We’ve been scolded by some of our readers for our coverage of Sarah Palin. This morning we turned to a “Washington insider” to find out about her economic outlook, largely because she didn’t seem to say much about economic policy in her speech and her short tenure as governor of Alaska didn’t give her much of a chance to articulate a policy. Some readers point out that we might have overlooked the gushing black elephant in the room: oil policy.
Former supply-side economics, tax-cutter guru Larry Kudlow gives voice to this idea in the new York Sun today.
“The no. 1 economic issue this election is gasoline prices at the pump,” he writes. “And Governor Palin has the energy answer: Our abundant country can produce more energy at lower cost if government gets out of the way.”
There is a body of thought–increasingly popular among Republicans apparently–that holds that energy policy is the key to economic growth and financial health. Everything from home prices (pricey gas makes suburban life more expensive) to drug prices (the cost of chemicals) to food has an energy pricing angle. “Energy prices are the extreme marginal tax rates for the twenty-first century,” a ‘drill, baby, drill’ Republican told us.
Palin Is Our Energy Answer [New York Sun]
— Advertisement —
Comments (64)
Leave a comment
You can log in with your account or comment as a guest below.
- Use the Bloomberg command
NH BLG_DEALBREAKER <GO>
to access Dealbreaker
why is this country so devoid of thought?
THINK YOU MEAN… “AN OIL…”
A Mayo-sider Republican.
http://icecap.us/images/uploads/The_Real_ANWR_Story_in_Pictures.pdf
@ 1 because you haven’t spoken up to enlighten all the rest of us.
@ 1 because you haven’t spoken up to enlighten all the rest of us.
Who are bigger oil experts than Bush (both I and II) and Cheney. And where has that gotten us, except in Iraq.
On CNBC this morning around 10:45 Donny “The Big Idea” Deutch was on talking about Palin as a product and how she had all the right ingredients. Then he said how every man wanted to mate with her and Erin Burnett went ballistic, saying Palin was just a MILF, but wouldn’t say MILF. It’s an acronym I’m thinking of, she said. Starts with an M, ends with an F. Donny said she was being simplistic.
It was pretty funny. There may be a video on CNBC.
@ 4 BLASPHEMY!
@ 1, after seeing 7, I have to echo your plaintive inquiry.
@4 – Not for nothing, but the shot of the caribou sitting around the drilling plant is very clearly photoshopped. The bear one is cute though.
@1 and 8, too. I thought you had to prove maturity before being allowed to graduate and mix with adults?
anyone got tix to bilderberg?
here’s the link
http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=843785638&play=1
@ 11 yes, when you’re a leftist, the truth is always photoshopped.
@8 – She should have just said it. That would have been entertaining.
Erin Burnett’s “map to her snatch” http://dealbreaker.com/2008/01/map_to_erin_burnetts_heart_the.php wouldn’t jibe well with Palin’s. No surprises there.
@15 – Hey I wasn’t arguing with the premise, the facts, or the message in that doc. I was just saying it’s a bad photoshop job.
I guess when you’re a righist, you’re always a defensive asshole.
“damn it Jerry! they could tell the caribou was photoshopped! Fix that picture!”
@ 17 well said.
@ 18 oy.
Billy Mays, “Washington insider”
I agree with 15 & 18.
BTW, anyone following my “Vote Obama, Short the market” trade?
I’m no T. Sykes, but its doing pretty good.
If I wanted to watch some Palin love-fest orgy – I would turn to FOX. Carney – get back to things that you know about. Otherwise you’re going to ruin Dealbreaker.
Carney,
Your main sin in all of these Palin posts is the assumption that she has any true philosophy at all. The fact is that none of these politicians really do. Palin likes oil because she grew up in an oil state. Republicans like drilling for oil because a lot of them work in the oil industry, and generally their philosophy is to go for the profits now and worry about long term consequences (global warming, etc) later. Democrats tend to emphasize conservation and alternatives because their philosophy is that global warming will kill us all within 5 years. This has nothing to do with actual policy; you can reduce oil prices by increasing supply (drilling) or reducing demand (alternatives, hybrids cards, etc), or do both.
The fact of the matter is neither Palin nor Obama will be really good or bad for Wall Street or the economy. We’ve had strong growth under Democratic politicians and strong growth under GOP politicians. We’ve had growth after tax raises and growth after tax cuts.
What matters when choosing politicians is what they can actually control. And Sarah Palin and at least half of the GOP have an utter disdain for any sort of modern lifestyle; this is why they have to go down. The messed up part about this is that McCain used to be one of the good guys in the GOP
“If I wanted to watch some Palin love-fest orgy – I would turn to FOX. Carney – get back to things that you know about. Otherwise you’re going to ruin Dealbreaker.”
agreed
@25 – Nice work, well said.
@24 — I would love to watch a Palin love-fest orgy. Where is that showing?
This is 2:56 again, thanks goes to blndebnker,
Carney is clearly disillusioned because he was all rearing to support McCain, then McCain goes out and picks a VP who essentially is a somewhat more talented and a lot more hickish version of Anne Coulter, and it has deflated him a bit
29,
please offer your alternative?
Ron Paul or Alan Keyes?
US DOE EIA “Analysis of Crude Oil Production in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.” 2008:
“The opening of ANWR is projected to have its largest oil price reduction impacts as follows: a reduction in low-sulfur, light crude oil prices of $0.41 per barrel (2006 dollars) in 2026 for the low oil resource case, $0.75 per barrel in 2025 for the mean oil resource case, and $1.44 per barrel in 2027 for the high oil resource case, relative to the reference case.”…”Assuming that world oil markets continue to work as they do today, the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) could neutralize any potential price impact of ANWR oil production by reducing its oil exports by an equal amount.”
Definition of modern lifestyle?
@32 – I’m going to take a stab at it and say not wandering around the Alaskan wilderness hunting moose is part of it…
@25 said – “What matters when choosing politicians is what they can actually control. And Sarah Palin and at least half of the GOP have an utter disdain for any sort of modern lifestyle; this is why they have to go down. ”
Excuse me, what? And what ‘modern’ lifestyle are we exactly talking about here?
And I guess you are unaware of the total control over every aspect of life that socialism intends to impose? Which would also mean that you are unaware of which party has massive socialism leanings – including members (senators!) who openly actually call themselves socialists? So I guess controlling what cars I drive, what bulbs I use, what ‘fat’ I eat, how much I earn, what form of energy I use, who gets to take my money and do his own stuff etc etc are inconsequential to taking ‘total control.’
Dude, be a friggin left wing partisan. There is no shortage of either your type or right wing partisans for that matter. Just dont try this fake ‘oh, i am so egalitarian and I see all sides (but in the core i am just a retarded partisan like my dailykos brethren’ thing. I know – it is very Obama-esuqe but the only person you are fooling here is yourself and probably some dolts like you.
And no. Countries do not continue to grow through economic mismanagement and centralized redistributionist policies else USSR would have wiped the crap out of entire world by now.
What’s up with EB being all catty?
What some of you guys who don’t realize, is that while you’ve been drinking the Obama koolaid for the last year or so, conservatives have been left out of the party. While dems have had Obama speeches to fawn over, conservatives were left with a bunch of rich boring old white guys to listen drone over for the umpteenth time. With Palin who’s young and charismatic, conservatives have their kool-aid and their party’s rockstar. So let them drink it. The more you b*tch and bicker about it, the more you energize them.
What’s up with EB being all catty?
What some of you guys who don’t realize, is that while you’ve been drinking the Obama koolaid for the last year or so, conservatives have been left out of the party. While dems have had Obama speeches to fawn over, conservatives were left with a bunch of rich boring old white guys to listen drone over for the umpteenth time. With Palin who’s young and charismatic, conservatives have their kool-aid and their party’s rockstar. So let them drink it. The more you b*tch and bicker about it, the more you energize them.
Conservatives don’t have time to mess with the Palin thing. They are all to busy burning documents in the bunker and telling everyone that a surprise counter-attack by Swift Boaters is surely going to happen soon.
Herr Rove, sits alone wearing only in his brown shirt, doing the “bat-wing” on his single testicle and remembering when he could “out” out a secret agent and not be arrested. For some reason he can’t get Herr Novak on the phone but that could be because it is still daylight outside.
@32 Modern Lifestyle;
One where creationism and evolution are NOT taught a side by side in public schools.
One where sexual education encompases more than “just say no”.
One where if you do get pregnant at 17 the way to make a not great situation more acceptable – getting married to the 17 year old baby daddy. Regardless of the fact that neither have graduated high school let alone thought about university.
Need i go on…..
ps – who the heck to you think paid for the new threads for the whole Palin family and Levi – Cindy McCain? Because i am telling you that the closest that Levi ever got to a suit before last night was a Wal Mart beige cord sports jacket.
34,
This is 25. “Socialism intends to impose?” Pretty stark exaggeration – both parties have argued for varying degrees of a mixed econonomy since Teddy Roosevelt’s Square Deal.
@33
shouldn’t that be a matter of choice?
you are fond of choice, right?
The last socialist president this country had is on your dime. And we are all better because of him. You have all carried him with you at one time or another and you don’t speak German or Japanese (unless you want to) because of his leadership.
@3:12
total horseshit. none of the future figures you cite are knowable, merely projections, and when has anyone seen a projection of any sort that ever landed in the ballpark? We have multiple revisions on quarterly numbers and your factually stating the 2027 effect? A little too much quant theory you swallowed from know-nothing professors.
@ 38
Wait wait wait,
they sell sportcoats @ Walmart? And no-one told me?
WTF?!?!
@38
I see. Modern means everyone is only taught your beliefs.
@7 you didn’t get the memos to be long oil in 1999 or short mortgages in 2007? You need to register as a replublican my friend :)
@ 42 those are not my projections they are the department of energy’s best attempt estimate. if you know of a better source i would love to hear about it. also we are not supposed to base investment decisions on projections? Uh, then what shall we use?
@ Anal_yst
I only assume, as first hand experience is almost non-existent. But you may have guessed that considering i can’t even fricking spell “Wal Mart”.
@ 38
Exactly – now you get it!
38, 39, 41 (same person?)
There is no point me trying to counter all points of yours. I am a right winger and unbashedly so. And yes, I also believe that most of you lefty/marxist/communist/socialist ideals are wrong. There have a much higher failure rate than capitalism in the real world. For something as abstract as a political ideology, you cannot get more proof that this.
If you still want to cling to those ideologies – fine, your choice. But do not try that nauseating ‘Ooooh, i see all sides and everything is bad but my side is good’ crap like you tried in #25. You are clearly a partisan, so accept it.
Your view of ‘freedom’ is where everything goes according to you and your wishes. The same people who are for side by side teaching of creationism and evolution (note, they are not banning evolution though it also is an incomplete ‘theory’) are also the ones who are strongly for school choice. They want to grant you the freedom to either see 2 viewpoints or stick to one.
Your side on the other hand first wants to force everyone into schools run by them, then wants to set the curriculum and then force everyone to learn what THEY think is right.
That is like SO totally NOT imposing your will on others. Yeah freedom fighter bipartisan savior of all worlds, only your views matter as the rest of the world is full of retards.
And in having the gall to hold such thoughts of superiority, I assume that you are a super intelligent peson who has accumulated billions from nothing and found a cure to aids and cancer and solver the energy crisis, hunger and poverty?
comments TLDNR
blndebnkr @33
pro-choice or not?
or does not not include people’s lifestyle choices?
43 Newsflash: Nordstrom has a store in Anchorage. I know, Nordies is not the slickest place on earth – from NYC, you need to get yr a** to NJ, LI, or White Plains shop in one, but its not Wal-Mart either. There’s actually a lot of money in Alaska. So stop pickin on my boy Levi, who looks so cute in those duds. GAnalYst
@50 – I am personally pro-choice but one has nothing to do with the other. Not to mention, your question doesn’t make sense.
“Former supply-side economics, tax-cutter guru Larry Kudlow…”
Carney, you lost me right there. Kudlow hasn’t changed his supply-side, tax cutting mantra. Why do you say “former”?
Oil inflation will be more under control by curbing demand. For example, in the USA Oil – Consumption: 20.73 million bbl/day (2004 est. CIA), vs. Oil – Production: 7.61 million bbl/day (2005 est. CIA). That’s about a 13 million bbl/day gap. EIA says ANWR may have a peak production capacity of 0.78 million bbl/day. Where is the other oil going to come from just to break even?
@53,
He lost guru status. He’s now a maven.
But he’ll be back.
@52
of course not. hypocrites always hear what they want to hear.
@48
Actually i am a fiscal conservative. I don’t think socialism works.
I also don’t believe that Little House on the Praire translates to the USA circa 2008.
I think that woman are always going to get abortions to why not keep it legal and regulate it.
I think that their are always going to be gay people so allow them to exisit in the same misery as hetro’s.
I think that 17 year olds are going to have sex, so teach them about sex,std’s and birth control.
I think prostituion is the worlds second oldest profession so legalize, regulate and tax the shit out of it.
I think that there are many religions. People should be exposed to many of them – NONE should be state sponsered.
I also believe that discussing abstience instead of the horror that is Gitmo, extraordinary rendition, the use of torture by the USA government, the lack of an energy policy, ect. it what the republican party wants. Which is to bad because i used to like McCain and now we are back to the republican party of Karl Rove circa 2000 & 2004.
52, @50’2 question makes lot of sense.
When it comes to mindless fuking and then baby killing – people are all prooooo choice. But the same group of people are going around trying to prevent people from eating foie gras (still banned in chi-town, was banned in nyc), banning trans fat, banning fur, banning cars and what not coz the it all of a sudden is not about choice but ‘how can you doooo that???’
Oil is not the problem w/ economy. This “crisis” has been created by two issues:
(1) Overspending (by GOP majority then presidency and GOP minority); and
(2) Under-regulation of the banking system (eg allowing capital to be wasted).
Graph USD/Basket of Currencies to Price of Oil.
It is basic economics. Print too many dollars (or send to many 010101 on the computer in our brave new financial world) and the price of commodities goes up.
“The fact of the matter is neither Palin nor Obama will be really good or bad for Wall Street or the economy.”
“The last socialist president this country had is on your dime. And we are all better because of him.”
“Actually i am a fiscal conservative. I don’t think socialism works.”
And so let me guess, your brand of ‘fiscal conservatism’ is one where the mega government regulates and tells everyone what to do and how, taxes teh 5% richest people ONLY because they need to pay their ‘fair share’, wantonly redistributed the money to industries, alternative energy sources etc that the bureaucrats believe are feasible (irrespective of that the market thinks), keeps increasing teacher salaries and forcing kids into predecided schools to please teh union, ends union secret ballot so that union thugs can freely unionize, hits any industry it feels like with ‘windfall profits’ based on whims without ever trying to justify what contrues a windfall (leave alone justiying the morality of the same)nationalizes health insurance (maybe also car insurance?), armtwists lenders to expand lending to risky segments to meet equality quotas… and I could go on and on.
Stop kidding yourself. You wouldn’t know fiscal conservatism even if someone shoved it up your ass. Oh, and neither would most of the current ruling establishment.
And the way you trivialize a very vexing moral issue like abortion shows the depth of your mental faculties. Stop deluding yourself into thinking that you are superior to the masses coz you get a couple of degrees. You understanding of most issues is not even rudimentary.
Incidentally, no one doesn’t want to let the gay peopel be. Conservatives are against gay ‘marriage’ because marriage is once again a conservative traditional institution. As per your logic for everything else, people are going to cheat anyways then why try to enforce marriage and shit. The government should have no say on ANY marriage – hence the question of it recognizing gay marriage becomes moot.
I subscribe to that. Marriage should be a personal thing. However – folks like you want yo have your cake and eat it too. You want ‘freedom’ when convenient. Why dont you want ‘freedom’ from welfare doles? Why dont you want ‘freedom’ from confiscatory redistributive taxation? Why do you want to ‘regulate’ everything which is the antithesis or ‘freedom’?
The reason is that it is not ‘freedom’ that you seek. It is the imposition of YOUR viewpoint on everyone else – masked as ‘freedom’, ‘regulation’, ‘collaboration’, and or ‘social contract’ as convenient.
confiscatory redistributive taxation…. Do you honestly believe your life would be better off if your marginal tax rate was lower? If so, take it to the ultimate conclusion: move to Brazil where rich people pay essentially nothing. But have to hire armed guards to protect them from the misery all around.
#60, I pity the way you must have struggled through school with all those D’s. Go back and read the context of that phrase. Lets give you one more chance to understand the argument being made. Let me know if you still dont get it. I will be glad to help you out.
#60, if you think that your life WILL be better if the taxes are higher then why dont you move to Cuba? They even have free universal healthcare – yippeeee – and plus your liberal idols have already been there and praise that place incessantly. They also have on-demand abortions and religion is officially non-existent. Be sure to not mention all this ‘restricting freedom’ and shit.
@46
Why not just say we don’t have a fucking clue what oil will cost in 2027. That would be the truth and not subjeect to revision. But by making up a back-dated model out of whole cloth that cannot possibly capture the intangibles in the oil market, it is a pointless exercise to throw any number out there and say here’s 2027 for you. Fucking retarded.
School Vouchers would work for Republicans and Democrats.
Republicans can dumb down their science education by teaching their kids creationism – and teach that Evolution is only a theory (which it’s not, please look up the word theory – you Religious types always misunderstand that – lack of science education?).
Democrats can send their kids to public schools where they can learn diversity and feel-good-ism. Vouchers follow the kids around. The parents make the choice of which curriculum to follow.
And people who just want a basic and common sense education can choose schools that teach that.
—-
Why isn’t there a party that 1) wants to win the war on terror? 2) is Pro-Choice 3) Allows Gay Marriage 3) Has National Health insurance through a market based system, but makes the purchase tax deductible for all? 4) Encourages alternative methods of transportation and urban living (to keep our “footprint” down carbon-wise 5) Keeps taxes low. 6) has a plan for social security 7) Has a plan for getting us out of paying the Arabs so much money for energy (largest transfer of wealth ever 8) School Choice.
Why isn’t there one party that just has common sense?
Special interests that get in the way — Religious right, Teacher’s Union, Oil companies, Health Insurance companies, people wanting to live in McMansions and drive big SUVs