Governor Sarah Palin Has What It Takes To Be The Next Dick Cheney

by dunkelberg | August 29, 2008 at 08:09 am
429 views | 23 Recommendations | 17 comments

With Sen. McCain's imminent announcement of Sarah Palin as his vice-presidential running mate, the Huffington Post is re-featuring Chris Kelly's May 2008 piece on the Alaska Governor

Sarah Palin keeps showing up on short lists of John McCain vice presidents. She doesn't have a weird thing growing on the side of her head, so she brings that to the ticket as balance. She also has a few other obvious things going for her:

She's the Governor of Alaska.
(A state that's 22 years younger than John McCain. Shows he can adjust to new things.)

She's a lady.
(Take that, Hillary. Or Obama, for slighting Hillary.)

She's what they call Nice Looking for a Politician.
(Don't look at me like that. I didn't say it. For one thing, Nice Looking for a Politician is what they say about anyone prettier than Haley Barbour. For another, I think Sarah Palin looks like an anchorwoman on a newscast no one wants to watch. And even if she didn't, I'm not shallow like that. I vote for the candidate with the most flag pins.)

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.


recommend This comment thread is now closed
Resonant Earth
Resonant Earth
flagged this story as Good Stuff

at 17:07 on August 29th, 2008

dunkelberg, I like this story. It's good stuff. hahahahaha, maybe you did not mean for this to be funny, but I could not help it!! Yep I think you are right, well I just saw her on the "Glen Beck" show and she just may be the next DAN QUAYLE

0
Karen Hatter

The reason the polar bears drowned can be attributed to malfunctioning gills. No, wait. They don't have gills!

I'm glad the Feds stepped in on that one. One of its better judgement calls.

Paschen
Paschen
flagged this story as Good Stuff

at 10:02 on August 29th, 2008

dunkelberg, I like this story. It's good stuff.

Hum. You will upset some for sure today.

Good Post.

0
dunkelberg

[blinking with puzzled, innocent stare]

Thanks for the flag and comment.


0
dunkelberg

Merci.

cassy82
cassy82
flagged this story as Good Stuff

at 11:17 on August 29th, 2008

dunkelberg, I like this story. It's good stuff.

0
dunkelberg

Thanks for the flag.

0
dunkelberg

Thanks for the flag.

BigT
BigT
flagged this story as Good Stuff

at 16:28 on August 29th, 2008

dunkelberg, I like this story. It's good stuff.

Sweet! I hope she is like Cheney!

0
dunkelberg

Thanks for the flag.  Yep, she promises to be maybe even more of same than McCain.  She certainly will be embraced by more of the clan than he.

Emilio Lizardo
Emilio Lizardo
flagged this story as Good Stuff

at 18:44 on August 29th, 2008

:o) ...

0
PEP

I think this needs an Opinion flag. And, I do hope this isn't the entire article copied in! (Excerpt, excerpt!) That being said, HuffPo isn't exactly an objective source, or a news source.

I'm sure that many people will have negative things to say about Palin. That's the nature of politics. I just hope that the discourse is factual--and so far, there have been many errors of fact put forth about Palin, even here on this website--and respectful.

One thing that I think will boomerang--the poking fun at her for being from a small town. There's a lot of Americans from and in small towns, who have gone on to do great things.


0
BigT

PEP,

You're absolutely right, this does need an opinion flag. Even though it isn't dunkelberg's original opinion it is still opinion.


0
dunkelberg

Actually, it was a test.

I just checked. 

"Big Dog" still has no opinion tag or request for one.

I now see the entire highlighted piece posted there was highlighting of one's own work.

Just checking.


0
PEP

Here's a differing take on the polar bear question.

0
Paschen

If you are in support of this article then you do have not idea as to how serious our situation is in regard to climate and extinction of species. It may be time to reduce the number of Humans using up all Earth resources and Polluting like they is no tomorrow.

I am starting to agree with the Paris Climate Convention of 2003. 

0
SpaceKat

Polar Bears once removed from their ice flows will head inland for food and forage. They will become as plentiful as the "Canada Goose". Eating any pooping on anything in their path. NIMBY if I have anything to say about it. I say no to changing our world and way of life to pacify these monstrous beasts. 


This story was created over 3 months ago, the comment thread is now closed.

closeSign in to NowPublic

is reporting from