Support Governor Palin At SarahPAC

Showing posts with label bp oil spill. Show all posts
Showing posts with label bp oil spill. Show all posts

Sarah Palin On Obama: Less Talkin’, More Kickin’ (Proof Executive Experience Needed)

Tuesday, June 08, 2010 1 Response
50 days in, and we’ve just learned another shocking revelation concerning the Obama administration’s response to the Gulf oil spill. In an interview aired this morning, President Obama admitted that he hasn’t met with or spoken directly to BP’s CEO Tony Hayward. His reasoning: “Because my experience is, when you talk to a guy like a BP CEO, he’s gonna say all the right things to me. I’m not interested in words. I’m interested in actions.”
First, to the “informed and enlightened” mainstream media: in all the discussions you’ve had with the White House about the spill, did it not occur to you before today to ask how the CEO-to-CEO level discussions were progressing to remedy this tragedy? You never cease to amaze. (Kind of reminds us of the months on end when you never bothered to ask if the President was meeting with General McChrystal to talk about our strategy in Afghanistan.)
Second, to fellow baffled Americans: this revelation is further proof that it bodes well to have some sort of executive experience before occupying the Oval Office (as if the painfully slow response to the oil spill, confusion of duties, finger-pointing, lack of preparedness, and inability to grant local government simple requests weren’t proof enough). The current administration may be unaware that it’s the President’s duty, meeting on a CEO-to-CEO level with Hayward, to verify what BP reports. In an interview a few weeks ago with Greta Van Susteren, I noted that based on my experience working with oil execs as an oil regulator and then as a Governor, you must verify what the oil companies claim – because their perception of circumstances and situations dealing with public resources and public trust is not necessarily shared by those who own America’s public resources and trust. I was about run out of town in Alaska for what critics decried at the time as my “playing hardball with Big Oil,” and those same adversaries (both shortsighted Repubs and Dems) continue to this day to try to discredit my administration’s efforts in holding Big Oil accountable to operate ethically and responsibly.
Mr. President: with all due respect, you have to get involved, sir. The priorities and timeline of an oil company are not the same as the public’s. You cannot outsource the cleanup and the responsibility and the trust to BP and expect that the legitimate interests of Americans adversely affected by this spill will somehow be met.
White House: have you read this morning’s Washington Post? Not to pile it on BP, but there’s an extensive report chronicling the company’s troubling history:
“BP has had more high-profile accidents than any other company in recent years. And now, with the disaster in the gulf, independent experts say the pervasiveness of the company’s problems, in multiple locales and different types of facilities, is striking.
‘They are a recurring environmental criminal and they do not follow U.S. health safety and environmental policy,’ said Jeanne Pascal, a former EPA lawyer who led its BP investigations.”
And yet just 10 days prior to the explosion, the Obama administration’s regulators gave the oil rig a pass, and last year the Obama administration granted BP a National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) exemption for its drilling operation.
These decisions and the resulting spill have shaken the public’s confidence in the ability to safely drill. Unless government appropriately regulates oil developments and holds oil executives accountable, the public will not trust them to drill, baby, drill. And we must! Or we will be even more beholden to, and controlled by, dangerous foreign regimes that supply much of our energy. This has been a constant refrain from me. As Governor of Alaska, I did everything in my power to hold oil companies accountable in order to prove to the federal government and to the nation that Alaska could be trusted to further develop energy rich land like ANWR and NPR-A. I hired conscientious Democrats and Republicans (because this sure shouldn’t be a partisan issue) to provide me with the best advice on how we could deal with what was a corrupt system of some lawmakers and administrators who were hesitant to play hardball with some in the oil field business. (Remember the Alaska lawmakers, public decision-makers, and business executives who ended up going to jail as a result of the FBI’s investigations of oily corruption.)
As the aforementioned article notes, BP’s operation in Alaska would hurt our state and waste public resources if allowed to continue. That’s why my administration created the Petroleum Systems Integrity Office (PSIO) when we saw proof of improper maintenance of oil infrastructure in our state. We had to verify. And that’s why we instituted new oversight and held BP and other oil companies financially accountable for poor maintenance practices. We knew we could partner with them to develop resources without pussyfooting around with them. As a CEO, it was my job to look out for the interests of Alaskans with the same intensity and action as the oil company CEOs looked out for the interests of their shareholders.
I learned firsthand the way these companies operate when I served as chair of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission (AOGCC). I ended up resigning in protest because my bosses (the Governor and his chief of staff at the time) wouldn’t support efforts to clean up the corruption involving improper conflicts of interest with energy companies that the state was supposed to be watching. (I wrote about this valuable learning experience in my book, “Going Rogue”.) I felt guilty taking home a big paycheck while being reduced to sitting on my thumbs – essentially rendered ineffective as a supervisor of a regulatory agency in charge of nearly 20% of the U.S. domestic supply of energy. 
My experience (though, granted, I got the message loud and clear during the campaign that my executive experience managing the fastest growing community in the state, and then running the largest state in the union, was nothing compared to the experiences of a community organizer) showed me how government officials and oil execs could scratch each others’ backs to the detriment of the public, and it made me ill. I ran for Governor to fight such practices. So, as a former chief executive, I humbly offer this advice to the President: you must verify. That means you must meet with Hayward. Demand answers.
In the interview today, the President said: “I don’t sit around just talking to experts because this is a college seminar. We talk to these folks because they potentially have the best answers, so I know whose ass to kick.”
Please, sir, for the sake of the Gulf residents, reach out to experts who have experience holding oil companies accountable. I suggested a few weeks ago that you start with Alaska’s Department of Natural Resources, led by Commissioner Tom Irwin. Having worked with Tom and his DNR and AGIA team led by Marty Rutherford, I can vouch for their integrity and expertise in dealing with Big Oil and overseeing its developments. We’ve all lived and worked through the Exxon-Valdez spill. They can help you. Give them a call. Or, what the heck, give me a call.
And, finally, Mr. President, please do not punish the American public with any new energy tax in response to this tragedy. Just because BP and federal regulators screwed up that doesn’t mean the rest of us should get punished with higher taxes at the pump and attached to everything petroleum products touch.
- Sarah Palin

Read more...

Letters To (WaPost) Editor: A lamestream Analysis of Sarah Palin

Saturday, May 29, 2010 0 Responses
Regarding Ruth Marcus's May 26 column, "Sarah Palin's lamestream thinking":
I heard Ms. Palin's comments about President Obama and "Big Oil" and drew an entirely different conclusion. I do not think Ms. Palin meant to imply that Obama is in the pocket of Big Oil; I think she meant to imply that the mainstream (lamestream) media have been incredibly reluctant to investigate the remote possibility that Obama may have been influenced by his energy industry contributions. By contrast, she implied that if George W. Bush were still president, the equally remote possibility that he may have been influenced by oil company contributions would have been trumpeted in high-profile investigative reports and opinion pieces for weeks or months.
What the lamestream media continually fail to understand is that Ms. Palin is a talented ironist with a biting wit and a deftness in skewering opponents by drawing simple, stark contrasts. Like all good ironists, the contrasts she draws are rarely what opponents perceive them to be. She is not stupid or sloppy; she is sharp and pointed -- if you are sympathetic to her point of view.
Malcolm Bliss, Arlington
Source:


Read more...

The Lighter Side of Sarah Palin

Friday, May 28, 2010 0 Responses
Sarah Palin’s post-gubernatorial career has been shaped, and misshaped, by a media strategy heavy on knee-jerk combativeness, with a not insignificant dose of victim’s complex thrown in. Her ceaseless campaign against the perceived distortions of the mainstream media routinely crosses from defensiveness into confrontation, and even paranoia. Her recent defenses of Rand Paul and Nikki Haley — two conservatives facing starkly different political challenges — were remarkably similar boilerplate condemnations of “gotcha politics” and “media corruption” that managed to reduce the pair’s trials to her own persecution.  

Palin’s prickliness has received a good deal of media attention, which makes sense. The gossip media’s laser-sighted focus on her every move — not to mention its fixation on the details of her personal life, from Andrew Sullivan’s obstetrical obsession to Joe McGinniss’s stalker journalismis inherently creepy and frequently unfair, and it warrants a firm response. Palin’s conservative following, from Facebook to Fox News, is constitutionally disposed to suspicion of the politico-journalistic complex, and helps beat the drum from her side. Likewise, when the press gets hit by a force whose social-media reach alone exceeds most newspaper circulations, it tends to take notice.  […]

Similarly, when the since-deposed late-night king Conan O’Brien created an Internet sensation by having William Shatner recite lines from Palin’s book Going Rogue as spoken-word poetry — Captain Kirk diction, bongo accompaniment and all — Palin didn’t get mad, she got even. She could have ignored the meme (her fan demographic overlaps very little with O’Brien’s), but she instead elected to appear herself on the show — and read lines from Shatner’s autobiography.
She’s even doing combinations now. At a recent endorsement rally in Colorado, Palin favorably noted an audience member’s sign that read “I Can See November From My House,” a reference to the unfortunate McCain-campaign talking point that the proximity of Russia to Alaska helped establish Palin’s bona fides on foreign policy. Palin called the slogan “palm-worthy.”
As Palin matures into a force in the conservative movement, she would do well to show America more of this side of her. She must learn that not taking oneself too seriously does not make one unserious (unless, of course, you’re Michael Steele). In the process, she can gain something that both the lazy media caricatures of her and her incessant counterattacks lack: a third dimension.
Source:


Read more...

Sarah Palin On Big Oil: Learning from Alaska’s Experience

Tuesday, May 25, 2010 0 Responses
Many Americans want a serious discussion about what can be done to finally tackle the Gulf Coast oil spill. Unfortunately, yesterday White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs used his appearance on “Face the Nation” to deflect from the needed discussion about solutions as he suggested that I should “get slightly more informed as to what’s going on in and around oil drilling in this country.”
Mr. Gibbs’ comments were in response to something I said last weekend in an interview on “Fox News Sunday.” In the course of discussing the administration’s failure to get to grips with the oil spill, I pointed out that the media was rather silent on asking if there was a connection between the White House’s hands-off response to the spill and the undisputed fact that Barack Obama was BP’s top recipient of both PAC and individual money for the last 20 years. Please note that I never claimed there was a conspiratorial connection; rather, I was saying that it’s odd that so few in the media have asked that question. In fact, I believe Major Garrett is one of the few reporters to pursue the issue. You can be sure that if this were a Republican administration, at the very least the media would be asking that question nonstop.
As for getting “informed” about oil drilling: I’m confident that in the course of my chairmanship of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission (AOGCC) and the U.S.’s Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission (IOGCC), and my work as governor of our nation’s huge oil producing state, I’ve learned enough to be able to say with some certainty that the White House’s response to this crisis leaves something to be desired. I also believe that the White House should spend all of its time finding solutions to the enormous oil gush problem.
The Obama administration claims that it “will not rest until we get this situation under control,” but in practice it’s evident that it must do more to stop a potential environmental disaster from happening. U.S. Coast Guard Commandant Thad Allen probably summed it up best when he described the Obama Administration’s approach to this crisis as “keeping a close watch” while BP is tackling the problem – at the company’s own pace. 
While the Administration watches from the sidelines, the Gulf Coast states face some potential disaster. This raises serious questions. Should it really take nine whole days before the Administration asked the Department of Defense for help in deploying equipment needed for the extreme depth spill site? Why is Governor Jindal still waiting, 35 days later, for material needed to tackle the oil spill to protect the coast’s environment and for federal approval to build offshore sand barriers to protect his state’s coast line? Is it correct that the Coast Guard was initially unwilling to burn off the oil for fear of causing air pollution (which would have been far less harmful than the current water pollution)?
These questions all require answers. In the meantime, let me make a constructive suggestion to help the White House out of its current impasse. They should reach out to the best oil and gas team in the nation and tap into its expertise. I know just the team: Alaska’s Department of Natural Resources, led by Commissioner Tom Irwin. Having worked with Tom and his DNR team as Governor, I can vouch for their expertise and their integrity in dealing with Big Oil and overseeing its developments.
This team’s (and Alaska’s PSIO team’s) expertise on oil spill issues is particularly relevant. We all lived and worked through the Exxon oil spill, and we all committed to the principle that this would never happen again in Alaska’s waters, at least not on our watch. That’s why we created the Petroleum Systems Integrity Office (PSIO) when we saw proof of improper maintenance of oil infrastructure in our state. And that’s why we instituted new oversight and held BP and other oil companies financially accountable for poor maintenance practices. And that’s why we cracked down on unethical and unsound practices by oil companies and their contractors that operate in Alaska. And that’s why I filed a Friend-of-the-Court brief against Exxon’s interests for its decades-old responsibility to compensate victims adversely affected by the Exxon-Valdez oil spill. None of these actions made us popular with oil company management. (In fact, Commissioner Irwin received a message from a North Slope oil company employee that summed up their view of our efforts well: the message told him to “go to hell, but resign first.”) Our relationship with Big Oil may have been perceived as contentious because we always put the interests of Alaskans first.
The White House could do worse than emulate what Alaska did over the years. No, it doesn’t make you popular with Big Oil (my commissioners and I certainly learned that!), and you may see fewer campaign contributions flow your way – but so what? Dealing with the impacts of 35 days of uncontrolled oil flow into pristine waters is more than enough time for the White House to realize they need to tap into expertise, hold BP accountable, and not waste time politicking around such a grave situation.
Taking a tough stand to protect our environment while domestically drilling for much-needed energy sources is the only way the public can trust government and industry to safely work towards energy independence. We need to “Drill, baby, drill” responsibly, safely, and ethically. That’s the way Alaska’s DNR accomplishes its mission in America’s 49th state.
- Sarah Palin

Read more...

Deals At Amazon

Get Your 2-Sided Palin Apparel (LOL on back)

Palin For President T-Shirts

Friends

Governor Palin 4 President Facebook:

You Can Get Involved ==> Organize 4 Palin

Join Draft Sarah Committee

NEWS ARCHIVE:

VISITORS BY COUNTRY

free counters

Visitors:

My Profile

My photo
Washington, DC, United States
I live in DC and a I can be reached at sarah2012gop@yahoo.com