Alaska is basically a petrostate -- to the extent oil prices rise, it benefits. Thus politicians in Alaska develop a very sophisticated ability to encourage Alaskan energy exploration and to use the resulting revenue to garner support among their constituents. It's difficult to see how that sort of "expertise" is going to translate to the national or international stage.
Or rather: What Matt said.
Comments
View as Flat
mreinbold Posted 5:05 am
05 Sep 2008
Permalink
Russ Posted 5:15 am
05 Sep 2008
Alaska should indeed be looked at as a petrostate, and as a resource plunder state in general (timber, fish and crabs, trophy hunting; not to mention how, with the blessing of the state government, it's literally overrun by "vermin on machines", ORV riders).
I'm not sure why it doesn't occur to Matt, this is a "bad guy" dictatorship!
Alaska has little in the way of any legitimate, sustainable economy. Rather, its activity is based on looting, aggressive begging (the federal dollars cascade in for these welfare mooches), and buying off the citizenry by spreading around some of the swag (the oil dividends, pumped from public land, which actually belong to ALL the people).
Looked at in that light, it's not at all clear why you'd regard an Alaska politician as expert in "the" energy crisis. Alaska politicians never worry that energy may be getting too expensive and think about how to respond. They worry that energy might get too cheap! Alaska politicians don't develop expertise in energy conservation measures or alternative fuels, they develop expertise in fighting with out-of-state executives about how to divide the profits that come from expensive energy. That's the energy problem people think about in Alaska, Oklahoma, and parts of Texas and Louisiana but it's not the energy problem people worry about in Michigan or Ohio or Virginia or Florida or New Mexico or Colorado or most anywhere else in the country.
This is a textbook example of the simple fact, there is no such thing as America, except in the purely nominal and legalistic sense. What Palin represents is in a zero-sum death struggle with the rest of the "country", and there can be no compromise because there is no common ground, even though people delude themselves with all manner of anodyne empty words derived from politics, religion, "patriotism", etc.
Permalink
globetrotter855 Posted 5:29 am
05 Sep 2008
Just more proof that we must consider our actions in a global perspective and cut this offshore oil drilling.
Permalink
mreinbold Posted 6:43 am
05 Sep 2008
Permalink
amazingdrx Posted 4:23 pm
05 Sep 2008
Plus, that Levi kid is a bunghole. She doesn't seem to have instilled much of a positive self image in her daughter. That's a shame.
Word is she will never answer any questions from the press or general public, so we're pretty much left to guess on what she actually knows about, if anything.
http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin
Permalink
amazingdrx Posted 4:29 pm
05 Sep 2008
Don't strain yourself trying to answer. Check Wikipedia, like Sarah's speechwriter does.
http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin
Permalink
amazingdrx Posted 4:40 pm
05 Sep 2008
Otherwise the nuclear football may have to be hidden from her, lest "god" commands her to nuke the beauty queen who beat her in the miss Alaska pageant.
She has analyzed the Iraq war policy in a theological mode, claiming the whole thing is "god's" idea.
http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin
Permalink
mreinbold Posted 12:21 am
06 Sep 2008
Permalink
amazingdrx Posted 2:46 am
06 Sep 2008
McCain looked tortured and embarrassed standing behind her. How many times will McCain/Palin handlers make them repeat this exploitation of war hero McCain's pain?
Will either of them ever go off script and honestly address american voters? Will they realize that in order to vote for a president we need to see what that candidate is actually made of, rather than what handlers and speech writers think we ought to see?
I doubt it.
http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin
Permalink
mreinbold Posted 3:49 am
06 Sep 2008
Permalink
wesrolley Posted 8:19 am
06 Sep 2008
All I look for in the media is a fidelity to fact, a term that Jamieson used. Lacking that, all we have is a James Carville - Mary Matalin side show.
Wes Rolley
CoChair - EcoAction Committee
Green Party US
Permalink
wesrolley Posted 8:21 am
06 Sep 2008
Pontius Pilate was a Governor.
Oh how we let politicians play with the language to work over our minds.
Wes Rolley
CoChair - EcoAction Committee
Green Party US
Permalink
Pangolin Posted 2:00 pm
06 Sep 2008
All the oil and gas in Alaska will not make us energy independent. Actually if the Earth were a thin crust of iron floating on a ball of petroleum burning oil wouldn't be sustainable. The only thing that changes is the date that we have to stop.
The data is quite clear that we should have stopped burning fossil fuels several years ago if we wanted to maintain the climate that feeds us now. We have no idea what the changes we are going to get will mean for feeding ourselves in the future.
Put the Carbon Back
Permalink
saluki Posted 2:51 pm
06 Sep 2008
"They are in overdrive in their efforts to discredit her."
That became apparent when they came out with the story that her husband had had a DUI conviction. Of course that conviction was 22 years ago - probably in his early 20s. But when they published the story, they didn't mention that it was 22 years ago. You can only imagine the muckraking that they are going through to find such stories.
Ted Kennedy could probably be issued a DUI any time he gets behind the wheel. But you won't find the media exploiting that fact.
Permalink
saluki Posted 3:07 pm
06 Sep 2008
Now that's a dumb assertion. Who cares if it doesn't make us energy independent. It can make us less energy dependent. That combined with drilling in the Gulf, off the coast of Florida, off the coast of California, other places in the US interior, and using the 1.5 trillion barrels shale oil in Utah, Colorado and Wyoming can make us 100% energy independent.
Get educated - please.
http://www.fossil.energy.gov/programs/reserves/publicatio ...
And I haven't even gotten into all of the new and extensive fields of natural gas that we are finding in the US.
We have more than enough US energy to stop sending 500 billion to foreign countries every year. And if we begin a steady, unhurried, program of nuclear construction projects we will never have an energy problem - ever.
It appears that Palin has a much better grip on the energy picture than anyone on this forum.
Permalink
saluki Posted 3:12 pm
06 Sep 2008
Yeah, that would be some time after the sun burns out.
Permalink