Palin's Response

Well, yesterday I said I wanted to hear from Sarah Palin, and regrettably, I got my wish.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,594753,00.html

While I'm not a fan of Bill O'Reilly, I think even he was having a hard time keeping up - or more specifically, trying to understand - Ms. Palin.

Part of the problem I have with her is that she's freaking illiterate.  She has trouble stringing words together to make a coherent, let alone grammatically correct, sentence.  So, trying to translate what she says into intelligible English is the first thing I have to do.  And that's just tiresome.  It's also pathetic when I have to do this for someone who was once a governor.  (Although, after listening to a recent speech from the governor of Mississippi, Haley Barbour, I'm now advocating IQ tests as a prerequisite for holding public office.)

I choose to believe that the average American is more like me than her.  At least, I pray I'm right about that.  So, what's her appeal?  I can see what her appeal is to men - T & A.  In a nutshell.  She's not bad to look at.  

But what's her appeal to women?  I don't think John McCain's wife liked her much, but there sure seems to be alot of other women who do.  Sigh.  It's such a discredit and embarrassment to my gender to have to admit that.  I'm really hoping that there aren't that many loopy women out there, but from what I've seen lately, I may be wrong about that, too.

Well, back to the Gulf Oil Leak.  Much to my expectation, Palin STILL defends the oil companies and their right to make money.  Her 'interpretation' of President Obama's speech is, of course, biased and to me, nonsensical.  But, I guess in all fairness, someone who can't string a coherent thought together probably can't understand one, either.

First, Palin accuses Obama of being wrong on his energy policy.  What Obama said was that we need to invest in alternative energy research and become less dependent on fossil fuels.  He also said that we still needed fossil fuels, but nonetheless, was putting a six-month moratorium on deep-water drilling.  While he didn't specifically address that perhaps it's time for the American people to conserve their use of energy, he did talk about environmental conservation of resources.

What Sarah Palin says she heard was that Obama ONLY talked about alternative energy resources.  Huh?  I guess she wasn't listening to the same speech I was, or else, she just plain wasn't listening and decided for herself what he said -without actually, well, listening to him.  That's not only deceptive, it's disrespectful and downright dumb.

Maybe Palin figures that most of the people that listen to her won't listen to Obama's speech, either, so she can get away with saying whatever she wants.  Geez, I sure hope not.  I don't want to believe that there would be that many people who just blindly and naively believe anything someone tells them, without checking out the source for themselves.  But, as Forrest Gump would say, "Stupid is as stupid does."

Second, the ditzy broad then talks about how Obama doesn't realize how dependent people are upon energy in this country, and how that's tied to the economy....Huh?  She really doesn't think Obama realizes how deeply addicted to massive amounts of energy the average American is?  Or how many people are employed by the energy industry?  How many air pockets does she have in that brain of hers?

Of course Obama knows all this.  And because he knows all this, he wants to make sure that Americans will have access to all the energy we need for a long time to come.  He knows that we cannot continue to depend on fossil fuels, for many reasons - most of these which either seems to escape Palin, or which she just can't seem to comprehend.  It's scary enough to think that she's just one person that just doesn't "get it" - but to think that she might actually be representative of thousands of people, maybe tens of thousands of people, is pretty horrific.

Because if that's the case, America's in deep doo-doo.

What Obama points out - and what Palin fails to understand - is that fossil fuel is not renewable.  There isn't an endless supply of it, either.  And if we dont' want to become dependent on Middle Eastern oil (which we don't), then we need to look to the future, not just tomorrow. Renewable energy sources make great sense, because they're generally cheaper to produce and there's an endless supply of it.  When energy is cheaper to produce and there is an endless supply, that means our utility costs go DOWN.  WE PAY LESS.  THAT LEAVES US WITH MORE MONEY FOR OTHER THINGS.  

Now, the question I have to ask myself is, "Why would Sarah Palin object to that?"

While I think Sarah Palin is not the brightest bulb in the pack, I don't think that she purposely wants to harm the environment.  I think she'd probably agree that we have an environmental catastrophe on our hands and probably doesn't want to see another one anymore than you or I do.  At least, I want to give her the benefit of the doubt on this.

Palin also shouldn't object to cheaper electricity that's easier to produce.  Or does she? 

Because if it's not the environment, then it has to be the industry, because these are the only two variables here. So, why would Sarah Palin choose the oil industry, over say, a solar energy industry, or a windmill industry?  All these industries would presumably employ workers, have research and development departments, etc.  The latter two would arguably produce greener energy and be kinder to the environment; the former is a multi-billion industry with long-arm lobbyists in Washington, D.C. - and probably anywhere else there are oil wells.  Like Alaska.

I'm just guessing here, but I don't think I'd be too far off if I was to say that Sarah Palin is "in bed" with the oil industry, because the oil industry gave millions of dollars to her political campaign/s.  In fact, it was sort of funny that she should have accused "the government" of being in bed with the oil companies, when she WAS the government in Alaska, where there are LOTS of oil companies!

Like I said, not the brightest bulb in the pack.

Her responses and criticisms made even Bill O'Reilly defend the President!  She showed herself for the idiot she truly is; she is an embarrassment to the Republican Party, I think, and that's why she's attached herself to the "Tea Partiers".  A bunch of radical, right-wing, rogue rednecks.

Which, of course, is why she fits right in.  (I couldn't resist that.)

In my opinion, Sarah Palin is just a flash-in-the-pan that exposes the extent of the American ignorance that plagues our country today.  It's plain for all to see that we, as a society, need to invest more money and effort into our educational system. We need to make sure that American minds are not closed due to lack of interest or critical thinking skills.  At the very  least, we need to make sure people know their basic reading, writing, and arithmetic - not to mention, grammar.  Miscommunication is perhaps one of the biggest problems in our society.  We all need to know how to communicate with others so that misunderstandings don't occur.  And perhaps, most of all, we need to learn how to listen so that we understand what's really being said.

It's very easy to manipulate speech.  It's also easy to play upon people's emotions, especially fear.  Those who manipulate speech and play upon people's emotions also take advantage of the ignorance and naivete that exists.  I think Sarah Palin is one of those people.  

Read the full article. If you're a conservative, it's a source I'm sure you trust.  If you're a progressive, you might be pleasantly surprised at Bill O'Reilly's reaction.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,594753,00.html

And that's all I've got to say about that, for now.

The Gulf Oil Leak

Here's what I have to say about the Gulf Oil Fiasco:

First of all, I want to know why BP was allowed to drill without having safeguards in place.  Didn't they have to have a permit?  Who was responsible for making sure that all the safeguards BP claimed to have were actually being used?

Second, I want to know what Dick "Darth" Cheney agreed to in those "secret" talks with the oil industry execs back in 2001-2003.  I've read that Cheney agreed to give the oil companies a "pass" on safety regulations...because they were too expensive and dipped into profits.

Third, I want to know why President Obama hasn't yet declared a national emergency!  I understand that there might be legal implications in doing so, and perhaps Obama is constrained by legalities of agreements made by President Bush with the oil companies, during the previous administration.  If that's the case, I'd like to know and I'm sure most Americans want to know, too.  It's time for Obama to give up the dream of non-partisanship and let the chips - and blame - fall where they may.

Fourth, I want to know why the media - which conservatives call liberal, even though the mainstream stations are now owned by a handful of conservatives/Republicans - hasn't tried to interview Sarah "Drill, Baby, Drill" Palin, or Darth Cheney, or John McCain.  While I usually don't care to hear what any of these individuals have to say, NOW I DO.  What response do these individuals have to the Gulf leak?  I want to know!  Don't you?

These are my questions, and I'd like to have them answered.  I find it very curious that Cheney, who has been so outspoken and critical of President Obama since Day 1 of his presidency, has been so markedly silent about the Gulf leak.  Could it be that his company, Halliburton, is somehow involved?  Cheney played quite a prominent role in deregulating the oil industry, which I believe contributed to this environmental and financial fiasco, so why isn't that being reported?  It's as though the media (or the government?) has declared "hands off" season on Cheney.  Why is he being given a free pass if he helped orchestrate this debacle?

I'm usually sick to death of seeing and hearing about Sarah Palin's escapades, or political backings, and especially her ignorant speeches.  Why isn't she being asked what she thinks of this mess?  Instead, even the more liberal news shows, like MSNBC's Hardball, Ed Shultz Show, Keith Olbermann, and even Rachel Maddow continue to show Palin stumping for her Tea Party candidates - but NEVER question her publicly about her continued support for offshore and inland drilling!  Why not?  Why is she so off-limits?  I want to know how she can still support the deregulation of the oil companies, when we have such a grave consequence because of it.  I want to know if she still supports deregulation and drilling.  Don't you?

John McCain, that wolf in sheep's clothing, is another politician that I'd like to hear give his take on the whole situation.  He's also been strangely silent.  Why isn't the media commenting about that?  I just don't understand why these ultra-critical conservatives are being given a FREE PASS by the media!

Yesterday, I heard a couple of things that give me pause to ponder.  The first thing I heard was that BP may not be able to stop the leak EVER, and the second was that while the oil companies have invested millions in technology research as far as drilling in greater depths, etc., they have NOT invested monies in safety or clean-up technology!  Basically, that means they've been investing money in those technologies that would enable them to drill for more oil and ensure greater profits, but they have NOT invested any money in technology that would enable them to clean up their messes or better yet, prevent them from happening in the first place - because it's not profit-driven.

Norway, for example, has a policy that if any company does off-shore drilling, they must FIRST have a "relief" well in place - "just in case".  That makes good sense to me.  Yet, yesterday, Trent Lott (remember him?), who is now an attorney FOR THE OIL COMPANIES (no surprise there), said that that was a WASTE OF MONEY.  So...Norway is SMARTER than the U.S.?  Apparently so.

I was thinking yesterday, "Why don't they just have big tubes that suction the oil off the water, much like a big vacuum cleaner?"  I got my answer.  The oil companies haven't developed that technology.  Yet, if a layperson like me can think of that possibility, surely there must have been other people out there, particularly within the oil industry itself, that could have developed such a technology.  Was the money just not there?  No one wanted to spend money on it?

I think the time is right, now, for President Obama to declare a national emergency.  I think it's time to call on the scientists of the world for solutions.  I think it's time to send out a global SOS.  It's been almost two months, now, with oil spewing into the Gulf at a rate of thousands of barrels a day.  The environmental and financial damage is destroying ecosystems, industries, and livelihoods - and what's really scary is that it might be forever....

Plus, the toxins from the chemical dispersents that BP has been using is now taking their toll on the people who are doing clean-up.  Respiratory problems, skin rashes, and other symptoms have grown so severe that a team of doctors have now been brought in to treat them.  

Another alarming development is that BP, or agents hired by them, have been "removing" dead carcasses from the Gulf in an effort to downplay the damage to marine life.  They've been caught literally "raking" dead carcasses out of the ocean and in some cases, beheading them.  As if that isn't gory enough, the reason for the beheading is so complete autopsies can't be done.  Can't see what's being done to the "brain" if there isn't one....

And so, on it goes.  When will it end?  We may never see an end to it.  If, as it was discussed yesterday on the cable news channels, BP doesn't have the ability to stop this leak, then the damage will be ongoing and catastrophic.  The ocean currents will carry the oil around the Florida peninsula and up the East Coast and out into the Atlantic Ocean.  What will that do to marine life?  The fishing industry?  Our ecosystem?  

And my final thought - is this the beginning of what Revelations meant by saying that one-third of our marine life on this planet will die in the end days?  Are we so full of greed that we are willing to destroy our planet in the process? Aren't we supposed to be stewards of this planet?  The earth?  Aren't we supposed to protect it?  How can these ultra-conservatives that are for deregulation and pooh-pooh the environmentalists, claim to be Christians, when as such, they have been given the responsibility of stewardship of the earth?  I'd like an explanation, please.