LiveWire

BeforeGoreKneel says:

So the real question of Maynard ought to be: why must it always be Democrats who
choose a transformative politician but Republicans must “field someone with more
experience and fewer negatives in the public eye”? Yet, he adds, “I don’t know who
that is at this point.”

We’ve all been around the block, we all know what is being said here.

Anyone but the woman. One gathers that we should await some magic person, one
who is out of the limelight, growing a reputation and track record, like a mushroom in
a dark room full of shit.

So make a list, man. And like my late waitress friend said to a customer who bragged
of nine inches of heaven, “Whip it out and let’s all have a look.”

I see Maynard’s energy argument. How far is it from Obama and friends? Not far, I
suggest. “The question we should be asking is how we can shift away from oil.” Well
horseshit is all I can say. Then you carry it to “Obama understands this” which is
certified field grade fresh manure.

In the race to the top — the competition between countries, economies and cultures,
one does not put on cement overshoes and a bucket over ones head. In other
words, we should use as much oil as everyone else does. And if we use more, we
make them rich, and ourselves energy rich.

Just what we do with that energy rich environment is another thing. Some people like
to bitch about people using a SUV to get a quart of milk. Some like to actually use that
SUV to actually get that quart of milk. Others like to make pretty piles of sand in the
Arabian Ocean and then build skyscraper casinos on top. Still others like to use that
energy to move stuff from low cost producers to deep pocketed consumers. That
those deep pocketed consumers no longer make those products is moot, unless of
course you’re a unionized labor force that expected to over-compensated until the
end of time making a high cost product with a Buy American label. But I digress.

‘Moving away from oil’ is really this: a realization that money earned by selling oil is
being used by bad actors to hurt us. And an abdication of the responsibility to do
something about those bad actors. Just because we put on Al Gore’s hair shirt will
not mean that oil will suddenly become less useful, or cheaper. It will mean that we
become less energy rich, that our energy costs will ‘necessarily skyrocket’ and our
products will be become more expensive. Just who gathers in those skyrocketing
dollars is still being worked out. But those green technologies — solar, wind, ‘lectric
cars will never come close to meeting our energy needs. And in fact, none of them
are worth a tinker’s damn nor an engineer’s momentary consideration were it not for
massive tax subsidies.

What to do about bad actors is subject to debate. Personally, I like falling pianos and
dead bad actors, but I also like John LeCarre. For a smarter answer, ask John Bolton
or Dick Cheney.

Maynard makes the point that “America’s appetite for oil exceeds its resources.” So
what. We don’t have much in the way of platinum either. In either case, when
something becomes scarce, it becomes more expensive. It’s important to note,
expensive for nearly everyone. One expects that the owners of oil reserves will
always have more longer and at lower price. Not always. Places like Venezuela will
always confound reasonable expectations. Neither does either of those end states,
high prices and scarcity, ensure that those late holders will become The Next Major
Power in the World. Of all of the world’s producers, only perhaps the United States
and Russia are not dysfunctional malevolent places. DMP’s are unable, ever, to
extend their reach for long nor far before the world destroys them.

Palin and others advocate finding and getting our own oil. Using our nation’s
workers, our nation’s technology, our nation’s commitment to the environment. Sure,
Alaskan oil doesn’t amount, thus far, to some of Opec’s numbers. But neither have
we done a thorough inventory that includes all of our continental shelves. How much
is under the Arctic Ocean? Can it be harvested? The Russians seem to think lots,
and yes, they can. How much is really offshore Santa Monica? Or New Jersey? Or
gee, 85% of our nation’s coastline.

Gone missing in his analysis is any acknowledgment of the western states aggravation
with Federal control of their lands for national policy. And sure, 12 billion might not
satisfy our appetite for long, but Alaskans would surely love to have that out of the
ground, bought and paid for, worked and earned. I have no doubt that many large
states — California, New York come to mind — are actively thwarting any rational
realization of western resources. They’re the important places, not Alaska, nor any of
the other red-neck boondocks upon whose throats they have their hobnailed boots.

What are Sarah’s strengths?

1) her leadership. I’ve been in the army and government and I can spot the real deal.
Go back and LOOK at the video clips where she interacts with active service
people. They are NOT just sucking up to the pretty woman. She looks them in the
eye, and they into hers. They get her. So do Democrats and many Republicans, who
are scared shitless of being found out to be not up to her standards. Thus their
attacks are often centered upon destroying her

2) moral authority, upon which leadership rests. Leadership does not depend upon
being correct at every moment. It depends upon the trust of that leader’s guiding
lights. What Sarah’s? Family, patriotism, capitalism, freedom, responsibility,
reverence.

3) religion as a basis for character, family and nation. Sarah comes from a frontier
society in a harsh environment. A society that must care for each of its people in
order to survive and thrive. Palin, unlike many in public life, is grounded in faith. This
makes her and her society stronger and better and more careful. It makes everyone
inside her circle stronger and better and more careful. Our society, our nation, would
be well served to be inside her circle of faith.

4) her word as a basis for action. Sarah rights wrongs, delves into details, assembles
teams, executes plans. Do you really think that those Alaskan pipeline deals came to
her in a flash of light? Or that the reorganization of Alaskan oil drilling contracts were
hashed out in some crony filled room? Or were her actions to remedy backroom deals?
Do you really think that she swept into Juneau armed with a partisan think tank’s white
paper? No, I think that the record shows that in every commitment she accepts when
she swears an oath of office are taken as her first principles. Then she builds a team
that works out the answer. Finally the coalitions that work to achieve the plan.

5) attention to detail. Sarah is a self described policy wonk. Do you think ‘death
panel’ came to her in a dream? I submit it came from her careful review of the
legislation, and importantly, the current commentary. Was she correct? You betcha.

6) innovation and thinking outside of the box. Sarah is fully comfortable in using
technology. She, like Obama, likes Blackberries. Her use of social networking is
awesome. Her ability to look past the immediate obstacle, anklebiters for instance,
and to act strategically ought to be clear. She’s been out of office for 53 weeks.
Time well spent it seems. Death panels, Fox commentary, mama grizzlies, one book
written and taken on tour, another readying, a 25-4 nationwide endorsement record.
And a growing body of commentary that 2 million readers get unmanaged by media
shills.

And her weaknesses?

1) partisans of every stripe
2) journolists
3) being damned by faint praise
4) the ambitions and collusion of others
5) damned fools and liars