THE MAN WHO DESPISES AMERICA
THE MODERN AMERICAN DECLARATION OF LIBERTY - WE MUST TAKE AMERICA BACK!
Posted on 12/04/2009 7:12:18 PM PST by GVnana
The president’s decision to attend the international climate conference in Copenhagen needs to be reconsidered in light of the unfolding Climategate scandal. The leaked e-mails involved in Climategate expose the unscientific behavior of leading climate scientists who deliberately destroyed records to block information requests, manipulated data to “hide the decline” in global temperatures, and conspired to silence the critics of man-made global warming. I support Senator James Inhofe’s call for a full investigation into this scandal. Because it involves many of the same personalities and entities behind the Copenhagen conference, Climategate calls into question many of the proposals being pushed there, including anything that would lead to a cap and tax plan.
Policy should be based on sound science, not snake oil. I took a stand against such snake oil science when I sued the federal government over its decision to list the polar bear as an endangered species despite the fact that the polar bear population has increased. I’ve never denied the reality of climate change; in fact, I was the first governor to create a subcabinet position to deal specifically with the issue. I saw the impact of changing weather patterns firsthand while serving as governor of our only Arctic state. But while we recognize the effects of changing water levels, erosion patterns, and glacial ice melt, we cannot primarily blame man’s activities for the earth’s cyclical weather changes. The drastic economic measures being pushed by dogmatic environmentalists won’t change the weather, but will dramatically change our economy for the worse.
Policy decisions require real science and real solutions, not junk science and doomsday scare tactics pushed by an environmental priesthood that capitalizes on the public’s worry and makes them feel that owning an SUV is a “sin” against the planet. In his inaugural address, President Obama declared his intention to “restore science to its rightful place.” Boycotting Copenhagen while this scandal is thoroughly investigated would send a strong message that the United States government will not be a party to fraudulent scientific practices. Saying no to Copenhagen and cap and tax are first steps in “restoring science to its rightful place.”
- Sarah Palin
Not that it makes any difference, but as of last night, the plans are that he will be in Copenhagen on the 18th and not
early next week. Then, of course, he’ll be away with family on an extended holiday vacation ending after the 1st of the year.(Suddenly I am starting to sound like Robert Gibbs) The only difference I would have with Sarah would be I would never address anything to him, as “Mr. President”,
I would say, “Barry Soetoro, please boycott Copenhagen.”
I credited her with seeing the importance of calling attention to the email scandal, and for having the hutzpah to call for boycotting Copenhagen...in the sentence right above the one you quoted.
I refuse to ignore, at the same time, certain problems that I think exist with what she said.
But, as I said before, I’LL TAKE IT (what she said).
Not that it makes any difference, but as of last night, the plans are that he will be in Copenhagen on the 18th and not
early next week. Then, of course, he’ll be away with family on an extended holiday vacation ending after the 1st of the year.(Suddenly I am starting to sound like Robert Gibbs) The only difference I would have with Sarah would be I would never address anything to him, as “Mr. President”,
I would say, “Barry Soetoro, please boycott Copenhagen.”
There wasn’t anything in what I wrote that would lead anyone to believe I for a second thought she was on the side of the “alarmists”, if by “alarmists” you mean the “climate change is man’s fault and we’re all gonna die” folks.
She stated a somewhat nuanced position, from which one could think she might have credited some of the science in terms of man causing a portion of it and in terms of the threat, yet she took a realistic - not left wing crazy - approach in terms of how she responded.
Clearly, she is no Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity or Rush Limbaugh on this.
Yes, she was a governor and they aren’t.
So?
Their positions are what they are, or aren’t, on the issue, no matter what job they hold.
In my posts I have given her great credit where she is due it.
I won’t ignore any problems, however.
You have a point, but remember, there are many Americans who don't know this, haven't a clue, the MSM is not enlightening them, and have no reason to quesion the Gore/Obama agenda on this.
The emails were a Godsend. They revealed these "scientists" as the bumbling, adolescent bureaucrats they really are.
SCIENCE: The earth stopped warming in 1998.
Al: that you? rl more...al gore, cool.
photo credit to missnry
“Policy decisions require real science and real solutions”
Finally, someone finally says the obvious. It’s the scientists who solve these things, not brainless celebrities. Of course, no one thinks to increase funding for the scientists.
Sarah knows that Obama does not intend to push cap & tax for environmental reasons more than it is to cripple the United States Economy and Military capabilities. And she should say as much if he decides to push ahead anyway.
It’s not enough to oppose cap and trade on scientific grounds?
I think I'll caption that, "Obama returns from Copenhagen."
I don't know anything about Sarah's Facebook page and even wonder if posting that is possible or acceptable.
"Reality of Climate Change? Ummm...yeah...that would be called WEATHER.
"Glacia ice melt?" Ummm....NOT FREAKING HAPPENING!.
The fact that she appointed (and was the first to appoint) a subcabinet official to deal with what is clearly a fraud AND NOW BRAGS ABOUT IT RATHER THAN APOLOGIZES disturbs none here? I am a big Palin fan, but I find this very distressing.
Hank
“But while we recognize the effects of changing water levels, erosion patterns, and glacial ice melt, we cannot primarily blame man’s activities for the earth’s cyclical weather changes.”
Wow, you really know how to analyze a sentence. Sarah Palin is obviously a “Warmer” except of course when she says it’s not primarily man made and it’s not necessarily warming.
Chill out. You really aren’t sharp enough to address these complex issues.
It appears to me that the Sub-Cabinet Member would be there to evaluate how to react to the natural weather changes, such as flood control and infrastructure requirements.
Governor Palin rejects the notion of “man made” Climate Change, which has now been exposed for the fraud it is and has been for some time.
Aren't you being a little selective?
“Chill out. You really aren’t sharp enough to address these complex issues.”
Gee what a pleasant fellow.
I’m sure as hell sharp enough to know the glaciers ain’t melting....and I’d be willing to bet I could see you 10 IQ points and raise you 20.
Hank
This would have made me feel much better about her statement.
Hank
Gee Hank, dueling IQ’s what a gas. Some Glaciers have been melting and some haven’t. Most believe we are entering a cooling trend where glaciers will grow.
Some glaciers are melting at the face because the main glacier has been thickening and growing, forcing the face towards warm coastal waters.
I just read Sarah’s words. She clearly indicated that climate changes. Sometimes this causes problems for local communities. Those communities may need help to deal with these changes. A government rep might be handy in these cases.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.