"Distraction Action": Arnold Hoisted on His Own Petard

- By Ian Ransom
*
Fine, I’ll admit it. My state (California) is a geographical miracle, a potent paradise of panoramic splendor, an oasis of almost outlandish opportunity, and a bedazzling beacon of American “Be All You Can Be” bravura.

It is also a befuddled frontier of fiscal fecklessness managed—-literally—-by boobs.

Yes, boobs.

Silicone and saline-inflated ones from San Luis Obispo south to San Diego (with a particularly critical-mass concentration in the Greater Los Angeles Area). Wine-saturated, sushi-stuffed and self-righteous “boobs-of-a-different-sort” from Paso Robles north to Sacramento.

Throughout the entire expanse, left-leaning hearts hemorrhage pools of vain ideological blood in perfect time to the arrhythmic beat of government crowbars atop the state’s dwindling coffers. Barbara Boxer bares Starbucks-stained fangs at military officials and brays her demands for titular homage. Sean Penn idly picks 500 thread-count lint from his belly-button and ponders new ways to render obsequies to Marxist dictators. A coven of Code Pinkies in San Francisco gathers 'round a Sarah Palin voodoo-doll, thankfully unable to lift their pin-sticking claws due to the onset of vegan anemia and misdirected ennui.

Meanwhile, Arnold the Governator observes it all from his terrifying, Terminating peak. He fiddles atop a perilous pedestal while the entire state continues its inexorable slide into the waiting Pacific—-crumbling away, though not due to any number of potentially predictable environmental disasters. Indeed, the power and possibility of California collapses under the mammoth weight of its own political subsistence.

In California, government is the “environmental disaster.”

Faced with his own, earnest failure to steer the world’s fourth largest economy in anything remotely resembling a “direction,” Schwarzenegger now opts, instead, to engage in the disturbingly familiar politics of deflection and distraction—-telltale signs of a pining Beltway bombast...signs of his own ruin. Arnold has attempted to belittle Palin, one of the nation’s most successful and energy-savvy governors and (whether he likes it or not) the de facto leader of his stated Party’s conservative movement. Yet, like many RINOs before, Schwarzenegger has been so utterly whipped by the vast liberal dismantling of his own back-yard that he’s starting to embrace bits of the enemy's doomed mythology! In the delirium, he besmirches a fellow leader on an ostensibly energy-related issue—-an issue concerning which she has far more first-hand knowledge and proven experience.

It's a sad day for California Republicans when Arnold slights Sarah, dear friends. Then again, if you were here, you'd realize that there are a lot of sad days to go around. More than anyone in this great state ought to endure, but perhaps more deserved here than anywhere else, due to rampant political idiocy. In this respect, Arnold Schwarzenegger has unquestionably hoisted himself on his own petard. By choosing such a silly, disingenuous, and specific stance against Sarah Palin on the global warming hoax, he has showcased his true agenda quite clearly in the great Wheat-From-the-Chaff separation game. To those of us who live in California and embrace common sense conservatism, this comes as no surprise.

Arnold certainly can’t preoccupy himself with any success of his own these days. Perhaps a jealous preoccupation with someone else’s success is—-amid his sinking political landscape—-the next best thing.

- Ian

Ian Ransom is the editor of The Ian Ransom Notes

Washington Post: Sarah Palin's Letter To The Editor

*
Sarah Palin has written a letter to the editor of the Washington Post in response to a column written by the Post's Eugene Robinson. The letter was published in the Thursday edition of the newspaper:

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

- JP

Ed Morrissey: Arnold should mind his own store

*
At Hot Air, Ed Morrissey says Sarah Palin's counter-punch to Arnold Schwarzenegger's weak-fisted jab at her was justified, while the Governator's attack makes no sense:

As Allahpundit noted, the attack on Palin seems pretty strange, from a political point of view.

[...]

And Palin’s right to skewer Arnold on economics. When California shows that it has the fiscal responsibility to actually cut its spending and bring its budget into balance while not overburdening its citizens with oppressive taxes and regulation, then perhaps its governor can offer advice on economics and policy. Until then, Arnold should mind his own store and save his wit for the state legislature.

Indeed, from the standpoint of governance, California is an economic basket case, while Alaska has weathered the recession better than most other states. Arnold would do well to shut his mouth and take some lessons in how to run a state without running it into the ground from Alaska's former governor.

Update: Arnie's approval rating has tanked.

- JP

NY Environmental Commissioner Pete Grannis Distorts Palin's Record in Copenhagen

- By Lisa Graas
*
You know about the distortions of Al Gore and Arnold Schwarzenegger regarding Governor Sarah Palin's record and her position on climate change. Now comes New York Environmental Commissioner Pete Grannis with false accusations about Governor Palin in remarks made at the climate change conference in Copenhagen.

From The Times Union:

"Last week, Sarah Palin -- you all remember her -- put a new posting on her Facebook page challenging the severity of climate change and telling President Obama to boycott Copenhagen," Grannis told his audience Monday. He pointed out that in the last 50 years, temperatures in Alaska have increased 6 degrees, and some coastal villages are at risk of falling into the ocean because of melting permafrost.

"Maybe instead of giving President Obama advice, (Palin) should be looking for a house further inland," Grannis said.

Actually, Governor Palin didn't "challenge the severity of climate change". She challenged the credibility of the data in light of ClimateGate, the release of emails showing climatologists have been fudging the numbers. She also challenged the claim that climate change is primarily caused by man's activities.

Governor Palin wrote:

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.

As New York's Environmental Commissioner, Grannis has been an active participant in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), a program in which New York's state government participates and has already raked in $25.4 million by selling carbon credits. Is he on the socialist bandwagon? It would seem so to me.

How effective is RGGI at reducing emissions? Not very. Not only that, states aren't using the funds for the purposes promised. Basically, RGGI allows states to impose what is rightly called an "energy tax" on businesses so that they can cover budget shortfalls not related to reducing emissions. See here for a report.

I'm reminded of something I read in Governor Palin's book Going Rogue:

“Politicians can either eat well, or sleep well. I wanted to sleep well."

~ Lisa

Is Sarah Palin's Inconvenient Truth Vexing Al Gore?

- By Lisa Graas
*

From the Times of London comes an intriguing report on Al Gore's latest falsehood in the debate surrounding climate change:

In his speech, Mr Gore told the [Copenhagen climate change] conference: “These figures are fresh. Some of the models suggest to Dr [Wieslav] Maslowski that there is a 75 per cent chance that the entire north polar ice cap, during the summer months, could be completely ice-free within five to seven years.”

Unfortunately for Mr. Gore, this was false. As noted by The Times:

[T]he climatologist whose work Mr Gore was relying upon dropped the former Vice-President in the water with an icy blast.

“It’s unclear to me how this figure was arrived at,” Dr Maslowski said. “I would never try to estimate likelihood at anything as exact as this.”

Mr Gore’s office later admitted that the 75 per cent figure was one used by Dr Maslowksi as a “ballpark figure” several years ago in a conversation with Mr Gore.

The embarrassing error cast another shadow over the conference after the controversy over the hacked e-mails from the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit, which appeared to suggest that scientists had manipulated data to strengthen their argument that human activities were causing global warming.

Full tory here.

Mind you, Mr. Gore has been under a great deal of pressure these days to salvage his credibility. He's reportedly made at least $100 million dollars telling people that the North Pole will melt within five years because of global warming that, he says, is primarily anthropogenic (caused by man). His film "An Inconvenient Truth", which my teenager assures me is misnamed and should be called "WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE" has won a boatload of awards, none of which caused this concerned parent's eyebrow to raise more so than the fact that my son's science teacher showed the film in class. Meanwhile, climatologists and meteorologists whose research shows that solar activity, orbital variations, and volcanic activity contribute more to climate change than man's activity are discounted by Gore and others who, like Gore, stand to lose credibility, prestige and, in some cases, federal grant money.

Though some reasonable people from across the societal spectrum have long questioned why research refuting Gore's claims has been largely ignored even as Gore is rolling in dough, sporting a big carbon footprint and influencing legislation, the megaphones of these skeptics weren't quite loud enough...........until ClimateGate.

In her recent op-ed in the Washington Post, Sarah Palin used her mighty megaphone to point out the "inconvenient truth" we "common-sensers", if you will, call ClimateGate.

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.

Palin's full statement is here. If you have common sense, the above makes perfect sense to you. If you are Al Gore or one of his radical followers, apparently you have trouble getting your mind around it.

Though the left would have us believe that Governor Palin is irrelevant (an Obama supporter I was debating with the other day characterized Palin as an annoying "gnat"), even they sometimes have to admit her power.

Greg Sargent, editor of The Plum Line, wrote:

I’m told by the paper's insiders that her piece was one of the most-read WaPo opinion pieces of the year, coming in 21st in page views out of literally hundreds of opinion articles. An earlier Palin Op ed in the paper on the same topic was the third most read of the year.

Clearly, the hockey mom from Wasilla is an Alaska-sized burr under Gore's saddle. Andrea Mitchell to the rescue! In an interview with Mitchell on the heels of Palin's op-ed, Gore chose to lie about Palin's position by saying that she denies climate change. Are you paying attention, folks? Al Gore told a convenient lie designed to make you think Sarah Palin isn't as smart as he is. (Yawn.)

It's quite an inconvenient truth, at least for those who are benefactors of "Hoaxenhagen", that the science is not settled on the matter. The only ones who truly believe the science is settled are those who embrace the leftist principle of "economic justice" and who see Copenhagen as a grand opportunity to bring that about no matter how badly it may damage our economy. The end justifies the means in the leftist playbook and environmental study is no exception in that playbook. Is it a coincidence that the climate alarmist camp is saturated with believers in "economic justice"? I think not.

In response to Gore's lie, Palin responded by doing what she does best. She went all "common sense" on him again.

Via Sarah Palin on Facebook:

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

Palin's common sense coupled with humor to highlight the error brought clarity to the national discussion and put some much-needed pressure on Gore to come clean on this hoax. The philosopher Epictetus once said: “If evil be spoken of you and it be true, correct yourself, if it be a lie, laugh at it.” Did Gore correct himself when Palin laughed at his lie? No, he just came up with another lie. If we wait long enough, he'll lie again. In fact, it wouldn't surprise me if he's telling another whopper as I write. Meanwhile, America watches.

All of this is strikingly reminiscent of what I wrote about just yesterday -- "Sarah Palin and Hillary Clinton: Is Obfuscation Intellectual?" I do hope you'll consider reading it. As time goes on, it's becoming increasingly clear to me that one of the most important reasons for the Palin phenomenon is her style of communication in which she deftly integrates, like Ronald Reagan before her, three fundamental qualities -- genuineness, forthrightness and levity. You do remember what they called Reagan, don't you? The Great Communicator.

The genteel left, so adept at pulling the wool over the eyes of hapless American voters with their obfuscation since the end of Reagan's term, are being stopped in their tracks by "The Thrilla from Wasilla". Yes, Sarah Palin has vexed Al Gore. Obfuscation isn't working anymore for him. This is why he told a blatant lie to Andrea Mitchell to defend himself against the WaPo op-ed and why he told an even more embarrassing, blatant lie to the climate change conference in Hoaxenhagen after Palin's follow-up.

In the left corner? The King of Platitudes, Barack Obama, and his pretentious band of thieves, including Mr. Gore.

In the right corner? The Real Deal, Sarah Palin, and her "roguish" band of common sense conservatives.

Though some deny it, there's been a Palin Revolution going on for some time now, folks. Rogue is Vogue! If you haven't come to realize this yet, you will. In time, you will.

~ Lisa

Lisa Graas is editor of the Palin Twibe Blog

Sarah Palin answers Arnold Schwarzenegger

*
Posting on her Facebook Notes page, Sarah Palin this evening answered California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger's criticism of her earlier today on the climate change issue:

Greener Than Thou?

Why is Governor Schwarzenegger pushing for the same sorts of policies in Copenhagen that have helped drive his state into record deficits and unemployment? Perhaps he will recall that I live in our nation’s only Arctic state and that I was among the first governors to create a sub-cabinet to deal specifically with climate change. While I and all Alaskans witness the impacts of changes in weather patterns firsthand, I have repeatedly said that we can’t primarily blame man’s activities for those changes. And while I did look for practical responses to those changes, what I didn’t do was hamstring Alaska’s job creators with burdensome regulations so that I could act “greener than thou” when talking to reporters.

- Sarah Palin

Governate that,  Mr. California! 

- JP

Sarah Palin Was Right #21: David Warren on Climategate

*
No sooner had John McCain announced that Sarah Palin would be his running mate, the Democrat opposition research machine shifted into overdrive. They intrepid diggers thought they had struck gold in an Palin interview for the September, 2008 issue of NewsMax. In that discussion, the then-governor of Alaska, said that she did not believe climate change is caused by human behavior:

“A changing environment will affect Alaska more than any other state, because of our location. I'm not one though who would attribute it to being man-made,” Palin said in the interview, which was posted online Friday.

AGW (Anthropogenic global warming) true believers are convinced that the earth is warming and that change in the climate is the result of human activity on the planet. AGW skeptics, however, argue that the earth has experienced alternating cycles of warming and cooling, both prior to and after the dawn of man. The warming and cooling, they say, can be attributed to variations in the sun's activity as the earth orbits around its star.

For more than a year the AGW true believers (i.e., most all liberals, Democrats and Palin-haters) have ridiculed former Gov. Palin and anyone else who doesn't adhere to their beliefs. Skeptics have long claimed that the "science" used by the true believers is in reality "junk science," and the data AGW proponents have relied upon to push their theories has been manipulate. Recent events tend to give credence to the skeptics and to vindicate Sarah Palin:

A computer hacker in England has done the world a service by making available a huge quantity of evidence for the way in which "human-induced global warming" claims have been advanced over the years.

By releasing into the Internet about a thousand internal e-mails from the servers of the Climate Research Unit in the University of East Anglia -- in some respects the international clearing house for climate change "science" -- he has (or they have) put observers in a position to see that claims of conspiracy and fraud were not unreasonable.

More generally, we have been given the materials with which to obtain an insight into how all modern science works when vast amounts of public funding is at stake and when the vested interests associated with various "progressive" causes require a particular scientific result.

There is little doubt that the e-mails were real. Even so warmist a true-believer as George Monbiot led his column in the Guardian yesterday with: "It's no use pretending this isn't a major blow. The e-mails extracted ... could scarcely be more damaging. I am now convinced that they are genuine, and I'm dismayed and deeply shaken by them."

[...]

Nigel Lawson (a.k.a. Baron Lawson of Blaby), the former British chancellor of the exchequer, who is among prominent persons demanding a full and open public inquiry, summarized the content of the e-mails in this way:

"Astonishingly, what appears, at least at first blush, to have emerged is that (a) the scientists have been manipulating the raw temperature figures to show a relentlessly rising global warming trend; (b) they have consistently refused outsiders access to the raw data; (c) the scientists have been trying to avoid freedom of information requests; and (d) they have been discussing ways to prevent papers by dissenting scientists being published in learned journals."

Why would they cook the data? Just follow the money. AGW has been a big money maker. Just ask Al Gore.

- JP