What Sarah is really saying to them is “If you are serious about wanting to reduce CO2, then you should be in favor of allowing Alaska to drill and ship more natural gas”, thus turning their own arguments against them.
I don't have a problem with that part.
I have a problem when she calls greenhouse gases "pollution", when she says she supports capping greenhouse gases and a cap-and-trade program, and when she supports the "all of the above" energy plan which includes throwing trillions at costly and unproven energy alternatives.
Oh... and I have a problem with FReepers who absolutely ignore her words, misrepresent her public statements, and instead choose to attack those who would like to see her modify her position on those subjects. We didn't need the Kyoto Treaty and we sure don't need the plans coming out of Copenhagen.