Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

What Can Governor Sarah Palin Not Do?
reasonisfaith

Posted on 09/01/2008 8:46:02 AM PDT by reasonisfaith

Alright, that’s it. I’m tired of putting up with the mediocrity of liberal thinking. I want the liberals, including you who disguise yourselves as Republicans, to do me a favor. It will have the added benefit of injecting a higher level of sophistication into your thought process, and the good news for you liberals is I won’t ask for anything in return.

If you’re making the accusation that Sarah Palin is not prepared to be vice president or president, you must explain which particular tasks are above the level of her skills and talents. Apparently not one of you has really thought about this. So try to focus for a moment on Palin’s resume and the duties required on a daily basis during the last couple of decades of her life. What skills has she not already learned? Assessing and directing security matters, making life or death decisions, speaking with grace and eloquence to large groups? Delegating responsibility and earning the loyalty of her staff and constituents? Standing up to bullies? Vetoing?

To assume she has not done all of the above seems a bit dim-witted.

You think Sarah Palin can’t make rational decisions? You think she can’t lead a meeting of high level staff, influence foreign leaders, even tell Putin what’s best for him? Can you not envision Palin speaking to the American people, reassuring them during a crisis?

Your challenge, liberals, is to prove us wrong when we say she can do all of this, and much more, better than any leader we’ve seen in a long time. Don’t merely repeat talking points or make the obligatory less than valiant innuendoes. Be specific.


TOPICS: Government; Politics; Society
KEYWORDS: 2008; 2008rncconvention; 2008veep; election; electionpresident; elections; mccain; mccainpalin; palin; sarahpalin
Tell me what Sarah Palin can’t do!
1 posted on 09/01/2008 8:46:02 AM PDT by reasonisfaith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: reasonisfaith

She can’t father a child?


2 posted on 09/01/2008 8:48:20 AM PDT by Old Sarge (I am not voting for McCain - I'm voting for PALIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reasonisfaith
We know what Biden can do...

He can shout down someone by yelling, "I think my IQ is higher than yours."

Biden is a heart-beat away from angering Putin.

3 posted on 09/01/2008 8:49:31 AM PDT by syriacus (It's "Can-Do Sarie" versus "Can-Schmooze Barry")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reasonisfaith
She's allergic to Kryptonite?
4 posted on 09/01/2008 8:51:27 AM PDT by GAB-1955 (Kicking and Screaming into the Kingdom of Heaven!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reasonisfaith
Tell me what Sarah Palin can’t do!

Sit next to Ayers or Wright without slapping them.

5 posted on 09/01/2008 8:52:05 AM PDT by N. Theknow (Proud member of the Pajamarines - First in facts - Semper FReep!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reasonisfaith

Pee standing up.


6 posted on 09/01/2008 8:52:24 AM PDT by NCBraveheart (Too bad ignorance isn't painful)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reasonisfaith
Tell me what Sarah Palin can’t do!

Miss.

7 posted on 09/01/2008 8:52:28 AM PDT by N. Theknow (Proud member of the Pajamarines - First in facts - Semper FReep!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reasonisfaith

hold back the tides!


8 posted on 09/01/2008 8:53:16 AM PDT by pennboricua
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reasonisfaith
I know what she can't do. She can't surround her children with role models whom she would be ashamed of or those who would shock the average voter (as Obama did). She can't let corruption in her own party slide by to help her get ahead. She can't whine about problems when she's in a position to actually solve them. And she can't be criticized as unready for office. Four presidents generally ranked in the top fifteen by historians have had experience comparable to Governor Palin’s prior to assuming office: Franklin Roosevelt, Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, and Grover Cleveland.

Sarah Palin spent four years as a City Council Member for Wasilla, Alaska, six years as Mayor of Wasilla, and two years as Governor of Alaska.

FDR spent just over two years in the New York State Senate, eight years as Assistant Secretary of the Navy, and four years as Governor of New York.

Theodore Roosevelt spent some time in the New York State Assembly(?), two years as Governor of New York, two years as Assistant Secretary of the Navy, and less than one year as Vice President of the United States.

Woodrow Wilson spent eight years as President of Princeton University and two years as Governor of New Jersey.

Grover Cleveland spent two years as Sheriff of Erie County, two years as Mayor of Buffalo, and two years as Governor of New York.

Overall, I’d say that Palin’s background is comparable with that of several presidents considered highly successful, even considering that her state has a smaller population than the other two states on the list.

While Obama has been running for office for as long as Palin has been running a state, I find it hard to consider the two tasks as comparable preparation.

One final note: I will be posting this multiple times because I think it is important to get the word out that that her experience is in keeping with previous presidents. I apologize to those who are annoyed by seeing it too often.

9 posted on 09/01/2008 8:53:46 AM PDT by RogerD (Educaiton Profesionul)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reasonisfaith

Use the men’s john?


10 posted on 09/01/2008 8:54:56 AM PDT by DJ MacWoW ("Make yourself sheep, and the wolves will eat you" Benjamin Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RogerD

Have you posted this as a thread so it can be bookmarked?


11 posted on 09/01/2008 8:56:57 AM PDT by DJ MacWoW ("Make yourself sheep, and the wolves will eat you" Benjamin Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: RogerD

I have to go pick up granddaughter. If you post this as a vanity, please ping me.


12 posted on 09/01/2008 8:59:13 AM PDT by DJ MacWoW ("Make yourself sheep, and the wolves will eat you" Benjamin Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: DJ MacWoW
Have you posted this as a thread so it can be bookmarked?

I have not and haven't gone through how to post a thread on my own, but I don't mind is someone else pirates my words, with or without attribution and with or without editorial changes of their own, for any thread, bulletin board, or other use.

13 posted on 09/01/2008 9:03:03 AM PDT by RogerD (Educaiton Profesionul)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: reasonisfaith

You ask a very important question, and one I’ve been researching all weekend. What I’ve come up with is not good. Let me share JUST ONE item I found in my research.

Here’s something she CAN do: misuse eminent domain and leave her town deeply in debt, even AFTER a tax increase. Oh yes, she did:

http://www.adn.com/matsu/story/474934.html

After she pushed through the building of a $14.7mm sports complex (that’s over $1500 for every man, woman and child in Wasilla), she forgot to buy the land, so it was purchased by a developer named Lundgren. Without any basis whatsoever, Palin tried to take the land from Lundgren using eminent domain. The city has spent nearly $2mm in legal fees since then and still hasn’t won the case, although it completed the sports center (on Lundgren’s land) in 2004.

The city is still $7mm in debt on the sports center and the residents are still paying higher sales taxes to support it and the litigation goes on.

I thought Freepers opposed abuses of eminent domain. I thought Freepers opposed raising taxes to fund government boondoggles. Oh well, I guess that went out the window when we collectively abandoned our principles to support John McAmnesty.

It’s all there in the article. Expect the MSM and the left to be all over this soon. And believe me, there’s more.


14 posted on 09/01/2008 9:24:01 AM PDT by Mr. Know It All (Quicumque vult salvus esse, ante omnia opus est, ut teneat catholicam fidem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reasonisfaith

Sadly, she legally can’t clone herself.


15 posted on 09/01/2008 9:37:27 AM PDT by johnthebaptistmoore (Vote for conservatives AT ALL POLITICAL LEVELS! Encourage all others to do the same on November 4!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: johnthebaptistmoore

Doesn’t have recipies for python or aligator in her cook book.


16 posted on 09/01/2008 10:10:20 AM PDT by spokeshave (Obama wants to raise taxes and kill babies. Palin wants to raise ba bies and kill taxes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: spokeshave

Nor does she either cook recipes or eat recipes from Hannibal Lecter’s cookbook.


17 posted on 09/01/2008 11:57:20 AM PDT by johnthebaptistmoore (Vote for conservatives AT ALL POLITICAL LEVELS! Encourage all others to do the same on November 4!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Know It All

She “forgot” to buy the land? What kind of statement is that? I’ll tell you what kind—it’s a statement loaded with bias, unless you have evidence justifying use of the word forgot.


18 posted on 09/01/2008 12:25:10 PM PDT by reasonisfaith (Reaganism lives--take a look at Sarah Palin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Know It All

From the article:

“The court battle launched in August 1999 when both Lundgren and the city sought to purchase the same land from national charitable organization The Nature Conservancy.”

“Lundgren was declared the rightful owner in 2002 and the city immediately sued to take the land by eminent domain.”

Seems there are facts missing. Not enough here to make any kind of conclusion. Note that Lundgren is a major industrial developer, not just a regular private individual.


19 posted on 09/01/2008 12:28:29 PM PDT by reasonisfaith (Reaganism lives--take a look at Sarah Palin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: reasonisfaith

Yes thereis some background missing; this is a follow-up article on previous reporting. Whatever the case, the inept use of eminent domain is clear. After Lundgren was declared owner of the property, Palin just used eminent domain to take it from him. That’s not in dispute and I can’t believe anyone HERE would defend that.

“Note that Lundgren is a major industrial developer, not just a regular private individual.”

Does this mean that he has fewer property rights than a regular Joe? Are you implying that we should be less concerned about Lundgren’s land being taken by the government because he’s rich?

When did this become Socialist Republic? Seriously. I’m on another thread arguing with someone because I refuse to respect Hillary Clinton. Get me a tinfoil hat because I’m starting to think there’s a conspiracy here. With all due respect to fellow Freepers, this is getting out of hand.


20 posted on 09/01/2008 12:34:32 PM PDT by Mr. Know It All (Quicumque vult salvus esse, ante omnia opus est, ut teneat catholicam fidem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: reasonisfaith

According to other things I’ve read (blogs — I’m trying to track down news articles), the plans for the sports center started before 1999. Had they purchased the land then, it would have been available. Instead, they waited until another buyer showed up. Perhaps “forgot” was a loaded word, but essentially, they blew it by not starting on the purchase soon enough.

After they were outbid for the land, they just used government authority to try and take it. When that failed, they just continued in court. Sorry I said “forgot.” The rest is in the article.


21 posted on 09/01/2008 12:40:16 PM PDT by Mr. Know It All (Quicumque vult salvus esse, ante omnia opus est, ut teneat catholicam fidem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Know It All

“Are you implying that we should be less concerned about Lundgren’s land being taken by the government because he’s rich?”

No I’m not implying that (I knew you would say this). Of course the principle of private ownership is fundamental and universal.

But there is not enough information about this case in the article. Knowing the facts is essential. Especially when a bright new conservative comes on the scene with the potential to start her own version of a Reagan revolution—I expect dirt digging, mud slinging and garbage throwing.

That’s what this is until you give me enough facts.


22 posted on 09/01/2008 12:54:50 PM PDT by reasonisfaith (Reaganism lives--take a look at Sarah Palin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Know It All

If this is true, the question is: can I reconcile my high regard for Palin with the idea that she tried to enforce the law of eminent domain, a law which I oppose because it violates principles of private ownership?

I admit, I wouldn’t like to find out that she did in fact do such a thing. But given everything else I know about her—political ideology, actions she’s taken as a political official and her personality—I don’t think it’s enough to bring her down much in my opinion, if at all. Not when weighed against the positives.

Bottom line is, it might be a minor blip, but it doesn’t demonstrate a pattern. It doesn’t show Palin to be a leftist, a statist or even a hypocrite.


23 posted on 09/01/2008 1:13:13 PM PDT by reasonisfaith (Reaganism lives--take a look at Sarah Palin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: reasonisfaith

“That’s what this is until you give me enough facts.”

Of course. If you don’t think there’s enough here to make any conclusions, then perhaps you’re right.

The point I was trying to make is that Sarah Palin is not a flawless gem. The attacks are coming, and some of them have some meat to them. We can’t ignore them and we can’t shout them down (we can HERE, but not in the public arena where we compete with the MSM).

Thanks for providing some serious discussion on this.


24 posted on 09/01/2008 1:45:22 PM PDT by Mr. Know It All (Quicumque vult salvus esse, ante omnia opus est, ut teneat catholicam fidem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: reasonisfaith

There is much more to this story about the City of Wasilla vs. The Nature Conservancy & Lundgren litigation. You are correct there have been two lawsuits, one for specific performance heard in US Federal Court and the other a condemnation “quick take” action heard in State Court. This litigation started in 1999 and is still in progress at the current time having traveled through Alaska Federal and State Courts to the Alaska Supreme Court and maybe evidually the US Supreme Court.

There are a few holes in your post that can be filled in. Shortly after Palin was elected Mayor of Wasilla she proceeded to purge many of the administrative employees of the past administation including the Attorney for the City of Wasilla. She hired a replacements friends of the Republican Party like Attorney Kenneth P. Jacobus ( republican party gadfly) to replace the prior Wasilla City attorney. In 1998 (long before the Sport Complex was even a serious consideration) Mayor Palin decided that the City of Wasilla should purchase 145 arces of property from The Nature Conservancy at it’s apprasied value and the City Council approved the purchase. In the meantime Lundgren negoiated in a competitive bid process the purchase of adjoining 325 arces of property from The Nature Conservancy (TNC). Lundgren had been negoiating to purchase the entire property since 1993 from it’s prior owner DOW CHEMICAL (DOW) but evidently DOW gifted the land to TNC as trade lands and Lundgren began negoiating with TNC after they acquired the land from DOW in about 1995 three years before the City of Wasilla even thought about acquiring the land.

TNC prepared a “standard” real estate purchase and sale agreement for the City of Wasilla to sign (just like a house purchase) but the City Attorney (Jacobus) decided that the agreement should have NO earnest money requirement and NO specific performance requirement which would allow the City of Wasilla to walk away from the transaction (at the closing table or before) without cost or obligation to perform. After months of hangling the TNC agreed to those terms and redrafted the agreement but again Wasilla Attorney Jacobus disagreed with the form of the agreement and it was never signed. Months went by during which TNC discovered they couldn’t transfer a portion (20+ acres called B-1-3) of the property to the City of Wasilla under the “unsigned” purchase and sale agreement because it was physically attached to the 325 acres being sold to Lundgren and couldn’t be subdivided because it was landlocked.

TNC advised the City of Wasilla of the problem telling them only the D-2 property could be sold if the City of Wasilla was interested in purchasing it. TNC made at least three separate attempts to sell this property to the Palin administration over the course of several months only to be rebuffed and threatned with litigation by Wasilla Attorney Jacobus and Mayor Palin.

Finally TNC gave up and amended the purchase agreement with Lundgren to include the B-1-3 property and again offered the City of Wasilla another (and final) chance to buy the D-2 property (125 acres) but again the City of Wasilla refused to purchase it for $125,000 leaving TNC the only option of selling it to Lundgren so again the purchase agreement was amended to include the D-2 property and Lundgren closed the purchase of all 450+ acres.

Mayor Palin then instructed the City of Wasilla attorney to sue TNC for specific performance, initally getting a favorable decision until the Court discovered City Attorney Jacobus representing the City of Wasilla mislead the court (something like lying) about the status of “legal access” and vacated his earlier judgement in favor of the City of Wasilla allowing both parties to file Motions for Summary Judgement of which the Court denied the City’s motion and granted Lundgren’s motion allowing him to retain title to the property.

Early in this litigation Mayor Palin and her administration attempted to change the zoning of the 325 acres of Lundgren property from General Commerical to Tourism to retailate against Lundgren but the Wasilla Planning and Zoning Commission “turned their request” down allowing the property to remain zoned General Commerical. In about 2001 Mayor Palin decided to build a Multi-Use Sports Complex on Lundgren’s property without owning title. Mayor Palin just charged ahead with design, financing and contracting to build the access road and improvements with her and Jacobus assuring the City Council that the legal issues were settled and Wasilla won title (WRONG). When the dust settled the City of Wasilla (after losing every legal decision) was building a 16 million sports complex on land owned by Lundgren thanks to the great advice of City Attorney Jacobus and Mayor Palin.

This left the City of Wasilla with no choice but to begin condemenation proceedings to take title but they couldn’t even execute that correctly. They obtained a legal opinion from a well respected lawfirm in Anchorage, Alaska detailing exactly how to file the condemnation lawsuit and all the requirements. The City of Wasilla proceeded to not follow the legal opinion detailing the correct actions required in a condemnation action. They proceeded (and did) a “quick take” condemnation using “slow take” methods. They filed the condemnation action without a current apprasil, without a legal description of the land taken or remainder land, and without negoiating with the landowner to purchase the property rather than condemn it all as requirement by State and Federal law. In the end all this litigation is a result of the failure of NOT buying the property when it was offered to the City of Wasilla for almost one year by TNC. Poor TNC took the proeprty off the market for them to purchase for almost one year and after the City failed to purchase it they sold the property to Lundgren. TNC for their reward of making a good faith effort to accomodate the City of Wasilla was sued in both of these two cases spending many thousands of their non-profit dollars to dfend themselves. In the end TNC recovered much of their legal expenditure through court awarded attorney fees.

Mayor Palin (and her judgement) one heartbeat away from the presidency gives me reason for concern for our country. She couldn’t manage the little City (5,000 poulation at the time) of Wasilla, over-her-head as 18 month Governor of Alaska and now we are considerating her to be the VICE PRESIDENT of the USA.

I have been a lifetime Republican but this is where we part paths. McCain’s appointment of Governor Palin as his running mate for Vice President of the United States shows his lack of good judgement. It appears to be an act of desperation choosing an “unqualified” person before the interests of his fellow citizens and his own COUNRTY.

It’s going to greatly injure the Republican party for the next eight years. I have never agreed with James Carville with anything that has come out of his mouth but last night watching CNN and listening to his common sense questions and concerns about the nomination of Sarah Palin and her lack of experience I found myself for the first time ever agreeing with this man (James Carville) on this point. Some people can rise to the occasion even without experience but it’s more difficult when your experience is bad expreiences. Of all the choices that McCain had why would he pick from the bottom of the barrell.


25 posted on 09/02/2008 9:11:28 AM PDT by viewpoint
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: viewpoint

You must be anti-woman.

If this is the worst dirt on her, she will probably be President for 8 years and make you very happy with her appointments.


26 posted on 09/02/2008 9:23:17 AM PDT by stevestras
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: viewpoint

Is there anyone out there who holds a grudge against Palin?

Would you be willing to reflect on this for a moment, and then incorporate it into your general understanding of the circumstances?

I don’t mind illustrating critical points like this one, whether the point be simple or complex, it’s no inconvenience to me and in fact requires little effort on my part.


27 posted on 09/02/2008 5:44:01 PM PDT by reasonisfaith (Reaganism lives--take a look at Sarah Palin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: viewpoint

“It’s going to greatly injure the Republican party for the next eight years.”

This is a false statement.


28 posted on 09/02/2008 5:49:52 PM PDT by reasonisfaith (Reaganism lives--take a look at Sarah Palin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson