entirely you. Most people who tell me they think she's stupid almost immediately walk it back to "well, she's not stupid, but...", meaning it's become an all-purpose insult. Ace's question was why she doesn't speak in the same detail in person as she does in print. There is a time for all things. Her FoxNews media appearances these days are short and she tosses quips to her audience. Her FBN interviews are less so. This week she's in India. Check back later to see if her speech was sufficiently free of talking points for you. (Call me crazy, but I bet you'll have something to criticize about it.)

269 271 hollow point
"Are you suggesting that she's intentionally dumbing down her interviews and appearances now"
NistaBots aren't arguing that. We don't see her as dumbing down anything. It's a dumbed down  tv show with a time limited format. You judge her in a way that you don't judge others.If you think "brilliant" "new" things are being said on BOR,Meet the press or Charlie Rose then you need to ... you don't need to do anything. Look, people talk often about things in my profesion on tv but I never expect to learn anything from it. Palin is an advocate and she advocates opinions I agree with.

270

Aaurgh!

It's not "global warming" that makes oil above the Arctic Circle available for extraction, it's an oil price around $100 per bbl and improved drilling technology that makes the oil available....but mainly $100 per bbl oil.

Ice in the Arctic continues to do what it has always done...melt and refreeze.  Oil companies have build artificial islands out of gravel to allow them to drill in extreme ice flow conditions.  The price just wasn't right to justify it when there were cheaper wells to be drilled in more hospitable operating conditions.

271 And I will say again - Palin is not going to run in 2012 and she is a powerful advocate for our side. Going out of hte way to say that she is saying things we like so that makes her bad is wasting a strategic asset. Every GOP person on TV needs to say that she's a great asset to the party and if she were to run and win that they would support her. That's it. You can say you prefer some other candidate, that's fine. But why piss away the support of her supporters?

272

HP: "Resigning in response to ethics complaints (bogus or not) doesn't inspire confidence in that regard." 

SP resigned due to the fact that the ethics complaints (all filed by democrat operatives) filed against her had cost HER (not the AK government or the GOP) six-figures in legal fees.

273

Posted by: alwaysfiredup at March 16, 2011 04:33 PM (UKAnE)

She had more than enough time to make a compelling argument; it wasn't a quick 30 second interview.

For instance, it wouldn't have taken long at all to make a better argument such as:

"We're $14 Trillion dollars in debt, and we're facing some tough spending decisions that will require significant cuts.  There may have been a time when funding the likes of NPR and PBS made some degree of sense; when we first began funding these organizations there was no Internet, 24 hour cable news, talk radio was largely non-existant, and most Americans only had a few TV channels to choose from."

"Today, Americans have many sources of information and opinion available to them 24 hours a day.  NPR and PBS now have an abundance of private competition, and we can no longer afford to go deeper into debt to fund unnecessary, redundant government programs."

That was just off the top of my head, but I think it would've been far more compelling (and no lengthier) than the rather mindless response I saw her give.

274

SP resigned due to the fact that the ethics complaints (all filed by democrat operatives) filed against her had cost HER (not the AK government or the GOP) six-figures in legal fees.

I know, though at the time she employed the Jake Blues defense, offering multiple explanations for her resignation.

Every politician facing ethics complaints claims to be the innocent victim of a political witch hunt, guilty or not.  That it happened to be (mostly) true with Palin doesn't much matter; there's just no way to spin it in such a way that it won't be viewed as a huge negative for her.

An opponent could easily counter "If these charges were as frivolous as you claim, why did you find it necessary to spend such a great deal of money defending against them?"  Isn't it true that you yourself championed the ethics law which you complain prevented you from using special interest money in your defense?"

275 Hollow pointFor instance, it wouldn't have taken long at all to make a better argument such as:....



Look at her resume, PLEASE. The wonks and pros in the Mcain camp saw every bit of media she ever did. She maintains a base is all 50 states. She is invited to speak all around the world to the best, brightest, richest. She draws ratings whenever she does a tv appearance.

This is not a criticism of you because I'm prob just like you but neither of us could make a better argument in the public arena then Palin or any other national political aspirant about anything "off the top of our head".

276 281 - "I know, though at the time she employed the Jake Blues defense, offering multiple explanations for her resignation."

You're right there. She should have probably had a better response prepared but everyone makes mistakes.

277 That it happened to be (mostly) true with Palin doesn't much matter

Mostly?  I was under the impression that all the complaints had been dismissed as being without merit.

Bring the knowledge please.

278 Hollowpoint is either the chairman of the local flat earth society or Ace in disguise trying to boost his numbers by provoking Team Palin.  Whoever he is, debating this guy is a lot like debating a duck.  No matter how much evidence you show the duck, you won't ever get it to do anything other than quack. 

Did you mention her high pitched voice today or is that to come in some future insightful observation? 

Get a grip guy  - she's just a private citizen.   She has no authority over anyone or anything.   Nothing she does can harm you, me, or the country.  The same cannot be said of Mitch Daniels, Chris Christie, or the senate Rs. 

279 Round 1 Nista's vs AntiNista's at the ACE Thread Colosseum.

Palin:10
Anti-Palin:8

Round 1: Palin

280

Palin:10

She only needed 6 shots.

281 What irritates me even more than high fuel prices is that this administration is deliberately keeping Americans out of work. Developing oil fields not only creates jobs at the site, but oil fields also create secondary and tertiary jobs.

282

Mostly?  I was under the impression that all the complaints had been dismissed as being without merit.

Bring the knowledge please.

IIRC, the found against her regarding her attempt to raise money for her defense, and something with the Troopergate thing.  Don't remember the details, but those complaints weren't completely meritless, though minor.

283

 Hollowpoint is either the chairman of the local flat earth society or Ace in disguise trying to boost his numbers by provoking Team Palin.  Whoever he is, debating this guy is a lot like debating a duck.  No matter how much evidence you show the duck, you won't ever get it to do anything other than quack. 

"I love her so much isn't she awesome she's the greatest thing ever" isn't "evidence", duder.

284

"I love her so much isn't she awesome she's the greatest thing ever"

but...but, Alaska...!!e!eventy!!!11!

285 "According to one industry study, allowing Royal Dutch Shell to tap these reserves in AlaskaÂ’s Chukchi and Beaufort seas would create an annual average of 54,700 jobs nationwide with a $145 billion total payroll and generate an additional $193 billion in total revenues to local, state, and federal governments over 50 years. " It has been corrected in the post.

286 I can confirm @15. I'm an AK resident and can tell you that the choice to disallow offshore exploratory drilling in that area was the source of weeping, wailing, and gnashing of teeth all over the state last summer. AK is, clearly, an economy based on resource collection, and it's tremendously frustrating for people across the entire social spectrum to be prevented in collecting what we see as ours, particularly when there is such plenty. Our President is _not_ a popular man in the 49th state.

287

SP resigned due to the fact that the ethics complaints (all filed by democrat operatives) filed against her had cost HER (not the AK government or the GOP) six-figures in legal fees.

Posted by: TheThinManReturns at March 16, 2011 04:50 PM (W3XUk)

It cost the state of AK almost $2mil in less than 6 months.   How much would it have cost her state over the next 2 years?   We know the frivolous suits would have continued.

288 My post @ 07:54 should state 8 months, not 6.

289 Isn't it true that you yourself championed the ethics law which you complain prevented you from using special interest money in your defense?"

Posted by: Hollowpoint at March 16, 2011 05:04 PM (SY2Kh)

Nice that you attempted to sneak in that lie regarding special interest money.   Would you like to elaborate on that lie?  It should be amusing.

290

ItÂ’s been five years since Shell purchased the lease to develop these fields, but itÂ’s been mired in a regulatory funk courtesy of the Obama Administration. After investing $3.5 billion in exploration programs (a significant portion of which went to ensuring responsible spill response and prevention), Shell announced last month that it has given up hope of obtaining the required permits...

 

But PotUS has the answer, following the lead of John Kerry he will fine them for those years when they did not drill in the leased ares, and use the money to put ip windmills.

291 Round 2 Nista's vs AntiNista's at the ACE Thread Colosseum.

Anti-Palin:concedes and leaves the ring.

Palin wins by opponent concession.

292

No, we nominate a candidate that wouldn't require divine intervention to succeed.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at March 16, 2011 03:36 PM (SY2Kh)

Seriously, fucking name one.  HP

293 "I love her so much isn't she awesome she's the greatest thing ever" isn't "evidence", duder.

I agree. 


P.S.  Not sure that "duder" is an English word. 

294 Fron the editor of the Petersburg, Alaska, Pilot. March 10, 2011 (weekly newspaper): Its more of the same. The federal govt establishes broad, all-encompassing policies and decisions that tie the hands of people attempting to carry out a common sense mandate to reduce oil consumption and make use of clean, renewable energy to light and heat our homes. Of course, the president is ignorant of the policy snafu that just shut down the prospects of building a hydro project that could remove diesel generation needs for this community and others for decades. President obama is clueless that the recent Roadless Rules imposed by his agencies on the Tongass have tied up over 92 % of the Tongass National Forest (in S.E.Alaska) from ever being home to some of the most cost-effective, environmentally sound hydro power projects in the world. Were (this ) power project developed... this community could curtail its diesel generation forever. ...We would have redundant power sources that would carry this town, and others into the next century. ( this project) will not be built because of a broad policy brushstroke... set in place by this administration. " Its unfortunate the politicians, the administration is saying 'develop renewable resources, reduce our dependence on oil, and yet the road-less decision prevents that from happening". (we) need to shout a collective "foul" on this matter and forcefully demand changes at the highest level to make this administration understand the folly of their ways, and advise them on how their actions have impacted this community. Human beings, not just fish, trees, birds, and bears, live in the Tongass, and its once again time to demand that competing uses can and should occur in the national forest.community.

295 yLQbc, jeTOb At least garrett remembered the proxy this time. Now call some regulars idiots and you can call it a night.

296 Let's make this real, real, real simple.

If you're a normal profit-seeking enterprise, the usual rule is that "ordinary and necessary" expenses to produce that revenue can be deducted against the revenue that results (Internal Revenue Code, section 162). If it is "ordinary and necessary" to drill three holes in the ground in order to get a producing well, then they're all deductible.

There was even a court case in which a pusher argued that the costs to obtain his illegal drugs should be allowed as a deduction against his illegal drug sales. He won. (The Feds have tinkered with the law somewhat subsequently.)

Virtually all that complicates the tax accounting for oil and gas interests relates to the timing and limitations of these deductions (mostly stalling the timing for political reasons). For instance, Intangible Drilling Costs are "all expenses incident to and necessary for the drilling of wells and the preparation of wells for the production of oil, gas, or geothermal energy that are neither for the purpose of tangible property nor part of the acquisition price of an interest in the property." This would be labor, fuel, materials, transportation costs, supplies, truck rent, repairs and depreciation of drilling equipment -- but may not include casing materials and production gear. Such IDC's may be expensed or depreciated. If you're an integrated oil company, you have to capitalize 30% for no apparent reason other than you're sitting there with a bunch of money. If you decide to expense it, and you're rich, you have to treat the difference between expensing and depreciating as if it were income for Alternative Minimum Tax -- because you're a stuck-up rich oil-grubbing bastard. If you decide to depreciate it because you're tired of being tagged and taxed as a "stuck-up rich oil-grubbing bastard" or "integrated oil company sitting on a pile of cash", you are allowed to write it off if you can prove that the well is completely worthless (***kisses***). In each case, you're not getting anything beyond what the basic rule might allow, but the timing and regulatory compliance become quite complicated.

297 Anything to appease the granola munchers and tree huggers as well as big oil and OPEC their all partners in crime

298

Ace is now coming to the realization that Palin is going to run for the nomination and walk away with it; especially if Huckabee doesn't run.

He doesn't want to look like a fool when this happens, so he is gradually praising her while still writing some criticisms so he looks more even handed.