Attempting the political equivalent of relaunching the Hindenburg, soon-to-be former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin hosted ABC, Fox News, CNN, Time, the AP and other media outlets while fishing Tuesday. But even as she proclaimed of her abrupt resignation, "politically speaking, if I die, I die," Palin reminded Americans once again why she so deserves that fate.

By claiming the nonexistent "Department of Law" in Washington would protect her from the kind of ethics woes she encountered in Alaska, Palin demonstrated her continuing ignorance of American government and public policy alike. Of course, it's far from the first time.

Here, then, is a look back at Sarah Palin's Greatest Hits:

"I think on a national level, your department of law there in the White House would look at some of the things that we've been charged with and automatically throw them out." (July 7, 2009.)

"It's all for Alaska." (Asked by Time why she resigned, July 7, 2009).

"In what respect, Charlie?" (Asked by ABC's Charles Gibson if she agreed with the Bush Doctrine, September 11, 2008.)

"Let me speak specifically about a credential that I do bring to this table, Charlie, and that's with the energy independence that I've been working on for these years as the governor of this state that produces nearly 20 percent of the U.S. domestic supply of energy..." (Misunderstanding Alaska's 3.5% share of U.S. domestic energy production, September 11, 2008.)

"We believe that the best of America is in these small towns that we get to visit, and in these wonderful little pockets of what I call the real America." (October 16, 2008.)

"A task that is from God." (On the war in Iraq, June 8, 2008.)

"I think God's will has to be done, in unifying people and companies to get that gas line built, so pray for that." (June 8, 2008.)

"To me, it motivates us, makes us work that much harder. And it also strengthens my faith, because I'm going to know, at the end of the day, putting this in God's hands, that the right thing for America will be done at the end of the day on Nov. 4. So I'm not discouraged at all." (Asked if she was discouraged by polls showing the McCain-Palin ticket trailing, October 22, 2008.)

"As for that VP talk all the time, I'll tell you, I still can't answer that question until somebody answers for me what is it exactly that the VP does every day?" (August 1, 2008.)

"That's something that Piper would ask me!...[T]hey're in charge of the U.S. Senate so if they want to they can really get in there with the senators and make a lot of good policy changes that will make life better for Brandon and his family and his classroom." (asked by third grader Brandon Garcia what the Vice President does, October 20, 2008.)

Continue reading »

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (1087)

PLAYS: (1280)

The America's Future Now gathering in D.C. just wrapped up today. I haven't been able to post a lot about the panels and talks that went on over the past three days, but probably the most interesting speech I heard came from Sen. Jeff Merkley of Oregon, talking about the energy bill working its way through Congress.

Adam Siegel at GetEnergySmartNow has a good post up about with excerpts:

If I’d been here a year ago, I would have talked to you about three things: The need to transform energy economy, create jobs, and tackle global warming. ... About the third, during the campaign, I spoke it about every single night. People asked me why, as it was 21st on people’s concerns. I responded: it should be first on everyone’s agenda and the only way it will be is if we talk about it.

... If I am going to simplify the issue, we have to quit taking geologic carbon and turning it into atmospheric carbon.

... In the past, people have described the Senate as the place where a good House bill goes to die. ... We need to change that. We need to reestablish the Senate as a place where an okay bill goes to get vastly improved.

... There is the possibility that we will end up with a framework that is ineffective, that has offsets, that doesn’t have a firm cap. ... Or, we could end up with something that could really transform our use of energy. Obviously, we’re going to have to work real hard to get from the former to the latter.

The whole session was fascinating -- including the speech by Sierra Club president Carl Pope, who talked at length about how the federal government's fickle ways on energy have been killing our ability to create green jobs. (You can watch it all here.) The classic case of this involves the reality that even though wind turbine transformers require elements mined from American soil, China is the world's leading manufacturer of them.

And if you don't believe that "green energy" is going to be the key to restoring America's position as the world's leading economy, check out this report about the fact that investment in that sector is rising at a sharp rate:

Continue reading »

From the White House blog:

This week the President discusses breakthroughs on two issues where stakeholders from all sides, who once opposed each other, are coming together for real reform. On health care and energy, solutions would provide key pillars for a new foundation for the country.

Full transcript below the fold.

Continue reading »

DOWNLOAD (19)

PLAY (100)

Speaking before the Energy Department this morning, President Obama made a stirring defense of his stimulus package, and nailed his critics' ears to the wall:

As we are meeting, in the halls of Congress just down the street from here, there is a debate going on about the plan I have proposed, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan. This isn't some abstract debate. Last week we learned that many of America's largest corporations are planning to lay off tens of thousands of workers. Today we learned that last week the number of new unemployment claims jumped to 626,000. Tomorrow we're expecting another dismal jobs report. On top of the 2.6 million jobs that we lost last year, we've lost half a million jobs each month for the last two months.

Now, I believe that legislation of such magnitude as has been proposed deserves the scrutiny that it has received over the last month. I think that's a good thing, that's the way democracy is supposed to work. But these numbers that we're seeing are sending an unmistakable message, and so are the American people. The time for talk is over. The time for action is now. Because we know that if we do not act, a bad situation will become dramatically worse. Crisis could turn into catastrophe for families and businesses across the country, and I refuse to let that happen.

We can't delay, and we can't go back to the same, worn-out ideas that led us here in the first place. In the last few days we've seen proposals arise from some in Congress that you may not have read, but you'd be very familiar with, because you've been hearing them the last ten years -- maybe longer. They're rooted in the idea that tax cuts alone can solve all our problems, that government doesn't have a role to play, that half-measures and tinkering are somehow enough. That we can afford to ignore our most fundamental economic challenges -- the crushing cost of health care, the inadequate state of so many of our schools, our dangerous dependence on foreign oil.

So let me be clear: Those ideas have been tested, and they have failed. They have taken us from surpluses to an annual deficit of over a trillion dollars. And they have brought our economy to a halt. And that's precisely what the election we just had was all about. The American people have rendered their judgment. And now it is time to move forward, not back. Now is the time for action.

The whole talk, in fact, was strikingly energetic, even inspiring -- especially for those of us waiting to see him come out fighting against the Republican ankle-biters he has to deal with. Later on, he lashes Republicans and their talking heads for how decidedly unserious their entire approach has been:

Now, I read the other day that critics of this plan ridiculed our notion that we should use part of the money to modernize the entire fleet of federal vehicles to take advantage of state-of-the-art fuel efficiency. This is what they called pork. You know the truth. It will not only save the government significant money over time, it will not only create manufacturing jobs for folks who are making these cars, it will set a standard for private industry to match.

And so when you hear these attacks, deriding something of such obvious importance as this, you have to ask yourself: Are these folks serious? Is it any wonder we haven't had a real energy policy in this country?

No doubt the Republicans will be howling about how this ends "bipartisanship." Let them.

    John McCain's plan to build 45 new nuclear reactors could cost taxpayers hundreds of billions in defaulted loan guarantees.

The Republican presidential nominee wants the plants built in time to help the U.S. meet a 29 percent increase in electricity demand by 2030. Industry estimates put their cost at $7 billion each ... Investment bankers, citing the industry's cost overruns in the 1980s, say they won't finance its long-sought ``nuclear renaissance'' without federal backing.

``Loan guarantees get reactors built, simply put,'' said Kevin Book, senior vice president and energy specialist at the Friedman, Billings, Ramsey & Co. investment banking firm in Arlington, Virginia.

... Taxpayers are on the hook only if borrowers default. A 2003 Congressional Budget Office report said the default rate on nuclear construction debts might be as high as 50 percent, in part because of the projects' high costs.

``The nuclear industry has been aggressively going after taxpayer-backed loan guarantees because nuclear technology cannot stand on its own two feet in the marketplace,'' said Allison Fisher, an energy policy analyst for the nonprofit consumer group Public Citizen in Washington.

Indeed, rising construction costs hit nuclear plants doubly hard because of safety considerations - which means a new nuke plant costs two to four times as much per kilowatt generated as any other kind of power. And with a total build cost at current prices of around $315 billion, defaults rates of 50% and more would involve taxpayers in yet more corporate giveaways and deficit spending. The potential costs in this plan alone outrun all the savings McCain says he can make by cutting earmark spending. The only way to make it viable is for consumers to pay up to four times more for their power.

Isn't it about time John McCain came clean about the pitfalls of his nuclear energy plan and explained why, if simply getting away from using oil is his priority, he won't turn up for Senate votes on tax credits for renewable energy generation?

Aside from Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney gallivanting around the Denver Metro area (hoping to pick up a couple of undecided Democrats or just to monopolize broadcast air time?  You decide) another notable non-Democrat in the Big Tent in Denver is T. Boone Pickens. 

About The Big Tent

The Big Tent will be the place to be for new media journalists, bloggers, reporters, and non-profit leaders covering the Democratic National Convention in Denver this summer. [..]

Quite simply, for anyone concerned about fostering a path toward a prosperous, climate-friendly society, The Big Tent's agenda reads like a who's who of heroes. From Lester Brown to Van Jones to Majora Carter to ..., there are people's whose fights for a better future cannot be question and whose visions merit a hearing in the halls of power. And, come next January, they will have a more receptive audience in the Oval Office and the Executive Branch.[..]

Another sponsoring organization could raise even more concern.

The Pickens' Plan is a "Major Sponsor" and is sponsoring a lunch in The Big Tent. And, speaking within The Big Tent will be T Boone Pickens. Next Wednesday, in The Big Tent, outside the Democratic National Committee, T Boone will be on the stage with Carl Pope, the Executive Director of the Sierra Club, and John Podesta, the President and Chief Executive Office of American Progress.[..]

For those listening to The Pickens Plan, a small reminder might be in order about The Pickens' Problem which ranges from being a key (and unrepentent) funder of the Swift-Boat Veterans for Truthiness and a continuing major contributor to the Republican Party, including his most recent political contributions maxing out to Jim Inhofe who, quite simply, is perhaps the worst member of the Senate when it comes to ending our oil addiction and moving toward a sensible energy future.

 So why is a guy with that kind of resume hanging with the Dems?  Get Energy Smart sees the difference between the Pickens' Plan and the Pickens Problem: 

T. Boone Pickens speaks to the need to end America's oil addiction, to move off oil. T Boone Pickens' political contributions speak to continuing the status quo, to drilling the hole deeper when it comes to oil addiction.

Thus, until there is a resolution of The Pickens' Problem, all are advised to tread very carefully when it comes to T Boone Pickens and The Pickens' Plan.

Josh Nelson reminds us (as if you needed it) that this is a man Democrats should be leery of praising.  Hear that Harry Reid and Dick Durbin?

The DNC made a new ad that connects McCain to his pals at Big Oil. He's Exxon John!

With Blitzer:

BLITZER: All right, a serious charge. Can you cite one legislative accomplishment that Senator McCain produced during those 26 years in Washington, in order to achieve energy independence?

ROMNEY: Well, I'm not a historian that goes through all of the pieces of legislation John McCain has worked on.

Mitt's not a historian. Gotcha!  Hey Mitt---did you miss the talking points memo?

Now the high comedy begins:

But let's talk about one piece of legislation that's pretty relevant, and that's the Bush energy plan, which Barack Obama voted in favor of. And John McCain looked at and it said, it's so larded-up with tax breaks and special incentives to oil companies and gas companies, John McCain voted no on that piece of legislation.

Romney throws George Bush under the bus. That is too much. It's a calculated move that McCain will take because he's backed almost everything Bush has done. 

Update:  Democrats.org:

And speaking of not being a historian, don't ask him for his opinion on anything because Mitt Romney ain't a lot of things.

Romney-McCain: Not the Kind of Leadership We'd Want, Either
Romney on Sanctuary Cities: "I'm Not a Mayor."
Romney on Immigration Proposal: "I'm No Legislator."...Keep reading... 

Looks like the Shock Doctrine is working once again:

Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama said Friday he would be willing to support limited additional offshore oil drilling if that's what it takes to enact a comprehensive policy to foster fuel-efficient autos and develop alternate energy sources .Shifting from his previous opposition to expanded offshore drilling, the Illinois senator told a Florida newspaper he could get behind a compromise with Republicans and oil companies to prevent gridlock over energy.

Republican rival John McCain, who earlier dropped his opposition to offshore drilling, has been criticizing Obama on the stump and in broadcast ads for clinging to his opposition as gasoline prices topped $4 a gallon. Polls indicate these attacks have helped McCain gain ground on Obama.

"My interest is in making sure we've got the kind of comprehensive energy policy that can bring down gas prices," Obama said in an interview with The Palm Beach Post...read on

Digby says:

Obviously, Obama changed his position because of public opposition to the ban and because he thinks he could use it get Republicans to sign on to other legislation as he says. It's an election year. But I would suspect they will extract another 100 pounds of environmental flesh before they do. That's how they operate. Maybe we could agree to store nuclear waste at Fisherman's Wharf in exchange for some investment in wind power. Or perhaps we could agree to drill in Yellowstone in exchange for subsidies to the automakers to put solar panels on their office buildings. If there's one thing you can count on it's that Republicans negotiate in good faith. 

And our pal Naomi Klein:

Continue reading »

Naomi Klein has a great new article up on her website called Look Out, that is worth a read. Her book, The Shock Doctrine has just been released in paperback so grab your copy here...She explains how the Shock Doctrine is being applied in the usual Milton Friedman way in the pursuit of pushing through the last remaining remnants of Bush's policies. As usual they prey upon the fears of Americans living in a time when gas and food prices are creating household insecurity like we haven't seen in a long time. What better time for the Republcians to pounce, right

Iraq isn't the only country in the midst of an oil-related stickup. The Bush Administration is busily using a related crisis--the soaring price of fuel--to revive its dream of drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR). And of drilling offshore. And in the rock-solid shale of the Green River Basin. "Congress must face a hard reality," said George W. Bush on June 18. "Unless members are willing to accept gas prices at today's painful levels--or even higher--our nation must produce more oil."

This is the President as Extortionist in Chief, with gas nozzle pointed to the head of his hostage--which happens to be the entire country. Give me ANWR, or everyone has to spend their summer vacations in the backyard. A final stickup from the cowboy President.

Despite the Drill Here. Drill Now. Pay Less bumper stickers, drilling in ANWR would have little discernible impact on actual global oil supplies, as its advocates well know. The argument that it could nonetheless bring down oil prices is based not on hard economics but on market psychoanalysis: drilling would "send a message" to the oil traders that more oil is on the way, which would cause them to start betting down the price.

Two points follow from this approach. First, trying to psych out hyperactive commodity traders is what passes for governing in the Bush era, even in the midst of a national emergency. Second, it will never work. If there is one thing we can predict from the oil market's recent behavior, it is that the price is going to keep going up regardless of what new supplies are announced...read on

She appeared with Tavis Smiley in the above video and got into this discussion a bit more and really explains the exploitation that occurs when some sort of disasters hit and BushCo is there just waiting...Her book was the best one I've read in a long, long time. Naomi will be joining C&L for a live chat next Wednesday, July 16 at 2:00 PM EST. I'll keep you posted...

Logan did a post on it, but what I want to know is why McCain is being so cheap about it?

Republican presidential candidate John McCain said Monday that the search for alternatives to the country's dependence on foreign oil is so urgent that he's willing to throw money at it.

The Arizona senator proposed a $300 million prize for whoever can develop a better automobile battery, and $5,000 tax credits for consumers who buy new zero-emission vehicles. The latest proposal is in addition to his support for overturning the federal ban on offshore oil drilling..read on

I'd say after I develop it, I should be paid not one cent less then 500 million dollars. Now who's going to help me? Are you with me? Let's ask Charlie Black if he feels this contest is a big advantage for McCain---as much as a possible terrorist attack would be.

In another sign of the media's sheepish acceptance of the Barack Obama "elitist" story line, the New York Times on Tuesday described the Illinois Senator as "tagged as elitist." But just as disturbing as the Republicans' apparent success in establishing the "out of touch" narrative as a fixture in campaign coverage is John McCain's seeming inoculation from it.

After all, John McCain isn't merely fabulously well off, courtesy of his wife Cindy's $100 million beer distribution fortune. At almost every turn, the Republican presidential nominee has shown almost a total ignorance of – or yawning disinterest in – the real lives of American voters. From the growing financial hardships of the economic slowdown and the foreclosure crisis to the disintegrating American health care system and the dangers U.S. troops face on the streets on Baghdad, it is John McCain who is truly "out of touch." Yet voters and pundits alike agree that the supposed maverick is treated with kid gloves by the press, an elitist masquerading as a man of the people.

Here, then, are John McCain's Top 10 "Out-of-Touch" Moments:

Continue reading »