In spite of Climate-gate that has, at the very least, brought reasonable doubt to the validity and motives behind the theory of global warming, more has been reported about Tiger Wood’s sex life than the impact the “success” of Copenhagen will have on the economy.
In an op-ed piece in The Washington Post written by Sarah Palin, the former Governor of Alaska, made the point:
“The agenda–driven policies being pushed in Copenhagen won’t change the weather, but they would change our economy for the worst.”
Chris Matthews host of MSNBC’s Hardball told his guests Chrystia Freeland, Financial Times and Eugene Robinson, of The Washington Post Palin’s concern for the economic impact was nothing more than a “cheap shot” and continued to ignore the facts.
Claiming the “Palin piece is a mess” Robinson explained, because she “trumpeted” the fact that she set up a panel when she was governor.
“Her whole state was thawing…but then she says, you know, these are just natural and cyclical changes, with no evidence to back that up.”
While Matthews wanted to take the giant leap backward from the “radical” idea that the earth has cyclical changes, to the Monkey Trials of the 1920s. Chrystia Freeland, Financial Times brought Matthews back to consciousness (for at least a few seconds).
“I do think that the smart political point that Sarah Palin did make in that op-ed, and I think Gene has written a column about this as well, is we are starting to get to the point where the discussion about the environment is going to be about real economic cost and real winners and losers.”
While both Matthews and Robinson stayed in the background humming in agreement, they seemed incapable of discussing what it would mean in terms of who would be those winners and losers. Instead, the conversation digressed.
“And that’s where I think she thinks she can score some real political points, by reminding some people, its going to cost a lot of money…”
“…That’s the cheapest shot in the world. Everybody knows that. That’s so obvious that she’s playing to the crowd.”
The king of cheap shots believes that concern for the economy is now playing to the crowd.
The Left loves to belittle and dismiss Palin, rather than engage her on what she actually says, or writes.
Palin wrote, “I’ve always believed that policy should be based on sound science, not politics. As governor of Alaska, I took a stand against politicized science when I sued the federal government over its decision to list the polar bear as an endangered species despite the fact that the polar bear population had more than doubled…This would have irreversibly hurt both Alaska’s economy and the nation’s, while also reducing opportunities for responsible development.”
“Our representatives in Copenhagen should remember that good environmental policymaking is about weighing real-world costs and benefits — not pursuing a political agenda…President Obama’s proposal calls for serious cuts in our own long-term carbon emissions. Meeting such targets would require Congress to pass its cap-and-tax plans, which will result in job losses and higher energy costs (as Obama admitted during the campaign).”
“What Obama really hopes to bring home from Copenhagen is more pressure to pass the Democrats’ cap-and-tax proposal. This is a political move.”
When it all is said and done, that is exactly what the President’s trip to Copenhagen will achieve. They are not going to debate the validity of Climate-gate, whether polar bears are increasing or decreasing and certainly not who will bear the consequences of their actions. Those are such inconvenient truths.
- Why Does Sarah Palin Make Chris Matthews Nervous?
- Chris Matthews’s All-White Panel Notes Melanin Deficiency in Palin Audience
- Censoring Sarah Palin: Meltdown with Keith Olbermann Part 19