Sarah Palin to resign as Alaska governor

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by VandalSquirrel

My opinion is that she was one of the least Libertarian leaning in recent years. If she was representatively Libertarian the GOP wouldn't have been interested in her. Decisions she's made and other policies have religious leanings more than the general Alaskan population. A lot of people are living off the grid and don't want any government, but they don't vote so they aren't represented. The Libertarian streak is pretty prevalent in frontier areas like Montana, Alaska, and even in parts of Idaho.

Show me where she made a political decision or took an action in office that seemed religious, please. There was a lot of talk, but very little that she seemed to actually try to effect, as far as I can tell, but I may have missed stuff.

Compared to Alaskans and real Libertarian party members, sure, she wouldn't be libertarian; compared to the average GOP politician in Georgia? That's what I was thinking about. She has faith that personally guides her, but I don't think there's much evidence that she expected to actually change policies for others based on that faith.

[VandalSquirrel]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

Show me where she made a political decision or took an action in office that seemed religious, please. There was a lot of talk, but very little that she seemed to actually try to effect, as far as I can tell, but I may have missed stuff.

Compared to Alaskans and real Libertarian party members, sure, she wouldn't be libertarian; compared to the average GOP politician in Georgia? That's what I was thinking about. She has faith that personally guides her, but I don't think there's much evidence that she expected to actually change policies for others based on that faith.

Being against same sex partnerships is part of her religious belief system, and she vetoed those benefits for state employees within a month of taking office in December 2006. Thankfully the Alaskan Supreme Court ruled that denying these benefits was unconstitutional. 1998 was when people voted for an amendment to make marriage between a man and a woman, so she claims she was upholding the AK constitution by vetoing it, but the bill predated her taking office as governor. It passed through the Legislature, and was only applicable to state employees.

Like many people, I have yet to see any reason against same sex partnerships and benefits that isn't backed by religion.

http://gov.state.ak.us/archive-16645.html

There are also much smaller things from her Wasilla days, but those are harder to dig out with official government documents.

ETA: I also found this http://gov.state.ak.us/archive.php?id=1500&type=6 and I searched through that site and found no mentions of anything comparable for other faiths, though I did find a Proclamation about the 50th anniversary of the Beth Sholom Congregation in Anchorage. Not mentioning other faiths in two and a half years, but proclaiming Tai Chi and Qigong Day is poor judgment and not inclusive. May is Jewish Heritage Month (Jewish Heritage Week falls in May), October is Islamic History Month, but they cannot be found in her proclamations, and I think that won't help her, or anyone, not look Christian centered.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by VandalSquirrel

Being against same sex partnerships is part of her religious belief system, and she vetoed those benefits for state employees within a month of taking office in December 2006. Thankfully the Alaskan Supreme Court ruled that denying these benefits was unconstitutional. 1998 was when people voted for an amendment to make marriage between a man and a woman, so she claims she was upholding the AK constitution by vetoing it, but the bill predated her taking office as governor. It passed through the Legislature, and was only applicable to state employees.

Like many people, I have yet to see any reason against same sex partnerships and benefits that isn't backed by religion.

http://gov.state.ak.us/archive-16645.html

There are also much smaller things from her Wasilla days, but those are harder to dig out with official government documents.

ETA: I also found this http://gov.state.ak.us/archive.php?id=1500&type=6 and I searched through that site and found no mentions of anything comparable for other faiths, though I did find a Proclamation about the 50th anniversary of the Beth Sholom Congregation in Anchorage. Not mentioning other faiths in two and a half years, but proclaiming Tai Chi and Qigong Day is poor judgment and not inclusive. May is Jewish Heritage Month (Jewish Heritage Week falls in May), October is Islamic History Month, but they cannot be found in her proclamations, and I think that won't help her, or anyone, not look Christian centered.

You actually have the top part exactly backwards. She vetoed a bill that prohibited giving benefits. She had been advised that the ban was unconstitutional so she vetoed it. It's there in the link you gave if you read it. To me that demonstrates a desire to govern well, rather than with religious bias.

Unless you can find stuff from here Wasilla days, it seems kind of strange to suggest it was important. Even if you can't or don't want to invest the time, list the accusations and I'll look them up. Some people were worried about her banning books, but she never did. She merely asked what the procedure was but never attempted to do it. Personally, that strikes me as okay. If you or your constituents are upset about certain books, having the librarian outline the methods to challenge a book seems fine, especially if you never use it.

As far as religious proclamations, that kind of strikes me as not really being a big deal. I doubt any governor is going to make one unless someone has asked him or her to do so. If we had evidence that she was requested to and then she didn't, there'd be something to talk about, but to say, well she made these meaningless proclamations for these faiths but not these others that she was never requested to make? Not a big deal to me.

[Munchkin03]

This morning, I got to hear one of the NPR correspondents discuss the resignation with two of Palin's biggest supporters--the founder of her PAC and someone else. You know, there were a lot of people on the far right who didn't know, or refused to believe, that Obama wasn't a Muslim; I was disappointed, however, to hear the NPR correspondent insist that Ms. Palin had dropped out of college (yeah, her revolving-doors college career is creepy, but she did finish), among other things related to her ethics violations. A far left weirdo spouting this stuff is one thing, a nationally-aired, government-sponsored radio show host is another.

We have crazies and inconsistencies on both sides, people.

[KSigkid]

Originally Posted by Munchkin03

We have crazies and inconsistencies on both sides, people.

Exactly, and it's endlessly interesting to me how many people refuse to understand this point.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by KSigkid

Exactly, and it's endlessly interesting to me how many people refuse to understand this point.

My hangup about it is that I don't think the traditional media handles the crazies the same way.

But that may end up changing as traditional print and network media fall apart.

ETA: I don't find Palin's college career "creepy," and I don't think I would even if she were a liberal from a comparable era. I'm not trying to make a lot of your word choice, Munchkin, but I think it's kind of interesting that it seems worth talking about to some pundits.

[Munchkin03]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

ETA: I don't find Palin's college career "creepy," and I don't think I would even if she were a liberal from a comparable era. I'm not trying to make a lot of your word choice, Munchkin, but I think it's kind of interesting that it seems worth talking about to some pundits.

Well, it's worth talking about to me. I suspect that, for reasons not related to political leaning, we would STILL be hearing about it if Obama had done the exact same thing. I know that my credibility in my field would be shot to hell if I played college hopscotch like she did.

4 colleges in 5 years is a lot, especially when you consider that she didn't change disciplines during her college career. It wasn't as if she started out as a chemical engineering major and changed to journalism and decided to transfer to a school where she could actually do more in that field. It doesn't even seem to be financially-related. I will concede that she may have been homesick in Hawaii, but what it indicates to me is that she lacked either the sense of commitment at that time in her life or the intellectual rigor to complete a college education in one place.

ETA: I would be just as hard on a liberal for changing colleges like one would change a pair of socks.

[texas*princess]

Originally Posted by KSigkid

Exactly, and it's endlessly interesting to me how many people refuse to understand this point.

I understood your point which is why I edited the post

[PhiSigmaRho]

Am I the only one who thinks she resigned because of a family situation? I just cannot see Sarah Palin "quitting" for any other reason.

When I first heard she was resigning, my first thought was Sarah Palin must be pregnant again. Then, my second thought was maybe either Bristol was pregnant again or Willow. My third thought was that someone in the family has a serious health situation. For example, Sarah might have breast cancer. Any of these would be a good reason for resigning, but not explaining the real situation until later.

[KSigkid]

Originally Posted by texas*princess

I understood your point which is why I edited the post

I wasn't referring specifically to you - I was talking about it in general. People on both the right and left don't understand that the crazies and inconsistences aren't limited to one party or one ideology.