Posted on 07/14/2009 4:51:33 AM PDT by KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
If Palin Derangement Syndrome-afflicted media members thought the Alaska Governor's surprising pre-Fourth of July announcement meant she was getting out of politics, her op-ed in Tuesday's Washington Post should change their minds.
In a scathing rebuke of the Obama administration, Sarah Palin took off the gloves to attack the recently House-passed American Clean Energy and Security Act, disaffectionately known as cap-and-tax.
Marvelously, Palin also took a couple of jabs at her not so adoring press:
Unfortunately, many in the national media would rather focus on the personality-driven political gossip of the day than on the gravity of these challenges. So, at risk of disappointing the chattering class, let me make clear what is foremost on my mind and where my focus will be:
I am deeply concerned about President Obama's cap-and-trade energy plan, and I believe it is an enormous threat to our economy. It would undermine our recovery over the short term and would inflict permanent damage.
American prosperity has always been driven by the steady supply of abundant, affordable energy. Particularly in Alaska, we understand the inherent link between energy and prosperity, energy and opportunity, and energy and security. Consequently, many of us in this huge, energy-rich state recognize that the president's cap-and-trade energy tax would adversely affect every aspect of the U.S. economy.
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! Those who understand the issue know we can meet our energy needs and environmental challenges without destroying America's economy.
Job losses are so certain under this new cap-and-tax plan that it includes a provision accommodating newly unemployed workers from the resulting dried-up energy sector, to the tune of $4.2 billion over eight years. So much for creating jobs.
In addition to immediately increasing unemployment in the energy sector, even more American jobs will be threatened by the rising cost of doing business under the cap-and-tax plan. For example, the cost of farming will certainly increase, driving down farm incomes while driving up grocery prices. The costs of manufacturing, warehousing and transportation will also increase.
The ironic beauty in this plan? Soon, even the most ardent liberal will understand supply-side economics.
Ouch! That's gonna leave a mark...likely on many of her detractors, assuming, of course, they get the joke.
That said, readers are encouraged to review the entire piece, and ponder just how this is going to play at Palin-hating media outlets the next 48 hours.
I agree. I think she could do a 90-second radio spot five days a week and that would be good. So would regular guest appearances on the right radio and tv shows, and of course op-ed pieces.
But putting her on Fox or giving her a show of her own would be setting her back, not moving her forward.
I’ve never seen this kind of humor from Kristol.
We don’t need to tear down someone who could be a great Secretary of Commerce to promote our ideas or candidates. Mitt is the perfect technocrat but honest to a fault and he could clear up a few corrupt agencies, as could Rudy. I just don’t want them in the top job.
capping varbon admissions is vague... no one wants to pollute indiscriminately... it is just a matter of to what degree we cap the carbons... and for what purpose.
teeman.
You mean: The media only like liberal "reasoning".
/s = close sarcasm
She trumps the liberal fools by using her celebrity to educate real Americans on the enormous traps in Cap & Tax. Can't wait to hear Rush today!
It’s vintage Palin, IMO. The left is unhinged (still).
I am looking forward to seeing Gov Palin's words in my local newspaper. WaPo news service makes opinion pieces available for newspapers around the country. It would be fun to see Sarah's words picked up in newspapers around the country . . as newsworthy . . because of all the fuss . .and extend Sarah's expose of this nasty bill.
I feel a thrill up my leg.
Since the left’s attacks on Sarah are working they will use them against any conservative that speaks out or runs for office.
Thus, all conservative candidates will become “unelectable”.
" IFILL: We do need to keep within our two minutes. But I just wanted to ask you, do you support capping carbon emissions?
PALIN: I do. I do."
Here's the thing. When Helen Thomas accuses the Obama administration of no transparency and planting questions for show, you know something is wrong. Too bad Helen hasn't realized the American people are on to the MSM's bed hopping with Obama.
The media deserves the criticism but they have the power to make or break you in an election campaign. Howard Dean and others have learned to their great distress that you cannot win an election if the media is against you. Right now they love the way people flock to their websites and news shows to see what she will say next. Their ratings are going up, but they will and are making her look very bad.
It would be wise for her to learn how to use the media so they would help or at least not be so against her. I do think she brought some of it on herself by trashing the media in her very first appearances, before they had even gone after her. Very unwise. I thought that at the time.
Not unwise at all to attack the enemedia.
If you attempt to be friends with them, like McCain,
they’ll work against you while you extend your hand to them.
They are STATISTS and elitists. They will never “help” an anti-statist, nor will they cease to be “so against her”.
Attack them. Point out their bias.
“You mean: The media only like liberal ‘reasoning’.”
You’re right. Liberal animals really can’t reason, so I guess it would be called “reasoning”.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/02/debate.transcript/
Sarah does not support Cap-n-Trade. In the debate she said there is climate change but would not argue whether it was man-made or not.
.....
IFILL: Governor, I’m happy to talk to you in this next section about energy issues. Let’s talk about climate change. What is true and what is false about what we have heard, read, discussed, debated about the causes of climate change?
PALIN: Yes. Well, as the nation’s only Arctic state and being the governor of that state, Alaska feels and sees impacts of climate change more so than any other state. And we know that it’s real.
I’m not one to attribute every man — activity of man to the changes in the climate. There is something to be said also for man’s activities, but also for the cyclical temperature changes on our planet.
But there are real changes going on in our climate. And I don’t want to argue about the causes. What I want to argue about is, how are we going to get there to positively affect the impacts?
We have got to clean up this planet. We have got to encourage other nations also to come along with us with the impacts of climate change, what we can do about that.
As governor, I was the first governor to form a climate change sub-cabinet to start dealing with the impacts. We’ve got to reduce emissions. John McCain is right there with an “all of the above” approach to deal with climate change impacts.
We’ve got to become energy independent for that reason. Also as we rely more and more on other countries that don’t care as much about the climate as we do, we’re allowing them to produce and to emit and even pollute more than America would ever stand for.
So even in dealing with climate change, it’s all the more reason that we have an “all of the above” approach, tapping into alternative sources of energy and conserving fuel, conserving our petroleum products and our hydrocarbons so that we can clean up this planet and deal with climate change.
From the Couric interviews, to the Biden debate, to the May 28 Michael(?) Duke interview, to this op ed, it seems pretty clear that Palin buys into the gw/climate change theories - or at least she has yet to attack them.
The Waxman cap and trade bill is a current pressing issue, and she does a great job in her op ed tearing it down. However, she still seems to assume the faulty premise of global warming/climate change. Until that premise is proven false, all energy plans will be subject to an alleged “necessary” cap issue. If caps are set for carbon emissions, then there must be a penalty (or tax) for exceeding the cap or the caps will be meaningless.
Again, the current “cap and trade/tax” plan must be attacked, as Palin has done. However, in addition to what she pointed out in the op ed (the adverse economic effects of the cap and trade plan, alternative sources such as nuclear and clean coal, natural gas, etc.), it must also be pointed out that 1) gw/climate change is B.S. or at least must be HONESTLY debated; and 2) even if gw/climate change is true at any level, the current proposed cap and trade plan will only reduce carbon emissions by .02-.07 over the next 100 years (from what I’ve read), so the plan is meaningless in addressing the alleged core problem (gw/climate change) and the same results can be achieved using our own sources of energy.
Bottom line: the current cap and tax plan (and anything like it) must first be taken down, and then its faulty premises must be addressed.
“...reduce carbon emissions by .02-.07...”. I think those numbers actually refer to a reduction of temperature, not emissions. Either way, it is a meaningless number.
I don’t know if the Leftist media will respond in support of cap and trade, but I do know the Washington Post is scrubbing comments that support Gov. Palin’s position.
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.