Posted on 03/30/2011 6:42:33 AM PDT by Anamnesis
Pissant really deserved it. It was disgusting.
So Jim finally got tired of him?
Keep up the good work! ... do you take requests?
Anybody who posted what Pissant posted would be gone in a flash. (ZOT pun intended.)But a lot of us had lost our love for him quite awhile ago. He kept getting more and more intense and less and less rational.
From what I see living in the lower 48, I’d say the law she signed is working and working effectivly. I have never seen so many shows and documentaries on the issues, travel and nature from Alaska in my short 40 year life.
The guy who writes for Reason. I got two brothers who read that crap, ugh it’s hard to stomach. It’s like Rolling Stone for radical Libertarians.
Read her comments before jerking your knee.
Do you view all tax credits as subsidies?
Gentlemen, and allmendream, please try reading downthread a little before you overreact. It’s a JOKE.
That is the way it usually works. just give them enough rope and they end up hanging themselves. As for me, he/she won’t be missed.
Eh...that’s just how communicating over the internet works.
I always use /sarc or something similar if I don’t want someone to take a reponse seriously or literally.
Not to worry, the pissant of National Review, Jim Geraghty, takes full aim at her on it as well, exposing his super-triple-quadruple standard for Gov. Palin compared to the other GOP guvs he likes, and his readers give him a surprisingly unified spanking in the comments section:
http://www.nationalreview.com/campaign-spot/263344/uh-oh-problematic-tax-breaks-sarah-palins-alaska
______________
Not true. Federal restrictions have led to the decrease in production and exploration in Alaska, not state taxes:
U.S. Government Shuts Out Increased Alaskan Oil Production Oil
Of course, many of the problems with the loss of production were also connected to the age of the pipeline, new restrictions, etc, but the tax on price increases took away most incentive to keep drilling. Instead, much of the interest went to Canada.
“They might not have rejected him, but probably would express doubts on specific practices. That would even more likely be the case if he benefited personally from such practices.”
Well since his job was Commissioner of Customs for Scotland, I think he did benefit personally:
http://www.econlib.org/library/YPDBooks/Rae/raeLS20.html
While one might favor what is best for society, one must live in the society as it actually is.
Okay, so in 2008, the Alaska lege passed, and then-Governor Palin signed into law, a tax-credit program for television and movie productions working in-state (not a unique thing, even among Republican-governed states, not even when the governors are ambitious for the big job). Subsequently, the gov joins the McCain campaign, the torture begins, and she finally resigns to escape the worst of it. (I mention this because, as little as it’s been mentioned in the news and here on FR, perhaps you hadn’t heard.) She’s offered a deal for what becomes “Sarah Palin’s Alaska” and she accepts. As part of the deal, the producers apply for and receive the tax credit. There’s no evidence or even an accusation that either Mrs. Palin, the producers or the state did anything illegal, unethical or otherwise improper with regard to this, and certainly Mrs. Palin exercised no improper official influence over the process, because...shazam!...she no longer had any.
I’m not seeing the problem here. I certainly don’t believe she got this thing passed, and then deliberately had the last couple of years of crap happen to her so she could quit and get a tax-credit-eligible deal. I may be a myopic Palin fanboy, but I’m neither stupid, stoned nor insane.
My thoughts exactly
Which one?
Ru?
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.