Tumblr Icon RSS Icon

Palin in debate STILL gets global warming backwards and repeats Big Energy Lie twice

By Joe Romm on October 2, 2008 at 11:17 pm

"Palin in debate STILL gets global warming backwards and repeats Big Energy Lie twice"

Share:

google plus icon

Palin had told Katie Couric “I’m not going to solely blame all of man’s activities on changes in climate.”

The debate transcript reveals she still can’t get her talking points straight on this issue:

I’m not one to attribute every man — activity of man to the changes in the climate. There is something to be said also for man’s activities, but also for the cyclical temperature changes on our planet.

It’s “attribute changes in the climate to activity of man”!

And, of course she repeated the The Big Energy Lie that John McCain actually believes in an “all of the above” energy policy — twice:

John McCain is right there with an “all of the above” approach to deal with climate change impacts….

So even in dealing with climate change, it’s all the more reason that we have an “all of the above” approach,

Sorry, that’s a lie. In order to have an “all of the above” approach, McCain would have to be a supporter of renewable energy like wind and solar rather than one of the strongest Senate opponents of renewable energy with a voting record on energy that matches that of global warming denier Sen. James Inhofe – see”The greenwasher from Arizona has a record as dirty as the denier from Oklahoma” and The real, Luddite McCain says “The truly clean technologies don’t work.”

Related Posts:

‹ PREVIOUS
Palin’s Bad Oil Math

NEXT ›
Despite market downturn, cleantech venture investment hits record $2.6B in 3rd quarter

21 Responses to Palin in debate STILL gets global warming backwards and repeats Big Energy Lie twice

  1. Charlie says:

    I think it’s a symptom of having her lines memorized (memorized wrong) rather than speaking her thoughts.

    As amusing as that is, it’s not as scary as some things that happened, like her advocacy of continuing Cheney’s expansion of VP powers.

  2. Sara Lee says:

    Are you kidding? There is not an absolute consensus on global warming at all. I like what my father-in-law has to say…………….
    “The earth has been around a very long time. Who’s to say we are not still coming out of an ice age???” A lot more carbons coming out when the volcanoes were active, fires went unattended………..
    I can’;t listen to Gore on anything afetr the ” I invented the internet” reference…………..

  3. rjm says:

    Her words are garbled – but thats part of her charm

    she says (or clearly means to say) man contributes to warming ….and the climate has cycles.

    She implies that climate moves up and down anyway and would even without our input. She’s unsure of how much of the warming should be assigned to man.

    Hows that a problem?

  4. hapa says:

    Hows that a problem?

    it’s completely wrong, and she wants to be vice president.

  5. rjm says:

    climate temps goes up and down.

    you don’t believe in ice ages or what?

    oh I get it – you’re one of those crazies who think the planet is 10000 years old – okay gotcha

  6. Bette says:

    Gosh, darn, gee, it’s hard to make sense when you have to memorize all the talking points.

  7. Lamont says:

    “The earth has been around a very long time. Who’s to say we are not still coming out of an ice age???”

    Actually the study of paleoclimatology cuts the other way and requires CO2 to be a greenhouse gas in order to amplify the effect of Milankovich cycles in order to create the magnitude of climate change necessary to produce the ice ages, and we are currently well outside of the historical norm for CO2 levels for at least the last million years. People have actually spent decades studying what your father-in-law thought up while sitting on the toilet one day and he’s, unfortunately, incorrect.

  8. Bob R. says:

    “Sara Lee” said “I can’;t listen to Gore on anything afetr the ” I invented the internet” reference…………..”

    It’s off-topic, but since it’s just as incorrect as everything else you said, why not start here…

    Al Gore never said that. So you can listen to him after all. You never heard him say it, because he didn’t. Not ever. Nope, didn’t do it.

    See:
    http://www.snopes.com/quotes/internet.asp

    PS… Learn to type.

    PPS… Brilliant fake troll, if that’s what it was. :-)

  9. Carmen Vj says:

    Not bad. However, I feel that everything was scripted for her. Her talking points anyway. Well let’s see what happens next. I will be watching the polls on this one between now and next week.

  10. Greg N says:

    As someone somewhere predicted:

    “He gets 45 minutes of free airtime in front of a huge national audience to debate his opponent with little fear of substantive rebuttal. Sarah Palin simply lacks the knowledge to rebut any detailed factual charges”

    And when we got to energy, Biden followed Joe’s recommendation to the letter:

    “Palin is certain to bring up the need for more offshore drilling. When she does, Biden should agree and repeat some version of the response that Obama used successfully in the first debate:

    ‘And that means, yes, increasing domestic production and off-shore drilling, but we only have 3 percent of the world’s oil supplies and we use 25 percent of the world’s oil. So we can’t simply drill our way out of the problem. What we’re going to have to do is to approach it through alternative energy, like solar, and wind, and biodiesel, and, yes, nuclear energy, clean-coal technology … Over 26 years, Senator McCain voted 23 times against alternative energy, like solar, and wind, and biodiesel.’ ”

    Has Biden been reading Salon articles?

  11. Joe says:

    Greg — well, to be honest, I thought my advice was fairly obvious, but it’s good to see that the Obama campaign understands both strategy and messaging, which I’m not sure their opponents do.

  12. Dennis says:

    None of the news reporting or political commentary I’ve read since the debate have brought up the energy/environment exchange, probably because there’s just too much else going on right now. But it is clear from the energy/environment issue — as well as all the rest — that Palin’s performance was nothing more than talking points and folksy colloqualisms.

    Yeah, she’s all for the environment and energy independence, as long as it involves burning more fossil fuels. Once Palin’s talking points hit facts and substance, the contradictions are obvious. Let’s hope the voters saw that too.

  13. gaiasdaughter says:

    Hey, she was perky, folksy, has a great smile — and did you see her wink at the camera? I think she has a brilliant career ahead of her . . . she would make a fanatastic game show host.

  14. Greg N says:

    The wink wasn’t very winky, if you know what I mean. Too rehearsed, too artificial, too much part of a memorized script.

    But she’s a wonderful character – if only she was fictional she’d be great to read about or see in a movie.

  15. How could anyone vote in such a way as to put such a woman in the White House? Do you realize that in following all of the Bible baggage she comes with, Todd Palin would become the Decider?

    We left England to get away from the Divine Right of Kings, surely we don’t want someone with a pipeline to God that’s filled with oil to have their fingers itchy on the button, when Armageddon’s one of their religious scenarios?

  16. Jim Eager says:

    Re Sara Lee: “The earth has been around a very long time. Who’s to say we are not still coming out of an ice age”

    Gee, I don’t know, maybe the people who have actually bothered to study it?

    Clue: the Holocene Optimum was 9000 to 5000 years ago.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocene_climatic_optimum

  17. Larry Coleman says:

    The Dems need a better response to the “all of the above” claim. It is, after all, merely the Cheney-Bush energy plan in new clothes. That plan was also all-of-the-above…so that they could never be criticized for not advocating X, no matter what X was. But of course they actually did very little except promote their buddies and contributors. They never walked the talk. The Dems should call the “all of the above” “plan” for what it is: a repeat of a plan to nowhere.

    I flinched when Biden called for clean coal.

  18. rjm says:

    game show host – thats true – that exactly what she seems like.

    But it’s not something to take lightly. A very substantial number of people really like game show hosts and trust them way ahead of career senators.

    Thats why Biden is at the bottom of the ticket despite his many years of experience. You might think that Obama would start at the bottom of a ticket but no – all the other choices have too much time in Washington politics.

    This doesn’t really explain how McCain got on the ticket.
    But it does explain why he’s going to lose.

  19. John Mashey says:

    Gov. Palin is sometimes claimed to be an energy expert, for which I have been unable to find even a shred of evidence. On the other hand, she is the Governor of a petro-state more akin to Oman or Venezuela.

    Once again, I recommend Michael Klare’s good short article:

    Palin’s Petropolitics.

    Alaska is unlike *any* other US state economically, it is more like Venezuela or Oman.

    Gov. Palin hasn’t displayed even the slightest understanding of any energy issues beyond trying to extract more revenue from oil companies. If she even really understands oil-field depletion curves, peak Oil, investment economics, etc, it’s unclear.

    From that article:
    “At a meeting of the National Governors Association in February, Palin argued against providing subsidies for alternative energy sources, claiming that domestic sources of oil and gas–many located in Alaska–can satisfy the nation’s needs for a long time to come. “The conventional resources we have can fill the gap between now and when new technologies become economically competitive and don’t require subsidies,” she asserted. When pressed by a reporter for Oil & Gas Journal she went further, denouncing government support for renewable energy. “I just don’t want things to get out of hand with incentives for renewables, particularly since they imply subsidies, while ignoring fuels we already have on hand.”

  20. Bob Wallace says:

    “Thats why Biden is at the bottom of the ticket despite his many years of experience. You might think that Obama would start at the bottom of a ticket but no – all the other choices have too much time in Washington politics.”

    I don’t think so.

    My guess is that Obama is at the top of the ticket because he excited more people and left them feeling that he had the best personal qualities to lead this country.

    Biden, Clinton, and several other people who ran for the Democratic position have more time in office, but Obama won more people over to his side.

    Now McCain’s getting a taste of Obama’s appeal.

    And McCain is losing because McCain is showing us the real McCain. He’s sold a bag of bogus bunk to the country over the years. Now people are smelling what’s in the bag from not-so-straight talk to being a Bush-bot to not vetting his VP choice.

    McCain has the “older” advantage, the “more experience” advantage and the “white guy” advantage and even those leg-up helpers he can’t overcome Obama’s message and abilities.

  21. Ronald says:

    What we need is an article titled ‘If it’s good enough for Alaska and Iraq, why not West Virginia and Wyoming?

    If most of Alaska’s state budget (80 percent) come’s from oil producing state that taxes the oil produced their. Maybe the same thing should be done for coal in West Virginia and Wyoming and all the other coal and other fossil fuel mining and drilling states.

    Palin should be asked if she pushed for and got more money from oil companies in Alaska, is she going to do the same thing as Vice President of the United States. How is she going to answer, not the usual Republican talking point. That would be an interesting answer to dance around.