The winner of Governor Palin's red Going Rogue jacket has been announced. The $57K winning price will be donated to the Wounded Warrior Project. Following is the complete audio transcript from the Laura Ingraham show:
Laura Ingraham Announces Going Rogue Jacket Auction Winner
Editor's Note:
The winner of the auction is best-selling author, John G. Miller. Additional information can be found here. Thank you, Mr. Miller, for your support of the troops!
Saturday, December 19, 2009
Gov. Palin to Speak at National Conservative Symposium
Tea Party Support will be hosting a National Conservative Symposium from January 22 to 24, 2010 at the Hyatt Hill Country Resort in San Antonio, Texas. Governor Palin will be a keynote speaker there, and Saundra Hadley who works for Tea Party Support confirmed that the Governor's speech is arranged through the Washington Speakers Bureau. Other well-known conservative speakers on the schedule include: Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, Michelle Malkin, and Kevin Jackson.
The $749 base cost of the event includes three nights (double occupancy) at the five-star resort, meals, access to resort facilities, and training materials. VIP access is available at additional cost.
We are pleased to announce our lineup of keynote speakers for the National Conservative Symposium.
The National Conservative Symposium will be held at the Hyatt Hill Country Resort in San Antonio, Texas, January 22-24, 2010. It will provide training, networking and strategy sessions to attendees. Networking and strategy focus sessions for attendees will develop for the first time the road map for success in the battle to restore conservative constitutional governance and fiscal responsibility to America.
Following is a complete transcript of the event's goals, objectives and methodology extracted from the main event page:
The $749 base cost of the event includes three nights (double occupancy) at the five-star resort, meals, access to resort facilities, and training materials. VIP access is available at additional cost.
We are pleased to announce our lineup of keynote speakers for the National Conservative Symposium.
The National Conservative Symposium will be held at the Hyatt Hill Country Resort in San Antonio, Texas, January 22-24, 2010. It will provide training, networking and strategy sessions to attendees. Networking and strategy focus sessions for attendees will develop for the first time the road map for success in the battle to restore conservative constitutional governance and fiscal responsibility to America.
Following is a complete transcript of the event's goals, objectives and methodology extracted from the main event page:
The National Conservative Symposium will bring together conservative grass-roots leaders and community organizers from across America at one of the nation’s premiere resorts for a weekend of intense discussion, education and training. Ideally we would like to have two leaders from each tea party, 9-12 or other like minded conservative groups to attend due to the extraordinary amount of information and training that we will be offering. The objective of the Symposium is to inspire and empower conservative activists to take back their political party and to take the country back to constitutional governance and fiscal responsibility by organizing for political action in their local communities and then projecting their voice and actions all the way to Washington, DC (Tea Party Support, 2009, ¶1).
The National Conservative Symposium is the first venture of this type, designed to inform, train and inspire conservatives who share a common belief in the Declaration of Independence, the U.S. Constitution and the role our Founding Fathers played in drafting these core documents (Tea Party Support, 2009, ¶2).
The Symposium will go beyond inspiration and raising expectations. It will provide attendees the tools and strategy for liberty that will enable grass-roots leaders and organizers to launch their organizations on a course to success when they return home (Tea Party Support, 2009, ¶3).
References:
Event details. (2009). Tea Party Support. Retrieved December 19, from: http://teapartysupport.com/national-conservative-symposium/event-details/
National Conservative Symposium. (2009). Tea Party Support. Retrieved December 19, from: http://teapartysupport.com/national-conservative-symposium/
Speakers. (2009). Tea Party Support. Retrieved December 19, from: http://teapartysupport.com/national-conservative-symposium/speakers/
Friday, December 18, 2009
Dissolving the Palin Prejudice
By Adrienne Ross - www.motivationtruth.com
I don't agree with everything Stephen H. Dinan has to say about Governor Palin, but I am willing to listen to what he has to say. The reason is simple: he's chosen to listen to what she has to say. In so doing, he has taken the road less traveled by the mainstream media. He chose to travel down Going Rogue Lane to find out who the Governor really is, rather than who the haters want people to believe she is. He chose to get to know her himself. The best way to do that, obviously, is to read her memoir and hear her words "unfiltered," as she says. He does just that. For this I commend him.
So what led Dinan on this journey?
This brings to mind a quote from my favorite novel, To Kill A Mockingbird. Atticus Finch taught his six year old daughter, Scout, a very important life-lesson when he said:
This further reinforces my philosophy that most of the lessons one needs to learn can be gathered from Harper Lee's classic novel.
Stephen H. Dinan came away from Going Rogue with a deeper understanding of Governor Palin, her upbringing, her love for family, her patriotic passion, and her desire to serve. He acknowledges, too, the prejudices she continues to face. He admits what liberals have been loath to admit--that she arouses fear and worry in people--and he doesn't exempt himself from those same emotions. Furthermore, he states that this has led to
It's the sad truth, yet it's refreshing to finally hear someone confess what we've always known to be true.
The bottom line is that Dinan had the courage to put aside his own prejudices in favor of the truth. And when he did, he discovered the Governor Palin who always existed, but one he had heretofore been deaf and blind to because he had been listening to and looking at others who themselves didn't know her. Going Rogue allowed him to get a real look.
Although he doesn't agree with every position Governor Palin takes, he has come to find what Scout finds at the end of To Kill A Mockingbird when she finally sees Boo Radley, the man she has known only through the rumors and smears of her neighbors. Scout realizes Boo cannot be honestly defined by others. The real Boo Radley would write his own story for Scout Finch to read.
To Kill A Mockingbird ends with this exchange between Scout and her father, Atticus, when she realizes Boo is not the monster he has been made out to be:
Dinan made the effort to see Governor Palin.
Stephen H. Dinan's article is a good one--and it's published in the Huffington Post, of all places. Maybe they'll get the message and take a look also.
Read the full article, Dissolving the Palin Prejudice.
(H/T Fay)
I don't agree with everything Stephen H. Dinan has to say about Governor Palin, but I am willing to listen to what he has to say. The reason is simple: he's chosen to listen to what she has to say. In so doing, he has taken the road less traveled by the mainstream media. He chose to travel down Going Rogue Lane to find out who the Governor really is, rather than who the haters want people to believe she is. He chose to get to know her himself. The best way to do that, obviously, is to read her memoir and hear her words "unfiltered," as she says. He does just that. For this I commend him.
So what led Dinan on this journey?
Over Thanksgiving, I was hiking with my brother-in-law when he commented that he only knew two kinds of people: those who loved Sarah Palin and those who hated her. Nobody was in the gray zone. While I didn't consider myself a "hater," I also knew that she had triggered intense reactions in me when she joined the Republican ticket. After Obama's victory, the fear of her becoming President subsided along with the negative charge, but I had to confess to a lingering prejudice beneath the surface.
One week later, I bought her autobiography, Going Rogue. Why? To dissolve my own prejudice and to better understand how we as a culture can go beyond the extreme political polarizations that have so paralyzed our country.
[...]
So reading Going Rogue was something of a test for myself - could I find the place of appreciation, respect, and even love for Sarah Palin?
What I found is that it wasn't really that hard, actually, simply by taking the time to meet her on her own turf rather than through sounds bites, spin, and polarized media battles. Reading someone's personal memoir is an intimate journey into their inner sanctum, and I developed a real appreciation for Sarah in reading the book.
This brings to mind a quote from my favorite novel, To Kill A Mockingbird. Atticus Finch taught his six year old daughter, Scout, a very important life-lesson when he said:
You never really understand a person until you consider things from his point of view...until you climb into his skin and walk around in it.
This further reinforces my philosophy that most of the lessons one needs to learn can be gathered from Harper Lee's classic novel.
Stephen H. Dinan came away from Going Rogue with a deeper understanding of Governor Palin, her upbringing, her love for family, her patriotic passion, and her desire to serve. He acknowledges, too, the prejudices she continues to face. He admits what liberals have been loath to admit--that she arouses fear and worry in people--and he doesn't exempt himself from those same emotions. Furthermore, he states that this has led to
a barrage of distorted stories, inflated fears, and downright misrepresentations, some of which were quite damaging to her family.
It's the sad truth, yet it's refreshing to finally hear someone confess what we've always known to be true.
The bottom line is that Dinan had the courage to put aside his own prejudices in favor of the truth. And when he did, he discovered the Governor Palin who always existed, but one he had heretofore been deaf and blind to because he had been listening to and looking at others who themselves didn't know her. Going Rogue allowed him to get a real look.
Although he doesn't agree with every position Governor Palin takes, he has come to find what Scout finds at the end of To Kill A Mockingbird when she finally sees Boo Radley, the man she has known only through the rumors and smears of her neighbors. Scout realizes Boo cannot be honestly defined by others. The real Boo Radley would write his own story for Scout Finch to read.
To Kill A Mockingbird ends with this exchange between Scout and her father, Atticus, when she realizes Boo is not the monster he has been made out to be:
"When they finally saw him, why he hadn't done any of those things...Atticus, he was real nice..."
"Most people are, Scout, when you finally see them."
Dinan made the effort to see Governor Palin.
Stephen H. Dinan's article is a good one--and it's published in the Huffington Post, of all places. Maybe they'll get the message and take a look also.
Read the full article, Dissolving the Palin Prejudice.
(H/T Fay)
Thursday, December 17, 2009
Sarah Palin In Three Parts
Part One: Sarah to LOTUS, “Where are you?”
Sarah Palin woke one morning and decided to write an op-ed to the Washington Post which I have copied for you here from her Facebook page.
Wednesday, December 9, 2009 at 2:34pm
Copenhagen’s political science
The Washington Post
By Sarah Palin
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
With the publication of damaging e-mails from a climate research center in Britain, the radical environmental movement appears to face a tipping point. The revelation of appalling actions by so-called climate change experts allows the American public to finally understand the concerns so many of us have articulated on this issue.
“Climate-gate,” as the e-mails and other documents from the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia have become known, exposes a highly politicized scientific circle -- the same circle whose work underlies efforts at the Copenhagen climate change conference. The agenda-driven policies being pushed in Copenhagen won’t change the weather, but they would change our economy for the worse.
The e-mails reveal that leading climate “experts” deliberately destroyed records, manipulated data to “hide the decline” in global temperatures, and tried to silence their critics by preventing them from publishing in peer-reviewed journals. What’s more, the documents show that there was no real consensus even within the CRU crowd. Some scientists had strong doubts about the accuracy of estimates of temperatures from centuries ago, estimates used to back claims that more recent temperatures are rising at an alarming rate.
This scandal obviously calls into question the proposals being pushed in Copenhagen. I’ve always believed that policy should be based on sound science, not politics. As governor of Alaska, I took a stand against politicized 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 had more than doubled. I got clobbered for my actions by radical environmentalists nationwide, but I stood by my view that adding a healthy species to the endangered list under the guise of “climate change impacts” was an abuse of the Endangered Species Act. This would have irreversibly hurt both Alaska’s economy and the nation’s, while also reducing opportunities for responsible development.
Our representatives in Copenhagen should remember that good environmental policymaking is about weighing real-world costs and benefits -- not pursuing a political agenda. That’s not to say I deny the reality of some changes in climate -- far from it. I saw the impact of changing weather patterns firsthand while serving as governor of our only Arctic state. I was one of the first governors to create a subcabinet to deal specifically with the issue and to recommend common-sense policies to respond to the coastal erosion, thawing permafrost and retreating sea ice that affect Alaska’s communities and infrastructure.
But while we recognize the occurrence of these natural, cyclical environmental trends, we can’t say with assurance that man’s activities cause weather changes. We can say, however, that any potential benefits of proposed emissions reduction policies are far outweighed by their economic costs. And those costs are real. Unlike the proposals China and India offered prior to Copenhagen -- which actually allow them to increase their emissions – President Obama’s proposal calls for serious cuts in our own long-term carbon emissions. Meeting such targets would require Congress to pass its cap-and-tax plans, which will result in job losses and higher energy costs (as Obama admitted during the campaign). That’s not exactly what most Americans are hoping for these days. And as public opposition continues to stall Congress’s cap-and-tax legislation, Environmental Protection Agency bureaucrats plan to regulate carbon emissions themselves, doing an end run around the American people.
In fact, we’re not the only nation whose people are questioning climate change schemes. In the European Union, energy prices skyrocketed after it began a cap-and-tax program. Meanwhile, Australia’s Parliament recently defeated a cap-and-tax bill. Surely other nations will follow suit, particularly as the climate e-mail scandal continues to unfold.
In his inaugural address, President Obama declared his intention to “restore science to its rightful place.” But instead of staying home from Copenhagen and sending a message that the United States will not be a party to fraudulent scientific practices, the president has upped the ante. He plans to fly in at the climax of the conference in hopes of sealing a “deal.” Whatever deal he gets, it will be no deal for the American people. What Obama really hopes to bring home from Copenhagen is more pressure to pass the Democrats’ cap-and-tax proposal. This is a political move. The last thing America needs is misguided legislation that will raise taxes and cost jobs – particularly when the push for such legislation rests on agenda-driven science.
Without trustworthy science and with so much at stake, Americans should be wary about what comes out of this politicized conference. The president should boycott Copenhagen.
_______________________________________________________________________
Steven Hayward has a great article in The Weekly Standard on the Climategate scandal. Be sure to check it out.
The response to my op-ed by global warming alarmists has been interesting. Former Vice President Al Gore has called me a “denier” and informs us that climate change is “a principle in physics. It’s like gravity. It exists.”
Perhaps he’s right. Climate change is like gravity – a naturally occurring phenomenon that existed long before, and will exist long after, any governmental attempts to affect it.
However, he’s wrong in calling me a “denier.” As I noted in my op-ed above and in my original Facebook post on Climategate, I have never denied the existence of climate change. I just don’t think we can primarily blame man’s activities for the earth’s cyclical weather changes.
Former Vice President Gore also claimed today that the scientific community has worked on this issue for 20 years, and therefore it is settled science. Well, the Climategate scandal involves the leading experts in this field, and if Climategate is proof of the larger method used over the past 20 years, then Vice President Gore seriously needs to consider that their findings are flawed, falsified, or inconclusive.
Vice President Gore, the Climategate scandal exists. You might even say that it’s sort of like gravity: you simply can’t deny it.
- Sarah Palin
Part Two: Eugene Robinson Opens Big Mouth
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
Sarah Palin is such a cold-eyed skeptic about the Copenhagen summit on climate change that it's no surprise she would call on President Obama not to attend. After all, Obama might join other leaders in acknowledging that warming is a "global challenge." He might entertain "opportunities to reduce greenhouse gas emissions." He might even explore ways to "participate in carbon-trading markets."
Oh, wait. Those quotes aren't from some smug Euro-socialist manifesto. They're from an administrative order Palin signed in September 2007, as governor of Alaska, establishing a "sub-Cabinet" of top state officials to develop a strategy for dealing with climate change.
Back then, Palin was the governor of a state where "coastal erosion, thawing permafrost, retreating sea ice, record forest fires, and other changes are affecting, and will continue to affect, the lifestyles and livelihoods of Alaskans," as she wrote. Faced with that reality, she sensibly formed the high-level working group to chart a course of action.
"Climate change is not just an environmental issue," wrote Palin. "It is also a social, cultural, and economic issue important to all Alaskans."
Palin mentioned having created the climate change unit in an op-ed she wrote last week for The Post. What she didn't acknowledge was the contrast between what she says about climate change now and what she said -- and did -- about it as governor of our most at-risk state. When she was in office, Palin treated the issue as serious, complex and worthy of urgent attention. Now that she's the iconic leader of a populist movement that reacts with anger at the slightest whiff of pointy-headed, "one world" intellectualism, she writes as if the idea of seeking ways to mitigate climate change is a crock.
"Alaska's climate is warming," Palin wrote to Alaskans in a July 2008 newsletter. "While there have been warming and cooling trends before, climatologists tell us that the current rate of warming is unprecedented within the time of human civilization. Many experts predict that Alaska, along with our northern latitude neighbors, will warm at a faster pace than any other areas, and the warming will continue for decades."
In her administrative order, Palin instructed the sub-Cabinet group to develop recommendations on "the opportunities to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from Alaska sources, including the expanded use of alternative fuels, energy conservation, energy efficiency, renewable energy, land use management, and transportation planning." She also instructed the group to look into "carbon-trading markets."
But in her op-ed last week, Palin -- while acknowledging "natural, cyclical environmental trends" and the possibility that human activity might be contributing to warming -- states flatly that "any potential benefits of proposed emissions reduction policies are far outweighed by their economic costs." What she once called "carbon-trading markets" she now denounces as "the Democrats' cap-and-tax proposal."
Palin cites the "Climate-gate" e-mail scandal as reason enough for the president to skip the Copenhagen summit. I've written about those e-mails and why, despite what skeptics say, they do not begin to prove that climate science is fraudulent, politicized or fundamentally flawed. The most compelling evidence for climate change is found in the Arctic, and Palin has seen it firsthand.
In her 2008 newsletter, Palin mentioned one coastal village, Newtok, that would have to be relocated because of flooding due to the effects of warmer temperatures. Since then, relocation plans have been developed for two more towns, Shishmaref and Kivalina. The Army Corps of Engineers has identified more than 160 villages that are threatened, according to a recent newsletter from Palin's successor, Gov. Sean Parnell. At least 31 are judged to be in "imminent" peril.
In case anyone was wondering, Palin's home town of Wasilla sits at an elevation of 333 feet -- high and dry.
The chairman of the Cabinet working group that Palin assembled to develop a climate change strategy, Larry Hartig, is scheduled to deliver a presentation at Copenhagen. Posted in advance on the Internet, the presentation shows that Alaskans aren't just fretting about the abstract possibility of effects from warming. They're dealing with a real, live situation.
I predict we'll see more artful dodges of this kind from Palin. She made any number of pragmatic, reasonable, smart decisions as governor -- and now, it seems, will be obliged to renounce them all. Her tea-party legions have one answer -- a shouted "No!" -- for every question.
Palin knows better, but she has to fiddle her followers' chosen tune -- not while Rome burns, but while Nome melts.
Part Three: Sarah Shuts Robinson’s Big Mouth
Today at 1:41pm
Letter to the Editor
Washington Post
Thursday, December 17, 2009
I’d like to thank Eugene Robinson for highlighting Alaska’s achievements on climate change [“Palin’s own ‘Climate- gate,’” op-ed, Dec. 15] and for noting that I’ve “treated the issue as serious, complex, and worthy of urgent attention,” while making “any number of pragmatic, reasonable, smart decisions as governor.” But he’s wrong to suggest that my views have somehow changed or that now I’ll have to “renounce” my past efforts.
Once again: I don’t deny that climate change is real. In creating a sub-cabinet to deal specifically with the issue, I said that “Alaska’s climate change strategy must be built on sound science and the best available facts and must recognize Alaska’s interest in economic growth and the development of its resources.” That goal made sense to me then, and it makes sense to me now.
Mr. Robinson tries to make hay out of the fact that I asked the group to advise me regarding opportunities to participate in “carbon-trading markets.” But considering voluntary participation in carbon-trading programs is much different from endorsing the economically disastrous cap-and-tax proposals put forward by Democrats in Washington. Those proposals will burden our job creators and raise energy prices for all of us, and that’s why I oppose them.
As governor of Alaska, I sought common-sense solutions that took real-world costs and benefits into account. That’s what I’m looking for now. But that’s not what’s on the table in Washington or in Copenhagen.
Sarah Palin, Wasilla, Alaska
Sarah Palin woke one morning and decided to write an op-ed to the Washington Post which I have copied for you here from her Facebook page.
Wednesday, December 9, 2009 at 2:34pm
Copenhagen’s political science
The Washington Post
By Sarah Palin
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
With the publication of damaging e-mails from a climate research center in Britain, the radical environmental movement appears to face a tipping point. The revelation of appalling actions by so-called climate change experts allows the American public to finally understand the concerns so many of us have articulated on this issue.
“Climate-gate,” as the e-mails and other documents from the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia have become known, exposes a highly politicized scientific circle -- the same circle whose work underlies efforts at the Copenhagen climate change conference. The agenda-driven policies being pushed in Copenhagen won’t change the weather, but they would change our economy for the worse.
The e-mails reveal that leading climate “experts” deliberately destroyed records, manipulated data to “hide the decline” in global temperatures, and tried to silence their critics by preventing them from publishing in peer-reviewed journals. What’s more, the documents show that there was no real consensus even within the CRU crowd. Some scientists had strong doubts about the accuracy of estimates of temperatures from centuries ago, estimates used to back claims that more recent temperatures are rising at an alarming rate.
This scandal obviously calls into question the proposals being pushed in Copenhagen. I’ve always believed that policy should be based on sound science, not politics. As governor of Alaska, I took a stand against politicized 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 had more than doubled. I got clobbered for my actions by radical environmentalists nationwide, but I stood by my view that adding a healthy species to the endangered list under the guise of “climate change impacts” was an abuse of the Endangered Species Act. This would have irreversibly hurt both Alaska’s economy and the nation’s, while also reducing opportunities for responsible development.
Our representatives in Copenhagen should remember that good environmental policymaking is about weighing real-world costs and benefits -- not pursuing a political agenda. That’s not to say I deny the reality of some changes in climate -- far from it. I saw the impact of changing weather patterns firsthand while serving as governor of our only Arctic state. I was one of the first governors to create a subcabinet to deal specifically with the issue and to recommend common-sense policies to respond to the coastal erosion, thawing permafrost and retreating sea ice that affect Alaska’s communities and infrastructure.
But while we recognize the occurrence of these natural, cyclical environmental trends, we can’t say with assurance that man’s activities cause weather changes. We can say, however, that any potential benefits of proposed emissions reduction policies are far outweighed by their economic costs. And those costs are real. Unlike the proposals China and India offered prior to Copenhagen -- which actually allow them to increase their emissions – President Obama’s proposal calls for serious cuts in our own long-term carbon emissions. Meeting such targets would require Congress to pass its cap-and-tax plans, which will result in job losses and higher energy costs (as Obama admitted during the campaign). That’s not exactly what most Americans are hoping for these days. And as public opposition continues to stall Congress’s cap-and-tax legislation, Environmental Protection Agency bureaucrats plan to regulate carbon emissions themselves, doing an end run around the American people.
In fact, we’re not the only nation whose people are questioning climate change schemes. In the European Union, energy prices skyrocketed after it began a cap-and-tax program. Meanwhile, Australia’s Parliament recently defeated a cap-and-tax bill. Surely other nations will follow suit, particularly as the climate e-mail scandal continues to unfold.
In his inaugural address, President Obama declared his intention to “restore science to its rightful place.” But instead of staying home from Copenhagen and sending a message that the United States will not be a party to fraudulent scientific practices, the president has upped the ante. He plans to fly in at the climax of the conference in hopes of sealing a “deal.” Whatever deal he gets, it will be no deal for the American people. What Obama really hopes to bring home from Copenhagen is more pressure to pass the Democrats’ cap-and-tax proposal. This is a political move. The last thing America needs is misguided legislation that will raise taxes and cost jobs – particularly when the push for such legislation rests on agenda-driven science.
Without trustworthy science and with so much at stake, Americans should be wary about what comes out of this politicized conference. The president should boycott Copenhagen.
_______________________________________________________________________
Steven Hayward has a great article in The Weekly Standard on the Climategate scandal. Be sure to check it out.
The response to my op-ed by global warming alarmists has been interesting. Former Vice President Al Gore has called me a “denier” and informs us that climate change is “a principle in physics. It’s like gravity. It exists.”
Perhaps he’s right. Climate change is like gravity – a naturally occurring phenomenon that existed long before, and will exist long after, any governmental attempts to affect it.
However, he’s wrong in calling me a “denier.” As I noted in my op-ed above and in my original Facebook post on Climategate, I have never denied the existence of climate change. I just don’t think we can primarily blame man’s activities for the earth’s cyclical weather changes.
Former Vice President Gore also claimed today that the scientific community has worked on this issue for 20 years, and therefore it is settled science. Well, the Climategate scandal involves the leading experts in this field, and if Climategate is proof of the larger method used over the past 20 years, then Vice President Gore seriously needs to consider that their findings are flawed, falsified, or inconclusive.
Vice President Gore, the Climategate scandal exists. You might even say that it’s sort of like gravity: you simply can’t deny it.
- Sarah Palin
Part Two: Eugene Robinson Opens Big Mouth
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
Sarah Palin is such a cold-eyed skeptic about the Copenhagen summit on climate change that it's no surprise she would call on President Obama not to attend. After all, Obama might join other leaders in acknowledging that warming is a "global challenge." He might entertain "opportunities to reduce greenhouse gas emissions." He might even explore ways to "participate in carbon-trading markets."
Oh, wait. Those quotes aren't from some smug Euro-socialist manifesto. They're from an administrative order Palin signed in September 2007, as governor of Alaska, establishing a "sub-Cabinet" of top state officials to develop a strategy for dealing with climate change.
Back then, Palin was the governor of a state where "coastal erosion, thawing permafrost, retreating sea ice, record forest fires, and other changes are affecting, and will continue to affect, the lifestyles and livelihoods of Alaskans," as she wrote. Faced with that reality, she sensibly formed the high-level working group to chart a course of action.
"Climate change is not just an environmental issue," wrote Palin. "It is also a social, cultural, and economic issue important to all Alaskans."
Palin mentioned having created the climate change unit in an op-ed she wrote last week for The Post. What she didn't acknowledge was the contrast between what she says about climate change now and what she said -- and did -- about it as governor of our most at-risk state. When she was in office, Palin treated the issue as serious, complex and worthy of urgent attention. Now that she's the iconic leader of a populist movement that reacts with anger at the slightest whiff of pointy-headed, "one world" intellectualism, she writes as if the idea of seeking ways to mitigate climate change is a crock.
"Alaska's climate is warming," Palin wrote to Alaskans in a July 2008 newsletter. "While there have been warming and cooling trends before, climatologists tell us that the current rate of warming is unprecedented within the time of human civilization. Many experts predict that Alaska, along with our northern latitude neighbors, will warm at a faster pace than any other areas, and the warming will continue for decades."
In her administrative order, Palin instructed the sub-Cabinet group to develop recommendations on "the opportunities to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from Alaska sources, including the expanded use of alternative fuels, energy conservation, energy efficiency, renewable energy, land use management, and transportation planning." She also instructed the group to look into "carbon-trading markets."
But in her op-ed last week, Palin -- while acknowledging "natural, cyclical environmental trends" and the possibility that human activity might be contributing to warming -- states flatly that "any potential benefits of proposed emissions reduction policies are far outweighed by their economic costs." What she once called "carbon-trading markets" she now denounces as "the Democrats' cap-and-tax proposal."
Palin cites the "Climate-gate" e-mail scandal as reason enough for the president to skip the Copenhagen summit. I've written about those e-mails and why, despite what skeptics say, they do not begin to prove that climate science is fraudulent, politicized or fundamentally flawed. The most compelling evidence for climate change is found in the Arctic, and Palin has seen it firsthand.
In her 2008 newsletter, Palin mentioned one coastal village, Newtok, that would have to be relocated because of flooding due to the effects of warmer temperatures. Since then, relocation plans have been developed for two more towns, Shishmaref and Kivalina. The Army Corps of Engineers has identified more than 160 villages that are threatened, according to a recent newsletter from Palin's successor, Gov. Sean Parnell. At least 31 are judged to be in "imminent" peril.
In case anyone was wondering, Palin's home town of Wasilla sits at an elevation of 333 feet -- high and dry.
The chairman of the Cabinet working group that Palin assembled to develop a climate change strategy, Larry Hartig, is scheduled to deliver a presentation at Copenhagen. Posted in advance on the Internet, the presentation shows that Alaskans aren't just fretting about the abstract possibility of effects from warming. They're dealing with a real, live situation.
I predict we'll see more artful dodges of this kind from Palin. She made any number of pragmatic, reasonable, smart decisions as governor -- and now, it seems, will be obliged to renounce them all. Her tea-party legions have one answer -- a shouted "No!" -- for every question.
Palin knows better, but she has to fiddle her followers' chosen tune -- not while Rome burns, but while Nome melts.
Part Three: Sarah Shuts Robinson’s Big Mouth
Today at 1:41pm
Letter to the Editor
Washington Post
Thursday, December 17, 2009
I’d like to thank Eugene Robinson for highlighting Alaska’s achievements on climate change [“Palin’s own ‘Climate- gate,’” op-ed, Dec. 15] and for noting that I’ve “treated the issue as serious, complex, and worthy of urgent attention,” while making “any number of pragmatic, reasonable, smart decisions as governor.” But he’s wrong to suggest that my views have somehow changed or that now I’ll have to “renounce” my past efforts.
Once again: I don’t deny that climate change is real. In creating a sub-cabinet to deal specifically with the issue, I said that “Alaska’s climate change strategy must be built on sound science and the best available facts and must recognize Alaska’s interest in economic growth and the development of its resources.” That goal made sense to me then, and it makes sense to me now.
Mr. Robinson tries to make hay out of the fact that I asked the group to advise me regarding opportunities to participate in “carbon-trading markets.” But considering voluntary participation in carbon-trading programs is much different from endorsing the economically disastrous cap-and-tax proposals put forward by Democrats in Washington. Those proposals will burden our job creators and raise energy prices for all of us, and that’s why I oppose them.
As governor of Alaska, I sought common-sense solutions that took real-world costs and benefits into account. That’s what I’m looking for now. But that’s not what’s on the table in Washington or in Copenhagen.
Sarah Palin, Wasilla, Alaska
Smack down Mr. Robinson...can't mess with a 'cuda
In Sarah Palin's FaceBook post today, she lets us know that she is fed up with the spin that some "writers" put on her words. It is almost humorous the way they so called reporters like to make thing up and read more into Sarah's words than is there. She is plain spoken, there is no need to second guess what she means because she tells you out right unlike the politicians who can't say anything without a teleprompter!
This just proves once again that most reporters would rather kiss up to the left than report the news to the people. When will it ever stop? My guess is that the more popular Sarah becomes the more they will attack her but you know what...she isn't going to be scared off easily. She is the heart and soul of what the Tea Party movement stands for. She is real...genuine...a straight shooter...and most of all isn't in it for fame and money, she is in this fight to uphold the principles of our Constitution. All I can say is...Run Sarah Run!
My Letter to the Washington Post
Share
Today at 4:41pm
Letter to the Editor
Washington Post
Thursday, December 17, 2009
I’d like to thank Eugene Robinson for highlighting Alaska’s achievements on climate change [“Palin’s own ‘Climate- gate,’” op-ed, Dec. 15] and for noting that I’ve “treated the issue as serious, complex, and worthy of urgent attention,” while making “any number of pragmatic, reasonable, smart decisions as governor.” But he’s wrong to suggest that my views have somehow changed or that now I’ll have to “renounce” my past efforts.
Once again: I don’t deny that climate change is real. In creating a sub-cabinet to deal specifically with the issue, I said that “Alaska’s climate change strategy must be built on sound science and the best available facts and must recognize Alaska’s interest in economic growth and the development of its resources.” That goal made sense to me then, and it makes sense to me now.
Mr. Robinson tries to make hay out of the fact that I asked the group to advise me regarding opportunities to participate in “carbon-trading markets.” But considering voluntary participation in carbon-trading programs is much different from endorsing the economically disastrous cap-and-tax proposals put forward by Democrats in Washington. Those proposals will burden our job creators and raise energy prices for all of us, and that’s why I oppose them.
As governor of Alaska, I sought common-sense solutions that took real-world costs and benefits into account. That’s what I’m looking for now. But that’s not what’s on the table in Washington or in Copenhagen.
Sarah Palin, Wasilla, Alaska
The writer, governor of Alaska from 2006 to 2009, was the 2008 Republican nominee for vice president.
This just proves once again that most reporters would rather kiss up to the left than report the news to the people. When will it ever stop? My guess is that the more popular Sarah becomes the more they will attack her but you know what...she isn't going to be scared off easily. She is the heart and soul of what the Tea Party movement stands for. She is real...genuine...a straight shooter...and most of all isn't in it for fame and money, she is in this fight to uphold the principles of our Constitution. All I can say is...Run Sarah Run!
Sarah Palin And Frozen Al Gore
This comes from the really just too good not to talk about file.
Compeau’s the Fairbanks, Alaska boat, snowmachine, and ATV dealer has an ongoing effort to expose the utter ridiculousness of the global warming hoax. From their website about this photo:
Sarah Palin stopped by to see the Frozen (Al) Gore ice sculpture in Fairbanks, in February 2009,
along with daughter Piper, husband Todd (on right) and Craig Compeau.
(The Frozen Gore sculpture, crafted in January 2009, made it until May 1 before melting.)
Check out the Arctic Fox in her Arctic Cat jacket! I guess the "official DNC blogger for Alaska"
was laying down on the job, or she’d have file an ethics complaint over this deal!
Here’s what the guys are up to at Compeau’s today:
Okay, so Frozen Gore was so popular last winter that we are at it again!
Help us decide what sculpture to introduce to the globe this winter by submitting your idea using the form below. Suggestions should relate to the global warming issue. Compeau's will donate heating oil to the town of Tetlin, AK (where it unofficially hit -80F last winter), in the winner's name.
This is what is great about this bunch. They can poke fun at Al Gore, help expose the greatest lie ever told, and help out fellow Alaskan’s all at the same time!
In case you didn’t know, heating oil in Alaska is expensive with a capital E!
You can check out their website here. Give ‘em some good ideas and maybe your name will be connected with helping some needy, and cold, Alaskan’s out.
Below is a cool (pardon the pun) video of sculptor Stephen H. Dean creating this masterpiece, followed by some interesting commentary on the weather trends in the area. A must see.
Why Going Rogue was good for Palin's career
Sarah Palin who was criticized for stepping down as the Governor of Alaska has proved that "Going Rogue" can be great for a career. Hitting 33 cities in 25 states is not your usual book tour, but the best-selling author behind the book is not your typical author.Since hitting newsstands Nov. 17, Going Rogue has spent three weeks at No. 1 on USA TODAY's best-seller list, matching the record for political memoirs, set by retired general Colin Powell in 1995. Publisher HarperCollins says it has gone back to the presses 13 times to keep up with demand and now has 2.8 million copies of Palin's book in print.
Despite losing the vice presidential candidacy, Sarah Palin turned a negative into a positive by publishing her memoirs and explaining, without a media spin, her take on a whirlwind rise to fame and time in the political spotlight.
The book tour has raised Palin's popularity to an all time high. Palin gave no interviews to local newspapers or television stations along the way, but it didn't stop the attention the tour received. When Palin did grant an interview, she took the media by storm. Palin boosted Oprah Winfrey's ratings by 68 percent, giving the show its best ratings in two years. And Palin recently put Tina Fey to shame in a brilliantly conceived skit on The Tonight Show that garnered much praise. The more she gets herself out there, it's obvious the more comfortable Palin gets in front of the camera...
Read the entire article at Examiner.com
Follow @PalinExaminer at Twitter and on Facebook
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
