Sarah Palin..hypocrite

[tarheelconservative]

While Obama should not have made the comments he did, at least he is willing to fund the issue. Whereas Sarah showed virtually zero interest in the subject until she was personally effected.

Yeah, that money that saves the burden of not only statewide spending, but also very strapped local governments. Also, as I said before, money goes away all the time, but this was designed to get communities and states some much needed help for the next 2 years.

Considering that Obama has shown some openess towards directional drilling in ANWR, this is much more than Clinton ever showed for the state, and now it might happen, unlike what Bush failed to deliver during his tenure on the subject.

So you are saying that creating more government programs that will eventually go broke unless the the state government picks up the tab is no problem at all. Since it happens all the time, that makes it right, and because that makes it right would should just continue to expand away at government. As far assisting communities and states for a couple years, and then the money being taken away. That is how many of these communities and states got into trouble from the start. How about tax cuts across the board for everyone, including businesses, and watch as the tax revenues roll in. I guess that would be just to easy and less dramatic. We can't create as many "government dependents" with this method. We will just spend our way out of debt, and out of financial wastelands.

Obama open to directional drilling?
This is just not true. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, and Obama have both said "The question of whether or not you can do directional drilling without impairing the ecological values of ANWR is an open question. Most of what I've seen up to this point is it would not be possible to do that," Salazar said in a conference call with reporters. Salazar also said protecting ANWR's ecology and wildlife is "not something we're going to change our position on" This is nothing more than political rhetoric, and Obama saying one thing while in front of one crowd, and something else to other people. Again, I go back to states rights. Alaska has unanimously voted to drill, which would create jobs, and state revenue.

This article sounds like Obama really wants to work with the oil companies.

http://www.adn.com/money/industries/oil/story/724855.html

 

[Pandora]

While Obama should not have made the comments he did, at least he is willing to fund the issue. Whereas Sarah showed virtually zero interest in the subject until she was personally effected. .

Oh you just made me puke!

"at least he is willing to fund the issue" He is willing to do a ONE time give away with TAX payer dollars, then it insures the state will have a new tax burden. You act like he is some sort of gift to humanity instead of what he really is.

Very sickening.

Oh there seems to be a fair amount of ignorance by the Palinistas on here.

I think you are just so enveloped with pure raw blind hate for the woman you could not see straight if your life depended on it.

I will say a few things from an Alaskan point of view here. Firstly, Sarah has drawn heavy criticism from a wide variety of Alaskans over this decision and even her supporters have said this is nothing but her making a shallow attempt at pandering to the lower 48 voters, all the while marginalizing Alaskans. .

Odd, I have friends in Anchorage and cousins in Juneau and neither of them go on like you do or say the things you say. Ever thought that maybe you just don’t like her? You always make it sound like your speaking for all Alaskans yet the other Alaskans I know think nothing like you at all. One is a family of republicans who like her very much but my other friend is a democrat who likes her. But you make it sound like she is hated through out the state.

She has been hardly doing her job. She spent 3 months last year running around the country making a fool of herself and acting at times as an utter embarassment, and misrepresenting her state and her actual political actions. .

You just made me puke again. Your “president” and I use that term loosely spent more than a year of his time in Illinois state senate not doing his job but running for the United States Senate office, then he was there what??? 153 working days or something before he spent THE ENTIRE REST OF HIS TIME running for ***** and chief.

You went on like a giddy school girl at how he had experience exc. Blah blah and never once complained that he spent from February 10, 2007 When he announced his candidacy to November 4th 2008 doing nothing but running for president, only going back to the senate for votes and even then only the key votes that made him look good. But you have the audacity to complain that Sarah took 3 months off to run for office.

Obama isnt running for anything.

Bull crap! He is still in campaign mode and has been since his poll numbers started to fall if he ever left it at all it was for a brief moment. But then again giddy school girls would not be able to see past their own nose on this now would they!


What Palin did is pretty smart, she knows the Legislature will circumvent and still collect all the money and the new tax burden it creates will be their scare not hers. If they are stupid, and it seems they are let them do it. Your taxes are not high enough anyways, you need to become more patriotic and pay higher taxes!

 

[tarheelconservative]

Im worried about my state. I want a Governor who is here to govern, not to further her own personal agenda for higher office, at a time when state revenue is down. I want a Governor, who will actually be available during the legislative session that is currently ongoing rather than traveling around doing fund raisers.

Obama isnt running for anything and you have zero problems lining up to take cheap shots at him.
But I dont you are that naive to think that she isnt running for President in 2012. She already has SarahPAC.

The better she looks? You appear to subscribe to conservative views, as a conservative, can you describe someone who raised taxes on the only signifigant source of revenue for the greater good of everyone else a conservative?
How about using government money to directly compete with the oil companies she raised taxes on?
How about taking the extra income made on raising taxes on the oil companies, and giving it out to every man woman and child who pay zero income taxes?
Now those are the three biggest policy issues that Sarah has pushed since her time in office and they are about as socialistic as anyone in America has ever managed.

Just because someone responds back to the premise of this thread, and doesn't agree with you doesn't make them a Palin super supporter. However, if you think that she was bad for oil companies, and that her tax raises on oil companies are extreme. I would suggest you look at Obama's budget, and see that he intends to take away tax cuts, and credits for oil companies. Why you might ask? "It isn't fair." Ken Salazar (Obama's Int. Sec.) So if you think oil jobs were in trouble before, just wait. As far as Obama not running for anything, I don't think you are that ignorant either. He is clearly trying to create more need, and more sorrowful drama. Democrat campaigns thrive on being able to parade a person of need in front of a camera. If you don't think he is trying to create more need.....your blind. Please, show me something significant he has done. That hasn't made the financial problem worse, or put us at danger as a country.

 

[Pandora]

Just because someone responds back to the premise of this thread, and doesn't agree with you doesn't make them a Palin super supporter. However, if you think that she was bad for oil companies, and that her tax raises on oil companies are extreme. I would suggest you look at Obama's budget, and see that he intends to take away tax cuts, and credits for oil companies. Why you might ask? "It isn't fair." Ken Salazar (Obama's Int. Sec.) So if you think oil jobs were in trouble before, just wait. As far as Obama not running for anything, I don't think you are that ignorant either. He is clearly trying to create more need, and more sorrowful drama. Democrat campaigns thrive on being able to parade a person of need in front of a camera. If you don't think he is trying to create more need.....your blind. Please, show me something significant he has done. That hasn't made the financial problem worse, or put us at danger as a country.

He knows that she is not top on anyone’s list that posts here to run for president but you have to bash her to be a true obama supporter I think is the way it has to go. He pulled the same stupid crap when anyone dared to support Hillary Clinton over obama. They were all clintonistas. Even to say a decent word about the woman branded you this silly title.

He confuses the fact that the oil in Alaska belongs to the people of Alaska and each citizen getting money from its own states oil resource is not socialism it fair.

Our government in Oregon is socialist, the government keeps ALL the money from the trees (Oregon’s natural resource) and does with it what it pleases and gives none of the money to the rightful owners of the resource, the citizens.

Socialism is when the government takes from rich people around the country and keeps large portions for their self and their pet projects then dole’s the rest out to who the government considers poor around the country and only for the things the government has decided the poor should need.

If Alaska gives some of its people larger portions of the oil because they are poor and others less of the money because they are richer then there is some socialism there, but I think they give each person the same ..... not socialistic!

 

[Dr.Who]

Maybe you should take off your liberal tinted glasses, and read the entire article. I think that the reasoning for turning down the money is clearly stated. It is more of a slap against the expansion of programs that would dry up after federal funding is gone, and leave the state of Alaska holding the bag. Which all sounds very familiar....oh yeah, the Clinton administration.

NC gov wanted to turn down all the stimulus money for the same reason.

 

[Pandora]

NC gov wanted to turn down all the stimulus money for the same reason.

Oh we should see Popeye or one of the gang make a new thread


Gov of NC hypocrite too


I cant wait to post on that one!!

 

[tarheelconservative]

NC gov wanted to turn down all the stimulus money for the same reason.

Some of the NC gov wanted to turn it down. Except for Kay Hagan, Brad Miller, and our nightmare of all nightmares Bev Purdue. Purdue I believe said that she would send trucks to get money from the other states that didn't want it.

 

[MichaelB]

I couldn't have said it better myself !!!! She is not a hypocrite ... she doesn't want to be beholdin to our govt. I believe the hypocrites are those NOW in WA DC putting tax evaders etc in charge of our country. We are doomed if we continue down this road. We need good HONEST men and women in WA DC listening to us since we are the bosses who pay their salaries.

 

[Bunz]

So you are saying that creating more government programs that will eventually go broke unless the the state government picks up the tab is no problem at all. Since it happens all the time, that makes it right, and because that makes it right would should just continue to expand away at government.

Not all of them will go broke. The ones that arent needed and dont work will probably go away, but most of these operational expenses are nothing new, just a continuation of funding of important things, most education to maintain current levels, before the currently cash strapped states and locals would be forced to cut them.

As far assisting communities and states for a couple years, and then the money being taken away. That is how many of these communities and states got into trouble from the start.

I disagree as to how this problem began to a point, but there is no question that revenues are down, especially on the local levels where revenue is generated mostly through property and sales taxes. When the economy is down, people spend less money, and with a major component of the downturn coming in the area of housing and retail space, the revenues are down there as well.

How about tax cuts across the board for everyone, including businesses, and watch as the tax revenues roll in.

Well that certainly hasnt been in Sarah's mindset, first thing she pushed for after taking office was to increase taxes on the production of Alaska oil, and create a profit tax for the said oil companies. In the meantime, with that extra short term revenue, she increased the level of Government in Alaska.
Sarah can say all the conservative punchlines, but in practice she is simply a socialist.

Obama open to directional drilling?
This is just not true. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, and Obama have both said "The question of whether or not you can do directional drilling without impairing the ecological values of ANWR is an open question. Most of what I've seen up to this point is it would not be possible to do that," Salazar said in a conference call with reporters. Salazar also said protecting ANWR's ecology and wildlife is "not something we're going to change our position on" This is nothing more than political rhetoric, and Obama saying one thing while in front of one crowd, and something else to other people. Again, I go back to states rights. Alaska has unanimously voted to drill, which would create jobs, and state revenue.

This article sounds like Obama really wants to work with the oil companies.

http://www.adn.com/money/industries/oil/story/724855.html

I would agree with you on states rights. But this is federal land, and therefore in the hands of DC at this point. Alaska is %60 owned by the Feds.
I also agree on ANWR, I support responsible development of the oil there. I am hoping and have reason to believe that ANWR if passed through Congress with the help of Sen. Begich(D-AK) that Obama would not veto it as Clinton did. Nor do I think that a considerable amount of American resources will largely be ignored for 6 years as Bush did, while chasing WMDs in the sandbox, and ensuring the access to the oil under that sand through force and at the cost of probably a trillion dollars when the effort is over.

But in the meantime, a major component of making ANWR a realistically viable project is the creation of a natural gasline from the north slope of AK, to market in the lower 48. When Sarah took office, the major oil producers had a deal in place to build that project. She balked. Raised taxes on the oil company and created a government sponsored program to build one largely without thier input(AGIA). While the oil companies are saying they will build a privately funded line that will go through the same rigor of permitting as AGIA would. But Sarah insisted on giving away $500million(twice the amount she is rejecting) to a foreign corporation, to simply study the feasibility of the project.
Again, she can use all the "conservative" mantra for the national spotlight, but she is nothing more than a rino socialist.

 

[Bunz]

Oh you just made me puke!

"at least he is willing to fund the issue" He is willing to do a ONE time give away with TAX payer dollars, then it insures the state will have a new tax burden. You act like he is some sort of gift to humanity instead of what he really is.

Oh cry me a river. He has given this money one time to maintain current levels of funding so kids and adults born with developmental and physical disabilities(the most vulnerable among our society) have the assistance they need. While costs were increasing to provide the same services were increasing steadily, Sarah didnt make it a priority to help the agencies and families doing important work. Now all of a sudden, because she happens to have a baby boy unfortunately born with Downs Syndrome, her give a damn has kicked in.

I think you are just so enveloped with pure raw blind hate for the woman you could not see straight if your life depended on it.

This is utter BS. I have given her credit where it has been due. You and I both know this. I was generally a Sarah supporter until AGIA came around. Then Troopergate showed her true colors and she disappointed me greatly when she basically broke the law by coming out against a particular ballot measure. Then throw on her utter Janus act while on the campaign trail and her late pandering and self centeredness during the latest legislative session and I take issue with that.
But you and I both know I have defended her from dumb stuff.

Odd, I have friends in Anchorage and cousins in Juneau and neither of them go on like you do or say the things you say. Ever thought that maybe you just don’t like her? You always make it sound like your speaking for all Alaskans yet the other Alaskans I know think nothing like you at all. One is a family of republicans who like her very much but my other friend is a democrat who likes her. But you make it sound like she is hated through out the state.

Good, so you know two small groups of people in an entire state, which is very geographically broad, and of course you have a pulse on the state from 2000miles away. Maybe you should listen to the local right wing talk shows who daily call her a socialist. Or the Democrats and Independants who actually had been her support base, and they are disappointed. I think an overall drop in 30points in her approval, myself included should be indicitive enough.
But by your justification, lets just say I have dozens of close personal friends who dont support her any longer. Nor a Aunt in Wasilla, or my cousins in Kenai, and my Grandmother in Anchorage, and a former hockey coach in Nome, and a college friend in Fairbanks. Then of course there is the overall displeasure of Sarah in the village I call home, the hometown of Todd, and the only ones who support Sarah are her inlaws.
See where I am going with this? You having a straw hole view of the state, overall, means very little.

You just made me puke again.

Why do I bother sometimes?

Your “president”

If you are an American, he is as much my President as he is yours.

and I use that term loosely spent more than a year of his time in Illinois state senate not doing his job but running for the United States Senate office, then he was there what??? 153 working days or something before he spent THE ENTIRE REST OF HIS TIME running for ***** and chief.

I dont disagree. Except for the utterly childish name calling. But that is fine with me, you only undermind your own argument.

Bull crap! He is still in campaign mode and has been since his poll numbers started to fall if he ever left it at all it was for a brief moment. But then again giddy school girls would not be able to see past their own nose on this now would they!

Where do I start. I was responding to someone else I believe, but my point being was that people are in campaign mode even when they havent declared thier official intentions. I can tell that Obama still thinks in terms of campaign 2012 when he can. But my point being was that Sarah has done the same thing, to an utterly unprecedented to what the state of Alaska has ever seen.

What Palin did is pretty smart, she knows the Legislature will circumvent and still collect all the money and the new tax burden it creates will be their scare not hers. If they are stupid, and it seems they are let them do it. Your taxes are not high enough anyways, you need to become more patriotic and pay higher taxes!

It was smart in terms of pandering to those she currently doesnt govern. I dont disagree with that. But she has pissed off a lot of people who will be voting for her actual future in 2010.
As for paying income taxes, I have room to pay more, and depending on how the actual tax structure works out, I very well could be one to have my taxes raised, that and the price of fish.

 

[Bunz]

Just because someone responds back to the premise of this thread, and doesn't agree with you doesn't make them a Palin super supporter.

I dont think I implied that you were a Sarah supporter. But if I did, I didnt mean to, infact if your name is an implication of being conservative, then you probably wouldnt be a Palinista.

However, if you think that she was bad for oil companies, and that her tax raises on oil companies are extreme. I would suggest you look at Obama's budget, and see that he intends to take away tax cuts, and credits for oil companies. Why you might ask? "It isn't fair." Ken Salazar (Obama's Int. Sec.) So if you think oil jobs were in trouble before, just wait.

I am fully aware of the cuts that oil companies are in the process of making, and like the rest of the economy it will come back. But this doesnt change the fact that this thread is really about Sarah Palin, and not really about Obama. So the old strawman issue is nill here. The oil companies will be shifting thier production to other places that are more friendly to thier activities. Would you agree that increasing production royalties while also slapping on the profits tax, to increase revenue so the government can compete with the overtaxed oil companies would drive them elsewhere?

As far as Obama not running for anything, I don't think you are that ignorant either. He is clearly trying to create more need, and more sorrowful drama. Democrat campaigns thrive on being able to parade a person of need in front of a camera. If you don't think he is trying to create more need.....your blind. Please, show me something significant he has done. That hasn't made the financial problem worse, or put us at danger as a country.

I have long been a subscriber to the mantra that the next campaign begins the day after the election.

 

[Bunz]

He knows that she is not top on anyone’s list that posts here to run for president but you have to bash her to be a true obama supporter I think is the way it has to go. He pulled the same stupid crap when anyone dared to support Hillary Clinton over obama. They were all clintonistas. Even to say a decent word about the woman branded you this silly title.

Yeah because I remember quite well how much you wanted to vote for Clinton in the general I have been critical and supportive of politicians when I agree with thier actions. Neutral when I dont care, and negative when I disagree. Lets not even go into some of the posts you have made in the past that were utterly hateful.

He confuses the fact that the oil in Alaska belongs to the people of Alaska and each citizen getting money from its own states oil resource is not socialism it fair.

No I dont confuse it at all. I am very well versed in the Alaska constitution. But I will point out that a sharing of wealth that and resource that they have done zero to develop, but still enjoy the hard work and investment of others is very much socialism.

Our government in Oregon is socialist, the government keeps ALL the money from the trees (Oregon’s natural resource) and does with it what it pleases and gives none of the money to the rightful owners of the resource, the citizens.

With turnabout being fair play, I have an old family friend who lives in Beaverton(a republican) and a college buddy who lives in the Bend area, and neither describe Oregon as being socialist. See how this works?

Socialism is when the government takes from rich people around the country and keeps large portions for their self and their pet projects then dole’s the rest out to who the government considers poor around the country and only for the things the government has decided the poor should need.

Oh, you mean takes from the rich oil companies? Then gives to the people who are not as rich as the oil companies? By any reasonable definition the Alaska Permanent Fund is a socialist entitlement program. And I gotta tell you, it works great for the most part. Has put tens of thousands through college, made for a nice Christmas for hundreds of thousands and this year, allowed me to buy a new rifle and a sattelite dish. Thanks socialism!

If Alaska gives some of its people larger portions of the oil because they are poor and others less of the money because they are richer then there is some socialism there, but I think they give each person the same ..... not socialistic!

No, giving the money back based on income or other factors to ensure an equal amount would not equate to socialism. When in reality the fact that everyone gets the same, is socialism. And again, it works.

 

[Pandora]

ok bunz, Sarah Palin is a horrible socialist pig from hell who cares nothing for special needs kids except maybe her own and even that is questionable. Thank god we have the capitalist / conservative humanitarian in office that we do. We would be so much worse off with her socialistic sick twisted ways; only this true blue honest terrorist fighting conservative steel of a man obama could pull us out of this mess. Hopefully she will pack up all of her family and leave Alaska never to return. Better yet maybe they can all die in some painful tragic death! Are you happy now?

oh and screw Hillary Clinton too... wait I think we can like her again since obama hired her. NM

 

[Bunz]

WOW, thanks for mischaracterizing me and my posts. Which were based on policy.

ok bunz, Sarah Palin is a horrible socialist pig from hell who cares nothing for special needs kids except maybe her own and even that is questionable.

I would never call her horrible or a pig, those are your words not mine. I was merely pointing out that she herself has made her major policy efforts while Governor would in normal political avenues be considered socialistic. What I have a problem with is her mischaracterizing herself as a Conservative.

Thank god we have the capitalist / conservative humanitarian in office that we do. We would be so much worse off with her socialistic sick twisted ways; only this true blue honest terrorist fighting conservative steel of a man obama could pull us out of this mess.

Oh give me a break. I, nor anyone else is characterizing Obama as a Conservative, certainly Obama himself is not suggesting it.

Hopefully she will pack up all of her family and leave Alaska never to return. Better yet maybe they can all die in some painful tragic death! Are you happy now?

Again, your words and not mine. I would never suggest such a childish response. I find it disturbing you would even suggest this sort of thing.

oh and screw Hillary Clinton too... wait I think we can like her again since obama hired her. NM

I still dont care for her.

 

[Bunz]

Here is more insight when it concerns the federal stimulus package and Alaska.
http://www.adn.com/news/government/legislature/story/735110.html

JUNEAU -- Top Alaska legislators said Tuesday they're likely to accept at least most of the federal economic stimulus money that Gov. Sarah Palin did not.
"I think at the end of the day we will end up taking most of the funds," said Anchorage Republican Rep. Mike Hawker, who is leading the House effort on the stimulus as co-chairman of the finance committee.

Senate Majority Leader Johnny Ellis agreed. "I would be surprised if we give up much or any of the federal money," the Anchorage Democrat said.

Palin announced last week she was not accepting $288 million of the $930.7 million that the state is due in the federal stimulus. Palin aides have said in the days since that the governor did not reject any money, leading some state legislators to charge the governor with backpedaling as a result of furor over the announcement.

The biggest chunk of money at issue is about $170 million for education. School district officials are mad, and Anchorage Democratic Rep. Harry Crawford said he doesn't expect legislators to withhold the money.

"I don't see anybody getting in front of that train," he said.

Senate President Gary Stevens, a Republican from Kodiak, said he's especially interested in the money that would go for special education and schooling for disadvantaged children. Stevens said his meetings with the governor prior to her stimulus announcement had given him the impression she was going to go after more of the money and he was surprised to hear otherwise last week.

But legislators do have questions about the stimulus package and plan on hearings in the coming weeks to sort out the details. Some share Palin's view that accepting federal money could create expectations among the public for services that the state would need to either fund or abandon after the federal dollars stopped coming.

"I am very concerned and I know Alaskans are about what we're about to do here," said Fairbanks Republican Rep. Mike Kelly.