Rick B
United States
Sunnyvale
CA
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb


Interviewer: What credentials does Governor Palin have in national security, diplomacy, and foreign policy that qualify her to be your partner on that issue? The fight against Islamic extremists.

McCain: Well, obviously, the economy is also a major challenge. (continues)

Interviewer tries again: Well, you say you're sure she has experience, but again, I'm just asking for an example. What experience does she have in the field of national security?

McCain: Energy. She knows more about energy than probably anyone in the United States of America. (continues, tying energy policy to national security, eventually ending on "she's from a state that's right next to Russia").
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kevin
msg tools
badge
Avatar
How dare you?! He spent five years as a POW!
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
"that's a smith and wesson, and you've had your six"
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Here is where McCain and I agree on.

Things that are important to me

1. Economy
2. Energy concerns
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
135. Terrorist Attacks
136. Abortion

God people, grow some balls. It's getting old.
10 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Einmal ist keinmal
United States
Andover
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
badge
You'll Never Walk Alone
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Here's my paraphrasing of that conversation:

Interviewer: What experience does Sarah Palin have regarding National Security?

McCain: Nah, let's talk about Energy instead.

Interviewer: No, I want to know about her experience with Foreign Policy.

McCain: Well, National Security equals Energy, so let's talk about how she knows more about energy than anyone else in America.

Interviewer: Fine, whatever.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark Hamzy
United States
Round Rock
Texas
flag msg tools
Ace race, baby!
badge
I, for one, welcome your mouse pointer.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
puckhead wrote:
McCain: Energy. She knows more about energy than probably anyone in the United States of America.


And McCain should explain what he means by that statement.

Out of energy experts in America, do people really consider her to be at the top?
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris B
United States
Oxford
Mississippi
flag msg tools
Hotty Toddy Rebels!
badge
Lets go Blues!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
hamzy wrote:
puckhead wrote:
McCain: Energy. She knows more about energy than probably anyone in the United States of America.


And McCain should explain what he means by that statement.

Out of energy experts in America, do people really consider her to be at the top?


I agree. She doesn't even have an oscar for a documentary she made on the energy crisis. I'd have to say that's at least one bullet point on her resume that would be required before trying to make that claim.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
puckhead wrote:


McCain: Energy. She knows more about energy than probably anyone in the United States of America.


T. Boone Pickens would disagree. In fact, it is arguable that he is the only person to put forth a tangible energy plan -- granted, it all involves him getting rich because he owns so much natural gas. On the other hand, he is investing heavily in wind turbines now.

Her energy plan was windfall taxes on big oil in Alaska (which sounds a lot like what Obama wants to do), which I think will be an enormous economic policy blunder.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Greg Michealson
United States
Maple Grove
Minnesota
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
dysjunct wrote:
How dare you?! He spent five years as a POW!


Conservatives use a similar strategy if you question Palin in any form or fashion.

How dare you?! Stop being so sexist!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Greg Michealson
United States
Maple Grove
Minnesota
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
steinley wrote:
puckhead wrote:


McCain: Energy. She knows more about energy than probably anyone in the United States of America.


T. Boone Pickens would disagree. In fact, it is arguable that he is the only person to put forth a tangible energy plan -- granted, it all involves him getting rich because he owns so much natural gas. On the other hand, he is investing heavily in wind turbines now.

Her energy plan was windfall taxes on big oil in Alaska (which sounds a lot like what Obama wants to do), which I think will be an enormous economic policy blunder.


Yeah, those windfalls taxes in Alaska really hamstrung big oil companies. They barely make any profit now and it's stifled their R&D into alternative energy sources.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
"that's a smith and wesson, and you've had your six"
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
hamzy wrote:
puckhead wrote:
McCain: Energy. She knows more about energy than probably anyone in the United States of America.


And McCain should explain what he means by that statement.

Out of energy experts in America, do people really consider her to be at the top?


Not unless it's God's energy plan. Then she is about as much of an expert as anyone.

The "Power" of Prayer!
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
mrspank wrote:


Yeah, those windfalls taxes in Alaska really hamstrung big oil companies. They barely make any profit now and it's stifled their R&D into alternative energy sources.


The windfall taxes just don't make any sense:

1. If you raise taxes on a company and the company wants to keep making the same profit, what do they do? They raise the cost of the product.

2. The usual Republican argument is pro smaller government. Well, now that "smaller government" is going to have a ridiculous amount of money to spend on whatever they want. I am more amenable to the idea if they can guarantee that the windfall taxes will go to R&D on alternative energy; however, do we really want the government running the R&D process? Couldn't this be better handled by private industry?

3. The call for more drilling is also ridiculous if that is all that is done. This has to be accompanied by reduction in consumption of fuel. While everyone wants the technology fairy to come and give us new products, the easiest way to reduce consumption is conservation.

Once again, we all lament sending $$$ to unfriendly foreign countries or global warming, or whatever .... but no one is willing to undergo real sacrifice that might impact their own way of life.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Greg Michealson
United States
Maple Grove
Minnesota
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
steinley wrote:
mrspank wrote:


Yeah, those windfalls taxes in Alaska really hamstrung big oil companies. They barely make any profit now and it's stifled their R&D into alternative energy sources.


The windfall taxes just don't make any sense:

1. If you raise taxes on a company and the company wants to keep making the same profit, what do they do? They raise the cost of the product.


Then you buy oil from a different company with lower prices. It's a free market, remember? Not every oil company paid windfall taxes in Alaska. Just the ones that drilled there.

Sorry, but I believe Alaska made the right economic choice by imposing windfall taxes on oil companies that drilled there. They have a tremendous budget surplus at a time when most states are in the red.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
mrspank wrote:
steinley wrote:
mrspank wrote:


Yeah, those windfalls taxes in Alaska really hamstrung big oil companies. They barely make any profit now and it's stifled their R&D into alternative energy sources.


The windfall taxes just don't make any sense:

1. If you raise taxes on a company and the company wants to keep making the same profit, what do they do? They raise the cost of the product.


Then you buy oil from a different company with lower prices. It's a free market, remember? Not every oil company paid windfall taxes in Alaska. Just the ones that drilled there.

Sorry, but I believe Alaska made the right economic choice by imposing windfall taxes on oil companies that drilled there. They have a tremendous budget surplus at a time when most states are in the red.


Ah...I am not arguing about Alaska's particular decision. I don't necessarily disagree with that decision at the state level. However, if it is implemented at the national level, then there won't be the options to buy from a different company (I don't think I have heard if the taxes would be linked to drilling in particular places, but I wouldn't be against that as much) because all companies will be hit with the tax.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Shushnik wrote:
For example, if not for governement intervention the cost of shipping products would be signifigantly higher. In the thirties, to stimulate the economy, the national highway system was heavily invested in. It kept people working during the depression and created a massive infrastructure. Free market would never make this kind of advancement because no one entity could possibly justify the cost. However, this advancement that would have been impossible with strictly free market is a major contributing factor to the success of U.S. business and economy for the past 80 years.

So the free market is a good thing, but not to the exclusion of other methods.


Clearly there is a difference between the interstate system and developing working renewable energy. For the most part, I am not completely against government doing some of the research. I do not think the government should be invovled in deciding which alternative energy resource should be subsidized -- for example, ethanol is subsidized even though the return on energy is suspect at best. The government is choosing which energy to back, which I think the free market is better at deciding. Whichever company is able to really break the dependence on oil will really be in for boom times.

On the other hand, I do support well funded scientific endeavor; such as the Manhattan Project.


Quote:
Not exactly true. I gave up rural living to move back to the city. Now I walk almost everywhere, and when I do have to drive it's less than 15 miles as opposed to 40 each way. A lot of people don't do anything, I agree, but some people change.


I didn't mean it literally. I know some change, either by choice or force; however, I do not think that it is a stretch to say that most people are not willing to sacrifice on their own accord for the betterment of the country.

Do you think that people would have supported higher taxes to go to war with Iraq (at the time)? Would people be willing to set the floor of a gallon of gas to be $4.00 regardless of the market price -- the proceeds could then go to government sponsored research and transitioning off of oil. If someone even suggested this, it would be political suicide.

The American people (as a whole) love to bitch and moan and then hope some magic team of fairies is going to come in and heal the country. We are definitely a big step away from the "greatest generation".
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
This Guy
United States
Durham
North Carolina
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
Anybody else think the reporter is being a dick in this clip?
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.