Replies

I read a wonderful explanation of Sarah’s one-time support for the LOST, but since the issue is low on my radar screen, I forget the rationale now. Does it trouble you that Bachmann has hired a buffoon to say things about Sarah that SHE apparently does not have the courage to say.
BTW, I see Sarah as a Constitutionalist, not a populist. A populist takes a poll, then encourages people to think that he or she can deliver the objective. That’s never Sarah Palin. SHE does the leading, based upon what SHE thinks is sound principle, damn the polls. Thanks again, Bob

Yes, I too see Sarah as a consitutionalist not a populist. She is a very pragmatic constitutionalist.

Sarah's explanation for her support of LOST is that it would protect Alaska's access to Artic energy resources. At least one conservative pro-sovereignty group has written her a letter explaining how LOST is not needed to do this and that it represents a serious threat to national sovereignty. The assessment that LOST represents a MAJOR threat to national sovereignty is shared by every major conservative organization that has weighed in on the issue. They forced the hand of the candidates running in the GOP Primary and every one of them came out against it. Even McCain reversed his earlier support for it. Sarah has expressed her support for this more than once.

She also signed a Climate Change order the same year that she sent that letter of support for LOST to Alaska's Senate delegation. That order contained a lot of verbiage that you often hear from the environmentalist movement, including support for "regional" carbon registries and carbon caps. Such things require a sovereign body to enforce. When asked in the VP debates about whether she supports carbon caps her response was that she does:

Q: Let me clear something up: Sen. McCain has said he supports caps on carbon emissions. Sen. Obama has said he supports clean coal technology, which I don’t believe you’ve always supported. Do you support capping carbon emissions?

PALIN: I do. I do. “

PALIN: 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. As we rely 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. 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.

Source: 2008 Vice Presidential debate against Joe Biden Oct 2, 2008

If the problem with other countries is that "we’re allowing them to produce and to emit and even pollute more than America would ever stand for", the implied solution is that there should be some authority that would not allow them to do so. Couple this with her support for LOST and I have serious questions about whether she understands the fundamental concerns associated with National Sovereignty.

As for Michele hiring someone who criticized Palin, that is politics. Palin supporters have been criticizing Michele as well. This does not worry me because campaign operatives handle the nuts and bolts of running a campaign, not the forming of policy. My concern with Sarah is on the policy level. She is on record for.... the L.O.S.T. Treaty, Carbon Credits, a Windfall profits Tax, Amnesty, ” registration” which is the prelude to amnesty, and endorsed by the Congressional Hispanic Caucus. She was also a major supporter of the "Bridge to Nowhere" and did not reverse course on this position until it became a national embarrassment and Congress cut off funding for it.

I have no such policy concerns with Michele.