by Mark Silva
Sarah Palin -- she of "Drill, baby, drill'' fame on the question of offshore oil production -- has found a few more simple words for President Barack Obama's offshore drilling plan:
"Stall, baby, stall,'' Palin, the former Alaska governor and 2008 Republican nominee for vice president, writes of the president's proposal to open up parts of the Atlantic Coast, the Gulf of Mexico and areas of Alaskan waters for oil and gas exploration.
"Many Americans fear that President Obama's new energy proposal is once again "all talk and no real action," this time in an effort to shore up fading support for the Democrats' job-killing cap-and-trade (a.k.a. cap-and-tax) proposals,'' Palin writes in a statement posted at National Review Online. "Behind the rhetoric lie new drilling bans and leasing delays; soon to follow are burdensome new environmental regulations. Instead of "drill, baby, drill," the more you look into this the more you realize it's "stall, baby, stall."
Too many studies involved in the president's plan, the Alaskan says: "What we need is action -- action that results in the job growth and revenue that a robust drilling policy could provide''.
She concludes that "the administration's sudden interest in offshore drilling is little more than political posturing designed to gain support for job-killing energy legislation soon to come down the pike,'' and predicts: "I'm confident that GOP senators will not take the bait.''
Palin will be going to the Southern Republican Leadership Conference in New Orleans next week, where she says will "look forward to discussing what 'Drill, baby, drill' really means.''
Palin notes in the NRO essay that Russia and others already are busy drilling offshore -- which begs the question of whether Palin can see the offshore oil platform off Sakhalin island in Far Eastern Russia pictured above from her home in Alaska. (Photo by Ursula Hyzy / AFP / Getty Images)





Comments
I hope Republicans are still stupid enough to listen to The Sarah the Stupid. It was Palin's crazy "death panels" claim during the health care debate that turned the tide in favor of health care reform because it made the general public realize that Republicans were full of crap.
This drilling order is a preemptive strike to counter the Wingnuts "drill baby drill" mantra. US oil companies don't seem to have any desire to poke more holes in millions of acres of coastal waters than they already are allowed to drill on, Obama seems to be calling their bluff. "Drill baby drill" was always just a red herring that the Repugs knew full well wouldn't help solve our energy problems in any way whatsoever.
Oil companies already won't drill on their current leases because it costs too much to drill and extract oil that far from shore/that deep in the water. There's a little oil there, but they don't want it; not enough profit in it.
Posted by: HHH | April 1, 2010 2:38 PM
Sarah Speaks! Mama said knock him out! Mama said knock him out! I'll huff! We'll puff until all America's dreams fall down! Replace and then Repeal! Repeal and then Replace Obama with me! Sarah! I'm the EVE in EEVS! John said so! I'm Embroynic! I'm at "Conception." See my smile! See my "SIGN" Stop the press! Stop the press! He's YOU LIE! He's a marxist! He's a Communist! Mama said knock him out! Mama said knock him out! See my SHOW! See my Smile! Mama said knock him out! Vote for John! Just not Mitt the Quit in a time of war! Too much Terror for him.! Our Southern Alliance, Haley, Trent, Lindsey, and 100 million dollars from the KATRINA fund! Mama said knock him out! I said mama said knock him out! Stop the press! See my smile! See my show! I'm the REAL DEAL! McCain is the REAL ID! Mama said knock him out and all that changey-hopey chicken and change in america! I hate Tacos! mama said knock him out! He's YOU LIE!
Posted by: Roger Morris | April 1, 2010 2:42 PM
Run, Sarah, Run and please, don't quit, this time. Also, Sarah, at least wait until you win, before you allow Alaska to secede !! That way, you won't alarm America, as to your using extremest ploys, to gain public attention.
SUPPORT OUR TROOPS, BRING THEM HOME, ALIVE AND WHOLE. NOW.
Posted by: Don Fitzgerald, IL | April 1, 2010 2:50 PM
Well. So there. I guess she told us, didn't she. This is a lot of fun , isn't it, listening to her. No need to take her seriously....
Posted by: irene | April 1, 2010 7:35 PM
This lady is an absolute joke. What is even more of a laugh are her blind, ignorant, low -information sheeple followers.
Go back to Alaska and your derelict family.
Posted by: Doug R. | April 2, 2010 8:05 AM
Won't make any difference if they drill or not. Even if they did drill for more oil...what makes anyone think they'd refine it here and sell it here? Most likely it would be sold to Japan or China like the oil they currently have in production.in Alaska. It is too expensive to ship it to a plant for refining. The only way it would help the situation in the US is to force the oil companies to keep it in the US. If you were in charge of an oil company, wouldn't you sell it for the highest profit?
Posted by: lochnessmonster | April 2, 2010 3:01 PM
A BIG STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION
March 31 was a groundbreaking day of such historic significance that had its developments come one day later, it might well have been mistaken as an April Fool’s Day joke.
President Obama has proposed opening large swaths of the country to offshore drilling, reversing the staunch anti-drilling stance he took while he was campaigning. It a decisive move that also marked a dramatic departure from the delays that have characterized Obama’s Interior Department in recent months.
Obama’s proposal is not perfect and today, as so many not-in-my-backyard types are attacking the new policy, it will be tempting for those of us who support a strong domestic oil sector to criticize the president for not going further in supporting drilling in many of the country’s oil rich regions, like Alaska, or to question the timing or the political motives behind his decision.
While there will be time to examine the proposal in more detail, our first order of business must be to applaud Obama’s courageous move, and offer to help him keep true to his words. In announcing a plan to open much of the Gulf of Mexico and the East Coast to drilling, he has not only opened up some major new sources of oil within our borders, he has also shown a willingness to break with his core allies for the greater good of the country.
At CEA, we have consistently chronicled the battle to produce more homegrown energy, but it has too often felt like a losing battle. We have offered all the arguments, from how domestically produced oil creates jobs and strengthens national security, to how a strong oil sector can coexist with strong environmental protections. We have offered all those arguments, but at times it felt like we weren’t getting through.
Obama’s support of offshore drilling has shown us that there need not be two sides in this issue; that anyone who is for a strong economy and strong national security should include development of more oil and natural gas here at home, and buying less of it from distant markets – while, of course, we also develop all forms of alternative energy.
“Given our energy needs, in order to sustain economic growth and produce jobs and keep our businesses competitive, we are going to need to harness traditional sources of fuel even as we ramp up production of new sources of renewable homegrown energy,” Obama explained.
Surprising? Yes. Courageous? Definitely. Practical politics? That too.
But, if the appropriate actions follow the President’s words, it’s no joke.
Posted by: CEA | April 7, 2010 11:46 AM
I understand that some of our US consumers are very hungry for energy and some are so impatient they would try to get it whatever the consequences.
But doesn't that kind of talk, that catchphrase, wouldn't confirm an image abroad that an important part of the US consumers think they may take any resources for themself and may produce and kind of pollution for the others? An attitude more and more associated with the word American?
Wasn't that also part of the message that was understood from the previous administration that resulted in quite a number of strong anti-American leaders getting in control of their country? Something that not only very much annoyed that administration but also let them spend a lot of the taxpayers money abroad to fight that situation?
Posted by: Dirk | April 17, 2010 5:32 AM
It may be a character issue but sometimes it looks that this kind of conservatives have a real problem with reality.
Once they saw communist conspiracy's in Hollywood and Soviet Union conspiracy's all over the world that history now learns never existed.
If the UN inspectors appointed to find weapons of mass destruction say there are none, they say there is a problem with the inspectors. If climate science says there is more and more evidence for climate warming, they say there is a problem with climate science.
If science says the most probable explanation for the existence of different species is evolution, they say there is a problem with science, sometimes adding complete conspiracy theory's and a fantastic redesign of the conclusions of many well established sciences.
Do they really think a politic debate about this items will advance science? They should know it may only result in the appointment of a politician that will dictate the scientists what they must find. And they should know that is improper.
Posted by: Dirk | April 17, 2010 6:03 AM