Alaska Politics Blog : No further comment

Alaska Politics Blog

This is the place to talk about Alaska politics -- state, local, national. Public life in the Last Frontier has probably never been more interesting than right now -- the governor as candidate for vice president, the broad and still-evolving corruption investigation, a big election, powerful members of Congress under scrutiny, and the usual hardball Alaska politics. Come here for news, tidbits and information, and join the discussion. Keep your comments civil and on point. Avoid personal attacks. Do not use profanity. Posts that violate the Terms of Use will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be banned.

Contributors

Erika Bolstad

Erika Bolstad covers Alaska issues, including the congressional delegation, from Washington, D.C., for McClatchy Newspapers. Before joining the bureau in 2007, she spent seven years as a reporter at the Miami Herald, where she covered politics, government and the state legislature. E-mail Erika at ebolstad@adn.com.

Sean Cockerham

Sean Cockerham writes about Alaska state politics. He spent three years based in Juneau for the ADN before joining the Tacoma News-Tribune to write about Washington state politics. He went to Iraq twice for the News Tribune, and previously wrote about Alaska government and politics for the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner. E-mail Sean at scockerham@adn.com

Kyle Hopkins

Kyle Hopkins covers politics and other stories for the ADN. He covered the 2006 campaign for governor, has blogged extensively about Alaska politics, covered Anchorage city government and was a reporter based in the Mat-Su. He grew up in Southeast Alaska and previously was a reporter at the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner and Anchorage Press. E-mail Kyle at khopkins@adn.com

Features

SECTION

Alaska political corruption

The FBI raided state legislatures offices in Aug. 2006, and the fallout since has been epic in Alaska's political world.

No further comment

Posted by Alaska_Politics

Posted: September 3, 2008 - 1:37 pm

From Sean Cockerham in St. Paul --

The McCain campaign is getting very prickly about all the questions regarding how well they vetted Sarah Palin for vice president.

Their answer? Stop asking about it.

Here's the full statement from McCain senior advisor Steve Schmidt:

"Governor Sarah Palin is an exceptional governor with a record of accomplishment that exceeds, by far, the governing accomplishments of Senator Obama. Her selection came after a six-month long rigorous vetting process where her extraordinary credentials and exceptionalism became clear. This vetting controversy is a faux media scandal designed to destroy the first female Republican nominee for Vice President of the United States who has never been a part of the old boys’ network that has come to dominate the news establishment in this country. Senator McCain picked his governing partner after a long and thorough search. Governor Palin looks forward to addressing the nation and laying out the fundamental choice this election represents for the American people.

"The McCain campaign will have no further comment about our long and thorough process. This nonsense is over. It is time to begin the debate about how to win the two wars this country is engaged in; how to make this country energy independent; and how to create jobs for American families that are hurting. The American people get to do the vetting now on Election Day – November 4th."

login or register to post comments

6 September 3, 2008 - 3:28pm | ginger_winfree

I hope

That noone falsely states that Gov Palin has an 80% approval rating in Alaska. She may have in the past, but it has gone down significantly in these past months. Last I read it was 53%.

September 3, 2008 - 6:18pm | palmerbuyer

Please quote

the source of your numbers. Thanks.

5 September 3, 2008 - 3:14pm | loflyer21

Rigorous?

If by rigorous he means cursory then I guess he's probably accurate. But I wonder, if this vetting process was so rigorous why were they so unprepared for the media sh*tstrom that was about to rain down on them?

4 September 3, 2008 - 5:56pm | stumpy01

About time we move forward

The USA has some real problems that must be addressed. All this fluff about the personal lives of the Palin family is the kind of vapid nonsense we expect to read on the pages of the tabloids- not in the mainstream media.

The concerns before us?

The massive US debt. Is it fair to future generations to be asking them to pay for our debt? Can we REALLY be this selfish?

The horrible war in Iraq- what, maybe a million people killed, and another one trillion added to the US debt? How do we get out of Iraq? Do we stay for 100 years like McCain wants?

The lack of a coherent US energy policy. What should our goals be toward getting the USA energy independent?

Foreign relations. What should our policy be with Russia? Iran? What if Iran makes nuclear weapons? What do we do, if anything, about that?

US tax policy. Should capital gains taxes be increased, as the Democrats want? Doesn't the Laffer curve predict that would hurt, not help, the US economy?

What about our immigration policy? Should illegal aliens continue to be allowed to pour across the US border? Should we allow an amnesty for the 15 million illegals already here?

What policy should we have about US population growth? Since immigration accounts for half of the US increase in population, should even legal immigration be curtailed? What long term impact will a massive increase in the US population have on our environment?

What programs should be implemented to encourage innovation in areas like cancer research? Stem cell research? Zero emissions vehicles?

We have so much more to worry about than the trivial pap we've been hearing for the last week.

Grow up, move on. Advance.

September 3, 2008 - 6:35pm | TheSdog

True enough Colonel

but if you look at those issues there is minimal difference between McCain/Palin and Obama/Biden.

Vote for Bob Barr.

3 September 3, 2008 - 1:59pm | raingod

Book banning?

A new story is breaking about her banning books when mayor. What books? Anyone know...?

September 3, 2008 - 3:23pm | AK_Lady

You need to find the librarian

her name is Mary Ellen Emmons.

2 September 3, 2008 - 1:57pm | tommcgrath

Well Said

Lets get to something of substance rather than "was she vetted properly".
We need a new kind of politician in Washington D.C. Since the gas lines in 1973 we have yet to formulate a cohesive energy policy, Government keeps getting bigger and more intrusive. Among the good old boys there is more and more corruption. Congress continually goes home on "break" rather than getting down to business.
John McCain has not been afraid to call for change and therefore has never made his way to be a good old boy. Sarah Palin has proven many times that she will take on the establishment.
I have been predicting for several years that we need reformers such as McCain/Palin in office TO REALLY GET CHANGE. It is the Obama/Biden ticket that is more of the same.
We need an energy policy that stops sending 700 billion dollars a year to our neighbors and in some cases our enemies. We are selling our country, one dollar at a time because of the inaction or misguided direction of our Congress and our Administrations. Only McCain/Palin have a chance of changing this.
I am excited that with the McCain/Palin team we have a chance. With the other team we have no chance.

September 3, 2008 - 2:04pm | Emperor

A vote...

...for McCain is a vote for a third term of failed Bush policies. The selection of Palin as VP candidate is the worse kind of tokenism and pandering. It's an insult to the American voter, particularly women.

They offer no new ideas or direction. Our economy will continue its downward death spiral while we continue to spend hundreds of billions of dollars on the war with no end in sight.

September 3, 2008 - 4:33pm | palmeranian

A vote for McCain is a vote for strength.

A vote for Obama is a vote for "peace in our time" through diplomacy with Islamist's who murder their sisters if they "dishonor" their families. Peace through diplomacy with Russia who of course wants only peace and democracy for his country. Peace through diplomacy with Iran who is only exploring nuclear power because they need it since they don't have any oil.

If Obama is good at anything its talking. Other than that, he shows no action.

September 3, 2008 - 5:01pm | Emperor

Strength?

Ending a war takes strength and courage. Continuing the same disastrous path is the epitome of weakness and cowardice.

If you're a McCain supporter that means you approve of the Bush policies, because there is no difference between the two at home or overseas.

September 3, 2008 - 2:07pm | tommcgrath

Tired

Same old tired liberal retoric

September 3, 2008 - 2:27pm | Emperor

So tell me....

...what is the difference between Bush and McCain? What new ideas does he bring to the table? How does he propose to fix our crumbling economy and non-existent health care policy?

I'm tired of lock step pseudo conservatives with their stepford-vp candidate.

September 3, 2008 - 2:32pm | lecjb

I'll tell you the difference between Bush and McCain:

Bush is younger and healthier than McCain. Other than that, not much difference.

September 3, 2008 - 2:21pm | rfn

Well, yeah,

but without the tired old rhetoric liberals would have absolutely nothing to say. Let 'em talk; it's about freedom of speech!

September 3, 2008 - 2:28pm | Emperor

So tell us...

...what's new and different about McCain? What sets him apart from Bush, who he supported on 90% of the votes in the Senate?

September 3, 2008 - 10:32pm | jdw

How much of this "90%"

How much of this "90%" passed in the senate? I think that there is a good chance that most of it did, meaning that a majority agreed also.

September 4, 2008 - 12:52am | Emperor

I don't know...

...and it doesn't matter.

The point is that there is very little difference (statistically insignificant) between Bush and McCain. A vote for McCain is like giving Bush a third term, with a more attractive bulldog.

September 3, 2008 - 2:32pm | rfn

No.

You tell me why 10% improvement is not better than the no improvement and demonstrated impotent leadership of Obama.

September 3, 2008 - 2:35pm | Emperor

So your answer is...

...no difference and a falsehood about Obama. Just as I expected. You're becoming too predictable.

September 3, 2008 - 2:51pm | rfn

No,

You told us McCain is 10% better than Bush.

Now stand behind your claim.

I am curious as to why anyone would equate Obama's failed attempt to control his own base with "leadership". Or his failure to fire anyone who repeated the malicious gossp, despite his having he would do so, to be other than an additional example of that missing leadership.

September 3, 2008 - 5:06pm | Emperor

No, you said...

...McCain was 10% better. I said he voted with Bush 90% of the time. Two different things entirely.

You also haven't answered why you think those repeating malicious gossip are part of the Obama organization or even volunteers. I say all kinds of things about Palin and Obama can't fire me.

September 3, 2008 - 5:13pm | rfn

Do you dispute that

100 -90 = 10?

So if voting against Bush is good....your definition....then there's no escape. 10% better.

I respect your right to speak as much trash about Palin as you can imagine. You claim not to work for Obama so you're safe from being fired. Come to think of it, it seems to have worked out that way for even the most malicious of those who do. He has not lived up his promises; nobody has been fired.

Just another example of Leadership-NOT.

September 3, 2008 - 6:02pm | Emperor

Without going through...

...vote by vote, I would bet that the 10% were items that had no chance of passing anyway or they were votes that he traded for support on other things. That's how it works. That's why your inference that since he voted against the Bush position 10% of the time, doesn't mean that he's 10% better.

Who should he fire? Who has been identified as a member of his campaign that has participated in attacking Bristol?

How do you consider that a lack of leadership? What other examples can you provide as a lack of leadership?

September 3, 2008 - 10:35pm | rfn

Why does anyone

have any reason to believe there is anything but a lack of leadership?

Is there some record of executive experience yet unrevealed?

Is voting "present" suggestive of the ability to even follow responsibly, let alone lead?

Please share!

September 4, 2008 - 1:20am | Emperor

He's showing his...

...leadership in his organization, and in reaching out to others to say families are and should be off limits.

It sounds more like Hillary supporters to me. Has Hillary stood up and condemned the treatment of Bristol?

September 4, 2008 - 1:34pm | rfn

"Reaching Out"

is a nice way of saying he groveled before his supporters and they laughed in his face. Well, except for the ones who spat in his face with their continuing disgusting attacks on innocent children.

But wait! He said he'd fire any staffer who did that. And then didn't even check to see how many were kept so busy that way.

Hillary is doing the wise thing. She's holding back, ready to step up gracefully when "Barry" figures out he's poisoned the well for himself and steps down. As he surely must if he wants to be a viable candidate in 2012 or 2016. If he loses this one - as he must with this macabre performance - he gets to join Carter, Dukakis, Mondale, Algore, Kerry and, sadly, Dianne Benson under the Great Democrat Bus!

1 September 3, 2008 - 1:56pm | ak_iceman2003

Straight Talk Express

Look like the "Straight Talk Express" just canceled yet another stop.

Search Jobs | Place an employment ad