Sarah Palin Parades Her Ignorance on Long Island

Sarah Palin was paid to appear at the Long Island Association, yesterday. Jeff Zeleny of the NY Times attended, and he wrote about her appearance in the Times' The Caucus blog. Zeleny noticed these statements made by Palin:

Ms. Palin said she believed that increasing the Treasury Department’s legal borrowing limit would simply “create the allowance for big spenders to get in there,” rather than save the country from defaulting on its financial burdens. She said that “the government receives so much revenue” every day that she doubted the money would run out to pay for critical operations.

And

“People are ready for our governmental establishment to be shaken up,” Ms. Palin said, adding that if she decided to become a candidate, she would campaign aggressively face-to-face with voters, not simply from a distance. “In a heated primary, it allows for some great debate – very heated discourse – all those things we need in order for those voters to decide.”

And

When asked why she opposed all types of gun control – with the moderator openly disagreeing with her – she said that the “bad guys” aren’t going to follow the laws, anyway.

And

And as she talked about the escalating price of gas and groceries, she said, “It’s no wonder Michelle Obama is telling everybody you better breast-feed your baby – yeah, you better – because the price of milk is so high right now!”

At the same appearance by Palin, Politico's Ben Smith noticed that as she addressed the situation in Egypt, she expressed a lack of confidence in democracy and Egypt's voters:

"We also have to be very wary of who it is that is being invited ot the table to discuss how the reform in that country is taking place," Palin said. "I’m talking about the Muslim Brotherhood," she said, deploring what she saw as "almost an invitation to them to sit at the table and talk."

"If they are radical enough to have already spoken against liberties and freedoms, then you have to wonder, is this a good deal for Egypt and for America's interest -- certainly for our ally Israel [whose] security and their safety ... must be forefront on our list of concerns," she said.

"We have to make sure that a group like the Muslim Brotherhood isn’t invited in to take over because that certainly would defeat all the purposes of those protesters," she said.

On Tuesday, The Washington Post's Eugene Robinson wrote "The GOP loves freedom, but not for Egypt." Palin may not support democracy in Arab nations, because she -- or rather the source of her talking points -- may be concerned that people unfriendly to Israel could be elected. Does Palin know that Israel itself is on the verge of becoming a majority Arab country? Will Israel continue to be a democracy? An attempt to strangle a potential democracy in a country neighboring Israel is an attempt to kick the can down the road; it isn't a long-term solution to any problem Israel may face. A description of Israel's demographics can be read in Wikipedia's "Arab Citizens of Israel."

All of Palin's views, expressed on Long Island, can be easily rebutted or can be used to show that she hasn't the knowledge and experience necessary to be President. The views that she expressed can even be used to show that she has no interest in government or governance. Papers are due in fifty minutes -- just kidding! But, seriously, Palin is too ignorant to know how ignorant she is.

Divided Government and Common Sense

From The New York Times' "Taking Control, G.O.P. Overhauls Rules in House," you can get an idea of Republicans' insanity on spending/taxes:

... To reverse what they say is a Congressional process tilted toward spending increases, the new Republican majority in the House — over strong Democratic objections — approved rules that would require spending increases to be directly offset with cuts elsewhere. But the rules would allow future tax cuts to be enacted without offsetting spending reductions, and would permit repeal of the health care legislation, which was estimated to save the government more than $140 billion over 10 years, without any requirement that those revenue losses be made up elsewhere. ...

... Democrats criticized the changes, saying Republicans were returning to the policies that had put the government on a path to deep deficits in the first place and would open the door to “Enron-style accounting” that covered up the costs of tax cuts and their other legislative efforts.

“House Republicans are like the fellow who bellies up to the bar, asking for just one more round of tax breaks for his buddies, while declaring, ‘Put it on my tab,’ “ said Representative Lloyd Doggett, Democrat of Texas. “But it’s really our tab. By focusing on only half the budget equation, and avoiding revenue stewardship, they reject sound fiscal leadership.”

The rules would allow tax cuts to be enacted without spending reductions! That is like having your pay cut and continuing to spend as you did when your income was higher. It leads to more debt. Did the Republicans forget to bring their "common sense" to Washington? No. They never had any.

For some insight into how difficult it is going to be for Republicans to enact their agenda, the Times' Carl Hulse wrote, "As Boehner Ascends, His Power Comes With Caveats," yesterday:

... While he will preside over a substantial and energized Republican majority, Mr. Boehner must contend with a Democratic president with whom he has little personal history and a Democratic Senate leader who is disinclined to make Mr. Boehner’s life easier and who failed to consider hundreds of bills passed by the House even when his own party ran it.

“The problem is going to be the grass-roots movement out in the countryside,” said Vin Weber, a former Republican House member and Washington lobbyist who served with Mr. Boehner in the 1990s. “They have no sense of the limits on a party that controls only one of the three seats of power. Managing that relationship is going to be difficult.”...

... Mr. Boehner’s expanded rank-and-file is populated by more than 80 newcomers — some with no elective experience — who do not seem of a mind to make the compromises that can be required when power is shared in Washington. And he sits atop a leadership team full of young and ambitious lawmakers eager to step up should Mr. Boehner falter, as did the last Republican speaker who engineered a House takeover, Newt Gingrich. ...

Will the reading of the Constitution in the House be enough for Republicans to learn about the limits of their new power? It's doubtful: they're intent on increasing the debt like they did during the Bush years. They have demonstrated an inability to learn from their own experience. How would reading anything help them?

An AP article, "PROMISES, PROMISES: GOP drops some out of the gate," finds that Republicans have alreay broken their campaign promises on spending.