Towards the end of his post, Eric expresses some disappointment with "Palin's (and McCain's) repeated attempts to show how they have and will stand up to 'Big Oil.'" Nothing earth-shattering there ... you hear a lot of political rhetoric targeting Big Oil around the country. So, why is Eric dissapointed?
"If any state in the Union has benefited from Big Oil's willingness to risk billions of dollars to develop natural resources in a safe and environmentally conscious manner (the Exxon Valdez notwithstanding), it's Alaska and its good citizens, many of whom owe their very livelihoods to those companies," he explains.
And he's right.
I think we see something like this at work in our own neighbor, New Mexico, where political rhetoric targeting Big Oil is frequently heard in the Round House, even as state coffers are swelled with tax revenue (and leasing fees, etc.) from that industry ... even as the wallets of state residents are swelled with larger and increasing payrolls, and mineral rights payments from that industry.
Ah, well ... it could be worse ... I think the rhetoric targeting Big Oil is nothing compared to that targeting us debauched harlots of the (insert SFX of ominous chord played on organ)