I just read an article on Real Clear Politics that confirmed my worst fears. Sarah Palin is definitely going to make a run for the brass ring of the Presidency. This egotistical, paranoid, soap opera queen and failed governor of the GREAT STATE of ALASKA, this individual who stated time and again while running for that high office "This is the greatest job that I could have," and who promised that she would never leave that office for national office before her two potential terms were up . . . Sarah Palin would be a disaster as a President.
I worked for that campaign as a volunteer, I wrote in support of her campaign, I talked to people, I did what I could to support her in her race for governor. Sarah called me, I did not call her and volunteer.
When Sarah Palin took her oath of office, she closed the door to most of the peons like me, and on her promises regarding change and open, conservative, pro-family, pro-life, constitutional State government.
Her administration was characterized as being left to itself without clear leadership or direction from her. She did something none of us thought that she would do. Instead of a new start for State government as she campaigned on--the Palin Revolution, remember?--she rehired many of her predecessors' commissioners and appointees. She changed nothing. If anything, she muddied the waters of State government further.
Her theme of open and transparent government was a joke. Contact with her office was a trial, without much chance of any call being returned. I heard this again and again from people who tried to contact the governor’s offices for one reason or another and were told that their call would be returned, but never was.
I have personal experience with her administration's public access policies. Open and transparent? Anything but.
I understand that the commissioners were left to work out amongst themselves what they thought she wanted from them. Sarah Palin was described as being above details, and uninterested in anything other than what she was trying to accomplish at the moment. A recent interview with Walt Monaghan, the former Dept. of Public Safety Commissioner under Palin, confirmed this characteristic of her administration. She was distant and aloof and out of touch with her commissioners.
As time went on, she increasingly made public appearances to respond to specious and idiotic attacks upon her family, character and ethics. Something she should have left out of her job as governor. It seemed she was making more retorts to these detractors than policy statements. Instead of hiring a publicist, attorney, attack dog, whatever, it was the governor's office that was dragged into the soap opera that was Governor Sarah Palin. She embarrassed us, and she acted immaturely, and foolishly by letting herself be swayed from her responsibilities as governor. She failed as a leader to keep the governor's office above the circus atmosphere, and, instead, used that office a bludgeon against those she did not like. The governor’s office was allowed to enter into the realm of a family feud between her sister and her former husband, an Alaska State Trooper.
Sarah is not a conservative. At best, she is a RINO with a great public persona who says all the right things, but shows her true colors in the record of her administration as governor.
Sarah Palin added 800 employees to the State of Alaska and oversaw the biggest expenditures since Statehood. She handed out a $1,200 fuel rebate to Alaskans in a shameless exhibition of pandering to the public with the public’s money. She expanded her cabinet to include a sub-cabinet that was devoted to . . . get this . . . climate change. She named the sub-cabinet the Climate Change Sub-Cabinet whose executive director was a federal EPA employee. According to her commissioner of DNR, and her Climate Change Sub-cabinet, global warming was a man-made problem.
Worse, the Climate Change Sub-Cabinet composition was the antithesis of her claims of supporting the State's sovereignty over ever increasing federal encroachment.
It is difficult to believe that she really supported the State of Alaska's sovereignty as expressed under AS 38.05.500-505 when she let a federal employee act as management in her offices. Especially, when a single source contract for approximately $80,000 was let to Climate Change Strategies (CCS), a progressive, anti growth, anti-development, population control cookie cutter global warming consultant to give the liberals the tools that they needed to feel better about destroying an economy through carbon tax initiatives. CCS was contracted to set up and administer her sub-cabinet. Sarah Palin signed up the State as an observer in the Western Climate Initiative arm of this organization.
Sarah Palin a supporter of the Second Amendment and our military? Highly suspect, given what she ordered where the 32 USC §109(c) Alaska State Defense Force is concerned.
Sarah Palin was the first Republican Governor to reduce the military forces of the State of Alaska by disarming the Alaska State Defense Force and rendering it from an operational, disaster response unit with an outstanding record of achievement over eight years to that of an unarmed "reserve of last resort". In doing so, then Governor Sarah Palin ignored the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, Art. 1 Sec. 19 of the Constitution of the State of Alaska, AS 26.05.070, AS 26.05.100, and the intent of NGR 10-4 sec. 5 and sec. 6, something her Adjutant General, LTG Craig Campbell should have been most aware of.
Her zeal for diminishing the Alaska State Defense Force and thereby removing from the State’s disaster response resources a proven operational unit that was a state military police constabulary has only been exceeded by her successor, Gov. Sean Parnell. Both former Governor Sarah Palin and Governor Sean Parnell have shown an incredible indifference to the fact that by their actions against the Alaska Sate Defense Force that they have shown a complete disregard for the militia’s right to bear arms. They also demonstrate a callous disregard for the fact that unarmed troops cannot afford protection and safety to those whom they serve. Alaskans are less safe because of Sarah Palin’s acts against the Alaska State Defense Force.
In diminishing the military forces of the State of Alaska, then Gov. Sarah Palin, and Gov. Sean Parnell,her successor and her former Lt. Gov., both went against the Alaska Republican Party's plank in support of the military in Alaska:
“C. We recognize Alaska’s strategic military location and unparalleled training opportunities and welcome the expansion of forces in Alaska, including our Active Duty, Reserves, Alaska National Guard, naval Militia, Coast Guard and Alaska State Defense Force.”
That this was done in a time of WAR should cause serious consternation on the part of any who might be considering Sarah Palin as qualified for the Presidency. That she stepped all over the Second Amendment and Alaska's constitution in doing so by diminishing the right of the organized and unorganized State militia to be armed should give cause to all who own weapons to worry about our Second Amendment rights if she actually achieves the presidency. That she did so during time of war should give considerable consernation to any who is concerned about the security of this great country.
Sarah Palin is not intellectually or politically qualified to be president. By intellectually, I mean that she has never studied or been interested in international affairs. Sarah Palin has demonstrated that she lacked the judgment necessary to weigh local and State issues concerning Alaskan much less weigh global issues against national interests. Sarah Palin failed miserably as the governor of the Great State of Alaska, as she did not even make it through her first term. She did not even make it two years into her administration. If Frank Bailey’s book has any truth to it, Sarah Palin can be characterized as a petulant, spoiled child who wanted to quit, because she could not stand the criticism.
You think criticizing Obama produces a spectacle, wait until Sarah Palin becomes President.
I have only seen one other as poor a candidate for the highest office. That one other is the communist and Muslim sympathizing, socialist, apologist heretic that is currently occupying the highest elected office of the United States: Barack Hussein Obama. A close second is former president James Carter.
Unfortunately, I personally believe that Sarah Palin as President would make Obama into a statesman by comparison.
That Sarah Palin just purchased a house in Scottsdale, Arizona for $1.695M is an indication of how much an Alaskan this woman really is.
Yeah, she is good looking and she says the right things that resonates with conservatives and most middle class family oriented, hard working Americans. However, that is all that Sarah Palin is and does. She is a mouthpiece and a lightning rod for the opposition.
Can you imagine her soap opera on national television with her as President? We would be more of a laughing stock than we are under Obama. She is worse than Obama where a sleight is concerned. She would rail publically against any who dared criticize.
Surely, we won't be that stupid to elect someone who is clearly unqualified for the presidency so soon after getting rid of the pretender that is now in that office?
The Republican Party has some serious soul searching to do. There has to be a candidate that has a consistent record of fiscal and social conservatism, who will not compromise our Constitution and our social and moral values, who is not afraid to say that they are an American and that our culture is distinct, that English is our language, and who will not BOW to a foreign potentate, and who has the credentials to be President. Who, like Ronald Reagan will not place his/her ego above that of the country, and who will not only say the right things about America, but will act upon those words to make it so.
Sarah Palin is NOT that candidate.
Real Clear Politics piece on Palin:
Showing posts with label president. Show all posts
Showing posts with label president. Show all posts
Saturday, May 28, 2011
Thursday, January 22, 2009
National Energy Policy
Like Winnie the Pooh, who ignores the obvious, the United States of America is slowly declining into straits that would be familiar to the second and third world.
It is recognized that there is growing pressure on the power grids of America. In California the highest power demand ever was recorded at 5.3 gigawatts as a result of the recent high temperatures. 20 small California communities suffered rolling blackouts as power was shuffled to keep Los Angeles residents’ air conditioners functioning.
Fuel prices continue to skyrocket, which will result in accelerated inflation until demand, speculation, and supply stabilize.
Unlike, Europe and Japan, our gas prices have more to do with the lack of refining capacity than government taxes. The U.S. national tax on motor fuels is 24 cents per gallon for diesel and 18 cents per gallon for gasoline. E.U. taxes are a minimum of $.42 EU per liter. This is amounts to a rough equivalent of $1.68 per U.S. gallon for taxes in the EU.
For those who believe motor fuels costs in the U.S. should be as high as it is Europe or Japan, that means increasing taxes on motor fuels by up to at least 5-8 times over the current level of taxation.
There is a potential answer to this energy dilemma that you will not hear about in the main stream media. The United States Air Force is working to wean the USAF off of fuel refined from foreign oil to support domestic training and operations.
The USAF is building a pilot refinery to convert coal to fuel and another to convert bio sources to fuel. Were these refineries to be proposed on private lands, they would be opposed by the nimby crowd and the eco freaks. Law suits would blossom in the courts as prolific as dandelions in a Spring lawn. Fortunately, the USAF showed some intelligence in its planning and provided for the location of these facilities on its own military reservations.
The largest landholder in the U.S. is government at every level.
Military reservations can become a haven for new refineries and new power plants.
It would be logical for the military to provide for its own needs by reducing dependence and competition with the civilian market for fuel sources.
Coal fired power plants can be built, new coal to fuel conversion plants can built, and new nuke power plants can be built on government lands. Either on military reservations exclusively, or upon government lands away from population centers, but within the surface transportation infrastructure and within the electrical power grid infrastructure.
To meet the needs of the U.S. in general, the use of other government lands could provide locations for the refining and power generation infrastructure necessary for the civilian market.
What it would take to ensure the success of such an initiative to prevent the U.S. from degenerating into a third rate power, is a mandate from the President authorizing the various branches of the U.S. military to utilize military lands for the installation of power plants and refineries in order to become independent of foreign oil using the USAF model. That is the first step.
The next step is for the President to declare a national emergency and to prioritize increased energy generation capacity and fuel refining capacity to resolve the looming energy crisis. The President could do this by authorizing the utilization of government lands to be leased to power companies and leased to companies desiring to build large scale refineries and fuel conversion facilities. Lands that would be reasonably situated, lands that would not require decades of impact studies before construction could begin.
The courts have been the tool of those who desire the U.S. to be less. By making this a national emergency/defense issue, the courts would no longer play spoiler.
The cost of fuel is high in the United States for one basic reason. Refining capacity in the U.S. has been artificially limited by those in this country who put their own interests above that of the nation. There is plenty of oil. Oil supply is not the underlying problem.
There is no doubt that between developing coal to fuel conversion capacity, tar sands development, increasing nuclear power generation capacity, lifting the ban on oil and gas drilling off the coast of the U.S., opening ANWR to oil and gas development, and constructing a natural gas pipeline to bring Alaska’s natural gas to market in the U.S., that the United States would eventually be in the enviable position to virtually eliminate foreign oil and natural gas dependence.
Nuclear power generation would free natural gas for home heating, fuel cell, and other uses, by reducing the need for natural gas for power generation.
To remove the need for foreign oil would also reduce rising tensions in the world over the supply of that oil.
Increasing power generation capacity reduces the cost of power, and should favorably impact the economics associated with hydrogen generation, and electric automobiles. Reducing cost of power should accelerate the introduction of these alternatives.
Seems to me, the nimbys and the eco freaks would figure this out.
I am not advocating money. Just a means to provide the land upon which to build the infrastructure to keep this country from becoming less and less by reducing the opportunity for sabotage through the courts of needed new refineries and power plants.
The USAF has shown the way.
It is recognized that there is growing pressure on the power grids of America. In California the highest power demand ever was recorded at 5.3 gigawatts as a result of the recent high temperatures. 20 small California communities suffered rolling blackouts as power was shuffled to keep Los Angeles residents’ air conditioners functioning.
Fuel prices continue to skyrocket, which will result in accelerated inflation until demand, speculation, and supply stabilize.
Unlike, Europe and Japan, our gas prices have more to do with the lack of refining capacity than government taxes. The U.S. national tax on motor fuels is 24 cents per gallon for diesel and 18 cents per gallon for gasoline. E.U. taxes are a minimum of $.42 EU per liter. This is amounts to a rough equivalent of $1.68 per U.S. gallon for taxes in the EU.
For those who believe motor fuels costs in the U.S. should be as high as it is Europe or Japan, that means increasing taxes on motor fuels by up to at least 5-8 times over the current level of taxation.
There is a potential answer to this energy dilemma that you will not hear about in the main stream media. The United States Air Force is working to wean the USAF off of fuel refined from foreign oil to support domestic training and operations.
The USAF is building a pilot refinery to convert coal to fuel and another to convert bio sources to fuel. Were these refineries to be proposed on private lands, they would be opposed by the nimby crowd and the eco freaks. Law suits would blossom in the courts as prolific as dandelions in a Spring lawn. Fortunately, the USAF showed some intelligence in its planning and provided for the location of these facilities on its own military reservations.
The largest landholder in the U.S. is government at every level.
Military reservations can become a haven for new refineries and new power plants.
It would be logical for the military to provide for its own needs by reducing dependence and competition with the civilian market for fuel sources.
Coal fired power plants can be built, new coal to fuel conversion plants can built, and new nuke power plants can be built on government lands. Either on military reservations exclusively, or upon government lands away from population centers, but within the surface transportation infrastructure and within the electrical power grid infrastructure.
To meet the needs of the U.S. in general, the use of other government lands could provide locations for the refining and power generation infrastructure necessary for the civilian market.
What it would take to ensure the success of such an initiative to prevent the U.S. from degenerating into a third rate power, is a mandate from the President authorizing the various branches of the U.S. military to utilize military lands for the installation of power plants and refineries in order to become independent of foreign oil using the USAF model. That is the first step.
The next step is for the President to declare a national emergency and to prioritize increased energy generation capacity and fuel refining capacity to resolve the looming energy crisis. The President could do this by authorizing the utilization of government lands to be leased to power companies and leased to companies desiring to build large scale refineries and fuel conversion facilities. Lands that would be reasonably situated, lands that would not require decades of impact studies before construction could begin.
The courts have been the tool of those who desire the U.S. to be less. By making this a national emergency/defense issue, the courts would no longer play spoiler.
The cost of fuel is high in the United States for one basic reason. Refining capacity in the U.S. has been artificially limited by those in this country who put their own interests above that of the nation. There is plenty of oil. Oil supply is not the underlying problem.
There is no doubt that between developing coal to fuel conversion capacity, tar sands development, increasing nuclear power generation capacity, lifting the ban on oil and gas drilling off the coast of the U.S., opening ANWR to oil and gas development, and constructing a natural gas pipeline to bring Alaska’s natural gas to market in the U.S., that the United States would eventually be in the enviable position to virtually eliminate foreign oil and natural gas dependence.
Nuclear power generation would free natural gas for home heating, fuel cell, and other uses, by reducing the need for natural gas for power generation.
To remove the need for foreign oil would also reduce rising tensions in the world over the supply of that oil.
Increasing power generation capacity reduces the cost of power, and should favorably impact the economics associated with hydrogen generation, and electric automobiles. Reducing cost of power should accelerate the introduction of these alternatives.
Seems to me, the nimbys and the eco freaks would figure this out.
I am not advocating money. Just a means to provide the land upon which to build the infrastructure to keep this country from becoming less and less by reducing the opportunity for sabotage through the courts of needed new refineries and power plants.
The USAF has shown the way.
Sunday, October 12, 2008
SARAH PALIN IS THE REAL DEAL.
Sarah Palin is the real deal. She is not made up, coached, or otherwise a construct of anyone other than her environment, upbringing, and moral foundation. She is first and foremost an Alaskan. Her values are immutable, and her ethics firmly established. You will not see Sarah changing her view on the basics.
Sarah is a constructionist when it comes to interpreting the constitution. She believes that the constitution of the United States says what it means, that there are no penumbras, or intepretations of language that is not there or adjustments made to satisfy a liberal mindset. What was written and adopted by our forefathers, is immutable.
Sarah is pro-life. Period. She will not change her views on that issue to get a few votes. I heard her express that sentiment to a lady on Alaska's PBS radio station when running for governor. Sarah simply expressed that she would not change her views on abortion and that she and the listener would simply agree to disagree on that subject.
Sarah is hard core 2d Amendment individual rights.
Sarah is a hunter and fisherwoman who partakes of Alaska's bounty.
Sarah is a strong family oriented individual with sound and solid family values.
Sarah is also a fiscal conservative and someone who believes that government should serve and do no more than what the constitution allows.
Sarah Palin is absolutely not racist. Her family is of mixed heritage, Alaska native and whatever a "Palin" is. (big smiley face goes here.)
How do I know these things?
I supported Sarah's run for governor. I wrote articles in support of her candidacy, and I butted heads with the local pundits who opposed her candidacy.
Sarah will not back down in a fight.
She can be counted on.
Sarah Palin is the real deal.
Sarah is a constructionist when it comes to interpreting the constitution. She believes that the constitution of the United States says what it means, that there are no penumbras, or intepretations of language that is not there or adjustments made to satisfy a liberal mindset. What was written and adopted by our forefathers, is immutable.
Sarah is pro-life. Period. She will not change her views on that issue to get a few votes. I heard her express that sentiment to a lady on Alaska's PBS radio station when running for governor. Sarah simply expressed that she would not change her views on abortion and that she and the listener would simply agree to disagree on that subject.
Sarah is hard core 2d Amendment individual rights.
Sarah is a hunter and fisherwoman who partakes of Alaska's bounty.
Sarah is a strong family oriented individual with sound and solid family values.
Sarah is also a fiscal conservative and someone who believes that government should serve and do no more than what the constitution allows.
Sarah Palin is absolutely not racist. Her family is of mixed heritage, Alaska native and whatever a "Palin" is. (big smiley face goes here.)
How do I know these things?
I supported Sarah's run for governor. I wrote articles in support of her candidacy, and I butted heads with the local pundits who opposed her candidacy.
Sarah will not back down in a fight.
She can be counted on.
Sarah Palin is the real deal.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)