Sarah Palin's Op-Ed Slams Obama's Cap-And-Trade Plan

Washington Post:

There is no shortage of threats to our economy. America's unemployment rate recently hit its highest mark in more than 25 years and is expected to continue climbing. Worries are widespread that even when the economy finally rebounds, the recovery won't bring jobs. Our nation's debt is unsustainable, and the federal government's reach into the private sector is unprecedented.

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:

Read the whole story: Washington Post

Comments

[endex05]

I would be surprised if Sarah even read that article (much less wrote it)-- she doesn't read newspapers....

[Ratfink1]

Yes she does! She reads ALL of them.

[dochollidey]

What is wrong with posting Sarah Palin's column? It seems free speech only applies to liberals.

[tssent]

Nothing -- if she wrote it.

But anyone who would list as a qualification for vice president
of the United States, "I can see Russia from Alaska," and use that
substantiate an understanding of national defense, almost surely
didn't write it.

That the Post would consider she did and publish it, is an insult.
That she would put her name on it if she did not, is injury to insult.

Shall we now expect the Post to offer Mahmoud Ahmandinejad
equal space to list the 10 reasons proving why the Holocaust is
a hoax?

[Grizzlynorth]

true

[Shilliam]

Are you another professional victim?

[Dubois651]

Hahahahahahaha. Sarah Palin can read and write?!!!!

[NotFooledByDistractions]

If you believe that palin actually wrote that op ed, I've got a bridge to nowhere you might be interested in.

Either way, she's got no - ZERO - credibility. She's a quitter.

[ThanksMatt]

I just saw the Daily show episode with Samantha Bee where she defends Palin's decision to step down as a mother.........

I am still roaring with laughter! Priceless!

[lsmull]

Of course it's going to cost more for energy. That is in direct costs (for example, when you buy fuel) and in indirect costs as all products and services price increased energy costs. That in fact should happen if all the bad stuff associated with energy use is recognized in the price -- like emmissions and, in the case of transport, congestion. And if we consume less carbon-based energy, which should be an objective in my view, then there will likely be fewer resouces devoted to the sector. So job losses are an outcome. Although other jobs will be created, it is likely a net loss that essentially reduces our overall wealth as measured by consumption of goods and services. (But don't positive planetary impact, health improvements, less congestion, and maybe fewer resources committed to a global military posture count a a positive?)

It's my strong view that we must alter the carbon-based economy towards alternative sources of energy (maybe even nukes for baseload) and much more efficient use to minimize emmissions and minimize our global footprint. Government fiat to alter behavior never really works. Economic incentives absolutely do work. Higher energy prices will absolutely change behavior. We can deal with the disproportionate burden on the poor through more direct means.

Palin's piece is an obvious and crass self-serving attempt to defend Alaska's energy position. And it can't even get near a legitimate debate as it's filled with nonsense, unconected logic, general gobledygook. Sound bite queen.

[zyxomma]

I may get slammed for saying this, but carbon-based fuels should certainly cost more than they do here in the US. I was in Brazil in 1984, and a LITER (not a gallon) of diesel (which powered all the cars, mostly Volkswagens) was around $2.50. Yes, that's about $10 a gallon. And this was in a country where the minimum wage was $62 a month. True, Brazil has (mostly) good public transportation, at least in the 11 states I visited, and most of the people I met didn't own cars (my host's boyfriend had one, and whenever the three of us visited somewhere -- mostly for my benefit, since I was the visitor) we chipped in for fuel. The ridiculously cheap price of gasoline in this country has contributed to the loss of agricultural and wild lands (for suburban sprawl), horribly toxic pollution in many locales (in 1972 in Los Angeles, a smog inversion was so bad my stockings ran spontaneously from sulphur dioxide in the moist air). That, too, is the price of gas.

[myfatherschild]

Palin and her supporters need never say another word about Palin getting so much press. As is and has been so very obvious, Palin seeks/courts the press like an animal in heat. This is another example of her doing so and attacking the President with a ghost written list of republican talking points designed to make her seem intelligent and thoughtful. The op/ed piece does not make a comprehensive case for Palin's arguments is is one-sided. Now when the pundits get through ripping her to shreds or request interviews for her to explain her position in depth, she'll run for cover, play victim, and have her base blame the liberal media for being mean....forget the fact that, once again, Palin is putting herself out there in the news.

I, for one, can't wait to see her defend her position in a hard hitting interview. She will get no sympathy from me.

[guinganbresil]

Palin did not attack the President in this article. Please read it more closely.

Referring to Palin as '..like an animal in heat...' is an attack, and seriously distracts from thoughtful criticism of her position.

[KayJay90]

....or reading "News Hounds: We Watch FOX News So You Don't Have To" if you're the more open minded sort.

http://www.newshounds.us/

[SmolderingRuin]

Of course she wrote it. This simple-minded drivel has her unmistakable stamp all over it.

"We must move in a new direction. We are ripe for economic growth and energy independence if we responsibly tap the resources that God created right underfoot on American soil. Just as important, we have more desire and ability to protect the environment than any foreign nation from which we purchase energy today.

In Alaska, we are progressing on the largest private-sector energy project in history. Our 3,000-mile natural gas pipeline will transport hundreds of trillions of cubic feet of our clean natural gas to hungry markets across America. We can safely drill for U.S. oil offshore and in a tiny, 2,000-acre corner of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge if ever given the go-ahead by Washington bureaucrats. "

Tap, tap, tap, right underfoot on American soil. We are progressing... blah, blah. OMG, what a loon.

[scotuswatcher]

It's just so simple. There's an unlimited supply of fossil fuels and all we have to do is extract and burn them. That will make us energy independent. And we can do this forever and it will be environmentally responsible!!

[SolarPowerGuy]

Republicans LOVE to move the goal-posts.

Several years back, when some people were urging a proper greenhouse gas TAX to cover the externalized costs of fossil fuel use, the Republicans SCREAMED that it was anti-free-market. What did they say they wanted instead? A cap-and-trade system.

Now that a Democratic government is actually delivering a cap-and-trade system, the Republicans hate it! I would like to see a political leader or journalist make this point, over and over. Rub the GOP's nose in its hypocrisy, like a dog who has used your carpet as a restroom.

[ThanksMatt]

In this way she brings her fight against President Obama at least to a more or less civilized level and I can accept that.

If she is putting out her thoughts, worries and ideas in a more or less coherent manner there is something to deal with and it can be accepted or refuted, but at least there is a basis to discuss issues.

This is much better than her riling up of crowds without even an attempt to temper them down - this was very, very dangerous for the safety of anyone who thinks different than she and her supporters.
The only thing she needs to learn is to address "Barack Obama" as President Obama - just as a matter of respect.

[ProfessorDuh]

She's not doing anything. She didn't write any of this. She's as articulate and well-informed as the Geico gecko.

[guinganbresil]

Two out three references were to "President Obama" with one "Obama supporter" - I do not believe disrespect was intended.

Please review President' Obama's speeches (nice link) when he was a Senator/Candidate.

http://obamaspeeches.com/P-Obama-Inaugural-Speech-Inauguration.htm

I abhor double standards...

[ThanksMatt]

You were right, she mentioned twice President Obama. Yet not in the last sentence where you would expect to find the correct way to address your opponent - so to me it seems to be intentional.

In any case, that was not the important part of my post. The important part is that I welcome the fact that Ms Palin enters a civilized political discussion.

[iawill]

Ms. Palin writes a good piece criticizing the President's plan. However, just like her speech at the Republican Convention, it still lacks substance. Ms. Palin states that "job losses are so certain under this new cap-and tax plan..." and she goes on to say that "In Alaska, we are progressing on the largest private-sector energy project in history".
What Ms. Palin fails to tell the reader is that while campaigning, she along with her running mate, John McCain, supported an "energy cap and tax plan". Why the change Ms. Palin?
Ms. Palin also fails to inform the reader that although Alask is "progressing" on their energy project, the state's unemployment rate continues to rise, up from 7.9% in April to 8.4% in May (June's stats are not out yet)!
I agree that America needs to become more reliant on it's own sources for fuel instead of relying on foreign entities and Mr. President and millions of other Americans know this as well. However, the solution is not as easy or as clear cut as Ms. Palin implies. If it were, the state in which she governs would be performing a lot better than it is, and would not be so reliant on Federal funds for help!

[thegrifter]

If only she wrote it...

[FairCitizen]

u nailed it. Again Palin needs to learn that attacking w/o having a solution to the attack is not going to work any more. She a pin head and the ghost writer should have throught this through a little longer!

[guinganbresil]

Thoughtful criticism, no vitriol - Thanks!

[mcmutter]

Please run Sarah in 2012 the sooner we get it over with the better.

[ReealOne]

Wow. If Sarah thinks that she needs "emergency" treatments for her hair falling out because of all the stress she CAN'T HANDLE, just wait until she tries to repeat this dribble in a REAL debate.... and then have to answer complex follow-up questions about what she has written.

She won't need "emergency" hair fall-out treatments (a.k.a. hair extensions and wigs 'n things), we'll be watching her up on the debatin' stage pulling out hands full of what's left of her hair, with extensions still attached and all, and losing it right on national teevee.

Oh what wonderful times are coming upon us, with Sarah trying to match intelligence with Pres. Obama.... or, well... just about anyone else. Everyone make sure to stock up on snacks and beverages, and let the entertainment and BIG fun begin!!! Not to worry, we intend to make Sarah's downfall VERY quick and VERY painful.

[chicagominx]

Palin's only good at bailin'.