Palin: Obama hostile to energy production

posted at 12:55 pm on March 16, 2011 by Ed Morrissey

We’re doing a lot of energy blogging today, but there’s a lot to cover — and it’s a topic that has become pressing for a number of reasons, not the least of which is the rapid increase in retail prices for families whose incomes haven’t risen over the last few years.  Last night, Sarah Palin issued a ringing indictment of the Obama administration’s energy policy, with specifics on actions taken by the White House to squelch production.  This means making budget deficits worse, not just from a weaker economy but also more directly in lost revenue opportunities:

Exhibit A: His drilling moratorium. Guided by politics and pure emotion following the Gulf spill instead of peer-reviewed science or defensible law, the President used the power of his executive order to impose a deepwater drilling moratorium. The Administration even ignored a court order halting his moratorium. And what is the net result of the President’s (in)actions? A large drilling company was forced to declare bankruptcy, the economy of the region has been hobbled, and at least 7 rigs moved out of the Gulf area to other parts of the world while many others remain idle. Is it any surprise that oil production in the Gulf of Mexico is expected to fall by 240,000 bbl/d in 2011 alone?

But that’s just the Gulf. There’s also the question of a moratorium on the development of Alaska’s Outer Continental Shelf. It seems the Obama Administration can’t agree with itself on whether it imposed a moratorium there or not. The White House claims that they didn’t, but their own Department of the Interior let slip that they did. To clear up this mess, Gov. Parnell decided to sue the DOI to get a solid answer because such a federal OCS drilling moratorium would violate federal law.

Exhibit B: His 2012 budget. The President used his 2012 budget to propose the elimination of several vital oil and natural gas production tax incentives. Eliminating these incentives will discourage energy companies from completing exploratory projects, resulting in higher energy costs for all Americans – and not just at the pump. According to one study mentioned in a recent Wall Street Journal op-ed, eliminating the deduction for drilling costs “could increase natural gas prices by 50 cents per thousand cubic feet,” which would translate to “an increased cost to consumers of $11.5 billion per year in the form of higher natural gas prices.”

Exhibit C: His anti-drilling regulatory policies. The U.S. Geological Survey found that the area north of the Arctic Circle has an estimated 90 billion barrels of technically recoverable oil and 1,670 trillion cubic feet of technically recoverable natural gas, one third of which is in Alaskan territory. That’s our next Prudhoe Bay right there. According to one industry study, allowing Royal Dutch Shell to tap these reserves in Alaska’s Chukchi and Beaufort seas would create an annual average of 54,700 jobs nationwide with a $145 billion total payroll and generate an additional $193 billion a year in total revenues to local, state, and federal governments for 50 years. This would be great news if only the federal government would allow Shell to drill there. But it won’t. It’s been five years since Shell purchased the lease to develop these fields, but it’s been mired in a regulatory funk courtesy of the Obama Administration. After investing $3.5 billion in exploration programs (a significant portion of which went to ensuring responsible spill response and prevention), Shell announced last month that it has given up hope of obtaining the required permits to conduct exploratory drilling this year. That means no jobs and no billions in oil revenue from the Arctic anytime soon thanks to this Administration. Let’s stop and think about this for a moment. Right now Beltway politicos are quibbling over cutting $61 billion from our dangerously bloated $3.7 trillion budget. Allowing drilling in the Chukchi and Beaufort seas will enrich federal coffers by $167 billion a year without raising our taxes. If we let Harry Reid keep his “cowboy poetry,” would the White House consider letting us drill?

I’d trade a few bars of “Streets of Laredo” for a sensible energy policy.  On the issue of subsidies, there is a counterargument that tax breaks for oil companies are a luxury the US can’t afford, especially given the profits of those corporations and the deficits of the federal government budgets.  The profit argument is weak; their margin typically runs around 9-10% of sales, which is decent but not spectacular (the computer industry regularly ran margins more than twice that overall before the recession).  But assuming that we’re discussing the effectiveness of subsidies to certain energy sources and not a more principled argument against all federal subsidies for energy production, then perhaps we need to revisit this chart from Reason TV to show which subsidies wind up being used more efficiently for actual energy production:

CNS News reports that Energy Secretary Steven Chu argues that the Obama administration is doing everything it can to produce oil and gas, except in ANWR, which Chu refused to discuss:

After testifying before the House Energy and Water Development Subcommittee about his department’s FY2012 budget, CNSNews.com asked Energy Secretary Steven Chu if — given the high price of gasoline — he supports increasing offshore drilling and opening up ANWR [Arctic National Wildlife Refuge] to domestic drilling?”

Chu responded, “I’m not going to talk about ANWR, but I think there’s many areas in the arctic that are potential exploration sites. We have opened up deep shore oil drilling; as I said, there are now two new leases since the Macondo well in deep shore. There have been some 33 or 35 shallow wells, so that has continued.”

Wow, two whole new leases since April of last year?  Why didn’t they say so?  Obviously, that makes it all better.  And why, exactly, does the Secretary of Energy refuse to talk about ANWR, a strategic reserve meant for later exploration and oil production?

With prices going through the roof at the grocery store and the gas pump, this administration has to do a lot better than two new leases in a year to convince people that they’re serious about domestic production.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Notice that this sham hit poll came out just as the Housing Starts data came out and the Food Price data came out.

Do not think that any of this is by chance.

The Propaganda Ministry stays busy.

victor82 on March 16, 2011 at 2:18 PM

I’m sorry I’m not fulfilling my troll duties. So many threads so little time.

Sarah Palin is a moronic gas bag. She knows nothing and is a horrible wife an mother. You all can fantasize all you want but your betters have everything under control. Now, I know things seem bad but all is well and you need to thank us

hboulware on March 16, 2011 at 1:22 PM

Yawn.

fossten on March 16, 2011 at 2:18 PM

Would’ve preferred Jindal being the one putting some knowledge to Chu, though.

Christien on March 16, 2011 at 1:05 PM

yet he DIDN’t and that is why we need Gov Palin as the nominee. No one but her attacks the dems and Obama. The rest will try to run on the small differences between Obama and them. They will try to make the cas eof lesser of two evils. Palin offers a different course.

unseen on March 16, 2011 at 2:18 PM

Everyone knows there’s no inflation.

hawksruleva on March 16, 2011 at 1:38 PM

No, see that’s not inflation, because that’s just a price increase on the cost of items the vast majority of Americans purchase on a daily basis.
/krugman

strictnein on March 16, 2011 at 2:20 PM

On the issue of subsidies, there is a counterargument that tax breaks for oil companies are a luxury the US can’t afford, especially given the profits of those corporations and the deficits of the federal government budgets.

The chart showing “subsidies” for wind/solar vs oil & gas are misleading.

There ARE NO SUBSIDIES for the oil companies, the govenrment gives them NOTHING, unlike the phenominally wasteful wind & solar crap. Statists like to describe a tax break that every other business gets as a “subsidy” when in fact it is just taking a little bit less in taxes to encourage more production. The oil & gas business is already the most heavily taxed industry in the country, and adding more tax onto the existing burdon will not improve our energy security.

iurockhead on March 16, 2011 at 2:21 PM

By schooling the general American populace (and that includes the currently “unshakable” potus and congressional skittles), against all odds and without the traditional GOP leadership as allies, Palin has herself managed to build the ’12 “big tent”.

More power to her.

maverick muse on March 16, 2011 at 2:22 PM

iurockhead on March 16, 2011 at 2:21 PM

in DC speak a tax break is a subside because you know DC owns everything and if they don’t steall as much as they usally do they ar egiving you a “break”

unseen on March 16, 2011 at 2:22 PM

Who cares what she thinks?

How about quoting someone with some actual credibility?

…and not this shrieking harpy….

*rolling eyes*

Patrick on March 16, 2011 at 2:23 PM

I traveled down the CA coast last week and saw the oil rigs way out in the distance in the channel, shrouded in fog. We have to support violent extremist dictators so we won’t be bothered with this slightly marred view?

Proposterous! Evil.

PattyJ on March 16, 2011 at 2:28 PM

turfmann on March 16, 2011 at 1:38 PM

I remember the summer of 1980, when I was 12, pulling a wagon with a cooler filled with cold sodas up and down the gas lines and selling them for 4x what I paid for them. That was the year we had some 60 -odd days of 3-digit temps, 41 of them sequentially, with humidity in the watch-for-passing-fish range. I made out like the gouging bandit I was!
I expect I will soon be the gouge-ee.

Random Numbers (Brian Epps) on March 16, 2011 at 2:28 PM

Rush called her latest piece “quite substantive”.

Naturally Curly on March 16, 2011 at 1:20 PM

It is. And contextually, it is Rush who has been coasting for years now on reputation laurels. As a media GOP spokesman, Rush’s gaffes are multiple and horrendous in comparison to media fabricated problems laid at Palin’s door. There’s more than a thing or two to learn from Palin. And Rush is only smart enough to see that if he wants to remain supposedly relevant with the American audience, being as lazy as he is on book learning, he’d better not disregard the leadership that Palin is providing.

Even from the sidelines with only her own fans cheering her on, Palin’s competence certainly is more effective as a substantive potus than the destructive Obama exudes.

maverick muse on March 16, 2011 at 2:28 PM

With prices going through the roof at the grocery store and the gas pump, and in my case no pay increase over the past four years this administration has to do a lot better than two new leases in a year to convince people that they’re serious about domestic production.

Added my two cents, even tho I can barely afford it. :)

scalleywag on March 16, 2011 at 2:28 PM

Are they trying to crater the economy?

sharrukin on March 16, 2011 at 1:07 PM

It makes the accuser sound radical (an Alinsky tactic I believe)

But the answer is very likely yes. Research Obama’s animosity towards the country to understand how.

scotash on March 16, 2011 at 2:29 PM

rockmom,

An animé cartoon would suffice if Obama’s too chicken to play an Alaskan fund raising game of hoops with Palin.

maverick muse on March 16, 2011 at 2:29 PM

Chu gotta be keeeding me maing!

44Magnum on March 16, 2011 at 2:32 PM

From the populist, big-oil bashing governor of Alaska.

AshleyTKing on March 16, 2011 at 2:34 PM

…and not this shrieking harpy….

If she hasn’t undertaken lessons yet, Palin’s projection could benefit greatly from a vocal coach.

maverick muse on March 16, 2011 at 2:34 PM

Palin’s negatives to independents have concerned me. But the bland noncommittal politics-as-usual GOP types are beginning to concern me more. Their calculated triangulations reduce their credibility, to me.

We need a President who will fight, who will stand up for America and for normal American citizens, who will do everything possible to pull us back from the brink. Palin would do this, she’s the only one that I have that faith in.

On the other hand, we MUST win. I am torn. MSM has really damaged her.

Palin supporters could improve her image by thoughtful posts all over the blogosphere, particularly on news sites. But I do think the cheerleader type of support does more harm than good. Thinking people see where the pop hero stuff got us in 2008.

I suggest finding news articles relating to policies where Palin has made good substantive statements, quote her in the comment sections, identifying her as the source at the end, so people digest the content before engaging their snap judgments.

jodetoad on March 16, 2011 at 2:35 PM

My only criticism here would be that she should have mentioned nuclear power as well given the war drums currently being pounded on that front. I can see why she didn’t, but we do need to address that at some point as well.

sharrukin on March 16, 2011 at 1:36 PM

She didn’t discuss nuclear because the subject was, “The $4-Per-Gallon President”. You sound like the jerk on GMA this morning who criticized her for not addressing nuclear. CARS DON”T RUN ON NUCLEAR POWER!

NoNails on March 16, 2011 at 2:35 PM

Largest jump in food prices in 36 years. Gas jumped .50 in 2 months. Is that right? Jobs outlook is grim. Mid east in turmoil

Obama is a disaster by any measure

Geochelone on March 16, 2011 at 2:37 PM

Largest jump in food prices in 36 years. Gas jumped .50 in 2 months. Is that right? Jobs outlook is grim. Mid east in turmoil

Obama is a disaster by any measure

Geochelone on March 16, 2011 at 2:37 PM

And Gov Palin has been 100% correct on all of these issues. I think the turth is starting to get out to the mindnumbed zombies. they have been lied to for the last 3years.

unseen on March 16, 2011 at 2:43 PM

So why are you so down on her? Do you like a guy who loves her just for her rack or something? She’s smarter and more wonky than advertised.

alwaysfiredup on March 16, 2011 at 1:34 PM

I’m firmly planted on both sides of the fence when it comes to Palin. :-P

I love her when she puts out statements like this. I love that she pissess off all the right people. I get why people like her. I just don’t think she should be the GOP nominee for President. It isn’t just about her smarts, because I think she is smart.

rockmom on March 16, 2011 at 2:43 PM

From the populist, big-oil bashing governor of Alaska.

AshleyTKing on March 16, 2011 at 2:34 PM

Oh look, our first troll! Shouldn’t we rng a bell, or something?

BTW, Whitney Pitcher put together a great piece on ACES that should shut morons like Ashley up.

Explains it much better than I can.

gary4205 on March 16, 2011 at 2:43 PM

Who cares what she thinks?

How about quoting someone with some actual credibility?

…and not this shrieking harpy….

*rolling eyes*

Patrick on March 16, 2011 at 2:23 PM

Because the former Governor of our largest oil-producing state and the former Chair of the Alaska Oil and Gas Commission couldn’t possibly know anything about oil and gas prices and production, now, could she?

*rolling eyes*

Who else should we lisetn to? Ken Salazar? LOLOLOL

rockmom on March 16, 2011 at 2:47 PM

Since energy is a significant component of food, clothing, and shelter, how can any reasonable person NOT conclude that a 3.3 % increase in energy prices in ONE MONTH (39.6% annualized increase) is a disastrous increase in the cost of living???

0Bama’s hostility to all forms of meaningful energy production is directly responsible for this debacle.

landlines on March 16, 2011 at 2:48 PM

Largest jump in food prices in 36 years. Gas jumped .50 in 2 months. Is that right? Jobs outlook is grim. Mid east in turmoil

Obama is a disaster by any measure

Geochelone on March 16, 2011 at 2:37 PM

It’s 1979 all over again!

Man, I remember when I was a teenager. We could go to the Dairy Queen and get a REAL hamburger for 35 cents. If you had $2 you could eat like a king. It wasn’t long after Carter took office those same burgers were costing well over a dollar!

No more nickel cokes either! (or dime cokes)

We are headed for this all again!

gary4205 on March 16, 2011 at 2:48 PM

Hey gary!

She is a populist. She did bash the oil companies. Her tax is a disaster. She was disengaged as governor. And she would be a flipping disaster as a president for the same reason.

Ding!

AshleyTKing on March 16, 2011 at 2:52 PM

The energy debates in the 2012 cycle will be epic, there is no way short of outright baldfaced lies (yes I realize the obviousness) that Zero can even begin to think about competing in that arena.

NY Conservative on March 16, 2011 at 2:53 PM

She is a populist. She did bash the oil companies. Her tax is a disaster. She was disengaged as governor. And she would be a flipping disaster as a president for the same reason.

Ding!

AshleyTKing on March 16, 2011 at 2:52 PM

You’re clueless.

darwin on March 16, 2011 at 2:55 PM

She is a populist. She did bash the oil companies. Her tax is a disaster. She was disengaged as governor. And she would be a flipping disaster as a president for the same reason.

Ding!

AshleyTKing on March 16, 2011 at 2:52 PM

Look, another idiot…..

idesign on March 16, 2011 at 2:58 PM

She is a populist. She did bash the oil companies. Her tax is a disaster. She was disengaged as governor. And she would be a flipping disaster as a president for the same reason.

Ding!

AshleyTKing on March 16, 2011 at 2:52 PM

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

Nice try troll. ACES was an incredible success for all involved.

Go back to HuffPoo, or Palingates, what ever cesspool you crawled out of. There are plenty of stupid people there to peddle your nonsense to. People here KNOW Palin’s record and know it well.

They know how successful she is.

gary4205 on March 16, 2011 at 3:00 PM

Hey, AshleyTKing, your C.A.T.T.Y green eyed, jealous, and envious monster is showing. Time to refill the meds. Palin was elected to the governors office in Alaska. What did you do sister? Crickets, I thought so. When you become somebody you can comment on successful people until then refill the meds.

Jayrae on March 16, 2011 at 3:08 PM

She didn’t discuss nuclear because the subject was, “The $4-Per-Gallon President”. You sound like the jerk on GMA this morning who criticized her for not addressing nuclear. CARS DON”T RUN ON NUCLEAR POWER!

NoNails on March 16, 2011 at 2:35 PM

That doesn’t change the fact that we need nuclear power as part of the overall energy strategy. I think Palin should at some point address this because she brings a lot of common sense to questions that are lacking in most other politico’s.

sharrukin on March 16, 2011 at 3:11 PM

For the multitudinous commenters here who keep saying Palin has no policy substance:

http://hrh40.wordpress.com/palin-policy/

A categorized listing of Palin’s policy statements at places like National Review, USA Today, Wall Street Journal, etc., as well as Facebook Notes over the last 3 years.

Brew a cup of tea and sit back for some substantive reading.

hrh40 on March 16, 2011 at 3:12 PM

P

alin’s negatives to independents have concerned me. But the bland noncommittal politics-as-usual GOP types are beginning to concern me more. Their calculated triangulations reduce their credibility, to me.

We need a President who will fight, who will stand up for America and for normal American citizens, who will do everything possible to pull us back from the brink. Palin would do this, she’s the only one that I have that faith in.

On the other hand, we MUST win. I am torn. MSM has really damaged her.

Palin supporters could improve her image by thoughtful posts all over the blogosphere, particularly on news sites. But I do think the cheerleader type of support does more harm than good. Thinking people see where the pop hero stuff got us in 2008.

I suggest finding news articles relating to policies where Palin has made good substantive statements, quote her in the comment sections, identifying her as the source at the end, so people digest the content before engaging their snap judgments.

jodetoad on March 16, 2011 at 2:35 PM

This.

YehuditTX on March 16, 2011 at 3:22 PM

She is a populist. She did bash the oil companies. Her tax is a disaster. She was disengaged as governor. And she would be a flipping disaster as a president for the same reason.
Ding!
AshleyTKing on March 16, 2011 at 2:52 PM

MORONS!!!!, get your morons hereeeee

Sonosam on March 16, 2011 at 3:25 PM

hrh40 on March 16, 2011 at 3:12 PM

Thanks.

Mirimichi on March 16, 2011 at 3:26 PM

That doesn’t change the fact that we need nuclear power as part of the overall energy strategy. I think Palin should at some point address this because she brings a lot of common sense to questions that are lacking in most other politico’s.

sharrukin on March 16, 2011 at 3:11 PM

In the past, she has spoken in favor of nuclear, as well as clean coal technologies, wind, solar, bio, etc. She made this post about gasoline prices and what affects them. That’s the pinch we are feeling.

NoNails on March 16, 2011 at 3:31 PM

Whoever writes Palin’s facebook posts makes some good points.
/

Paul-Cincy on March 16, 2011 at 1:35 PM

Whoever writes your Hot Air posts does not.

Amjean on March 16, 2011 at 3:36 PM

Would’ve preferred Jindal being the one putting some knowledge to Chu, though.

Christien on March 16, 2011 at 1:05 PM

yet he DIDN’t and that is why we need Gov Palin as the nominee. No one but her attacks the dems and Obama. The rest will try to run on the small differences between Obama and them. They will try to make the cas eof lesser of two evils. Palin offers a different course.

unseen on March 16, 2011 at 2:18 PM

And don’t forget that Palin knows way more about energy
than Jindahl does.

Amjean on March 16, 2011 at 3:42 PM

And what did Carter tell us to do as his energy strategy? That moron told us to put on a SWEATER and turn down our home thermostats. AUGH!!!!!!!!!

karenhasfreedom on March 16, 2011 at 1:51 PM

We’ve come a long way. Now, instead of asking us to turn down the heat, liberals are installing automated thermostats that will turn down the heat FOR us, whether we like it or not.

hawksruleva on March 16, 2011 at 3:46 PM

And don’t forget that Palin knows way more about energy
than Jindahl does.

Amjean on March 16, 2011 at 3:42 PM

I’m not certain of that. I know Palin knows a lot on the subject, but I don’t know what Jindal knows.

hawksruleva on March 16, 2011 at 3:47 PM

Palin supporters could improve her image by thoughtful posts all over the blogosphere, particularly on news sites. But I do think the cheerleader type of support does more harm than good. Thinking people see where the pop hero stuff got us in 2008.

I suggest finding news articles relating to policies where Palin has made good substantive statements, quote her in the comment sections, identifying her as the source at the end, so people digest the content before engaging their snap judgments.

jodetoad on March 16, 2011 at 2:35 PM

I enjoy your contributions, jodetoad, but this makes no sense. First, begin by scrolling up to the top of the page for the latest in a long litany “substantive statement(s).”

Yet this critique represents a strange cognitive lacuna I see everywhere in the Palin “critique-osphere”. She is peerless and timely in her output of substantive policy statements. No likely Republican candidate comes close to her in both written and spoken statements, as well as in swift and detailed (and often prophetic) challenges to Obama’s policy. And all the serious Palin supporters here provide ample backup and links. Yet all I hear are warnings about “cheerleading” and mindless “Palinbot” adoration. At the same time, the rote critiques of her simply repeat MSM memes that she lacks substance.

Perhaps this all makes sense. Maybe it is a kind of internalized reflection of the empty MSM meme, which they hoped would root itself in our consciousness.

rrpjr on March 16, 2011 at 3:52 PM

We know how lazy the average person is and I’ve personally pretty much given up on having a conversation or any respect for anyone who’s only source of knowledge is the MSM.

If Palin runs, she’ll win. I have no doubt that once she is given a platform and the MSM can no longer control the narrative, she’ll do just fine and show she can stay “in the room” (FU Krauthammer).

I’m really looking forward for her to debate Obama. The MSM fears that with every ounce of their being. They won’t be able to protect him after that. There won’t be enough lies (she’s st00pid) to cover his incapability and they won’t be able to play fast and loose with editing, etc, in a live debate. People will finally see. A lot of people as there will be curiosity factor to bring them in. And the MSM knows this.

I think she’ll run. I can’t wait.

kim roy on March 16, 2011 at 3:53 PM

Jindal did a great job raising h3ll over the oil spill and lack of federal focus on the problem. We need to give him props for that. During that process, I am pretty sure he probably ramped up really fast on the ins and outs of off shore drilling.

Jindal has a good future ahead. Right now, I think Palin is a more effective counter puncher to the Obama Regime.

karenhasfreedom on March 16, 2011 at 3:54 PM

It’s unfortunate she makes some numerical mistakes in her post. If she or a staffer is reading, that’s not $193 billion a year.

alwaysfiredup on March 16, 2011 at 3:54 PM

I just don’t think she should be the GOP nominee for President. It isn’t just about her smarts, because I think she is smart.

rockmom on March 16, 2011 at 2:43 PM

So, who should it be in your mind? And, please don’t spew that “I haven’t decided yet” crap because we know who the 10-12 potential caqndidates are.

bw222 on March 16, 2011 at 3:58 PM

bw222 on March 16, 2011 at 3:58 PM

Rockmom is undecided but she really hates being confronted and accused, fyi.

alwaysfiredup on March 16, 2011 at 4:00 PM

I’m not certain of that. I know Palin knows a lot on the subject, but I don’t know what Jindal knows.

hawksruleva on March 16, 2011 at 3:47 PM

I love Bobby Jindal, and think he has a future, HOWEVER, when it comes to energy, no one on the national stage can touch Sarah Palin.

She is a policy wonk, whether people want to admit it or not. And not just on energy, but energy is her thing.

Reading about her time as the top energy regulator in Alaska, one finds she had to make herself an expert on the subject, and consumed everything she could find on the subject. Her peers were continually amazed at her ability to learn so quickly.

Everyone should read “Sarah Takes On Big Oil.” It’s an impressive book.

gary4205 on March 16, 2011 at 4:05 PM

hawksruleva on March 16, 2011 at 3:47 PM

I think Jindal is a very intelligent man, with a bright future.

However, my memory is that his background has much more depth in health care, public policy etc. than energy. I’m sure he has some knowledge of the sector, and is probably learning even more as a Gulf area governor.

Palin’s primary strength in terms of experience is being deeply steeped in energy issues.

Just my take.

cs89 on March 16, 2011 at 4:08 PM

So, who should it be in your mind? And, please don’t spew that “I haven’t decided yet” crap because we know who the 10-12 potential caqndidates are.

bw222 on March 16, 2011 at 3:58 PM

Good luck with that. Most of the “anyone but Palin” crowd won’t DARE say who they will support. They know their favorite is so inferior they’d be laughed out of the room.

But you are right. At this point we know who the players are, as well as who will be serious contenders and who will just be filler.

It’s time for the ABP people to either present a viable alternative, or just STFU.

gary4205 on March 16, 2011 at 4:09 PM

It’s time for the ABP people to either present a viable alternative, or just STFU.

gary4205 on March 16, 2011 at 4:09 PM

It is far too early to unite behind a candidate. Let people make their criticisms. I personally think anyone who thinks Palin has no shot at being the nominee is a fool, but that’s my opinion and will eventually be proven right or wrong.

alwaysfiredup on March 16, 2011 at 4:16 PM

Well a subsidy is when the govt directly makes a payment of X amount of dollars when someone actually does something that the said subsidy says you have to do.
Like for instance, there are CRP payments made to people who own highly erodable land that has a crop history.
The payment amount depends upon many factors, including crop history & land conditions.
So this is the classic subsidy of paying farmers not to farm.
Imagine owning land & getting paid like $20/acre to let it sit. All you need to do is weed control.
Now, imagine the govt says, hey! Mr Corn farmer! If you plant corn instead of soybeans on those 100 acres, we’ll pay you $600/acre to plant corn vs maybe $50/acre to plant the soybeans.
If you ever have shortages of wheat, corn, etc., feel free to blame your govt (with minor cursing to Mother Nature perhaps). Bcs it is the federal govt which actually manipulates how much acreage is planted for such crops.
The subsidies given to farmers directly influence how much a farmer or what a farmer is going to plant.
Now let’s look at tax incentives/breaks.
The state of ND is looking at lowering it’s extraction tax to get more in line with those of MT & SD so oil companies will come here & drill.
Some would consider this a subsidy.
But it isn’t.
The state is just allowing the oil company to keep more ofits money as profit.
Many people think that lowering taxes is like giving away money, which of course, is completely retarded.
But then, we have Obama as POTUS, which shows just how many retarded people there really are in America.

Badger40 on March 16, 2011 at 4:23 PM

Rockmom is undecided but she really hates being confronted and accused, fyi.

alwaysfiredup on March 16, 2011 at 4:00 PM

I could be wrong, but I don’t think the Easter Bunny is going to throw his hat in the ring, but you never know.

We all know which candidates are expressing an interest in running and anyone who follows politics at all should be aware of the candidates and their stands on the issues (although one or two change fairly frequently). Even if someone says, “I have not decided yet, but X and Y look good to me.”

Campaigning during the primaries is really for independents, who really don’t follow politics closely.

bw222 on March 16, 2011 at 4:30 PM

Campaigning during the primaries is really for independents, who really don’t follow politics closely.

bw222 on March 16, 2011 at 4:30 PM

Which is exactly why I think Palin can up her independdent numbers.

alwaysfiredup on March 16, 2011 at 4:38 PM

That doesn’t change the fact that we need nuclear power as part of the overall energy strategy. I think Palin should at some point address this because she brings a lot of common sense to questions that are lacking in most other politico’s.

sharrukin on March 16, 2011 at 3:11 PM

Right but she has in the past. She advocates an “all of the above” approach and has explicitly supported nuclear.

She didn’t in this piece since it was about why it costs so much to fill up a tank on your car.

powerpro on March 16, 2011 at 4:58 PM

Jindal did a great job raising h3ll over the oil spill and lack of federal focus on the problem. We need to give him props for that. During that process, I am pretty sure he probably ramped up really fast on the ins and outs of off shore drilling.

Jindal has a good future ahead. Right now, I think Palin is a more effective counter puncher to the Obama Regime.

karenhasfreedom on March 16, 2011 at 3:54 PM

He did a pretty good job. But do you remember during that whole thing that Palin actually publicly advised him to stop waiting for the feds to get things done and to do it himself?

Better to ask forgiveness than permission, and all that…

powerpro on March 16, 2011 at 5:03 PM

That’s exactly why people campaign, btw.

Palin has the Base nailed down, which is why the Establishment is trying to drive her from the race, because they know that she can suck the Oxygen from the room. She may have a time of it for awhile if Huck runs, but if he stays out, it’s Palin by a mile for the nomination, because she will sit down with Huck and promise him a cabinet post for his support (an important one, probably HHS or something where he can make his mark on issues he cares about).

She can’t give Huck the veep nod. That’s for Jeb, Rubio, or Christie.

She was always a lot more right of center and moderate than the propagandists painted her. Once that knowledge actually gets out into the country, and is reinforced by her personality, she’ll do fine.

victor82 on March 16, 2011 at 5:12 PM

It is far too early to unite behind a candidate. Let people make their criticisms. I personally think anyone who thinks Palin has no shot at being the nominee is a fool, but that’s my opinion and will eventually be proven right or wrong.

alwaysfiredup on March 16, 2011 at 4:16 PM

Hmmm …. it too early to get behind a candidate, but never too early to bash Palin?

Really?

I don’t buy that. It’s time for the ABP loudmouths to either pony up or STFU.

They lose all credibility if they come on here bashing Palin but can’t offer up any realistic alternative.

People that come on here doing this should be taken to task at every opportunity. If they don’t have a “solution” to the “Palin problem” then they just have no legitimacy. Period.

gary4205 on March 16, 2011 at 5:12 PM

ObaMao and the phonily named “progressives” are engaged in a willful collapse of our economy through high energy prices and an incoherent energy “policy,” a weakening of our dollar, and an expansion of government in every area of our lives. This nonsense is not happening by accident.

Peter Ferrara has a great companion piece about how we are slouching towards becoming another Argentina. (I will I could locate in my files a chilling video of how that once-great country of wealth collapsed. The parallels to what is happening in America are chilling.)
Check out Ferrara’s piece.
http://spectator.org/archives/2011/03/16/slouching-towards-argentina

onlineanalyst on March 16, 2011 at 5:15 PM

She can’t give Huck the veep nod. That’s for Jeb, Rubio, or Christie.

She was always a lot more right of center and moderate than the propagandists painted her. Once that knowledge actually gets out into the country, and is reinforced by her personality, she’ll do fine.

victor82 on March 16, 2011 at 5:12 PM

You had me until I got there.

She will NOT give Jeb, Rubio, or Christie the VP slot, anymore than she would Huckabee.

You got a Bush. Not going to happen. You got Rubio who has distanced himself from the Tea Party, and has barely set foot in the Senate. Not Gonna happen.

As for Christie, why in the hell would she choose a democrat for a running mate? Christie is a left wing radical on every single issue. Hell, even his so called “fiscal conservatism” is nothing but smoke and mirrors!

Not.Gonna.Happen.

You are right though, Sarah is more of a centrist than many believe. She governed as one.

Our biggest challenge is just continually getting her real record out there. Letting people know who she really is, and all of the stuff she has really accomplished.

We can never let up.

gary4205 on March 16, 2011 at 5:22 PM

If they’re gonna drill the whole kahuna, they better get going; we all want $18b, riiight?

ProudPalinFan on March 16, 2011 at 5:46 PM

I think Jindal is a very intelligent man, with a bright future.

However, my memory is that his background has much more depth in health care, public policy etc. than energy. I’m sure he has some knowledge of the sector, and is probably learning even more as a Gulf area governor.

Palin’s primary strength in terms of experience is being deeply steeped in energy issues.

Just my take.

cs89 on March 16, 2011 at 4:08 PM

Give the man a cigar. You are 100% correct in this assessment.

Wouldn’t a team with Palin, Jindal, Bolton, and Liz Cheney be superb? Now who do we want as AG? Guiliani? Andy McCarthy? Who for Commerce or Treasury? The field in the GOP is rich with possibilities of solid leadership.

onlineanalyst on March 16, 2011 at 5:57 PM

And don’t forget that Palin knows way more about energy
than Jindahl does.

Amjean on March 16, 2011 at 3:42 PM
I’m not certain of that. I know Palin knows a lot on the subject, but I don’t know what Jindal knows.

hawksruleva on March 16, 2011 at 3:47 PM

Well, then do your research and get back to us.

Amjean on March 16, 2011 at 6:38 PM

Jindal did a great job raising h3ll over the oil spill and lack of federal focus on the problem. We need to give him props for that. During that process, I am pretty sure he probably ramped up really fast on the ins and outs of off shore drilling.

Jindal has a good future ahead. Right now, I think Palin is a more effective counter puncher to the Obama Regime.

karenhasfreedom on March 16, 2011 at 3:54 PM

One oil spill equals Jindhal’s extensive knoweledge of subject. Ask Jindhal how much money the state receives
from the off shore oil companies and what the state does
with it? What did Palin do with the proceeds from Alaska’s
oil profits?

18 years government experience, Oil & Gas Commissioner of
the largest state, almost 3 years as governor of same state,
I think she might have been the Chair of the Governor’s
Association on same subject – equals counter puncher to
Obama. After all every country needs one of these, right?
Should she be called the Counter puncher Czar? Is this a
paid position? Are you nuts?

By the way, Jindhal IS a great governor – the problem is,
he is not Palin.

Amjean on March 16, 2011 at 6:50 PM

Credit where due, it was a pretty good piece.

I wonder who wrote it.

Hollowpoint on March 16, 2011 at 6:53 PM

Credit where due, it was a pretty good piece.

I wonder who wrote it.

Hollowpoint on March 16, 2011 at 6:53 PM

Look, it’s Kathy Griffin….

idesign on March 16, 2011 at 7:27 PM

So, in his desperate need to pander to whiny Asian racialists, O’Bozo couldn’t find a single person with Asian ancestry who knows anything about energy production and can speak English in complete sentences?

Are you fu**ing kidding me?!

I knew Chu was a dope liberal, but I’ve never heard the stuttering twit talk before. Unbelievable.

Jaibones on March 16, 2011 at 8:01 PM

Energy is the building block of our economy. The President is purposely weakening that building block and weakening our country.

- Sarah Palin

I am late to this thread and skimmed the above comments to see if anyone mentioned this sentence from Palin’s article, and not having noticed any I quote it above. This reads like many comments on Hot Air over the last year or so: Obama intentionally doing damage to our country. This is quite a shot. Has any other so-called presidential candidate taken this strong a position against Obama?

GaltBlvnAtty on March 16, 2011 at 8:22 PM

Palin is right as usual.

Obama already has his minions calling for a move away from coal and nuclear and toward “clean” energy.

The coup de tat we saw on our health care and financial system is now taking place on our energy systems.

Osama must be thrilled with the success Obama is having

.

cntrlfrk on March 16, 2011 at 8:23 PM

How’s that Hopey Changey thing working out for you now?

Roy Rogers on March 16, 2011 at 8:36 PM

Palin SAYS what most of us think!

The rest of the repubs are too busy worrying about
being “moderate” in tone so they can get elected.

Palin is raising a flag to who Obama is. She tried
to do it during the presidential campaign with McCain;
McCain and the campaign got scared and ran from it.

Many spend their time trying to determine if Obama is
dumb, a puppet of Soros, etc. or if he is being true to
his socialist/marxist/communist agenda. I say who cares
why? He is doing it and that is all that is important.
He is ruining this great country and someone needs to have
the cojones to stop him.

Amjean on March 16, 2011 at 8:44 PM

GaltBlvnAtty on March 16, 2011 at 8:22 PM

Good point. It echoes a comment she made a few months ago (can’t remember the issue — there have been so many — but in that case she used Obama’s own words to implicate him on doing purposeful harm). This time it’s an open cuff across the face. I was expecting a backlash, as last time. But perhaps the Left no longer wants start a debate on Obama’s malice aforethought. Anyway, she’s the only one who has made this connection between motive and action.

rrpjr on March 16, 2011 at 8:47 PM

Gov. Palin lays out a succinct and accurate cause and effect of Barry’s energy policies. Or lack thereof. One can only say Barry’s policies are a deliberate attempt to cripple the US economy.

Kini on March 16, 2011 at 8:48 PM

He did a pretty good job. But do you remember during that whole thing that Palin actually publicly advised him to stop waiting for the feds to get things done and to do it himself?

Better to ask forgiveness than permission, and all that…

powerpro on March 16, 2011 at 5:03 PM

I think Jindal was being respectful of the fed’s fiefdom for the first couple of days, but when it became apparent that Obama was phoning it in, then Jindal took Sarah’s advice and “went rogue”. I could not believe how the EPA tied his hands, and did MORE damage. Geesh, they didn’t even want him to use sand berms to mitigate the oil getting back into those swampy waters.

My dream cabinet for Palin:

Liz Cheney, National Security Advisor
State: Bolton
Attorney General: Guiliani
Treasury? dunno, just not another Tarp supporter from Goldman Sachs, that unholy alliance needs to end
Education: none, she abolishes it and returns it back to the states
HEW: someone committed to dismantling Obamacare
Energy: someone that she trusts who agress with her all of the above, drill baby drill
Homeland Security: someone very competent who has the balls of Jan Brewer with a military background (I want Governor Brewer to stay in Arizona to fight the good fight on the border)
Defense: Hmmm, Someone not tainted by the Bush or Obama admins
Commerce: Trump (doubt he would take it, but I like how he talks about protecting America’s trading positions
Labor: Scott Walker!!!!!!!!!!!!

karenhasfreedom on March 16, 2011 at 11:14 PM

Again, Palin will never be given credit for being spot on.
These threads tire me.
People are such fickle stupid morons.
The woman knows her stuff & does good & also makes mistakes.
Last I knew, she was human.
But bcs she has a vag!na, she will never be viable for some.
Whatevs.

Badger40 on March 17, 2011 at 12:04 AM

Badger40 on March 17, 2011 at 12:04 AM

Sexism is certainly part of it. Curiously, I deal with
many older men (mostly) in my business, say 50-75. They,
without exception, LOVE Sarah Palin. Also, without
exception, they despise Obama. And the ones in the south?
Oh my, they are very vocal in their hatred of Obama.

Amjean on March 17, 2011 at 10:42 AM

Chu, another effete intellectual who doesn’t know his own ass from a hole in the ground.

Better he should get back to the ranch and raise those rainbow colored unicorns with their non-polluting, carbon free energy farts that will help us ‘win the future’.

GarandFan on March 17, 2011 at 10:43 AM

Comment pages: 1 2