Palin's exceptional, constitutional and ethical track record

Why in the world would anyone hate or despise this person?

1. As governor in 2007, Palin was responsible for the largest veto totals in state history, while investing $1 billion in forward-funding education and fulfilling public safety and infrastructure necessities.
   
2. Palin invested $5 billion in state savings during a time of economic surplus.
   
3. Palin reduced spending by 9.5% from 2007 to 2010 and slashed earmark requests by over 80% during her time as governor.
   
4. Under Palin, Alaska’s total liabilities were reduced by 34.6% overall.
   
5. As governor, Palin was the CEO of the state and had substantial authority. As reported by The Wall Street Journal, “In Alaska, the Governor has line-item veto power over the budget and can only be overridden by a three-quarters majority of the Legislature.”
   
6. Palin’s free-market approach to AGIA (Alaska Gasline Inducement Act) featured full transparency with respect to competitors and no back-door meetings. It also unlocked the ConocoPhillips, BP and ExxonMobil monopoly and marked an enormous step toward energy independence.
   
7. Palin tossed out the corruption-ridden, structurally-flawed Petroleum Profits Tax of the Murkowski administration and put forth ACES (Alaska’s Clear and Equitable Share), which incentivized development while seeing to it that Alaskans — resource owners as per the Alaska Constitution — would receive “A CLEAR and EQUITABLE SHARE (ACES) of the value of their commonly-owned oil and gas.” The result? Alaska was left with a $12 billion surplus. Also, as reported at Big Government, “The number of oil companies filing with the Alaska Department of Revenue has doubled, indicating that competition has indeed increased. Alaska has the second most business friendly tax set-up — up two spots since the passage of ACES. Additionally, a report from Governor Parnell’s Department of Revenue indicated that 2009 yielded a record high in oil jobs.”
   
8. Palin held ExxonMobil’s feet to the fire when it wasn’t abiding by a lease agreement to drill in Point Thomson. (You thin-skinned hockey mom, you!) After over 25 years of sitting on leases with no activity, ExxonMobil finally got to it.
   
9. Palin served as president of the Alaska Conference of Mayors, chair of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, vice chair of the National Governors Association Natural Resources Committee and chair of the Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission.
   
10. Palin’s commitment to free-market competition and transparency is well-evidenced by her establishment of the Alaska Health Care Strategies Planning Council (HCSPC) and her introduction of the Alaska Health Care Transparency Act. The American Spectator points out that although it didn’t make it through the legislature, “The Alaska Health Care Transparency Act confirmed that Sarah Palin means it when she says she’s in politics to ‘challenge the status quo and to serve the common good.’ Moreover, her push for greater competition also demonstrates that she understands the potential of the free market to cure much of what ails American health care.”

What pundits should be talking about when it comes to Palin
http://dailycaller.com/2011/08/26/what-pundits-should-be-talking-about-when-it-comes-to-palin/

 

Why should we be talking about Palin??? Do you think she will come into the race and kill Perry's chance to beat Barry?? I don't think that she can do herself or our country any good by getting in at this stage.

I like her just fine and I would rather have her that Barry but the rest of the country is not so sure. I think that Perry has a better chance than Palin to save us from the progressive agenda that Barry is dedicated to.

 

you forgot completely oblivious

 

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oS4C7bvHv2w"]Sarah Palin: Paul Revere Warned The British - YouTube[/ame]

In 1774 and the Spring of 1775 Paul Revere was employed by the Boston Committee of Correspondence and the Massachusetts Committee of Safety as an express rider to carry news, messages, and copies of resolutions as far away as New York and Philadelphia.

On the evening of April 18, 1775, Paul Revere was sent for by Dr. Joseph Warren and instructed to ride to Lexington, Massachusetts, to warn Samuel Adams and John Hancock that British troops were marching to arrest them. After being rowed across the Charles River to Charlestown by two associates, Paul Revere borrowed a horse from his friend Deacon John Larkin. While in Charlestown, he verified that the local "Sons of Liberty" committee had seen his pre-arranged signals. (Two lanterns had been hung briefly in the bell-tower of Christ Church in Boston, indicating that troops would row "by sea" across the Charles River to Cambridge, rather than marching "by land" out Boston Neck. Revere had arranged for these signals the previous weekend, as he was afraid that he might be prevented from leaving Boston).

On the way to Lexington, Revere "alarmed" the country-side, stopping at each house, and arrived in Lexington about midnight. As he approached the house where Adams and Hancock were staying, a sentry asked that he not make so much noise. "Noise!" cried Revere, "You'll have noise enough before long. The regulars are coming out!" After delivering his message, Revere was joined by a second rider, William Dawes, who had been sent on the same errand by a different route. Deciding on their own to continue on to Concord, Massachusetts, where weapons and supplies were hidden, Revere and Dawes were joined by a third rider, Dr. Samuel Prescott. Soon after, all three were arrested by a British patrol. Prescott escaped almost immediately, and Dawes soon after. Revere was held for some time and then released. Left without a horse, Revere returned to Lexington in time to witness part of the battle on the Lexington Green.

http://www.paulreverehouse.org/ride/real.html

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Yeah, what's no to like about her. She's so knowledgeable.

 

Why don't you send a bunch of your money to SarahPAC so they can afford to run ads that "set the record straight"?

If you think she is running, bet on your horse. Sucker bet...but go ahead.

 

http://www.politicalforum.com/curre...bout-paul-revere-s-midnight-ride-factual.html

 

Because it's another example of cons going straight to the bottom of the barrel for junk ideolic control of our country. You guys really need to step up the quality of your game, you should be killing the spineless Dems, but when you have no game..., fortunately there's still enuf of decent America left to keep cons from kicking in the door and offing the last of what made this country worthwhile.

 

So instead..you prefer blind hatred...over something like that?

 

I prefer Ron Paul over blind stupidity.

 

Palin was right about Paul Revere...

http://www.politicalforum.com/curre...bout-paul-revere-s-midnight-ride-factual.html

 

Hey, when you've been reading all of the print out there, she's bound to get something correct at some point.
But not this time, she fumbled the explanation so bad it will always be regarded as wrong, and she was.

 

Well, right off the bat, she and her family whored themselves out to America to make a large amount of cash.

 

Palin's not even good for a laugh anymore.

Keep trying to sell her as if no one's had a chance to evaluate her and make up their mind. The jury's no longer out. She had her chance to make an impression on the electorate....and she did.

Game over. She's at least smart enough not to even try to run now. But she'll still spend your money on publicity tours. Donate to SarahPAC today!

 

According to historical documents, she was factual...

http://www.politicalforum.com/curre...bout-paul-revere-s-midnight-ride-factual.html

What are you basing your false biased opinion on?

 

Wrong.

She made a critical decision to pay off a $700,000 debt incurred by numerous baseless and frivolous lawsuits file against her (all were eventually thrown out) by loony left liberal terrorists.

 

What lawsuits?

 

Baseless and frivolous ethics complaints.

There, happy?

 

Yeah, I don't really think she occurred a $700,000 debt from these lawsuits as the only lawsuit I heard about dealt with her wrongful termination of somebody. That lawsuit was thrown out and her legal fees were covered. So, where exactly did you get $700,000 from?

 

Nope. She did a little better on FOX after her comment, but her original comment is still totaly false.

Her quote.

Quote:

In no way did he warn the british by ringing them bells and shooting those shots. He was riding from Boston to Lexington to warn John Hancock and Samuel Adams of the British Army. He stoped by towns on the way quietly warning the locals (because of british patrols) and it wasnt until after he met John and Sam when he was captured on the route to Condord. There he tried intimidateing the Brits questioning him. He certianly didnt answer their questions with bells and gunshots.

 

Sara Palin is an idiot:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ba439w4-v_0&feature=related"]Sarah Palin gives 'insanely idiotic' answer - YouTube[/ame]

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VAC05nrYCdg&feature=related"]Sarah Palin interview, Billy Madison response - YouTube[/ame]

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sEZITdTFfPY&feature=relmfu"]Sarah Palin on Abortion and Evolution - YouTube[/ame]

 

Maybe she was just following the Obama family "whoring" themselves out to America with a couple of racist books..

 

Sarah Palin might have been quite good at following the Alaska State Constitution but she doesn't have a clue about the US Constitution.


Case in point is that she opposes equal protection under the law for gays and lesbians which is a protected Right under the 14th Amendment. When she endorses the entire US Constitution, including same-sex marriage and becomes pro-choice, along with opposing US military interventionism in the affairs of other nations, then she might begin to understand and follow the US Constitution.

By the way when she was governor how many of Alaska's debts did she pay in gold and silver coins in accordance with Article I Section 10 of the US Constitution?

 

Palin vetoed a bill that would've barred same-sex partners from receiving state employee benefits under grounds of the constitutionality of the measure.

 

While at the same time opposing same-sex marriage where gays and lesbians are being denied Social Security benefits thereby denying them equal protection under the law in violation of the 14th Amendment. The prohibitions against same-sex marriage deny gays and lesbians something like 1400 different rights, benefits and privilages that opposite-sex couples have under the law. Sarah Palin opposed same-sex marriage in Alaska and that is in direct violation of the US Constitution. Alaska does not recognize the marriage of same-sex couples that are legally married in another state and more to Alaska. Sarah Palin is opposed to that recognition.

http://news.yahoo.com/remain-married-may-key-resolution-same-gender-marriage-232918072.html

Sarah Palin only supports those parts of the US Constitution that she agrees with and opposes the US Constitution on any issue she disagrees with.

Once again I will ask a simple question on another related issued.

Article I Section 10:

When Sarah Palin was governor of Alaska how many of the States debts were paid in American Gold and/or Silver Eagle coins which are legal tender in the United States. As Article I Section 10 explicitly establishes the States, under the US Constitution, can only make payments of debts in gold and silver coins. If she supports the US Constitution then wouldn't it logically follow that she would have insisted the State pay all of its debts in gold and silver coins produced by the US Mint in complaince with this provision? Why didn't she insist on this compliance by the State she was the governor of? She controlled the Alaska Treasury as the executive of the State and could easily of ordered that all payments be made in gold and silver American Eagle coins. She could have redeemed Federal Reserve notes in American Eagle gold and silver coins at any Federal Reserve Bank or the US Treasury under Title 12 of US Statutory law. So why didn't she?

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode12/usc_sec_12_00000411----000-.html

 

The government should not be in the Marriage business.

End of story.