December 4, 2008 - 11:31pm | serena

SWF FLV Converter | Free

SWF FLV Converter |
Free YouTube Downloader |
YouTube Video converter |
YouTube Ripper |
FLV to Video Converter |
SWF to Video Converter |
Video to SWF converter |
Video to FLV converter |
Batch FLV converter |
FLV Ripper |
DVD to FLV Converter |
DVD to SWF Converter |
FLV to DVD |
SWF to FLV Converter |
FLV Editor |
FLV Joiner |
FLV Splitter |
FLV Cutter |
flv encoder |
flv decoder |
FLV Converter for Mac

login or register to post comments | flag this »

  July 26, 2008 - 12:09pm | _Syrin

Ivy- Sarah is a FRAUD

call me again! Maybe we should turn the tables, Alaskans call Ivy at 623 698-6986.. You should be ashamed of yourself. Tell your aunt to seek help from a specialist in de programming...Cause you view Sarah in a cult-like manner

login or register to post comments | flag this »

  June 27, 2008 - 12:08pm | North2Alaska

Palin's proposal isn't an energy plan

But just a government giveaway. An energy plan would look at the long term substainability of fuel prices in AK when the pipeline doesn't supply 90% of state revenue.

login or register to post comments | flag this »

  October 10, 2008 - 12:11am | megal_1

swf converter for ipod

swf converter for ipod convert swf to wmv, avi, mp4, mpeg, etc. No matter you are a veteran or beginner, you can convert swf files to avi, wmv, flv, mp3 with wonderful output quality.

login or register to post comments | flag this »

  June 24, 2008 - 8:59am | Stags_Leap

Palin is pro-tax

unless you were sleeping -you would have noticed the multi billion dollar tax increase she slapped on industry. She's also pulling a Hugo Chavez and trying to take back the Pt. Thomson leases, which is government intereference with the free market.
Returning our wealth? There will be no wealth for our children if she keeps giving it away at this pace instead of re-investing it for l;ong-term strategic planning purposes.

login or register to post comments | flag this »

  June 24, 2008 - 4:02pm | akjustice2day

Palin is PRO-ALASKAN !

What part of the owner state is so difficult to understand. What the Stag-ster is suggesting is a return to colonialism, where we're owned by Big Oil.

The federal government caught Bill Allen and it's up to the people to finish the job. Governor Palin did what the people demanded, which was to demand a FAIR return for the oil that is OWNED by the STATE.

It's our oil. The oil does not belong to the corporate producers until the Alaskans are paid. What we're getting is a royalty check, not socialism.

login or register to post comments | flag this »

  July 2, 2008 - 8:52pm | rfn

"Return"?

In some heads (I almost said minds) statehood never happened.

login or register to post comments | flag this »

  June 24, 2008 - 9:34am | LilysDaddy

And since

you (and sDog, AK_Lady/Jenny, and others) are opting out of the $1,200, there will be even more money for the children!

login or register to post comments | flag this »

  June 23, 2008 - 7:47pm | rfn

I can think of no

more powerful way to express discontent with the Governor's energy assistance plan than to opt-out.

All else is meaningless froth of the type that gets furred animals quarantined as possibly being rabid.

login or register to post comments | flag this »

  November 23, 2008 - 9:05pm | serena

mts to ipod

MTS to ipod converter

login or register to post comments | flag this »

  June 24, 2008 - 7:08am | happycamper

Exactly...

You're right, rfn. The critics who are so discontented by the governor's energy plan should opt out.

login or register to post comments | flag this »

  June 24, 2008 - 11:10am | rfn

Or if they don't...

they should make sure their shots are up to date and carry proof of vaccination at all times to avoid inconvenience.

login or register to post comments | flag this »

  June 23, 2008 - 8:22pm | AngryWhiteMale

AWM

Obviously you don't care about the needs of those in the bush, only the one's you can see or read about. Well, let me tell you this fool, had some of us known the cost of everything would go up in a few short years like it has perhaps we would not be suffering from sticker shock and plan accordingly.

So let's get your logic straight - Tax the shiyat out of big oil and give the money to the many woman and children at the soup kitchen - Very Good!

Or, tax the shiyat out of big oil and give to everyone, bad, very bad according to you.

What you want is for Palin to pick who get's what - fine - let it start with you, you get to give your check to the divorced, never married, seperated women who are in the soup line. And while some members of my family struggle along to make a living you can break your damn arm just to pat yourself on the back for that little good deed!

login or register to post comments | flag this »

  October 14, 2008 - 12:40am | cautionyou

sure

Obviously you docare about the needs of those in the bush!mts converter

login or register to post comments | flag this »

  July 9, 2008 - 8:18pm | christyteawolf

AWM

Not just women and children stand in the soup line, I help out at a food pantry every week and we have a lot of men coming for help also, and i would never put them down as you have put women and children down.Everyone is needing help except maybe the rich, i have seen family's hate coming for help but they have no choice, they have to choice rather to put gas in there cars or buy food and since both is going up so fast they really have no choice if they want to work

login or register to post comments | flag this »

  June 23, 2008 - 9:51am | LilysDaddy

Really?

Exactly how many "women and children" do we have standing in line at soup kitchens and shelters here in Alaska?

Do you have numbers, or are you just making stuff up?

login or register to post comments | flag this »

  June 23, 2008 - 10:18am | Stags_Leap

Try reading the front page of the ADN

just the facts... You'd think a state with billions in surplus and a PFD -coould spare some loose change to prevent women and children standing in soup kitchen lines and living in homeless shelters...I'd rather see those in need get some real assistance instead of giving out an extra $1,200 per person, which is really designed to keep Palin's popularity poll numbers high. Everyone loves free money. But some people need a house or apartment, food and milk, medication, and equal access to quality education and support services.

login or register to post comments | flag this »

  June 23, 2008 - 10:22am | LilysDaddy

Just as I thought

No numbers. Just rhetoric. Thanks.

Oh. Could you please explain how providing $1,200 to each qualifying Alaskan *is* an example of Palin "socialism," but providing assistance to those who, you say, need a house or apartment, food or milk, etc., is *not* socialism?

login or register to post comments | flag this »

  June 23, 2008 - 11:32am | Stags_Leap

for the intellectually challenged

here is a link to the story:

http://www.adn.com/anchorage/story/443959.html

some excerpts from that article below (note this is NOT rhetoric. These are real people with real needs):

"A few blocks away, Bean's Cafe is serving more free meals. A 33 percent increase in May, compared to the same time last year.

A local pantry that delivers food to needy families recently asked the Food Bank of Alaska to stop sending people its way.

"They aren't able to meet the needs," said Food Bank development manager Amy DeBruhl.

"We are definitely seeing a lot more of the working poor, rather than the unemployed," said Jennifer Nieves, program director for St. Francis House, a food bank run by Catholic Social Services.

...some volunteers have noticed a change.

"We would always have an occasional mom come in with some kids or something like that," said board vice president Marty Turnbow. But now strollers and mothers carrying babies arrive on a regular basis.

Gabriel Wilburn, a commercial diver hoping to work on oil exploration in the Beaufort Sea or a natural gas pipeline project, brought his 3-year-old son to the kitchen Thursday.

People are making hard choices, said DeBruhl, the Food Bank development manager.

"Do they pay for a tank of gas to get to work, or do they pay for food?" she said.

At St. Francis House, people picked up about 22,000 pounds of food in January. That number jumped to about 31,000 pounds in May.

Part of that increase could be families picking up more food for kids who are now on summer break and no longer eating free breakfast or lunch at school.

Still, the numbers at Bean's have increased in each of the past two months compared to the same time last year. People who used to show up when money ran out toward the end of the month are now appearing at the kitchen more than a week earlier."

You can help these people with non-socialist programs. The state could start providing the level of services that are necessary for people in need. These people don't want free money. They want a roof over their heads, a safe home for the kids, and the ability to feed their kids -long term. Most of all -they need hope...something that could be facilitated by that huge surplus -instead of giving out $1,200 per person. It serves no long-term benefit.

login or register to post comments | flag this »

  June 23, 2008 - 12:04pm | LilysDaddy

You've yet to explain...

how giving someone "...a roof over their heads," food, etc., is *not* socialism, and giving someone $1,200 *is* socialism.

And BTW, I still did not see any actual numbers of "women and children" lined up for food or shelter in Alaska in the ADN article you cherry-picked from. (Bad form, Staps_Leap, distorting sources like that, including only those quotes which you believe support your point.) Here, I'll help you out with a quote from that article that you forgot to include:

"Dozens of people lined up in the alley outside the Downtown Soup Kitchen on Fourth Avenue on Thursday."

Dozens, huh? So, we're now up to, what? 24, 36, 48 people (or "women and children" to use your words) lined up for food and shelter? Guess we have a regular crisis on our hands.

Rhetoric. Tired, stale, flat rhetoric. "They need hope." Yeah, got it. Use that "huge surplus" and give shelter and food to all those "women and children" who are lined up? Sure thing. No socialism there, no siree.

Oh, one more thing: weren't you the oil company shill who opposed any increase in taxes just a few months back? You know, the increase that has given us this "huge surplus?"

login or register to post comments | flag this »

  June 23, 2008 - 7:25pm | Stags_Leap

Palin's socialism plan

hey -you can try and smoke screen the issue all you want. But the Newsweek article said it best: Hugo Chavez would be proud of Palin and her "policies."

http://www.newsweek.com/id/139335/output/print

I think I gave you a very basic presentation above on socialism vs. capitalism. If you can't grasp it -I can't help you. But I suspect you're not here to understand anything. You're only here...yet again...to attack all critics of Palin and her flawed policies. Go whine to your pal Gara...he may be more sympathetic than I.

login or register to post comments | flag this »

  June 24, 2008 - 8:58am | LilysDaddy

Oh, really?

Palin's "...flawed policies?"

The same flawed policy that has state coffers bulging? *That* flawed policy?

And keep in mind, Stags_Leap, when you're quoting "Newsweak," you're really scraping the bottom of the barrel.

login or register to post comments | flag this »

  June 23, 2008 - 8:14pm | rfn

Under "socialism"

you would not have a choice. You'd get the energy assistance, want it or not. Fortunately we live in a responsibly run state where the constitution dictates residents are afforded equal opportunity to share in the proceeds of resource development. While I'm sure some folks would rather the oilies not be taxed at all (in fact one got voted out of office over something very much like that....though memories seem short), a tax was voted by the legislature and remains in effect.

Yes, some of it must be used to address non-fossil fuel based energy but, in the meanwhile, those of modest resources need to keep on living. Inconvenient though some may find that to be.

Governor Palin is taking a balanced approach. Of course anyone could ask their favorite legislator to introduce a bill reducing or eliminating taxes on the oilies. Might be fun to try!

Oh yes, about that constitutional requirement for equality to Alaska residents....it has been interpreted to mean that the offer must be extended. It does not mean anyone has to accept it. They are free to opt out though this imposes a moral obligation to refrain from crying about it later.

That may be the most difficult party; the "refraining".

login or register to post comments | flag this »

  June 23, 2008 - 11:03am | rayrocks

Classic sock puppetry

Don't look for reason from that poster, LilysDaddy. There's nothing but double-standards and hypocrisy.

Here's the short answer, though: If Palin proposes it -- anything -- it's socialism. If Begich or Berkowitz, the typical tax-and-spend types, propose the same thing, it's sound public policy.

Clear? Don't worry, you'll get used to it.

login or register to post comments | flag this »

  June 23, 2008 - 12:06pm | LilysDaddy

Agree, rayrocks

Plus, he/she seems to display quite a bit of intellectual dishonesty.

login or register to post comments | flag this »

  June 23, 2008 - 2:24pm | Stags_Leap

Who'se your daddy?

another new alias, egh? Let me try and simply the two terms for you, even though you could care less:

Under socialism, the government agencies are in charge of production . They try to project how much of each resource is going to be needed -and allocate the means of production accordingly. In capitalism, market forces (demand and price) determine which products are produced and in what quantities. Due to the imperfect nature of human beings, the predictions of government bureaucracies tend to not be very good predictors of future demand. Therefore socialism tends to lead to surpluses in somethings and shortages in others. On the other hand, capitalism tends to be self-correcting in this regard because people who are trying to make money will tend to quickly shift production from things that aren't in demand to those that are.

In truth -the U.S does not have a pure a capitalistic system. We have a modified one -due to the need to regulate certain industries for the good of the public health. Hence -while we may provide "social" services to the people, that doesn't make mean we are practicing socialist policies.

login or register to post comments | flag this »

  June 23, 2008 - 6:26pm | LilysDaddy

Interesting

Again, you've not answered the question. There are "...so many women and children" lined up at soup kitchens and shelters. How many is "...so many?"

Again, you've not answered why giving each qualifying Alaskan a check for $1,200 *is* socialism, but giving "...so many women and children" food and shelter is *not* socialism.

No, please don't obfuscate by modifying and posting the Wikipedia definition of socialism (based upon your previous postings, which appear limited to commenting upon women's dress colors and their "hotness," I don't believe you have the intellectual chops to have come up with the above posting on your own.) Stretch the gray matter; see if you can come up with an original answer.

Or do you simply have an ingrained habit of labeling any proposal or action that comes from Gov. Palin "socialist?"

Tired, stale, flat rhetoric.

login or register to post comments | flag this »

  June 23, 2008 - 3:58pm | cheech907

Get a job

there wouldnt be so many people "standing in line for soup" if they would get off they lazy ass and get a job... honestly, they dont work and we are suppose to help them? i think not!

login or register to post comments | flag this »

  June 23, 2008 - 3:48pm | rfn

Not socialist yet?

Be patient, November is coming.

Doesn't matter which of the two liberals in the lead positions (McCain or Obama) win.

Be patient.

login or register to post comments | flag this »

  June 23, 2008 - 12:12pm | rayrocks

"Intellectual dishonesty"?

Yep. That about sums up Stags.

login or register to post comments | flag this »