Palin gears up to take down Murkowski number two?

December 4th, 2008 by Nick Wallace, Assistant Opinion Editor

US Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) was appointed to her seat by her dad – Frank - when he resigned to become the Governor of Alaska. Later, Sarah Palin defeated him soundly in the Republican primary running as a candidate of change against his stale leadership style, involving sticky oil deals she bravely blew the whistle on.

Now, Lisa – dubbed “Liberal Lisa” by radio conservatives – is feeling the pressure not to let the Murkowski name be thrown entirely out of Alaska. Palin has so far released no statement as to whether she’ll be challenging the incumbent in the Republican 2010 primary. Some think she may covet the seat.

Just to be safe, Lisa has some words for Palin: back off.

Specifically, Murkowski’s advice was: “If she wants to be president, I don’t think the way to the presidency is a short stop in the United States Senate.”

But that’s only her “advice” because

a. She wants to keep her seat

and

b. She wants to convince Palin that running in 2012 would be a bad option if she’s only been in the Senate for two years.

But why should Palin want to run in 2012? She could wait until 2016 (assuming Obama’s reelected) and run as the candidate for change. If that’s the case, Lisa: watch out! Sarah may want 6 years in the Senate to prepare to be Commander in Chief.

Nepotists don’t stand a chance in a race against the former almost Vice President / maverick number two Palin.

Election '10!, Nicholas Wallace | 1 Comment »

How not to win in 2010

November 7th, 2008 by Nathan Dixon

Something of a response to Chase about Republican prospects in 2010. I agree with the sentiment that, depending on their approach to governing, Democrats could make the Republican exile much shorter than it should be.

I found this video. See if you can spot anything unusual.

Now there could be plenty of explanations for the appearance of a Soviet flag at an Obama victory rally. As the FOX corespondent noted with such disdain, the young people carrying the flag could have just been a little drunk. They also may have been making fun of conservatives who tried to pin Obama as a socialist.

I certainly don’t think it reveals an abhorrence of private wealth by the Democratic party, even if that’s what FOX News and Michelle Malkin might want you to think. I am sure a few people who thought communism never got it’s fair shot voted for Obama. I am also sure a few people who believe we are living in the end of days voted for McCain. Such people, minority that they are, get to vote like anyone else.

However, I do feel like many people celebrating Obama’s victory last Tuesday might have agreed with a less extreme symbol of skepticism towards the free market.

Democats have rightly seen a role for the government in fighting global warming, fixing our quality of education, and improving access to health-care.

Yet, I hope Democrats realize the market is the greatest tool in dealing with most of their issues.

So if Democrats fight global warming with green protectionism, farm-subsidies, and massive investment projects.

If they try to fix education by pouring money into failed schools without increassing teaching standards or considering the private sector.

If they continue to embrace employer based health care while maintianing the system of state-by-state regulation.

Well then, in future elections my vote will very much be up for grabs.

Election '10!, Nathan Dixon, Politics | 4 Comments »

2010 could be our year to party…

November 6th, 2008 by Chase Cooper

…but we’ve got to work day and night to remake our Party first.

Believe it or not, I’ve got lots of thoughts on the election that I’m dying to share with the world, but unfortunately the homework doesn’t stop just because the nuts have taken over the asylum (just teasing Dems ;) enjoy your celebrations, and I hope you’re still as happy this time next year as you are right now). So I’ll just do a quick repost of an audio commentary I recorded last semester called “Party like it’s 1994!”. At the time, we thought we would be dealing with a Clinton nightmare-scenario, rather than the more hopeful, changeful nightmare-scenario that we actually got… but the basic point is still relevant.

In a related item, this line from an AP story entitled, “Democrats in Congress wary of overreaching” made me laugh out loud:

While Democrats are eager to churn out the new president’s legislative programs, they’re also anxious to avoid the electoral wipeout that swept them from power in the 1994 congressional elections.

Strange country, our USA.

Chase Cooper, Election '10!, Politics | 1 Comment »