MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Sarah Palin Explains Herself

Since she was brought into this election, I have heard about Sarah Palin being an “energy expert.” But I do not recall hearing a single detail of any kind from her about energy… only the broadest jingoistic word play. So I was very interested – still willing to think she could be an expert on sometihng, other than self-promotion – when I saw the Wall Street Journal had “Excerpts: Sarah Palin on Policy”
Here is a part (and here is the link):
On the GOP ticket’s energy policy goals:
“We’re going to talk about finally ending 30 years of failed energy policy in this nation. We have gone without an energy policy in America and finally a perfect time where the price of a barrel of oil is down right now. It’s only half of what it was. Now is our opportunity to invest in alternative sources of energy but a new technology to allow our conventional sources of energy to be tapped and to flow in hungry markets, all with the goal of becoming less reliant on foreign sources of energy.
So, with my experiences in Alaska, coming from the huge energy-producing state and as the former regulator of our oil and gas industry and chair of the nation’s interstate oil and gas conservation commission, this is one of the missions that I cannot wait to get to work on. We do have the commitment to setting our nation firmly on the path towards energy independence…”
* * *
On why she’s focusing on energy at this point in the campaign:
“This is when American voters are really paying attention to the issues, which is so important, and very thankful for the opportunity to be able to specifically talk about what it is that America has had opportunity in the past to do but again, has not seen to have had the political will to buck some of the good ol’ boy system that has controlled the energy resources in this nation. That’s what I’ve had to do up in Alaska, to break up an oil industry monopoly that…. had been controlling much of the nation’s energy supplies. Breaking that up and putting the people first, the owners of the resource first.

Now, honestly, not trying to be a smart ass here…
Did she say a single thing other than “energy independence” and “take on the oil companies”? Is the a SINGLE idea in here about how to do any of it?
Has she ever suggested anything specifc other than “Drill, Baby, Drill”?
I’m reallly not kidding. I am deeply confused that the energy expert has not offered up a single actual idea in all this time, media filter or not.

Be Sociable, Share!

6 Responses to “Sarah Palin Explains Herself”

  1. IOIOIOI says:

    Hopefully in five days, there will be very little reason for us to know where she stands on energy policy. Seriously… if we fuck this up. If the ball lips out of the rim. We really deserve Vad Putin flying over here, putting on his gui, and beating the living shit out of every single adult in this country individually.

  2. swordandpen says:

    McCain/Palin has been the most shallow presidential campaign I’ve ever witnessed. All vagaries and platitudes. Basically, what all the right-wingers were accusing Obama of months ago long before their recent run of guilt-by-association and socialism scare tactics.
    Perhaps if Palin held a single press conference instead of delivering speeches where she talks a lot and says absolutely nothing, her ignorance of basic issues would be more apparent that it already is.

  3. doug r says:

    She makes my brain hurt, the way she connects unrelated thoughts with “because” and “and”. The logic center of my brain trying to follow just starts screaming and I give up.

  4. Rob says:

    Seriously, David, don’t even waste the brain power. She has no ideas, she brings nothing to the table. She is a focus group decision gone horribly awry.

  5. hcat says:

    She is the greatest thing to happen to Dems since Union voters. If she remains on the national stage she will possibly split the social conservatives and the business conservatives while giving the left a way to scoop up scores of independents.

  6. Hiya very nice web site!! Man .. Beautiful .. Wonderful .. I will bookmark your site and take the feeds also…I am glad to seek out so many helpful info right here in the submit, we’d like develop more strategies on this regard, thanks for sharing. . . . . .

The Hot Blog

Quote Unquotesee all »

It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?

So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.

And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.

There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.

I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.

So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.

But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”

My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher

“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.

~ David Simon