Reporter admits media bias against Palin.
Sarah 'Barracuda' Palin and the Piranhas of the Press
A good article with many examples from other journalists.
Some quotes:
"But the true villains in this political morality play may have been the press."
"Our journalism model is busted, too."
"In the 2008 election, we took sides, straight and simple, particularly with regard to the vice presidential race."
"What I am saying is that we simply didn't hold Joe Biden to the same standard as Sarah Palin, and for me, the real loser in this sordid tale is my chosen profession."
"From the beginning, and for the ensuing 10 months, the coverage of this governor consisted of a steamy stew of cultural elitism and partisanship."
"Women columnists turned on Sarah Palin rather quickly. A plain-speaking, moose-hunting, Bible-thumping, pro-life, self-described "hockey mom" with five children and movie star looks with only a passing interest in foreign policy -- that wasn't the woman journalism's reigning feminists had envisioned for the glass ceiling-breaking role of First Female President (or Vice President). Hillary Rodham Clinton was more like what they had in mind – and Sarah, well, she was the un-Hillary."
"The first thing reporters and commentators seemed to have noticed about Gov. Palin was her physical beauty. The second was that she had a bunch of kids, the last one born with Down's syndrome in spring 2008. For some reason, these two facts infuriated many Democratic activists and bloggers – and some liberal journalists."
"This proved a harbinger, too, as misinformation slipped easily from the left blogosphere into mainstream coverage."
"The Times, for example, which found the alleged transgressions of an actual presidential candidate (John Edwards) unworthy of investigation, managed to find room for three Page One stories touching on the sex life of a vice presidential candidate's daughter."
Friday, July 10, 2009
Thursday, July 9, 2009
Cash for Clunkers ???
Ok, the government wants you to get rid your old car and wants you to get a new more fuel efficient new car. Ok, skipping the fuel costs in building and transporting a new car, how much is saved.
Say you have two cars, one getting 18 mpg and the other 12 mpg. And you buy a new car with 22 mpg.
At 4 mpg savings, the new car will use 101.01 gallons less per 10,000 miles. At 10 mpg savings, the new car will use 379.78 gallons less per 10,000 miles. If the old car would have lasted 10K miles, it would have cost the taxpayers, $34.65 per gallon saved at 4 mpg, or $11.88 at 10 mpg more efficient. If the old car had stay on the road for 100K miles, at 4 mpg less efficient it would have used 1010 more gallons of gas or $3.465 cost per gallon for the taxpayers, or 3787 gallons saved at a cost of $1.188 per gallon saved at 10 mpg efficiency.
Best case: Currently getting 10 mpg, buy a car with 45 mpg. That would by save 777.77 gallons by 10K miles. Or costing the taxpayer $5.78 per gallon at 10K, or $0.58 per gallon for 100K miles.
If it is a clunker, how many more miles would you get? How much is this worth?
Say you have two cars, one getting 18 mpg and the other 12 mpg. And you buy a new car with 22 mpg.
At 4 mpg savings, the new car will use 101.01 gallons less per 10,000 miles. At 10 mpg savings, the new car will use 379.78 gallons less per 10,000 miles. If the old car would have lasted 10K miles, it would have cost the taxpayers, $34.65 per gallon saved at 4 mpg, or $11.88 at 10 mpg more efficient. If the old car had stay on the road for 100K miles, at 4 mpg less efficient it would have used 1010 more gallons of gas or $3.465 cost per gallon for the taxpayers, or 3787 gallons saved at a cost of $1.188 per gallon saved at 10 mpg efficiency.
Best case: Currently getting 10 mpg, buy a car with 45 mpg. That would by save 777.77 gallons by 10K miles. Or costing the taxpayer $5.78 per gallon at 10K, or $0.58 per gallon for 100K miles.
If it is a clunker, how many more miles would you get? How much is this worth?
A discouraging word?
It may be my imagination, but I think I am beginning to hear a discouraging word from the three major networks (ABC,CBS and NBC) nightly news. The question is, is because Obama has gone to far left or not enough?
Monday, July 6, 2009
Earth Cooling .74F
Earth's 'Fever' Breaks! Global temperatures 'have plunged .74°F since Gore released An Inconvenient Truth'
"the Earth has cooled .74°F since former Vice President Al Gore released "An Inconvenient Truth" in 2006."
"the Earth has cooled .74°F since former Vice President Al Gore released "An Inconvenient Truth" in 2006."
Sunday, July 5, 2009
Did Palin resignation doom further political office?
I question those who believed she doomed a further run for the Presidency. Yes, she may be viewed as a quitter. But if McCain had won in November she would of quit then. Secondly, did not Obama and Biden "quit" their jobs as Senators?
Would a year and half more in the Governor do her more good? Those who dismissed Alaska as a small state before would not have been impressed if she had 2 full terms. Already she has done more than Obama had done when he ran for the Presidency.
Of course, she may just want to play with a role like Newt Gingrich, providing support other candidates in their campaigns.
The biggest clue to her future is the need of her opponents to still try knock her down. If she wasn't a further threat, they would just leave her alone. No, they are afraid of combining her popularity with the growing TEA (Taxed Enough Already) Party movement. A populist charismatic conservative female frightens the liberal "Women's Movement".
My prediction, should Cap and Trade pass this year, the effects on job losses and higher bills will be noticeable by 2011. If global temperature continue to decline despite China building a new coal plant a week and India's increasing C02 output, Palin will be good position for a run.
Would a year and half more in the Governor do her more good? Those who dismissed Alaska as a small state before would not have been impressed if she had 2 full terms. Already she has done more than Obama had done when he ran for the Presidency.
Of course, she may just want to play with a role like Newt Gingrich, providing support other candidates in their campaigns.
The biggest clue to her future is the need of her opponents to still try knock her down. If she wasn't a further threat, they would just leave her alone. No, they are afraid of combining her popularity with the growing TEA (Taxed Enough Already) Party movement. A populist charismatic conservative female frightens the liberal "Women's Movement".
My prediction, should Cap and Trade pass this year, the effects on job losses and higher bills will be noticeable by 2011. If global temperature continue to decline despite China building a new coal plant a week and India's increasing C02 output, Palin will be good position for a run.
Saturday, July 4, 2009
Why Palin's Resignation Make Sense.
As I started to write this, I have decided that Palin has made an excellent decision.
If she is being blocked in Alaska government with spurious ethics charges (15-0) and her opponents will prevent her agenda from succeeding, then staying on an additional year and a half would do her no good nor the state any good. If she did not plan to run for another term leaving now gives her successor (which I assume she believes will follow the same agenda as hers) will give him a better chance in winning the next election.
If she is spending 80% her time fighting ethics charges, and it is costing the State millions to investigate and her family $500K to fight, then it makes little sense to continue on. Her opponents will say she quit because of this and of course it will make a great 30 second ad. Had she wished just to remain the governor for another term, it would have shown politically weakness. But if she already decided not to seek another term, then it makes sense to leave now.
If pundits are right, she can make $50K to $100K a speech. These could help pay-off her legal defense bills. Leaving also limits the amount of new spurious ethics charges. If she plans to run for President, then she can build the funds necessary for a run. Giving the current situation, remaining as Governor just hamstrings her. She will now be able to freely leave the state and campaign for others.
It also allows her to spend more time with her family. Something that must be appreciated if she does run for President (2 years running, 8 years governing).
I suspect that the building of the Alaskan gas pipeline through Canada will have started by 2014. This will give her a big boost for a 2016 election bid. Six years of campaigning on a national level could give her a strong base.
It is also possible that the Democrats will mess things up so bad that Obama will be seen as defeat-able in 2012. If she campaigns for congressional candidates in 2010 and has an impact on the races, she could be in great position for 2012.
If she is being blocked in Alaska government with spurious ethics charges (15-0) and her opponents will prevent her agenda from succeeding, then staying on an additional year and a half would do her no good nor the state any good. If she did not plan to run for another term leaving now gives her successor (which I assume she believes will follow the same agenda as hers) will give him a better chance in winning the next election.
If she is spending 80% her time fighting ethics charges, and it is costing the State millions to investigate and her family $500K to fight, then it makes little sense to continue on. Her opponents will say she quit because of this and of course it will make a great 30 second ad. Had she wished just to remain the governor for another term, it would have shown politically weakness. But if she already decided not to seek another term, then it makes sense to leave now.
If pundits are right, she can make $50K to $100K a speech. These could help pay-off her legal defense bills. Leaving also limits the amount of new spurious ethics charges. If she plans to run for President, then she can build the funds necessary for a run. Giving the current situation, remaining as Governor just hamstrings her. She will now be able to freely leave the state and campaign for others.
It also allows her to spend more time with her family. Something that must be appreciated if she does run for President (2 years running, 8 years governing).
I suspect that the building of the Alaskan gas pipeline through Canada will have started by 2014. This will give her a big boost for a 2016 election bid. Six years of campaigning on a national level could give her a strong base.
It is also possible that the Democrats will mess things up so bad that Obama will be seen as defeat-able in 2012. If she campaigns for congressional candidates in 2010 and has an impact on the races, she could be in great position for 2012.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
