Posted on 02/05/2010 8:10:31 PM PST by Bigtigermike
Palin gets these additional states (on top of the ones from 2008), and she’s in...
27 - FL
15 - NC
5 - NM
5 - NV
7 - IA
20 - OH
11 - IN
10 - WI
No nrve = No nerve
That's your answer to my very simple question about whether or not this is a conservative position?
PALIN/BROWN 2012..you betcha~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I have yet to receive a straight answer on this subject, which has always stuck with me--if she's merely doing what the Constitution of her state says, how is this a bragging point, which I've heard from her supporters repeatedly? And how is this some "conservative" position?
I can see I'm never going to get an answer, which should trouble some of her supporters, but doesn't.
What “depth” do you have?
I am yet to see you make even one post on this site that has any depth in it.
“Kiss up to McLoser and kiss me goodbye.”
You have never backed her anyway, so there can't be any “kiss goodbye” can there?
Plus who the heck cares whether you back her or not?
You are freewheeling what you call conservative.
Back it up with your conservative for 2012.
The Palin basher hide under the bed. they can’t defend their person for 2012 so drone on with bogus questions
So should the state be compensatd for energy exploration on it’s lands or not?
It’s a simple question. Maybe I touched a nerve??
Allow private investment. Period.
Then your question becomes moot. Anyone drilling on their own land doesn't need to compensate their neighbor.
Sarah's position follows the law. IF you are going to have PUBLIC resources, then any profit made off that land needs to be shared with the "owners". Ie; the Public.
Sarah has been blasting bailouts eversince she's been on her own and had you read her book you'd know she never approved of bailouts to begin with.
Understand this, the laws of Alaska are different Wolfie! It states I believe in their Constituion that the people and the resources are one and the same, and that they should benefit from it.....it’s the law of that State
Care to expand with specifics? If you chose to respond, please compare and contrast with some one you considered ‘presidential material’.
I ask this in the spirit of trying to understand your position in all of it's fullness and political gravitas.
This just about fits the usual trolls we usually see
I would say it is for inhabitants of Alaska...unless you think it's not conservative to follow the tenets of the state constitution.
Does that make it clearer for you?
Yes, it is a conservative position.
What a tired, empty-headed response.
It's now Palin-bashing to simply ask whether a government official made a choice in line with conservative political philosophy.
The Cult of Personality reigns.
No. But when I ask a question, I don't allow the other party to slip and slide and dodge. When they give a straight answer, it's then their turn to ask one.
Yes, indeed. She is the best stump speaker I have every heard, because she has a distinctive voice, a master of colloquial speech. ON Tv, though, she needs to learn to shorten her responses.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.