Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin announced July 3 that she would step down as governor July 26.
(Robert DeBerry/The Mat-Su Valley Frontiersman/AP)Photos (1 of 1)
Palin misses mark on cap-and-trade critique
By Laurent Belsie | 07.14.09
Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin has an uncanny knack for seizing the political moment. Can she keep it?
After her surprise announcement early this month that she was resigning her governorship, she followed up Tuesday with an op-ed in the Washington Post attacking the global warming legislation now before Congress. [Editor’s note: Text corrected to describe her piece as an op-ed; below, text changed to eliminate the political characterization of her blogger critics.]
It is a smart political move, showing she’s ready to become an important conservative voice on policy debates. It’s the right topic, because she’s spent years dealing with energy policy. It’s the right bill to attack, because the cap and trade system to curb greenhouse-gas emissions is a controversial and vulnerable proposal that would transform the rules of the road for the US economy if passed.
Conservatives have important economic arguments to make in this debate. But Governor Palin’s Alaska-centric op-ed misses the mark.
She focuses on job losses and costs, which are real for energy-producing states but probably small nationally, and ignores the bill’s more glaring weaknesses. In June, in the same op-ed pages of the Washington Post, Harvard economist Martin Feldstein made the much more compelling argument that the bill imposes costs with little environmental benefit unless China and other developing nations agree to cut their emissions, too. And he pointed out that by giving away 85 percent of the permits rather than auctioning them off, the government is cutting the revenue it could funnel to households to cushion the blow of higher energy prices.
By comparison, Palin’s points in the op-ed are weaker:
There is no denying that as the world becomes more industrialized, we need to reform our energy policy and become less dependent on foreign energy sources. But the answer doesn’t lie in making energy scarcer and more expensive!
And this:
We have an important choice to make. Do we want to control our energy supply and its environmental impact? Or, do we want to outsource it to China, Russia and Saudi Arabia?
Those are applause lines, red meat for the dinner circuit of hard-core conservatives. But will her arguments win over independents and centrists? They could be swayed on cap-and-trade (but might be a little puzzled about what exactly we would be outsourcing to China).
Bloggers have already attacked the op-ed.
The point, however, is that Palin needs to broaden her appeal and outlook if she wants to run for president. Perhaps, freed by the demands and distractions of the governorship, she will be able to buckle down, hone her economic rhetoric, and reach those crucial voters in the middle.
_______________
– Hone your economic rhetoric by following us on Twitter.
Comments
3. paul | 07.14.09
“The point, however, is that Palin needs to broaden her appeal and outlook if she wants to run for president.”
That’s not the point at all.
She needs to be honest and stand for what she believes. Either she will get elected for what she believes or she won’t. We’ve had enough people in office who simply say what they need to say to get elected. If the middle is too stupid to realize what will go to China & India after it is explained to them then we are all doomed anyway.
4. Bemused | 07.14.09
You go to great lengths to explain what Palin needs, yet you never explain why America needs a politician who is so deficient.
Absent a predicate for its existence, your analysis is frivolous, if not inane.
5. Steve Spear | 07.14.09
By now it should be apparent that Palin is not positioning herself for a run for the presidency, but for a lucrative talk show slot on Fox News. Her Washington Post Editorial is in keeping with that goal.
6. matt | 07.14.09
We should outsource Palin to China (makes as much sense as what she said!).
She is the ultimate display of “the politics of stupid” and a shining example of the dumbing down of America. Her ineptitude is boundless; she is a Caribou Barbie being groomed to dupe the conservative middle class with winks, colloquialisms and one-liners.
7. TKevan | 07.14.09
Who is the biggest producer of Wind Turbines? GE Energy. Where are they made? GE Energy production plant in Shenyang, China.
Where are the majority of solar panels made? China.
8. fjelsted | 07.14.09
how many voters actually care what sarah palin thinks about real issues? it seems they only care about her clothes, her pregnant teen, her hillbilly feuds, and her fundamentalist views on abortion, gay marriage, and creationism. she’s never going to amount to more than that - which personally, I find reassuring.
9. Greg C | 07.14.09
My opinion is, that if people don’t understand what this means “We have an important choice to make. Do we want to control our energy supply and its environmental impact? Or, do we want to outsource it to China, Russia and Saudi Arabia?” - Than they probably should not vote on that topic. At all.
10. S Dale | 07.14.09
Harvard economist Martin Feldstein made the much more compelling argument for independents and centrists. Sarah Palin is broadening her appeal beyond the middle to the American people. Read it again with different vision. “We have an important choice to make. Do we want to control our energy supply and its environmental impact? Or, do we want to outsource it to China, Russia and Saudi Arabia?”
11. bevoDee | 07.14.09
“Perhaps, freed by the demands and distractions of the governorship, she will be able to buckle down, hone her economic rhetoric, and reach those crucial voters in the middle.”
You should have added, “and gets someone to think for her.”
13. Paul Browning | 07.14.09
This is the launch of her 2012 presidential campaign. It’s a publicity stunt created by a staff of campaign advisers I’m sure she hired right before quitting as Governor. They picked an Obama topic for her to attack, told her what to think and gave her a couple reports to read in case the media asked, and then launched this statement for her. She doesn’t know anything about cap-trade. The way that she came out with this statement shows that she is already being pushed and guided by the GOP. She’s the perfect presidential candidate for the GOP. She’s the controllable female counterpart of George W. Bush.
14. AgentLemon | 07.14.09
Please don’t encourage Sarah Palin. I honestly think that my head might explode if I get this dunce crammed down my throat until 2012. The fact that she ditched her job in Alaska pretty much ensures Sarah “Man Chin” Palin is going to be EVERYWHERE until 2012. *sigh*
15. Simpleton | 07.14.09
That is putting it mildly. She is incurious and her editorial only highlights the shallowness she exemplified during last year’s campaign.
Her time would be better spent on taking some basic classes in civics. There is a reason why Washington Post even offered her the opportunity. Nothing like reality to caricature Palin.
17. LouAz | 07.14.09
She did not “resign her governorship”. She gave up her TITLE. She does not understand the difference between being Miss Alaska and being Governor of Alaska. In her latest Wash Post Op-ed she still talks about her “Title”. CSM and all the media filled in the “resign her governorship” because you assumed that is what she really meant. This is Sarah Palin - no one knows what she means about anything ! What a gal ! She has got you eating out of her hand.
18. Header | 07.14.09
I cannot think that someone who quits an elected position for the confused reasons she gave is making “…a smart political move, showing she’s ready to become an important conservative voice on policy debates.”
Similarly, I don’t believe she wrote the Post article; she isn’t sufficiently intelligent. If by becoming a voice of conservatism you mean having someone else do her work, then yes, she’ll succeed. But that doesn’t elp learn the material and most certainly doesn’t contribute to her expertise, which I have found to be seriously lacking.
19. R N Utoft | 07.14.09
I am a strong Democrat but also feel that the cap and trade bill needs to have some more qustions answered. As it is now I can’t support it.
20. Jay | 07.14.09
She is not dead wrong she is on the mark. She hit the right bill. She just wanted to point out some things other than the norm. is the job creation great? No. there are more and more people loosing their jobs everyday. She tied the two issues. this is the best thing she can do! great job! Bad story.
21. mark | 07.14.09
this debate starts with examining the disagreements among scientists that globsl warming is in fact due to and thus can be mitigsted by a reduction in greenhose gases. were we to spend more on finding our how and why climate changes occur (the ice age melted for reasons other than industrial carbons) we might have more agreement on what to do about it if anything.
22. blaine | 07.14.09
Sarah Palin has about as much credibility as George W. Bush - absolutely ZERO.
23. Scott Browne | 07.14.09
America taxing carbon dioxide, the air that tree’s breath, while China builds coal fired electricity plants to fuel their economy, means the world will lose the climate control issue, sooner rather then later.
24. Hana | 07.14.09
Outsource Palin!
The only thing that Palin has to offer is raw ambition, gone wild.
25. Tilden Parker | 07.14.09
Palin’s comment “Do we want to control our energy supply and its environmental impact? Or, do we want to outsource it to China, Russia and Saudi Arabia?” is right on the mark, and apparently overlooked by environmentalists who want to limit greenhouse gases. If the U.S. makes it more expensive to produce energy intensive products, we will become less competitive and lose manufacturing jobs to China, Russia, and other nations. I read recently that China is building on average on new coal fired plant a week. The net result of Cap and Trade legislation will likely be a net “Increase in worldwide carbon emissions” as more factories open up in China, further fueling the need for more heavy polluting coal based energy plants. So, we lose jobs, hurt the economy, increase the deficit, and increase worldwide pollution. Sounds like a Lose-Lose proposition to me.
26. Mike Tanis | 07.14.09
She hit the bullseye. Using climate change to implement brain-dead policy is a trick only a socialist could love.
28. Nomo Stew | 07.14.09
Palin asks the right question, but she has the wrong answer. The free market will, in the short term, make us even more dependent on foreign energy. Drilling our own oil faster just means we will run out earlier without having developed alternatives, once again making us dependent on foreign powers, this time for the long term indeed. Obama is trying to ensure that we start making more of our own green energy products so that we buy less from China; and beyond that, once we have them, our wind and sun is our own, for the indefinite future. The best long-term answer is to use as little of our on non-renewable energy as possible, become more energy efficient, and develop renewable domestic alternatives. The free market will not do that, and domestic drilling incentives will do the opposite. Obama’s plan makes sense because it has been vetted by exhaustive processes of campaigning and press questioning - something Palin has yet to face, leading to the juvenile tone of her ideas. If she really wants to be a player, then for her own sake, she needs to comed down and really play. I doubt she can, but at some point she has to try. She will never make it past a Republican primary otherwise.
29. policywank | 07.14.09
One might consider calling the Atlantic blog author’s attack one by a neo-liberal, not an attack by liberals.
30. justiceserved | 07.14.09
And how long has Ms. Palin been an economist/energy expert? I live out side NY. Does that make me an expert in the stock market? She is and always will be a waffle house waitress!
31. Harvey | 07.14.09
Ms. Belsie critiques Ms. Palin’s critique by citing Martin Feldstein’s critique (???) which in effect is that the US should not do anything because China, et. al. have not done anything. So the logic is that we should continue to pollute until everyone else agrees not to pollute. Now that is what I call great thinking!
32. Hana de Haya | 07.14.09
The only thing that Palin has to offer is raw ambition, gone amuck.
Can you imagine the nightmare scenario, of life now, with McCain/Palin,
had they been elected?
2012 will not necessarily be a better year for the US and Global economy. Does anyone really want no-nothing people like McCain/Palin running things?
If Palin could not stand the heat as gov of Alaska, how could she begin to run anything else? I cannot bear to write prez….connected with someone like Palin…..just too depressing a thought.
33. Lars | 07.14.09
>> @ 5. Steve Spear : By now it should be apparent that Palin is not positioning herself for a run for the presidency, but for a lucrative talk show slot on Fox News. Her Washington Post Editorial is in keeping with that goal.<<
I hope so. It would be awesome with a daily show where the interviewer gets grilled routinely by the people being interviewed.
34. Hemi | 07.14.09
She’s right about Cap & Trade. Didn’t we learn anything from Cap & Trade in Europe? What was it that happened, the energy companies made a fortune and it didn’t do squat for curbing emissions? And why should we have to pay for this when the energy companies are making billions in profits? This is going to whined up being another Wall Street rip-off if ya ask me.
35. Tyler | 07.14.09
Paul (#3) is right. I don’t think much of Gov. Palin, but — far more than an appeal to “the broad middle”, she need to articulate and promote what she understands and believes in. Her strength is her simplicity, forthrightness and unapologetic conservativism on social and energy issues, and pushing forth nuanced positions on those issues would make her “just another politician”.
One issue with this column though: Andrew Sullivan may be a lot of things, but he’s NO liberal. Referring to him as a “liberal critic” is, at the very least, incorrect.
36. TCE | 07.14.09
Energy Bill Ignores Oil Depletion
Although future fuel shortages and price increases are openly predicted by four Federal Government reports, several books, and multiple documents, Congress refuses to acknowledge oil, coal, or natural gas depletion. There is nothing in H.R. 2454 that even hints Congress understands the consequences. It’s as though energy resource depletion doesn’t exist.
Congressional failure to acknowledge the reality of depletion creates an interesting irony. Congress wants us to believe the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 will create clean energy jobs, achieve energy independence, reduce global warming pollution and transition America to a clean energy economy. But this bill is based on a basic assumption we will always have unlimited quantities of cheap coal, oil and natural gas. The stated objectives of this bill are therefore rendered useless by the underlying assumptions.
There is nothing in this bill that addresses, or even acknowledges,
that oil resource depletion will reduce the production of greenhouse gases
between now and 2050.
Higher prices and limitations on availability will force a reduction of consumption and a decline of economic activity. By 2020 North American oil and other liquids consumption will have fallen below year 2000 levels. Additional reductions will occur through 2050 and beyond. Declining global oil consumption will bring down CO2 levels with greater efficiency than H.R. 2454, and at a much lower cost to the consumer.
Congress needs to include energy resource depletion in its legislative discussions. There can not be any doubt, depletion is a critical component of a credible energy plan.
37. Benjamin Hale | 07.14.09
politicians like quit-Gov Palin remind me of the political scams in american history - in that she is quick to point out and attack points from her political adversaries……. She has long experience in pointing at someone else’s attempt to create policy, but she is short on actually creating anything with impact on any resolution…… In other words, what has she accomplished that actually improved America……(besides quitting)
Any power forward can tell you - Yes you have to pass the ball, when the time is appropriate - But first and foremost, you have to be ‘in the game’ to play. Coaching from the bench, hurts the TEAM - Palin just does not seem to be a team player - She’s a politician. By definition this means she will cheat on her husband, lie to the public and maintain her point of view is for the benefit of America.
My personal opinion - is obvious - I don’t like her - I think she is wasting time and effort of the people we voted to handle our issues - just to promote herself and her own agenda as a politician.
To me - people like that - belong on an island - where they can govern themselves the way they see fit - leave problem solving to problem solvers not politicians who quit there current post to pursue another post
38. Chadlyo | 07.14.09
It sounds pretty obvious that she didn’t come up with this speech on her own. Once again she doesn’t know what she is talking about. I think the GOP is trying to out do what Obama did with this “outside the box grass roots effort”. They think they can win back the white house under the guise of some po dunk Alaskan hockey mom leading the way from outside of the “inside”. I wonder where she meets the GOP big wigs to get her notes for what she’s suppose to talk about next. I’m picturing a frigged igloo adorned with freshly harpooned baby seals….editorial cartoonists, be my guest
39. mac1 | 07.14.09
This is really a lefty site. It is sooooooo amazing to see how you have to comfort yourselves trashing this lady. Talk about your term ” mean-spirited”.
No holds barred when your trying to destroy a conservative, even if she is a woman. The more personeland nasty, the better, right libs? When it comes time to pick up the pieces of the mess this administration is going to be leaving, people like Sarah Palin will be front and center.
Your nightmares are just beginning.
40. kk | 07.14.09
Winner never quit and quitters never win. Learn how to spell. But Palin is a joke and I was hoping she would disappear.
41. Phil | 07.14.09
“Perhaps, freed by the demands and distractions of the governorship, she will be able to buckle down, hone her economic rhetoric, and reach those crucial voters in the middle.”
Yes because we clearly need a president that finds the demands of governing to be a distraction.
42. MJ | 07.14.09
TKevan said “Where are the majority of solar panels made? China.”
I believe the correct answer is Germany (about 75% of the world’s production). Germany adopted a very aggressive stance in 1997 introducing the Renewable Energy Sources Act. Since 2000 Germany has increased it renewable energy from 6.3%to about 15% in 2008.
As a result Germany has taken a global-leadership role in this sector, employing some 214,000 people in the renewable energy sector (2006).
Maybe it is time the US took a leadership role in this issue and got ahead of China, Russia, Saudi Arabia and Germany.
43. Darrell Udelhoven | 07.14.09
There are other options that do not have the negative effects that either Cap-and-Trade or doing nothing could have.
The average person can greatly reduce their home energy use, many could reduce it in half or more.
With our existing economic crisis, we do not need any policies that increase the cost of energy or lead to more unemployment, or less reemployment.
In this situation Cap-and-Trade could lead to a stagflation economic crisis leading to a deeper recession.
44. Everyman | 07.14.09
Palin trully misses the mark.
While Palin spent a few — a very few — years on a state energy board, she hardly is an expert on energy policy.
Her remarks represent the retrenched views of the conservatives.
I’m reminded of JFK’s comments regarding the Apollo program — we choose to do this because it is hard. That should be our appoach to energy policy. We choose to pursue environmentally sustainable energy policy not because it is easy or convenient, but because it is difficult and necessary.
Palin appeals to all that is weak and easy and self-serving.
We need leaders — Democratic and Republican — that appeal to that which is best in us, to inspire us to do great things.
45. JP | 07.14.09
“There is no denying that as the world becomes more industrialized, we need to reform our energy policy and become less dependent on foreign energy sources. But the answer doesn’t lie in making energy scarcer and more expensive!”
Partisan talking heads have an uncanny way of making their words look shiny on the surface but offering no substance underneath. Yes, reform our energy policy and let’s indeed become less dependent on….FOSSIL FUEL SOURCES. Saying “foreign energy” is just a pathetic half-truth, a cheap slogan that appeals to those who don’t think beyond the rhetoric.
It’s the Dirty Energy, stupid.
46. Mike Smith | 07.14.09
As long as China and other emerging economies are wholly or partly exempt from environmental legislations, manufacturing work will keep moving to less regulated countries. There is a triple strike against the environment. 1. the west ships raw materials, sensitive components, engineers half way around the world to China, 2. China production uses energy predominantly from dirty coal plants, 3. finished goods are shipped half way around the world again to western marktes. Sadly, the Global Warming Legislation before Congress will only accelerate this nonsense.
Politicians from neither side get this.
47. June | 07.14.09
Mr. Obama and his addmt. are going nowhere.
repeat, mark my words. Obama and his addmt are going nowhere.
48. Jon Do | 07.14.09
I’m certain that Palin is a major cause of global warming, because when she appears, libs begin to spout off hot air and lots of CO2. I must say it is an entertaining show, and she feeds on their tears and fears.
That aside, Cap and Tax is an easy target, since it is expensive and won’t reduce global warming. Which makes it a perfect target for Palin, since libs are obliged to take the opposite of any position Palin takes.
49. Larry | 07.14.09
What was the Washington Post thinking? It’s obvious that she didn’t write the Op Ed piece. I’ve seen her writing and, other than the red meat for the base lines, this is obviously not in her voice. This was very dishonest on the part of the Post. Op Eds should reflect the real writing skills of the supposed author. I’m sharpening my crayola set to be ready for Palin’s upcoming coloring book.
50. Dee | 07.14.09
What a joke. Palin quits before actually running for President but it so obvious she going to run with this type of article. LOL, how she panders to the Chattering Class. She should start her own party. The Gosh Darn Cry Baby Party…
51. Will | 07.14.09
If you auctioned off the 85 percent of the allowances that are currently designated to be free than in year one of the program you would see the cost of producing energy and manufactured goods skyrocket with almost no reduction in U.S. carbon production. So when you say that it “softens the blow” of higher energy prices on homes, it only softens the blow that it directly creates. Having some allowances given away at the beginning reduces the cost to simply keep the lights on for the first few years of the program where the overall reduction of carbon is minimal. The percent of the allowances that are given free of charge steadily decreases until they all have to be purchased. So the polluters still pay, just at a more logical time. Let me say though that I agree that this bill is completely worthless without a similar movement coming from China and India. I mean the EPA even said that the bill would not “materially effect global carbon concentrations in the atmosphere” because there is no similar movement coming from China or India, and they have expressed recently at the G8 summit that they have no intention of “following our example” so the idea that we are going to lead the way is not true either.
52. Pete | 07.14.09
Someone has to put a stop to the Obama train wreck on cap and tax. We have enormous resources that will last the US for the next 250 years. There is no need to drive our economy into the stone age to support Al Gore and Goldman to blow up the next carbon bubble.
2010 there will be change you can count on. Most of it sending these Spendocrats who signed these bills without even reading them.
53. Tim Kim | 07.14.09
Do you think she is realted to the 2007 Miss South Carolina? Maybe US Americans dont have maps and such as.
54. John Huffman | 07.14.09
After reading the coments on Sarah Palin I have come to the conclusion that Sarah has the liberals scared.
56. Don | 07.14.09
Let’s see…most think Palin a dunce, a quitter, inept, etc.etc.etc. One question for all you intellects….how is this Obama/Biden team working out for America?
57. dennis | 07.14.09
Hey, I have an idea that’s gooder than Palin’s. Let’s ferget all this “alternative energy” communism and just drill, drill, drill, keeping drilling that hole, same hole. And when Earth is 10 degrees hotter and all the ice is gone and the seas have risen by several feet, inundating LA, Manhattan, and a thousand other coastal cities, and we have 40 million environmental refugees and the world economy is in shambles and chaos rules the planet, we can elect Sarah Palin our Fearless Leader. Because she’s such a danged visionary, and the librals are all such chikn littles.
We used to be able to recognize and address problems defined for us by science (landed on the moon, conquered polio, and on and on). Now we only believe our scientists if they agree with our regimented partisan opinions. God save us from ourselves.
58. jk-II | 07.14.09
>> “Those are applause lines, red meat for the dinner circuit of hard-core conservatives.”
Exactly. While the majority of Americans do not agree with Ms. Palin on numerous issues, she is not stupid; in real life; she is much more than a Saturday Night Live parody.
She knows she can never be President. She knows that the Governorship of Alaska is a dead-end job with only a moderate salary. She has a family to support, including a disabled child and a brand new grandchild.
So what’s a mother to do?
Find the best paying job she can so she can put away money for the leaner years ahead when her notoriety fades and the spotlight finds a new glamour child. For Ms. Palin - right now - the big money is on “the dinner circuit of hard-core conservatives” who will pay her a lot of money for after dinner rhetoric. She may be able to convert the lecture circuit into a TV or Radio talk show which will provide her with a much better income than the Governor or the President.
Ms. Palin does not need to be politically correct; she does not need to be accurate on policy; she needs only to inflame and attract the audience that will pay her the highest salary so she can support her family.
It’s a smart move.
59. Attila The Plumber | 07.14.09
And who, exactly, do we think actually wrote the op-ed piece?
Anyone with half a brain knows it wasn’t Palin herself.
“That energy is, as we all know, a thing which we want to progress, the country won’t have to get any anyway because we Alaskans know, and try to tell a hockey mom that you won’t or can’t believe in the future, you’ll find out for sure what that is. It’s just that simple. People know that.”
OMG!
60. cynthia | 07.14.09
Sarah’s “Drill baby, drill” does not put the proper infrastructure in place for the future of our planet, jobs, resource development, only serving to divert attention away from our efforts to make the changes required to replace what needs to be replaced.
The Earth itself is fueled by the energy of the SUN. We have been duped into thinking oil is king, fueling only pollution, war, and dead-end programs for our children’s children.
If Sarah’s vision stays this narrow, as we know it will, she will reach the end of her rope-a-dope ideas planted by the rope-a-dope oil companies.
I’m tired of putting taxpayer money into Exxon Mobil’s bank accounts. Aren’t you?
Grow up Sarah. Get a life.
62. John W. Fort Wayne, IN USA | 07.14.09
I think that your periodical needs to change its name. You really are “political science monitor”.
63. Drew | 07.14.09
It was pretty careless and quite misleading of the author of this article to refer to the criticism of Palin to be from “liberal critics.”
Anyone who has read Andrew Sullivan or seen him on television would know that he is not a liberal.
According to Wikipedia, “Sullivan describes himself as a libertarian conservative.”
64. FL voter | 07.14.09
Scott Browne: “America taxing carbon dioxide, the air that tree’s breath, while China builds coal fired electricity plants to fuel their economy, means the world will lose the climate control issue, sooner rather then later.”
In fact, China is building some of the most advanced and cleanest coal plants on the planet. Lots of them. They clearly leapfrogged in the field and envision export the coal plant technology in future.
65. JJ | 07.14.09
Watch and see the job losses…not in the energy sector, but EVERYWHERE-
If you want to limit your energy uses, start now- don’t wait on legislation. It won’t make an iota of difference in the world-
66. Annie | 07.14.09
Keep talking, Sarah, and sending half your party scrambling away from you. It will be a great day when the Republican party splits down the middle and sinks into oblivian.
67. Marko-Q | 07.14.09
“She needs to be honest and stand for what she believes. Either she will get elected for what she believes or she won’t. We’ve had enough people in office who simply say what they need to say to get elected. If the middle is too stupid to realize what will go to China & India after it is explained to them then we are all doomed anyway.”
Been there, done that in 2008. She lost.
68. MarkRSM | 07.14.09
Dear Friends,
It is funny how people are always looking back to Reagan as a great president but we want a Jimmy Carter type president. Jimmy Carter was one of the smarter president, but he was not able to cut the meat of the issues, and he was a very bad leader.
Mrs Palin gets the issue, increasing the cost of energy costs jobs, and the jobs will move to countries that provide cheap dirty power, such as China.
Why is this so hard for an educated person to understand, the cap and trade bill, will cost americans jobs, increase taxes, and produce more CO2 than we had before.
But on the good side we get to hire a bunch of new government employees.
69. djhhh@q.com | 07.14.09
PLEASE…PLEASE….STOP QUOTING MS. PALIN…I’m hoping she will just “GO AWAY.” We don’t need her in any way, shape, or form…another political figure….She is not good for OUR COUNTRY….We need BRAINS!!!!
70. June Jackson | 07.14.09
Mr. Obama and his addmt. are going nowhere.
repeat, mark my words. Obama and his addmt are going nowhere.
71. Rmoen | 07.14.09
Great points, Ms. Belsie. But with 1,500 pages the cap-and-trade bill is hard to capture in a single editorial so let’s give Ms. Palin an opportunity to flesh out her argument.
Daily I read editorials, comments and letters-to-the-editor from all over the nation. Support for cap and trade is evaporating. Whereas two weeks ago it was maybe 2-to-1 against cap and trade, opinion now seems to be at least 6-to-1 against. The Senate will be wise to heed the overwhelming lack of public support and stop this disastrous legislation from passing into law.
If instead of cap and trade the United States had a national mandate to replace coal generation plants with natural gas and nuclear energy, plus if we replaced our commuter cars with battery-powered electric cars, we would drastically reduce our dependence on foreign oil and reduce CO2 emissions faster and beyond the proposed cap and trade targets.
– Robert Moen, http://www.energyplanUSA.com
72. nowukkers | 07.14.09
The point is that this country will, sooner or later, have to develop clean, renewable sources of energy. Total reliance on non-renewable sources of fuel has only one result - extinction of those sources. Moreover, the current state of carbon-based emissions cause pollution, and there is every possibility, according to the clear majority of scientific research, that the resulting pollution will have adverse effects on Earth’s climate. Since there is the clear potential for deriving renewable sources of energy from Earth’s climate - solar, wind, tidal etc - ignoring this growing threat also jeopardises our future ability to adapt and create alternative forms of renewable energy. Palin’s op-ed does not confront that reality. Instead, it is a slightly more polysyllabic iteration of that mindless mantra uttered before the 2008 election: “Drill, Baby, Drill”.
73. Gar | 07.14.09
Palin is correct.
The Satellite data has shown that the Earth Temp. has cooled down every year since 2000. Last year the Earth experienced record lows (for the last 20 years). This coming year will be colder then last year. The Earth is not in a period of Global Warming cycle caused by green house gasses. We are on hte brink of the next Ice Age. If you have paid attention to the Global Warming Advocates you will have noticed they have changed to Global Climate. That is because they have seen the data on the up and coming Ice Age. You don’t have to believe me, look it up.
74. john | 07.14.09
Do you ever stop and wonder if maybe your hatred or Sarah Palin is just a little bit… irrational?
Have you ever read 1984? You’re the ones joining in the 2 minute hate. Are you going to vote for Cap ‘n’ Trade now, just to poke Sarah in the eye? Like you wanted to do with George W. Bush and Kyoto?
The climate changes, you know. That’s just what it does. That’s why we don’t live under glaciers these days.
Hate is ugly. Lose the hate.
75. Everyman | 07.14.09
@ Mr Huffington: “After reading the coments on Sarah Palin I have come to the conclusion that Sarah has the liberals scared.”
Willful ignorance and power should frighten anyone.
76. Larry Solesby | 07.14.09
The forum participants that waste time responding to Palin’s platitudes should remember that this country’s marketplace has always had politicians and brodcasters for the intelligent, the creative, the educated, and the empathetic and those for the mentally lazy, the greedy, the bigoted, and for the outright dumbasses. The latter category listens to and supports “W”, Reagan, Palin, Limbaugh, Dan Quayle, O’Riley, Al Sharpton, Anne Coulter, and their lesser-known rightist counterparts. I dare anyone to produce verifiable historical data about any conservative producing anything of significant value and consequence in any activity other than business (which is logical since business is all about money-making, i.e. greed).
77. Gaias Child | 07.14.09
Clearly, she is not writing her own editorial. As soon as she starts talking, out comes the burble of word salad and silly purposefulness. Whoever’s doing her writing is doing somewhat better. Now that she’s got a forum, there will never be a dull moment in journalism.
78. James | 07.14.09
We would do well to remember that Ms. Palin supported Bush/Cheaney and their energy policies that were nothing more than turning ENRON loose on the state of California to remove Gray Davis and install another actor. Now California is not only the poster child for fraud in government but also the stone broke laughing stock of the fourth largest economy in the world. Ms Palin is a far cry from the intelligence level it will take to repair the damage done from decades of republican greed and democratic ambivalence. Her insistane on running an oil pipeline through a forien country and expose it to taxes and cutoffs beyond our control was stupidity personified.
79. john | 07.14.09
“Anyone who has read Andrew Sullivan or seen him on television would know that he is not a liberal.” — Drew
Maybe. But he has an extremely unhealthy obsession with Ms. Palin. Something about her drives him over the edge, I wonder what that is?
80. Jar Head | 07.14.09
Obama is trying to tax the Co2 that we exhale and people are insulting Palin.
Next thing you know the libs will want to take over the American auto industry and attempt to save the economy by spending trillions they don’thave. Oh, they’re already doing that? Wow, I guess Palin is an imbecile. Imagine suggesting that we develop an energy policy using the resources we already have.What a crazy idea.
81. Dude | 07.14.09
The US should simply do what Palin did in Alaska - raise taxes on oil and give a rebate back to citizens.
http://mccain.voterfactcheck.com/facts/11/palin_windfall_profits_tax_344511.shtml
http://aklegislature.com/stories/111607/leg_20071116036.shtml
If it was good enough for Alaska, it should be good enough for the rest of us.
82. Steward of the Earth | 07.14.09
The argument that energy-intensive manufacturing will be outsourced to China if carbon caps are implemented has some major flaws. First, SOMETHING must be done to prevent further climate change. The US needs to lead, not act in fear, to address this problem. And as the greatest consumer of energy per capita, it is our responsibility to do so.
Secondly, this manufacturing loss argument could be applied to any technological innovation in history. Did we ulimately lose competitive economic advantages with the invention of the computer or automated factory assembly line? No, we increased the efficiency of our economic engine allowing even more of our citizens a life beyond manual labor.
83. John | 07.14.09
The Waxman/Markey proposal aka “Cap-and-Trade” is an attempt to curb greenhouse gas emissions by the year 2050 by roughly 80% over current emission levels. While this is a noble effort and certainly a central item for debate between liberals and conservatives, the entire idea of “green” energy fueling (arguably) the world’s most established economy has been lost to the political squabbling and selfishness that has polluted Capitol Hill for the last two decades. The resolution will not pass in the Senate because no one understands what the original goal of the bill was!
Cap-and-Trade is not the answer. Increased taxes on everyday goods will drive the current economy into the ground. To put it in perspective, think about fuel: Waxman/Markey is likely to increase taxes another $0.70 at the pump per gallon - this ON TOP of the roughly $0.40 you already pay per gallon to the government, while “big oil” maintains a margin of less than $0.06 per gallon!
I for one am not in favor of the government telling me what is best. We need to do our homework on this issue and INFORM OUR SENATORS of the implications that the passing of this legislation will have for all of us. Get involved! Speak with your electric company or your gas company… Ask them what the implications are. You will not be disappointed!
84. Mike C | 07.14.09
It’s amazing to me that people find fault with anyone that calls for more domestic production of energy, let alone someone who knows something about like Sarah Palin. We have vast supplies of natural gas and oil in our country, however no one wants to drill for it. California would not have a budget crisis if they allowed for safe and responsible off-shore drilling. What about the natural gas that we are buying from Russia. They definitely have our interests at heart. Let’s keep buying oil from Iran and Venezuela. That’s a plus for our future. Our energy policy under Obama is a unmitigated disaster. Can anybody say Nuclear Power? Not Obama. Not for us.
85. Arthur Collins | 07.14.09
The Editor, The Christian Science Monitor:
Carbon Caps are fundamentally at fault because they will increase greenhouse emissions, rather than reduce them: ‘high emitters’ will simply transfer their operations to countries with low environmental standards.
The correct solution for the U.S., and for California, is to provide cheap, clean energy - thereby attracting ‘high emitters’ to a beneficial and supportive regulatory regime. The current policy of coercion, and imposing caps and penalties, only encourages evasion and resistance, and searching for the cheapest, but environmentally damaging, solution - this is human nature. It is far easier for government, and society, to ‘pull’ on the noodle with positive, economically supportive solutions, rather than try to ‘push’ the noodle with coercion and punishments and prohibitions.
The only currently available ‘cheap, clean energy’ is nuclear. Solar and wind have excessive land use, operational and economic costs - they will never solve, by themselves, the climate change problem. We should be trying to attract customers to cheap, clean energy - become a world energy Mecca. Our current policy of punishing energy producers and manufacturers only chases them away from our shores, and devastates our economy.
Regards, Art Collins, Retired Aerospace Engineer
86. Kathleen Finigan | 07.14.09
I hate conspiracy theories but I’m beginning to think that Hilary Clinton had a point. Note the cessation of highly publicized, vitriolic and fear-mongering charges leveled against Barack Obama in recent months by Dick Cheney. Seems that Sarah Palin has now taken over that portfolio. I expect we’ll see a determined, consistent public effort to undermine the Obama administration, with Palin as the figurehead but orchestrated by unknown others who are likely footing the bill for her services and undoubtedly providing her with copy.
87. Simpleton | 07.14.09
20. Jay | 07.14.09
She is not dead wrong she is on the mark. She hit the right bill. She just wanted to point out some things other than the norm. is the job creation great? No. there are more and more people loosing their jobs everyday. She tied the two issues. this is the best thing she can do! great job! Bad story.
===
Check for how long the unemployment worsened under Reagan, when things were no where near as bad as they were when Obama took office.
A 780 billion bill was passed just four months back. It is going to take some 16 to 18 months before the unemployment improves.
Drilling in ANWR is not going to save jobs in the country. That is what is so uneducated about Palin’s rants
89. The Blake | 07.14.09
Why is this news? Does anyone really care what Sarah Palin’s view is? While we’re at it, why don’t we find what what John Kerry’s opinion is on cap-and-trade, or Ron Paul for that matter, because their opinions would seem just as relevant.
90. Dee | 07.14.09
I love Sarah. Short of submitting a white paper ( do any of you know what that even is?? ), she speaks basic Econ and American Values 101. The problem is that this country has been spoon fed non-sensical vitrolic rhetoric for so long that you people think that foolishness is reasonable and acceptable.
It’s not and even though not a lot of people like me are commenting here, believe me there are a lot more of us out here than you may think. And more are beginning to realize the difference.
As for quitting. It’s the smartest, bravest and most generous thing she could have done. Not only for her family, but for the great State of Alaska. Now the State doesn’t have to waste their resources on frivolous lawsuits when there are serious issues to tackle. Just cause she doesn’t hold the title, doesn’t mean she isn’t influencing government there and doesn’t have a longer reach to influence the country as a whole. She’s brilliant!
Keep running your mouths about her - it’s the best press she can receive. The difference between her and the rest of this dribble is so obvious and no matter how loud you scream, you still sound like a bunch of two year olds.
I’ll vote for Palin whenever she chooses to run and - beware. She’ll win.
91. Donna | 07.14.09
Let’s not underestimate Sarah Palin. She is definitely up to something. The thought of her as president of the U.S. is frightening to me and it is a possibility. When I was young no one thought a man with the name of Barack Obama could ever win the presidential election… but he did and so far he’s not half bad. I used to like Sarah Palin and I had familial connections to Alaska so I knew about her long before the voters in the lower 48 knew who she was. She is not for the environment and right now, unless we drastically change our ways our environment and our society is failing. She is a person who insists there is no problem even in the face of melting icebergs and drowning polar bears. She lives in a state where the evidence of global warming is incontrovertible. She has an agenda which she has not yet revealed and she bears watching.
92. Bob | 07.14.09
How is Saudi Arabia not in control of our energy now, since it exports more crude oil than any other country, and we use more of it than any other country? If GE, a US corporation, chooses to buy or build turbines or anything else in China, or anywhere else, how is it that conservatives have a problem with that, since its based on that famous Econ 101 principle of free enterprise they’re always lecturing about?
93. Lewis | 07.14.09
Sarah Palin is obviously not qualified for any real leadership position, and I don’t think anyone would expect her to win - she just doesn’t have anything good to offer. Consider one of this Country’s biggest issues is how so many people bicker and nothing gets done. Could you imagine if Palin was ‘Top Dog’? You can’t lead when you’re as close-minded as she is, it just wouldn’t work.
What is really scary is the number of people who like her. I’m an independent who did not vote for McCain because of the Palin tactic; republicans wake up your party used the female sex to try and win an election. Totally degrading but people eat it up; I just don’t get it…I think if Romeny, Huckabee, or even Powell was selected for Repub VP we’d have a different president today and I bet a lot of people feel the same way.
As for Cap & Trade it’s just another scam to make money for big business, specifically banks and investment firms (wallstreet of course). There is no reason these ‘carbon bucks’ should be sold on the open market, they should be regulated and the private sector shouldn’t be making money on these government regulations as this bill allows…it truly is a scary piece of legislation and further proof our government needs an overhaul…it’s bad everyone, really bad.
There is some great investigative reporting out there on this bill and our country over the last 40 years of growing government. You would probably start a revolution if you knew the half of it…dems, repubs, it doesn’t matter they’re all sellouts and we’re still left at the bottom begging for scraps…
94. Ken Baily | 07.14.09
Sure, Sarah Palin wrote the op/ed herself. If so, it’s the first thing she’s written herself in the last year. You can tell when it’s really from Ms. Palin - it makes no sense at all.
95. Chief Rhetoric | 07.14.09
TO: 16. Corrado | 07.14.09
Winers never quite and quiters never wine
TRY “Whiners never quit and quitters never whine!” PROBLEM: We need a stronger educated class of citizens in this country. Mrs. Palin would never have a chance in a great country of well educated citizens. Her depth of understanding
Furthermore, Palin misses the mark on this issue, change in economic stewardship of energy and environmental resources is inevitable, being ahead of the change is SO MUCH MORE profitable than resisting it…just watch Japan and Germany kick our ass again as they did with the auto industry. The energy industry USED to be #1USA…let’s see where we stand in 15 years from now!
97. Simpleton | 07.14.09
73. john | 07.14.09
Do you ever stop and wonder if maybe your hatred or Sarah Palin is just a little bit… irrational?
Have you ever read 1984?
The climate changes, you know. That’s just what it does. That’s why we don’t live under glaciers these days.
Hate is ugly. Lose the hate.
==
There is warming caused by man. Release of heat trapping gases (C02) has contributed to it. Understand that, and you’ll shed your ignorance.
I do not hate you, just your ignorance. You lose your ignorance and I’ll lose the hate.
Deal?
98. Jerry Dercks | 07.14.09
Where are all the good capitalists out there? You buy cheap and sell high. Oil and gas have a limited supply and will be far more valuable in the future. Buying from the rest of the world now and saving our domestic reserves will give our children something to pay back the massive debt we are building for them. Why do we only think for the short term? Sarah Palin may want to cash out now but all domestic reserves are money in the bank; safe where they currently are and gaining value. Moving to green energy sources means jobs and a competitive advantage as fossil fuels increase in price. True conservatives should understand this. This isn’t a “liberal” issue
99. HumanSimpleton | 07.14.09
55. Don | 07.14.09
Let’s see…most think Palin a dunce, a quitter, inept, etc.etc.etc. One question for all you intellects….how is this Obama/Biden team working out for America?
===
So far better than what we had in the last eight years, or what we could have had for the next four with McCain/Palin.
At least for the America I want to live in, and you don’t.
Thanks for asking.
100. Andrea | 07.14.09
She needs to pack up and go home. She crashed a party she wasn’t invited to and got away with it. She wouldn’t even qualify to volunteer for the PTA. We all have her number now and those of you think she is some brilliant politician you might want to read the Emperor‘s New Cloths.
102. Simpleton | 07.14.09
72. Gar | 07.14.09
Palin is correct.
The Satellite data has shown that the Earth Temp. has cooled down every year since 2000. Last year the Earth experienced record lows (for the last 20 years). This coming year will be colder then last year. The Earth is not in a period of Global Warming cycle caused by green house gasses. We are on hte brink of the next Ice Age. If you have paid attention to the Global Warming Advocates you will have noticed they have changed to Global Climate. That is because they have seen the data on the up and coming Ice Age. You don’t have to believe me, look it up.
==
Provide the satellite data reference that backs up the above hot air.
Or, you can educate yourself: http://www.realclimate.org/
Easy choice really, but I bet you choose the wrong one.
103. The US Vet | 07.14.09
It is interesting that liberials are drooling and spitting to say anything negative against Sara Palin. They are like rabid dogs whose minds are diseased and beyond all reason. There is never a point for point debate, or a well articulated counter argument - there is only seething rage, decorated with disparaging comments and four-lettered words.
104. captbilly | 07.14.09
What smart polotical move can a none too smart politician make? Look Palin is an anomolous political joke. She never had any business being in politics in the first place. Perhaps it was resonably safe having her as mayor of a little Alaskan village, but at any higher position than Mayor of Wassilla she is completely out of her league.
The media has given Palin a complete free ride as to her compitence. She is entirely capable of spewing extreme conservative croud pleasing lines, but totally at a loss as to how to accomplish anything of value to her state or our country. Even though her family, her ethics and her extremely out of the mainstream views are more fun to write pieces about, the media misses the much more important point when they speak about her as though she was a viable leader. Look at her interviews, any time she speaks without a script she talks jibberish. Sometimes even with a script she is scarilly incoherant and rambling. Her behavior in and out of the view of the media is pretty darn crazy, but the media covers her like she was somehow the intellectual and emotional equal to all the other politicians out there.
Perhpas the media knows something about our politicians that they are not telling us, but I personally have never seen a politician so over her head than Palin (and yes I was paying attention to GW Bush over the past 8 years, and yes he was also in over his head, but not quite so much as Palin). The media owes us the right to expect an honest appraisal of a politicians abilities, not a whitewash of the obvious.
By the way does anyone remember when CNN’s Dr. Gupta was so worried about offending any CNN viewers that when he did an analysis of the likelyhood of Obama or McCain of dying in office, that his ultimate conclusion was that a 72 year old with an extensive history of cancer and other serious medical conditions was just as likely to survive 4 years as President as a 46 year old with zero history of any serious medical conditions at all. My point is that the only reason that Palin has not been laughed out of politics when she ran for VP, is that the media simply refuses to say anything that might offend any of their viewers. Does anyone remember the coverage of the run up to the war in Irag, or the coverage of the war itself? No major media outlet said anything that might be interpreted as even slightly questioning of the the Administration’s line, for fear of being tuned out by the audience. Palin has benefitted hugely from the media’s unwillingness to say even obvious things, that might offend a customer.
105. mortified for my country | 07.14.09
One day we are all going to cringe in embarrassment that this preposterous fraud was given a national platform to parrot her Free Republic-based grasp of issues. Right about when she signs up for a stint on “I’m a Celebrity, Get Me Out Of Here!”
106. Kane | 07.14.09
Obviously Sarah didn’t write the article - it’s way beyond her.
Corner her in a live interview on the points and she’ll reveal that truth in a heartbeat
107. Bob Wright | 07.14.09
A couple of people have said that the editorial was written for Palin, but … “Do we want to control our energy supply and its environmental impact” is conventional Palinese. Do we want to control the environmental impact of our energy supply? Hm? Do we? What do you suppose the question means? The environmental impact of energy supply would refer to things like oil tanker wrecks, or coal runoff from mountaintop mining. I don’t think that’s what she intends to be talking about though. She meant (I think) something like “Do we want to control our energy supply and the environmental impact of our energy use” but just grabbed onto the key term “energy” and then hung two different items off the same word, without noticing that she wasn’t quite making sense. A grade school teacher wouldn’t be that clumsy, let alone a professional writer of any sort. Folksy is one thing, but real ineptitude can hardly be faked. There are other examples like this in the piece, that point to the slightly astonishing certainty that she sat down and wrote it herself. The ideas are pretty much just cliches and memes, but the style is all Palin.
108. Brew | 07.14.09
She’s just another neocon, and if the Republicans put up another neocon ticket … America gets another Democratic trifecta, because the Libertarian brand of Republican will not vote for thier ilk. We are sick of the empty promises and warmongering. Don’t tell us you support a limited government, at the same time creating the largest branch of government yet, homeland security, and don’t talk about the nanny state, while enacting the most financially unsustainable medical expansion the USA has ever seen in medicare and medicade reform. All the while raping what liberties we have left from the bill of rights. So in all reality liberals should be screaming from the mountain how great she is.
109. Jonathan | 07.14.09
She’s spent “years” dealing with energy policy? Do you mean a few months in 2003 on the Oil and Gas Commission (before she quit) and then the two years that she was governor (before she quit), right? That’s not much of a record. Other than getting a windfall tax passed and making a string of false statements about the degree to which we rely on Alaska for energy, how has she shown that she knows anything about national energy policy?
110. AlexB | 07.14.09
Would Palin have a problem with cap and dividend? That’s probably the better choice, though if it will cost her more to fill up her Hummer than I’m sure she won’t like it. Her argument seems to be that we need to do nothing now since Jesus will come back before climate change matters.
111. fiendish avatar | 07.14.09
Palin expresses disagreement with Obama’s XYZ policy. News, at 11.
*YAWN*
I clicked this link by accident, walked away, and found it loaded on my screen. Are we really going to read this much into every speech she gives? At this point, Palin is like the sister that won’t stop staring at the little brother, and the media is the little brother constantly complaining about the sister’s staring (granted, this article is not in the form of a complaint, but it all sounds the same at this point). Here’s an idea: look the other way!
112. AnotherMark | 07.14.09
It is terribly obvious she had a ghost writer write that article for her… Her points are too clear… too well formed… too on subject. There is also punctuation used… often… and correctly. THERE IS NO WAY she wrote that.
113. RThomas | 07.14.09
“Hate is ugly. Lose the hate.”
How true. Of course, Sarah Palin doesn’t hate anybody, right?
115. Andrew | 07.14.09
RE: post 47 so what you are saying is that the “perfect target” for Palin is an “easy target”? Well that shows her competency.
Cap and trade is the type of free market program that conservatives claim to promote, and then they argue against it because liberals proposed it. That being said, it is a silly solution. The best way to reduce dependence on foreign energy sources while also promoting employment is to build up our own alternative energy sectors, like wind and solar power. That may just help out the whole climate change thing too…
116. Icarus | 07.14.09
Obama has access to the best economic and energy minds in the world. And Palin’s source of information is…what?
117. Gregory S. | 07.14.09
Sarah Palin will no doubt become more articulate in her ability to argue the issues. Cap & trade WILL compel some businesses to “outsource” the manufacturing of their goods to places such as China, to avoid the higher cost. Any rational business owner would undoubtedly look for ways to save money/increase revenue. In our ever growing global economy, business owners are discovering the advantages of utilizing the land and manpower that exists on continents not our own. Makes sense. It’s amazing how many people love to pick on Sarah and her faux pas, yet give passes to so many others. Instead of looking at the validity of the arguments for and against C&T, within our own communities, informing each other of the real pros and cons, we do this foolishness.
118. R. L. Hails Sr. P. E. | 07.14.09
Having engineered some five score of thermal power plants, and spent a decade assessing advanced technologies in energy and material science, I have far more confidence in Mrs. Palin’s writings than this Administration’s cap and trade policy. To boil down the issue, candidate Obama Promised that energy costs under his leadership will skyrocket. The political struggle of cap and trade is simply to shift these unsustainable costs to others. All alternate energy technologies are, and will be far more costly that atomic or fossil fuel technologies. Since energy costs are inversely related to the standard of living, all Americans will get significantly poorer under cap and trade. It is inevitable. Moreover, if China and India do not constrain combustion, they will dominate competitive heavy industry, a point Governor Palin made in promoting US energy sources.
I welcome rebuttal by Professional Engineers, but will ignore most of the technically juvenile responses driven by partisan hatred.
119. Norris Hall | 07.14.09
Palin’s emphasis on more oil exploration is way off the mark.
What we need to be doing is focusing on an energy source that’s going to take us into the next century.
Oil is not it.
1. The world’s oil supplie are being used up faster than it is being regenerated. We are now resorting to plunge the ocean depths and squeeze it out of shale to keep us supplied with oil
2. It’s becoming too expensive as the world competes for limited oil reserves. $4 dollar gas sent shockwaves through our economy. Once the recession is over expect to be in for an even bigger shock
3. The price and supply is constantly manipulated by OPEC, oil refiners and commodities speculators. Even though oil stockpiles are growing and oil use is down…the price continues to climb.
4. Burning oil in the atmosphere pollutes
What we need is a new source of energy for the next 1000 years.
An energy source that is
1. inexhaustible
2. available to all countries…not just the lucky once sitting on oil or natural gas
3. cheap
4. clean
5. controlled by the consumer..not some corporation or cartel
We have wind, solar, gasoline, coal, natural gas, and nuclear. Pick the one that delivers the most promise.
120. J Main | 07.14.09
I am a local in Wasilla, Alaska. I enjoyed Sarah Palin’s presence in our town and have supported her in her rise as a political person. Now I feel that she is out of her depth since John McCain and the GOP recruited her. She is a small town girl who has gone to the big city and now wants the money, glamour and lights that the national stage has to offer. This is an age old story in America. Throw a little money and fame at people and they forget what is important, all the while talking about how they are serving the Lord. She is no pitbull with lipstick. She has neither the courage or smarts to make a difference. She is scared, arrogant, ignorant and lashing out at a world she doesn’t understand. She will sell herself to the highest bidder, because that is truly the big city American way.
121. Thom | 07.14.09
Well, she’ll soon be unemployed (by choice) and in the unenviable position of having to bring in cash to pay the mortgage, household and other expenses. We can expect to hear more from her, in many media venues - whether you like it, or not.
122. jkt | 07.14.09
Sarah Palin - the newest face of Republican Party propaganda. The words in her op-ed simply are not hers. She cannot write that well, just as she is incapable of clear articulation. Perhaps she has the ability to read the talking points aloud, but don’t ask her any questions about those points because you will not be able to understand the question or answer it. She is just there to deliver the message (repeat 3 times). This is just Sarah Palin making money for her family — a noble cause (I guess), but totally selfish. This is a governor of a state, not too shabby of a job, having a public fight with a 19 year old at the moment — does that not tell you something about her character? IF she should end up on a presidential ballot as an Independent (because she won’t survive the Republican party nomination process), she will only take votes away from whoever is the Republican presidential candidate. Sarah — GO FOR IT!
123. Jerry Johnson | 07.14.09
Obama is a pathetic joke. He became President without enough experience to handle the mayor’s job in the small town where Palin started. It is difficult for me to believe that Barack Obama taught a course in constitutional law. It is so obvious that he knows nothing at all about the Constitution. He would be quite competent teaching a course in marxism. He should stick to what he knows.
124. Attila the Plumber | 07.14.09
The coming Ice Age, Gar?
The only thing frozen is that kind of thinking, courtesy of Ice Age Palin.
The science is clear and emphatic, and the feedback loops in our complex environment have, in some cases, reached their tipping points.
What was a fear and a theory 25 years ago is a looming and frightening reality now.
We are seeing some of it but our grandchildren and their kids will likely see most of it, and it will not be pretty.
For about 11,000 years, the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was about 280 parts per million- steadily for all that time. Now it’s about 380 parts per million, most of the increases coming since 1950 and the rate of increase just going off the charts in the last 30 years.
Come on, Gar. Do a little research and get informed.
125. PatNC | 07.14.09
Wait a minute, Laurent!! Since when did Andrew Sullivan become a “liberal”?!! Have you read any of his books?
I am a Reagan conservative, and I think that Sullivan is one of the clearest conservative voices out there (I know, I too was really disappointed that he supported Obama, even though I didn’t care much for McCain… but thats besides the point). Just because he is critical of extreme nut cases like Palin doesn’t make him “unconservative” - it just shows how much the crazies have hijacked the great movement. I don’t think that Goldwater or Reagan or Buckley would recognize these people who pretend to be conservative these days.
126. Steven | 07.14.09
What will be outsourced to China and India is obvious, jobs. If China and India are not imposing increased costs on energy on the same industries that we are imposing these new costs on, then our domestic industries will outsource those operations. Simple. That’s why she called it cap and tax. This is just another cost added to doing business in America and industries will outsource to low cost countries to stay competitive. What’s so hard to understand? Lastly a very salient point about environmental protection was made in the op-ed. Why if we care so much about the global environment, should we outsource our energy production to countries that don’t care as much about the environment as we do? Environmentalist and liberal always talk about we are one world and yet close down production in ANWR in favor of production in Venezuela or Saudi Arabia? Who would produce the oil “cleaner”, us or them?
127. Bob | 07.14.09
A whole lot of people who can’t even spell are calling Sarah stupid. (The fear of this woman on the part of libs is palpable.) Behind this whole topic is the religion known as man-made global warming. Question it and you’ll be burned at the stake (releasing all manner of pollutants into the air). See globalwarminghoax.com
128. RJC DEVIL DOG | 07.14.09
You Lefties have proven your education levels with your comments here. I live in Wasilla AK. Sarah Palin is singlehandedly responsible for the natural gaspipeline Alaska is progressing towards. It was her who stood up to a republican party that ran the state. Check your history and look into the Pipline that Alaska’s Legislature turned down, that was the plan of Gov. F Murkowski. His Plan was “Give the Oil Companies whatever they want, so long as there is a pipeline.” Now that is not only bad for Alaskans, It is Bad for The United States Of America as a whole. More supply=Lower prices to the consumer. I know the Nation for which I proudly defended in the United States Marine Corps is better than all this name calling, and inmature behavior. Please before you post anything do the proper research. A keyboard at your fingertips does not raise your intelligence.
Respectfully Ryan J Clark USMC Vet.
129. grannynerd@gmail.com | 07.14.09
Several media have reported that she will campaign for any candidate who shares her values, regardless of party.
So there we have it. A new career path for attractive airheads: being a campaign fixture across the country. No need to worry about a filling an office if your candidate wins–just move on to the next campaign, get people fired up.
Of course, this career path does have pitfalls. If a candidate loses, it will be difficult to get hired by another campaign. It might help to practice a speech emphasizing that even though the candidate was not elected, he/she did not lose. Nosiree, the candidate will simply find a higher calling.
130. Hilary | 07.14.09
Why has “the economy” become more important than people or even the survival of the human race? Why don’t we have an agreement on global emissions reductions? The answer is that corporations are in charge of the world. We get to vote so it makes us think we have some say, but corporations hand pick the candidates we choose from. Sarah Palin thinks she’s a maverick but she’s actually towing the capitalist line. They’ve used their domination of the media to convince us that capitalism is a renegade concept when it’s the most politically correct thing going. Compassion is revolutionary.
131. John | 07.14.09
The Woman is a menance you think maybe she could get one or two things right. First of all we tried drill baby drill for the last eight years, G. W. Leased an area the size of Tennessee to oil companies yet despite the biggest fire sale in history, a huge amount of tax incentives and give aways, US oil production actually declined. If Miss Palin bother to actually try to understand anything about the energy industry she would realize just leasing federal lands for oil production will not lead to a huge increase in oil production, as the US really doesn’t have much in the way of conventional oil resources left to drill.
Also, hundreds of trillions of cubic feet of natural gas. There isn’t that much gas in the state of Alaska. Total estimates of recoverable natural gas in Alaska came 35 trillion cubic feet according to a 2002 Energy Information Report, where does Miss Palin get her figures from, Oh never mind it’s not she paid attention to even minor details like the cost of her wardrobe during the campaign.
Additionally with breakthroughs in shale gas production the amount of Natural in the lower 48 looks to be conserably higher than in Alaska. In 2009 alone natural gas reserves in the US were raised by 35 percent due to shale gas reserves. Palin’s multibillion dollar gas pipeline is not needed, wer are awash in Natural Gas, it’s oil were running out of.
Sarah Palin, energy expert? Hardly she simply reports the stupidity she hears on right wing talk radio without bothering to check or facts or anything else.
132. mountainpals | 07.14.09
Palin the quitter should not be allowed to comment on anything she has the tactic’s of a rattlesnake in a dust storm with the wind blowing in a northerner .She can not even take care of her own let alone following through with her job. God forbid she run for president what a joke that would be , she is dimwitted , a fornicator of her marriage vows,not to be trusted ,like a cheap ticket for a chippie .
133. AntonioSosa | 07.14.09
You are right, mac1, this site is left of Fidel Castro. The attacks of Obama’s brainwashed lemmings against Palin are ridiculous but expected. The more they attack her, however, the more we like her.
And of course she is right about cap and trade. No patriotic and informed American can support cap and trade, Obama’s huge Ponzy scheme that will kill the U.S. economy.
Cap and Trade “would be the equivalent of an atomic bomb directed at the U.S. economy—all without any scientific justification,” says famed climatologist Dr. S. Fred Singer. It would significantly increase taxes and the cost of energy, forcing many companies to close, thus increasing unemployment, poverty and dependence.
Cap and trade represents huge taxes and cost increases, which will hurt mostly the poor and the middle class while further empowering and enriching Obama and his fraudulent billionaire friends (Gore, Soros, Goldman Sachs, Obama’s Chicago Climate Exchange friends, GE, the United Nations, etc.)– all at our expense and at the expense of our children and grandchildren.
134. Basso | 07.14.09
Sarah Palin has no interest in being taken as a serious candidate. She likes the adoration of the campaign and has little interest in the function of governing. Yes she likes the acquisition of power and will use it ruthlessly if she gains it. She tired of the governors job when it was no longer was meeting her needs for narcissistic self gratification. When given an opportunity to expand her horizons she rejected any expectation that she have a modicum of curiosity as an elitist request. Sarah is quite satisfied with her inflated opinion of herself and blames others for all of her inadequacies. That is hardly the milieu for self expansion. No one has the contracted knowledge base that she demonstrated in her Couric without spending years avoiding information.
Sarah has parlayed her personality and her looks, her manipulativeness and her cunning ruthlessness into a successful career. She only will accept things if they are on her terms and she is far too shallow and narcissistic person to allow professional inadequacy to curtail her from seeking the adulation of the limelight.
135. William Shipley | 07.14.09
What are we outsourcing to China? Jobs and soverignty. Why, because they are loaning us the money to buy the Saudi Oil.
Governor Palin is right, energy is the key to jobs and industry. Higher energy costs will cause even more outsourcing of jobs and impact the standard of living of America.
We have to start making things again, building things again and developing our own resource rather than just charging Chinese goods on the good ol’ U.S. credit card.
136. SP Phil | 07.14.09
Sarah Palin’s piece in the Wall Street Journal is not an editorial.
An editorial is a piece about a significant issue, without an named author, and reflecting the opinion of the editorial board of the publication in which it appears.
“Op-eds”, of which Palin’s piece is one, represent the opinion of someone not affiliated with the publication, who presumably has some interest or expertise relating to a specific topic.
137. Suzan D. | 07.14.09
As an Alaskan, I say even the Republicans here have given up on her. She has been the same way for most of her life, we just didn’t see it. The rest of America will see it sooner or later. The Dems will laugh all the way to the ballot box if she actually decides to run in 2012. Dems aren’t scared, they are just astounded that so many people can have the wool pulled over their eyes.
For more interesting notes on Palin http://www.alaskadispatch.com
138. Winnie | 07.14.09
I cannot agree that the woman who has proudly summarized her stand on energy issues with her favorite catch phrase of “drill, baby, drill” can reasonably be described, as you do, Mr. Belsie, as someone who has spent “years” dealing with energy policy.
She is not a credible source on this subject, despite the media portraying her in that regard. It was disingenuous of John McCain to paint her as an expert on energy issues during the campaign, and it’s disingenuous of the Washington Post and the Christian Science Monitor to try to lend her an air of credibility.
Let’s not forget that she QUIT the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission after serving for less than a year. That was, of course, several years before she QUIT as Governor of Alaska.
139. Frumious | 07.15.09
“…the burble of word salad….” That is a priceless description of what comes out of Sarah Palin’s mouth. Kind of a tossed salad, don’t you think?
140. Katie | 07.15.09
Someone has to constantly dissect, define, refine, or just plain explain Sarah Palin’s remarks. What does that tell us about both Sarah Palin and those that feel the need to consider her every utterance?
If the woman can’t make herself clear, why is it up to someone else to do it for her? Why does anyone care enough to keep pointing out her obvious flaws? It’s time to stop giving her press coverage.
141. Laurent Belsie | 07.15.09
Policywank (#29) and other commenters question my use of “liberal” to describe blogger Andrew Sullivan. I’m not sure what tag to pin to him. One biting critique calls him “a political wanderer” who has at various times supported Clinton, George W. Bush, and now Obama.
Also, thanks to Phil SP (#134) for pointing out that Palin’s piece should be described as an op-ed.
I’m fixing the post.
142. Elinor | 07.15.09
I am at a loss to understand why we need a President who needs to bone up on policy, who writes like a nineth grader and whose appeal is extremely narrow. Could it be that the media simply can’t let go of someone who is not ready to govern a state, let alone a country. I continue to believe Peggy Noonan had it right when she wrote in the WSJ, Palin makes the GOP look stupid.
143. Goforride | 07.15.09
It boggles the mind that Republicans are fighting cap-and-trade. Cap-and-trade was the policy they fought FOR in the Carter Administration. Back then, they made the argument that specific limitations for each smokestack were unnecessary because the essence of the problem was to clean the air in total. If that could be done by cleaning up one smokestack a lot and another a little or even not at all, as long as the sum of pollution was reduced, that’s all that matters. The Republicans said the best way to accomplish this was to let the market decide how “pollution credits” would be apportioned, rather than to have government set rules that forced one size to fit all.
I don’t get it: Do those who oppose cap-and-trade oppose pollution regulations altogether? Or do they support Carter-Era smokestack-by-smokestack emmissions?
144. SusanS | 07.15.09
This opinion sounds like something written for a high school debate. Sarah Palin doesn’t have an original thought in her head–my guess is that this was a school assignment written by Willow. (Maybe I have the wrong daughter–I had better check with Letterman.)
145. Kay | 07.15.09
Jesus said “those without sin cast the first stone”. Seems to be alot of stones thrown by people with little or no real knowledge of Sarah Palin or her polices.
If you feel you to degrade someone look in the mirror, staring back at you is the person you need to start with.
146. AntonioSosa | 07.15.09
Thank you, RJC DEVIL DOG, for stating the truth. Those attacking Palin, her intelligence, and her opinions on cap and trade are the “dumbed down” population (as per Pravda) http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/107459-american_capitalism-0
Palin is absolutely right about cap and trade, and thousands of scientists, like famed climatologist Dr. S. Fred Singer, agree with her.
Cap and Trade “would be the equivalent of an atomic bomb directed at the U.S. economy—all without any scientific justification,” says Dr. Singer. It would significantly increase taxes and the cost of energy, forcing many companies to close, thus increasing unemployment, poverty and dependence.
147. Shahoon | 07.15.09
I find these musings about Sarah Palin’s intellect and future aspirations to be very interesting. If she has “little intelligence, political ability and knowledge of the facts”, why is she all over both liberal and conservative news outlets? She should be a non-issue, especially with people who would never vote for her should she decide to run for national office. For someone who has such “little skill”, she sure has caused quite a stir. In the words of William Shakespeare: “Me thinks thou dost protest too much!”
To its detriment, the liberal media is stubbornly blind to a conservative, non-partisan ground swell of angst steadily growing across this country against the policies of the current presidential administration. This grassroots movement is based on the simple constitutional fact that it’s the PEOPLE who rule in a democracy, not the Executive Branch and its current acquiescent mouthpiece, the media.
I look forward to see what Sarah Palin might do in the future when she is no longer a “public servant”, but a private citizen and has some legal leverage to thwart the multitude of attacks that come her way. My common sense tells me that we haven’t seen anything yet!
148. mark | 07.16.09
You liberals just dont get it do you. Cap and trade is just the international bankers way of bringing the US economy to its knees. It’s not about solving globing warming, it’s about bringing in the United States into the New World Order. It’s about the elite having all the power and wealth and everyone else basically a slave. Tax and trade goes after your money then national healthcare goes after your body, your right to choose your own doctor.
Trackbacks/Pingbacks
Leave a Comment
We do not publish all comments, and we do not publish comments immediately. The comments feature is a forum to discuss the ideas in our stories. Constructive debate - even pointed disagreement - is welcome, but personal attacks on other commenters are not, and will not be published.
Tip: Do not write a novel. Keep it short. We will not publish lengthy comments. Come up with your own statements. This is not a place to cut and paste an email you received. If we recognize it as such, we won't post it.
Please do not post any comments that are commercial in nature or that violate copyrights.
Finally, we will not publish any comments that we regard as obscene, defamatory, or intended to incite violence.
1. John | 07.14.09
Palin the energy wizard is lecturing Obama, what a joke. There is a related post at http://iamsoannoyed.com/?page_id=588