z Facts.com
 KNOW THE FACTS.  GET THE SOURCE.
About Printable
 
 
  Home
Politics
2008 Election
Sarah Palin
TrooperGate
Global Warming ♦
Good Debater
Newsweek - Palin
Time on Palin
Witchcraft Palin
Alaska on Palin
Charge for Rape
No Choice
Palin on Hilary
Fith Child
 
  Don’t Miss:
 
 National Debt Graph

US National Government Debt

A Social Security Crisis?

Iraq War Reasons

Hurricanes & Global Warming

Crude Oil Price

Gas Prices

Corn Ethanol
 
   
 
"Do All of the Above:" Palin's Stealth Attack
  on global warming
 
 
  Katie Couric: Is it [global warming] man-made in your view?

Sarah Palin: "You know there are - there are man's activities that can be contributed to the issues that we're dealing with now, these impacts. I'm not going to solely blame all of man's activities on changes in climate. ... The point is: it's real; we need to do something about it."

Palin says she doesn't "blame all of man's activities on changes in climate." She meant to say what she said before: she doesn't blame climate change on man's activities. That's what Bush said back in 2000—Warming's not our fault. Actually he was more moderate—he just said there was no scientific proof, but now he admits there is.
Saying global warming is not caused by coal, gasoline, fossil fuel and other man-made greenhouse gases would upset most people, and Biden would win this round.
But Palin has Joker up her sleeve.
She says: "We need to do so something about it."
This will confuse many moderates who do want to do something about global warming.
What's the trick?
Palin's conservatives will understand this:
If fossil fuel is not causing global warming, then cutting back on oil, coal and gasoline will not help stop global warming. So we don't need to do that.
This is exactly what Palin and the conservatives want. She is a huge supporter of the oil industry, but a clever one. She wants them to make tons of profit so she can take a cut for government. That makes a little sense. We all like to get some of the profits, and Alaska takes so much oil profits that every Alaskan get $1000 in the mail every June (actually more in most years). (But Alaska is small and they tax all the oil coming to the lower 48 states.)
But why she does back conservation ?
She's for "energy independence," but she doesn't get global warming and doesn't care about it. Now both are important. But her approach is "all of the above." The problem is some of the above are good for energy independence but actually cause global warming.
More drilling and boosting synfuels both help independence (sort of) but increase global warming. Why?
The oil/synfuel business is global, so 3/4 of all that's produced goes to other countries—the U.S. only uses and gets 1/4. Of course the oil companies profit off all of it.
Worse yet, because these are sold on the world market, when OPEC raise the world price have to pay that price for oil pumped in the United States. That's how it works now and will alway work. Did you ever see a gas station selling US gas for cheap when the world price went up? And you never will.
Our oil companies are all behind "energy independence." They get privileges and synfuel subsidies, and the sell all their oil at the high world price mostly to China, Europe, and Japan, but also to America. This just increases the use of fossil fuel and makes global warming worse.
I have a new energy book coming out soon. Get a free PDF here.
 
 
 
 
poppy-s
poppy-s
poppy-s
poppy-s
poppy-s
 
 


http://zfacts.com/p/1074.html | 01/18/12 07:19 GMT
Modified: Fri, 03 Oct 2008 15:15:40 GMT
  Bookmark and Share  
 
.