If Palin were a Democrat, Republicans would be calling her a flip flopper. But, since she's one of their own, I guess her sudden opposition to cap and trade is deemed having seen the light.  

Little obsessed with Palin are we?

And this is important, how?

Domenico, excellent research to get fact! Not only did she say it, but she said it twice. Riddle me this; "can a zebra change it's stripes"? lol

I just love the SMELL of FACT.

Well that settles it then. If Sarah Palin is for Cap and Trade, then I am too.

What a "Gotcha question."  When will people learn to stop asking this woman direct questions and expecting answers?

This is a national security issue. How? I haven't a clue. But the Democratssaid so, so it must be true.

She never said she wanted to just go out and kill the environment regardless.  Yes, she supports responsible ways to help the environment but that doesn't mean she supports outrageous job-killing measures which are idealogically driven ("global warming" or "climate change" or whatever the next name will be...) and which raise our energy costs dramatically while not requiring other competetive nations (China, India,...etc) to also reduce theirs.

And if you're looking for contradictions, First Read, the Dems have plenty.  Both Hillary and Biden, now working FOR Obama, criticized him silly in the primaries about what a rookie he was in foreign policy.  Biden also said (during the general election) he was against clean coal which Obama later corrected for him.  Biden just admitted team Obama "mis-read" the economy which his boss didn't agree with.  

Cap and Trade "passed" in the House by 2 votes. 2. And that was after a log of arm twisting by Pelosi and Obama, and a lot of payoffs to many Democrats, including a $3.5 earmark for Ohip representitive Marcy Kaptur to buy her vote. The Senate won't even take of the bill, it probably won't get 30 votes if they did.

Cap and Trade is just more dead legislation in the Senate.

I love how the left wing nutjobs ask "Where do you get your health care from?!", like it's a mystery to them. It probably is. Most people get their health care from their employer, but it's not like it's free. If the costs of your employer (cost being pay + benefits) exceeds what money you are bringing in for that employer, you will be fired. So benefits are paid by the employee, because if they aren't, then your are of no use to your employer.
Cole Franklin, Radcliff Ky (Sent Wednesday, July 15, 2009 3:10 PM)
____________________________________

I love how the right wing whack jobs can spin & twist ANYTHING!  In the Repulicant fantasy world every thing is as simple as they are!

Genious – Healthcare was originally supplied by the employer as a way of retaining ‘talent’!

We’re all now aware that Econ 101 wasn’t included in your curriculum!

Of course, that was then.  Now, Palin doesn't have to drag that boat anchor McCain around anymore, so she is free to say whatever comes into her mind on a minute-to-minute basis.

Sort of 'free association', political version.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):