Search This Blog

Tuesday, July 14, 2009

It Looks Like Sarah Palin is Following My Advice

While all the "nattering nabobs of negativity" (to quote a former VP) were busy writing Sarah Palin's obituary while dancing on her grave, I predicted that she would come out and begin a conversation with the American people. Specifically, here is what I said in my essay What Palin Could, And Should, Do

Here's my suggestion for the key topic she should be focused on: ENERGY.

Outside of glaciers and polar bears, it's what Alaska is known for. It's also the area of Palin's greatest expertise. It also happens to be topic number one for most Americans. Every time they fill their gas tank, every time they pay their electric bills, every time they discuss "cap and trade," every time they see windmills on the horizon and know - in their hearts - that these ugly machines are not going to be the solution, they will think about Sarah Palin.

She will talk persuasively about the Democrats' refusal to tap the billions of barrels of oil in Alaska's wildlife refuge, about denying Americans access to clean coal in Utah, about the refusal of congress to explore for oil and gas off our coasts even as foreign companies are doing exactly that, about congress' refusal to allow the expansion of clean and proven nuclear power plants, the government's wrongheaded policies that make us rely more and more on foreign sources of energy even as they claim to be doing exactly the opposite.

She will be doing something that she does best: connecting with the American people in terms that they can understand. And she will be pointing out that the problem is a bipartisan one. She will have the opportunity to take on pandering and corruption on both sides of the aisle, just as she did in Alaska.

Sarah Palin can become the spokesman for abundance while the left preaches the politics if scarcity. The Left’s solution to the issue of energy is to try to cope with scarcity. Every “solution” they propose is build on the assumption that energy is going to be less available and more expensive. Even their technological fixes - wind and solar power – are no one’s idea of the source of abundant energy.
To this Leftist dystopia, Palin can bring the politics of abundance. The development of our own natural resources including oil, natural gas and coal. The re-vitalization of the nuclear power industry. Research can be funded to develop new power sources, but ones that are at least as efficient as current sources without requiring taxpayer subsidies to compete.

If given a choice between a vision of scarcity and a vision of plenty, a people will choose the path of plenty every time.

Sarah, are you listening?

Somehow, I suspect that she has it figured out already.

So imagine my surprise - NOT - when Palin emerges from her Alaska cocoon with an Op-Ed in the Washington Post The 'Cap And Tax' Dead End

Here's just a taste:

American prosperity has always been driven by the steady supply of abundant, affordable energy. Particularly in Alaska, we understand the inherent link between energy and prosperity, energy and opportunity, and energy and security. Consequently, many of us in this huge, energy-rich state recognize that the president's cap-and-trade energy tax would adversely affect every aspect of the U.S. economy.

There is no denying that as the world becomes more industrialized, we need to reform our energy policy and become less dependent on foreign energy sources. But the answer doesn't lie in making energy scarcer and more expensive! Those who understand the issue know we can meet our energy needs and environmental challenges without destroying America's economy. ...

We must move in a new direction. We are ripe for economic growth and energy independence if we responsibly tap the resources that God created right underfoot on American soil. Just as important, we have more desire and ability to protect the environment than any foreign nation from which we purchase energy today.

In Alaska, we are progressing on the largest private-sector energy project in history. Our 3,000-mile natural gas pipeline will transport hundreds of trillions of cubic feet of our clean natural gas to hungry markets across America. We can safely drill for U.S. oil offshore and in a tiny, 2,000-acre corner of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge if ever given the go-ahead by Washington bureaucrats. ...

We have an important choice to make. Do we want to control our energy supply and its environmental impact? Or, do we want to outsource it to China, Russia and Saudi Arabia? Make no mistake: President Obama's plan will result in the latter.

For so many reasons, we can't afford to kill responsible domestic energy production or clobber every American consumer with higher prices.

Can America produce more of its own energy through strategic investments that protect the environment, revive our economy and secure our nation?

Yes, we can. Just not with Barack Obama's energy cap-and-tax plan.

There you have it: the politics of energy, the appeal to abundance rather than living with scarcity, the discussion of the issues that any American can understand.

I don't know why all those people who are being paid the big bucks for their opinions could not figure this out. Why they could be so far wrong and still keep their jobs as "pundits." But maybe I had the advantage of not living inside the Beltway and not taking part in "salons" and exchanging ideas with the other members of the JournoList. Sitting here at my desk in Tidewater Virginia helps to keep the mind clear.

As Elvis would say as he took a bow: "Thank you, thank you very much."


thisishabitforming said...

Imagine not spending two to three dollars a gallon for gas. Imagine what other things you could buy with that money. Imagine the increase that would bring to the economy of the United States.
Imagine what that would do to the phyche of the United States.
So who is the real "Yes, we can" candidate?

Anonymous said...

rumor has it there will be tea party thingies Sept 11/12 in Dc have they got a headliner to speak yet or must he/she be mum until july 27?

Matthew Tripp said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.