Palin: Bush Administration to blame for failure of McCain/Palin ticket

Governor Palin doesn’t want anybody to worry about “Troopergate” anymore, nothing to see here folks!  When she protests as much as she has on this subject, you know it should be investigated further.  Oh, and by the way, it’s business as usual again.  Palin is still going to be charging the government of Alaska a per diem to work out of her house and the state is still going to be picking up the tab for her children to fly everywhere with her.

The really bad news, we are going to be hearing more about Sarah Palin.  She refuses to fade from the limelight.


Palin also said she loved her time in the national spotlight and won’t rule out a run for president or vice president in 2012.

Those were some of Palin’s responses to questions posed Sunday afternoon in a wide-ranging interview with the Anchorage Daily News and KTUU Channel 2 at the governor’s Wasilla home.

Greta Von Susteren of Fox News had just finished an interview with her and was chatting with the governor and her husband in the kitchen. Moose chili cooked in the crock pot and moose hot dogs lay on the table. Palin insisted they weren’t a prop for the national media but just how the family likes to dine.

Here’s some of what she had to say:

Q — Why did your campaign lose?

A — I think the Republican ticket represented too much of the status quo, too much of what had gone on in these last eight years, that Americans were kind of shaking their heads like going, wait a minute, how did we run up a $10 trillion debt in a Republican administration, how have there been blunders with war strategy under a Republican administration.

If we’re talking change, we want to get far away from what it was that the present administration represented and that is to a great degree what the Republican Party had been representing.

Q — There’s been an enormous amount of information about you that Alaskans have been exposed to the past couple of months — and lots of it very critical. What are Alaskans supposed to make of all this?

A — Regarding information regarding my record, that its now out there much of it that was based on misinformation was a very, very frustrating thing to have to go through when the record was never corrected. And we would try to correct the record and too many in the media chose not to make those corrections.

Gosh, golly gee, it seems Sarah Palin feels misunderstood.  That meddlesome media, never gets anything right in her opinion.  Well our fondest wish, that she would quitely slink into oblivion just isn’t going to happen, not with the likes of Entertainment Tonight camped outside her door.  It looks like our suffering is going to continue…

4 thoughts on “Palin: Bush Administration to blame for failure of McCain/Palin ticket

  1. Our suffering will only continue if we continue to watch Sarah Palin. The right wingers are also taking a good look at Newt Gingrich for 2012. Ha! I hope they choose either Gingrich or Palin. They will get their butts handed to them with either candidate.

  2. “Regarding information regarding my record, that its now out there much of it that was based on misinformation was a very, very frustrating thing to have to go through when the record was never corrected. “

    Sarah, you corrected the record a lot with the Couric interview.

    I find it amazing how the likes of William Kristol will tout how Sarah’s selection gave McCain a big boost, only to lose because of the economic crisis.

    Palin did indeed boost McCains ratings, until she opened her mouth. Conservatives thought, ok, she’s a governor, she’s incredibly popular in her home state, she’s a milf … then, they had their “comming to Jesus” moment … she’s an airhead…

    If she wants to run again, she’ll have 3 years to get herself educated. If she does, she’ll attract a whole lot of voters. Her base will be the evangelical christians. And they’ll have had 3 more years of indoctrination from their pulpits.

  3. So Palin, who during the debates invoked the ghost of Ron Ol’ Raygun, can’t fathom how Repugs could steer the economy wrong?

    Cribbed from article of 1998:

    “In three respects the Reagan deficits differ from their historical forebears:

    * Size. Economists measure government deficits not in absolute terms but in relation to the GNP. That’s only common sense: as GNP expands we can afford more debt, and if the debt is growing slower than the economy as a whole, we’re in good shape. Under Reagan, however, the federal deficit expanded from 2.6% of GNP to 5.3% in 1986 (before falling somewhat in 1987), adding more than $1 trillion in red ink to our national accounts. Worse, this growth took place not during wartime or depression but in a period of peace and prosperity. That’s when the national debt is supposed to shrink.

    * Persistence. Reagan came to Washington promising to cut taxes and federal spending. He cut taxes. But spending rose both in absolute terms and as a share of GNP. Was it Congress’s fault? Nope, says Friedman: total government outlays between 1982 and 1987 averaged only $15 billion a year more than what Reagan requested. That accounts for only 8% of the accumulated deficits.

    * Effects. In the past, the government financed its deficits mostly by selling bonds to American investors. This time it has borrowed from the rest of the world. The result: by the end of 1987 the United States had completed a fast transition from the world’s largest creditor to the world’s largest debtor, owing foreign investors roughly $400 billion. What made the borrowing possible was high interest rates, which themselves may have been caused by the big deficits (see “On Deficits and Interest Rates,” page 3). With foreigners happy to snap up high-yielding American assets, the dollar remained high, making imports cheap and damaging the competitive position of U.S. manufacturers. We therefore ran up huge trade deficits and provided overseas investors with ever-increasing quantities of dollars to lend us.”

    Re: “…how have there been blunders with war strategy under a Republican administration.”

    Like, how there was no war, only a wrongful invasion and occupation? With no realistic grasp of the likely consequences or cost in dollars and blood?

    So much for the lie that Repugs are the better trustees of economics and national security.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s