Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Gov. Sarah Palin Has What It Takes to be the Next Dick Cheney

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
AZBlue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-29-08 02:43 PM
Original message
Gov. Sarah Palin Has What It Takes to be the Next Dick Cheney
by Chris Kelly
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/chris-kelly/governor-palin-has-what-i_b_103702.html

Over the weekend, the Anchorage Daily News discovered a whole new reason Governor Palin is the perfect person to be the next Dick Cheney:

She can look you in eye and tell you black is white.

Especially when there's oil involved.

Back in January, the secretary of the interior was considering whether or not polar bears should be on the endangered species list. There were strong feelings on both sides of the issue. Childish romantics, who think there should be more bio-diversity on Earth than cows and us, wanted them listed. Grown-ups (and oil company lobbyists) argued that the answers are never that simple. But what about the scientists? Governor Palin wrote an op-ed for the New York Times that said:

"I strongly believe that adding them (polar bears that is, not scientists) to the list is the wrong move at this time. My decision is based on a comprehensive review by state wildlife officials of scientific information from a broad range of climate, ice and polar bear experts."

The polar bears weren't drowning. They were hanging themselves in their cells.

So that was that. Scientists said so.

Except they didn't.

The Feds -- who eventually did add the bears to the list -- based their decision on models that showed all of Alaska's polar bears dead by 2050. The ice they hunt and mate on is melting and they'll fall in the water and drown.

There were too many "ifs" to this theory for Governor Palin. (Does ice really melt when it gets warm? Is ice really water? It doesn't look like water.) She had to have her own people check it out. So she sent the Feds' reports to three marine biologists, including Robert Small, head of the marine mammals program for the Alaska Department of Fish and Game.

Small wrote back:

"Overall, we believe that the methods and analytical approaches used to examine the currently available information supports the primary conclusions and inferences stated in these 9 reports."

In other words, the Feds are right. The email is dated October 9, 2007. Palin's op ed, where she says they said the Feds were wrong, was published January 5th, 2008.

But was Palin lying? Not technically. Look at what she wrote again. She only says her decision is "based on a comprehensive review of wildlife experts." She doesn't say it's based on agreeing with anything they said. That's you, jumping to conclusions.

It's like later, in the same op ed, where she repeats talk radio's favorite polar bear fact:

"Polar bears are more numerous now than they were 40 years ago."

The implication is that their habitat is stable and climate change is something Al Gore made up because he's lonely. But it's only an implication. Why else would their population increase? I mean, we also stopped hunting them in 1973, and that's... let's see... 08 minus 73... carry the 5... round up... about 40 years ago. Not shooting them -- that might be part of the explanation. But I'm sure there's more.

All I know is, there are lots of polar bears and no scientific reason at all to believe they can't live happily, underwater, eating clean coal. Let's get drilling!

It's almost like Republicans say ridiculous twisted half-truths, and the New York Times publishes them as facts.

Makes you wonder if they'd lie about a war.

- - - - - - - - - - - - -

Gov. Palin loves to say that drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge will affect "a small footprint... about 2,000 acres, which is smaller than the size of LAX." This is an adorable sound bite, but when I go to LAX, I take a road. Presumably, to get the trucks to the drills, they'd also need to build those, too.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
woodsprite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-29-08 03:52 PM
Response to Original message
1. Yup! Handy with a shotgun. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue May 07th 2024, 02:57 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC