Schoolyard Taunting

[timesjoke]

I'd like to see those numbers adjusted for cost of living. That would better tell the story.

 

Bingo!!!

 

I saw snaf's point of $10 milk to be very important. Items like milk and bread are considered foundation foods and if even those basic foods are so incredibly high priced, we can imagine how much everything else costs.

 

 

I guess hugo wants the oil companies to get the oil for free, the politicians to get millions of under the table bribes for giving it away for free, and a few of the most wealthy to get tax breaks while everyone else in the State of Alaska gets nothing.

 

 

 

 

While some may call it welfare in their desperate attempt to justify why they voted for Obama instead of McCain/Palin, myself I prefer to eliminate the greed, eliminate the temptation for redirecting so much wealth into just a few political hands to be used in corrupt ways for personal gain instead of helping all of the residents of Alaska.

 

A politician is supposed to be representing everyone, not just those who donate the most money into their election funds, and that is exactly what would happen if you let the politicians have unfettered control over how to spend the oil revinue funds.

 

 

Consider the "stimulus" bill last year, almost $800 billion of pure garbage spending most of it earmarked as "rewards" to contributers and States that voted for Obama. If we can't keep our elected officials from doing stuff like this with money we do not even have, what makes anyone think we can make politicians behave with the kind of funds comming from the sale of the oil?

 

 

No, it is better in my mind to eliminate the chance of abuse and simply ensure that money is not used for political gain for a just a couple corrupt politicians.

[eddo]

Bingo!!!

 

 

dang, I was close too. Only needed B4 or G37

 

 

 

dammit...

[hugo]

Everything has to be flown in at these villages across Alaska on mostly bush planes. Yeah they eat caviar but it's organic salmon roe they harvest themselves. The bread and butter on the other hand needs to be flown in as the fuel to cook and heat their homes. Milk as I said before goes for up to $10 a gallon in most villages. So it is extremely expensive for these people to live.

 

It is sad the state of Alaska has converted hunter/gatherers into beggars.

[snafu]

It is sad the state of Alaska has converted hunter/gatherers into beggars.

 

Ain't nobody begging their just renting their land.

[hugo]

They should all be killed.

[snafu]

They should all be killed.

 

Yeah something like that. They should put us all on a boat and send us back were we came from too.

[snafu]

Stay Focused: Relocating Terrorists' Trial Doesn't Solve the Main ProblemShare

Fri at 2:57pm

People are celebrating the fact that the Obama Administration is considering relocating the terrorists? trial from New York to another American city. Yet there?s still no talk of moving the trial out of our U.S. civilian courts to where it should take place ? a military tribunal.

 

Now the administration is backtracking in order to fix its initially blundered decision to try these dangerous terrorists in New York City despite the great danger and cost to New Yorkers. This scenario is all too common in Washington. The tactic is to propose something so outrageous that the public will rise up and demand common sense, and then the White House ?concedes? and changes its initial decision to give the impression of newfound reasonability and moderation. But the problem still isn?t solved! The trial location debate becomes a diversion so that we?ll take our eyes off the ball. The point missed is that our President still wants to give these terrorists U.S. constitutional protections in our civilian courts, allowing them to lawyer-up on our dime.

 

This tactic is in the same vein as another Washington game: creating the appearance of a ?crisis? in order to push for a radical solution. (?The health care crisis must be fixed by government now or we?re all gonna die! The earth?s temperature is fluctuating; government must fix this crisis now or we?re all gonna die! Private businesses made poor decisions and bureaucrats claim they?re too big to fail, so government must fix this crisis now or we?re all gonna die!?) Politicians and lobbyists announce that there is a ?crisis,? and never letting a good crisis go to waste, they propose a radical solution to fix it. The public listens intently, and in a sincere desire to help, an alternative to the politicians? radical solution gets put forward. The politicians then ?concede? and mellow out their radical solution. The public?s attention has been diverted to tinkering on the periphery, all the while ignoring the real problem at the heart of the ?crisis? that started the whole debate.

 

The fact is our government has a choice as to where to try the terrorists. We don?t have to try them in our civilian courts. The peripheral debate regarding in which city to try these evil, dangerous haters-of-America is a diversion. Let?s get back to the heart of the matter: what choice will our government make ? terrorist trials in civilian courts or military tribunals?

 

- Sarah Palin

[hugo]

Stay Focused: Relocating Terrorists' Trial Doesn't Solve the Main ProblemShare

Fri at 2:57pm

People are celebrating the fact that the Obama Administration is considering relocating the terrorists? trial from New York to another American city. Yet there?s still no talk of moving the trial out of our U.S. civilian courts to where it should take place ? a military tribunal.

 

Now the administration is backtracking in order to fix its initially blundered decision to try these dangerous terrorists in New York City despite the great danger and cost to New Yorkers. This scenario is all too common in Washington. The tactic is to propose something so outrageous that the public will rise up and demand common sense, and then the White House ?concedes? and changes its initial decision to give the impression of newfound reasonability and moderation. But the problem still isn?t solved! The trial location debate becomes a diversion so that we?ll take our eyes off the ball. The point missed is that our President still wants to give these terrorists U.S. constitutional protections in our civilian courts, allowing them to lawyer-up on our dime.

 

This tactic is in the same vein as another Washington game: creating the appearance of a ?crisis? in order to push for a radical solution. (?The health care crisis must be fixed by government now or we?re all gonna die! The earth?s temperature is fluctuating; government must fix this crisis now or we?re all gonna die! Private businesses made poor decisions and bureaucrats claim they?re too big to fail, so government must fix this crisis now or we?re all gonna die!?) Politicians and lobbyists announce that there is a ?crisis,? and never letting a good crisis go to waste, they propose a radical solution to fix it. The public listens intently, and in a sincere desire to help, an alternative to the politicians? radical solution gets put forward. The politicians then ?concede? and mellow out their radical solution. The public?s attention has been diverted to tinkering on the periphery, all the while ignoring the real problem at the heart of the ?crisis? that started the whole debate.

 

The fact is our government has a choice as to where to try the terrorists. We don?t have to try them in our civilian courts. The peripheral debate regarding in which city to try these evil, dangerous haters-of-America is a diversion. Let?s get back to the heart of the matter: what choice will our government make ? terrorist trials in civilian courts or military tribunals?

 

- Sarah Palin

 

Every other Republican says the same damn thing. Stalin was tough on terrorism.

[timesjoke]

Your never going to get hugo to admit he is wrong about Sarah, he bought into the negative hype from the liberals and is now having to justify why he voted for Obama.

 

 

He will refuse to admit it, but I do believe hugo like his fellow independents voted for Obama as a 'punnishment' to the Republicans. Now everything Obama has done is directly because these independents like hugo gave Obama that power.

 

 

 

 

Palin is a great conservative, but hugo can't admit it because admitting it would mean he voted for the wrong guy.

 

 

 

The last two guys hugo named as good conservatives both support welfare, in fact the last guy was a product and success story of welfare.

[snafu]

Every other Republican says the same damn thing. Stalin was tough on terrorism.

 

geeze man. You can't admit she's right on anything? You don't agree with her hear? I'm really glad Stalin was tough on terrorism. Stalin was tough on everbody what's that got to do with anything? That makes about as much sense as a screen door on a submarine.

[hugo]

HItler executed terrorists without bothering with a trial.

[timesjoke]

HItler executed terrorists without bothering with a trial.

 

Hitler and Stalin were both Atheists too, so what?

 

 

The point is if Sarah is a conservative, you say she is not a conservative and is instead a socialist based on one point of sharing the resources all Alaskan people own based on State law.

 

 

 

We have established that even Texas gives a cash benefit to all residents with lower taxes that all people benefit from but very few actually contrubute to oil production.

 

 

 

We have established that two other people you say are good conservatives both support welfare in various forms and the last guy you named is actually a success story of how welfare can help create great Americans.

 

 

 

Like I already said, I believe you voted for Obama and your now just grasping desperately to your excuses for not voting for her and McCain. You independents claim to be conservative but your directly responsible for putting Obama in the Whitehouse, how do you guys balance that inconsistency?

[snafu]

Hitler and Stalin were both Atheists too, so what?

 

 

The point is if Sarah is a conservative, you say she is not a conservative and is instead a socialist based on one point of sharing the resources all Alaskan people own based on State law.

 

 

 

We have established that even Texas gives a cash benefit to all residents with lower taxes that all people benefit from but very few actually contrubute to oil production.

 

 

 

We have established that two other people you say are good conservatives both support welfare in various forms and the last guy you named is actually a success story of how welfare can help create great Americans.

 

 

 

Like I already said, I believe you voted for Obama and your now just grasping desperately to your excuses for not voting for her and McCain. You independents claim to be conservative but your directly responsible for putting Obama in the Whitehouse, how do you guys balance that inconsistency?

 

I think hugo voted for the wrong black man.

[hugo]

I sure did not vote for a socialist unlike y'all. Now ya support another one.

 

Watching Newt right now. A true conservative and smart too. Unlike your socialist bimbo.

[ImWithStupid]

I sure did not vote for a socialist unlike y'all. Now ya support another one.

 

Watching Newt right now. A true conservative and smart too. Unlike your socialist bimbo.

 

 

Didn't Newt back Didi Scozzafava?

 

Not real good conservative instincts.

[timesjoke]

Didn't Newt back Didi Scozzafava?

 

Not real good conservative instincts.

 

Newt also has voted for various 'welfare' programs while in office, again, everyone hugo mentions as great conservatives also support welfare programs so why is he so worked up against Sarah Palin?

 

 

Obviously he voted for Obama, there is no other explanation that makes sense.

 

 

It kills me how these independents put people like Obama into power but then later pretend to be conservative minded people, I think their crazy to be honest.

[hugo]

Didn't Newt back Didi Scozzafava?

 

Not real good conservative instincts.

 

No one, who can get elected, is perfect in our socialist world.

[timesjoke]

No one, who can get elected, is perfect in our socialist world.

 

And yet you expect Sarah Palin to be perfect?

 

 

Every good conservative you name supports various forms of welfare, even giving more money to the rich would still be giving them money they did not actually earn so why are you completely blocked against Sarah Palin?

 

 

Becuase you voted for Obama and need to justify that vote to yourself, that's why.

[snafu]

No one, who can get elected, is perfect in our socialist world.

 

Well there ya go.

[hugo]

Well there ya go.

 

Most ain't as flawed as Bimbo Palin, now she is mad at someone for insulting liberals. Newt, reduced the size of government. Sarah increased the size of the most socialist state in the union's spending by 30%. Newt cut welfare, Bimbo increased it.

 

Bimbo is like GW, a populist. Newt is in the Goldwater/Reagan tradition, a classical liberal.

[timesjoke]

Okay, so now Newt was a great conservative by comparison to Sarah.........

 

 

Care to guess how many times Newt voted to increase the deficit ceiling during his time in office?

 

 

Care to guess how many times Newt voted to increase entitlements and special welfare programs?

 

 

Care to guess how many times Newt voted to send aid to foreign Countries?

 

 

 

Interesting reading:

 

Devvy Kidd -- Who is the Real Newt Gingrich? Part 1

 

At the bottem there is a link to part two of the story.

[RegisteredAndEducated]

Here is some fun stuff from PJTV.

 

An interesting video that's already on the boards here somewhere I think...

 

 

Off subject in the fact that he doesn't mention Alaska's oil issue, on subject because it is about Sarah Palin.

 

 

 

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DmEE61iVhCA&NR=1]YouTube - PJTV: Bill Whittle on the Sarah Palin Haters[/ame]

[Ahhlee]

Actually if you include the sales to mass market retailers like Wal-Mart, Sarah sold 700,000 books in the first week. The Nielsen BookScan does not track those sales.

 

 

And let's not compare Sarah to other female ploiticians like Hillary Clinton, Hillary even had a sex scandle with her husband to drive her sales. Sarah smoked even Hillary, I believe you could call that making the best sellers list, lol.

 

 

 

 

I understand why Liberals would be scared of Sarah in general because she really is "of the people" while they just pretend to care about the little guy but the thing that has always surprised me is the raw anger and hate most liberal women show Sarah.

 

You would think a smart, successful, and moral woman who has shown that you can be strong and still remain feminine in life would be admired by all women even if they did not agree with all of her political stands but that just is not the case. Every Liberal women's groups have come out against Sarah with pure attacks and even say if she would have been elected into office as the Vice-President, it would be a massive step backwards for all women around the word....

 

 

Really?

 

A step backwards?

 

How do they figure that?

 

It seems to me the only way a woman is considered a "good" woman to a Liberal woman is if that first woman is willing to kill babies in the womb. Everything else does not matter from the looks of things.

 

Ummmmm.....what?

 

Sheesh.

[timesjoke]

Ummmmm.....what?

 

Sheesh.

 

Did you not understand my point?

 

Hillary's book had a sex scandle with an American President fresh in the minds of the people to help generate sales for her book, airing dirty laundry for very public figures has always been a powerful book selling possition.

[Ahhlee]

Did you not understand my point?

 

Hillary's book had a sex scandle with an American President fresh in the minds of the people to help generate sales for her book, airing dirty laundry for very public figures has always been a powerful book selling possition.

 

The way you worded it, I thought you were implying that Hillary actually orchestrated the affair as a means to sell her book.

 

Now I see what you were saying. My bad. Please, carry on.