Sarah Palin vs. the Tyrant Murkowski

October 30, 2010

Last I recall, a Senator of the United States, even one who got her seat as a gift from Daddy, swears the following oath:

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.

And that support and defense includes supporting and defending the amendments to said Constitution, including the 1st Amendment, which reads:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

(Emphases added)

So, when a sitting senator, through her underlings, uses the threat of a federal investigation to drive a critical radio host off the air*, is she not violating that oath six ways from Sunday, in spirit if not in letter?

Sarah Palin thinks so, and it’s made her mad:

Yesterday, Lisa Murkowski’s hired guns threatened radio host Dan Fagan, and more importantly, the station that airs Fagan’s show, with legal action for allegedly illegal “electioneering.” The station, unlike Murkowski, who is flush with millions of dollars from vested corporate interests, does not have a budget for a legal defense. So it did what any small market station would do when threatened by Beltway lawyers charging $500 to $1000 an hour – they pulled Dan Fagan off the air.

Does all this sound heavy handed? It is. It is an interference with Dan Fagan’s constitutional right to free speech. It is also a shocking indictment against Lisa Murkowski. How low will she go to hold onto power? First, she gets the Division of Elections to change its write-in process – a process that Judge Pfiffner correctly determined had been in place without change for 50 years. She is accepting financial support from federal contractors, an act that is highly questionable and now pending before the FEC. And today, she played her last card. She made it clear that if you disagree with her and encourage others to exercise their civic rights, she’ll take you off the air.

The concept of “electioneering” involves several issues, but typically refers to campaigning at the polls, which is appropriately banned. Under federal law, it can also mean paying for advertising on broadcast media during a federal election cycle, and it requires disclosures if done by groups and corporations. Fagan used satire to mock Murkowski’s write-in efforts and encouraged Alaskans to run as write-in candidates. That is not illegal. That is free speech.

(Emphasis added)

With her attitude toward opponents’ free speech, I’m sure Princess Lisa would fit right in with the Obama administration.

Go, ‘Cuda.

*(Yeah, I know the guy who made the complaint is “just” a Murkowski volunteer and the campaign denies any connection. If you believe that, perhaps you’d like to buy this lovely bridge, too.)

LINKS: Ed Morrissey connects this to the debate over the possible return of the Fairness Doctrine.


Elitism + Cluelessness = NRSC

August 27, 2010

I’ve often accused the Obama Administration of being filled with the politically tone-deaf, but the National Republican Senatorial Committee is giving them stiff competition:

Sean Cairncross, the general counsel of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, is headed to Alaska at the request of Sen. Lisa Murkowski  (R) to help provide guidance to the GOP incumbent who finds herself trailing attorney Joe Miller (R) by roughly 1,600 votes.

Cairncross will spend several days on the ground in Alaska as Murkowski and her campaign prepare for the counting of as many as 16,000 absentee ballots — a process expected to start next Tuesday and continue through early September.

Committee sources insisted that too much should not be read into Cairncross’ presence in Alaska — only that the NRSC is an incumbent-retention committee and, as such, provides assistance when Senators ask for it.

As evidence that the committee is not putting all of its chips on Murkowski, a GOP source tells the Fix that Rob Jesmer, the bespectacled executive director of the NRSC, spoke by phone with a top Miller aide yesterday — making clear that if he wins the election the committee will support him wholeheartedly.

How nice: “Oh, if you still happen to win, Mr. Miller (you peasant), we’ll deign to help you. Until then, we’re going to do all we can to help our incumbent sister keep the seat Daddy gave her.”

You would think, after the flack the NRSC took for interfering in Florida’s primary, they’d remember the lesson. (Just how did that Crist endorsement work out for you guys, eh?) Senator Cornyn, head of the NRSC, even promised to not spend money in contested primaries. So…what? Cairncross isn’t  being paid?

For a supposedly smart bunch, the NRSC is like the guy who goes to the doctor complaining that it hurts whenever he hits himself in the head with a hammer: too dumb to realize he should stop doing it. They’re completely misreading the mood of the electorate and spitting in the faces the voters – who want to vote for conservative Republican candidates, not kinda-sorta squishes who are all too happy to bolt the party.

There’s a huge anti-Beltway elitist, anti-incumbent wave sweeping the electorate, and it’s showing up in election after election and poll after poll. People are angry at Washington telling them what they must do; the rejection of  ObamaCare is just one example. It’s largely aimed at the Democrats for the insane way they’ve governed since 2009, showing little but contempt for ordinary citizens, and they’re going to get punished for it harshly in November. But stupid stuff like sending a top lawyer to fight for the incumbent who’s been rejected by the locals tells the voters that the national Republicans are little different from the Democrats. That’ll help bring in the donations.

Is this really smart,  Senator Cornyn? It may not be a big deal in reality, but just how do you think this will look to the average grassroots voter? Ooops. And how long will it take you to scrape the egg off your face again after Murkowski loses in the absentees and then says “thanks for all the help” by bolting to the Libertarian Party?

No wonder they call the Republicans the “party of stupid.”

LINKS: More at Hot Air, Conservatives for Palin, and Obi’s Sister.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Sarah Palin on energy independence

October 16, 2009

The former Alaska governor writes in National Review: Drill

Given that we’re spending billions of stimulus dollars to rebuild our highways, it makes sense to think about what we’ll be driving on them. For years to come, most of what we drive will be powered, at least in part, by diesel fuel or gasoline. To fuel that driving, we need access to oil. The less use we make of our own reserves, the more we will have to import, which leads to a number of harmful consequences. That means we need to drill here and drill now.

We rely on petroleum for much more than just powering our vehicles: It is essential in everything from jet fuel to petrochemicals, plastics to fertilizers, pesticides to pharmaceuticals. Ac­cord­ing to the Energy Information Ad­min­is­tra­tion, our total domestic petroleum consumption last year was 19.5 million barrels per day (bpd). Motor gasoline and diesel fuel accounted for less than 13 million bpd of that. Meanwhile, we produced only 4.95 million bpd of domestic crude. In other words, even if we ran all our vehicles on something else (which won’t happen anytime soon), we would still have to depend on imported oil. And we’ll continue that dependence until we develop our own oil resources to their fullest extent.

Those who oppose domestic drilling are motivated primarily by environmental considerations, but many of the countries we’re forced to import from have few if any environmental-protection laws, and those that do exist often go unenforced. In effect, American environmentalists are preventing responsible development here at home while supporting irresponsible development overseas.

That last point is something a lot of people don’t understand: in order to make our selves feel morally pure by not drilling for our own oil and gas, we contribute to the severe environmental damage caused when other, less stringent countries drill for theirs to sell to us. It’s like saying you don’t drink, then sending the butler out to the liquor store.

Palin goes on to provide examples of how Alaska combined energy development with responsible stewardship of the environment, and at the end takes a playful shot at the Obama administration.

I hope to see much more of those in 2012.  Cowboy


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 13,568 other followers