Palin/ West. Walker supports amnesty.

I remember when the oil company executive told Sarah he would sue her and her administration. She said: "I know where the courthouse is." Lol, the woman is incorruptible.

Thanks for a great response to the Red State idiot Steve. I loved it when you cooked his goose with replies from his readers!

As for me;
The Virginia Gentleman is a VERY ARDENT SUPPORTER of Sarah Palin and proud to say so!

VERY ARDENT SUPPORTERS from sea to shining sea! Our numbers are growing and growing!

Gov. Palin wrote in August, in part...

"Alaskans know we own our resources that fuel our economy. Alaskan oil belongs to us as residents of this great state, a fact which is purposefully and clearly spelled out in our state’s Constitution so we’d never make the mistake of allowing others to try to lay claim to it. So, we have every right and responsibility to share, clearly and equitably, an appropriate value that we place on our energy reserves.

When I was elected governor, it was clear that for too long our leaders refused to exert constitutional muscle on behalf of Alaskans. For years, we were taken for a ride by crony capitalists with the complicity of corrupt politicians, coupled with industry-fueled fears we’d never make it on our own as Alaskans if Big Oil’s unethical Outside influence was challenged.

Remember though, the FBI busted much of the corruption and some of the oil industry players went to prison. We, the people, rose up and made sure unethical influencers would no longer control our state capital. We regained control of the governor’s office, and Big Oil lost both houses of the legislature for the first time since the early ‘80s. Alaskans could finally secure a fair share of our own resources to ensure more aggressive and responsible development; Alaskans were in the driver’s seat.

After two years of arduous, prudent, open, and honest work with the world’s top energy consultants helping us reclaim our right to value our oil appropriately, I presented legislation called Alaska’s Clear and Equitable Share (ACES), which passed by a huge bi-partisan majority in a “cleaned up” legislature that could no longer trade votes for selfish industry favors.

In creating ACES, my team – the wisest and most experienced energy-focused team in the nation – knew Big Oil would have their top lawyers, lobbyists and PR firms on their side of the negotiating table – as is their right and duty to their shareholders. So, I made sure Alaskans had the world’s best experts on our side facing off against these enormously funded multinational corporations.

All consultants had a similar message: Alaska had for decades been essentially giving our resources away while providing Big Oil huge financial benefits which they took advantage of by sitting on unused leases that previous governors declined to demand they uphold obligations to develop. The result was a few companies obviously monopolized the North Slope oil reserves, and the new, independent players wanting to compete for the right to partner with us in developments were shut out, all to Alaska’s detriment. We determined to change that through new legislation passed by the people’s representatives and by legal action if necessary.

So, we secured sound formulas for our oil extraction’s fair market value in order to partner fairly and ethically with oil companies for everyone’s mutual benefit. ACES protected Alaskans and incentivized new exploration and new production, which are key to new jobs and state progress towards a prosperous, self-determined future.

While the expected cries of poverty came from the oil industry, Alaskans knew that under ACES oil companies would realize an extraordinarily high rate of return of 123% at a conservatively averaged $80 per barrel from new investments in Prudhoe Bay – that’s a rate of return oil companies don’t expect nor ever receive in other parts of the world!

In no time at all, it was clear ACES worked. Unemployment was low, energy exploration increased, oil companies recorded their customary huge profits, and the state’s treasury was replenished and actually flowed over. We were able to save for the future, forward-fund education, reform state pensions, and return more of the people’s money back to the people as their share in the development of their oil.

Unfortunately, it only took six years for Big Oil to regain control of the narrative and their influence in the governor’s office and the legislature. Legislators, including oil company employees who are lawmakers, exchanged ACES for Senate Bill 21 (SB21) and it barely squeaked by. Just one vote changed everything, which tells you the public’s will wasn’t for lawmakers to “cave.”

ACES had passed with overwhelming public support because it protected the interests of Alaskan resource owners as equal partners with oil companies. But then, Juneau and statewide airwaves seemed to melt new leaders’ resolve and common sense, as Outside influence cozied up to the administration and legislative branch, and control of our energy resources slid back out of Alaskans’ hard working hands...."

http://conservatives4palin....

You're welcome, Palinprodigy.

This year, I bought the book, "Sarah Takes On Big Oil." Here is some commentary along those lines. http://www.politifact.com/t...

RedState and their boy wonder leader, ERIC the RED, are very jealous of Sarah due to her undisputed popularity and rock-solid Conservative credentials. Hit-articles like the one mentioned here are just traffic-generators for a moribund website whose glory days are way in the past.

Here are some questions for the
STUPID PHONY CONSERVATIVE REDState people:

1.
Why do you PHONY CONSERVATIVE REDState people act
like JACKA55 democrats/liberals and tell
1/2 TRUTH/LIES/MISLEADING stories about Gov. Palin?

2.
According to the Alaska's constitution, the people
of Alaska OWN the oil/gas in the ground, so do you
PHONY CONSERVATIVE REDState people want Gov. Palin
to be LAWLESS like POS 'Walking DEBT' Obama and
give the oil companies more of the people's money?

3.
Since POS 'Walking DEBT' Obama and
Hillary 'Benghazi' Clinton are 2 faces of the same
coin, why do you PHONY CONSERVATIVE REDState people
want to be their BlTCHes?

Great write-up, Steve.

The situation in Alaska is a lot more similar to that of shareholders in a trust, or a closely held corporation, who are entitled to dividends from the parent organization (in this case the state of Alaska) which is entrusted to look out for their interests. It is more analogous to those types of capitalist entities than it is to socialism, where the state, not its citizens, would own the resources under a socialist scheme.

Clearly, socialism it ain't.

I believe that's in the Alaskan constitution, isn't it? That the people own the resources?

That is my understanding, too. That constitution was written before Sarah was even born. She lived up to it, better than anyone else, when it came to her stewardship of the people's property.

That is a good analogy, Laddie. The concept of ownership, though, implies the right of disposal, and as I understand it, an Alaskan citizen does not have the right to sell his share of oil like a shareholder might. In that light, oil rights are owned by the state.

I think it would be better if ownership consisted of true shares in the oil rights, but I am not sure how Alaska could have or could achieve that.

In a trusteeship, the trustees are entrusted to manage the assets of the beneficiary (or beneficiaries) of the trust relationship. But the trustees do not "own" the assets which they are managing on behalf of the beneficiaries of the trust, any more than the state of Alaska "owns" the assets it manages on behalf of the citizens of the state.

"(A)n Alaskan citizen does not have the right to sell his share of oil like a shareholder might."

And the beneficiary does not have the right to sell the assets of the trust being managed for his or her benefit, either.

"In that light, oil rights are owned by the state."

I disagree. In your own definition of ownership, the state of Alaska cannot sell the assets of its citizens, either, so how can you say the state "owns" assets it cannot sell if you assert that the citizens do not own assets they cannot sell?

"I think it would be better if ownership consisted of true shares in the oil rights, but I am not sure how Alaska could have or could achieve that."

Easy (easy for me to say, anyway). They would have to rewrite the state constitution so that each eligible citizen would be issued an equal share in the ownership of the assets under management by the state, just as the assets of a trust are distributed to the beneficiaries when the trust is dissolved. The citizens could then sell, or buy, shares on the open market, just as the beneficiaries of a trust can sell the assets, or keep them, once the trust is dissolved and the assets distributed.

Then there are MLPs - master limited partnerships.

A good corporate or trust attorney could dream up a number of ways to redefine the ownership paradigm, but all would require change to the state constitution. According to the existing state constitution the people do own the assets which are covered in that constitution, no matter how you slice it.

Nice take down thanks

Great comment by Sir Gladiator! I have to keep that one.

I'm not an expert on oil policy, although I grew up in Oklahoma, which at the time was a major oil producing state. It is my understanding that, in spite of ownership, there are also certain rights granted. Oil, water, etc. In the case of the Alaskan people, due to the Alaskan constitution, the oil rights belong to Alaskans. Every oil company that drills has to pay someone for the right to drill. Because of the way that it is written, the people of Alaska are the ones that benefit from those payments. There is nothing socialistic or communistic about it.

This comment and commentor pisses me off. I'd reply to a few of them but I'm not a member of that stupid site.

mattse001 maxconservative • 4 hours ago
I'd love to see conservatives stacked to the ceilings. The question this article poses is whether or not Sarah Palin always takes the conservative position.
Supporting a Democrat "unity" ticket is not a good sign.

When all else fails they lie. Walker is not a Democrat. He was a republican gone independent His running mate happens to be a Democrat. Lt. Governors in Alaska have very little power while the Governor has a lot of power.
I have no idea why they choose to lie about things that are so easily verifiable.

i see a guy in there dmac schooling some of them, including the author, who think that the Republican party is a conservative party. That kind of thinking ultimately puts you right behind the 8 ball.

@MJUdall
You CAN NOT fix STUPID.
(you can explain it to them but I can not understand it for them).

Excellent as usual, Mr. Flesher. Thank you for always having the Governor's (and our) back.

Part of the problem is that it is being referred to as a "tax" when it is NOT a tax. It is a royalty owed to the citizens of Alaska just like any arrangement a private land owner makes with an Oil company to extract oil from his property. Words have meanings and the willingness to accept the characterization of these payments as taxes is not only wrong but strategically foolish.

why do the people of Alaska support what Parnell just took from them?

Erick Erickson is such a hypocrite...(and no, this is not an endorsement for the Democrat, Mallot), but why did EE join CNN? Money, money, money....

Bravo Steve!! Well said.

Somehow, "very ardent supporters" is intended as a veiled slight; think :nut", am I correct? Sadly, if only Jeb, Mitt, or Chris could find a few... then all would be right in the world.

BUT IT'S ALLRIGHT to be "very ardent supporters" of Obama!