Palins Alaska

[likwid]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

and got the oil companies to give her citizens a fortune in profit sharing.

so you support socialist agendas?

also she promised the oil companies the north slope and ANWR.
too bad that didn't work out for them.


you don't get something for nothing.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by likwid

so you support socialist agendas?

also she promised the oil companies the north slope and ANWR.
too bad that didn't work out for them.


you don't get something for nothing.

Likwid, so instead of simply admitting that she actually did some good, you have to ask what you think is a "gotcha" question.

I don't think that Palin's decision to force oil companies to share profits with Alaskan citizens constitutes "socialism", and here's why. As Palin pointed out, that oil is a natural resource on public lands, and as such, it belongs to the citizens of Alaska, it doesn't belong to the oil companies.

But to answer your question, I supoprt socialism to a point, in that I believe that the rich and the strong have a duty to serve the poor an dthe weak. You could argue that my service in the USMC was a form of socialism, because I felt obligated to try to help others.

You might be suprised (since you don't seem to know a lot of facts) that not all conservatives are as cold-hearted as liberals claim. In fact, many studies show that conservatives give way more time and money to charity, than liberals do.

Snack on that...

"you don't get something for nothing"

Tell that to everyone who gets a welfare check in the mail, when they don't have to lift a finger to earn it. Why can't those peoplpe, at least the ones physically able, do somehting like picking up garbage in parks?

[likwid]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Likwid, so instead of simply admitting that she actually did some good, you have to ask what you think is a "gotcha" question.

I don't think that Palin's decision to force oil companies to share profits with Alaskan citizens constitutes "socialism", and here's why. As Palin pointed out, that oil is a natural resource on public lands, and as such, it belongs to the citizens of Alaska, it doesn't belong to the oil companies.

It was her excuse for allowing drilling in a WILDLIFE REFUGE.

Just like 'making jobs' is her excuse for allowing Pebble.

Yep, make 5 jobs at the cost of 20 ways of life that also provides an income (that has lasted longer and will last longer than the mine will).

BRILLIANT!

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by likwid

It was her excuse for allowing drilling in a WILDLIFE REFUGE.

Just like 'making jobs' is her excuse for allowing Pebble.

Yep, make 5 jobs at the cost of 20 ways of life that also provides an income (that has lasted longer and will last longer than the mine will).

BRILLIANT!

Likwid, please tell me where there is drilling in a wildlife refuge? I didn't think there was any, but I'm not certain. And if so, what damage has been done?

The pipeline, which delivers oil, runs through wildlife refuges in Alaska. Liberal idiots warned that would decimate the caribou herds, yet the herds are thriving (and now, so is the Alaska economy). That's what you call win-win, and it would not have happened if the Kool Aid-drinkers called the shots. Oil in Alaska has meant that modern schools, airports, and medical clinics were funded in all of the remote communities, vastly improving quality of life.