Hi, opentv,

I don't believe Sarah Palin is "owned and controlled by oil interests," though I'm quite certain her predecessor, Frank Murkowski, was. She raised the oil companies' taxes. You can read about it here or on many other sites:
http://www.reuters.com/article/rbssEnergyNews/idUSN2537118220080125

Note that this was before she ever dreamed of being nominated as V.P.

My understanding is that BP, for one oil company, pays about 50% of its revenues to the State of Alaska. I personally benefit from this, as strnog1 has pointed out. Very few Americans have a tax rate anywhere near that percent.

In Wasilla, she raised the sales tax but lowered property taxes. There is no Alaska income tax.

So, we're rich, and yet the state park ten miles down the road from me has been closed since a flood two years ago ripped out a small wooden bridge inside it. Stretches of the 250 miles of pavement between my house and Anchorage are under construction and/or repair every summer, but access to Worthington Glacier on the way to Valdez is underfunded and so is manned by volunteers. To the untrained eye, Prince William Sound is virtually restored--I've been there many times.

Gov. Palin began fighting Republican corruption since before she was governor. I've lost track of the number of convictions--at least half a dozen--with more investigations and the high-profile indictment of Sen. Stevens. She is not personally behind all of this, as far as I know, but did start the ball rolling against Randy Ruedrich. (Strnog1 may care to correct or addend this.)

Now I have a few comments of my own and will then stop beating this horse...and hope to read future comments from others.

After batting this news around with friends and family near and far, and then cogitating on it all, I'm far less alarmed than I was at first.

There is no question that she does not possess the credentials expected of the President of the United States. Neither does Sen. Obama. Yet both of them, despite gross inexperience, are charismatic, energetic, and, I think and hope, basically decent people.

One of my friends asked, "So, are you going to vote for the ticket that will put an inexperienced man into office, or for the one that has a very slight chance of putting an inexperienced woman into office?" Food for thought.

Now, as to juggling family and career, Gov. Palin has always done that, just like so many other women. I would imagine she would be no more busy, and perhaps less, as vice president than as governor. Again, there's the what-if should McCain become incapacitated.

Although he was a lawyer, which Palin is not and a good number of our presidents weren't, Chester Alan Arthur was considered woefully under-qualified to replace President Garfield. Yet to everyone's surprise he was an effective president.

Of course you can always write in Hillary Clinton or any person you choose. Hurray for the USA!

queproblema...excellent!

Thank you! Thank you!

I'ver never been to Alaska, but I do have good memory, and do remember that in the past, it was an untapped wilderness.

Prince William Sound may be restored today, but I still have to question the loss of potential jobs due to that disaster.

That is what I factor in when determining what the proper fine should be for Exxon (now, through merger, Exxon Mobil).

Once Exxon was known as Esso.

Before that, probably Standard Oil of ???

The fine yet to be paid by Exxon Mobil for that disaster is still being bandied about in the courts, last I heard...over whether it should be one or several billion dollars. I have to believe that that disaster was more costly than only a few billion dollars.

The difference, when one follows the money trail, is the openings these corporations obtain through delivering soft (PAC) money to our elected officials, thereby feeding the very people we elect to high office so that they are full and satisfied, and forget or turn a blind eye to the abuse that certain corporations do to us and our environment.

Unless you feel everything that goes is basically okay, then I (also) don't need to beat this horse anymore.

What I'm getting at is that through many mergers, we lose sight of what a corporation is doing. It's kind of like a magic trick they pull over the gullible, believing public.

Very few corporations are solid citizens of the world, and for those few there should be rewards and recognition which ordinary people can relate to.

Understand, I have been looking for a site like this and happened upon it by accident, and now feel at home with a diverse group from all over the world.

Your intelligent input about Chester Arthur is much appreciated as we ponder the next election and determine whether experience is what makes for a great president.

I'm in the minority. I don't feel it's an asset because too much experience tends to corrupt, and we have a long chain of corruption here in the States.

I want to feel our next president will not be manipulated by the special interests...that he will be accessible by everyone...that America will be restored to the Beacon of hope it once was and should be in a troubled world.

We have had a virtually non conspicuous president, and a vice president who talks seriously but is hardly seen or heard from (anymore).

The image they project is one of secrecy and possible deceit, while at the same time popping up, now and then, to appease the general public and offer hand-outs that future generations will be saddled with.

No, we need only a great orator and a "buddy" that all can identify with, who will be there for us in bad times and good times...conspicuous and tenacious...strong and yet tender...possessing all the elements of a complete human being.

I hope and pray we get that come next election.

Thank you again, from the great state of Alaska!

God speed!

"Although he was a lawyer, which Palin is not and a good number of our presidents weren't, Chester Alan Arthur was considered woefully under-qualified to replace President Garfield. Yet to everyone's surprise he was an effective president."

I don't see how there can possibly be a comparison made to now and the world as it was when Arthur took over as President upon Garfield's assassination. They are two completely different worlds. Once more I come back to Obama's obvious lack of experience and now Palin in basically the same league, albeit not in the '1st Seat' in leading the country.

"They are two completely different worlds".

You said it, jordandog!

History isn't what is needed for us to make comparisons...it serves just to confuse us more.

If I can paint for you a picture of George W. Bush...and allow me this indulgence...it is one blurry image of an unknown that spent eight years in office and can't be recognized for anything of material value...other than acting immediately to send us stimulus checks...checks that have dissipated in thin air like snow flakes.

At one time I had disdain, and now I just tollerate him... avoid listening to his speeches...he's become such a fixture you can't disrupt that you have to simply adopt him.

And when he will be gone, he still won't be gone...until the day when I will have to admit, he wasn't all that bad.

I may be wrong here, but I concur with your assessment of the new world of trickery and distored images that don't get the job done, and leave us all desiring something more...something special...somthing we can relate to, and something to be proud of.

Merely waving a flag and clapping hands ain't cutting the mustard, I am sorry to say.

Just to hear someone eloquently speak, and inspire a little...and possibly motivate a lethargic society...might be just what the doctor ordered.

Maybe...later....(and thanks).

Ah, this just in. ( I've always wanted to use that phrase, do I sound like newscaster? ) There seems to be a chink in *Palin's Morality Armor* brought on by news that her 17 year old, unmarried daughter is 5 months pregnant. Obviously, with her mother being so adamantly Pro Life, daughter Bristol's decision to keep the baby takes some of the *sting* out of it. The article also states McCain's people were aware of this before she was offered the V.P. spot.

http://tinyurl.com/6d67p5

So that's news?

Cart before the horse is what everyone is doing today.

But this is all good, because I firmly believe capitalism wants more babies.

America, 400 million
India 1.1 billion
China 1.4 billion

Hey, we got room to grow.

My advice to everyone is tell your teenage kids to make more babies...don't care where they will work, how they will be able to support themselves...just do it.

...and before you know it, we'll be right up there with those other countries.

(Caution, I was being facetious)

opentv,
You may be new around here, but even without us really knowing you that well, I would certainly hope everyone reading that would take it as being facetious. I guess you never know though!

queproblema,
You pointed out her signing the tax on oil companies and thus showing she was not "owned and controlled by oil interests'. Again I ask, what did this actually do to help the state and the people of Alaska? In the article you furnished, I noted this in reference to her instituting the tax:
"against warnings from the oil majors it would slow spending and accelerate a steep decline in oil output."

So, as strnog pointed out in his answer to my above question, no monies have been put into infrastructure, the health system, etc. and instead we are now even more heavily reliant on other countries for oil imports and are being held hostage by high prices. What good did her bill do if the monies just sit there? It will most likely never happen, but that would be akin to the National Debt being wiped out, the U.S. operating in the black with a huge surplus fund to boot and doing zip with it. Personally, I don't think that was a very fiscally responsible action on her part and it has now impacted many more that just those of you living in Alaska.

Yikes. All the "media hype" surrounding the candidates this year is getting to be just a bit movie-ish. Sell the ticket. Buy extra buttered popcorn. Enjoy "To Sir, With Love". Or is it "On Golden Pond"? No, wait ... it's "An American Predident" (or potential vice president, as the case may be). It seems odd ... but true!? The ethnic charming young guy teaching his "wards" to 'be real', etc. The old guy who has the occasional temper tantrum (but still he go, go, goes!), the stalwart widower with a kid (or two) to raise. Now we get a little bit of "Juno" thrown into our fourple feature! Supportive parents with the "oopsing" daughter (and a half). The common thread seems to be that they were all notably successful movies. Perhaps we should just skip the election. And give one of 'em an Oscar instead ? This whole election has taken on some very very unforseen twists and turns, hasn't it?

Let's hope the public doesn't get too distracted by these outrageously compelling back stories and forget that some combination of these folks will be hoping to "fix" the world in a few months. But, I gotta say - the *characters* seem a good bit more interesting than whatever it is they are (or aren't?) bringing to the political table. It's making me very nervous ...

Amen on the making me nervous! Maybe when choosing nominations for an Oscar, it is all right for the actors to overshadow the work they were in. I don't feel that holds true when these actors are overshadowing the office and work of the P.O.T.U.S.

Since I'm the new guy around here, what's "P.O.T.U.S."?

You're OK, opentv . I wasn't sure either, but googled it and it's "Presidents of the United States".

Well, Jordan, we have a double standard in this country regarding the oil companies:

1. They are the big bad ugly octupus monopolies who want to squeeze the average American to death. Enemies of the state! or at least the people!

2. They are our ace-in-the-hole against foreign oil cartels and our key to independence.

Remember those senate hearings after the Enron implosion?

So, taxing them, they say, makes them spend less and produce less.

The tax monies have indeed gone into our infrastructure! (As well as into our personal pockets.) I can't drive to Anchorage without factoring in wait time due to construction. I don't mean fixing little potholes, either, but blasting out whole sides of mountains and building bridges...to somewhere.

Gov. Murkowski, I believe it was, instituted Denali Kid Care, a subsidization of health care for children 19 and under of low- and middle-income families.

Quote:

---

There seems to be a chink in *Palin's Morality Armor* brought on by news that her 17 year old, unmarried daughter is 5 months pregnant.

---

As mother of an authentic, constantly on the go 16 year old, I find this remark pretty smarmy. Just because one tries their best to teach a child some values doesn't mean the child will always be able to overcome peer pressure , hormones and being constantly exposed to an increasingly jaded, shallow culture. Bombarded by slinky ads and suggestive music, it's a wonder anybody's kid makes it through to age 20 without a visit to the maternity ward.
As somebody who at least tries to raise my girls, I can testify as to how difficult it is, how it keeps me up at night and how I try not to worry. I think the Palins are a lot like me...i.e. -we do our best - but we're not magic. Ultimately kids make their own choices once they go out the front door.

Hello ktstew...

I'm new here, and getting to like this site more and more because I see we can have intellectual conversation even though we have no idea who hides behind these code names and pictures.

I have had three children who are now adults...and although they lived with spouces before they decided to marry, I feel I got lucky.

Now a proud grandfather, I still see where there is considerable peer pressure, and as you say, a bombardment of sleaze in our culture...that I feel blessed mine aren't into this new wave.

What can we as a society do about it?

I only wish I knew.

I feel Barack Obama's response to this latest information was admirable...by saying children are off limits and this issue is mute.

But I would like to know how you feel about the morality issue pervading the Clinton's being you are from Arkansas.

I know this is old news now, and one day this topic of discussion will most definitely morph into something more substantive.

Thanks.

Something I've been wondering today...

Many people have mentioned that if McCain is elected, and for whatever reason cannot fulfil his presidential duties, then they do not have a lot of faith that Palin can step up.

Out of pure curiosity, what happens if the VP dies in office or cannot fulfil his/her duties? Does the president just pick a new one?

Quote:

---

...He [ Obama] said he would fire anybody in his campaign who spreads rumors about the situation -

“I think people’s families are off limits, and people’s children are especially off limits,” he said. “This shouldn’t be part of our politics.”

---

I was gratified to read his response. At least in this much he and I seem to be on the same page.

As for the Clintons - I wrote for a local news company in the 1980's and often found myself in their presence when they visited NW Arkansas. Usually somebody would go out and take a handshake picture and ask a question or two for a cutline caption. I have written about the Clintons on this forum but am pretty much burned out on the subject at this point.

I don't really know how to answer your question, TV. Sometimes it's over whelming to try and raise decent kids -it's something I take seriously. I just do the best I can and thank heavens - nobody's pregnant or using drugs or drinking. They get first rate grades and try to do the right thing...so far, and I'm grateful.

Sorry for the double post, everybody -

Quote:

---

Out of pure curiosity, what happens if the VP dies in office or cannot fulfil his/her duties? Does the president just pick a new one?

---

Without googling, GG, I believe the current [ seriously scary ] Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi would be groomed for that post.

What's so scary about Nancy?

Haven't we all been scared beyond expectations from past events to be practically numb to whatever is coming next?

I just (a moment ago) burst out laughing over recalling when president Clinton was in office, and was visiting a nearby racetrack (now a shopping center), and we were told to move away and that no president was going to appear in a helicopter...by some burly-looking secret service agents.

And then I remember that of all the letters I mailed to former persidents, Clinton was the only one who answered me...twice, with a personal signature.

And this, to me, is important because I still feel many of our elected officials are far removed from the rest of us...to the point where it's a mockery of our system.

I also can add that the actor Robert Redford was privy to a political event for both parties, and there was lots of back slapping and hobnobbing to the point where he thought it was pathetic.

(I have utilized this precious day off from work to indulge in political discussion which I find highly interesting)

If I told you what was so scary about Nancy, TV - it would quickly degenerate into a drawn out harangue of why we should drill for oil on our own land until we perfect other viable energy sources which offer at least a partial solution. Yada yada.
So...

Kate (and Jordan too)...on the subject of oil drilling, being that I chart stocks of various corporations each day...I feel in the not too distant future we will have mulitple choices of what kind of energy we want to use, and oil will have to slowly become insignificant...and if my judgement is correct (and mind you, this won't happen quickly but more stealthily, I expect)...then I welcome the day we don't need stinking oil from overseas.

Oil has been a thorn in our side for ages now.

The games they play over it are deadly, in many ways.

I welcome its demise.

Don't worry, Sandy -it's okay. I tend to be overly sensitive about certain things -one being the 'morality' 'issue. Probably what grates me the most is that people think christians are these perfect creatures. Nothing could be farther from the truth, as you well know, just by reading the headlines. In fact, some of the worst drivers on the road tend to have some annoying 'Jesus this or that' stickers plastered all over their rig - a sure sign they are about to cut me off in traffic, and I try to leave them a wide berth if I can.
All any of us can do is teach the kids as well as we can and then let 'em go out the door...all any christian parent tries to do is their best. I don't think Palin's aptitude for this job should be measured by her daughter's 'mistake' so to speak. The girl is probably a good kid and will make her own path, regardless of what the folks have tried to teach her.
Sorry I got so testy.

This is what the 25th Amendment says about replacing a vice president. (Remember Spiro T. Agnew-Gerald Ford-Nelson Rockefeller?)

"Section 2. Whenever there is a vacancy in the office of the Vice President, the President shall nominate a Vice President who shall take office upon confirmation by a majority vote of both Houses of Congress."


Also, I failed to point out that strnog1 was talking about Permanent Fund money when he was saying it wasn't being invested in the infrastructure; he never meant we're not building and maintaining. It may be difficult for non-Alaskans to realize how controversial the subject of hanging on to the dividends as an inalienable right vs. changing course on the initial direction is here. It's political suicide to suggest diverting that sacrosanct fund away from the private purse to the public one.

That's right, Guitar Goddess -I seem to have misread your question, and queproblema's information is right. Pelosi would be eligible if both the president and vice president were deceased or unable to fufill their duties.

"I don't think Palin's aptitude for this job should be measured by her daughter's 'mistake' so to speak."

No, it shouldn't, and family business should stay family business. Unfortunately, we live in a world where the press and many people love to jump on the misfortune or life circumstances of anyone in the political arena. Sharks swim in shallow waters for a reason when they are looking for a kill.