Palin Snubs Solar Workers

Sarah Palin hasn't learned the art of tailoring a political speech to the audience. This morning she spoke about energy independence.

Palin spoke after touring Xunlight Corp., one of a handful of solar technology startup companies in Toledo, a struggling industrial city in this swing state. The city's leaders are hoping that the solar companies will create jobs to replace some of those lost by downsizing in the auto industry.

But Palin made only a passing reference to solar power in her speech and instead renewed her call for more drilling in U.S. coastal waters. She repeated her signature anthem, "drill, baby, drill," which seemed to fall a bit flat on the audience at the plant even as it's become a popular chant at her rallies.

Did Palin really believe the audience at a solar plant in Toledo would be interested in hearing "drill, baby, drill" rather than "sun, baby, sun"? Is she planning to drill under Toledo's Chrysler plant that just laid off 825 workers?

< "Thirteenth Amendment" Wins CNN i-Film Grand Jury Award | AP-GfK Battleground State Poll: >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Somebody... (5.00 / 4) (#1)
    by kdog on Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 11:52:35 AM EST
    should "drill baby drill" for a clue.

    Pretty sad when a candidate can't even match the correct bullsh&t canned speech to the right hand-picked audience.  Seriously...I don't even think Bush could screw that up.  

    I listened to the speech (5.00 / 2) (#2)
    by Dave B on Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 12:04:03 PM EST
    And I was surprised how little she talked about alternative energy and how much she focused on oil and natural gas.  The only bone she really threw them was, (paraphrasing) John McCain and I believe that the alternatives we must pursue are "all of the above."

    She's an idiot. (5.00 / 3) (#4)
    by ThatOneVoter on Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 12:13:09 PM EST
    Isn't natural gas a good (none / 0) (#13)
    by hairspray on Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 01:12:05 PM EST
    option opposed to coal?

    Natural gas sources (none / 0) (#27)
    by DFLer on Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 06:10:55 PM EST
    in US are concentrated in the oil producing areas like Texas & LA. It is still just another fossil fuel, after all.

    Maybe the "goodness" of it lies in the fact, that after a complex purifying process, it's more or less ready to go, via pipelines, to your furnace, as opposed to crude oil, which has to be refined into a variety of consumable products: gasoline, kerosene, heating oil etc.

    Info re natural gas processing: link


    Isn't it cleaner as well? (none / 0) (#30)
    by hairspray on Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 10:10:23 PM EST
    I thought the same thing as I listened to her. (none / 0) (#17)
    by lucky leftie on Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 01:33:44 PM EST
    What do these people have against energy that has no negative environmental impact?  Weird.

    The big reason why many corporatists (5.00 / 2) (#26)
    by inclusiveheart on Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 04:57:38 PM EST
    like Palid dislike solar is because it decentralizes the energy industry - if you can generate your own power at your house without assistance from a major energy company - that's a threat to their business model which relies on total control of the energy delivery chain.

    The convenience store people with gas stations feel threatened by electric cars because if people don't need to stop for gas, they think they will lose business.  

    The Green Revolution will change a lot of business models.  Like the horse stables that closed up shop after the advent of the line production cars, we'll see a re-alignment of how we do business.  That is why there is so much resistence from corporate America and resistence from sectors that wouldn't even occur to most people to think about.  It is not just oil and gas - it's coal - it's your local electric company - your convenience store - your mechanic - truckers - truck builders - etc.

    I think it will be the next extremely profitable industrial revolution, but the old guard is going to fight the change hard every step of the way.


    Solar not exactly a business model that (none / 0) (#28)
    by DFLer on Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 06:16:32 PM EST
    comes to mind in the northern latitudes, where daylight gets pretty damn sparse in the winter. She can't think outside her zone.

    Actually most places in the US (none / 0) (#31)
    by inclusiveheart on Thu Oct 30, 2008 at 10:03:23 AM EST
    have far more solar potential than Germany which is a leading model of solar installation and energy prodcution.

    The Solar Energy Industries Association has a nifty comparison map that shows that far more of the US than just the SW where most people associate solar has tons of potential.  Alaska has about the same potential as Germany according to their map.

    Pennsylvania has a state program encouraging solar which is also considered a model for encouraging building our solar infrastructure.

    A lot of people would like us to think that solar isn't practical in certain latitudes, but as the techonolgy gets better and methods for storing energy become more sophisticated, there are more and more places where solar is a good option.


    Heart - I really meant the way north (none / 0) (#32)
    by DFLer on Thu Oct 30, 2008 at 05:43:41 PM EST
    not much winter daylight in Alaska.

    it's too damn dark early here already! (MN)

    I'd love to have solar available here


    Every energy (none / 0) (#24)
    by Wile ECoyote on Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 03:44:07 PM EST
    source has a negative impact.  Ask Ted Kennedy.  He is against Wind because it impacts the view out his window.

    PDS. (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 01:07:41 PM EST
    Had she said a lot in support of solar  -  which, of course, would have been contrary to the pro-oil and gas exploration position she's been talking up - the headline would read: "Palin Panders to Solar Workers."

    better to be a panderer (none / 0) (#18)
    by Jlvngstn on Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 01:45:15 PM EST
    than an idiot, no?

    and really brings life (none / 0) (#19)
    by Jlvngstn on Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 01:53:22 PM EST
    to the comment from one of her handlers:

    "we could have had a scripted robot or an unscripted ignoramus".....


    Ignore them.

    Not "Sun, Baby, Sun". . . (none / 0) (#3)
    by LarryInNYC on Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 12:12:04 PM EST
    but "Burn, Baby, Burn" would have been the appropriate chant, and video of Palin chanting that would be priceless.

    Her expertise is in the fossil fuel (none / 0) (#5)
    by hairspray on Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 12:49:40 PM EST
    industry and that will be around for a long time, but have a diminishing role. The message Americans want to hear is how we will move quickly to sun, geothermal, wind, etc. And how these new energy sources will reduce our atmospheric carbon buildup.  She is clearly respresnting old values.

    I think her area is fossils, period, (none / 0) (#6)
    by ThatOneVoter on Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 12:52:53 PM EST
    as shown by her choice to go with McCain.

    Except for the fossil record (none / 0) (#12)
    by Dr Molly on Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 01:09:50 PM EST
    proving the age of the planet and evolution through time. She doesn't like those fossils much.

    Speaking of oil.... (none / 0) (#7)
    by kdog on Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 12:56:36 PM EST
    I heard somewhere, sorry can't remember where, that with the economy in the tank oil could go as low as 38 bucks a barrel or something.

    Hopefully the price drop, though very welcome with heating season upon us, doesn't take our eye off the ball for the need for new energy sources....though knowing the American attention span it probably will.

    Good (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by eric on Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 01:05:46 PM EST
    I'm getting a little tired of driving my little Mazda.  $38?  Time to upgrade to a Hummer!!!

    LOL (none / 0) (#9)
    by CaptainAmerica08 on Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 01:07:02 PM EST
    Actually, I hope Obama as pres would (none / 0) (#11)
    by hairspray on Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 01:09:41 PM EST
    put a floor on the price of oil imported into the US, so that if it falls below say $70 a barrel, the small solar and wind companies will not go out of business.  We need to keep the price up to guarantee some parity ( and growth potential) for these new sources of energy.

    Putting a floor (none / 0) (#14)
    by eric on Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 01:13:42 PM EST
    on the price of oil?  Wow, that would be a really, really unpopular thing to do, even if he could do it.  He even loses me on that one.

    He hasn't really proposed this, has he?


    Adding (none / 0) (#15)
    by eric on Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 01:17:41 PM EST
    I don't mean to imply that all efforts must be maintained to develop energy other than oil, I just don't think that forcing people to pay more for oil is the way to get there.

    And if you are going to pay more, I say put a tax on gas.  I would much rather collect taxes than artificially inflate oil prices.


    When the price of oil goes down (none / 0) (#29)
    by hairspray on Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 10:07:57 PM EST
    gas gets cheaper and people again drive like there is no tomorrow.  Or hadn't you noticed?  Good luck geting alternative energy competitive with gasoline under the old system. Of course we could tell everyone alternative energy is better but unless the price is competitive it will not budge the market forces.  or hadn't you noticed/

    Loses me too... (none / 0) (#16)
    by kdog on Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 01:21:48 PM EST
    I'd rather the govt. not be party to price fixing aka market rigging...too much of that going on as it is, to the detriment of the consumer.

    we do need to be weary, though, that the (none / 0) (#21)
    by of1000Kings on Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 02:51:06 PM EST
    American public doesn't make the same mistakes it made in the past 10 years concerning the driving of inefficient cars just because they make you feel like a bigger person...

    preferably that would happen through good decision making by the American public....but I have some reservations about that...

    I did notice that Chyrsler is shutting down it's only Hybrid plant, this coming after the government just gave the auto-industry a 25B bailout, all of which was supposed to pay for alternative endeavors...
    my guess is that the auto-industry is trying to put a stranglehold on the government, forcing the government to give even more money, which it probably will considering we live in a corporate-socialist country (socialism is good as long as it goes to corporations and not those beggars in the public who are too lazy to work)


    Corporate-Socialist... (none / 0) (#22)
    by kdog on Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 03:12:21 PM EST
    you're too kind...I believe the more accurate term is fascism.

    Ford/GM/Chrysler will get their slice of the vig...no doubt.


    If I use the F word then I become (none / 0) (#23)
    by of1000Kings on Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 03:41:10 PM EST
    the radical stepping over the line...

    people don't like the word very much, no matter how much truth it holds...


    Too bad... (none / 0) (#25)
    by kdog on Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 03:45:03 PM EST
    people don't fear the definition and the results as much as the word, eh Kings?

    It ain't got nuthin' to do with Hitler people...it's about the merger of government and corporate power.