« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Senate 2010

By: Daniel Horowitz (Diary)  |  August 13th, 2009 at 02:42 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

In light of Senator Lisa Murkowski’s recent attack on Sarah Palin, I was wondering why in the world in there no primary challanger to her. She votes with the democrats who are as radical as ever 50% of the time. I know all of the arguments that in order to pick up or hold a seat in certain states like Kirk in illinois and Castle in Deleware, we must run RINO’s. But Alaska?? Please! Not only is Alaska a liberatarian state, they are disenchanted with the Murkowski name. If anything she is more of a drag on the prospects of holding the seat than any no name freshman candidate.

Its not just Alaska. The liberals are vulnerable in North Dakota and Arkansas. If we can find challengers why not find conservatives? It has always baffled me how we surrender so many conservative states to rats and rinos.

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • mbecker908

    So, you’ve been here 3+ years and you’ve got one comment from about two months ago and now this stellar little piece. You’ve obviously paid no attention to the site.

    You’ve said that Sen Murkowski votes with Dems 50% of the time. Produce some facts to back that up. The ACU shows her with a 58 rating for ’08 and a 70 rating lifetime. That’s without actually examining her specific votes which may or may not be a big deal.

    Cough up some specifics.

  • Achance

    and I’ll stay out of politics in whatever hole you live in. Busy body self-styled conservative/Republican purists have done enough damage here and if you actually live here, you have to take a number to get in line to criticize Sarah Palin. Certainly anyone whose name is Murkowski or who was associated with the Murkowski Administration has every right to critize her at will.

    • dhorowitz3

      I apologise for posting about the need to challenge a liberal Republican (yes, 50% rating from NTU and 54% from CCAGW) who negates the efforts of conservatives in a state that Bush won by almost 30%. I guess I am not qualified to post about any other state but my own. Next time I will run it by you and you can modify it for me. You are right. Palin is a jerk and the Meurkowski clan is the paragon of fiscal restraint and small gov’t. How dare I post about this on a conservative website!

      In terms of purists doing damage, I don’t know what you mean. If you mean primarying liberal republicans, well you know more about Alaska than me. You would call Alaska a liberal state like Maine? I am not advocating running against Collins and Snowe in Maine or challenging Kirk in Illinois. I just don’t understand why we need pro abortion, big spenders like Murkowski in states that vote overwhelmingly Republican.

      So you think that by challenging Murkowski in the primary we will destroy the party? You believe that she is very popular? Why did dhe barely eeke out a win in 04′ when Bush won the state by such a large margin?

    • AceInTX

      But Murkoski’s votes affect me so why wouldn’t I care what she does or says.

      That said…by Becker’s account from the ACU…She gets a D- in 2007 and 2008 using a grading scale so maybe she’s not failing…but she’s not passing with flying colors either…

      The “Purist” canard is getting rather tired at this point don’t you think?

      • dhorowitz3

        Yes, anyone who wants Republicans to be conservative enough just to the extent that they oppose Obama is a purist these days

      • Achance

        Then the issue becomes caucus discipline, of which there has been none since the earliest days of the Gingrich Revolution. I’m not going to primary or even chastise a member of my delegation because s/he isn’t conservative enough for somebody in some other state so long as their is no caucus discipline. When somebody starts holding Gramnesty or Snow or McCain’s feet to the fire, then maybe I’ll get behind making Lisa find god or find a job, but until then, she’s a incumbent with an R behind her name and that’ll do.

        • AceInTX

          So…let’s hold all their feet to the fire…including Murkowski’s. You’ve got to start somewhere and if primary every single one of them is what it takes…then what are we waiting for?

          Here is where my frustration is coming from…and why I’ve become somewhat of an anti RINO crusader.

          I’m an all arround Conservative as I’ve said 100s of times here…and believe one part of the ideology of conservative can’t survive without all the other parts….I’ve been in this game for 20 years as such but my main focus has always…(until recently)…on social issues. I’ve watched the party and the RINOs grousing about and working to stifle Social Conservatives all that time. Well…they’ve succeeded largely since 2006 since no one is discussing social issues any more…Now we’re having to fight the RINOS on fiscal issues with Snowe and Collins, and environmental radicalism in Kirk, McCain and other Greenies who’ll stick us with Cap and Trade given half the chance.

          So…what do we do at this point? Our Representatives aren’t listening to us….nor are their leaders in the House and Senate let alone the whips who should be enforcing discipline in the caucus…they can’t enforce discipline because we’ve got so many RINOs up there we can’t get a consensus on what we should be about…so what do we do if not primary as many of them as possible to send a message that they can’t ignore us any longer without consequences?

  • dhorowitz3

    First of all, are there requirements for posting? Did I do something wrong?

    Second, 58% by the ACU is 58%. You think that is good. Also, if you take a look at the top RINO’s, many of them will have higher lifetime ACU ratings but in recent years they have taken a slide. For me anyone who decides to vote with the Democrats now of all times when they are so radical is not a Republican.

    Third, If you take a look at the ratings by Jim Demint’s senate conservatives fund. www.senateconservativesfund.org, you will find that she is rated 50.

    Why are you so defensive of someone like Murkowski? I will provide for you her issue positions but all I have to say is this. Anyone who is baffled by the allegation that Murkowski often votes with the liberals knows nothing about the Senate.

    • Achance

      Sorry, Alaska while a Red State isn’t a conservative state as that term is understood by many here. We are more a “not Democrat” state because of the Ds alliance with the Greenies and the Nanny Staters. I don’t always agree with Sen. Murkowski, but she represents Alaska well and that’s all I expect from her.

      • dhorowitz3

        Sorry I didn’t read your bio. You were appointed to a state postion by Frank Murkowski. That about says it all. No objective conservative would get so defensive about the corrupt, big spending Murkowski’s except for someone who is tied to them. I’m from Maryland and I guess I would right positively about Cardin and Mikulski if I got a job from them. nough said

        • George Claghorn

          Than you can *ever* claim to know.

        • Achance

          The appointment was worth a couple hundred bucks a month; that’s probably chump change even in that Blue hole you live in. Why is it that you Palin-loving busy bodies always think it is about a job? I didn’t need Frank Murkowski, he needed me.

          I can’t imagine how someone from a Democrat infested hole like Maryland has the audacity to criticize anyone with an R behind their name in a state that had a 100% R federal delegation until Outside interference and the Bush Administration’s DOJ decided to make our State an FBI playground. I still can’t believe that I actually watched Red State for a time endorse the Boy Mayor, Mark Begich. And you’re worried about my Senator who’s not conservative enough for you? Worry about the liberal Democrat that so-called conservatives helped elect to a Senate seat we’d held since 1968.

          Now go away, your too stupid to waste any more time with.

          • dhorowitz3

            You can call names all you want but you have still not explained how Murkowski is a conservative based on the fact that her voting record proves the contrary. She got a D from the NRA while in the state legislature. Guns in Alaska? If there is any issue that dems, R’s and I’s agree on in alaska it is gun rights. It looks like you know your state less than I do. And I still don’t understand why a person is defined by the state they live in?

            Why the hell can’t I talk about politics in another state and why the hell does it reflect on a conservative if they live in a blue state? This has nothing to do with Palin, it has to do with trying to elect small gov’t, anti nanny state Republicans in an anti nanny state. There is no way you can say that Murkowski qualifies for that. Based on National Journal’s scores, Murkowski scored almost as bad on economic issues as social issues (59%, 58% respectively). You are the one who started attacking me while I am merely having a civil discourse about the voting record of a Senator.

            Maybe you ought to educate yourself about the voting record of your own Senator before you start calling names.

        • AceInTX

          I have no love of the RINOs as anyone who follows me can tell you…and I have little love for the Murkawski clan…but calling the man a currupt shill is one step to far and I’ll defend him in that…Art is many things…but a corrupt shill is not one of them!

          • dhorowitz3

            I was talking about Frank Murkowski.

          • AceInTX

            You Wrote:

            Sorry I didn?t read your bio. You were appointed to a state postion by Frank Murkowski. That about says it all. No objective conservative would get so defensive about the corrupt, big spending Murkowski?s except for someone who is tied to them. I?m from Maryland and I guess I would right positively about Cardin and Mikulski if I got a job from them. nough said

            The man has been around here since before I was and he’s a man of character and integrity…if misguided at time IMHO…You should learn more about the regulars here before you spout of…you’ll last a lot longer that way!

          • AceInTX
          • dhorowitz3

            If you read the thread I was just sticking to the facts whether you agree or not. Art came in and attacked me really nastily. So I was wondering why someone is so defensive over somebody like Murkowski. I have never seen it before. Thats when I saw his bio. I wasn’t calling him corrupt, I was calling Frank Murkowski corrupt. What is so pathetic about this is that if we all got in a room together we would all probably agree on over 90% of policy issues. I don’t know why I needed to get attacked so vociferoucly. The first guy was more civil and asked me for specifics so I got more info.

          • JadedByPolitics

            however it does appear some get away with that while others cannot. I personally would love to see anything with the name Murkowski behind it GONE but it would appear that is not going to happen and I can speak to any Senator or Congressperson I want as can you because each one of their votes affects all Americans. If I were you I would do what most do and ignore him!

          • Achance

            recommended diaries. I’d like to see ignorant neophytes gone from politics too, but I guess that ain’t happening. We’ll see, maybe Princess Palin will take you all to some Promised Land. I suspect that the only thing she’ll take is the money.

            Come to think of it, what was the last diary you wrote? In fact, when have you had anything other than cant to contribute? You and tbone are birds of a feather; always some rejoinder or holier than thou remark but almost never a substantive contribution on anything.

            Now I’ll resume ignoring you.

          • JadedByPolitics
          • JadedByPolitics
          • azaeroprof

            I didn’t detect any animosity in Jaded’s comment. Where did the second half of that comment come from?

          • Rod_Patrick

            I would prefer if you can discuss to us this topic:

            Is there a difference between advanced directives vs Palin’s “death panel” theory?

          • aesthete

            Tbone’s the classic archetype of the internet flamer, but Jaded has contributed to this site and made a positive impact. There’s no way that you can lump them together (and this is coming from someone who took a while inn warming up to Jaded). I appreciate your comments most of the time, but that was an uncalled-for comparison.

          • AceInTX

            First off…I’ve seen Jaded up in lights quite a bit…and besides…who says she has to write 10 diaries a week before she can participate in debate and contribute to the discussion…maybe she doesn’t have time to write? This is the first time this week I’ve been able to sit down and comment some…

            As for:

            You and tbone are birds of a feather; always some rejoinder or holier than thou remark but almost never a substantive contribution on anything.

            Let’s try this on for size:

            I?d like to see ignorant neophytes gone from politics too, but I guess that ain?t happening. We?ll see, maybe Princess Palin will take you all to some Promised Land. I suspect that the only thing she?ll take is the money.

            Or this:

            Busy body self-styled conservative/Republican purists have done enough damage here and if you actually live here

            Then there’s this:

            So, someone criticizes the Princess and this jackass wants to primary her; the rest is an afterthought and a rationalization. The ONLY reason Palin isn?t challenging LIsa is that she knows she?ll lose and that would kill a whole bunch of her buzz. Sarah?s claim to fame doesn?t come from attacking Democrats, it comes from attacking Republicans.

            Maybe I’m getting kind of rusty….but I don’t see a whole lot of substance in any of that…and not much in what I didn’t include here. I don’t think Jaded was out of line in her comment though I disagree with it to a small extent…but you are a little punchy here….mabe it’s time to put away the Port, or whatever adult beverage you are currently indulging in…and take a nap?

          • JadedByPolitics

            my behalf I appreciate it and Achance and I do not speak to one another due to bad blood over Palin, he hates her and I don’t. I usually don’t read nor recommend his diaries and since it had been awhile I decided to read it and it was well done so I recommended it. He has NO CLUE what I contribute here at Redstate nor anywhere else or what I do to advance the conservative movement nor is it his business. To me as a woman in her 40′s he is but an old bitter man who lost his job when Sarah Palin took the Governership and so when it comes to her he will always be an angry bitter person so I ignore him and anyone who wants to write about her should do the same and the reality is when someone write’s about her he should be MAN enough to ignore it, he won’t but he should.

          • aesthete

            Look, both of you contribute to this site, and I don’t see why there has to be bad blood between you over Palin of all things, when she’ll probably never get to the places that she’d need to get to to make either Art uncomfortable or to make you excited :) Personally, I think that she’s fine right where she’s at, and if she stays in the public square to help conservatives without getting behind the levers (which is, like it or not, probably what will end up happening anyways), there’s no reason to squabble over it (unless there’s a troll who’s panties are particularly fun to get in a wad :) )

          • http://theminorityreportblog.com David Hinz

            your arrogance is showing, Art!

            perhaps you are getting too old and jaded to discuss politics rationally.

            YOU start the personal attacks … and like a handful of people, get away with it.

          • AceInTX

            if you try to assert otherwise then fine…nut I can read…and know what you meant..I think his reply to you was a little hyperventilating as well…I’m simply suggesting to you…that you get to know people around here a little better before accusing them of holding positions because of what they are paid as opposed to holding thos positions about what they believe.

          • azaeroprof

            Other than mentioning the name Palin once, this post really has nothing to do with her. So I don’t understand Art’s initial reaction. Yes, dhorowitz3 knows much less about Alaska politics than Art, but he certainly has the right to comment on politics outside his state.

            That said, he should have done a little more research first. I looked at Murkowski’s issue ratings and the 58 is a bit unfair. All in all, she seems to be more of a 70% conservative if you look at a conglamerate of all her ratings. There are plenty of other GOP senators more deserving of a primary challenge.

            And as a Palin fan (still, and in full knowledge of Art’s objections), I sincerely hope that she does not challenge Murkowski in 2010. That would be disastrous for Palin, Murkowski and the GOP.

          • Achance

            “In light of Senator Lisa Murkowski?s recent attack on Sarah Palin, I was wondering why in the world in there no primary challanger to her.”

            So, someone criticizes the Princess and this jackass wants to primary her; the rest is an afterthought and a rationalization. The ONLY reason Palin isn’t challenging LIsa is that she knows she’ll lose and that would kill a whole bunch of her buzz. Sarah’s claim to fame doesn’t come from attacking Democrats, it comes from attacking Republicans.

          • AceInTX

            Her buzz comes from the fact that she was more conservative than the slime ball that nominated her….

            I’ve defended you on the attacks on your character here Art…but let me tell you what frosts my britches about this whole thing…RINOS and so called “Moderate Republicans” have no problem attacking Conservatives at every turn and feel entitled to do just that in front of any microphone they can get thrust in their faces from the so called objective press…but let Conservative dare to criticize these self righteous asses and self proclaimed maverics and all hell’s a ridin on the plain!

            Your Palin hatred is well known and maybe justified…but I don’t for the life of me understand your overreaction to this post!

          • dhorowitz3

            That is exactly what I mean. I have posted about the likes of Grahamnest on other conservative forums and never saw any reaction like this. You don’t have to be a Palin lover. This has nothing to do with her or Alaska. Its just that this was the latest example in the news about a moderate R blasting a conservative and giving aid to the libs. we are all sick of this regardless of who its coming from and what state they are from. I don’t understand all this bitching

          • Achance

            Now, give me two pieces of legislation that Gov. Palin sponsored that would give anyone the slightest indication that she was a conservative. In fact, give me one thing, other than giving birth to Trig, that she as done, as opposed to said, that would indicate that she is a conservative. Now, mind you, I said things that she’d done as a political figure, not stuff she’s done or claimed credit for personally, but as mayor, AOGCC Commissioner, or Governor; give me Sarah Palin’s actual conservative bona fides. Hear the “Jeopardy” theme playing in the background?

            And, thanks for coming to my defense, but I didn’t over-react; they all go to the same place. If you don’t like Sarah you’re a corrupt old boy or frustrated job seeker; I’m neither.

          • azaeroprof

            Don’t be too quick to dismiss the value of saying conservative things. If we don’t give that any credit, than most of us here at RS have no bona fides either. For that matter, what did say William F. Buckley every DO that was conservative? Yet he started the movement.

            You may be right about Sarah not having done a whole lot as Gov that would be construed as truly conservative, but then you also have stated that Alaska is nearly a socialist state anyway. So how conservative could a Gov there be at this point? I don’t know.

            But she certainly has represented and presented conservatism both during the ’08 campaign and at speeches and online since.

          • aesthete

            We do have to realize that many of the problems that Republicans have been facing recently have had to do with our beloved leaders’ collective penchant to run home, whisper sweet conservative nothings into their constituents’ ears, and then proceed to vote for crap legislation that was half-conservative, half-liberal, and all-statist. ATM, talking helps, but we need more than talk if we’re to enact actual change in spending and Federalism. I agree with Art that, in the long run, this will involve caucus discipline, but in the short run, we need people who will walk the walk, as it were. Mrs. Palin is an outrageously talented stump speaker, and I hope that she continues to use her gifts in populist oratory to help in conservative causes, but we should realize that if if the extent of her abilities so far have only been in oratory, she will not suddenly turn around and become a spectacular conservative executive because we want her to be.

          • mbecker908

            or haven’t held elective office. Once you have a record, “saying” doesn’t mean a damn thing. For instance, Mike Huckabee “saying” he’s a conservative. Or Mitt Romney.

            There is absolutely NO comparison between former Governor Palin and William F. Buckley. Buckley was a writer and a journalist. Palin hires writers and ticks off journalists.

          • azaeroprof

            aesthete and mbecker. I did not mean to imply an equivalence between Palin and Buckley. I was just using Buckley as an extreme example of someone who had quite earned conservative bona fides without any record of *public* action, strictly by talking and writing.

            Yes, Palin has a record, and her reputation should include that. I agree with Art that it was less conservative than we might like. But I also think that she was somewhat constrained by the nature of Alaskan gov’t (not her fault) and by the fact that she only served 2.5 years (her fault).

            But at the same time, just because she has a record doesn’t mean she cannot be an effective voice for conservatism, and as long as she doesn’t start sounding like a squish, I would consider her a conservative voice. If she is effective and makes a significant impact in the conservative comeback, I do think she can write her own ticket if she wants back in elected politics. If not, then she slowly fades away and Art and mbeck are happy, and some of us will be disappointed but continuing to plug away.

          • mbecker908

            and you’re OK with that when translated to the national level? If she’s constrained by the libertarians in AK just think what would happen when confronted by hard core Marxists in DC.

            I think she can be a moderately effective conservative voice, mostly to whip up the core. As far as elective politics is concerned, she’s toast for the foreseeable future – at least 20 years – but she’s young enough to maybe have a shot way out.

            I’m not particularly “happy” about her fading away because I really don’t care about her or anybody else right now. I will admit that she now has a huge hurdle to overcome at my house because she ran out on her commitment to the voters of AK. As far as I’m concerned it was either an act of political cowardice or self-aggrandizement.

          • azaeroprof

            That thought occurs to me, too. The only difference is that in AK, she was constrained (probably?) by wanting to maintain viability for national office. If she were POTUS, maybe(!) she would be less cautious in at least trying to do the right thing.

            On the rest, I will continue to agree to disagree with you. I tend to see her resignation as more an act of political courage (albeit a risky one, seeing as how it created an initial backlash among *some* conservatives, yourself included apparently). And the only things that can settle our disagreement are Sarah Palin, and time.

          • mbecker908
          • AceInTX

            Part of that was an elbow to the ribs if you didn’t get it…

            I simply stated she was more conservative than McCain who we all know I loath….and let’s not forget…one doesn’t have to be all that Conservative to be more conservative than he…she was the one bright spot for me in a very dark time…and that’s honestly what I’m hanging my hat on. I’ll also admit, I’ve heard some things from her lately that have lifted my eyebrow…so…who knows…maybe we’ll end up on the same side concerning her…

            What I’d like to see you address however…and I suspect is what dhorowitz3 is making is driving at…if not very effectively is what I wrote:

            RINOS and so called ?Moderate Republicans? have no problem attacking Conservatives at every turn and feel entitled to do just that in front of any microphone they can get thrust in their faces from the so called objective press?but let Conservative dare to criticize these self righteous asses and self proclaimed maverics and all hell?s a ridin on the plain!

          • Achance

            Once they see bright lights and cocktail parties full of people in real designer clothes, they only care about the approval of the Georgetown set, not the folks back home. The lobbyists and players ply them with money and convince them that with enough money, they don’t have to listen to the folks in the district. Unfortunately, it is all too often true.

            I’ll be the first to admit that the only answer I have is old-fashioned Democrat-style organization down to the precinct level that makes the Party more powerful than any candidate. Right now, any incumbent can thumb his/her nose at the Party, and most do.

          • AceInTX

            but I still say primarying a few of these pin heads is what we need!

            Look at what happened with Specter…The Party hacks decided to back him all the way till he jumped ship…now he’s in the other party…Tomey leads him by double digits…his sucker mentality lead him to believe Harry Reid that they wouldn’t oppose him in the Dem Primaries and now he’s having a contested primary…and what are the party hacks doing?

            Pushing Crist, Kirk and a bunch more Specters for the Senate…I mean…COME ON ALREADY!!!

          • mbecker908

            party comes out a winner. That wouldn’t be the case in AK no matter who won. In both PA & FL it is case, no matter who wins.

          • AceInTX

            It can be said we’ve lost far more with RINOs in the majority caucus than we would have with a strong and united minority caucus.

            Before anyone accuses me of advocating we lose more seats, I’m simply positing the question at what point do we reach a point of diminishing returns by electing those who do more harm in the caucus than if they had never been a part of it.

            I think I’m saying there has to be a balance…Yes we need Moderate Republicans to gain a majority…but at some point we compromise so much by supporting them that we have no reason to hold the majority in the first place.

          • eburke

            On the one hand, there *are* places where a Tom Coburn/Jim Demint won’t ever win an election – Maine/Maryland/Vermont come to mind. Thus, I can tolerate a 50 – 60% ‘squish’ in those states/districts *as long as they’re with us on the ‘brand-building’ votes when we need them (votes like the Porkulus, Crap & Tax, and the Health Care Boondoggle and constructionist judges).

            Those are positions which represent both highly visible and seminal differences between us and the socialists in the Dem party. But where I respectfully differ with the “Republicans at all costs” mentality is that at some point in time, the ability of the MSM to blur the differences between ‘Pubs’ and Dems because of the support of Pubs to socialist policies makes it much more difficult to elect solid conservatives in Purple and Red states/districts and whatever we gain from ‘leadership’ votes I believe we lose by Senators/Congresscritters who never get elected because the ‘brand’ has become so blurred.

            Hey, speaking as someone who has lived in the investment banking world, McDonalds wants as many franchisees out there as possible, but you just can’t do anything you want as a franchisee because some base level of brand consistency has to be enforced or in the big picture people start equating the bad experience at one McDonald’s with other McDonald’s and they quit going so whaterver revenues that franchise brings in are more than offset by the revenues they’re costing you at other locations.

            I realize that limps some as an analogy (as all analogies do) but I do believe that there are RINOs who are necessary (the Coleman types), RINOs that destroy the brand (McCain/Specter/Collins/Chafee types), and RINOs who are occupying seats which represent states/districts that could be occupied by solid Red conservatives (Graham/McCain/Crist types).

            Depending on which category you’re in determines, IMO, how you should be treated.

          • AceInTX
          • pilgrim

            http://www.redstate.com/pilgrim/2009/03/08/votes-are-what-count-more-than-statements-2010-us-senate-elections/

            It was a vote on an amendment to the SChip bill that would have put back into law the Mexico City policy of not using taxpayer money to fund abortion mills all around the world. Lisa Murkowski is the only Republican Senator up for reelection in 2010 to vote against this bill. The bill was close, and Sen. Murkowski’s vote is going to result in many deaths.

          • AceInTX
          • dhorowitz3

            If you look at her recent scores they are way too low. Arlen Specter also has a higher lifetime average but, obviously decided to become more liberal in recent years. Does anyone here think that Specter shouldn’t have been challenged? Also, the point is that its not like the Republican caucus is all like Tom Tancredo and the Dems are all like Ben Nelson. Quite the contrary. The R’s are very moderate and the D’s are more liberal than any causus in American history. So to vote 30-50% of the time with them is a huge deal.

            Furthermore, what is this business with defending a liberal R because they are in your state. I fully agree that Grahamnesty needs to go too. I’m just saying that I would work on red states first (like Alaska and South Carolina) before blue states like Maine because there is no threat of losing the seat by virtue of not being liberal enough

          • azaeroprof

            so I’m putting it as a reply to myself that you both replied to (confusing enough?).

            You’re right, Art. The way the post was worded, it does sound like it’s advocating a primary of Murk just because she attacked Palin. That is not appropriate. Had dh3 simply left Palin out from the beginning and argued that Murk deserved to be primaried due to her voting record, it would be more appropriate. Then it could be simply argued on the merits.

            To that end, dh3, I agree with your premise that we can make conservative gains by replacing liberal or even moderate Repubs in deeper red states more easily than we could in blue or purple states. Murkowski isn’t bad, but she ain’t that great, either.

          • mbecker908

            - other than her speeches in the last 9 months – do you have to guess that she’d be significantly better than Lisa. Oh, and ya think maybe if she did get elected Senator she’d serve a full term?

          • azaeroprof

            as I said in some comment above, I am very opposed to Palin running for Senate. I think there is an excellent chance that Art is correct, that she would not beat Murkowski. Ironically, I think she would stand a better chance at this point in running for POTUS than she would Senate in her own state! (and both are well under 50-50 at this point).

            I do believe that if she were somehow to make it into the Senate that she would have higher conservative ratings than Murkowski, but I don’t have anything to base that on other than her word. I do believe that she is more of a natural, or *gut*, conservative, not even an intellectual idealogue like Buckley. What do I have to base that on? Just my own reading of her as someone who has a pretty good knack for reading people. I may be wrong. You, or anyone else, might be better at that than me, and I’ll be the first to admit it if I’m proven wrong. But often, politics is like that. We can look at records and words all we want, but it frequently comes down to trust, character, and personality. (Otherwise, we could just elect books or computers to public office and know exactly what they would do!)

            And to your last question: I don’t know. I suspect she would, unless she decided to run for higher office.

            Frankly, I wouldn’t mind seeing someone more reliably conservative primary Murkowski. But I don’t want it to be Sarah. She’s better off where she is, and so are we.

          • mbecker908

            I don’t believe there’s anybody in AK more conservative than Murk who could get two dozen votes running against her.

          • azaeroprof
          • dhorowitz3

            I understand those that might say that her pro choice views would be fine because Alaska is more lib. than conservative. But aren’t issues like CAFE standards and bailouts the very nanny state policies that liberatarians oppose just as vociferously as conservatives do? Again, Murkowski’s National Journal ratings are almost as bad on economic issues as on social issues.

            Also, Rush slapped down Murkowski on this issue. Its not just about Palin. In fact, the clowns in the Senate indeed took out those provisions eventhough they didn’t exist in their minds. It was ridiculous for Murkowski to side with the liberals and MSM on this. Its not about Palin. Unless people like Rush aren’t real conservatives either as they have never done anything for conservatives. Only those like Ridge, Powell, Murkowski, Kathleen Parker, and David Frum are real conservatives

          • Achance

            Sen. Murkowski’s straying from the ranch is a problem for Alaska Republicans in OUR primary and not the concern of naive bloggers in a very Blue state who should probably concern themselves with the hole they live in.

            You live in a state that has provided an idiot Democrat senator and now VP, has a Democrat Senate delegation and has all, save one, Democrats in it’s House delegation. I think you should get busy; why aren’t you out organizing a Republican groundswell in, say, the hole formerly known as the City of Baltimore, and, yes, I’ve been there? It is easy for you to be a purist about Republicans in other states: you don’t have any Republcans in yours!

            There were far better choices for Frank Murkowski in ’02 than his daughter; the choice doomed his gubernatorial term, but in ’04 we had no candidate with a hope in Hell of beating former Governor Knowles for the Senate, so we had to support her. We have to support her now unless and until someone comes along here that has the wherewithall to beat an incumbent Senator. The Ds will move Heaven and Earth and move in massive special interest money, as they did for Begich, to try to unseat Murkowski. Some fresh face will go down to ignominious defeat to any credible D. The days of being able to elect a corpse here if it has an R behind its name are long gone and much of Alaska is now Purple trending Blue anyway, so we really don’t need your help in restoring our ideological purity; we have enough trouble just holding caucus seats.

          • dhorowitz3

            Look, if I met you in person I would love to just shake on it. I don’t doubt that you are a great American and I apologise if I said anything offensive. I was just simple venting my frustrations about so many R’s siding with the MSM and Democrats. I just don’t understand why I am a bad person for living in a blue hell hole.
            I agree a thousand percent about these clowns in Md. If I had a non liberatarian R from a liberatarian state I would hate them even more. I and others have posted on other forums about the need to dump Grahmnesty in SC and we never got such vociferous anger from those in SC telling us to shut up and mind your own state. They usually hate them even more being from SC. You still didn’t answer my point that I am not demanding a social conservative in Alaska, just a liberatarian.

            Is there any threat of losing the seat this cycle? Is Tony Knowels running this time around? I just didn’t think that Lisa was that popular anyway. I know some states like Maine have RINO’s that are evidenlty very popular, so it would be a huge risk trying to unseat them. But is Murkowski that popular and will 2010 bring us as strong as a challenger as Knowels? I am just asking and trying to have a dialouge. All the best.

          • Achance

            Murkowski is probably the most popular politician in the State, even moreso than Palin who has pretty well fouled her nest here; people are simply overdosed on drama and Sarah Palin. I haven’t seen any recent polls, but Murkowski would have troubles on specific issues as even when she was in the Legislature, she was fairly liberal for an Alaskan Republican, so much so that former Sen. President Mike Miller ran against her in the ’04 primary to make her run right so that Knowles, a master of triangulation, couldn’t run to the right of her in the general.

            Haven’t heard anything from Knowles but he’s still young and remains a force as does his former LG, Fran Ulmer. We can tie the greenies around both their necks but they can tie perceived “Republican corruption” around any Republican’s neck, thanks in no small part to Princess Palin. The Ds also have some present and former mayors and members of the Legislature that could be credible contenders for any statewide office.

            I’d simply like to hold the statewide seats we have and maybe do some good in the Legislature, particularly the Senate where all the corruption drama and the Palin-Green battles have caused us to have a D dominated coaltion in a body we’d held since the ’80s. I just thank God and Greta that Sarah Palin is gone and we can now try to restore some sanity to Alaska politics.

          • dhorowitz3

            for the info. It doesn’t seem that the DSCC is making Alaska a priority. I’ve never read anything from their camp indicating a serious challenge. Is there any visible R in Ak that has potential for statewide office one day?

          • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

            I expect to be doing a bunch of MD-related stuff over the next year, particularly if Charles Lollar really does challenge Hoyer for his seat.

          • dhorowitz3

            Your efforts are definately appreciated. All I am saying is that in general there are so many R leaning areas that are represented by D’s that if we just went after them we could have a majority. Hoyer’s district is rated by the Cook PVI as D+11 while Alaska is rated as R+13. There are 70 congressional districts that are over R+1 and 35 over R+5 that are held by Rats. Thses should be the priority. I would love to unseat them in Maryland too. Its just that the demographics kill us. I live in CD-3 which is the most conservative” of all 7 D districts, it is D+6. Yet in 2006 I was the regional coordanator for John White against the boy Sarbanes but we got creamed.

          • mbecker908

            business tax increase Palin dumped on the oil companies, that will likely never produce revenues expected.

            Now then, about my point. There IS no “conservative” in AK that can take Lisa’s seat.

          • Rod_Patrick

            But there is a beautiful story behind that, if reported without bias.

          • DavidS1787

            for taking a big swipe at big business and oil. We will!

          • Achance

            She did that in the wake of the now largely discredited FBI investigations when Alaska legislators would hardly dare to talk to anyone for fear they were wearing a wire and wouldn’t dare vote against something that the Industry opposed. Even in that climate, she passed ACES only with the support of the Democrats. Until Palin, taxation based on price rather than production had been anathema to Republicans because of the difficulty of administering a price or profit based scheme. It was a bet that prices would remain at astronomical levels, which they haven’t. At very high prices, Alaska receives more revenue than under the predecessor scheme, but a low prices, we receive less. Since the price came down from the stratospheric levels of the summer of ’08, continuing revenue has been far below State expenses and we have heavily tapped reserves. Only now with oil near $70/bbl. is continuing revenue approaching the levels necessary to support her SFY 10 budget. She threw a budget far above continuing revenue to the Legislature and forced them to make the hard choices so she could remain popular. When faced with the daunting prospect of having to actually govern the State in a time when hard choices had to be made and constituencies had to be denied, she quit.

            I said long ago that it was unlikely she’d run for re-election in ’10 because second terms have been so unkind to Alaska governors and her popularity was largely based on her throwing around historically high expenditures, some of which was pure pandering, e.g., her “energy rebate.” Most of that money should have been saved and the rest spent to meaningfully address the exhorbitantly high energy costs in rural Alaska.

          • mbecker908

            Like hell there is.

            And if you really think so, you should enlighten the fools among us with a diary.

          • Rod_Patrick

            - that’s what I said Mr. Mbecker.

            BUT ASK YOUR BROTHER ART TO LEARN HOW TO SING A DUET. Geez, the two of you sound like the different versions of the Obamacare.

            DID SHE RAISE AND LOWER THE TAX? Art answered it all. Not necessarily. Because she made it price-based, not output-based.

            But let me try your challenge. This is a big deal for me. Alaska, for many of us here at Lower48, is too creepy. Thanks to Art’s former bosses. I’d known the Murkowski-Steven clan before I heard a name Palin.

            On the Taxation and Pricing of Oil

            The current crude oil price in INTERNATIONAL MKTS covers Royalty Tax or National Wealth Tax. That’s the source of wealth by the Arab countries (and now, Russia because of natgas). The premise is simple. The state owns the resource.

            Assuming the Alaskan State abandons its ownership of the resource (this occurs when the land is not owned by any private citizen), then the oil production cost (including sunk cost) will be lower. But an Alaskan oil company will not sell its product in an Alaska oil market (if one exists) at a lower price. Surely, that company will sell its oil produce to the International Markets that offer the higher prices. The result: WINDFALL PROFIT (or to be specific, the current international price includes royalty/national wealth given up by the State.) In Financial Market, this dilemma is called Martingale.

            Only a foolish Alaskan Governor will give up that RIGHT in behalf of its citizens. Government, in this case, is the manager of its citizen’s wealth. A good CEO (AK Govt) is to ensure that the its stakeholders (the Alaskans) will yield greater wealth to its citizen.

            OF COURSE, ART THINKS THAT HIS AK GOVERNMENT IS BETTER THAN ITS CONSTITUENTS TO DECIDE WHERE THE MONEY SHOULD BE SPENT. VERY CONSERVATIVE.

            If AK Legislature doesn’t want to act like Putin Government in Russia or an Arab King, the profits from the taxes should be “directly” distributed to the AK people.

            Sounds like a Liberal? NO. THAT’S TRUE REPUBLICANISM (briefly, Government works for its people.) Associating with a Democrat is not bad, as long as you know how far you can go. In this case, the AK Democrats supporting Palin were actually supporting Republicanism.

            Now don’t start with the meme that the Alaskan Tax is unfair for the rest of American people. We are federalists: I respect Alaskans’ own course for its own “common” wealth. ALASKA is a “state” of its own.

            Did Alaska Tax Hampered the Production?

            Seems to me the contrary is true. Ask Art of the production and government collection from 1983 to 2008.

            To the point: Smaller Oil companies in Texas really like ACES. Its more pro-business than pro-government. Achance’s treatment of ACES only focuses on the Government side.

            1. Article. ?Big Risk, Bigger Rewards?

            http://www.petroleumnews.com/pntruncate/936617849.shtml

            2. 1st Production at Pt. Thompson. Thanks for Palin’s bullying of ExxonMobile.

            It is the first time a well has been drilled there since 1983. “ExxonMobil informed my administration that, at 2:30 a.m. today, drilling operations began,” the governor said. “Today’s action shows that our perseverance is paying off. We congratulate ExxonMobil on their successful efforts, and commend them for fulfilling their recent commitments to the state.”

            Now, don’t ask me if bullying a MONOPOLY is right or wrong. My populist side will force me to answer YES.

            Is Your and Art’s Truth about Palin really universal?

            An ordinary Republican in Alaska defended Palin like this:

            http://gretawire.blogs.foxnews.com/2009/07/27/moveon-on-former-gov-palin/comment-page-5/?action=late-new

            2- Now with the CBC gone, there were fewer Alaskan politicians to protect the huge, giant oil companies here. So, she constructed and enacted a new system of splitting the oil profits called “ACES”. Exxon (the biggest corporation in the world) protested and Sarah told them “don?t let the door hit you in the stern on your way out.” They stayed, and Alaska residents went from being merely wealthy to being filthy rich. Of course the other huge international oil companies meekly fell in line. Again, give me the name of any other governor in the country that has done anything similar.

            5- For 30 years, Exxon held a lease to do exploratory drill[ing] at a place called Point Thompson. They made excuses the entire time why they couldn?t start drilling. In truth they were holding it like an investment. No governor for 30 years could make them get started. This summer, she told them she was revoking their lease and kicking them out. They protested and threatened court action. She shrugged and reminded them that she knew the way to the court house. Alaska won again.

            At least, the commenter seems fair. Not a Palinista like Josh Painter neither a Murkowski Clan Apologist like your friend.

            Leader is not a quitter?

            Common. Review leadership. As I recall from my MBA books, a leader should know when his position or office is already compromised. If such is the case, his strength of resolve as a leader will be determined by his courage to RESIGN from his post. That’s true leadership especially in time of crisis. A leader is always lesser than his goals. But that’s still 101 of Leadership. In other aspects, Bullying (getting things done through other people) and Exaggerating are essential traits of a leader.

            Now, as for Palin as a quitter, good for her. If I were in her position, if both Republicans and Democrats in her state were personality-oriented and not goal-oriented like Art, I would quit too. Alaskan Republican Party was really a train wreck. The recent AK Assembly’s ruling on Gay Marriage is just an example.

            I am an icky Deranged Palinista now?

            No way. My Governor is Mitch Daniels. I have my own “list of disgusts” against this man. But he’s a Republican. I stick to Reagan’s admonition on internal politics.

            All I can say is that all my Governor knows is “how to outsource”. LOL!

            MY LIPS ARE SEALED ESPECIALLY IF HE DECIDES TO RUN AS PRESIDENT IN 2012. I WILL SUPPORT HIM, NOT PALIN. THERE IS THIS THING CALLED SENSE OF STATE-LEVEL PATRIOTISM IN ME. It will be my honor as a citizen of Indiana.

            One thing is for sure, though. NOBODY’S PERFECT. I hate “perfect” candidates too, like Obama. In that sense, thanks to Art for all the negatives of Sarah Palin. But all I’m asking is this: be fair in reporting.

            a) High tax to oil companies that makes 2008 tax collection low.

            b) Government deficit in AK vis-a-vis non-deficits in other states like Indiana simply because the coverage of the government activities are not the same.

    • dhorowitz3

      She voted for HR 3221- the Fanny-Feddy bailout. She voted against missle defense S. 3001.

      Voted for financial services bailout-HR 1424

      voted against earmark moratorium- roll call 75

      I don’t know, but I always thought that missle defense, anti pork and anti bailout were basic tennents of conservatives. I understand what you are saying that Alaska is more liberatarian than conservative, but heck we are still a lot closer to liberatarians than the dems are. Abortion is one thing, but big gov’t spending and intervention?? Tell me what the difference between a purist and a regular conservative is? In my book when the Republican party is quite moderate and the Dems are as radical as ever, if someone votes with the dems half the time, how is that conservative?

  • dhorowitz3

    If Alaska is not conservative but more anti nanny state and greenies then why did amazing public servant vote for the bailouts and HR 6 (Roll Call 226) in 2007 which increased CAFE standards. Isn’t that the epitomy of something that Alaskans would oppose? Please educate me.

    • dhorowitz3

      One more thing,

      Here is what I find astounding. I could stomach the fact that a lot of people in Alaska aren’t social conservatives. But they are certainly anti gov’t intervention and environmental regulation. So the one big issue that we can all agree on is that Alaskans would want a Senator to be pro energy. If you look back at ACU’s ratings for the past few years, you will find that she voted on the wrong side of energy issues with the exception of ANWR.

  • Rod_Patrick

    Primary Murkowski? NO WAY.

    SarahPAC even donated $5,000 to Murkowski. That’s what I have read from a reliable blog. Go figure.

    As for your diary, I have a problem. No one has presented here yet the details of YOUR ALLEGED “ATTACK”, unless you’re accusing the RS guys that 4palin’s recommended diary was masterminded by Murkowski. (he he! just joking, guys!)