Outside Erie

36 Responses to “Palin v. Ridge”

1. Joe Erie
   August 29th, 2008 at 11:40 am

   He’s banking on getting the votes from all of the Hillary Clinton supporters.

2. Joe Erie
   August 29th, 2008 at 11:46 am

   And Tom Ridge is not a very popular figure outside of Erie, PA.

   Tom Ridge could’ve been Joe Biden, if he stayed true to his roots. Instead, Ridge morphed into the very type of elitist politician that the conservative pundits love to accuse democrats of being.

3. Tim
   August 29th, 2008 at 12:01 pm

   I agree with what Joe Erie said about Tom Ridge. Tom Ridge USED to be one of the people - an average, everyday Joe six-pack. Something happened to him once he became Governor. He turned into an arrogant, I’m-better-than-you politician.

   I think John McCain made the right choice. Tom Ridge should SERIOUSLY reconsider his stance about being pro choice. He’s hit the ceiling for the rest of his career. He’ll never be a Vice-President or President as long as he is pro choice.

4. Amy Smith
   August 29th, 2008 at 12:27 pm

   I’m interested to see what will happen to the “Obama lacks experience” theme now…Palin has a pretty light resume herself, and she’ll be only a (73 year old) heartbeat away from the Presidency.

5. SMS
   August 29th, 2008 at 1:08 pm

   As great as it would have been for an Erieite to hold the office of Vice President, Ridge would have done very little for that ticket that McCain didn’t already provide. Ridge would have not brought any new energy to McCain’s campaign, something he needs to defeat Obama. Two Vietnam-era guys would have done nothing to stop the Obama-train.

   Maybe Ridge will get tabbed for another Cabinet position if (and hopefully when) McCain and Palin win. He’s already been in Homeland Security; I wonder if there is another job TR might fill well?

   Overall, Palin was a great choice by Maverick McCain.

6. Jim
   August 29th, 2008 at 1:46 pm

   I think its a great pick. She’s tough, and sued the federal government, over interference with energy production in her state. Conservative, pro-life, life member of the NRA (I believe she can shoot straight), and loves moose burgers. Whats not to like? As for experience, she’s been a chief executive of a state. Obama? Well he has none.

   And the fact that she makes PIAPS look like a plow horse doesn’t hurt either.

7. john morris
   August 29th, 2008 at 1:55 pm

   Biden is about as elitist as it gets– at least if he’s not plagiarizing Neil Kinnock and trying to steal his life story.

   One interesting opening putting Palin on ticket does is it provides an opening to talk about what should be the top subject in the campaign, which is the growing insolvency of the Federal government. I think(and I don’t think many of us know much about her) she has a very good record of taking a hard line on government spending.

   Anyone not taking the financial position of US seriously should read about the Suez crisis. There is no such thing as a broke world power.

8. Dale Hannah
   August 29th, 2008 at 2:39 pm

   I suggest that palin has more leadership experience than Barak Obama, and is not indebted to anyone. The Democrats claim to want change, then opt for a good ole’ boy Senator Biden. You can bet there is a lot of baggage there. I think the USA is ready for REAL change.
   Someone experienced to be President, and someone younger, very intelligent, and strong in her own right.

   I call it a winner!

9. john morris
   August 29th, 2008 at 2:59 pm

   Sorry but sooner or later this dirt was going to be dunped on here. As lying goes in Washington, it’s tame but what stands out is a real pattern. Biden lies regularly.

   “By August 1987, Biden’s campaign had begun to lag behind those of Michael Dukakis and Richard Gephardt.[32] In September 1987, the campaign ran into trouble when he plagiarized a speech by Neil Kinnock, then-leader of the British Labour Party.[34] Kinnock’s speech included the lines: “Why am I the first Kinnock in a thousand generations to be able to get to university?” Then pointing to his wife in the audience, he continued: “Why is Glenys the first woman in her family in a thousand generations to be able to get to university? Was it because all our predecessors were thick?” While Biden’s speech included the lines: “I started thinking as I was coming over here, why is it that Joe Biden is the first in his family ever to go to a university?” Then, pointing to his wife: “Why is it that my wife who is sitting out there in the audience is the first in her family to ever go to college? Is it because our fathers and mothers were not bright? Is it because I’m the first Biden in a thousand generations to get a college and a graduate degree that I was smarter than the rest?” Though Biden had previously cited Kinnock as the source for the formulation many times before, he made no reference to the original source at the August 23 debate in question.[35]

   It was also discovered that, during his time as a law student at Syracuse, Biden had plagiarized a law review article. Though the then-dean of the law school, as well as Biden’s former professor, downplayed the incident, they did find that Biden drew “chunks of heavy legal prose directly from” the article in question. Biden said it was inadvertent due to his not knowing the proper rules of citation, and Biden was permitted to retake the course after receiving a grade of F, which was subsequently dropped from his record.[36] Biden also released his undergraduate grades, which were unexceptional.[36] When questioned by a New Hampshire resident about his grades in law school, Biden had inaccurately recollected graduating in the “top half” of his class when he actually graduated 76th from 85, that he had attended on a full scholarship, and had received three degrees.[37] He had received two majors, History and Political Science, and a single B.A., as well as a half scholarship based on financial need.[37] Faced with these revelations, Biden withdrew from the nomination race on September 23, 1987, saying his candidacy had been overrun by “the exaggerated shadow” of his past mistakes.[38] After Biden withdrew from the race, it was revealed that the Dukakis campaign had secretly made a video showcasing the Biden/Kinnock comparison and distributed it to news outlets.[39″

   Biden’s use of Kinnock’s words held a double lie in that members of his family had gone to college. It was also very weird in that Kinnock was a well known figure and these were well known lines of his.

   Getting to another major area of advantage for Palin is her young age. She belongs to the first generation that will almost surely have a diminished lifestyle due to the debts and obligation’s run up by the federal government. Of course Obama, also belongs to that generation but his politics as an advocate of big government makes this moot.

   The refrain at the convention should be– WHERE IS MY MONEY?!!! What right did any generation have to force unchosen obligations on future generations?

10. Michael Mahler
    August 29th, 2008 at 3:24 pm

    I think it looks totally cynical. I feel like this was a selection made by a committee or out of some weird attempt to look diversified. (I don’t think that appealing to Religious Right folks and disaffected Hillary supporters at the same time is a very feasible option.) There are certainly more qualified Republican women out there. It does take away any argument that McCain might have made about experience. She has only held statewide office for 2 years, after having been part time mayor of a small town (barely 8000) village.

    Is she someone we can see as president if something happens to McCain? Furthermore, she has 5 children, including a 4 month old with Down’s Syndrome. I certainly believe that women can balance having a career and a family. I just question the wisdom of balancing being potentially leader of the free world and a special needs infant at the same time. Maybe if she had greater experience in politics, it might be more reasonable, but I don’t get the jumps from part time village mayor to governor of the 3rd least populated state in the union to VP, with the possibility of being president if something happens to McCain (who turns 73 today.)

11. Red States R4 RedNecks
    August 29th, 2008 at 3:28 pm

    McCain is not any different than Biden. They are the same politician representing different colors. They even both admit to being great friends of each other. If you can’t see that then your close-minded political oberservations are as lost of a cause as that blog I never visit.

    Experience also seems like such a desperation item to dwell on. More than anything, I see fear in those who use it as a sticking point. Fear of change, new ideas, and sombody who doesn’t think like you.

12. john morris
    August 29th, 2008 at 3:54 pm

    The Democrats put someone with an equally thin resume at the top of their ticket!! Also, Palin (like I can’t remember her first name yet) has executive experience and the presidency is the ultimate executive position. Biden does have some considerable experience but almost no executive experience.

    I have to admit to being a mild fan of McCain so I’d like to see her take the stage as someone not mired in the history that has racked up 53trillion or more in federal bills and counting.

    First up should be a call for an in depth investigation into Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac. This is something likely to put mud on almost everybody and soak McCain in it. But, an honest investigation might also take out the Democratic party.

13. Ian Enterline
    August 29th, 2008 at 4:47 pm

    I think it’s a great pick. As far as picking up disaffected Hillary supporters, and making the Right happy at the same time, it is feasible because it just happened. As far as her executive experienced is concerned, I echo the sentiments of some others on here. The Obamessiah has none…oh wait, there was the Chairman of the Board thing he did with Bill Ayers. Other than that, he’s just a street organizer.

14. Mikey Z
    August 29th, 2008 at 5:01 pm

    The Republicans are geniuses. Pair up a war hero with a MILF. What heterosexual red-blooded American man wouldn’t vote for that ticket!?

15. john morris
    August 29th, 2008 at 5:04 pm

    By the way, a lot of these federal federal liabilities the government has been keeping off the books in a way that would send any corporate executive to jail, will be popping up onto the ballance sheet in the next few months and years.

    We know a bit about the looming Fannie/Freddie bailouts but does anyone have a clue how much the FDIC will need from the Treasury?

    “Net Charge-Off Rate Rises to Highest Level Since 1991

    Loan losses registered a sizable jump in the second quarter, as loss rates on real estate loans increased sharply at many large lenders. Net charge-offs of loans and leases totaled $26.4 billion in the second quarter, almost triple the $8.9 billion that was charged off in the second quarter of 2007. The annualized net charge-off rate in the second quarter was 1.32 percent, compared to 0.49 percent a year earlier. This is the highest quarterly charge-off rate for the industry since the fourth quarter of 1991. At institutions with more than $1 billion in assets, the average charge-off rate in the second quarter was 1.46 percent, more than three times the 0.44 percent average for institutions with less than $1 billion in assets.

    Note that big banks – those presumably with favourable CAMELS ratings in years past, allowing them to gobble up their less favourably rated peers – have much worse charge-offs than smaller banks.

    Large Boost in Reserves Does Not Quite Keep Pace with Noncurrent Loans ”

    That’s right, it’s the big banks with the worst loans!

16. john morris
    August 29th, 2008 at 5:08 pm

    Sorry, here’s the link.

    http://www.rgemonitor.com/financemarkets-monitor/253437/is_the_fdic_another_troubled_monoline

17. Amy Smith
    August 29th, 2008 at 5:25 pm

    Tut, tut, Michael…like she’ll be raising her own kids anymore. That’s what the nanny is for. Also, this woman has a son who just joined the Army and will be headed for Iraq but she said herself that she hasn’t put much thought into the Iraq war. I for one will continue to view this as complete and utter pandering on the part of the Republican party. I saw a hilarious factoid on Jezebel.com today: “Fox News has been calling her “Susan” Palan; and unless this is another one of their subliminal tricks — SUSAN; as in “B. Anthony,” angry feminists! — that shows you exactly how known this lady is.”

18. Ray D.
    August 29th, 2008 at 5:30 pm

    Michael, there is no way a commitee of Republicans would have picked Sarah Palin. She has spent much of her time in Alaska cleaning up corruption, much of it from the Republican side. She unseated a Republican governor in the primary and won the governorship with little support from her party.

    As for executive experience, she has more than Obama and Biden combined, and she has shown herself to be very vigorous. When it comes to political appointees in Alaska, she gives the phrase “fired with enthusiasm” new meaning.”

19. Dale Hannah
    August 29th, 2008 at 5:59 pm

    Hang in there, Amy. Come November you will have the opportunity to come to know SARAH Palin very well

20. john morris
    August 29th, 2008 at 6:02 pm

    No, I never heard of her. But that doesn’t mean she doesn’t have a bio that’s decent. McCain did have a basic need to try to balance the age on the ticket and that age comes with that kind of resume.

    The other sad fact is how far one has to go to find people not coated in the Washington slime. I think Ron Paul managed to do it but only by never reaching any major position. The government hiding 40 some trillion or more in off the books liabilities and bankrupting future generations has been a team effort with slime all around.

    Either 95% of these folks flunked math or a large chunk of them are just scum. They can’t all not know what they are doing.

21. Dale Hannah
    August 29th, 2008 at 6:03 pm

    But then again, how many Americans had any idea that a Barak Obama even existed, until the democrats dredged him up in a life and death charge to get rid of the Clinton curse?

22. Tom
    August 29th, 2008 at 6:39 pm

    Gosh Michael, would you question the abilities of a man to balance this job with the needs of an infant?
    Palin is perfect. More executive experience then the top of the dem’s ticket (can Obama balance the requirements of the presidency with the needs of his 2 little girls, or is that woman’s work Michael?), and while Obama and Biden have wallowed in the muck of corruption (c,mon, Chicago?), Palin brought down corrupt officials of her own party.
    Ridge was never an option. Some people in local media need to get past their love affair with that second rate congressman.
    When will the dems put a pro-life person in any prominent position in their party?
    Clinton had one and only one; Ray Flynn, ambassador to the Vatican, former mayor of Boston.
    I’ve been watching Palin for a few months now and am overjoyed that McCain picked her.
    BTW, didn’t somebody give a speech last night? Oh well, yesterday’s news.

23. Michael Mahler
    August 29th, 2008 at 8:15 pm

    Um, yes I would question any parent who had a child that young with those sorts of special needs. Are you suggesting that her husband is going to be Mr. Mom now? Hmm, we will see how the ethics investigation that Palin is already involved in turns out.

    And Obama’s speech last night was nothing short of electric and inspiring! I found it deeply moving, and substantial. It showed a genuine commitment to diversity, rather than the obvious pandering. McCain has reportedly only met with Palin once.

24. Tim
    August 29th, 2008 at 9:35 pm

    Well done Michael. My wife and I are the parents of 4 daughters, one of which is a special needs child. By your standards my wife wouldn’t qualify to do much because of our daughter???

    By the way, I am a PROUD MR. MOM! (There are some of us still left our there who place family BEFORE career!)

25. Amy Smith
    August 29th, 2008 at 9:39 pm

    I don’t think Michael is suggesting that a mother of a special-needs child cannot do anything except parent; however Tim, would you want your wife to be the VP of the US? Would you think she’d still be able to devote much time to family if she were?

26. Amy Smith
    August 29th, 2008 at 9:41 pm

    Oh, and Dale…I expect to get to know enough about Ms. Palin before Nov that I will be happy to watch her fade into the sunset as I welcome the new Obama Presidency.

27. George Vietze
    August 30th, 2008 at 6:31 am

    Politics! I tried to stay out of the conversation because it is very emotional and “FACTS” are not generally distributed in an unbiased manner. The fact is that I am 71 and John McCain is 72 and I lived in Arizona for many years I had the opportunity to first hand observation of his “straight talk” reputation and judgement., In the 1980’s during the height of the Savings and Loan Scandel, Charles Keating the President of Lincoln Savings & Loan who ultimately was convicted of felonies had contributed over $100,000 to John McCain an Arizona Senator. Cindy McCain and her father were also personal friends with Charles Keating and had invested over $350,000 in one of Mr Keatings real estate deals. During the investigation John McCain and three other Senator’s made an efforts to put pressure on the investigation to discontinue its efforts against Mr. Keating which became public news in Arizona. When faced with reporters about this claim Mr. McCain’s behavior was embarassing and his display of temperment and temper
    was publically noticed. When Mr. Keating was asked if he thought the $112,000 given to Mr. McCain’s campaign influenced Mr. McCain to interfere with the investigation, Mr. Keating replied, “I hope so!:.
    Mr. Keating’s companies paid for multiple trips on private planes for the McCains and utlimately the McCains were required to re-imburse the IRS for deductions and Mr. McCains answer to the IRS was that he thought that Mrs. McCain had re-imbursed Mr. Keating. He not only doesn’t not know how many houses he/she has but has no knowledge of when they have free trips or when they pay for them.

    In an effort to demonstrate a fairer presentation of “FACTS, over the years, since that time John McCain has been more careful of perceptions of ethics, I believe he has learned from that experience. His temper and judgement however may not have made the same progress. He is 72 and has had a rough emotional life with his experience as a prisinor and the Keating scandel and has had some health issues that put some question on his ability to survive as President and some question his choice of VP’s ability to become Commander in Chief.
    I am not saying that I believe that John McCain is unethical, bcause over many years after the Keating scandel he has not publically been involved in a scandel and has been careful to avoid those instances and when asked about his houses, it may have been fairer to say that because of his wife’s separate property and wealth it was too complicated of a question for a simple answer because he may not have been involved in the ownership of some of those houses. Being wealthy is not a crime or something he should have to apologize for, but it is a “fact” that attitude of wealth and being able to relate and understand the “average American worker” may be a consideration for some people.

    John McCain has proven himself a true American and I am not questioning his integrity because since the Keating Scandel he has gone many years free of public scandel but his judgement, rough emotional life and temperment and health and age are fair questions.
    Is his VP choice capable of being Commander in Chief is a question voters have to ask themselfves.

    The other choice does not have a long history to evaluate over time and being a great inspirer and speach maker does not necessarlly a President make, although it seems to be a quality that elected Kennedy, Reagan, Cllinton and others.

    That said, his challenger Mr. Obama has not stood the test of time and experience and we don’t have the luxury of time to examine his career

    By the way, I am not against conservative philosophy, small government and balanced budgets but unless I am missing something
    the implementation of that platform lacks results from both parties.

    GOD BLESS AMERICA, we need all the help we can get.

28. Joe Erie
    August 30th, 2008 at 8:26 pm

    Interesting piece from a government watchdog group:

    Palin Repeatedly Professed Desire To Renew Federal Funding For ‘Bridge To Nowhere’»

    During the unveiling of his running mate, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin (R), Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) tried to cast her as a “reformer” and “fiscal conservative.” She boldly claimed that with regard to Sen. Ted Stevens’s (R-AK) infamous “Bridge to Nowhere,” she told Congress, “Thanks, but no thanks“:

    I championed reform to end the abuses of earmark spending by Congress. In fact, I told Congress — I told Congress, ‘Thanks, but no thanks,’ on that bridge to nowhere. If our state wanted a bridge, I said we’d build it ourselves.

    It appears, however, that Palin is lying. As Bradford Plumer first noted, the Anchorage Daily News interviewed Palin during her 2006 campaign for governor. At the time, federal funding for the bridge had been stripped by Congress. They asked if she was in favor of continuing state funding for the project. “Yes,” she responded, noting specifically her desire to renew Congressional support:

    Yes. I would like to see Alaska’s infrastructure projects built sooner rather than later. The window is now–while our congressional delegation is in a strong position to assist.

    That assistance never materialized. When she finally canceled the $400 million project, Palin lamented the fact that Congress was not more forthcoming with federal funding. She said in a statement at the time:

    Despite the work of our congressional delegation, we are about $329 million short of full funding for the bridge project, and it’s clear that Congress has little interest in spending any more money on a bridge between Ketchikan and Gravina Island.

    Palin’s desire to have federal funding directed toward pet projects in Alaska, however, did not diminish. As recently as March 2008 — around the time she first met McCain — her special counsel, John Katz, wrote in the Juneau Empire that despite recognizing increased scrutiny of such spending, Palin was not “not abandoning earmarks altogether.” While McCain expressed high-profile disdain for earmarks, the Palin administration held that:

    “Earmarks are not bad in themselves. In fact, they represent a legitimate exercise of Congress’ constitutional power to amend the budget proposed by the president. ”

    Doesn’t this go directly against what McCain supposedly stands for???

29. Joe Erie
    August 30th, 2008 at 8:46 pm

    I’m not sure what the McCain camp is thinking with the selection of Palin. I believe it must be in an effort to win women voters (especially those militant, win-at-all-costs Hillary supporters) over to the Republican side. I read that she is strongly conservative (which is quite funny for a woman, really) and some political commentators feel that that may help McCain solidify the conservative voting base for himself. However, that seems to be incredibly faulty thinking since he has that contingent locked up. I mean, does anyone really think that ultra-conservative voters are going to cast their votes for Obama? Come on now, those soft-brains will vote republican no matter what, cause that’s how daddy and mommy voted their entire lives regardless of the candidate. It must be that his camp knows that they have no chance without wresting some of the female vote from Obama.

    Overall, I don’t think Palin’s a strong choice for VP at all, and I wonder what McCain’s been smoking.

30. Dale Hannah
    August 30th, 2008 at 10:20 pm

    Joe, could you link us to that site, please? That goes against everything I have found about Palin, including from a fellow resident of North East who lived in Alaska until just recently. He said the people loved her for her battles to reduce the graft and corruption in the government.
    Thanks

31. john morris
    August 31st, 2008 at 5:03 am

    Here’s a story on the subject.

    http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_plank/archive/2008/08/29/did-palin-really-fight-the-bridge-to-nowhere.aspx

    I can’t really say I’m too suprised. McCain has never really taken cutting government spending very seriously.

32. Joe Erie
    September 2nd, 2008 at 1:01 pm

    Here are some more articles on the topic. It’s interesting that some posters on globalerie have touted their support for McCain citing his policies to cut earmarks. What do you have to say about this, guys?

    http://voices.washingtonpost.com/washingtonpostinvestigations/2008/09/palins_earmarks_spark_question.html?hpid=topnews

    http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/09/02/politics/animal/main4406380.shtml

    http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/09/stephanopoulos.html

33. john morris
    September 2nd, 2008 at 3:34 pm

    How would voting for a collectivist like Obama help with this problem? If you think the Democratic party will cut spending, you need to be reminded that drugs are illegal.

34. Joe Erie
    September 3rd, 2008 at 8:48 am

    I’m not saying it would. You’re changing the argument. It’s just interesting to see such bold pronouncements about McCain being against earmarks (and that being a given reason for supporting him) and then seeing his chosen running mate involved in one of the most egregious examples of that very matter.

35. TonyF
    September 3rd, 2008 at 8:59 am

    It’s interesting to note that George W and Dick Cheney are similar. The similarity “smudged” W’s terms. Of course their came in handy because of 9/11.

    It’s refreshing to note that McCain and Palin are not. However they have the talent and platforms for a successful presidency. Obama and Biden are not similar. They are not refreshing and they don’t have the talent and platforms for a successful presidency. Most of America can spot this no matter how much the media has made them hate Bush.

36. Erie/DC
    September 3rd, 2008 at 11:17 am

    Uh…”the media” didn’t make us hate Bush…he was able to do that all by himself. When all else fails, or you’re desperate enough, blame “the media.”