Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Liberalism: Do You Agree We've Had Enough of It? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Thomas A Watson who wrote (44794)	9/5/2008 4:46:40 PM
From: Ruffian	Respond to of 224744

Obama Tightens, McCain Broadens John Podhoretz - 09.05.2008 - 10:30 AM There have been several unexpected political developments in the presidential race over the past 13 days, following the selection of Joseph Biden as Barack Obama’s running mate. First was the way the opening two days, and even part of the third, of the Democratic convention were overrun by the Clinton melodrama. That was resolved, to the satisfaction of all, with an energetic speech by Hillary and a stemwinder by Bill — but even so, it was not predictable that they were going to get away with turning Obama’s coronation into yet another Arkansas soap opera. But perhaps nothing has been more surprising than the fact that Obama’s own speech was far more personally and ideologically negative toward John McCain and the GOP than Biden’s was. Standard general-election politics has it that the vice presidential candidate is to dispense with the cordiality and go directly at the opposition, while the presidential candidate — whose central goal is usually to broaden his appeal, move to the center, and try to bring new voters into his camp — is to elevate himself into the realm of World Leadership. He wants people to be able to imagine him in the Oval Office, and to like what they imagine; leaders, it was once presumed, had to remain above the partisan fray. Even if the idea of a leader too august to mix it up is more spin than substance, there is still something to the notion that the comportment of the leader of the Free World is important, and that we expect such a leader to focus his attention on higher matters. It was therefore even more stunning that Obama, who made such a point of running as a change agent sick of the same old Washington bickering during his ascension in late 2007 and early 2008, chose the moment of his greatest visibility to muddy his own message and to blur that image. After all, more people saw Obama’s speech a week ago than have ever seen him speak before, by a factor of four. I don’t know whether those potential initiates will now think of him as someone new and different in American politics for reasons other than his race, since his speech smacked of the partisan rancor he has suggested he was put on this earth to overcome. Obama’s decision to go at McCain rather than ride a higher horse left McCain with a colossal opening, and he took it last night. His speech was the most non-partisan address I think any of us has ever heard at a political convention, and it was explicitly directed toward the people who were seeing him for the first time. He told anew the story of his captivity and his life of service, so they would know what kind of man he is outside of politics. And then, because he could, because it is part of his own political story, he told them that he had spent a lifetime in politics trying to change Washington, and that because he knew the fight down to his marrow, he could succeed at it. He said he had been fighting the status quo for 25 years, that he knew why his party had fallen into disrepute, that it deserved the disrepute into which it had fallen, and that he didn’t care whether Democrats or Republicans got the credit for good ideas he might implement in office. Claiming this turf in the non-ideological center was the sole purpose of this speech, and succeeding at this task was made far easier by the fact that Obama strangely chose not to stake his claim to it. Now, obviously, Obama has a better partisan hand to play than McCain. Ask voters whether they prefer Democrats to Republicans and Obama’s party prevails by a dozen points. Still, Obama will not win with a coalition made up entirely of partisan Democrats and independents who are Democratic fellow travelers. Many of those independents may indeed dislike George W. Bush, but the very fact that they remain undecided demonstrates that their negative feelings may not have the intensity Obama believes or wishes to believe they do. Obama tightened and focused his message in his speech. McCain broadened his. As always, the only judges of these strategies will be time and results. But there is strong reason to think that the golden-tongued Obama tripped himself up a bit last week, while his rival, who tripped over his own tongue more than a few times last night, laid out for himelf a path to victory last night.

To: Thomas A Watson who wrote (44794)	9/5/2008 6:05:54 PM
From: Ann Corrigan	1 Recommendation Respond to of 224744

Entrenched DC watch out: How Palin Beat Alaska's Establishment September 5, 2008; wsj.com, Page A13 If you've read the press coverage of Sarah Palin, chances are you've heard plenty about her religious views and private family matters. If you want to know what drives Gov. Palin's politics, and has intrigued America, read this. Every state has its share of crony capitalism, but Big Oil and the GOP political machine have taken that term to new heights in Alaska. The oil industry, which provides 85% of state revenues, has strived to own the government. Alaska's politicians—in particular ruling Republicans—roll in oil campaign money, lavish oil revenue on pet projects, then retire to lucrative oil jobs where they lobby for sweetheart oil deals. You can love the free market and not love this. Alaskans have long resented this dysfunction, which has led to embarrassing corruption scandals. It has also led to a uniform belief that the political class, in hock to the oil class, fails to competently oversee Alaska's vast oil and gas wealth, the majority of which belongs to the state—or rather, Alaskan citizens. And so it came as no surprise in 2004 when former Republican Gov. Frank Murkowski made clear he'd be working exclusively with three North Slope producers—ExxonMobil, ConocoPhillips and BP—to build a $25 billion pipeline to move natural gas to the lower 48. The trio had informed their political vassals that they alone would build this project (they weren't selling their gas to outsiders) and that they expected the state to reward them. Mr. Murkowski disappeared into smoky backrooms to work out the details. He refused to release information on the negotiations. When Natural Resources Commissioner Tom Irwin suggested terms of the contract were illegal, he was fired. What Mr. Murkowski did do publicly was instruct his statehouse to change the oil and gas tax structure (taxes being a primary way Alaskans realize their oil revenue). Later, citizens would discover this was groundwork for Mr. Murkowski's pipeline contract—which would lock in that oil-requested tax package for up to 40 years, provide a $4 billion state investment, and relinquish most oversight. Enter Mrs. Palin. The former mayor of Wasilla had been appointed by Mr. Murkowski in 2003 to the state oil and gas regulatory agency. She'd had the temerity to blow the whistle on fellow GOP Commissioner Randy Ruedrich for refusing to disclose energy dealings. Mr. Murkowski and GOP Attorney General Gregg Renkes closed ranks around Mr. Ruedrich—who also chaired the state GOP. Mrs. Palin resigned. Having thus offended the entire old boy network, she challenged the governor for his seat. Mrs. Palin ran against the secret deal, and vowed to put the pipeline back out for competitive, transparent, bidding. She railed against cozy politics. Mr. Murkowski ran on his unpopular pipeline deal. The oil industry warned the state would never get its project without his leadership. Mrs. Palin walloped him in the primary and won office in late 2006. Around this time, news broke of a federal probe that would show oil executives had bribed lawmakers to support the Murkowski tax changes. Among Mrs. Palin's first acts was to reinstate Mr. Irwin. By February 2007 she'd released her requirements for pipeline bidding. They were stricter, and included only a $500 million state incentive. By May a cowed state house—reeling from scandal—passed her legislation. The producers warned they would not bid, nor would anyone else. Five groups submitted proposals. A few months before the legislature awarded its license to TransCanada this July, Conoco and BP suddenly announced they'd be building their own pipeline with no state inducements whatsoever. They'd suddenly found the money. Mrs. Palin has meanwhile passed an ethics law. She's tightened up oil oversight. She forced the legislature to rewrite the oil tax law. That new law raised taxes on the industry, for which Mrs. Palin is now taking some knocks, but the political background here is crucial. The GOP machine has crumbled. Attorney General Renkes resigned. Mr. Ruedrich was fined $12,000. Jim Clark—Mr. Murkowski's lead pipeline negotiator—pleaded guilty to conspiring with an oil firm. At least three legislators have been convicted. Sen. Ted Stevens is under indictment for oil entanglements, while Rep. Don Young is under investigation. Throughout it all, Mrs. Palin has stood for reform, though not populism. She thanks oil companies and says executives who "seek maximum revenue" are "simply doing their job." She says her own job is to be a "savvy" negotiator on behalf of Alaska's citizens and to provide credible oversight. It is this combination that lets her aggressively promote new energy while retaining public trust. Today's congressional Republicans could learn from this. The party has been plagued by earmarks, scandal and corruption. Most members have embraced the machine. That has diminished voters' trust, and in the process diminished good, conservative ideas. It is no wonder 37 million people tuned in to Mrs. Palin's convention speech. They are looking for something fresh.