OgBlog.net

OgBlog.net

THE 2008 ELECTION JUST CHANGED…..

And this is how it happened:
. .
.

.
. .
They say that in Alaska, she’s known as Sarah Barracuda.  Don’t miss the rest of this tectonic speech…...

.
. .

.
. .

.
. .
READ AN ANALYSIS HERE  explaining why the nomination of Sarah Palin exemplified the foundational difference between the two candidates, and won the election for John McCain.

REMEMBER—this is just political opinion-mongering…..not anything exhibiting omniscience, or even (necessarily) accurate psychological insights.  But…..it *is* interesting stuff.  For example:

Obama will spend the rest of his life wondering why he rejected the obvious road to victory, that is, choosing Hillary Clinton as his vice presidential nominee. However reluctantly, Clinton would have had to accept. McCain’s choice of vice presidential candidate made obvious after the fact what the party professionals felt in their fingertips at the stadium extravaganza yesterday: rejecting Clinton in favor of the colorless, unpopular, tangle-tongued Washington perennial Joe Biden was a statement of weakness. McCain’s selection was a statement of strength. America’s voters will forgive many things in a politician, including sexual misconduct, but they will not forgive weakness.


I guess we’re all going to see, and it won’t take very long, either.  Enjoy the show!!

Posted by on 09/04 at 07:19 PM

  1. You can read some fact checking here

    Posted by  on  09/04  at  08:30 PM

  2. Well, there are facts and “facts”.  I expect politicians to exaggerate - they are human and like the rest of us, they want to look good.  But, they have an even bigger incentive - they need to get elected, so they REALLY need to look good.

    How come Yahoo reporters, whose job description is to get it right, so that their readers get accurate information, can’t quite manage it?

    Sarah Palin did not “tax oil”....had they checked this out, they’d have found that the “royalty” the companies pay to the State for each barrel of oil extracted had been negotiated with the former (corrupt) administration, and was shot through with loopholes.  She faced down these large corporations and negotiated a more equitable deal for Alaska’s citizens, who are the owners of that oil.

    Of course, telling it that way puts the governor in a whole new light….can’t have that, now, can we?

    Have you got a link to Yahoo’s “fact-checking” on the speeches given during the Dem convention…..?

    Posted by  on  09/04  at  08:41 PM

  3. the ACES is not a tax increase?  All my research shows that it is…

    It’s not a “yahoo” reporter. It’s the Associated Press. Just fyi.

    Posted by  on  09/05  at  10:43 AM

  4. I suppose that “definition is everything”, but I see taxes as money that the government takes from away because they can. 

    What happened here, as I understand it, is that the previous administration cut a deal that allowed the companies to take the Alaskan citizens oil and escape paying the full price they had agreed to….in exchange for favors from the companies to the party in power.

    This “corrupt bargain” was overturned by the new governor, so that the amount the companies were paying for the oil (oil that belonged to the Alaskans, and was being extracted and sold by the companies) was the actual price that everyone had been told was what the oil’s owners would get.

    If an oil company comes to my land and offers me a dollar a barrel for any oil they take from under my land, it would be wrong to call it a “tax”.....I see it the same way in Alaska.  The government collected the money that the oil companies were paying for the oil they got.

    When the oil company sells ME the gasoline they made, the government demands 30 or 40 cents a gallon…..for what?  They don’t own the oil, so THAT is what I’d call a tax.

    Posted by Earl  on  09/05  at  10:53 AM

Name:

Email:

Location:

URL:

Smileys

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Next entry: ARE YOU UNDERESTIMATING SARAH PALIN? WILLIE BROWN GETS IT...... (UPDATED)

Previous entry: WASHINGTON D.C. REALLY COULD USE A MAJOR SHOT OF *THIS*......

<< Back to main