Posted on 01/31/2009 7:56:52 PM PST by Sarah Barracuda
Infrastructure can be funded through the regular appropriations process.
"The other part she is against, but I don’t think she can do a damn thing about it."
Like I said, the stimulus plan is truly dangerous and destructive and should be fought by every conservative in any way possible. What she can do is speak against it in the strongest possible terms, which does not include being "for" the part of the bill that benefits her.
"She is just a Governor..."
Okay. I'll keep that in mind from here on out. I was previously led the believe that she was a leader that was prepared to step into the oval office, if necessary.
Someone on another forum has a very interesting theory as to what might be going on..
So who is FOX’s source for saying she is lobbying Senators to vote yes - Obama’s people, a primary rival - or maybe Lisa Murkowski.
I’m firmly convinced the Cuda’s going to take her on in the primary. One of the reasons the Cuda has been vague on the stimulus bill is to wait until Murkowski is forced to vote on the final package.
The Cuda will then fully clarify her position - which surprise surprise - will be critical of Murkowski’s vote.
Lisa knows what the the Cuda is up to so she leaks to FOX that the Cuda is lobbying for a yes vote.
The Cuda will now be forced to issue a press release clarifying exactly where she stands - before Murkowski has to cast her Senate vote.
Good political moves by both women
Well then you fix the problem, you don’t compensate for the fixable underlying problem by making a new one.
Too many symptomatic fixes in economic policy rather than causal fixes, that’s why things are so screwed up.
I was really more interested in the discussion that you and I were having on this forum, but oh well.
I believe that any money that would normally go to states for infrastructure and so on, is all lumped into the stimulus bill. The money that Gov. Palin is asking for was already approved it has just been moved to the stimulus bill.
Oh, I’m sorry if I went off topic, just wanted to post something I read on another forum, but back to what I was saying earlier. None of this to me makes any sense, last week she said on camera she was against it, now she is for it. Something about this story does not make any sense to me. Until I hear out of her own mouth that she is 100 percent for this package I won’t believe it. Everything that she has stated til now tells me she is against the stimulus package but for the 1 part that is beneficial to her state
Any enthusiasm you might have had is news to me. Two months ago (soon after you joined FR) you said you had just about given up on all politicians and you specifically singled out Palin and Jindal in your post. Hmmmm......
You're exactly right -
Governor Palin Notes Limits on Stimulus Package
January 12, 2009, Anchorage, Alaska – Governor Sarah Palin today emphasized that the stimulus package pending in Congress likely will be based largely on existing federal formulas for appropriations and will not be the vehicle for earmarked spending on specific projects for states.
Yes it’s called the AP and MSM finding a way to turn the base against so that we will instead run some dork.
If I understand what you're saying, that sounds like nothing more than a ploy to gain support for the stimulus. Had these infrastructure projects already been in some other sort of legislation, or were they going through the normal appropriations process, or what? Please explain in more detail.
If that is the case then it sounds like to me they are using something as important as infrastructure into a horrendous stimulus package so that Governors will have no other choice but to support it even though they are against what the bill stands for. Figures the Dems would do that
Be careful what they report, I heard it too, and they just gave the AP headline, not the actual facts. I caught several things today on Fox that are incorrect... they are better than the other stations, but they are lazy with facts on the weekends.
Fox News has unfortunately gone a little bit to the left. All day they were talking about the return of the Fairness Doctrine, I think they really fear it’s return. They just repeated the same story as the AP, in fact, word for word. I wonder who the AP source is, probably the same jerk who said that Sarah thought Africa was a country, probably the same jerk who said that she was asking for 11 million bucks for her book deal, guess what, no book deal, she doesn’t even have a publisher
WE are not paying for the pipeline... this is for infrastructure the state of Alaska is putting in place to get to the pipeline. Something else, we all gain, down here in the lower 48, from that natural gas pipeline and lower gas prices... and instead of electric, I would rather see more cars built to run on clean natural gas, too.
I was a lurker for years before I joined.
And bashing dissenting voices as trolls is something I expect on DU or dailykos, those people are nuts. But it should not happen here.
The opinions I gave are the exact same opinions you would have gotten from such people as Rush Limbaugh, Milton Friedman, Thomas Sowell, or any conservative/libertarian economist.
The only justification for tax-payer money funding the pipeline were if the pipeline were a natural monopoly, but I haven’t seen anybody presenting evidence that that is so.
It doesn't make sense to many who are repeating what they heard on the news or trying to nail down the facts. It also doesn't make sense to go around insulting folks and making nasty comments about other members of this forum who are simply reporting to one another what they heard on the news, when you clearly don't have any better handle on the situation than they.
If they would allow drilling in ANWR we wouldn’t have to rely on foreign oil, thus saving Americans so much money, but of course the Dems and many Environmentalists are against it
I don’t remember what I said about Palin or Jindal (I’m fans of them both), but my view is that we have so many problems that I frankly doubt we can vote our way out of this. Having the right policy is one thing, but many policies are politically impossible. Too many powerful special interests, too many sectors of the government would need to be dissolved, etc. And unfortunately public opinion is trending more statist than ever.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.