A little background on the welfare state, Alaska (from Alaskonomics): As if it couldn't support itself, Alaska also ranks No. 1, year after year, in money it sucks in from Washington. In 2005 (the most recent figures), according to the Tax Foundation, Alaska ranked 18th in federal taxes paid per resident ($5,434) but first in federal spending received per resident ($13,950). Its ratio of federal spending received to federal taxes paid ranks third among the 50 states, and in the absolute amount it receives from Washington over and above the amount it sends to Washington, Alaska ranks No. 1 ----- But the kicker is (Palin, on the Ongoing Financial Crisis): Saturday in Colorado Springs, Colo., Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin said, "The fact is that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have gotten too big and too expensive to the taxpayers. The McCain-Palin administration will make them smaller and smarter and more effective for homeowners who need help." -------- My brain hurts from reading that. Too big and expensive for taxpayers?? More effective for homeowners? lol. Isn't this the reform candidate?
but she is expert on foreign policy because "she is right there next to Russia", those from North Dakota are natually good at foreign policy because " they are right there next to Canada"
Whereas the Romans hoped for more Bread and cirucuses, American votes can be bought off with talk of tax cuts and Jesus. Although in this case, supposed "hotness" for common sense.
According to a number of websites Washington DC is by far number 1 in Federal spending per capita. $67,982 per capita in 2004 according to http://www.fedstats.gov/qf/states/11000.html and http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/04/AR2006010401952.html $68,000 per capita according to http://money.cnn.com/pf/features/lists/state_expend/percapita.html
Convertability, Gee whiz, Why can't you just say how you feel, directly? Like, you think you and the rest of us will get a better deal from Osama Bama? Why beat around the "Bush" and say it like you see it?
Oh yeah...that article in "Alaskonomics" Is not biased at all. I mean just reading the first sentence and you can tell its a bunch of propaghanda. "Sarah Palin thinks she's better than you because she is from a small town" Hey, I can do the same thing with Obama...."Obama thinks he's better than you because he's black!" I mean really? Do some of you people actually follow those articles as truth when you read that? How they cherry pick some things and take it out of context?