Quote of the Day (September 6, 2011)

Palin calls for elimination of corporate income tax
*
Howard Richman, at IdealTaxes.com:

“Palin continues to show more economic common sense than any other potential candidate who has a chance to be president.”

- JP

Sarah Palin: Conquering the Storm

Real solutions to grow our economy and reduce our debt
*
On Facebook today, Sarah Palin posted her prescription for fixing the mess that President Obama and his Democrats have made of the American economy on their watch. She says we must stop the spending, balance the budget, repeal ObamaCare, cancel the stimulus, reform entitlements, develop our domestic energy resources, and get the federal government off of the back of the private sector:

Conquering the Storm

In the coming days we’ll sort through the repercussions of S&P’s downgrade of our credit rating, including concerns about the impact a potential interest rate increase would have on our ability to service our suffocating $14.5 trillion debt.

I’m surprised that so many people seem surprised by S&P’s decision. Weren’t people paying attention over the last year or so when we were getting warning after warning from various credit rating agencies that this was coming? I’ve been writing and speaking about it myself for quite some time.

Back in December 2010, I wrote: “If the European debt crisis teaches us anything, it’s that tomorrow always comes. Sooner or later, the markets will expect us to settle the bill for the enormous Obama-Pelosi-Reid spending binge. We’ve already been warned by the credit ratings agency Moody’s that unless we get serious about reducing our deficit, we may face a downgrade of our credit rating.” And again in January, in response to President Obama’s State of the Union address I wrote: “With credit ratings agency Moody’s warning us that the federal government must reverse the rapid growth of national debt or face losing our triple-A rating, keep in mind that a nation doesn’t look so ‘great’ when its credit rating is in tatters.”

One doesn’t need a Harvard Law degree to figure this out! Just look across the pond at Europe. European nations with less debt and smaller deficits than ours and with real “austerity” plans in place to deal with them have had their ratings downgraded. By what magical thinking did we figure we could run up perpetual trillion dollar deficits and still somehow avoid the unforgiving mathematics of a downgrade? Nothing is ever “too big to fail.” And there’s no such thing as a free lunch. Didn’t we all learn that in our micro and macro econ classes? I did at the University of Idaho. How could Obama skip through Columbia and Harvard without learning that?

Many commonsense Americans like myself saw this day coming. In fact, in June 2010, Rick Santelli articulated the view of independent Tea Party patriots everywhere when he shouted on CNBC, “I want the government to stop spending! Stop spending! Stop spending! Stop spending! STOP SPENDING!” So, how shamelessly cynical and dishonest must one be to blame this inevitable downgrade on the very people who have been shouting all along “stop spending”? Blaming the Tea Party for our credit downgrade is akin to Nero blaming the Christians for burning Rome. Tea Party Americans weren’t the ones “fiddling” while our country’s fiscal house was going up in smoke. In fact, we commonsense fiscal conservatives were the ones grabbing for the extinguishers while politically correct politicians and their cronies buried their heads in what soon became this bonfire.

With S&P and others now warning that we could face another downgrade if we don’t get serious about our debt problem (i.e., recklessly spending money we don't have), Washington needs to wake up before things get worse! We’re already hearing murmurs about QE3, which is just madness and will further debase our currency at a time when the dollar’s status as the world’s reserve currency is already being questioned. The loss of the dollar’s reserve currency status would adversely impact us in every conceivable way. Our standard of living would decline as imports become more expensive (including imports of foreign oil), government wouldn’t be able to finance deficits as cheaply, and American corporations – employers – would lose a competitive edge. It would be another crack in our status as a financial superpower.

Last May, I gave a speech at Westhills Community College in Lemoore, California, to an audience that included farmers from California’s Central Valley. I tried to paint a picture for them of where all of this was heading. The following is an excerpt from my prepared remarks:

Now we’re all getting hit with rising food prices too. Back in November of last year, I predicted this would happen when the Federal Reserve dropped a $600 billion money bomb called QE2 on us! That’s short for “quantitative easing 2.” It’s a fancy term for running the printing presses and creating money out of thin air – which drives down the value of the dollar and makes the price of everything more expensive.

As I predicted six months ago, these policies will lead us down a path where for the first time in our history our fate will be taken out of our own hands and placed in the hands of the world’s capital markets. They will force us to make the responsible decisions that our leaders are unwilling to make. Just as the destinies of the Central Valley farms have been taken out of your hands by the federal government’s overreach into your water rights, so the destiny of our nation will be taken out of our hands because our leadership has failed to get our financial house in order.

This isn’t some theoretical threat any more. It’s already happening. The world’s biggest bond investment fund PIMCO announced last month that it was dumping U.S. Treasury bonds. The head of PIMCO, Bill Gross, one of the world’s preeminent debt investors, warned that the U.S. is in serious risk of default with our trillion dollar deficits and no end in sight. And last week, credit rating agency Standard & Poor’s downgraded our credit outlook to “negative” – that’s the first time that has happened to us since the attack on Pearl Harbor. The IMF has even given us formal notice that, unless we do something to deal with our debt problem, we could tip the world economy into another recession.

It is a disgraceful and embarrassing situation when the United States finds itself justifiably chastised in the same tone normally reserved for near-bankrupt economies.

And in this, like in shutting off your water, the federal government has failed you. Their reckless spending and destruction of the dollar will make access to available credit for farmers and small business owners harder to get. And it will make transportation costs higher because it will hit everyone at the gas pump. You see, because the Obama White House won’t let us drill domestically, we’re forced to import oil that we pay for in dollars. So, when the value of the dollar drops, the price of gas goes up. And if you think $4 a gallon is bad, wait till you see what life is like at $6 or $7 a gallon.

Last November, the so-called smart people all laughed at me when I warned them of this. They told me not to make such a big deal about rising prices. Well, guess what – it became a big deal all on its own.

In fact, there was an editorial in the New York Sun that said – and I quote: “As gasoline is nearing six dollars a gallon at some pumps, the cost of groceries is skyrocketing, and the value of the dollars…has collapsed to less than a 1,500th of an ounce of gold. Unemployment is still high. Shakespeare couldn’t come up with a better plot. But how in the world did Mrs. Palin, who is supposed to be so thick, manage to figure all this out so far ahead of the New York Times and all the economists it talked to?”

Well, I’m sure the New York Times writers will remember the famous line: “You don’t need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows.” And right now the American economy is in the howling, hot headwinds of a gathering storm. We’re printing up and buying up our own notes at an unprecedented rate, and the Fed is artificially holding interest rates down to nearly zero. Anyone with commonsense could see what was coming. Unfortunately, common sense is in short supply among our leaders. It’s like they never believe that the rules of common sense apply to them. They think somehow we'll escape from the consequences of their policies. It’s the same magical thinking that allows them to run up trillion dollar deficits and still think that we can “win the future.”

Every other generation has weathered recessions by sacrifice and belt tightening. But our leaders today decided that they could magically paper over the tough decisions by running the printing presses. A little history lesson might have showed them how well that worked out for Germany in the 1930s. The Weimar Republic inflated its currency so much that it took a wheel barrel full of paper money to buy a loaf of bread. That might be the main thing I remember from Mr. Crum’s history class at Wasilla High, but it told me all I needed to know about the inflationary dangers of a weak currency and why we must avoid it. What a shame Mr. Crum didn’t teach at Harvard.

That was just three months ago, and things have already gotten worse. We have to face this storm head on. It won’t be easy, but there are real solutions to grow our economy and reduce our debt.

First, we need to get serious about our deficit. No more accounting gimmicks. No more cuts in “out-years” that never materialize. The permanent political class in D.C. might be fooling themselves with these Enron-like accounting games, but they’re not fooling the world’s capital markets. And we don’t need any more happy talk from the White House about “investing” in solar shingles and really fast trains. The White House shouldn’t even bother floating these new spending programs. We can’t afford them. Period. We need to stop this deficit spending, balance our budget, repeal Obamacare, cancel all unused stimulus funds, and reform our entitlement programs. We have to have an adult conversation about our spending commitments; circumstances have changed, and we must adapt. I know none of this will be easy, but, “thick” or not, the average American outside the D.C. politico bubble knows that we no longer have a choice! We will have entitlement reform and a balanced budget; it’s just a matter of how. We can do it ourselves in a calm, methodical, and responsible manner, or we can wait for the world’s capital markets to ram it down on us. Let’s be responsible and do it ourselves. And let’s get serious about reducing the size of government across the board and rooting out waste. How many more reports (that today are destined to merely gather dust on the shelf) do we need about duplicative and unnecessary programs before we actually do something about government waste?

We need to get this economy moving again, and the real stimulus we’ve been waiting for is domestic energy development. We must reduce our dangerous dependence on foreign oil by responsibly developing natural resources here. This will provide good paying jobs, reduce our trade deficit, increase federal and state revenue, ensure environmental standards, and actually stimulate our economy without incurring any debt. That’s real stimulus! Affordable, plentiful, and secure energy is the foundation of every thriving economy. Let’s make it the foundation of ours. Let’s do the opposite of President Obama’s manipulation of U.S. energy supplies. Let’s drill here, build refineries, and stop kowtowing to foreign countries in asking them to ramp up energy production which makes us even more beholden to them as we rely on their foreign product. Let’s move on tapping our massive domestic natural gas reserves. Natural gas is the perfect “bridge fuel” to a future when more renewable sources are available. It’s clean, it’s green, and we’ve got a lot of it. Let’s drill. Let’s build an infrastructure for natural gas cars and power plants. Energy development can help kick start our economic engine.

In addition to energy security, I embrace a pro-growth agenda that can make American corporations far more competitive on the global stage. (I will be writing more about this in the coming days.) We need to tell the world, “America is open for business again!” And let’s welcome industry by reducing burdensome regulations. The Obama administration keeps strangling businesses in red tape. From the EPA’s rulings to that nightmare known as Obamacare, the Obama administration is hanging one regulatory albatross after another around the private sector’s neck. Let’s get government out of the way and give the private sector room to breathe, grow, and thrive. We can provide businesses confidence to expand and hire Americans in a stable environment.

Be wary of the efforts President Obama makes to “fix” the debt problem. The more he tries to “fix” things, the worse they get because his “solutions” always involve spending more, taxing more, growing government, and increasing debt. This debt problem is the greatest challenge facing our country today. Obviously, President Obama doesn’t have a plan or even a notion of how to deal with it. His press conference today was just a rehash of his old talking points and finger-pointing. That’s why he can’t be re-elected in 2012.

Our economic news is disheartening and the task before can seem daunting, but we must not lose our sense of optimism. People look around today and may see only the negative. They see a culture and a nation in decline, but that’s not who we are! America must regain its optimistic pioneering spirit again. Our founders declared that “we were born the heirs of freedom.” We are the heirs of those who froze with Washington at Valley Forge, who held the line at Gettysburg, who freed the slaves, carved a nation out of the wilderness, and allowed reward for work ethic. We are the sons and daughters of that Greatest Generation who stormed the beaches of Normandy, raised the flag at Iwo Jima, and made America the strongest and most prosperous nation in the history of mankind. By God, we will not squander what has been given us!

Our destiny is still in our own hands if we pick ourselves up and act responsibly and quickly. We must all get involved. Concerned Americans must seek truth, work harder than ever, and be willing to sacrifice today to ensure freedom tomorrow. Please get engaged in 2012 electoral politics and support experienced, vetted, pro-free market fiscal conservatives who will dedicate all to preserving our Republic and protecting our Constitution.

- Sarah Palin

- JP

How Sarah Palin can defeat Barack Obama

Taking a page from the Clinton War Room
*
In 1992 incumbent president George H. W. Bush, despite enjoying relatively strong approval ratings as high as 89 percent right after the Gulf war, was deprived of a second term in large part thanks to one man, but it wasn't Bill Clinton or H. Ross Perot. Although Perot's independent effort did its damage, analysis of Perot voters shows that the damage he did affected Bush and Clinton in proportions not sufficiently out of balance to have made the difference for Clinton:

Perot's voters voted overwhelmingly for Democratic Governor candidates, and only marginally in favor of the Republican candidates for the House and Senate. Perot's voters favored Republican Senate candidates by 2.28%, and Republican House candidates by 2.69%. Because Perot's voters were only 1/5th of the total, that translates into about another 500,000 votes or 0.5% for Bush if they had voted in a two way presidential race the same way they voted for the Senate and House. That is about 1/7th of the margin by which Bush lost.

If Perot cost Bush the election, the proof must lie somewhere else. On a statistical basis, it's essentially impossible to make a case for Perot costing Bush the 1992 presidential election. The election results show that Perot took many voters from Clinton among his supporters who demonstrated a low interest in politics by voting only for President and Governor, while taking marginally from Bush among those who demonstrated more commitment by casting ballots for Congress.

As for Clinton, he was mostly remembered for his rambling speech at the DNC convention four years earlier, a marathon address which was cheered when it was over mostly because it was finally over. Otherwise, he was relatively unknown on the national stage before primary season began. He quickly gained notoriety, however, and not in a good way, when allegations of his affairs began to surface in the press. There were also rumors of draft-dodging and marijuana use floating around about Clinton, and the Bush team decided to push hard on the character issue. But Clinton's moral failings were scarcely a minor blip on voters' radar screens. According to exit polling, something else was foremost on the minds of the electorate. 75% had said that the economy was Fairly Bad or Very Bad. After having pledged, "Read my lips, no new taxes," in a 1988 campaign speech, Bush later became concerned with the rising federal deficit and agreed to a budget compromise with Congress to raise taxes in the mistaken belief that higher taxes would reduce the deficit. The Clinton campaign flooded the airwaves with a series of ads which showed Bush repeatedly asking the American people to read his lips, while Clinton was on the campaign trail slamming the incumbent for raising taxes. Ironically, the net effect was to make the same voters who seemed uninterested in character issues begin to question Bush's honesty.

So who was the man who denied George H.W. Bush a second term? It was Clinton strategist James Carville, who never doubted for a minute that the recession and its impact on the electorate were the keys to a Clinton victory. To insure that everyone in the Clinton War Room -- including both Clinton and Carville himself -- was on the same book and page, the aide had hand-written a list on a white board and hung it on the wall. It read:

1. Change vs. more of the same
2. The economy, stupid
3. Don't forget healthcare

Nearly two decades later, 70 percent of voters now say the country is on the wrong track, and 57 percent disapprove of the way Obama has handled the economy. The lesson here practically writes itself. We're no fans of Carville. Our memories of him scurrying from network interview to network interview during the 2008 RNC convention with a blown-up photo of the modest structure that is Wasilla City Hall babbling on about how "dat don't look like no gubmint building. Dat look like a bait stand in south Luzianna" still rankles. We don't agree with much of what he has to say most of the time, but in the run up to the 1992 election, Carville was right as rain after a long Texas drought about the economy and how to exploit the issue.

It's the economy again, stupid. It's not about where Barack Obama was born, and it's not about any social issue, at least in the minds of the voters. They aren't just concerned about the economy, they're very worried about it. So economic issues -- whether it's the price of gasoline and other goods and services, the federal deficit, looming inflation, the budget, the debt ceiling, the housing market, and what Vice President Biden referred to as a "three letter word - j-o-b-s" -- are the keys to making sure Obama's further presidential ambitions will suffer the same fate as those of Bush41 twenty years ago. Just reminding voters of these issues won't be enough, of course. The successful GOP candidate will have to present real solutions to these fiscal problems, solutions which voters believe will work.

If and when Sarah Palin gets into the 2012 race for president, James Carville's short list of three items should be plastered all over the walls at her election headquarters.

1. Change vs. more of the same

Carville's first point can be very effectively driven home by taking a page out of Ronald Reagan's playbook. The governor should ask voters in every stump speech, "Are you better off now than you were four years ago?" Most aren't, so they will pay attention when she explains how she can make things better.

2. The economy, stupid

She can pound away at Obama as the bus driver who's got the economy headed over a cliff. She already knows from the 2008 election that voters don't care who he used to hang out with, where he was born, or how much of a deranged Marxist his former pastor is. They're all valid points to conservatives, but the larger electorate tuned out and didn't listen last time, just as they weren't interested in Clinton's character in 1992, and they're not likely to want to hear such talk now. But if she talks about the pain at the pump, when filling up the family ride takes the lion's share of a $100 dollar bill, it will hit home. So will talk of higher prices and smaller servings at the grocery store and the the family's favorite restaurants. Abortion is an issue close to the governor's heart, and justifiably so. But talking about how domestic drilling makes us more energy secure and has the side benefit of creating jobs will resonate with the voters, while condemning Planned Parenthood will only make their eyes glaze over. To be able to appoint justices who will strike down Roe. v Wade, she will have to first get elected, and managing the debate over the economy successfully will go a long way toward helping her to do that.

3. Don't forget healthcare

This one takes on a whole new meaning now that ObamaCare has been rammed through. The results of a poll released April 18 show that this is still an unpopular measure, with 52 percent of Americans in favor of its repeal. But the issue is strongly tied to the economy, and treating it not just as a matter of government intrusion, but as an economic issue as well will hit home with voters if they understand how ObamaCare will affect their lives and those of their family members. For many Americans, their aging parents will be ill served by ObamaCare, while their children will have to pay for it.

Staying focused on the economy will require no small measure of campaign discipline of Gov. Palin and her team, but the rewards will be great. She will need some well-defined plans which she can present as white papers on energy, health care, debt and the deficit, the budget, jobs and much more. But we don't doubt that she is capable of doing this and building a team of problem-solvers to help her.

Game On!

- JP

Reich: Sour economy could put Sarah Palin in the White House

*
Political economist and former Clinton Administration Labor Secretary Robert Reich, in a Christian Science Monitor blog rant so stuffed with liberal Democrat talking points along with buzz words and phrases that he employs the term "white working class" no less than seven times, concludes that the economy, stupid, could put Sarah Palin in the White House:

As I believe will become clearer, the Palin Strategy will involve a political threat to the GOP establishment: Deny her the nomination she’ll run as independent. This will split off much of the white working class and guarantee defeat of the Republican establishment candidate. It will also result in her defeat in 2012, but that’s a small price to pay for gaining the credibility and power to demand the nomination in 2016, or threaten another third-party run in 2020.

Once nominated, her campaign for the general election will be purely populist. She’ll seek to broaden her base to become the candidate of the people, taking on America’s vested Establishment.

More than anything else, the Palin Strategy depends on the continuing fear and anger of America’s white working class. She’s betting that their economic prospects will not improve by 2012, or even by 2016 and beyond.

Sadly, this is likely to be the case. On Tuesday, the Fed issued a gloomy prognosis. Even if the U.S. economy began to grow at a rate more typical of recoveries than the current anemic 2 percent, unemployment won’t drop to its pre-recession level for 5 to 7 years. A minority of the Fed thought this was too optimistic.

The disturbing truth is the bad economy is likely to continue for most Americans beyond 7 years — maybe for ten or more — because of a chronic lack of aggregate demand. Apart from inevitable inventory replacements and the necessary replacements by consumers of cars, appliances, and clothing that wear out, nothing will propel the U.S. economy forward.

[...]

The President seems unable or unwilling to provide the clear narrative that explains what’s happened and what needs to be done, and Republicans are at this moment ascendant.

It all fits into Sarah Palin’s strategy.

Reich, who drew the ire of his fellow liberals by essentially confirming Gov. Palin's warning about death panels before she even issued it, also invoked the word "anger" six times in his post and tossed in some other reliable old leftist pearls such as "racist," fascist," "fear" and "right wing" just for bad measure. To slam Sarah, he employed "snark," "snide," "sarcastic" and "revenge." One would think he was describing his old Clinton Crew colleague Paul Bergala, not Gov. Palin.

Reich's rant is pure Democrat fear mongering, race baiting and Palin demonizing, but it does offer one thing which is new, and it marks a key change in the Democrat's previously-employed narrative that she could win the GOP nomination, but never the general election. Another liberal Democrat has now admitted that Sarah Palin can not only win her party's nomination, but the presidency as well. The point of Reich's piece is to try to scare Democrats and those Vichy Republicans who read the CSMonitor into stopping her.

- JP

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 on Obama's "backassward" economic policy

More from Barbara Walters' interview of Sarah Palin for ABC:

Walters: "Unemployment in the United States is now more than ten percent, the highest level since 1893. If you were president, what would you do about unemployment?"

Palin: "I would start cutting taxes and allowing our small businesses to keep more of what they are earning, more of what they are producing, more of what they own and earn so that they could start reinvesting in their businesses and expand and hire more people. Not punishing them by forcing health care reform down their throats; by forcing an energy policy down their throats that ultimately will tax them more and cost them more to stay in business. Those are backassward ways of trying to fix the economy."

A video of the exchange, courtesy of Real Clear Politics, is here. YouTube videos of former Gov. Sarah Palin's interview segements which were aired on ABC Tuesday are here, here and here.

- JP

Sarah Palin Was Right #19: IBD on Domestic Energy Reserves

A recent report from the Congressional Research Service contains some startling information: when U.S. energy resources are counted and then converted to their barrels of oil equivalent (BOE), we are literally sitting on the largest energy reserves in the world. Via Investors.com:

According to the CRS, the U.S. has 1,321 billion barrels of oil (or barrels of oil equivalent for other sources of energy) if you combine its recoverable natural gas, oil and coal reserves. Russia is close behind with 1,248 billion barrels BOE. Other energy-producing nations, including many that export oil to the U.S., lag behind.

Of course, much of our world-leading reserves are off-limits by government edict.

Former Governor Sarah Palin of Alaska, commenting on how the current administration's pandering to special interest groups keeps us dependent on foreign sources of energy:

This nonsensical opposition to American domestic energy development continues to this day. Apparently the Obama-Biden administration only approves of offshore drilling in Brazil, where it will provide security and jobs for Brazilians.

The editors at Investors.com point out that the Democrats' idea of exploiting only renewable domestic sources of energy is not only an expensive notion, but in our weakened economy, it is depriving Americans of badly-needed jobs*:

We are dependent on fossil fuel energy and will be for some time. The folks at Peabody Energy say replacing coal would require 2,400 times more solar generation, 40 times more wind power, 250 new nuclear plants, almost double the U.S. production of natural gas, 500 hydro plants the size of the Hoover Dam or halving electricity consumption.

"Our overwhelming coal, natural gas and oil resources represent tens of trillions of dollars in wealth and millions of American jobs," said Sen. James Inhofe, R.-Okla., who released the CRS data.

[...]

Sadly, the report stated that the U.S. has tapped into only 13%, or 21 billion barrels of its oil reserves, with the other 87% still untouched.

Palin reminds us that the U.S. dependency on foreign energy sources is not just economic foolishness, but also as a failure to make this nation a more secure one:

Through this massive transfer of wealth, we lose hundreds of billions of dollars a year that could be invested in our economy. Instead it goes to foreign countries, including some repressive regimes that use it to fund activities that threaten our security.

Reliance on foreign sources of energy weakens America. When a riot breaks out in an OPEC nation, or a developing country talks about nationalizing its oil industry, or a petro-dictator threatens to cut off exports, the probability is great that the price of oil will shoot up. Even in friendly nations, business and financial decisions made for local reasons can destabilize America’s energy market, since the price we pay for foreign oil is subject to rising and falling exchange rates. Decreasing our dependence on foreign sources of energy will reduce the impact of world events on our economy.

In the end, energy independence is not just about the environment or the economy. It’s about freedom and confidence. It’s about building a more secure and peaceful America, an America in which our energy needs will not be subject to the whims of nature, currency speculators, or madmen in possession of vast oil reserves.

* The U.S. now has double-digit unemployment, according to the Labor Department

- JP

Krugman: Economy Won't Recover Until Palin's Second Term

- By Thomas Lamb



Link

- Tom

National security Republicans prefer Palin

Michael Goldfarb posted an interesting item a few days ago at TWS's The Blog.

According to a recent Rasmussen poll, those Republicans for whom national security is the most important issue, Gov. Sarah Palin is their first choice with with former Gov. Mitt Romney a close second. For Republicans with economic matters at the top of their list of issues, Palin and Romney are tied for the lead with 24% each.
This doesn't bode well for Governor Romney, in our opinion. With his considerable experience in the world of high finance and his reputation as a turnaround specialist, we would have thought that he would have a considerable advantage over all of his potential rivals for the 2012 GOP presidential nomination. That is not the case. Last year's financial meltdown seems to have tarnished the image of money men in the public's eye.

- JP

Gov. Palin's political future tied to Alaska economy

"It's the economy, stupid," is a phrase from Bill Clinton's campaign "war room" which has become a familiar part of the political lexicon. There's a lot of truth in it. Office holders are judged on the relative health of the economy in their jurisdictions whether they have any control over it or not. Perception is everything.

Case in point - the McCain-Palin ticket was doomed by a financial crisis which was a harbinger of the economic downturn in which the nation now finds itself. Sen. John McCain was perceived more as part of the problem than part of the solution. Had he taken a principled stand in opposition to the financial bailout, some analysts believe that the results of the 2008 election could have been different. Indeed, public opinion polls showed the McCain-Palin ticket actually enjoying a modest lead until the bottom fell out of the financial market. It may not have made enough of a difference to catapult McCain into the White House, but we will never know. One thing is for certain. The Arizona Senator did not help the cause of his ticket by suspending his campaign, returning to Washington and taking basically the same stance as his opponent on the financial bailout.

A large part of how Sarah Palin's first term as governor will be judged depends on Alaska's economic fortunes. Her state's economy hasn't been hit as hard as some others, but the 49th state has not endured the recession without some problems. However, there are some signs that Alaska's economy may be headed for an upturn.

The first indication is the unemployment rate. A recessionary economy loses jobs, and that has been an increasing trend nationwide. In Alaska, however, the seasonally adjusted unemployment rate, which was at or near the national rate, fell to 8 percent for the month of April. It's a seasonal decline, as Alaska typically adds construction and tourism jobs this time of year, and the governor can take no more credit for the rebound than she could be blamed for the decline. But remember, perception is everything. If Alaska can just manage a lower unemployment rate than the national average, it will be seen as a positive for Gov. Palin.

By vetoing $80.3 million from the state budget, even including $28.6 million in federal stimulus energy funds, Alaska's governor is again staking her claim to fiscal conservatism. Part of the reason for the better than 80% approval ratings Gov. Palin enjoyed prior to campaigning for John McCain can be directly traced to the spending vetoes she made in her first year in office. In the midst of the current recession, she is taking the prudent course by demonstrating fiscal restraint as governor.

Another factor over which Gov. Palin has no control is the stock market. But the recent rebound in stock prices should make a positive contribution to her political success. An improving stock market has made a difference of billions of dollars to the Alaska Permanent Fund. Not only is this likely to increase dividends in future years, but it also may ensure that Alaskans will be able to cash a dividend check this year. Though still below its peak of over $40 billion prior to last year's market slide, the fund had recovered as of Wednesday back up to $30.4 billion. Voters with dividend dollars in their wallets are happier voters than those without.

But the factor that may have an even greater impact on how Sarah Palin's stewardship of Alaska is perceived is the price of oil. Since the state's funding is derived not by taxing its citizens and small businesses but from oil revenues, Alaska's fortunes are closely tied to the price of oil. And the price of North Slope crude has risen 40 percent in just the past month. Closing at $60.19 a barrel Wednesday, it’s the first time the barrel price of Alaskan oil has surpassed the $60 mark in more than six months.

There are several reasons for the rise in oil prices. A new report from the U.S. Energy Department released Wednesday showed that crude oil stockpiles declined by 2.1 million barrels for the week ending last Friday. Refinery fires, optimism in the equities markets, variations in the strength of the dollar and the advent of the "driving season" with the Memorial Day holiday are some of the other contributing factors.

Generally speaking, crude oil prices in the $70 to $80 range are what Alaska needs. It allows the state to to refrain from making withdrawals from its $6 billion savings account and eliminates the need for draconian budget measures. It is also the range cited by the oil companies as the point at which they spend money on investments, resource replacement and ramped-up production. At $60, Alaska isn't quite there yet, but things look much brighter at this price point than they did when oil prices bottomed out in the first quarter. 

The price of oil is just one more factor over which Gov. Palin has no control. But the prudent steps she and the legislature had previously taken to set aside billions in a "rainy day" fund and the fiscal restraint she is showing in dealing with Alaska's budget bode well for a positive verdict ultimately for her first term as governor. This should send her approval ratings back up and propel her towards a second term by a margin of votes sufficient enough to be seen as comfortable at the least. Should she harbor ambitions for national political office, as many believe she does, all of this should work in her favor.

- JP