Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Sarah Palin leaving Alaska for Arizona?

So... What is your point?

Use em for all their worth, then they can get the [bleep] out; ain't it

Yes, yes, the good old days�AK Chessie vs. SportingSpecialist�where is the man when we need him?

I have done a lot of look-ups on Sarah, but I have never found anyone with the comprehensive knowledge of her background as SportingSpecialist:

"You're juvenile attempt at logic is again pathetic. By your reasoning ,if you don't live in Alaska you can't possibly understand Alaskan politics. LOL. Using your mutated logic one would conclude that because you don't live in Washington D.C you can't possibly understand national politics. LOL. Again you've impugned Sarah Palin. Any reasonable person, with a modicum of common sense, cannot possibly believe that a woman who births a special needs child is as selfish as you want members to believe. She has worked on fishing boat, which not easy work. She�s raised a family while serving the citizens of Alaska in multiple capacities. She is certainly not afraid of hard work in spite of your slanderous lies. Her record of accomplishments speaks for itself. As I stated earlier none of the slander you've proffered here reconciles with her tremendous popularity and her favorable pole ratings. Your slander of Sarah Palin seems to be more than just anger, it appears to be pathological. Are you the state trooper who threatened to shoot Palin�s father? Are you Andree McCloud ,who filed frivolous ethics complaints that have all been dismissed because they were shown not to have merit? Are one of the Republicans that fell to Palin�s righteous morality ? Are you a whiny liberal hack? Please enlighten us."

Walt needs a plane ticket.

you're kidding right?


well just in case you're not

the basic point is I've had a belly full of people like you and Brown Dog, to last me several lifetimes.


as I stated earlier, your thought processes are what's wrong with this state and country.

I won't just sit by any longer, and let a guy like Brown Dog or you pretend he's all knowing cause he likes to hear himself speak.

Sean sums it up pretty well you're lie-liberal type folks, you talk chit long enough without being challenged by facts eventually it's not just your stupid azzes that believe it, but all the fat ignorant slobs sitting around thinking you really should get something for nothing.

Wouldn't be so bad, but they end up lettin all those stupid folk vote.

I've F__ing had enough.

my kids will most likely have a very tough row to hoe in this life, because people that are conservative and either run a biz for profit, work for someone that does and are prepared to pull their own weight have been lettin morons like you guys shape the debate cause they've been too busy makin a life for ourselves and others, and whining/speech makin just ain't their thing.

what's my point?

the Fed gov't is broke, their IOU the $ is on the verge of going worthless, backed by nada but empty promises

why?

cuz you pandering sumbitches begged em to spend money they don't have, and when it runs out you beg them to tax the very folks that do create jobs outa the country or outa existence.

folks on food stamps buying new snowmachines every other year, new motors etc. sound familiar Walt?


I'd rather still not take the time, but I'm done letting you mouthy muthaphuckas think you're correct cause busy folks haven't taken the time to date to tell you how full a chit you and all your fing theories are.


you get my point?

That's my father,and he's been abroad for over a year.He has been home several times to make sure we haven't burned down the house.LOL.He will return home this June for good.

Bowsinger you are correct about his knowledge of Sarah Palin.He and my mother spent a great deal of time researching her in an effort to discover what this woman stood for.I've read several of my father's books that were written about her as well as the book she published in 2009.Two and half years ago his office was strewn with articles and blogs that he reprinted from the internet in his efforts to conduct research about Sarah Palin.He,my mother,my sisters,my aunt and my cousins are all fans of this strong competent,conservative woman. Sarah Palin possesses more common sense than all her detractors combined.As my father has said "common sense can be more valuable than all the education in the world".

LOL you're stuck on stupid!

In some jurisdictions that's called a mega bitch slap.

Let me see if I get it now..... You are a really whinny kind of guy who is really pissed at the world as a whole. Many things that you said are correct. Lots of folks driving a new Sno-Go every year and no job period.


I think that our priorities are all out of whack. If a village can stand on its own with out government subsidies then they should fail. Ever been to Kivalina Ak? One of the most god forsaken places in the state and should have never been a village. Its a total of 3 feet above high tide and get smacked with storms almost every year. Stop spending money in places like Kivalina until they decide upon a way to make that village livable. Bet it would not last 2 months without government support.


We are not that far apart on these types of issues, really! Most of my views are more common sense-middle of the road than lib.

PS send some Cheese Please!

You definitely are on the Board of Directors for the stupid and worthless.

I'm only pissed at the stupid half of the world Walt, the ones that vote for people like Obama and ask gov't to do this, do that, do this, all with money that just isn't there.


as to "whinny" I ain't hung big enough to whinny

now THAT leaves me pizzed off at the whole world, if not for that fact I could be makin porn movies instead of correcting jabronis on the internet


the check/cheese is in the mail

Thanks for saving me seat right next to yours!


Silly Man!

Good one!


I will look for my cheese!

LOL who told you that your friend Machelle Obama?

Like I said, the higher the gas price at the pump, the better the PALIN Pipeline and Alaskan crude looks to the moderate independent voter.

Via Gov. Palin�s Facebook:
The New York Times just can�t seem to get much of anything right lately.
No wonder they�re facing economic and reputation woes.
Their article today falsely reporting on my record as governor is full of spin, and I shall call them out on it.

Regardless of the recent political posturing, ACES (Alaska�s Clear and Equitable Share) is a success for all stakeholders who want more domestic energy supplies for our great country.
The Alaskan people (who collectively own the natural resources, via our state constitution), the resource producers who bid on the right to develop our oil and gas, and consumers all benefit under ACES.
It incentivizes production and development. It works.
Amazingly, to the uninformed (or to those who really don�t want to incentivize oil exploration in America) ACES is spun to sound like an oil windfall profits tax and its progressivity is made to sound excessive. In reality, it was born of a need to have a tax structure that did three things:

1. It could not be created under a cloud of political corruption and self-dealing like the former Alaska administration and legislature�s PPT oil valuation structure. That�s a critical fact that is now frequently overlooked years later. Remember the legislators and oil industry players who went to jail because of bribes leading to votes in favor of the former administration�s PPT, which was unfairly tilted in favor of the resource producers against the resource owners (i.e., the people of Alaska)? Have we conveniently forgotten the fact that a corrupt process brought forth PPT, and I and others set out to change it by cleaning up the corruption?

2. It had to align the interests of Alaskans and the oil producers through exploration and production credits in partnership so that they benefit proportionally from commercialization of Alaska�s sovereign resources. This is very different from a government overtaxing personal or corporate income in which the government has no ownership stake in whatever it is that is being taxed.

3. It had to use a progressivity system that protects the producers from commercial strain when oil prices are low, otherwise the producers would seek development opportunities elsewhere. ACES does incentivize industry, but beware that Big Oil will always do what it does best for its shareholders: it will look out for its bottom line and always claim that it needs even more tax breaks. More power to them for trying, but resource owners deserve A CLEAR and EQUITABLE SHARE (ACES) of the value of their commonly-owned oil and gas.

ACES accomplished all three. The current criticism of this fair valuation makes no real sense. As an article at Big Government notes:

�The number of oil companies filing with the Alaska Department of Revenue has doubled indicating that competition has indeed increased. Alaska has the second most business friendly tax set-up � up two spots since the passage of ACES. Additionally, a report from Governor Parnell�s Department of Revenue indicated that 2009 yielded a record high in oil jobs. Even more recently, the newest employment numbers from Alaska show that oil job numbers were higher in January 2011 than in January 2010, indicating that jobs are growing at the seasonal level. Parnell argues that state revenues are in jeopardy, but it is estimated that his proposal would reduce revenues by $100-200 million.�
Most importantly, Alaska enjoys a $12 billion surplus thanks to ACES and the sound fiscal policies of my administration. I put billions of dollars aside in savings accounts (though I could have easily spent those billions and made a lot of friends with big-spending legislators on both sides of the aisle), and I continued to veto excess spending and Obama stimulus funds, and chopped earmarks by 86% � much to the chagrin of liberal legislators who were used as �sources� in the article. It�s kind of amusing to see state legislators claim credit for the surplus when they didn�t vote for ACES, and they cried to high heaven when I vetoed their wasteful spending on their special interest projects.
ACES accomplished all three. The current criticism of this fair valuation makes no real sense. As an article at Big Government notes:

�The number of oil companies filing with the Alaska Department of Revenue has doubled indicating that competition has indeed increased. Alaska has the second most business friendly tax set-up � up two spots since the passage of ACES. Additionally, a report from Governor Parnell�s Department of Revenue indicated that 2009 yielded a record high in oil jobs. Even more recently, the newest employment numbers from Alaska show that oil job numbers were higher in January 2011 than in January 2010, indicating that jobs are growing at the seasonal level. Parnell argues that state revenues are in jeopardy, but it is estimated that his proposal would reduce revenues by $100-200 million.�
Most importantly, Alaska enjoys a $12 billion surplus thanks to ACES and the sound fiscal policies of my administration. I put billions of dollars aside in savings accounts (though I could have easily spent those billions and made a lot of friends with big-spending legislators on both sides of the aisle), and I continued to veto excess spending and Obama stimulus funds, and chopped earmarks by 86% � much to the chagrin of liberal legislators who were used as �sources� in the article. It�s kind of amusing to see state legislators claim credit for the surplus when they didn�t vote for ACES, and they cried to high heaven when I vetoed their wasteful spending on their special interest projects.

See, competition works.
So does a transparent process.
- Sarah Palin

Randy, Isaac, Bowsinger: there is a verse in the Bible that quite accurately defines Walt, Brown Dog, Grizzkid et.al

"A fool takes no pleasure in understanding, but only in expressing his opinion." Proverbs 18:2

Sorry I can't get back here on the Fire to respond to you wannabe Sara Palin panty-sniffers more often. I've been out living life. I can only stop by here intermittently when I don't have actual things to do in real life.

But let's see. I changed my screen name because I wanted to. I like BrownDog better. Hiding from nothing. Happy to own up to anything I've ever said or done.

Politician? Nope. Apparently you poor folks don't understand that citizens can actually be involved in political action - beyond doing "look-ups" and ranting in online forums. But, it happens.

Actual people do actual things in real life. Got that? Here I'll repeat it for you. Actual people do actual things in real life.

And, I'll still put up a lot of money betting against Sarah ever running for president. If she ran she'd lose - wouldn't get past the first few primaries from the looks of the polls showing her trailing other potential Republican candidates in positives and exceeding them in negatives. And, hell that's just among Republicans. She would stand NO CHANCE in a general election with independent voters. Want to put up some actual cash to back up your mouth?

I admit, it can be hard to predict what Sarah's delusional vanity will prompt her do - if she thinks there's a buck or more celebrity in it for her she'll do anything.

But, even Sarah can read polls and her primary goal has nothing to do with public policy and everything to do with money and celebrity. She'll milk the political forum she's got for all the money and celebrity she can get - without actually having to do any work. When it comes down to the real work of running for president she won't do it. If she ran and lost her money-generating capacity and celebrity interest are diminished dramatically. If she dangles out the potential for running she'll keep panty-sniffers like you sending her money in hopes she'll run (or send them a pair of used panties). She won't run in 2012. She'll keep you panty-sniffers hoping beyond 2012 because that keeps the money coming in and allows her to retain some celebrity cachet for a while longer. Lose in the primaries and no one will care about her.

Here, Bowsinger, is some information from a source other than Sarah's paid bloggers regarding the issue of Sarah's centerpiece legislation in Alaska - you know the issues I addressed in an earlier post a few days BEFORE this article was printed. Compare my post with the information presented. Then do a few "look-ups".

You've apparently already found Sarah's paid staff response to the Times article. But, then like your other "look-ups" it's just Sarah's self-serving drivel. Her "response" quotes none of the other of the actors involved in the legislative process in support of her assertions. It simply attacks the NY Times.

The Times just reports the facts as those involved in the issues see them. Sarah reports only "her" facts. You believe Sarah. Keep it up and keep sending her money.

And, please, please, raise enough money to convince her to move to YOUR locality. She's nothing but a distraction in Alaska. She's irrelevant here. Maybe she still has some relevance in your state or community. Take her, please.

Sorry, Bowsinger, et al, I can't stay longer to play with you Sarah worshippers. I've gotta get back to real life. You might want to try it sometime. Turn off the computer. Step outside. You might find you enjoy it. Naaaaaah, guess not.

New York Times
March 17, 2011
Palin�s Successors (Republicans Too) Seek to Dismantle Her Energy LegacyBy WILLIAM YARDLEY
JUNEAU, Alaska � While every online swipe from former Gov. Sarah Palin still draws national attention and stirs fresh speculation about her political ambitions, back home she is no longer quite so imposing.

Even as she casts herself as an energy expert and is quick to attack the Obama administration on oil and gas issues, the two most prominent energy policies she put in place as governor of Alaska face new challenges less than two years after she left office.

Gov. Sean Parnell, Ms. Palin�s fellow Republican and former lieutenant, has announced that it is his top priority to undo parts of major oil tax increases that Ms. Palin made law. He argues that high state taxes, not just federal regulations, are preventing oil companies from exploring new drilling in Alaska and therefore jeopardizing future state revenues.

�Lower taxes means more competitive,� Mr. Parnell said last week. �It means more jobs.�

And the project Ms. Palin once portrayed as her principal legislative triumph, a plan to build a 1,700-mile natural gas pipeline that she said would transform the economy of Alaska and contribute to America�s domestic energy supply, seems an increasingly distant dream, undercut by low gas prices and more practical projects in other states.

�She made it an issue,� said Mike Chenault, the Republican speaker of the State House, who has sponsored a bill that would end Ms. Palin�s pipeline plan if firm evidence of progress is not documented by this summer. �That was the way that Alaska was going to move forward. As of yet, we haven�t, in my opinion, moved one step forward.�

Ms. Palin�s policies may well survive, at least for this legislative session. Mr. Parnell still supports her gas pipeline plan, and even some Republican lawmakers say they are wary of lowering taxes on oil companies without assurances that it will lead to more production.

Strikingly, some of the lawmakers most dedicated to preserving Ms. Palin�s signature achievements come from a constituency she rarely courts nationally but one that was crucial to her in Alaska: Democrats.

�She hasn�t said boo to help us protect this thing since it�s come under assault,� said State Representative Les Gara, a Democrat from Anchorage, referring to the oil taxes Governor Parnell wants to alter.

That is not to say that lawmakers are clamoring for her return. Elected by a wide margin in 2006, Ms. Palin was wildly popular among voters and held sway in the Legislature. By the time she abruptly resigned, in July 2009, her approval rating among voters was in decline and both Democratic and Republican legislators accused her of being detached and imperious.

Ms. Palin was never fond of Juneau, the capital � her husband once encouraged the House speaker to pursue moving the seat of government closer to Anchorage � and it feels as if she has been long gone, preserved in an official photograph and in what remains of her legislation.

Mr. Parnell replaced most of her closest aides, including many of her advisers on oil and gas issues. He said that he had not consulted with Ms. Palin about his plan to revise oil taxes. �We need to be nimble with changing times and history,� he said.

Compared with many states, Alaska is in fine shape in the short run. It is sitting on a $12 billion revenue surplus, a sum driven directly by the high price of oil. Taxes on oil production provide nearly 90 percent of state revenue. Some of the surplus comes from the increased tax on oil production, tied to the price of oil, that Ms. Palin supported in 2007. But not everyone is willing to give her credit for helping to create a nest egg for Alaska.

�We�re probably the most fiscally sound state in the union,� said Bert Stedman, a Republican who is co-chairman of the Senate Finance Committee and one of the Legislature�s most influential members. �I�d say she had little to nothing to do with it.�

Even Ms. Palin, who did not respond to a request for comment, does not boast these days about raising taxes on oil companies.

�It�s this fundamental achievement that�s at odds with the political persona to which it�s attached,� said State Senator Hollis French, a Democrat who worked with Ms. Palin on oil and gas issues.

Democrats say that the oil tax increase was their idea to begin with, and that Ms. Palin rallied to their cause amid a wave of populism after a scandal linking lawmakers to the oil industry. (At least two guilty verdicts in a federal investigation have since been thrown out based on questions over prosecutorial misconduct.)

Mr. Stedman, meanwhile, said the state was in good shape in part because lawmakers in both parties � armed with the surplus � pushed through major spending projects that have limited the recession�s impact.

Still others, like Governor Parnell, say that while high oil taxes have lifted revenues, they are causing oil companies to hesitate before investing in new wells on the North Slope, where production has been declining steadily since 1988.

Mr. Parnell noted that Alaska, which ranks second in domestic oil production, after Texas, is projected to fall to fourth within a decade. �We�ve got jobs leaving Alaska going to North Dakota,� he said.

The proposed natural gas pipeline is supposed to help the state shift from relying on oil to relying on a different, cleaner fuel, which the state has in abundance. That was at the center of Ms. Palin�s campaign when she ran for governor in 2006; her slogan was �New Energy for Alaska.� Two years later, in September 2008, when she spoke as a vice-presidential candidate at the Republican National Convention, she made the project sound as if it was under construction.

�We began a nearly $40 billion natural gas pipeline to help lead America to energy independence,� she said at the convention.

Yet the pipeline was only in the planning stages. The Legislature, prodded by Ms. Palin, had just agreed to provide $500 million to a Canadian company to secure gas suppliers and apply for federal permits. Now, two and a half years later, the state is scheduled to reimburse the company, TransCanada, $185 million in the current fiscal year and $160 million in the next.

Some lawmakers are frustrated. TransCanada missed a self-imposed deadline for securing agreements with companies to ship gas from the North Slope. In December, the United States Energy Information Administration projected that the pipeline would still not be in service by as late as 2035.

�There�s frustration because a lot of people thought in �07 and �08, if we do this we�ll get it,� Larry Persily, the federal coordinator for the Alaska Pipeline Project, said of Ms. Palin�s plan.

Mr. Persily, who once worked for Governor Palin, was named to his position by President Obama. He said the pipeline could still become reality, particularly if the nation moved away from coal and the demand for gas rose � and if the state modified Ms. Palin�s plan to assure gas providers of a predictable tax structure.

�Certainly it helped, but it was oversold as the global solution,� he said of Ms. Palin�s plan. �Not that Palin was the first politician to oversell something � she just did a good job of it.�

I have offered to place money that Perky would not run and if she did run would not be nominated and if by complete fluke she was nominated she would be defeated in a landslide of tsunamic proportions.

The only person brave enough (or stupid enough) to take a piece of that action was Bows. Anyone else?

well let's see how many possible candidates for GOP are there or could be?


pretty good odds you made for yourself


i'm hopin she doesn't run, but if as you say by some fluke she'd capture the nomination

I'm willing to bet you a princely sum she doesn't end up as the lowest draw on the popular vote,ever, IOW's there'll be candidates that lost worse.

I'd have to do some research to see if I'd make the same bet on the electoral college. but most likely so.


but since in the heat of the battle of your denigration of Palin you got Bows to take the hook


are you a sportin man or just a sleazebag opportunist?

I'll make you twice the bet you have with Bows that Obama is the Dem candidate.


so do you feel lucky punk? (grin)

Hey, Spanky.

If it becomes Palin vs. Obama, how would you vote?

Would you vote your bet?