Sunday, March 27, 2011

Palin Out Of Gas on Energy Policy?

Trying to staunch the bleeding of her support among GOP Conservatives and Tea Partiers, Sarah Palin has been hammering President Obama on the one issue she maintains some credibility – Energy. And more specifically, the current price of gasoline. In a Facebook post on March 15th, Palin tries to saddle Obama with a new political moniker - “the $4-Dollar-Per-Gallon President.”  Palin citied the following Obama positions as causes of the nations current gasoline prices:

  • Exhibit A: His drilling moratorium
  • Exhibit B: His 2012 budget
  • Exhibit C: His anti-drilling regulatory policies.
Palin further wrote that gas prices have soared "67 percent since he took office," claiming it is "no accident." The former Alaska Governor trades on her assumed expertise in energy issues, even as opponents and former supporters seek to undo many of her policies. In reviewing her latest charges of energy policy malfeasance against the Obama Administration, FactCheck.Org has researched Palin’s claims and discovered them be incorrect.  Among their findings:

§         “We talked to Fadel Gheit, a former Mobil Oil executive who is now a senior energy analyst at Oppenheimer & Co. Asked about the impact of the deepwater moratorium, Gheit said the moratorium had a "negative impact on production, but not as much as the politicians would like us to believe." The impact of the moratorium on gas prices? "Nothing. Zero," he said.”
§         “…on imports, Palin claimed in that same March 15 Facebook post that the administration’s inaction on drilling permits is "allowing America to remain increasingly dependent on imports from foreign regimes in dangerously unstable parts of the world."
§         FackCheck.Org however, points out….”First of all, net imports are trending downward. Our reliance on imported liquid fuels — as the EIA calls oil and other petroleum products — declined to less than 50 percent of U.S. consumption in 2010. And, despite an expected uptick this and next year, it will decline through 2035. The EIA’s 2011 Annual Energy Outlook, released December 2010, projects our reliance on imported liquid fuels will drop to 42 percent by 2035.”
§         When looking at Palin’s dangerous regimes claim, FactCheck.Org observed the following…”So, going by the countries that the State Department considers to be "dangerous or unstable," Palin would be wrong when looking at total imports since Obama became president. Individually, however, imports were up from some nations and down from others.”

While there is no doubt a lot more information and detail regarding the issue of Energy Policy and the root causes of price fluctuations, the questions begging to be addressed are:
Is Governor Palin using the current price spike in gasoline as a political tool, in order to pander to her base, in an effort shore up her waning poll numbers?

Or

Does Governor Palin really know enough about Energy Policy, to realistically speak out on the subject?


Author's Note:

I'd post this at WhyNot Romney.blogspot.com - but based upon the number of comments posted there, it's doubtful anyone would even read the article. In case anyone has yet to visit the site, here's a recent picture to let you know what's going on there....

36 comments:

Right Wingnut said...

LOL. The Romney website is for LATER. When I post an article here, along with a cross-post to Why Not Romney, I also put the post up at Free Republic and a link at C4P, both LINKING TO RIGHT SPEAK. I don't care about hits or comments. I'd rather have more traffic here. It's intended to be a reference to be used during the campaign.

Right Wingnut said...

Doug, do you tend to lean toward Palin's views on the topic, or the analysis provided by factcheck.org?

Anonymous said...

Doug, to top this off, Palin's 2 signature pieces of legislation on energy--ACES and AGIA--are both losing support in Alaska. ACES is about to be dumped, and AGIA is going nowhere fast.

-Martha

Anonymous said...

Geeze!

Now who are you going to trust on energy?
The cuda from oil country or the man from Boston, who's main experience in energy is pulling up to a gas station and telling the attendant to fill her up?

TEX

Doug NYC GOP said...

Doug, do you tend to lean toward Palin's views on the topic, or the analysis provided by factcheck.org?

I'd like to think I lean to the truth, where ever that leads.

If FactCheck,org, a site which you apparently put a lot of faith in, has determined Palin is wrong, then we would all be foolish to believe her, no?

If FactCheck is wrong, then why would you believe them about what they write about other GOP leaders?

Right Wingnut said...

Doug, I asked you a simple question, for which you apparently have no answer.

Anonymous said...

Mitt Romney 2012!!!!!!!

Doug NYC GOP said...

Nor do you it seems, RWN, nor do you.

Jonathan said...

Correct me if I'm wrong but it seems to me that the recent rise in gas prices is due to two main factors; the continued increase in demand from China and India and the current constraints in the supply due to the Middle East problems.

While I'd love for the President to get blamed for the rise in gas prices (folks blamed Bush and turnabout is fair play), but I think it's a stretch to place the blame at Obama's feet.

Right Wingnut said...

Nice dodge, Doug, nice dodge.

Pablo said...

Jonathan,

You are exactly right. Sarah Palin is not an expert on energy. She is only again at partisan shots at the President. Criticizing Obama for rising oil prices is like criticizing him for the fact that the sun rises every morning. What does she expect him to do about demand in China and the Middle East crisis?

Jonathan said...

Pablo:

Well, we are attacking Libya. That's doing something about the Middle East. I was willing to give Palin the benefit of the doubt on energy, but what's going on in Alaska, with her own former Lt. Governor rolling back her policies, I'm not giving her that benefit anymore.

BTW, I read your piece on Bahrain. It was... concerning. The best thing for us with that country is the royal family staying in power, but as a constitutional monarchy.

Sal Monella said...

Right Wingnut,

Your Blogs headquarters, East Beirut?

Right Wingnut said...

I'm going to hold off on forming an opinion on this until after Mitt Romney weighs in.

I lift tings up ans puts dem down said...

You peeeples shut be asshamed.
We are all supporters of Palin at de gym.
We like peeples who are like us.
You tink Romney is such a smarty pants.
So what.
He is nut one of us.
One of de peeples.

Pablo said...

Jonathan:

I think that I agree with you on Bahrain. As much as I want the Shiites there to have a voice in the government, I just don't see how it is possible. And there is virtually nothing the United States can do about it other than private diplomacy. It is a very troubling area of the world, though.

In many ways Libya is an easier problem to fix, because nobody likes Gadaffi.

Doug NYC GOP said...

RWN,

I am not dodging at all - it's you dear friend, trying to be elusive of the subject at hand.

You ignore the original questions in my post, in order to ask me questions about whether or not I agree with Palin's views, simply to put me on the defensive.

You have used FactCheck.org as source material and apparently believe what they say about Romney, as gospel. However, once they disprove Palin, you attempt to make me the focus.

Palin posted a series of facts she cited as the reason for gas price increases.

FactCheck has proven them wrong or incorrect.

Why should I agree with Palin, when it now appears she is wrong? I'd like to think it's Obama's fault, but apparently, according to YOUR sources, this is not the case.

So back to my original question - Is Palin an energy expert who got this wrong or is she a pandering political hack trying to get back in the good graces of her base, by making false charges?

Right Wingnut said...

Doug, I'm not a commodoties expert, but from what I understand, prices are affected by the future projections of supply and demand. And I'm sure you'll agree that Obama's policies do little to reassure investors that the supply will be adequate to fuel future global demand, hence the higher prices.

Oil prices were rising prior to the conflicts in Libya and Egypt.

There's probably no point in debating this one much, because Mitt will walk in lock step with Palin on this issue, whether they both run or not.

Johan "Mcon" said...

RWN,

In other words, Factcheck.org is right about Romney but wrong when it comes to Palin. Lolz

Anonymous said...

This back and forth is sooo annoying. You find a post somewhere on the web that claims that Palin is not an energy expert and I'll find a post that claims, with facts, that Romney was a corporate Raider...we can do this back and forth for months...what will be gained in the end?

jerseyrepublican

Anonymous said...

Doug, my real concern on this post is why you had to take a dig at RW's site?

jerseyrepublican

Anonymous said...

I'll stick with Factcheck.org always over Palin. Palin is not even close to being an energy expert. Her failures in Alaska are coming to light. At least Parnell is starting to correct her multiple wrongs.

Anonymous said...

Jonathon, why do you think that Governor Parnell is backing away from ACES? The program was/is a success that costs the oil companies a pittance of their multi-billion dollar profits. It has helped balance their budget and helped the citizens of Alaska pay for their extraordinary high energy prices...especially considering that the energy is farmed in their own backyard and the resource is owned by them.

jerseyrepublican

Anonymous said...

Anon, what about factcheck.org over Romney?

Her failures in Alaska? That is hilarious...you do realize that Alaska has 12 billion dollar surplus due to Palin...right?

jerseyrepublican

Anonymous said...

Sarah's excuse for quitting was so that she could help Alaska. The reality is "She has pretty much checked out of state politics". Sarah doesn't care about Alaska or the lower 48, her main concern is being Sarah the media star.

Anonymous said...

Johan von Mcon, the question can be asked of you as well...is factcheck.org correct when they refer to Palin but not correct when they refer to Palin?

jerseyrepublican

Anonymous said...

DUH...I meant...not correct when they refer to Romney?

jerseyrepublican

Anonymous said...

Doug, my real concern on this post is why you had to take a dig at RW's site?

JR - Lighten up. I was just teasing RWN and he obviously got the joke. See the first comment of the thread.

Doug

Anonymous said...

Doug, whatever...it just rubbed me the wrong way but RW can defend his own site if he wants to...it's not my place.

BTW, what is your opinion of Sarah Palin and her thoughts on energy. You set up a good gotcha question but failed to offer your own opinion.

jerseyrepublican

Anonymous said...

If you want the truth about Palin's energy issues, talk to the folks in Alaska. I don't think they will give a good report.

Right Wingnut said...

JR, I don't care about the dig at my site. It's basically just a file for my Romney posts.

Anonymous said...

Fair enough RW.

jerseyrepublican

hamaca said...

Why Not Romney. That could actually be taken in either of two ways. 1) The way you meant it, as in reasons for not supporting Romney or 2) Why not? as in there's no good reason not to support him.

I think you referred somewhere to a site called Why Romney. To be consistent, that could be taken in two different ways as well.

Right Wingnut said...

Hamaca, Good observation. That's why I picked the name.

BOSMAN said...

Great Piece Doug!

We both need to thank RWN for introducing us to factcheck.

Revolution 2010 said...

I'll have to check Factcheck out as well.

Thanks RWN!