What Palin Said...

Okay, here’s the text of Sarah Palin’s acceptance speech. As promised, except for truncating the beginning where she talks about how terrific her husband and kids are (although I think that the comment about his being a fisherman was kind of redundant – I think that I was the last non-fishing man in the state) I have not edited her words. Just like with Joe Biden’s speech, I will clearly mark my commentary
(like this)

Here’s her speech.

A writer observed: "We grow good people in our small towns, with honesty, sincerity, and dignity." I know just the kind of people that writer had in mind when he praised Harry Truman.

(This is one of the themes of the modern Republican party that bothers me. This romanticization of a rural, small-town America that really hasn’t existed for decades. Yes, we grow good people in our small towns. We also grow bad people. And neutral people. Same for our cities. We grow PEOPLE in our small towns. If you think that every small town person is a good person, then you don’t know small towns very well.)


I grew up with those people.

They are the ones who do some of the hardest work in America ... who grow our food, run our factories, and fight our wars.

(Grow our food and run our factories? Not anymore. And I hate to break it to Ms. Palin, but since Viet Nam, the majority of our fighting army is minority city kids. Since so few parents of the middle-class and below can afford to send their kids to college, the Army College Fund starts looking like a last alternative.)

They love their country, in good times and bad, and they're always proud of America. I had the privilege of living most of my life in a small town.

(Let me go on record here that I love America, but I’m NOT always proud of America. Like any loved one, I find things to be proud of, but when America strays from the path of righteousness, I try to help steer it back in the right direction. And no, I do not believe that simply because America does something that makes it right.)

I was just your average hockey mom, and signed up for the PTA because I wanted to make my kids' public education better.

When I ran for city council, I didn't need focus groups and voter profiles because I knew those voters, and knew their families, too.

Before I became governor of the great state of Alaska, I was mayor of my hometown.
And since our opponents in this presidential election seem to look down on that experience, let me explain to them what the job involves.

(This comment confuses me a little. Have you heard any of the democrats speak with disdain about being Mayor of a small town? I haven’t, and I’ve been following their speeches pretty closely. So I’m not sure what evidence she’s basing her comment that her opponents “seem to look down” on.)

I guess a small-town mayor is sort of like a "community organizer," except that you have actual responsibilities.

(Here’s something that I can’t figure out – when did the Republican party become so simple-minded and mean-spirited that a phrase like “community organizer” becomes a punchline? I already talked about the importance of “community organizers” in a previous post – all that I can hope is that all of the community organizers around America rise up and let Ms. Palin know exactly how they feel about being mocked by voting for her opponents.)

I might add that in small towns, we don't quite know what to make of a candidate who lavishes praise on working people when they are listening, and then talks about how bitterly they cling to their religion and guns when those people aren't listening.

(People in small towns weren’t listening when Obama said that? Weird. I thought that it was all over the media. Even F-word news, where a lot of these small-town people get all of their information raised hell about it. I’m not going to defend the comment here, I thought that it was a dumb, poorly-phrased thing to say, but jeez, can we let it go?)

We tend to prefer candidates who don't talk about us one way in Scranton and another way in San Francisco.

As for my running mate, you can be certain that wherever he goes, and whoever is listening, John McCain is the same man. I'm not a member of the permanent political establishment.

(You’re not? You were chairman of the PTA, mayor of Wasilla, governor of Alaska and are now trying to become vice-president of the United States. Seems pretty permanently political to me. This is what I mean by “simple-minded”. She says it – they buy it. No critical thinking at all, and that bugs me.)

And I've learned quickly, these past few days, that if you're not a member in good standing of the Washington elite, then some in the media consider a candidate unqualified for that reason alone.

(Once again with the “Washington elite”. Ms. Palin’s entire career has been political. John McCain has been in the senate since 1983, twenty-five years. If that doesn’t make them part of the political establishment of which she speaks, then I’m missing something.)


But here's a little news flash for all those reporters and commentators: I'm not going to Washington to seek their good opinion -- I'm going to Washington to serve the people of this country. Americans expect us to go to Washington for the right reasons, and not just to mingle with the right people.

(Again, I’m not sure where she gets her information. I may be naïve, but I assume that ALL candidates who seek public office do so, at least in the beginning, to serve what they believe to be right.)

Politics isn't just a game of clashing parties and competing interests.

The right reason is to challenge the status quo, to serve the common good, and to leave this nation better than we found it.

No one expects us to agree on everything.

But we are expected to govern with integrity, good will, clear convictions, and ... a servant's heart.

(Integrity – boy, that’s a good word, isn’t it? The sad fact is that, by simply being involved in politics, it’s easy to become sullied. Ms. Palin herself has an ethics charge pending against her from the Alaska State Troopers. John McCain has been investigated for SEVERAL ethics and conflict-of-interest cases.)

I pledge to all Americans that I will carry myself in this spirit as vice president of the United States. This was the spirit that brought me to the governor's office, when I took on the old politics as usual in Juneau ... when I stood up to the special interests, the lobbyists, big oil companies, and the good ol' boys network.

Sudden and relentless reform never sits well with entrenched interests and power brokers. That's why true reform is so hard to achieve.

But with the support of the citizens of Alaska, we shook things up.

And in short order we put the government of our state back on the side of the people.

I came to office promising major ethics reform, to end the culture of self-dealing. And today, that ethics reform is the law.

While I was at it, I got rid of a few things in the governor's office that I didn't believe our citizens should have to pay for.

That luxury jet was over the top. I put it on eBay.

I also drive myself to work.

(And Barack Obama, when he discovered that our representatives were allowed to charter private jets to ferry them from DC to their home states did so – until he found out how much it was costing taxpayers. Then he stopped. What’s your point?)

And I thought we could muddle through without the governor's personal chef -- although I've got to admit that sometimes my kids sure miss her. I came to office promising to control spending -- by request if possible and by veto if necessary.

Senator McCain also promises to use the power of veto in defense of the public interest -- and as a chief executive, I can assure you it works.

Our state budget is under control.

We have a surplus.

And I have protected the taxpayers by vetoing wasteful spending: nearly half a billion dollars in vetoes.

I suspended the state fuel tax, and championed reform to end the abuses of earmark spending by Congress.

(Now, there’s a good point. State fuel taxes, which go ON TOP of federal fuel taxes, are often higher than the federal tax. You really want to reduce your gas taxes, lobby your state government to follow this example. Of course, they’ll have to find that money somewhere else, but that can be done. This is a misapprehension about taxes – that eliminating or reducing them will cut government waste. Not so. They continue to waste at the same rate, but make cuts in programs to the poor or shift that tax into higher property taxes, etc.)

I told the Congress "thanks, but no thanks," for that Bridge to Nowhere.

(Unfortunately, back to the issue of ethics, this is an out-right lie. I don’t know about Ms. Palin’s mom, but MY mom taught me that lying was unethical. In a 2006 interview with the Anchorage Daily News, Ms. Palin said “Yes. I would like to see Alaska’s infrastructure projects built sooner rather than later. The window is now–while our congressional delegation is in a strong position to assist.” When Congress cancelled funding for the program (a democratic congress, I might add), Ms. Palin issued a statement that said “Despite the work of our congressional delegation, we are about $329 million short of full funding for the bridge project, and it’s clear that Congress has little interest in spending any more money on a bridge between Ketchikan and Gravina Island.” I’m not sure where “thanks, but no thanks” is in those statements. I can’t find it. Can you?)

If our state wanted a bridge, we'd build it ourselves. When oil and gas prices went up dramatically, and filled up the state treasury, I sent a large share of that revenue back where it belonged -- directly to the people of Alaska.

(It really annoys me to see a politician take credit for someone else’s work. This program of which Ms. Palin speaks is the Alaska Permanent Fund dividend, and it was actually established in 1976, when Ms. Palin and I were both still trying to figure out high school. The first year the dividend check was $1000. The next year it had dropped by almost a two-thirds, and didn’t go over $1000 again until 1996. Give credit where credit is due, Ms. Palin – and credit is NOT due to you for the Permanent Fund. There’s also a contingent of Alaskans who believe that money shouldn’t get distributed blindly to the citizens of Alaska, but used to rebuild crumbling roads and infrastructure in the state.)

And despite fierce opposition from oil company lobbyists, who kind of liked things the way they were, we broke their monopoly on power and resources.

(She talks about her opposition to oil and gas lobbyists frequently. Not to make a blanket statement here, but her Lt. Governor in Alaska was a former oil and gas lobbyist. How mad could she have possibly made them?)

As governor, I insisted on competition and basic fairness to end their control of our state and return it to the people.

I fought to bring about the largest private-sector infrastructure project in North American history.

And when that deal was struck, we began a nearly forty billion dollar natural gas pipeline to help lead America to energy independence.

That pipeline, when the last section is laid and its valves are opened, will lead America one step farther away from dependence on dangerous foreign powers that do not have our interests at heart.

The stakes for our nation could not be higher.

When a hurricane strikes in the Gulf of Mexico, this country should not be so dependent on imported oil that we are forced to draw from our Strategic Petroleum Reserve.

And families cannot throw away more and more of their paychecks on gas and heating oil.

With Russia wanting to control a vital pipeline in the Caucasus, and to divide and intimidate our European allies by using energy as a weapon, we cannot leave ourselves at the mercy of foreign suppliers.


To confront the threat that Iran might seek to cut off nearly a fifth of world energy supplies ... or that terrorists might strike again at the Abqaiq facility in Saudi Arabia ... or that Venezuela might shut off its oil deliveries ... we Americans need to produce more of our own oil and gas.

And take it from a gal who knows the North Slope of Alaska: we've got lots of both.

(Oil production on the North Slope has actually halved since the seventies, down from about a million and a half barrels per day to just over eight hundred thousand. Meanwhile, we’re consuming about twenty-one million barrels per day in the US. In other words, we DON’T have enough oil to continue consuming at our current rate without relying on foreign oil, PERIOD. As Ms. Palin once said, this is a problem that we can’t drill our way out of. We need to reduce our oil consumption fairly dramatically if we ever want to end our reliance on foreign oil. I would disagree with Ms. Palin that providing around a third of our oil is “lots”. And natural gas is a terrific thing, and yes, where there’s oil, there’s natural gas. The problem is that it’s very difficult and expensive to store and ship. It’s not a liquid, it’s a gas. So in order to be shipped and used, natural gas has to be converted into a liquid at it’s starting point, and then converted back into a gas when it arrives at it’s destination. It’s a great future solution, like hydrogen, but is going to take time and effort to exploit.)

Our opponents say, again and again, that drilling will not solve all of America's energy problems -- as if we all didn't know that already.

But the fact that drilling won't solve every problem is no excuse to do nothing at all.

Starting in January, in a McCain-Palin administration, we're going to lay more pipelines ... build more nuclear plants ... create jobs with clean coal ... and move forward on solar, wind, geothermal and other alternative sources.

We need American energy resources, brought to you by American ingenuity, and produced by American workers. I've noticed a pattern with our opponent.

Maybe you have, too


We've all heard his dramatic speeches before devoted followers.

And there is much to like and admire about our opponent.

But listening to him speak, it's easy to forget that this is a man who has authored two memoirs but not a single major law or reform -- not even in the state Senate.

(Actually, Obama has sponsored 131 bills in the last three years. John McCain has sponsored 537 bills since 1993. That means that Obama is averaging 43 bills per year and McCain is averaging 35. Get your facts straight, Ms. Palin. Unless by “authoring” she means something else. The Republican party has become very good at specific terminology, and I’m sure that, if she were confronted with this untruth, she would come up with a great Clinton-ish “depends on what the meaning of the word “is” is” in response.)

This is a man who can give an entire speech about the wars America is fighting, and never use the word "victory" except when he's talking about his own campaign. But when the cloud of rhetoric has passed ...

(Oh, goodie. Maybe when the “cloud of” republican “rhetoric” about “victory” has passed, she can tell me exactly what “victory” in Iraq actually is. All of the republicans talk about it – none of them seem to be able to DEFINE it, and I, for one, am dying to know.)

when the roar of the crowd fades away ... when the stadium lights go out, and those Styrofoam Greek columns are hauled back to some studio lot - what exactly is our opponent's plan?

(Maybe she should take a peek at Obama’s website to get that question answered. I mean, if I found the answer in two seconds by googling “Obama Iraq Plan”, surely she could have found it somehow. The first step of Obama’s plan, no big secret, is to bring our boys and girls home. The rest of the plan, according to Obama’s website is “a residual force will remain in Iraq and in the region to conduct targeted counter-terrorism missions against al Qaeda in Iraq and to protect American diplomatic and civilian personnel. He will not build permanent bases in Iraq, but will continue efforts to train and support the Iraqi security forces as long as Iraqi leaders move toward political reconciliation and away from sectarianism.” Sounds like a pretty damned good plan to me.)

What does he actually seek to accomplish, after he's done turning back the waters and healing the planet?

(This kind of pointless sarcasm really bugs me. Yeah, it’s a good punch-line to get a snide giggle out of the simple-minded, but it doesn’t mean anything. It’s more of the partisan one-upsmanship that she is supposedly against.)

The answer is to make government bigger ...

(FYI – at the end of the Clinton administration, the Federal government stood at about 12 million employees. It now stands somewhere around 14 million. Apparently the answer for REPUBLICANS is to make government bigger.)

take more of your money ...

(If Mr. McCains proposal to reduce the corporate tax burden from 35% to 25%, you can bet that they’ll be taking more of your money and more of your community’s money to run the government. These two sound more like republican campaign promises than anything to a reader who takes the time to look beyond the rhetoric to reality.)

give you more orders from Washington ... and to reduce the strength of America in a dangerous world. America needs more energy ... our opponent is against producing it.

(Again, FYI – Barack Obama is actually FOR off-shore drilling as a temporary patch on our energy problems while we concentrate on reducing our consumption and developing alternative energy sources. So, again, this statement just seems to be a flat-out lie.)

Victory in Iraq is finally in sight ... he wants to forfeit.

(I ask again – what IS victory? I think that what she and Mayor Guiliani mean when they say this is that we finally have sight of troop pullout. But that is not only NOT victory, it is because the Iraqi government has demanded that we leave. Major troop withdrawal will happen under either President Obama or President McCain, but not because of the actions of either of them.)

Terrorist states are seeking new-clear weapons without delay ... he wants to meet them without preconditions.

Al-Qaida terrorists still plot to inflict catastrophic harm on America ... he's worried that someone won't read them their rights? Government is too big ... he wants to grow it.

Congress spends too much ... he promises more.

Taxes are too high ... he wants to raise them. His tax increases are the fine print in his economic plan, and let me be specific.

(Beware of republicans bearing tax reductions… they are almost entirely tax reductions for corporations and the wealthiest 2% of Americans. Not for you and I.)

The Democratic nominee for president supports plans to raise income taxes ... raise payroll taxes ... raise investment income taxes ... raise the death tax ... raise business taxes ... and increase the tax burden on the American people by hundreds of billions of dollars.

(Again, I’m not sure where she gets her numbers, unless she’s classing only wealthy Americans as Americans. Obama proposes raising income tax on people who make more than $250,000 per year – less than five percent of our population. According to the Chicago Sun-Times, “The 95 percent-plus of the American population that earns less than $250,000 would see the following tax breaks: A $500-per-worker tax credit for people who earn less than $150,000 and do not itemize, and a $4,000 credit per child in college. Seniors who earn less than $50,000 would pay no income tax.” Those are tax BREAKS for you and I folks. I’d sure like to see that $500 tax credit when I file my income taxes. As far as the “death” tax (actually an estate tax) goes, Obama wants to make it 45% for estates of 3.5 million or larger. McCain wants it to be 15% on estates of five million or larger. Trust me – for most of the estates in America, estate tax would be negligible or non-existent. Again, this is not a tax “hike” on most Americans, but only on the wealthiest. Add into that that McCain wants to make the tax breaks for the wealthy (which he voted against) permanent and reduce the corporate tax burden. That adds to higher taxes for you and I.)

My sister Heather and her husband have just built a service station that's now opened for business -- like millions of others who run small businesses.

How are they going to be any better off if taxes go up? Or maybe you're trying to keep your job at a plant in Michigan or Ohio ... or create jobs with clean coal from Pennsylvania or West Virginia ... or keep a small farm in the family right here in Minnesota.

How are you going to be better off if our opponent adds a massive tax burden to the American economy?

(Obama proposes reducing the tax burden for most Americans – the McCain plan would “add a massive tax burden” to the middle class and below.)

Here's how I look at the choice Americans face in this election.

In politics, there are some candidates who use change to promote their careers.

And then there are those, like John McCain, who use their careers to promote change.

They're the ones whose names appear on laws and landmark reforms, not just on buttons and banners, or on self-designed presidential seals.

(Once again, Ms. Palin, Barack Obama’s name has appeared on more bills (they’re only laws once they’ve been passed, which the sponsor has little or no control over) per year on average than John McCain’s. Guys, please – look beyond these simple-minded lies and to the truth.)

Among politicians, there is the idealism of high-flown speechmaking, in which crowds are stirringly summoned to support great things.

And then there is the idealism of those leaders, like John McCain, who actually do great things. They're the ones who are good for more than talk ... the ones we have always been able to count on to serve and defend America. Senator McCain's record of actual achievement and reform helps explain why so many special interests, lobbyists, and comfortable committee chairmen in Congress have fought the prospect of a McCain presidency -- from the primary election of 2000 to this very day.

(John McCain has taken nearly two million dollars in donations from the telecommunications industry, just to pick one “special interest”. Whereas “The campaign also announced that the DNC (Democratic National Committee) will no longer accept donations from lobbyists and political action committees, to comply with Obama’s campaign policy.” Who do you trust? McCain, who says one thing and then does another, or Obama, who follows through on what he says?)

Our nominee doesn't run with the Washington herd.

He's a man who's there to serve his country, and not just his party.

A leader who's not looking for a fight, but is not afraid of one either. Harry Reid, the Majority Leader of the current do-nothing Senate, not long ago summed up his feelings about our nominee.

He said, quote, "I can't stand John McCain." Ladies and gentlemen, perhaps no accolade we hear this week is better proof that we've chosen the right man. Clearly what the Majority Leader was driving at is that he can't stand up to John McCain. That is only one more reason to take the maverick of the Senate and put him in the White House. My fellow citizens, the American presidency is not supposed to be a journey of "personal discovery." This world of threats and dangers is not just a community, and it doesn't just need an organizer.

(Again with the community organizer balderdash. Actually, I would utterly disagree with this statement. I think that the world IS a community, and if we have an organizer, instead of another disorganizer, the threats and dangers might just decline.)

And though both Senator Obama and Senator Biden have been going on lately about how they are always, quote, "fighting for you," let us face the matter squarely.

There is only one man in this election who has ever really fought for you ... in places where winning means survival and defeat means death ... and that man is John McCain. In our day, politicians have readily shared much lesser tales of adversity than the nightmare world in which this man, and others equally brave, served and suffered for their country.

It's a long way from the fear and pain and squalor of a six-by-four cell in Hanoi to the Oval Office.

But if Senator McCain is elected president, that is the journey he will have made.

It's the journey of an upright and honorable man -- the kind of fellow whose name you will find on war memorials in small towns across this country, only he was among those who came home.

To the most powerful office on earth, he would bring the compassion that comes from having once been powerless ... the wisdom that comes even to the captives, by the grace of God ... the special confidence of those who have seen evil, and seen how evil is overcome. A fellow prisoner of war, a man named Tom Moe of Lancaster, Ohio, recalls looking through a pinhole in his cell door as Lieutenant Commander John McCain was led down the hallway, by the guards, day after day.

As the story is told, "When McCain shuffled back from torturous interrogations, he would turn toward Moe's door and flash a grin and thumbs up" -- as if to say, "We're going to pull through this." My fellow Americans, that is the kind of man America needs to see us through these next four years.

For a season, a gifted speaker can inspire with his words.

For a lifetime, John McCain has inspired with his deeds.

If character is the measure in this election ... and hope the theme ... and change the goal we share, then I ask you to join our cause. Join our cause and help America elect a great man as the next president of the United States.

Thank you all, and may God bless America.

End of speech.

I think that when Ms. Palin mentioned “this world of threats and dangers”, she pinpointed exactly why I cannot, in good conscience, support ANY republican politician at the moment – I’m not afraid. I don’t see the world as a world of threats and dangers, I see it as an amazing creation, filled with challenges and joys. The entire republican message seems to be “Be afraid.” Be afraid of terrorists, be afraid of homosexuals, be afraid of immigrants, be afraid of non-Christians. I’m not. As a matter of fact, I refuse to be. You have a greater chance of being struck by lightning then of being killed by a terrorist. Homosexuals do not threaten your marriage, unless you or your spouse are closeted homosexuals. And yes, we do need to change our immigration policies – but locking the door isn’t the answer. And as far as my non-Christian brothers and sisters go? I love them and embrace them as Jesus commanded me to do.

Peace.
Randal