“First there would be nothing principled about refusing Federal stimulus money. These very same governors routinely accept all sorts of federal money. In fact, if you rank states according to the ratio of federal money received per tax dollar contributed, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Alaska are all in the top 4. South Carolina and Idaho are in the top 20 and receive significantly more in federal money than they contribute.
These politicians are not standing up for principle. They are grandstanding. Most of them (particularly Palin, Sanford, and Jindal) are trying to raise their national profile and give themselves a talking point to use in a future presidential run.
Moreover, they are doing so in direct contravention of the interests of their own constituents. These folks are not federal office holders. Their duty is to look after the interests of the people of their respective states, not to police the federal budget. If they were CEOs of a corporation or trustees of organization or trust, this kind of action would be seen as a breach of their fiduciary duties. They would get sued. And rightfully so. By turning down federal stimulus money, they would be inflicting harm on their own citizens.”
–Anonymous Liberal, 02.20.09
This must be sad news to the paragon of intellectual political thought, Mr. Rich “I Seriously Need to Get Laid” Lowry:
By pulling out of CPAC she guarantees February will be relatively quiet. With continual attention from August to January, Palin courted overexposure, but looks to be avoiding it this month. She’s facing criticism in her own state for paying too much attention to her national image, and she wants to rectify that.
The victimology of Sarah Palin’s worldview is truly astounding.
Not a good look, though. Americans don’t like whiners.
Vodpod videos no longer available.
Unfortunately, McCain has already chosen and flamed out in classic belly flop fashion with Sarah Palin.
Eric Kleefeld over at TPM analyzes some very interesting Gallup Poll data and comes to this tongue-in-cheek schaedenfreude conclusion:
A separate question in the data set showed 59% of Republicans saying the party needs to be more conservative, compared to only 12% who say the party should be less conservative. So not only is the pool of Republican voters shrinking, but the ones who remain are really nuts.
We could be seeing the emergence of a pattern common in democracies, when a ruling party is turned out of power in a landslide: The folks who are left to pick up the pieces are often the most extreme elements, and are in fact the least fit to actually clean things up. The best examples of this are probably the UK Labour Party after they were beaten by Margaret Thatcher in 1979, the Conservative Party after Tony Blair finally ousted them in 1997, and over here the Democrats when they lost in 1980 and then nominated Walter Mondale in 1984.
Hmm, can anyone say Palin/Bachmann in 2012?
There are many Democrats just salivating with glee as the hardcore right-wingers push for Sarah Palin to continue her date with destiny in 2012. Josh Marshall of TPM has some conflicted emotions about this:
The GOP is already defaulting to her. That’s good for Democratic candidates. ‘Palin 2012!’
I quite agree from a partisan perspective. The more Palin the better. But I think we also need to think about this from the broader perspective of national dignity. And simple human decency. You’re at a party and someone’s drinking too much and starting to do embarrassing things. Even if you don’t like them, and even if the unlovely part of you thinks it’s kind of funny, still someone should step in. On the other hand, if Rush and Sean, are up for it, maybe we just tap another keg?
READ HIS FULL COMMENTS HERE.
As you know, Steve Schmidt vetoed Sarah Palin’s request to give a speech right before McCain’s concession speech. The intrepid folks at 236.com have somehow managed to get ahold of her notes for that speech.