A Palin flip-flop so big, you can’t even SEE it if you read it carefully
Political Punch tries so hard to nail Palin on an environmental flip-flop. By quoting Newsmax!
“I think you are a cynic (Charlie Brown Gibson)” Palin said, “because show me where I’ve said there’s absolute proof that nothing that man has ever conducted or engaged in has had any effect or no effect on climate change. I have not said that. I have said that my belief is there is a cyclical nature of our planet — warming trends, cooling trends — I’m not going to argue scientists because I believe in science and have such a great respect for what they are telling us. I’m not going to disagree with the point that they make that man’s activities can be attributed to changes.”
**
Show me?
Ok, Gov. Palin:
Fairbanks Daily News-Miner, December 4, 2007: “I’m not an Al Gore, doom-and-gloom environmentalist blaming the changes in our climate on human activity, but I’m not going to put my head in the sand and pretend there aren’t changes.”
Some pretty vague pragmatism here. . .Wonder if the next bit of “proof” has a more compelling nugget:
Interview with Newsmax, August 28, 2008: “A changing environment will affect Alaska more than any other state, because of our location. I’m not one though who would attribute it to being man-made.”
Wait, where’s the “absolute proof” part? Did I miss it? I guess it’s hiding after the period. This really may be her position, but this particular statement is devoid of anything “absolute” that would support Tapper’s “gotcha”.
More here.
Related posts:
Yes, she said it! But it’s a cheap text-search gotcha that illustrates only a single facet of her attitude towards the issue. It says nothing about how she would govern. And it doesn’t fully satisfy Tapper’s implication; yes, it positions her as a skeptic, but the quote is nowhere near as strong as her request of proof in the Gibson interview.
It would be one thing to cite NewsMax commentary or reporting but it is altogether different to quote Palin’s very own words from a NewsMax interview. I followed the link; what more context is there? She clearly states without nuance: “I’m not one though who would attribute it to being man-made. “
(zac) So, let me get this straight: Pre-Charlie Gibson interview-Palin does not attribute climate change to being man-made but never asserted that there’s absolute proof of said claim. agreed. Isn’t anyone who denies the role that humans play in climate change in that position? Perhaps, but that’s a different argument than proving she actually said something on the public record. . . which is the gist of the thread.
That was what I was pointing out. It came from NewsMax(!), a source that would otherwise be scoffed at by the Jake Tapper types. The quote seems direct and sufficient for the John Stewart crowd, but means nothing without more context. It baffles me how the left tries to define itself as the more nuanced thinkers, always seeking additional (and often contradictory) information in order to form the most ‘balanced position’–and then without any irony at all bases WHOLE attacks on very short snippets of dialog lacking any substantive context, which evaporate after couple of hours in the newscycle.
So, let me get this straight: Pre-Charlie Gibson interview-Palin does not attribute climate change to being man-made but never asserted that there’s absolute proof of said claim. Isn’t anyone who denies the role that humans play in climate change in that position?
And I think you focused on “absolute” (I know, I know, it was Jake’s fault) and missed the real flip-flop:
Palin now: “I’m not going to disagree with the point that they make that man’s activities can be attributed to changes.”
Palin then: “I’m not one though who would attribute it to being man-made.”