Comments on: Palin on CBS: “I’m not going to solely blame all of man’s activities on changes in climate.” Seriously.

By: Mark Shapiro

Mark Shapiro — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 03:31:12 +0000

And yet close to 50% of American voters are poised to vote for this person and her less exciting partner.

Thanks (I think) for bringing this to our attention.

In case there was any doubt, we have serious work to do.

By: Danny Wool

Danny Wool — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 04:03:39 +0000

I think this is a wake-up call. The fact that the vast majority of people reading this realize how wrong Palin is doesn’t matter. It is essentially preaching to the converted. The real problem is that she is just one representative of many, many millions of Americans, quite a few of them in positions of power, who share these views. Palin would not be the phenomenon she is without the backing of the “Drill, baby, drill!” crowd that supports her.

While I fully agree with the sentiment of this posting, indignation expressed to like-minded individuals will never effect the necessary change. It is far more important now to get out there and show the people like Palin why we have to change the way we approach energy–and why we have to do it now, rather than later.

And remember, not many of them will be swayed by purely scientific arguments.

By: Uosdwis

Uosdwis — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 05:06:44 +0000

There are 2 kinds of people who will vote for her: those who want to overturn Roe v Wade and those who think she’s hot.

By: rjm

rjm — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 06:03:18 +0000

oh no! - an honest politician - we can’t have that - don’t tell us what you believe - tell us what we want to hear ! ….. like the rest of them

By: rjm

rjm — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 06:06:00 +0000

“we need to do something about it”

thats from the AGW songbook guys - you’ve won her over - she’s on your team - don’t trash her for that

By: Bob Wallace

Bob Wallace — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 06:21:41 +0000

Everyone needs to read more carefully…

“there are man’s activities that can be contributed (sic) to the issues that we’re dealing with now, with these impacts.”

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

She’s got it twisted around 180 degrees.

This person talks in word salad.

This is like what one would get if Bush and Quayle had a love child.

–

You have a big need to vote Republican?

Ask yourself if you want this person trying to deal with hostile world leaders if McCain drops dead.

By: rjm

rjm — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 06:36:58 +0000

she talks backwards all the time. It’s pretty funny. I guess theres a large segment of the population that identifies with that.

It’s a little bit of whatever Bush has.
In politics - there is such a thing as being too smooth and well spoken - she doesn’t suffer from that

By: Richard C

Richard C — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 10:50:14 +0000

Do you guys really want her as Vice President? She can’t speak English properly.

By: red

red — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 12:13:42 +0000

I haven’t heard her speak except in the Republican Convention intro which I assume was teleprompted, so I can’t say anything on that one way or another. However, I will note that I just took an online class taught by a very clear, professional speaker on video. My connection wasn’t working, so I resorted to downloading a text version with all of the mixed up words, umms, ahhs, and so on. It was so bad that I couldn’t even read it. None of that messy stuff is noticed in the video version. So, don’t draw too many conclusions from a transcript like that - it may give a valid impression, but it may not.

As for the content, rather than the delivery, of the discussion - have at it.

By: Dennis

Dennis — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 12:17:29 +0000

Tomorrow’s debate should be good. Since this just came out, let’s hope Gwen Ifill asks a question on AGW. I’m interested in Palin explaining why she’s so much more intelligent that the world’s scientific community. I also hope Biden takes an opportunity to present a few hard facts about what’s going on with Alaska’s climate (permafrost, glaciers, sea ice) to point out how out of touch she is with the real world — even in her own state.

By: Tom Adams

Tom Adams — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 12:40:29 +0000

I agree with Bob Wallace. Either you can’t read, or you are intent on ignoring the fact that her syntax is garbled.

She is talking about whether climate change is the cause of man’s activities. You have no business turning the meaning around. You are just doing Palin a favor. And you are not the only one. All of you should stop and just take her words for what they mean because it makes her look like a moron.

Her syntax was crystal clear when she earlier said that climate change was not man-made. It is not your role to attribute meaning that is clearly not in her current words.

With people like you helping her, she can appear to take a position without being truely on record. The Republicans should be paying you for this service.

By: CharlesM

CharlesM — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 12:45:51 +0000

>There are 2 kinds of people who will vote for her: those who want to overturn Roe v Wade and those who think she’s hot.

3rd kind: Single issue gun nuts. 4th kind of voters would be racists, but I think we’re really only talking about her fans and admirers, not those who will vote for her (since she’s just part of a ticket).

By: Earl Killian

Earl Killian — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 13:26:37 +0000

The worst part of Palin is she is starting to infect McCain with her bogus claims. While pandering to Ohio, promising them lots of coal, he slipped up and said that the largest oil reserves in the world are in the U.S.

By: Earl Killian

Earl Killian — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 13:42:34 +0000

Oh no, I just thought of another reason for McCain’s claim about the U.S. having the largest oil reserves in the world. What if it is not the result of Palin’s bogosity field, but he means Green River basin? Perhaps some “Shale, baby, shale” oil executive got to him?

By: Richard C

Richard C — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 14:03:30 +0000

Okay, transcripts can appear worse than the actual conversation. However, in the quoted section above, she uses the wrong words, reverses concepts and fails to show coherence. This is not just about climate change. If she gets the job she will need to communicate clearly with senior politicians and world leaders, many of them will not have English as their first langusage.

By: john

john — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 14:18:57 +0000

rjm:

We’re finishing up 8 years of a person who “wasn’t to smooth talking” … and we eschewed two “elitist” candidates to get him. The result: a 1929 style economy, a ruined military, a shredded Bill of Rights, record debt, and a loss of prestige that is unprecedented in US history.

I’m kinda ready for an elitist, myself.

By: OregonGirl

OregonGirl — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 15:53:26 +0000

Um, yeah, it kind of DOES matter, A LOT, because you kind of need to know what CAUSES climate change to “do something about it”. If man’s activities have caused climate change, then any intelligent person would make some changes to, what? MAN’S ACTIVITIES.

And, what does this even mean?

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

Is she saying that instead of man’s activities bringing about climate change, instead climate change is having an affect on man’s activities?

By: Dano

Dano — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 17:24:35 +0000

3rd kind [to vote for Palin]: Single issue gun nuts. 4th kind of voters would be racists, but I think we’re really only talking about her fans and admirers, not those who will vote for her (since she’s just part of a ticket).

Didn’t bookmark it, and could have faulty memory, but recently read an analysis that of the MSAs with the highest family size, all 25 poll pro-Palin. Smallest family sizes (possibly misremembering), ~22 of 25 polling pro-Obama.

This ties to religiosity and conservatism. I also tie the McCain base to gun nuts.

Best,

By: DWM

DWM — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 12:45:53 +0000

So many of you think that the greenhouse effect is the only possible effect? Palin is supposedly stupid because she does not attribute warmming solely to human activity, but allows for the possibility that solar activity might have at least a small impact? OK, I smell where you are comming from.

By: Sarah Palin

Sarah Palin — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 15:27:44 +0000

Now its not very nice of you guys to gang up on me - I’m only a woman after all!

So what if I backwards say my sentences sometimes - at least I can write proper!

Palin for President, um, Vice President, I meant Vice President.

By: Jim Eager

Jim Eager — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 21:00:19 +0000

Not the only possible factor, DWM, just the dominant one, at least over the past century. See:
http://climateprogress.org/ 2008/ 09/ 30/ study-suns-contribution-to-recent-warming-is-negligible/

By: Danny Bloom

Danny Bloom — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 04:13:32 +0000

Joe,
It’s true, as Gov Palin says, that Alaska is the only state to have
set up a sub-cabinet agency in the state government in Alaska system
“to focus solely on climate change.” they have their own website too

BUT

I’ve written to the director Larry Hartig 10 times and he has not responded once to
my emails……maybe the email account has been hacked…..But what’s up
with that?

I just wanted to tell him and Palin that in 2500, Alaska will be the
center of polar city activity for survivors of global warming……if
worst comes to worst…….as Lovelock predicts….and that Juneau will
house the buildings and people of the US CONGRESS NORTH…..and
Anchorage will house the Northern White House…….since nobody will be
left in the Lower 48…….

But Larry, the head of the subcabinet post, does not reply to any of
my emails……..What kind of state govt does Palin run? they do not answer letters from Lower 48 people?

Sarah and Larry, see the future of Alaska here:
(http://www.polarcity.org)

— Danny Bloom