Election 2008--Palin Accuses SF Chronicle of Suppressing an Interview with Obama

She goofs like that all the time, on purpose or she's just terrible uninformed of all that stuff.

And coal is VERY dirty and we need it badly in the short term - so we need to figure how to clean it up !!!

I can just hear her whiney little voice now...

Did she wink while saying it? Did she smirk and nod her head when the crowd shouted?

The woman should be tarred and feathered. I'm so sick of her running around spreading lies and innuendoes. Does she never have anything valid to say re: her VP plans?

"The Chronicle wasn't on the extensive list of print media on which Palin relies for information."

That isn't true. As she very clearly told Katie Couric when she asked Palin what newspapers she reads, Palin said she reads "all of 'em". So obviously, the SF Chronicle is included in her reading.

"Palin said she reads "all of 'em". "

That's true, Joseph. I believe she reads all magazines as well.

And you know that if you point out that fact to Palin and her crowd who yelled "Liberal media", they'll either ignore you or shout you down. It's like citing Snopes.com to point out the email hoaxes - those who want to believe will, no matter what you tell them or how compelling the evidence against their belief is. When I see/hear a Palin rally (much moreso than even a McCain rally) I feel like I'm watching one of the old newsreels of Hitler or Goebbels or Rosenberg whipping up the crowd. It's scary.

I guess in Pennsylvania and West Virginia they have more of those robocalls and such spewing this garbage because of course that's big coal-mining country.

Palin is not exactly what I would call a deep-thinker and unfortunately, it's not what a lot of her followers are looking for.

I didn't realize that she reads.

I don't think it's pictograms on the tele-propmter. :)

Nippy--McCain is on tv right now saying exactly the same thing. He sounds horrible, snarky, snippy, and jealous. He threw a dig in at the San Fran neswpaper too.

It's really bad--he's trying to be sarcastic but is coming off as a summary of old complaints.

Reading is too intellectual, Joe. The elitists do that kind of thing, ya know.

Right, Joseph... When Katie Couric asked her to name one, she couldn't.

Yup yup, you betcha', Robin!

Today in Alaska the Anchorage Daily News, Alaska's largest newspaper, guess who they endorsed: Barack Obama. I know! That's another newspaper Sarah Palin will never read." - Craig Ferguson, CBS's "The Late Late Show."

I was behind a car today with a bumper sticker that read:

"Defeat ABC, NBC, CBS, MSNBC, CNN. Vote McCain/Palin"

What Palin said, and what Obama said, boils down to the same thing.

By levying huge "fines" on coal burning plants, not only will it bankrupt the plants, it WILL bankrupt the coal industry. There will be no need to mine coal thereby, no need for coal miners. Thus a loss of thousands of jobs.

if technology allows us to use coal in a clean way....IT ALREADY DOES!! Many coal burning power plans have been retrofitted with smoke stacks that capture the smoke, recycle it thriugh a collector and "re-burns" it. Obama's assertion that coal is nothing more than a "dirty fuel" is WRONG!

Ivan, have you really read up on it? It gets a lot cleaner, but it's not CLEAN by any means. Just in the Wikipedia, it says, "While it is possible to remove most of the sulfur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen oxides (NOx) and particulate (PM) emissions from the coal-burning process, carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and radionuclides will be more difficult to address. Technologies do exist to capture and store CO2, but they have not yet been utilized on a large-scale commercial basis due to the high economic costs."

So CO2 isn't yet being cleaned out of the emmissions. Then it said:

"In terms of mercury, coal-fired power plants are the largest aggregate source: 50 tons/year come from coal power plants out of 150 tons emitted nationally in the USA and 5000 tons globally. In the USA, neither the combustion products of oil, nor their associated solid or liquid waste streams, are considered to be major contributors to mercury pollution."

So burning coal spews mercury and lots of it. Mercury is the stuff many parents are convinced turned their kids autistic (I don't know if it's true, but I know it's bad stuff). Mercury (and other things) are why pregnant women shouldn't eat fish from the Great Lakes.

As for jobs ... have you looked around and seen how many people are out of work now? Obama sure didn't do that! :) And while I really, really, really want jobs for people, I do want to be able to breathe and have my grandchildren be born with only 2 eyes...

Ivan, that's not the point of the article. The point of the article is that Palin claimed that the "Chronicle" suppressed the interview and that Obama wanted to bankrupt the coal industry.

What she means is that Faux News didn't find the interview and and make a big fuss over it when they should have. That's clearly the the San Francisco liberals' fault. If they weren't so darn liberal, good patriotic people would be able to read The Chronicle too.

I agree that mercury emissions is a concern. However, Obama voted against the Clean Air Initiative that would have reduced those emissions.

He sided with environmantalists because they felt the Initiative would postpone other restrictions on air polution regulations.

Ivan, how's it feel to know Obama is your President? lol

It's common knowledge in the cat world that Palin hates them.

I'm shocked! She's usually so well informed.

Thanks, Gary for stating the obvious because somebody had to. Technology has no intrinsic moral qualities. :) It's amazing how many people think otherwise.

McCain's cap and trade plans would do exactly the same thing to huge carbon emitters like coal, but it would also make clean energy cheaper.


Though Gary, I disagree with you on one thing. Technology displacing workers is a good thing. Of course not in the short term for those workers. But the technology makes the goods produced much cheaper for everyone, which means everyone now has more money to ask those replaced workers to provide another type of service.

Or another take on it... The workers are free to contribute in another way to the total amount of goods and services available for all of us.

I mean, it's certainly good for us that we don't have thousands of workers picking crops in the fields.