Blog Debate – Sarah Palin & The Economy, Pt. 2

Okay T. Christopher posted a response to my opening remarks. Now I shall sit down and pen some thoughts in an effort to help further shape the debate and represent my side of this conversation. First of all, let me laud TC on his passion. He is up front with his beliefs and you know well where you stand with him, especially on this issue. That is commendable. However I do have a few opinions of my own.

TC said:

The very idea of Palin (at any point in the future) having an impact on the nation’s economy in my mind is tantamount to thinking cheerleaders have an impact on the outcomes of football games.  She can no more impact our nation’s economy than can Beck, Hannity, Coulter, or my seven year old nephew for that matter; but in the spirit of this “debate” I will forge ahead nonetheless and play along.

The premise of this discussion, as I understand it, is what effect would her policies have upon our national economy. Not whether she is fit for the job, nor if she can even get elected to the job, that of residing in the Oval Office. So while I see what TC is saying and understand his frustration with Sarah Palin, I find it hard to debate pure passion, rather than hard ideas as to what her effect might or might not be, ultimately.  But let me try.

TC said:

“She knows I want lower taxes, smaller government, etc, etc…  so she force feeds it to me day after day.  If she is the great communicator and conduit for relating to “everyday” Americans as everyone tells me that she is, shouldn’t she be the one to begin explaining to the American People how we as conservatives have come to those positions – or more importantly how we’re going to put talk into action?  If she is the common man’s woMAN of choice, why hasn’t she realized that the vast majority of her followers couldn’t connect the Tenth Amendment with States’ Rights if they were sitting with a copy of the Bill of Rights in their Right hand and the Declaration in their left because people like Sarah Palin have gone so long without referencing the two openly and honestly that they’ve all but become an afterthought.”

If Sarah Palin started right now, this instant giving detailed instructions on how to go about getting back to the concepts and principles of our founding, then all chances of her being a serious contender in ’12 would be for nil. If she isn’t contemplating on running, then why would she set out detailed instructions? I would also posit that Sarah Palin has to be not twice as good as the next “guy,” but three times as good. She is a female in a man’s arena, that of national politics and on top of that, she is a conservative female so the media hates her. That being said, to expect her to be on a soapbox saying, “Here is my plan” is expecting too much too soon. Her record speaks for itself on both the fiscal front and the transparency issue as well.

As for connecting the Tenth Amendment with States’ Rights, well I don’t recall Reagan ever doing that. I was in my 20s during his Presidency and looking back I know now that he DID protect States’ Rights, he just did it without saying so, I suppose. So for us to expect Palin to do anything different than that, is well…odd. She IS in favor of States’ Rights. She IS in favor of personal liberties. She IS in favor of smaller government. As I said, her record speaks for itself.

Speaking of transparency, in October of 2007 during a special session, Alaskan legislators – both Republicans AND Democrats wholeheartedly endorsed a plan that she called ACES. One of those nifty government acronyms, it stood for Alaska’s Clear and Equitable Share. ACES was Governor Palin’s plan to finally, after decades of talk by administrations of both parties bring about the realization of the natural gas pipeline that I mentioned in my opening remarks. She did so in open to the public meetings and by having the oil companies bid for the project. This had the big oil companies furious, but in the end even they admitted that her legislation worked and even “significantly increased their profits.” I mention this again because if she is able to bridge the party line gap and bring big oil on board then her “seen through the who gives a shit looking glass sounds a great deal like President Obama’s Ten Letters he reads every night” transparency is more than a gimmick.


“Right now, I see Palin as a one trick pony.  If she can trade in the talking points and bone up on the rarely-used practice of strict interpretation and start to flesh out a few of her talking points…”

Should we take this to mean that her record in Alaska as both a two term mayor and the state’s Governor are to be discounted as mere talking points? On the contrary, I think she has a firm grasp of what is expected of her and what she expects from her government and given the chance, which is how this debate is framed, I think she would have a very positive impact on our economy.


3 comments on “Blog Debate – Sarah Palin & The Economy, Pt. 2

  1. You got something wrong. The ACES you refer to is the restructuring of the taxing of the oil companies, to a sliding scale based on oil prices. Prices go up , the tax rate climbs a little, when prices go down, the oil companies get a break, because their profit margins shrink or disappear.

    The gas pipeline legislation is another acronym, AGIA. That means Alaska Gasline Inducement Act.

    That is the bill you are describing. Otherwise, I agree with you in this debate, and I find the dismissive attitude or your collegue a little offputting. His points are well argued on the merits, and there does seem to be a little open minded wiggle room, but the ferocious certainty that it will never, ever, ever matter in the slightest is overdone, IMHO. But hey, that is what this is for right? People who think as he does I see as Palin’s challenge to win them over, not a reason to jump ugly on them.

    • @Brian…You are correct. I used the wrong acronym. AGIA, (Alaska Gasline Inducement Act) was the effort of the Palin administration to bring to fruition the Natural Gas Pipeline for Alaska. ACES is the restructuring of the oil taxation. Alaska’s Constitution gives the citizenry part ownership in the natural resources, and ACES enabled Alaska to get a better more equitable share of the profits, it also aided the oil companies in their end of the deal as well by increasing their profits.

      Thank you for pointing that out.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s