Posted on 09/17/2008 2:50:30 PM PDT by GOPinCa
GOV. SARAH PALIN TELLS FOX NEWS CHANNEL’S SEAN HANNITY ‘THE CORRUPTION ON WALL STREET’ IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE FAILING INSTITUTIONS Palin: ‘CEO’s and Top Management’ Have Been ‘Addicted’ to ‘O-P-M, Other People’s Money’ In a two-part interview, with the first part airing tonight on FOX News Channel’s “Hannity & Colmes” at 9PM, Governor Sarah Palin talks about the economy and who is to blame and her and McCain’s strategy to try to fix it. Excerpts of the first part of the interview are below. Thursday night’s excerpts will be released tomorrow. *Mandatory Credit: FOX News Channel’s “Hannity & Colmes” On fixing the economy: “Through reform, absolutely. Look at the oversight that has been lack, I believe, here at the 1930s type of regulatory regime overseeing some of these corporations. And we’ve got to get a more coordinated and a much more stringent oversight regime…government can play a very, very appropriate role in the oversight as people are trusting these companies with their life savings, with their investments, with their insurance policies, and construction bonds, and everything else.
(Excerpt) Read more at thepage.time.com ...
If Hannity doesn’t bring up Gibson and the way she was treated (and edited) I’ll be disappointed.
GOV. SARAH PALIN TELLS FOX NEWS CHANNEL’S SEAN HANNITY
‘THE CORRUPTION ON WALL STREET’ IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE FAILING INSTITUTIONS
Palin: ‘CEO’s and Top Management’ Have Been ‘Addicted’ to ‘O-P-M, Other People’s Money’
In a two-part interview, with the first part airing tonight on FOX News Channel’s “Hannity & Colmes” at 9PM, Governor Sarah Palin talks about the economy and who is to blame and her and McCain’s strategy to try to fix it. Excerpts of the first part of the interview are below. Thursday night’s excerpts will be released tomorrow.
*Mandatory Credit: FOX News Channel’s “Hannity & Colmes”
On fixing the economy:
“Through reform, absolutely. Look at the oversight that has been lack, I believe, here at the 1930s type of regulatory regime overseeing some of these corporations. And we’ve got to get a more coordinated and a much more stringent oversight regime…government can play a very, very appropriate role in the oversight as people are trusting these companies with their life savings, with their investments, with their insurance policies, and construction bonds, and everything else.
“When we see the collapse that we’re seeing today, you know that something is broken and John McCain has a great plan to get in there and fix it.”
On the danger of a presidential candidate using the economy for political gain:
“Well, there is a danger in allowing some obsessive partisanship to get into the issue that we’re talking about today…It is that profound and that important an issue that we work together on this, and not just let one party try to kind of grab it all or capture it all and pretend like they have all the answers. It’s going to take everybody working together on this.”
On who is responsible for the failing financial institutions:
“I think the corruption on Wall Street. That’s to blame. And that violation of the public trust. And that contract that should be inherent in corporations who are spending, investing other people’s money, the abuse of that is what has got to stop.
“And it’s a matter, too, of some of these CEOs and top management people, and shareholders too not holding that management accountable, being addicted to, we call it, OPM, O-P-M, “other people’s money.”
“Spending that, investing that, not using the prudence that we expect of them. But here again, government has got to play an appropriate role in the stringent oversight, making sure that those abuses stop.”
On AIG getting government bailout:
“Well, you know, first, Fannie and Freddie, different because quasi-government agencies there where government had to step in because of the adverse impacts all across our nation, especially with homeowners.”
“It’s just too impacting, we had to step in there. I do not like the idea though of taxpayers being used to bailout these corporations. Today it was AIG, important call there, though, because of the construction bonds and the insurance carrier duties of AIG.”
“But first and foremost, taxpayers cannot be looked to as the bailout, as the solution to the problems on Wall Street.”
On reaction to Obama’s attack on McCain for saying that the “fundamentals” of the economy are strong:
“Well, it was an unfair attack on the verbiage that Senator McCain chose to use because the fundamentals, as he was having to explain afterwards, he means our workforce, he means the ingenuity of the American people. And of course, that is strong and that is the foundation of our economy.”
“Certainly it is a mess though, the economy is a mess. And there have been abuses on Wall Street and that adversely effects Main Street.”
“It is, somebody was saying this morning, a toxic waste there on Wall Street, affecting Main Street. And we’ve got to cure this.”
On if there should be an investigation on relationships between political donations from Fannie and Freddie Mac and the bankruptcy and its impact on the economy:
“I think that’s significant, but even more significant is the role that the lobbyists play in an issue like this also. And in that cronyism — it’s symptomatic of the grade of problem that we see right now in Washington and that is just that acceptance of the status quo, the politics as usual, the cronyism that has been allowed to be accepted and then it leads us to a position like we are today with so much collapse on Wall Street. That’s the reform that we’ve got to get in there and make sure that this happens. We’ve got to put government and these regulatory agencies back on the side of the people.”
On how she and McCain can follow through on their promises in a divided Washington:
“Yes it is gridlock and that’s ridiculous. That’s why we don’t have an energy policy, that’s why there hasn’t been the reform of the abuse of the earmark process. And real reform is tough, and you do ruffle feathers along the way. But John McCain has that streak of independence in him that I think is very, very important in America today in our leadership. I have that within me also. And that’s why John McCain tapped me to be a team of mavericks, of independents coming in there without the allegiances to that cronyism, to that good ole’ boy system. I’m certainly a Washington outsider and I’m proud of that because I think that that is what we need also.”
On drilling and ANWR:
“But, no secret, John McCain and I agree to disagree on that one. And I’m going to keep working on him with ANWR.
“Well, I’m very, very encouraged, as we all understand that John McCain knows, more so than any other leader in our nation today, that for national security reasons we must be an energy independent nation. We must start taking the steps to get there. That’s why he has embraced offshore drilling. That’s why he has embraced the ideal of the alternative fuels also. And I’ll keep working on him with ANWR.”
“It’s a nice thing about him, too, is he is not asking me or anybody else to check our opinions at the door. He wants that healthy deliberation and debate with it.”
On her family’s reaction to be picked as the VP nominee:
“It was a time of asking the girls to vote on it, anyway. And they voted unanimously, yes. Didn’t bother asking my son because, you know, he’s going to be off doing his thing anyway, so he wouldn’t be so impacted by, at least, the campaign period here. So ask the girls what they thought and they’re like, absolutely. Let’s do this, mom.”
On if the political attacks by the democrats on the republicans will be effective:
“You can’t underestimate the wisdom of the people of America. They’re seeing through the rhetoric, and they’re seeing through a lot of the political cheap shots, also. And they’re getting down to the facts and the voting records that are going to show that stark contrast.”
On if Republicans in Washington have lost their way in recent years:
“I believe that Republicans in Washington have got to understand that the people of America are not fully satisfied with all the — all the dealings within the party. The same — it applies for the other party, also. Americans are just getting sick and tired of politics as usual, that embracing of the status quo, going with the flow and just assuming that the people of America are not noticing that we have opportunities for good change. We have opportunity for a healthier, safer, more prosperous and energy-independent nation at this time. People are getting tired of a process that’s not allowing that process — that progress to be ushered in.”
On if she’s spoken to McCain about her role in a McCain administration:
“Sure have. I’m very excited about the role that I will play as his partner. And I will focus on energy independence and reform overall of Washington and tax cuts for Americans and reigning in spending.”
On how she thinks Americans will be impacted if the energy dependency isn’t solved:
“In that $700 billion transfer of wealth, that’s when the price of oil was up as high as it was there at the $140 mark. But, of course, that transfer of wealth, still, that imbalance of trade is something that we need to tackle also. Yes, those dollars should be circulating within our own economy. It’s a matter of national security. It is a matter of our future prosperity. Energy is inherently linked to security and prosperity.”
“We sort of have a “do nothing Senate” right now where nobody’s wanting to really pick up the ball and run with it and take the steps that we have to take to become more energy independent. And it’s going to take…a change in leadership in order to really crush that gridlock and get going on this.”
The Taleban nitpickers will be here on 1...2...3..., ready to yell “Stone her” and do a “conservative purity” honor killing.
McCain, T-Boone, and Sarah need to quit with this misrepresentation.
They are saying one of two things: that they are stupid or think that we are. Either way, not a good thing.
Wall Street AND DEMOCRATS are to blame....Bush too.....
A sense in which it is true is in terms of balance of trade. To the extent we import more than we export we are transferring our wealth to other nations. That doesn’t mean we can’t make it up other ways but we clearly aren’t right now.
We still have our oil in the ground, which means it is a resource we didn’t deplete precisely because of the imports. They fail to factor that in of course, but I’m still not bothered because of our balance of trade and the fact that we through that deficit selling off our country at an alarming rate.
I much larger transfer of wealth occurs every April 15th, yet not a word said about that.
Typo, sorry. For ‘’I’’, please read ‘’A’’.
Oversight Yes. Regulations No.
Again, nothing on Sarah Palin’s views on the issues of full U.S. border security and illegal immigration! Also, what is Sara’s view on the present campaign finance reform system that McCain helped to create?
Thanks. I’d missed that. LOL.
Wouldn't a better answer (both more accurate, and more appealing to the electorate) be that when fuel prices get so high, it drives up the cost of diesel fuel, which drives up the cost of transportation, which drives up the cost of everything including groceries?
That would be a firm counter-punch to Obama's claim that Palin is "only" interested in "energy" and not in the real problems people face like spiraling food costs.
Only fools think it's somehow wise to speak absolute truth at all times. "Gee, you really look fat and ugly...".
Why is this a misrepresentation? Are you suggesting we are NOT transferring hundreds of billions of dollars each year to Muslim pest-holes?
-ccm
“Why is this a misrepresentation? Are you suggesting we are NOT transferring hundreds of billions of dollars each year to Muslim pest-holes?”
I think the main complaint is the implication that we’re SENDING them money, and losing it ourselves. The concept of capitalism is that when two parties enter into a trade, large or small, THEY BOTH PROFIT. If, instead of 700 billion bucks of oil being purchased, it was 700 billion in rice, or 20 bucks in oil, or whatever, the answer would be the same: we received a commodity we needed, at a price (yes, I said it) that is reasonable, uncoerced and profitable.
The reason it would be economically better to reduce this number is not because we’re “losing” 700b a year, but that we’re failing to enrich our own citizens and country, when we COULD be. McCain/Palin should focus on this failure to enrich our own citizenry, not the myth that 700b is “lost” each year.
Another nail in the Liberal McShame coffin. He just won’t get it.
IOW, we’ve profited from purchasing oil from rats in the mid-east, by using that energy to build up infrastructure, employ people, drive gas-guzzling SUV’s, cart our children to soccer practice, keep the lights on in our place of business, etc.
We could do better though, doubly enriching our country by keeping commerce internal that needn’t be lost.
From T Boone Pickens:
"$700 billion are leaving this country to foreign nations every year -- the largest transfer of wealth in the history of mankind."The $700 billion number is not a "transfer of wealth." It is the monetary value given to purchase a product, crude oil. (It's also an inflated number, but that's another problem). Purchasing a product is not a transfer of weatlth--it is trade. United States consumers receive value for those dollars in the form of oil/product. Furthermore, many represent the number as being a "transfer of wealth" to our enemies. That is utter hogwash. 20% of the imports come from Canada, 15% from Mexico, etc. Less than half comes from OPEC countries.
T. Boone Pickens and those pushing for huge government "investments" in alternative energy have a vested interest in having people believe the number is bigger than it is. That is the only way they can sell the taxpayer fleecing that is coming our way. Subsidies, "investments," "public private partnerships," or my favorite: McCain promising a $300 million prize for developing a battery. There is a reason that private industry has not pursued these projects without government assistance (i.e. your taxpayer dollars)--because they aren't economically viable! There is a reason we use oil--it's cheap! By the time they are done with all of these alternative energy scams, we could have imported or developed twice the energy for the same price. What do you think will happen to the economy when we are paying higher prices than our competitors in other countries to produce the same amount of energy. You got it--we lose!
The "energy independence" argument also fails the truth test. Self reliance sounds good on the surface but is that realyy what is best for "national security"? What if terrorists target U.S. energy sources and we have no alternative sources? Wouldn't some diversification (in sources) be in our best interest?
You never hear anyone talk about "food independence" or "technology independence," both of which depend on huge imports from foreign countries. Is that a "wealth transfer" when our computer products and other electronics come mostly from Asia? Of course not! We are continuing to shut down farming in the United States and rely more on imports. What is more important--food or air conditioning?
I could go on, but I think you get the idea. Don;'t even get me started on the "market based" (Ha Ha!) cap-and-trade scam that Obama and McCain are pushing in the name of global warming. All of these arguments are intellectually dishonest.
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.