-
RSS Subscribe
-
Obama is lying about supporting increased energy production.
In order to optimize the number of votes that Obama might get he has at least stated that he is in favor of energy policies that include: Clean Coal Technologies, Safe Nuclear and Offshore Drilling of Oil. We now see that he won’t expand any of these at all through additional production BECAUSE he plans to tax Clean Coal Technologies into bankruptcy (his words) not for pollutants but for carbon emissions which is not mitigated by Clean Coal Technologies (see my post immediately below). We know that he will not support Safe Nuclear even though there are decades of proven and improving technology because he is claiming we need alternate technology for “storing” spent fuel first and he gets to define those standards. Also he is not really for increasing offshore drilling because he will only allow it at the 300 mile limit where first of all there is no oil and if there were it would be prohibitively expensive to retrieve………..but he can say out loud to minimally informed adults and the willing media that he supports coal, nuclear and drilling…….what a guy. The increase in production of energy by these means will be exactly zero and he will have a good story as to why not. You’ve already heard his excuse right here, right now.
comments
6 Responses to “Obama is lying about supporting increased energy production.”
Leave a Reply
Ah, my friend..we are down to the wire..PRAY for our Nation please!..hugs!
His nose will only continue to get longer. The only things missing are the donkey ears.
this is probably going to go over like a lead balloon, so if readers already question my comments please save your self the wasted time and vote, or get a free starbuks coffee and participate in the historic election. heck, there was a black man and a black woman on the ballot as well as a war vet (last vet was bush 41), but i dont recall if lyndon laruche was there…
but what if the obama presidency does not turn out the way that the conservablog press is implicating him on? what if he assembles a coherent and well rounded support team that will present well thought out and executable strategies that includes a mixture of what the conservablogs are accusing him of lying about? he has not even been elected and already it seems like the nay-sayers are holding him to a standard that they would never held for bush 43 or mccain. he even said that he will make mistakes but is willing to work. have the mavericks been so forthright? i dont think it is fair. and just so people know, i am a conservative and republican but i am so distraught at where our party has gone, i want them to return to core principles of what conservative means. this is the perfect time for repubs to deeply think about how they want their party to move forward. denial is no remedy for this problem. excuses like pandering to liberals for legislative purposes or the last two years was a left congress is going to prolong their agony and truly hinder democracy. how about the get a reality check, brainstorm about the direction of their party (hopefully not sarah palin), and learn how to form a cogent message about what are the problems so that we can present solutions. blaming the left, or complaing that they were voted out is not what i am saying. what i would like to see is some humble dialog about balance of power (not bush doctrine or wolfowitz musings) but core discussions about hard decisions on solutions to our problems. an example for me is where is this generations “manhattan project” that the wwII generation heavily invested in? can we get a comprehensive look at energy without “drill baby drill” when we know that fossil fuels are not the long term answer. can they acknowlege (without invoking the war on terror) that the money we spend on iraq and afghanistan could have been used to aggressively promote new tech to get us off oil? we wasted 6 years that now put us behind the curve.
if you have made it this far, believe me, i only am saying this because i know that steve and his readers care as passionately about dialog and solutions as anybody.
Hi Steve,
But he will spend more money on energy; it’ll just all go to Al Gore and his friends, and the rest of us will suffer from high energy prices and scheduled power outages. The environmentalist movement must be creaming their jeans today.
Hi matt,
And Obama could also whip out a bag of fairy dust, sprinkle it around and magically transform the world into a paradise for all.
Seriously, while it’s obvious that we need to look for alternative sources of energy to reduce our dependence on oil, it’s equally obvious that Obama’s plan to force a sudden switch to unproven technologies is as stupid as his belief that we can pull out of Iraq overnight. You should also note that the US has several hundred years worth of coal under our feet, so there’s not really any big rush to replace it. And please don’t bring up the Global Warming Scam; you can take a look at Northern Hemisphere temperatures this fall to know that dog won’t hunt. Or, if you need more scientific proof, look up the historic data on which this great crisis is built, and take note of such things as a total lack of data from India, and only 4 to 6 weather stations in Antarctica, and no consistent data sampling over the oceans, then look up all the mathematical tricks the “climate scientists” had to use to “correct” this scanty data so it applies to the entire world and, after more “corrections,”proves that there is a small amount of Global Warming. If that doesn’t change your view on the subject, get in touch with me as I have a bridge to sell that I think you may be interested in.
By the way, Federal money for research into alternative energy supplies has increased tremendously during the Bush Administration, but the liberal press doesn’t really like to talk about it.
the Grit
dont think i mentioned anything about global warming. also have nothing against bush using resources to fund the search for alt energy. my qualm is that i dont think we as a country are asking the right questions. drill baby drill is not an answer to our problem of being dependent on foreign oil. no matter how you parse the info, we know that the future of this country is not tied to oil. how about accelerating the move by a “manhattan project” sized attempt to the next generation of resources? the amount of money we spent on iraq and afghanistan would have been a great place to start. could you envision an america where we used the war money on relevant issues rather than squeezing iran like a pimple? so, now that we are behind in the race for alt energy… drill baby drill???
your comment on obama and fairy dust i find to be ad homienm. who said he was “special” in that regard. maybe i am wrong here, but i never mentioned a sudden switch to unproven tech. what i think is best is a paradigm shift in the direction of getting ofg fossil fuels. why not accelerate the eventual switch? could we also put the “conserve” back in conservative?
i highly doubt that there is any creaming of the jeans going on in the environmental movement. what might be going on is a giddy feeling that a candidate does not want to continue the course of bush 43 and the neocons. could that be the “change we can believe in?”
i also find it comedic that obama is treated like a massachusetts liberal. anyone in the academic community will tell you where the person teaches shapes solutions more than anything else. univ of chicago is quite pro business. obama is drawing on the resources of buffett, volker, summers and rubin? who is on the mccain panel? but, if mccain wins we will get country first. if obama wins, we will get a president who recognizes gray matter in all issues and quite possibly a shift away from american isolationism in foreign policy.
Hi matt,
You didn’t mention GW or a sudden switch in technologies, but that’s the reason Obama gives for his energy policy and for pushing the cap and trade system that Steve was talking about, and which would force the sudden change. With that off the table, there’s no need for emergency measures to research new technologies, since we have sufficient resources here in the US and off shore.
As to the money spent on the wars, that’s a tiny fraction of what it will cost to switch our economy away from oil and coal. Just the expense of adding a new distribution system for, say, hydrogen to run fuel cell cars on would dwarf the war costs, and our yearly military budget for that matter, and it would take years to finish. In the mean time, we need to tap our own resources.
As to Obama and business, if you read his biography you’ll find that he made a point of hanging out with Marxist leaning professors. Also, several of the people he chose to spend his time with after college are admitted Marxists, Bill Ayers for example. Hence his “spread the wealth” comment.
And, yes I can imagine a world where we ignored the threat of terrorism, and that image starts with a large glowing crater in the middle of New York City and our capital relocated under Cheyenne Mountain because DC has been vaporized, and Islamic law being integrated into our legal system because a bunch of spineless liberals were more interested in buying votes with tax money than in maintaining our freedoms.
the Grit
Hi Grit……..I wanted to add that if we had as of TODAY the final product of green technology that everybody agreed was an abundant, cheap and environmentally friendly source of energy it would take decades and trillions of dollars to implement the program and infrastructure. Also people have investment in cars and home furnaces and an electrical grid hooked up to “coal.” That nobody could just walk away from. Wouldn’t it be nice to make two car payments. One for the “obsolete” car and the other for the green car. This will take a long time to sort out after the technology arrives. Certainly much longer than the false claim by the left of 10 years to get additional oil from drilling. We need to run the economy in the interim and that must be economically acceptable which will increase more supply in the short to intermediate run.
I don’t see Rocket Ships or Commercial Jets using solar or other green technologies so there will always be a place for oil………..steve