Photo from FoxNation
From the Washington Post:
With the publication of damaging e-mails from a climate research center in Britain, the radical environmental movement appears to face a tipping point. The revelation of appalling actions by so-called climate change experts allows the American public to finally understand the concerns so many of us have articulated on this issue.
“Climate-gate,” as the e-mails and other documents from the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia have become known, exposes a highly politicized scientific circle — the same circle whose work underlies efforts at the Copenhagen climate change conference. The agenda-driven policies being pushed in Copenhagen won’t change the weather, but they would change our economy for the worse.
The e-mails reveal that leading climate “experts” deliberately destroyed records, manipulated data to “hide the decline” in global temperatures, and tried to silence their critics by preventing them from publishing in peer-reviewed journals. What’s more, the documents show that there was no real consensus even within the CRU crowd. Some scientists had strong doubts about the accuracy of estimates of temperatures from centuries ago, estimates used to back claims that more recent temperatures are rising at an alarming rate.
This scandal obviously calls into question the proposals being pushed in Copenhagen. 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. I got clobbered for my actions by radical environmentalists nationwide, but I stood by my view that adding a healthy species to the endangered list under the guise of “climate change impacts” was an abuse of the Endangered Species Act. 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 policy-making is about weighing real-world costs and benefits — not pursuing a political agenda. That’s not to say I deny the reality of some changes in climate — far from it. I saw the impact of changing weather patterns firsthand while serving as governor of our only Arctic state. I was one of the first governors to create a subcabinet to deal specifically with the issue and to recommend common-sense policies to respond to the coastal erosion, thawing permafrost and retreating sea ice that affect Alaska’s communities and infrastructure.
But while we recognize the occurrence of these natural, cyclical environmental trends, we can’t say with assurance that man’s activities cause weather changes. We can say, however, that any potential benefits of proposed emissions reduction policies are far outweighed by their economic costs. And those costs are real. Unlike the proposals China and India offered prior to Copenhagen — which actually allow them to increase their emissions — 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). That’s not exactly what most Americans are hoping for these days. And as public opposition continues to stall Congress’s cap-and-tax legislation, Environmental Protection Agency bureaucrats plan to regulate carbon emissions themselves, doing an end run around the American people.
In fact, we’re not the only nation whose people are questioning climate change schemes. In the European Union, energy prices skyrocketed after it began a cap-and-tax program. Meanwhile, Australia’s Parliament recently defeated a cap-and-tax bill. Surely other nations will follow suit, particularly as the climate e-mail scandal continues to unfold.
In his inaugural address, President Obama declared his intention to “restore science to its rightful place.” But instead of staying home from Copenhagen and sending a message that the United States will not be a party to fraudulent scientific practices, the president has upped the ante. He plans to fly in at the climax of the conference in hopes of sealing a “deal.” Whatever deal he gets, it will be no deal for the American people. 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. The last thing America needs is misguided legislation that will raise taxes and cost jobs — particularly when the push for such legislation rests on agenda-driven science.
Without trustworthy science and with so much at stake, Americans should be wary about what comes out of this politicized conference. The president should boycott Copenhagen.
The writer was the 2008 Republican nominee for vice president and governor of Alaska from 2006 to 2009.
Fear of Sarah Palin from the left continues to mount as the Washington Post is criticised for running the Sarah Palin piece. Just what exactly are they afraid of? THE TRUTH!
Go get ‘im, Sarah!
Liberals: Be afraid. Be very afraid. This woman is going to tear your world apart. Just you wait and see.
Long Live the Republic!
Donald,
Are getting on the SP bandwagon?
Chet, Chet, Chet…perish the thought.
However, and I mean this sincerely: If Palin goes Third party and leaves the GOP taking with her the real Conservatives from that now foundering party, I just might consider her as a possible candidate, indeed.
I know Miss Natalie and you are GOP, so please understand I’ve no wish to offend your sensibilities with that last paragraph. Each of us must follow their hearts. Hence, I am Constitution Party, as they address my concerns better than any other Party, although they are kinda lax on terrorism. Anyhoos…
If Palin seriously did leave the GOP and either start or join a Third Party,…wow…can you imagine the uproar? I disagree with Rush and whoever else would say that a Third Party with Conservatives would guarantee an Obama victory. To me it just sounds like the GOP is whining about possibly losing again to the Dems because they dropped the ball on Conservatism and chose to follow after mediocrity, (cough-McCain!), and it’s not so much about what’s best for the people of our Nation as it is what’s best for the GOP.
But, in all honesty, I could be completely off-base about the whole thing. Time will tell.
And as far as Palin and getting on her bandwagon, welllll, let’s just say I love it when anyone challenges Obama and he cannot fight back due to fact and reality. In this instance, Palin is kickin’ some booty! Rock on.
Long Live the Republic.
Oh Donald, you should know by now that there is nothing that you believe or value that would offend us…we are to much on the same page. A name, is a name is a name…nothing more than semantics really. Actions speak louder than “the name”! No what I mean?
Actually, I wouldn’t claim to be GOP. Remember, this site typically leans to the right,, which doesn’t make us truely GOP. Me, I consider myself a “Reagan Conservative” and believe republican values are were we need to be, but that s not where the party currently is. Remember Natalie’s article “Republicans, all you need to do is come home” explains it best. It is the “values” that we beleive in, not the party “name”!
Later bro…stay in touch!
Chet, check the “pending” file. I think you might find something of interest in it…
Back at ya, bro!
I apologize for pigeon-holing you and Miss Natalie as GOP disciples. Your words above made perfect sense.
APOLOGIZE…for what? Nothing to apologize for…I was chuckeling when I was reading and writing brotha!!!!
Chuckeling? Apparently you were chuckling too hard to see you misspelled “chuckling”! Ha! Just jokes, Chet, just jokes.
Thanks for being so cool with me. This is why I enjoy writing for you and Miss Natalie and PIN!
Now if I could just get a raise…
Third Party, baby, all the way!
you know me, my spelling is the worst. If not for my wife, I would not be able to spell my name! ha
Raise? Where do I sign up? lol
here is a fun link
I see you guys know each other fairly well. Thats fine. Heres my point, 1 I do not know if Palin is going to run, or if her intent is to throw road blocks up to slow down the leftist agenda. I do believe she is qualified to be President based on the real qualities needed. Intelligent, integrity, and common sense. Things not present in current leadership. I too am a conservative, however I am of the Wiley C Sampson variety. Wylie as you may or may not know wrote ‘The Patriots Primer’ He covered a lot of ground, but what I feel is very important and a belief I have adopted as my own, is, “there is no such thing as an ultraconservative, you either are conservative or you are liberal”. There is no room in the conservative movement for moderates or centrists. I have traveled most of this country, I have talked to people in taverns, churches, schools, factories, retail stores, dock workers, ditch diggers, law-enforcement officers at every level, city county and state, and if there is one thing they have in common more often than not, they are conservative. A conservative, a true conservative does not need to seek a bigger tent to win. But first they have to prove they are conservative. Palin has done that. Next issue, who does she get for a running mate that fills the bill? Guys, this country is at risk of being lost to the socialist holding the majority of power at this time. Let me assure you they are cowards and if we show we are not afraid to stand up to them, they will slink away. WRITE. CALL, FAX, EMAIL DAILY, THEY CAN BE HELD AT BAY UNTIL WE GET THE COUNTRY BACK. Oh, by the way Wylie’s book is still available but hard to find, also read “DIVIDING THE WEALTH” by James Kirshner, he will open your eyes to what is happening in D.C.